politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: FiveThirtyEight gives Trump 1-in-3 chance
Source:
FiveThirtyEight
URL Source: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus
Published: Jul 13, 2016
Author: FiveThirtyEight
Post Date: 2016-07-13 17:08:23 by ConservingFreedom
Keywords: None
Views: 3297
Comments: 22
Electoral votes Hillary Clinton 303.4 Donald Trump 234.4 Gary Johnson 0.2 Popular vote Hillary Clinton 48.1% Donald Trump 44.8% Gary Johnson 5.8%
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: ConservingFreedom (#0)
oh ... hellary by ... Bencrazi destroyed Make love If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
Don't worry, the poll numbers aren't even close to accurate. Out of the THOUSANDS of people I know, about 15 will vote for the cunt. Everyone else is voting Trump. The polls don't reflect the Brexit like outcome that's coming this November. I'm gonna laugh my ass off when the liberal left has that "what the fuck just happened" look on their MSM faces for about a month. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
"In September, he (Nate Silver) told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Trump had a roughly 5-percent chance of beating his GOP rivals. In November, he explained that Trump’s national following was about as negligible as the share of Americans who believe the Apollo moon landing was faked. On Twitter, he compared Trump to the band Nickelback, which he described as being “[d]isliked by most, super popular with a few.”
Birds of a feather flock together - proves nothing about the national vote. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. In November, he explained that Trump’s national following was about as negligible as the share of Americans who believe the Apollo moon landing was faked. On Twitter, he compared Trump to the band Nickelback, which he described as being “[d]isliked by most, super popular with a few.” And on May 18 he wrote "How I Acted Like A Pundit And Screwed Up On Donald Trump" - fivethirtyeight.com/featu...rewed-up-on-donald-trump/ A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. rooting for a tie with Gary Johnson getting enough elector votes to prevent Evita and Trump from getting the requisite 270 electoral votes. Then it gets thrown into the House (12 Amendment )
Oh, miserable mortals! Oh wretched earth! Oh, dreadful assembly of all mankind! Eternal sermon of useless sufferings! Deluded philosophers who cry, “All is well,” Hasten, contemplate these frightful ruins, (Voltaire)
Nickleback plays good music. I guess most people now know what people in bands look like, I only listen to what they play. Except for Jennifer Nettles.............gotta get a rag, slobbering on the keyboard again......
Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU? Our ignorance has driven us into slavery and we do not recognize it.
Amerexit all Make love If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
When will he write, "How I Made Lame Excuses For My Emotion-Based Prediction In A Pathetic Attempt To Salvage My Credibility"?
I don't believe that exercising rights is radical -- unless exercising a right is used as justification to violate someone else's right.
In your book the following is a "lame excuse"? In mine it's a mea culpa. "we were basically acting like pundits, but attaching numbers to our estimates. And we succumbed to some of the same biases that pundits often suffer, such as not changing our minds quickly enough in the face of new evidence. Without a model as a fortification, we found ourselves rambling around the countryside like all the other pundit-barbarians, randomly setting fire to things." A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Trump's chance of winning is up to 36.7% today - and 46% according to their "now-cast" ("we lie to our computer and tell it the election is today. As a result, the now-cast is very aggressive. It’s much more confident than polls-plus or polls-only; it weights recent polls more heavily and is more aggressive in calculating a trend line.").
A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. FWIW, 538 puts the probability of Johnson getting any electoral votes at between 1.5% and 7.5% (depending on statistical model). A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Had he said that at the time of his prediction, that would have been different. Saying it now sounds like a lame excuse.
That makes less than no sense ... if he'd realized at the time of his prediction that he was playing a pundit rather than doing statistics, he wouldn't have made the prediction. You seem to be confusing "explanation" with "excuse." A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. He admitted his prediction was not based on a model. Meaning he knew at the time that he was playing a pundit. I'm saying he should have admitted that at the time. "You seem to be confusing "explanation" with "excuse." No. It's a lame excuse. We would never have heard this "explanation" had he been proven right.
These two sentences bear no logical relationship to each other - much less the second proving the first. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Weren't meant to.
How'd they do on predicting Brexit?
yes I know there is little chance for that .Ross Perot did not get any. But this is a strange year. Just for fun ; if he took his home state of New Mexico and maybe an independent minded state like NH ......and Evita and Trump end up tied ,but under 270 electors ..... then all bets are off . Oh, miserable mortals! Oh wretched earth! Oh, dreadful assembly of all mankind! Eternal sermon of useless sufferings! Deluded philosophers who cry, “All is well,” Hasten, contemplate these frightful ruins, (Voltaire)
Would be a hoot. I just noticed that they have a probability for "Electoral College deadlock: no candidate gets 270 electoral votes": between 0.5% and 0.6%. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. They abstained: in a June 20 podcast (fivethirtyeight.com/featu...rendum-polls-are-a-mess/) on the methodological problems of UK referendum polling, Nate Silver said at the 39:13-remaining mark, "we're not trying to make a forecast of this ourselves". A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.
yeah
a
... landslide
by
her
own
witch
craft
web
poison
America
moth
balled
great
again
boris
#2. To: BorisY (#1)
#3. To: ConservingFreedom (#0)
(Edited)
#4. To: GrandIsland (#2)
Out of the THOUSANDS of people I know, about 15 will vote for the cunt.
#5. To: misterwhite (#3)
"In September, he (Nate Silver) told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Trump had a roughly 5-percent chance of beating his GOP rivals.
#6. To: ConservingFreedom (#0)
#7. To: misterwhite (#3)
#8. To: Willie Green, yukon, roscoe, gatlin, harrowup, all alert canaries, canary island (#2)
of
this
black
lives
mattering
is
back
firing
America
red
white
blue
again
boris
#9. To: ConservingFreedom (#5)
"And on May 18 he wrote "How I Acted Like A Pundit And Screwed Up On Donald Trump"
#10. To: jeremiad (#7)
"Exercising rights is only radical to two people, Tyrants and Slaves. Which are YOU?"
#11. To: misterwhite (#9)
When will he write, "How I Made Lame Excuses For My Emotion-Based Prediction In A Pathetic Attempt To Salvage My Credibility"?
#12. To: All (#0)
#13. To: tomder55 (#6)
with Gary Johnson getting enough elector votes
#14. To: ConservingFreedom (#11)
#15. To: misterwhite (#14)
Had he said that at the time of his prediction, that would have been different.
Saying it now sounds like a lame excuse.
#16. To: ConservingFreedom (#15)
"That makes less than no sense ... if he'd realized at the time of his prediction that he was playing a pundit rather than doing statistics, he wouldn't have made the prediction."
#17. To: misterwhite (#16)
It's a lame excuse. We would never have heard this "explanation" had he been proven right.
#18. To: ConservingFreedom (#17)
"These two sentences bear no logical relationship to each other"
#19. To: ConservingFreedom (#0)
#20. To: ConservingFreedom (#13)
FWIW, 538 puts the probability of Johnson getting any electoral votes at between 1.5% and 7.5% (depending on statistical model).
#21. To: tomder55 (#20)
and Evita and Trump end up tied ,but under 270 electors ..... then all bets are off .
#22. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
How'd they do on predicting Brexit?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]