Woody wrote:Wait, it' s possible for others to do math too???? #$!&@!

dajafi wrote:Think jh has it right re: RAND. it's interesting as one input among many but seems unlikely to offer special insight for the same reasons it's interesting.

I think the Unskewed guy is this year's Joe the Plumber.

td11 wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/31/on-hating-nate-silver/

Silver’s smug defenders assume that it is his detractors who can’t grasp the concept — but Silver’s critics know that the general public doesn’t understand the nuances at play here. And that’s part of problem.

Silver comes out of the baseball statistics world, and his defenders like cite sports and gambling analogies when defending him. But there is a key difference. If Silver says the Giants have only a 5 percent chance of winning the World Series again next year, it is highly unlikely that would impact the outcome of games. Umpires won’t begin making bad calls, the fans won’t stop attending games, etc.

But when the public sees that a prominent New York Times writer gives Barack Obama a 70 percent chance of winning, that can become a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy. It has consequences. It drives media coverage. It dries up donations. Whether Silver likes it, or not, people do interpret his numbers as a “prediction.” They see this as election forecasting.

at least we'll know whose fault it is

td11 wrote:http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/31/on-hating-nate-silver/

Silver’s smug defenders assume that it is his detractors who can’t grasp the concept — but Silver’s critics know that the general public doesn’t understand the nuances at play here. And that’s part of problem.

Silver comes out of the baseball statistics world, and his defenders like cite sports and gambling analogies when defending him. But there is a key difference. If Silver says the Giants have only a 5 percent chance of winning the World Series again next year, it is highly unlikely that would impact the outcome of games. Umpires won’t begin making bad calls, the fans won’t stop attending games, etc.

But when the public sees that a prominent New York Times writer gives Barack Obama a 70 percent chance of winning, that can become a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy. It has consequences. It drives media coverage. It dries up donations. Whether Silver likes it, or not, people do interpret his numbers as a “prediction.” They see this as election forecasting.

at least we'll know whose fault it is

Soren wrote:

Roger Dorn wrote:If the media gave third party candidates a voice and access to the national airwaves, the Dems and Repubs would become obsolete. Its unfortunate the two party duopoly has convinced everyone that you only have 2 choices, and any other vote is wasted. The Dems and Repubs have a common interest in limiting the playing field to 2 party politics. Screw ideals and candidates with actual solutions...too much money at stake.

QStarNews Election Day Exit Poll

This is a voluntary exit poll which will tell us how the electorate voted before the official results are in, and it will tells which issues are more important to votes, etc.

If you have already voted via early voting in your state, please click here to take the quick exit poll survey.

If you have not voted yet, or your state does not allow early voting, please return here and take the survey after you have voted. Look for results here in the early evening on election day.

It comes down to numbers. And in the final days of this presidential race, from polling data to early voting, they favor Mitt Romney.

He maintains a small but persistent polling edge. As of yesterday afternoon, there had been 31 national surveys in the previous seven days. Mr. Romney led in 19, President Obama in seven, and five were tied. Mr. Romney averaged 48.4%; Mr. Obama, 47.2%. The GOP challenger was at or above 50% in 10 polls, Mr. Obama in none.

The number that may matter the most is Mr. Obama's 47.2% share. As the incumbent, he's likely to find that number going into Election Day is a percentage point or so below what he gets.
...
Desperate Democrats are now hanging their hopes on a new Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News poll showing the president with a five-point Ohio lead. But that survey gives Democrats a +8 advantage in turnout, the same advantage Democrats had in 2008. That assumption is, to put it gently, absurd.

In addition to the data, the anecdotal and intangible evidence—from crowd sizes to each side's closing arguments—give the sense that the odds favor Mr. Romney. They do. My prediction: Sometime after the cock crows on the morning of Nov. 7, Mitt Romney will be declared America's 45th president. Let's call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more.

So what gives? If it’s possible to recreate Silver’s model using just Microsoft Excel, a cheap Monte Carlo plug-in, and poll results that are widely available, then what real predictive value does Silver’s model have?


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/01/is-na ... z2AynCvZIT

The Nightman Cometh wrote:I should have went on Intrade to monetize my pessimism about Obama's chances. Win-win and what not.