Write Review
1,981,935 Total Reviews 3,843 New Reviews
11,534 Users Online

Politics and Religion

Re: GREAT point! (Robert’s Response To A Nate Silver Probability Favoring Harris?)
cks175 44 Reviews 59 reads
posted

He’ll forget he ever trashed it as biased.

lester_prairie539 reads

This is a prediction model.  My opinion is that his previous Hillary prediction model didn't pan out well suggests that election prediction models are useless.  But anyhow, I think some liberals here were happy about Silver models until this moment.

ReplyQuoteReport
coeur-de-lion49 reads

to watch Robert gasp and clutch his pearls.  Lol

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert40 reads

You realize she only needs 270 right?

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie55 reads

You realize both Silver predictions can't be true at the same time.  Anyhow, I don't trust models.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert61 reads

But of course you were dishonest and sycophantic AGAIN in your OP and I had to point out the truth. Glad I could educate you. And of course CDL steps in poop again. Are the bottom of his shoes ever free of dog shit? lol.

ReplyQuoteReport
coeur-de-lion54 reads

Silver is saying that Kamala is holding on by a thread but that she is TRENDING to lose.  You do understand trending analysis, right?  

 
Saying she is ahead today, but predicting she will lose in November can both be true.  

-- Modified on 8/29/2024 1:16:53 PM

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert64 reads

Good for you for acknowledging the truth!  Just like cicadas coming out, you tell the truth every 17 years. lol.

ReplyQuoteReport
coeur-de-lion58 reads

I summarized what Silver was saying.  Where did I say I agreed with him?  You know, when you attribute quotes to me that I didn't say when they are right here on the thread, it makes you look both desperate and not very bright, but you be you and I'll be me.  

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky4648 reads

And, given your posting history, the obvious assumption is you DO agree. At least man up and admit the obvious. Until then, you're the one who appears "not very bright."

ReplyQuoteReport
coeur-de-lion41 reads

Robert the Simp and doubling down on attributing a quote to me that I didn't make?   You know the old saying about  
A-S-S-U-M-E?  Well, here you are trying to sell your assumption as fact.  You just flipped YOURSELF into the "not very bright" group.

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky4653 reads

And certainly your repetition of old lines is VERY tired. As is your reading comprehension. All I said was you clearly DID have a point of view. And this is undeniably true.
To deny it is clearly "not very bright."

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie51 reads

Gotta say that Silvers model is stupid.  What's with fractional electoral votes. That's not the way it works.  They are not only whole integers, they are clumped by state in most cases.  
.
Silver should pick winning and losing states and assign electoral votes accordingly. Fractional votes have no bearing on the underlying reality and therefore can only mislead.

ReplyQuoteReport
impposter60 reads

I don't know what source you are referring to, but some states allocate electors by county. I.e., in most states, the entire slate of N electors goes to whoever wins the state (by simple statewide majority). It is possible to win a single county in, say, Nebraska, and be awarded the electors for that county: N total electors are allocated into N(county) for candidate A and [N(total)-N(county)] for candidate B.
.
Is THAT what Silver meant by "fractional"?

Posted By: lester_prairie
Re: Fractional electoral votes
Gotta say that Silvers model is stupid.  What's with fractional electoral votes. That's not the way it works.  They are not only whole integers, they are clumped by state in most cases.    
 .  
 Silver should pick winning and losing states and assign electoral votes accordingly. Fractional votes have no bearing on the underlying reality and therefore can only mislead.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie42 reads

In the Nate Silver chart above there is a column of predicted electoral votes.  It has 272.1 for Harris and 265.9 for Trump.  Electors are real individuals and can't split their individual vote.  It is either 1 or nothing.  So the .1 and .9 make no sense.  I don't know if there are state combinations that can add up to 272/265 but my guess is his model is not allocating correctly by state due to the fact that he used those .1 and .9 fractions.  

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie55 reads

Georgia has started posting its absentee file.  Comparison to 2020.

8.31.24 Requested Absentees - 80,240
8.29.20 Requested Absentees - 806,561

Yikes!  The covid effect won't be prominent this time.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie55 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
durran42151 reads

In addition I was just reading this earlier......

Related Link: https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1830637163563860297?t=TWVUvN2uZyEBI1HdxGLy6Q&s=19

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert56 reads

BOTH the RCP and 538 have her winning the electoral college as of now. The link below is the same one Lester and CKS kept telling us it was worthy of our trust...but only when Trump was ahead I guess?. ;)

Related Link: http://www.realclearpolling.com/maps/president/2024/no-toss-up/electoral-college

ReplyQuoteReport
cks17564 reads

I’ve seen another map where it’s Trump with 270 and Harris with 268.  What I’m expecting is a Trump bump after the September 10th debate. It looks like Harris is trying to back out of it, but I think she’ll end up debating while griping about the rules being unfair.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert60 reads

Did you forget all those posts?

ReplyQuoteReport
cks17557 reads

Where did you get the idea that I said RCP was invalid and/or infallible? I point alternative data and analysis and you proceed to shit your pants? What’s with that?

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie51 reads

He just makes shit up. He is not intellectually honest about anything. Not really a worthy opponent.

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky4659 reads

It's so ironic seeing Fester accuse anyone of making shit up or being "intellectually dishonest."
Why? Because Fester is routinely busted here for distorting information of all kinds, not to mention outright lying.
Right, Duchess? She's Fester in drag.

ReplyQuoteReport
durran42149 reads

Oops, your right, the lead is even better than originallyposted!😃

Related Link: https://x.com/Polymarket/status/1830983281556476392?t=eLwyP1YSUwFsyFwW76ovmg&s=19

ReplyQuoteReport
coeur-de-lion80 reads

You also have Alan Licks-men backing you up.  (No pun intended.)

ReplyQuoteReport
Hpygolky48 reads

Spreading propaganda on Twitter 😂😂😂
See, you’re the kinda stooge they were after all along . I see you fell for it
🤣🤣🤣
And you threw on the Polymarket post ..,😊
Simple minds…😉

-- Modified on 9/6/2024 8:40:34 AM

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie61 reads

"Silver elaborated on the reasoning for Harris falling behind on the probability model in another Substack piece. He gave three main points as to why Harris's chances at victory were declining: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. not only dropping out of the race but actively endorsing Trump, poor polls for Harris in Pennsylvania, and a disappointing post-Democratic National Convention bump."

ReplyQuoteReport
Hpygolky82 reads

Again , who’s main investor is Peter Thiel.., that should tell you a lot

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie46 reads

Hmm, how did Peter Thiel engineer RKFjr endorsing Trump, poor poll results for Kamala in Pennsylvania, and no DNC polling bounce?  That guy must be magical!!!

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert49 reads

There has been ZERO bump from RFK Jr, she doesn't have "poor" results in PA as Trump was leading Joe there by 5 just 2 months ago and she LEADS there now, and neither candidate got a convention bounce.

Related Link: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/pennsylvania/

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert55 reads

No wonder Lester cherry picks that one! Notice how he dodged your point about polymarket? That is who Lester is. He is a bad faith actor. He uses only what is beneficial to his TDS at the moment and disregards all other evidence to the contrary.

ReplyQuoteReport
cks17560 reads

He’ll forget he ever trashed it as biased.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert51 reads

Run away now little boy. Mommy is calling you.

ReplyQuoteReport
followme47 reads

What a pathetic little worm.

You do not have to go running to mommy because you never left.

At bobbie boy the board beta we laugh

ReplyQuoteReport
cks17539 reads

More of your passive aggressive “he’s not playing fairly”  bullshit without mentioning what the actual issue is. If you have a question for me, just fucking ask it.  

ReplyQuoteReport
inicky4646 reads

"BetaBob" is almost as weak as his endlessly repeated "soy-boy."
And stop pretending you can't read this thread and actually respond to his point.

ReplyQuoteReport
cks17554 reads

I did answer his points, he just didn’t like the counterpoints.  If he wants to restate a question, I’m happy to answer. But this “he’s not playing fair” whining is a pussy move and you know it.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie49 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie48 reads

However Silver thinks things might turn better for Harris in the next few days as he sees some better polls for her coming and also apparently his own model starts to uncorrect for anticipated convention poll bounce.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie46 reads

Rasmussen overnight polls getting a little noisy coming out of the holiday weekend.   Trump still maintaining a 1 or 2 point lead in the popular vote if averaged over five previous days.

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert50 reads

Oops.

Related Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/08/rasmussen-538-polling/

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie46 reads

RCP uses Rasmussen and so does Nate Silver.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie48 reads

Also I look to polls mostly for trends.  In a close race like this, even a small weighting difference can mean success or failure of the predicted winner.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie50 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Hpygolky44 reads

Seem like his polling data favors Trump, even some poll by 2 high schoolers.
I dunno … I’m smelling a rat here
Lichtman… you’re looking better

Related Link: https://www.salon.com/2024/09/06/nate-silver-faces-backlash-for-pro-model-skewing/

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie42 reads

Patriot Polling, the outfit that was started by two high schoolers (now college students) in 2020 currently has Harris ahead by 1.9, almost matching the RCP aggregate of 1.8.  

Their team of analysts:
Alexander Farman-Farmaian, Political Analyst Williams College — New York, New York
Elisa See, Political Analyst  Harvard University — Johor Bahru, Malaysia
Heidi Small, Political Analyst Columbia University — Wallingford, Connecticut
Connor Khoury, Political Analyst Harvard University — Columbus, Georgia
Evan Epstein, Political Analyst Harvard University — New York, New York
Victoria Dolan, Political Analyst Harvard University — Hull, Massachusetts
Cash Moore, Political Analyst Georgetown University — New York, New York
Ryan Brewington, Quantitative Analyst Harvard University — Radnor, Pennsylvania
Andrew Yang, Quantitative Analyst Rutgers University — Exton, Pennsylvania

ReplyQuoteReport
RespectfulRobert41 reads

Def a rat. Embarrassing for Lester. He has touted Silver, Polymarket, Trafalgar and "Rassy." 538 has destroyed Trafalgar and Rassy and Silver now tied to Polymarket. Yep! They are all dirty. You busted Lester again! lol.

ReplyQuoteReport
lester_prairie51 reads

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!