Cont: 2024 Election Thread part 2

[Tero]

By Lenny Bronner, Luis Melgar, Diane Napolitano and Kati Perry

The latest polls...

Harris’s surge has peaked.

Nate Silver was quick to jump to this convlusion as well. Where the difference is still the 1%. Insignificant.

One is not justified in making this prediction in the weeks past Harris starting campaign.

It may justify a conclusion that neither will lead by 5% before election. But this is a Trump election. Polling is never going to be very accurate.

 

[CarbShark]

RFK posted

"Liberals, take note: If you support Kamala Harris, you are now on the same side as Dick Cheney."

Bobby Jr., take note, you are now in the same boat as Dick Cheney: Kamala Harris did not seek nor offer anything in return for your endorsements.

 

[dirtywick]

he talks like a worm ate some of his brain

 

[shemp]

How are the polls even close?

 

[shemp]

he talks like a worm ate some of his brain

Just some?

 

[Armitage72]

RFK posted

"Liberals, take note: If you support Kamala Harris, you are now on the same side as Dick Cheney."

You can't have different opinions of someone on different topics at different times. You have to be 100% for them or 100% against them forever.
We saw that with the Mueller investigation. He supported the Iraq invasion, so if you opposed the invasion you had to oppose the Trump investigation, and if you supported the investigation then you must have been in favor of the invasion.

 

[jt512]

From the "I used to be somebody but now I'm just a washed-up attention whore department":

Nate Silver’s Latest Forecast Has Trump Winning Every Single Swing State in Electoral College Blowout



Whatever Putin or Trump might be paying him, he's not worth it.

Your glib condemnation of Nate Silver belies an astounding ignorance of his methodology.

 

[shemp]

From the "I used to be somebody but now I'm just a washed-up attention whore department":

Nate Silver’s Latest Forecast Has Trump Winning Every Single Swing State in Electoral College Blowout



Whatever Putin or Trump might be paying him, he's not worth it.

And maybe this is why:

Nate Silver faces backlash for pro-Trump model skewing

Nate Silver, the celebrity statistician who gained notoriety for his FiveThirtyEight election models, is facing backlash over alleged skewing in his new model.

Some social media users have denounced his complaints as not based in math, especially as he makes similar adjustments to his data. Silver has adopted the FiveThirtyEight system of weighting polls differently, ostensibly based on reliability. He's facing criticism for allegedly favoring junk polls over respected pollsters.

“Patriot Polling is literally run by two right wing high school students that is ranked 240th on FiveThirtyEight,” former pollster Adam Carlson noted on X, asking why that poll was weighted more highly than a YouGov poll, which they called “an internationally respected pollster that is ranked 4th on FiveThirtyEight.”

Silver's now being scrutinized for a potential conflict of interest after joining the crypto-based gambling company Polymarket as an advisor in July, and pushed his model while promoting election betting opportunities. “Feels like it should be a bigger deal that Nate Silver is employed by Polymarket, a site that allows you to bet on political outcomes, and also runs a “prediction model” that has the ability to directly affect betting behavior,” journalist Brett Meiselas wrote on X.

 

[bruto]

You can't make this **** up.

We don't have to. We have clowns to do it for us.

 

[The Atheist]

From the "I used to be somebody but now I'm just a washed-up attention whore department":

The really sickening thing about Silver, he took his 30 pieces and then still wanted more.

What a twat.

Harris’s surge has peaked.

Not even close. You can't expect to stay on the trajectory she was without pause, and that's what this is - a pause, to be followed by a further rise right up to Melbourne Cup/Guy Fawkes Day.

I think something happens in America that day, too.

How are the polls even close?

The thing is, it's excellent news. Two months out, you don't want women and minorities thinking they don't need to vote because Kamala's murdering Trump. Keep them on edge, keep them determined to vote and be repaid in spades.

Your glib condemnation of Nate Silver belies an astounding ignorance of his methodology.

Oh boy, I bet you wished you waited 90 minutes to post that.

The butthurt is strong with this one.

 

[Delvo]

Silver admitted that his previous projection was based on the idea that there should've been a post-convention "bounce" for Kamala so the lack of a bounce was really a negative. But I don't know of anything specific wrong with this new poll (note the difference between a poll and a projection), and it generally agrees with a couple of other new non-Silver polls showing that Kamala's rise has stalled. Just "But it's Silver!" isn't good enough. In fact, that really sounds a lot like the fingers-in-ears "La-la-la I can't hear you on your land line!!!!" denialism that was rampant while the party was still trying to prop Biden up.

 

[jt512]

Your glib condemnation of Nate Silver belies an astounding ignorance of his methodology.

Oh boy, I bet you wished you waited 90 minutes to post that.

Not in the least.

 

[jt512]

Silver admitted that his previous projection was based on the idea that there should've been a post-convention "bounce" for Kamala so the lack of a bounce was really a negative.

Yep. Isn't it amazing what reading the methodology section reveals.

Just "But it's Silver!" isn't good enough. In fact, that really sounds a lot like the fingers-in-ears "La-la-la I can't hear you on your land line!!!!" denialism that was rampant while the party was still trying to prop Biden up.

Yep, again.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Ya'll are retconning how pissy so many people, including people here, were at Silver for giving Trump any odds of winning at all back in 2016. Like people were legit angry at him, a few outright basically claiming he had a hand in Trump winning by not dismissing him as an impossible candidate.

Big chunks of the election thread back in 2016 was just people crapping on Silver for not pointing and laughing at Trump for thinking he could win like the rest of us were doing. Hell one major prolific poster basically just spent the last 3 months of the election doing a "LOL Silver Sucks he thinks Trump has a chance" routine and then disappeared after Trump won.

Is Silver right? *Shrugs* Who knows and from looking at his Twitter/X he's backtracking HARD right now.

 

[jt512]

Ya'll are retconning how pissy so many people, including people here, were at Silver for giving Trump any odds of winning at all back in 2016. Like people were legit angry at him, a few outright basically claiming he had a hand in Trump winning by not dismissing him as an impossible candidate.

Big chunks of the election thread back in 2016 was just people crapping on Silver for not pointing and laughing at Trump for thinking he could win like the rest of us were doing. Hell one major prolific poster basically just spent the last 3 months of the election doing a "LOL Silver Sucks he thinks Trump has a chance" routine and then disappeared after Trump won.

Is Silver right? *Shrugs* Who knows and from looking at his Twitter/X he's backtracking HARD right now.

No, he's not. What are you talking about?

 

[The Atheist]

Is Silver right?

Given him being miles from even known right-biased aggregators like RCP, I'm going to go out on a limb and say "Hell yeah."

 

[bruto]

Just some?

Even worms have some standards.

 

[Brainster]

Ya'll are retconning how pissy so many people, including people here, were at Silver for giving Trump any odds of winning at all back in 2016. Like people were legit angry at him, a few outright basically claiming he had a hand in Trump winning by not dismissing him as an impossible candidate.

Big chunks of the election thread back in 2016 was just people crapping on Silver for not pointing and laughing at Trump for thinking he could win like the rest of us were doing. Hell one major prolific poster basically just spent the last 3 months of the election doing a "LOL Silver Sucks he thinks Trump has a chance" routine and then disappeared after Trump won.

I remember that Michigan Democrats were urging Hillary to spend more time there in the last few days, and her campaign refused on the basis that it might encourage Trump to devote more resources to the Wolverine State. As it was, Trump held his last rally in Grand Rapids and a day later took Michigan by a little over 10,000 votes or 0.22 percentage points.

As to why Silver shows Trump doing better than most other polling aggregators, he's explained several times that his model assumes that Kamala would get a decent bounce out of her convention. While there was a bounce, it was not at the level his model would assume and as a result what are shown as Harris wins at other sites grade out as modest losses or ties. BTW, that adjustment is already starting to be phased out as time passes since the convention, And RCP doesn't have Harris killing it by any means; they have her up by 1.2 percentage points nationally and 0.2 percentage points in the battleground states. That's well within the range where she could win the popular vote and lose the EC.

The betting sites also currently have Trump slightly favored; RCP's betting average has the Donald at 52.0 to Harris' 46.8.

 

[angrysoba]

From the "I used to be somebody but now I'm just a washed-up attention whore department":

Nate Silver’s Latest Forecast Has Trump Winning Every Single Swing State in Electoral College Blowout



Whatever Putin or Trump might be paying him, he's not worth it.

And maybe this is why:

Nate Silver faces backlash for pro-Trump model skewing

If you listened to Silver's podcast, he has said multiple times what his relationship is with Polymarket. He and his co-host have also said that they want Harris to win.

That said, Silver is posting his electoral forecasts according to the data his model spits out.

Why do you assume something nefarious is going on?

It's really strange to me that people think a prediction or forecast of the election result is equal to making Trump win.

 

[angrysoba]

Ya'll are retconning how pissy so many people, including people here, were at Silver for giving Trump any odds of winning at all back in 2016. Like people were legit angry at him, a few outright basically claiming he had a hand in Trump winning by not dismissing him as an impossible candidate.

Big chunks of the election thread back in 2016 was just people crapping on Silver for not pointing and laughing at Trump for thinking he could win like the rest of us were doing. Hell one major prolific poster basically just spent the last 3 months of the election doing a "LOL Silver Sucks he thinks Trump has a chance" routine and then disappeared after Trump won.

People clearly should have been listening to Silver more when he said that Trump was easily within a margin of error of victory, because the state polls, not the national polls were the important metric. Yet there were others, like that stupid guy who had his own model favouring Clinton by 99% saying he would eat a bug on TV if Trump won. People I know, and no doubt people on this forum were accusing of Silver of somehow helping Trump for making a more accurate forecast.

This is a bizarre way of looking at things. In my own humble opinion, talking as though a Harris victory is inevitable is the biggest mistake of all. People also made similar mistakes with Brexit and Clinton. They assumed the way the votes would go and did not turn out. A co-worker of mine here in Japan said he had no need to send a postal vote because his home state of Michigan always went to Democrats.

Is Silver right? *Shrugs* Who knows and from looking at his Twitter/X he's backtracking HARD right now.

I don't see any backtracking, HARD or otherwise.