• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2024 Election Thread part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
EHocking said:
He has been predicting US election results 150 years before he was born?

I can be 100% accurate from the first USAan elections up to 2020 and I’d bet , minimum, 99.9% accuracy if 2024 was included.
Click to expand...

He says he has applied the parameters of his model to past elections and it has proven 99.9% accurate.
 
CarbShark said:
He says he has applied the parameters of his model to past elections and it has proven 99.9% accurate.
Click to expand...

In order for this to be true, he would have had to have examined at least 667 elections (666/667 = 99.85%).

I'm curious if that's what he has done. I mean, it's possible if he examines non-presidential elections, but I am just wondering.
 
CarbShark said:
He says he has applied the parameters of his model to past elections and it has proven 99.9% accurate.
Click to expand...


What he said pre-2016 is that his model "retroactively predicted" every presidential race up to a certain date that I don't specifically recall. What he was saying is that his model was a perfect fit to the data it was trained on. It is well known that such in-sample accuracy will overestimate out-of-sample accuracy, that is, predictions made about a future event.
 
jt512 said:
What he said pre-2016 is that his model "retroactively predicted" every presidential race up to a certain date that I don't specifically recall. What he was saying is that his model was a perfect fit to the data it was trained on. It is well known that such in-sample accuracy will overestimate out-of-sample accuracy, that is, predictions made about a future event.
Click to expand...

Do we know how many variables? Because with sufficient degrees of freedom you can fit any data to a polynomial fit but with very little predictive power
 
TofuFighter said:
This piece quotes David Frum framing it thusly in 2020:
"Trump allows jerks to be jerks," These people look to the president almost as "the leader of a jerk liberation movement," because he gives them permission to behave like cretins without shame or apology.
Click to expand...

And the Trump shall set them free!

I agree with Frum 100%. They proudly let their jerk flag fly openly now.
 
Because his victory was so complete he doesn't need another. Only the loser asks for another crack at the title.
 
jimbob said:
Do we know how many variables? Because with sufficient degrees of freedom you can fit any data to a polynomial fit but with very little predictive power
Click to expand...


I don't recall ever having read a disclosure of that. I've wondered the same thing myself. It had to have been a lot; there's no way you look at precisely 13 variables and they miraculous fit your data perfectly.
 
I don't understand why Trump refused to say he supported Ukraine. I mean, he lies constantly, they not just lie about that as well?

My guess is that he didn't want to anger his lord, Putin.
 
jt512 said:
I don't recall ever having read a disclosure of that. I've wondered the same thing myself. It had to have been a lot; there's no way you look at precisely 13 variables and they miraculous fit your data perfectly.
Click to expand...

It looks like JoeMorgue gave a good illustration of this

JoeMorgue said:
Again, this should be the required reading for the "Analytics" crowd, even the ones who AREN'T doing it after the fact:

https://xkcd.com/2383/
Click to expand...


electoral_precedent_2020.png


Alt text


Electoral Precedent 2020(alt-text)
He also broke the streak that incumbents with websites are unbeatable and Delawareans can't win, creating a new precedent: Only someone from Delaware can defeat an incumbent with a website.

 
Last edited:
Donnie 's as far a another debate goes, is in full Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail mode:

'COme back you coward and I'll bite you to death".
 
Unsurprisingly, Trump is in AZ at his rally lying is stupid head off about the debate. He's repeating the same lies as always and his audience is lapping it up like the mindless idiots they are. He's claiming Harris was to confiscate all their guns, Harris was the "leader of the movement 'Defund the Police'", Harris wants to end fracking, he's denying knowing anything about Project 2025, the FBI left out crime-ridden large cities in crime report, the moderators only corrected him on things he was right about, all polls show he won the debate. Now he's rambling on about her name, and mentally ill and prisoners are flooding in.

It's just more of the same craziness he's been spewing for years. He's nuts.
 
TofuFighter said:
This piece quotes David Frum framing it thusly in 2020:
"Trump allows jerks to be jerks," These people look to the president almost as "the leader of a jerk liberation movement," because he gives them permission to behave like cretins without shame or apology.
Click to expand...

Brilliant! The "leader of a jerk liberation movement". Spot on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom