HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Nate Silver is not high o...

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 06:50 PM

Nate Silver is not high on Bernie's chances of winning the Nomination

(Nate Silver puts out averages of recent political polls weighted to take into consideration the tendency of polls to favor one candidate or the other and the polls historic accuracies.)

The Five Thirty Eight articles Is The Bernie Sanders Surge Real? is really a discussion between Nate Silver and two others about Bernie's current chances of winning the nomination. I especially like the answer that Nate gives to the question about what odds would he have to have to bet on Sanders. He says: "If I could get him at 20-1 (implying about a 5 percent chance of winning), Iíd take it."

(snip)

natesilver: FWIW, our FiveThirtyEight national polling average (which weíre not publishing yet ó stay tuned) has Clinton up 22 percentage points. Although that was before the Monmouth poll released today, which might tighten things a bit. But somewhere in the high teens or perhaps low 20s.

(snip)

micah: All right, so letís posit that the tightening of the race in Iowa and (to a lesser extent) the nation is real and lasting. Sanders leads in New Hampshire. Is Sanders a real threat to win the nomination now?

natesilver: Define real.

clare.malone: I think thatís definitely going to change over the next week or so. The New York Times had a big piece this morning about how the Clinton campaign is changing its strategy given the Bernie bump (which, incidentally, sounds like a really fun dance move, no?).

harry: My New York accent is real. My ability to drive is also real, but not really real.

micah: Real means >25 percent chance.

natesilver: Sell.

micah: 20 percent.

harry: Sell.

natesilver: Still selling.

micah: [letís give the #feeltheberners a moment to leave an angry comment]

15 percent.

natesilver: Thatís about where Betfair has it, for what itís worth.

harry: Iím sorry, but ó knowing Iíve been paid off by my corporate overlords ó hereís what I see: Thereís just little-to-no sign that Clinton has lost any traction among black voters. The most recent YouGov poll has her up 75 percent to 18 percent among black Democrats. The most recent Morning Consult poll has her ahead 71 percent to 14 percent. The most recent Monmouth poll has her up 71 percent to 21 percent among non-white voters. Sanders would need to close that gap to have any chance in South Carolina. And remember, Clinton was only up by 7 percentage points at this point among non-white voters in the 2008 cycle.

natesilver: Indeed. That, along with her support from the party establishment, is why Clinton is the heavy favorite. But at what point does the price on Bernie become attractive to you?

natesilver: If I could get him at 20-1 (implying about a 5 percent chance of winning), Iíd take it.

32 replies, 1910 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Nate Silver is not high on Bernie's chances of winning the Nomination (Original post)
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 OP
monmouth4 Jan 2016 #1
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #2
jfern Jan 2016 #7
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #18
jfern Jan 2016 #19
roguevalley Jan 2016 #32
Stargleamer Jan 2016 #29
wildeyed Jan 2016 #30
Health Wagon Jan 2016 #24
OilemFirchen Jan 2016 #3
jfern Jan 2016 #20
OilemFirchen Jan 2016 #21
jfern Jan 2016 #26
OilemFirchen Jan 2016 #31
madokie Jan 2016 #4
lunamagica Jan 2016 #9
KingFlorez Jan 2016 #5
RobertEarl Jan 2016 #6
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #14
book_worm Jan 2016 #8
Codeine Jan 2016 #10
hobbit709 Jan 2016 #28
nolabear Jan 2016 #25
Fumesucker Jan 2016 #11
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #12
Goblinmonger Jan 2016 #15
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #16
reformist2 Jan 2016 #13
CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #17
ronnykmarshall Jan 2016 #22
nolabear Jan 2016 #27
AZ Progressive Jan 2016 #23

Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:08 PM

1. I'm not real high on Nate Silver, so I guess he and I are even...LOL...n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:15 PM

2. I don't know you, but Nate Silver has been highly accurate in his predictions....

...so I am not overly concerned with your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:50 PM

7. Trump crash and burned immediately upon entering the race, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:44 PM

18. Incomplete information early on - Nate is now projecting Cruz as the favorite in Iowa

Chance of Cruz winning Iowa - 48%. Chance of Trump winning Iowa - 43%. So it is real close.

By the way, he is also projecting Hillary as the favorite in Iowa over Bernie with an 80% chance of winning to Bernie's 20%. Not so close.

Let's see how Nate does on those projections; we are only a week away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #18)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:06 PM

19. Jim Webb was supposed to be the frontrunner

Jindal was supposed to have a good chance in Iowa. And Trump was supposed to immediately crash and burn. I've seen quite enough from 538 this primary to evaluate their accuracy. It's piss poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #19)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 11:18 PM

32. check his predictions on the British elections and the Scottish referrendum and

you will find he is no better at this than anyone else. Its like my meteorologist. I have a window too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:39 PM

29. He had Trump at 2% then 5% then somewhere under 20%

last year. He pretty much stated that no way would Trump be their nominee. Now look at how that prognosis turned out

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:57 PM

30. I have total faith

in Nate Silver.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monmouth4 (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:26 PM

24. I would question Nate's recent failures

 

on the UK and Canada elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:32 PM

3. Dear Nate Silver,

I really liked you and thought you were really smart until you started to say things I don't like. What caused you to become so stupid and unlikable?

Regards,

Bernie Warrior, 18th Internet Battalion

cc: Paul Krugman, Ezra Klein

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jfern (Reply #20)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:21 PM

21. The first article was written by Harry Enten.

The second assumes facts not in evidence. There has not yet been a Republican caucus nor primary. Silver has consistently said that Trump has an extremely neglible chance of being the Republican nominee. He is absolutely correct.

That said, Silver is not infallible. But "laughably wrong"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #21)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:28 PM

26. Harry Enten is employed by Nate Silver at 538

And Trump is clearly doing much better than Nate Silver thought possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jfern (Reply #26)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 11:11 PM

31. My missive was to Nate Silver.

Had I intended it to be for Harry Enten it would have begun "Dear Harry Enten,".

Trump may be doing "better" than Silver's initial prognosis, but he remains an extremely long shot. Has Silver changed his long-term outlook? No. That's not "laughably wrong" - it's adjusting for time.

Still the best in the game. Even when he says something you don't like. (See above.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:34 PM

4. How many times had Nate Silver got it right anyway

all I remember is once.

He's a clueless as she is as you seem to be

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madokie (Reply #4)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:52 PM

9. No, not just once

He was right about the outcome of the 2008 American presidential election in 49 of the 50 states, making a name for himself as a statistician of note. In 2012, he got all 50 states right, cementing his status.

There's a reason why hehe is so well-known.

I thought this was interesting:

2008 Presidential Election

Prediction: Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) will win comfortably over Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).

Outcome: Obama won big.

In the forecast that put him on the political map, Silver applied the statistical analysis that made him a hero to baseball fanatics during his career to horse-race politics in predicting a resounding victory for Obama in 2008.

Silver correctly forecasted the outcome in 49 out of 50 states in the presidential race that year. He only whiffed on Indiana, a traditional Republican stronghold that Obama improbably carried. Silver's analysis in the 2008 election cycle vaulted him to prominence, showing off his number crunching on television with the likes of Stephen Colbert and Dan Rather during the campaign. Two years later, he moved his FiveThirtyEight blog over to the New York Times.

ó

2013 College Football Championship

Prediction: Notre Dame will beat the spread against Alabama in the 2013 BCS National Championship Game.

Outcome: Alabama won in a landslide 42-14.

On Jan. 7, the day of the big game, Silver published an extensive breakdown of the matchup between the two college football powerhouses. Along with the article, Silver appeared in a video in which he said that, although he isn't paid to dispense gambling advice, "Notre Dame might almost be a good pick against the spread," which most oddsmakers placed at 10 points in favor of Alabama.

In his write-up, Silver suggested that the "game should be remembered as a classic" if "Notre Dame is able to keep pace with Alabama." They couldn't, and Alabama had essentially sealed the title by the second quarter.

ó

2013 College Basketball Tournament

Prediction: Louisville, Florida, Indiana and Gonzaga will advance to the NCAA Tournament's Final Four.

Outcome: Of the four predictions, only Louisville was right.

Silver's pre-tournament analysis gave eventual champion Louisville the best chance of cutting down the nets, but he was failed by his other three Final Four picks. Gonzaga, Silver's pick to emerge from the West region, was bounced in the second round. The team that upset them, Wichita State, made an improbable run to the Final Four, despite Silver giving them a mere 1.3 percent chance of advancing that far.

Silver's other two Final Four teams fared better, but still fell short of the final weekend. Indiana was two wins short of making it to the Final Four, while Florida fell only one win short.

ó

2010 Midterm Elections

Prediction: Republicans will pick up 54-55 seats in taking back the U.S. House; Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) will be unseated.

Outcome: The GOP gained 63 House seats; Reid survived in Nevada

Silver was rightly high on the GOP's prospects to take back control of the House of Representatives in 2010, writing in his final forecast that the party was poised to gain 54-55 seats in the chamber. Republicans ended up pulling in what was the largest midterm gain for since World War II.

But Silver may have been too bullish on the Republicans' chances of taking back control of the Senate. His forecast made Republicans Ken Buck and Sharron Angle the clear favorites in Colorado and Nevada respectively. Buck was ultimately nipped by Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), while Majority Leader Harry Reid won with breathing room over Angle.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/nate-silver-s-seven-most-memorable-predictions

---

2013 Academy Awards


Prediction: 'Argo' for Best Picture; Daniel Day-Lewis for Best Actor; Jennifer Lawrence for Best Actress; Steven Spielberg for Best Director

Outcome: He got three of four right.

Silver's new job will reportedly include a spot on ABC's coverage of the Academy Awards. In something of a foreshadowing of this role, Silver took a stab at the 2013 Oscars, correctly predicting three out of the four major categories using a model that took into account 16 other awards leading up to the Academy Awards. Silver's pick for Best Director was his lone miss, with director Ang Lee taking the prize.

---
2013 NFL Playoffs And Super Bowl

Prediction: Before playoffs, he picked the Seattle Seahawks and New England Patriots to advance to the Super Bowl. Before the game he picked the San Francisco 49ers to win the championship.

Outcome: None of those things happened.

Before the NFL playoffs kicked off earlier this year, Silver picked a bi-coastal clash in the Super Bowl, with the Seattle Seahawks emerging from the NFC and the New England Patriots coming out of the AFC. The game ultimately pitted a West Coast squad against an East Coast team, but not the matchup Silver envisioned.

Hoping to redeem himself before the Super Bowl, Silver pegged the San Francisco 49ers as the favorites over the Baltimore Ravens. In a classic game, the 49ers fell five yards short of claiming the title -- and of giving Silver more bragging rights.
ó

2012 Presidential Election

Prediction: Obama, the consistent favorite, will win in an electoral college landslide.

Outcome: Obama held consistent leads in the polls en route to an electoral college landslide.

If the 2008 election was Silver's "Meet The Beatles!," then 2012 was his "Revolver." It was during the most recent cycle that Silver asserted himself as both an authority of polling analysis and a seminal figure in American political coverage.

His consistently favorable forecasts for Obama drew the ire of many on the right who insisted that Silver had a bias against Mitt Romney. But he was ultimately vindicated on Election Day and even improved upon his stellar showing in 2008, correctly forecasting the electoral college outcome in all 50 states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:40 PM

5. Those are fair odds at this point

When you take into account the delegate math, the odds are very fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:49 PM

6. Your avatar

 

Why is it so huge? 907 kb

And next time you see Nate, tell him I said he needs to quit whoring for the establishment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RobertEarl (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:11 PM

14. My Avatar is so huge because it is actually a phograph

It is the Japanese symbol for "Patience", a trait that comes in very handy here on DU.

Nate is one of the top statisticians in the country. Statisticians don't care about candidates; they only care only about numbers. Numbers don't care who will win and who will lose. They are inanimate and totally impartial. It's hard to like or hate numbers, they just are what they are.

I bet if Nate were projecting Bernie as the eventual winner, you would be saying very nice things about him. Apparently if you are a Sanders supporter, if you don't like the message, you attack the messenger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:51 PM

8. Nate Silvers is not a god. He's a pundit like Toady Chuck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to book_worm (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:53 PM

10. He's a statistician, not a pundit.

 

He's a lifelong numbers geek.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Codeine (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:30 PM

28. "There's lies, damned lies, and statistics"-Mark Twain

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to book_worm (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:28 PM

25. Since when? He was a god around here in the last election.

What did he do to change that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 07:55 PM

11. I'm sure that will bring you comfort

You should print it out and hold it tight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:08 PM

12. Ever the optimistic

More proof that Sanders are dreamers rather realists. When given a 5% of winning by one of the nation's top statisticians the die hard Sanders supporters respond by shouting: Bernie! Bernie! Bernie! With people like us behind him, he can't lose!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Reply #12)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:16 PM

15. And what about Trump's supporters

 

How did they take Silver's prediction that Trump would crash and burn when he entered the race. They must have been devastated when that happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Goblinmonger (Reply #15)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:34 PM

16. Incomplet information early on - Nate is now projecting Cruz as the favorite in Iowa

Chance of Cruz winning Iowa 48%. Chance of Trump winning Iowa 43% So it is real close.

By the way, he is also projecting Hillary as the favorite in Iowa over Bernie with an 80% chance of winning to Bernie's 20% Not so close.

Let's see how Nate does on those projections

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:09 PM

13. Did Nate Silver predict Bernie's surge??? At all??? Some prognosticator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #13)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 08:39 PM

17. He doesn't project where the polls will be tomorrow

He predicts based on what the polls are showing right now because the the poll respondents are asked: "How would you vote today"

Obviously his projections grow more accurate the closer we get to the event projected. Based on Nate's projections only a week out from the Iowa caucuses, Bernie is in trouble because Nate has Hillary with an 80% chance of winning in Iowa with Bernie having the remaining 20%. Those odds could change with the publication of additional Iowa polls, but I personally like those odds, don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:25 PM

22. Nate Silver a prawn of the right wing

An enemy of The People.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ronnykmarshall (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:29 PM

27. This is sarcasm, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CajunBlazer (Original post)

Mon Jan 25, 2016, 10:26 PM

23. Obviously you haven't seen this thread

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread