Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
1. And if she loses CA, then Silver and apologist will inform us that 98% isn't 100&
Tue May 24, 2016, 09:29 AM
May 2016

and his projections being wrong AGAIN weren't his fault.

His 15 minutes were up a while ago.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
5. Not talking about Sanders chances overall in the election.
Tue May 24, 2016, 10:21 AM
May 2016

I'm talking about the prediction of CA. I don't like meta data analysis people all that much (I'm a teacher and education meta analysis people give me a sad).

yellowcanine

(35,699 posts)
3. "His 15 minutes were up a while ago." Wishful thinking.
Tue May 24, 2016, 09:36 AM
May 2016

Nate has been forthright about the unreliability of primary election predictions compared to general election predictions. And he has always pointed out that his predictions are based on probabilities. After 2012 when he wiped the floor with the wishful thinking Karl Roves etc. he IS the premier election prognosticator and he will remain so at least through this election.

 

Goblinmonger

(22,340 posts)
4. If he were being honest about the unreliability of primary election predictions
Tue May 24, 2016, 10:19 AM
May 2016

he wouldn't be giving a 98% Clinton wins projection.

yellowcanine

(35,699 posts)
7. As I said, wishful thinking. Nate sticks to his models. He is not dishonest.
Tue May 24, 2016, 10:37 AM
May 2016

Your claims not withstanding.

oasis

(49,376 posts)
9. After the American public witnessed the tirade in Nevada, these
Tue May 24, 2016, 10:45 AM
May 2016

kind of poll numbers are no surprise.

firebrand80

(2,760 posts)
10. I wonder how that could affect things
Tue May 24, 2016, 11:10 AM
May 2016

On the GOP side, there were some clues in the polling that the possibly of a shit-show at the convention was helping Trump, people on the fence believed he would be the nominee, and just wanted to put it all to bed. It's possible that we could see something similar on our side, voters might believe that the continuing primary is helping Trump.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»538 Odds for Hillary, CA:...