Originally Posted by Adder (Post 508349)

There are no mavericks. They're all going to vote for the secret senate health care bill.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 508350)

Please go read up on the 2016 presidential election polling. You don't understand what happened.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508353)

The polls were spot on, and they were posted here, IIRC. What was off was bullshit analysts (hi 538!). My wife would quote from the times each morning, "today it's 70% chance Hil is going to win!" And I ask how that could be given the polls. In retrospect those predictions probably are as much to blame as anything, given lefties peace to vote for Stein, or Johnson.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508353)

In retrospect those predictions probably are as much to blame as anything, given lefties peace to vote for Stein, or Johnson.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508354)

If you (not you, Hank, but one) accept that the polls are not an attempt to directly predict what the vote will be, but an indirect indicator that will come pretty close, then it's no mystery that the polls will be off by some factor, and that in a close election this can be decisive. If Nate Silver says, there's a 70% chance that HRC is going to win, then he's saying, on the same factual predicate, there's a 30% chance that Trump is going to win. If I say there's a 50% chance that I'll flip this coin and it's heads, and then it's tails, it doesn't mean that I was wrong. It Nate Silver's case, an advantage or disadvantage of his art form is that it's completely untestable. When Trump won, was Silver wrong or was it just the less likely outcome coming to pass? You can't tell.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508353)

The polls were spot on, and they were posted here, IIRC. What was off was bullshit analysts (hi 538!). My wife would quote from the times each morning, "today it's 70% chance Hil is going to win!" And I ask how that could be given the polls. In retrospect those predictions probably are as much to blame as anything, given lefties peace to vote for Stein, or Johnson.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508355)

I couldn't possibly ever agree with you more.

TM

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508356)

The guy who taught me to do litigation, when asked by a client to predict a % chance of winning, would say: "I won't, I'll tell you you have a good case, but I'm not going to guess a percent. Besides, if I say there's only a 10% Chance you'll lose, if you lose you still lose 100%."

Predictions are dangerous and stupid. I know one person who voted third party and he pointed to the prediction to justify the vote.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 508348)

Except that it's entirely self-inflicted. Had he just said, "Foreign interference in our elections is entirely unacceptable and we're going to do everything to make sure it can't happen" and let the FBI counterintelligence investigation play out, he'd be fine (assuming there's nothing to find).

Instead, he insisted there's nothing there, tried to shut down the investigation, bragged that he did so by firing Comey, asked the DNI and the deputy director of the NSA (I think it was) to publicly say there's no collusion, told the intelligence agencies that they're wrong, apparently randomly blurts out that he's not under investigation, repeatedly denied he was with any Russian prostitutes and otherwise acted like he's guilty as hell.

Meanwhile, we don't really know if he's guilty as hell. He might just be a petulant man-baby whose ego can't handle any suggestion that he didn't win fair and square... sorry, bigly... who crybabied his way into a criminal obstruction investigation.

Either way, this shit is on him.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 508357)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/u...rump.html?_r=0

If you're argument is the national popular vote polls were spot-on, but the state polls were off, I buy that: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tive.html?_r=0

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508361)

It was only 7 months ago. I posted polls HERE from realclearpolitics that showed Michigan and Pa were in play. Obama and hil were in the both states the week before the election. The last time Mi saw Obama in 2008 was September. The dems knew there was trouble. And I also posted totals showing if Hil lost EITHER Mi or Pa Trump would win.

Those are facts. And realclearpolitics posts raw polls and averages. The times was off, but the polls were not.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 508370)

In a just world, you would get all the riches that are going to Nate Silver, and he would spending his time trying to win The Moth in different cities, amiright?

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 508372)

Not trying to claim credit, just trying to call bullshit.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 508355)

I couldn't possibly ever agree with you more.

TM

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 508373)

I'm old enough to remember when Hank would have responded with a triumphant listing of all the cities he's won.