November 5, 2018
At the Day-Before-the-Deluge Café...
... talk about the midterms if you like. I'm tired of all the gabbing and need a break before the challenge of staying alert for the actual experience tomorrow. Feel free to talk about anything though.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
245 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 245 of 245I tried to vote early today (Franklin Cty, Ohio). I waited until 10 am, thinking it would be relatively easy. Wrong! (as Trump would say.) Completely full parking lot with traffic backed up. Long line of people outside the building. So I pulled the plug, and will vote at my usual polling place tomorrow. (Early voting is at a different location.)
Not sure who will benefit from the high early turnout, but my guess is the Republicans. This is unlike any midterm I've ever seen. For the first time in my life, I will not even consider voting for a Democrat or third party nominee. The Dems need to have a "time out" until they come to their senses.
Prager quoted Instapundit to the effect "democrats saying policing voter fraud is voter suppression says it all."
Dust Bunny Queen said...
Birkel: When comparing the returned ballots to past election totals at similar points before the election, we have an accurate measure of voter enthusiasm and participation. This is much more accurate than polling based on predictions.
Just remember as in investing, it is the same in politics.
Past performance is not indicative of future results
You are measuring and comparing correlations.
Polls would be .3-.6 with a constant error of +3% democrat.
Returned ballot voter affiiation would be .7-.9 with no constant error.
Where is Michael K? I haven’t seen him comment for several days now. I hope he’s OK despite bumping heads with him.
ARM’s another one who hasn’t been around for awhile. Hope he just got tired of us.
Michael K was volunteering for his local congressional candidate.
Hope he is just busy.
Some black kids spelled out "CNN" ? They shouldn't be expelled, they should be exemacuted.
Off topic but I've commented here before that CNN was taken off the televisions at the Savannah Airport- Savannah GA, CNNs home state. Yesterday I noticed Fox News was on. How far CNN has fallen...
Ditto's on Doc Mike. I hope he is pounding the pavement getting out the vote. Can't wait for him to regal us with stories from the trenches.
I saw that bit by Nate Silver. I think the same thing probably happened that I hypothesized happened in 2016- he got a last minute look at internal Democratic polling, and has greatly hedged his predictions once more so that he can look good no matter what happens tomorrow night- so, officially, he sticks with the 85%+ chance the Democrats win the House, but can always point to the 50/50 remark if it doesn't happen that way.
I kind of agree with your conclusion, but not with your guess as to the cause.
Like almost all pollsters and predictors he was badly burned by the 2016 outcome. No one cared that his model gave Trump a chance when most experts did not. He realized then that no one cares about percentages. Politics isn't horseshoes.
So now he wants everyone to know that he's giving the Republicans a chance. 85% is not 100%.
Henry, we are not going to buy stock in polling firms.
Stop selling your tires ideas.
BTW, if you all of Silver's twitter feed, rather than cherry-picking and misreading his one "you shouldn't be surprised" comment, you'll find that he very much is not hedging.
Some guy named Joe Concha picked up the "no one should be surprised" tweet and ran with it:
Joe Concha: "No one should be surprised if they [Ds] only win 19 seats & no one should be surprised if they win 51 seats ... both extremely possible, based on how accurate polls are in the real world" - Nate Silver. In a related story, I'm picking Dallas to top the Titans by 3-31 pts tonight
Silver's response:
Nate Silver: "Be happy to play poker against you or make some sports bets any time you want, subject to legal restrictions in our respective jurisdictions."
And here Silver responds to Nicholas Nassim Taleb also making the same assertion that "no one should be surprised" means "50-50":
The forecast has been ~80% the whole time bro
Birkel -- I'm just trying to sell numeracy.
God, I only have one request. That activist Donna Shillala (sic) lose and lose badly. Lord, you have seen all the bad things that the Clintons and their activists have done.
And may you grace Hillary with almost enough health so that she feels good to run in 2020.
And if you got a lightning bolt for Peter Strzok.
May you gift Mueller with more truth than his clenched cheeks can handle.
Amen.
Okay, four requests.
Ditto, her challenger is an honest newswoman, the Latin version of sharyl atkinson.
Strzok is up to $448,162 now.
Granted, it is probably the last honest money he makes. After this, CNN.
Sorry if someone else has brought this up.
Political parties, voluntary associations of citizens, are in the Constitution. The first amendment.
Henry said...
Birkel -- I'm just trying to sell numeracy.
Get your numeracy right here! $1 each, or 3 for $5!
The passing of Wah Wah Watson has me thinking about all the great musicians that lived their lives, and particularly their professional careers, in the shadows of fame. I'm thinking about the people like Wah Wah and the other members of The Funk Brothers. There is a really good documentary of these guys, "Standing in the Shadows of MoTown" that is well worth watching.
Who are some of the others?
The Wrecking Crew.
Rasmussen’s new poll on generic voting is R+1. If this is accurate, then N8’s model will be wrong. And he’s not telling us how much the generic means in his model. He’s likely using a range of D+3-D+6. D+3 gives him some wiggle room on his projection. But D+6 is probably where the 80% comes from. Then there is the part of the model where he estimates enthusiasm to project vote totals. His model likely assumes a Democrat edge in the totals. If that is wrong, his model will be wrong. These 2 uncertainties are what screwed him in 2016. They are why he is hedging in public today. Makes me wonder if early vote totals are a part of his model and they’re not what he wants to see?
Nate also makes allusions to money in a race equating to voter enthusiasm for the recipient candidate, but who beleives that in a year when billionaires and super pacs are willing to back up dumptrucks of money on house races?
Probabilistic prediction models mean never having to say you’re wrong.
Politico has generic D+3.
Numeracy: assume turnout and generate numbers with those assumptions in mind.
Then, make predictions in hopes of influencing the elections.
Then pretend last minute swings happened.
Henry, sell that bull shit elsewhere.
Rasmussen’s new poll on generic voting is R+1. If this is accurate, then N8’s model will be wrong.
If Nate Silver is wrong two elections in a row, we will have a blast on this blog.
That's one thing that should motivate skittish Trump supporters. You gotta watch MSNBC when they lose an election (Trump 2016), lose a Special House election (Ossoff 2017) or lose a big political fight (Kavanaugh 2018).
They alternate between going ballistic against the enemy de jour and meekly crawling into fetal positions underneath their desks.
It's quite humorous!
What gives the pollsters hope this year is that the generic was mostly correct in 2016. What they didn’t count on was the skew in individual states. So they feel pretty good that RealClear is showing an average D+7. They’ve probably tweaked the models to account for skew in individual states. The thing that puzzles me is how the Voters are going to vote for Republican Senators and at the same time, vote for Democrat Representatives. It’s happened in the past, but that sort of hedging your bet on government just doesn’t sound right in 2018.
The Crack Emcee said...
"People talk about reparations all the time, most just think it is a dumb, unworkable concept"
Show me the stats on blacks thinking it's a " dumb, unworkable concept" and then explain to me how racism has and does work in this country.
**********************************
Millions are getting their "reparations" one welfare check, one food stamp, one "free" Medicaid service, one EBT card at a time, some for *years* at a time, despite paying no income taxes. Have all those payments and services made them change their bad habits, or become industrious? Do they save for the future? Hell, no.
So why do you think giving people a huge sum of money is going to change them in any way that will permanently improve their lives?
Will they buy businesses they have no idea how to run? Will they buy fancy homes and cars, and then find their reparations stash is depleted and have no means to maintain them?
IOW Have you read about lottery winners (of all races) who piss everything away in a couple of years? Why would paying "reparations" lead to a different result/ And if a A/A is already doing well, why would he/she take the money---how exactly has he/she been held down?
If claims of burgeoning black support for Trump are any indication, many Africans-Americans are rejecting the "bad whitey" trope as they see Trump, the Epitome of "The Man", creating the economic conditions that allow them to get ahead in life, not merely whinge about "racism".
From your comments, it seems you think so too. So why slip back into a fantasy that's never going to happen?
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...in a comment he later deleted...that he didn't own a TV.
Which made me think of a conversation with a leftist, in which I asserted that a lot of leftists engage in "virtual signaling".
He: "Oh, you guys don't, eh...
"What about those of you who brag they don't own a television?"
The upside of this pro Dem reporting is perhaps pulling them into a sense of security.
I have been vehemently told that getting a voter ID is WAY too much trouble for the core Democratic voter. So why should they get off the couch for a shoo in?
"According to [Brookwook High School Principal] Ford, the four students, two of whom are black, one of whom is Asian, and one of whom is Hispanic, said it was intended as a joke."
Crack, come get your people.
I’m watching Sean Hannity in Fox right now and I am wondering how it is not a coordinated; in-kind campaign communication?
Chuck said...
I’m watching Sean Hannity in Fox right now and I am wondering how it is not a coordinated; in-kind campaign communication?
********************************
You mean, like the one George Stephanopolos has been running for the Clintons and other Dems the past20 years?
Jay I recognize the pernicious left wing bias in the media. It isn’t just George Stephanopoulos either.
But I challenge anybody to find a left wing corollary to the opening of Hannity’s show tonight.
Show me your nominations.
Every show on MSNBC?
Well what a coinkydink. I just got a cell phone call from a strange number. Not my area code so I answered, thinking I might get a polling story to add to the conversation.
It was the CDC. Vaccination survey. No one under 18 in the household, so she let me go after ascertaining that.
A young female voice with a slight Latina accent. She sounded cute.
I'm going to go out on a limb here.
Have you looked at the House maps from the last 3 elections? They're on Wikipedia, the source of all truth....
There are very few districts that have flipped at all recently; a couple have switched back and forth.
I swear, the pollsters have been making up the whole "toss-up" meme just to get people anxious--or hopeful--or anxiously hopeful.
If the pollsters were realistic they probably wouldn't have a job, though, so there's that.
I just do not see districts that have gone red for the last 3 cycles going blue, even if there's no incumbent running for reelection.
DavidD,
80% of the "toss-up races" have been won by Republicans the last few election cycles.
Polling is bought and paid for by the MSM ownership class.
Blogger Birkel said...Original Mike:If you are registered with a party in your state, the Secretary of State knows that information. It's in a database and they report the total number of ballot requests and ballots returned on an ongoing basis.
It's not magic.
Only certain state have (allow) party registration, with Florida as one major example. My state, Minnesota does not have party registration, and has open primaries in light of this.
Trump on live with his monkey butler Sean Hannity; Hannity is not asking a single substantive question. Just cheerleading.
Trump says “We won easily.” Then a happy mutual admiration society with Hannity and Laura Ingraham.
Hannity concludes by saying “Go Vote (shock the world like we did two years ago).” “We...”. Vote for us.
“We won easily,” was Trump’s own referrnce to 2016; and his miraculous inside-straight victories with razor thin margins in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. A remarkably narrow victory in the electoral college, without the national popular vote.
Rush Limbaugh, on the eve of an election, assailing the Congressional delegations and leadership of both parties.
Hey thanks Rush. With friends like you, Republicans don’t need any more enemies.
By the way, when you get a cold call at 8pm and the caller says they're with the Center for Disease Control, your first reaction is a sense of unease.
I have it on good authority that Trump could not win Michigan in 2016.
NPChuck, fopdoodle extraordinaire, is the LLR you want supporting your party.
NPChuck says "Hey thanks Rush. With friends like you, Republicans don’t need any more enemies."
Like incels who constantly try and smear the Republican President while pretending to be an attorney on the internet? "Friends" like that?
Shut your pie hole, retard.
Berkel,
My point exactly.
Jack Wayne said...
What gives the pollsters hope this year is that the generic was mostly correct in 2016.
There's a single shorter word for mostly correct. Wrong.
Post a Comment