Nate Silver

Cliffy6745

This will probably get no responses, but Nate Silver has been getting absolutely butchered by the media. In 2008 he picked 49 of 50 states correctly and has been trashed over and over, so you know what, he just went out and picked 50 out of 50.

Prince Of Dorkness

Yeah and with some states that everyone was saying were out of reach.

snow_board_rider

he'll be the most sought after interview on all of the shows now.

satansbed

nate silver is awesome, i think i beat him by one in the senate though, he had montana going against tester, i had it going for him, thats our only differences.

on a side note, EVERYONE go buy his book now, will teach you alot about stats, predictions, and betting.... 3 of my favourite things

brianlux

satansbed wrote:

nate silver is awesome, i think i beat him by one in the senate though, he had montana going against tester, i had it going for him, thats our only differences.

on a side note, EVERYONE go buy his book now, will teach you alot about stats, predictions, and betting.... 3 of my favourite things

Haven't heard yet- did Tester loose? Is that race decided?

gimmesometruth27

brianlux wrote:

satansbed wrote:

nate silver is awesome, i think i beat him by one in the senate though, he had montana going against tester, i had it going for him, thats our only differences.

on a side note, EVERYONE go buy his book now, will teach you alot about stats, predictions, and betting.... 3 of my favourite things

Haven't heard yet- did Tester loose? Is that race decided?

tester is still too close to call per fox and msnbc.

satansbed

brianlux wrote:

satansbed wrote:

nate silver is awesome, i think i beat him by one in the senate though, he had montana going against tester, i had it going for him, thats our only differences.

on a side note, EVERYONE go buy his book now, will teach you alot about stats, predictions, and betting.... 3 of my favourite things

Haven't heard yet- did Tester loose? Is that race decided?

its not decided but tester is ahead as of now, silvers model had it going against him, but in fairness montana was the only state that his model could have gone against him... his model had the state fundementals at r+8, which balanced out testers lead in the opinion polls, but his model couldn't take into fact the odd local race that was going on in montana and tester who lost three fingers in a farm accident is possibly the most Montanan person in a race that was all about who was the most Montanan.

tester is also the on balance is the most right wing democrat, which is understandable coming from the state he comes from, hes possibly the only democrat who could ever get elected in montana

brianlux

satansbed wrote:

brianlux wrote:

satansbed wrote:

nate silver is awesome, i think i beat him by one in the senate though, he had montana going against tester, i had it going for him, thats our only differences.

on a side note, EVERYONE go buy his book now, will teach you alot about stats, predictions, and betting.... 3 of my favourite things

Haven't heard yet- did Tester loose? Is that race decided?

its not decided but tester is ahead as of now, silvers model had it going against him, but in fairness montana was the only state that his model could have gone against him... his model had the state fundementals at r+8, which balanced out testers lead in the opinion polls, but his model couldn't take into fact the odd local race that was going on in montana and tester who lost three fingers in a farm accident is possibly the most Montanan person.

tester is also the on balance is the most right wing democrat, which is understandable coming from the state he comes from, hes possibly the only democrat who could ever get elected in montana

I've been reading a lot about Montana over the last month and yes, if you're at all progressive you still need a little mud on your shoes and a good understanding of the history and people.

dignin

I'm not a religious man, but I followed Nate Silvers blog like a religion. Amen he was right.

dasvidana

dignin wrote:

I'm not a religious man, but I followed Nate Silvers blog like a religion. Amen he was right.

+1

Johnny Abruzzo

dignin wrote:

I'm not a religious man, but I followed Nate Silvers blog like a religion. Amen he was right.

Yep, me too.


Scarborough's attack on Silver was absurd and unfounded.

Funny how reason and sound analysis can beat out "gut feelings."

"This race is razor tight"
"It's a tossup"
"Romney's going to win PA, wave election, blah blah"

RFTC

dignin wrote:

I'm not a religious man, but I followed Nate Silvers blog like a religion. Amen he was right.

538 was my crack addiction for the last 40+ days, i am going through withdrawals this morning.

polaris_x

this excerpt from another story on thestar.com

The media personality with perhaps the most on the line was Nate Silver of The New York Times, whose FiveThirtyEight blog was sought out by 20 per cent of the people who visited the newspaper’s website on Monday. He has used statistical data throughout the campaign to predict an Obama victory and by Tuesday, had forecast a 90.9 per cent chance that Obama would win.

After Obama’s victory became clear, Gavin Purcell, producer of “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon,” tweeted that “Nate Silver is the only white male winning tonight.”

CNN’s Piers Morgan tweeted Silver an invitation to appear on his show Wednesday.

Go Beavers

I think he's on either Cobert or Stewart tonight.

jimed14

Honestly, it reminded me of the old baseball purists attacking the folks who believed in the theories of Bill James.

Statistics, when not manipulated with predetermined bias, are powerful.

_

I never heard of this guy until everyone started posting about him on FB the night before the election. But why would the media give him a hard time? Seems like he's about the only person whose perspective is worth listening to.

whygohome

I guessed Romney would take it with 279. Silver said Obama with 313.

I think I should stop making predictions....or I should stop being such a pessimist.

Four more years....woot!

kenny olav

Predictions are a super nerdy thing to do, but here's what I predicted on Nov 4:

https://twitter.com/kennyolav/status/265155705781227521

kenny olav

btw, I hadn't known of Nate Silver's prediction until the day after the election.

whygohome

kenny olav wrote:

Predictions are a super nerdy thing to do, but here's what I predicted on Nov 4:

https://twitter.com/kennyolav/status/265155705781227521

Impressive, soothsayer.

Can you tell me the date of my death?

kenny olav

whygohome wrote:

kenny olav wrote:

Predictions are a super nerdy thing to do, but here's what I predicted on Nov 4:

https://twitter.com/kennyolav/status/265155705781227521

Impressive, soothsayer.

Can you tell me the date of my death?

That I cannot do, but may you live long and prosper.

Prince Of Dorkness

_ wrote:

I never heard of this guy until everyone started posting about him on FB the night before the election. But why would the media give him a hard time? Seems like he's about the only person whose perspective is worth listening to.

Because he's a nerdy, bespectacled gay guy that the conservative press said was "effeminate" and that he was cherry picking polls and skewing results to boost the morale of democrats. Cuz if there's anything they hate more than a democrat, it's an effeminate one.

Because it's illegal to ACTUALLY shoot the messenger, they decided to shit-talk him and rip him to pieces.

But his book jumped 800% in sales yesterday, so I'm sure he's too busy sleeping on a big bed of money with a bunch of Ambercrombie greeters to care.

Cliffy6745

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

_ wrote:

I never heard of this guy until everyone started posting about him on FB the night before the election. But why would the media give him a hard time? Seems like he's about the only person whose perspective is worth listening to.

Because he's a nerdy, bespectacled gay guy that the conservative press said was "effeminate" and that he was cherry picking polls and skewing results to boost the morale of democrats. Cuz if there's anything they hate more than a democrat, it's an effeminate one.

Because it's illegal to ACTUALLY shoot the messenger, they decided to shit-talk him and rip him to pieces.

But his book jumped 800% in sales yesterday, so I'm sure he's too busy sleeping on a big bed of money with a bunch of Ambercrombie greeters to care.

So, not that it makes an absolute ounce of a difference, but I had absolutely no clue that Nate Silver is gay until I read this and I have been reading him since the Baseball Prospectus days, being the baseball nerd that I am.

brianlux

Interesting "shoot the messenger"/ Nate Silver article:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13366%3Cbr

Trying to shoot the messenger

"Does this sound familiar? A quantitative prediction is inconvenient for some heavily invested folks. Legitimate questions about methodology morph quickly into accusations that the researchers have put their thumb on the scale and that they are simply making their awkward predictions to feather their own nest. Others loudly proclaim that the methodology could never work and imply that anyone who knows anything knows that -it’s simply common sense! Audit sites spring up to re-process the raw data and produce predictions more to the liking of their audience. People who have actually championed the methods being used, and so really should know better, indulge in some obvious wish-casting (i.e. forecasting what you would like to be true, despite the absence of any evidence to support it).

Contrarian attacks on climate science, right?

Actually no. This was assorted conservative punditry attacking Nate Silver (of the 538 blog) because his (Bayesian) projections for Tuesday’s election didn’t accord with what they wanted to hear. The leap from asking questions to cherry-picking, accusations of malfeasance and greed, audits, denial, and wish-casting was quite rapid, but it followed a very familiar pattern. People who value their personal attachments above objective knowledge seem to spend an inordinate amount of time finding reasons to dismiss the messenger when they don’t like the message.

Fortunately for Nate, all it took was one day, and reality came crashing down on his critics entire imaginary world.

For climate science, it will probably take a little longer…"

Prince Of Dorkness

Cliffy6745 wrote:

So, not that it makes an absolute ounce of a difference, but I had absolutely no clue that Nate Silver is gay until I read this and I have been reading him since the Baseball Prospectus days, being the baseball nerd that I am.

He's now such a sensation, today I pitched a movie called "Polling The Electorate" that features a bespectacled nerdy pollster.

Played by Jesse Jackman.


OK... so.. maybe Jesse's a bit bigger. He still wears glasses.

(you know that Jared Max is gay too, right? He's an ESPN sports caster. His radio show kicks ass.)

Johnny Abruzzo

Cliffy6745 wrote:

So, not that it makes an absolute ounce of a difference, but I had absolutely no clue that Nate Silver is gay until I read this and I have been reading him since the Baseball Prospectus days, being the baseball nerd that I am.

Yeah I also had no idea. Seems more nerdy/awkward than effeminate. But whatever.


Funny thing about conservatives hating him is that when he is wrong, it's usually in their direction.

His wrong state in 2008 was Indiana, which he picked R and went D.

He was wrong on the North Dakota senate, which he picked R and went D. Jon Stewart blasted him on that one.

whygohome

Cliffy6745 wrote:

being the baseball nerd that I am.

And you're a Yankees fan?

That sucks.
( )

Johnny Abruzzo

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

He's now such a sensation, today I pitched a movie called "Polling The Electorate" that features a bespectacled nerdy pollster.

Your shit creeps me out a little, but I guess somebody has to make those movies. That's a pretty funny idea.

Prince Of Dorkness

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

That's a pretty funny idea.

Yeah... I try to keep it as PG-13 as I can here. While I'm sorry if it "creeps you out," now you know how I feel watching every James Bond movie that wastes miles of film on women slinking around in bikinis and while James leers at them. Or when my well-meaning straight friends invite me to their bachelor parties and think it would be funny to get a woman to do a lap dance for me.

I digress.

Sadly, the ideas that are deemed "funny" aren't ever taken at the studio I work for. We don't do comedy. And I've got an exclusive contract so I can't take my funny ideas anywhere else and they either just die there on the table or I dash out quick script and hand it off to a friend who then turns around and makes a million bucks on it.

Oh well.

Johnny Abruzzo

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

That's a pretty funny idea.

Yeah... I try to keep it as PG-13 as I can here. While I'm sorry if it "creeps you out," now you know how I feel watching every James Bond movie that wastes miles of film on women slinking around in bikinis and while James leers at them. Or when my well-meaning straight friends invite me to their bachelor parties and think it would be funny to get a woman to do a lap dance for me.

I digress.

Sadly, the ideas that are deemed "funny" aren't ever taken at the studio I work for. We don't do comedy. And I've got an exclusive contract so I can't take my funny ideas anywhere else and they either just die there on the table or I dash out quick script and hand it off to a friend who then turns around and makes a million bucks on it.

Oh well.

I see your point. The world would be a lot more boring if we all liked the same things.

_

brianlux wrote:

Interesting "shoot the messenger"/ Nate Silver article:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13366%3Cbr

Trying to shoot the messenger

"Does this sound familiar? A quantitative prediction is inconvenient for some heavily invested folks. Legitimate questions about methodology morph quickly into accusations that the researchers have put their thumb on the scale and that they are simply making their awkward predictions to feather their own nest. Others loudly proclaim that the methodology could never work and imply that anyone who knows anything knows that -it’s simply common sense! Audit sites spring up to re-process the raw data and produce predictions more to the liking of their audience. People who have actually championed the methods being used, and so really should know better, indulge in some obvious wish-casting (i.e. forecasting what you would like to be true, despite the absence of any evidence to support it).

Contrarian attacks on climate science, right?

Actually no. This was assorted conservative punditry attacking Nate Silver (of the 538 blog) because his (Bayesian) projections for Tuesday’s election didn’t accord with what they wanted to hear. The leap from asking questions to cherry-picking, accusations of malfeasance and greed, audits, denial, and wish-casting was quite rapid, but it followed a very familiar pattern. People who value their personal attachments above objective knowledge seem to spend an inordinate amount of time finding reasons to dismiss the messenger when they don’t like the message.

Fortunately for Nate, all it took was one day, and reality came crashing down on his critics entire imaginary world.

For climate science, it will probably take a little longer…"

Excellent article. I guess I must've had temporary amnesia when I asked my the media would villify him and forgotten that "people.. value their personal attachments above objective knowledge". Not sure how I was able to forget that.