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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

factfinder_77

(841 posts)
Wed May 11, 2016, 09:01 AM May 2016

Nate Silver rips Trump-Clinton polls in 8-part Twitter rant

Nate Silver thinks it's time to pump the brakes on predicting the results of a Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton matchup in November.

"For f--k's sake, America. You're going to make go on a rant about general election polls -- in May?" the editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight wrote as part of a tweetstorm on Tuesday.

Silver said Clinton has an about 6 percent lead over Trump nationally, but cautioned: "It's early. Trump could win. Also, he could lose in a landslide." He added that Trump's presumptive nomination and Clinton's ongoing battle with Bernie Sanders could be having an effect — "We'll know more in June."

The statistician said he wouldn't have polls of each state for "a few months."

He also warned his followers to check whether pollsters interview likely voters or registered voters.

"The election will go through a lot of twists and turns, and polls are noisy. Don't sweat individual polls or short-term fluctuations," Silver tweeted.




https://twitter.com/NateSilver538

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/nate-silver-trump-clinton-polls-223015
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nate Silver rips Trump-Clinton polls in 8-part Twitter rant (Original Post) factfinder_77 May 2016 OP
Yes, because Nate Silver has been incredibly accurate this cycle. Matt_in_STL May 2016 #1
And so objective, too!!!111!! merrily May 2016 #3
538's "Polls-only" model is up to 52/57 (91%) correct "calls" this year factfinder_77 May 2016 #5
My post said he was not objective. I stand by that. merrily May 2016 #6
Of course he did. merrily May 2016 #2
The latest polls are "likely voters", voters who voted in the previous 2 federal election cycles. Kip Humphrey May 2016 #4
 

Matt_in_STL

(1,446 posts)
1. Yes, because Nate Silver has been incredibly accurate this cycle.
Wed May 11, 2016, 09:03 AM
May 2016

He'd do best to lay low and not really critique anyone else and their methods for a while.

 

factfinder_77

(841 posts)
5. 538's "Polls-only" model is up to 52/57 (91%) correct "calls" this year
Wed May 11, 2016, 10:09 AM
May 2016

538's "Polls-only" model is up to 52/57 (91%) correct "calls" this year, and "polls-plus" up to 51/57 (89%), after Sanders's win in WV.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538



merrily

(45,251 posts)
6. My post said he was not objective. I stand by that.
Wed May 11, 2016, 10:13 AM
May 2016

Which time did he err to Hillary's disadvantage? Who is his candidate and the candidate of the other 538 writers?

I have a diner rule. http://www.democraticunderground.com/128037667

Kip Humphrey

(4,753 posts)
4. The latest polls are "likely voters", voters who voted in the previous 2 federal election cycles.
Wed May 11, 2016, 09:24 AM
May 2016

Consequently they boost Hillary's numbers while understating both Bernie's numbers and Trump's. As for relevancy, general election match-up polls taken beginning in April historically show correlation with November results (Silver knows this!). Finally, Silver steadfastly refuses to recognize that this election is a change election for which he does not adjust his predictions - which is why he has been wrong to such a high degree.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Nate Silver rips Trump-Cl...