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

Jarqui

(10,118 posts)
29. Unfortunately, folks looking for the quick answer don't fully inform themselves
Wed Jan 13, 2016, 05:36 AM
Jan 2016
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-we-are-forecasting-the-2016-presidential-primary-election/
"Therefore, we think the models (polls-only model & polls-plus model) are more useful when looked at together."


That one sentence doesn't replace what Nate says at that link about what is behind his analysis. It underscores that before drawing too much conclusion incorrectly like the simplistic top post in this thread, one needs to look a little deeper at what Nate is trying to tell people with this information. Nate should stick to doing what he's doing. People should not stick to interpreting Nate incorrectly.

Normally, I'd lean more towards Nate's polls plus model in the general election. In the primary, I'd currently lean more towards the polls only model because things like endorsements and national polling are in Clinton's favor because Sanders is coming on - folks do not know him and what he stands for well nationally yet. If Sanders wins Iowa and NH, that's going to change - something like it did for Obama. In fact, Sanders good results recently are starting to change the mainstream's view and coverage of his candidacy. I think that will continue to drive Nate's results further towards Sanders over the next couple of weeks.
Even when she is 14% behind in New Hampshire they think she will win? Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #1
And then maybe certain DUers will quit hauling Nate Silver John Poet Jan 2016 #23
Unless he is right. eom lunamagica Jan 2016 #40
Did you notice the trend in that top chart on the page you linked to for NH? Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #47
We'll see soon enough. eom lunamagica Jan 2016 #50
Don't you think he is aware of that? He wouldn't risk his reputation for Hillary.eom lunamagica Jan 2016 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #43
It is based on the theory that most NH voters make up their minds after IA Godhumor Jan 2016 #53
Yep! I think she will win both. They will share/split delegates but she will win. leftofcool Jan 2016 #2
If the Indies flock to the GOP mess, then Dawson Leery Jan 2016 #3
Sanders TROUNCES Clinton w/Indies. IF Clinton gets the nom we lose the general.Period. Indepatriot Jan 2016 #6
There is no Republican who could beat and of the Democrats Gore1FL Jan 2016 #11
Current polling shows otherwise. SheilaT Jan 2016 #21
That's their "polls plus" forecast. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #4
plus what... a "fudge factor"? reformist2 Jan 2016 #8
Nate Silver should stick to the polls only. LoveIsNow Jan 2016 #10
Unfortunately, folks looking for the quick answer don't fully inform themselves Jarqui Jan 2016 #29
What!? Adrahil Jan 2016 #68
Sure Nate, you are the guru, you are the best. :) 7wo7rees Jan 2016 #5
That article still hints the Hill can lose...read it closer !!! Pauldg47 Jan 2016 #22
Yes! We still have two more weeks till Iowa and 53/47 in N.H. Which is still even odds!!!.. Pauldg47 Jan 2016 #67
The Hillary die-hards still have Nate to cling to for false hope. reformist2 Jan 2016 #7
I'm not clinging. Hillary will win at least one of those states regardless of today's polls. RandySF Jan 2016 #9
Well she's not winning NH, I can tell you that... reformist2 Jan 2016 #14
Maybe, it helps to be a next door neighbor. RandySF Jan 2016 #16
Then how is Clinton catnhatnh Jan 2016 #17
oof! bunnies Jan 2016 #62
New York State is only ~60 miles away from New Hampshire (at it's closest point) Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #48
Doubtful. morningfog Jan 2016 #30
Romney and Karl Rove ignored the polling and Nate's predictions in 2012 Gothmog Jan 2016 #13
I love Nate Silver and math Gothmog Jan 2016 #12
......... marmar Jan 2016 #15
Thats based on current polling and not taking in account the trend toward Sanders Quixote1818 Jan 2016 #18
Bernie was trending up last summer too. Beating HRC handily. ucrdem Jan 2016 #19
You can look at elections 50 years back and if it is trending toward a candidate at the end Quixote1818 Jan 2016 #20
His model isn't static . DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #41
Thanks for posting. But I don't know about NH and I think that even if she lost both it wouldn't be Number23 Jan 2016 #24
The news cycle changes. Cassiopeia Jan 2016 #26
By lying and trying to tell people he wants to destroy Obamacare and Medicare of course. Kentonio Jan 2016 #31
inflation enid602 Jan 2016 #34
When a tremendous social works program brought America out of depression? Kentonio Jan 2016 #36
debt/GDP enid602 Jan 2016 #42
How else exactly do you suggest building the economy enough to start paying back that debt? Kentonio Jan 2016 #45
taxes enid602 Jan 2016 #49
So do nothing other than raise taxes to pay off debt? Kentonio Jan 2016 #58
carefully enid602 Jan 2016 #60
That's a charitable interpretation of history mythology Jan 2016 #57
Despite the unemployment rate, America was recovering from the Great Depression years before WW2. Kentonio Jan 2016 #59
I have absolutely no idea what your post has to do with mine Number23 Jan 2016 #63
Again, the news cycle changes. Cassiopeia Jan 2016 #64
Oh, I see what you're saying now. Number23 Jan 2016 #65
Is Jim Webb still the anti Hillary? jfern Jan 2016 #25
Well DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #44
Nate Silver is OK at using poll averages to predict general elections in a week jfern Jan 2016 #66
Then Bernie Sanders supporters should keep donating, volunteering, and spreading the word Eric J in MN Jan 2016 #27
I am optimistic but BlueMTexpat Jan 2016 #28
Hmm.. Kentonio Jan 2016 #32
I don't understand why anyone would vote for Hillary coyote Jan 2016 #33
It's been outlined before on these pages. randome Jan 2016 #35
Nate is not infallible. Even he would tell you that. DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #37
Polls plus is arbitrary nonsense. joshcryer Jan 2016 #38
That is basically the same model he has used to predict the last four elections. DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #46
This is the first time he's factoring endorsements. joshcryer Jan 2016 #51
That was a lot to read... DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #54
He never had a "polls plus" metric in the general. joshcryer Jan 2016 #55
But his general election model relied on more than just polls. DemocratSinceBirth Jan 2016 #56
We all know rjsquirrel Jan 2016 #52
Thanks for the links. Great find! **We Are Team Hillary** :-) Alfresco Jan 2016 #61
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Nate Silver's 538: Hillar...»Reply #29