COMPLETE COLLAPSE–> Nate Silver: No One Should be Surprised if Democrats Only Pick Up 19 Seats and F

I understood your post. You didn't understand that I think Nate is to full of himself to correct his mistakes and bound to make them again.

 

Didn't realize Australian's took such an interest in US elections. Welcome mate

 

Limbaugh usually avoids appearances like this. It was a memorable rally with Limbaugh and the incident where they stopped the rally for the ill person, prayed for that person and sang Amazing Grace. Amazing.

 

Which would make you wrong about him yet again.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/

 

Nate Silver would like to play poker with you or anyone else who has a complete failing when it comes to probability.

 

He hasn't changed. Admitting one was wrong is only the first step and doesn't correct the problem if the methodology stays the same. Here is what Nate had to say in the article you posted:

There’s a danger in hindsight bias, and in overcorrecting after an unexpected event such as Trump’s nomination.
"So when the next Trump-like candidate comes along in 2020 or 2024, might the conventional wisdom overcompensate and overrate his chances? It’s possible Trump will change the Republican Party so much that GOP nominations won’t be the same again. But it might also be that he hasn’t shifted the underlying odds that much. Perhaps once in every 10 tries or so, a party finds a way to royally screw up a nomination process by picking a Trump, a George McGovern or a Barry Goldwater. It may avoid making the same mistake twice — the Republican Party’s immune system will be on high alert against future Trumps — only to create an opening for a candidate who finds a novel strategy that no one is prepared for.
Cases like these are why you should be wary about claims that journalists (data-driven or otherwise) ought to have known better. Very often, it’s hindsight bias, sometimes mixed with cherry-picking"

Nate makes the mistake of assigning the cause of his miscalculation totally to Trump. It's more than that and he doesn't get it. It's because of Trump but it's more than Trump. Trump is still driving the boat but Nate doesn't take that into account. In the title of that section of his article he even rationalizes that he won't change because Trump is an anomaly and his methods were thrown by that one factor by saying, "There’s a danger in hindsight bias, and in overcorrecting after an unexpected event such as Trump’s nomination."

You should have read the article before linking it but thanks for linking the article that proved my point.

 

US politics is on the news here most nights with or without an election. There is even a program on our national broadcaster soley dedicated to it. A half dozen or more wars, a treaty almost 70 years old and the predominance of US entertainment & media makes the US is the nation we most pay attention to here.

I think most Australians would have an opinion on your President at any given time. Not necessarily informed, but that doesn't seem to stop Americans on any given subject.

I've been following US politics fairly closely since Reagan was POTUS. Visited the country numerous times. Have friends & family there. I also have a degree in US history which I pursued to PhD level. The internet makes it incredibly easy to keep track of things and people.

 

Many Australians take a very keen interest in what happens there. We have put all (at least most of) our eggs in the basket of the US. Just a little anecdote. It was only today that Trump decided to appoint an Embassador to Australia, a position he left vacant for as long as he has had control. I doubt many Australians are able to warm to a bloated, orange (except around the eyes) bragging spuzzy grabbing, adultering, hush money paying prick, and a bloke who finds some way to ignore the fact that his own Son Barron was born in the US in March 2006, yet the kid's Mother was not an American until July, 2006. And more. Sure, there are plenty of conservatives in Australia (who have Government by a bee's dick here at the moment) but there would not be overwhelming support among those conservatives for him. Might be just an Aussie thing. Personally, I can't identify a redeeming feature in that bloke for whom I have zero regard or respect as a human being. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

 

It's funny, the stuff which somehow gets in my memory banks. I recall saying elsewhere that Obama would be welcome to join our golf playing group if ever he was in the area. I reckon he'd enjoy our golf course trash tallking 'get up each other' banter. Trump....nah...even the people who have played with him, his own 'friends' say he is a bloody cheat. Colour me surprised to hear that.

 

Smart move by Nate to make sure he saves some face

 

And I thought you could have an intelligent conversation but all you speak is rhetoric while avoiding the subject.

 

According to the current prediction, there is an 80% chance the dems will pick up somewhere between 21 and 59 seats.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/
A 1.4% chance the will pick up 21
A 1.1% chance they will pick up

So really, the headline should read, "No-one should be surprised if the Dems pick up anything from 21 to 59 House seats."

 

We can certainly hope so; and of a certainty Right of Center voters are turning out in unprecedented numbers for this mid term election -- unprecedented for the party in power, that is -- and yet we won't know until either late this Tuesday evening or early Wednesday morning. But what we can say for certain is that this predicted and touted massive Blue Wave is impacting against a huge Red Wall. This is a possibility that the blatantly leftist allied Mainstream Media never even bothered to take into consideration when they first began SHRIEKING that the Left was going to win massively across the board.

As for Obama, the nation is finally seeing the REAL Obama as politician when he does not have the Mainstream Media in his back pocket praising him to the sky and telling this nation how wonderful he is, and that they are racist if they don't fall down in worship of the man. No endless and over the top worship of Obama by the adoring MSM then no massive crowds at his political rallies and now we see that Obama really does NOT have the innate and necessary charisma to legitimately pull in those crowds all on his own personal merits . . . just like the Right -- which DID do real vetting of him -- said about the real Obama from the very get-go so many years ago.

The MSM simply can't spend the huge amount of time or invest the resources in him that Obama became accustomed to receiving, because they have instead gone all-in on Trump hatred 24/7/365. They can either return to politically propping Obama up as their main task in life or hate on Trump nonstop; but they can't do both simultaneously. They have, in other words, finally kicked Obama under THEIR . . . bus.

 

NBC this morning was just reporting about the polling showing a historic loss for Republicans. Ummm what would be historic about these midterms? They went on for another 10 mins showing us how Trump is lying about everything and spreading hatred for immigrants. They pointed out supposedly racist ads more hatred spread by the right. Then showed happy OBama being cheered on by what seemed like a small room of 10 people while they narrated how his presence is energizing Democrats.

But NO bias there

 

The choice today is simple:



Even Nate Silver knows that.

Nate Silver Gives Dems 88% Chance of Taking House: "It Aligns with My Intuition" (President Hillary Clinton unavailable for comment)

 

Predictably enough you are wrong on both counts!

Silver CORRECTLY identified that your BLOTUS is an ABERRATION and not the norm and that future models MUST allow for parties making egregious errors like nominating lying shysters like him.

Furthermore Silver clearly RECOGNIZED and ACKNOWLEDGED that the models that they did have in 2016 did NOT contain the ALLOWANCE for GROSS PARTY DEVIATIONS when picking utterly UNQUALIFIED imbeciles like your BLOTUS.

So Silver has acknowledged that his models were inadequate and has subsequently modified them to ensure that FACTOR IN the INCOMPETENCE of the parties when it comes to nominating candidates.

That you failed to either read or comprehend what was actually provided in the link is not my problem.

 

The alleged "red wall" has a massive gaping hole where 40+ GOP incumbents quit rather than face defeat in 2018.

Much harder to defend an open seat than one with an incumbent.

 

Factually, you are correct, obviously. After Trump was inaugurated he was almost immediately and dogmatically opposed by Democrats -- no surprise! AND, he was also opposed by 'establishment' RINO "Republicans" who had lost all contact with truly Conservative values.

Consequently, a large number of "Republicans" announced their intention to leave Congress when their terms expired.

Thus, throughout his first two years in office, President Trump has had to fight not only radical, America-hating Democrats, but foot-dragging, saboteurs within the Republican Party. OF COURSE the Democrats will take over the House in January... and then we'll have two years of even MORE agonizing hatred, political 'trench-warfare', and total paralysis of the government....

. "We got no problem with THAT!"

 

And error that won? Silver is a stat guy... Who is he to determine who is "competent" or not?

 

They never accept defeat graciously.
Their excuses:
racism
the Koch brothers
racism
voter suppression
racism
voter fraud
racism
election fraud
racism
rigged voting machines
racism
bad weather
racism
gerrymandering
racism
negative ads by the opposition
racism
homophobia
racism
misogyny
racism
fascism
and lastly,
racism

 

Bullshit! You need to read up on the demographics of the house democrats.

 

Then offer a cohesive and intelligently thought out rebuttal rather than a babbling partisan rant, if you can. He hasn't modified his methodology as stated in the article you linked. He rationalized NOT modifying it in the last paragraph.

 

I heard Zoghby discussing Silvers methodology and it goes something like take all these polls mix them all together then check to seenifbthe Yankees used a lefty or a righty yesterday and did it snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro two weeks go.

 

If the dems win, Trump could be impeached, just like Clinton was, but not convicted. Impeached doesn't necessarily mean removal from office, unless it comes with a conviction. Trump could be impeached by the House, but not removed from office by the Senate (i.e. just like Clinton was).

 

He's not even a stat guy. He plays games with his numbers.