Posted on 11/08/2012 4:57:01 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
So much for gut feeling.
After correctly predicting the results in 49 of the 50 states that have been called in the U.S. election (Florida remains too close to call), Nate Silver, the statistician behind the popular FiveThirtyEight blog, woke on Wednesday to find himself the poster child of what is sure to be a new data-driven approach to politics.
While Obama was declared the winner of the election, Silver won the polling race. Television anchors from Rachel Maddow on the left-leaning MSNBC, to Bret Baier on the right-leaning Fox News, praised his accuracy. A comedian on Twitter called him "The Emperor of Math." Silver's publicist said he had been so inundated with requests she had been unable to reach him.
(Excerpt) Read more at mobile.reuters.com ...
Good points. The GOP might be over, if they can’t adapt and change. I have my doubts that they can, without a 3rd party for Conservative arising.
Fair enough. Even more reason to believe Silver’s data. Prior to the election Axelgrease was 100% confident of the Marxist’s impending win. Guess his internal data were spot on.
You are embarrassing yourself.
Morris doesn't even claim that. He says his mistake was second guessing pollsters models for minority turnout. Basically, he says he underestimated how many blacks, Hispanics, single women, etc, would show up at the polls.
Also, the "majority" never predicted Obama to win. The majority on some conservative sites and Fox News maybe, but in the greater media universe the vast majority correctly picked Obama to win a narrow election. This includes seasoned election analysts like Cook, Sabato, Rothernberg, etc, - all thought Obama would win. Only the conservative echo chamber that was foolishly claiming all the polls were skewed thought otherwise.
Then whoever is putting together the Rat internals is a genius.
With such an enormous, unfettered, precise, and coordinated vote fraud machine, why is the House still Republican by a large margin?
Great point and the elephant in the room here on FR. Many are saying we need a "real" conservative to win, someone who is unapologetic about their opposition to gay rights and abortion. But, unfortunately, I truly believe we are way past that place. If we continue to believe that the evangelical vote is our "base" and that we must have it to win, we will never win another election. I am personally pro-life and support traditional marriage, but I am also coming to terms with the fact that insistence on including them into our political platform is a losing proposition. If our country goes under financially, none of that will really be important anymore, will it? If we can't find work and feed our families do you really think anyone will care? What we need is a platform that appeals to all the factions that go nearly 100% to the Dems - they outnumber us, and if we fail to appeal to them, fiscal conservatism will wither and die. We MUST figure out a way to effectively get the message out that good fiscal policy is their road to success and happiness.
“Conservatives sat out this election. That’s the only reason Obama won. The reverse happened from what actually was predicted by a majority.”
Totally agree. Key conservative blocs sat out on principle and helped hand the Socialists a victory. Without a doubt, many couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon. We even saw many Freepers of this ilk proclaiming their inability to support Romney; sometimes referred to as “cutting off the nose to spite the face.”
Nate Silver schooled the clueless anecdotal echoers at FR like it was nobody’s business. I have never seen someone who was so derided by the masses here turn the tables on us so convincingly and so completely. It was an utter failure of FR contributors in ignoring polls and creating fantastic conspiracy theories to debunk them. Silver single-handedly eviscerated the establishment opinion on FR.
Makes a lot of sense when you recall the 2010 census data went to the WH instead of the Commerce Dept as it has forever. What do you think the WH wanted that for? Every swing state voter was identified. JMO
It is only safe to plan to impact the Presidential vote, far in advance of the election. Too much time and thought required to fake the entire ballot.
A lot of people are wrestling with this very thing.
The new generation is far more libertine and there is just no stopping that now. I still think our loss can be mostly attributed to rapidly changing demographics (Hispanics primarily) that want free stuff, but there is no doubt that the GOP is increasingly out of step with the new generation on social issues. I am in a suburban area and I am taken aback fairly often at how 20 somethings I run into regularly at the office and elsewhere won't even consider the GOP because of their social issue stands. I mean, these people have a stereotype of a Republican party that is backwards and they won't even consider aligning with it.
I don't know the answer here. I think you will probably start seeing Republicans opposing social order laws to attract the libertine younger crowd. Probably still going to be nominally pro-life, but I suspect Republicans will more and more back ending drug laws, gambling laws, prostitution laws, etc. Social order laws look increasingly doomed since there won't be anyone to support them among the major party's.
I don't see the remotest scrap of evidence that this is true.
It's not a very effective means of argumentation to simply invent non-existent data that you wish to be true to support an argument.
Doing so is just repeating the "Unskewed Polls" fiasco all over again.
Yep, that's true because with what we thought, Mitt had momentum and Obama voters did not. But the FACT still remains enough conservatives did not vote because they said they would not back Romney when he was first nominated.
Only the conservative echo chamber that was foolishly claiming all the polls were skewed thought otherwise.
You are correct only because nobody realized conservatives wouldn't vote for a LOSER rino to beat Obama! ...And I meant the "majority" of republican's. Should have clarified this.
I was told on a thread once that socially liberal, fiscally conservative people didn't exist. Astounding blindness.
There are plenty of people on FR (perhaps even a majority" that live in a fantasy world that believes if Sarah Palin ran in 2016 with her top platform planks being making abortion illegal in all circumstances, banning gay marriage and re-banning homosexuality in the military, and getting prayer back in schools, that she would win because this mythical true conservative base would magically show up at the polls.
That's worse than Baghdad-Bob-ism.
Dole - rino - Loser
McCain - rino - Loser
Romney - rino - Loser
What does this tell you dumbass?
Conservatives sat out!
This "FACT" is from where? A couple hundred FR posters?
There were about 6%, or more than 200,000, MORE votes for Romney in Texas than there were for McCain. So where is the evidence that anyone stayed home?
Sorry, I mistyped that!! It was not meant for YOU personally. It was meant for the republican party insanity of foisting rino's upon us!
I am always correct and look incredibly brilliant when the outcome is something I am privy to in advance.
This is why he looks like a guru. He really isn’t. He is just the guy they use to soothe worried lefties.
NH instituted a voter ID law. RR lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.