Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2016, 01:11:07 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 1103
101  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who WILL BE the GOP nominee for President? on: May 20, 2016, 07:55:00 pm
I voted Rubio in this one, though IIRC, this was around the time in the race that I was split in my thinking between Rubio and Walker.
102  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / CBS/NYT national poll: Clinton 51% Sanders 44% on: May 20, 2016, 09:03:39 am
CBS/NYT national poll, conducted May 13-17:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsnyt-national-poll-hillary-clintons-lead-over-donald-trump-narrows/

Clinton 51%
Sanders 44%
103  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: It's a shame that so much $$$ is being spent on this election... on: May 20, 2016, 08:48:36 am
What's the problem?  If it wasn't for billions of dollars being spent on TV advertising, we wouldn't be getting all these free TV shows.
104  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton & Trump VP search news LATEST: Carson leaks Trump's list? on: May 20, 2016, 08:42:58 am
Ernst says no one from the Trump campaign has contacted her about VP vetting:

https://www.radioiowa.com/2016/05/20/ernst-says-trump-camp-has-not-contacted-her-about-vp-slot/
105  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Reaction to a Trump nomination from the governments of US’s Western allies on: May 20, 2016, 08:06:32 am
Latest on Cameron vs. Trump: Trump claims that Cameron has invited him to London for a visit:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-david-cameron-invitation-223400

Quote
David Cameron has invited Donald Trump to visit 10 Downing Street, the presumptive Republican nominee said Friday, days after the British prime minister lambasted his call to temporarily ban Muslims from the United States as "stupid, divisive and wrong." And Trump says he is "thinking about it."

Trump rejected the notion that he was "going after" Cameron on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," adding, "He came after me a little bit."

"He would like me now to visit 10 Downing Street," Trump said. "They put out that invitation about two days ago. I’ll do just fine with David Cameron. I think he’s a nice guy. I’ll do just fine. But they have asked me to visit 10 Downing Street. And I might do it."
106  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: #NeverTrump GOP endorsements (Sasse,Whitman,Romney,Baker, Beck,Kristol,Ridge...) on: May 20, 2016, 07:47:18 am
A spokesman for George Pataki says the former NY governor won't back Trump "until he reverses his position on deporting millions of undocumented immigrants."

EDIT: Spokesman?  Do former governors who'll presumably never run for office again really need spokesmen?
107  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton & Trump VP search news LATEST: Carson leaks Trump's list? on: May 20, 2016, 07:32:48 am
Booker on veepstakes:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/280636-booker-let-bernie-make-his-own-decisions

Quote
Booker also batted away questions on the possibility that he may be picked as Clinton's running mate. When asked if he's being vetted, Booker responded: "I have no knowledge of any vetting going on at all."
 
"Well right now I don't know if there's a short list or not. I hear a lot of names [going] about. I'm just keeping my focus on doing my job here in the Senate and working for the campaign," he said.
108  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Paul Manafort promoted to Trump “campaign chairman and chief strategist” on: May 20, 2016, 07:29:11 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/politics/paul-manafort-trump.html?_r=0

Quote
Donald J. Trump has given a broad new role and title to Paul Manafort, the veteran Republican operative he hired in March, ending weeks of confusion within Mr. Trump’s organization about the campaign’s chain of command.

Mr. Manafort will now be the campaign’s chairman and chief strategist, according to Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump. Such titles are generally reserved for a presidential candidate’s highest-ranking advisers.

The move, which was first reported by ABC News, formally elevates Mr. Manafort beyond the role for which he was initially hired: managing the convention for Mr. Trump and wrangling delegates to get behind his candidacy.

Corey Lewandowski, who has been the campaign manager since Mr. Trump entered the race, will remain in that role, Ms. Hicks said. She told ABC News that Mr. Lewandowski would “continue overseeing day-to-day operations and will work with Manafort on political strategy and communications, among other things, through the general election.”
109  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Dave: Please extend the topic title character limit on: May 20, 2016, 06:58:44 am
If another World War breaks out, we need to be able to get the headline right, like this one:



The image is kind of broken.

Fixed.
110  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Inside Never Trump's Indie draft effort (WaPo) on: May 20, 2016, 05:58:08 am

Coburn says he won't do it:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/18/former-oklahoma-sen-tom-coburn-says-he-wont-run-third-party/
111  General Discussion / History / Re: Most underrated evil person in history? on: May 20, 2016, 03:46:13 am
Atheist2006 is surely a contender for this, no?
112  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton & Trump VP search news LATEST: Carson leaks Trump's list? on: May 20, 2016, 03:17:53 am
Deval Patrick reacting to the VP speculation:

http://www.abccolumbia.com/2016/05/19/former-governor-deval-patrick-seems-uninterested-in-being-clintons-vp/

Quote
Patrick did not directly respond to the potential nod, but told ABC News that he is very busy working on a new business venture. “I am in the midst of launching a new business and trying my level best to give it my concentrated attention,” Patrick said. “I hope you will understand.”
.
.
.
A close aide to the former governor says that he is unaware if the Clinton campaign has contacted Patrick but assures ABC News that the former governor is absolutely not interested in being a vice president. He is instead primarily focused on building his business.
113  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Primary calendar / poll closing times and delegate allocation megathread (Christmas is saved!) on: May 20, 2016, 03:11:57 am
For next Tuesday:

Like Oregon, Washington is a vote-by-mail, with "poll closing time" of 8pm local time, which is 11pm ET.
114  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: TN-Vanderbilt University: Trump + 9 on: May 19, 2016, 11:42:06 pm
http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/19/vanderbilt-university-releases-poll-results/84584202/?hootPostID=716351e2999e6ff19ab754ad54b5748f

Democrats
Clinton 83%
Trump 5%

Republicans
Trump 78%
Clinton 3%

Independents
Trump 40%
Clinton 34%
115  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NYT/CBS-National: Clinton +6 on: May 19, 2016, 10:21:39 pm
Crosstabs:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbsnyt-national-poll-hillary-clintons-lead-over-donald-trump-narrows/



Another poll in which Clinton does (slightly) better among members of her own party than Trump does among his.  Yet it's the Republicans who have "unified" while Democrats haven't?
116  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: The “Who is running in 2020?” tea leaves thread on: May 19, 2016, 07:49:31 pm
More Cruz 2020 talk:

http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Cruz-what-next-7729331.php

Quote
Cruz insiders and political analysts who have followed his career say all the signs point to another run in 2020, when the tea party champion will only be only 49-years old.

“My guess is that he intends to run again and will run in 2020, on the presumption that it will be Hillary’s midterm,” said Texas GOP strategist Matt Mackowiak, referring to Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
117  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Now that Trump has unified his party, he's surging on: May 19, 2016, 07:20:39 pm
"Unified the party".  Latest Gallup has Trump's standing with Republicans improving, but still 30% have a negative opinion of him:



Which compares with just 13% of Republicans having a negative opinion of Romney four years ago, and 11% for McCain eight years ago.
118  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you remember 9/11? on: May 19, 2016, 09:48:26 am
While I don't think I recognized the term "al Qaeda" before 9/11, I knew who Osama bin Laden was, because he'd been talked about since the 1998 African embassy bombings.  And the Taliban had just recently been in the news in the summer of 2001, because of those Western aid workers who were jailed there.
119  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Now that Trump has unified his party, he's surging on: May 19, 2016, 09:24:38 am
"Unified his party".  To be clear, almost every general election poll has Clinton getting at least a slightly larger share of Democrats than Trump gets of Republicans.  But Trump is also competitive with, if not winning, Independents, which is why he's competitive overall.  Of course, it's still really early.
120  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you remember 9/11? on: May 19, 2016, 09:09:37 am
OK, here's another question.  Before 9/11, how many of you:

1) Knew who Osama bin Laden was, and
2) Knew what the Taliban was.

Since I was already an adult (and a news junkie) in 2001, yes on both counts for me.  But I don't think that, for example, my mother had ever heard of either of them before 9/11, as she doesn't really follow world events that closely.  Of course, once 9/11 happened, name recognition for both bin Laden and the Taliban reached ~100% overnight.
121  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: latest Betfair odds on: May 19, 2016, 08:38:52 am
Winning Individual
Clinton 70.4
Trump 27.3
Sanders 2.8

Dem. VP
Castro 21.7
Kaine 18.9
Warren 14.3
Perez 10.0
Sanders 7.4
Brown 6.9
Booker 6.7
Franken 6.7
Patrick 4.5
Biden 3.6

GOP VP
Gingrich 40.0
Ernst 12.2
Sessions 8.3
Brown 6.7
Martinez 6.7
Carson 5.3
Kasich 4.8
Christie 4.2
Fallin 3.3
Rubio 3.1

Four years ago at about this time on Intrade:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=152060.msg3306644#msg3306644

Quote
GOP VP

Rubio 23.2
Portman 19.0
Christie 7.4
Pawlenty 5.6
McDonnell 4.4
Daniels 4.0
Jindal 4.0
Rice 3.5
Ryan 3.5
Toomey 3.3
Ayotte 2.9
Thune 2.4
Huckabee 1.8
McMorris Rodgers 1.8
Rand Paul 1.7
122  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver eats crow on: May 19, 2016, 07:44:27 am
The problem was using endorsements to predict election results when polls did not back it up at all. The polls plus was worse than polls only overall,

I’m not sure what you mean about “polls did not back it up at all”.  Polls are one observable.  Endorsements are another.  In past presidential primary races, they both had predictive power.  Sure, the polls have much more predictive power, but for two candidates who are equal in the polls, the candidate with more endorsements was more likely to do well on election day.  That was the point of “polls plus”.  To incorporate additional variables that aren’t captured in polling.

Yes, the polls plus model did worse than polls only this time, but would have done better in previous races.  You can’t know for sure which model is going to work better in advance.  That said, as Nate said in his mea culpa, the use of fundamentals in “polls plus” was probably an example of “overfitting”.  So, again, we can knock him for that, but I don’t see a problem per se with incorporating additional information besides polls alone.

Quote
and though they came up with a demographic model (that would of allowed them to predict states with few polls decently well) they never treated seriously, never incorporating it into their model. They just avoided forecasting a third of the contests because there were no polls, even though they had same kind of demographic model that performed well for Nate in 08.

OK, there are two different things here which we shouldn’t confuse.  You can make a model that you develop based on previous years’ presidential primaries.  You look at how predictive a poll or any other variable is X number of days before primary day.  Then you just wait for the data points to roll in over the course of the campaign.  Your model doesn’t actually change over the course of the campaign.  Just the data inputs.  Both “polls only” and “polls plus” worked this way.

That’s one way to do it.  But another way is to wait for election results from the early primary states, then build a demographic model for the rest of the primary campaign based on how each candidate does with each demographic.  That’s more of a dynamic model, where you need election returns from this election in order to even get started.  NYT’s Upshot did that, and I had a thread on it.  538 also had a quickie version of this, which they used for their “delegate targets”.

But the problem with this approach is that you’re assuming that there is no movement in candidate support over the course of the campaign.  You’re assuming that all of the differences from state to state are demographic differences only, rather than an indication that the race is moving.  Maybe that works for the Democratic race this year, but it definitely doesn’t work for the Republican race.  I mean, it can give you crude benchmarks, but it’s complicated by the fact that candidates kept dropping out every couple of weeks, and you also saw some real movement, like after New York, when Trump started blowing through demographic targets in subsequent states.  It’s a fun thing to look at, but it would be tough to use that in a serious way when the number of candidates in the race changes so much over the course of the campaign.
123  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: New Jersey: Quinnipiac 5/10-5/16, 1989 RV. Hillary 45% | TRUMP 38% on: May 19, 2016, 07:23:57 am
Democrats:
Clinton 84%
Trump 7%

Republicans:
Trump 78%
Clinton 4%

Independent:
Clinton 41%
Trump 39%

Another poll in which is Trump is below 80% among Republicans, yet remains in the game because he’s competitive with Indies.
124  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / MOVED: New Jersey: Quinnipiac 5/10-5/16, 1989 RV. Hillary 45% | TRUMP 38% on: May 19, 2016, 07:20:23 am
This topic has been moved to 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=237040.0
125  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: 2013 Fertilizer plant explosion near Waco, TX "result of a criminal act"? on: May 19, 2016, 07:18:16 am
*bump*

Three years later, we have this:

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/ATF-says-West-explosion-was-a-criminal-act-7462148.php

Quote
In an extraordinary turn for one of the ATF's most labored and expensive fire investigations ever, the agency said Wednesday that the deadly blaze that destroyed West Fertilizer Co. in 2013 was a criminal act, and it pleaded for the public's help to find who was responsible.
.
.
.
No arrests have been made, he said, and the investigation remains open.

The agency is offering up to $50,000 for information leading to an arrest, and McLennan County Crimestoppers is offering another $2,000.

Elder would not elaborate on what evidence led to the finding or whether investigators have suspects, but said extensive scientific testing was done.

I still think it's weird that this got so little national media attention, considering the death toll.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 1103


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines