Nate Silver explains FiveThirtyEight's Senate forecasting model

[eric82oslo]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

Even I, a super partisan guy (and also somewhat a semi statistician nerd) would've been pretty upset with that ultra laughable Wang guy (who obviously doesn't know a single thing about numbers) if I was in Nate's shoes. The awesome thing with Nate - and the prime reason that I love him - is because he's the most reasonable guy I know of. You can rest asured that every single sentence he ever writes, he has spent at least two hours dwelling on. Every single thing he utters/writes, is there for a reason. You can't say that about many people. In fact, Nate Silver is the only and unique example that I personally know of.

[dmmidmi]

Silver is 100% correct. But it doesn't change the fact that his stats-based approach to journalism is now schtick, and no longer groundbreaking.

He would be fantastic if he focused all of his efforts on election forecasting and baseball (the two subjects where Silver is leagues better than his peers). I get my sabermetrics fix from www.beyondtheboxscore.com now. It may not be long before I go elsewhere to get my political forecasting fix.

I personally don't give a damn where they say the country's best burrito is.

[7,052,770]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

He's Tweeted about it repeatedly over the last few days. He needs to move on.

[Nichlemn]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

He's Tweeted about it repeatedly over the last few days. He needs to move on.

He made three tweets a couple of days ago, nothing since. Seems like he's "moved on", and in any case, it was never excessive to begin with. You've probably made more posts criticising Nate Silver than Silver has posted/tweeted criticising Wang.

[7,052,770]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

He's Tweeted about it repeatedly over the last few days. He needs to move on.

He made three tweets a couple of days ago, nothing since. Seems like he's "moved on", and in any case, it was never excessive to begin with. You've probably made more posts criticising Nate Silver than Silver has posted/tweeted criticising Wang.

This one post in this one thread is the only time I've ever criticized Nate Silver in my entire life, so unless Silver has never made a criticism of Wang and I've just gone completely insane, you're way off.

[Nichlemn]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

He's Tweeted about it repeatedly over the last few days. He needs to move on.

He made three tweets a couple of days ago, nothing since. Seems like he's "moved on", and in any case, it was never excessive to begin with. You've probably made more posts criticising Nate Silver than Silver has posted/tweeted criticising Wang.

This one post in this one thread is the only time I've ever criticized Nate Silver in my entire life, so unless Silver has never made a criticism of Wang and I've just gone completely insane, you're way off.

Weren't you one of the guys who kept going "but but Nate Silver got a couple of Senate races wrong! Fundamentals are BS, Dems gunna win!" If not, sorry, I've mistaken you for someone else.

However my point stands that Nate is hardly paying too much attention to Wang. If anything I think he should pay more attention. Personally I find the "nerdfights" quite enjoyable as a spectacle and arguably, they help illuminate, as without criticism superficial models can easily survive for years with a bit of luck and/or short memories.

Although if we are going by an "obsession" metric, Wang definitely wins, as a lot of his posts contain jibes against Silver, and the comments especially often talk about how bad 538 is. Personally, I think his main appeal is to a) people who like the idea of certainty and simplicity and b) partisan Democrats in recent cycles.

[Antonio the Sixth]

From what I've seen, Harry is probably Nate's strongest supporter on this forum.

[7,052,770]

Silver had 6 Tweets about Wang in a 48-hour period, all saying essentially the same thing: https://twitter.com/NateSilver538

That's too many -- it was annoying to see them keep popping up on my Twitter feed.

I imagine he's kinda scared that if Wang ends up with more "right" than him (even though both Wang and Silver give probabilities, not predictions, and neither of them are ever "right" or "wrong"), the masses are going to declare Silver a permanent failure, regardless of whose model is actually better.

[7,052,770]

Also, even though I'm a Silver fan, I find it really weird how he spent all day picking a fight with that Wang guy.

He didn't. He put up 5 lines.

He's Tweeted about it repeatedly over the last few days. He needs to move on.

He made three tweets a couple of days ago, nothing since. Seems like he's "moved on", and in any case, it was never excessive to begin with. You've probably made more posts criticising Nate Silver than Silver has posted/tweeted criticising Wang.

This one post in this one thread is the only time I've ever criticized Nate Silver in my entire life, so unless Silver has never made a criticism of Wang and I've just gone completely insane, you're way off.

Weren't you one of the guys who kept going "but but Nate Silver got a couple of Senate races wrong! Fundamentals are BS, Dems gunna win!" If not, sorry, I've mistaken you for someone else.

God no. I must've posted 30 times that it is impossible for Silver to ever be "wrong" (or "right" for that matter).