Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 11, 2019, 03:06:03 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: TJ in Oregon, x)
  NJ: Academics and Model-makers on Hillary Clinton's chances (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: NJ: Academics and Model-makers on Hillary Clinton's chances  (Read 5820 times)
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,731
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

« on: February 16, 2015, 11:21:30 pm »

President Romney is sure glad the "models" were correct in 2012.
Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,731
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2015, 02:26:04 pm »

Junk model, obviously!
#HillaryIsInevitable
#DemographicsAreDestiny
#TheGOPHasNoSeriousCandidateWhoCaresAboutTheModelNoOneCanBeatHillary
#muhModelAlsoPredictedARomneyWinEvenThoughItDidn't
#MuhModelDoesn'tConsiderTurnout

For once, the "scientists" are wrong and the political operatives are right. You just CANNOT predict the outcome of an election between two persons based on past elections and "fundamentals", while ignoring the qualities of those two persons.

Uh, then why did everyone cheer Nate Silver? Why did so many Democrats predict Democratic wins in the South because of Demographics? Why does every Democrat cheer the polls 20 months before the election that are showing Hillary ahead by 10-16 points?

Nate Silver's model is mostly based on polling. These ones are based solely on "fundamentals" and "economic indicators", and assumes that candidates don't matter. The Republicans will win whether they nominate Palin/Trump or Kasich/Martinez. A pretty ludicrous concept.

As for the models predicting a Romney win, my initial post in this thread was tongue in cheek. Obviously the "models" in general all didn't predict a Romney win, because there is no consistency among the models. Some of them had Obama winning in a landslide, some of them had a razor thin election, some of them had a Romney landslide. The hacks of both parties constantly touted the models showing their respective party winning in a landslide. The rational people ignored them entirely.
Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,731
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2015, 11:20:10 pm »

President Romney is sure glad the "models" were correct in 2012.

Every single ONE of those models picked Obama to win, even when Obama was polling poorly

This model was widely touted by the right wing blogosphere during 2012. Don't try to rewrite history.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university#sthash.Yd7lxnQp.dpuf
Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,731
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2015, 03:23:39 pm »

President Romney is sure glad the "models" were correct in 2012.

Every single ONE of those models picked Obama to win, even when Obama was polling poorly

This model was widely touted by the right wing blogosphere during 2012. Don't try to rewrite history.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university#sthash.Yd7lxnQp.dpuf

The Time For A Change model predicted an Obama win

Yes, that's the point. Models ran the gamut from an Obama landslide to a Romney landslide.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC