Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:04 AM
 
11,755 posts, read 7,080,576 times
Reputation: 8011

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado^ View Post


Statistics can be manipulated to show just about anything.
Except that reputable outfits are judged by actual results in relation to the polls.

Stats are rigged now, huh? Unless Trump is leading or catching up, I guess.

Mick

 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:08 AM
 
Location: The 719
17,932 posts, read 27,358,647 times
Reputation: 17227
So THERE'S STILL A CHANCE!

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTQ3000 View Post
Except that reputable outfits are judged by actual results in relation to the polls.

Stats are rigged now, huh? Unless Trump is leading or catching up, I guess.

Mick
Oh gee. You're very clever. Could you do a Sigma-3 std dev analysis for us?

You libs are rly smrt.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:12 AM
 
Location: New York, NY
4,204 posts, read 2,330,209 times
Reputation: 2358
Those statistics only work with traditional politicians. Just ask Nate Silver, and the CNN crowd.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Amongst the AZ Cactus
7,068 posts, read 6,440,688 times
Reputation: 7730
Quote:
Originally Posted by SQL View Post
Hillary may not be the most ideal candidate (has there ever been), but she's sure as heck a lot better than what the GOP put out this year.

The GOP is about to implode. We may very well see a strong 3rd party come from this as the Republican Party tries to distance itself from this alt-right movement of white, Christian nationalists.
I'd take that much further than your hil leaning attitude....NO establishment politician in my view is an ideal candidate for this nation, period. The system is broke/bought and sold/and a joke. This obviously is news to those voting for this clown.

As for hil "may not be the most ideal candidate", yeah, with the rumblings of all the beyond pathetic/ugly nonsense going on in her party/for her with wikileaks and the rumblings like this:

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/11...an-indictment/

"FBI Leaks: Clinton Foundation Probe a 'Very High Priority,' Will Likely Lead to an Indictment"

Secret Recordings Fueled FBI Feud in Clinton Probe - WSJ

WSJ: Secret FBI Recordings Polarized Agents Against Corruption Prosecutors

You have a very odd sense of humor on your ""may not be the most ideal candidate". Seriously. Or perhaps your part of the enabling side of hil's kind of behavior/the 99% this thread mentions as perhaps electing this type of clown in office. Yikes.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:14 AM
 
11,755 posts, read 7,080,576 times
Reputation: 8011
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
So THERE'S STILL A CHANCE!



Oh gee. You're very clever. Could you do a Sigma-3 std dev analysis for us?

You libs are rly smrt.
I am much too humble, but if you say so.

Mick
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:15 AM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,794,371 times
Reputation: 9283
Well then, Hillary liberals... you can now rest easy, your candidate is going to win... no need to lie, deceive, slander, fearmonger, or threaten anymore.... wow, I guess you guys don't believe a statistician that your candidate is going to win...
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:15 AM
 
51,608 posts, read 25,642,689 times
Reputation: 37793
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
Nate Silver did not say that. Rob Arthur did. He's a baseball columnist.
There you go again with that darn truth business.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:30 AM
 
51,608 posts, read 25,642,689 times
Reputation: 37793
I'm reluctant to put too much faith in polls for number of reasons.

The increased use of cellphones and the decline in people willing to answer surveys has impacted the accuracy of polls. (6% of folks primarily relied cellphones in 2004. 60% in 2014.)

Federal law prohibits autodialing cellphones which means some organizations rely heavily on landline surveys, which can skew results by ignoring large segments of the population.

"Guess who answers the [landline] phone now? It's all people over 50," says Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who helps conduct the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey. That can make for a more affluent and conservative sampling. In addition to overlooking younger voters, landline polling also gives short shrift to minorities and the poor, sectors most likely to rely on cellphones. Underrepresenting those groups, McInturff explains, "means you are systematically undercounting Democrats." ... One of the ways pollsters try to compensate for these problems is by "weighting" their results."

But "no matter how polls are weighted, they really can't compensate for declining response rates."

Plus, telemarketing has poisoned the well and now people use voicemail and caller ID to ignore calls from unknown numbers.

The problem with polls

So while I'm encouraged by checking the 538 site, I'm also aware that even an aggregate of polls could be way off.

The poll I'm holding my breath for is on Nov. 8th.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Minnesota
1,548 posts, read 909,064 times
Reputation: 1413
Right, I think the problem with his research is that he's relying on polls, which can be wrong. Granted it's all he has to work with, so given the data at hand I believe his results.
 
Old 11-03-2016, 12:06 PM
 
11,989 posts, read 5,261,667 times
Reputation: 7284
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
Highly respected statistician Sam Wang at Princeton University does continuously updated statistical analysis of polls. He has analyzed prior elections and one of the key factors he has calculated is how fast do polls move, not just one poll, but all of them together. In other words, when all polls shift two points, they do not shift instantly or overnight. It takes a number of days for the opinions of millions of people to change.

Based on where the polls are today with just 5 days left, Wang's calculations show that there is not enough time remaining for Trump to catch and pass Clinton. You can see it on the Median EV Estimator chart here. The red band is the maximum change with 66% certainty, while the yellow has 99% certainty. Since the yellow band is higher than 270 for Clinton, the stats say it is extremely unlikely for Trump to win.
Sam Wang is really a lot more than a statistician. Statistical modeling is just his hobby. He's on the faculty of Princeton with a Ph.d. in neurological science.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_...neuroscientist)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top