Even Nate Silver knows it's over

Even Nate Silver knows it's over

Other urls found in this thread:

businessinsider.com/nate-silver-donald-trump-polls-2016-7
twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/757558402667188224
cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html
fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Wtf I hate Hillary now

i am a #jebpleb now

I'm now a #cruzmissle

Pennsylvania and Florida will be blue.

Jewish tricks.

It ain't over until the fat lady croaks in November. He who laughs last laughs best, this premature celebration is pointless.

All he needs is FL, OH and PA and he's won. It would take a really weird electoral map for Hillary to overcome that deficit.

PA is hard to win.

It's going to be hard to take all 3. Especially with Kasich being a butthurt faggot.

His people are about to tar and feather him.

Nate Bronze is a joke

Woah wait, wait, wait you from the future or some shit? Don't worry I'll take your random word for it over statistical data. Your wishful thinking must be so much more accurate

Die nigger, stay in Sup Forums and watch jewish mcu kino

I think the high Republican turnout will simply bruteforce the relatively low Democrat turnout in the battleground states.

Democrat hatred of Trump will motivate them to the ballot box even in spite of Hillary.

basically in November if PA goes red or blue we will know the outcome of the election. It seems like that will be an indicator of whether or not Trump can turn blue states red.

Also new fag here in 2012 were people so sure Romney would win? Were they spouting the same statistics bs they are now?

>implying
Dems have been losing ground since 2012

Even some of the bernouts will vote Trump according to polls. If DNC will keep imploding on itself at the current rate a lot of white moderate dems will not bother to vote.

Liberals will not bother to vote as they think trump has no chance. Exactly like brexit

>CT goes red
>Republicans take the state house and throw out the post-Sandy Vagina gun laws
I want to believe

>Taking the convention bump bait

TRUMP
R
U
M
P

IL will go red this year. Mark my words.

>their messiah is now saying Florida and Pennsylvania will be red
>they're still in denial

kek

Nate Silver suckers and left wing stat rats on suicide watch

businessinsider.com/nate-silver-donald-trump-polls-2016-7

Election is four months away, still too early to call.

The white working-class and lower middle-class is the single most powerful voting block IF they turnout, which they haven't been doing in recent times due to neither party representing them. All Trump needs is to motivate them to turn out.

This is how we won Brexit. They finally had something to vote for that they cared about.

Here's an early but interesting poll out of Central Oregon. Also, is it possible for Gary Johnson to steal NM electoral votes from Hilldog?

He hasn't been right about anything this entire election cycle.

This. It's not over until it's over, for either side.

>Have not met a single person voting for Hillary yet over half the state I do business in regularly
>State in still hard blue and gets all the votes up here for free because of one cashsink of a city attached to it

Long Island needs to be its own state, same shit every year. Then you would almost never see a blue presidential election though and can't have that.

Don't get complacent. It isn't over until it's over.

NM is extremely unimportant for Republicans because it is so poor and blue.

Not really though, since '88, PA has barely gone blue, usually only winning by 1-3%. Trump has huge appeal among the blue collar workers in PA that usually vote Democrat. He just needs to capitalize on that in October and he can flip that state easy.

this.

Reuters will release another poll woth +12 for Hillary to break our spirits

The same could be said about Chicago - and a lot of big cities.

It's unfortunate for us rural folk how we can't get our own voice. However in IL a lot of blue voters are moving downstate - and they're outnumbered by red voters. This helps even the playing field a bit - it's a big part of the reason why a republican got elected Governor of our state.

Maybe if Chicago gets nuked.

Why did this rise so fast? I could have sworn that Trump was only at 25% 3 weeks ago.

When did you cap that? My page says 53.7-46.2, Clinton's favor.

fucking Reuters is the worst

i like it, but i wouldn't trust his predictions

Well, that's the end boys.
>Fact: polls are controlled by the globalists.
>Fact: they always show the globalist favorite winning unless both are cucked.
>Fact: Hillary was up pre-convention.
>Fact: now Trump is up.
>Conclusion: Trump picking an establishment VP, giving a fag-loving speech, etc. has convinced the globalists he is no longer a threat.

TL;DR: Trump loves kikes as much as Hillary now.

>NY that blue
Really? I thought Donnie had a lot of support there

Is Nate trying to take advantage of his always-wrong-on-Trump status?
If so it won't work.

Romney was leading at this point, then he basically vanished from the campaign trail for the months before the election and allowed Obama to catch up.

New York hasn't been a blue state since 1984 and NYC is now liberal as fuck with a huge population. It's pretty unlikely to tip Republican and isn't considered a swing state.

(PA is interesting because that hasn't swung in a number of years either but current trends indicate a much more likely potential switch to red than in previous elections).

hasn't been a red state

outside of NYC he does, but NYC has a shitload of black people and outweighs the rest of the state

>R A R E

Mea culpa, I brainfarted.

NYC is liberal as fuck, it would be a tremendous shock if it went red for Trump this cycle, too many libs voting.

Ironically, this is one of many reasons some people believe NYC should be split into two states; the interests and beliefs of much of NYS are very different than the much larger (but smaller population) remainder of the state. Much of NY is red, but the population in NYC is so dense it overrides it. (There are other factors, such as NY outside the city relying off the city for much funds collected as taxes from the city, and NYC relying off much of the rest of the state for natural resources, namely water).

this

here
I use "ironically" mainly because the blue state thing with so many electoral votes things suck but splitting NY would disadvantage both upstate and downstate. NYS for revenue, NYC for natural resources. Redrawing the map for the electoral college would likely be a net gain for republicans though, but a split is a bad idea for a variety of reasons and isn't going to happen to the state.

It's just whenever the state elects a republican/democrat governor or whatever, there are people on the side that one who praise unity and people on the side who lost who advocate a split.

Wait what happened? Everything changed on his site. It shows Clinton winning

Yeah, it switched somehow in the past two hours. Nate Bronze is at it again.

Nate's twitter reflects the map shown in OP, while the website only shows statistics (if you use the mouseover) from Saturday July 23rd. It's likely he updated the graphic for his twitter (five hours ago) without updating the interactive map on his website to account for the post RNC bump.

here
twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/757558402667188224
His "polls plus" forecast (which totally failed to predict trump's nomination and primary wins) still has hillary in the lead at 58.2%.

I'm so confused now.

The "now" forecast is likelihood of victory based off of current polling data. Essentially, if the election were to happen based on the polls today, what would happen.

"Polls Plus" is essentially "muh feels". It takes the polls and then adds subjectively additions or subtractions. Right now, Nate's "polls plus" is trying to "deduct" a convention bump from just ending the RNC that Nate is convinced he has (is temporary, Clinton could get one) plus long term trends, endorsements, etc.

"Polls plus" continually called for Trump to lose the GOP nomination and many states over and over again because it under-emphasized sheer polls and emphasized subjective feelings and endorsements from politicians over hard polling data.

tl;dr Polls-plus (showing hillary winning) is a subjective guess based on feelings on how trends will go through november.

> There hasn't been a significant post-convention bounce in CNN's polling since 2000.

cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html

Time to be nervous again

No he wasent stay nervous

What ever you have to tell youself to ease that burn of a trump presidency

The issue I'm having is how it's shifted ~10-15% in a matter of hours. How did it go from the chart posted on his twitter five hours ago, to the one OP posted, to the one now on his website? It's the same chart using the same analytics, why has it shifted so much?

The one on his site by default is polls-plus (muh feels) without changing options).

is polls plus today (static graphic, website not updated) trying to account for Trump's "convention bump").

OP is polls only (Now-cast) on the website if you pick that option.

Is the polls only (now-cast) on his twitter as of today.

Basically - different points of time and methodologies account for the differences, the website is not fully up to date vs. Nate Silver's twitter.

Thank you, sorry for being so retarded.

>Florida blue
because that always happens and Cubans are the same as Mexicans, right?
>PA blue
The PA is (((NY))) meme again. Not when we have an actually exciting candidate on the Republican ballot. He's reaching the working class, and even young voters. McCuck and Romney had nothing on Trump. And Bush was charismatic but Trump is much more dynamic.

this desu

It's no big deal, the way that polls plus vs. polls are minimized on his site and then tweeting vs. updating his site just lends itself to this sort of confusion.

Polls plus model masterrace .

Out of curiosity, how can they get away with their blatantly skewed/outlier polls?

>His "polls plus" forecast (which totally failed to predict trump's nomination and primary wins)

no it didn't you fucking retard. I am not going to dig up the blog post about it but they got every primary correct.

"Polling" is as close to pundits get to meme magic. Even the current poll is wrong, there's simply always been a ****100%**** certainty that Donald Trump will win the election

fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/
>FiveThirtyEight “polls-only” model has correctly predicted the winner in 52 of 57 (91 percent) primaries and caucuses so far in 2016, and our related “polls-plus” model has gone 51-for-57 (89 percent)

By Nate's own admission, they did not get all primaries correct under either formula and got at least one state wrong under the polls plus formula.

The withdrawal of other candidates in late April/May also made upping the accuracy at which point the race was no longer a competition but the primaries still occurred easier, which closed the gap.

Nate got the overall odds wrong early and the verdicts on several primaries wrong later.

>to break our spirits
its good to make hillary voters complacent. then have a surprising result for them