Nate Dirt saving face

breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/11/08/2016-polls-less-reliable-silver/

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com.mx/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiI5tO86pnQAhVqlFQKHTstCDoQFggcMAA&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_general_election,_2012&usg=AFQjCNEA6_l58GWEoYi1wNvR3eQW8xGfiw&sig2=4wrmjAMhz491qHI6M2uIGg
nexos.com.mx/?p=24960
fivethirtyeight.com/features/one-ohio-countys-struggles-are-fueling-trump-support/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver#FiveThirtyEight.27s_election_forecasts
realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/06/21/the_case_of_the_missing_white_voters_revisited_118893.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Nate Dookie
Nate Feces
Nate India

Nate Aluminum

Nate Air

Trump still loses even with a 3 pt correct in his favor.

Nate needs a new job.

>Nate (((Silver))) spends months publishing rigged polls with deliberate oversampling to support his narrative.
>Realizes all the shilling in the world can't defeat the God Emperor.
>One last ditch effort to salvage his credibility.
Just more (((trickery))) as expected.

Are you kidding? He literally has an empirical model to tell you what polls are reliable and model the election. And he properly accounts for uncertainty in polling which is why he gives Trump 30%.

He writes all the time how other models are under-predicting Trump because they don't properly model uncertainty and don't account for the fact that polling errors tend to be correlated nationwide.

The only thing he did wrong was try and call the Republican Nominee based on his subjective assessment rather than a real model. Basically he thought the RNC would unite against Trump like the DNC did against Bernie, but they weren't corrupt enough to.

Only trickery if you're statistically illiterate, genius.

he was always a fraud

fuck off nate

>trump leading all polls
>g g guys read "the party decides"

what a hack

checked and rek'd

being objective

he called 2 obama victories

and has shown he cant really do anything else

then he clearly threw away the data this cycle

All this damage control

Praise Kek.

like pottery

anybody could have called the 2 obama elections.

Trump was not a republican. Trump is having an awful effect on downballot races for Republicans. Trump has massively increased Latino turnout in Florida and Nevada and pushed the latinos and women to vote heavily democratic.

Nate Silver suggested the Republican party would come together to defeat Trump. They didn't. They had a clusterfuck of a primary with way too many candidates and as a result the elites lost control of the party even more than they did with the tea party.

He was wrong to assign a percentage to it and to engage in dangerous speculation, but he has apologized for this. He's the only one with a good statistical model for the election.

Have you ever taken any mathematical modeling courses? No? Then fuck off.

no. it is the same as saying rn HC is the guaranteed winner. if you disagree why are you shilling here for trump?

What a dirty lying piece of shit

>hey guyz listen to me, drumpf has no chance to win!
>p-poll aren't r-reliable

And we're full circle now.

Thanks Nate.

NATE
CARBUNCLE

>He's the only one with a good statistical model for the election.

Problem is, all of his sources are biased, as well as himself.

Unless you truly believe dems are +10 and women are +15 in every single electorate.

He's going to be shocked by how many dems aren't voting party line on president.

Nate Grass

yea because they have been obviously rigged.

He's right. I think social media has really changed the game.

We saw it with Brexit, we saw it with the Republican primaries. Nate's predictions about the Cubs losing were also inaccurate. He's just covering his ass because he knows Trump has a high chance of winning with the high turnout and monster vote, and he doesn't want to look like a fool if it happens.

His twitter is a giant mess of him calling all options out so he can go back and say "look, i told you so!". His going to get more wrong than he did for brexit.

Nate Wagon Wheel.
Nate Loo.
Najeet.

He lost his nerve after his shitty calling of the republican primary. Now all he does is change predictions constantly and cover his ass.

Nate Ashes
Nate Dust
Nate Cobweb

exact same tactic they used in mexico during the 2012 presidential elections
do you fucks don't learn from us?
you are literally becoming mexico, fuck

google.com.mx/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiI5tO86pnQAhVqlFQKHTstCDoQFggcMAA&url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_general_election,_2012&usg=AFQjCNEA6_l58GWEoYi1wNvR3eQW8xGfiw&sig2=4wrmjAMhz491qHI6M2uIGg

use translate for this one
nexos.com.mx/?p=24960

Nate Magnesium

Nate indescript mineral

you are agreeing with me

hes a total hack

anyone could read that book....

Nate '0% chance the Cubs win' Bronze is a fucking hack get over it. All about based Bill Mitchell not your kikes (((numbers)))

Nate Oxygen

Nate Cadmium BTFO

Nate Pyrite

He knows that there are many democrats that are voting trump. He knows that the split is more Urban vs Rural this time. He has written about how many more states are in play this time. fivethirtyeight.com/features/one-ohio-countys-struggles-are-fueling-trump-support/

>Nate's predictions about the Cubs losing were also inaccurate.

The thing about statistics is if you forecast say a 5% chance of something happening and it happens then that doesn't mean the forecast was wrong. There's a 5 percent chance for every particular side of a D20 but one of them must be correct.

Again his baseball is based on mathematical modeling and there are many factors that go into his predictions. And predicting that something has a small chance doesn't make the prediction wrong if it happens.

An overall assessment of how accurate a prediction is has to use multiple data points.

Based on his model there was a very low chance the cubs win. This is modeling, not voodoo prediction magic. The cubs came from behind in a very unpredictable win.

>muh over representation

Yeah that's why polls failed to predict the Romney victory in 2012.

Nate Bismuth

reminder

Nate Boron

hahahaha

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver#FiveThirtyEight.27s_election_forecasts

2008
He called 36 out of 37 gov races
He called 49 out of 50 states for president
He called the winners for every senate race

2010
He called 34 of 37 senate races

2012
He called all 50 states


But you're "being objective" so I guess that all means fuckall, amirite?

(((Nate Aluminum)))

Aluminum is a useful material

He has missed every other prediction for Donald Trump

Its also very worthless.

I guess like a useful idiot.

haha wtf does that mean?

he made a prediction about trump winning the election tonight. tune in and see what happens!

when he started throwing the data out

people started shitting on him

people forget he largely missed bernie as well

lets see how he does without obama... so far it hasnt been impressive

yawn
those elections are all infinitely easier to predict

LOL.

Every other prediction ITS OVER. TRUMP IS DONE.

Pure aluminum.

Romney had awful turnout because he couldn't energize anyone. 6 million white voters just didn't show up. And all the dems and minorities were excited for Obama.

realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/06/21/the_case_of_the_missing_white_voters_revisited_118893.html

The opposite is true this year. Trump has massive enthusiasm behind him, while Hillary has a hard time getting the excitement of Democratic women, let alone anyone else.

Nate Nylon

and keep in mind trump is leading all polls for months in primary

he exposed himself as a hack

HAHAHAAHA

its not 2008 or 2012

hillary is no obama

and trump is no romney ect

I'm guessing he also counted on Brexit not happening, didn't he.
Face it. We've been defying your "predictions" for a while now

Urgent spread the word....

Opps they released the pre determined results a little early.

> Nate indescript mineral
mine your pronouns schist lord

Nate Sodiumbicarbonate isn't really to blame, statistics can be a bitch.

Not only this.

The problem is, that people who used to be democrats in the past, fell for Trump now. It is more complicated than most people think.

Back in 1990's and I've said it few times already - Pat Buchanan had virtually the same platform as Trump but didn't go past primaries in 1992 and 1996. Now, one GOP commentator looked at his rally once and said - your voters aren't Republicans.

And he was right. They were motorcycle gangs and lots of blue collar democrats, but not republicans.

Donald Trump managed to get both Pat voters and traditional republicans. Which gives you wrong assumptions in early voting - some of those dem votes are for him. Hard to say what percentage but definitely bigger than pollsters want to admit. Hence why whole Hillary campaign went to Michigan for their last rallies.

The pollsters and analytics in general seem to have had models made for Jeb vs Hilldog and refuse to change it.

>Romney had awful turnout because he couldn't energize anyone. 6 million white voters just didn't show up. And all the dems and minorities were excited for Obama.

this is exactly what's fucking with the polls. trump is getting massive turnout, a lot of it from people who have been too disillusioned to ever vote. they don't have any models that apply to them.

> Nate Sodiumbicarbonate
SodiumbicarboNate

Nate Nickel will never aggregate polls in this town again.

NaTe NaHCO3

trump is winning. get over it faggot. your kike tricks wont work on me