- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Nate trying to get his mojo back
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:47 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:47 am
7
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:48 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
Predicts bad midterms for Trump
he's betting the Ryan led GOP congress is full of cucks. Difficult to say this is a bad bet.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:49 am to Ag Zwin
He always fails to account for the current political climates, at least quantitatively.
The liberal overreach and terror threats that are ongoing in Europe will serve as a check to the gains that the leftists/Democrats SHOULD make.
His refusal to hire even a SINGLE conservative writer prevents him from seeing this. He has no understand about America outside of the coastal elite bubbles, and this is his (huge) blind spot that has haunted him for nearly 2 years.
The liberal overreach and terror threats that are ongoing in Europe will serve as a check to the gains that the leftists/Democrats SHOULD make.
His refusal to hire even a SINGLE conservative writer prevents him from seeing this. He has no understand about America outside of the coastal elite bubbles, and this is his (huge) blind spot that has haunted him for nearly 2 years.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:50 am to Ag Zwin
It's pretty common for the party in power with a sitting president to lose congressional seats in midterms, specifically the house.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:50 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
Predicts bad midterms for Trump
I didn't realize TRUMP was running for office.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:51 am to SirWinston
quote:
He always fails to account for the current political climates, at least quantitatively.
I mean the entire point of what he is doing is to look at things quantitavely. Climate and momentum are qualitative things that you can't analyze quantitatively.
It is like arguing that PER in basketball fails to include Dwight being a cancer. Yeah that is true, but it also just isn't what PER is trying to do in the first place.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:52 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
It's pretty common for the party in power with a sitting president to lose congressional seats in midterms, specifically the house.
I'm pretty certain that the liberal arrogance and overreach (antifa, MSM, pussy hats, etc.) will negate some/most/all of the gains that the Dems should see in the house in 2018.
Further, the chessboard for the 2018 Senate races is so remarkably stacked in the GOP favor that even an overperformance by Dems will result in demoralizing losses for the party.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:52 am to SirWinston
quote:His model gave Trump 3:1 odds on election night which was higher than any of the other quants did. It was even higher than Vegas, so if you used Nate as a guide the value play was to put a ton of money on Trump to exploit the difference and win big.
He always fails to account for the current political climates, at least quantitatively.
This post was edited on 4/24/17 at 9:53 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:53 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
I mean the entire point of what he is doing is to look at things quantitavely. Climate and momentum are qualitative things that you can't analyze quantitatively.
You can. You can realize that all politics is local, and that favorable trends for Dems in LA and NYC and Las Vegas and Miami don't necessarily mean good things for them nationwide.
He can identify where liberal overreach (Georgia 6th and Montana are two current examples) will potentially backfire and prevent the Dems from reaching their goals.
This post was edited on 4/24/17 at 9:54 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:54 am to SirWinston
quote:
He always fails to account for the current political climates, at least quantitatively.
Yeah, the town halls and massive protests against Trump and Republicans surely preview a YUGE win!
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:56 am to SirWinston
quote:
You can. You can realize that all politics is local, and that favorable trends for Dems in LA and NYC and Las Vegas and Miami don't necessarily mean good things for them nationwide.
I mean realizing that and being able to describe it in a quantitative term is different. Again go back to the Dwight example. Everyone may know he is a team cancer, but there is no quantitative way to describe his effect on a locker room (well at least not directly).
quote:
He can identify where liberal overreach (Georgia 6th and Montana are two current examples) will potentially backfire and prevent the Dems from reaching their goals
No one will care about GA6 in nine months.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:57 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Yeah, the town halls and massive protests against Trump and Republicans surely preview a YUGE win!
Which is a better sign of genuine momentum for Democrats in the vacated 6th district House seat:
1. boy wonder Ossoff getting $9 in donations split 50/50 between outside players and Georgian donors local to the district
2. boy wonder Ossoff getting over 95% of his donations from outside forces (mainly in CA) and having most of his volunteers come in from out of state
538 currently treats all "momentum" as equal. They treat all political activism as equal and some qualitative, organic sign of momentum (the same thing they mocked Bill Mitchell and proTrump spinners for in the 2016 elections).
They don't grasp that Trumpmentum was local and meaningful and that the current liberal outcry is organized and non organic.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:57 am to Iosh
If you listened to their podcasts leading up to the election they actually spent a lot of time talking about how volatile the election was and how Trump's 33% chance to win was very real.
The idea he gave Trump no chance is a weird ex post facto creation:
The idea he gave Trump no chance is a weird ex post facto creation:
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:59 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
The idea he gave Trump no chance is a weird ex post facto creation:
Agreed.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:59 am to Iosh
quote:
His model gave Trump 3:1 odds on election night which was higher than any of the other quants did. It was even higher than Vegas, so if you used Nate as a guide the value play was to put a ton of money on Trump to exploit the difference and win big.
Yes, we fricking get this. At the same time, if you listened to his podcasts and read the chats and follow Harry Enten on twitter, you see that 538 is incredibly biased and you see that they have a ginormous blind spot that colors their judgement.
And by the way, Nate had North Carolina and Florida going for Hillary on election morning DESPITE their own evidence and polling aggregates saying they should be leaning Trump. Nate constantly put his finger on the scale due to his own biases.
So congrats 538 for not being quite as horrible as Huffpo. I guess.
This post was edited on 4/24/17 at 10:00 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 9:59 am to Ag Zwin
All of HRC's old peeps from her campaign and democrat leftists are tweeting the crap out of Nate Nickle. It is their only hope, truly.
If we had a Jeb! or GOPe as POTUS I would agree with the Nate assessment. We have Trump, who is not shy and won't allow Ryan to circumvent what Trump was voted in to do.
If we had a Jeb! or GOPe as POTUS I would agree with the Nate assessment. We have Trump, who is not shy and won't allow Ryan to circumvent what Trump was voted in to do.
This post was edited on 4/24/17 at 10:00 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 10:01 am to SirWinston
quote:the result also made his many odds updates look ridiculous.
And by the way, Nate had North Carolina and Florida going for Hillary on election morning DESPITE their own evidence and polling aggregates saying they should be leaning Trump. Nate constantly put his finger on the scale due to his own biases.
the dude embarrassed himself and he knows it.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 10:01 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
The idea he gave Trump no chance is a weird ex post facto creation:
I'm not arguing with his statistical analyisis, I'm arguing about the left-wing bias that he uses to "tweak" his statistical analysis that he does NOT give credence to when it could/should be applied to the right.
I followed his state by state models daily and it was obvious how quick he was to flip certain states (NH, FL, OH, NC, NV) to light blue the MINUTE that a favorable poll for Hillary dropped.
Then he would drag his feet when the reverse occurred. I made at least 10 posts about it. There would be instances when the polling aggregates had his model showing Florida as 50.1% Hillary and 49.9% Trump. Then a highly rated Florida poll would drop showing Trump +4 and he'd completely change his metrics and drop off a newer poll (favorable to Trump) while keeping an older, pro-Hillary FL poll in the mix and somehow it would stay light blue instead of flipping to pink.
This post was edited on 4/24/17 at 10:04 am
Posted on 4/24/17 at 10:02 am to SirWinston
quote:
His refusal to hire even a SINGLE conservative writer prevents him from seeing this. He has no understand about America outside of the coastal elite bubbles, and this is his (huge) blind spot that has haunted him for nearly 2 years.
Why don't you email him and tell him this? I'm sure he would appreciate your insight into all of this.
Posted on 4/24/17 at 10:03 am to SirWinston
quote:
I'm not arguing with his statistical analyisis, I'm arguing about the left-wing bias that he uses to "tweak" his statistical analysis that he does NOT give credence to when it could be applied to the right.
What "tweak" are you talking about? He creates a model that uses quantitative inputs (polls, number of endorsements, historical data). That model runs over and over. The outcome is what you see on the site.
Page 1 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News