Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(72,014 posts)
Sat Nov 3, 2012, 09:43 AM Nov 2012

NATE SILVER: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased

To be exceptionally clear: I do not mean to imply that the polls are biased in Mr. Obama’s favor. But there is the chance that they could be biased in either direction. If they are biased in Mr. Obama’s favor, then Mr. Romney could still win; the race is close enough. If they are biased in Mr. Romney’s favor, then Mr. Obama will win by a wider-than-expected margin, but since Mr. Obama is the favorite anyway, this will not change who sleeps in the White House on Jan. 20.

My argument, rather, is this: we’ve about reached the point where if Mr. Romney wins, it can only be because the polls have been biased against him. Almost all of the chance that Mr. Romney has in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, about 16 percent to win the Electoral College, reflects this possibility.

Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking.

Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the race is “too close to call.” It isn’t. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you can’t acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.

But the state polls may not be right. They could be biased. Based on the historical reliability of polls, we put the chance that they will be biased enough to elect Mr. Romney at 16 percent.


MUCH MORE:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NATE SILVER: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased (Original Post) kpete Nov 2012 OP
It would take Election Fraud on a pretty massive scale..... yourout Nov 2012 #1
I'll take 16%. Jennicut Nov 2012 #2
Nate seems a little pissed off and fired up. Frumious B Nov 2012 #3
I can't wait until Nate Silver is vindicated on Nov.6th. Then he can rub it in their faces that JaneyVee Nov 2012 #4
Good for Nate theKed Nov 2012 #5

Jennicut

(25,415 posts)
2. I'll take 16%.
Sat Nov 3, 2012, 09:59 AM
Nov 2012

I like our odds. Their odds are not nearly as favorable. And I have a feeling the polls with their LV models are more biased against Obama then Romney.

 

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)
4. I can't wait until Nate Silver is vindicated on Nov.6th. Then he can rub it in their faces that
Sat Nov 3, 2012, 10:21 AM
Nov 2012

they were once again proven wrong by a gay half-Jew, just to put the icing on the cake.

theKed

(1,235 posts)
5. Good for Nate
Sat Nov 3, 2012, 11:05 AM
Nov 2012

I enjoy the slightly veiled shot at MSM (and most likely CNN in specific) for their insistance on it being "too close to call"

"If you can’t acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NATE SILVER: For Romney t...