2016 Postmortem

titaniumsalute

(4,742 posts) Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:26 PM Nov 2016

I don't trust Votecastr

The problem is they assume A LOT of things. It is very tough to nail down Independent/Non Affiliated Party voters. I HOPE they are right with these numbers.

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I don't trust Votecastr (Original Post) titaniumsalute Nov 2016 OP

Totally unreliable and not worth a moment of time wasted.... beachbumbob Nov 2016 #1

Agreed vadermike Nov 2016 #2

People can watch it, but the only numbers that count are MineralMan Nov 2016 #3

Yeah, waste of time. But generates lots of traffic to Slate. So they're happy. emulatorloo Nov 2016 #4

It's a nice time waster during the day waiting for actual votes to come in MSMITH33156 Nov 2016 #6

it's a real time science experiment. geek tragedy Nov 2016 #7

you don't have to trust them.... getagrip_already Nov 2016 #9

Not sure where the scepticism comes from. grantcart Nov 2016 #11

beachbumbob

(9,263 posts)

1. Totally unreliable and not worth a moment of time wasted....

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:27 PM

Nov 2016

vadermike

(1,415 posts)

2. Agreed

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:28 PM

Nov 2016

But what if it showed the opposite DU would melt down Just kidding the trend is good I don't fully trust it as it is not perfectly accurate But the trend is good Just GOTV

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)

3. People can watch it, but the only numbers that count are

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:31 PM

Nov 2016

the ones generated by voting officials in each state. There's no rush. The results will be known soon enough.

Uff da!

emulatorloo

(44,131 posts)

4. Yeah, waste of time. But generates lots of traffic to Slate. So they're happy.

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:34 PM

Nov 2016

MSMITH33156

(879 posts)

6. It's a nice time waster during the day waiting for actual votes to come in

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:35 PM

Nov 2016

but for sure, nothing to believe in those numbers.

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)

7. it's a real time science experiment.

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:36 PM

Nov 2016

we'll see the results in the evening

getagrip_already

(14,764 posts)

9. you don't have to trust them....

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:37 PM

Nov 2016

all they do is count noses, and based on where the noses are or live, they assign them to one of the candidates.

That's all they really do.

But, if they show turnout in county x is exceeding expectations, and that county is reliably blue, it's good news.

but don't listen to them if you don't want to. Fox news, cnn, and msnbc are out there. So are tarot cards.

It's theater. Nothing more.

grantcart

(53,061 posts)

11. Not sure where the scepticism comes from.

Reply to titaniumsalute (Original post)

Tue Nov 8, 2016, 04:39 PM

Nov 2016

This is exactly the same micro targeting that the campaigns have been using over the last two cycles. One of the principals is Ken Strasma

Ken Strasma is a pioneer of high-tech statistical modeling in political campaigns, and served as the Targeting Director for the 2008 Obama and 2004 Kerry campaigns. As the former Research Director for the National Committee for an Effective Congress and manager of numerous campaigns, Ken understands the importance of data and advanced targeting techniques to a campaign's outreach strategy.

His work as head of Obama's 2008 microtargeting operation was considered ground breaking and highly reliable.

Reply to this discussion