Nate Silver doesn't like Bernie's chances

[Aloisius]

@shikata_ga_nai

I have theories (well, conjecture mainly) about why the polls have been wrong so often: (a) under-representation of young voters, some or many of whom do not have a land-line phone. (b) missing data on people (like me) who don’t answer their land lines when unknown numbers call.

After Michigan, the larger pollsters adjusted their weights for the increased youth demographic turnout for calculating likely voters. This has led to significantly better polling.

Most major pollsters call cell phones. Non-answer rates are often largely mitigated by calling the same number upwards of 10 times until they answer at different times of the day.

The whole point of using sample weights is to compensate for unequal sampling rates that result in a demographic that is not representational of likely voters. Typically they adjust by age, ethnicity, gender, education level, geographic strata, phone type and if they are likely to vote (based on questions).

Controlling for bias in population surveys is pretty well understood, but election polling is problematic because people change their mind, different levels of GOTV efforts can change the voting demographics, open primaries can cause people to switch which party they vote for to sabotage them, weather can affect turnout, early voting rates and the fact that polls can influence people’s decision to vote.

[subextraordinaire]

@shikata_ga_nai

I have theories (well, conjecture mainly) about why the polls have been wrong so often: (a) under-representation of young voters, some or many of whom do not have a land-line phone. (b) missing data on people (like me) who don’t answer their land lines when unknown numbers call.

Exactly. I had to take the essential polling/social science stats class in college during the mid-eighties. Even though I did see my first mobile phone (remember the big handset connected to a small over-the-shoulder box?) being used by a pretentious* businessman, I doubt my prof even considered the implications.

I answered one poll this season and it was so poorly designed and executed. I only answered the questions because I felt so sorry for the young person who had the job to read the essays prompts that the pollster considered questions. It was awful (and I suspect skewed right).

eta: on a cell (don’t have a land line and I’m way above 30 @jackbird) and that’s 20 minutes I’m never getting back.

Also *he was pretentious because I got to know him as a customer.

[subextraordinaire]

@Aloisius

upwards of 10 times until they answer at different times of the day.

Oh, I’d say way more than 10 times…maybe 30 is when I finally picked up? My husband still won’t pick up.

I can’t believe we are the exception, and thus is why I find the the polling for this particular election season a bit suspect.

[Jehovazilla]

@Ryuthrowsstuff

So I’ve got no say till the general. But I’ll happily vote for either Bernie or Hillary.

If its Clinton vs. Trump, I’m leaving it blank (barring a decent 3rd party candidate as a protest vote). I can’t, in good conscience, vote for either of them. Both of them are pro-war, pro-business, anti-poor, know-better, authoritarian jerks. Clinton is a bit worse, since she is still a machine establishment candidate, she’s looking out for the Democratic power base (not the people). Clinton represents pretty much everything wrong with American politics. Trump, I obviously can’t vote for, because he’s insane, unstable, racist, and a clown.

Bernie, in my mind, is the last chance we have of saving the Democratic party. Clinton, Obama, Clinton would be the complete death blow of liberalism for a long time. I’m sick of slick Corporately Endorsed, groomed, sacks of populist sweet nothings, who believe in nothing but power for the sake of power. Candidates who think that Americans are to stupid and weak, and thus need the Government to choose whats best for them (which, obviously, is what’s best for Wall Street and the Globalized Economy). Politicians that give lip service to equality, and the general welfare of Americans, but do absolutely nothing about it, unless it threatens their polling numbers. I’m sick of reactionary warmongers, trading “security” for popularity. We need to kill some brown people, so Americans can sleep better in the fact that “we’re doing something”, because murder is easier than fixing the real problems. I’m sick of these slick asshats playing tit-for-tat with our well being, just to get some little progress. I’m sick of them scratching the back of the power brokers (Hollywood copyright lobby, energy, insurance, etc…) just to guarantee funding for the all important party. What (profanity) good is being in office, if you don’t actually FIX anything.

Sorry for the rant. I have very strong opinions about HRC. Please mind that they are my opinions, and I don’t mean to wield them to belittle the opinions of others. I don’t think Bernie would make a good president, to be completely honest. But I voted for him, and will vote for him, because he, at least, seems to be a good human being, as opposed to being a good politician.

@subextraordinaire

Oh, I’d say way more than 10 times…maybe 30 is when I finally picked up? My husband still won’t pick up.

I added all the unknown numbers to spam using Google Voice, and put them all in a special contact listing that sends them straight to voicemail without notification. Thus all my polling calls go straight to, basically dev/null. I also can’t be alone in never answering unknown numbers, and never acknowledging them after the fact unless their business is important enough to leave voice mail.

[TobinL]

@daneel

@cowicide used to talk a lot about the importance of voting for any Dem (I do get the argument, just…ugh).

Oh believe me I won’t be happy to vote for Clinton if it comes to that, but I will happier doing that than anything that will help Trump or even worse Cruz win.

[Aloisius]

@subextraordinaire

I can’t believe we are the exception, and thus is why I find the the polling for this particular election season a bit suspect.

Major pollsters actually compensate for that too. Pollsters occasionally conduct large surveys over days or even weeks to get the demographics and biases of non-responders which can be used to make non-response adjustments. Pew last did one, that they made public at least, in 2012.

[subextraordinaire]

I think your correct with respect to major pollsters. However, the poll I answered wasn’t from a major pollster (and not just because she mentioned the poll, but because of the design and execution).

[anon26940528]

@daneel

Personally, I switch to the Greens.

I writing Bernie in, whether or not he makes a Sherman declaration.

[dpeters911]

Nate Silver doesn’t do a great job taking state population by age (a big demographic factor) into these contests.

[unclemike]

President Trump thanks you.

[anon26940528]

@unclemike

President Trump thanks you.

I’m not a Democrat and I do not negotiate with terrorists.

[jlw]

@ActionAbe

I’m not a Democrat and I do not negotiate with terrorists.

Doesn’t matter what party you affiliate with – not doing the most strategic thing to stop any of the current GOP crowd from taking the reigns is essentially counting on herd immunity to save you while skipping the vaccine.

[unclemike]

You’re living up to your profile pic.

When the dinner buffet only offers you a choice of spinach or broccoli, good luck screaming for the ice cream you really want.

[anon26940528]

@jlw

Doesn’t matter what party you affiliate with – not doing the most strategic thing to stop any of the current GOP crowd from taking the reigns is essentially counting on herd immunity to save you while skipping the vaccine.

People always promise disaster when you fail to vote for the lesser of two evils. More often than not, not only is it not a disaster, but when the lesser of two evils finally wins, they continue the problematic policies of their predecessor. People have cried wolf too many times. I don’t do strategic voting. If you do, then it sounds to me like all those strategic voters should do more to help Bernie win. They don’t care who they vote for, after all. Here’s the thing, I knew I wasn’t going to vote for Hillary the second she announced. She’s not a candidate I want to see be president. At all. Neither is Trump, but to me, one is acutely damaging, and the other is chronic. It’s not a choice at all. The HRCs of this world made the Trumps of this world possible. So maybe it goes away this election. You think it’s not going to come back? I’m not thinking in four year cycles.

@unclemike

You’re living up to your profile pic.

I picked it for a reason. And I don’t want ice cream. I want something edible. The choice is between piss and shit.

[Franko]

exactly. while i like Nate, he was wrong about Michigan because he has to rely on old, fallible data.

[anon73430903]

Does this apply in Texas or any other state that Hillary has no hope of winning? Or in D.C. where the Republicans don’t stand a chance?

If she must be president then there needs to be some way of letting her know that people are not happy about the choice. If Hillary cannot win or lose a state then is voting Green or writing in Bernie really such a bad move?

[anon26940528]

@anon73430903

Does this apply in Texas or any other state that Hillary has no hope of winning?

There is this too. You think my state has a chance of going to Hillary? Hah. No.

[subextraordinaire]

Ooh, don’t start that one again.

[anon68939300]

What about Kasich?

[unclemike]

@ActionAbe

People always promise disaster when you fail to vote for the lesser of two evils. More often than not, not only is it not a disaster, but when the lesser of two evils finally wins, they continue the problematic policies of their predecessor.

Bush v. Gore, 2000.

And ice cream is quite edible. It’s a treat!