EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2816
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
KwarK
United States44415 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On February 02 2016 03:40 oneofthem wrote: why is omalley in the poll lmao i misclicked it My OCD had me put 3 people in each contest. On February 02 2016 03:44 KwarK wrote: Any. I checked the odds on a betting site and Hillary is favoured. I'll simply bet on Hillary with GH 1:1 and then counter it with a bet on BH where the winnings equal my bet with GH on a betting site. Lmao the hedge | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
| ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 02 2016 04:38 Mohdoo wrote: Who in the hell is predicting Rubio to win the Iowa caucus!? i misclicked that too but on purpose | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Where are your poll gods now??? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:19 Seuss wrote: He's had a surge but I've got my fingers crossed that it's a statistical blip and he still finishes a distant third (I want the madhouse to continue). I want it to end and for the clown show to finally stop. Him coming in second would be amazing since it would at least renew my faith in the more moderate part of the GOP and make the last 7 months of news coverage look terrible. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24485 Posts
On February 02 2016 03:44 KwarK wrote: Any. I checked the odds on a betting site and Hillary is favoured. I'll simply bet on Hillary with GH 1:1 and then counter it with a bet on BS where the winnings equal my bet with GH on a betting site. Kwark and your crazy maths. Still ready for that sig bet though. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:27 TheTenthDoc wrote: I hope Rand Paul and O'Malley win the caucuses. Where are your poll gods now??? E Plebius Unum In Nate Silver we trust | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24485 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:30 ticklishmusic wrote: E Plebius Unum In Nate Silver we trust I mean they have an explanation already for why being wildly wrong wouldn't be their fault, but I'm predicting this will be the most wrong Nate and crew have been about an election. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:42 cLutZ wrote: I thought they weren't even predicting the primaries because Silver relies on polling, and polling is dead. If anyone can understand the modeling that needs to be applied to new poling dynamics, it is Nate Silver. Dude has quite the track record. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
But Silver has been throwing all sorts of shade on the polling for the last 7 months, especially the head to head polling. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10980 Posts
| ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:23 ticklishmusic wrote: Rubio has good polling the last few weeks, I think some of the establishment is coalescing around him and if anything momentum has been important in Iowa and if anyone's got that it's him. Not so much weeks as days. He was in decline in Iowa up until the 24th, but started gaining ground after that. I suspect he's gained less ground than the RCP average indicates. He's definitely up 2-4 points from where he was before, but I suspect a lot of what we're seeing is simply polls that have historically favored Rubio (or don't have much history) pushing out polls on the other end of the spectrum. That could be wishful thinking on my part, but I'm hoping for an extended circus since I believe it might cause the Republican establishment to reevaluate (but that's probably also wishful thinking). On February 02 2016 05:48 Velr wrote: And if he's not sure enough to make a good guess, well then he only can lose, so why would i put his name on the line? Fivethirtyeight.com has up to date probabilities for Iowa and New Hampshire. The problem isn't Nate Silver's models at the moment, it's that his models don't have a conclusive winner for the Republican primary in Iowa. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i was telling you guys the polling numbers are a joke for a long time but you gotta go to silver to learn this apparently | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On February 02 2016 05:51 oneofthem wrote: nate silver isn't doing some crazy model it is just polls and stuff like endorsements. wouldn't really call it a model at all. he just had a platform. i was telling you guys the polling numbers are a joke for a long time but you gotta go to silver to learn this apparently I think it is fair to note that Nate Silver was distinguished in his analysis of 2008 and 2012. | ||
| ||
