|
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. |
On December 13 2017 12:10 Danglars wrote: I think Jones has got it. Moore's up too little for the percent reporting in the Dem counties.
It's still Alabama, Jones has to beat the .5% margin to get past a recount.
|
On December 13 2017 12:08 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:06 mozoku wrote:I'm in agreement with Plansix on the value of this Upshot model. It's literally worthless besides for entertainment purposes and has a useful life of two hours. On December 13 2017 11:42 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:41 Plansix wrote:On December 13 2017 11:39 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:38 Plansix wrote: Our model predicts the outcome of an election with closed ballets. This is a waste of Human Resources and time, since more accurately results can be obtained by waiting for the real count to come in. Well obviously it's 50-50, either Moore wins or Jones does! Someone already won! Predictions no longer matter!!!! It's a level of confidence, not a probability. Pretty basic statistics, there's no need to be obtuse here. This depends on your statistical assumptions and, empirically speaking, you're more likely than not wrong here seeing as most electoral forecasters aren't using frequentist methods. Or probably shouldn't be anyway. I would have ignored this if it wasn't for the snarky "basic statistics" comment. Most people are taught the difference between confidence and probability in stats 101 when being taught how to interpret confidence intervals. edit: and empirically it's not a probability because as Plansix said, it already happened. But who fucking cares when we can literally have the results tomorrow? Or in an hour? This is treating politics like sports and entertainment, which it isn't.
|
On December 13 2017 12:12 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:10 Danglars wrote: I think Jones has got it. Moore's up too little for the percent reporting in the Dem counties. It's still Alabama, Jones has to beat the .5% margin to get past a recount.
They'll also have to actually count the provisional ballots then, though, and I can't help but think that would be an advantage for Jones.
The bigger risk is a blitz from Trump's fraud of a "voter fraud" commission. Especially since write-ins are basically certain to be a greater share of the vote than any margin for Jones' victory.
|
United States24740 Posts
On December 13 2017 12:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:08 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 12:06 mozoku wrote:I'm in agreement with Plansix on the value of this Upshot model. It's literally worthless besides for entertainment purposes and has a useful life of two hours. On December 13 2017 11:42 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:41 Plansix wrote:On December 13 2017 11:39 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:38 Plansix wrote: Our model predicts the outcome of an election with closed ballets. This is a waste of Human Resources and time, since more accurately results can be obtained by waiting for the real count to come in. Well obviously it's 50-50, either Moore wins or Jones does! Someone already won! Predictions no longer matter!!!! It's a level of confidence, not a probability. Pretty basic statistics, there's no need to be obtuse here. This depends on your statistical assumptions and, empirically speaking, you're more likely than not wrong here seeing as most electoral forecasters aren't using frequentist methods. Or probably shouldn't be anyway. I would have ignored this if it wasn't for the snarky "basic statistics" comment. Most people are taught the difference between confidence and probability in stats 101 when being taught how to interpret confidence intervals. edit: and empirically it's not a probability because as Plansix said, it already happened. But who fucking cares when we can literally have the results tomorrow? Or in an hour? This is treating politics like sports and entertainment, which it isn't. We are in the age of everyone wanting all available information immediately. Real-time models and analysis is to be expected. Why do you care if the NYT or others make this type of information available? If you would prefer to wait a couple of hours to see the final results then you can still do that. I'm not saying the model jumping back and forth every minute isn't a bit of a silly exercise, but why do you care?
|
|
|
United States24740 Posts
{CC}StealthBlue just how in the fuck is that news.
|
On December 13 2017 12:15 micronesia wrote: {CC}StealthBlue just how in the fuck is that news. What? There are people who are still under the illusion that he posts news?
|
|
|
Pretty sure we got it boys.
|
On December 13 2017 12:15 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:13 Plansix wrote:On December 13 2017 12:08 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 12:06 mozoku wrote:I'm in agreement with Plansix on the value of this Upshot model. It's literally worthless besides for entertainment purposes and has a useful life of two hours. On December 13 2017 11:42 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:41 Plansix wrote:On December 13 2017 11:39 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:38 Plansix wrote: Our model predicts the outcome of an election with closed ballets. This is a waste of Human Resources and time, since more accurately results can be obtained by waiting for the real count to come in. Well obviously it's 50-50, either Moore wins or Jones does! Someone already won! Predictions no longer matter!!!! It's a level of confidence, not a probability. Pretty basic statistics, there's no need to be obtuse here. This depends on your statistical assumptions and, empirically speaking, you're more likely than not wrong here seeing as most electoral forecasters aren't using frequentist methods. Or probably shouldn't be anyway. I would have ignored this if it wasn't for the snarky "basic statistics" comment. Most people are taught the difference between confidence and probability in stats 101 when being taught how to interpret confidence intervals. edit: and empirically it's not a probability because as Plansix said, it already happened. But who fucking cares when we can literally have the results tomorrow? Or in an hour? This is treating politics like sports and entertainment, which it isn't. We are in the age of everyone wanting all available information immediately. Real-time models and analysis is to be expected. Why do you care if the NYT or others make this type of information available? If you would prefer to wait a couple of hours to see the final results then you can still do that. I'm not saying the model jumping back and forth every minute isn't a bit of a silly exercise, but why do you care? I mocked it on general principle that it is an source of worthless entertainment that the NYT feels the need to defend. I am of the opinion that News agencies and papers shouldn't use these. They should report facts, not the accuracy of algorithms using imperfect data. But apparently by insulting math I have angered some TL people. Because GH was right that the instant math is referenced on TL, posters are on it like nerds trying to get with that one girl at their party.
|
|
|
On December 13 2017 12:17 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:15 micronesia wrote: {CC}StealthBlue just how in the fuck is that news. What? There are people who are still under the illusion that he posts news? I have to agree with this. The Twitterstream is more often than not just petty gossip.
|
On December 13 2017 12:13 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:08 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 12:06 mozoku wrote:I'm in agreement with Plansix on the value of this Upshot model. It's literally worthless besides for entertainment purposes and has a useful life of two hours. On December 13 2017 11:42 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:41 Plansix wrote:On December 13 2017 11:39 jalstar wrote:On December 13 2017 11:38 Plansix wrote: Our model predicts the outcome of an election with closed ballets. This is a waste of Human Resources and time, since more accurately results can be obtained by waiting for the real count to come in. Well obviously it's 50-50, either Moore wins or Jones does! Someone already won! Predictions no longer matter!!!! It's a level of confidence, not a probability. Pretty basic statistics, there's no need to be obtuse here. This depends on your statistical assumptions and, empirically speaking, you're more likely than not wrong here seeing as most electoral forecasters aren't using frequentist methods. Or probably shouldn't be anyway. I would have ignored this if it wasn't for the snarky "basic statistics" comment. Most people are taught the difference between confidence and probability in stats 101 when being taught how to interpret confidence intervals. edit: and empirically it's not a probability because as Plansix said, it already happened. But who fucking cares when we can literally have the results tomorrow? Or in an hour? This is treating politics like sports and entertainment, which it isn't.
It sure is entertaining though! Its kinda like sports too, 'cause you just root for your team even if they're likely to lose and regardless of much of anything they do or have done in the past.
I'm just enjoying riding my civic engagement high this year, beats the hell outta meth!
|
It's still entirely possible that the parts of the blue counties yet to be counted are the more red-leaning ones.
That said...this is real, real bad for the GOP tax bill. I think Jones'll get to vote on the conference version if he wins, right?
|
The NYT prediction is purely for fun. No reason to pretend it's anything different, it's just part of that live experience.
And that prediction is basically calling it for Jones right now.
|
On December 13 2017 12:20 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's still entirely possible that the parts of the blue counties yet to be counted are the more red-leaning ones.
They think that's the case in Mobile (not anymore). But now that Tuscaloosa is other it seems quite hard for Moore to come back.
|
On December 13 2017 12:20 TheTenthDoc wrote: That said...this is real, real bad for the GOP tax bill. I think Jones'll get to vote on the conference version if he wins, right? Well since Pence is VP you're going to need two GOP traitors to vote against it for it to fail. Do we have such traitors lined up at the moment?
|
Only if Collins finds her spine.
|
|
|
On December 13 2017 12:22 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2017 12:20 TheTenthDoc wrote: That said...this is real, real bad for the GOP tax bill. I think Jones'll get to vote on the conference version if he wins, right? Well since Pence is VP you're going to need two GOP traitors to vote against it for it to fail. Do we have such traitors lined up at the moment?
Corker is one. Depending on what emerges from conference I could easily see any of the folks who got bought out being another.
|
|
|
|
|
|