|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On April 25 2017 08:31 bardtown wrote:Uh, the French have the most negative opinion of the EU in Europe. Significantly higher percent with a negative opinion of the EU than in the UK. They're less inclined to leave because it's a more significant risk to them and the continent as a whole, but they don't like it by any stretch of the imagination. Edit: Actually they're 2nd to Greece. http://www.politico.eu/article/poll-the-eu-is-bad-news-but-britain-shouldnt-leave-it/Maybe the EU will swing their way now, but that will cause more discontent in NL, Denmark, Germany, etc. that's an old survey made even before brexit(early 2016).
brexit'ers probably used it to further their agenda pointing and saying - LOOK!, EU is dead or dying; better bail now.
i'm pretty sure opinions changed since then.
|
On April 25 2017 13:57 cLutZ wrote:I mean, I know your flair says Spain, but that is like citing infowars... and it doesnt even really answer the question.
You said you don't speak French, and mine is not great, so I am limited to finding English pieces. Most vox pieces I've read seem fairly decent, and this one cites interviews and articles, so doesn't seem like Infowars to me.
But sure, if a xenophobic denier of Vichy France complicity in actions in WW2 isn't enough evidence for you, nothing much will convince you.
|
On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote.
Macron is much more of an economy wonk than Fillon, even though I disagree with both of them.
Unless economic literacy means thatcherian politics for you, of course.
As for Le Pen she doesn't have a clue, and doesn't care. Her party has gone full 180 degrees on economics in a decade and her voters haven't really noticed. It has always been more about black people and arabs. Sorry, muslims.
|
France12906 Posts
On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions.
The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure.
|
On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure.
There is no 100% certainty.
What they do is that they estimate the most likely parameter(s) of the outcome, so the percentages for each candidate. This estimation has a certainty below 100%, just like any estimation on the question "will Macron reach above 50%". For a statistic with the result of 65/35 for the most likely parameters this certainty for the question will probably be above 99%, but it will never be 100%.
In short, every statistic on these questions always carries variables that also tell you how likely it is that the statistic is right/wrong - based on the assumption that your data is representative to begin with.
|
On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure.
Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong.
|
On April 25 2017 18:41 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. There is no 100% certainty. What they do is that they estimate the most likely parameter(s) of the outcome, so the percentages for each candidate. This estimation has a certainty below 100%, just like any estimation on the question "will Macron reach above 50%". For a statistic with the result of 65/35 for the most likely parameters this certainty for the question will probably be above 99%, but it will never be 100%. In short, every statistic on these questions always carries variables that also tell you how likely it is that the statistic is right/wrong - based on the assumption that your data is representative to begin with.
It can be 100%. You have to count with significance. If your digits beyond the 3rd are not significant (in other words, the power of your test is not enough to give you higher than 3 digits worth of precision) or you are simply not interested in displaying precision beyond 3 digits, rounding can give you 100% and it is a valid result of your test. And in this case, if we assume normal distributions with the margin of errors as given, then the chance of Macron dropping below 50% is greater than 4 sigmas away from the mean... or effectively 0% chance.
|
On April 25 2017 19:03 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 18:41 Big J wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. There is no 100% certainty. What they do is that they estimate the most likely parameter(s) of the outcome, so the percentages for each candidate. This estimation has a certainty below 100%, just like any estimation on the question "will Macron reach above 50%". For a statistic with the result of 65/35 for the most likely parameters this certainty for the question will probably be above 99%, but it will never be 100%. In short, every statistic on these questions always carries variables that also tell you how likely it is that the statistic is right/wrong - based on the assumption that your data is representative to begin with. It can be 100%. You have to count with significance. If your digits beyond the 3rd are not significant (in other words, the power of your test is not enough to give you higher than 3 digits worth of precision) or you are simply not interested in displaying precision beyond 3 digits, rounding can give you 100% and it is a valid result of your test. And in this case, if we assume normal distributions with the margin of errors as given, then the chance of Macron dropping below 50% is greater than 4 sigmas away from the mean... or effectively 0% chance.
Then it would be just bad presentation. It's a long agreed tradition that you do not round up to 100% in displaying such results. Sane tests will also never give you a result that you could rightfully round up to 100%, they give you the significance instead with some uncertainty.
|
France12906 Posts
On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong.
No?
It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose.
Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit).
|
On April 25 2017 19:12 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong. No? It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose. Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit).
Yeah, but if the chance right now were 100%, that means it can't change. Because that would mean that right now, she loses, no matter what happens. So if something happens that leads to the percentages lowering below 100%, that means that at that point, she has a chance of winning. Which means that she had a chance of winning before. Which means that your 100% was wrong before.
|
On April 25 2017 19:24 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 19:12 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong. No? It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose. Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit). Yeah, but if the chance right now were 100%, that means it can't change. Because that would mean that right now, she loses, no matter what happens. So if something happens that leads to the percentages lowering below 100%, that means that at that point, she has a chance of winning. Which means that she had a chance of winning before. Which means that your 100% was wrong before.
That's not what the test is saying. If people vote in the proportions currently polled, there is 0% chance Le Pen wins. It doesn't mean things can't change. And if they do, these tests won't be wrong, but the polls will be outdated.
E: for instance, given the data available, I predict with 100% confidence the sun will rise tomorrow. I don't take into account Vogons blowing up our solar system for their intergalactic highway. It is simply not in my model. If we then learn that the Vogons are in fact on their way, I should trash my model, because the data was incomplete, not because the statistical methods were wrong.
|
On April 25 2017 19:36 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 19:24 Simberto wrote:On April 25 2017 19:12 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong. No? It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose. Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit). Yeah, but if the chance right now were 100%, that means it can't change. Because that would mean that right now, she loses, no matter what happens. So if something happens that leads to the percentages lowering below 100%, that means that at that point, she has a chance of winning. Which means that she had a chance of winning before. Which means that your 100% was wrong before. That's not what the test is saying. If people vote in the proportions currently polled, there is 0% chance Le Pen Windows. It doesn't mean things can't change. And if they do, these tests won't be wrong, but the polls will be outdated.
Oh, come on, this doesn't make any sense. If you would assume that the people vote as polled, you wouldn't need to ascribe any confidence to the prediction, you'd just have a look on the result and say who wins. The uncertainty is supposed to do exactly the opposite, to evaluate the probability that the actual outcome will be different from the face value of the poll.
|
On April 25 2017 19:39 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 19:36 Acrofales wrote:On April 25 2017 19:24 Simberto wrote:On April 25 2017 19:12 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong. No? It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose. Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit). Yeah, but if the chance right now were 100%, that means it can't change. Because that would mean that right now, she loses, no matter what happens. So if something happens that leads to the percentages lowering below 100%, that means that at that point, she has a chance of winning. Which means that she had a chance of winning before. Which means that your 100% was wrong before. That's not what the test is saying. If people vote in the proportions currently polled, there is 0% chance Le Pen Windows. It doesn't mean things can't change. And if they do, these tests won't be wrong, but the polls will be outdated. Oh, come on, this doesn't make any sense. If you would assume that the people vote as polled, you wouldn't need to ascribe any confidence to the prediction, you'd just have a look on the result and say who wins. The uncertainty is supposed to do exactly the opposite, to evaluate the probability that the actual outcome will be different from the face value of the poll.
You're a scientist. You should be better at statistics than that...
There's error margins in the polls. What the test says is that the error margins are not big enough for Le Pen to have a chance at winning. These error margins do not measure the uncertainty of data not taken into account.
|
It's not really that important guys. You're looking at the 99% that Macron has and the 98% Hillary supposedly had. You should be looking at the 60%+ he has vs the 51% or whatever Hillary had.
|
If I tell you that my box has a million green and red balls, and you may draw 100, and from that have to tell me the proportions of green and red balls in the box, you will (should) give me your estimate and an error margin (or some other way of estimating the uncertainty in your estimated proportions). These margins say nothing about the possibility that I then scoop out green balls and add red balls after you have drawn the sample.
|
I guess that's a fair point, it the quoted uncertainty is really only the statistical one of the measurement. I was just expecting more from the predictors.
|
France12906 Posts
On April 25 2017 19:36 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On April 25 2017 19:24 Simberto wrote:On April 25 2017 19:12 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 19:02 opisska wrote:On April 25 2017 18:00 Poopi wrote:On April 25 2017 16:02 Danglars wrote:On April 25 2017 06:56 Poopi wrote:
A lot of models predict Macron winning with a probability of 100.0%, as for the results I guess it'll depends on the next two weeks. Model prediction and 100.0% should never be mentioned in the same sentence. "A lot of models" are pure bullshit if they're citing that number. And I'd consider mid to high 90s to be believable. On April 25 2017 11:53 cLutZ wrote:On April 25 2017 10:42 warding wrote:On April 25 2017 10:19 cLutZ wrote:
Can someone from France explain how Le Pen is considered so threatening to the status quo? Her economic illiteracy is the same as all the other candidates (except the one that finished 3rd), and my understanding is that if she tries to unilaterally do something on EU you can no-confidence vote and get a new President?
Unless immigration is really the #1 issue of the time in France, but idk how that's possible given that they don't get to vote. Why do you consider Macron economically illiterate? In the realm of ideas, Le Pen comes from the same place fascism came from. We tried it out a whole ago on this side of the pond and it left us a really bad taste in our mouths. Edit: to add a little bit of seriousness to the snark, she doesn't have to unilaterally try to leave the EU - nor could she - but I'm guessing she could call s referendum which would run the risk of going the same way the UK did. To everyone in Europe, that is real economic and social upheaval if it happens. Its my understanding he is marketed as an "economic centrist/realist" but doesn't have anything about the early retirement age, 35 hr work week, or pension cuts in his platform. Also I haven't seen a plan for reducing the youth unemployment rate. He's fine elsewhere, and certainly better than Le Pen, but I dont see why she's cataclysmic. The immigration thing, IMO seems like a predictable response to a country with a large welfare state. Open borders or a welfare state, pick one, is the old Milton Friedman saying. It's just the left/right divide, Euro-version. The left will hype doom and gloom, the right will get welfare points from people tired of dialogue norms, and the marketing on market-friendliness is not much more than posturing. I read the thread and talked to leftist French expats and haven't heard anything out of the ordinary. She's bad in conventional ways. Bad debater, majority bad policy suggestions. The 100.0% is the current number, it can change during these two weeks. However as a French I can tell you that's it's the right number for sure. Que?! If the 100.0% ever changes, then it was surely wrong. No? It's not 100% as in it's 100% sure that this will happen, since there is a possibility that either of them got killed or whatever, but given the current intel/polls/whatever there is no statistical way (with their model, but in reality either ^^) for Macron to lose. Since their prediction is fed probably daily, maybe it will go down a bit to like 99% (their 100% is probably rounded a bit). Yeah, but if the chance right now were 100%, that means it can't change. Because that would mean that right now, she loses, no matter what happens. So if something happens that leads to the percentages lowering below 100%, that means that at that point, she has a chance of winning. Which means that she had a chance of winning before. Which means that your 100% was wrong before. That's not what the test is saying. If people vote in the proportions currently polled, there is 0% chance Le Pen wins. It doesn't mean things can't change. And if they do, these tests won't be wrong, but the polls will be outdated. E: for instance, given the data available, I predict with 100% confidence the sun will rise tomorrow. I don't take into account Vogons blowing up our solar system for their intergalactic highway. It is simply not in my model. If we then learn that the Vogons are in fact on their way, I should trash my model, because the data was incomplete, not because the statistical methods were wrong.
This. I don't get why it's seemingly hard to understand, maybe I don't express it well enough in English?
|
I mean, there's a pretty big difference between the statistics on a well defined physical system with absolutely zero failures down millenia of recorded data... and a political model based on polling.
Like obviously you know that in making the analogy, but the size of the errorbars really can't be overstated here. Two sigfigs is optimistic, imo, let alone finding enough decimals that you could meaningfully round to 100.
Also, more importantly, "the far right populist hasn't got a chance" have been the famous last words of an awful lot of political campaigns recently. Be careful.
|
Norway28716 Posts
There really is no comparison between the polls now and the polls before Trump won. And, from round 1, we saw that Le Pen was the one candidate of the top 4 to do worse than she polled.
|
France12906 Posts
On April 25 2017 22:40 Belisarius wrote:
I mean, there's a pretty big difference between the statistics on a well defined physical system with absolutely zero failures down millenia of recorded data... and a political model based on polling.
Like obviously you know that in making the analogy, but the size of the errorbars really can't be overstated here. Two sigfigs is optimistic, imo, let alone finding enough decimals that you could meaningfully round to 100.
Also, more importantly, "the far right populist hasn't got a chance" have been the famous last words of an awful lot of political campaigns recently. Be careful.
It's a model based on previous past French elections relative to the polls back then, taking into account the current polls.
We saw sunday that the pollsters gave a very accurate idea of the results of round 1, so the polls on which the model I'm talking about is based uses very good data.
The fact that Trump won actually lowers the chance of MLP tho!
Because French people are, in general, proud, and won't allow themselves to lose miserably as USA did with Trump, as some French poster said a few pages ago.
Right now, the polls indicate around 65-35 for Macron iirc.
What will probably happen in the next two weeks will be something like:
- MLP and her counselors try some shenanigans in order to create a positive dynamic, such as yesterday with the whole "it's about France, not about our party" thing. edit: they'll probably try to discredit Macron with the banker angle, since a lot of people don't like that image, hidden accounts or whatever, as well as the fact that he is "like Holland", which will not play to his favor.
- Some salty Melenchonnistes (they are the ones that are estimated to vote "null" the most atm, around 30%) will be back to reason after a few beers and nights of sleep, so they probably won't abstain as much as they want to right now.
- A lot of people that want FN to win will act like "it's already won for Macron, blabla..." or "the elections are rigged by the system/the media" trying to do it USA elections style with all the "Hillary has already won because it's rigged!" thing, but it won't work, because the actual opinions aren't as close as it was during the US election, and because on TV you'll have another rhetoric "it's not won already, be scared!!" that, on average, will work and give Macron more votes!
Why? Because the average people will react like this: "hmm it's won already, do I really need to vote? they tell me that it's not won already but I'm pretty sure it is. There is no way the FN will move on, right? Hmm, maybe there is a chance, so I better vote for Macron in order not to regret my choice afterwards".
- The other factor is that French people are heavily influenced by polls results, which creates a dynamic of "Self-fulfilling prophecy", that's what happened with Hamon and Melenchon: since Melenchon had a small lead, people that wanted to vote for either of them were afraid of the 2002 elections where the left lost to the far right in the first round because they weren't united behind the left candidate, thinking he would automatically qualifies, thus spreading their votes among smaller candidates that had no chance of qualifying to begin with.
Therefore, people in the last few weeks saw Melenchon gain a good dynamic after the debates, he gained enough popularity in polls to be ahead of Hamon, so they tried to vote strategically and most of them reported their voices, which failed.
It also happened with Fillon, some feared that he would lose automatically because of the stories around him, so they tried to prevent a second round consisting of MLP - JLM, thus voting for Macron, which is probably what made Fillon lose.
I think it'll be a non factor this time, because there is only one choice, so if the dynamic is becoming less in favor of Macron, people that said before that they won't vote will start doing it. Thus, virtually, Macron can't lose.
The only question is by how much will he win?
I would say that the whole "Macron hasn't won yet, remember 2002" will make people go back to primary instincts, fear, and he'll probably win with a better % than he is predicted to today.
My wild guess would be 70%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
