U.S. politics isolation tank

[DeepGreenEyes]

Love that, Stella.

Have trouble keeping track of all the ways the prez is Not One of Us? Overwhelmed by his multilayered deviosity? Well then, you NEED this chart!

Yer welcome, friends.

 

[gypsy*seer]

Love that, Stella.

Have trouble keeping track of all the ways the prez is Not One of Us? Overwhelmed by his multilayered deviosity? Well then, you NEED this chart!

Yer welcome, friends.

Well...

that is just

beautiful.

*wipes away a tear*

I am SO swiping this!

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

I am SO swiping this!

Please do.


FDR's message from the grave to 2012 America.

Everything old is new again.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

Yes, there are idiots of every political stripe.

But... THIS!!!!!!





But wait - there's MORE!

 

[intothewoods]

So if Nate Silver's analysis is correct, it's proof positive that the media doesn't have a liberal bias, just a ratings bias.

In fact, even if his analysis is flawed or off, you have to accept that the polling data is only meaningful when looked at in its entirety (in other words, not just CNN polls or ABC polls, etc.). The way polling data is reported seems laughable to me.

My entire world view -- everything from politics to vaccines -- is starting to shift into facts versus mythology. And it's a lonely place to be...which -- when you stop and think about it -- is ENTIRELY INSANE!! Who doesn't want the facts??? Answer? Almost everyone!!

 

[Netzach]

So if Nate Silver's analysis is correct, it's proof positive that the media doesn't have a liberal bias, just a ratings bias.

In fact, even if his analysis is flawed or off, you have to accept that the polling data is only meaningful when looked at in its entirety (in other words, not just CNN polls or ABC polls, etc.). The way polling data is reported seems laughable to me.

My entire world view -- everything from politics to vaccines -- is starting to shift into facts versus mythology. And it's a lonely place to be...which -- when you stop and think about it -- is ENTIRELY INSANE!! Who doesn't want the facts??? Answer? Almost everyone!!

Nate Silver is the hero of this cycle for me.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

So if Nate Silver's analysis is correct, it's proof positive that the media doesn't have a liberal bias, just a ratings bias.

In fact, even if his analysis is flawed or off, you have to accept that the polling data is only meaningful when looked at in its entirety (in other words, not just CNN polls or ABC polls, etc.). The way polling data is reported seems laughable to me.

My entire world view -- everything from politics to vaccines -- is starting to shift into facts versus mythology. And it's a lonely place to be...which -- when you stop and think about it -- is ENTIRELY INSANE!! Who doesn't want the facts??? Answer? Almost everyone!!

There is this interesting subtext to this election, isn't there? I can't wait to see how it plays out.

It's not just a left-right divide, it's a math majors/history majors divide! If the quants (and Nate in particular) are right, then we will build a shrine for him at Delphi, with unmatched computing power.

Because his model says the prez has terrific odds of being re-elected, it's also set up this miniaturized version of the right wing anti-facts crusade: if it doesn't buttress our ideology, it's a conspiracy. Lump polling models in with evolution, climate change, sex ed studies, galloping income inequality, etc. as Not Real Things That Have to Be Considered Seriously.

I read Rush's site last night, and he is calling it big for Romney, as is Rove and Dick Morris and that freakishly popular unskewedpolls.com. None of these people has a good reason for picking the win, and if the results were flipped, you can bet there'd be no complaints about Nate Silver.

And Silver doesn't say Obama will win, just that he is highly likely to win. If you watch any sport religiously, you've seen big underdogs beat the odds.

If Romney wins though, I don't think you'll hear about the usefulness of broad polling models, or the need to tweak them. It'll be "pollsters are in the tank for Dems, just like the rest of the lamestream media."

I need coffee before posting. Ugh.

 

[Keroin]

If polls actually mean anything, a recent one said that 87% of Canadians would vote for Obama. A little less fuzzy on this side of the border.

Actually, in Canada, I think we see him as just slightly right of center, lol.

But Will Butler's right, we will like you all more if you vote for him, and who doesn't want to liked by Canucks?

http://90days90reasons.com/87.php

 

[IrisAlthea]

If polls actually mean anything, a recent one said that 87% of Canadians would vote for Obama. A little less fuzzy on this side of the border.

Actually, in Canada, I think we see him as just slightly right of center, lol.

But Will Butler's right, we will like you all more if you vote for him, and who doesn't want to liked by Canucks?

http://90days90reasons.com/87.php

I just read about this too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687

 

[Keroin]

I just read about this too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687

Yeah, I think the global message is a pretty strong, "Please, no more Republicans! Pleeeeaaaaaase!"

Especially not Romney! *shudders*

 

[midwestyankee]

I just read about this too:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687

Did anyone else nearly spit out their lunch upon seeing that when results were listed by rank according to support for Mr. Romney that Kenya was highest on the list?

 

[Netzach]

in local news: this is pretty interesting. It seems that some GOP people have bought themselves a windsock for the winds of inevitable change.

It's gonna be close. I'm not optimistic. A lot of conservatives are smart enough to realize this is like saying "we have to write an amendment banning drunk driving into the state constitution" - it's already BANNED so this is a waste of money on a giant scale.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/10/24/stronger-marriage-more-commitment/

This is the kind of thing that also raises my radical "why should ANYone have to get married to decide who gets to visit them when sick/parent with them/have a claim to half their shit on breakup?" hackles, but oh well. I'm just glad that a lot of people are rethinking this in different ways.

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

Who are y'all following on Twitter tonight that I need to add???

 

[Stella_Omega]

Actually, in Canada, I think we see him as just slightly right of center, lol.

So do we in the USA. But that's about as for left as we can get right now. Evidently.

 

[intothewoods]

Nate Silver is the hero of this cycle for me.

Yup!

There is this interesting subtext to this election, isn't there? I can't wait to see how it plays out.

It's not just a left-right divide, it's a math majors/history majors divide! If the quants (and Nate in particular) are right, then we will build a shrine for him at Delphi, with unmatched computing power.

Because his model says the prez has terrific odds of being re-elected, it's also set up this miniaturized version of the right wing anti-facts crusade: if it doesn't buttress our ideology, it's a conspiracy. Lump polling models in with evolution, climate change, sex ed studies, galloping income inequality, etc. as Not Real Things That Have to Be Considered Seriously.

I read Rush's site last night, and he is calling it big for Romney, as is Rove and Dick Morris and that freakishly popular unskewedpolls.com. None of these people has a good reason for picking the win, and if the results were flipped, you can bet there'd be no complaints about Nate Silver.

And Silver doesn't say Obama will win, just that he is highly likely to win. If you watch any sport religiously, you've seen big underdogs beat the odds.

If Romney wins though, I don't think you'll hear about the usefulness of broad polling models, or the need to tweak them. It'll be "pollsters are in the tank for Dems, just like the rest of the lamestream media."

I need coffee before posting. Ugh.

Math is hard. Just ask Joe Scarborough.

I wasn't a math major though! I think it's also logic and rational thinking.

If polls actually mean anything, a recent one said that 87% of Canadians would vote for Obama. A little less fuzzy on this side of the border.

Actually, in Canada, I think we see him as just slightly right of center, lol.

But Will Butler's right, we will like you all more if you vote for him, and who doesn't want to liked by Canucks?

http://90days90reasons.com/87.php

Well that poll doesn't mean anything! Lol. I mean you guys are like socialists and shit.

 

[gypsy*seer]

Who are y'all following on Twitter tonight that I need to add???

Brazile, Kristof, The Onion....
then there's Cooper & Stephanopoulos, and all of the usual suspects.


Go, you-know-who!

 

[Sir_Winston54]

The Night A Computer Predicted The Next President

Some milestone moments in journalism converged 60 years ago on election night in the run between Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower and Democratic Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson. It was the first coast-to-coast television broadcast of a presidential election. Walter Cronkite anchored his first election night broadcast for CBS.

And it was the first time computers were brought in to help predict the outcome. That event in 1952 helped usher in the computer age, but it wasn't exactly love at first sight.​

There's more, of course, and it's actually funny. Just click the headline/link.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Pennsylvania for Obama. That's kinda sweet. What with the voter ID laws ansd all.

 

[Stella_Omega]

SUCK ON YOUR OWN KOCHS YOU SHITHEADS!

Well, it turns out-- Can't buy democracy.

 

[Keroin]

On behalf of Canadians everywhere...WHEW!

Though it is always nice to gain new US refugees whenever y'all vote in some crazy assed Republican.

 

[Keroin]

Well that poll doesn't mean anything! Lol. I mean you guys are like socialists and shit.

Yes, yes, we are the evil red maple-leafed menace.

Come visit, tour our lovely death camps for the elderly. This is what universal health care gets you!!! BE AFRAID!!!

 

[Keroin]

Oh, and, great tweet:

"What a horrible night for rapists everywhere."

*snort*

 

[BiBunny]

The official numbers were a hell of a lot closer here than I would ever have imagined it--though you wouldn't have guessed it by the Chicken Littles on my Facebook. I'm starting to have hope for us rednecks, though.

 

[Keroin]

Another great tweet:

"Do Canadians tweet this much when they elect their moose king?"

 

[njlauren]

So if Nate Silver's analysis is correct, it's proof positive that the media doesn't have a liberal bias, just a ratings bias.

In fact, even if his analysis is flawed or off, you have to accept that the polling data is only meaningful when looked at in its entirety (in other words, not just CNN polls or ABC polls, etc.). The way polling data is reported seems laughable to me.

My entire world view -- everything from politics to vaccines -- is starting to shift into facts versus mythology. And it's a lonely place to be...which -- when you stop and think about it -- is ENTIRELY INSANE!! Who doesn't want the facts??? Answer? Almost everyone!!

Reminds me of an old Peanuts Comic strip, where Lucy is giving Charlie Brown a rundown on their teams performance: "Charlie Brown, our team has played 100 games, and lost 100; our team has scored 56 runs, the other teams, 360; our team batting average is .200, while opposing teams hit .330 against us; our pitches had an era of 3.6, theirs 0.5...."

Charlie Brown looks at Lucy wearily and says "Lucy, tell your statistics to shut up"...that is how people are with facts. Sound bytes sound a lot better and more importantly, you don't have to think.