538 Right On Target As Usual!

These polling gurus really know their stuff...LMAO!

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/two-special-elections-on-tuesday-could-hint-at-another-blue-wave-in-2020/

Two Special Elections On Tuesday Could Hint At Another Blue Wave In 2020

3 Likes

Did they not win? Every link in that looks like a stupid ad so I didn’t click on anything. 

DropKick Joe -

Did they not win? Every link in that looks like a stupid ad so I didn’t click on anything. 

Republicans took both seats

3 Likes

nate silver is a retarded faggot. 

Anyone that listens to anything that guys says deserves what they get. 

2 Likes

Blue Wave 2020 Yall!!

It is hard to believe these people did not learn anything in 2016. 538 proclaims expertise in data and statistics, yet they write an article about the special elections forecasting a "Blue Wave" where the DNC candidates get trounced... The article would make more sense if they predicted a red wave.

It seems like many liberals allow partisanship to skew their perception of reality (and professionalism), which then impedes their ability to accurately analyse their data.

Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

1 Like
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

1 Like
The Green Bastard -
RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

LOL

The Green Bastard - 
RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

This place… I swear.

Try to read and comprehend. The article is about assessing whether or not a blue wave is possible this cycle based on these special elections.

So far they are somewhere between 2018 and historical. (with a giant sample size of 2).

I know, you want to just paint a picture based off of a dumb title… but maybe do some reading for once.

RdotC -
The Green Bastard - 
RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

This place… I swear.

Try to read and comprehend. The article is about assessing whether or not a blue wave is possible this cycle based on these special elections.

So far they are somewhere between 2018 and historical. (with a giant sample size of 2).

I know, you want to just paint a picture based off of a dumb title… but maybe do some reading for once.

See this:

The media narrative works like this:

Big Democrat Win = OMG BLUE WAVEZ!!!!!!!!!

Narrow Democrat Win = OMG BLUE WAVEZ!!!!!!!!!

Narrow GOP Win = BAD FOR GOP IT WAS SO CLOSE OMG BLUE WAVEZ!!!!!!!!!!

Big GOP Win = BAD FOR GOP, BECAUSE WE NARROWED THE GAP SOME, OMG BLUE WAVEZ!!!!!!!!!

1 Like
RdotC -
The Green Bastard - 
RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

This place… I swear.

Try to read and comprehend. The article is about assessing whether or not a blue wave is possible this cycle based on these special elections.

So far they are somewhere between 2018 and historical. (with a giant sample size of 2).

I know, you want to just paint a picture based off of a dumb title… but maybe do some reading for once.

they have no idea if 2018 is a bookend based on approval polls

these ppl are not very good at predicting the future and they live in echo chambers so they dont even have anecdotes or a general feeling of the ppl on the street that mean anything

gregbrady - 
RdotC -
The Green Bastard - 
RdotC -
camicom - 
RdotC - Its a stupid headline (article also not by Silver).

The reason the headline is stupid is that they talk about the polling and numbers favoring the republican in both races so the outcome was of no surprise.

The main tie back to the title was talking that when a party outperforms historical percentages in a special election, it generally carriers over to the general (ie if the two democrats lost by lower percentage points that historical races, it would bode well for a ‘blue wave’ in the general).

But actual reading and comprehension is alot to ask for on here…

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1260571858786824193

And prior to Hill winning, Republicans had held that seat since 1992.

Generally the split in congressional races for that seat were ~60/40 republican.

So the 56/45 points closer to historical than 2018.

Lol sooo..... blue wave!

This place… I swear.

Try to read and comprehend. The article is about assessing whether or not a blue wave is possible this cycle based on these special elections.

So far they are somewhere between 2018 and historical. (with a giant sample size of 2).

I know, you want to just paint a picture based off of a dumb title… but maybe do some reading for once.

they have no idea if 2018 is a bookend based on approval polls

these ppl are not very good at predicting the future and they live in echo chambers so they dont even have anecdotes or a general feeling of the ppl on the street that mean anything

FiveThirtyEight has been one of the best at predicting outcomes.

They’ve been right or within the margin of error for most races since Silver started doing this work.

Now I’m sure you’ll want to say something like ‘Hurr Durrr Hillary has a 90% chance of winning’

And yes, she did. And then lost when most of the toss up states ended up going to Trump.

But don’t take one of the closest elections in history (and one with a split popular/electoral vote) as a reason to shit on actual analytics.

The analogy would be that you could flip a coin a thousand times and at some point you could get 20 heads in a row… but over time, the probability will win out and you’ll end up with a near 50/50 distribution.