Princeton Election Consortum - Sam Wang

[asiliveandbreathe]

Some say Sam Wang is just as good, if not better than Nates stats machine....I have never seen Sam's numbers this high....

http://election.princeton.edu/category/politics/

As of October 5, 12:04PM EDT:

Snapshot (163 state polls): Clinton 317, Trump 221 EV    Meta-margin: Clinton +3.0%

Clinton Nov. win probability: random drift 86%, Bayesian 91%

Senate snapshot (48 polls): Dem+Ind: 50, GOP: 50, Meta-margin: D +1.2%, Nov. control probability: Dem. 71%

PSSSTTT - There is a great story at the link above also re: the altright - Julian Zelizer and I had the pleasure of interviewing historian Rick Perlstein on the subject of the “alt-right.” Fringe movements on the right have been around a long time, and Perlstein has studied these movements deeply, starting with his classic book Before The Storm

[NNadir]

1. Unfortunately, my neighbors, who work at Princeton, told me that Wang predicted a Kerry...

...landslide in 2004.

My wife never lets me forget that I was nodding in agreement when we met them during the time people around here meet most often; while accompanying the children trick or treating.

I cannot believe this country would elect a man like Trump, but I also didn't believe that it elect a man like George W. Bush.

I hope and pray that Wang is right, and I believe he is, but I will not be a peace until the election and that horrible man is on the waste heap where he belongs.

[mrsv]

2. Maybe....

Kerry did win

[MFM008]

3. Thanks to Blackwell

Ohio was stolen. You don't lock yourself in with the voting machines all night.

[Raster]

4. Blackwell was a liar, cheat and a thief.

[gto]

5. THIS IS SO WRONG. Wang accurately predicted the 2004 election. He is more accurate than Nate.

In 2004, Wang was one of the first to aggregate US Presidential polls using probabilistic methods.[10] The method's applications included correct Election-Eve predictions, high-resolution tracking of the race during the campaign, and identification of targets for resource allocation. Wang's calculation, based on polls only, ended up precisely at the actual electoral outcome, Bush 286, Kerry 252 EV. In 2008, Wang and Andrew Ferguson founded the Princeton Election Consortium blog, in which he analyzes U.S. national election polling.[11][12] His statistical analysis in 2012 correctly predicted the presidential vote outcome in 49 of 50 states and even the popular vote outcome of Barack Obama's 51.1% to Mitt Romney's 48.9%.[13] That year, the Princeton Election Consortium also correctly called 10 out of 10 close Senate races and came within a few seats of the final House outcome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Wang_(neuroscientist)

Wang started the modeling and he has a better track-record than Nate. I will never understand why Nate is more popular.

[RonniePudding]

6. Thanks, that's how I remembered it too

I don't know as much about Wang, but I've seen enough of Nate to know he's overrated, and a clown.