Hawkeye-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:21 PM
Original message |
Wednesdays
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:23 PM
Response to Original message |
|
we get off our collective asses.
|
curse10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
that's my thoughts- screw algorithms
|
SlavesandBulldozers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:23 PM
Response to Original message |
2. my algorithm came up with the exact same results |
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:27 PM
Response to Original message |
3. unless Bush uses nuclear weapons in combat |
|
according to the previous study http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3fs8i/air/pres2004b.htmlJust to be sure everyone knows where this is coming from, these are both from the Annals of Improbable Research. It's a joke, people.
|
lancdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Just saw that in the upper left-hand corner.
|
lancdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:32 PM
Response to Original message |
LoneStarLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-11-03 01:40 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Incomplete But Interesting |
|
An incomplete formula but an interesting idea.
It's fairly well established that background isn't the single deciding factor in Presidential elections although it is important. Particularly for incumbent chances, economic conditions play a significant role as well.
I'd like to see this model tested head-to-head against some of the more accepted quant forecasting models from Presidential studies. I bet it might out-perform some of them but I also feel it would be defeated by others.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:51 AM
Response to Original message |