This fall, I've made a series of posts documenting right-wing innumeracy when it comes to polling data. Polls of course are samples, and the poll data is only as good as the sample itself. One way to improve the data is to simply average several polls. Loren Cobb had an elegant and simply explanation on PA the other day why this works. There are several sites who do this for you. Nate Silver, is the famous one, but also Drew Linzter, Sam Wang, electoral-vote.com, etc. If you average the polls and add up the electoral votes Obama wins comfortably. That's been true all summer and fall. Romney did gain some ground after the first debate, but the momentum shifted back toward Obama by mid-October and Obama is now almost back to where he was at the first debate. There is no Ro-mentum, in other words. Obama is the one with the momentum, if there is such a thing.But an astonishing number of people of the right-wing simply don't believe the numbers. And on top that, they don't even seem to understand the numbers. I've made multiple posts on this topic before and this will probably be my last one before the election. Here is a round-up right wing pundits who don't understand math and their predictions. We'll find out soon enough if innumeracy is the best policy. Enjoy.Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post: "Race is still up for grabs." She doesn't know about averaging polls to reduce uncertainty, so "take your pick" regarding which poll to believe, she advises. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/the-poll...Unskewed polls predicts a Romney landslide:http://www.unskewedpolls.com/unskewed_projection_2012%20pres...Michael Barone predicts Romney "wins handily." "Romney 315, Obama 223. That sounds high for Romney. But he could drop Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and still win the election. Fundamentals."http://washingtonexaminer.com/barone-going-out-on-a-limb-rom...Dick Morris predicts a Romney landslidehttp://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/264935-her...Kevin Holsberry (National Review) predicts a Romney win in Ohiohttp://www.nationalreview.com/battleground-ohio/332232/why-r...Josh Jordon (National Review)"the size of Romney’s victory could be the biggest surprise of all."http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332170/turnout-game-jos...Josh Jordan "Nate Silver's Model is flawed" His gut tells him so.http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331192/nate-silver-s-...Michael Franc (National Review) "If Gallup has it right, Governor Romney’s lead may be several percentage points greater than the most recent round of polls suggests." Franc's article is a great one, because he believes the poll, but only the crosstabs, and rejects the topline.http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332386/parsing-polls-...Karl "The Math" Rove "Let's call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more."http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB1000142405297020484630...Jay Cost "I think Mitt Romney is likely to win next Tuesday." Another example of trusting the crosstabs, but ignoring the topline.http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-why-i-think-...And for your amusement, Romney supporter Steve Lombardo abuses the graphing function in Excel to demonstrate Romentum:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-lombardo/election-monito...
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. M