Nate Silver’s Predictions Aren’t What They Used To Be

Nate Silver’s Predictions Aren’t What They Used To Be


IDIOTS LIKE JOE
SCARBOROUGH WOULD GO ON THE AIR AND TALK BADLY ABOUT HIM. NATE
SILVER HAD NUMBERS. UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS ELECTION
CYCLE, HE HAS LOST TRACK OF THE NUMBERS AND CAN’T SEE PAST HIS OWN BIAS. I AM PULLING FOR NATE.
I WANT A NUMBERS GUY, I’M NOT INTERESTED IN YOUR POLITICAL
OPINION IN THIS CONTEXT. I WANT YOU TO ANALYZE THE NUMBERS IN
THE MOST OBJECTIVE WAY THAT YOU CAN. HE JUST CAME OUT AND SAID
HILLARY CLINTON NOW HAS AN 80% CHANCE OF WINNING THE
ELECTION. WHY WOULD I BE UPSET ABOUT THAT? BERNIE SANDERS FOR
ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES IS NOT GOING TO BE THE NOMINEE, THAT FIGHT IS OVER. IT’S TRUMP VERSUS
CLINTON, BUT IN THAT FIGHT I CLEARLY WOULD PREFER CLINTON TO
TRUMP. I CAN’T STAND TRUMP. BUT I DON’T BELIEVE IT. AND HERE’S WHY. I REMEMBER NATE TELLING ME
JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT THE POLLS WHERE HILLARY CLINTON WAS
LOSING TO DONALD TRUMP. WHO LOOKS AT POLLING THIS EARLY? NAY, WE ARE STILL PRETTY EARLY
AND NOW WE ARE AT 80%? YOU ARE AT 0% A WHILE AGO, NOW YOU ARE AT 80%? IT HAS BEEN AT LEAST A
MONTH AND A HALF. THINGS CHANGE, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT BACK THEN
HE WROTE ABOUT THE POLLS SHOWING DONALD TRUMP LEADING HILLARY CLINTON. GOING ON A RANT ABOUT
GENERAL ELECTION POLLS IN MAY IS UNACCEPTABLE FOR FUCK SAKE.
[VIDEO BUFFERING] ALRIGHT GUYS, WE HAD A TRI-CASTER ISSUE. YOU
NEVER THOUGHT YOU WOULD HEAR THE WORD TRI-CASTER SO MUCH IN YOUR LIFE. APPARENTLY WE DON’T KNOW
WHAT A TRI-CASTER IS. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON’T HAVE
A LOT OF MONEY. YOU HAVE A LOT OF AUDIENCE, BUT NOT A LOT OF MONEY. A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE NOT
FIGURED OUT THAT THE AUDIENCE IS ALL HERE. WE COULD GET MORE
BACKUPS AND HAVE A BETTER SYSTEM IF WE HAD MORE RESOURCES,
TYTNETWORK.COM/JOIN. YOU GUYS POWER THE SHOW, SO IT IS YOUR FAULT. I’M KIDDING. IMAGINE
WHERE WE WOULD BE WITHOUT YOU? THE ANSWER IS LITERALLY NOWHERE.
IF YOU WANT TO HELP OUT, BLESS YOUR HEARTS. LET ME PICK UP THE
STORY WHERE WE LEFT OFF WITH A NATE SILVER. IN MAY THE POLLS
MEANT NOTHING, BUT IN JUNE THE POLLS MEAN EVERYTHING. BACK THEN
HE SENDS OUT THESE TWEETS. ONE MONTH THE POLLS ARE NOISY, AND
THE NEXT MONTH THEY ARE COMPLETELY QUIET. WHEN HIS
CANDIDATE, HILLARY CLINTON ñ WHO ARE YOU KIDDING? YOU BACK HILLARY CLINTON SO HARD, I KNOW
YOU DON’T ñ HERE ARE THE NUMBERS. IN MAJOR CANDIDATE, HILLARY CLINTON IS LOSING. IN
THE NEXT MONTH, IN JUNE, OH, THIS ELECTION IS 80% OVER.
EVERYBODY GO HOME. CONVENIENTLY THEY ALL THINK ALIKE. I AM
TRYING TO HELP YOU TO BREAK OUT OF THAT GROUP THING. YOU ARE IN NEW YORKER, YOU ARE IN THAT BUBBLE. THAT’S WHAT
THEY DID IN
THE PRIMARIES, AND THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING IN THE GENERAL
ELECTION. REMEMBER, I AM AGAINST TRUMP I WANT HIM TO LOSE. I HOPE
YOU ARE RIGHT, BUT I WANT YOU TO BE FAIR AND HONEST. LULLING
EVERYONE INTO A FALSE SENSE OF COMPLACENCY DOES NOT HELP. THE
POLLS DO MATTER, THEY SHOW YOU A SNAPSHOT IN TIME. THE FACT THAT
TRUMP PULLED A LITTLE AHEAD OF HILLARY CLINTON. THAT BUFFOON
SHOULD BE 20 POINTS AHEAD OF CLINTON. AMONG MEN SHE IS
GETTING KILLED. 56 TO 25, DONALD TRUMP’S WEDDING. YOU HAVE TO BE
BALANCED IN BOTH CASES. THE POLLS DON’T MEAN EVERYTHING, AND THEY DON’T MEAN NOTHING. IF
TRUMP’S LEAD IN MAY DIDN’T MEAN NOTHING, IT MEANT SOMETHING. AND
RIGHT NOW HILLARY CLINTON FLEET DOESN’T MEAN EVERYTHING, A MEANS SOMETHING. YOU GOT TO BE HONEST
ABOUT IT. ONE LESS THING FROM SILVER. HE GAVE TRUMP A 2%
CHANCE OF GETTING THE NOMINATION. THAT IS WHAT WE IN
THE BUSINESS CALL OOPS. PART OF NATE’S BIAS HERE IS NOT LIBERAL
OR CONSERVATIVE. IF ANYTHING IT IS THAT GROUP THING BIAS. PART
OF IT IS THAT HE WROTE A BOOK ABOUT HOW THE PARTIES MATTER. HE
WAS RIGHT UP UNTIL THIS REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT WHERE PEOPLE ARE SICK OF IT. THEY
DON’T WANT TO LISTEN TO THE ESTABLISHMENT. PARTIES PICK JEB
BUSH AND MARK RUBIO, WHERE ARE THEY? YOU MIGHT WANT TO GO VISIT
THEM ON THE GOLF COURSE BECAUSE THEY ARE IN GOD DAMN RETIREMENT.
SO HE GAVE TRUMP A 2% CHANCE FOR THE NOMINATION, WHICH I SUSPECT IS WRONG. HE SAYS IN THE PRIMARY
WAS HARD TO PREDICT BECAUSE HE WAS GOING UP AND DOWN. ACTUALLY,
HE WAS CONSISTENTLY NUMBER ONE. THAT’S WHY BACK IN JUNE 2015 I
SAID HE WAS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE IN THE TOP THREE. THEN BY
OCTOBER, MONTHS BEFORE ANY OF THE VOTING I BET THAT HE WOULD WIN THE NOMINATION. WHAT DID I
BASE THAT ON? MY GUT? NO. FUNNY ENOUGH I BASED IT ON POLLS. I
ALSO BASED ON HOW HE WAS CAMPAIGNING, AND THE MOOD OF THE
COUNTRY. ALSO HOW THE RIGHT-WING VOTERS WERE RECEIVING HIM. NO,
2% CHANCE. PART OF THAT ñ IT’S ABOUT HOW YOU SAID THOSE POLLS WERE ALL OVER
THE PLACE. WHAT
THE HELL IS CONSISTENT ABOUT THOSE NUMBERS? I HOPE THAT I
HELPED IN AN EFFORT TO BE AS OBJECTIVE AS WE CAN. I KNOW THEY
WILL NEVER ACCEPT THAT. THEY WILL SAY YOU ARE YOU A
PROGRESSIVE, SO YOU SUPPORT CERTAIN CANDIDATES. NO, THERE
ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE POLITICALLY, AND
I AM CLEAR ABOUT THAT, AND WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO ACTUALLY HAPPEN? THAT ANALYSIS
IS ONE THAT WE HOPE WE DO HONESTLY AND TRUTHFULLY.
HOPEFULLY WE ARRIVE AT THE TRUTH, WE WOULD LIKE EVERYBODY TO DO THE SAME INSTEAD OF JUST
GOING WITH THEIR BIAS. I AM ESPECIALLY MAD BECAUSE I EXPECT
BETTER FROM NATE. HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE GUY THAT WE CAN TURN
TO FOR FACTS. LET’S GET BACK TO THAT.

100 Comments

  1. Ehrmagawd he doesn't know what the words mean the dumb fuck. Someone send him on a beginners statistics course.

  2. Reminds me of John Zogby several presidential cycles back. Everybody was touting Zogby polls as THE polls to end all polls based on accuracy. Then he predicted that John Kerry would win the 2004 election. Oops. Now it's "John Who?"

  3. Oh, FFS. The model he's using is the same as the one from 2012. If you read Silver's posts, you'd see that he repeatedly emphasized that an 80% chance of winning is not a guaranteed win for Hillary. It's not a number he pulled out of his ass, it's the number yielded by the statistical model that's been developed over multiple elections. In fact, one of the recent articles on fivethirtyeight is titled 'An 80 Percent Shot Doesn’t Mean Clinton Is A Sure Thing.' It's almost as if she has a 1 in 5 chance of losing! Do you even know what 'noisy' means in a statistical sense? It means you can't take individual polls or short-term fluctuations in Trump's performance at face value, especially at a time when Clinton and Sanders were particularly competitive and when Democratic tensions were high (May). Sure, Nate Silver is not perfect, but don't for a second claim that you're a perfect reporter of the polls. You say that he's deep in his bubble, yet you host a talk show with a panel of like-minded people. Don't pretend that you're immune from groupthink, Cenk.

  4. It's not just Silver, it's Robert Reich, Bill Maher and others….they think a rock could beat Trump and are jumping on the odds on favorite.

    Truth is, Hillary is hated, hated, by Bernie supporters, and they would rather vote for the rock. Or, Larson, or Jill.

    We are seeing who is a carrying the establishment message to the masses. What they don't understand is that third party recognition is the "revolution".

    We don't care if Trump wins because we don't see any difference between the two.

  5. Wow, Cenk took the ideological lenses off for a second and saw the world, I'm shocked, I'm honestly bewildered. More of this please.

  6. I knew it, Cenk is against Nate because Silver doesn't confirm HIS bias, the one favorable to Bernie.

    You are so stupid Cenk to doesn't make the difference between a general poll in may and a primary poll 1 month before the convention.

    Cenk is exact on one thing though, it is not 80% chance for Clinton, it's 100%, everybody with a moderate knowledge of politics know this.

  7. Hillary should be ahead.Trump barely has a campaign. The R party is freaking out that he will drag everybody down.They will put in an extreme RWer as VP so in case Trump died we would be stuck with a dweeb like MIKe SPence or Pete SEssions. Then they could resume their rape of the middle class That is the exact opposite of what Sanders and TRump voters want.

  8. how does Nate Silver crunch his numbers?….with a set of gold encrusted crushers….a gift from the Clinton foundation….=/

  9. I like Cenk but damn man you need chill, did you know trump is down in every swing state?
    Iowa Clinton 48 – Trump 34,
    Florida Clinton 46 – Trump 42,
    North Carolina Clinton 42 – Trump 40,
    New Hamphsire Clinton 47 – Trump 42,
    Pennslyviana Clinton 46 – Trump 42,
    Ohio Clinton 44 – Trump 40,
    Wisconsin Clinton 47 – Trump 39,
    Colorado Clinton 40 – Trump 39

  10. Nate may be a Hillary bag-man (even though he was right about Hillary having the overwhelming mathematical edge over Sanders), but this tirade against Nate, because Cenk perceives a bias against his candidate, is as revealing of Cenk's bias against Hillary and for Bernie.

  11. The polls had Jimmy Carter up on Reagan by 14-pts., then Carter got emasculated at the polls. I agree with Cenk on this: polls this early don't mean diddly squat.

  12. Yeah Cenk, like when you seriously thought Bernie Sanders could still win the democratic nomination as late as June 2016.

  13. Trump's lead in May meant something. It meant that he had locked up his party's nomination and Hillary hadn't. The same thing will happen after the Republican Convention. Trump will get a bounce that will last until the Democratic convention, where Hillary will get a countervailing bounce. The polls in between will show a closer race than it really is. TYT will conveniently not notice that data point, and will predictably freak out.

  14. I don't recall TYT ever predicting bernie would win the primary, in fact I think they have been saying hillary always had the upper hand….
    I noticed in the comments a lot of people saying "He's just mad because nate predicted hillary would beat bernie"… yea I think everyone predicted that, it wasn't a very hard prediction to make…

    yes, we had hope bernie would do the impossible… but nobody ever predicted a bernie win…

    you guys are just terrible winners lol

  15. Nate Silver's twitter "rant" about the fact that polls (especially daily tracking polls) are noisy. In a series of tweets that day Silver states that Clinton has on average an average of six point lead over Trump. The so called rant was about having to rant in May because of noise in one or two polls showing Trump ahead.

    Secondly, the first Nate Silver statement Cenk discussed was about the probability of winning the election, which relies heavily on winning the electoral college moreso than popular vote (remember, Gore won the popular vote in 2000). The second Silver statement (a twitter post) was only about popular votes. And as I stated in the previous paragraph, Trump was not consistently winning even the popular vote.

    Cenk is just on a crusade against Silver because he thinks Silver was biased against Sanders. However, as Silver projected- even in straight up pledged delegate count, Sanders would not catch up with Clinton.

  16. I like how he completly ignores tweet 4 in wich he said "4. Possible there are effects from Trump wrapping up his nomination
    while Clinton still competes against Sanders. We'll know more in June"

  17. Cenk proving once again he doesn't understand anything about polls. And knows even less about politics in general. Heck, I am 100% positive he didn't even read more than the first three paragraphs of Mr. Silvers article.

  18. This video shows a stunning lack of knowledge regarding statistics and general election polling. The main reason that Silver stated that we shouldn't get so worried about Trump in May was because the Republican primary was over and there was a small degree of consolidation around Trump by Republican voters. As common sense would dictate, this would lead to a polling bump for Trump that was, for all intents and purposes, temporary. Once Hillary Clinton won the Democratic primary we saw a similar consolidation around her as some (but most certainly not all) Democrats began to consolidate around her candidacy. Silver and his team were very clear when they said: "Wait until Hillary clinches the Democratic nomination and see how the polls match up. If Trump is still ahead or very close, that is when the Democrats should worry." They didn't hide that and they didn't try to pull the wool over your eyes. They've been very clear with their expectations based on the numbers. (There is also the fact that polling during active primaries is much less predictive of the general election results than after each candidate has clinched their nomination)

    Btw: Don't forget that Silver's forecasts are not static. If Trump suddenly pulls close to Clinton by the conventions then the forecast will adjust those expected winning percentages.

    This video is just as biased against Silver as the media was against Bernie. It wasn't right then and it isn't right now.

  19. Nate Silver was horrible about the UK elections. He had predicted the Conservatives would end in a tie with Labour.

  20. Nate Silver is a propagandist, obviously. By telling people Hillary has an 80% chance of winning, it is a way to deter those who might have voted for Trump from going to the polls. They tried the same shit with the 'Brexit' vote, when the papers claimed 75% of Brits would vote to stay in the EU… everyone is against Trump in the media, even Fox news.

  21. I knew Trump would be the GOP nominee, and I dislike the man…but it takes little to understand, exactly how many moronic individuals reside in this country. 😛

    …so the nomination was a given, the presidency won't happen though.

  22. Maybe he's right about Silver being off his game, but Cenk's argument is based off nothing but his feelings and hunches. It's not like he's putting forward a mathematical argument here.

  23. Looks to me like he should have stuck to the numbers and avoid the editorializing. He's a statistician not an electoral studies scholar.

  24. Why do you guys bang on Nate silver so much? You're the only reason I've ever heard of him because his opinion means nothing to anybody anyway lol you're creating your demon

  25. Unbelievable. They quote Silver recently as saying "every poll, every swing state, and every national poll" and the example Cenk uses to point out a seemingly screaming hypocrisy is a tweet of Silver's saying "don't sweat an INDIVIDUAL POLL" too much..
    Nate using an aggregate of information from many sources isn't in conflict with his lambasting the hyperbole of any one individual source of polling data.

    Hypothetical; if I were to say, "don't trust any individual's review of this movie…" and then a month into the future I were to say, "well, according to Metacritic, the RT fresh% and the academy nomination for best picture , this movie is widely acclaimed."

    How would there be any contradiction there? Being skeptical of an isolated opinion isn't the same as forming a reasonable conclusion based on an aggregate preponderance of evidence.

    Give me a break.

  26. I've been calling Nate out for months, but really this has been a problem for him ever since 538 was bought by ESPN in 2013. The site hasn't been profitable for them so they have been forcing him to write about forced narratives and use clickbait and junk math to try to recoup their investment. It's not just with his primary forecasts either, which have been off my nearly twice as much as his past primary forecasts, but also his other writing on sports and entertainment, like CARMELO. I don't blame Nate. I blame ESPN/Disney.

  27. The Progressive vote not reflected as moving to Clinton, because it won't. TYT has moved on from hard thinking about the Election, I'll be moving on from opportunistic, short-term coverage like this. We're in a battle to get corruption out, and you're talking the Lesser of 2 Evils, when Evil has never been weaker. I'm disgusted you would day after day surrender any Progressive issue to Hillary, which isn't yours to do, and that's too long a list Cenk.

  28. Cenk, no offense, but Nate Silver is using the numbers if you look at his forecast for about 2 seconds. He saw that he was going off course with his forecasts and returned to using the numbers.

  29. you're just a sore loser Cenk, because you predicted Bernie and Nate was right Hillary would win (hmm maybe a bit of group think there)

    Everyone with half a brain knows Trump has no chance, what a load of tripe Cenk is spewing out.

  30. Cenk,
    generally I'm with you but you are way off on this one man. The article in which you are taking the 80% from explicitly describes the model and how the number was derived. You are pulling from the republican play book and projecting. I know you have a hard on for establishment media, but this is a model, it just crunches the numbers. In the article Nate specifically says Trump could still pull off an upset, or there may be intangibles that the model doesn't account for that could lead to it underestimating Trumps chances.

    You're also taking his tweet out of context. He was talking about people freaking out about a single poll in May that had Trump ahead. It was a statistical outlier. Not every poll is equal.

    Furthermore, Nate wasn't going with the establishment predicting that Hillary would win the primary, he was using math and numbers and by the way he was right. I'm a Bernie supporter but Hillary got more votes. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy. So anyone that predicted Hillary would win was part of a self fulfilling prophecy???

    The TYT network tries to sell itself as the pro science, rational, skeptical alternative to mainstream media. In most cases I think you fill this role admirably. However, rants like this will only make it easier for people to discount your analysis as the tea party of the left seeing conspiracies and the "establishment" filling in for Obama.

  31. This guy is an ass. Nate did miss Michigan. Name another state. Hillary won 9 out of the last 11 contests. When everyone was saying California was close Nate was calling it by 14 points. Bernie thought he would do well there in eight of those states. He called D.C. by 40 points. Does anyone remember the margin? If you want a true poll you should check the bookies. They have a 94% success rate and they have something to lose if they are wrong. This guy is a sore Bernbot loser that blows it out his ass without reason.

  32. https://electionbettingodds.com/
    http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

  33. the trend matter in the long terms, from his own confession on elections podcast, trump's fans don't have to panic just yet. 80 % isn't 100 % .

  34. Cenk, Cenk…..Silver also said in of those early May tweets that  "Possible there are effects from Trump wrapping up his nomination while Clinton still competes against Sanders. We'll know more in June".

  35. Cenk Uygur has the most annoying voice on the internet, He treats EVERY single news story as if it is the most incredulous thing that EVER happened.

  36. All these "experts" are like the augurs/seers in Ancient Rome . ( They made prognoses by studying the livers of slaughtered sheep. ) Anybody remembers when not even o n e of all the "experts" were able to foresee the demise of the USSR . All "Kremlologues" claimed the USSR was "a monolith" and not a chance in hell it would break up in out lifetime…

  37. If Hillary has an 80% chance of winning, what are all the Hillary supporters whining about? I mean if she has such a big chance of winning why shouldn't Bernie supporters vote Bernie or Jill Stein, I mean there is no way Trump can win right?

  38. Hillary has a higher likelihood of being indicted. Hillary's numbers will fall as we wait for the FBI to finally drop the other shoe and they'll plummet greatly if they recommend indictment, which they likely will. Comey is no sycophant as was Eric Holder. Hillary for prison 2016. Bernie or bust.

  39. Nate predicted Hillary to win, Cenk predicted Bernie. We can clearly see by TYT videos who lives in a bubble. Tell me how Nates ass tastes Cenk.

  40. Nate Silver also didn't post some primaries and caucuses that would be easy Bernie Sanders wins, so that when you looked at the primary predictions, the list often only included ones that Hillary was expected to win.

  41. Nate Silver did not write The Party Decides: https://www.amazon.com/Party-Decides-Presidential-Nominations-American/dp/0226112373

    His only book is The Signal and the Noise which is about predictions in general.

  42. I would please urge you to listen to the fivethirtyeight elections podcast because they talk in much more nuance. They point out that 80% actually means the opposite happens 1 out of 5 times, that is a lot!

  43. Cenk is the guy who thought Bernie was above 50% to win the primary when Bernie hadn't led in a single national poll.

  44. Arguing that the trend of polls conducted so far amounts to a 72%-80% (there are three models) chance of Clinton winning and that this is an early stage ('Half-Time') to have any confidence in these predictions is precisely looking at the macro level. Moreover, Clinton won 12% (3.7 million) more votes than Sanders did when the average gap in polls during the primaries was around 8%-10% according to 538. So in fact Silver was generous towards Sanders' chances if you buy into him manipulating the results. What is proven however is that unlike the republican party after 2012 TYT don't bother with the real results it's echo-chamber all the way. I don't know what is more bothersome the blatant disregard to factual reporting or the lack of basic reading comprehension let alone analysis capabilities.

  45. Thats where me and you disagree Hillary and trump are equal they both suck ass. #neverhillary #nevertrump

  46. He was right in 2012. So unless he is shown to be wrong,,,,,
    Cenk is mad because Bernie was forecast not to be the winner.Silver was right about that.

  47. Isn't Cenk doing the same thing Scarborough and others did? "Nate's numbers don't make sense because my gut doesn't agree with his statistically accurate method of weighting data."

  48. Bias has nothing to do with extrapolating data and analytics. If you are a registered voter, you will always have bias. Speak ill of Mr. Silver all you want when it came to the primaries – but the Presidential Election, his word is gospel and his history shows it.

  49. Pollsters and pundits got real money for buggering their own numbers and opinions in order to shape public opinion for Hillary Clinton.

    Uh, it is not that they made mistakes, they took some real payoff money to state in public that they believed in Santy Claus (a Hillary landslide). This is what happened in reality.

  50. I think he's smart but he let his bias make him wrong.  It happens to lots of people!  Or he got paid to pump Hillary and make Trump supporters look like losers.

  51. Wow, I despise TYT but I actually got to tip my hat to Cenk here. He's on to something here (especially looking at this months later). Nate was dead wrong, had bias, all that Cenk is arguing here is correct.

  52. Why is Nate Silver being referenced? Would you take your car in for transmission repair to the same mechanic that failed to fix your brakes?

  53. We don't believe news reporters or television personalities with political opinions. They are liars. When I need a little pick me up, I play these and laugh my ass off.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*