« | »

Democrats Turn On Wunderkind Guru Nate Silver

From The Hill:

Democrats turn on Nate Silver

By Alexander Bolton | March 24, 2014

Democrats are turning against Nate Silver, the political data guru they touted in 2012. Two years ago he was described as soothsayer after repeatedly saying that President Obama would win a second term, accurately predicting the winner of each state in the 2012 contest.

Even though Silver had been largely wrong about the midterm elections in 2010.

Conservatives ripped Silver back then for his “flawed model,” with some claiming Silver was a biased liberal. Democrats loved him then, but now they’re attacking him. The difference, of course, is that the Democrats’ political fortunes have taken a turn for the worse and Silver isn’t optimistic about their chances in November.

“We think the Republicans are now slight favorites to win at least six seats and capture the chamber,” Silver wrote, predicting Republicans could net as many as 11 seats. Silver, who pegs the chances of a GOP takeover at 60 percent, unveiled his crystal ball Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

Would Silver have been allowed to espouse such negative projections if he were still writing for the NYT? Maybe so, if The Times thought it would boost DNC fundraising. — Which still could be what this is really all about.

Democrats quickly fired back. Sen. Michael Bennet (Colo.), who heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), told The Hill, “I think he’s got his numbers wrong, which is unusual for Nate. In this case, I look forward to talking to him after the election.”

Bennet added, “He ought to go back and check what he said about [Sen.] Claire McCaskill [(D-Mo.)] and some of the other races in the last cycle.” …

Pressed on Silver’s 2014 predictions, Sen. Mark Begich (Alaska), one of the Senate’s most vulnerable incumbents, said, “It’s very early.” Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), whom Silver gives only a 30 percent chance of winning reelection, said, “I don’t agree with that at all.” …

Guy Cecil, the DSCC executive director, circulated a memo on Monday that criticized Silver. Cecil argued that Silver and his staff at FiveThirtyEight.com based their analysis disproportionately on surveys by GOP polling firms. He claimed a similarly flawed sampling produced inaccurate predictions two years ago.

Paul Krugman, a liberal New York Times columnist who often sides with Democrats in policy debates, took a shot at Silver’s methodology in a blog post Sunday.

Krugman said Silver’s revamped blog, which recently spun off from the Times, so far “looks like something between a disaster and a disappointment.” Krugman, a professor at Princeton University, faulted Silver for not consulting experts to refine his analytical models.

“Data never tell a story on their own. They need to be viewed through the lens of some kind of model, and it’s very important to do your best to get a good model,” he wrote…

Note that the Democrats are now saying that computer models can be wrong. How come they never admit that when it comes to global warming? Then they are ‘settled science.’

Silver jabbed back on Twitter. “Pundit Paul created a strawman caricature of 538 and misrepresented the site,” he wrote Monday afternoon…

Note to Nate: That’s what ‘Pundit Paul’ always does. He is a hack of a hack.

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Tuesday, March 25th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Democrats Turn On Wunderkind Guru Nate Silver”

  1. BannedbytheTaliban

    Translation; Dems are mad Silver failed to accurately account for the Democrat voter fraud machine.

  2. Off the Reservation means a trip to Lubynka


« Front Page | To Top
« | »