Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Today's Polls, 6/19

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-10-09T02:57:35.251-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、...

2009-09-10T01:13:58.676-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-02-12T22:15:00.000-05:00

Paul, besides what Juris wrote, which I believe is...

2008-06-20T11:15:00.000-04:00

Paul, besides what Juris wrote, which I believe is entirely correct, there may be an additional factor. As noted, the 538 Regression basically controls those states with very little and very old polling. However, the 538 Regression for a particular state is not fixed. If I understand it correctly, Nate looks at all the polls and, using regression analysis, determines the various weight to be given various demographic factors. He then calculates the 538 Regression for a particular state based on its unique demographics. The key point here is that new poll results in one state can strongly affect the 538 Regression for a demographically similar state. Thus, I wouldn't be surprised if the change you observed in ND resulted from a good Obama poll in a demographically similar state.

Thanks, Juris for writing...

2008-06-19T22:42:00.000-04:00

Thanks, Juris for writing...

New SUSA poll in Iowa has Obama +4

2008-06-19T20:21:00.000-04:00

New SUSA poll in Iowa has Obama +4

Insider Advantage poll of Georgia:McCain 44Obama 4...

2008-06-19T20:17:00.000-04:00

Insider Advantage poll of Georgia:
McCain 44
Obama 43
Only one poll, but still, wow.

Paul Wrote:"I've asked this question before, but I...

2008-06-19T20:02:00.000-04:00

Paul Wrote:
"I've asked this question before, but I haven't gotten an answer to it.

Why do some of the states that haven't been polled go up, and others go down?

Today we got a poll in FL that showed Obama trailing McCain. Obama's chances of victory there have dropped from 62.6%(yesterday) to 53%(today). OK. That makes sense, I understand that. What I don't understand is how Obama's chances in ND have gone up 12.1%. It was 27.9% yesterday and today it's up to 40%...."

Hi Paul, let me take a stab at an answer. I'm not sure this is completely accurate but it's my understanding.

If you take a look at the available polls from ND, you'll see that there are just two and they are quite old -- from February and March. Mainly for that reason, they have very low "weights" in the regression analysis and those weights decline every day until they fall below .05, at which time the poll is totally dropped.

So even in the absence of new polling, the projections are going to change. But what determines the projection if there are just two very old polls (or if there were none)? The "538 regression," which was set up exactly to compensate for the lack of recent polling in many states.

In addition, under the new methodology introduced last week-end, the projections can also be affected to some degree by trends at the national level. In a case like ND, the projections are more sensitive to national trends than in a case like, say, NY, in which there are many polls to rely on. As the election goes forward, however, we can expect to get many more polls for ND and other states.

You have noted large swings in the probability of winning in ND from one day to the next. But if you had instead focused on the projected vote percentage shares by McCain and Obama, you would see that the change there is pretty small and the difference between the McCain and Obama percentages as of today is just 2.6 percentage points.

But any change in the percentage of votes received by McCain or Obama is amplified when the vote margin is translated into a "probability of winning," which also takes into consideration the margin of error in the projection and the likelihood that a given projected vote margin will translate into a majority on election day.

I tend to pay more attention to the projected division of the votes than to the projected probabilities, because I'm more comfortable with thinking about the relationship between the polls in a state and the projected vote shares in that state.

I hope this helps. If anyone else wants to chime in here, please do.

Alex,I agree with you for the most part. But about...

2008-06-19T19:55:00.000-04:00

Alex,

I agree with you for the most part. But about nuclear energy, most of the waste is waiting to be moved to a planned facility in Nevada, but Democrats have blocked this, without offering any solutions.

Other nuclear countries re-process spent fuel for weapons manufacturing.

Two points you're wrong about:

1) Nuclear waste is actually very small in volume. There just isn't that much of it, especially when compared to waste from burning carbon fuels, which ends up in the environment and not in safe, contained facilities.

2) Radioactive material gets less radioactive over time. And even when it is fresh waste, the amount of radiation that would leak out from storage facilities is much, much smaller than the amount that causes problems to the environment and human beings.

Alex: No problem. It's nice to know someone agre...

2008-06-19T19:49:00.000-04:00

Alex: No problem. It's nice to know someone agrees with me. :-)

Hooboy! Love the site, but it sure would be great...

2008-06-19T19:37:00.000-04:00

Hooboy! Love the site, but it sure would be great to see embedded comments, rather than time-sequential. A lot of the anonymous (and occasionally non-anonymous) comments and responses later on with "XXX @ 12:41 said" etc. can get frustrating.

But yeah, love the site. And for what it's worth, I think it's a great idea to contest every state to the extent of our ability, which fortunately is Howard Dean and Sen. Barack Obama's plan as well. Judging by the enthusiasm so far, the record new Democrats registering, the factors against Republicans this year (including their presumptive nominee), it looks like a whole lot of states are now up for grabs. Who'd have expected this even a year and a half ago?

Thanks for the point-out, Modeler. You definitely ...

2008-06-19T19:32:00.000-04:00

Thanks for the point-out, Modeler. You definitely beat me to the punch on that idea ;).

John,You're absolutely right that there is no stop...

2008-06-19T19:22:00.000-04:00

John,

You're absolutely right that there is no stopping the increase in energy use. In fact, increased energy use is exactly the hallmark of a developed (and advancing) civilization. We should not hope to ever decrease our energy use unless we are planning on reverting civilization dramatically.

However, and here's the key point, the way that we use energy right now is both inefficient and detrimental to future energy use. When you talk about a gasoline engine in a car, you're seeing less than 25% efficiency (with a Prius pushing 30%, maybe). If everyone drives an electric vehicle and you consolidate electricity production, you can get much more bang for your energy input--60% efficiency or so. So that's one step: use less input to generate more output.

Step two is realizing that the carbon-based energy system is overwhelming climatic processes. You can argue whatever you'd like as to if the planet is warming, cooling, boogieing or pop-locking, but you can't deny that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is rising. Bicarbonate/carbonate in the ocean and biological carbon fixing can't keep pace with the carbon dump-out that is occurring from finding locked carbon sources (oil/gas) and taking them out of the ground.

That being said, my point is that we can and should be finding other ways of harvesting energy. If that's solar, wind, tide, whatever, great. Fixed hydrocarbon energy can only take us so far, and with unknown and probably dangerous effects. Finding other sources is important if we want to continue our energy use-growth.

Regarding nuclear power, it's tough to say how truly safe it is. I read a recent SciAm article about dealing with the waste...currently much of it is just stored in casks and awaiting transport to...somewhere. Where it'll be radioactive forever. In France they reprocess it (or ship it out to be reprocessed), but that leaves them with tons and tons of lightly-radioactive bomb-grade plutonium that no one knows what to do with. I'm not saying nuclear is bad (far from it), but that it has problems that we've never really dealt with that go beyond just "the environment." One day I hope we can just blast it all off into space, but God forbid it blows up en route and showers us all with mutagens.

Long winded point short, left/right wing politics are both marked by overreactions and low-information demagoguery. Many left wing people knee jerk on the environment, many right wing people on taxes, terror or energy. No one stops to think through both sides, it seems. But one of the reasons I like Obama so much is that he does seem to listen to what other people have to say (on most issues--he is not perfect). National Republicans seem exactly the opposite to me. Your mileage may vary, and I'd love to hear stories about how they are open to new thoughts and new ideas, but I won't hold my breath.

Alex.

I've asked this question before, but I haven't got...

2008-06-19T19:14:00.000-04:00

I've asked this question before, but I haven't gotten an answer to it.

Why do some of the states that haven't been polled go up, and others go down?

Today we got a poll in FL that showed Obama trailing McCain. Obama's chances of victory there have dropped from 62.6%(yesterday) to 53%(today). OK. That makes sense, I understand that. What I don't understand is how Obama's chances in ND have gone up 12.1%. It was 27.9% yesterday and today it's up to 40%. Obama's chances have gone up by 5 points or more in NM, MT, SD, AK and WI. What happened today to justify that adjustment?

Obama's lost ground in other states. He's lost three or four points in MO, TN and WV. Something appears to have happened today to improve his chances in the West but worsen them in Appalacia. What am I missing???

John Peterson--This is a perfect example of how we...

2008-06-19T19:08:00.000-04:00

John Peterson--

This is a perfect example of how we differ.

1: The idea that energy consumption can't come down is flatly wrong. Oil use has actually marginally declined in the US in the past--technology exists to make it decrease further (even dramatically, if we're willing to upset the auto companies with dramatic fuel efficiency increases). But, of course, the right wing obstructs these measures to protect the economy, as if the way to produce more wealth is to continue to make products that are empirically *worse*.

2: The real happy-smiley delusion in the field of energy is the idea that we can just keep drilling and everything will be okay. This is where the right wing is really in the land of magical fairy dust. The fact is, all those vast oil resources the right wing wants to open up amount to very nearly *nothing* in the scheme of global oil--and in any case, the very soonest they could be brought into production would be *fifteen years* from now. The fact is, hard choices need to be made. Yes, that includes embracing more nuclear, I agree. But more than anything else it means sacrificing short-term economic self-interest to get us off of oil.

OK, yes, I know that NV is not actually on the coa...

2008-06-19T19:05:00.000-04:00

OK, yes, I know that NV is not actually on the coast.

Cugel:I agree that the underlying demographic data...

2008-06-19T19:04:00.000-04:00

Cugel:

I agree that the underlying demographic data in the polls tells us a lot. The question I've been pondering is whether Nate should fit his regression model to the top-line demographic data from the poll, or data from the states. There are pros and cons to each.

Alex:

Wrong thread! We've been talking about the "must-win" situation on another thread.

I agree with you about the "As so goes..." interpretation. (See my June 17 9:11 comment). Right now, I'm thinking the best way to represent this is, perhaps intuitively, by using correlation. Correlation is also somewhat consistent with Nate's "must-win" definition.

I'm not sure if we should call them bellwether states though; a bellwether fortells, which would make no sense for a west-coast state like NV. I was thinking "telltale" states, but I suspect there's a better term.

Indicator states?
Signal states?

My read on Florida is that it is a victim of inert...

2008-06-19T19:03:00.000-04:00

My read on Florida is that it is a victim of inertia. It's not the kind of place these days that will flip, and the resources necessary to get it close will be ENORMOUS there. Of course any election there will be relatively tight given that Broward and Dade counties are more like New York City than anywhere in the South, however, I see McCain winning Florida by the same 5-point margin that Bush did in 2004.

This election will see a dramatic shift in voting patterns in the West, and that's what Obama should be nurturing. He must visit Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Nevada, and foremost, Colorado, in addition to the obvious large MidWest battlegrounds.

Forget the South. It's a lost cause and quite frankly, I'm happy to let the Republicans have it.

To those who mentioned Virginia - yes indeed it is in play. It's the one Southern state (and it's only borderline anyway) that I would recommend Obama spend significant resources.

Florida is not winnable this year.

for those who are interested, Rasmussen's politica...

2008-06-19T18:58:00.000-04:00

for those who are interested, Rasmussen's political leanings are easily discerned by going to the political commentary page, where rightwingers Dick Morris, Robert Novak and Michael Barone are featured. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary

That does not axiomatically mean the polls have a bias, but when they are out of step with the other polls from the same place, it is something to take into account, which is why the hot and bothered polls over Ohio, Florida and Colorado by Rasmussen should be taken with a grain of salt until some other reputable pollster such as surveyusa, gallup or quinnipiac confirms them. Bias can be subtly woven in, but there is no doubt that Rasmussen is a partisan...and yes, I would say the same thing about PPP, but the sheer volume of Rasmussen polls feels like a bit if a thumb on the scale. I do believe you should take a look at that, Nate, especially in light of your partnership with Rasmussen You know how the trolls and haters would be flooding this site if your alliance were with PPP...

Stephen,One example off the top of my head is ener...

2008-06-19T18:43:00.000-04:00

Stephen,

One example off the top of my head is energy policy. Plenty of liberals my age (under 30) seem to think that the goal of our energy policies should be to reduce our use. That is just not going to happen and is wishful thinking that takes us away from the real issue: having cheap energy that we don't have to make hostile nations rich in order to acquire.

Yet all of the liberal-sponsored energy policies increase our dependence on foreign oil and make it more expensive. They are against drilling offshore and in the Arctic. You know, because of the environment. They are against extracting oil from pil shale. You know, environment. Ludicrously, they are against the safest and potentially the cheapest form of energy: nuclear power. We subsidize ethanol production, which merely drives up the price of food and doesn't save the environment. We place restrictions on carbon emissions. Etc.

I honestly don't know what most of the candidates' positions are on these things, and for the most part, they are both probably on the wrong side of most of them.

But to characterize left-wing politics broadly, I'd say they, not the right-wing, are based on mere fantasy. The world's not going towards less energy use. That's a pipe dream. Any policy that pretends otherwise will needlessly cripple the economy and lessen American prosperity.

I know this isn't the place. Sorry..

john peterson--Funny how perception works. I alway...

2008-06-19T18:34:00.000-04:00

john peterson--

Funny how perception works. I always find right-wing politics so ludicrous because it's feel-good nonsense based on wishful thinking rather than a sober analysis of our problems. Funny old world.

Dear Republicans,Please don't feed the animals wit...

2008-06-19T18:31:00.000-04:00

Dear Republicans,

Please don't feed the animals with your comments. If you have insightful comments on the modeling, please don't leave them! Nate has set up a very nice, very well thought out website, but he is a known Obama supporter and Daily Kos denizen. His models are not unreasonable, but clearly are based on some suspect assumptions. Let them be ... in middle of an Obama bump for winning the Democratic nomination, it will appear that he is going to wipe out McCain. Don't worry, things will settle down and it will be a long, hard slog. Get your van ready and your sneakers comfortable, but don't give the Dem's poster material or better models to work with ... Sheesh!

Hmm, a little disturbing to see it so close (in th...

2008-06-19T18:28:00.000-04:00

Hmm, a little disturbing to see it so close (in that one poll) in Colorado -- I had always counted it as a pretty solid Obama-lean state.

But what I get out of that poll is that 16% are undecided. Is it just me, or has there been a marked increase in undecided voters in recent polls?

How come Obama is doing well in Coloradoits a RED ...

2008-06-19T18:23:00.000-04:00

How come Obama is doing well in Colorado

its a RED state

these polls make my heard hurt

I'm just waiting for someone to declare that McCai...

2008-06-19T18:14:00.000-04:00

I'm just waiting for someone to declare that McCain has an advantage because he has better team chemistry and intangibles. He's a Proven Veteran, after all.

Funny that you say that, because I was thinking that with regards to baseball, I reject the received wisdom and traditional metrics and embrace modern statistical analysis. I would not say that such analysis detracts from, or is separate from, my enjoyment of the game.

However, with politics, the study of the numbers, which is taken to be "politics," actually has nothing to do with the enjoyment of its benefits. Whether done using flawed methodology, or as accurate as possible as on this site, it is totally irrelevant and disconnected from the enjoyment of politics' benefits, i.e. who gets elected and what policies are enacted. These metrics are concerned solely with accurately measuring who plans on voting for whom at this juncture. Thus, I am totally uninterested in its methodology. It has nothing to do with actual law-making and enforcement, the actual purpose of politics. Until you consider the reciprocal self-fulfilling prophecy of it all: policies change because of the numbers, and the numbers change because of policy.

Weird. And another thing. While I consider myself a baseball progressive who rejects the received wisdom (in re: proven veterans and the like), I find progressive liberal policies in politics to be, for the most part, incredibly naive and stupid, based more in whimsy than reason. Thus it is perplexing to me that so many of my peers, rational in other studies, choose feel-good nonsense in politics.

Thanks for letting me share.