Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Art of Elections Forecasting

Posted by timothy on from the can-we-get-a-point-spread-in-vegas? dept.

ideonexus writes "Years ago Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com, a blog seeking to educate the public about elections forecasting, established his model as one of the most accurate in existence, rising from a fairly unknown statistician working in baseball to one of the most respected names in election forecasting. In this article he describes all the factors that go into his predictions. A fascinating overview of the process of modeling a chaotic system."

6 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Educating the Public? by newcastlejon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope that includes "don't vote according to forecasts". I mean, it'd be nice if more people voted for the candidate they actually want instead of the one they think will win.

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    1. Re:Educating the Public? by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hope that includes "don't vote according to forecasts". I mean, it'd be nice if more people voted for the candidate they actually want instead of the one they think will win.

      An educated public would realize that voting for who you want in today's election environment is not optimal strategy.

  2. It's all about the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ever since the Republican members of the supreme court overturned our campaign finance laws, elections have become an epic bribe-fest where money almost always wins.

    You tell me which side is outspending the other 10-1 and I'll tell you who is most likely to win the election.

    Let's just save ourselves alot of time and aggravation, and ask the America's 10 most bigoted and bribe-happy billionaires who they would like to win.

    1. Re:It's all about the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Democracy = one man one vote.

      Capitalism = one dollar one vote.

      Only an idiot or a libertarian (but I repeat myself) fails to understand that you can't "vote with your wallet" unless everyone has about the same size wallet.

    2. Re:It's all about the money by robinsonne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can say "correlation != causation" all you want, but the simple thing is more $$$ = more advertising, and the more advertising = more votes. IOW more $$$ = more votes.

  3. Re:Doesn't Matter by Marcika · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lieberman is no democrat. He sabotaged the public option for the republicans by joining the threatened filibuster. Thus no majority. Thus your point is moot, coward.