Because he pissed me off. It would still be up if his kid wasn't in it.
Rasmussen's national tracker shows a tie today.
Rasmussen is a hack, but trend matters. The national polls are moving towards the state polls. This is actually pretty big news for Obama.
But the most ridiculous part of Scarborough's attitude is his belief that the opinions of the campaigns themselves are more accurate than polling data. I mean, WTF? That's just incredibly stupid. What the campaigns think has NOTHING whatever to do with reality. Want proof? Well, I guarantee that both campaigns believe in their hearts that they're going to win. How can that possibly be more accurate than polling data, which favors one candidate or the other?
Read that Scarborough and Silver now have a $2000 bet on the outcome of the election. The proceeds go to charity.
^ Yup. With no toss-ups RCP has Dems gaining a Senate seat for a total of 54, which includes the independents that will caucus and therefore vote with them.
Early this year it looked unlikely Dems would hold the Senate, now it'd be a shocking upset if they didn't hold the Senate (and indeed, they're going to gain seat(s)). Shows you the importance of running quality candidates in the Senate. Tea Party candidates bowled over moderate Repubs from a possible majority in two straight elections (NV, DE, MO, IN, etc.). That's gotta be frustrating.
Susan Collins (R)
Susan Collins seat will never be competitive. She is the perfect wolf in sheep's clothing for Maine. Although, she has aged a bit......
BTW same goes for Snowe.
That's true, I guess I just assumed she would retire like Snowe. Republicans like them are being pushed out of the party
Interesting piece. Thanks.
There's a very, very simple reason why many political journalists don't like Nate Silver: Silver reduces to a science what journalists want to remain a source of income for themselves.
Honestly, why read the ramblings of a bunch of hare-brained political wonks when all that matters is the cold equations?
Did they up it? I thought it was $1000 and I think it was going to the Red Cross. I think Joe had a mustache bet with Axelrod as well over a few different swing state results. Fun times.
According to some reports, they upped it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/nate-silver-joe-scarborough-bet_n_2056401.html
Besides Spidey & Perknose's $500 bet, are there any other active wagers here?
sighThey have to get back in line with other polls before election da so they can claim they were accurate. Can't schill for Romney too long
It isn't like silver has any testable predictions either. We'd need 400 years of elections (presidential) to make any conclusions on how accurate he is.I read all 4,663 words and let me save you some time. He uses extremely blustery language to whine that not enough Republicans are being sampled and too many Democrats are being sampled. He offers no testable prediction on the outcome of any of the state races.
It isn't like silver has any testable predictions either.
How would we test his 75% Obama victory prediction?That has to be one of the most asinine things I've read on this board. Silver has explicitly forcasted the outcomes of fifty one races.
That has to be one of the most asinine things I've read on this board. Silver has explicitly forcasted the outcomes of fifty one races.
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You can't test probabilities on unique events that happen once. If he says 100% and he's wrong then sure. But if he says Romney has a 25% chance to win and he wins then he's right. If he says Obama will win then he's right. He can't lose.This guy just isn't very bright. Nothing penetrates.
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You can't test probabilities on unique events that happen once. If he says 100% and he's wrong then sure. But if he says Romney has a 25% chance to win and he wins then he's right. If he says Obama will win then he's right. He can't lose.
I think you just doubled down dude.