Nate Silver Knocks 'Hypocritical' Democrats Who Criticized His Analysis

[Capt. Obvious]

The feud between probability wizard Nate Silver and Democratic campaigns deepened Tuesday when Silver penned a blog post saying that Democrats were "hypocritical" for criticizing his Senate forecast and then fundraising off it.

"Here’s the least surprising news: Political campaigns are hypocritical," Silver wrote. "At the same time the DSCC is criticizing our forecasts publicly, it’s sending out email pitches that cite Nate Silver’s 'shocking, scary' forecasts to compel Democrats into donating."

As TPM reported, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee sent out a memo Monday noting that Silver has been wrong in the past about Senate races -- a day after Silver's FiveThirtyEight website released a new 2014 forecast that gave Republicans about a 60 percent chance of winning the Senate.

The Atlantic also reported that the DSCC led with Silver's "shocking, scary new Senate forecasts" in a fundraising email.

TPM

[sharp_stick]

1. He's bang on

People that criticize him now that he's saying something they don't want to hear are just as clueless as that "unskewed poll" jackass back in 2012.

I love the idea of fundraising off of it but use that to change his calculations. He'll update many times before 2014.

[stevenleser]

7. I agree. I'm sure he was right with his snapshot of how things looked at that time. It doesnt mean

that it was written in stone. Plenty of elections change in eight months of campaigning.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

9. About the hypocrisy? yes.

But I think your final sentence points out the problem. He comes up with 60% now, but by the time the elections actually roll around, that number might be 45% or might be 75%. We're still so far out that there are an awful lot of variables that essentially make polls this far out guesswork. We've still got a lot of time to see 'Macaca Moments' or 'Legitimate Rape' comments, for instance.

[Capt. Obvious]

10. What you just said is our problem

We're waiting for Macaca Moments and Legitimate Rape comments - That is no way to win a race.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

12. I agree.

But the problem before the problem is that the time to win this year's races was largely 5-10 years ago. We need to be working on the 'farm team' now, to be winning races a decade from now. Grooming and training candidates who have the principles, but need training in how to campaign, how to fundraise, how to speak, how to connect with their fellow Americans.

We spend most of our resources on the 'back end' of races, working and spending hard simply to elect whoever is thrown at us, rather than recruiting the right people and readying them for the job. Getting them known and respected in their districts or states in advance, so that when they do run for office, they can win far more easily. We shouldn't be simply competing for the 'best soundbites', pitting commercial against commercial, but rather have voters KNOW our candidates before the first commercial in a given cycle is even run.

[hfojvt]

14. actually no, WE are not

a party that I know has some sort of big GOTV effort for this fall that they are trying to sell and to organize and train volunteers for.

I am not that excited about it myself.

I try to go in other directions.

Rather than "get more people who support us to goto the polls".

I prefer to "get more people to support us". Mostly by telling them they are a bunch of privileged loser-whiners. Then after they slam the door in my face, I tell the closed door that Democratic economic policies are better than Republican ones. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024400678

[sharp_stick]

13. You're right

and that's why we have to take what he says now as a snapshot of now and use it for the future. He's not telling us that the GOP has a 60% chance of winning the Senate, if you read the fine print he's telling us that if nothing changes between now and then he's giving them a 60% chance of winning the Senate.

We can't count on Macaca moments, I know the pukes are fonts' of idiocy and are sure to spout off some racist shit but I'd rather start messaging on the chance that they manage to not screw up their own campaigns.

There's a long time to go and plenty of time for events to catch up and pass the current ones. It was only about 4 months ago that the teabagging assholes shut down Congress and were pretty much given last rites.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

16. That's my biggest despair linked to the voting public.

There seems to be massive amnesia that always hits right before people walk up to the polls.

They can never seem to remember incredible levels of stupidity that took place anything more than a month or two out from the actual elections.

[PoliticAverse]

2. Hypocrisy in politics?? Unpossible! n/t

[Kelvin Mace]

3. He would have gotten a lot less grief

if he hadn't just hired a discredited climate change denier to work for him.

[hack89]

4. That is just a weak rationalization

for trying to ignore what he had to say about the 2014 elections.

[Kelvin Mace]

8. He may be right

I haven't looked at his math yet. But hiring a climate denier did NOT help his credibility. You can't claim to be a "numbers guy" then hire a person whose claimed expertise has been thoroughly discredited.

The Dems are in for a tough time in November and could very well lose the senate thanks to voter suppression and MASSIVE negative ads courtesy of Citizens United.

[Capt. Obvious]

6. Spot on

The only reason people have become unhinged about the math is because of the climate change denier who has nothing to do with the poll analysis.

Everyone here would not have accused him of "smoking crack" and "shilling for the GOP" and being an "aspergers sufferer" if he had just not hired a climate change denier to write for the Science section of his website.

[1000words]

21. Illustrates just what gets passed off as "discussion," at DU.

And just how genuine some are about trying to grasp an honest narrative.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. What's hypocritical is politicians who claim to be against money in politics and hold fundraisers.

Kinda like screwing for chastity.

[Lasher]

11. I don't understand all the the 'kill the messenger' sentiment.

We've been discussing the 2014 Senate elections here for at least a year now. I and others have pointed out, and appropriately so, that there is a good chance we'll lose our majority there.

Do the math, we'll be trying to keep 21 Democratic seats on our side of the aisle while Republicans have just 15 incumbents running for reelection. And then the thing about being halfway through Obama's second term, so history is against us too.

[leftyohiolib]

17. history was also against the 1st black president of the u.s. - turnout is the key

[jbond56]

15. at least they are raising money on issues based in fact instead of just making shit up. nt

[Chathamization]

18. Criticizing the memo without reading it? "projection as a reminder that we have a challenging map"

Here's the excerpt from TPM:

All four are senators today because they were superior candidates running superior campaign organizations who made their elections a choice between the two candidates on the ballot. Only three Democratic incumbent senators have lost reelection in the last ten years, and our incumbents are once again prepared and ready.

We don't minimize the challenges ahead. Rather, we view the latest projection as a reminder that we have a challenging map and important work still to do in order to preserve our majority.

It's basically saying that we should take the projections as a warning that 2014 will be challenging, but not as proof that the Democrats have no hope in 2014. Then the fundraising e-mail said...that we should take the projections as a warning that 2014 will be challenging, but not as proof that Democrats have no hope in 2014. Feel the hypocrisy!

But hey, don't let facts stop you from joining the MSM's latest attack on Dems.

[Portland Blazer]

19. kick

[Warren DeMontague]

20. If you're in a marathon and find out you're slightly behind, do you give up, or do you run faster?

I don't really understand the "we're doomed" reaction to what Silver said, honestly. He said it looks close, there will probably be a bunch of tight races in play.

Anyone who takes away a "demoralizing" message from that isn't paying attention.

[JoePhilly]

22. Some are trying to frame Nate's info specifically to demoralize Dems.

There are many efforts underway to demoralize Dems, on almost every topic.