Nate Silver's 538: Hillary still favored to win Iowa and NH

[RandySF]

Iowa: Hillary at 73% http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/iowa-democratic/

New Hampshire: 53% http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-hampshire-democratic/

[Motown_Johnny]

1. Even when she is 14% behind in New Hampshire they think she will win?

Nate's credibility is at stake here. If she loses both he is going to look foolish.

[John Poet]

23. And then maybe certain DUers will quit hauling Nate Silver

out of their backside every five minutes...

[lunamagica]

40. Unless he is right. eom

[Motown_Johnny]

47. Did you notice the trend in that top chart on the page you linked to for NH?

Hillary is in a nose dive and Bernie is skyrocketing. Plenty of time for those lines to cross.

Unless something happens to change the trajectories of those trend lines, Bernie is going to win New Hampshire.


Iowa's trend lines are not as close, yet. Still, the trend is there. We will need to see if Mr. Silver doesn't change his tune as the contests draw closer.


Oh, and on a slightly different subject. Here is something that may be influencing his perspective:


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/07/17/in-this-money-race-bernie-sanders-wins/

^snip^

Her campaign spent more than $900,000 on polling in the quarter that ended June 30; Mr. Sanders, $0.

[lunamagica]

50. We'll see soon enough. eom

[lunamagica]

39. Don't you think he is aware of that? He wouldn't risk his reputation for Hillary.eom

[Godhumor]

53. It is based on the theory that most NH voters make up their minds after IA

So, owf she is favored to win IA she gets a bump in NH. If she ended up losing IA, I guarantee his projection for NH will stop showing the race as a toss up.

[leftofcool]

2. Yep! I think she will win both. They will share/split delegates but she will win.

[Dawson Leery]

3. If the Indies flock to the GOP mess, then

Hillary will win NH in a landslide.

[Indepatriot]

6. Sanders TROUNCES Clinton w/Indies. IF Clinton gets the nom we lose the general.Period.

Indies have decided the last few elections, and will likely decide this one as well.

[Gore1FL]

11. There is no Republican who could beat and of the Democrats

I support Bernie, but Hillary could win a general election.

[SheilaT]

21. Current polling shows otherwise.

[geek tragedy]

4. That's their "polls plus" forecast.

Their "polls only" forecast is much better for Sanders (73% of winning NH, 45% of winning IA).

[reformist2]

8. plus what... a "fudge factor"?

[LoveIsNow]

10. Nate Silver should stick to the polls only.

That USED TO be the hallmark of his theory on predicting elections. If he was meant to inject his opinions or hypotheses, his name would have been Charlie Cook.

[Jarqui]

29. Unfortunately, folks looking for the quick answer don't fully inform themselves

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-we-are-forecasting-the-2016-presidential-primary-election/

"Therefore, we think the models (polls-only model & polls-plus model) are more useful when looked at together."

That one sentence doesn't replace what Nate says at that link about what is behind his analysis. It underscores that before drawing too much conclusion incorrectly like the simplistic top post in this thread, one needs to look a little deeper at what Nate is trying to tell people with this information. Nate should stick to doing what he's doing. People should not stick to interpreting Nate incorrectly.

Normally, I'd lean more towards Nate's polls plus model in the general election. In the primary, I'd currently lean more towards the polls only model because things like endorsements and national polling are in Clinton's favor because Sanders is coming on - folks do not know him and what he stands for well nationally yet. If Sanders wins Iowa and NH, that's going to change - something like it did for Obama. In fact, Sanders good results recently are starting to change the mainstream's view and coverage of his candidacy. I think that will continue to drive Nate's results further towards Sanders over the next couple of weeks.

[Adrahil]

68. What!?

Have you read any of his work? The idea that he limited his model to the polls is ridiculous. The hall,ark of his model is, and always has been, to include all relevant data and weight it. It's what has made him so accurate when poll aggregators have failed.

[7wo7rees]

5. Sure Nate, you are the guru, you are the best. :)

Last edited Wed Jan 13, 2016, 01:43 AM - Edit history (1)

Should have added sarcasm emoji.... Sorry.

[Pauldg47]

22. That article still hints the Hill can lose...read it closer !!!

[Pauldg47]

67. Yes! We still have two more weeks till Iowa and 53/47 in N.H. Which is still even odds!!!..

...again two more weeks...Bernie is a winner and still may pull a rabbit out of his hat???....where's Elizabeth Warren??

[reformist2]

7. The Hillary die-hards still have Nate to cling to for false hope.

[RandySF]

9. I'm not clinging. Hillary will win at least one of those states regardless of today's polls.

[reformist2]

14. Well she's not winning NH, I can tell you that...

[RandySF]

16. Maybe, it helps to be a next door neighbor.

[catnhatnh]

17. Then how is Clinton

doing in Vermont?

[bunnies]

62. oof!

[Motown_Johnny]

48. New York State is only ~60 miles away from New Hampshire (at it's closest point)

It really is a shame that her message can't carry that far, even when her state has the major media outlets for the area.

[morningfog]

30. Doubtful.

[Gothmog]

13. Romney and Karl Rove ignored the polling and Nate's predictions in 2012

How did that work out for them?

[Gothmog]

12. I love Nate Silver and math

[marmar]

15. .........

[Quixote1818]

18. Thats based on current polling and not taking in account the trend toward Sanders

Current polling means very little if there is a trend toward a candidate as people gear up to vote. So really this means very little but a snap shot of today. The snap shot of next week could have Sanders predicted to win both if polling keeps moving in Sanders direction.

[ucrdem]

19. Bernie was trending up last summer too. Beating HRC handily.

Then along came the first debate and that was that. Incidentally the next debate is on Sunday at 9 pm ET.

[Quixote1818]

20. You can look at elections 50 years back and if it is trending toward a candidate at the end

it's bad news for their opponent. People are tuned in right now and they are making their final choices. This is why Hillary is worried and in major attack mode.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. His model isn't static .

His model isn't dynamic . If the Vermont senator continues to trend up his model will reflect that.

[Number23]

24. Thanks for posting. But I don't know about NH and I think that even if she lost both it wouldn't be

as big a deal as some here seem to think.

[Cassiopeia]

26. The news cycle changes.

Sanders takes a lead with the first 2 states and everyone from both parties attacks.......

Only there's nothing to attack. He wants you to be paid a fair wage and to have healthcare, not insurance.

How the hell do you fight that?

[Kentonio]

31. By lying and trying to tell people he wants to destroy Obamacare and Medicare of course.

[enid602]

34. inflation

By undergoing a tremendous social works program at a time when our debt to GDP ratio is 65%, the same as it was toward the end of the Great Depression.

[Kentonio]

36. When a tremendous social works program brought America out of depression?

[enid602]

42. debt/GDP

The debt to GDP ratio was 11% in '33, at the beginning of the New Deal. The New Deal did get us out of the mess, and resulted in a debt/GDP ratio of 65%. WELL worth it. Our debt/GDP ratio right NOW is 65%. Bad timing for a Roosevelt style program.

[Kentonio]

45. How else exactly do you suggest building the economy enough to start paying back that debt?

[enid602]

49. taxes

The economy is growing at a nice clip, at least compared with other countries. You may actually see a contraction in China in '16, and Brazil and Russia are already in the dumper. I think our main concern right now should be to increase taxes on the wealthy to approximate historic levels, and avoid any taxes on working/middle class earners.

[Kentonio]

58. So do nothing other than raise taxes to pay off debt?

Despite the fact the poor and working class are hurting badly, and the only reason there IS so much debt is because Wall St collapsed the economy causing most of that hurt?

[enid602]

60. carefully

Very carefully. No pie in the sky.

[mythology]

57. That's a charitable interpretation of history

In 1940 the unemployment rate was 15%. In 1942 it was 4.2%. Roosevelt's programs kept the Great Depression from getting worse, but it was World War 2 that got us out of it.

[Kentonio]

59. Despite the unemployment rate, America was recovering from the Great Depression years before WW2.

[Number23]

63. I have absolutely no idea what your post has to do with mine

And Sanders as far as I know has the lead in only one state. And as I said, even if Hillary did lose both I don't think it will be nearly as big a deal as those here seem to think.

There have been several candidates that have won individual primaries and lost the nomination. That's kind of the point. Even Pat Buchanan won New Hampshire.

[Cassiopeia]

64. Again, the news cycle changes.

If Hillary loses the first two states, the way the entire primary is covered by the MSM changes. Bernie suddenly becomes a real contender and will be covered appropriately.

[Number23]

65. Oh, I see what you're saying now.

[jfern]

25. Is Jim Webb still the anti Hillary?

What a joke site.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Well

I am a huge NBA fan and Miami Heat fan. When I used to see folks disparage LeBron James on a sports board I would sometimes ask the person doing the disparaging if he or she is as good at what he or she does as LeBron James is at what he does. You notice I didn't ask the person if he or she is as good in basketball as LeBron James. That would be absurd.

I will never post here again if anybody can demonstrate they are as successful in their chosen endeavor as Mr. Silver is in his. Of course we would have to operationalize our terms but that's logistical stuff.


Respectfully,
DSB

[jfern]

66. Nate Silver is OK at using poll averages to predict general elections in a week

That doesn't mean the clowns he hired have any idea how to predict the results of a primary months away.

[Eric J in MN]

27. Then Bernie Sanders supporters should keep donating, volunteering, and spreading the word

...instead of assuming he'll win IA and NH regardless.

[BlueMTexpat]

28. I am optimistic but

oh, do I want these two states that are treated so disproportionately in the whole scheme of the election process to have their results over and done with - whatever those results may be! It cannot happen too soon for me.

Thanks for the post, RandySF!

[Kentonio]

32. Hmm..

"Iowa: Hillary at 73%"

It seems Nate has been preparing for the upcoming legalization of pot by doing too much intensive research.

[coyote]

33. I don't understand why anyone would vote for Hillary

What is the psychology of a Hillary voter on Election Day? "Yeah, I am so excited to vote for more of the same".

Bernie on the other hand is touching people emotionally with hope and issues that people really care about...that basically the middle class is getting wiped out and the top 1% is screwing us. He motivates me, Hillary does not.

[randome]

35. It's been outlined before on these pages.

Sanders is not a Democrat. He doesn't have the connections with other legislators and groups that Clinton has. Without those connections, and against an obstructionist Congress, Sanders actually has less of a chance of getting things done.

I truly doubt that Clinton will simply be 'more of the same'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Nate is not infallible. Even he would tell you that.

That being said he is a most perspicacious gentleman who is exceptionally good at what he does, who is right infinitely more times than he is wrong, and has made his detractors look like ciphers.

My favorite " Nateism* is when his model predicted the team that just won the World Series would win seventy games the next year. The "old hands" lambasted him. Guess what, that team won seventy games.




*from memory so the details might be a bit off but I got the gist of it right.

[joshcryer]

38. Polls plus is arbitrary nonsense.

That they are including two different metrics lets them really cover their ass if they blow it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. That is basically the same model he has used to predict the last four elections.

I respectfully point Mr. Sliver's detractors to Posts 44 and 37.

[joshcryer]

51. This is the first time he's factoring endorsements.

And even if there was a method to it (which I don't even see how) it'd apply more to the Republican race.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. That was a lot to read...

I just read the entire methodological statement.

Are you sure he didn't include endorsements in his prior primary models as opposed to his general election models?

Also, he is doing a Polls and Polls Plus Model. I assume the closer we get to a primary the less effect endorsements will have on his model. If the polls show a candidate is down 20 points in the polls on election day that twenty point deficit is going to have a much, much...much larger effect on his model than any endorsement.

These models are dynamic. If my memory is correct Obama's valley in 012 was around 45% and his peak on election day was 70%.

[joshcryer]

55. He never had a "polls plus" metric in the general.

And it wouldn't make sense to factor in endorsements in such a race. Maybe in a simple newspaper endorsement thing that one shouldn't take seriously.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. But his general election model relied on more than just polls.

He also included the state of the economy and the favorable ratings of the respective candidates.

[rjsquirrel]

52. We all know

Nate is a closeted Trump supporter.

Yeah and he's a corporatist oligarch.

And he's never been right about anything before.

Yeah that's the ticket.

You're talking about Poblano. And he has never been wrong about a national election. Ever.

[Alfresco]

61. Thanks for the links. Great find! **We Are Team Hillary** :-)