The number that are worth watching can be counted on one hand.
I'm not sure what you take issue with but thats your business.
I'm checking silver bullets, Nate silvers blog.
538 isn't what it used to be. It had Biden winning when he was polling At 38%. You shouldn't rely on it.
He campaign has absolutely been a bummer and she's not winning this election at the moment. Lemmy has repeatedly gaslit itself into a delusional state around what is happening in reality and it seems to be happening again in regards to Kamala Harris performance. Gaslighting yourself at your own peril.
Lemmy is an echo chamber with mods who editorially filter the views they want to see. If you are relying on it for confirmation of your world view, you are in for a deep and upsetting shock. The perfect example of this was Biden, his performance, and his ability to win. Another even more recent example of this was Walzs performance in the debate (the question of if he won).
On polling, where we can actually have a conversation. Within the MOE is losing for a democratic candidate. Harris needs overwhelming numbers to account for existing and upcoming structural issues to the election. She doesn't have those, and her trajectory isn't up (like it was drying and immediately after the convention). It's going down, and that's terrible if you want to keep Trump out of office. It's because she's making the classic mistake Democrats always seem to make which is to start on the left but shift to the center.
Harris topped out in growing her support about 2 weeks after the convention and with every step to the right, she backslides further. If she continues the strategy she employed from the convention to now, she will 💯 lose this election.
The worms gotta eat.
I think something worth noting about older games too is that they didn't try and deal with many of their limitations head on. In fact many actually took advantage of their limitations to give the feeling of doing more than they actually were. For example, pixel perfect verus crt. Many 8 bit and 16 bit games were designed specifically for televisions and monitors that would create the effect of having more complexity than they were actually capable of. Other things like clever layout designs in games to limit draw distance, or bringing that in as a functional aspect of the game.
The technical limitations seem largely resolved by current technology, where previously things were made to look and feel better than the hardware allowed through clever planning and engineering.
Exactly. The Supreme Court retroactively elevated the office of presidency to "something more", with the caveat that at the end of the day, they get to decide what qualifies as crime or not.
I wouldn't say that the office has become a kingship, but I don't know what else to call a leader unbound by law.
It's absolutely horse shit and we have no reason to accept it as a ruling.
Don't forget the 26 billion we gave them before that, and the several billion a year weve been giving them for decades before that.
I bought a cheap Chinese manufactured CO2 sensor (RS485) with basically no documentation. It took a while, but I've finally got it reading. 0 to about 1700 was me continuing to work, then I left the room and did some gardening. I came back into the room at about 3400.
Olive oil, garlic, nutmeg, Parmesan, mottz and basil.
I think I went half a cycle too long in the oven. I'm not sure the frequency of rotation but I want to get a timer in the pizza kitchen.
Hey all,
I modified my Qstove to take a pizza steel instead of engineered stone and am sharing the results here.
This is an approach I've been using since last November to put Biden's polling in a historical context. I'm using the Gallup approval rating dataset because its the longest, deepest single source dataset where the same question "Do you approve or disapprove of the way [current president's name] is handling his job as president?". Its been going on since the 40's, but has remained extremly predictive of the next president.
Previously, I presented some results (March) in the c/Politics community where using this approach, I said that Biden had between a 5-15% of winning the election. At that time, Biden was polling higher and there was more time between now (then) and election day.
I've re-run the simulation with updated numbers and am presenting them here.
First, get the mean and standard deviation of how approval ratings for past presidents have typically changed leading up to an election based a 30 day window around the current date. I then compare them to a 30 day window at election day, and get back a distribution of shifts: the typical range over which a presidents approval might change between now and the election
Next, I calculate a mean and standard deviation of approval ratings for incumbent Presidents who win their second term. We kind-of have to stick with incumbent presidents, based on the nature of the data. There really is no way to ask the Gallup pole question of non-sitting presidents or candidates.
Using these two distributions, I take a sample from the 'shift' distribution, and add it to Biden's current polling.
I then calculate the probability this new polling value would have come from the "Incumbent presidents who won election" distribution, effectively giving us the probablity, that based on extant polling, Biden can get into an approval range not-disimilar to Presidents who won re-election. Based on this approach, I'm getting an average probability of Biden winning the election at around half a percent. This is down substantially from March, where I had him at at between 5-15% probability of winning. At that time, he was both polling better, and there was more time between March and the election for him to improve.
Using this approach, a Biden victory is currently standing at between a 5 and 6 sigma event. To put it into context, last years historic rate of ice-melting in the arctic was also a five sigma event.
Bonus figure:
The distribution of Presidential polling for sitting presidents who did not win re-election:
11
So I'm going to try and stay true to Nate's blog-post, but I see his predictions as too important to be pay-walled (especially consider how 538 basically isn't 538 any more since they don't use Nate's model). All of the figures in this post are my own and made using Nate's data and were made in R using ggplot. Just simple reproductions for the purposes of discussion. I didn't do all of them, just the big headline figures.
If you are in Dark Mode (as you should be) you may have to right click the figures and look at them in a separate tab.
Figure 1: Who is ahead in the polls.
Figure 2: Who is ahead in the polls (inset to recent weeks).
Table 1: State and national polling.
Table 2: Who is favored to win the Presidency?
Figure 3: How each candidate's chance of wining has changed.
Figure 4: Probability of Winning Presidential Election.
Keeping everything editorial out of the post. These are basic reproductions of Nate Silvers recent post using data he provided, to support having a discussion.
view more: next ›
The only acceptable answer: