Comments on: Nate Silver Is Not A Political Scientist

By: Matthew Dickinson

Matthew Dickinson — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 21:13:02 +0000

Sailor – No one is quibbling with Nate’s predictions. For political scientists, this isn’t about style points at all. It about contributing to a body of knowledge to increase our collective understanding of what drives elections. That’s what political scientists do – but, in Nate’s defense, it’s not what he does. No matter – the political scientists forecast models by Linzer, Jackman, Putnam all hit the final electoral college vote squarely on the head. So they are both accurate and transparent too!

By: The Sailor

The Sailor — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:05:36 +0000

This article is like Sports Illustrated complaining about Peyton Manning’s throwing style. Silver is successful, more successful than almost all other polls. And has been consistently proven right in 2008 2010 2012.

So he’s not a political scientists? Great!

By: Matthew Dickinson

Matthew Dickinson — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 03:15:34 +0000

About average for the midterm forecasts – see http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2010/11/21/why-did-political-scientists-miss-the-midterm-wave/

But that’s pretty good for someone who is not a political scientist!

By: hanna

hanna — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 02:52:04 +0000

so, he ended calling 54 of 63 House seats and 36 of 37 Governor’s races in 2010. this gives him some degree of credibility, o?

By: Craig

Craig — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 01:35:16 +0000

Now, about Rasmussen…