Silver didn't admit anything. Silver said exactly what he said all of the way through the lead up to the election (where I followed him daily, by the way). Trump has a reasonable chance of winning, and most people were discounting his odds for the wrong reason.
I followed him right up until the end, hoping he was wrong, but fearful that he was right.
I dispute the use of "liberal" (and I dispute Silver's use of it in his title too). The general misreading of the polling data was not confined to liberals (no matter how much you want to make it so after the fact). Trump's team did not believe he was going to win the election. Read that last sentence through three times. Are you suggesting that Trump, and his advisors are part of the liberal media conspiracy?
If you want the full picture you have to read all nine parts (this article is one of many in other words). Unless you are a statistician, or a complete election junkie, I can't imagine why the average person would be interested at that level of fine grained understanding of polling and statistical analysis.
Part of what Silver is doing here (legitimately) is very subtly blowing his own horn and pointing to the fact that he got it right when few others did. That's two elections in a row, which is a hell of a track record (the last election he predicted 50 out of 50 states correctly).
There may be a liberal media bias, but it's offset by a huge right wing propaganda mill which generates and republishes reams of stories -- many of them completely false. One could make a pretty strong case that the conservative propaganda mill has been much more powerful in recent years because they somehow manage to get politicians elected, en mass, whose policies ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE MAJORITY. Liberal positions poll as having support by the majority almost across the board, and yet conservatives keep getting elected in larger numbers. So who has the bias working in their favor?
Return to Odd
Reply to message