Since we are pretty uncreative this year, I offer some great political nerdiness. Below you will find three great election prediction websites to indulge those political geeks, who also love science and mathematics. The following statisticians, neuroscientists and Poly Sci Professors will make you wonder why the hell we are spending $2 billion on an election when they predicted the likely outcome in June.
Take a look:
Nate Silver is the most well-known election predictor, having appear on the Daily Show and NPR. Silver is a former baseball statistician and FiveThirtyEight.com creator, who last year imported his blog over to the New York Times.
Check out FiveThirtyEight.
Prof. Sam Wang's academic specialties are biophysics and neuroscience. The Princeton University Professor has been predicting elections longer than Silver, and with equal accuracy.
Check out the Princeton Election Consortium.
Drew Linzer is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Emory University. His site, called Votamatic is less frequently updated, but interesting nonetheless.
Take a look at Votamatic.
Utah Valley State University’s Political Science and History department have their own model.
Check out Jay DeSart at the DeSart and Holbrook Election Forecast.
UPDATE 1:
Here is a fifth source:
Wesley N. Colley is a senior research scientist at the Center for Modeling, Simulation and Analysis at the University of Alabama in Huntsville who has joined with J. Richard Gott, III, a professor of Astrophysical Sciences at Princeton University. The run various sports and election predictions.
Go to Gott and Colley's Median Poll Statistics.
UPDATE 2:
For those pissing their pants over this single poll or that single poll, I recommend you look at these sites, which better look at various soruces of data. Some rely on state-wide polls only (Wang and Linzer); weight and agregate national polls with state polls, along with econmic data (Silver); or weitake the median of the state polls (Colley).
Personally, I am just not that excited for this election. As a moderate-independent, I want to have good choices or at least a good choice.
ReplyDeleteWhile Obama has done some good things, he has also done some bad things or allowed some bad practices to continue. I agree with some of his core ideas, but just don't think he is a great leader.
I can't get excited about Romney, either. If he wins, which Romney do we get? The somewhat moderate, Governor of Massachusetts? The conservative? The Paul Ryan tea partier?
As for lies, I can't even watch political ads anymore. In the past, I would just kind of ignore them when they are one, but with all the proposals on the Michigan ballot, we have been treated to a plethora of goodies...
Vote no on Proposal 2 or teachers will be drunk on the job! *
Let the people decide!
If you want to get rid of Medicare, you will have to go through Debbie Stabenow.
Uggh, talk about pandering to the lowest common denominator. I am pretty much a free speech zealot, but at this point, I would be ok with $50 cap on political advertising.
*To be fair, I did pause the TV and look at the contract referenced in that anti-proposal 2 ad. If that s accurate, then the union negotiator that got that contract is a genius. That contract does allow for teachers that are drunk while at work to get 5 chances. It would also allow for a teacher that sold illegal drugs to a child while at work to get another chance.
Steves-
ReplyDeleteDon't complain, you could live in Ohio. It's probably ad war hell there.
True. I will have to say that the ads for the Supreme Court have been relatively tame this time.
ReplyDeleteNice one, I should agree on this one.
ReplyDelete