Anyone want to chime in on the downvotes?
Maybe because the article is behind a paywall?
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
19 points (100.0% liked)
politics
22730 readers
3278 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean, you can just close the pop up and still read the full article? Or do you see something different?
Hmm... I could have sworn that the first time I followed the link it went to this page which ends after a few paragraphs with a subscription link. But the page I get now is fine.
(Edit: I see now that I got to that page from a link in your comments, and mistook that tab for the one I’d opened from the main link.)
That was the link I gave in the comments about their current analysis based on aggregated polling. If you’re only getting a few paragraphs, I’m guessing you’re using reader view? (I default to it too) Unfortunately a bunch of news-type websites now essentially break reader view and only show a snippet. If you view outside reader, you should be able to see the polling analysis.
I was wondering that too. Do we hate Nate silver now? Dude always seemed pretty respected
I was actually excited to share as I hadn’t seen this explained as well before. Live and learn I guess.
BTW, if you haven’t seen it already, this is Nate’s forecast page with a national aggregate, aggregates for swing states (or what were thought to be potential swing states earlier in the year), and the latest polls that have been brought into the model. https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
It shouldn’t be so close but I’ll take it
The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
Holy moly 170 comments on the article itself and nothing but downvotes over here. Man I wonder what the conversation that didn't happen was that caused this.
I am just as confused. Most of my /politics posts and comments are relatively well upvoted, but I guess there’s a sizable contingent who just hate any mention of polls at all or have it out for Nate Silver. I was at least expecting a few more comments about how Silver ranked some pollsters and whether folks thought those assessments were accurate. 🤷🏼♂️
Well you are still getting downvoted so.... Did you piss someone off?
In general I don’t think so, and there’s only about one to three accounts that downvote most things I post/comment so I don’t think it’s that. I think I’m leaning towards reactionary downvotes for anything that mentions “polls” - which is a shame, as while I don’t think polls are terribly good at being reliably predictive of the results, I think they’re fairly good when used for tracking changes in momentum and at least more reliable when analyzed in aggregate with competent and rigorous weighting based on past performance. And this article is great about explaining how that’s done by the only folks who’ve been shown to be any good at it.