# "This election is an epistemological watershed." **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 4, 2012, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886 "2012-11-04T21:30:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/1 "2012-11-04T21:30:09Z")
Nate Silver ‏@fivethirtyeight He’s right. Polls have shown that the President is likely to win this election. They have shown Obama with a small but significant and consistent lead. Silver’s analysis in the much maligned New York Times has never shown Mitt Romney with a lead, but there are legions of people, both here and out in the real world (I met two more of them last night) who are absolutely convinced that Mitt Romney will win handily. They are 100% sure that the polls are biased, that they oversample Democrats, and they do this on purpose to come up with a desired outcome. These people get their news from Fox News (although for some reason they deny that they ever watch it), Rush Limbaugh, the Drudge Report, etc., and they are getting a completely different narrative than what the “Mainstream Media” is putting out. So we have a real world test: If Romney wins, they have a point. If he loses, especially by the margins predicted by the polls, they will have been shown that their preferred news sources are full of shit. The next time a story like Benghazi or “Climategate” or Fast and Furious" blows up in the right-wing news bubble but gets ignored everywhere else, those of us who believe in facts can point to this election, look the wingnuts in the eye, and tell them “You and your news sources are full of shit.” Fox News has put it’s reputation, such as it is, at stake. Current lead story at National Review Online: **[Parsing the polls If Gallup is right, Tuesday will be a long night for the Democrats](http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332386/parsing-polls-michael-g-franc)** > [@](#): > > Last week, the Gallup Organization provided more fodder for the debate over whether this year’s polls are skewed due to a systematic over-representation of Democrats in the samples. If Gallup has it right, Governor Romney’s lead may be several percentage points greater than the most recent round of polls suggests. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/2 "2012-11-04T22:01:11Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > The next time a story like Benghazi or “Climategate” or Fast and Furious" blows up in the right-wing news bubble but gets ignored everywhere else, those of us who believe in facts can point to this election, look the wingnuts in the eye, and tell them “You and your news sources are full of shit.” Do you really imagine that’s going to happen? These news sources will just “explain” what happened and their viewers will swallow it whole. I think they’re already laying the groundwork with the idea that Hurricane Sandy changed the outcome of the election. I believe the idea is that all the polls that showed Obama had a lead were being made up by the liberal media up until last Tuesday. Then a hurricane struck New York and New Jersey and as a result, Obama now actually has a lead that matches what the fake polls had been predicting. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/3 "2012-11-04T22:03:09Z")
[_Plus ça change,_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=278328) [_plus c’est la même chose_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=282811). [A walk down memory lane.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=284425) ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/4 "2012-11-04T22:16:20Z")
I see little in John Mace’s links to indicate a stubborn detachment from reality. The closest is the OP in the last link, which was promptly slapped down by RickJay and others. _Nothing_ comparable to adaher and OMG, who wholeheartedly believe in a Romney victory, up to the point of committing to something tangible. Nate Silver is a remarkable guy. He’s inserted some rather sophisticated statistics into the national conversation. His book _Signal and the Noise_ shows that prediction isn’t just the province of consultants and academics. Rather, having a strong reality basis can make the difference between good business decisions and disastrous ones. Ditto for the CDC, earthquake forecasters, etc. So while on the one hand Fox News sails its way into deeper delusion, the normals are getting more sophisticated in their appraisal. Look, Romney could win if the polls are consistently miscalibrated, either reflecting newish developments in voter suppression, [tampering with electronic balloting](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=669867) or more mundane explanations regarding declining response rates and underlying likely voter models. With the popular vote this close, we can’t rule out such possibilities. But it’s still pretty exciting that the informed segment of the populace is becoming more statistically sophisticated: this stuff isn’t easy so cogent and high profile treatments are welcome. I can only hope that _a few_ of the punditry scramble to catch up. Next: Bayes’ Theorem! ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/5 "2012-11-04T22:17:06Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > [_Plus ça change,_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=278328) > > [_plus c’est la même chose_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=282811). > > [A walk down memory lane.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=284425) Devastating finds. Oddly, it seems that people prognosticate the winner of every Presidential election, and even more remarkably, some of them end up being wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/6 "2012-11-04T22:22:02Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Do you really imagine that’s going to happen? These news sources will just “explain” what happened and their viewers will swallow it whole. I think they’re already laying the groundwork with the idea that Hurricane Sandy changed the outcome of the election. I believe the idea is that all the polls that showed Obama had a lead were being made up by the liberal media up until last Tuesday. Then a hurricane struck New York and New Jersey and as a result, Obama now actually has a lead that matches what the fake polls had been predicting. Note that I didn’t say that Fox will reform itself or that the wingnuts aren’t going to stop believing in things that are false. My point is that we have a real world test that is going to have an outcome that can’t be denied. If things end up as I believe they will, I can point to this election and say “They were lying to you. They made up a bunch of shit and you believed them. They are not to be trusted.” > [@John\_Mace](#): > > [_Plus ça change,_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=278328) > > [_plus c’est la même chose_](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=282811). > > [A walk down memory lane.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=284425) I don’t see your point. Those threads are asking questions like “Which poll is right? This one that says Bush has a small lead or this one that says he has a huge lead?” and “What can Kerry do to catch up?” Nobody is flat out denying the polls and claiming they have a systemic bias. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/7 "2012-11-04T22:49:16Z")
I guess I’ll post some links to MMFA, the wingnut media watchdog. Fox News gives Romney 80% more airtime than Obama: [http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/03/fox-news-redefines-unbalanced-by-giving-romney/191118](http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/03/fox-news-redefines-unbalanced-by-giving-romney/191118) Dick Morris, predicting a landslide victory for Mitt Romney. Oh and Republicans will have 53 Senate seats to the Democrats 47. To give an idea of how detached this is, Silver puts the probability of 50-50 at about 6%, 51R at 4%, 52R at 2% and 53R at less than 1%, at least when I eyeball his frequency distribution. > **[Opinion: Here comes the landslide](https://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/133145-opinion-here-comes-the-landslide/)** > > Voters have figured out that President Obama has no message, no agenda and little explanation for the past four years. [http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/02/newsmax-teleconference-romney-is-going-to-win-e/191107](http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/02/newsmax-teleconference-romney-is-going-to-win-e/191107) Chris Cillizia of the Washington Post bemoans cherry picking of polls, before he cherry-picks his own showing a close race! [http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/02/a-fitting-coda-to-the-gut-vs-data-slap-fight/191090](http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/02/a-fitting-coda-to-the-gut-vs-data-slap-fight/191090) Nate Silver notes that when 19 out of 20 battlefield state polls point to Obama, it’s not “Too close to call”. There may, however be systemic problems in the polls to consider: [Nov. 2: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased - The New York Times](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/) Meanwhile the Fox-owned Wall Street Journal gives Karl Rove of all people a column which he uses to pimp his Super-Pac. Smart businessmen should migrate to the NYT and Bloomberg. [http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/01/roves-final-pre-election-wsj-column-again-expos/191050](http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/11/01/roves-final-pre-election-wsj-column-again-expos/191050) And speaking of reality, here’s a history of dishonest Fox charts: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=15660406](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=15660406) ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/8 "2012-11-04T23:00:02Z")
Hopefully it will be a psephological watershed, not an epistemological one. But opinion polls have been wholly wrong before. I’m thinking of the U.K. in 1992. We’ll find out in a little over 48 hours. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/9 "2012-11-04T23:06:51Z")
> [@Lamar\_Mundane](#): > > I don’t see your point. Those threads are asking questions like “Which poll is right? This one that says Bush has a small lead or this one that says he has a huge lead?” and “What can Kerry do to catch up?” Nobody is flat out denying the polls and claiming they have a systemic bias. From the scond link, which was on Oct 25, started with an OP that the polls show Bush in the lead: > [@](#): > > Kerry is already ahead in every place that counts. The mood in camp Republican is quite wonderfully desperate. How I love the screams of frustration in the morning. Unless they have some sort of big bomb to drop on Kerry saved up (which probably wouldn’t hit until Friday for maximum impact with little time to respond), they are in a very very bad place for a personally popular wartime incumbent to be. Granted, it’s far from a huge Kerry lead, and I doubt it will be given the previous advantages Bush has. But it looks like this season’s underdog magic is coming into play. From the first link: > [@](#): > > The polls are undercounting those groups that historically have not turned out in great numbers. All of these dormant groups are coming to life now. > [@](#): > > The polls may be very badly off the mark this year. > > \ > > I seriously doubt that any of the polls are taking into account the unprecedented surge in new voters this year. The last one was just a funny thread that, early in the evening on election day, we still had folks saying Kerry would win. I have to admit I was expecting Bush to lose up until the last minute, even though the polls were saying otherwise. In a close race, I think most of us tend to give our guy an edge, for whatever reason, even if the polls are saying otherwise. We either think the polls are missing something, or we focus on the one or two polls that paint our guy in the better light. You can see that all through that first thread I linked to. > [@VT](#): > > Devastating finds. We’re supposed to post only devastating finds here? I missed that in the rules. ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/10 "2012-11-04T23:46:14Z")
> [@](#): > > If Romney wins, they have a point. If he loses, especially by the margins predicted by the polls, they will have been shown that their preferred news sources are full of shit. they will believe whatever their “news” sources tell them. the Democratic party stole the election by suppressing the vote or owning the voting machines or whatever else the Republicans were _actually doing_. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2012, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/11 "2012-11-04T23:55:43Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > think they’re already laying the groundwork with the idea that Hurricane Sandy changed the outcome of the election. I believe the idea is that all the polls that showed Obama had a lead were being made up by the liberal media up until last Tuesday. Then a hurricane struck New York and New Jersey and as a result, Obama now actually has a lead that matches what the fake polls had been predicting. Well, there is an argument to be made that Sandy will change the outcome. They can now report the living hell out of Sandy and ignore Benghazigate. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/12 "2012-11-05T00:03:34Z")
> [@JackieLikesVariety](#): > > they will believe whatever their “news” sources tell them. the Democratic party stole the election by suppressing the vote or owning the voting machines or whatever else the Republicans were _actually doing_. :smack: This. It won’t make a damn bit of difference. The base of the Republican party is so disconnected from reality that no factual occurrence will shake their faith in either their Elders in the party or their priests on Fox. They will simply be fed a new sermon directing them to hand wave any unpleasantness away and they’ll eat it up like starving wolves on a lamb. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/13 "2012-11-05T00:05:41Z")
Still not sure episiotomies have to do with it… ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/14 "2012-11-05T00:22:06Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Well, there is an argument to be made that Sandy will change the outcome. They can now report the living hell out of Sandy and ignore Benghazigate. Which your average person who doesn’t have rocks in his head would tend to call “appropriate,” being that one is a natural disaster that’s killed over 100 people and continues to affect millions right here in the United States, and the other is a single event occurring in Libya two months ago that resulted in four deaths, which partisan right-wingers have strained to the point of rectal prolapse to turn into a “-gate” that will sink Obama. But I realize I am not addressing you when I say that. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/15 "2012-11-05T00:24:36Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The last one was just a funny thread that, early in the evening on election day, we still had folks saying Kerry would win. I have to admit I was expecting Bush to lose up until the last minute, even though the polls were saying otherwise. In a close race, I think most of us tend to give our guy an edge, for whatever reason, even if the polls are saying otherwise. We either think the polls are missing something, or we focus on the one or two polls that paint our guy in the better light. You can see that all through that first thread I linked to. So who’s is the analogue to Dick Morris, the Fox News regular who predicts a Romney landslide? Not just squeeking a victory. Landslide. Those wishing to be informed are ill-served by Fox News. Those of sensitive disposition, always thirsting for reassurance, receive their fill. It’s a big country and all Americans can play their part. But some lack the requisite character for policy analysis or decision making. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/16 "2012-11-05T00:36:38Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Well, there is an argument to be made that Sandy will change the outcome. They can now report the living hell out of Sandy and ignore Benghazigate. If only there was some 24/7 news channel and attached radio stations dedicated to reporting nothing but Benghazi. Maybe some kind of top-5 newspaper owned by the same media empire, doing the same thing. Well, at least a conservative can dream. ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/17 "2012-11-05T00:52:14Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Those wishing to be informed are ill-served by Fox News. Those of sensitive disposition, always thirsting for reassurance, receive their fill. What I’m worried about is Fox’s inevitable “the election was stolen” getting these same people worked into a rage. That’s the kind of shit that gets people killed. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/18 "2012-11-05T01:05:21Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Well, there is an argument to be made that Sandy will change the outcome. They can now report the living hell out of Sandy and ignore Benghazigate. As I pointed out the last time you raised this issue, the Benghazi attack happened six weeks ago - even if there had been a story there, it’s no longer newsworthy. And that includes the accusations against the Obama administration - they were made and they were reported at the time they were made. And now the media moves on to current news. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/19 "2012-11-05T01:10:21Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > _Nothing_ comparable to adaher and OMG, who wholeheartedly believe in a Romney victory, up to the point of committing to something tangible. The most extreme case is klaatu, who is currently taking bets for substantial sums that Romney will receive over 300 electoral votes. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 5, 2012, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886/20 "2012-11-05T01:17:56Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > So who’s is the analogue to Dick Morris, the Fox News regular who predicts a Romney landslide? Not just squeeking a victory. Landslide. Not sure there was anyone of national recognition doing that\*, but you’ll note that Morris is no longer saying that about Romney. \*but I honestly don’t remember, and have no interest in trying to sift through 8-year-old news stories to find out. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-election-is-an-epistemological-watershed/639886.md?page=2)