Lifehacker has a top 10 list of tools that cover issue tracking, voter information, and poll-tracking. A great resource!
Top 10 Web tools for election season
October 10th, 2008, 10:42pm by Sam Wang
Tags: 2008 Election
Princeton Election Consortium
A first draft of electoral history
-
Poll Updates- US: National Survey (Economist 11/1-3) November 6, 2009
- US: National Survey (Kos 11/2-5) November 6, 2009
- US: Health Care (CNN 10/30-11/1) November 6, 2009
- US: News Interest (Pew 10/30-11/2) November 5, 2009
- CA: 2010 Gov (Capitol Weekly 10/26-28) November 5, 2009
History and snapshot
State-by-State Maps
-
Senate and House
Meta-Analysis Thread
- Spacetime rift delays update until noon
October 7, 2008 | 11:42 amAndrew says there was “a routing problem this morning between the University and quite a few outside websites — a split in the internet, if you will.” For the next EV estimator update, check back at noon…
- VP debate: big audience but race unchanged
October 5, 2008 | 3:00 pmBiden v. Palin drew 70 million viewers, one-third more than Obama v. McCain. VP debates usually don’t matter, but I wondered… Read more »
- For locals: a talk on the Meta-Analysis
October 2, 2008 | 9:00 amTomorrow (Friday) at noon, I’ll give a talk in Kosuke Imai and Dustin Tingley’s political methodology seminar. If you’re nearby, you’re welcome to attend. Of course, the math will all be included. The blurb is here (PDF).
Update: Here’s another local event, happening next Tuesday: a panel on the reliability of state polls featuring both pollsters and academics, including Andrew Gelman, author of Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State. I hear the panel will be webcast. If so I’ll post a link.
Archive for Meta-Analysis Thread »
- Spacetime rift delays update until noon
I was hoping that PEC would make the list!
I seriously think that there is no reason why 538.com could be gaining more attention than PEC. I mean, your meta analysis have proven record in the past being correct while Nate have proven record in predicting baseball.
I specifically like your model because your model is somehow very less prone to fluctuations. When all national polls showed McCain leading, you still consistently showed Obama to have some EV lead although by a very tiny margin. 538.com at that time showed McCain leading Obama because Nate’s model take into account the national polls too.
I hope you are 100% correct again this time :)
I disagree – there are good reasons why FiveThirtyEight is popular. As I’ve said before, Silver has put together an extremely useful resource.
In regard to fluctuation, one factor that works against him is overreliance on numerical simulation when an exact solution is possible. The problem can be repaired, but he will need to reach beyond his current toolkit.
In regard to correcting for national polls, this seemed like a good idea for a while, and I was tempted to do it. But Silver himself pointed out that the post-RNC bounce for McCain/Palin was concentrated in frontier states. This would not have been predictable in advance by existing demographic models. This invalidates the use of national polls as a correction. A real consequence is that showing McCain pulling ahead in the EC was probably an error. I wrote about this previously.