2025 & 2026 Elections | Adams drops out in NYC

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 808
  • Views: 27K
  • Politics 
duluoz said:
So you want to take social media posts, which are small in sample relative to total actual voters, and are often anonymous or can very easily be faked… and try to bridge that to voter registration and turnout records in a meaningful way.

That sounds like bad data you got brewing there, but knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
Data brokers do this all the time. It's a billion dollar business. Why do you think Google gives away its browser, OS and email for free? It's the targeting. And the targeting knows who you are unless you are careful not to reveal it.

I'm not the data science grad student who published that piece. I don't know what he did or didn't do, or what data he did or didn't use. I'm just saying there are more tools out there than you think.
 
superrific said:
Data brokers do this all the time. It's a billion dollar business. Why do you think Google gives away its browser, OS and email for free? It's the targeting. And the targeting knows who you are unless you are careful not to reveal it.

I'm not the data science grad student who published that piece. I don't know what he did or didn't do, or what data he did or didn't use. I'm just saying there are more tools out there than you think.
Click to expand...
Data brokers TRY to do this all the time. If they were successful at tying voter data to social media at scale, we’d have much more accurate polling and election insights.

I’m very aware of the tools and how targeting works, and if you think individual social media posts can at this point be scraped and linked to voter registration data in a meaningful way, i.e. at scale, then no, they’re not yet as sophisticated as you think. The best you can likely do with that is some thin modeling, which is likely what this guy did.

And I’m certain he didn’t pay walled gardens like google or meta for the data needed to even attempt to do what you’re suggesting (which is exorbitantly priced relative to a grad student or even an Ivy League graduate program, especially in the current climate).

Back to my original point — this data is modeled and likely a flimsy model. That doesn’t mean it’s worthless, but take it just as he states it to be — an estimate.
 
duluoz said:
Data brokers TRY to do this all the time. If they were successful at tying voter data to social media at scale, we’d have much more accurate polling and election insights.

I’m very aware of the tools and how targeting works, and if you think individual social media posts can at this point be scraped and linked to voter registration data in a meaningful way, i.e. at scale, then no, they’re not yet as sophisticated as you think. The best you can likely do with that is some thin modeling, which is likely what this guy did.

And I’m certain he didn’t pay walled gardens like google or meta for the data needed to even attempt to do what you’re suggesting (which is exorbitantly priced relative to a grad student or even an Ivy League graduate program, especially in the current climate).

Back to my original point — this data is modeled and likely a flimsy model. That doesn’t mean it’s worthless, but take it just as he states it to be — an estimate.
Click to expand...
I'm not well versed in this area so I won't argue the point, except to say that targeting tools would be more or less useless for polling, which requires a random sample.

I'm not saying you can target everyone, only that it could help what that guy is doing. And maybe I'm wrong about that last part.
 
duluoz said:
Interesting but keep in mind these are still modeled projections of some kind, since nobody knows how anyone voted other than exit polls and other self reporting, which are unscientific and small in sample. Who anyone actually voted for is not public record.

Demographics are available, and registration and turnout numbers are available publicly, but there’s no surefire way to link those to actual votes for this candidate or that candidate.

Looks like this guy’s a data science grad student at Harvard, I’m guessing there’s reasonable methodology behind it but either way he is right to use the term “estimate.” Especially since pollsters have been getting so much wrong lately.
Click to expand...
Having looked at what the tool does -- I mean, it's pretty basic. Other than the demographics, all of the data is directly available. Precinct level vote totals are a matter of record. I thought he was drilling down further to the neighborhood level and that's where social media might help. I know there are data files at the neighborhood level but I don't know how accurate they are.

I suspect the model is pretty good. Assuming correlations between areas are relatively stable over time, basically the system is just solving a huge matrix of equations. There will be a set of precincts P, and a set of precinct correlations PC(n, m). No idea if n and m are comprehensive across all precincts or if trivial correlations are weeded out. Census data gives breakdowns on racial composition at a granular level. There's also precinct change over time, which would help determine deltas -- i.e. if a precinct goes from 50% white to 30% white, you can correlate that with different vote totals and again use correlations to fill in the gaps.

It's still a model, but I suspect it's pretty good. The Needle is at least pretty good.
 

Trump Advisers Prepare to Target Left-Leaning Groups After Kirk Shooting​

GOP looks to harness outrage, draw younger voters ahead of midterm elections​


🎁 —> https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy...7?st=pB7qMC&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

“… Among the actions being discussed by the president’s team: reviewing the tax-exempt status of left-leaning nonprofit groups and targeting them with anticorruption laws, according to administration officials. The president could begin rolling out the actions as soon as this week, officials said, part of a bid to harness support for Kirk, particularly among young voters, ahead of the midterm elections.

… The White House also plans to highlight what it sees as violent rhetoric from opponents, amplifying a law-and-order focus that has for weeks been a centerpiece of Trump’s political messaging.

… In a speech to influential Republican donors on Friday night, Vance said Kirk should inspire them ahead of the midterms.

“Take that commitment to American greatness, take that commitment to our civic virtue and take that recognition that a very good man gave his life for his country, and let’s go win—and win for the right damn reasons,” Vance said, according to people in the room.

Trump will speak at Kirk’s funeral in Phoenix on Sunday, and he will be joined by several administration officials, many who had personal bonds with Kirk.…”
 
Do they not realize that, having said out loud that they are targeting the left, they can't legally go after those leftist groups?
 
Super please explain if you can how the Dems would control the house if every state that can do so gerrymanders.
 
Last edited:
Mundial said:
Super please explain if you can how the Dems would control the house if every state that can do so gerrymanders.
Click to expand...
1. Gerrymanders can go both ways
2. I'm just doing the math. In 2018, the Dems did about 5 points better than they did in 2016, and they flipped 41 seats. In 2020, Dems did 3 points worse than in 2018 and they lost 13 seats. In 2022, the GOP improved by about 3 points and gained 9 seats. In 2024, the House races didn't change much.

So Wasserman says that the GOP might pick up 10 seats on net from redistricting. If we go back to 2018 numbers nationally, maybe the Dems' 36 vote majority would shrink to a 26 vote majority.
 
superrific said:
1. Gerrymanders can go both ways
2. I'm just doing the math. In 2018, the Dems did about 5 points better than they did in 2016, and they flipped 41 seats. In 2020, Dems did 3 points worse than in 2018 and they lost 13 seats. In 2022, the GOP improved by about 3 points and gained 9 seats. In 2024, the House races didn't change much.

So Wasserman says that the GOP might pick up 10 seats on net from redistricting. If we go back to 2018 numbers nationally, maybe the Dems' 36 vote majority would shrink to a 26 vote majority.
Click to expand...
On your first point, I think that you are saying that there is a risk that if you gerrymander a district, it may backfire as the new district may not work out as intended and actually vote for the other party but let me know if that is incorrect (obviously both parties can gerrymander).

On your second point, I don't quite follow. What do you mean by "5 points better...3 points worse". Are you saying that you think that the Democrats will perform better generally during the midterms than the Republicans to the tune of a certain amount of percentage points of the relevant vote?
 
Mundial said:
On your first point, I think that you are saying that there is a risk that if you gerrymander a district, it may backfire as the new district may not work out as intended and actually vote for the other party but let me know if that is incorrect (obviously both parties can gerrymander).

On your second point, I don't quite follow. What do you mean by "5 points better...3 points worse". Are you saying that you think that the Democrats will perform better generally during the midterms than the Republicans to the tune of a certain amount of percentage points of the relevant vote?
Click to expand...
Well, there are two factors in that first point. First is that gerrymandering helps Dems in some states. Illinois, for instance, is pretty Dem-gerrymandered. Maryland is very Dem-gerrymandered. On net, GOP states are more gerrymandered but not by THAT much. The second is the dummymander, which used to be a problem and appears to be less of a problem today.

On the second point, the Dems lost the popular vote in the House in 2016 by 1 point. In 2018, they won by almost 10 (so a 5 point swing in either direction). That was the difference between a narrow minority and a 35 seat majority. In 2020 they regressed by 3 points but that was still better than 2016, and thus did the Dems hold the House. In 2022, the GOP improved by 3 points (so a difference of 6) and they narrowly held the House.

So the national environment affects the distribution of races. I don't know where it happens exactly, but there are districts that go blue in blue waves and red in red wave elections. I don't know it that's just seats that would be Lean R and are now tossups, or if the Dems just win (or lose) almost all of the tossups, or if the Dems can win more "Likely R" districts, since Likely <> safe. But that's how it goes.

Now, factor in gerrymandering off that baseline. If the Dems would win 38 seats, maybe gerrymandering means that they will win 8 fewer. 10 fewer by design, but Dems prevail in a couple.
 
Mobile AL mayoral race:



Would be a shocking flip if the Dem* wins (she lead most of the evening).

*technically non-partisan

There has been the same Republican incumbent since 2013. This is a runoff from a prior election with multiple GOP challengers, with the top 2 vote-getters facing off tonight. Trump won Mobile 58-41% last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top