Or, maybe not enough like a pundit, since "models" are least useful when dynamics of low frequency events change.http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/ …
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
Polls said Trump was popular, but Herman Cain was also popular. Difference was changed dynamics. Smart "pundits" caught that, models cannot.
1 reply 4 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
I'm a firm believer in empirically-grounded analyses but the real art & science is knowing what kind of data supports what kind of argument.
3 replies 10 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Models based on prior data or great, until when they are not, and it's your "pundit" that that will alert you to that. The "model" cannot.
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
this is a good point, except how do we discern when the pundit is better informed? The pundit thinks s/he is but how sure can we be?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @charlesarthur
I'd say the worst are the ones that have to write every week. Pressure on them to create tension/mystery when there's none.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @charlesarthur
I understand the financial/economic incentive structure but it really makes for bad reporting and punditry.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @charlesarthur
People who are thoughtful and empirical and not mono-method tend to do well. It's a judgment call who you think fits.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
TV pundits? I couldn’t figure if you had a preferred medium.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I can no longer stand watching TV widely enough to judge but @chrislhayes is a positive example. TV but a lot of smart stuff.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.