A month ago, people were getting so mad about articles like these: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/ … http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-dont-ignore-the-polls-clinton-leads-but-its-a-close-race/ …http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-why-clintons-position-is-worse-than-obamas/ …
-
-
Replying to @NateSilver538
Articles were fine; people getting mad were wrong. 538 was best out there. Yet. Topline & graphs did NOT communicate this.
6 replies 4 retweets 30 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @NateSilver538
People don't/can't get what "errors are correlated" or "small shifts are huge" corresponds to in the huge topline percentage.
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes
Replying to @zeynep @NateSilver538
The uncertainty needs to be incorporated into the thing everyone is looking at; not just in long articles or in footnotes.
7:01 AM - 5 Dec 2016
0 replies
0 retweets
7 likes
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.