If you were demoralized by news of the recent election model that predicts a Romney victory, don't be. Turns out it's bullshit.
Touted as a model "with 100% success rate for the past thirty years", Nate Silver tells us that it is, in fact, a brand new model that has never been used before!
Nate also finds "glaring problems with their methodology".
Follow me after the jump for an exact transcript of Nate's tweets last night...
Nate posted these tweets in fairly rapid succession late last night:
A Denver Post reporter asked me (bit.ly/MNOF1C) about this U. of Colorado election model (bit.ly/O7pN4I). (1/5)
It's late, so I'll be blunt: I saw their paper and I think there are glaring problems with their methodology. (2/5)
The U. of Colo. model fits the equivalent of 7 unknowns to 8 elections. That's not a good idea. (3/5)
The Colo. model also assumes huge effects from unemployment if incumbent is a Dem., but none if he's GOP. Hard claim to defend. (4/5)
If you want a "fundamentals" model that shows Romney winning, the Hibbs model is a lot more sensible. bit.ly/SqgfnH (5/5)
Also, it's false advertising to claim CU model has predicted the last 8 elections right. It's a new model. Hasn't predicted anything yet.(bolding by diarist)
It looks like the Republicans are going to attempt every dirty trick in the book this election, including dishonest propaganda to demoralize Democrats. We can add it to the list alongside race baiting, voter suppression, and a Romney-Ryan campaign built solely on lies.
Update 1:This may be another iteration of the GOP's strategy of attacking an opponent's strengths. From last August in U.S. News & World Report:
Never-Wrong Pundit Picks Obama to Win in 2012http://www.usnews.com/...
By PAUL BEDARD, LAUREN FOX
August 30, 2011 RSS Feed Print
Allan Lichtman, the American University professor whose election formula has correctly called every president since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 re-election, has a belated birthday present for Barack Obama: Rest easy, your re-election is in the bag.