
What does Trump's victory say about data analysis for the social sciences? - daturkel
There are enough media think-pieces about why mainstream media coverage and punditry misread the electorate [0], but how exactly do we explain the gross inaccuracy of some of our predictive data analysis?<p>For instance, on 11&#x2F;5, Huffington Post was taking Nate Silver to task for &quot;unskewing the polls,&quot; seemingly to create an image of a race that was closer than it &quot;really is.&quot; [1]<p>For their own part, 538&#x27;s forecast <i>did</i> have Clinton going into the election with a margin equivalent to polling error. [2] But that doesn&#x27;t explain why the New York Times&#x27; Upshot, for instance, had Hillary at an 85% chance of winning on the eve of the election. [3]<p>(We should note also that the Trump &quot;upset&quot; was not just about white males without college education turning out in greater numbers than expected. Clinton shocked by underperforming 2012 Obama among black and Latino voters. [4])<p>So my question is: is the Trump &quot;upset&quot; an indictment all of big data as a tool for election prediction (or perhaps the social sciences at large)? Or do we just say that our models were largely miscalibrated and that the relative accuracy of 538&#x27;s, for instance, shows that we simply need to learn from our mistakes to move forward using data in politics?<p>For some initial conversation on this topic, see this thread in the Trump victory HN post [5].<p>[0]: I found this one particularly insightful http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;11&#x2F;09&#x2F;business&#x2F;media&#x2F;media-trump-clinton.html
[1]: http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.huffingtonpost.com&#x2F;entry&#x2F;nate-silver-election-forecast_us_581e1c33e4b0d9ce6fbc6f7f?
[2]: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NateSilver538&#x2F;status&#x2F;794571867449421829
[3]: http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;interactive&#x2F;2016&#x2F;upshot&#x2F;presidential-polls-forecast.html
[4]: http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fivethirtyeight.com&#x2F;live-blog&#x2F;2016-election-results-coverage&#x2F;?lpup=12607239#livepress-update-12607239
[5]: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=12907961https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=12907961
======
NumberCruncher
Even the Iowa Electronic Markets [1] got it wrong despite of being so accurate
in the past.

[1] [http://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/](http://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/)

