Nate Silver "Calculates" Hillary Would Win If Not For Comey, Russia As Democrats Come Swinging

Tyler Durden's picture

In the immediate aftermath of last night's WaPo article revealing a "secret" CIA assessment according to which Russia (without a shred of evidence) helped Trump win the election, we explained - in five points - how this was nothing short of a "soft coup" attempt by leaders of the US Intel community and Obama administration to influence the Electoral College vote. To wit:

  1. Announce "consensus" (not unanimous) "conclusion" based in circumstantial evidence now, before the Electoral College vote, then write a report with actual details due by Jan 20.
  2. Put a proven liar in charge of writing the report on Russian hacking.
  3. Fail to mention that not one of the leaked DNC or Podesta emails has been shown to be inauthentic. So the supposed Russian hacking simply revealed truth about Hillary, DNC, and MSM collusion and corruption.
  4. Fail to mention that if hacking was done by or for US government to stop Hillary, blaming the Russians would be the most likely disinformation used by US agencies.
  5. Expect every pro-Hillary lapdog journalist - which is virtually all of them - in America will hyperventilate about this latest fact-free, anti-Trump political stunt for the next nine days.

Shortly thereafter, the prominent beacon of liberal thought, Paul Krugman, confirmed that this agenda was quickly taking shape when he tweeted that "we'll have a president who lost the pop vote by 2.1%, got in thanks to FBI and Putin. And supporters will demand respect. Um, no."

He continued: "Also note CIA held findings until after election; FBI splashed its story -- which turned out to be LITERALLY nothing -- 10 days before", and concluded furiously that "The big problem, for me at least, it how to keep the rage on a simmer, rather than boiling over. The path to justice will be long 9:24 AM - 10 Dec 2016."

That was the initial salvo. It was to be followed promptly by many other liberal voices who have not only concluded that if it not for Russia, Trump would not win, but that without the involvement of FBI director Comey and Vladimir Putin, Hillary would have won the key swing states, and thus the presidency. Case in point, statistician Nate Silver who, together with all other experts, called the election drastically wrong, and is now seeking scapegoats. He appears to have found them.

And so, with Krugman laying out the ideological strawman, and "statistical genius" Nate Silver validating the fabricated strawman by calculating the odds of Hillary's victory if it wasn't for the FBI and evil Russian government hackers, the Democrats have come out swinging, with another liberal commentator, Keith Olberman, laying out the party line that "Priority now is preventing swearing in of Trump (R-Russia). From 9/28: "Is @realDonaldTrump Loyal To This Country?"...

 

...followed the the punchline: getting the Electoral College to "realize" that Clinton would be the winner, if only the unproven intervention of Putin (and his lapdog, FBI diretor Comey) had not happened.

From Politico:

A Democratic congressman is suggesting that members of the Electoral College should be able to consider Russian interference in the presidential election — and whether it influenced the outcome — when deciding how to cast their vote.

 

Cicilline appears to be the first member of Congress and the highest-ranking elected official in the country to endorse the notion that electors aren’t simply rubber stamps for their states’ popular vote. Earlier Saturday, he retweeted a Rhode Island-based national security expert who argued that the intelligence community “must brief electoral college about Russia before vote.”

 

"To the extent that foreign interference in the United States presidential elections may have influenced the final result, I believe the electors have the right to consider that,” Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) said in a statement to POLITICO on Saturday.

 

Cicilline’s comments come amid the explosive determination by the U.S. intelligence community that Russia interfered in the presidential election in support of Donald Trump. Trump’s transition team has forcefully denied the conclusion.

 

“EC exists to protect republic from candidate under foreign influence,” the expert, Salve Regina University researcher Jim Ludes, wrote.

 

Cicilline stopped short of endorsing that sentiment in his statement to POLITICO. But in a second tweet on Saturday, he urged the White House to publicize information surrounding the CIA’s assessment that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump. “Before the Electoral College votes,” he added.

If Trump isn't profusely nervous at this very moment - when everyone from the Obama administration, to US intel, to every living, breathing liberal, to the "unbiased" press - will be screaming that Trump should not get the Dec. 19 EC vote and effectively engaging in a "soft coup", then he is not paying attention.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mini-Me's picture

Right, Nate.  Come over here, get on your knees and talk into the mic, you putz.

The Saint's picture

Nate, if ifs and buts were candy and nuts we would all have a Merry Christmas.

peddling-fiction's picture

If Cankles were not Cankles, she would have done better.

Evil does not respect evil. Isn't that true Moloch and Baal?

MagicHandPuppet's picture

This is another non-issue.  If it does somehow become a real issue, the tree of liberty may have to be refreshed again with the blood of patriots and tyrants, and then the issue will be resolved... and President-elect Trump will still become President Trump.  Nothing to see here.

wolfnipplechips's picture

Would of, should of, could of...blah, blah, blah.

Trump won. Libs and cry babies can sit in the corner and whine. We're moving forward with you or without you.

Handful of Dust's picture

Lets focus on what exactly was in those emails that someone leaked/hacked.

All Clinton's criminal activity.

They also revealed the treachery of Podesta, Huma, Mills, Wasserman, Brazile, and the other Gangsters.

LowerSlowerDelaware_LSD's picture

It still comes down to Hilary being a habitual LIAR, an unindicted FELON, a snob who looks down on everyone but Huma (she **goes** down on her), a shrill grandma cancles, a wealthy-by-government pay-for-play criminal, Satan who eats babies, and corrupt to the core. If not for those few things she would have won.

jeff montanye's picture

i'm not sure she actually eats the babies but she has blinded, crippled, and killed them in the tens of thousands at the very least.  in afghanistan, pakistan, iraq, libya, syria, honduras and ukraine.  

oh and that congressman who wants to subvert the electoral college?  hard core mossad/likud zionist (jew).  hillary the same except ().  not sure what goes in there at this point.  or if it matters.

can the fact that essentially all the zionists supported hillary and that trump didn't take the big money sheldon adelson offered make at least a tiny change in israel's use of the u.s. as its doormat, shill, mark, fluffer and hit man?  

imo the u.s. doesn't need to renegotiate the iran deal.  it needs to renegotiate the 9-11 commission investigation and report.  that will solve an abundance of problems.  nail "too big to jail" and we are nearly home.

PT's picture

Pre-Election:  "Trump is going to start WW3 against the Russians."
Post-Election:  "Trump was colluding with the Russians."

I guess that makes sense when you sell Uranium to the Russians and then try to start WW3 against them.

Econogeek's picture

The big money&power status-quo people behind Clinton/Kaine will not accept defeat.  They will not stop or go away.  They are determined that Trump will not come within 500 feet of the Oval Office.  

To do that they need to keep Trump's Electoral College count under 270.

Plan A - Stein recounts - didn't work.  This is Plan B.  There is a Plan C, a Plan D, a Plan E...

Sorry to repeat this so many times.  Hard to understand how anyone can take this lightly. 

ACES FULL's picture

I "calculate" that my aunt would have been my uncle if she woulda had balls.

HalinCA's picture

Right ... with Obiwon declaring a national sate of emergency every jackbooted thug will be patrolling, and so who will die?  Keith Oberman and Paul Krugman, or the poor thugs and patriots?

The wrong people usually end up dead in most riots ...

Jim in MN's picture

So the revelations about the collusion and lies by her campaign cost her some votes.....

 

....but she wouldn't even have been the candidate without the collusion and lies.

 

Just go the fuck away.

Midas's picture

Food for thought:  We were told not to vote for the Donald because he was a loose cannon war-monger who couldn't be trusted with the big red button.  Now they are telling me V. Putin was pulling strings to get Trump elected? And get blown away?   Can they at least come up with something plausible, like a youtube video?

tarsubil's picture

Deny it all you want. I've gone even more into the numbers and found that Hillary would have easily won by 5 percent if she wasn't a complete lying filthy cunt.

Midas's picture

I have seen more evidence of a high-powered pedophilia ring of Washington insiders including John Podesta than I have of Russia influencing the US election.

TeamDepends's picture

Hillary is a diseased pedophile with a rap sheet as long as your arm, and a trail of dead bodies behind her that would make Castro blush. Probably had something to do with Trumps landslide.

philipat's picture

Surely not? It has to be someone else's fault, Russia, Assange are easy targets because they can't really defend themselves so are good "messengers" to shoot. And don't call me Shirley....

Sebastion's picture

trump lost the vote.  looks like they may get this right after all!

IridiumRebel's picture

You gonna cry your bitchass to sleep sucking your thumb when that doesn't happen or merely shit yourself? We will all pitch in and get you some participation trophies!

TeamDepends's picture

Poor boy, doesn't even know how to spell his own name. Probably an orphan from a fag plantation. Will the horrors never cease?

marathonman's picture

The CIA me thinks has jumped the shark. Everyone except them can see it at this point. A true den of thieves and liars.

Jeffersonian Liberal's picture

Seb,

We all know that this entire an attempt is not to change the results of a massive ass-pounding that Trump gave to the entire Establishment Party and especially to the leftists but that its entire goal is to justify the coming four years of protests and riots and stonewalling and filibustering and all the cantankerous nasty shit you liberal assholes are going to shove in the face of every American for daring not to put another one of your fascist/socialist tyrants in the WH.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

I agree ... well put ... here is my contribution.

Definition of a DEMOCRAT: = A narcissistic PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL God-hating DESPOT with a REPROBATE mind who LIES  continually!!!

 

LOCK HER UP!!! LOCK HER UP!!!


Jeffersonian Liberal's picture

Jeffersonian Liberal tells Nate:

If Comey had done his job (and not protected Clinton) and passed along the findings of the FBI with the suggestion to prosecute her (you know, for that long list of crimes she committed that Comey recited just before he recommended not to pursue a prosecution), then Clinton would not only have lost the election by an even greater landslide, she would probably have been in a holding tank during the election.

So fuck off Nate Silversteingoldmanburg.

dilligaff's picture

Who the fuck is Nate Silver and why should I give a shit??

Mustafa Kemal's picture

Nate Silver uses the now ubiquitous statistical methodology called Bayes inference.

Not only does it produce an estimate of someone's beliefs, so that one might reasonably ask them why I should care, but this estimate is well known to be extremely unstable to small perturbations in both the model and the prior. Its primary utility is that it is a statistical methodolgy that anyone can apply if they can do an integral. It has many adherents.

When you ask the Bayesians for rigorous performance guarantees they cannot provide them. Their response is that it is not necessary. Bayes inference is the right thing to do.

Jeffersonian Liberal's picture

And thus it becomes not a form of statistical tracking/modeling but of opinion influence, just like most polls.

Odd coincidence that the name of the Bayes inference is so similar to another 'king' of influencing the public: Bernays.

Both essentially perform some public-opinion polls to establish where a populace can be guided in order to effect a desired outcome. Bernays was a propaganda peddler early in his career and then became a marketer selling Americans what he convinced them they needed.

And so have most our polls (especially the push-poll) become just a tool the Statists and the Establishment Party use to put forth the "narrative" of how strongly Americans support the Establishment Party and its agenda.

Mustafa Kemal's picture

Indeed, the primary problem with Bayes inference is you begin with an input of what you believe, this input is called the prior, then when you see data you use a model to "invert" probability using the formula called Bayes rule, which is simply a law in probability, and this produces "a posterior" which reflects "your" beliefs after modifying them "appropriately" using Bayes rule. Again, you end up with beliefs, so in some sense you are correct. It is belief peddling. Whats worse, its so very easy to input biases into the prior AND the model.  It is easy to change your prior or the model to obtain results that you would prefer.

Bayes inference is more like a belief system than a science.

And again, never will any Bayesian be able or willing to provide any performance guarantees for their estimate. You are just supposed to believe it.

MCDirtMigger's picture

Sounds like he came from the 'Hedonic adjustment' school of statistical duplicity.

Hide and Watch's picture

Ya. Checked out Nate Silver's website. It looks like he was doing a big Monte Carlo. It didn't make any sense to me as to how it could be predictive. And, it turns out he was wrong. So, I guess it wasn't. 

ersatz007's picture

I announce that Hillary would have won if she hadn't lost

tmosley's picture

Yeah, and if Nate's grandmother had balls she'd be his grandfather.

IridiumRebel's picture

Fuck you! You lost.
No do overs!

booboo's picture

This is more about the little schmucks reputation as a credible pollster than principle. One thing a schmuck hates more than anything is to lose his street creds.

AlexCharting's picture

Hillary & Co’s recent shenanigans will result in them losing allot more than the election… those crooks will end up in jail. Not lock her up… lock THEM up!

LawyerScum's picture

Oy vey, 2 billion skelels and the MSM shilling non-stop for Hillary was not enough...it must of been Putin that ruined it for us! 

Vardaman's picture

Doing rigorous math like that, how did he miss out on becoming a quant for a Wall Street bank?

Seasmoke's picture

I feel a Civil War blowing in the Winter winds.

Just remember not to die for what you believe in. But make the other cocksucker die for what he believes in ...

 

Omen IV's picture

its time for the NYPD to go rouge and send the Life Insurance file to Assange

Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

He has it. Assange is an agent. Why didn't he leak all of the Bank of America stuff he got? Common sense. Setup the alternate "boogieman" that real leakers will approach. Why did the Weiner emails and photos get contained? NYPD would have leaked in a sec. I bet they did, and were intercepted. This is all cover for the NSA/CIA/Military/BigCo hijack of America. Why else would Trump stack his cabinet like this? In life, I find people do what they accuse others of doing. In this case, the CIA is blaming Russia for tampering with the election. Well....... maybe someone did. Maybe they were onshore?

rbg81's picture

According to the fuktards, "Russian Interference" = Any news the Clinton campaign didn't approve. 

TeamDepends's picture

American Resistance: Hey Vlad, don't you think it's time for an official statement denouncing these ridiculous claims that "Russia" was instrumental in Klinton's big loss? Just sayin'....

rbg81's picture

It wasn't enough that Hillary had the entire fuking MSM cheerleading for her, including broadcasting doctored poll results to deoralize Trump supporters.  In their mind, if ANY news came that didn't paint Hillary in the best possible light, then it was obviously foreign interference....or just "unfair".  Meanwhile, they were throwing everything but the kitchen sink at Trump, including digging up 11 year old off-mike comments.  And he STILL won.  Now they want to brainwash (or threaten) the Electors into believing Hillary really won after all.  Any thinking person should laugh this nonsensce off, but we are dealing with Republicans here who have a history of eating their own.

TeamDepends's picture

Agreed rb, it was the deoralizing that hurt the most. (budumpshh!!) Kidding! But seriously, we are struggling right now what with the propaganda bill and the pic of Big Brother 1984, we are taking our own advice and drinking heavily tonight.

What Name's picture

Bring it you fuckers. Let's just get this shit over with.

max2205's picture

Gezzz give it up.. this is pathetic 

Mr. Bones's picture

1) Democrats lose the electoral college vote

2) Democrats say the electoral college shouldn't exist

3) Democrats determine that the electoral college should bend to their whims because Hillary might have won under different circumstances.

I'm not a doctor and I haven't slept at a holiday inn express, but if I were too hazard a guess I'd say this is what delusion looks like.