Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Saturday November 19 2016, @01:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the simon-says-campaign-in-pennsylvania dept.

Submitted via IRC for chromas

The Clinton presidential campaign used a complex computer algorithm called Ada to assist in many of the most important decisions during the race.

According to aides, a raft of polling numbers, public and private, were fed into the algorithm, as well as ground-level voter data meticulously collected by the campaign. Once early voting began, those numbers were factored in, too.

What Ada did, based on all that data, aides said, was run 400,000 simulations a day of what the race against Trump might look like. A report that was spit out would give campaign manager Robby Mook and others a detailed picture of which battleground states were most likely to tip the race in one direction or another — and guide decisions about where to spend time and deploy resources.

Of course, the results are only as good as the data. Since the outcome of the election was different than most poll predictions, it seems like Ada may have had a Garbage In, Garbage Out problem.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:44PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday November 19 2016, @08:44PM (#429611) Journal

    Rather, you are ignoring the fact that a very few small, densely populated cities in this nation expect the country to follow their lead. Wag the dog, so to say. Look at that map of counties again - a couple larger islands, and several smaller islands, in a sea of red. But, you want to claim that Hillary is popular, based on that?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @11:56AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 20 2016, @11:56AM (#429869)

    To an outsider in the modern age, it looks like the originators of the Electoral College system took a look at the first past the post system and asked themselves "how can we make it worse?". I don't have skin in the game beyond if the US farts my country has to either hold its breath or berate the dog, but not a single candidate from *any* party is worth a damn. Sanders was the best of a bad lot but look what happened to him. Clinton was the status quo personified and if people were happy with the status quo, Sanders wouldn't have got a look-in. Every single Republican candidate is batshit crazy. If they want to get back to normal, they'll need to take the likes of Cruz (and opportunist shit-stirrers like Palin) et al out the back and send them to the Great Congress in the Sky. Both mainstream parties are simply ultra-distilled versions of themselves and no, none of them are in the slightest bit politically left wing. Sanders is centre-right, the rest are further and further to the right. The US is fast turning into Turkey, albeit with an interchangeable talking head as president.
    Never mind, in 50 years or so you'll all be crushed under the Chinese steamroller, though only if they can work out how to build them without important parts falling off first. Thank fuck I'll be dead.

  • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday November 21 2016, @10:44PM

    by urza9814 (3954) on Monday November 21 2016, @10:44PM (#430897) Journal

    Rather, you are ignoring the fact that a very few small, densely populated cities in this nation expect the country to follow their lead. Wag the dog, so to say. Look at that map of counties again - a couple larger islands, and several smaller islands, in a sea of red. But, you want to claim that Hillary is popular, based on that?

    Funny, I thought the Constitution was all about "We the people", not "We the largely unpopulated landmasses".

    Land doesn't vote, people do. Owning a big farm should not give you more influence in our government. Nor should owning a large corporation for that matter. Unfortunately we still need to fix both of those problems...

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 21 2016, @11:59PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 21 2016, @11:59PM (#430940) Journal

      That is why our government is set up the way it is. Land doesn't get a vote. Each state gets two senators. The people get a congressman for x amount of people. The people get to elect one president, through the electoral college. That electoral college has been doing it's thing for quite a long while now.

      Now, we have one spoiled rich bitch who didn't win that vote - so the vote is all wrong?

      I'll be fair here. If I were backing one particular candidate, and put all my heart and soul into that candidate's election - I might cry foul as well. I might even throw a tantrum, and scream "It ain't fair it ain't fair it ain't fair!"

      Then again, I might not.

      The system is what the system is. The fact that you lost doesn't mean the system is wrong.

      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday November 22 2016, @09:14PM

        by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday November 22 2016, @09:14PM (#431487) Journal

        The bit that I quoted and was replying to implied that Hillary wasn't as popular because her supporters are "a couple larger islands, and several smaller islands, in a sea of red". But that ignores the fact that those "islands" are where the vast, vast majority of the nation actually lives. The fact that the land is "red" doesn't mean a damn thing if that land is empty.

        My point is not that the system is hopelessly screwed (although it *is* pretty bad...) -- my point is just that it's kind of absurd to claim your candidate was more "popular" just because he won the most empty fields. He lost the popular vote by a rather large margin.