My thoughts here.
And, for a different audience, a discussion of Red State, Blue State.
As always, I thank my collaborators for a lot of the analysis that I’m summarizing in these articles and discussions.
My thoughts here.
And, for a different audience, a discussion of Red State, Blue State.
As always, I thank my collaborators for a lot of the analysis that I’m summarizing in these articles and discussions.
Andrew,
I was surprised to see you writing at New Majority – are you going into political consulting?
DD
DD,
I've done a bit of statistical consulting over the years but no, I haven't yet done any political consulting (or statistical consulting for political organizations).
Andrew,
Let me begin by saying that I'm a huge fan of your work in general (particularly Bayesian Data Analysis), so I'm not intending to come across as a troll. I suppose that the reason that I was shocked to see you writing at New Majority is that their mission explicitly states:
It makes sense to me that you would be hired by journalistic entities to help them interpret data, and maybe that's the scope of your writing there, but it was bit odd to see you there.
DD
DD,
It would be completely reasonable for a journalistic or political entity to pay me to help interpret data, but this has never actually occurred. I sent my articles to New Majority for free, just as I send for free my articles to the Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vox EU, and other outlets.
David Frum has his political goals and the people at Firedoglake have theirs. I enjoy communicating with Frum's audience and look forward to doing more of this; I also enjoyed participating in a book forum at Firedoglake and hope to do so again when my next book comes out.
P.S. Don't worry–I didn't think you were troll. I don't think we've ever had any trolls on this blog. After all, what would a troll here have to say? "Bayes sux"??
I would like my research to be helpful to both sides of the debate. My hope is that it would serve the country for all parties to have a better understanding of public opinion and voting. I recognize that people on the left or the right (or, for that matter, the center) can use such knowledge to try to manipulate the political process in ways I might not like, but on the whole I'd think that giving out clear information is a plus.
> I would like my research to be helpful to both
> sides of the debate
Admirable – and my superstition is that better information processing will win over censorship.
(Of course this would not apply to adversarial procedings such as in litigation where the only good thing the other side could ever do is lose!)
Keith
Keith
Haha, let me go ahead and satisfy the conditions for trolling:
d00d andr00 b4y3z suxxx
You know, what you say makes perfect sense. I should have realised that you were simply helping people sort through the data and come to terms with what they say, rather than using your incredible talents to aid a political party.
I can't believe that after reading this blog for so long, this was the issue that motivated me to create an account and start commenting. I feel a bit silly.
Actually, a few friends of mine and I run a very small blog about political data, polling and open source technology (Obligatory Link), and I'd love it if you would allow us to reprint some of your material. as long as you're giving it away. :)
DD
DD,
Feel free to reprint my material–it's here for free on the blog–but please link to the original source as well!