andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-1020 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I enjoy the London Review of Books but I’m not a fan of their policy of hiring English people to write about U.S. politics. In theory it could work just fine but in practice there seem to be problems. Recall the notorious line from a couple years ago, “But viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite predictable.” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that th
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 ” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. [sent-6, score-0.69]
2 The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. [sent-7, score-0.173]
3 There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. [sent-8, score-0.757]
4 The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that they were irrationalist: they were consciously pursuing a course of action which made no economic sense, as part of a worldview which is essentially theological [emphasis added]. [sent-9, score-0.652]
5 They know that everyone else knows that they truly don’t care about the consequences of their actions, and the prospect of the Tea Party wing being in government is truly frightening. [sent-10, score-0.495]
6 ‘Sane Republican’ is not an oxymoron, not yet – but we’re heading that way. [sent-11, score-0.071]
7 The Tea Party activists have several goals, #1 of which is to unseat Obama in 2012, and one step of that goal is to shoot down any stimulus plans that might juice the economy between now and then. [sent-13, score-0.481]
8 So it’s not at all “irrational” (let alone “irrationalist”) for them to pursue a strategy which, in Lanchester’s words, “will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. [sent-14, score-0.832]
9 By refusing to compromise, the conservative Republicans got the Democrats to give in. [sent-16, score-0.195]
10 Conservative Republicans would like a long-term balanced budget with low inflation and low taxes on the rich. [sent-18, score-0.309]
11 With that as a goal, it’s not unreasonable to fight any expansion of spending on items they do not support. [sent-19, score-0.072]
12 I’m not saying you have to agree with Republican politicians or Tea Party activists here; it just seems silly to describe them as irrational. [sent-20, score-0.163]
13 They just have goals which are much different from Lanchester’s (and, for that matter, from many Americans). [sent-21, score-0.101]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('tea', 0.379), ('lanchester', 0.275), ('irrationalist', 0.223), ('party', 0.189), ('wing', 0.177), ('trigger', 0.177), ('activists', 0.163), ('recovery', 0.163), ('republicans', 0.155), ('recession', 0.154), ('severe', 0.147), ('irrational', 0.14), ('worst', 0.116), ('truly', 0.115), ('ceiling', 0.102), ('empowered', 0.102), ('partiers', 0.102), ('theological', 0.102), ('goals', 0.101), ('conservative', 0.099), ('republican', 0.098), ('obama', 0.098), ('surrender', 0.096), ('refusing', 0.096), ('juice', 0.092), ('globally', 0.092), ('consciously', 0.092), ('worldview', 0.092), ('unprecedented', 0.088), ('sane', 0.088), ('prospect', 0.088), ('newly', 0.086), ('low', 0.082), ('goal', 0.08), ('process', 0.077), ('stimulus', 0.076), ('compromise', 0.076), ('difficult', 0.075), ('debt', 0.075), ('disturbing', 0.075), ('pursue', 0.075), ('pursuing', 0.074), ('balanced', 0.073), ('edge', 0.073), ('inflation', 0.072), ('forced', 0.072), ('unreasonable', 0.072), ('heading', 0.071), ('actions', 0.07), ('shoot', 0.07)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
Introduction: I enjoy the London Review of Books but I’m not a fan of their policy of hiring English people to write about U.S. politics. In theory it could work just fine but in practice there seem to be problems. Recall the notorious line from a couple years ago, “But viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite predictable.” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that th
Introduction: A Brooks op-ed in the New York Times (circulation approximately 1.5 million): People at the extremes are happier than political moderates. . . . none, it seems, are happier than the Tea Partiers . . . Jay Livingston on his blog (circulation approximately 0 (rounding to the nearest million)), giving data from the 2009-2010 General Social Survey, which is the usual place people turn to for population data on happiness of Americans: The GSS does not offer “bitter” or “Tea Party” as choices, but extreme conservatives are nearly three times as likely as others to be “not too happy.” Livingston reports that the sample size for “Extremely Conservative” here is 80. Thus the standard error for that green bar on the right is approx sqrt(0.3*0.7/80)=0.05. So how could Brooks have made such a mistake? I can think of two possibilities: 1. Brooks has some other data source that directly addresses the happiness of supporters of the Tea Party movement. 2. Brooks looked a
3 0.21003529 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
Introduction: A lot of people are asking, How could the voters have swung so much in two years? And, why didn’t Obama give Americans a better sense of his long-term economic plan in 2009, back when he still had a political mandate? As an academic statistician and political scientist, I have no insight into the administration’s internal deliberations, but I have some thoughts based on my interpretation of political science research. The baseline As Doug Hibbs and others have pointed out, given the Democrats’ existing large majority in both houses of Congress and the continuing economic depression, we’d expect a big Republican swing in the vote. And this has been echoed for a long time in the polls–as early as September, 2009–over a year before the election–political scientists were forecasting that the Democrats were going to lose big in the midterms. (The polls have made it clear that most voters do not believe the Republican Party has the answer either. But, as I’ve emphasized before
4 0.19627221 286 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-20-Are the Democrats avoiding a national campaign?
Introduction: Bob Erikson, one of my colleagues at Columbia who knows much more about American politics than I do, sent in the following screed. I’ll post Bob’s note, followed by my comments. Bob writes: Monday morning many of us were startled by the following headline: White House strenuously denies NYT report that it is considering getting aggressive about winning the midterm elections. At first I [Bob] thought I was reading the Onion, but no, it was a sarcastic comment on the blog Talking Points Memo. But the gist of the headline appears to be correct. Indeed, the New York Times reported that White House advisers denied that a national ad campaign was being planned. ‘There’s been no discussion of such a thing at the White House’ What do we make of this? Is there some hidden downside to actually running a national campaign? Of course, money spent nationally is not spent on targeted local campaigns. But that is always the case. What explains the Democrats’ trepidation abou
5 0.18062806 521 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-17-“the Tea Party’s ire, directed at Democrats and Republicans alike”
Introduction: Mark Lilla recalls some recent Barack Obama quotes and then writes : If this is the way the president and his party think about human psychology, it’s little wonder they’ve taken such a beating. In the spirit of that old line, “That and $4.95 will get you a tall latte,” let me agree with Lilla and attribute the Democrats’ losses in 2010 to the following three factors: 1. A poor understanding of human psychology; 2. The Democrats holding unified control of the presidency and congress with a large majority in both houses (factors that are historically associated with big midterm losses); and 3. A terrible economy. I will let you, the readers, make your best guesses as to the relative importance of factors 1, 2, and 3 above. Don’t get me wrong: I think psychology is important, as is the history of ideas (the main subject of Lilla’s article), and I’d hope that Obama (and also his colleagues in both parties in congress) can become better acquainted with psychology, moti
6 0.15132982 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
7 0.1317689 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
9 0.11935588 551 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-Obama and Reagan, sitting in a tree, etc.
10 0.11917568 384 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-31-Two stories about the election that I don’t believe
11 0.11314745 814 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-The powerful consumer?
12 0.10956036 659 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-13-Jim Campbell argues that Larry Bartels’s “Unequal Democracy” findings are not robust
13 0.09952347 1569 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-08-30-30-40 Nation
14 0.094857164 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government
15 0.091361932 1385 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-20-Reconciling different claims about working-class voters
16 0.090654105 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
17 0.087518908 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
18 0.083872452 125 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-02-The moral of the story is, Don’t look yourself up on Google
19 0.083455451 1097 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-03-Libertarians in Space
20 0.083039992 100 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Unsurprisingly, people are more worried about the economy and jobs than about deficits
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.124), (1, -0.084), (2, 0.097), (3, 0.099), (4, -0.084), (5, -0.001), (6, -0.02), (7, -0.023), (8, -0.003), (9, 0.012), (10, -0.012), (11, 0.019), (12, -0.007), (13, -0.021), (14, 0.028), (15, -0.03), (16, -0.018), (17, 0.001), (18, -0.021), (19, 0.011), (20, 0.014), (21, 0.002), (22, 0.02), (23, 0.023), (24, -0.035), (25, 0.016), (26, -0.004), (27, 0.008), (28, 0.025), (29, 0.001), (30, -0.012), (31, 0.061), (32, 0.023), (33, 0.025), (34, -0.066), (35, -0.032), (36, -0.072), (37, 0.057), (38, 0.058), (39, -0.0), (40, 0.013), (41, 0.005), (42, 0.021), (43, 0.021), (44, 0.043), (45, 0.01), (46, 0.015), (47, -0.014), (48, 0.016), (49, -0.017)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96104211 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
Introduction: I enjoy the London Review of Books but I’m not a fan of their policy of hiring English people to write about U.S. politics. In theory it could work just fine but in practice there seem to be problems. Recall the notorious line from a couple years ago, “But viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite predictable.” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that th
2 0.92755508 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
Introduction: A lot of people are asking, How could the voters have swung so much in two years? And, why didn’t Obama give Americans a better sense of his long-term economic plan in 2009, back when he still had a political mandate? As an academic statistician and political scientist, I have no insight into the administration’s internal deliberations, but I have some thoughts based on my interpretation of political science research. The baseline As Doug Hibbs and others have pointed out, given the Democrats’ existing large majority in both houses of Congress and the continuing economic depression, we’d expect a big Republican swing in the vote. And this has been echoed for a long time in the polls–as early as September, 2009–over a year before the election–political scientists were forecasting that the Democrats were going to lose big in the midterms. (The polls have made it clear that most voters do not believe the Republican Party has the answer either. But, as I’ve emphasized before
3 0.90987045 286 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-20-Are the Democrats avoiding a national campaign?
Introduction: Bob Erikson, one of my colleagues at Columbia who knows much more about American politics than I do, sent in the following screed. I’ll post Bob’s note, followed by my comments. Bob writes: Monday morning many of us were startled by the following headline: White House strenuously denies NYT report that it is considering getting aggressive about winning the midterm elections. At first I [Bob] thought I was reading the Onion, but no, it was a sarcastic comment on the blog Talking Points Memo. But the gist of the headline appears to be correct. Indeed, the New York Times reported that White House advisers denied that a national ad campaign was being planned. ‘There’s been no discussion of such a thing at the White House’ What do we make of this? Is there some hidden downside to actually running a national campaign? Of course, money spent nationally is not spent on targeted local campaigns. But that is always the case. What explains the Democrats’ trepidation abou
4 0.90978771 551 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-Obama and Reagan, sitting in a tree, etc.
Introduction: I saw this picture staring at me from the newsstand the other day: Here’s the accompanying article, by Michael Scherer and Michael Duffy, which echoes some of the points I made a few months ago , following the midterm election: Why didn’t Obama do a better job of leveling with the American people? In his first months in office, why didn’t he anticipate the example of the incoming British government and warn people of economic blood, sweat, and tears? Why did his economic team release overly-optimistic graphs such as shown here? Wouldn’t it have been better to have set low expectations and then exceed them, rather than the reverse? I don’t know, but here’s my theory. When Obama came into office, I imagine one of his major goals was to avoid repeating the experiences of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter in their first two years. Clinton, you may recall, was elected with less then 50% of the vote, was never given the respect of a “mandate” by congressional Republicans, wasted
5 0.90622771 384 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-31-Two stories about the election that I don’t believe
Introduction: I don’t exactly disagree with the two arguments that I reproduce below, but I think they miss the point. Is “the battle over elitism” really central to this election? First, the easy one. Peter Baker in the New York Times, under the heading, “Elitism: The Charge That Obama Can’t Shake”: For all the discussion of health care and spending and jobs, at the core of the nation’s debate this fall has been the battle of elitism. . . . Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist, said Mr. Obama had not connected with popular discontent. “A lot of people have never been to Washington or New York, and they feel people there are so out of touch,” he said. . . . Rather than entertaining the possibility that the program they have pursued is genuinely and even legitimately unpopular, the White House and its allies have concluded that their political troubles amount to mainly a message and image problem. I think this is misleading for the usual reason that these message-oriented critiques are
7 0.87068766 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
8 0.81621718 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
9 0.81433582 521 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-17-“the Tea Party’s ire, directed at Democrats and Republicans alike”
10 0.79577035 1388 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-22-Americans think economy isn’t so bad in their city but is crappy nationally and globally
11 0.78249645 1936 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-13-Economic policy does not occur in a political vacuum
12 0.77594686 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
13 0.76299298 1569 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-08-30-30-40 Nation
14 0.74239451 828 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-28-Thoughts on Groseclose book on media bias
15 0.73906434 312 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-“Regression to the mean” is fine. But what’s the “mean”?
17 0.72855353 130 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-07-A False Consensus about Public Opinion on Torture
18 0.71949875 585 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-22-“How has your thinking changed over the past three years?”
19 0.71946031 100 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Unsurprisingly, people are more worried about the economy and jobs than about deficits
20 0.71457171 649 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-05-Internal and external forecasting
topicId topicWeight
[(4, 0.022), (9, 0.025), (13, 0.014), (15, 0.015), (16, 0.091), (21, 0.026), (22, 0.015), (24, 0.111), (28, 0.014), (42, 0.039), (43, 0.013), (45, 0.026), (52, 0.163), (60, 0.017), (66, 0.022), (72, 0.01), (87, 0.016), (99, 0.265)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
Introduction: Mark Palko points me to a news article by Zack Beauchamp on Jason Richwine, the recent Ph.D. graduate from Harvard’s policy school who left the conservative Heritage Foundation after it came out that his Ph.D. thesis was said to be all about the low IQ’s of Hispanic immigrants. Heritage and others apparently thought this association could discredit their anti-immigration-reform position. Richwine’s mentor Charles Murray was unhappy about the whole episode. Beauchamp’s article is worth reading in that it provides some interesting background, in particular by getting into the details of the Ph.D. review process. In a sense, Beauchamp is too harsh. Flawed Ph.D. theses get published all the time. I’d say that most Ph.D. theses I’ve seen are flawed: usually the plan is to get the papers into shape later, when submitting them to journals. If a student doesn’t go into academia, the thesis typically just sits there and is rarely followed up on. I don’t know the statistics o
2 0.95444691 223 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-21-Statoverflow
Introduction: Skirant Vadali writes: I am writing to seek your help in building a community driven Q&A; website tentatively called called ‘Statistics Analysis’. I am neither a founder of this website nor do I have any financial stake in its success. By way of background to this website, please see Stackoverflow (http://stackoverflow.com/) and Mathoverflow (http://mathoverflow.net/). Stackoverflow is a Q&A; website targeted at software developers and is designed to help them ask questions and get answers from other developers. Mathoverflow is a Q&A; website targeted at research mathematicians and is designed to help them ask and answer questions from other mathematicians across the world. The success of both these sites in helping their respective communities is a strong indicator that sites designed along these lines are very useful. The company that runs Stackoverflow (who also host Mathoverflow.net) has recently decided to develop other community driven websites for various other topic are
3 0.94931936 1686 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-21-Finite-population Anova calculations for models with interactions
Introduction: Jim Thomson writes: I wonder if you could provide some clarification on the correct way to calculate the finite-population standard deviations for interaction terms in your Bayesian approach to ANOVA (as explained in your 2005 paper, and Gelman and Hill 2007). I understand that it is the SD of the constrained batch coefficients that is of interest, but in most WinBUGS examples I have seen, the SDs are all calculated directly as sd.fin<-sd(beta.main[]) for main effects and sd(beta.int[,]) for interaction effects, where beta.main and beta.int are the unconstrained coefficients, e.g. beta.int[i,j]~dnorm(0,tau). For main effects, I can see that it makes no difference, since the constrained value is calculated by subtracting the mean, and sd(B[]) = sd(B[]-mean(B[])). But the conventional sum-to-zero constraint for interaction terms in linear models is more complicated than subtracting the mean (there are only (n1-1)*(n2-1) free coefficients for an interaction b/w factors with n1 a
same-blog 4 0.94873732 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
Introduction: I enjoy the London Review of Books but I’m not a fan of their policy of hiring English people to write about U.S. politics. In theory it could work just fine but in practice there seem to be problems. Recall the notorious line from a couple years ago, “But viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite predictable.” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that th
5 0.94211906 1246 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-04-Data visualization panel at the New York Public Library this evening!
Introduction: I’ll be participating in a panel (along with Kaiser Fung, Mark Hansen, Tahir Hemphill, and Manuel Lima), “What Makes Good Data Visualization?”, at the 42nd St. library this evening. The event is organized by Isabel Walcott Draves and is part of the Leaders in Software and Art series. This article with Antony Unwin should be relevant (although I won’t be “presenting”; I’ll be part of a panel and we’ll be having a wide-ranging conversation).
6 0.93990606 1301 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-05-Related to z-statistics
7 0.93356365 889 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-04-The acupuncture paradox
8 0.9214254 104 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-22-Seeking balance
9 0.91724205 485 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-25-Unlogging
10 0.91606373 1531 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-12-Elderpedia
11 0.90517926 948 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-10-Combining data from many sources
12 0.90386629 1369 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-06-Your conclusion is only as good as your data
14 0.89889824 786 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-04-Questions about quantum computing
15 0.87580919 82 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-12-UnConMax – uncertainty consideration maxims 7 +-- 2
16 0.87473595 1588 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-23-No one knows what it’s like to be the bad man
17 0.87371683 2265 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-24-On deck this week
18 0.87122524 653 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-08-Multilevel regression with shrinkage for “fixed” effects
19 0.86706293 2041 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-27-Setting up Jitts online