andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1407 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Ring Lardner, Jr.: [In 1936] I was already settled in Southern California, and it may have been that first exercise of the franchise that triggered the FBI surveillance of me that would last for decades. I had assumed, of course, that I was enjoying the vaunted American privilege of the secret ballot. On a wall outside my polling place on Wilshire Boulevard, however, was a compilation of the district’s registered voters: Democrats, a long list of names; Republicans, a somewhat lesser number; and “Declines to State,” one, “Ring W. Lardner, Jr.” The day after the election, alongside those lists were published the results: Roosevelt, so many; Landon, so many; Browder, one.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 : [In 1936] I was already settled in Southern California, and it may have been that first exercise of the franchise that triggered the FBI surveillance of me that would last for decades. [sent-2, score-1.096]
2 I had assumed, of course, that I was enjoying the vaunted American privilege of the secret ballot. [sent-3, score-0.45]
3 On a wall outside my polling place on Wilshire Boulevard, however, was a compilation of the district’s registered voters: Democrats, a long list of names; Republicans, a somewhat lesser number; and “Declines to State,” one, “Ring W. [sent-4, score-1.153]
4 ” The day after the election, alongside those lists were published the results: Roosevelt, so many; Landon, so many; Browder, one. [sent-6, score-0.417]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('lardner', 0.409), ('ring', 0.346), ('landon', 0.205), ('surveillance', 0.193), ('triggered', 0.193), ('franchise', 0.185), ('compilation', 0.178), ('fbi', 0.178), ('privilege', 0.165), ('roosevelt', 0.165), ('registered', 0.165), ('declines', 0.161), ('enjoying', 0.161), ('settled', 0.161), ('southern', 0.158), ('alongside', 0.158), ('lesser', 0.146), ('district', 0.134), ('lists', 0.133), ('polling', 0.133), ('california', 0.128), ('secret', 0.124), ('exercise', 0.123), ('wall', 0.121), ('assumed', 0.117), ('names', 0.106), ('voters', 0.105), ('republicans', 0.104), ('democrats', 0.104), ('somewhat', 0.097), ('outside', 0.096), ('election', 0.092), ('list', 0.081), ('many', 0.075), ('place', 0.074), ('american', 0.074), ('however', 0.069), ('state', 0.068), ('day', 0.067), ('already', 0.065), ('long', 0.062), ('number', 0.06), ('published', 0.059), ('last', 0.059), ('course', 0.058), ('results', 0.057), ('may', 0.054), ('one', 0.041), ('first', 0.04), ('would', 0.023)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1407 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-06-Statistical inference and the secret ballot
Introduction: Ring Lardner, Jr.: [In 1936] I was already settled in Southern California, and it may have been that first exercise of the franchise that triggered the FBI surveillance of me that would last for decades. I had assumed, of course, that I was enjoying the vaunted American privilege of the secret ballot. On a wall outside my polling place on Wilshire Boulevard, however, was a compilation of the district’s registered voters: Democrats, a long list of names; Republicans, a somewhat lesser number; and “Declines to State,” one, “Ring W. Lardner, Jr.” The day after the election, alongside those lists were published the results: Roosevelt, so many; Landon, so many; Browder, one.
2 0.14796838 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
Introduction: An interview with me from 2012 : You’re a statistician and wrote a book, Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State , looking at why Americans vote the way they do. In an election year I think it would be a good time to revisit that question, not just for people in the US, but anyone around the world who wants to understand the realities – rather than the stereotypes – of how Americans vote. I regret the title I gave my book. I was too greedy. I wanted it to be an airport bestseller because I figured there were millions of people who are interested in politics and some subset of them are always looking at the statistics. It’s got a very grabby title and as a result people underestimated the content. They thought it was a popularisation of my work, or, at best, an expansion of an article we’d written. But it had tons of original material. If I’d given it a more serious, political science-y title, then all sorts of people would have wanted to read it, because they would
3 0.13284248 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
Introduction: Matthew Yglesias noticed something interesting in a political story today that reminds me of one of our arguments in Red State, Blue State. I have the feeling that most readers of this blog are less fascinated than I am by U.S. politics, so I’ll put the rest below the fold. Yglesias quotes a Washington Post article on Blanche Lincoln returning to the U.S. Senate after surviving a primary challenge from a candidate supported by organized labor: Lincoln was embraced by her colleagues . . . Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) held up two fists and said of her primary campaign: “Fighting Wall Street with one hand, unions with the other.” Yglesias points out a fundamental asymmetry here: Schumer, who’s become something of a national leader among Senate Democrats, celebrates this ideal [of governing in a manner that's equidistant from rival interest groups], but there’s not a single member of the Republican Party–much less a leader–who’d say anything remotely similar. Schumer is basi
5 0.10154578 1613 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-09-Hey—here’s a photo of me making fun of a silly infographic (from last year)
Introduction: Here’s the story of the graph, which was “was shown as part of a training for FBI agents,” and here’s the more recent long form of my presentation.
6 0.093528137 2148 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-25-Spam!
7 0.090685241 2022 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-13-You heard it here first: Intense exercise can suppress appetite
8 0.082738273 2092 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-07-Data visualizations gone beautifully wrong
9 0.079938002 389 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-Why it can be rational to vote
10 0.079938002 1565 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Why it can be rational to vote
11 0.072382867 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
12 0.072199546 2211 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-14-The popularity of certain baby names is falling off the clifffffffffffff
13 0.070758067 2303 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-23-Thinking of doing a list experiment? Here’s a list of reasons why you should think again
14 0.069852941 237 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-27-Bafumi-Erikson-Wlezien predict a 50-seat loss for Democrats in November
15 0.064454235 2212 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-15-Mary, Mary, why ya buggin
16 0.063497737 1364 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-04-Massive confusion about a study that purports to show that exercise may increase heart risk
17 0.060403582 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government
18 0.058841284 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
19 0.058779329 406 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-10-Translating into Votes: The Electoral Impact of Spanish-Language Ballots
20 0.057796448 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.066), (1, -0.046), (2, 0.066), (3, 0.047), (4, -0.029), (5, 0.008), (6, -0.029), (7, -0.032), (8, -0.024), (9, -0.027), (10, 0.042), (11, 0.018), (12, 0.003), (13, -0.017), (14, 0.023), (15, 0.013), (16, 0.006), (17, 0.007), (18, -0.015), (19, 0.013), (20, -0.017), (21, 0.043), (22, -0.008), (23, 0.011), (24, -0.022), (25, 0.011), (26, -0.035), (27, 0.007), (28, 0.021), (29, 0.021), (30, -0.019), (31, -0.003), (32, -0.016), (33, 0.025), (34, -0.007), (35, -0.007), (36, -0.021), (37, 0.026), (38, -0.008), (39, -0.006), (40, -0.028), (41, 0.0), (42, 0.032), (43, 0.014), (44, 0.036), (45, 0.015), (46, 0.009), (47, -0.009), (48, -0.009), (49, -0.006)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9588877 1407 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-06-Statistical inference and the secret ballot
Introduction: Ring Lardner, Jr.: [In 1936] I was already settled in Southern California, and it may have been that first exercise of the franchise that triggered the FBI surveillance of me that would last for decades. I had assumed, of course, that I was enjoying the vaunted American privilege of the secret ballot. On a wall outside my polling place on Wilshire Boulevard, however, was a compilation of the district’s registered voters: Democrats, a long list of names; Republicans, a somewhat lesser number; and “Declines to State,” one, “Ring W. Lardner, Jr.” The day after the election, alongside those lists were published the results: Roosevelt, so many; Landon, so many; Browder, one.
2 0.80687231 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
3 0.77987438 237 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-27-Bafumi-Erikson-Wlezien predict a 50-seat loss for Democrats in November
Introduction: They write : How many House seats will the Republicans gain in 2010? . . . Our methodology replicates that for our ultimately successful forecast of the 2006 midterm. Two weeks before Election Day in 2006, we posted a prediction that the Democrats would gain 32 seats and recapture the House majority. The Democrats gained 30 seats in 2006. Our current forecast for 2010 shows that the Republicans are likely to regain the House majority. . . . the most likely scenario is a Republican majority in the neighborhood of 229 seats versus 206 for the Democrats for a 50-seat loss for the Democrats . How do they do it? First, they predict the national two-party vote using the generic polls (asking voters which party they plan to vote for in the November congressional elections). Then they apply the national vote swing on a district-by-district level to predict the outcome in each district. They account for uncertainty in their predictions (I assume by using a model similar to what Gar
4 0.73036093 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
Introduction: A few years ago Larry Bartels presented this graph, a version of which latter appeared in his book Unequal Democracy: Larry looked at the data in a number of ways, and the evidence seemed convincing that, at least in the short term, the Democrats were better than Republicans for the economy. This is consistent with Democrats’ general policies of lowering unemployment, as compared to Republicans lowering inflation, and, by comparing first-term to second-term presidents, he found that the result couldn’t simply be explained as a rebound or alternation pattern. The question then arose, why have the Republicans won so many elections? Why aren’t the Democrats consistently dominating? Non-economic issues are part of the story, of course, but lots of evidence shows the economy to be a key concern for voters, so it’s still hard to see how, with a pattern such as shown above, the Republicans could keep winning. Larry had some explanations, largely having to do with timing: under De
6 0.71964639 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
7 0.71800035 1569 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-08-30-30-40 Nation
9 0.70850766 377 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-28-The incoming moderate Republican congressmembers
10 0.69952464 1574 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-12-How to Lie With Statistics example number 12,498,122
11 0.69382089 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
12 0.69263023 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
13 0.69085318 210 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-16-What I learned from those tough 538 commenters
14 0.68403882 292 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-23-Doug Hibbs on the fundamentals in 2010
15 0.67577404 312 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-“Regression to the mean” is fine. But what’s the “mean”?
16 0.67038816 384 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-31-Two stories about the election that I don’t believe
17 0.66462052 1556 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-01-Recently in the sister blogs: special pre-election edition!
19 0.65880597 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
20 0.65830129 521 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-17-“the Tea Party’s ire, directed at Democrats and Republicans alike”
topicId topicWeight
[(5, 0.033), (9, 0.051), (23, 0.018), (24, 0.066), (45, 0.437), (53, 0.051), (63, 0.025), (93, 0.022), (99, 0.17)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9272207 1407 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-06-Statistical inference and the secret ballot
Introduction: Ring Lardner, Jr.: [In 1936] I was already settled in Southern California, and it may have been that first exercise of the franchise that triggered the FBI surveillance of me that would last for decades. I had assumed, of course, that I was enjoying the vaunted American privilege of the secret ballot. On a wall outside my polling place on Wilshire Boulevard, however, was a compilation of the district’s registered voters: Democrats, a long list of names; Republicans, a somewhat lesser number; and “Declines to State,” one, “Ring W. Lardner, Jr.” The day after the election, alongside those lists were published the results: Roosevelt, so many; Landon, so many; Browder, one.
2 0.90315109 1873 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-28-Escalatingly uncomfortable
Introduction: Aggressive, fizzing nonconformity .
3 0.80865544 999 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-09-I was at a meeting a couple months ago . . .
Introduction: . . . and I decided to amuse myself by writing down all the management-speak words I heard: “grappling” “early prototypes” “technology platform” “building block” “machine learning” “your team” “workspace” “tagging” “data exhaust” “monitoring a particular population” “collective intelligence” “communities of practice” “hackathon” “human resources . . . technologies” Any one or two or three of these phrases might be fine, but put them all together and what you have is a festival of jargon. A hackathon, indeed.
4 0.75972509 543 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-28-NYT shills for personal DNA tests
Introduction: Kaiser nails it . The offending article , by John Tierney, somehow ended up in the Science section rather than the Opinion section. As an opinion piece (or, for that matter, a blog), Tierney’s article would be nothing special. But I agree with Kaiser that it doesn’t work as a newspaper article. As Kaiser notes, this story involves a bunch of statistical and empirical claims that are not well resolved by P.R. and rhetoric.
5 0.67025357 206 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-13-Indiemapper makes thematic mapping easy
Introduction: Arthur Breitman writes: I had to forward this to you when I read about it… My reply: Interesting; thanks. Things like this make me feel so computer-incompetent! The younger generation is passing me by…
6 0.66545093 1325 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-17-More on the difficulty of “preaching what you practice”
7 0.65145749 310 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-The winner’s curse
8 0.63789302 1031 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-27-Richard Stallman and John McCarthy
9 0.63541251 791 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Censoring on one end, “outliers” on the other, what can we do with the middle?
10 0.62455624 69 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-04-A Wikipedia whitewash
11 0.61818886 1504 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-20-Could someone please lock this guy and Niall Ferguson in a room together?
12 0.61715484 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
13 0.61631161 192 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-08-Turning pages into data
14 0.60432434 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
15 0.60376072 573 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-14-Hipmunk < Expedia, again
16 0.59654886 1015 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-17-Good examples of lurking variables?
17 0.59110951 2189 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-28-History is too important to be left to the history professors
18 0.59064066 735 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-28-New app for learning intro statistics
19 0.57699072 1012 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-16-Blog bribes!
20 0.5755949 1089 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-28-Path sampling for models of varying dimension