andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-2087 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: The above graph shows the estimated support, by state, for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, a gay rights bill that the Senate will be voting on this Monday. The estimates were constructed by Kate Krimmel, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips using multilevel regression and poststratification. Check out that graph again. The scale goes from 20% to 80%, but every state is in the yellow-to-red range. Support for a law making it illegal to discriminate against gays has majority support in every state. And in most states the support is very strong. And here’s the research paper by Krimmel, Lax, and Phillips, which begins: Public majorities have supported several gay rights policies for some time, yet Congress has responded slowly if at all. We address this puzzle through dyadic analysis of the opinion- vote relationship on 23 roll-call votes between 1993 and 2010, matching members of Congress to policy-specific opinion in their state or district. We also extend the MRP opinion e
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 The above graph shows the estimated support, by state, for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, a gay rights bill that the Senate will be voting on this Monday. [sent-1, score-0.718]
2 Support for a law making it illegal to discriminate against gays has majority support in every state. [sent-5, score-0.314]
3 And here’s the research paper by Krimmel, Lax, and Phillips, which begins: Public majorities have supported several gay rights policies for some time, yet Congress has responded slowly if at all. [sent-7, score-0.618]
4 We address this puzzle through dyadic analysis of the opinion- vote relationship on 23 roll-call votes between 1993 and 2010, matching members of Congress to policy-specific opinion in their state or district. [sent-8, score-0.537]
5 Though opinion strongly influences white male Democrats, black lawmakers and white female Democratic lawmakers generally support gay rights and Republicans consistently oppose them, regardless of constituent preferences. [sent-11, score-1.389]
6 For example, here’s the story of the 2007 House vote on employment non-discrimination: The pattern is clear: as far as can be estimated, majorities supported the nondiscrimination bill in nearly every district, but only half the congressmembers voted for it. [sent-14, score-0.724]
7 was last brought to a vote in the Senate in 1996, failing by only a single vote (49-50). [sent-18, score-0.31]
8 This time around, success will require the proponents of LGBT rights to secure the votes of at least 60 senators, enough to overcome a likely Republican filibuster. [sent-22, score-0.527]
9 If senators listened to their constituents, the bill would pass overwhelmingly. [sent-27, score-0.292]
10 Our opinion estimates suggest that the top target should be Sen. [sent-32, score-0.271]
11 Estimated support for ENDA in her state is a whopping 77% and strong opposition only about 5%. [sent-34, score-0.612]
12 Of all Republican senators who are not already committed to supporting the bill, her constituents would be most supportive of a “yes” vote. [sent-35, score-0.301]
13 Other top targets (based entirely on constituent opinion) ought to be senators Toomey of Pennsylvania, Johnson of Wisconsin, and McCain and Flake of Arizona. [sent-36, score-0.312]
14 ” The suggestion is that voters who oppose gay rights feel more strongly about the issue than voters who support gay rights. [sent-45, score-1.472]
15 It is possible, but I have no particular reason to believe it—if anything, given the nature of the issue, I’d be inclined to believe the opposite, that supporters of gay rights feel more strongly about the issue than do opponents. [sent-46, score-0.601]
16 And you’d need a huge huge difference in intensity to overcome the huge disparities in support that we see from the polls. [sent-47, score-0.532]
17 Finally, consider the estimates reported by Lax and Phillips: Estimated support for ENDA in [New Hampshire] is a whopping 77% and strong opposition only about 5%. [sent-48, score-0.594]
18 Mark, Shaun, and Ashok point out that Republican primary voters are far more conservative than the average person. [sent-51, score-0.277]
19 Sure, that could be part of it, on the other hand Democratic primary voters are far more liberal, yet Lax and Phillips have consistently found lack of congruence in certain issues comparing state-level attitudes vs. [sent-52, score-0.352]
20 I guess what I’m saying here is that, yes, primary electorates (and, more generally, political activists) are definitely a key part of the story, but it’s more complicated than a simple counting of the preferences of a majority of a majority. [sent-54, score-0.249]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('enda', 0.385), ('rights', 0.237), ('support', 0.22), ('phillips', 0.209), ('gay', 0.209), ('lax', 0.202), ('senators', 0.184), ('voters', 0.181), ('nondiscrimination', 0.176), ('vote', 0.155), ('opinion', 0.142), ('constituent', 0.128), ('krimmel', 0.128), ('constituents', 0.117), ('opposition', 0.115), ('employment', 0.113), ('lawmakers', 0.11), ('whopping', 0.11), ('ashok', 0.11), ('bill', 0.108), ('majorities', 0.106), ('estimated', 0.103), ('proponents', 0.102), ('votes', 0.101), ('primary', 0.096), ('majority', 0.094), ('strong', 0.089), ('overcome', 0.087), ('republican', 0.085), ('senate', 0.084), ('oppose', 0.08), ('state', 0.078), ('strongly', 0.078), ('issue', 0.077), ('consistently', 0.075), ('huge', 0.075), ('target', 0.069), ('congress', 0.067), ('supported', 0.066), ('democratic', 0.064), ('act', 0.061), ('graph', 0.061), ('address', 0.061), ('estimates', 0.06), ('republicans', 0.06), ('democrats', 0.059), ('electorates', 0.059), ('unpack', 0.059), ('shaun', 0.059), ('lgbt', 0.059)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 2087 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-03-The Employment Nondiscrimination Act is overwhelmingly popular in nearly every one of the 50 states
Introduction: The above graph shows the estimated support, by state, for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, a gay rights bill that the Senate will be voting on this Monday. The estimates were constructed by Kate Krimmel, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips using multilevel regression and poststratification. Check out that graph again. The scale goes from 20% to 80%, but every state is in the yellow-to-red range. Support for a law making it illegal to discriminate against gays has majority support in every state. And in most states the support is very strong. And here’s the research paper by Krimmel, Lax, and Phillips, which begins: Public majorities have supported several gay rights policies for some time, yet Congress has responded slowly if at all. We address this puzzle through dyadic analysis of the opinion- vote relationship on 23 roll-call votes between 1993 and 2010, matching members of Congress to policy-specific opinion in their state or district. We also extend the MRP opinion e
2 0.21440065 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
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
Introduction: John Kastellec, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips write : Do senators respond to the preferences of their states’ median voters or only to the preferences of their co-partisans? We [Kastellec et al.] study responsiveness using roll call votes on ten recent Supreme Court nominations. We develop a method for estimating state-level public opinion broken down by partisanship. We find that senators respond more powerfully to their partisan base when casting such roll call votes. Indeed, when their state median voter and party median voter disagree, senators strongly favor the latter. [emphasis added] This has significant implications for the study of legislative responsiveness, the role of public opinion in shaping the personnel of the nations highest court, and the degree to which we should expect the Supreme Court to be counter-majoritarian. Our method can be applied elsewhere to estimate opinion by state and partisan group, or by many other typologies, so as to study other important qu
5 0.17691226 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting
Introduction: Last week, as I walked into Andrew’s office for a meeting, he was formulating some misgivings about applying an ideal-point model to budgetary bills in the U.S. Senate. Andrew didn’t like that the model of a senator’s position was an indifference point rather than at their optimal point, and that the effect of moving away from a position was automatically modeled as increasing in one direction and decreasing in the other. Executive Summary The monotonicity of inverse logit entails that the expected vote for a bill among any fixed collection of senators’ ideal points is monotonically increasing (or decreasing) with the bill’s position, with direction determined by the outcome coding. The Ideal-Point Model The ideal-point model’s easy to write down, but hard to reason about because of all the polarity shifting going on. To recapitulate from Gelman and Hill’s Regression book (p. 317), using the U.S. Senate instead of the Supreme Court, and ignoring the dis
6 0.17603718 162 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-25-Darn that Lindsey Graham! (or, “Mr. P Predicts the Kagan vote”)
7 0.16085561 688 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-30-Why it’s so relaxing to think about social issues
8 0.15571757 381 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-30-Sorry, Senator DeMint: Most Americans Don’t Want to Ban Gays from the Classroom
9 0.14767227 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
10 0.14453557 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government
11 0.14064872 50 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-25-Looking for Sister Right
12 0.13876043 389 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-Why it can be rational to vote
13 0.13876043 1565 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Why it can be rational to vote
14 0.13745132 1227 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-23-Voting patterns of America’s whites, from the masses to the elites
16 0.13419041 2061 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-14-More on Mister P and how it does what it does
17 0.1251667 1385 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-20-Reconciling different claims about working-class voters
19 0.12184061 279 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Electability and perception of electability
20 0.12097102 2074 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-Can’t Stop Won’t Stop Mister P Beatdown
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.14), (1, -0.072), (2, 0.206), (3, 0.086), (4, -0.063), (5, 0.001), (6, -0.087), (7, -0.02), (8, -0.056), (9, -0.028), (10, 0.073), (11, 0.01), (12, 0.013), (13, -0.005), (14, 0.054), (15, -0.011), (16, 0.001), (17, 0.007), (18, -0.001), (19, -0.017), (20, -0.019), (21, -0.034), (22, -0.006), (23, -0.078), (24, 0.008), (25, -0.015), (26, -0.007), (27, 0.02), (28, -0.023), (29, -0.013), (30, 0.07), (31, -0.06), (32, 0.051), (33, -0.016), (34, 0.009), (35, -0.003), (36, 0.022), (37, -0.015), (38, 0.032), (39, 0.004), (40, 0.03), (41, 0.008), (42, -0.07), (43, -0.02), (44, 0.031), (45, -0.006), (46, 0.004), (47, 0.023), (48, 0.011), (49, 0.013)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97883499 2087 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-03-The Employment Nondiscrimination Act is overwhelmingly popular in nearly every one of the 50 states
Introduction: The above graph shows the estimated support, by state, for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, a gay rights bill that the Senate will be voting on this Monday. The estimates were constructed by Kate Krimmel, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips using multilevel regression and poststratification. Check out that graph again. The scale goes from 20% to 80%, but every state is in the yellow-to-red range. Support for a law making it illegal to discriminate against gays has majority support in every state. And in most states the support is very strong. And here’s the research paper by Krimmel, Lax, and Phillips, which begins: Public majorities have supported several gay rights policies for some time, yet Congress has responded slowly if at all. We address this puzzle through dyadic analysis of the opinion- vote relationship on 23 roll-call votes between 1993 and 2010, matching members of Congress to policy-specific opinion in their state or district. We also extend the MRP opinion e
2 0.84193373 162 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-25-Darn that Lindsey Graham! (or, “Mr. P Predicts the Kagan vote”)
Introduction: On the basis of two papers and because it is completely obvious, we (meaning me , Justin, and John ) predict that Elena Kagan will get confirmed to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. But we also want to see how close we can come to predicting the votes for and against. We actually have two sets of predictions, both using the MRP technique discussed previously on this blog. The first is based on our recent paper in the Journal of Politics showing that support for the nominee in a senator’s home state plays a striking role in whether she or he votes to confirm the nominee. The second is based on a new working paper extending “basic” MRP to show that senators respond far more to their co-partisans than the median voter in their home states. Usually, our vote “predictions” do not differ much, but there is a group of senators who are predicted to vote yes for Kagan with a probability around 50% and the two sets of predictions thus differ for Kagan more than usual.
Introduction: Conservative data cruncher Charles Murray asks , “Why aren’t Asians Republicans?”: Asians are only half as likely to identify themselves as “conservative” or “very conservative” as whites, and less than half as likely to identify themselves as Republicans. . . . 70% of Asians voted for Barack Obama in the last presidential election. Something’s wrong with this picture. . . . Everyday observation of Asians around the world reveal them to be conspicuously entrepreneurial, industrious, family-oriented, and self-reliant. If you’re looking for a natural Republican constituency, Asians should define “natural.” . . . Asian immigrants overwhelmingly succeeded, another experience that tends to produce conservative immigrants. Beyond that, Asian minorities everywhere in the world, including America, tend to be underrepresented in politics—they’re more interested in getting ahead commercially or in non-political professions than in running for office or organizing advocacy groups. La
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
Introduction: I dodged a bullet the other day, blogorifically speaking. This is a (moderately) long story but there’s a payoff at the end for those of you who are interested in forecasting or understanding voting and public opinion at the state level. Act 1 It started when Jeff Lax made this comment on his recent blog entry: Nebraska Is All That Counts for a Party-Bucking Nelson Dem Senator On Blowback From His Opposition To Kagan: ‘Are They From Nebraska? Then I Don’t Care’ Fine, but 62% of Nebraskans with an opinion favor confirmation… 91% of Democrats, 39% of Republicans, and 61% of Independents. So I guess he only cares about Republican Nebraskans… I conferred with Jeff and then wrote the following entry for fivethirtyeight.com. There was a backlog of posts at 538 at the time, so I set it on delay to appear the following morning. Here’s my post (which I ended up deleting before it ever appeared): Party-Bucking Nelson May Be Nebraska-Bucking as Well Under the head
6 0.79016864 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
7 0.78948325 377 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-28-The incoming moderate Republican congressmembers
8 0.78473318 1385 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-20-Reconciling different claims about working-class voters
9 0.77684039 1227 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-23-Voting patterns of America’s whites, from the masses to the elites
11 0.75576872 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government
12 0.74461728 1504 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-20-Could someone please lock this guy and Niall Ferguson in a room together?
14 0.71813947 44 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-20-Boris was right
15 0.71115136 1635 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-22-More Pinker Pinker Pinker
16 0.68959796 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting
17 0.68765116 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
20 0.67461461 1229 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-25-Same old story
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.022), (2, 0.034), (16, 0.039), (19, 0.03), (21, 0.066), (24, 0.099), (31, 0.011), (42, 0.015), (44, 0.014), (46, 0.01), (55, 0.073), (72, 0.029), (87, 0.182), (90, 0.032), (99, 0.206)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.92606425 2087 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-03-The Employment Nondiscrimination Act is overwhelmingly popular in nearly every one of the 50 states
Introduction: The above graph shows the estimated support, by state, for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, a gay rights bill that the Senate will be voting on this Monday. The estimates were constructed by Kate Krimmel, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips using multilevel regression and poststratification. Check out that graph again. The scale goes from 20% to 80%, but every state is in the yellow-to-red range. Support for a law making it illegal to discriminate against gays has majority support in every state. And in most states the support is very strong. And here’s the research paper by Krimmel, Lax, and Phillips, which begins: Public majorities have supported several gay rights policies for some time, yet Congress has responded slowly if at all. We address this puzzle through dyadic analysis of the opinion- vote relationship on 23 roll-call votes between 1993 and 2010, matching members of Congress to policy-specific opinion in their state or district. We also extend the MRP opinion e
Introduction: John Kastellec, Jeff Lax, and Justin Phillips write : Do senators respond to the preferences of their states’ median voters or only to the preferences of their co-partisans? We [Kastellec et al.] study responsiveness using roll call votes on ten recent Supreme Court nominations. We develop a method for estimating state-level public opinion broken down by partisanship. We find that senators respond more powerfully to their partisan base when casting such roll call votes. Indeed, when their state median voter and party median voter disagree, senators strongly favor the latter. [emphasis added] This has significant implications for the study of legislative responsiveness, the role of public opinion in shaping the personnel of the nations highest court, and the degree to which we should expect the Supreme Court to be counter-majoritarian. Our method can be applied elsewhere to estimate opinion by state and partisan group, or by many other typologies, so as to study other important qu
3 0.90585411 127 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-04-Inequality and health
Introduction: Several people asked me for my thoughts on Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s book, “The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.” I’ve outsourced my thinking on the topic to Lane Kenworthy .
4 0.90304065 225 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-23-Getting into hot water over hot graphics
Introduction: I like what Antony Unwin has to say here (start on page 5).
5 0.85726714 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting
Introduction: Last week, as I walked into Andrew’s office for a meeting, he was formulating some misgivings about applying an ideal-point model to budgetary bills in the U.S. Senate. Andrew didn’t like that the model of a senator’s position was an indifference point rather than at their optimal point, and that the effect of moving away from a position was automatically modeled as increasing in one direction and decreasing in the other. Executive Summary The monotonicity of inverse logit entails that the expected vote for a bill among any fixed collection of senators’ ideal points is monotonically increasing (or decreasing) with the bill’s position, with direction determined by the outcome coding. The Ideal-Point Model The ideal-point model’s easy to write down, but hard to reason about because of all the polarity shifting going on. To recapitulate from Gelman and Hill’s Regression book (p. 317), using the U.S. Senate instead of the Supreme Court, and ignoring the dis
6 0.83744949 1773 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-21-2.15
7 0.82406569 1868 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-23-Validation of Software for Bayesian Models Using Posterior Quantiles
8 0.82256746 918 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-21-Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models
9 0.82096905 233 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-25-Lauryn Hill update
10 0.82046402 720 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-20-Baby name wizards
13 0.79897392 1788 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-04-When is there “hidden structure in data” to be discovered?
14 0.79887056 2351 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-28-Bayesian nonparametric weighted sampling inference
15 0.7984525 1574 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-12-How to Lie With Statistics example number 12,498,122
16 0.79516149 381 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-30-Sorry, Senator DeMint: Most Americans Don’t Want to Ban Gays from the Classroom
17 0.78923756 583 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-21-An interesting assignment for statistical graphics
18 0.78680998 783 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-30-Don’t stop being a statistician once the analysis is done
19 0.78226781 252 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-02-R needs a good function to make line plots
20 0.77893484 183 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-04-Bayesian models for simultaneous equation systems?