7305
Comments (574)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
4
CosmoDiGirolamo 4 points ago +9 / -5

This guy did a thread on why the NYT "Edison" scraped dataset is no good. If you are interested, please read it. We may be barking up the wrong tree here.

https://twitter.com/hyonschu/status/1325627295181103104

If you are interested in checking out what is a bigger / better scraped dataset, check this one out from Decision Desk HQ.

https://gofile.io/d/eUNz6r

8
roytheboy 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yes! Glad I'm not going crazy. The tl;dr from his tweets:

This dataset doesn't even have the number of votes actually cast. It's

  • total votes cast
  • percentage dem
  • percentage rep

lots of room for error here. Once we get into the millions, we are going to miss >thousands of votes and attribute them incorrectly due to rounding. So we have >to be super careful about what conclusions we can reach using this data.

-2
CosmoDiGirolamo -2 points ago +4 / -6

If you are interested in checking out what is a bigger / better scraped dataset, check this one out from Decision Desk HQ.

https://gofile.io/d/eUNz6r

4
Magafactured 4 points ago +4 / -0

β€œHello, fellow millipedes! Trust my true and honest advising!”

0
CosmoDiGirolamo 0 points ago +1 / -1

You can find my twitter if you want, @CosmoDiGirolamo. I helped share this original time series analysis. If it's incorrect, I want to help share the correction. I don't want pedes wasting time in a flawed dataset.

5
Thinkgod 5 points ago +5 / -0

Why are u spamming this bot

0
CosmoDiGirolamo 0 points ago +1 / -1

You can find my twitter if you want, @CosmoDiGirolamo. I helped share this original time series analysis. If it's incorrect, I want to help share the correction. I don't want pedes wasting time in a flawed dataset.