by Mike ‘Mish’ Shedlock
From the beginning of this election season, I have been highly skeptical of the odds Nate Silver has placed on various candidates winning various primaries.
Silver’s odds provide, his reasons for them, and the secret sauce behind them are now in question in multiple places.
I sent an Op-Ed on this idea to the New York Times in January. As expected, they would not touch it. Since then, evidence against Silver has mounted in what’s clearly a “late to party” phenomenon.
Last weekend I had a phone discussion with Salil Mehta, a top-selling mathematics and statistics book author, about mathematical discrepancies and other biases in Silver’s estimates.