What happened to the election?

April 5, 2020 • 8:30 am

On March 17 I noted that I’d made a $100 bet with a friend that Donald Trump would lose his bid for a second term come November.  My reasons were these:

Now that Trump has bungled the handling of the epidemic, makes daily statements about it so palpably stupid that even a “deplorable” can see through them, and gives himself a ten out of ten in handling the crisis, I think his chances of victory are even slimmer. And that’s on top of the economy, which is heading south so fast it will reach Antarctica before the summer.

Since then Trump has screwed up even more, repeatedly making dumb and even harmful assertions (“I might take chloroquine”), backtracking (pews filled by Easter!), praising himself, denigrating others (including governors) and generally looking like the narcissistic moron he is. It’s on view daily.  And yet. . . his approval rating is as high as it’s ever been since right after he was elected: here’s the latest from FiveThirtyEight (click on screenshot to see more):

 

He’s declared himself a “war president”, clearly to bolster his popularity, despite the fact that he claimed that the virus was no big deal and the country would get over it quickly. (Then, of course, he backtracked, but now is sending mixed messages, still dangling the possibility of pew-filled churches on Easter). Easter is a week from today.

So, have you heard anything from Biden lately? I thought not. And it’s not really Joe’s fault, as anything beside coronavirus gets pushed from the news. On last night’s NBC News, for instance, the entire show was devoted to the pandemic, except for the obligatory “feel good” segment at the end (which is usually connected with the pandemic as well). That’s not the fault of the news: the virus is pretty much what we want to hear about.

But we’ve forgotten that there’s an election in November, and it’s our only chance to heave the moron President out on his tuchas.  People are going to forget about Biden, and that, combined with Trump being a President (however dreadful) in a crisis, would seem to bolster the chance of an Orange Man reelection. I’m worried: can we, or our republic, really stand another four years of this man? (Remember that Biden is not a man who excites me, but he’s surely better than Trump.)

Well, have your say in the comments, and here’s another poll:

I’m nervous.

Can’t we please get rid of political polls? (And our own political poll. . .)

February 3, 2020 • 10:45 am

Yes, I understand that some people need political polls: candidates need numbers to stay in the race, organizations need data to decide whom to support, sociologists need to monitor the political heartbeat of America. But I don’t like them as a way to tell people how the candidates are doing. They create a “herd effect,” in which people may tend to vote for whoever’s ahead, following the crowd rather than their own heart. This is more a problem in the primaries, I guess, than in the general Presidential election, because by November the polls are largely irrelevant in whether you vote for Trump or Democrat X.

And polls make people anxious: we all become like gamblers, obsessively following the odds. It was the polls that got so many people depressed four years ago: right up to the last minute many of them predicted a Clinton victory. And when the results came in, those hopes were bitterly dashed.

We can’t ban polls, of course, but I wish people would pay less attention to them (and I say that even though I do pay attention to them).

At any rate, tonight begins the Iowa caucus, which gives that small state unwarranted power in picking the Democratic nominee. This state caucus is not a traditional vote in which each Iowa voter’s choice is tallied, but a very complicated process in which voters gather in places and stand in groups, trying to recruit other people to join their candidate-specific group (see the explanations here and here).

I won’t tell you who’s leading in Iowa, but just for fun answer below which Democratic candidate do you think will “win”.

 

 

 

Pew: Americans know bupkes about religion (and test yourself)

July 28, 2019 • 9:15 am

In a poll of Americans’ religious knowledge reported this week by Pew, two things were revealed. First, most Americans don’t know much about religion—either theirs or that of other believers. Second, it is the atheists, agnostics, and Jews who rank highest on religious knowledge.

You can read the long report, which gives the 32 questions, by clicking on the first screenshot below. But before you do that, take a 15-question quiz (apparently an abbreviated version of what Pew asked people) by clicking on the second screenshot. Do it! You know you want to!

Pew asked 10,971 people, selected, as usual, from landline and cellphone numbers dialed randomly, and state that the “margin of sampling error” (presumably the standard error of the mean) is “plus or minus 1.5 percentage points”. Now, click on the second screenshot that says “Before you read the report”, and then on the brown “next” bar to see how much you know about religion.

 

THE QUIZ:

First, some braggadocio: I aced the test. Here are my results:

But is that surprising? After all, among all respondents, Jews answered the most questions correctly (18.7 out of 32) and atheists the next most (17.9/32); see below. As an atheist Jew, I was ideally positioned to know about religion—and I wrote a book about science and faith that involved reading a lot about religion, including plowing through the Bible and the Qur’an (the Book of Mormon defeated me). Report your results below, and be honest!

Now, you’re allowed to go back to the first link and see all the questions, and how people did.

As you see from the mini-quiz above, the average number of questions answered by Americans was about half: 7.4 out of 15. In the overall survey, the mean number of questions answered was 14 out of 32. Here’s how the different groups did. Note that “nothing in particular” (which I suppose are the “nones” who don’t say they are atheists are agnostics, scored below the mean, as did the “historically black Protestants,” who got fewer than a third of the questions right:

FiveThirtyEight has a useful summary of the main results (this is a direct quote):

  1. Many Americans know some basic facts about major religions and belief systems — and not just Christianity. Seventy-nine percent of respondents knew that, in Christianity, the Trinity is one God in three persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) and that Moses led the Exodus of Israelites from Egypt, a tenet of both Christianity and Judaism. Sixty-two percent of respondents knew that Mecca is Islam’s holiest city and a place of pilgrimage, while 60 percent knew that Ramadan is an Islamic holy month. Atheism (87 percent correctly described it as not believing in God) is better understood than agnosticism (61 percent answered correctly that it means being unsure of the existence of God).
  2. It gets murky for people outside of the basics. Respondents really struggled with some questions. For example, only 24 percent answered correctly that Rosh Hashanah celebrates the Jewish New Year, similar to the number (26 percent) who knew that Islam is the religion of most people in Indonesia. Even some Christian doctrines and facts are not that well-known — despite it being the faith of about 70 percent of Americans. Only 51 percent correctly said that Jesus is the person known for giving the “Sermon on the Mount,” a number I thought was low considering that’s a fairly important event in Christianity. (The other possible answers were Peter, Paul and John.) And just 22 percent of Americans could describe the “prosperity gospel,” which is generally associated with evangelical Christians. (Pew defined it as the tenet that “those of strong faith will be blessed by God with financial success and good health.”)
  3. Americans really don’t know the number of Jewish and Muslim people living in the U.S. According to Pew Research estimates, about 2 percent of American adults are Jewish and 1 percent are Muslim. But only 26 percent of respondents answered correctly that Muslims make up less than 5 percent of the population in the U.S. And only 19 percent knew that the share of Jewish Americans is also below 5 percent. Most either thought the Muslim American and Jewish populations were each larger than 5 percent or didn’t know. But I suspect that the explanation for these inaccurate responses might not totally be about how much Americans know about these two religions but may instead be related to broader issues of innumeracy. Other research has shown that Americans have inaccurate views about the size of many demographic groups and may be particularly likely to overstate the size of groups of which they are not a part. For example, Republicans vastly overestimate the number of Democrats who are black.
  4. Some groups answered more questions correctly than others. On average, respondents answered 14 of the 32 questions correctly. But people who are Jewish (19 correct responses on average), atheist (18) and agnostic (17) scored the best.

I’ll add to that a few more tidbits:

a.) The amount of education you have is strongly associated with how well you answered the questions. That’s not surprising, as general education, even if not religious, exposes you to what different faiths believe. And if you’ve taken a world religions class, you do better than if you didn’t, though not as well as general college graduates. Here are the Pew figures:

b.) Catholics don’t know important dictates of their own faiths.  Pew says this:

Half of Catholics in the United States (50%) correctly answer a question about official church teachings on transubstantiation – that during Communion, the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. The other half of Catholics incorrectly say the church teaches that the bread and wine used in Communion are just symbols of the body and blood of Christ (45%) or say they are not sure (4%).

Lordy, isn’t that something that all of us know? It’s not a damn metaphor! (But DNA and protein tests can’t be used to test it.)

c.) Only 1/5 of Americans know about that the doctrine of sola fide (described by Pew as “salvation comes through faith alone”) is characteristic of Protestantism and not Catholicism (the latter faith maintains that salvation comes through works, deeds, and acts, like baptism).  As Pew reports:

Just one-in-five Americans (20%) know that Protestantism traditionally teaches that salvation comes through faith alone, a key theological issue in the Protestant Reformation.  One-in-ten incorrectly believe that Catholicism teaches that salvation comes through faith alone, while the remainder of adults declined to offer a response in the survey (38%) or wrongly state that both Protestantism and Catholicism teach this (23%) or that neither Christian tradition teaches this (8%). Evangelical Protestants are more likely than other groups to know the traditional Protestant teaching, though even among evangelicals, far fewer than half (37%) answer the question correctly.

Well, I’m sure some of you will be thinking that atheists did well because they really knew about the doctrines of the faiths they rejected. But that can’t be the whole story, as the questions are about many beliefs: those of Catholics, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, and so on. I suspect that atheists are generally better educated than the average American, though that may be wishful thinking. Also, the Jews did better than the atheists, though I suspect that most American Jews (like me) really are atheists, despite the claims of people like Dave Silverman that atheists can’t say they’re Jews. (Of course many of us do.) Again, I suspect that Jews are better educated than the general population.

But here’s hoping that you readers will take the 15-question quiz and report your scores below. I’ll take an average and standard error after people weigh in. And then be sure to look at all 32 questions given in the long-form Pew report.

Go to it! Who can resist a quiz, especially one on religion?

h/t: Dave

Famous election prognosticator says that House must impeach Trump or he’ll be re-elected

June 2, 2019 • 12:15 pm

So here’s a professor and a respected Presidential prognosticator, Allan Lichtman, who suggests that unless the Democrats impeach Trump, he’ll win again in 2020. Lichtman’s fame in this area, and his bona fides, appear in Wikipedia, which conflicts a bit with what the newswoman says in his introduction:

Allan Jay Lichtman (born April 4, 1947) is an American political historian who teaches at American University in Washington, D.C. He is well known for predicting seven of the last eight election results for the president of the United States Presidential Election since 1984, including forecasting the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election remarkably early. . . In April 2017, Lichtman authored the book The Case for Impeachment, laying out multiple arguments for the impeachment of Donald Trump.

Note that the news anchor below says that Lichtman predicted the last nine presidential elections, while Wikipedia says he predicted seven out of eight.  The exception: “The single failure was the 2000 election, where the model predicted a victory for incumbent party nominee Al Gore.”

Lichtman’s “model” is called “The Keys to the White House,” developed in collaboration with Vladimir Keilis-Borok, and aims to predict not who wins the popular vote, but who wins the White House.  It uses 13 criteria to determine the outcome, shown in the screenshot below. I haven’t sussed out the model, but supposedly when give of the relevant questions are answered in the negative, the incumbent party keeps the Presidency. If six or more are answered in the negative, the party of the presiding President changes.

Now some of the elections were no-brainers, like Obama’s re-election victory. And there are probably plenty of people who predicted 7 of the 8 last elections, so Lichtman isn’t necessarily some kind of wizard. But in the clip below he’s viewed as one, and makes the point that unless the Democrats impeach Trump, he’ll be re-elected.

You might ask yourself, “Well, an impeachment by the House is only a trial, and conviction requires vote of the Republican Senate. So how can he be sucessfully impeached Lichtman answers that below, and I’ll let you listen to the short video.  Then there will be two polling questions for you to answer.

If you’ve heard what he said, answer this question first:

And then this one.

And, of course, weigh in below.

Readers’ votes: Northam should stay on

February 4, 2019 • 3:00 pm

It’s pretty much academic whether Virginia Governor Ralph Northam will stay on: he won’t, as the pressure on him to resign will build and build, with nobody defending him. I say this regardless of what I feel, which right now is conflicted and still in stasis waiting for the facts to come out.  But I will give the results of a poll from two days ago when I asked readers whether they thought that Northam should resign. The results are pretty clear:

More than twice as many respondents thought Northam should stay on rather than resigning, with a tad more than 16% having no opinion. Now I’m not pretending that this is a scientific poll: I’m just the messenger here. I will predict that within a week Northam will be out as Governor, and that his political career is over. Such is the Zeitgeist. 

Vote for cats!

August 13, 2018 • 7:38 pm

Brady Haran, who, among other things makes YouTube videos about science, is taking a vote on who favors dogs vs. who favors cats.

You know what to do: click on the tweet below to go to Haran’s twitter site, and then vote for felids! I don’t ask readers for much, and never for money, so humor me and vote the right way by clicking on the tweet below. There are only a few thousand votes, d*gs are winning, the vote ends at about 4 pm Chicago time on Tuesday, and we have 56,000 subscribers. Do the old Professor a favor.   

We can do it!

https://twitter.com/BradyHaran/status/1029130814443999232

h/t: David

Yesterday’s poll: Prognostications about Trump

April 11, 2018 • 9:20 am

My poll yesterday, “Is Trump toast?” came from my feeling—which I still hold—that he won’t last his first term: that he’ll either resign or be forced out of office.  I asked readers their opinion, and here are the results as of 8 a.m. today:

Only about 28% of respondents agree with me, 43% think he’ll get in trouble (well, he is in trouble already) but weather it, and 25% think nothing will happen. In other words, 68% think that it’ll be business as usual after the Mueller/Stormy Daniels/other Future Fracases affairs are over. That’s either remarkably cynical (but a justifiable cynicism) or a reflection that people think Trump didn’t break the law.  I think he did, but that’s just a guess.