Naheed Nenshi vs Michelle Rempel

[Senator Clay Davis]

National average of polls before the election predicted a Hillary win by 3-4%. She won by....3%. The notion the polls were a debacle is mostly about the state polls, and specifically the state polls of Wisconsin and Michigan, which never had Trump winning once. National polls basically nailed it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Not arguing one way or another on the mayors popularity, because he's going to win this election and basically run unopposed by anyone good.

But are we still actually putting any validity into polls anymore, the biggest political story last year outside of Trump would be the failure in polls in most elections.

A failure in people and reporters to interpret polls properly not a failure in polls.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

National average of polls before the election predicted a Hillary win by 3-4%. She won by....3%. The notion the polls were a debacle is mostly about the state polls, and specifically the state polls of Wisconsin and Michigan, which never had Trump winning once. National polls basically nailed it.

This is revisionist and inaccurate. The "good" polls tracked both popular vote and had translations to the electoral college. All of them had Hillary winning both.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Delgar

This is revisionist and inaccurate. The "good" polls tracked both popular vote and had translations to the electoral college. All of them had Hillary winning both.

fivethirtyeight had Hilary at a 75% chance to win the election. This means that 1 in 4 times, Trump wins.

A 75% chance is not 100%. A 25% chance is not 0%.

Even the other models, 90% chance to win is STILL not 100% chance. It's 1 in 10, which is pretty significant. I wouldn't do something if someone said I had a a 1 in 10 chance of being severely injured.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Regorium

fivethirtyeight had Hilary at a 75% chance to win the election. This means that 1 in 4 times, Trump wins.

A 75% chance is not 100%. A 25% chance is not 0%.

Even the other models, 90% chance to win is STILL not 100% chance. It's 1 in 10, which is pretty significant. I wouldn't do something if someone said I had a a 1 in 10 chance of being severely injured.

Is that it though? I don't care enough to delve deeper, but I was pretty sure there were claims way into the 90's on election day. Yeah, I get it....probabilities work that way where its not 100%, so its not wrong. That being said, it was a pretty atrocious miss no matter how you spin it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Delgar

This is revisionist and inaccurate. The "good" polls tracked both popular vote and had translations to the electoral college. All of them had Hillary winning both.

You had Huff post and the Princeton model at 99+ %.

The NYT was 80%. Five thirty eight had it at 75%

More importantly if you want to read how accurate 538s prediction was read their last week of articles leading up to the election where every day they said approximately the following. If Hillary Clinton has only a 2%-3% edge in the popular vote her electoral math becomes difficult because of the demographics in the mid western states. So for trump to win you just need a 2% miss in the national number which has happened regularly. Flip a coin twice if you flip heads twice Trump wins.

Nate also got in a twitter fight with the Huff post modelers over giving trump too much of a chance. In my opinion the 538 model was almost exactly right.

[monkeyman]

Wait, I though Nenshi tweeted and several posters agreed that Rempel was out to lunch and there was nothing the city could do about the huge tax increases... am i missing something?

[RatherDashing]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Wait, I though Nenshi tweeted and several posters agreed that Rempel was out to lunch and there was nothing the city could do about the huge tax increases... am i missing something?

I think this was already in the works a few weeks ago. If I'm remembering correctly, council had approved the spending but they hadn't figured out the specifics of how to distribute the subsidy.

Edit:

Council agreed in November to withdraw $15 million from its rainy-day fund to help struggling small businesses. City hall lawyers are still trying to determine how to dole out the funds, with council expected to weigh in on a plan Jan. 23.

“We have to come up with a process where small businesses that are finding themselves in trouble can apply for this money and that’s what we’re working on right now,” Nenshi said Tuesday.

“Lawyers, frankly, are tying themselves in knots trying to figure out a way to target this aid to the people who need it the most.”

While it’s been criticized as not being enough, Nenshi said the $15-million figure was calculated as the amount of money needed to cap increases for small businesses at a maximum of five per cent.

What constitutes a small business and whether a potential rebate program would be run by the city or handled by an outside agency are two of the questions officials are still trying to solve.

From the article in OP.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by RatherDashing

I think this was already in the works a few weeks ago. If I'm remembering correctly, council had approved the spending but they hadn't figured out the specifics of how to distribute the subsidy.

Perhaps Nenshi should have conveyed that in his response, could have saved himself some embarrassment? I think his response brought a lot of unwanted negative attention to this and what started as 15 million, quickly turned into 45.

[RatherDashing]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Perhaps Nenshi should have conveyed that in his response, could have saved himself some embarrassment? I think his response brought a lot of unwanted negative attention to this and what started as 15 million, quickly turned into 45.

Well, in fairness the original funds were approved in November, Rempel would have been fully aware of that. I think this stuff looks bad on both of them.

I'm curious now when subsidy value changed though.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

Perhaps Nenshi should have conveyed that in his response, could have saved himself some embarrassment? I think his response brought a lot of unwanted negative attention to this and what started as 15 million, quickly turned into 45.

Really? From the beginning of this spat Nenshi had said the city was looking at using the 15 million they had on hand to reduce small business tax increases, but that it would probably take a lot more money. After working out the details they have now said 45 million. His initial response was correct in that Rempell didn't know what she was talking about.

Maybe Rempell could have saved herself some embarrassment by keeping her mouth shut and letting the people in charge work through the problem and come up with a solution. Kinda like they did.

I always find it amazing the narratives people come up with when they ignore the facts.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Really? From the beginning of this spat Nenshi had said the city was looking at using the 15 million they had on hand to reduce small business tax increases, but that it would probably take a lot more money. After working out the details they have now said 45 million. His initial response was correct in that Rempell didn't know what she was talking about.

Maybe Rempell could have saved herself some embarrassment by keeping her mouth shut and letting the people in charge work through the problem and come up with a solution. Kinda like they did.

I always find it amazing the narratives people come up with when they ignore the facts.

I feel exactly the same way.
It completely boggles my mind how people can still declare Rempell was wrong after the city not only came up with 200% more funds than they originally discussed but also limited the increase to 5%. But hey, Nenshi... am i right?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Because that's completely different than what Rempel was talking about. She was wrong. Obviously and demonstrably and really, really obnoxiously wrong. But hey, #### Nenshi, am I right?

[bizaro86]

I'm hearing Rempel is looking at running for mayor of Calgary as a "conservative" candidate. Sort of a younger, blonder Richard McIvor.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I'm hearing Rempel is looking at running for mayor of Calgary as a "conservative" candidate. Sort of a younger, blonder Richard McIvor.

Bad timing. A smart person would hold on to their MP seat until Nenshi gets bored.