Neocon's New Doctrine: Ignore Evidence and Data When You Don't Like Them

In 2010, conservatives didn't complain when Silver predicted big Republican wins. Now, they say he's too liberal and too gay to crunch the numbers.

Nate Silver, and the book anyone should read
before questioning his methods.

Neocons seem to have developed a gag reflex all of their own. When evidence and data contradicts them, they ignore the evidence and attack the person presenting it.

If they really want to have a fit, they should follow the four most trafficked poll aggregator sites: Silver's 538, PollTracker from Talking Points Memo, Pollster on THP and RealClearPolitics (RCP). All show that Obama is likely to win the election, because he's leading in battleground states and has more ways to get the 270 electoral votes needed to win. (Even RCP –which uses simple average and gives the most favorable numbers to Romney– says so).

Were they attacking Silver when, in 2010, he predicted big Republican wins in the House (and when the wins fell within his model's margin of error)? No, they were not. Silver was neither less gay nor less liberal when he predicted a Republican win. Now he predicts a likely victory for Obama, and Republicans vilify him for being too liberal and too gay.

But then, current conservatives never fear sinking too low. It has become his favorite political sport.