Dan Drezner, subbing for Andrew Sullivan, discusses problems with forecasting models and the media members who latch onto them. One notable oversight in forecasting: virtually all of the existing models predict the nationwide vote, rather than the outcomes of state elections to the electoral college—a particularly problematic consideration when dealing with close elections, like that in 2000. The ones that do make state-level predictions are rather dated.

More to the point, as Matt Yglesias points out, aggregate-level models are often inherently problematic. The problem that Yglesias calls “specification searching”—or what I’d call atheoretical modelling, with a healthy dose of stepwise regression to boot—is endemic to the whole class of forecasting models, because fundamentally they are inductive exercises, focused on finding the best combination of variables to predict the observed outcome. Most good social science (or science in general, for that matter), by contrast, is deductive: establish a truly explanatory theory, develop specific hypotheses, and operationalize and test them.

That isn’t to say, however, that unemployment doesn’t belong in the model at all; it may, for example, be the best available indicator of a theoretical construct like “voters’ perceptions of the national economy.” But as someone whose research interests are more centered on individual-level explanations of behavior, rather than attempting to explain aggregate outcomes, I sometimes wonder if aggregate-level models trade too much scientific value for their parsimony.

See also James Joyner, who points out that small sample sizes aren’t necessarily problematic when the universe is also small. However, in a small sample the good social scientist will be particularly attentive to the potential issue of outliers—atypical observations that can lead one to make conclusions that aren’t justified on the basis of the data as a whole.

Robert Prather notes the increasing enthusiasm for introducing High Occupancy/Toll lanes for congestion relief in the Washington area.

Prompted in part by my new cell phone, which includes a built-in web browser, I’m pleased to announce the debut of Signifying Nothing Mobile. There isn’t a lot of support for navigating between posts yet, but hopefully I’ll be able to add that soon. Any reports of success or failure would be appreciated!

Matt Stinson finally stops teasing us and announces his big plans for the new year. Très cool.

Will Baude has yet another 20 Questions interview, this time with Reason writer/blogger Julian Sanchez. Plenty of good stuff there; go RTWT™.

While waiting in line at Books-A-Million today here in Ocala (a long wait, since the computers crashed due to a power spike), an elderly woman noticed that I was buying a copy of the latest book on Southern politics by the Black brothers, Merle and Earl, The Rise of Southern Republicans (a real find in a general-interest bookstore). The woman, who I really didn’t want to get into a political conversation with,* informed me that she hoped Bush would be reelected in 2004, and that she considered two Democrats particularly “dangerous”: Howard Dean and Hillary Clinton. I nodded, smiled, and seriously considered backing away slowly.

She didn’t seem quite as interested in the copy of The Economist’s “The World in 2004” I was buying.

This is my entry in today’s Beltway Traffic Jam.

I think Michele has the better of the argument in contrasting Lair’s and Meryl’s reaction to the U.S. sending aid to the earthquake victims in Iran with her own. Personally, I think it’s worthwhile even if not a single Iranian mind is changed about America—the point of charity, after all, isn’t to make the beneficiary think better of you for doing it.

Update: Add Glenn Reynolds to the list of people who can’t seem to make the people/leaders distinction—even if I agree that the U.S. efforts to play arbiter are unlikely to be effective.

While Stephen Green points out that the latest Zogby numbers show Howard Dean in statistical dead heats in both Iowa and South Carolina (but with a commanding lead in New Hampshire), James Joyner retorts that Dean’s lead is more durable than the numbers indicate:

...this is now Dean’s race to lose. While he’s not running away with anything, he’s got a huge lead in New Hampshire and a small one everywhere else. Meanwhile, there is no consistent number two. More importantly, he’s absolutely dominating the money primary.

More to the point, the rules are such that you can effectively discount anyone not named Al Sharpton* unless they get double-digits, because the Democrats’ delegate allocation system works at the congressional district level—and, as I keep pointing out, you have to get 15% in a congressional district to win delegates from it. This effect will massively inflate Dean’s standing at the convention.

Like James, I’m becoming more convinced than ever that South Carolina will be pivotal. And, barring a seismic shift after Iowa, I can’t see any S.C. scenario that Dean can’t spin as a win—realistically, he needs to be blown out by 10% or more by a credible candidate (at this point, either Clark or Gephardt), which just ain’t happening with Edwards still in the race and a lot of Republicans coming out to vote for Sharpton. A narrow ABD victory gives Dean the line that he “polled well in the South,” even if he only gets a third of the primary vote.

Eugene Volokh, in a post defending Strom Thurmond against the charge of child molestation, notes a handy table that lists the age of consent in all fifty states, and comments:

I also suspect that the table is mostly designed for people who like to have sex with teenagers, but it seems to be pretty accurate, and I’ve found it useful even for more academic purposes.

Now, I’m not an expert on such matters, but it seems to me that having sex with teenagers is quite a popular activity, particularly among college students; the only thing I can figure is that law professors—the only academics who, as a group, don’t have much contact with the 17-21 demographic—are unaware just how much sex goes on among undergraduates.

Dave of dave’s not here thinks the arguments of some in favor of reinstating the draft don’t hold up against scrutiny. Me? I’d be even happier if Congress killed the Selective Service System—and the ridiculous line-item in the budget attached to it—once and for all.

I safely arrived at my dad’s house in a secure, undisclosed location in southeastern Marion County, Florida last night. Traffic on both I-10 and I-75 was horrible, albeit fast moving—though I-10 could use an extra lane from Pensacola to I-75, as left-lane traffic was continuously stacked up trying to pass the few stragglers in the right lane.

Anyway, if you’re a regular SN reader within, say, a two-hour radius of Ocala (roughly anywhere north of I-4, south of I-10, east of Tallahassee, and not in the Atlantic Ocean), the first beer’s on me.

Stephen Green and Matt Stinson note the latest whining from Howard Dean about his fellow candidates picking on him.

Also of note: Dean’s Bushian energy policy coverup. Truth to power indeed.

Update: Steven Taylor points out that DNC head Terry McAuliffe couldn’t do much about the attacks, even if he were inclined to do so. And, the Diktat has the Stalinist perspective, as always.

Dan Drezner will be playing the role of guest-blogger for Andrew Sullivan this coming week. I knew there had to be a reason I added Sully to the blogroll…

Rosemary Esmay apparently is familiar with the same driver I saw today on I-10 between Mobile and Pensacola who apparently thought the left lane was his own personal playground—even when the right lane was clear a mile ahead of his pickup truck.

Also of note: I think I saw more Mississippi state troopers today than I’d seen total in the 5½ years I’ve lived in the state.

Steven Taylor links approvingly to a Jonah Goldberg column lamenting the lack of political knowledge in the electorate.

At some point, I’ll have meaningful thoughts about the column (i.e. something to say beyond “Goldberg’s wrong”). Unfortunately, now isn’t that time; for some reason, driving through a landscape of endless conifers in eastern Mississippi and western Alabama has sapped my ability to compose coherent arguments.

Colby Cosh notes, in the midst of decrying Howie Kurtz’s lack of permalinks, that the people most upset that George W. Bush doesn’t read The New York Times are print journalists. Fancy that.

Kevin Aylward passes on the good news that we can expect increased venom levels in the near future.

American Idol loser Clay Aiken’s new hit, “Invisible,” features the following chorus:

If I was invisible
Then I could just watch you in your room
If I was invincible
I’d make you mine tonight
If hearts were unbreakable
Then I could just tell you where I stand
I would be the smartest man
If I was invisible
(Wait… I already am)

Yes, it’s a toe-tapping song you just want to sing along to… but, as the founder (and sole member) of the American Society to Revive the Subjunctive Voice, I must point out that the first line should read “If I were invisible,” as it expresses a hypothetical state of being rather than objective reality. (Just call me Don Quixote.)

I also am slightly disturbed by the fact that the loser on American Idol is permitted to have a showbiz career. Fox should seriously consider adding a provision to the rules that permanently blackballs the runner-up from showbiz. Nothing against Clay, but if there’s nothing at stake, and no downside to losing, what’s the point of the contest?

Update: Brian J. Noggle further deconstructs Aiken’s lyrics and is, to put it mildly, disturbed.

Steven Taylor’s Boxing Day edition of the PoliBlog Toast-O-Meter is now available. And, for those of you living in a hole, it shows Dr. Howard Dean with a commanding lead—but facing a serious uphill struggle in head-to-head polling against George W. Bush.

Also of note: Jeff Quinton has the latest South Carolina primary news, while Robert Prather doesn’t see Anyone But Dean (a.k.a. Dick Gephardt) looking much better than Dean himself.

The Boston Globe suggests that Howard Dean isn’t really a secularlist after all; instead:

Presidential contender Howard B. Dean, who has said little about religion while campaigning except to emphasize the separation of church and state, described himself in an interview with the Globe as a committed believer in Jesus Christ and said he expects to increasingly include references to Jesus and God in his speeches as he stumps in the South.

Dean, 55, who practices Congregationalism but does not often attend church and whose wife and children are Jewish, explained the move as a desire to share his beliefs with audiences willing to listen. [emphasis mine]

Well, it’s nice to see Dean takes his faith so seriously that he considers it to be a strategic asset in his campaign. Me, I’d rather he be honest with the public than start engaging in calculated pandering to voters—but, then again, I already find Dean loathsome on so many levels that I’m probably not in his target demographic.

I also tend to agree with Jeff Jarvis and Matt Stinson that people of faith will find Dean’s attempts to speak on faith deeply insulting—particularly if they know that it is part of a calculated strategy by Dean. And I don’t think regionalized campaigning can really work in the modern era—Bush probably lost as many votes as he won by visiting Bob Jones University in 2000, for example.

Incidentally, I saw a shorter version of the article in today’s Memphis Commercial Appeal, so it must be getting wide play.

One other thing: like Matt, I don’t think the fact that his wife and kids are Jewish should make any in how Dean’s religiosity is perceived (if anything, the faith of the people I know in families with mixed religions seems stronger than the norm). His other behavior alone is sufficient to make his sincerity about the nature of his faith questionable.

Link via email from Erick Erickson.

Merry Christmas.

Robert Prather of Insults Unpunished has reevaluated the MSA component of the Medicare reform/prescription drugs bill, and thinks it goes much further toward introducing more of a market-based approach to health care than he originally thought. However, James Joyner correctly points out that the bill’s other provisions greatly expand the role of the government in health care in ways that won’t be easily rolled back and which may lead to subsequent expansion.

I discovered Christmas Eve that the reason I thought that my mother’s new cell phone—my old cell phone—wasn’t working for the past week, since I added it to my account, is that I put the wrong phone number for her line in my new cell phone’s built-in phone book.

So, the moron scoring goes: Me 1, SprintPCS customer service 0. At least it made the day of the CSR who handled my call.

If you’re the morbid sort, you can join The Amish Tech Support Dead Pool, coordinated by everyone’s favorite catblogger, Laurence Simon. So far, the pick distribution seems fairly interesting. Now I just need to remember (or dig out) the list of picks I sent Lair…

Glenn Reynolds has the scoop on David Letterman’s latest trip into a war zone. In a related story, I hear Jay Leno took a crew down to Camp Pendleton to film a “Jay Walking” segment.

(Yes, it’s the same joke I used last year when Dave went to Afghanistan…)