spec

Something very similar has been done years ago: http://www.city-data.com/accidents/acc-Chicago-Illinois.html. Per-city mapping using Google Maps with additional info and Google street map when clicking on each marker.

You are absolutely and factually wrong. He absolutely calls them predictions when he is right. Here is a direct quote from Silver: "predicting 49 of 50 states correctly in the presidential election." http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/25/welcome-...

There is a very common fallacy committed by people outside economics in thinking that Krugman has something substantial to say in areas of economics outside of his very narrow focus of expertise. Let's say you founded a successful advertising-based Web startup from a scratch and you exited for 8 digits. People who are only vaguely familiar with technology and computers (let's say nurses, taxi drivers, high school teachers) will now think you are an expert in pretty much all matters related to starting a business and computers. However, unless you are a pompous egoist, you should realize that your opinions, even in seemingly very related matters, like running a Web store or creating an iPhone app, will likely be quite uninformed. Krugman's opinions are about economic matters much further away from his true area of expertise than your opinions about running a Web store.

Based on your post, it appears that you don't understand how things like statistical significance work. If there is not enough data to make a prediction, you simply should not make a prediction and wait. If you ignore this and your whole business is based on the accuracy of your predictions, expect to be held accountable.

You also apparently didn't read his post I mentioned. It does not talk about just Romney. Here is the direct quote: "As for other Republicans in Massachusetts, their prospects don't figure to be much better."

Silver's whole failed business was based on what Taleb called the "Ludic fallacy" in The Black Swan.

No, that poster was claiming that his coverage was "well-deserved" and I disagreed. He was not obligated to mention his failures, but I did, and that apparently troubles you greatly for some reason. Silver's whole reputation is based on his assumed accuracy and that's why it is important to provide a more complete record of his predictions (not that my post claims to do that or that I would care enough to do that; since you are so impressed by him, you're welcome to try).

Krugman's reputation as a partisan hack that opines on matter he is ignorant about is among other economists with no fewer accomplishments (but his reputation as a pompous ass is among everyone else).

You're right - it appears that he updated his model right before the elections and I only saw his earlier posts. However, he had a post in 2009 entitled "Could a Republican Win Ted Kennedy's Senate Seat?" with his answer being "Very probably not."

The point was that selectively praising someone's accurate predictions without mentioning his failures is wrong.

Krugman is a partisan hack that has a Nobel Prize is one very specific area of economics. It does not qualify him to opine on all other areas.

How about his failure in predicting UK elections results, US unemployment rate, Maine's same sex marriage vote, special Senate elections in Massachusetts? These are just a few examples that I remember. But then the NY Times thinks that Krugman deserves the coverage too...

The writer states himself that the results of "site:" don't mean anything: "Of course this says nothing about how much they appear in the rankings." So what's the point of this article?

This paper does nothing to calculate any "real value" and is just a collection of biased and discredited arguments.

Example of one of the arguments: "They have supported the propagation of the misguided view that tax cuts are good for stimulating growth and even increasing government tax revenues. The Nobel Prize- winning economist Paul Krugman claims that this is not true in the context of the United States."

That's the best they can do? Because Krugman says so? This paper is a joke.

This confirms that they had no contracts - Arrington's "exhibits" are some blog posts and emails. This guy seriously used to be a lawyer? The initial price point was just an attempt to hype it up by Arrington, so this whole device would never be much anyway. BTW, Techcrunch is deleting any unfavorable comments on their blog, just as they have done many other times previously.