538 is like the QAnon of the left. Biden won by less than one percent in the tipping point state. If biden was one percent more liberal, trump would have cruised to victory. No forecaster predicted that.
Polls lead to aggregates which lead to simulations which inform forecasts. Forecasts predict error by watching prior error and finding out how error itself trends, as well as watching individual cohort behaviours. Simulations arrive everywhere on the spectrum from Trump winning by landslides, to Biden winning by landslides, and every outcome in between. By projecting 91% odds of winning, 538 are explicitly stating that 91% of their 40,000 simulations, once error is accounted for, yielded a Biden victory. This is one of those outcomes. You're trying to argue with math, and I'm not sure I understand why.
desperate to be right
Liberal QAnon made its way to Manitoba? I would never expect a Canadian to understand the trump phenomenon
Silver got shamed. Wrong outside MoE in 9 of 11 key states. Lecture me he is not a pollster. Then after he screws up, lecture me because he can’t do a good job because the polls suck.
He has a lot of interesting articles and writers but he made hundreds of factual errors this year and should get out of the prediction business. No the pollsters did not compensate for NCWs. No Biden did no make major widespread strides in suburbs except for a small shift in a tiny handful of metro areas that prevented a disaster. Completely missed an R+22 shift in the most important swing state metro area, Most voters did the same thing as last time, as many warned him was going to happen, but Nate knows better. Throw away 39,999 of those simulations, as they were absolute garbage and almost cost Biden the win.
538 is like the QAnon of the left. Biden won by less than one percent in the tipping point state. If biden was one percent more liberal, trump would have cruised to victory. No forecaster predicted that.
Polls lead to aggregates which lead to simulations which inform forecasts. Forecasts predict error by watching prior error and finding out how error itself trends, as well as watching individual cohort behaviours. Simulations arrive everywhere on the spectrum from Trump winning by landslides, to Biden winning by landslides, and every outcome in between. By projecting 91% odds of winning, 538 are explicitly stating that 91% of their 40,000 simulations, once error is accounted for, yielded a Biden victory. This is one of those outcomes. You're trying to argue with math, and I'm not sure I understand why.
desperate to be right
Liberal QAnon made its way to Manitoba? I would never expect a Canadian to understand the trump phenomenon
Silver got shamed. Wrong outside MoE in 9 of 11 key states. Lecture me he is not a pollster. Then after he screws up, lecture me because he can’t do a good job because the polls suck.
He has a lot of interesting articles and writers but he made hundreds of factual errors this year and should get out of the prediction business. No the pollsters did not compensate for NCWs. No Biden did no make major widespread strides in suburbs except for a small shift in a tiny handful of metro areas that prevented a disaster. Completely missed an R+22 shift in the most important swing state metro area, Most voters did the same thing as last time, as many warned him was going to happen, but Nate knows better. Throw away 39,999 of those simulations, as they were absolute garbage and almost cost Biden the win.
You clearly paid no attention. Silver constantly said that things would be tighter if polls were adjusted to margins of error.
Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2 2020: Oakland1, Oakland2
F Me In The Brainthis knows everybody from other commetsPosts: 23,450
Liberal Q. That is funny. As in, dumb as hell, but the term itself makes me laugh.
When I check his numbers I don't really get caught up in his electoral vote prediction, though you definitely have to look at specific states (swing) for the overall prediction of a win, or his %s. 84 out of 16 still means 16 times out of 100 is a Trump win, which is not nothing. If you were rolling dice and hit on the first roll (Election Day) then game over.
Personally, I'll look at his popular vote prediction and then specifically look at FL, PA, MI, WI, AZ. The thought is anything over 6 points is a win. I like to play it conservative and say 7. Right now he has Biden at 7.9 - I really don't think 130+ electoral margin is going to happen, though I think a 100+ could definitely happen. If Biden gets FL it's a done deal. If he loses FL but regains PA it's also a lock because I don't see him losing 2 of PA/WI/MI like how 2016 happened. The only way that happens is if AZ doesn't push over like so many think then all of a sudden NE2 comes into play (Obamaha).
Pretty wild to see The Economist has Biden up to 91% to win the electoral vote. Any time %'s get to 95% you can call it an absolute certainty (depending on the source and this is a good source).
To me, if it's a blowout electorally (via the popular vote it will be a blowout), this is what it looks like:
When I check his numbers I don't really get caught up in his electoral vote prediction, though you definitely have to look at specific states (swing) for the overall prediction of a win, or his %s. 84 out of 16 still means 16 times out of 100 is a Trump win, which is not nothing. If you were rolling dice and hit on the first roll (Election Day) then game over.
Personally, I'll look at his popular vote prediction and then specifically look at FL, PA, MI, WI, AZ. The thought is anything over 6 points is a win. I like to play it conservative and say 7. Right now he has Biden at 7.9 - I really don't think 130+ electoral margin is going to happen, though I think a 100+ could definitely happen. If Biden gets FL it's a done deal. If he loses FL but regains PA it's also a lock because I don't see him losing 2 of PA/WI/MI like how 2016 happened. The only way that happens is if AZ doesn't push over like so many think then all of a sudden NE2 comes into play (Obamaha).
Pretty wild to see The Economist has Biden up to 91% to win the electoral vote. Any time %'s get to 95% you can call it an absolute certainty (depending on the source and this is a good source).
To me, if it's a blowout electorally (via the popular vote it will be a blowout), this is what it looks like:
Alright, everyone who posted a map show it. This is what I had. I was off by Georgia and NE-2. I'll quibble you can flip ME and NE districts here.
I didn't save it but I was really thinking Biden would have 411....over optimistic
Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2 2020: Oakland1, Oakland2
When I check his numbers I don't really get caught up in his electoral vote prediction, though you definitely have to look at specific states (swing) for the overall prediction of a win, or his %s. 84 out of 16 still means 16 times out of 100 is a Trump win, which is not nothing. If you were rolling dice and hit on the first roll (Election Day) then game over.
Personally, I'll look at his popular vote prediction and then specifically look at FL, PA, MI, WI, AZ. The thought is anything over 6 points is a win. I like to play it conservative and say 7. Right now he has Biden at 7.9 - I really don't think 130+ electoral margin is going to happen, though I think a 100+ could definitely happen. If Biden gets FL it's a done deal. If he loses FL but regains PA it's also a lock because I don't see him losing 2 of PA/WI/MI like how 2016 happened. The only way that happens is if AZ doesn't push over like so many think then all of a sudden NE2 comes into play (Obamaha).
Pretty wild to see The Economist has Biden up to 91% to win the electoral vote. Any time %'s get to 95% you can call it an absolute certainty (depending on the source and this is a good source).
To me, if it's a blowout electorally (via the popular vote it will be a blowout), this is what it looks like:
When I check his numbers I don't really get caught up in his electoral vote prediction, though you definitely have to look at specific states (swing) for the overall prediction of a win, or his %s. 84 out of 16 still means 16 times out of 100 is a Trump win, which is not nothing. If you were rolling dice and hit on the first roll (Election Day) then game over.
Personally, I'll look at his popular vote prediction and then specifically look at FL, PA, MI, WI, AZ. The thought is anything over 6 points is a win. I like to play it conservative and say 7. Right now he has Biden at 7.9 - I really don't think 130+ electoral margin is going to happen, though I think a 100+ could definitely happen. If Biden gets FL it's a done deal. If he loses FL but regains PA it's also a lock because I don't see him losing 2 of PA/WI/MI like how 2016 happened. The only way that happens is if AZ doesn't push over like so many think then all of a sudden NE2 comes into play (Obamaha).
Pretty wild to see The Economist has Biden up to 91% to win the electoral vote. Any time %'s get to 95% you can call it an absolute certainty (depending on the source and this is a good source).
To me, if it's a blowout electorally (via the popular vote it will be a blowout), this is what it looks like:
Alright, everyone who posted a map show it. This is what I had. I was off by Georgia and NE-2. I'll quibble you can flip ME and NE districts here.
I didn't save it but I was really thinking Biden would have 411....over optimistic
I expected AZ, but not GA. I thought NC was 50/50.
I was thinking TX, FL and OH would turn blue....boy that was a fucked up thought.
Remember the Thomas Nine!! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2 2020: Oakland1, Oakland2
When I check his numbers I don't really get caught up in his electoral vote prediction, though you definitely have to look at specific states (swing) for the overall prediction of a win, or his %s. 84 out of 16 still means 16 times out of 100 is a Trump win, which is not nothing. If you were rolling dice and hit on the first roll (Election Day) then game over.
Personally, I'll look at his popular vote prediction and then specifically look at FL, PA, MI, WI, AZ. The thought is anything over 6 points is a win. I like to play it conservative and say 7. Right now he has Biden at 7.9 - I really don't think 130+ electoral margin is going to happen, though I think a 100+ could definitely happen. If Biden gets FL it's a done deal. If he loses FL but regains PA it's also a lock because I don't see him losing 2 of PA/WI/MI like how 2016 happened. The only way that happens is if AZ doesn't push over like so many think then all of a sudden NE2 comes into play (Obamaha).
Pretty wild to see The Economist has Biden up to 91% to win the electoral vote. Any time %'s get to 95% you can call it an absolute certainty (depending on the source and this is a good source).
To me, if it's a blowout electorally (via the popular vote it will be a blowout), this is what it looks like:
Alright, everyone who posted a map show it. This is what I had. I was off by Georgia and NE-2. I'll quibble you can flip ME and NE districts here.
I didn't save it but I was really thinking Biden would have 411....over optimistic
I expected AZ, but not GA. I thought NC was 50/50.
I was thinking TX, FL and OH would turn blue....boy that was a fucked up thought.
FL and OH are going the other way. Like Missouri. These states are becoming more red. More and more, the split will be by education level more than anything else. That's the new alignment.
Comments
Silver got shamed. Wrong outside MoE in 9 of 11 key states. Lecture me he is not a pollster. Then after he screws up, lecture me because he can’t do a good job because the polls suck.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
2020: Oakland1, Oakland2
At least there is that....
I guess I just forgot.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
2020: Oakland1, Oakland2
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley #1, Wrigley #2, Boston #1, Boston #2
2020: Oakland1, Oakland2