|
Concerned Citizen posted:lol every model has the same projection except for upshot and maine cd-2 ME CD-2 looks hella safe and has been for a month, don't know why it keeps popping up.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:14 |
|
|
exquisite tea posted:ME CD-2 looks hella safe and has been for a month, don't know why it keeps popping up. Because there hasn't been much quality polling there over the past month, and the few recent polls showed it seemingly switching from strong Republican to weak Democrat. It's one of the few toss-up electoral markets on PredictIt, and is probably going to be an early bellwether vote to see how good the polls were for this cycle.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:lol every model has the same projection except for upshot and maine cd-2 It's almost like they all use the exact same data or something
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:It's almost like they all use the exact same data or something untrue
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:ME CD-2 looks hella safe and has been for a month, don't know why it keeps popping up. In addition to what Discospawn said, it's as demographically favorable to Trump as any solid blue location, and because of the absence of polling data saying otherwise, it likely represents Trump's best chance to pull off an "upset" somewhere on Clinton's map. There's also a scenario where it literally delivers the presidency to Trump:  I don't think that scenario is gonna happen, but that's why it's getting way more attention than some of Trump's other longshots.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:In addition to what Discospawn said, it's as demographically favorable to Trump as any solid blue location, and because of the absence of polling data saying otherwise, it likely represents Trump's best chance to pull off an "upset" somewhere on Clinton's map. There's also a scenario where it literally delivers the presidency to Trump: I mean, that map is pretty much the most reasonable path to a Trump victory. He has next to no chance in PA, and that map has him winning all reasonable toss ups (NH/NC/FL/MA2/NV)
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:I mean, that map is pretty much the most reasonable path to a Trump victory. He has next to no chance in PA, and that map has him winning all reasonable toss ups (NH/NC/FL/MA2/NV) Isn't NV already lost for him due to crazy amounts of early voting?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Isn't NV already lost for him due to crazy amounts of early voting? in theory, yes. But we don't really know for sure. We can only make assumptions about who those early voters voted for based on demographics, and if those assumptions are true then he is pretty boned, but not completely boned. Regardless, things look really, really bad for Trump, and I am more bullish on him than most people.  He needs to either swing Michigan/Pennsylvania/Virginia in his favor, which would require some massive polling error in his favor, or win literally every swing state, which would require a much smaller polling error. We already know for early voting that the demographics do not favor trump in FL or NV, which could spell doom for him. We also know that polls tend to underrepresent minority votes, which means any error is most likely going to be in favor of Abuela. His path to 270 still exists, it just stinks like doo-doo. Paul Zuvella has issued a correction as of 14:59 on Nov 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:lol every model has the same projection except for upshot and maine cd-2 Which means Nate can't be the most accurate, only the least inaccurate. Only way he can be ahead in Brier scores or whatever other metric now is if the states where he was less certain go to the underdog.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Which means Nate can't be the most accurate, only the least inaccurate. Only way he can be ahead in Brier scores or whatever other metric now is if the states where he was less certain go to the underdog. You could go by projected vote percentage and see how well everyone stays in their confidence intervals. If Nate has been way to conservative this year, it should show up that he got every state in his 50% CI range, instead of only half. We did that for offshore exploration projects and it was hilarious how much people would sandbag success probabilities to not look bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:in theory, yes. But we don't really know for sure. We can only make assumptions about who those early voters voted for based on demographics, and if those assumptions are true then he is pretty boned, but not completely boned. Nevada's gone and so are his chances. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Paul Zuvella posted:in theory, yes. But we don't really know for sure. We can only make assumptions about who those early voters voted for based on demographics, and if those assumptions are true then he is pretty boned, but not completely boned. If NH is a toss-up then so are Ohio and Iowa.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:If NH is a toss-up then so are Ohio and Iowa. I'm inclined to agree with on principle alone, but NH is white as gently caress and imo more likely to sway towards trump than IA and OH are to sway towards Hilary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Looks like Nate Silver is being vindicated once again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
At the very least, Huffington Post's 98% prediction looks dumb as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
I took back everything I said about Nate Silver, he is 100% right about everything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/796177129343975424 NAAATE
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
It's pretty funny that all the 95+% news organizations are shook down to toss up territory so now dems are flock back into the warm embrace of Nate's 73%. 73% is still pretty drat high really.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Why is Michigan going red?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
So are shy Trumpsters really a thing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Sebadoh Gigante posted:So are shy Trumpsters really a thing? No, close states are close. Trump didn't immediately crumble the second returns started coming in so now the rest of the media is shook. For people who have been worried about the lack of uncertainty in some of the other models this is exactly as it should be. This is exactly what a +4% sub 50% popular vote win looks like. When Hillary wins with ~300 EV's it's going to be hilarious when everybody forgets there was 2-3 hours where everyone stopped making GBS threads on Nate Silver and then they'll go back to making GBS threads on him. edit because 270-to-win is poo poo: If Hillary gets the states she's >70% likely to win she only needs a single one of the swing states that are too close to call to push her over 270. This is why they are called swing states, lol. ErIog has issued a correction as of 04:01 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
I take it back, Nate. I take it all back.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Lotta folks owe Nate an apology.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
Nate Silver is a chubby, stuttering god
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:I take it back, Nate. I take it all back. Vox Nihili posted:Lotta folks owe Nate an apology. Fuligin posted:Nate Silver is a chubby, stuttering god I don't understand. What happened? ChristopherRobin has issued a correction as of 04:55 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
ChristopherRobin posted:I don't understand. What happened? Exactly what Nate said there was about a 30% chance of happening, a massive polling miss in Trumps favour. And literally everyone mocked him for saying it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:Exactly what Nate said there was about a 30% chance of happening, a massive polling miss in Trumps favour. And literally everyone mocked him for saying it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
ErIog posted:No, close states are close. Trump didn't immediately crumble the second returns started coming in so now the rest of the media is shook. For people who have been worried about the lack of uncertainty in some of the other models this is exactly as it should be. This is exactly what a +4% sub 50% popular vote win looks like. Lmbo
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
Zo posted:Lmbo Yeah, feeling less good about that, but if she can pull through with a few coin flips in the swing states that were still too close to call but she also needs to pick up NV and AZ for that to work. So yeah, I'm pretty shook. ErIog has issued a correction as of 05:13 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Wisconsin going red would be a major embarrassment for a lot of people
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
It looks like...the LAT/USC Poll was right all along...
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
Man Musk posted:It looks like...the LAT/USC Poll was right all along... That'd require HRC losing the popular vote...
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Nate Silver was the least wrong
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Huh, I guess 30% of the time things can happen 100% of the time after all
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:Wisconsin going red would be a major embarrassment for a lot of people
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
You must be feeling a bunch of fools right now 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
e: wrong thread
frankenfreak has issued a correction as of 05:50 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:48
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:Wisconsin going red would be a major embarrassment for a lot of people well its Happening
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Man Musk posted:It looks like...the LAT/USC Poll was right all along... no the IBD/TIPP poll was right... LA Times had Trump up +7, he's gonna win by 2-ish
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:14 |
|
|
computer parts posted:Those two events aren't related. They're not the same people, it's not the same time frame, and they aren't even the same group that's being drawn from. My one saving grace tonight is that I get to watch Sam Wang eat a bug.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 05:55
|
|
