I think what people sense -- and this is related to the "Bayesian vs. frequentist" debate -- is that an election is not really a random event. The source of unc

I think what people sense -- and this is related to the "Bayesian vs. frequentist" debate -- is that an election is not really a random event. The source of uncertainty is different. The Card Sharks example is a genuinely random event. If you draw a random card, it will probably be higher than 5, but it could be lower. Whereas an election is not truly random. By election day the outcome is essentially foreordained. The "randomness" that 538 is trying to model are things like uncertainty and unreliability in the polls. What is the relationship between what voters said they will do, and what they actually will do? You can make inferences based on the past, but every election is different, and the mood of the electorate is definitely unique this year. Nate Silver knows from his experience to hedge his bets, as he did in 2016. It's much more complicated and subtle than a genuinely random event. I find it understandable that people get confused.