> I honestly don't even get what Taleb is truly arguing here. He is using a lot of statistical arguments but ultimately Silver is making a model to predict an o

> I honestly don't even get what Taleb is truly arguing here. He is using a lot of statistical arguments but ultimately Silver is making a model to predict an outcome. It is like a weather forecast. "Making models to predict" is precisely the fluff that Taleb is against. There is no "if elections were held today", there are no do-overs, there is only one election. And you either win or lose (binary price [1]). So any prediction that doesn't incorporate the events between making the prediction until the election actually occurs, is worthless, or to be more precise: 50/50 (arbitrage free). The probability only goes up when you start counting the actual votes on Election Day. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06351.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.06351.pdf