5 ms·

It's simple: Election forecasting is often used as a form of voter manipulation, if not outright suppression. People should vote for the candidate that they wa

It's simple: Election forecasting is often used as a form of voter manipulation, if not outright suppression. People should vote for the candidate that they want to win, not the candidate that the tv says has a better chance of winning.

fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago
Isn’t the 538 approach of rigorous modeling a lot less likely to be manipulation than than the often vibes-based approach it replaced? Their predictions are based on actual polling, so they won’t take a candidate with real support and propaganda the support away with their forecasts.
- justinsaccount 3y ago
  What purpose does predicting the outcome of an election serve in a democracy?
  - fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago
    People want predictions for various reasons, but in general, predictions are good for making plans and preparing for the future. Elections are just one of many examples of an outcome you might want to predict, alongside crop yields, population growth, product sales, etc. I don’t have any deep thoughts about how these predictions serve democracy, but if people are interested in that line of inquiry, they should go ahead and pursue it.
jen20 3y ago
This only works where there is a candidate you want to win, who possibly can win. For example, where I vote in the UK, there are only two choices: Conservative or Liberal Democrat. Which you vote for has more to do with which of those you dislike least and not which is preferable (which would, frankly, be a golden retriever in a rosette, who would be more effective than either party).
- justinsaccount 3y ago
  > who possibly can win huh, who told you that, the people forecasting the election?
  - jen20 3y ago
    No, a basic understand of history. The last time someone that was not a member of the Conservative party, Liberal Democrat party, or one of the direct predecessors of these parties was 1857. If you count the Whigs as a predecessor of the Liberal party, that goes back to 1830, which is the earliest election listed on Wikipedia. It is safe to say that Bath will not be represented by someone who is not a member of one of those two parties any time soon, regardless of what forecasts may or may not say.
tantalor 3y ago
Making stuff up.
tedunangst 3y ago
Free speech, but not if it's consequential.
saghm 3y ago
Would this opinion still hold in places where voting is mandatory (or more precisely, not voting is penalized)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting

fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago

Isn’t the 538 approach of rigorous modeling a lot less likely to be manipulation than than the often vibes-based approach it replaced? Their predictions are based on actual polling, so they won’t take a candidate with real support and propaganda the support away with their forecasts.

justinsaccount 3y ago
What purpose does predicting the outcome of an election serve in a democracy?
- fshbbdssbbgdd 3y ago
  People want predictions for various reasons, but in general, predictions are good for making plans and preparing for the future. Elections are just one of many examples of an outcome you might want to predict, alongside crop yields, population growth, product sales, etc. I don’t have any deep thoughts about how these predictions serve democracy, but if people are interested in that line of inquiry, they should go ahead and pursue it.

jen20 3y ago

This only works where there is a candidate you want to win, who possibly can win. For example, where I vote in the UK, there are only two choices: Conservative or Liberal Democrat. Which you vote for has more to do with which of those you dislike least and not which is preferable (which would, frankly, be a golden retriever in a rosette, who would be more effective than either party).

justinsaccount 3y ago
> who possibly can win huh, who told you that, the people forecasting the election?
- jen20 3y ago
  No, a basic understand of history. The last time someone that was not a member of the Conservative party, Liberal Democrat party, or one of the direct predecessors of these parties was 1857. If you count the Whigs as a predecessor of the Liberal party, that goes back to 1830, which is the earliest election listed on Wikipedia. It is safe to say that Bath will not be represented by someone who is not a member of one of those two parties any time soon, regardless of what forecasts may or may not say.

tantalor 3y ago

Making stuff up.

tedunangst 3y ago

Free speech, but not if it's consequential.

saghm 3y ago

Would this opinion still hold in places where voting is mandatory (or more precisely, not voting is penalized)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting