3 ms·
I think FiveThirtyEight's method is overrated but they basically put the last three elections as 50/50. Given how close the three of them were that seems fair e
by neaden 2y ago
I think FiveThirtyEight's method is overrated but they basically put the last three elections as 50/50. Given how close the three of them were that seems fair enough.
- rurp 2y agoWhat? They had Biden at something like 90% to win. Hilary was around a 2-1 favorite which was vastly lower than almost anyone else.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> FiveThirtyEight's method is overrated but they basically put the last three elections as 50/50 You may be thinking of Nate Silver's Silver Bulletin [1]. He took the original 538 model with him when he left. The model 538 runs now is something they made up afterwards. [1] https://www.natesilver.net https://www.natesilver.net
- lotsofpulp 2y agoI don't consider losing all 7 swing states 50/50. If the Dems had a chance, presumably, they would have picked up at least 1 or 2? Also, all states increased their proportion of votes that Trump received.
- rurp 2y agoPolling errors are highly correlated so it's not surprising if all states that are within a point or two break the same way. Nate's model had Trump sweeping the swing states as the single most likely outcome, with Harris sweeping all seven as the second most likely.
- lotsofpulp 2y agoSure, but when I hear 50/50, I expect the result will be nearly tied. Like a sports game. 312 electoral college votes versus 226 electoral college votes does not seem like it was a 50/50 game. Of course, this isn't a linear game where scores are alternating, so my line of thought isn't completely fair.