3 ms·

Normally reporters are supposed to be unbiased, and so making a call one way or the other is inappropriate. In OP/ED mode, probabilities are completely beside

Normally reporters are supposed to be unbiased, and so making a call one way or the other is inappropriate. In OP/ED mode, probabilities are completely beside the point. No one is going to say, "You should vote for XYZ because he is currently the most likely to win." I really am not sure what the point of predicting is unless you're betting, or unless you're a high-level campaign manager who needs to allocate resources in various districts/states.

nmcfarl 14y ago
I can give you another reason with a much bigger population base. You have a candidate you are backing, with your time and/or money. But you are not made of time and money. What are you doing this weekend, working in the yard, or at the phone-bank? Signing checks to your candidate, or putting that money back into your business? Predictions help a lot here - they're useful for time and money allocations other than just at the "high-level campaign manager" level.
- tspike 14y ago
  Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me. I agree that disinterested parties have a lot to gain from a probabilistic analysis, but someone who's working at the phone bank likely cares deeply about the cause and is convinced that their efforts can make a difference. At a macro scale, they do make a difference. It's precisely those kinds of actions which shift the overall probabilities regarding the outcome.
albedoa 14y ago
Citing statistical models based on massive samples of polling data is not biased reporting; it's based on fact, on what's actually happening. What the the media should not be saying is that the race is close when it isn't. It has no basis in reality. One purpose of predicting the outcome is to take the narrative back from the pundits whose obvious motives are to maintain the perception of a close race. That's media bias. The FivetThirtyEight is a response to that.

nmcfarl 14y ago

I can give you another reason with a much bigger population base. You have a candidate you are backing, with your time and/or money. But you are not made of time and money. What are you doing this weekend, working in the yard, or at the phone-bank? Signing checks to your candidate, or putting that money back into your business? Predictions help a lot here - they're useful for time and money allocations other than just at the "high-level campaign manager" level.

tspike 14y ago
Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me. I agree that disinterested parties have a lot to gain from a probabilistic analysis, but someone who's working at the phone bank likely cares deeply about the cause and is convinced that their efforts can make a difference. At a macro scale, they do make a difference. It's precisely those kinds of actions which shift the overall probabilities regarding the outcome.

albedoa 14y ago

Citing statistical models based on massive samples of polling data is not biased reporting; it's based on fact, on what's actually happening. What the the media should not be saying is that the race is close when it isn't. It has no basis in reality. One purpose of predicting the outcome is to take the narrative back from the pundits whose obvious motives are to maintain the perception of a close race. That's media bias. The FivetThirtyEight is a response to that.