IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2016 elections , donald trump , fivethirtyeight.com , hillary clinton , Nate Silver , political predictions , public opinion polls

Reply
Old 6th October 2016, 12:14 PM   #201
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 52,823
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
The now-cast just turned Arizona a tiny bit blue. Wow.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-forecast/#now
It's what has happened in Ohio that is the big reversal. Clinton has a 60% chance of winning...when Donald had been given the edge a week ago. I think the did not pay taxes story has hurt him badly with the key Blue Collar voters in Ohio.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 12:34 PM   #202
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility (USA, sort of)
Posts: 26,611
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
It's what has happened in Ohio that is the big reversal. Clinton has a 60% chance of winning...when Donald had been given the edge a week ago. I think the did not pay taxes story has hurt him badly with the key Blue Collar voters in Ohio.

Maybe it's from the bump Trump's campaign got from Pence's gripping performance in the debate.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 04:46 PM   #203
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,379
Wrong thread.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 6th October 2016 at 05:18 PM.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 06:09 PM   #204
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,947
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
(ETA: The odds that 19 or 20 out of 20 win their race, given that all of them have 95% odds, is about 38%. Not terribly unlikely. The odds that 95% or greater win their races, given that each have 95% odds, is a bit more of a pain to calculate, involving 22 "n choose k" calculations, but it can be done. If I do it, I will update here.)
The odds are higher than I expected.

Suppose that in every congressional district, one candidate has the (unreasonable) probability of 0.95 to win the race. In that case, the probability of every favored candidate winning is 0.32, not bad at all. The probabilty of at least 95% of the favored candidates winning is about 0.34.

Drop the probability of the favored candidates from 0.95 to 0.75, and the odds of all of them winning goes down to about 0.0018, and the odds of at least 95% of them winning is roughly 0.0027.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 06:39 PM   #205
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 32,412
Originally Posted by maxpower1227 View Post
The now-cast just turned Arizona a tiny bit blue. Wow.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-forecast/#now
That's just because of illegal aliens voting ten times each! Never fear, Sherrif Joe will track them down.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 06:51 PM   #206
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,626
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
That's just because of illegal aliens voting ten times each! Never fear, Sherrif Joe will track them down.
Personally, I'm going to send in my mail in ballot and then cast a provisional ballot at every polling station that I can manage to get to. I'm a US citizen though.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 07:33 PM   #207
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
It's what has happened in Ohio that is the big reversal. Clinton has a 60% chance of winning...when Donald had been given the edge a week ago. I think the did not pay taxes story has hurt him badly with the key Blue Collar voters in Ohio.
Ohio's been given a lot of attention, but it's everywhere. (And whether the polls adjust themselves or not, the worst prognostication is often Ohio. They just don't seem to find a way to poll the inner cities and rely on roving reporters saying, "Gosh, Ed. It just doesn't seem to be a lot of support for the Democrats.")

538 has Iowa turning blue. Once RCP puts the blue states in the gray boxes, Trump has about zero routes to victory. RCP has the most conservative projections at present. A candidate has to be leading by 6 or more for them to change the color. If they move WI, MN, NH, ME to light blue, Hillary's at 272.

And that's without FL or OH or NC, all of which Clinton will probably win.

The real key that the GOP hasn't commented on is that conservative-friendly RCP has had Trump on a solid 165 all along. Big wins for him in polling news consist of "hey, it's closer in New Hampshire than we thought". Usually based on one poll. And poof(!) a week later Hillary's up by four on the average and cruisin'. Meanwhile Donald keeps spending his money in those places and when he leaves town the polls shift to Hillary. PA, MI, NH, CO, NV. Donald's the best campaign tool the Dems have. He cuts a swath through the local Fox interviews, trashes whomever is on his list that day, and four thousand people of all stripes (unions in NV, teachers in NH, never-trumpers in MI) shudder collectively and say, "I gotta call me the Clinton HQ and help stop this schmuck!".

The Trump Challenge: Find a way to break 200 Electoral Votes. Yeah, it's that grim for him. He's got his ironclad 165. He can go to 192 with AZ and GA, which I think he'll take. He might get six in IA. I don't think he gets any others.... not OH, not FL, not NC.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th October 2016, 09:14 PM   #208
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,947
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
The odds are higher than I expected.

Suppose that in every congressional district, one candidate has the (unreasonable) probability of 0.95 to win the race. In that case, the probability of every favored candidate winning is 0.32, not bad at all. The probabilty of at least 95% of the favored candidates winning is about 0.34.

Drop the probability of the favored candidates from 0.95 to 0.75, and the odds of all of them winning goes down to about 0.0018, and the odds of at least 95% of them winning is roughly 0.0027.
Agh. A horrible miscalculation, sorry.

There a 435 house members. Given that the probability of each favored candidate is 0.95, the probability that 95% (or more) actually win their elections is actually 57%. If the probability for favored candidates is only 0.75, odds drop to 10^-29.

Even if the probability is 0.9, then the likelihood that 95% or more win is 0.0001!

Given my abject failure in calculating the probability correctly before, take these numbers with a grain of salt. I calculated them thus:

Sum_{i=0}^{22} (435 choose i) * P^(435 - i) * (1-P)^i,

where P is the probability that the favored candidate wins. (Again, I'm using a constant probability, which is unrealistic, but a heck of a lot easier to calculate.)
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 01:03 AM   #209
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
The Trump Challenge: Find a way to break 200 Electoral Votes. Yeah, it's that grim for him. He's got his ironclad 165. He can go to 192 with AZ and GA, which I think he'll take. He might get six in IA. I don't think he gets any others.... not OH, not FL, not NC.
I'm in Michigan and I'll be voting for Trump.

That should help.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 03:15 AM   #210
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'm in Michigan and I'll be voting for Trump.

That should help.
Naaaah. Trump will still be over in Grand Rapids with his Breitbart bush-beaters, wearing a pith helmet searching for The Lost Tribe of Angry White Voters while Detroit puts Hillary over the top by about 9% in Michigan. But if you could mail that sentiment in to Kellyanne, it'd help. Get them to spend some more time in Michigan, particularly chasing the elusive rust-belt vote - the people who most hate his tax shenanigans.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 09:04 AM   #211
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Update Noon 05 October

NY Times - 81%
538 - 75%
Daily Kos - 82%
Huffington Post - 82%
PredictWise - 80%
Princeton Election Consortium - 91%

Fivethirtyeight is often accused of having a left bias, but they're the most conservative (in the "playing it safe" sense of the word).
Update Noon 07 October

NY Times - 82%
538 - 79%
Daily Kos - 86%
Huffington Post - 84%
PredictWise - 81%
PEC - 93%

Whomever predicted the polls would come back towards Trump in time to make the second debate tenser is incorrect. The backlash from his poor performance in the last debate and his even poorer news coverage has created a situation where he doesn't just have to clear the low bar on Sunday, but needs a complete meltdown by Hillary or a solid knockout blow. Since their hoped-for Wikileaks bombshell was a wet firecracker, they've got to do it on their own.

Dems need to not get too smug. (Note to self: Heed your own advice.) There are thirty days to go and a month before the 2012 elections Romney was leading in a number of polls and on the RCP average.... also after the first debate.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 09:38 AM   #212
Sabrina
Wicked Lovely
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,810
To be fair though, a month before the 2012 election 538 was still predicting an Obama victory.
Sabrina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 11:49 AM   #213
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 52,823
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Update Noon 07 October

NY Times - 82%
538 - 79%
Daily Kos - 86%
Huffington Post - 84%
PredictWise - 81%
PEC - 93%

Whomever predicted the polls would come back towards Trump in time to make the second debate tenser is incorrect. The backlash from his poor performance in the last debate and his even poorer news coverage has created a situation where he doesn't just have to clear the low bar on Sunday, but needs a complete meltdown by Hillary or a solid knockout blow. Since their hoped-for Wikileaks bombshell was a wet firecracker, they've got to do it on their own.

Dems need to not get too smug. (Note to self: Heed your own advice.) There are thirty days to go and a month before the 2012 elections Romney was leading in a number of polls and on the RCP average.... also after the first debate.
Someone wrote that n the Second Debate, all Hilary has to do is not totatlly blow it,whereas Donald needs to hit a home run. Just doing better or OK will not be enough for him.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 12:53 PM   #214
Mader Levap
Graduate Poster
 
Mader Levap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,576
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Whomever predicted the polls would come back towards Trump in time to make the second debate tenser is incorrect.
It is good to be mistaken pessimist!

Current stat: 79.6%. Let's see how Sunday town hall debate - entire universe (including Trump) vs Trump - will change that!
__________________
Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Republicans is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.

Last edited by Mader Levap; 7th October 2016 at 12:56 PM.
Mader Levap is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th October 2016, 07:59 PM   #215
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Mader Levap View Post
It is good to be mistaken pessimist!

Current stat: 79.6%. Let's see how Sunday town hall debate - entire universe (including Trump) vs Trump - will change that!
The aggregators don't have any overnight action, but PredictWise, which follows the odds giving by the bookies jumped 4% since the Grab Her Pussy tape came out.

ETA: Ooops.... 538 just went up a point to point-and-a-half. I think that's reaction to the late polls on Friday, though.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

Last edited by Foolmewunz; 7th October 2016 at 08:04 PM.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th October 2016, 01:32 AM   #216
SezMe
post-pre-born
Moderator
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,178
Originally Posted by A'isha View Post
Well, I dare say! If I had known Nate was light in his loafers, I would never have turned my browser loose on his site. Now I'll have to scrub it in some bleach. <--There ain't enough of these.

More seriously, since the tape of Trump talking about women on the bus has hit the airwaves, the odds will see a major shift toward HRC before the townhall on Sunday. He has boldly stated that he has not prepared for this one either. By mid-next-week, every poll will be over 90%

Last edited by SezMe; 8th October 2016 at 01:59 AM.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th October 2016, 02:38 AM   #217
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
Well, I dare say! If I had known Nate was light in his loafers, I would never have turned my browser loose on his site. Now I'll have to scrub it in some bleach. <--There ain't enough of these.

More seriously, since the tape of Trump talking about women on the bus has hit the airwaves, the odds will see a major shift toward HRC before the townhall on Sunday. He has boldly stated that he has not prepared for this one either. By mid-next-week, every poll will be over 90%
By mid-next week? Maybe by mid-day Sunday. The betting poll (PredictWise has moved five points, NYT and 538 about three and Princeton a mere 1, but they were already 90. The Daily Kos and Huffpo haven't really moved. Knowing Daily Kos and HuffPo readers, they're still laughing too hard.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th October 2016, 08:34 AM   #218
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Update Noon 07 October

NY Times - 82%
538 - 79%
Daily Kos - 86%
Huffington Post - 84%
PredictWise - 81%
PEC - 93%
<snip>
I'd only been updating this every 48 hours but the last 24 have been rather eventful.

NY Times - 83%
538 - 82%
Daily Kos - 90%
Huffington Post - 84%
PredictWise - 86%
PEC - 93%

Two of the big jumps are from significant organizations - 538 and PredictWise, +3 and +5, respectively.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

Last edited by Foolmewunz; 8th October 2016 at 08:36 AM.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th October 2016, 02:40 PM   #219
Stacko
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
From 538's Harry Enten:
All it takes is 3 out of every 100 Trump supporters to flip to Clinton for this to turn into a double-digit blowout.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 08:22 AM   #220
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,777
Clinton is back to roughly 79% win in the 538 polls plus model. She's at similar numbers to the post-convention high.
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 09:10 AM   #221
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 32,412
I'm going to start paying more attention to the Senate forecasts. Polls and Polls-plus showing a near-even chance of a Democratic Senate, nowcast still showing R's up 54-46. Lots of close races for Republican incumbants; the only likely R pickup appears to be Harry Reid's seat in Nevada. The Dems should have lost that in 2010, but the R's picked a complete loon for a candidate.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 09:23 AM   #222
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
I'm going to start paying more attention to the Senate forecasts. Polls and Polls-plus showing a near-even chance of a Democratic Senate,........
How come the odds have moved so much towards the Republicans in the last few months on that poll tracker graph?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 10:38 AM   #223
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 32,412
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
How come the odds have moved so much towards the Republicans in the last few months on that poll tracker graph?
Dunno, I was wondering that myself.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 11:03 AM   #224
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 23,356
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
How come the odds have moved so much towards the Republicans in the last few months on that poll tracker graph?
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Dunno, I was wondering that myself.
Isn't there some popular wisdom that significant numbers of unaffiliated/swing voters want to try balancing out the power by voting opposite for the Presidency and House?

Or did I imagine that?
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 11:35 AM   #225
The Fallen Serpent
Master Poster
 
The Fallen Serpent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,139
Eighteen of the seats Republicans are predicted to win are incumbents. Incumbents tend to trend better the closer to the election. Louisiana is predicted for Republicans, and is currently held by a Republican. As said before, Nevada is the only expected pick up for Republicans.

Democrats are predicted to pick up Illinois, Indiana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. A number of those are even against incumbents. That is a pretty good swing.

Who knows though, as we get closer there can be shake up as fallout from Trump trickles down.
__________________
You don't use science to show that you are right, you use science to become right. - Randall Munroe
The Fallen Serpent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th October 2016, 11:40 AM   #226
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by The Fallen Serpent View Post
.......shake up as fallout......trickles down.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 05:25 AM   #227
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,626


And this is without pussygate fully factored in.

Last edited by Tony Stark; 11th October 2016 at 06:05 AM.
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 06:01 AM   #228
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
...blocked.

what does it say?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 06:05 AM   #229
Tony Stark
Philosopher
 
Tony Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,626
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
...blocked.

what does it say?
NYT: 87%
538: 83%
Daily Kos: 95%
HuffPo: 88%
PredictWise: 88%
PEC: 97%
Tony Stark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 06:30 AM   #230
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by Tony Stark View Post


And this is without pussgate fully factored in.
It says, up from about 48 hours ago....

NY Times - 87% +4
538 - 83% +1
Daily Kos - 95% +4
Huffington Post - 88% +4
PredictWise - 88% +2
PEC - 97% +4

Again, all of these are aggregates and they use many of the same polls, but they weight the results differently.

In terms of the RCP average, because they just added the Atlantic poll, Hillary's now on an average there of 6.5+. This is still without the full impact of the weekend's developments as some of those polls are before/after the Friday **** storm. The gap far exceeds anything during Obama/Romney. It's about the same as at this stage Obama/McCain.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 07:25 AM   #231
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,777
538 Polls only now at 84% and Polls Plus at 80.9% (highest yet).
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 07:45 AM   #232
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty View Post
538 Polls only now at 84% and Polls Plus at 80.9% (highest yet).
I wish 538 would change their algorithm for showing EC votes. If you take Now-Cast vs Polls Only vs Polls Plus there are only two different one-state swings. Now-cast gives Hillary both AZ and IA and 339.7 EC votes. Why? By my count that would be 365 EC votes.

And then, starting with their reduced total,... Polls Only takes away AZ but gives her IA and 334.5 EC votes. Why? There are 11 votes in AZ. Polls Plus gives her neither of those, but 319.7 EC votes. Again, two states with a total of 17 EC votes, but they reduce by 20. Makes no sense. It should be relatively simple - they have the EC votes and know that with the exception of NE(2) and ME(2) every state is winner take all.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 07:57 AM   #233
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,777
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
I wish 538 would change their algorithm for showing EC votes. If you take Now-Cast vs Polls Only vs Polls Plus there are only two different one-state swings. Now-cast gives Hillary both AZ and IA and 339.7 EC votes. Why? By my count that would be 365 EC votes.

And then, starting with their reduced total,... Polls Only takes away AZ but gives her IA and 334.5 EC votes. Why? There are 11 votes in AZ. Polls Plus gives her neither of those, but 319.7 EC votes. Again, two states with a total of 17 EC votes, but they reduce by 20. Makes no sense. It should be relatively simple - they have the EC votes and know that with the exception of NE(2) and ME(2) every state is winner take all.
I think it's just how they run the simulations. If you win a given state a certain number of times in the simulation, then you are given part of its electoral vote. It's intended to be a reflection of the distribution of EVs from all the simulations, rather than a whole number - i.e. when you average it all out after the simulations Hillary has a mean of 334.5 EVs.

It's actually a useful way of doing it. It's a high level display of the certainty of the results. The closer they are to the real, whole number, possibility the stronger their certainty that their predictions are correct. And a wider spread indicates higher certainty that it won't get closed.

Last edited by bonzombiekitty; 11th October 2016 at 08:04 AM.
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:07 AM   #234
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 41,468
Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty View Post
I think it's just how they run the simulations. If you win a given state a certain number of times in the simulation, then you are given part of its electoral vote. It's intended to be a reflection of the distribution of EVs from all the simulations, rather than a whole number - i.e. when you average it all out after the simulations Hillary has a mean of 334.5 EVs.

It's actually a useful way of doing it. It's a high level display of the certainty of the results.
Yeah, I get it but it's like averaging fifty judges in a boxing match and coming out with scores like 127.5 to 84... they're impossible with the points you are required to give out and the number of judges giving them. You know the Electoral votes for each state. If a state moves over to one or the other, move the finite number of votes.
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:10 AM   #235
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,579
Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty View Post
I think it's just how they run the simulations. If you win a given state a certain number of times in the simulation, then you are given part of its electoral vote. It's intended to be a reflection of the distribution of EVs from all the simulations, rather than a whole number - i.e. when you average it all out after the simulations Hillary has a mean of 334.5 EVs.

It's actually a useful way of doing it. It's a high level display of the certainty of the results. The closer they are to the real, whole number, possibility the stronger their certainty that their predictions are correct. And a wider spread indicates higher certainty that it won't get closed.
I suspect that's the case. It's simple to check: hover over each state, multiply the percentage you get with the number of EVs of that state, and add them up.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:10 AM   #236
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,777
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Yeah, I get it but it's like averaging fifty judges in a boxing match and coming out with scores like 127.5 to 84... they're impossible with the points you are required to give out and the number of judges giving them. You know the Electoral votes for each state. If a state moves over to one or the other, move the finite number of votes.
The point of those EV numbers in the model isn't to say "If Clinton wins all the states we predict she will win, this is the number of EVs she will have" it's more a display of the certainty of their predictions and who will ultimately win.
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:18 AM   #237
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,299
That would be more intuitive, but less informative.

It would effectively discretize the total EC estimate to whatever the EC value of the swingiest state is at the time. If they did that then a shift of 6 EC votes, say, could be just noise as a swing state flops over or could represent a substantive trend, and you'd have no way of knowing which until you dug deeper and looked at the individual states. Every time.
Beelzebuddy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:21 AM   #238
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
......If a state moves over to one or the other, move the finite number of votes.
But if a state moves over 3 times out of 5 runs of the programme......?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:23 AM   #239
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,579
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Yeah, I get it but it's like averaging fifty judges in a boxing match and coming out with scores like 127.5 to 84... they're impossible with the points you are required to give out and the number of judges giving them. You know the Electoral votes for each state. If a state moves over to one or the other, move the finite number of votes.
No, because that's not mathematically accurate. The EC is the outcome of 54 separate races (*). The expected number of EVs is not necessarily simply the sum of all those races you're likely to win with 50+%.

And it's unfortunately also not as easy as I wrote in my previous post; I retract that. That would be the case if all those 54 races were independent, but they're not. If there's another scandal hitting Trump, it will decrease his chances in all those races, but not to the same extent. Or if Hillary says that ex-coalminers can screw it, it will hit her chances in WV, but not or hardly not in CA.

(*) number of races:
48 winner-take-all states
1 for DC
2 Maine electoral districts
3 Nebraska electoral districts
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th October 2016, 08:35 AM   #240
Bindamel
Graduate Poster
 
Bindamel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,509
Originally Posted by Foolmewunz View Post
Yeah, I get it but it's like averaging fifty judges in a boxing match and coming out with scores like 127.5 to 84... they're impossible with the points you are required to give out and the number of judges giving them. You know the Electoral votes for each state. If a state moves over to one or the other, move the finite number of votes.

Which is why they have the actual distribution from the simulations on the same page as the forecast: (This is the Polls-only version)



So, the most likely outcome is about 360 EV for Clinton, which is probably the most meaningful number.
Bindamel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:19 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.