ST Alpha - "The same kind of "evidence" that showed he had a 99% chance of losing the election?" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 152

In response to "oh, it can sow even more distrust of media among supporters, to be sure. i just don't think you can win with this sort of media strategy.." by x

The same kind of "evidence" that showed he had a 99% chance of losing the election?

Posted by Cuzzin Todd (aka cuzzintodd) Jan 21 '17, 15:42

I don't disagree with what you're saying in theory. And I ultimately hope it plays out against Trump and more people turn on him and his special brand of bullshit.

I'm just surrounded by a large number of people that I expect are going to keep drinking the kool aid.

Responses:

ST wasn't there. We thought Hil would win, but a lot of people gave way lower odds than those. (link) -- (link) - Andie Jan 21, 16:43 [Backboard]
It would be difficult to find any over 85%, although I think there were one or two outliers up there. -- nm - mara Jan 21, 15:55 9
- My recollection is that almost everybody other than 538 was in the mid-upper 90s on election day -- nm - ty97 Jan 21, 16:06 8
  - bookies were paying out tickets for Hilary prior to the election, doesn't get more sure thing than that -- nm - Beaker Jan 21, 16:13 3
    - show me a bookie who pays out before the race is over, and i'll show you a bookie.... - x Jan 21, 16:16 2
      - I wonder if it saved them some bucks in the long run - Reagen Jan 21, 16:18 1
        
        right. you pay out early to hedge your bets....nm - x Jan 21, 16:21
  - It's weird (but I mean, I know why people are trying this) that Silver is getting hammered for polling failures - Reagen Jan 21, 16:08 3
    - the real problem is that most people don't understand how probability works....nm - x Jan 21, 16:10 1
      - There's a 50/50/50 chance you're right about that. -- nm* - Cuzzin Todd Jan 21, 16:20
    - Conservatives have hated him for years and don't care about facts. They just want a pound of flesh from Mr. Smarty Pants. -- nm - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:10
what are you taking about? i don't remember anyone saying he had a 99% chance of losing the election. what is your source for that? - x Jan 21, 15:52 10
- Actually, it was 538 that kept me from hopping competely onboard the "Hilary's got this" train. - Cuzzin Todd Jan 21, 15:59 1
  - I posted a Ken Jennings tweet that Trump had the same chance as a missed extra point. - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:05
- some of the poll aggregator/model people did. HuffPo I think. NY Times had her at 94 or 95%. -- (edited) - ty97 Jan 21, 15:58 7
  - Even Princeton Election Consortium had her at 98-99%. Here they are defending it on November 6. -- (link) - ty97 Jan 21, 16:03 4
    - Nate of 538 and Ryan Grim of HuffPo twitter warring about the topic in early November -- (link) - ty97 Jan 21, 16:04 3
      - Heh, okay. I guess it was HuffPo. -- nm* - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:07 2
        
        this is all fair enough. i sure don't pay any attention to huffpo....nm - x Jan 21, 16:12 1
        
        The important thing is that it was the bad timing hall of fame. - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:16
  - I'm trying to find the piece I read on election day (or the day before) scolding 538/Nate Silver for being too gloomy... - Cuzzin Todd Jan 21, 16:01 1
    - That's the one I referenced below. I don't remember who it was, either. -- nm - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:06
That's probability models, not polling, and anyone who went with 99% was bonkers. -- (edited) - ty97 Jan 21, 15:48 4
- Nate Silver got slammed by an analyst at some site like HuffPo (but not them). His research indicated 99%. - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:04 3
  - I think it actually was HuffPo. But models have to allow for unexpected events like Comey to happen - ty97 Jan 21, 16:05 2
    - Could have been, but I tend to dismiss things on HuffPo as quickly as I would dismiss something from Fox. -- nm - Cuzzin Todd Jan 21, 16:21
    - That's the problem with models predicated on history. Nothing can anticipate the unprecedented. - David, ST's Ultimate Lover Jan 21, 16:09

Post a message top

The same kind of "evidence" that showed he had a 99% chance of losing the election?

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.