Columbus, OH
There is a danger that I'd like to point out in your predictions.
In earlier days, pollsters would make predictions of the outcome, i.e., Bush
will get 51% of the vote, and it will result in some modeled electoral college
vote.
But now the Times, and others, such as 538 and Huffpost, publish the odds,
which is quite a different calculation, and turns a 52% vote margin into a 90%
probability (I made those figures up,... Show more
Columbus, OH
There is a danger that I'd like to point out in your predictions.
In earlier days, pollsters would make predictions of the outcome, i.e., Bush
will get 51% of the vote, and it will result in some modeled electoral college
vote.
But now the Times, and others, such as 538 and Huffpost, publish the odds,
which is quite a different calculation, and turns a 52% vote margin into a 90%
probability (I made those figures up, but you will recognize the directional
correctness of them). Then the 90% figure becomes a headline all over the
news, on TV, on internet, etc. This, in an era where the polls on which the
figure is based are severely unreliable in the era of the cell phone.
Our populace is not particularly well educated on statistics, let alone basic
arithmetic. In the popular view, 90% means it's already been decided, and it
really isn't necessary to vote, or, if you're going to make the effort, you
can go ahead and waste your vote on a third party or a write-in. I know plenty
of millennials who did just that.
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan were determined by fewer that 80,000
votes, if I remember correctly, on a total vote of 137 million, which was a
new low in turnout, percentage-wise.
I beg you to abandon your computation of the odds because it is actually
influencing the results. I am sure you already realize this. So please, stop,
and please tell the headlines why you decided to stop.
------
Video: https://moxox.com
Music: https://muxiv.com
AV: http://yofuk.com
