Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

projects.fivethirtyeight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#31

Post by beardedetim »

GameOfFrowns wrote: post #28
gorgonical wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Echoing a sibling comment, it seems strange it's so common that people look at probabilities like this and say that because the thing that happened was less likely that the model was wrong. They say explicitly how this works: they run simulations and count winners. That means among their simulations is very likely to be an instance that is similar to the real outcome.

>That means among their simulations is very likely to be an instance that is similar to the real outcome. So what? If you only make enough enough predictions then some of those will turn out predict the future correctly. It is how "The Simpsons did it first" meme came into being.

> If you only make enough enough predictions then some of those will turn out predict the future correctly.

If we have a coin and we say "It's 50% chance it lands heads" and it lands tails, were we wrong?

If we have a 20-sided die and we say "It has a 5% chance of landing on 20" and it lands on 20, were we wrong?

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#32

Post by UncleMeat »

Jonovono wrote: post #7
wbsss4412 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even with the benefit of hindsight, I don’t know how one can look back and say trump wasn’t an underdog going into the election. What exactly were they supposed to do? Ignore polls that show him behind and divine somehow that he was actually going to win based off of nothing?

Anyone paying attention was pretty certain Trump was going to win that. All you had to do was look at Trumps subreddit vs Hilarys. Look at Trumps rally turnouts. The energy behind Trump was insane and it seemed pretty clear something was going on in the media to make it sound like only a "minority" of people supported him. That's why I bet around $1000 with some coworkers he would win that were certain he was going t…

> All you had to do was look at Trumps subreddit vs Hilarys.

I have absolutely no idea how this could be good science.

Especially given the outcome of 2020.

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#33

Post by timapplesauce »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #25
meatsauce wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

President Trump won the popular vote in 30 of 50 states.

And 0 out of 1 countries. Here's a map showing where all the votes were cast: https://engaging-data.com/county-electoral-map-land-vs-popul...

The Electoral College exists because popular vote would lead to just a handful of our largest cities holding all of the political power. Switching to popular vote would lead to presidents completely ignoring or worse enacting policies that harm smaller cities, suburbs, and rural Americans.

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#34

Post by timapplesauce »

rgifford wrote: post #23
meatsauce wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

President Trump won the popular vote in 30 of 50 states.

9 of those 30 states have more cows than people [1]. When your state is a single dude standing in a field filled with cows, getting the popular vote doesn't say much. 1. https://beef2live.com/story-cattle-inventory-vs-human-popula...

How much of our food supply comes from New York City and Los Angeles?

Your comment implies that the needs of these states is somehow less important in the governance of our nation.

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#35

Post by GameOfFrowns »

beardedetim wrote: post #31
GameOfFrowns wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That means among their simulations is very likely to be an instance that is similar to the real outcome. So what? If you only make enough enough predictions then some of those will turn out predict the future correctly. It is how "The Simpsons did it first" meme came into being.

> If you only make enough enough predictions then some of those will turn out predict the future correctly. If we have a coin and we say "It's 50% chance it lands heads" and it lands tails, were we wrong? If we have a 20-sided die and we say "It has a 5% chance of landing on 20" and it lands on 20, were we wrong?

Depends, is the coin a Democratic party establishment candidate and the predictor part of the liberal politico-media complex trying to prime an audience?

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#36

Post by wly_cdgr »

egberts1 wrote: post #2

New York Times that predicted a 93% chance of a Clinton landslide in 2016. And the same 538 concurred with 87% chance of a Clinton win. And the very same 538 that claimed a “Comey Effect” that purportedly botched their deep analytical effort, posthumously. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-a-clinton-landslid...

While it should have been obvious to anyone who had been to Ohio in the couple years before the election that Trump was the favorite, 538 did give Clinton a lower chance than other outlets. Also, 13% things happen all the time. Now if the model had said 0.13%, ok, maybe you side-eye it

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#37

Post by wbsss4412 »

timapplesauce wrote: post #33
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And 0 out of 1 countries. Here's a map showing where all the votes were cast: https://engaging-data.com/county-electoral-map-land-vs-popul...

The Electoral College exists because popular vote would lead to just a handful of our largest cities holding all of the political power. Switching to popular vote would lead to presidents completely ignoring or worse enacting policies that harm smaller cities, suburbs, and rural Americans.

This is oft repeated, but it does hold up to even minor scrutiny.

1. More Americans live in suburbs than in urban areas, so they actually represent a larger share of the popular vote.

2. The electoral does not actually bias small states that significantly. California’s share of the popular vote was 11.0% in 2020, while it cast 10.2% of EVs.

3. The electoral college primarily biases large, tipping point states. Biden won California by a 63-34 landslide, while trump won Florida 51-48. In both cases, each candidate gets 100% of the electoral votes rather than a proportional amount.

4. Finally, the electoral college biases low turnout states vs high turnout ones, as EC votes are based on population and senators not actual votes themselves. In 2016 for example, Texas cast fewer votes than Florida, even though it is the second biggest state by population, and it got to cast 7 move EC votes.

As an aside, it’s always telling that when this debate comes up, people will always say that “California and New York will decide the election”, referencing the largest and fourth largest states, while leaving out Texas and Florida, the second and third largest…

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#38

Post by Jonovono »

UncleMeat wrote: post #32
Jonovono wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone paying attention was pretty certain Trump was going to win that. All you had to do was look at Trumps subreddit vs Hilarys. Look at Trumps rally turnouts. The energy behind Trump was insane and it seemed pretty clear something was going on in the media to make it sound like only a "minority" of people supported him. That's why I bet around $1000 with some coworkers he would win that were certain he was going t…

> All you had to do was look at Trumps subreddit vs Hilarys. I have absolutely no idea how this could be good science. Especially given the outcome of 2020.

Did I claim it was science? The people that used 'science' to predict the results... look at how that turned out.

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#39

Post by timapplesauce »

wbsss4412 wrote: post #29
rgifford wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Passion votes count the same, sure. But impassioned voters advocate for their candidates and get their friends to vote. Lesser of two evils voters don't really care like that. It's the whole reason startups go for natural marketing. Users that naturally come upon and love your product will proselyte it more and better than anyone else.

And yet the candidate with the more impassioned voters got significantly fewer votes in both 2016 and 2020.

I would argue in 2020 Biden had more of the passion votes. It was passion AGAINST Trump of course, not FOR Biden.

The entire media apparatus with only a few notable exceptions worked tirelessly to undermine Trump at every opportunity and suppress negative stories about Biden. There was almost no media coverage of Biden’s obvious mental decline, lack of energy to campaign, low rally turnout, his son’s incriminating laptop, blatantly racist comments made by Biden both during his decades serving as a Senator and even during the campaign (such as the infamous “you ain’t black” comment on Charlamagne tha God’s show.

Re: FiveThirtyEight 2022 Election Forecast

#40

Post by md2020 »

timapplesauce wrote: post #33
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And 0 out of 1 countries. Here's a map showing where all the votes were cast: https://engaging-data.com/county-electoral-map-land-vs-popul...

The Electoral College exists because popular vote would lead to just a handful of our largest cities holding all of the political power. Switching to popular vote would lead to presidents completely ignoring or worse enacting policies that harm smaller cities, suburbs, and rural Americans.

Another way of saying this is we have tyranny of the minority. A handful of small states hold the majority of the political power and get to make decisions that affect the majority of people. I don’t know why you think this is better than a majority of people holding the majority of power.
Post reply on HN