No way. If she can't beat Trump she's done for good.

 

She'll have to ride off into the sunset if she loses. Too unlikeable, too old, too crooked for another run. If she can't be Trump, she certainly won't beat anyone 4 years from. She likely won't beat anyone 4 years from now if she does beat Trump today.

38% of Latinos who voted early in FL had not voted on 2012.

538 is projecting HRC with 302.

 

That's what they have because of percentage allocations, but if each state goes by its current color (therefore getting all the votes from that state rather than what percentage is allocated), the real prediction is Hillary getting 322 - provided Trump gets the single vote from Maine as expected. Even if Trump were to battle back to take Florida and North Carolina, it'd still be 278-260.

Is 538 at 100% right now?

Everyone needs to go back over this thread and really look at it close. Just saying.

TTT.

I'm simply going to assume everyone attempting to ridicule Silver and his site don't understand probability or have an intelligent critique of his methodology. Silver has been transparent about how his model works throughout the election and was probably more bearish on Clinton than a lot of the media.

I'm simply going to assume everyone attempting to ridicule Silver and his site don't understand probability or have an intelligent critique of his methodology. Silver has been transparent about how his model works throughout the election and was probably more bearish on Clinton than a lot of the media.

 

No I am trying to ridicule those who treated 538 like the Bible. And doing a good job of it I might add.

The final round of state poll results were much closer to the actual results than Nate Silver's predictions were. You cannot improve on statistically valid polling results and the polls taken immediately prior to an election are generally the most accurate ones taken during the campaign. Every pollster wants to be known as the one whose poll was closest to the actual results, and nobody bothers to investigate the previous poll numbers, because there are no actual results before the election returns are finalized.

 

To his credit, Silver's predictions were more bearish on Clinton's chances of winning than other liberal poll adjusters. He took a lot of heat from HuffPo for not placing Hillary's chances of winning at 90%+.

No I am trying to ridicule those who treated 538 like the Bible. And doing a good job of it I might add.

 

Being good at ridiculing somebody. It's not good enough to simply win or be right. Gotta rub it in. That should go a long way in bringing both sides together.

The polls failed to detect the true undercurrent of the electorate. So did the Democrats, so did the media. I and others like me were very confident going into Tuesday.

My daughter is taking AP Stats this year and we spent a lot of time talking about Nate Silvers 538 projections, as she did in class. As she was quick to point out when it was 80-20 Clinton on 538, Trump still had a 1 in 5 chance at winning. What was amazing to me was how many people acted as if she had a 60 point advantage then, even if they didn't say so explicitly. Then my little Bernie Supporter started updating me daily on the % from 538...it hit her when it was down to 65% to 35% or so that Trump had a 1 in 3 chance of winning and he had a pretty decent chance of winning.

 

538 was ever only going to be as good as the info coming in. With all of the vitriol focused on Trump supporters, it wasn't shocking that polls were under representing his potential election draw.

Lots of folks had it very wrong in this thread. Loved reading it from a position of hindsight and from the winning side!

I'm simply going to assume everyone attempting to ridicule Silver and his site don't understand probability or have an intelligent critique of his methodology. Silver has been transparent about how his model works throughout the election and was probably more bearish on Clinton than a lot of the media.

Your assumption is wrong.

Holler at me on Tuesday night if 538 proves to be wrong. They've been right for how many elections in a row now?

Hey, @PurplePride92, 538 was wrong on election night! Nate Silver should have based his analysis on the last round of polling results and not applied his expert analysis to them. He would have still predicted a Hillary win, but with much less certainty.