undefined | Better HN

0 pointsceilingcorner5y ago0 comments

I called it a debacle because 99.9% of media sources, pundits, politicians, political figures, or anyone else thought that Hillary had anything less than a guaranteed win. I'm simply suggesting it was actually always a close race, but that the media ignored this because it went against their ideological model / they weren't familiar with places like the Rust Belt.

0 comments

wtallis5y ago

You really need to be more clear about which of your criticisms are against FiveThirtyEight specifically vs against the media in general. Because now it's looking like you are complaining about the media in general and using that as justification for mistrusting FiveThirtyEight, in the context of a discussion specifically about FiveThirtyEight being a notable outlier from that general media trend.

ceilingcornerOP5y ago

It's still just unclear to me how FiveThirtyEight assigning Trump a ±30% chance of winning can be considered "accurate" or "good".

From my point of view, this is only because said people considered Trump winning so extremely unlikely that 538 getting it sort of right appears exceptional. In reality, they were still quite wrong, just slightly less so. Ergo I don't see much value in their model.

I'm seeing the same exact thing today with Biden at a 90% chance of winning.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsceilingcorner5y ago0 comments

0 comments

wtallis5y ago

ceilingcornerOP5y ago

It's still just unclear to me how FiveThirtyEight assigning Trump a ±30% chance of winning can be considered "accurate" or "good".

I'm seeing the same exact thing today with Biden at a 90% chance of winning.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse