Been some very noticeable polling failures over ghe years, most recently 2015 in the UK. I guess you should explain to those voters about your ‘math’.
I reckon the unconventional candidate and campaign is more likely to buck the polls, especially one despised by the intelligentsia, but that’s gut feeling.
Btw, good for Sam Wang! Right up there with Paul the Octopus.
LOL. Math in quotes.
Got it.
It’s only a polling failure if you think that the favored candidate (or option) should win 100% of the time. Trump is projected to have a 20% or so chance of winning, so that’s not zero - Leave had about a 25% chance the day of the vote. If Trump also has a 25% on Nov 8th, I think most of us will be hiding in bunkers while we watching the results. Still, if you’re going to bet on Trump, you’ll probably want to take some odds.
Most reliable polls are exit polls bud. Math is secondary. You’ll figure it out.
Oghier
1709
Remember when Howard Dean was deemed unpresidential because he yelled something?
KevinC
1710
I never really understood the backlash at the time, to be honest. I remember hearing so much about it when it happened but I didn’t see it live, so a week or so later I pulled up the video and was just kind of stumped. That tanked a campaign?
Miramon
1711
Dean’s campaign had already tanked and was spiraling the drain. His yell was at an event meant to inspire his supporters. It was great symbolism for the media, but if he hadn’t done it nothing would have changed for him.
magnet
1712
We don’t have any exit polls. So what is the reason behind your belief that Trump will probably win? Because “gut feeling” is even less reliable than pre-election polling. Just ask Karl Rove.
Well Magnet, apart from the reasons I’ve already stated, I’ve knocked up a bit of a mathematical model. 1 winner divided by 2 candidates equals a 50% chance of Trump getting over the line. Can’t argue with the science.
If I’m right I’ll come back to gloat and enjoy the spectacle, if I’m wrong I’ll pretend this never happened.
I alone can debunk that math.
I look forward to more insightful analysis. Perhaps I could suggest you write us a detailed essay with your findings in the event DT happens to lose the election? Because we love essays here. Your name will be remembered forever.
Timex
1717
No one can do anything about Bad Sport’s math.
Well, maybe some second amendment people can. Who knows.
rowe33
1718
Between Dave Perkins and me, I have a 50% chance of teaching his classes this fall.
That’s how I’ve always viewed the lottery. I either win or I don’t win. 50/50, right?
(forgot to make this Trumpish)
I mean, a lot of people are saying Trump - I hear that a lot - I don’t know - maybe - people - stuff
Holy crap. Congrats. You’ve thoroughly shown up decades of modelling and polling.
What about Gary Johnson and Jill Stein?
Please update your equation to an equal 25% chance per candidate.
rowe33
1722
Many people are saying that Trump’s 2nd amendment threat was just like Palin and her infamous crosshairs image targeting congress members. And look how that ended…That’s what people are saying, many in this room right here. Believe me!
Timex
1723
All I’m saying is that people are talking about this. Many smart people, with good ideas, are saying things. Why isn’t anyone talking about this?
Lantz
1724
You know who I really hate? Weather forecasters. Using their ‘math’ and ‘science’ and ‘computers’ to try and tell me what the weather will be like tomorrow? Just measure the weather tomorrow idiots.
ShivaX
1725
[quote=“BadSport, post:1713, topic:78530, full:true”] 1 winner divided by 2 candidates equals a 50% chance of Trump getting over the line. Can’t argue with the science.
[/quote]
Whelp, I’ve now read the dumbest thing on the internet.
