not even nate anymore (worse) but 538 has has 297 evs for trump as the third most likely outcome. with 312 being the most likely.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

how do you think probability works?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48300090)

Lmao at this cope. I could have done that too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48300902)

hard to tell if you're being obtuse or really just a dunning kruger midwit. but if you don't find value in statistical models no one is forcing you to pay them any mind.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48301110)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48301195)

it's as if i said "if you flip a coin twice there's a 75% chance it won't land on heads twice", and then when it does, you rage about how stupid my prediction was.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48301316)

What in the fuck are you talking about? Every goddamn poaster here made a strong prediction about the race? Do you mean make your own model? And if so, you realize it's perfect legitimate to criticize a product/service that you don't or even can't provide yourself, right? Especially if part of your criticism is that the whole class of products is stupid and shouldn't exist?

"it's as if i said "if you flip a coin twice there's a 75% chance it won't land on heads twice", and then when it does, you rage about how stupid my prediction was."

No, it's more like if I read your palm and told you that a very big opportunity would be coming your way in a very short period of time, and then your wife and kids died in a car crash and I was like "see, this creates an opportunity in its own way for you to start anew with a new wife and new kids," and you were like "no my face and balls were destroyed in the accident," and I was like "oh, well, I said 'short period of time' so it probably hasn't happened yet."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48302133)

this is no different than when a client engages you for legal services and you coach them on what's likely to happen, and they still have expectations completely out of line with what you explained. and no matter how much you explain what's going on they're like "yeah, but i want x outcome!"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48302295)

you're retarded. that's exactly what i said. what do you think is the difference between a "aggregator" and a "model" aside from the more advanced analysis of the data? yes, it does other things beyond weighing polls, but you didn't seem to even understand that much.

state your most advanced statistics course before i engage you further.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48301293)

it does produce results when the models are used with things that can be repeated. the issue is that an election cannot be repeated and tested against the model. you have no idea whether if you ran the election 100 times how the distribution would work out. but there will always be outliers.

in events that can be repeated these models prove how predicative they are. as well as when you consider individual events over a long period of time.

people that just say "wow, an outlier happened, therefore this is crap" don't understand what a stupid statement that is. outliers are *guaranteed* to happen. and in this case, the results were well within silver's most probable results. if you think you can do better, do it, because then you'd be making millions instead of passionately arguing about shit you don't even know the fundamentals of.

hth.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5628539&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310481",#48301543)