Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 18,094
![](./avatars/Republican/R_MS.gif)
Political Matrix E: 0.52, S: 1.46
![P](https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/GOVERNOR/2022/PREDMAPSI/i13984.png)
![](https://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/PRIMARY/CAMPAIGN/2024R/Banners/banner3.png)
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: March 09, 2022, 02:19:18 AM » |
|
|
« edited: March 09, 2022, 02:25:06 AM by DT »
|
Don't I have an old post where I already answered this question for you? lol
The myth of the "winners' streak" demonstrates a misunderstanding of conditional probabilities, somewhat akin to the famous Monty Hall problem.
Basically, an incumbent only has two possible outcomes for his reelection: he either increases his margin or not. If he does increase his margin then he is always reelected, definitionally. This conditionality creates the seemingly unusual probability for presidents to win second terms with better margins.
If you remove the conditionality (i.e., treat all incumbent reelections the same) then you're left with nothing spectacular at all. 17/28 incumbent presidents seeking reelection have had decreased margins.
|