Why did the networks take so long to call Wisconsin? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 01:55:06 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Why did the networks take so long to call Wisconsin? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did the networks take so long to call Wisconsin?  (Read 4587 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,783


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

« on: July 03, 2017, 06:31:33 AM »

While I wouldn't deny that many network journalists might have hoped for a Trump loss I think there is a somewhat simpler explanation which has to do with evidence contradicting priors.

Regardless of what one hoped would be the outcome it was reasonable for most people to enter election night with a fairly strong prior that Clinton would win. That's what the polls, betting markets and prediction aggregators were all saying. If evidence is coming in that contradicts what you expect you're slower to accept it.

This of course often makes sense. Even if your exit poll says Trump is winning Vermont you're gonna disregard it. Even if the early precincts show Clinton on course to win Oklahoma you'll give it no credence.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.015 seconds with 12 queries.