538 model & poll tracker thread

[ultraviolet]

Good find, I expect you're right.

He did this already in the primaries. After Super Tuesday it took him FOREVER to release the updated model showing Biden with a 99% chance of winning. And I have no doubt it was because he feared the wrath of the bros even though he was right.

What malarkey, he updated within 2 days.
Grow up, outside of high school hanging on to grudges won't get you far.

Hell I'm pretty sure the model started showing Biden winning more delegates headed into super Tuesday lol.

I remember they had a Super Tuesday simulator and it definitely still had Bernie as the favorite at that point.

[ultraviolet]

This model is really awful. Biden 72% in MN but 73% in PA? 84% in CO? Trump 10% to win in NM???

Cmon nate you can do better

[ultraviolet]

It’s unbelievable that you have to go to each state’s individual page to see the forecast for it. There should be a map, or at the very least a list that’s all on one page.

[ultraviolet]

It’s really bothersome how little information the design of this model makes easily available to viewers.  It seems like the only message they want to communicate is “I guess anything could happen?!?”.

Where’s the “polls only” forecast?
Where’s the “now cast”?
Where’s the easy link to the database of polls used to generate the projections?
Where’s the accounting for how individual “fundamentals” factors influence the projections?
Where’s the map??

All of this was available in the 2016 model, which actually performed quite well.  This is such a huge step backward.

He has said since 2017 that he's never doing another Nowcast and it was a mistake to make it, so I'm not surprised it's gone.

The rest, though, should be there. I really want that list of probabilities of various interesting things (Electoral tie, landslide, EV/PV split, etc) that they had in 2016.

There is a link at the very bottom of the "National overview" page that will download model outputs. Besides more precise numbers, there is a file called "Scenario Analysis" that includes the chances of:

1: An Electoral College tie. (0.3%)
2: A presidential recount. (0.5%)
3: Trump winning the popular vote. (16.6%)
4: Biden winning the popular vote. (83.4%)
5: Trump winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College. (0.1%)
6: Biden winning the popular vote but losing the Electoral College. (10.2%)
7: Trump winning a majority. (12.3%)
8: Biden winning a majority. (78.5%)
9: Trump winning by over ten points. (1.2%)
10: Biden winning by over ten points. (31.9%)
11: The same map as 2016. (0.0%)
12: Trump winning a Clinton state. (41.1%)
13: Biden winning a Trump state. (88.0%)

All of this is interesting, and it's valuable to have, but it is definitely odd that it requires a separate file download to find.

How is the 2016 map 0.0%?

[ultraviolet]

I noticed in the current "cloud" figure of 100 sample elections that Biden wins >350 electoral votes about 37% of the time.  Trumps wins >350 electoral votes 1% of the time.  So many the uncertainty finally is contracting somewhat.

If you create a map where Biden wins everything in their "Very likely" category (95%+ chances) and Trump wins everything else, you end up with this:

362-176 Trump. It's on the verge of plummeting to 349-189 because Virginia is RIGHT on the cutoff line of that Very Likely category.

Why is VA safer than OR?

[ultraviolet]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1306946216828305410

You can clearly see that Trump’s line is above basically all the poll dots, and Biden’s below.

[ultraviolet]

He said in the aritcle that went up last night that Biden's odds would be 91% on Election Day if things stay consistent.

Given that 91% was exactly the odds he gave Obama 2012 on Election Day when Obama only had a 1.5% national polling average lead over Romney, it says a lot about how much more cautious this model is that it'd give Biden's much larger lead the same chance.

I'm not so sure about that. The model also detected structural advantages for the democrats in the electoral college in 2008 and 2012. But now it thinks Trump has a structural advantage.

Yeah because that’s the truth...

The tipping point will vote to the right of the nation this year while in 2008 and 2012 it was to the left.

[ultraviolet]

I could be wrong but I think MacArthur is doing some sort of mocking? He lectures us all the time on stuff like this so

[ultraviolet]

In the absence of much new polling, Trump's chances will steadily decrease toward Election Day as the incumbent/economy factor gets less weight.

Especially considering how few undecideds there are. That was the big difference between 2012 and 2016. The 2012 forecast gave Obama over a 90% chance of winning, despite his national lead over Romney being smaller than Hillary's over Trump. The range of uncertainty was much smaller.

As we get closer to Election Day, the range of likely outcomes will definitely narrow.

Also, the EC advantage. In 2012 the race seemed pretty close nationally but the EC was stacked hard against Romney, since he would have to win states Obama won by up to 9 to win.

[ultraviolet]

His analysis is getting very poor. Just because some people are dumb doesn’t mean you have to oversimplify it to the point where there’s only one factor.

[ultraviolet]

Tbh they probably just don’t want to say Biden is “clearly favored”

[ultraviolet]

After getting his ass whupped last election, Nate is going with Biden having a 90 percent chance of winning?

Wow. Crazy sauce.

It’s amazing that you’ve come on here for the last 9 years to make 6,000 low effort posts

[ultraviolet]

You do you, we’ll find out soon enough

[ultraviolet]

But Trump's chances go up to almost 70% if you give him PA.
If you give him Wisconsin it goes up even more.

Yeah, Nate's staked his reputation on this election here. He's going to regret calling it a 90 percent election for Biden.

Only cause GEM has it at 96%