• @Rapidcreek
    link
    -23 months ago

    His methodology was better since he was right and Silver was wrong.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate
      link
      153 months ago

      This is a perfectly succinct, textbook example of Outcome Bias.

      Betting $1 with a 1 in 3 chance to win $2 is objectively a bad idea; the odds are against you. It doesn’t stop being a bad idea if you win the $2 after 1 bet.

      • @Rapidcreek
        link
        -123 months ago

        Nothing like one person being right and another being wrong in bringing the amateur philosophers out.

        • @butwhyishischinabook
          link
          63 months ago

          Tell me you don’t understand directionally or literal numbers without telling me…

          • @Rapidcreek
            link
            -53 months ago

            Tell me you don’t know simple English without telling me…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      143 months ago

      Lol no that’s not how any of this works. If I flip a coin and correctly pick the outcome in 2024 will you start paying me to forecast elections?

      • @Rapidcreek
        link
        -93 months ago

        Not how it works? That’s exactly how it worked.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          53 months ago

          In one single election, yes. It means nothing, especially when you understand that his job is not to generate an accurate prediction, it’s to energize core supporters into donating to the campaign.

          By the way, you can make the same argument in reverse—Trump always overperforms his polling right? If that prediction is accurate then Biden is absolutely going to get trounced. Now I don’t necessarily think this is correct, but it’s a slightly more sophisticated version of the fallacy you are falling prey to here.