• @WrenFeathers
    link
    281 month ago

    Didn’t 538 inaccurately call the past 2 elections? Either way- vote like polls don’t exist!

      • @WrenFeathers
        link
        -13
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Aaaaand… weren’t they wrong the past two elections?

        • @BradleyUffner
          link
          English
          221 month ago

          Someone doesn’t understand probability.

          • @WrenFeathers
            link
            -8
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Oh I understand it just fine. Fine enough not to rely on polling to indicate anything. 538 isn’t accurate. Why is that up for debate?

            Odds can’t be wrong?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              131 month ago

              If I told you that you had a five in six chance to roll the dice and not roll a one, and then you rolled the dice and got a one, was what I told you wrong?

              • @sorval_the_eeter
                link
                2
                edit-2
                30 days ago

                “wrong” is a subjective call dependent on the intelligence of the observer. To some other people the answer isnt ‘wrong’ or ‘right’ its ‘I love my pickup’ or ‘boobs!’ or ‘me no like polls, they say me losing’.

              • @WrenFeathers
                link
                -9
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Their odds predicted the past two elections wrong. What part of this is not getting through?

                There wasn’t a five in six chance for the candidates during either of the previous two elections. So I’m ignoring your example.

                They were wrong. Twice. Enough said.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  7
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Here is a direct quote from 538:

                  538’s forecast is based on a combination of polls and campaign “fundamentals,” such as economic conditions, state partisanship and incumbency. It’s not meant to “call” a winner, but rather to give you a sense of how likely each candidate is to win. Check out our methodology to learn exactly how we calculate these probabilities.

                  Source

                  In 2016 they gave Hillary Clinton a 71.4 % chance of winning, and in 2020 they gave Joe Biden 89 % chance of winning. They are dealing in odds, not calls.

                  And even if it isn’t getting through to you, how were they wrong in 2020?

                  • @WrenFeathers
                    link
                    -6
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    So based on their record over the past two years, it’s safe to say that whoever they assume to have the best odds of winning- it’s still going to be a whoever wins, wins.

                    My point is… they’re not accurate.

    • abff08f4813c
      link
      fedilink
      129 days ago

      TBF, that would have been when Nate Silver was running the show. But he left and 538 is using a new, untested model now.