![]() We can get a better sense - though still imperfect - of the forecasters’ judgment by looking at how they predicted the individual state races. These prognostications are based on how each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia were expected to vote. PollSavvy - a “ 16 y/o high school junior and his stats teacher” (18%) To recap, here are the forecasts we examined - listed by the likelihood Trump would beat or tie Clinton in the Electoral College:įiveThirtyEight - “polls-only” and “polls-plus” (29% and 28%, respectively) Other high-profile forecasts gave Trump small-to-vanishing odds. Not only did he give Trump more than a 1-in-4 chance to win the election, but he also repeatedly defended his forecasts’ bullishness on Trump, for reasons that later proved prescient. It doesn’t take fancy math to determine that Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight forecasts, although they gave Hillary Clinton better odds than they did Trump, were the least wrong. ![]() But some forecasters, who typically rely on polls and often combine them with other data to give odds on who will win, were less wrong than others. Now that every state has finally been called - assuming that Jill Stein’s recount effort doesn’t change things - we have the results. On Monday afternoon, Michigan’s Board of Canvassers finally certified Trump’s win. Earlier this month at BuzzFeed News, we announced we’d be grading this year’s election forecasts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |