Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Sorry I used the wrong word. I meant the Princeton Model. The Princeton model if you remember was forecasting a 98% probability of Hillary victory. This was because it assumed that a polling error in a state was an independent event and not a correlated event.
You made that error in your one in 8 comment. That isn’t the way swing state works. If you are down 3 points in Ohio and 2 points in Pensylvania and 1 point in Nevada and you win Ohio you likely win all 3. Essentially the odds end up being the odds of the largest polling error occurring and not the odds of 3 independent polling errors occurring.
I do agree that the under-sampling of Trump in the last two elections is a concern. I just think your 80/20 odds statement is not well founded with current data and the potential error in the current data.
|
1 in 8 may be wrong, but he's a very significant underdog without a doubt.
He's down by 2.5 points in Pennsylvania, and when under sampling is taken into account, he's probably actually down by 4 or 5. So going by your assumption that by winning Penn he automatically wins all 3 (presumptuous, but I'm willing to grant you it), he's still in quite a bit of trouble.