- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Votecastr Explained - Read before using the site.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:15 pm
quote:
Here’s how the VoteCastr system operates. By combining proprietary, large-sample polls taken prior to Election Day with targeted, real-time tracking of voter turnout on Tuesday, VoteCastr will make rolling projections of how many ballots have been cast for each candidate in each of the states we’re tracking: Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. If you visit Slate at 11 a.m. EST on Tuesday, you’ll see projections for how many votes have been cast for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in each of those states as of 11 a.m.
quote:
Some polling experts also question whether the rolling projections are even likely to be reliable, because they depend so heavily on voter turnout figures.
One obstacle is that on election day, voter turnout varies over time, according to Nate Cohn, who writes The Upshot column for The New York Times.
"Younger voters don’t usually vote in the morning, and many voters in 9-to-5 jobs might surge to the polls in the evening," Cohn said in a report on Monday.
"The VoteCastr model makes no effort to adjust for this," he says. "It will treat turnout as if it's uniform throughout the day."
But VoteCastr, as well as the two media outlets - Slate and Vice News - which will publish the projections, have defended their model, even if they acknowledge it is not perfect.
"When it comes to who might win, the emphasis should be on might," said a Slate article describing the VoteCastr projections. "There are too many unknowns for us to be able to say with confidence that what we think is happening in the present will continue to happen in the future."
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:19 pm to GEAUXmedic
That is a very iffy model.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:19 pm to GEAUXmedic
It is heavily influenced by early voting as well, although that will fade as the day moves on.
The bottom line is that it is still based on a 10,000 person survey they've done. They're simply trying to match turnout to their surveys and then post a projection of who that person selected. If you're a white male in a rural county in Iowa, chances are you voted for Trump. If they see a lot of those coming through, they'll increase chances for Trump and vice versa.
If their survey is wrong, then their projecting the wrong numbers from jump street, but they supposedly have 10k surveys in each state their doing, so who knows.
Still an interesting experiment - nothing more, nothing less.
The bottom line is that it is still based on a 10,000 person survey they've done. They're simply trying to match turnout to their surveys and then post a projection of who that person selected. If you're a white male in a rural county in Iowa, chances are you voted for Trump. If they see a lot of those coming through, they'll increase chances for Trump and vice versa.
If their survey is wrong, then their projecting the wrong numbers from jump street, but they supposedly have 10k surveys in each state their doing, so who knows.
Still an interesting experiment - nothing more, nothing less.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:20 pm to slackster
quote:
Still an interesting experiment - nothing more, nothing less.
This.. it's just an experiment. Slate and Vice were the only two willing to go along with it cause it bucks any tradition of waiting til polls close.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:23 pm to GEAUXmedic
Yeah I won't trust any numbers until precincts start reporting actual votes.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:24 pm to GEAUXmedic
quote:
This.. it's just an experiment. Slate and Vice were the only two willing to go along with it cause it bucks any tradition of waiting til polls close.
It is also a bit irresponsible to give any projections before the polls close.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 1:40 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
It is also a bit irresponsible to give any projections before the polls close.
Meh, it cuts both ways IMO. I understand it from a pure journalistic standpoint. If you have the data and you explain that it is experimental, then go ahead and report it. You can argue it suppresses vote just as much as it increases turnout IMO.
Posted on 11/8/16 at 2:02 pm to GEAUXmedic
Slate and Vice picking up a bullshite unscientific estimate to drive clicks today. I doubt this mess is within 8 points of reality.
Popular
Back to top

4






