- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
2
Posted on 8/12/20 at 10:30 am to jatilen
Actually, Nate was criticized by liberals before Election Day 2016 because his model was considered to be far too generous to Trump. Many thought it ridiculous that Trump was given a near-30% chance of victory.
Sure, they ended up with egg on their faces, but Silver was actually one of the fairest and most objective analysts at the time. Trump's victory actually vindicated him in a certain sense, since he had given Trump the highest odds of winning compared to other analysts.
Sure, they ended up with egg on their faces, but Silver was actually one of the fairest and most objective analysts at the time. Trump's victory actually vindicated him in a certain sense, since he had given Trump the highest odds of winning compared to other analysts.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 12:04 pm to jatilen
quote:
This is terrible news. Nate was so accurate in 2016:
I'm sure you are looking at the top percentage numbers, but if you look at the map, it's actually almost spot on.
The popular vote broke almost exactly as predicted
He missed on 4 states, but they were arguably the 4 biggest: WI,NC,FL,PA
Of the 4 he missed, NC and FL where shaded the lightest blue, which indicated basically a 50/50 tossup to Hillary
From an EC standpoint the victory was a landslide in 2016, but that came with razor thin margins in some key states
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News