Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
In the example in the Tweet, PA is awarded to Trump. But PA is projected 87% to Biden. There are other ways for JB to make up for the loss of PA, the easiest being to win Arizona (68%) and Nebraska District 2 (78%). Along with the states I mentioned, that would get Biden to exactly 270.
The states aren't independent of each other. If Trump does better than expected in Florida, there is a good chance that he does better than expected in other battleground states too.
Biden will either win or he will lose, right? No one will be able to assess the accuracy of any of these models post-election to determine if the winner should have been given a 64% chance or an 88% chance. Add in what happened in 2016 and I just don't see ANY benefit for either organization to be anything but conservative in building their model. If Biden wins and the Economist had him at 93% and 538 had him at 88% does anyone think that we'll be crapping all over 538 and declaring the Economist to be the better predictor? No, we won't. So, prisoner's dilemma thinking has me believing that if these two organizations have him around 90% then Biden's chance MUST be significantly higher than that. If they have him that high AND Trump wins then both are out of the forecasting game. Why risk it all on 10-15 percentage points? It'd be a heck of a lot easier to build a model that is OVERLY conservative to ensure that one builds in a lot of margin for error and downside risk.
It got George Popodopoulous off the streets, that’s significant and a win for all no matter what the cost.
The forecasts are also predicting the popular vote percentages overall and in individual states. How close they are to those is how I’ll judge them.
I think alot of people could be worried (consciously or subconsciously) about getting overconfident / complacent like last time and driving down voting numbers.
2020 is nothing like 2016. President Trump was unknown of how he would be as a President. We have 4 years of his history (some positive some negative).
The election. I'd prefer to not go through this all more than once.What do you mean?
Nobody has to do anything.
I'm sorry but I still don't understand. You think there will be more than one election this year we'll have to go through?The election. I'd prefer to not go through this all more than once.
Thanks. Will be super interesting to see how it plays out. Thanks for the thoughtful post.
He's just giving you a hard time, Joe. You asked if we had the election 100 times, how many would Biden win. Lehigh is saying he only wants to do the election once, not 100 times.Joe Bryant said:I'm sorry but I still don't understand. You think there will be more than one election this year we'll have to go through?Lehigh98 said:The election. I'd prefer to not go through this all more than once.
I definitely will revisit this topic next week with likely a new poll to see if things are changing.
The various machinations will probably make news for a month or so after Election Day, but I don't think very many in the federal judicial system (to include the Supreme Court) have an appetite to set a precedent for insta-lawsuits after every presidential election. There will be an ethic that the idea of suing one's way into an election victory needs to be quashed.
Florida starts counting mail-ins early and ballots must be received by election day. What I've read is expectations for reasonably quick results coming in out of Florida are higher than many other battleground states (I'm thinking of PA and WI in particular).
No worries. I'm an easy target for the :whoosh: I know. I thought everyone understood the 538 format of talking about results based on 100 simulations. All good.
We start 20 days out....I just don't understand the argument or "fear/concern" is they frame it.
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
I'm not too concerned about lawsuits, but one scenario does make me think a bit:
The concern, I think, is in regards to the 17 states (+ DC) which allow ballots to trickle in after the election.
PA was blessed by the Supreme Court. Ballots must be postmarked by 8pm Nov 3 and received by 5pm Nov 6.
I'm with you and @IvanKaramazov on this. For reasons stated by @Thunderlips and in line with the solid analysis by @Doug B, I'm very confident. Regarding the bolded, states should be able to say how many mail ballots were sent out, how many have been returned, and how many have not been received yet, so we should know whether there are enough outstanding ballots out there in a given state that could swing the election.
I mailed mine in a good 4 weeks before the election date. To a mailbox about 4 blocks from the city clerks office. I think a turtle would get it there on time. So I am semi confident it will end up counting.
My local, liberal village (outside Chicago) didn't have their drop-off box in place, so I mailed my ballot two weeks ago. Through online tracking, I saw they had it within a week, and I also received an email from them confirming receipt.
This article explains your new state's process pretty well. It explains a possible scenario where FL wouldn't be called on election night.
Yeah....i know all that stuff..... what i don't follow is the concern ofc not reporting on election night
Unfortunately that did not happen.da_budman said:
94% of voters have stated that their mind was made up before the debate, and over 1/3rd of them have already cast their ballot.
We will see, listening to POTUS Radio this morning Biden could have blown some key states last night. The more Biden talks the the worse it is for him. Should have kept his answers closer to the vest last night.
