• SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Still, a word of caution: You might be tempted to make a big deal about our forecast “flipping” to Trump, but it’s important to remember that a 52-in-100 chance for Trump is not all that different from a 58-in-100 chance for Harris — both are little better than a coin flip for the leading candidate. While Trump has undeniably gained some ground over the past couple weeks, a few good polls for Harris could easily put her back in the “lead” tomorrow. Our overall characterization of the race — that it’s a toss-up — remains unchanged.

    I think it’s funny posts like this get downvoted when it’s just polls and statistics.

    I hope it will get upvoted so more people see it and get inspired to vote!

  • Wren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Didn’t 538 inaccurately call the past 2 elections? Either way- vote like polls don’t exist!

          • Wren@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Oh I understand it just fine. Fine enough not to rely on polling to indicate anything. 538 isn’t accurate. Why is that up for debate?

            Odds can’t be wrong?

            • TheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              If I told you that you had a five in six chance to roll the dice and not roll a one, and then you rolled the dice and got a one, was what I told you wrong?

              • Wren@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Their odds predicted the past two elections wrong. What part of this is not getting through?

                There wasn’t a five in six chance for the candidates during either of the previous two elections. So I’m ignoring your example.

                They were wrong. Twice. Enough said.