His 2016 prediction was 70% chance for Clinton, and 30% chance for Trump. That’s substantially higher odds for Trump than any other notable prediction.
Yup. Disliking the guy is no reason for academic dishonesty though. He gave 70/30 odds. The key part about odds though is that they’re basically confidence ratings.
He was wrong and surprised, along with basically everyone else.
Guy came up with the method basically everyone uses to combine and aggregate polling data now, which is far more accurate than previous methods. It’s weird to say he’s an idiot.
Also didn’t he predict Hilary Clinton would win in 2016?
His 2016 prediction was 70% chance for Clinton, and 30% chance for Trump. That’s substantially higher odds for Trump than any other notable prediction.
Yup. Disliking the guy is no reason for academic dishonesty though. He gave 70/30 odds. The key part about odds though is that they’re basically confidence ratings.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-fivethirtyeight-gave-trump-a-better-chance-than-almost-anyone-else/
He was wrong and surprised, along with basically everyone else.
Guy came up with the method basically everyone uses to combine and aggregate polling data now, which is far more accurate than previous methods. It’s weird to say he’s an idiot.
NateHate and not knowing what you’re talking about, name a more iconic duo XD
Ahaha, well put.