Summary

Polling aggregator FiveThirtyEight has named Vice President Kamala Harris as the narrow favorite to win the presidential race on Election Day, shifting from former President Donald Trump for the first time since October 17.

Harris’s lead is razor-thin, with FiveThirtyEight’s model showing her winning 50 out of 100 simulations compared to Trump’s 49. Similarly, Nate Silver’s model in The Silver Bulletin also slightly favors Harris, giving her a win in 50.015% of cases.

Both forecasts emphasize the unprecedented closeness of this race, with Pennsylvania as a key battleground.

    • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      16 days ago

      Pollsters sucked in the election. It’s like forecasting a 50% chance of rain. “One candidate may win, but the other may win too!” I know that.

      • candybrie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 days ago

        That’s pretty much always what the polls say for the presidential election. I don’t know why people expect pollsters to have crystal balls. The election is mostly decided on who is going to actually go vote, and a lot of people don’t know the answer to that until election day.

    • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Nate said today that a coin actually has a 50.5% chance of heads, so this is technically closer than a coin flip!

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      This is why people keep complaining about the polls being wrong. The polls are often pretty good these days, but the people reporting and talking about them do not understand basic statistics.

      If I had a coin with a small booger weighting one side and making it more likely to land booger side down 51% of the time, would I be surprised if it landed booger side up? No.

    • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      16 days ago

      I cannot wait to stop seeing this comment. “Doesn’t matter. Go vote.” Like people on Lemmy or even reddit for that matter are unaware of the impact of voting.

        • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          16 days ago

          Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.Doesn’t matter. Go vote.

          pls upvote me

  • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    BuT tHeY wErE WrOnG iN 2016!1

    Yes, and no. They estimated a slightly higher chance for a Hillary win over a Donald win, but they were well within the margin of polling error, and they have been for every election. Plus people have a tendency of over-valuing a “51% chance to win”.

    While this is good news, it could mean nothing.

    EDIT: 538 explained it better than I ever could:
    "Statistically, too, there is no meaningful difference between a 50-in-100 chance and a 49-in-100 chance. Small changes in the available polling data or settings of our model could easily change a 50-in-100 edge to 51-in-100 or 49-in-100. That’s all to say that our overall characterization of the race is more important than the precise probability — or which candidate is technically ahead.”

    • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      16 days ago

      Anyone who’s ever played a dice-based game knows full well how uncertain 50% is.

      Warhammer: oh I just need a 4+ to hit, this shouldn’t be bad - proceeds to roll nothing but 2s

      DnD: I just need an 11 to hit, surely I’ll get him this turn - fails, rerolls a fail into another fail

      Every time you need it, a coinflip will fail you

      • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        I played a lot of D&D back in the day, and while I’m normally not a superstitious person, we did have a dice jail for poorly performing dice. That light blue d20 was a repeat offender.

  • EleventhHour@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    I wouldn’t be surprised if what we learn from this election is how it wasn’t really close at all, and all of the polls were extremely wrong.

    I’m basing this on the fact that more newly registered voters are voting this election than in decades, and all of the polls only account for “likely voters“ based on their registration and party affiliation without taking into account all of the new voters. Most of the new voters are likely to vote Democratic.

  • JWBananas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    16 days ago

    The fucking media!

    Look at this.

    These two posts are about the exact same data from the exact same source:

    Notice the subtle difference?

  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    I dont care what the polls say. I voted, you should vote, tell your friends and family to vote. Tell the stranger down the street you barely know to vote.

  • TipRing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    The safest prediction of 50/50. No matter who wins they can claim to have called it.

  • LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    “Suddenly”. Mainstream media is realizing they are at a risk of becoming irrelevant due to their blatant lies and disparity in their coverage for Kamala vs Trump.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    In 2016, Trump needed to win three states that were coin flips to win the race. With that, pollsters said he had a 1 in 8 chance. Trump took those coins, glued them together (the states had correlated outcomes) and then flipped the 3-coins-glued-together and got all three to land heads. So instead of a 1 in 8, it was a 1 in 2.