So then Democrat don’t even need to go out and vote... they’ve got it all set
I think Trump will win bigly. These polling companies will have a lot of splaining to do after the election. I look at them as suppression polls. They’re in the tank with the left in this country and will lie,cheat and steal to get to their goal of total power. By any means necessary. Right?
His premise is that bettors are a better predictor then polls and betters in 2020 are overwhelmingly on the Biden side of the equation. Makes absolutely no sense because betters were on the Clinton side of the equation betting on the basis of the garbage polls in 2016.
Is there a site that allows US residents to legally bet on US elecyions?
There is always going to be statistical variation.
Nate Silver on the night before the election gave Trump a 29% chance of winning the electoral college in 2016.
His polls and predictions were failures.
A scene to remember: PDT pointing to his head and saying Slo Jo is “gonezo.”
Once again your thread begins to repeat itself.
What are the odds of Trump, Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election?
Published November 1, 2016PoliticsTribune Media Wire
To borrow the cliché, the 2016 U.S. presidential election has been one for the books – but in the United Kingdom, it’s been one for the sports books.
With just one week to go, at offshore sportsbooks and at shops in the betting-mad United Kingdom, Clinton remains a substantial favorite, with odds hovering around -300 – meaning one must bet $300 to win $100. Meanwhile, Trump is in the range of a +275 underdog – meaning a $100 bet could bring in $275. https://www.fox6now.com/news/what-are-the-odds-of-trump-clinton-winning-the-2016-presidential-election
Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, which came closest to predicting Trump’s win in 2016...
Ahahahahahahahahahahaha...... wow...just wow.
Gamblers die broke.
Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, which came closest to predicting Trump’s win in 2016...
They really are delusional.
They believe their own BS, and those are worst type of deluded fools.
I'll say this, though: if Trump "loses", we should act as if he won and Demonrats cheated. Trump should not concede.
I was watching one of Bill Whittle's videos last night, and in it, he discussed a famous incident that happened at the world fair in 1904.
One of the attractions was a large ox they were giving away. You could guess the weight of the ox and write it down on a piece of paper. Whoever got the closest guess to the real weight won the ox.
The did a statistical analysis on the guesses (they had all the names and addresses) and were able to find out some interesting data.
The best guess was the mean of ALL the guesses submitted. The mean of all of them together came within a pound of what the ox actually weighed.
Using their researched data, they divided the people who submitted guesses into classes such as "Farmer", "Butcher", "Rancher", "Office worker", "Factory worker", "Housewife", and so on.
They found and interesting phenomenon-the average of no single grouping's guess was as accurate as the mean of the whole.
Even more interesting is...the people who should have been able as a group to guess better...didn't. The experts, people who SHOULD have been able to make on the whole more accurate guesses at the weight of the ox, missed it, and in some cases, missed it worse than other groups.
One would think Ranchers who were well versed in evaluating flesh on the hoof, or Farmers, or even Butchers, would be able to guess more accurately, didn't.
This oddity engendered studies, many of them to replicate and study this phenomenon. They found the same type of result again and again, replicating the initial one, the experts rarely, if ever, did better at making guesses on something they had expertise on.
In analyzing it, they realized two things had to happen for this to hold up:
They found that if the audience was not representative of a complete cross section (that is, they only included farm workers, or only included miners), but they also found that if "experts" were allowed to influence the guessers...people would change their guesses because they became "biased".
This is a very meaningful type of study, and tells us why Capitalism works where a huge cross section of people vote for goods and services using their hard-earned dollars as ballots.
It also tells us one of the reasons why socialism does NOT work-a small group of experts typically does not make judgements as accurately as a large and varied group that is a real cross section.
There have been studies done and redone since the initial one, that all validate it.
I think all of those things apply here...to the polling, to the election voting, to capitalism vs. socialism, and to the economy in general.
The left have a fixation about making things up note everything they stated in this election.