people who say that have no understanding of stats. there is something called a margin of error. all of the reputable polls had a trump victory within the margin of error. there is no certainty in stats
He gave Trump about 30+% chance of winning, which was by far the highest out there from anyone else I saw.
Morey uses this logarithm, he acquired three players in the top 31 without first round pick. But the cincher is that Vince Edwards compares to Chandler Parsons lol
was it 30% chance of outright winning the election or just 30% of electoral votes in a landslide loss? in any case, i had actually seen at least 2 diff hedge fund computer models stubbornly predicting trump wins it all even a year prior thru election nite. not because it was trump, but simply b/c that's the way the trend was going w/ voters fed up w/ establishment. moral of the story, computers will be the death of us all
He had it at 30% chance of a Trump victory. Nate Silver had also written an article months before the election discussing that same sort of thinking you mentioned and cyclical American anti establishment voting history. I thought he had some pretty good analysis overall. Anyhow it’s great to see we are guaranteed to have the next Eric Bledsoe!
The 538 model is complex and they ran a full simulation of the entire national election, district by district, 10,000 times per day, including every latest poll with individual weighting for reliability and demographics and performance over time, trends, etc. The percentage was the percentage of wins in those simulations for that day. Silver wrote weeks earlier that the "blue wall" was not at all as steady as many assumed. The 30% projection was solid considering how rare it is to win the electoral college but not the popular vote. The CARMELO projections may be junk, but 538's election models and political reporting are consistently among the best in the business.
