Re:Live Presidential Forecast
by chiaro on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @11:00PM
(#12905946)
To be fair, the polls were consistently in the opposite direction. 538 had clinton at 70%, PEC at 99%, everyone else somewhere in between. It's a black swan event, bubble or no.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
A 30% probability event coming to pass isn't a black swan event. This term is unfortunately overused for anything unexpected but that isn't what it means.
It is a black swan event? or there are significant problems with the polls?
Re:Live Presidential Forecast
by humanrebar on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @11:34PM
(#12906067)
A new wrinkle on the Bradley effect, maybe?
LA times had it for trump. They had their own weighting. Their results when adjusted for commonly accepted weighting matched the common poll average. So it is in the weighting.
No they didn't:
>Our final map has Clinton winning with 352 electoral votes. Compare your picks with ours.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trai...
Your link doesn't work for me. If you look at their Daybreak poll http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/ you can see that they had Trump at 46.8 and Hillary at 43.6