Good job predicting the outcome of the election. But no way will you be able to do better than 538 in the long run.

I agree with this entirely (assuming you are talking generally, not about 538 specifically). There were people in the GJP Superforecasting project giving Clinton 98% chance of the win 2 months out, which in a 2-person race is just ridiculous (There were people giving Trump that as well, but a lot less of them).

How did you come to this 50/50 prediction though? I can't find the report now, but I believe that Trump data science team gave him a 35% chance of winning, and that was only in the last 10 days of the campaign (they gave him much less prior to that).

To go from the 28%/35% (538/Trump Team) range to 50% seems a pretty big jump.

I haven't done the maths, but to make it a 50/50 doesn't that mean polls in Michigan etc would have had to be around 10% incorrect (to give him sufficient margin to make it that sure)?

That seems a pretty big difference to what the error actually was.