Re:Time Person of the Year 2017: The Silence Breakers
by ZeroGravitas on Wednesday December 06, 2017 @10:24AM
(#15861700)
The "polls" did not predict the electoral college, they ask people how they are going to vote and how likely the are to vote i.e. the popular vote. Other predictions are a seperate step done afterwards using the polls as input, generally not by polling companies. And at least one such prediction by 538 had it as a 1/3 chance of Trump winning, which considering how narrow the eventual gap was, is a pretty darn accurate prediction.
A couple of other people did say 99%, but they were clearly wrong even before the result came in and were called out by, for example, 538.
Re:Time Person of the Year 2017: The Silence Breakers
by bigchewy on Wednesday December 06, 2017 @10:58AM
(#15862052)
>> I have a blocker for all news sites so i can't access them without going through like 20 steps.
Then consider no longer commenting on news related articles, sources etc that you don't know anything about. Wild speculation isn't helpful.
Re:Time Person of the Year 2017: The Silence Breakers
by dominotw on Wednesday December 06, 2017 @12:48PM
(#15863148)
ok. my bad.
Re:Time Person of the Year 2017: The Silence Breakers
by heartbreak on Wednesday December 06, 2017 @10:44AM
(#15861921)
> My comment was about their predictions about number of seats each candidate will win. What does that have to do with "predicting the popular vote." .
Why are you using “seats” to refer to Electoral College delegates?
Ok thats fair. I might have dismissed them without good reason. I have a blocker for all news sites so i can't access them without going through like 20 steps.
>where they were very accurate in predicting the popular vote.
My comment was about their predictions about number of seats each candidate will win. What does that have to do with "predicting the popular vote." .