USA presidential elections 2016

Post by **clv101** » 07 Nov 2016, 18:55

It's looking overwhelmingly likely Clinton will win... (as it looked with 'Remain' back in June). My exception is that she will win, fairly comfortably.
Nate Silver's is about the most positive analysis of the poles from Trump's point of view, and he only gives Trump a 30% chance of winning.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... -forecast/
It seems Florida is absolutely key to a Trump victory and he certainly doesn't have the Hispanic/Latino vote, a vote which looks to have a far higher turnout than previously.

I also think Clinton will be 'bad' result from the point of view of the rest of the world. I'll be very interested in just how hawkish she ends up being.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 07 Nov 2016, 23:14

clv101 wrote:It's looking overwhelmingly likely Clinton will win... (as it looked with 'Remain' back in June). My exception is that she will win, fairly comfortably.
Nate Silver's is about the most positive analysis of the poles from Trump's point of view, and he only gives Trump a 30% chance of winning.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... -forecast/
It seems Florida is absolutely key to a Trump victory and he certainly doesn't have the Hispanic/Latino vote, a vote which looks to have a far higher turnout than previously.

I also think Clinton will be 'bad' result from the point of view of the rest of the world. I'll be very interested in just how hawkish she ends up being.

Don't count your chickens before they hatch. If you understand polls more completely you will understand that they all have a margin of error number expressed as a percentage, usually 2.0 to 3.5 percent. That dose not mean the result is expected to fall within just say 3 percent of the poll numbers. It means that each candidates numbers could be (to take the mid point) off by three percent. So a poll that has it 45 Clinton and 44 Trump might end up anywhere between 42 Clinton vs. 47 Trump and 48 Clinton vs 41 Trump.
By midnight tomorrow you should know the real numbers, but before that all guesses are just that guesses.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 08 Nov 2016, 07:08

The margin of error for polls of any size (in the sense of being certain to within 95%) is roughly the square root of the size of the sample. Hence it goes down with larger polls, but not directly in proportion to the size of the poll.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 08 Nov 2016, 08:29

Clv101, I recall you stating just before the brexit referendum that the only question was the margin of the Remain victory.

My own view is that it could go either way.

My own gut instinct tells me that a combination of shy Trump supporters, a surge of first time white working class voters in the Rust Belt states and a last minute swing by voters to the change option will just edge it for Trump.

I am happy to accept that this could be wrong and Hilary will win it though!

Post by **clv101** » 08 Nov 2016, 09:00

Lord Beria3 wrote:Clv101, I recall you stating just before the brexit referendum that the only question was the margin of the Remain victory.

Yeah, I'd be less surprised by a Trump victory than I was about 'Leave' winning, I still think Trump is very unlikely to win. I'd give him 20% chance at best.

Post by **clv101** » 08 Nov 2016, 21:10

Early indications are Trump's losing Florida... which would be pretty much game over right there:

http://www.slate.com/votecastr_election ... acker.html

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 08 Nov 2016, 21:21

Those are "estimated" votes based on an indirect sampling and then extrapolation of people done previously in that district. There is no evidence anywhere I have looked for whether such an indirect-index statistical model has any veracity. in other words, these "early indications" are not exit polls or anything even resembling them.

Furthermore, the site even admits to a significant undercount of votes cast on the day anyway:

As some astute readers have noticed, VoteCastr's estimated early vote totals do not add up to the totals released publicly by a number of states. In Nevada, the secretary of state has reported that 770,149 total ballots were cast early while VoteCastr has tracked only 593,893. In Colorado, the secretary of state had counted 1,852,029 votes as of Monday while VoteCastr has tracked 1,656,947. And in Florida, the secretary of state has reported a total of 6,511,712 early and mail-in ballots compared to 3,680,611 for VoteCastr.

What accounts for the difference? VoteCastr is able to apply its microtargeting model when it knows the identities of early voters. (I explained the ins and outs of that model here.) Because of the way early votes are reported—essentially, it’s a piecemeal process that happens at the county level—VoteCastr does not have specific voter identity information for every single early ballot. As a consequence, VoteCastr’s top-line numbers are going to be smaller than the ones you might find elsewhere. But, VoteCastr argues, its data are more robust.....blah....blah....blah.....

The site is junk. Trump or Clinton may have won or lost. But the site is junk irrespective

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 08 Nov 2016, 22:48

Whats your take Little John?

Trump or Clinton?

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 08 Nov 2016, 23:10

If this is anything to go by, I think it will be rigged, by hook or by crook, for Clinton. At which point, expect fireworks all across America:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl724fwqls0

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 09 Nov 2016, 02:39

Trump doing better than expected. Early days though...

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 09 Nov 2016, 03:23

Well I'm just home from counting votes. 671 votes of 975 registered to vote. Vt is going for Hillary as was always expected but it looks like it is electing a Republican governor after three terms Democrat. Lots of split tickets in the 121 votes I counted with half a dozen write ins for Bernie Sanders.
Watching the networks to see how it comes out Nationally. Trump doing better then expected. Liberal media beginning to look for a savior.

Post by **clv101** » 09 Nov 2016, 04:49

Incredible. Trump's won Florida, and other key states. The polling was just as bad as with Brexit.

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 09 Nov 2016, 04:50

Looks like trump will now be the next american president.

The commentators and pundits still seem surprised.

THIS ISN'T A BLACK SWAN EVENT!

Post by **clv101** » 09 Nov 2016, 05:04

If, as it appears likely, we have a Republican President, Senate, House and Supreme Court, policy and law will shift sharply to the right. Putting aside what that would look like on the merits, it does give us something we have not had in our system of divided government: a chance for a single party to govern and be held responsible and accountable by the voters. Gone would be arguments about the other party obstructing.

It is a very different world that the gridlock we have seen.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 09 Nov 2016, 06:29

clv101 wrote:Incredible. Trump's won Florida, and other key states. The polling was just as bad as with Brexit.

We told you so.

This time I am not remotely surprised. It was obvious this was coming.