this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
204 points (87.2% liked)

politics

19170 readers
4579 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Polling aggregator FiveThirtyEight has named Vice President Kamala Harris as the narrow favorite to win the presidential race on Election Day, shifting from former President Donald Trump for the first time since October 17.

Harris's lead is razor-thin, with FiveThirtyEight’s model showing her winning 50 out of 100 simulations compared to Trump’s 49. Similarly, Nate Silver’s model in The Silver Bulletin also slightly favors Harris, giving her a win in 50.015% of cases.

Both forecasts emphasize the unprecedented closeness of this race, with Pennsylvania as a key battleground.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 24 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (3 children)

BuT tHeY wErE WrOnG iN 2016!1

Yes, and no. They estimated a slightly higher chance for a Hillary win over a Donald win, but they were well within the margin of polling error, and they have been for every election. Plus people have a tendency of over-valuing a "51% chance to win".

While this is good news, it could mean nothing.

EDIT: 538 explained it better than I ever could:
"Statistically, too, there is no meaningful difference between a 50-in-100 chance and a 49-in-100 chance. Small changes in the available polling data or settings of our model could easily change a 50-in-100 edge to 51-in-100 or 49-in-100. That’s all to say that our overall characterization of the race is more important than the precise probability — or which candidate is technically ahead.”

[–] InEnduringGrowStrong@sh.itjust.works 26 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I predict someone will win this election.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 11 points 11 hours ago

Yes; pollsters and advertising platforms. They've got to be raking it in these days.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 6 points 10 hours ago

Someone will win, but the rest of us might lose, bigly.

[–] knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 10 hours ago

More people should play xcom, with a 51% chance i would assume to miss 2 from 3 shots

[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who's ever played a dice-based game knows full well how uncertain 50% is.

Warhammer: oh I just need a 4+ to hit, this shouldn't be bad - proceeds to roll nothing but 2s

DnD: I just need an 11 to hit, surely I'll get him this turn - fails, rerolls a fail into another fail

Every time you need it, a coinflip will fail you

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I played a lot of D&D back in the day, and while I'm normally not a superstitious person, we did have a dice jail for poorly performing dice. That light blue d20 was a repeat offender.