John Richard@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 11 days agoTrump has taken the lead over Harris for first time in 538 forecast.projects.fivethirtyeight.comexternal-linkmessage-square26fedilinkarrow-up163arrow-down151cross-posted to: politics@lemmy.worldpolitics@beehaw.org
arrow-up112arrow-down1external-linkTrump has taken the lead over Harris for first time in 538 forecast.projects.fivethirtyeight.comJohn Richard@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world · 11 days agomessage-square26fedilinkcross-posted to: politics@lemmy.worldpolitics@beehaw.org
minus-squareWrenFeathers@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down7·edit-29 days agoSo based on their record over the past two years, it’s safe to say that whoever they assume to have the best odds of winning- it’s still going to be a whoever wins, wins. My point is… they’re not accurate.
minus-squareTheKingBombOmbKiller@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up3·9 days agoWhat would accurate odds in the previous two presidential elections look like to you?
minus-squareWrenFeathers@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down3·9 days agoVoting is the only accurate means to determine a president. This bullshit with odds and predictions muddies the water.
minus-squareCoggyMcFee@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down1·9 days agoYou just fundamentally do not understand statistics and it’s tiresome
So based on their record over the past two years, it’s safe to say that whoever they assume to have the best odds of winning- it’s still going to be a whoever wins, wins.
My point is… they’re not accurate.
What would accurate odds in the previous two presidential elections look like to you?
Voting is the only accurate means to determine a president. This bullshit with odds and predictions muddies the water.
You just fundamentally do not understand statistics and it’s tiresome