electoral college histogram

vision · Post by **vision** » Sat Aug 06, 2016 11:36 am

callmeslick wrote:Time will tell if misplaced......

While it is looking bad for Drumpf, there is still a chance he can even out the numbers a bit. With three months to go all he has to do is dial it down a little and show noticeable restraint and his numbers will pick up. Maybe not enough to overcome Mrs Clinton, but enough to aggravate some Democrats.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Aug 06, 2016 12:23 pm

I see where Trump is now endorsing Ryan so maybe he is learning...

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:42 pm

or perhaps bitchslapped by reality.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sat Aug 06, 2016 3:44 pm

Isn’t that the same thing.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Aug 06, 2016 5:59 pm

Slick is always looking for a angle to denigrate Trump.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:52 pm

I mentioned this one, to the ever-hopeful Woodchip. Let's put it back up here for easy access, should he take my advice.
Bayersian likelihood approaching 90% for Clinton.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sun Aug 21, 2016 2:53 pm

I bump this extremely accurate(historically) analysis merely because it now shows something I've never seen before, even a week or two out. Both random drift(chance events taken to extreme extrapolation) and Bayersian(more like range of drift) probabilities show Hillary over 90%. Bayersian is at 96%. They didn't even show that on Election eve in 2004, 2008 or 2012.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:28 pm

You're placing am awful lot of trust in something started 12 years ago. So they been thru 2 presidential cycles. Whoopdedo.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:17 pm

reality check bump

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:43 pm

Yeah, I see Hillary Clinton is down to a 2.4 lead in RCP. Quite the drop from the 8 pt lead in Aug.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:45 pm

watch and wait. Your boy is ALREADY whining about the debates. Why?

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:48 pm

callmeslick wrote:I bump this extremely accurate(historically) analysis merely because it now shows something I've never seen before, even a week or two out. Both random drift(chance events taken to extreme extrapolation) and Bayersian(more like range of drift) probabilities show Hillary over 90%. Bayersian is at 96%. They didn't even show that on Election eve in 2004, 2008 or 2012.

Are you willing to bet at those odds?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:57 pm

8-1? Yup.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:37 am

this now stands at a 93% chance of a Clinton victory. Watch it move to 99% in the course of the weekend.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:44 pm

up to 96%. And, the Donald is getting prepared to make excuses and not show up in Vegas:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnbcA1

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:31 pm

All aboard the failtrain!

vision · Post by **vision** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:31 pm

Oh man, the RCP spread is now comfortably outside of the margin of error. Let's just get this over already.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:46 pm

callmeslick wrote:up to 96%. And, the Donald is getting prepared to make excuses and not show up in Vegas:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnbcA1

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 5:01 pm

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/v ... 2256707624

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 9:26 pm

Is it november yet? honestly, I'm getting worn out from all the insanity that is the 2016 general US election.

vision · Post by **vision** » Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:09 am

Ferno wrote:Is it november yet? honestly, I'm getting worn out from all the insanity that is the 2016 general US election.

Just make a habit of cleverly derailing every election thread into something you find more interesting! For instance, this thread can be about histograms in general. Or maybe we shouldn't even be using histograms at all in this case? Is there a better tool displaying similar collections of data?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Tue Oct 11, 2016 3:12 pm

bump, for all to see that the Histogram is now a staggering 97% for Clinton.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:23 am

well, folks, we've hit 99%

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Nov 03, 2016 8:03 am

100% Bayersian

vision · Post by **vision** » Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:55 pm

callmeslick wrote:100% Baye[r]sian

heh, so excited you spelled it wrong.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:51 pm

and in red, to boot!!! Won't edit.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:58 am

And your histogram has proven to be the piece of junk science that it is.

electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram

Re: electoral college histogram