Apparently you don’t know the difference between a discussion of statistical probabilities (which is what @NateSilver538 does) and making concrete predictions (which seems to be what you and the other Right-Wing pundits expect and demand).
-
-
-
They also don't understand the difference between poll data and predictions made from poll data. They think because predictions were wrong, then the poll data was wrong. In fact, national poll data for 2016 put Hillary up by 2%, which is exactly what happened.
-
Precisely!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Where does it say the chances are 50-50? Are you just making shit up?
-
I think he means like when you buy a lottery ticket, you can either win or lose, so you have a 50-50 chance. Shining brilliance
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
If you are ever in the UK and fancy a bet, please get in touch.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Hahahahaha
-
Some people will try and make you believe that we're fine and don't need to go out and vote. MOST HOUSE RACES ARE NOT POLLED. NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S REALLY IN STOCK. DON'T BE COMPLACENT. DON'T BE PASSIVE EITHER. GET 5 PPLE WITH YOU, GO OUT AND VOTE!
#VoteRedToSaveAmericapic.twitter.com/vOOwptmtIZ
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I give Dinesh a 50-50 chance of violating campaign finance law again.
-
It’s WAY higher than that.
-
It's like 80/50.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
The problem, Dinesh: He doesn't have a polling operation. A model is only as good as the data you input into it. That's why we try to poll as much as possible for our's. You cannot even trust third-party data anymore. I can't anyway.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

