1) 2020 election odds
Conversation
4) There are lots of approaches here.
You can read polls, as 538 does; they end up at 13%: projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-
1
5
5) You can look at the economy, as The Economist does, and end at 9%: projects.economist.com/us-2020-foreca
2
5
6) Or you can look at what prediction markets say--which have Trump around 33%.
electionbettingodds.com
[Disclosure: FTX owns electionbettingodds.com; the odds there come in part from FTX's market at ftx.com/trade/TRUMP]
1
2
9
8) First off, 's model seems suspect to me.
They use a fundamentals model.
Their description (projects.economist.com/us-2020-foreca) beings "A common criticism of fundamentals models is that they are extremely easy to 'over-fit'..."
Replying to
9) To combat this, they:
a) combine two statistical techniques chosen out of who knows how large a set
b) sample 100 values of a parameter and choose the 'best' fit
c) add in an arbitrary coefficient for COVID
d) fit the model to 18 data points
glad they aren't overfitting
1
17
10) 's is way more up-front. It _does_ have a ton of factors in it, but uses much more data and many more data points.
It also is based heavily on polls, rather than fundamentals.
Historically, it's done quite well compared to others.
1
8
22) Both sides are doubling down, e.g. twitter.com/NateSilver538/
If is right that 's COVID strategy sucks, then Trump very likely loses.
But the public secretly liking it more than they let on is an example of a possible systematic bias.
Quote Tweet
Trump doubling down on a series of extremely unpopular messages about COVID—after having caught COVID, and at a time when COVID cases are rising again nationally—is about the worst possible closing pitch, and one has to wonder about how downballot GOP candidates feel about it.
Show this thread
8
12

