Post

In contrast, a statistical model based purely on (a) historical error of primary polls and (b) the high quality polling of the race (Marquette and Impact were at Hong+11 and 13) would have given Crowley a 25% chance. Fundamentals probably even higher for him (Hong was outspent by about 13x)

Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com

Prediction markets are not predictive and should not be covered as news

29 reposts152 likes

I'm not here to defend prediction markets, but how should we be judging one-off events like this? Shouldn't a predictor get this wrong ~5% of the time? Shouldn't 95% just mean ~2sd separation in vote means?

I thought I saw you posting about how the off-year senate polling is historically ~12 points off? How should we judge a "predictor" in such a volatile environment? Are most of these models just wildly under counting their "error bars" and predictions outside 40-60% should probably just be ignored?

Not just Republicans. A couple-three articles in local allegedly-progressive media ginning up 'controversy' (like the "Thanksgiving" statement) had just enough effect.