The Non-Prophets: At a Harvard Conference, America’s Top Political Analysts Say the 2016 Election Wasn’t Their Fault | News Feature | Indy Week
Pin It

The Non-Prophets: At a Harvard Conference, America’s Top Political Analysts Say the 2016 Election Wasn’t Their Fault 

click to enlarge 19.15_news_top_200_dpi.png

At the planet’s most prestigious school, during an event designed to make sense of the most consequential upset in a year full of them, the world’s most prominent statistician admitted that his research and reporting, which millions of readers had turned to for reason during an unreasonable time, may have been open to misinterpretation.

“It’s not intuitive, for people, to have numbers convey uncertainty,” pioneering data journalist and FiveThirtyEight founder Nate Silver explained at Harvard’s second annual Political Analytics Conference.

Throughout the exhausting 2016 presidential race, millions followed the mathematical election forecasting popularized by Silver, whose previous precision had made him the darling of the political data world (and the sports world before that). Silver’s polling models correctly predicted the electoral outcomes of forty-nine states in the 2008 election, and in 2012 he called them all. So when his FiveThirtyEight formulas consistently showed Hillary Clinton as about a 3–1 favorite to defeat Donald Trump for most of the political season, onlookers took that to mean America’s first female presidency was all but a lock.

With two weeks to go, Silver had Clinton at 86 percent likely to win, while his previous employers at The New York Times had the Democrat’s odds pegged at 93 percent. Her lead persisted in both until election night, when the Times had Clinton’s odds at 85 percent and FiveThirtyEight measured them to be 71 percent. When Donald Trump clinched his shocking Electoral College victory on November 8, those who had come to believe that the odds were impossibly against a President Trump were dumbfounded.

Had the experts made a mistake, or were they mistaken to trust them?

Neither, to hear Silver tell it. The mistake that nonquantitative thinkers made, he argues, was presuming fate from a tool meant only to calculate likelihood. They misread the numbers they were looking at. As his Times counterpart Amanda Cox put it in describing her own election night model, “It’s really probability, not prophesy.”

  • They assured us Trump couldn’t win. Trump won.

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

INDY Week publishes all kinds of comments, but we don't publish everything.

  • Comments that are not contributing to the conversation will be removed.
  • Comments that include ad hominem attacks will also be removed.
  • Please do not copy and paste the full text of a press release.

Permitted HTML:
  • To create paragraphs in your comment, type <p> at the start of a paragraph and </p> at the end of each paragraph.
  • To create bold text, type <b>bolded text</b> (please note the closing tag, </b>).
  • To create italicized text, type <i>italicized text</i> (please note the closing tag, </i>).
  • Proper web addresses will automatically become links.

Latest in News Feature



Twitter Activity

Comments

OCCULT FESTIVAL is around the Conner , join the Illuminati cult online
today and get instant sum of 1 million …

by Johnson Ken on The powerful people behind the eugenics movement (News Feature)

Give me a break!!!!

by Patricia Perry on After Fifteen Years, the Michael Peterson Case Concludes But Provides Little Closure (News Feature)

Most Recent Comments

OCCULT FESTIVAL is around the Conner , join the Illuminati cult online
today and get instant sum of 1 million …

by Johnson Ken on The powerful people behind the eugenics movement (News Feature)

Give me a break!!!!

by Patricia Perry on After Fifteen Years, the Michael Peterson Case Concludes But Provides Little Closure (News Feature)

It was the one winged owl!!!!

by Patricia Perry on After Fifteen Years, the Michael Peterson Case Concludes But Provides Little Closure (News Feature)

The truth is the truth. Governor Cooper should not have supported this new bill. Yes, he cannot fully control the …

by Corrupt Judge Walczyk on Lipstick on a Pig: Fifty-three Weeks of HB 2, and the Day That Gave Us HB 2.0 (News Feature)

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars...

If politicians fail to act as LGBT advocates desire, the …

by OrionMaize on Lipstick on a Pig: Fifty-three Weeks of HB 2, and the Day That Gave Us HB 2.0 (News Feature)

© 2017 Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation