Nate’s (and many others’) issue with 538 isn’t that it might be wrong.
Their issue is that it’s clearly broken. Or at the very least, in the early stages of beta testing with lots of bugs that haven’t been worked out.
Its predictions make no sense, some of which are mathematically impossible.
And its assumptions make little sense, strongly weighting historical state-level polling but without accounting for how the demographics of states change over time.
Not to mention the fact that state-level polling tends to be sparse, especially historically and especially in non swing states.
538 might end up being right...but that doesn’t mean it’s good.
Would love to see your forecast when it comes out, specifically what you define as the "fundamentals". In my admittedly amateur experience, there's no agreed upon set of fundamentals nor the appropriate sliding scale to weight them. And I totally agree with your view on polls. I have spent countless hours telling people that polls in July are about as accurate as an Imperial Stormtrooper in Star Wars.
Is there any way to use current polling to determine the best person to replace Biden if it gets to that point? Not to say the Dems would use it or that it’ll happen. I just don’t trust any of the polls showing how Biden compares to other Dems.
Nope, the polls about hypothetical replacements are unreliable at best. For one, people are bad about accurately responding to what they'd do in hypotheticals.
Second, that data is being collected on candidates who haven't been attacked or even slightly tested - other than maybe Harris - so is likely to be high.
I don't doubt for a second that there might be stronger candidates than Biden. But the idea we can just sub in whoever's "hot" right now to be President feels a little slimy
Have you looked at 538’s model?
Nate’s (and many others’) issue with 538 isn’t that it might be wrong.
Their issue is that it’s clearly broken. Or at the very least, in the early stages of beta testing with lots of bugs that haven’t been worked out.
Its predictions make no sense, some of which are mathematically impossible.
And its assumptions make little sense, strongly weighting historical state-level polling but without accounting for how the demographics of states change over time.
Not to mention the fact that state-level polling tends to be sparse, especially historically and especially in non swing states.
538 might end up being right...but that doesn’t mean it’s good.
Would love to see your forecast when it comes out, specifically what you define as the "fundamentals". In my admittedly amateur experience, there's no agreed upon set of fundamentals nor the appropriate sliding scale to weight them. And I totally agree with your view on polls. I have spent countless hours telling people that polls in July are about as accurate as an Imperial Stormtrooper in Star Wars.
Is there any way to use current polling to determine the best person to replace Biden if it gets to that point? Not to say the Dems would use it or that it’ll happen. I just don’t trust any of the polls showing how Biden compares to other Dems.
Nope, the polls about hypothetical replacements are unreliable at best. For one, people are bad about accurately responding to what they'd do in hypotheticals.
Second, that data is being collected on candidates who haven't been attacked or even slightly tested - other than maybe Harris - so is likely to be high.
I don't doubt for a second that there might be stronger candidates than Biden. But the idea we can just sub in whoever's "hot" right now to be President feels a little slimy