Think about your answer and why. Here few snips from the latest Nate Silver Bulletin.
I am a subscriber to the Silver Bulletin and find his thoughts refreshingly unbiased.
One thing I have noticed is Republicans tend to believe him when Trump is in the lead, and Democrats the opposite.
A Word About Probabilities
I consistently hear comments “Why should I believe Silver, he was wrong in 2016?”
Is Silver supposed to be perfect? Anyone who makes predictions or forecasts odd is going to be wrong.
Also, it’s debatable if Silver was wrong. He posted odds. That is not the same as a predictions.
The odds of a coin toss coming up heads twice in a row is 25 percent. If I bet against that, and it happens, was I wrong?
I think Silver was wrong but in a much different way. I thought (and said so at the time), that his probability of Hillary winning was too high. I had Hillary at 55-45. People tell me “Mish, you were wrong”. Sheeeh.
Only a last minute statement by FBI director James Comey on Hillary’s emails gave the win to Trump. Yet, people tell me they “knew” Trump would win.
No they didn’t. They were lucky.
High or Low?
Q: Is the lead chart giving Trump a 61.5 percent chance high or low?
A: I don’t know, you don’t know, and Nate Silver doesn’t know.
My guess (based of the current data only) is high. My guess (based off where I think the economy will be in November) is about right.
It’s the latter that Silver is attempting to project.
Not a Nowcast
Silver’s model is not a Nowcast. It it was, I think he would be closer to 50-50.
A lot of things can happen between now and November in the debates and the economy.
The Electoral College Bias Has Returned With a Vengeance
Please consider the Silver Bulletin report The Electoral College Bias Has Returned With a Vengeance
There’s been a lot of talk lately about our model’s convention bounce adjustment, and that’s understandable. Harris is still ever-so-slightly ahead in our polling averages in enough states for her to win 270 electoral votes — but she’s slightly behind in our forecast of those states, mostly because the model assumes that polls conducted just after the DNC are likely to be relatively favorable for Harris.
I think the adjustment is highly defensible, but if you don’t like it, don’t fret: it will begin to work its way out of the model over the course of the next week or two. And if you really hate it, you can always just stick to our “raw” polling averages instead, which aren’t subject to the convention bounce adjustment at all.
The problem for Harris is that Donald Trump has been gaining on her in our polling averages, too — at least in the most important Electoral College states. If, say, Harris had gained 1 point, when the convention bounce adjustment was expecting her to gain 2 points, that would look like more of a rounding error in the model. Instead, though, she’s actually losing ground since the start of the convention in swing state polls.
Why Is Trump Ahead?
Harris is leading in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Nevada.
Yet, Silver has Trump’s odds of winning over 60 percent. Mercy!
Hopefully, this permanently removes any charges of bias against Silver. He is rooting for Harris, big time.
My keep-it-simple explanation is that Trump is ahead because the bounce for Harris was not as big as the model expected.
GDPNow vs Silver Bulletin
GDPNow is an Atlanta Fed Nowcast (not a forecast like the Silver Bulletin).
But a very similar thing happens frequently: The GDPNowcast rises on bad data or falls on seemingly good data.
Those familiar with the nuances of the Nowcast might have a better grasp of what’s happening with the Silver Bulletin.
For discussion, please see Recapping GDPNow Third-Quarter Nowcast Changes, What’s Going on and Why
Curiously, it is not the data that matters, but rather what the economic data does vs the model’s expectation of the data.
Debates, Economy, Mideast War Escalation?
I do not know who will do better in the debates. Nor do I have any idea what political bombshells might turn up for team Harris or Team Trump.
Bombshells are very rare and the word is so overused my immediate reaction when I hear the word is to toss the idea in the ashcan. Comey was a genuine bombshell. There aren’t many.
My edge, if I have one, is in the economy.
Recessions are not good for the incumbent party and I think we are in one.
This is where I think Silver is correct about the odds, but perhaps for the wrong reasons.
His economic forecast is much better than mine. I have asked twice how his model would change if his forecast was recession, but have not received an answer.
A Complaint
My one huge Silver Bulletin complaint is if you think you will get an answer to anything as a subscriber, you won’t.
There is no repository of questions and only a very poor way of asking them, with zero acknowledgement. 300 people might ask the same thing and you won’t even know.
I subscribe because I get value anyway.
To answer my own question (sort of), by election time the state of the economy will be known. The polls will be 100% of the data and all guessing (other than how accurate the polls are), will be factored in.
Meanwhile, however, a worsening recession is not yet factored into the polls so I would be curious as to what Silver’s forecast would be if it was.
That’s the unanswered question.
Key Recession Indicator Gives Stronger Recession Signal in August
For discussion, please see Key Recession Indicator Gives Stronger Recession Signal in August
My post is complicated, but Silver would understand immediately.
A modified McKelvey recession indicator with no false positives or false negatives since 1953 suggests we are in recession now.