• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Final Presidential Prediction from Sam Wang is In

Vic Vega

Graduate Poster
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
1,186
Sam Wang at the Princeton Election Consortium has made his final prediction and it virtually guarantees an Obama victory. He has put the final electoral count at 303 - 235 with Obama winning the popular vote 51.1% to 48.9%.

How accurate has he been?

In 2004 he was exactly right. In 2008 he was off by a single electoral vote.

http://election.princeton.edu
 
Last edited:
I don't believe in ""virtual guarantees" where elections are concerned. We won't know till we know.
 
Who the hell is Sam Wang? I've gotten it right in 7 of the last 8 presidential elections and I didn't need a Princeton education to do it.
 
The difference between Wang and Silver is that Silver is putting Florida more likely on the Obama side, whereas Wang puts it for Romney. However, they both acknowledge that it is pretty much a coin flip.

I hope it doesn't matter. If they are right, then it won't, so who cares.
 
Personally, I'm interested in reading his Bayesian analysis - anyone know where to find a link on that?
 
The difference between Wang and Silver is that Silver is putting Florida more likely on the Obama side, whereas Wang puts it for Romney. However, they both acknowledge that it is pretty much a coin flip.

I hope it doesn't matter. If they are right, then it won't, so who cares.


A coin flip? Silver puts the chance of Obama winning at 90.9% and Wang at 99.2% with the Bayesian Prediction at 100%.
 
Who the hell is Sam Wang? I've gotten it right in 7 of the last 8 presidential elections and I didn't need a Princeton education to do it.

He's a professor at Princeton and, I would guess, far more qualified than you to make these predictions. You should read the site.

Thanks for the info. We were all pretty sure you didn't go to Princeton...

:rolleyes:
 
I don't believe in ""virtual guarantees" where elections are concerned. We won't know till we know.

This is a statistical analysis of polling data that has been extremely accurate in past elections. What you believe or don't believe is irrelevant.
 
He has Florida at a >60% chance of going to Romney.

Nate Silver flipped Florida to light blue just yesterday. He finishes it with 50.3% chance of Obama winning that state. That's a real toss-up.
 
Yeah, one of my old Political Science profs made the news a few decades ago. It seems his prediction model was stunningly accurate in previous elections. The prof appeared on several network news segments and got written up in major periodicals.

But one year, he was wrong. I don't remember which year it was. It might have been 1988 (Elder Bush vs. Dukakis), but I'm not sure about that. Anyway, his model didn't pan out and he was pretty much pushed aside in later years.

I have a soft place in my heart for this professor. It was during one of his classes that all students had to make oral presenations on various political topics. I chose as one of my topics the proposition that the telephone system was NOT a natural monopoly and ought not to be regulated as such. My classmates were VERY critical of my presentation, but after they had all had their say, the professor stunned them by saying that my propositions didn't seem nutty to him. I took an unpopular position, but I supported it and I stood my ground. This professor liked that.

And it turned out that I was right. Within less than a decade, there was the break-up of the Bell system, the deregulation of several telephone services, the advent of phone competition, and the rise of cellular service. The phone company wasn't a natural monopoly after all.
 
He has Florida at a >60% chance of going to Romney.

You know, you should read Wang's analysis. It would really help.

In particular, read this part

As I wrote late last night, Florida is a hard case. Several new polls came out this morning, making the median basically zero. As a tie-breaker I resorted to mean-based statistics. I will be unsurprised for it to go either way. Nate Silver and Drew Linzer went the other way. We are all tossing coins. I am prepared to lose the coin toss.

See? WANG is the one characterizing it as coin flip.
 
Wang has promised to eat a bug if Romney wins Pennsylvania or Minnesota. If Romney wins Ohio, he'll eat a really big bug.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom