Timeline for What do poll probabilities actually mean [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 2019 at 12:20 | history | closed |
Juho Kokkala Michael R. Chernick kjetil b halvorsen♦ mkt jpmuc |
Duplicate of Probability of a single real-life future event: What does it mean when they say that "Hillary has a 75% chance of winning"? | |
| Feb 20, 2019 at 19:11 | comment | added | whuber♦ | Re "there is no randomness:" On the contrary, there are myriad events in an election that must be modeled as random because (a) they cannot be predicted and (b) they nevertheless exhibit regular statistical properties. Examples of such events are the turnout, which is determined by who is sick that day, what the weather is like, and so on; and the actual proportion of voter sentiment, which (at least for some voters) is determined by information they might or might not have seen just before election day. | |
| Feb 20, 2019 at 17:55 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 21, 2019 at 12:20 | |||||
| Oct 19, 2017 at 5:45 | answer | added | eSurfsnake | timeline score: -1 | |
| Oct 18, 2017 at 23:19 | comment | added | Dave Kielpinski | I don't see where Gelman denies that view in the article. He denies that it makes sense to state the probabilities to many significant figures. But that is a point about our ability to estimate the probabilities, not about the meaning of the probabilities themselves. In fact the view you are talking about is the only one that makes sense to me. | |
| Oct 18, 2017 at 22:26 | history | asked | mguzmann | CC BY-SA 3.0 |