And her chance of winning Alabama has doubled to 0.2%!
Before the debate, I told myself I’d be a little less nervous if 538 Polls-Plus model showed Hillary at at least 62% by Saturday* (i.e., in two more days from now) – that is, the “first debate bounce” – and then at least 75% by Election Night.
So far, she’s on track to reach these goals, but you never know.
*She’s at around 58% at this moment – this model has just started to show her climbing up from the just-before-the-debate low of around 54.5% likelihood of winning, IIRC.
If you’re referring to the “NowCast” model, she’s already passed 60 as of this morning – yay. If you’re referring to the “Polls Only” model (which I would recommend to anyone that they focus on more), she hasn’t reached 60 yet, but could easily do so in the next 24 hours.
Sorry, I meant “Polls Only” model. (This late in the game, the Polls Plus isn’t very interesting, and is converging with the others. It was more interesting a few months ago, when historic patterns and economic facts were helpful in getting a better idea where things were likely headed overall.)
These are teeny-tiny differences. There is really no difference of substance between having a 57% chance of winning and a 60% chance of winning. Either is pretty much a tossup.
Based on strong post-debate swing state polls from PPP (+2 NC and FL; +6 PA, VA, and CO), she’s up to 61 in the Polls-only and 68 in the Nowcast (and 60 in the Polls-plus).
Yay!
Forgot to mention that Florida is back to blue in the Polls-only and Nowcast.
True. That’s why I’ll still be especially nervous if she hasn’t reached 75% by Election Night. 3 out of 4 is still sickeningly low, but I wouldn’t call it a “tossup” (at that point).
I’m high on 538 because in 2012, every state they had as 50.1% or more for Obama went to him, and some states (like Florida) were incredibly close to 50%. So the closer we get, the better an advantage will feel to me.
Which given those were probabilities actually is a ding on his model y’know. If his model was right he should have been wrong on those states almost half the time …
North Carolina and Nevada are now blue on the now-cast.
If I recall correctly, 538’s actual vote predictions were a couple percent out towards Romney almost across the board. If there had been any states that they had predicted would just barely go for Mitt, then their state prediction record wouldn’t have been perfect.
Whether there might be a similar skew this time round is a valid question. If that couple percent gap was actually explained by Obama’s superior GOTV machine then Hillary is likely to out-perform her polls, possibly by an even greater margin than Obama in '12, because the disparity in campaigns is even greater. On the other hand, if something else explains the gap between vote prediction and outcome in 2012, then it’s at least possible that they’d be 2 percent out in the other direction this time and that would be very scary for Democrats.
Polls-only up to 62%, and Nowcast at 69%. The only change seems to be a national Rasmussen poll at HRC +1 (from 9/26-28, so 1/3rd from before the debate).
New polls released. HRC is now up to 62.2%.
This twitter account (a bot) automatically tweets anytime 538 odds change.
I posted last week (I think) that I would be getting close to panic if she stayed in the 50s on 538’s Polls-only in the two weeks after the 1st debate. I’m much more comfortable now and my worries and concerns are only slight.
I think having the two side by side was an eye-opener for a lot of people. I, too, was getting quite nervous as the drip drip drip of phony scandals seemed to be eating away at her support.
There are still a couple things that could happen to upset the apple cart: either a weak debate by Hillary in the last two debates or a serious terrorist attack. Unfortunately, the latter is infinitely more likely than the former.
While 538 did get pretty lucky in 2012, the thing to remember is that they pegged Obama’s chances of winning the election as something like 92-93% (same in 2008) and if anything it was probably a conservative model. The sum total of all the state likelihoods was such that he was a heavy favourite. Yes, as it happens, 538 got every state “right,” but even Nate Silver would probably tell you that was a bit flukey and that if he predicts ten states as 50.1% to go Clinton, really, he’d expect half of them not to.
The sum total now is not very far from a coin flip. Like JKelly, I’d agree even 75% of election night would be frightening. A one in four chances of global recession and possibly general war is not very encouraging.
Not really, because the state probabilities in a single election are all correlated. It’s not like having a bunch of 55% picks for a week of football games.
There’s no reason to assume everyone will scurry to Trump in the event of a terrorist attack. Hasn’t seemed to happen with the I guess “less than serious” attacks that have happened so far.
Terrorism Doesn’t Help Trump
And polls on which candidate would handle terrorism better have been fairly even with Clinton often coming out on top.