I have found that RCP's model produces results that are a bit right leaning and Pollster, although trimmed down during this election, has been fairly close to the truth.
The polls are all over the place this time and this is causing the experts to have very different numbers. My favourite polling guru is Sam Wang, whereas I thought Nate Silver cheated last time by changing his numbers after people were voting.
The wide range of predictions is discussed in this article: "The latest RealClearPolitics projections have the race teetering on a knife’s edge. But other, more complex forecast models — based on the same polls — give Clinton a 98 percent or 99 percent chance of defeating Trump next Tuesday.
As of noon Friday, the models and polling averages ranged from RealClearPolitics’ close-to-tied electoral map — if Florida were to flip back to Trump, he would be ahead in the Electoral College — to HuffPost Pollster and the Princeton Election Consortium, which each show Clinton’s chances close to 100 percent, and Daily Kos Elections’ model gives Clinton a 91 percent chance of winning.
In the middle are models from two high-profile data-journalism sites, FiveThirtyEight and The New York Times’ Upshot. But those two models aren’t in complete agreement, either. FiveThirtyEight’s “polls-only” model pegs Clinton’s chances at 67.8 percent as of late Friday morning, while the Upshot model is more bullish at 84 percent."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/is-nate-silver-538-right-230734#ixzz4P570stI2
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
| 