tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3618477121835864822.post5379056826450664442..comments2020-10-20T13:05:22.454-07:00Comments on Based on Actual Math: Election Model: National SimulationPatrickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12505507519580728909noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3618477121835864822.post-7364886400941344742012-10-31T15:28:23.591-07:002012-10-31T15:28:23.591-07:00Historical data simply doesn't support bear ou...Historical data simply doesn't support bear out an approach like that, and neither does common sense.<br /><br />As a demonstration let's look at Kansas. The model currently gives Romney 100% chance to win in Kansas, an 18 point lead there. If we assumed there were no undecided voters in Kansas that comes out to 59% - 41%; if the model assigned President Obama a 41% chance of winning Kansas it would be very very wrong to do so.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12505507519580728909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3618477121835864822.post-49024425586966958042012-10-29T20:05:06.675-07:002012-10-29T20:05:06.675-07:00May I ask why you are using the logistic function ...May I ask why you are using the logistic function instead of just the raw poll results (i.e. if Obama's poll result in a state is 53%, why not just say his probability of winning in that state is 53%)?enistenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14042582572719224755noreply@blogger.com