No, please don’t split the vote against FPTP. That’s how you get more FPTP.
Just this guy, you know?
No, please don’t split the vote against FPTP. That’s how you get more FPTP.
Probability is useful because it can make predictions that can be tested against reality.
Yes. But you’d have to run the test repeatedly and see if the outcome, i.e. Clinton winning, happens as often as the model predicts.
But we only get to run an election once. And there is no guarantee that the most likely outcome will happen on the first try.
There is an alternative to getting older but you wouldn’t like it.
Twice around the hickenloop.
As she should.
That’s just not true. Go to https://ev-database.org/ and compare the dry weight of the different models. You don’t add 66kg going from standard to long range in software.
We have them in Torino in Italy where I now live. There are a lot more than I would have expected.
What’s the over/under on how close that gets to being distributed before being destroyed by the most ethical army in the world?
But don’t get complacent. It’s possible the polls this year are over-correcting for that. We won’t know for sure until the election is over.
Not only that. You may need a quite healthy margin to overcome the various voter suppression and other plans the Rs have in place to steal the election. A Texas sized margin might do.
There you go conflating Jews and Israel. Apart from that you have an arguable point.