R_K_M

I'm not Elliott, but I have stalked them enough on twitter to delute myself into thinking that I can answer that.

First of, I think its Important to point out what it similar between both models. They both have somewhat sophisticated poll averaging models. They both try to estimate EV outcomes by looking at the outcomes of the individual states. They both have extensive correlation matrices to estimate how the results are related between the states. They both have a list of factors to introduce uncertainty in the models. Despite their "twitter forecasting wars" their models are more alike than different.

The differences are legion, but mostly minute. Sadly, 538 hasnt opened up his model so its impossible to compare everything. We can make a list of some of the most important or interesting differences by looking at some of nates/538s statements and some reverse engineering:

1. Nate Silver generally uses much more uncertaincy in his models. This is partly due to him just using fatter tails in generall, partly because he introduced some "fuzzy" measurements such as the number of full width headlines in the NYT or special covid uncertaincies and partly because Elliott has introduced a "polarisation" term, which basically states that polls move less now than they did 50 years ago. In general their models should slowly converge the closer we come to election day as a lot of this uncertainty isnt about how wrong polls are, but about how much polls will move until election day.

2. The 538 model has some negative correlations between states. I.e. if trump is underestimated 1% in state X, they think polls will underestimate biden by 0.y% in state Y. The Economists model caps the correlation at 0% instead because they say that negative correlations are nonsensical.

3. They have different priors. E.g. Elliott uses presidential approval as an important measure to estimate the vote share months before the election but Nate says that approval is not usefull as a fundamental because it is itself subject to all the same downsides as head-to-head polls are. Again, this difference should get reduced the closer we are to the election because the fundamentals wont play a large role anymore. I think Nate was more bullish on trump than elliott from a fundamentals sense ?

4. I think (?) Nate mostly uses state polls to estimate the vote in each state and mostly only uses national polls to fill in the gap in states where little polling is done. Elliott on the other hand does use national polls plus an "uniform swing" model to a small extend to estimate the vote shate in each state.

5. The way their polling average is done is slightly different. Both use a model that takes into account "house effects" of the individual polling firms, but Elliott additionally punishs pollsters who dont weight by eductions and/or dont weight by past vote/party registration.

I think this is mostly it ? Please correct anything that is wrong.

Rhino = Super Hornet if somebody wants to know.

The original english saying goes "Football is a gentleman's game played by ruffians and rugby is a ruffian's game played by gentlemen". And Football meaning soccer here.

Hi and thank you very much for the AmA Bernie !

My questions are partly topics that are important to me, and partly things I'd like to have a rebuttle for in discussions.

So here they come:

• You said that you want to introduce the 15$/h minimum wage over a span of some years. Do you have any form of timetable you want to use yet ? Would you like it to be introduced everywhere at the same time, or do you want some regions to have some time to catch up ? Is an mechanism to increase the minimum wage coupled to the inflation planned ?

• Also regarding the minimum wage: Some people are afraid of high inflation rates if high(er) minimum wages are introduced. Whats your answer to them ?

• You have been a big opponent for FTAs such as TPP or TTIP because you dont want americans to compete with low income countries and because these agreements are intransparent and rob the people of their sovereignty while giving cooperations more power.

  But how do you feel about (theoretical,) transparent agreements with other high income areas (i.e. the EU) ? IHMO, an free trade area consisting of the EU and the US would only benefit us all.