It's been a crazy week of analysis on the US Presidential election and how it came to be that Trump won the Electoral College and Clinton won the popular vote. There are lots of threads to pull on, but I'm going to focus on one particular theory I read online: The Electoral College is skewed where some states, like Nebraska, have more EC votes than you would expect given it's population while others, like California, have many fewer. California, by population share alone, should have 11 more EC votes. So did this conspire to give Trump the election?
The U.S. Presidential election was on Tuesday and the result was not what many people were expecting, to put it mildly. Let's take a voyage of discovery to find out how we ended up here, and what to make of the apparent failure of election forecasters to predict...this...
We are in the final months of the 2016 US presidential election and people have gone a little nuts analyzing and overanalyzing the various election forecasts out there on the internets. I want to take a minute and explore what exactly the election forecasters are doing, using silly toy examples
I've been hearing a lot that this past election was the PC party's to lose, and that what we saw was not an "Orange Crush" as much as an ABC -- Anything But Conservative.
I was thinking, while I drove home today, about how close so many of the ridings seemed, and whether or not voter turn out was correlated to how contested a riding was.
Alberta's big election was last night, and an orange wave overcame the province resulting in an NDP majority. This ends the 44 year reign of the Progressive Conservative party, and marks the fourth change in government in Alberta, ever, in 110 years. Yes only 4.
Anyways. For a long time …