,
5 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
🚨CLICK HERE FOR 2020 CONTENT🚨
When should you start to take 2020 nominee polling at face value? I have crunched the numbers for a piece on the leading 2020 candidates, which we will be updating for the next 72 (!) weeks: economist.com/graphic-detail…
When should you start to take 2020 nominee polling at face value? I have crunched the numbers for a piece on the leading 2020 candidates, which we will be updating for the next 72 (!) weeks: economist.com/graphic-detail…
Hint: Don't look at the toplines just yet. Only about 17% of polls at this point have correctly identified the eventual nominee in primary contests between 1980 and 2016. You'd be better off flipping a coin until March-April of _next_ year.
We've also included a chart on the @PredictIt odds for each candidate. You can get a lot from this graph, I think, including @KamalaHarris's notable announcement bump and increasing optimism abt @amyklobuchar. @ewarren is having a hard time putting the past behind her.
This graph also shows you (a) how crowded the contest is and (b) how volatile the market price for any one candidate is. You shouldn't assume that any one candidate's odds will stick, because they won't. Volatility is especially high before a candidate announces.
h/t to @PollsAndVotes for the polling data. I will also acknowledge that there are some ways that you can make primary polling more reliable (namely: adjusting for name recognition) but I don't include those here. That's not how people read polls, so isn't useful (yet... 😉).
