Today’s post is over at Legal Insurrection, a classy site run by Cornell Law guy Bill Jacobson.
I have a preliminary analysis of wishcasting the election. Once it’s finished, I’ll post the entire thing here (and in a paper). Quick conclusion: both sides had their fair share of shading their bets towards their picks.
One thing that’s missing (I ran out of my 750 words) is the proviso that the results are “on average”, which is the assumption that the evidence (let the reader understand) is roughly the same for all participants. This isn’t quite true, but it isn’t far off to the first approximation.
Anyway, head on over and take a read. Let me know what you think.
Update Links fixed. Thanks, DAV!