Would you hire an analyst who predicted Brexit and Trump?
Or one that got it wrong, but understandably so from the polls?
How about one who didn’t make any predictions until the day before each, and then put their neck on the line and got it right?
An analyst goes with the probabilities and polls and social effects.
But the day before each, I’d like to explain why an analyst should have got it right both times.
With Brexit, the polls flipped on a daily basis before the vote. People backed off when they felt the responsibility of their voting, and that leave may happen, playing it safe. The day before, the polls ended on Stay. It seemed likely that people would continue their pattern and vote leave, after realising it was unlikely again, and they did.
With Trump, there was more to it(as there was with Brexit actually), but the polls reached a point just short of 50:50, but nearer than ever, and following Brexit thinking, as there was no more campaigning to influence things, Trump could only improve upon that as people saw it as unlikely and their priorities changed in their minds from polling thinking to a state that had been improving his ratings as the time got closer and other considerations became involved. From a long time before, or a foreign perspective, the least controversial is always best, but you aren’t thinking about what is best for your country and that can only improve the alternatives chances, and this will rise over time and shoot up a little more come actual voting. He could only have done better, and as he was predicted to lose by the polls, there was no pull back by anyone thinking that if they got it wrong they would be responsible, and so change is always more likely than before.
Both involved many types of voters with falling into many groups and much more complicated than this explanation.
I made a prediction for both the day before and got both correct. I wouldn’t have before, because it wasnt possible to make the right choice before that without making the least probable choice and so being bad at your job.
Now analysts havent self corrected properly, and explain what happened incorrectly from a simplistic perspective, biased from the view that madness won out and so defied logic, as it keeps them feeling good analysts. So they simplify the voters and make them self-destructive badly educated voters, rather than look into the various voters that interacted and their opinions and perceptions. There are an amazing amount of interesting factors that were involved that provide a lot of insight into future election success and failure and do’s and don’t, once you understand this subject properly.
James Cook UKThinkTank.com