
2016’s election data hero isn’t Nate Silver, it’s Sam Wang - signa11
https://www.wired.com/2016/11/2016s-election-data-hero-isnt-nate-silver-sam-wang/
======
adolph
_[Wang] promised to eat more than just his hat if Clinton loses: “It is
totally over. If Trump wins more than 240 electoral votes, I will eat a bug,”_

------
clishem
I don't understand the title of this article; his prediction was even worse
(99% Clinton win) than Nate Silver's (60% Clinton win).

~~~
nanis
It was written the day before the election, because the author liked the fake
certainty offered by Wang (who seems to have just discovered correlated
errors). Both Wang and the Wired author seem to be unaware of
[http://psych.colorado.edu/~vanboven/teaching/p7536_heurbias/...](http://psych.colorado.edu/~vanboven/teaching/p7536_heurbias/p7536_readings/kruger_dunning.pdf)

