
You're 25 times more likely to be the next US president than to win at Powerball - drfuchs
The $1B+ Powerball lottery jackpot is being covered all over the US press, with many articles quoting Jeffrey Miecznikowski, associate professor of biostatistics at the University at Buffalo, as saying that &quot;you&#x27;re 25 times more likely to become the next president of the United States than to win at Powerball&quot;.<p>But in the next four years and ten months, at most one person will be elected president, while quite a few people will win at Powerball, so it&#x27;s obvious that Jeff&#x27;s &quot;25 times&quot; claim is completely backwards (good thing for him he has tenure). The question is: how can it be that not a single news outlet is pointing out that all the others are reporting obvious nonsense?
======
greenyoda
Also, the probability of being elected president is definitely not evenly
distributed across the U.S. population:

1\. If you have no prior political experience (e.g., you've never been a
governor, U.S. senator, mayor of a major city, etc.), you probably won't get
elected unless you're wealthy enough to be able to spend $100 million of your
own money on your campaign.

2\. If you're less than 35 years old, or were not born a U.S. citizen, you
have a zero probability of being elected president since you don't meet the
constitutional requirements to hold the office.

3\. If you come from certain ethnic or religious groups, your probability of
being elected are greatly diminished. The U.S. has only had one Catholic
president (JFK), and no Jewish or Muslim or atheist presidents.

4\. If you're not good at public speaking and TV appearances, you'll never be
elected president.

I expect that my own probability of being the next president is zero, but my
probability of winning a lottery (if I ever buy a ticket) is some very small
positive number.

------
adamredwoods
The money and effort required to become the next president greatly exceeds the
effort to purchase $10 in lottery tickets.

I'll take my chances with the lotto.

~~~
pcurve
yep. Chance of becoming president for 99.99999% of American is exactly 0.

~~~
meric
Let's say there are on average 10 "viable" presidential candidates per
election cycle every 4 years. Over a 40 year time-frame (You can be elected
president during approximately 40 years of your life, from your late thirties
to your late seventies), there are total 400 viable presidential candidates.

If 99.99999% of Americans have 0% chance of becoming president, that means
you're saying only 3180 Americans have greater-than-zero chance of becoming
president.

I suggest it is a little more than that. Millions of Americans, aged 10 and
under, have the potential to work towards becoming first a mayor of their
small city, then a mayor of a big city, and then finally have a small positive
chance of becoming president. If you have greater than zero chance of becoming
a person who has a greater than zero chance of becoming president, then you
have a greater than zero chance of becoming president, period.

I suggest the number of such people is surely greater than 3180.

~~~
pcurve
Then 99.999% it is. ;-) That should cover enough number of people who have
take even that first minor step towards becoming a career politician. :)

------
strangecasts
It's just a figure of speech. You could compare it to getting struck by
lightning or attacked by a shark: neither are (thankfully) uniformly
distributed, but they're both recognizably unlikely enough to provide an
immediate shorthand for a negligible probability. Asking someone to imagine
rolling a five on a 292201338-sided die may be more technically accurate, but
makes for a very dry analogy indeed.

No matter which shorthand you use, the conclusion is still the same: you're
going to lose money playing the lottery.

~~~
drfuchs
No, his university's press release says he calculated the value 25 carefully;
it's even in the title: "You’re more likely to become president (25 times more
likely, that is), than win Powerball, but someone will win, says UB
biostatistician". See [http://sphhp.buffalo.edu/home/news-
events.host.html/content/...](http://sphhp.buffalo.edu/home/news-
events.host.html/content/shared/university/news/news-center-
releases/2016/01/013.detail.html)

~~~
strangecasts
"You’re 25 times more likely to become the next president of the United
States, _assuming the entire U.S. population had an equal shot at the
presidency_ , than you are to win Powerball, says Miecznikowski."

~~~
drfuchs
Right, so it's not "a figure of speech", which was my point. He wasn't just
saying "hey, like, it's a billion-to-one", which would be a figure of speech
because the "billion" clearly would not be meant literally. Rather, the 25 was
specifically computed, albeit under unrealistic assumptions (as you point
out).

In any case, the fact is that he should have said that "you're 48 times LESS
likely to become the next president of the US....," based on the observation
that there's about one Powerball Jackpot winner per month:
[http://portalseven.com/lottery/powerball_jackpot_winners.jsp](http://portalseven.com/lottery/powerball_jackpot_winners.jsp)

------
jere
>The record-breaking $800 million Powerball jackpot drawing will take place
Saturday night. Ticket holders have a 1 in 292.2 million chance of winning,
notes Miecznikowski. Here’s a look at some of the statistics:

>You’re 25 times more likely to become the next president of the United
States, assuming the entire U.S. population had an equal shot at the
presidency, than you are to win Powerball, says Miecznikowski.

What he's saying is clearly nonsensical because the population of the US is
close enough to 292 million to round off and say the chances of you winning
powerball and becoming president (if everyone has the same shot) are equally
likely.

You can say that only half the population is old enough and you can take off a
few percentage points for foreign born citizens, but that gets you to 2-3
times, not 25. Plus he specifically said the _entire US population_. Not only
those qualified. Very odd statement.

------
DiversityinSV
I'd rather have the money than be Prez. Thank you very much. I might even do a
blog about my feeling of being devoured by the envious poors.

------
rdiddly
The annoying thing about this analogy is that if I'm going to be the next
president, the probability of my being president is 1, and for everybody else,
it's 0. But we don't know anything about it until we go through the process of
observing the outcome. Or do we? I bet somebody does know with 100% certainty
who will be president, that's how undemocratic I believe the process has
become.

