>This is hacker news: I'm allowed to be more interested in bayesian statistics than your country's electoral system.
Aren't regional probabilities just conditions on the national distribution? Building the national Presidential election distribution from the conditioned distributions versus just using the sampled national distribution is bayesian statistics.
>The probability of winning is based on the popular support for a candidate
This was the argument you made. And I don't see how this is Bayesian vs frequency when all I am saying is that the same national popular vote distribution can have large variance in regional conditional distributions which leads to large variance in election outcome distribution due to the electoral college.
Aren't regional probabilities just conditions on the national distribution? Building the national Presidential election distribution from the conditioned distributions versus just using the sampled national distribution is bayesian statistics.
>The probability of winning is based on the popular support for a candidate
This was the argument you made. And I don't see how this is Bayesian vs frequency when all I am saying is that the same national popular vote distribution can have large variance in regional conditional distributions which leads to large variance in election outcome distribution due to the electoral college.
Sounds pretty bayesian to me.