Nate Silver seeks to calm people freaking out about his Now-Cast forecast

[Godhumor]

The now-cast also suggests that Trump has gained a net of about 4 percentage points on Clinton in national polls from a week ago, turning a deficit of about 3 points into a 1-point lead. If so, Trump would turn out to have a fairly typical convention bounce. Over the past few cycles, convention bounces have been 3 to 4 percentage points, on average. As is also typical of convention bounces, Trump appears to have gained in the polls (taking votes from undecided and third-party candidates) more than Clinton has declined.

On the opposite side of the spectrum from the now-cast is our polls-plus forecast, which builds in a convention bounce adjustment. Because Trump’s convention bounce is broadly in line with its expectations, the polls-plus forecast hasn’t moved very much: It gives Trump a 42 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, up only slightly from last week.

...

On the one hand, the conventions are not a particularly good time to sweat every tick in the polls. Instead, they tend to be one of the less accurate times for polling. Historically, it’s unusual for candidates not to at least pull into a rough tie after their party convention — John McCain and Sarah Palin did so in 2008, for example, and even Walter Mondale led a couple of polls in 1984. But those bounces do not always turn out to be predictive.

...

It’s hard to know what to expect out of the Democratic convention — I could tick off a half-dozen reasons why I’d expect Clinton to get a relatively large bounce, and another half-dozen why it might be quite small. We know, however, that the polls are normally a lot more predictive a few weeks after the conventions — by which time the convention bounces have died down — than a few weeks beforehand.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-trump-gets-convention-bounce-drawing-polls-to-dead-heat/

[CrowCityDem]

1. Here's an idea: don't put out a map between the conventions, when one side has an obvious advantage.

[AgadorSparticus]

5. especially when he even says it doesn't mean as much because of the convention bounces.

[TeddyR]

2. For me, these are the key points from the article

On the other hand, Clinton’s had a bad July, polling-wise — and that was clear before the conventions began. That Trump had narrowed the race to 3 percentage points before the conventions is why he could pull into an approximate tie with Clinton — or perhaps slightly ahead of her — with a medium-size convention bounce.

And

So if the race is still tied two or three weeks from now — or Trump is ahead — then it will really be time for Democrats to panic and for Trump fans to rejoice. For now, we can say that Clinton isn’t just going to glide to victory. Trump has a real chance at becoming president, and although Clinton is still favored, she’s already had a bumpy ride.

These ideas are related. Hillary isn't going to run away with this election, regardless of how awful a candidate Trump has been. He's going to win the white vote and he's going to win it by a large amount. The question is going to be what turnout looks like. And I think that's how you get to the second point. Trump has a chance to win this election depending on turnout. Hillary will win by huge amounts in California and New York, but she was going to carry those states anyway. Dems have to turn out the vote in PA, OH, FL, VA, CO and NC.

[LAS14]

3. How does this information work with...

... this information?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512292299

IMPORTANT NOTE: This is not a glass is half full rhetorical question. It's just a request for help in understanding the apparent conflict between these two articles.

[Godhumor]

4. The other one is about the Now-Cast

His highly aggressive model trying to figure out what would happen if the election was held today and not in November. He has readily admitted that the Now-Cast can and will see large swings based on small polling changes.

[LAS14]

6. Thanks much!