Hacker News Reader

Comment by bguberfain | Hacker News Reader

This was the first time I saw a major mainstream media outlet prominently feature a statistical predictive model live during the vote count (and it was spot on): https://www.estadao.com.br/politica/eleicoes/em-tempo-real-p...

View on HN

The Finnish public broadcaster has used a model to predict final vote share for as long as I remember. The stated purpose is to offset the bias that comes from smaller, more rural municipalities reporting sooner.

It usually kicks in when 10-20 % of the votes have been counted and switches back to raw results near the 90% mark.

Didn't find an exact date when they started using it; an article says "dates back to 1960s" but it's definitely been a staple in 2000s.

Mexico has been doing that since the 90s, with the PREP (Programa de Resultados Electorales Preliminares). Preliminary results start pouring almost soon as the voting period ends, and in 24 hours we know the winner. Statistical models are perfect for this scenario, as they become increasingly certain. In my country, the loser has conceded defeat before all 100% votes are counted, by sheer mathematical certainty.

It always surprises me that USA, the self-appointed bastion of democracy worldwide, has such tortuous and malleable elections; and that no serious academic discussion occurs despite the endemic flaws. Even these days, the PREP's Wikipedia page lacks an English translation.

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programa_de_Resultados_Elector...

Indeed, Rodrigo Mahlmeister's model was absolutey impressive. It even predicted the inflection points incredibly well.

They are impressive but I often ask myself why so much effort is spend here. While people are curious about results, a bit of waiting for the counts shouldn't matter.

The most "sensible" application would be for betting markets I thought.

One modern need is to avoid people using the well known patterns of vote reporting to inflame conspiracies about "mysterious" and "sudden" reversals in vote tallies.

Trust me, telling people the vote will look weird ahead of time does not quiet the vote consipuracistst. Heck I'd say it gives ammo. They call it predictive programming. The lie is revealed and normalized.

True but for example in California we have it extra bad where it takes weeks for votes to get counted. Even the most idealistic person with respect to how people should process election results must admit that it taking this long either:

a) Undermines trust or

b) Creates a more fertile ground to undermine trust

The NYTimes does this with "The Needle"

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/elections/100000009683078/h...

NYT famously had the needle which infamously kept breaking down on election day and they'd have to take it down

Are there any sources of the methodology ?

The github link in the article does not work

https://github.com/rodrigomahlmeister/projecao-2026-metodo

It was there last night. Now I get a 404.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com