Full listing (BMG in blue, RMG in red).
| Deviations | Predictor | Brown | Coakley | Kennedy |
| 0 | Actual | 51.9 | 47.1 | 1 |
| 0.2 | Ken Pittman | 52 | 47 | 1 |
| 0.2 | Paul “Cool Cal“ Ferraro | 52 | 47 | 1 |
| 1.6 | Mike “DD4RP” Rossettie | 52 | 46.2 | 1.6 |
| 1.8 | yankeepundit | 51 | 48 | 1 |
| 1.8 | Republican Ram Rod Radio | 51 | 48 | 1 |
| 2 | garyrlake | 51 | 47 | 2 |
| 2 | swamp_yankee | 51 | 47 | 2 |
| 2.5 | RMG prediction average | 51 | 46.9 | 2.4 |
| 2.8 | Rob “EaBo Clipper” Eno | 50.5 | 48.5 | 1 |
| 3.8 | Argyle | 50 | 49 | 1 |
| 4 | South Shore Republican | 50 | 47 | 3 |
| 4.2 | demolisher | 54 | 45 | 1 |
| 5 | JoeTS | 49 | 47 | 3 |
| 5 | Peter Porcupine | 49 | 47 | 3 |
| 5.6 | Philo Publius | 53.7 | 44.3 | 2 |
| 5.8 | JohnD | 49 | 48.5 | 2.5 |
| 5.8 | MerrimackMan | 49 | 48 | 3 |
| 6 | cater68 | 51 | 45 | 4 |
| 6 | Peter Porcupine | 49 | 47 | 4 |
| 6 | All predictions average | 48.9 | 48.7 | 2.4 |
| 6.1 | BlueMass model |
52.7 | 44 | 3.2 |
| 6.2 | VESuggestions | 54.3 | 44 | 1.7 |
| 6.2 | Witch7 | 54 | 44 | 2 |
| 6.2 | nomad943 | 54 | 44 | 2 |
| 7.6 | ElectricStrawberry | 48.1 | 48.1 | 3.8 |
| 7.8 | sleeples | 48 | 50 | 2 |
| 7.8 | sleepleswithamoustache | 48 | 50 | 2 |
| 7.8 | Vote3rdpartynow | 48 | 48 | 4 |
| 8.1 | BMG/RMG models AVG | 47.9 | 49.2 | 3 |
| 8.8 | Hoyapaul | 47.5 | 51 | 1.5 |
| 8.8 | jconway | 47.5 | 49.5 | 3 |
| 8.8 | PeteSimon | 47 | 49 | 3 |
| 9.2 | Manny Happy Returns | 53 | 41 | 3 |
| 9.8 | sabutai | 47 | 51 | 2 |
| 10.3 | BMG prediction average | 46.7 | 50.4 | 2.8 |
| 11.8 | Wookie | 46 | 52 | 2 |
| 11.8 | HLPeary | 46 | 52 | 2 |
| 11.8 | BigD | 46 | 49 | 5 |
| 12.8 | ruppert | 46 | 53 | 2 |
| 13.8 | Carey Theil | 45 | 53 | 2 |
| 13.8 | Ray M | 45 | 52 | 3 |
| 15.8 | eddiecoyle | 44 | 54 | 2 |
| 15.8 | PatrickLong | 44 | 51 | 5 |
| 16.8 | Steve Stein | 43 | 51 | 5 |
| 19.6 | RedMass model | 42.1 | 55.2 | 2.7 |
| 21.8 | BrooklineTom | 46 | 61 | 3 |
| 32.8 | petr | 32 | 59 |
Possible reasons for why RedMass did so well?
1) In a tossup race, BMG erred on the side of Coakley, RMG on the side of Brown. Race broke to Brown, they got lucky.
2) RMG better at predicting outcomes of elections.
Future data may help answer that question.
3) with no money riding on the race, predictors maximized the next most important thing — their side’s chance of winning. What do I mean?
<
p>When the narrative is that your candidate will win in a squeaker, it’s easy to motivate folks to work for your candidate. When the narrative is that your candidate will come up short, it’s much harder to get folks to work GOTV. So, the narrative is always the same: it’s close, but our guy/gal will come out on top as long as we work hard.
<
p>After all, if you don’t lose money for being wrong, might as well be wrong in the way that maximizes your candidate’s chances of winning.
I DID think Scott would win, but I didn’t think he’d break 50% because of Kennedy.
<
p>I’ll never be pessimistic again!
I do think that is a factor in close races. My hope is that is a factor that can be isolated and accounted for to help get an accurate picture of where the race actually is.
<
p>Maybe if the predictions were private, they would be free from that kind of bias?
what is the relation b/w sleeples and sleeples with a moustache? “they” had identical predictions.
<
p>is it the same relationship as the one between Ernie Boch Jr and EB3?
And since I don’t know the true nature of EB3 and Ernie Boch Jr’s relationship, I’ll decline to compare the two.
To the late Frank/Festus.
Classless, even in victory.
I think they’re both over 50.
The late Frank predicted 2 million the week before…anyone have a higher number?
I’ll post those numbers later tonight. I am pretty sure nobody broke 2 million.