It's published.
We ran 80,000 simulations tonight.
Harris won in 40,012.
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
The STATA output window that has a 50.015% chance of living in glory and a 49.985% chance of living in infamy.
(There are a small number of 269-269 ties that we don't count toward either candidate, though probably = Trump in practice.)
Really quite a thrilling race. After a big Harris lead early, Trump (+ no majority) was ahead as late as simulation 79,287, just couldn't close.
BREAKING MRC POLL: Over 70% of Democrats are unfamiliar with Kamala Harris’ radical policies.
The leftist media rarely talk about these policies. Details below 
![](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="700" height="400"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Rate proposed Community Notes
I said it a month ago that he would say it’s 50/50 on Monday night. The whole thing is a joke
The classic let’s call it a coin flip so you can stay relevant for next election
The grift that keeps on grifting
Predictions don’t win. Vote for Harris
Quote
Franklin
@franklinisbored
I am a proud Democrat! Here is my presidential voting history since I turned 18:
2008: Barack Obama (D)
2012: Barack Obama (D)
2016: Hillary Clinton (D)
2020: Joe Biden (D)
2024: Kamala Harris (D)
Show more
The accuracy of this simulation is based on the presumption that the polling averages are going to be reflective of the actual numbers right?
BREAKING MRC POLL: Over 70% of Democrats are unfamiliar with Kamala Harris’ radical policies.
The leftist media rarely talk about these policies. Details below Rate proposed Community Notes
next time save your time and money and just flip a frickin coin then
I spoke with the simulator. He knows Trump is winning. He blames the pollsters & Nate's love of the Democrat party.
No one cares. You’re the ghost of Christmas past. We’ve moved on to better pollsters. 
How are you, as a man, going to pretend this isn't nonsense?
*Any* undergrad statistics student would debunk this
I called that he would do this at the last second. He’s a hack who wanted attention
How do you know the shape of the model won't change after the 80,000th simulation? It converged at around 45,000 and then the gap widened again. How did you decide the 80,000 cutoff?
What fascinates me is that in reality there's one (1) current split of the country that barely changed over years (and certainly not within the last month) and one (1) current split of people who'll vote and people who won't, and there too as the country is polarized that's not a
Show more
Ah yes hope all that data collected was useful, was this the Monte Carlo calculation? Has to learn that one by hand and with calc, also coding.
I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you! I never could’ve predicted **checks notes** a 50/50 toss up!
wildly close. either direction, just can’t wait for this to be all over
Looks like it too close to call and within .015% which is in line for statistical deviation… crazy! Thanks for doing what you do.
