The 93-Percent Image

Once or twice a year, someone will put up the NY Times piece from late October 2016, to remind folks of the 'odds' of Hillary Clinton winning against Donald Trump.

Maybe if they'd lessened the amount (say instead of 93-percent.....it was 58-percent), then a lot of people would have been more controlled in their anti-enthusiasm of the situation.

The thing is....they lead these people like a herd of cattle to one broad expectation.  And in evening hours of election day....that expectation died off.

But I go back to this one central theme.....93-percent.  How the hell do you arrive at such a number, and how realistic was it in the first place?  Was the act of 5th-grade kids, working with a marginal instructor?  Or was this just a wild number they plucked out of the sky?