Why did the networks take so long to call Wisconsin?

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

But Wisconsin should have been called MUCH sooner.

All networks and news organizations should have called Wisconsin by 12:30AM. Then the networks should have called Pennsylvania all before 2AM like print media organizations did.

You say that, but unless you were doing a hardcore statistical analysis on it, complete with computer modeling, analyzing all of the precinct totals and exit polling, etc, then you really have no idea whether they "should" have been called earlier. The decision desks are doing all that and don't make calls until there is virtually no doubt.

Georgia was called by all the news organizations from 11:35-11:45PM.

It was bizarre. It was like they forgot about it. Should've been called at around 9:30PM. Atlanta was a little bit slow but it was clear Trump would win it.

"Clear" to you is probably a lower threshold than the statistical threshold they're looking for before making a projection they can stand behind. There's a reason the networks have had only one misfire on projections since 2000, and it's not because they make the calls once the result are clear to Atlas armchair pollsters.

If Clinton was ahead they would have called it ASAP.

Possibly. It would depend on where the vote was coming from that was putting her ahead. Regardless, if she was ahead it would be more likely she would win because it would align with the exit polls. It's basically was Gustaf said. Less evidence would be needed from raw votes to pass their statistical threshold for calling the race.

This ignores the fact Fox News was able to call it (Wisconsin) so quickly.

[emailking]

This ignores the fact Fox News was able to call it (Wisconsin) so quickly.

It only ignores it in the sense that I did not directly address it. But it does not affect anything I said. Fox News has their own model, and that model allowed them to call it at 11:30. Maybe Fox News has the best model, and if so good for them. But it doesn't mean the CNN and NBC models were flawed, or that partisan leanings led the decision desk analysts to hold back on a conclusion that should have been evident. Maybe that did happen, but the evidence for it is circumstantial. And for all we know, partisan leanings could have caused Fox News to jump the gun a bit.

Remember, it was Fox News that first called Florida in 2000, which they then retracted. There are lots of reasons for why the results were so strange. But it illustrates the point that just because they were able to call the race in WI quickly doesn't mean the conclusion was justified. It was justified to them using their model and desired level of confidence. And it wasn't justified for the other networks until later. That's all we really know.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

This ignores the fact Fox News was able to call it (Wisconsin) so quickly.

It only ignores it in the sense that I did not directly address it. But it does not affect anything I said. Fox News has their own model, and that model allowed them to call it at 11:30. Maybe Fox News has the best model, and if so good for them.  

Except the NYT Upshot also had Trump at a 95%< of winning at 11:30 and CBS gave it the "Edge" at that time.

Trump wouldn't even have a 95%< of winning Pennsylvania until around 1AM, 30 minutes before AP called it.

The networks tried to hold off calling Wisconsin until Milwaukee absentee ballots came in, and when they did and Trump's lead was just as large they should have called it.

Remember, it was Fox News that first called Florida in 2000, which they then retracted.

CBS was the first network to retract Gore's projected win, not Fox. Quit reading socialist propaganda plz.

NBC called Florida first for Gore at 7:50PM - 10 minutes before the polls in the panhandle close. The panhandle votes 75%+ for Bush - coincidence? You decide. Source: https://uselectionatlas.org/INFORMATION/ARTICLES/ElectionNight/pe2000elecnighttime.php

Oh yeah and I should mention Fox ALSO called Florida for Gore before the panhandle closed - only ABC called Florida for Gore after the panhandle polls closed.

As I said, stop reading socialist (aka "progressive") propaganda.

[heatcharger]

You're still going on about this shit?

[emailking]

Except the NYT Upshot also had Trump at a 95%< of winning at 11:30 and CBS gave it the "Edge" at that time.

So what? Maybe CNN and NBC had it at >95% too. That's not enough to call it. They don't report their confidence levels, until they call it.

The networks tried to hold off calling Wisconsin until Milwaukee absentee ballots came in, and when they did and Trump's lead was just as large they should have called it.

You don't know why they held off calling it though. That's kind of my whole point. You're just making assumptions.

Remember, it was Fox News that first called Florida in 2000, which they then retracted.

CBS was the first network to retract Gore's projected win, not Fox.

To clarify, what I meant was that Fox News was the first to call Florida for Bush, not that they were the first to retract a call for Gore. It doesn't really matter who it was. I'm just making the point that because a network calls a race before another network doesn't mean the model or analysis of the former is better or more correct. Florida 2000 provides an unambiguous example of that.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Except the NYT Upshot also had Trump at a 95%< of winning at 11:30 and CBS gave it the "Edge" at that time.

So what? Maybe CNN and NBC had it at >95% too. That's not enough to call it. They don't report their confidence levels, until they call it.

The networks tried to hold off calling Wisconsin until Milwaukee absentee ballots came in, and when they did and Trump's lead was just as large they should have called it.

You don't know why they held off calling it though. That's kind of my whole point. You're just making assumptions.

Remember, it was Fox News that first called Florida in 2000, which they then retracted.

CBS was the first network to retract Gore's projected win, not Fox.

To clarify, what I meant was that Fox News was the first to call Florida for Bush, not that they were the first to retract a call for Gore. It doesn't really matter who it was. I'm just making the point that because a network calls a race before another network doesn't mean the model or analysis of the former is better or more correct. Florida 2000 provides an unambiguous example of that.

We can't keep bringing up Florida 2000 as an example when that situation hasn't happened in a Presidential race since then.

And I think they were Karl Roving because CNN or NBC would have called it ASAP for Clinton.

95%< = 95.1%+ btw. The Upshot never had a number high than 95% (thus the greater than) so by 95%< the state can be called accurately (if it's been that way for like 20 minutes at least). A lot of pundits on Twitter thought Wisconsin was over by 12:30AM. Obama believed the call enough to call Hillary to concede after Fox called Wisconsin (this from the "Shattered" book).

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

We can't keep bringing up Florida 2000 as an example when that situation hasn't happened in a Presidential race since then.

They also retracted their calls for New Mexico in 2000, but it stayed with Gore.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

We can't keep bringing up Florida 2000 as an example when that situation hasn't happened in a Presidential race since then.

They also retracted their calls for New Mexico in 2000, but it stayed with Gore.

Yeah but they did that with Illinois and Bush in 1988 as well. Called Illinois for Dukkakis IIRC. In 1992 they called New Hampshire as the polls closed for Clinton (he won it, but definitely should not have been called as the polls closed).

It seemed normal for them to call states quickly pre-2004 (most networks called Florida for Clinton before the panhandle closed IIRC).

Ever since the 2000 election they have been more careful.

[emailking]

95%< = 95.1%+ btw. The Upshot never had a number high than 95% (thus the greater than) so by 95%< the state can be called accurately (if it's been that way for like 20 minutes at least).

No? >95% for 20 minutes doesn't mean you can call a state. You can call a state when the probability reaches a certain threshold (typically 99.5% or higher). It doesn't matter how long it sits at a high threshold. It just doesn't work that way.

A lot of pundits on Twitter thought Wisconsin was over by 12:30AM.

Again, so what? They're just as armchair as you are. None of you were performing hardcore mathematical models using the exit polls and raw results.

Obama believed the call enough to call Hillary to concede after Fox called Wisconsin (this from the "Shattered" book).

Concede before any network had actually called the whole race though? Ok, whatever. It still doesn't matter. I can concede it was extremely likely that he would win Wisconsin once a network (any network) called it. That's probably what Obama based his decision on. That still doesn't mean the result was virtually certain according to the other network analysts, or should have been. They're in a bubble. They don't know that Fox News has called the state.  They're just looking at the results and running they're models.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

No? >95% for 20 minutes doesn't mean you can call a state. You can call a state when the probability reaches a certain threshold (typically 99.5% or higher). It doesn't matter how long it sits at a high threshold. It just doesn't work that way.

If it was Hillary Clinton they would have called it ASAP, like they did with Virginia and Colorado (which I have no problem with BTW).

Again, so what? They're just as armchair as you are. None of you were performing hardcore mathematical models using the exit polls and raw results.

The math stated quite clearly Trump was going to win Wisconsin by then lol.

Once again, sounds like Karl Rove flipping out over Ohio in 2012

Concede before any network had actually called the whole race though? Ok, whatever. It still doesn't matter. I can concede it was extremely likely that he would win Wisconsin once a network (any network) called it. That's probably what Obama based his decision on. That still doesn't mean the result was virtually certain according to the other network analysts, or should have been. They're in a bubble. They don't know that Fox News has called the state.  They're just looking at the results and running they're models.

As I said, everyone knew Wisconsin was done - even the President.

The networks were holding out hope that she would come through. I remember CNN desperately kept saying "Milwaukee is going to come through with 60,000 ballots!!! God help us!!" and when Milwaukee came through with 99.5% precincts reported and it didn't move the needle, CNN nearly flipped lol. Madison would close the gap but it was clear it would not be enough.

[emailking]

I think you're either missing my points entirely or aren't discussing this is good faith. I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt before, but after the last post I fear it may be the latter. In any case, I think I'm out. We're just going in circles at this point.

[Simfan34]

Trump led in exactly zero polls (at least in the RCP database) there throughout the entire election. I can see why the result would've been treated with caution.

[super6646]

Networks took a long time to call most states this time around. Ohio wasn't called by ANY of the networks till 3/4 of the vote was in, even though Trump led by 10%. Only CNN and Fox projected Wisconsin before Trump declared victory (Fox may have been a bit early on its call, but even CNN should've known it was done by the time it hit 90%). Georgia took forever to call too, even though Trump won by the same margin as Mccain. Missouri was also called far later than it should've (frankly, Fox was right to call it on the poll-closing), and the same can also be said with North Carolina (CNN and MSNBC), Florida (MSNBC and CNN), and even Virginia (all networks but Fox). In fact, FOX called states for Clinton and Trump very quickly. MSNBC had no problem following NBC on its calls until Trump started winning key states (Florida, North Carolina, Utah, and Iowa were all called on MSNBC far later than on NBC).

So it could've been exercising caution, but it could've been done simply because none of the networks wanted to lose ratings (if Trump won Wisconsin, the race was over).

So Fox was probably the best of the networks in calling the states that night. NBC did ok, but waited far too long to call Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. CNN was way to slow in projecting states from both sides (Connecticut too early to call for almost an hour, waiting far too long in calling Alabama and South Carolina, taking forever to call Virginia and North Carolina, last network to call Florida, not projecting Texas after the polls closed with half the vote in, and many others), and the only significant calls they got right with timing was Arizona and possibly Wisconsin. MSNBC just wanted to drag it out, and deliberately waited to call key states that Trump won, even though they had no problem calling states for Clinton when NBC called them.

[super6646]

Maybe because it was actually very close. It was called before Minnesota or Arizona, both of which had larger margins of victory for each candidate. Why Arizona took so long is more puzzling to me.

According to the decision desk at FOX News, Arizona started counting votes differently (and not all of it on election night), so it was harder to make a call. CNN did all Arizona I believe.