I wouldn't want to accuse you of cherrypicking but your own link puts the odds of Trump winning the electoral college and losing the popular vote (which is what happened) at 10.5% in the "crazy and not so crazy scenarios" section at the bottom. And you were giving me a hard time about rounding up from 29% to 30%
And here is the NYT compilation of a bunch of other "expert" forecasts (scroll down the page about 40% of the way), I trust that you were unaware of 538 being by far one of the most Trump friendly "expert" models when you decided to reference that one...
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ecast.html
I'll go over a few of the highlights:
NYT: 85% Clinton
538: 71% Clinton
HuffPo: 98% Clinton
PredictWise: 89% Clinton
Princeton Election Consortium: 99% Clinton
Daily Kos: 92% Clinton
I tend to side with LTLFTcomposite based on those predictions. The "experts" blew this one... bigly. Either their models suck or the polling was flawed. Most of those are like fiipping 4 coins in a row and getting heads every time. Not impossible, but definitely not likely. And certainly not the kind of performance I'd trust in the future unless they could point to some flaw, like people lying at the polls, which contributed to their colossal failure.
And enough about the popular vote already, it didn't matter one bit. It is the equivalent of the Sixers saying they should have beat the Warriors because they made more field goals even though the Warriors outscored them by 10... one team made a bunch of layups while the other team made a bunch of 3's. Like them or not, those are the rules of the game...