For those who wonder whether the world really needs the election needle, we realize the actual results will emerge soon enough. But we also think that the millions of people who follow election night results online ought to have the context to understand them as well as experts do.

Is it harder in Iowa?

The Iowa caucuses pose a number of challenges for election night forecasting.

First, Iowa is the first contest of the Democratic primary season. We think we have a pretty good idea of where each candidate should fare well, based on polling data and past elections. But Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have never faced off before; it’s hard to be absolutely sure who would have the edge in rural areas, for instance, until we start to see some votes. Certainly, we’re far less confident of who will win a given county in Iowa than we would be in a general election between Democrats and Republicans.

Second, Iowa polls have often been inaccurate, and it is hard to know how changes in the race — like a hypothetical election night surge from Amy Klobuchar — might wind up upsetting our expectations. The large number of candidates adds volatility to our expectations.

Third, the caucuses are complex and involve multiple stages of voting. It is hard to know how each of these stages will play out over all, or by precinct. Voters can make strategic decisions in a specific caucus site that we do not anticipate.

A final complicating factor is that in 2020, the Iowa caucuses aren’t just in Iowa. There will be satellite caucuses in retirement communities, mosques and people’s homes, some as far away as Paris, Scotland and Tbilisi, Georgia. Without any prior voting history there, or knowledge of the demographics of who will attend, it’s hard for us to know what to expect from these locations.

Nonetheless, we do have some things going for us:

In general, the demographic divisions in the Democratic field are good news for the needle. Based on our polling, we have a decent idea of the likely geography of the Iowa caucuses: Bernie Sanders has an edge in many urban areas and college towns; Pete Buttigieg is relatively strong in rural areas; Elizabeth Warren does well in areas with more college graduates; and the Des Moines suburbs are a battleground.

We expect to receive results by precinct, rather than by county; these more granular results will help us make sense of the data fairly quickly.

Historically, there does not appear to be a big difference between the preference of voters when they show up to caucus and the actual state delegate equivalency results, based on entrance poll data.

The complicated nature of the delegate math is easy for computers, but hard for humans. Even an expert in Iowa’s political geography might have a hard time translating first alignment votes to delegate totals for thousands of precincts in real time. Advantage, Needle.

Can the needle be ‘wrong’?

Yes, depending on what you mean by “wrong.”

Once all of the votes have been counted, the needle will — by definition — match up perfectly with the final result.

But before all votes have been counted, the needle may suggest that one candidate has a pretty good chance of winning, only to have someone else eventually win. A 65 percent chance of winning means losing quite often. Likely to happen does not mean certainly will happen. We don’t quite think of this as “wrong.” (We know that some people do. This year, the needle will also describe probabilities with a simple phrase; it would describe the odds of someone with a 65 percent chance of winning as “likelier than not.”)