Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 14, 2020

Created

Fri Nov 08 23:24:37 +0000 2019

Likes

385

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Lots of stakeholders in the system (donors, consultants) have lots of incentive to believe that money matters a ton in presidential campaigns, and that probably leads journalists to overrate its importance if they talk to these folks and don't have a good BS detector. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Nov. 8, 2019 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Tom Steyer has spent ~$45 million on advertising in the early states, which mostly are fairly cheap to advertise in, and it got him to around 2-3% of the vote. Not quite a randomized control trial, but some pretty compelling data that advertising only moves the needle so far. — PolitiTweet.org

By Super Tuesday, the field will be smaller, the candidates who’ve made it through will be more weathered and the r… https://t.co/wRQmo1HnmQ

Posted Nov. 8, 2019 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Hard IMO to escape the idea that there's a Dunning–Kruger Effect at work here. These donor types are often successful in other areas, and they're usually (because of their status) insulated from criticism, so they tend to vastly overestimate how much they know about politics. — PolitiTweet.org

The Biden erasure is the craziest thing is about the search for a moderate Stop Warren candidate. (He's right there… https://t.co/nYL6vYdOY6

Posted Nov. 9, 2019 Hibernated