Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 26, 2020

Created

Wed Nov 27 22:46:24 +0000 2019

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

...meaning, if they had gotten the national margin exactly right (Conservatives +2.4 instead of +4), they would have shown an even narrower Tory seat margin and so would have been further off from the actual seat count. Luckily for them, their errors canceled out. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Nov. 27, 2019 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

They had Tories +33 seats when the final result was Tories +55. That's decent as these things go because this stuff is **really hard** to model. But certainly not fantastic. Also they got a bit lucky because they *underestimated* Labour's vote share.... — PolitiTweet.org

The 2017 YouGov model did better at forecasting seat level vote shares than a regional swing model *with known vote… https://t.co/ezzTubGLmS

Posted Nov. 27, 2019 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@DKarol @richardmskinner I still think the worst case for Biden is a Klobuchar, Booker or Harris surprise. A lot of the others would leave him in a relatively tenable position IMO, because there will be doubts about whether the IA/NH winner can win over moderates/the establishment, black voters, or both. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Nov. 28, 2019 Hibernated