Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked May 6, 2020

Created

Tue Dec 17 17:06:00 +0000 2019

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@DKarol TBH, I'm not sure if these comparisons are supposed to convince me that any of the current Top 4 still have a chance—of course they do—or that there's a decent shot someone from *outside* the current top 4 could emerge (I have thoughts but a much trickier thing to estimate). — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 17, 2019 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

The problem with the 2004 comparison is that it sort of erases Biden and Sanders, who are big trusted brand names and "next-in-line" candidates (Biden as the last Democratic VP and Bernie as 2016 runner-up). There was nobody really like them in the 2004 field. (h/t @DKarol). — PolitiTweet.org

I mention 04 a lot because it shows: 1) How dramatically a race can change in the final days/weeks before Iowa 2) H… https://t.co/gWAfKBPJLn

Posted Dec. 17, 2019 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@DKarol One thing I think people miss is that the probability of a "becoming a factor" isn't the same thing as actually winning. There's a decent shot Klobuchar becomes a factor in IA. But many of those times result in her finishing 2nd/3rd there, or winning IA but losing NH/NV/SC, etc. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Dec. 17, 2019 Hibernated