Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked Dec. 30, 2020

Created

Mon Jul 20 17:33:01 +0000 2020

Likes

293

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

People might object to going back all the way to 1880. But in some ways, late 19c and early 20c elections are a *better* match for the chaotic conditions of an election amidst a global pandemic than say an election amid a standard postwar recession. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 20, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

And if polls and "fundamentals" align (as they do this year; Trump is down by about the amount he "should" be) it might make you modestly more confident in the outcome, but not dramatically so. There is a long history of econ models being overconfident. https://t.co/uzhRzj9s2F — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 20, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Basically, this election presents a mix of reasons to think uncertainty could be higher *or lower* than usual. The case for low uncertainty: * Polls have been stable * High polarization likely = lower volatility * Relatively few undecided voters * No major third-party candidate — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 20, 2020 Hibernated