Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 27, 2021

Created

Wed Aug 12 18:49:31 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris @SethS_D I would say the empirical track record of election models being overconfident, e.g. several models in 2016, Sam Wang with Kerry at 97% in 2004, the often disastrous performance of "fundamentals" models out of sample, is relevant here. https://t.co/uzhRzj9s2F — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris @SethS_D For context, 97% is what we get for Biden's popular vote win probability **if we run our model as a now-cast**. So your model is basically as confident on Aug. 12 as ours will be on Election Day. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris @SethS_D You may not make the same mistakes as models did in 2016 or as Wang did in 2004. But you may make different mistakes. Given the nature of election data (small n's, lots of covariance), it's way easier to make mistakes that result in overconfidence than under-confidence. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 12, 2020 Hibernated