Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked April 27, 2021

Created

Thu Aug 20 16:17:43 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris "There's actually no evidence" is kind of a silly statement. Most of the evidence does point toward VBM increasing turnout. And since the effect of rejection rates is quite small (about a 1% increase in *net* rejection rates vs in-person) it could *easily* be the larger effect. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 20, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris This is frustrating since it misses the central argument of my thread yesterday. What I'm also saying is (c): since VBM is more convenient, a higher percentage of people who *intend* to vote (and are counted as "likely voters" in polls) will actually *wind up* voting if they VBM. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 20, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris This just seems like a very confusing way to approach things. If VBM increases turnout by 2%—which, I would note, is *net* of rejected ballots since those estimates are generally based on *counted* ballots—it would seem like the convenience factor outweighs the rejection factor. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 20, 2020 Hibernated