Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked March 15, 2021

Created

Tue Sep 01 16:00:29 +0000 2020

Likes

153

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I'm sure their authors would disagree, but we think some other models are closer to *conditional* predictions. IF certain assumptions about partisanship, how voters respond to economic conditions, etc., hold, then maybe then Biden has a 90% chance of winning instead our ~70%. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Sept. 1, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

(I don't want to overly harp on 2016, but it's not unconcerning. If you think there's a secular trend toward polls/forecasts being more accurate, then 2016 being quite a bit less accurate than 2004/08/12, especially for state-by-state forecasts, is problematic.) — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Sept. 1, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

These assumptions are *highly plausible*, but they are a long way from *proven*. It is easy to forget how little data we have to work with, including only a handful of presidential elections for which we have particularly robust state polling data. https://t.co/C1M0OsfzGz — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Sept. 1, 2020 Hibernated