Tweet by @NateSilver538

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I think I'm making a more subtle point here, which is that a 15% vs. a 35% probability isn't highly actionable in the context of the 2020 presidential election in particular, i.e. it probably won't/shouldn't change your behavior, nor how you *feel* about the election. — PolitiTweet.org

I don’t get this. Yeah I get Bayesianism, but Bayesian probability is an epistemic state of affairs not a feature o… https://t.co/iShBeZ29Hr

Posted Oct. 22, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@jbarro Yeah, especially since it's those folks who are more likely to not ultimately have their vote counted. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Oct. 22, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So…I do think it's worth mentioning that the pendulum has swung somewhat from contracting voting rights to expanding them over the past few years, and certainly many of the COVID-related changes (many of which are ostensibly temporary) count as expansive. https://t.co/0ngCtfP8fZ — PolitiTweet.org

It’s telling that cynical, reactionary supporters of voter suppression are viewing this estimate as some weird just… https://t.co/Vibl4F8Pzz

Posted Oct. 22, 2020 Hibernated