Nate Cohn

@Nate_Cohn ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked Feb. 3, 2022

Created

Thu Aug 27 13:28:36 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@gelliottmorris You know the demographic explanation for OH, so you nod and say it makes sense. But the model doesn't, and so it's got to allow for Trump+9 in FL as a very realistic possibility. And tbh, your model barely even allows for the '16 result in OH/IA at this point! — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 27, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@gelliottmorris now, it's true--having a model that's prepared for craziness in UT will also allow for some wild things in FL. But pretty crazy things happen! By the numbers, Trump+9 in OH in '16 just isn't very different and it just happened in '16. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 27, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn

@gelliottmorris You can also think of this in terms of the demographic shocks. *You* know in '16 there's a risk of a Trump surge among white no col voters, but maybe not other kinds. How does the model account for that risk but *not* the ones you *don't* find plausible, like FL Hispanic surge? — PolitiTweet.org

Posted Aug. 27, 2020 Hibernated