Nate Silver

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @WPT: Nate Sliver (@NateSilver538) finishes #WPTVenetian Day 1B as the overall chip leader with 462,000! Stay tuned for full chip coun… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So... this happened! Ended the day with 462K chips. Played good and ran really really really really good. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @nathanwpyle: NBA Animal Mascots Ranked By How Well They Could Hold A Basketball 🏀 ⭐️⭐️Can Definitely Hold ⭐️⭐️ Grizzlies Raptors… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Kinda surprised by this from Biden, I'd imagine her suspension is quite unpopular. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@berkey11 About 20 min in reg line just now no wait for a table — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @MC_of_A: I made a model to estimate the likely distribution of the remaining absentee vote it projects, like, a tie -- 50.1% Adams, 4… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@allahpundit They'll think they have to nominate her but even if the party stops some of the more obvious challengers from running, some random rich dude like Ned Lamont would run and if that rich dude wins the New Hampshire primary all bets are off. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@SeanTrende @sahilkapur @RobGeorge @EsotericCD Fear of Trump is >= in Democratic circles than fear of bad optics. The most likely outcome is not that she gets the nomination without a serious challenge but that she does get challenged and it gets quite ugly. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@notdred @allahpundit What does "needed" mean? Is it not likely to do substantially more good than harm? My critique here is that people are thinking in inflexible categories rather than in a Bayesian/probabilistic way. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@notdred @allahpundit All perfectly reasonable. But we have a lot of real world data now that a 2nd dose is very likely to be helpful against variants. If you had an elderly relative who had gotten one dose of J&J and they had an opportunity to get an mRNA booster, would you tell them to turn it down? — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@allahpundit IIRC it's a different dosage but a lot of these efficacy studies are not apples to apples, e.g. they're comparing different outcomes measured at different time frames in different ways in different countries against different mixes of variants. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@allahpundit It's because everyone was throwing at different targets last spring and J&J reasonably decided to go for the one-dose target even though two doses are clearly better in hindsight. But public health people are weird and will twist themselves into pretzels rather than admit this. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

In this case, I'd guess that experts are reluctant to get out ahead of the CDC (which I'd bet large $ will *eventually* endorse boosters but hasn't yet) and/or to encourage the mildly shady behavior you'd have to go through get a booster now. But that's not really science per se. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

One consistent lesson from COVID is you should trust the experts' evidence (e.g. studies that show mRNA boosters really boost protection in people who got the AZ vaccine) more than their proscriptive advice (e.g. "I wouldn't get a booster) when the two are in conflict. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Another example of the logic I find confusing. Sure, one-shot J&J may provide decent protection against Delta and better-than-decent against severe illness from Delta. But why wouldn't you want the VERY good protection you might get from an mRNA booster? https://t.co/azfOuIKTgC https://t.co/VJtnl412WH — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Late night poker hot take is that they should bring the Tiger back (as described in James McManus's "Cowboys Full"). https://t.co/ZO7XZBcc8B — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

This article is confusing. Experts make a great case that J&J recipients should get a booster. But then it's said a new study—so far described only in a J&J press release!—addressed "some of those concerns". Weak basis for concluding no booster needed. https://t.co/KD1DmgZIs6 https://t.co/8HlhEm7pX4 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @BenRossTransit: NY mayoral primary may be a famous math paradox come to real life. If * Majority prefer Garcia to Adams * Majority pref… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @maggiekb1: Experts told me that one of the factors contributing to the loss of trust was the lack of outside perspectives. In past pand… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@NWSWPC . b . Y N 2 B P 2 . L B , — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @trvrb: How big of a wave of #COVID19 do we expect in the US from the Delta variant? Here I describe a simple approach to this question… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Mayyybe but mutliway primaries are pretty dynamic and campaign strategies were affected by RCV so the whole thing might have played out differently. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

What the fuck — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @Redistrict: I've deleted three tweets that implied 140k+ Election Day votes remained outstanding. They were indeed tabulated in today's… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Eyes emoji https://t.co/zNX4wvI2ru — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@conorsen My polling-infused gut is something like * 75% chance Garcia stays ahead of Wiley in the penultimate round * 55% chance Garcia overtakes Adams if she does make the final 2 * 25% chance Wiley overtakes Adams if she makes the final 2 In that case, you'd rather be Adams. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Also some questions about whether there are some uncounted election day votes and/or a lot of provisional votes in the Bronx, which would potentially help Adams. https://t.co/LK7FxmHAQ5 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Also, the distribution of absentee ballots seems to correlate more with strong Garcia precincts than strong Wiley precincts. https://t.co/oNzjJWoAzL — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Why? Polls show more Wiley voters had Garcia as their 2nd choice than the other way around. Which makes sense: some Garcia voters might prefer Adams to Wiley, who like Garcia is experienced & anti-"defund". Thus, Wiley might not pick up as much ground vs Adams as Garcia did. https://t.co/I8XUmc32oK — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Another question: Given that Garcia barely edged out Wiley in the penultimate round before nearly catching Adams, does that mean Wiley has a path *too* once absentees are added? My guess is Wiley has a path, but it's pretty unlikely one (see next tweet). https://t.co/oA8N65lSjB — PolitiTweet.org