Nate Silver

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I do not see a citation in this ... interesting ... ad, but I *believe* they are referring to the FiveThirtyEight Trump score, which indeed has Loeffler voting with Trump 100% of the time. https://t.co/hdJRgWVME7 https://t.co/XvZKKL1O57 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Lukewarm take: Maybe, as this paper about an outbreak in Brazil would seem to suggest, the herd immunity threshold is higher than the low-end estimates but lower than the high-end estimates. https://t.co/KQ6HhsBiQ0 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

If it's in between—more than merely *somewhat* unpopular, but not quite to the point of being *extremely* unpopular—then there's probably a ton of in-fighting within the GOP, which is not what you want on the eve of an election. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

If moving to confirm someone was merely *somewhat* unpopular, one imagines the GOP would do it (since getting a Supreme Court seat is hugely impactful). If it was *extremely* unpopular, McConnell might not be able to hold together support anyway. But what if it's in between? — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

If voters prefer waiting until after the election by a 13-point margin *and* D's are more fired up about the Supreme Court, this starts to look like a challenging issue for Republicans. Which is not to say they won't confirm someone, just that it could come at an electoral price. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

It doesn't seem completely far-fetched to imagine a world where Trump was for lockdowns and Democrats were against them. In that world, you'd probably see more of this kind of thing, i.e. an argument from the left that lockdowns perpetuate inequality. https://t.co/nCmTxBnT7w — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

FYI, in response to criticisms along these lines, USC is now showing a 14-day version of their poll. It has been much more stable, and that's the one we'll be using in our polling averages going forward. https://t.co/9oj2jlKZD8 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So the GOP probably loses those seats BUT gets a conservative justice, whom McSally and Gardner will vote for. Which net-net is a good trade. (One Supreme Court >> 2 Senate seats for 6 years). The GOP has the luxury of having a lot of cards to play to make those sorts of trades. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

McSally and Gardner are instructive. Trump is not popular in their states (especially CO). If their focus were on winning re-election, it is quite insane for them to support Trump as often as they have. But that's not their only focus. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

A problem with this is that the GOP is willing to trade off electoral success for big victories on policies and judges. So their advantage in the Senate translates to shifting policy well to the right of what the average voter would prefer, not necessarily winning every election. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

A lot of pretty good polls in Senate races for Democrats this weekend and this AM. They're now up to 61% to take the Senate in the Deluxe version of our model, 68% in Classic, 71% in Lite. It's very competitive but we're getting into "Leans D" territory. https://t.co/eev4w6wba9 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

One basic thing about the Supreme Court pick is it reminds voters Republicans have a lot of power...not necessarily what you want voters to be thinking about if you're a GOP incumbent running at a time when Congress is unpopular and folks are unhappy with the direction of the US. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

All of it amounts to a 1-point lead for Trump in our average, about what you'd expect. (Keep in mind that our average applies a house effects adjustment to internal polls.) Still, between POTUS and the *2* Senate races, there's a lot to poll here. https://t.co/VYrvEGxHXu https://t.co/wcR3n4LYEV — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Georgia's a state where it's a bit hard to tell what's going on from the polling. Trump had a couple of strong polls there immediately after the RNC. But since then, two Democratic internals show Biden leads and two non-partisan polls show Biden +1 and Trump +1, respectively. https://t.co/YZ98mfuRZd — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@artfcity People should be freaked out to some extent! But they should be freaked out because it's a small probability that is *plausible enough* and would be *very, very bad*, not because it's a large probability. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@mattyglesias Part of it is that as stodgy mainstream media centrists have tended to drive the political conversation less and edgy liberal/conservative activists have tended to drive it more, folks have gone from overrating the electoral benefits of moderation to underrating them. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Our research has found that voting against your party actually is helpful electorally ... voters still pick up on that signal. The high rates of party-line voting for Ernst, Tillis etc. are a big part of why they're in trouble. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

It's not surprising that Gardner, McSally, Ernst, Tillis, et. al. seem ready to move full steam ahead with a nomination given that they have a consistent track record of supporting Trump. But in an earlier era, purple-state senators are probably defying the president more often. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @jbenton: Functionally, the structure of the U.S. Senate takes about 1/3 of the political power of urban areas and reallocates it to rur… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So we had two polls (YouGov and RMG) that showed a roughly -10 margin against proceeding with a Supreme Court nomination pre-election. This shows a much bigger gap, about -40. These results are likely to be sensitive to question wording, but some warning signs for Trump & GOP. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @baseballot: Reuters/Ipsos: 62% of adults (including half of Republicans) believe the SCOTUS vacancy should be filled by the winner of t… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

As I've pointed out before, there's also the Thing Everybody Does where they pretend that "Hey, maybe Trump has a shot?!?" is the most contrarian position imaginable when it's incredibly banal and conventional. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

RT @baseballot: New https://t.co/7Wicn53YB5 survey (this is NOT the same as Rasmussen): Likely voters say 52–41% that the Senate should wai… — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

i.e. given the choice between a) Pursue a moderate agenda and win the Senate 80-90% because of the GOP's built-in advantage. -or- b) Pursue a very conservative agenda, which is unpopular, but still win the Senate ~60% of the time because of the GOP's advantage They choose b) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

The reason being that McConnell and Trump can use the GOP's advantage in the Senate to pursue a very conservative, largely unpopular agenda, even if it risks losing the chamber. Indeed, the equilibrium probably involves taking on some electoral risk for wins on policy and judges. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

One other point of context about the Senate: The battle for the Senate has often been quite *competitive* in recent elections, which might seem to contradict the notion that there's a built-in GOP advantage. But that's not necessarily how these things work. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

OK, here's a "fun" question. Our model has Biden with similar odds (about 1 in 3) of winning each of Iowa, Georgia and Texas. If you had to bet on him winning one of the 3, which would you bet on? — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Bunch of state polls today, but all pretty close to the averages in their respective states. Presumably we'll get Iowa presidential numbers from Selzer soon, too. Could be interesting with Biden polling well in demographically similar states like MN & ME. https://t.co/9AeTKX5o0O https://t.co/RMp5L0AJXX — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

PS the Senate skew toward Republicans (6-7 points) is both bigger and more permanent than the Electoral College one (2-3 points) or the one in the House (a bit tricky to measure but probably amounts to 2-4 points in practice right now and possibly less after 2020 redistricting). — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

And white voters are represented as though they're 68% of the country in the Senate, when they're actually 60%. It's basically as if you'd turned the clock back 20 years. https://t.co/7nvWwhh4hT — PolitiTweet.org