Nate Silver

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris Also, in person ballots *also* have some rejection rate, perhaps in the neighborhood of 1%. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris But you're still missing the original point. The added convenience of VBM means that a higher percentage of "likely voters" who VBM will in fact cast ballots, vs. people who intend to vote in person but then have something come up. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris The surprisingly high turnout of mostly VBM primaries during the pandemic (despite the lack of competitive presidential races by that point in the campaign) also seems like relevant data. https://t.co/MU5WQ7SI5P — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris *You* can say that but, again, I think you're overestimating the confidence which we can assess these factors ahead of time. In particular, estimates of how much VBM increaes turnout vary a great deal from one another, and there may be additional complications during a pandemic. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@gelliottmorris The uncertainty on estimating either of the parameters you need (increase in turnout vs. increase in rejection rates) is quite large, especially given the somewhat sui generis event of an election in a pandemic, to the point where all we can usefully say is it ↑ uncertainty. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So while a partisan split in vote-by-mail increases *uncertainty*, it's hard to predict who might benefit from it on balance. If more D's are voting by mail, more D voters may have ballots rejected. But more R voters will have something come up on Election Day and fail to vote. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Indeed, there is decent (though not overwhelming) evidence that vote-by-mail increases turnout, which is a sign that this convenience matters. https://t.co/79VTeD2bPw — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

This is the sort of analysis I was warning against yesterday. Vote-by-mail may result in higher rejection rates. But its convenience also means that as many or more people who intend to cast a ballot will in fact wind up casting a ballot. https://t.co/rdnJ0mN33J — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

It's Day 3 of the Democratic Convention. And we are "live blogging" it. Where might you find the "live blog"? You will find it here, friends: https://t.co/6dH3VmGFu2 — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@JamesFallows Yeah. I don't think this is happening at any sort of conscious level, but there's a part of the MSM psyche that would love to blame Facebook or weird Russian memes or other dark and hidden factors because it obscures any role that their coverage played, especially on emails. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

On partisanship, for instance, it seems relevant that 88% of Republicans backed Trump (per the 2016 exit poll), including lots and lots of normies who wanted lower taxes and a conservative Supreme Court and who *really really* didn't like Hillary Clinton. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I'm a person who thinks Facebook memes etc. had very little impact on 2016 as compared more obvious factors like "but her emails", racism and sexism, partisanship, and the Electoral College, so I'm not sure what to think about the QAnon stuff. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So let's say (these numbers are hypothetical but should pass the smell test) that 2% of postal ballots are rejected vs. 1% of in-person ballots. That means in-person voting is safer, right? Well, not if there's a 2% chance that something comes up that prevents you from voting. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

There are also a lot of things that can go wrong when you intend to vote in person. Long lines. Car trouble. Going to the wrong polling place. Getting stuck late at work. Getting sick. Bad weather. Not knowing what time polls close (surprisingly early in some states). — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

The point about convenience is important, and why it's best to avoid conclusions such as "mail ballots are rejected at (slightly) higher rates than in-person ballots, and more Democrats (at least in 2020) vote by mail, therefore polls will overrate Democrats." — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@JustinWolfers But people who sat down to in March formally predict what would happen, accounting for factors like policy failures and lack of compliance rather than wishing them away, mostly came up with predictions that are very close to where we are at today. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I'm not sure elite discourse around lockdowns in March was especially honest with itself about this, especially the likelihood of achieving technological improvements (such as fast-turnaround testing) on a short time frame in countries with poor governance (including the US). — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

* People hate when this is brought up, but part of the problem with suppression via lockdowns is that unless you either achieve eradication (~impossible) or use the time under lockdowns to improve technology (e.g. testing) cases start rising again once you relax the measures. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

** If it had been impossible to keep R from falling to <1, COVID would run its course until herd immunity. Indeed this is what some March predictions assumed. This would have been VERY bad. But it does mean it might have been "over" at some point, depending on length of immunity. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

But also, we wound up in a middle ground where given the sort of interventions that society is willing to undertake, R seems to hover around 1. Achieving true suppression (R << 1) is too hard, apparently*. But it's not that hard to prevent R >> 1 with moderate interventions**. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

So if forecasts were pretty good in March, what changed? Part of it is was just this was very new in March. People weren't thinking so far ahead. Fall seemed a LONG time away. You could read these predictions, agree with them intellectually, but they didn't register emotionally. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

3. Prominent epidemiologists like Marc Lipsitch predicted in February that 40-70% of the world's population would be infected with COVID-19 over the next year. https://t.co/7W677X6GTC — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

2. The Imperial College study in March envisioned on-and-off waves of COVID until a vaccine, if social distancing measures were implemented then relaxed then re-implemented, etc. (which is basically what has happened). https://t.co/0lITMpN9fh — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

This is not correct. Not only was it imaginable... it was widely predicted in March that COVID would be a highly persistent problem. 1. An expert panel in March predicted ~200K US deaths this year: https://t.co/C4BoF70nfD — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@DKThomp @mattyglesias @OsitaNwanevu The modern version of this is academic papers that have like three pages of differential equations instead of just saying "we ran a linear regression". — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Our NBA forecast thinks the Lakers and Bucks will still probably win their first round series after Game 1 losses, but they've taken a fairly big hit to their title odds. https://t.co/SfFhO0cq2P https://t.co/TBR2ofU0Jm — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

The "I'm leaving New York City!" thinkpieces are interesting give that it might currently be the safest place in the country from a COVID standpoint. (Usual disclaimers apply: We'll see about the fall/winter. And, yes, that's partly because it got hit hard before, etc.) — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

I like panel surveys and so defended the USC/LA Times poll against its detractors in 2016, but still kind of mad that the LA Times bragged about the poll calling the result right when it was a national survey that incorrectly had Trump winning the popular vote. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

@jtlevy Fivey (a fox, not a hellbeast) is scrupulously nonpartisan. — PolitiTweet.org

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Day 2 of the Democratic National Convention is commencing, and even if you're not as excited about it as @FiveyFox (pictured here), we'll be watching it with you and liveblogging here: https://t.co/LpYZfXPXyw — PolitiTweet.org