Nate Silver issues "good news" for Harris on electoral college chances (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 3 hours ago by realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club to c/politics@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 31 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 19 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I keep trying to reframe it to people that I am happy to spend an extra $2 on a tank of gas if it means not having a convicted rapist who sows division and hate as a role model for my 12 year old niece.

And then add in that I’m an international buyer and can confirm EVERYONE globally is paying more since COVID. And tariffs ARE passed on to the consumer.

I’ve slowed down my own postings and now responding to my conservative friends political posts, hoping it gets to more of those people.

[-] cheeseandrice@lemm.ee 9 points 2 hours ago

Sorry to focus on this point but gas is subject to a fairly fluid global market. I've been driving a car since Clinton and have never noticed Republicans being better for gas prices or the price of anything, if anything it's the opposite.

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I thought the President wasnt able to do anything about gas prices?

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

The President can do a lot of macro things that affect oil supply, like exercising some control over leases in public land, choosing to regulate or deregulate fracking, or invading a foreign country to obtain more oil.

In a more micro scale the President has fairly direct control over the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and can decide when to release and when to replenish.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 23 points 3 hours ago

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 25 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

So the model image you posted above there says it's more likely that Trump wins the election than it is flipping two heads in a row while flipping a coin. This is saying it's less likely for Trump to win than Hillary to win, but something that could fairly easily happen still. These aren't poll numbers, where 70-30 would be a massive blow out. This is a 30% chance of winning for Trump, closer to a coin flip than a sure thing.

A lot of other models were saying something ridiculous like Clinton had 95% chance to win or something. Nate Silver's model seems better than others based on this, if anything.

[-] commandar@lemmy.world 22 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

A lot of other models were saying something ridiculous like Clinton had 95% chance to win or something. Nate Silver’s model seems better than others based on this, if anything.

The constant attacks on how 538's model performed in 2016 says more about statistics literacy than it does about the model.

There is plenty to criticize Nate Silver for. Take your pick. Personally, the political nihilism that's increasingly flirted with "anti-woke" sentiment is good enough for me. Some people might prefer taking issue with the degenerate gambling. The guy has pumped out plenty of really dumb hot takes over the years, so you have your options.

But his models, historically, have performed relatively well if you understand that they're models and not absolute predictors.

[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago

People forget that Clinton lost because of Comey's October revelation that the FBI was reopening the investigation into her emails.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I was assured for a solid 7 years that it was solely the fault of everyone who was even the slightest bit disappointed about the primaries.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Looking at the historical election wins where president with lower popular vote won, trump clearly is outlier and either had outrageous luck (I doubt it) or help to push things just enough to get enough EC votes.

Of course this help, that he got in 2016 he still is getting right now so we should still assume odds will be in his favor and make won't get suspended and vote (the more people vote, the harder is to artificially affect the results).

[-] realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 hours ago

Is this from FiveThirtyEight or Nate Silver?

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I think Silver. Nate left FiveThirtyEight and now the site doesn't even publish any kind of predictive model.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 2 points 57 minutes ago

When did Nate Leave 538? Screenshot was from before the 2016 election.

[-] realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club 2 points 46 minutes ago

I think it's more than ABC News fired Nate and most people involved with FiveThirtyEight. Happened awhile ago, at least a year or two ago.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 1 points 37 minutes ago

I looked it up. Looks like he were with 538 from 2008-2023.

So to answer your original question, “It’s from 538 while Nate was still there” but I couldn’t say how directly involved he was with the models that backed this image from 2016. My assumption is that he would have been fairly deeply involved in the models though.

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

Suddenly everyone loves Nate Silverman again? Or is it confirmation bias kicking in?

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 hours ago

why did they hate him?

[-] realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club 2 points 2 hours ago

LOL you love to see it

There are some people still mad at him in this comment section though, to be fair

[-] anticolonialist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I did see a few, a few surprised me

[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I have full confidence she'll win the votes necessary. I have less confidence in GOP and MAGA operatives not pulling out all the stops to ensure Trump wins on a technicality. They WILL attempt a steal!

[-] realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club 0 points 2 hours ago

If Trump wins, would you accept the results of the presidential election?

[-] Awesomo85@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

No. Per their post, they already have it in their mind that he will "steal" it, so even if it was an absolute landslide and there was no funny business to be heard of, he cheated.

Now That's What I Call Democracy™!!! Vol. 47

You see, there is only ever fraud if your candidate loses.

P.S. I will not be voting for Trump in the coming election. I just know you will dismiss me as a "MAGAt Ultra Trumpetearista" or whatever other name is popular now for it.

[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 2 points 59 minutes ago

I said they'll attempt a steal. Doesn't mean they'll be successful or they wouldn't win without it. And I will accept the result in that I'm not going to storm Congress over it.

[-] perviouslyiner@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Meanwhile in republican planning... how can we cause enough delay to trigger a contingent election?

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 5 points 3 hours ago

Nate Silver is still trying to figure out the difference between his ass and a hole in the ground.

[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

Time to shut the orange turd out!

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Newsweek - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for Newsweek:

MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.newsweek.com/nate-silver-issues-good-news-electoral-college-donald-trump-election-1956228

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[-] RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

This bot shouldn't be able to call itself a "fact checker" when it doesn't check any facts from the articles it replies to. It just spams its own bias opinion about what bias the website has in general.

You are a spam bot. Lemmy would be better off without you.

[-] Nawor3565@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 hours ago

Just so you know, Lemmy has an option in every person's account to hide posts and comments from bot accounts ("bot" in this context meaning accounts that have voluntarily tagged themselves as bots, which is the case for the one you replied to.)

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago

It's also pretty easy to just block the account.

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024

33 points (88.4% liked)

politics

18894 readers

3199 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News