Trump will win in a landslide and the left will say it was close.
In a “fair” election I think President Trump wins re-election easily. The problem is the voter fraud.
Nate knows Trump is already leading and is only going to get stronger. This was his tell..
Nate got his fingers burned on the hot stove in 2016—he has learned the hard way never to underestimate the hidden Trump supporters.
Democrats will still be accepting and counting mail-in ballots when the Twelve Days of Christmas starts
Doesn’t every president win because of the electoral college?
To be fair though he has been one of the few on the left that have come right out told democrats not to celebrate too soon because Presidential election polling is pretty much useless until mid October when the vast majority of the electorate finally starts paying attention. In fact he said this just a couple weeks ago:
When my democrat friends excitedly ask me if the campaign is over, I tell them "No. Because it hasn't even really begun, and won't until after the conventions."
We all ought to pray that it is so.
Well since that's how every single President is elected (except in the rare cases where there was no majority or contested and it was decided by the House) - that's quite an astute observation there, Nate.
I do agree with him that the 2004-2012 stretch (and even 2014) was pretty good for pollsters. They nailed every single major election.
Nate Silver: A Legend in His Own Mind
Translation: Trump is ahead.
The dems are going to do all they can to steal it and if they lose they will claim we stole it. Hillary/2016 all over again.
Silver and his whole website have been awful in “predicting” future behavior by voters. Silver is probably the best of his ragtag group of statistics hacks at spinning a bad prediction (78% Hillary wins) into a less wrong result (I told you there was a 23% chance Trump wins, and look at all this margin of error stuff). He doesn’t actually put nearly the amount of work into his “models” that he claims, they all seem to be no more complicated than simple averages of other polling data with all of their biases and inaccuracies carried over.
They have been remarkably successful in explaining away those failures after the fact and continuing to get paid despite them, in part because they keep writing articles that give people who want a certain electoral outcome (Dems winning in a landslide) hope that it will happen if they run the numbers enough times.
This election, like every other, will come down to enthusiasm and organization. Nobody is enthusiastic about Biden, but there are a fair number of very enthusiastic anti-trump people out there. Right now they are fragmented in their support and the longer they don’t have a candidate to feel confident in, the harder it will be to get them organized and motivated. Polling may reflect that, or it may be pushed like it often is to hide or manipulate the perception in the public, probably through fear.
EVERY PRESIDENT WINS BECAUSE OF THE Electoral College... IT’S HOW WE DETERMINE WHO WON THE RACE.
Baseball teams win based on runs. Why is this so difficult for liberal useful idiots to understand.
In 1988, at about this time, Dukakis was 17 points “ahead” of GHW Bush. The Duke was a Bozo fun circus “almost winner”, finishing only 7,000,000 votes behind Bush 41.
I wouldnt worry about it Nate. Trump is going to win in a landslide.