‘@mitchellvii is a beacon in a growing storm of bad news — a kind of post-truth, post-math Nate Silver.’
What is ‘post-math,’ supposed to mean? Mitchell is post math the way Hillary is post alcohol. He’s a numbers whiz. I followed him for mos leading up to the election, and his poll analysis was nonpareil. He took the methodology apart at the seams, and put the poll biases in glaring highlights. His predictions were uncannily accurate.
He was at his best on election night. I checked in at FR, and a chorus was claiming we’d lose FL. I switched over to Mitchell’s twitter feed, and he said (in essence) ‘FL is in the bag for Trump: here’s why.’
I’d have been a basket case on election eve without Mitchell. I’ve enjoyed his pithy comments in the meantime too. He’s right—he does have a way with words.
“What is ‘post-math,’ supposed to mean?”
I could be wrong, but think it was meant as a compliment to Mitchell and dig at Nate Silver.
I take “math” in this context to mean the reality of the 2016 election.
Pre-math (pre-election), Nate Silver was seen by many as the premiere election forecast prophet. Post-math (post election), not so much.
I totally agree. I relied on Mitchell to keep the faith — especially on election night when it didn’t look so good.
His career as a headhunter is very interesting! Many of his anecdotes are solid career advice or business advice.
What he’s got going for him is the good conversations he has with his co-hosts. They play off each other beautifully I find and they’re all wicked smart about politics. You always learn something.