Nate Silver: Democrats more than doubled their chance of winning overnight

https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/nate-silver-democrats-more-than-doubled-their-chance-of-winning-overnight-217058373910

40 Comments

  1. It’s weird, but I hope it stays “slight.” People can’t get complacent, everyone has to keep their foot on the gas.

  2. Spare_Substance5003 on

    Advisor: The good news is that we just tripled our chance of winning, sir!

    Trump: So what’s the bad news?

    Advisor: We had a 0% chance of winning.

  3. BeowulfShaeffer on

    Nate Silver on Monday released an updated forecast for the presidential election, and he has Kamala Harris as a slight favorite over Donald Trump. Silver joins Morning Joe to discuss 2024 and his new book ‘On the Edge’.
      
    That’s it.  That’s the entire “article”

  4. Extreme_Lunch_8744 on

    https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote

    • ⁠Check your registration here as well. Some states have purged voter rolls and you may need to register again.
    • ⁠Some states require you to register 30 days before the election you wish to vote in.
    • ⁠If you have questions check with your local election officials.

  5. Wearing a hat on national TV isn’t fooling anyone Nate. I say this as someone who understands your struggle. Just shave your head already.

  6. Is there a link to the forecast or this just an article talking about the forecast while not giving any actual details of it.

    Edit. There is a video. Could not tell on mobile.

  7. I’m not sure what a doubled chance is supposed to mean? She already had just over a 50% chance, and obviously you can’t double that. It seems he means the difference between her chance and Trump’s chance has doubled. But, it’s really only a very small increase in her chance of winning.

  8. It’s crazy to think America will end up voting for a black woman, never thought it was possible (I know the race ain’t over yet). But then again, I never thought Obama would win.

    Every once in a while, America pleasantly surprises me 🙂

  9. Ambitious-Joke-4695 on

    Yeah and I doubled my chances of winning the lottery by buying a second ticket. Pollsters have a worthless language to keep them in the news without saying anything. Voting is all that matters.

  10. AgitatedListen3118 on

    I’m not holding my breath. I keep thinking about Nate’s call in 2016.

    If there is a big turnout, the chance is strong. However if people assume it’s a done deal, which I hope doesn’t happen, and turnout is low, we will see the Republicans winning.

  11. TheManInTheShack on

    If you’re 30 or under and haven’t voted before or haven’t consistently, make a point to vote this time and show the rest of us that you value your citizenship.

  12. Hes on thiel’s payroll so the result must be even more burgeoning than this for him to actually admit this

  13. threehundredthousand on

    The nazi hornets nest is wild on twitter the last couple days. I have never seen them go so hard attacking people. They are definitely worried and, of course, the ultranationalists believe that being even more aggressively hateful is what will bring people to their side.

  14. Vote. Trust no one and nothing. Register, and then check monthly to make sure you didn’t get “purged by accident”

  15. GhostOfTimBrewster on

    Have pollsters got anything right since 2016?
    Honest question,

    Hillary was supposed to win.
    A Red wave was supposed to happen.

  16. Jorgen_Pakieto on

    Still a toss up election. What we really want to do is completely dominate it so that there’s no space for Trump to launch his rigged election campaign.

  17. I’m excited to get out and vote. I thought 2020 was the end, I’ve been waiting 4 fucking years!

  18. *sigh* Just a reminder (for both sides), from a statistics professor:

    **A candidate having an “x” chance of winning is not the same as having “x” percent of support.**

    For example, if polling gives some candidate, say 70% prference over 30% for the other, does not mean the first one has a “70%” chance (probability) of winning , it’s more likely (under several standard assumptions) than the **chance of winning** is much much higher (because the probability of observing such poll result given the opposite on the whole population, would be very small).

    The problem is that media (and people) usually confuse % of support with probability (chance) of winning

    Alternatively: having doubled the chance of winning is not the same as having doubled the amount of supporters).

  19. PromptAcademic4954 on

    Any day, Fox will showcase a caravan of immigrant militants careening to the border

  20. Did he get paid by the GOP to say this in an effort to suppress dem turnout? Trust no one. Vote.