this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
134 points (81.0% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3072 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] friek@sh.itjust.works 50 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nate isn't associated with 538 anymore.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the article points out that the new group he is associated with is partially owned by Peter thiel

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

His job at Polymarket and his blog are separate.

[–] fahfahfahfah@lemmy.billiam.net 23 points 2 months ago

Also 538 is predicting a Kamala win…

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 48 points 2 months ago

He uhhh... He isn't associated with 538 anymore...

But sure

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago

It doesn’t matter if Thiel pays him, fact is that the electoral college has a real danger of being fixed for Trump IF people don’t turn out to vote

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nate Silver is good with odds, regardless of who he works for. This whole article is a genetic fallacy; it's saying that it's wrong just because he's funded by someone that supports Trump. There's no counter-evidence, although there's a counter-claim, that also doesn't have strong evidence.

As of 10 Sept., FiveThirtyEight is giving Harris a 56:44 edge over Trump. Personally, I tend to believe FiveThirtyEight a little more over all, because they're looking at and weighting many different polls. But these odds are way too close for comfort, given that Clinton was favored to beat Trump 6-4 the day of the 2016 election.

If you don't want Trump to win, get out there and vote, and make sure everyone that leans Harris knows that they need to get out and vote on 5 November, and make sure your Republican friends get out there and vote on 6 November.

[–] Twinklebreeze@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nate Silver is no longer with fivethirtyeight.

[–] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That explains the recent news.

Meanwhile, let's all be sure to vote.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

How does it explain the recent news?

[–] AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today 19 points 2 months ago

who cares what the pollsters say, just fucking vote

The other takeaway I'd have from this is - if Nate Silver is correct then it's a warning sign to Dems. There's a need to go out to the swing states and tweak policy positions and messaging to win over voters there to get the numbers back up and get a stronger win - one strong enough to translate into a win in the EC.

I'm confused. The article doesn't make clear the distinction between 538 (owned by Disney with Nate Silver no longer involved) vs Nate Silver's new (and paywalled) Silver Bulletin.