"People, understandably, are having trouble believing in the polls," Nate Silver acknowledged to New York Times columnist Ezra Klein.

The post Nate Silver Suggests ‘Momentous’ Midterms Might Mark ‘the End of the Trump Era’ first appeared on Mediaite.

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
27 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 61 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Man there is nothing we love more than counting our chickens before they hatch, huh?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Strong polls encourage people to vote. Weak polls discourage participation and donations.

    https://time.com/article/2026/10/23/what-fake-wedgewood-polls-scandal-reveals-about-election-polling/

    Just this year - Michigan primary - one campaign says their donations plummeted when fake polls claimed they were far behind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago

    My local ads have reverted to the shaming tactic - "your vote is private, but anyone can look up whether you voted or not". From my dad who's been working the early voting location for my county, it sure sounds like they've had one hell of a turnout.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    And yet I keep seeing people on Lemmy say that polls being good discourages people from voting

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

    Don't listen to polls, don't let people keep you from voting to improve things, don't put it off...

    VOTE!!!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago

    I voted, you should go vote too.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Fuck hope. Get angry and vote.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Ah yes famously reliable Nate Silver lol

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    He gave Trump 2016 more odds than anyone else, the model probability was 1/3 chance, up to polling issues.

    All Nate Silver’s models did was run a hierarchical Bayesian regression model with polls weighted by demographics and their forecast accuracy on previous elections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    Yeah this is just a horrible take. 538 was the only one I remember actively cautioning that a Trump win was possible and a 20% chance means you win one in five times you run the election. People who say they were notoriously wrong, frankly, weren't paying attention.

    EDIT to correct typo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Shut up and Nate and fuck Ezra Klein.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    oh are we listening to him again? i aint buying any of that copium again.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago

    I'd like to point out that in an interview where Nate Silver came out looking like an arrogant ass, he predicted Trump would lose the last election.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago*

    “People, understandably, are having trouble believing in the polls,” Nate Silver acknowledged

    Especially Nate Silver's interpretation of them.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    If so, I hope the media constantly and always mentions this, if not in the title, above the fold, in all articles related to donnie for the rest of his term.

  • source
  • [+] -17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    ha oh is the coin flipping on the uniparty! that must mean theyre going to switch to the rainbow colored genocide bombs instead soon. "democracy"

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • 6 comments in c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 10 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    dont forget election night 2016 when every one thought it was over then

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    Indeed. But many pollsters (like Nate) acknowledged this huge miscalculation in hindsight, and have tried to dissect that and predict with that in mind.

    In fact, the original source addresses this and discusses the topic extensively. It’s most of the interview:

    I think Democrats have the emotional feeling that when there’s a polling error, it is against them. Because Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and just in general — polls actually have repeatedly underestimated Donald Trump. But is that true? And is it particularly true in midterms? Have polling errors been consistently against Democrats?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Probably not the end, but likely a shifting into a new phase. One where he'll simply ignore outcomes, rules, boundaries, orders. You know - like he always does. Except worse. Always, always, somehow....worse.

    There's gonna be violence. And death. You're not getting him out of there except in a body bag.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Also Trump and Iran are now in an escalation trap. The Iran war is very likely to continue to escalate, and the odds increase if(when) Trump loses the mid terms.

    They will use the war to try to stop the Democrats from investigating them by characterizing investigations as an attack on the troops, treason, etc...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    Expanding their failed air campaign against Iran has no bearing on the committee investigations that Democratic majorities can use if the midterms go as expected. Quite the opposite - it will provide more exposure since most of what they're doing is not just immoral and ineffective, but totally illegal. Even after Pearl Harbor, the president sought congressional approval for the war against Japan. Trump the Fool fell prey to Netanyahu's scheme to do the dirty work for him, assuming it would be as effortless as the Venezuelan Job.

    I agree it will continue, but what does escalation look like? Boots on the ground will be a bloodbath, even the vulgar talking yam understands that and it's why he hasn't done it yet. The first footage of slaughtered Marines and smouldering Abrams tanks would be an instant impeachment and such a brutal display of wasted american casualties might well be enough to get the 2/3 majority required to impeach a lame duck presidency. There are probably more Republicans too than we realize who would welcome a way to get rid of a Trump. Nobody expects him to leave peacefully in 2028, other than waiting for a sufficiently large stroke. He is an obese octogenarian rageaholic troll who is blocking their own futures as much as he is the decent portion of the world's path forward.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago*

    Good content, Nate Silver knows what he’s talking about, but why didn’t you link the original source?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/27/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-nate-silver.html

    It’s not paywalled. And mediaite is a questionable source, to the extent that even Wikipedia advises against citing them:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources

    It’s generally best practice, most ethical, and good information hygiene, to link the original source instead of a downstream “repost,” or at least to link it in the post text.

  • source