But don’t get complacent! You still need to volunteer. Reading blogs is not activism. You all have to make calls and knock doors on Election Day.
Based on academic studies of the effect of changes to voter ID laws, we had estimated that the law would have reduced turnout in Pennsylvania by 2 percent and reduced President Obama’s margin relative to Mitt Romney by about 1 percentage point. So while that isn’t a huge effect, it is now one less thing for Mr. Obama to worry about.
It is also one less reason for Mr. Romney to compete in Pennsylvania, where his standing was already very tenuous. As of Tuesday, the forecast model — which incorporated a modest adjustment for the voter ID law that has now been reversed — gives Mr. Obama a 97.7 percent of winning the state’s electoral votes on Nov. 6.
Maybe it’s just me, but Nate’s blog seems to have lost a lot since he married it to the NYT.
Yeah, it’s not as exciting, but neither is this election cycle.
It’s got the same level of wonky stat-geekiness, but on the stand alone site, it was easier to find things and the commentary was more open. Now the articles seem more constrained, I guess.
Just because Nate Silver is a democrat and admitted Obama supporter from Chicago who writes for the New York Times doesn’t mean his findings should be discounted…… right?
Nate Silver is first and foremost a stats/numbers geek. He calls what his models and reserach tells him. He rarely discounts a poll and if he does it’s only because the poll has a long and/or documented history of bias.
Right. He called the last election. No reason to doubt.
Pingback: Massachusetts Mass 10/4 Morning Buzz | Massachusetts Mass