Nate Silver
Forecaster, founder of FiveThirtyEight, author of The Signal and the Noise and On the Edge. Writes Silver Bulletin, where the predictions come with numbers and the numbers are later checked against what happened.
Nate Silver did not write this page.
We collected these quotes from things they published elsewhere, and every quote links to where it was said. They have no account here and have not endorsed this site. Quotes are word for word; the short line under each one is our own restatement, not their wording. Their own site. Is this you? Claim it or ask us to remove it. Or tell us what is wrong here.
Filter All topics · Newest first
-
Their wordsIt would take a massive October surprise or a bigger-than-2016 polling error to save the Republican majority there, despite Republicans’ aggressive redistricting.
↗Will Republican gerrymanders become dummymanders?natesilver.net
- 4 days earlier
-
Their wordsThere remains a very real chance — about 1 in 4 — that Republicans keep the Senate despite Democrats’ seeming momentum.
-
Their wordsPerpetually increasing polarization means that: 1) fewer states are competitive; 2) there’s less and less ticket-splitting, so races for Congress are more predictable based on presidential voting and 3) “candidate effects,” including incumbency, are weaker, so there’s less opportunity for a candidate with strong personal qualities to overcome the partisan tide.
- 1 day earlier
-
Their wordsOverall, there isn’t much evidence that female candidates face an electoral penalty, although that deserves a deeper analysis.
↗The left’s fortunes have been rising. Will 2028 be AOC’s moment?natesilver.net
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsBut not everyone is so bullish on AI, and with the arguably alarming rate at which the models are improving, this issue is likely to become more relevant before 2028.
-
Their wordsThose primaries might feel a long way off, but remember, candidates will almost certainly start to announce their bids in early 2027.
- 3 days earlier
-
Their wordsIn the 9 midterms or presidential years I’ve covered since FiveThirtyEight launched in 2008, polls have had a systematic bias against Democrats once, in 2012, a systematic bias against Republicans four times (the three Trump presidential elections + 2014), and were basically unbiased in the other four elections, including in the past two midterms.
-
Our reading
Their wordsSystematic polling errors are common. Polls might be biased against Republicans again. Or against Democrats.
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsDemocrats’ voter-targeting efforts are plausibly more efficient and effective than the Republican ones under Trump.
-
Our reading
Their wordsall three Big Ten states have become much redder in the Trump Era — but Ohio more so than the others.
- 9 days earlier
-
Their wordsInflation in fuel prices is much higher in diesel-heavy farm states — and may explain some surprisingly competitive Senate races.
↗Diesel prices could crush Republicans in the heartlandnatesilver.net
-
Their wordsBut generally, Democratic polling overperformance has been strongest in the middle part of the country, in rural, agricultural states and in states that are big energy producers.
↗Diesel prices could crush Republicans in the heartlandnatesilver.net
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsConversely, expert ratings imply a much different political environment. The Cook Political Report, for example, counts seven races as “toss-ups,” including states like New Hampshire where models and prediction markets imply that Democrats are heavy favorites. This cautious view is misaligned with the long history of strong opposition performance in midterm elections, especially when the incumbent president is as unpopular as Trump.
↗Expert ratings are ignoring signs of a blue wavenatesilver.net
- 3 days earlier
-
Our reading
Substantive AI regulation is probably more likely to pass than conventional wisdom suggests.
Their wordsI don’t know what odds I’d give, but I’m probably bullish on the odds of substantive regulation passing relative to the conventional wisdom.
-
Their wordsSo I don’t expect this pro-AI coalition to be very durable. The AI denialists and the Trump fans hate one another.
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsI think AI has basically been hitting its marks so far as anticipated by people who are really worried about existential threats.
-
Their wordsIt just seems like common-sense risk management that the industry needs far more regulation, and probably some sort of enforceable slowdown.
- 6 days earlier
-
Their wordsBut if your model shows profound, systematic differences from Vegas, it’s probably doing something wrong.
-
Their wordsA projection model will never solve the problem that a 17-game NFL season with imbalanced schedules is inherently going to introduce a degree of randomness.
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsEfficiency measures, such as yards per play and first downs gained, are generally more predictive than scoring alone.
-
Their wordsQBs literally account for almost a third of overall player value in the NFL, based on our analysis.
-
Their wordsTDs are both noisy and opportunity-dependent, and TD rates don’t “travel” all that well when a QB changes teams.
- 2 days earlier
-
Their wordsWe are quite confident that drops should be attributed to the WR, not the quarterback.
-
Their wordsSneaks are almost purely a result of the offensive line and/or opportunities.
- 2 days earlier
-
Our reading
Midterm races in the modern era tend not to change much between Labor Day and Election Day.
Their wordsmidterm races in the modern era tend not to change all that much between Labor Day and Election Day.
-
Their wordsA new poll in Michigan or Maine or South Carolina or Alaska pretty much affects that state and that state only.