Sam Wang is talking smack to Nate Silver

[Godhumor]

Everyone knows who Nate Silver is. The other big player in electoral modeling is Sam Wang, who runs the Princeton Election Consortium (PEC) and has as impressive of a track record as Nate. You can check his website here:
http://election.princeton.edu

Anyway, Nate has been going pretty hard lately on the "Trump can win" narrative, including the following tweet:

Don't think people are really grasping how plausible it is that Trump could become president. It's a close election right now.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/756681961809272832

Sam, who as a peer, likes to tweak Nate about numbers (Something very few people seem to be comfortable doing) responded with:

Scary!! Though um, HRC has always led, Obama is at net approval, & generic House is at D+7%.
https://twitter.com/SamWangPhD/status/757015143373017089


Good times.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

1. Wang's model makes a lot less assumptions.

Wang also has a job beside poll aggregating.


I like the Upshot.

It lists all the models:





http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?action=click&contentCollection=upshot&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=7&pgtype=sectionfront

[Johnny2X2X]

3. Excellent analysis

The 10 states at the bottom tell the whole story. Hillary wins FL and Trump can win the other 9 and Hillary wins. Hillary wins PA and one of the other states and she wins. Trump has to win 9 of 10 of the most competitive states to win and Hillary is the favorite in 8 of those 10 right now.

Trump cannot win without winning FL.

[tallahasseedem]

2. I had to unfollow Nate

he losing his shit.

[jimw81]

6. I think the bros and trumpkins

Got to him mentally

[Cha]

4. I've always liked Sam Wang! Thank you for this, GH~

[pnwmom]

5. There's also this University of Virginia site, called the Crystal Ball.

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2016-president/