Six Questions, Washington Babylon — September 23, 2008, 8:06 am

Six Questions for Nate Silver on Polls and the Election

Nate Silver is the founder of the popular website FiveThirtyEight.com and a writer, analyst, and partner at a sports media company called Baseball Prospectus. He developed a system called PECOTA, which predicts future athletic performance (accurately calling, among other things, the Chicago White Sox’s dismal 72–90 record in 20052007, two years after they were world champions), and his political projections have been equally impressive. As a Newsweek story on Silver noted, “He came within 20 delegates of the final split on Super Tuesday (out of nearly 1,700) and 2.5 percent, on average, in the other six post-March primaries.” Silver is an Obama supporter, which he says does not influence his methodology. I recently spoke to Silver by phone and asked him six questions about how the election is shaping up as we head into the last stretch of the campaign. This interview was edited for length and clarity.

1. The polls have been jumping around a lot, with McCain getting a big bounce after the G.O.P. convention, but Obama seems to be back on top now. Are long-term trends really emerging, or should we just assume the polls will keep shifting from one day to the next?

Last week was difficult to interpret because we had a few things going on at once: Wall Street melted down, and McCain’s convention bounce began to wear off. But now there seems to be a sharp uptick for Obama. He’s got a two- or three-point lead, which is not robust, but it matters, and it’s starting to get close to the election. If you look at the broad arc of the campaign, Obama has been ahead by three, five, six points, except for when Jeremiah Wright was front-page news and, later, immediately after the G.O.P. convention. At the point of equilibrium Obama wins by a few points, so McCain needs to do something to move away from that equilibrium–say, raise significant doubts about Obama or win the foreign-policy debate by a big margin. If he loses the debate, he doesn’t have a lot of cards to play; if he wins, it’s probably back to a rough tie. But we give Obama about a 75 percent chance of winning the election. He’s stronger than his slim lead in the polls suggests.

It violated the first rule of picking a vice presidential candidate, which is “Do no harm.”

2. In a recent post on your site, you criticized an AP poll and related news story that suggested that Obama’s support “would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.” What’s the gist of your critique? And is it possible that there will be some sort of “Bradley Effect on Election Day?

There is no doubt that Obama’s race hurts him with some voters, and that some people will not vote for him because he’s black, but race probably helps him with other voters. The AP didn’t really open up and disclose how they got that 6 percent, but it looks like their survey reflected the views of all adults–very different from the views of likely voters. As to the Bradley Effect, there was no evidence during the primaries that white voters are lying to pollsters about their willingness to vote for Obama. In fact, Obama frequently outperformed his polling numbers. In North Carolina, the primary polls showed it might be a tight race, but he beat Hillary Clinton by fourteen points. So there and in some states in the Midwest the pre-election polls apparently underestimated the black turnout. There may even be a reverse Bradley Effect, where African-American voters are reluctant to tell pollsters that they are going to vote for Obama. In the abstract, the AP argument may make sense, but only in the abstract (for example, if Obama were a white candidate, he wouldn’t be Barack Obama). And you have to remember that Hillary Clinton was never going to run away with the election if she had won the nomination. When she exited the race in June, she was only three points ahead of McCain. That’s where Obama is now. (Note–Silver has written a detailed web post on this topic)

3. So why is the race so close?

McCain doesn’t get enough credit. This is the guy Kerry almost picked as his running mate in 2004. He has a lot of crossover appeal; he’s perceived as a maverick and a moderate; and he has a good story–he’s a war hero. A lot of Democrats kind of like him. All along he was the only Republican candidate who was in range of Obama or Clinton. Any other Republican would have been running ten or fifteen points behind at this point.

4. In the end, will McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin help or hurt the G.O.P. ticket?

Her favorability ratings have declined by ten or fifteen points in the span of a week. She’ll play well among “Perot independents” out West, and she obviously took Alaska out of play, but in a lot of places her résumé may seem thin. McCain had to take a risk because he was so far behind, but it was a big risk. It violated the first rule of picking a vice presidential candidate, which is “Do no harm”–she’ll turn off a lot of voters. Vice presidential nominees are usually very likable. People forget now, but even Cheney had high favorability scores when he was picked in 2000.

A lot of strange things could happen, but Obama only has two “must-win” states while McCain has half a dozen.

5. What are the key states that are likely to determine the election?

The battlegrounds change on a daily basis. Obama has to win Michigan and Pennsylvania. There are scenarios where he could lose one of them, but it would make things tough. Obama’s easiest path to victory is to hold the Kerry states and also win Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico. That would give him 273 electoral votes. Right now he’s ahead in Iowa and New Mexico by seven or eight points, but Colorado is closer. The only Kerry states where McCain has a chance are Michigan and Pennsylvania, and maybe New Hampshire, but I’m not sure New Hampshire’s four electoral votes will matter. McCain thought he might win in Wisconsin or Minnesota, but that doesn’t look likely now. And he has to hold on to Ohio, Colorado, Florida, and Virginia, and even Indiana and North Carolina could be close. So a lot of strange things could happen, but Obama only has two “must-win” states while McCain has half a dozen.

6. And what about the congressional races? A few months ago there was talk of huge Democratic pick-ups in both houses.

On the Senate side, Democrats will probably gain five or six seats but probably won’t win a filibuster-proof majority. They should win seats in Virginia and New Mexico, and probably New Hampshire. Oregon and Minnesota are toss-ups. On the House side, the Democrats should win another fifteen or twenty seats. Here’s where picking Palin helped, because she’ll help bring out the base in the congressional elections. It should be a good day for the Democrats but not a landslide.

Share
Single Page

More from Ken Silverstein:

Commentary November 17, 2015, 6:41 pm

Shaky Foundations

The Clintons’ so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.

From the November 2013 issue

Dirty South

The foul legacy of Louisiana oil

Perspective October 23, 2013, 8:00 am

On Brining and Dining

How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy

Get access to 169 years of
Harper’s for only $23.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2019

Gimme Shelter

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Body Language

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Trash, Rock, Destroy

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Make Way for Tomorrow

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Red Dot

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Gimme Shelter·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

I.

That year, the year of the Ghost Ship fire, I lived in a shack. I’d found the place just as September’s Indian summer was giving way to a wet October. There was no plumbing or running water to wash my hands or brush my teeth before sleep. Electricity came from an extension cord that snaked through a yard of coyote mint and monkey flower and up into a hole I’d drilled in my floorboards. The structure was smaller than a cell at San Quentin—a tiny house or a huge coffin, depending on how you looked at it—four by eight and ten feet tall, so cramped it fit little but a mattress, my suit jackets and ties, a space heater, some novels, and the mason jar I peed in.

The exterior of my hermitage was washed the color of runny egg yolk. Two redwood French doors with plexiglass windows hung cockeyed from creaky hinges at the entrance, and a combination lock provided meager security against intruders. White beadboard capped the roof, its brim shading a front porch set on cinder blocks.

After living on the East Coast for eight years, I’d recently left New York City to take a job at an investigative reporting magazine in San Francisco. If it seems odd that I was a fully employed editor who lived in a thirty-two-square-foot shack, that’s precisely the point: my situation was evidence of how distorted the Bay Area housing market had become, the brutality inflicted upon the poor now trickling up to everyone but the super-rich. The problem was nationwide, although, as Californians tend to do, they’d taken this trend to an extreme. Across the state, a quarter of all apartment dwellers spent half of their incomes on rent. Nearly half of the country’s unsheltered homeless population lived in California, even while the state had the highest concentration of billionaires in the nation. In the Bay Area, including West Oakland, where my shack was located, the crisis was most acute. Tent cities had sprung up along the sidewalks, swarming with capitalism’s refugees. Telegraph, Mission, Market, Grant: every bridge and overpass had become someone’s roof.

Post
Perhaps the World Ends Here·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Climate disaster at Wounded Knee

Article
Body Language·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

I am eight years old, sitting in my childhood kitchen, ready to watch one of the home videos my father has made. The videotape still exists somewhere, so somewhere she still is, that girl on the screen: hair that tangles, freckles across her nose that in time will spread across one side of her forehead. A body that can throw a baseball the way her father has shown her. A body in which bones and hormones lie in wait, ready to bloom into the wide hips her mother has given her. A body that has scars: the scars over her lungs and heart from the scalpel that saved her when she was a baby, the invisible scars left by a man who touched her when she was young. A body is a record or a body is freedom or a body is a battleground. Already, at eight, she knows it to be all three.

But somebody has slipped. The school is putting on the musical South Pacific, and there are not enough roles for the girls, and she is as tall as or taller than the boys, and so they have done what is unthinkable in this striving 1980s town, in this place where the men do the driving and the women make their mouths into perfect Os to apply lipstick in the rearview. For the musical, they have made her a boy.

No, she thinks. They have allowed her to be a boy.

Article
Trash, Rock, Destroy·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The writer and filmmaker Virginie Despentes lives in a nondescript modern building in the Belleville neighborhood of Paris. I know it well: it has a Bricorama—like a French Home Depot—on the ground floor, where we sometimes had cause to shop back when we lived in the neighborhood. The people who work there seemed to hate their jobs more than most; they were often absent from the sales floor. In the elevator to Despentes’s apartment, I marvel that while I was trying to get someone to help me find bathroom grout she was right upstairs, with her partner, Tania, a Spanish tattoo artist who goes by the name La Rata, like someone out of one of Despentes’s novels.

In an email before our meeting, Despentes asked that we not do a photo shoot. “There are so many images available already,” she explained. Much had been written about her, too. A Google search yielded page after page: profiles, interviews, reviews, bits and bobs—she read from Pasolini at a concert with Béatrice Dalle; someone accused her of plagiarizing a translation; a teacher in Switzerland was fired for teaching her work. The week I met her, she appeared in the culture magazine Les Inrockuptibles in conversation with the rapper-turned-actor JoeyStarr. The woman is simply always in the news.

Article
The Red Dot·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

That night at the window, looking out at the street full of snow, big flakes falling through the streetlight, I listened to what Anna was saying. She was speaking of a man named Karl. We both knew him as a casual acquaintance—thin and lanky like Ichabod Crane, with long hair—operating a restaurant down in the village whimsically called the Gist Mill, with wood paneling, a large painting of an old gristmill on a river on one wall, tin ceilings, and a row of teller cages from its previous life as a bank. Karl used to run along the river, starting at his apartment in town and turning back about two miles down the path. He had been going through the divorce—this was a couple of years ago, of course, Anna said—and was trying to run through his pain.

Cost of renting a giant panda from the Chinese government, per day:

$1,500

A recent earthquake in Chile was found to have shifted the city of Concepción ten feet to the west, shortened Earth’s days by 1.26 microseconds, and shifted the planet’s axis by nearly three inches.

An eight-foot minke whale washed ashore on the Thames, the third beaching of a dead whale on the river in two months.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Jesus Plus Nothing

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

At Ivanwald, men learn to be leaders by loving their leaders. “They’re so busy loving us,” a brother once explained to me, “but who’s loving them?” We were. The brothers each paid $400 per month for room and board, but we were also the caretakers of The Cedars, cleaning its gutters, mowing its lawns, whacking weeds and blowing leaves and sanding. And we were called to serve on Tuesday mornings, when The Cedars hosted a regular prayer breakfast typically presided over by Ed Meese, the former attorney general. Each week the breakfast brought together a rotating group of ambassadors, businessmen, and American politicians. Three of Ivanwald’s brothers also attended, wearing crisp shirts starched just for the occasion; one would sit at the table while the other two poured coffee. 

Subscribe Today