Also vibes matter to the extent they anticipate future policy and consumer responses and these things probably matter more than market sentiment has priced in up to this point. Original post

I think kind of the opposite, a big part of Newsom's appeal to a certain type of [racially progressive/ woke/etc.] Democrat is that he presents as a "normal" white guy when they think Harris lost because of her race/gender. https://nitter.net/SwipeWright/status/2025938644838519209 Original post

To the extent he emphasizes his dyslexia it's because he's trying to explain/excuse middling acadmic performance. (Also he talks a lot, not sure it's been a particular point of emphasis.) But trying to be an "identity politics" candidate would undermine his electability pitch. Original post

The United States might have a lot of problems but we're pretty fucking good at hockey. Original post

Repost by @natesilver538 This is a good take. I haven’t heard anyone in the AI world credibly articulate why the average person should assume it will make their life better. Typically they say the opposite. https://nitter.net/natesilver538/status/2025246413764846007 Click to see original repost

If AI produces unprecedented levels of technological disruption on time scales that are an order of magnitude or two faster than anything in human history, it's going to be an unprecedented political fight. And FWIW, the timelines potentially line up with the 2028 U.S. election. Original post

Displacement of narrow classes of blue-collar workers (e.g. coal miners), even if most of society would benefit, usually causes *huge* political battles. Here, the displacement would be much broader, the benefits are less clear, and the people displaced are more influential. Original post

"It's coming whether you like it or not" is near-universally (and probably correctly) accepted within Silicon Valley, but is not something people outside the bubble are going to be easily persuaded of at all. Original post

Opposition to building data centers might be irrational at the mircoscale (they're just gonna be bulilt somewhere else). But at the mesoscale, people are profoundly doubtful about whether AI will broadly benefit society and that's not so irrational at all. Original post

People don't like being forced into prisoner's dilemmas they didn't ask for and it is macro-level rational for them to feel resistance and indeed resentment toward that. Original post

There are Olympic events before the Opening Ceremony, you can have the Gold Medal Match after the Closing Ceremony, literally the whole Paralympics are coming up anyway. It's a ceremony who cares! https://nitter.net/kennyounot_/status/2024708051639673236 Original post

Doing a little brainstorming for future columns. No wrong answers. What's your best guess? AI will be ____ in the 2028 U.S. presidential election. ("Issue" here means something that explicitly sparks policy debates, not merely downstream effects from AI.) Original post

Hmm AI really into the hot hand theory. Original post

Just gave up a shortie pushing my timelines back. Original post

Love everything about this interaction, the different manifestations of passive-aggression in different cultures and so on. https://nitter.net/ZeppiCC/status/2022413114168479964 Original post

Can be some noise here. But new 2nd-term Trump approval low in our tracking. We haven't had a lot of popular presidents lately. But he's also now a hair below Biden and Trump 1.0 at comparable points. Original post

Repost by @natesilver538 Frontrunner Newsom is an under-performer. Dems who’ve run the strongest races are Beshear, Klobuchar, Shapiro, and Gallego. https://nitter.net/natesilver538/status/2024820595607687297 Click to see original repost

And then at the newsletter, I have a more data-driven take on who's actually been outperforming their benchmarks. Beshear, Gallego, Shapiro, Whitmer, Warnock, Kelly ... lots of options. Even AOC's numbers aren't bad. https://www.natesilver.net/p/which-2028-democrats-have-the-best Original post

Two items on this theme for you today. At the NYT, I have an overview of how I see the 2028 race shaping up and the different factions of the party, and how Gavin has played his cards smartly. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/20/opinion/2028-democrats-presidential-primary.html Original post

Gavin Newsom has run a very sharp 2028 campaign (yes, the campaign is already underway let's not kid ourselves) aimed at convincing Democrats he's a winner. But his electoral track record suggests underperformance instead. Original post

30. Kings 29. Pelicans 28. Wizards 27. Bulls 26. Bucks 1-25. ??? Original post

It's also 100% a situation where if you give them an inch they'll demand a mile. Draw the line early. You can be 1) polite but firm or 2) snarky and firm (fun but risks further engagement) or 3) literally just block/ignore them, any of these are fine, but you have to be firm. Original post

Important when discussing polling data or really anything else not to care what annoying bad-faith actors think. You should truly give 0 fucks. Maybe 0.03 fucks at the most. Any more than that and it'll make your analysis less sharp but they'll continue to be just as annoying. Original post

We’ve got a great @emckowndawson deep dive for you on why Florida is no longer a swing state and why it’s considered a reach this year even as Democrats’ chances look strong elsewhere. https://www.natesilver.net/p/can-democrats-escape-their-florida Original post

Chock & Bates sounds like a circa 2006 hipster restaurant. Original post

Ehh Blue MAGAs are nowhere near the Abundance Libs or Neolibs, they're a third thing defined primarily by pro-D *partisanship* as opposed to any type of coherent ideological worldview. https://nitter.net/aaron_renn/status/2023821312956002379 Original post

I was arguing that the left was understating the threats posed by AI before it was cool. But more on that in yesterday's newsletter. Original post

There's also some evidence here that women candidates face more trouble "shape-shifting" than men and can be less trusted when they're perceived as switching positions. https://www.natesilver.net/p/kamala-harris-has-liz-cheney-syndrome Original post

Here's the result of 30,000 simulations of the final score, LOL. (There's an EXCEL version of this in the article that's actually legible.) Original post

Since the "moderation wars" are heating up again I guess I'll repost this very deep dive I took on it from this summer. https://www.natesilver.net/p/real-talk-on-models-moderation-and Original post

Also, while Darnold's QBERT rating is above-average (86.8) he ranks 108th out of 120 starting Super Bowl QBs all-time going into the game. More Super Bowl stuff TK later, but the QBERT page is ready for now. https://www.natesilver.net/p/qbert-nfl-quarterback-ratings Original post

The actual NBA trades are now weirder than the fake AI slop trades in my For You timeline. Original post

Wrote an essay that pushes back against some of the pessimism I've seen about American democracy. This is going to be one of those times when I'd ask for you to read the whole argument rather than trying to summarize it: https://www.natesilver.net/p/dont-discount-american-democracys Original post

Obviously, a big part of the story is Bezos's intervention in quashing the Harris op-ed in October 2024, plus losing lots and lots of talent. But it's showing up in a really big way in the numbers. More here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/the-sad-and-self-inflicted-decline Original post

Whole preview here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/super-bowl-lx-preview-odds-squares-scores-silver-bulletin Original post

Democratic primary draft with @ClareMalone and @galendruke! 1. (Galen) Gavin 2. (Nate) AOC 3. (Clare) Mayor Pete FYI, I'd probably also have taken Newsom #1 if I'd had the top pick. These are my predictions of who Ds will like, not who I personally think is most electable. Original post

The rest of the picks plus lots of commentary here: https://www.natesilver.net/p/2028-democratic-primary-draft-2 Original post

Failing that, maybe make some testable predictions? If your thesis is right, where is the conventional wisdom (e.g. as embodied by models or prediction markets) wrong? Original post

Late-night newsletter about AI’s potential impact on politics. Perhaps this is obvious, but I’m skeptical that we’ll see rapid AI progress without extreme disruption to the political system. Original post

(This chart is from our newsletter last week. Was hoping things wouldn't be quite *this* bad, though.) https://www.natesilver.net/p/the-sad-and-self-inflicted-decline Original post

Ossoff is slightly cringe but a better candidate along every dimension that matters than Gavin. Original post

Would you do this if you're the Knicks? Checks out in trade machine. Original post

I don’t exactly buy that Kamala tried to run as a centrist but to the extent she did not many voters bought it. We can debate the reasons for it, but if you look at any sort of polling data, her image was very lib. Original post

It's probably helpful to consider how other people treat investments or purchases that represent 0.1% of their net worth, they'll generally treat them as fun to play around with until they get bored or annoyed but after that point they won't really GAF. Original post

Just a quick newsletter today on the sad state of the Washington Post. This chart tells the story. Original post

The cuts at the Post are devastating, and my heart goes out to everyone affected. To state the obvious, there's no reason to be sympathetic to Bezos or any of the other leaders there. The paper's influence really cratered following the editorial shifts in 2024/25. Original post

As you'll see, I do think the impact of moderation has diminished, along with all other "candidate quality" variables. But a lot of the work from e.g. Bonica/Grumbach is classic Replication Crisis Era junk science & there's been next to no effort to refute any of these points. Original post

Although the NYT takes a broader overall outlook, from 2016 through 2024, the Post ran about evenly with the NYT in mindshare for American politics coverage, as measured by incoming links to @memeorandum. Now it suddenly has only about 1/3 as much influence. Original post

Busy day, but our Super Bowl preview is out. 🏈 The Seahawks and the Pats started at +6000 and +8000 to win the Super Bowl, respectively. Despite being among the most unlikely champs, they're probably closer to underrated than overrated. But there's a lot to consider: Original post

I recommend the W-S-O-P Method instead (play the World Series of Poker every year). https://nitter.net/SystemSunday/status/2020856361748246979 Original post