Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making
better decisions. I'm Maria Kanikova.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
And I'm Nate Silver. Do we even need a script?
For today? We're talking about the election, right.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
We are, and today is Monday, November fourth, and so
today we will be This is an extra special episode
of Risky Business. We don't usually drop on Mondays, but
here we are recording and dropping on the same day
to bring you what we know and hope and fear
and just state of the world less than twenty four
(00:56):
hours away from election day. Yeah, it's exciting. Nate. What
are your plans for today and for tomorrow?
Speaker 3 (01:09):
So for today there are things that are extremely high
priority and things that are medium high priority. Today, at midnight,
we will run the model for the last time, and
I'll publish kind of my big last overview of the race.
So I'm starting to write that in my head.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
I haven't put.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Keys to our fingers to keys quite yet. We also
have an election night model for Silver Bulletin readers that
I think is kind of cool. It relies on which
states have been called by the networks, because we didn't
want to have to estimate vote shares individually. Right, we
(01:49):
don't want to have to get too cute and we're busy.
We're just two people, Eli and I. But I'll figured
out that you can get a lot of information from
like when a state is called. If Florida, probably a
Trump state is called early for Trump accounts, it's both
fast that reveals much more information than if it takes
a while, and it's kind of closed, which, even though
Trump might win, is kind of potentially maybe even vaguely
(02:13):
okay for Harris. If Florida is not called until eleven PM,
that means probably Trump wins by only a couple of points,
which means that Harris will performing her polls. So the
model can now account for the timing of calls as
well as which state remains uncalled.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
I think it's pretty cool. Product.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
I have like three more hours of work to do
on that product.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
No, that is pretty cool. Yeah, no, I didn't really
think about that. But of course there is a ton
of information in things like that which can be more
bullish or more bearish for either of the candidates. So
I'm excited to see how that plays out in real time.
So before we get into kind of the nitty gritty
and some of the big polls and big news that
have come out since we lost spoke La last week.
(02:54):
What is your thought on kind of where we are
right now? Let's get like a big picture overview, you know,
one day to go before the election. Where do we stand?
Where does the ray stand?
Speaker 3 (03:03):
So the big picture, and we'll get into the medium
sized picture in a moment. The big picture is that
it's an extremely close election in the polls. That does
not necessarily guarantee it will be a close election. In reality,
the polls could be way off out the direction, and
I've been getting more worried about that in both directions
for various reasons recently. But you know, we've never had
(03:24):
a presidential election this close to fifty to fifty. Literally,
our last model run had Trump at fifty point Let
me look at the exact numbers, just so I'm not
misquoting myself, and Harris at forty nine point scroll down, page,
scroll down, scroll down, Brood forty nine point two percent,
Trump at fifty point four percent, and no majority meaning
(03:47):
a tie which probably gets resolved for Trump by the way,
at zero point four percent. So I literally do not
know who's going to be ahead. In the last model
run we published after midnight tonight. That is Harris's best
number in two and a half weeks. At the same time,
the forecast has spent the last six or seven weeks
in the range we call a tass up within the
range of sixty to forty.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
You now the direction.
Speaker 3 (04:09):
It's rarely fallen outside of that range.
Speaker 2 (04:11):
We've never gone.
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Outside that sixty forty range at almost any point, just
for a few days for Harris after her convention she
was below of forty percent. But like so, it's the
same variation. There are these seven swing states. She at
this point seems to be doing a little bit better
in the Blue Wall states in particular Michigan and Wisconsin,
less so in Pennsylvania. But that's kind of a pure
(04:33):
tie and has kept a North Carolina and Georgia quite competitive.
But if you squint, you see maybe a Trump lead
of one point. No one can agree on Nevada except
to say that we don't know anything about Nevada. Arizona
is the one state that seems like the safest bet
for Trump, although although Maria, there was a poll of
(04:53):
Latino voters out today that showed Harris ahead, and it
survey just I think it was Telemundo or Univision.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
I can't one of.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
Those major networks that had Harris winning Latinos by thirty
two points in a large sample of Latinos or something
the range of thirty two points, which would be a
total reversal of earlier poland that showed her doing worse
than typical Democratic margins among the Hispanic population. And you
have this plausible cause where Trump had this rally where
(05:24):
one of the warm up speakers made offensive comments about
Puerto Ricans, and all these Latino pop stars endorsed Harris,
and that would.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
Be a big deal.
Speaker 3 (05:34):
I mean, that's when you might get you know, in
particular Arizona, Nevada finishing for Harris a little bit than
the polls might suggest. By the way, there are a
lot of Puerto Ricans in eastern Pennsylvania. There are some
counties in Pennsylvania where eleven percent of the population is
Puerto Rican.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
That could be important in.
Speaker 3 (05:59):
A race that could come down to one or two
counties in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
And so I don't know, we.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Talked about it last week bad but any matters people
that matter.
Speaker 3 (06:12):
Well, I also worry that, like, look, there's not a
huge change in the race. There's also some data that
Harris is doing well with people who decided late in
the race over the past week. You know, I mean,
I wish, despite wanting to get some sleep and having
this fucking thing be over with, I wish that uh,
we had like three more days of polling, or that
we had polsters that were pulling this week in because
(06:33):
like you can kind of see the makings of a
trend toward Harris. It's not so clear that it isn't
just noise. A lot of polsters, by the way, are
it's got picked up last.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
Week, are hurting.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
They're just kind of literally matching the polling averages exactly
in every state.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
You know.
Speaker 3 (06:52):
But the independent data points like this pull latinos.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
The last seve New.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
York Times polls were pretty good for har It's not fantastic,
you know, consistent with tilt Harris race. Also some poles
that were good for Trump. Right, I mean, the forecast
is like literally fifty to fifty. Now she talked about
the Seltzer poll.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Yeah, let's do it. So let's first set this up
for people who don't obsessively follow polls. So the Seltzer poll,
one of the most high quality polls that exists and
something that people really pay attention to. Nate, do you
want to just give us like a little bit of
an overview why her poll matters and kind of what
this means and why it's important that this poll dropped
(07:32):
just right now and is actually giving information that is
contrary to two prior polls in the state.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
So and Seltzer is the one polster that kind of
doesn't have egg on her face. She has repeatedly defied
the conventional wisdom and bean correct I remember in two
thousand and eight she had Barack Obama winning the Iowa
caucuses by a large margin.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
People didn't believe it, and he did so.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
In June and Seltzer has a poll showing Biden trailing
Trump by eighteen points even a by the way, eighteen
points is epic landslide. And she has an old school poster.
She doesn't do this hurting crap. She's not afraid to
let her data speak for itself. In September, she has
(08:20):
a poll showing Kamala Harris trailing Trump, but by only
four points in Iowa. People are like, oh, it's an outliner.
Kind of interesting, kind of interesting. I think Biden lost
Iowa by eight points in twenty and twenty, so she
had her finer pull out on Saturday night. I had
plans on Saturday which were canceled because of this poll.
I'm okay, it'll probably show Trump plus six, a little
(08:44):
bit better for Harris, and the priors might be, but
you know whatever, we know Trump's gonna win Iowa instead.
The number is Harris plus three, the state that Democrats
lost by nine points in twenty eight nine points in
twenty twenty, Harris has had by three points. Now, look,
these poles have a margin of error. If you actually
(09:05):
calculate this out diligently like I do, the real margin
could be Trump plus three, or for that matter, Harris
plus nine or whatever.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
I think that's pretty unlikely.
Speaker 3 (09:14):
But this is an epistemologically important data point because Anne
Selter doesn't follow the herd. One of the few independent
pieces of information that you get. And there's kind of
a story of like Paris getting some surprisingly good polls
in this kind of prairie part of the Midwest. Right,
(09:34):
You've got polls of Ohio that she's probably gonna win Ohio,
but are closer. You got poles, and you know in Nebraska,
including the one district where they do reward an electoral vote,
that have been very good for Harris all year long,
even a pole and Kansas.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Showed a single digit race. You know. The thing that
doesn't make sense is like, if she's doing so.
Speaker 3 (09:52):
Well in Iowa, then why is it tied in Wisconsin.
You're not gonna have like Wisconsin Harris plus one and
Iowa Harris plus three. If she wins by three in
Ioways probably wins by seven in Wisconsin or something at
a minimum, And so lots of theories about it, but
but you know, it reassured. At the very least, it
(10:14):
raises the possibility that polsters who have less guts than
an Seltzer are terrified to show Harris leads because they're knits, Maria,
They're fucking knits, and they're terrified of being wrong and
being criticized because they don't have the fucking guts that
that we have here on the podcast.
Speaker 1 (10:33):
This is true.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
This is true.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
We're definitely not.
Speaker 2 (10:35):
And they have bad data.
Speaker 3 (10:36):
By the way, if you have bad data, to just
copy the polling averages.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
But that's absolutely true. So if so, if Seltzer is
is onto something I'm actually a little bit curious about
your your take on whether we've been We've been critical
of her VP pick for for many for many months,
basically since she made it. Do you think that Walls
(11:02):
might be helping her a little bit? No, not at all.
Speaker 2 (11:05):
She's Minnesota. That is that is very funny the satur
Live skit where they couldn't tell it was Tim Walls
or Tim Kane. I think is all you need to know?
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Is all you need to know?
Speaker 2 (11:17):
All right?
Speaker 1 (11:17):
All right, I just wanted I just wanted to throw
that out there. But yeah, it seems like ann Seltzer
has more balls than a lot of the other polsters
that we're seeing. And uh, and that says something so
other than that. We had the New York Times Siena
polls right come out. That is the other thing that
has uh, that has changed since you and I spoke,
and those are well, why don't you why don't you
(11:39):
give us a little bit of an update and how
that has has that has affected your thinking if at all?
Because they did their polls of the seven swing states
right New.
Speaker 3 (11:50):
York Time Sceiena College had shown this unusual divide where
they had had Harris doing conspicuously well in the Blue
Wall states. Again, those are in Michigan, Wisconsin, in Pennsylvania,
and conspicuously badly outside of the blue walls, so North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada.
Those margins tightened a little bit in their final set
(12:10):
of poles, which could reflect I mean, they don't heard either,
at least I don't think it could reflect mean reversion, right.
I mean maybe if you if you burnt all these
poles and you're honest and you don't heard, you're gonna
have some results that are are our outliers, and directionally speaking,
you know, I mean, they still show a wider gap
(12:31):
in somebody.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
It was a little more scrambled, right.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
It kind of was more that thesis like, yeah, all
these seven states are are are really close. But in general,
I think, if you like, in general, they were consistent
with like a map where Harris probably finds some way
to win. I think they had her head in like
North Carolina and Nevada and Michigan, Wisconsin. That's the case
where actually Nevada would matter in that precise combination. I
(12:56):
think they also had Pennsylvania as a tie. Roughly, well,
all these poles, I have had a tie roughly, I
think they had like an exact DIY.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
It's going for memory here.
Speaker 3 (13:03):
So yeah, Now, look there are other poles. This this
Brazilian in firm called Atlas Intel, that's highly rated, that's
had very Trump numbers. National polls have tightened a lot,
to the point where you would think that would be
good news for Trump. If he wins or loses a
popular vote by only a pointer, or wins a popular vote,
(13:24):
then he probably is gonna win the electoral College. So yeah,
conflicting data, but I'd say that I mean both the
model and kind of.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
My subjective subjective take not worth very much.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Are are you know, more bullish for Harris than they
were a week ago or two weeks ago, And to
the point where if you literally gave me a million
dollar free bet, I'm not sure who had been on,
I'd be here.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
I'd be here.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
That's interesting because we know that a few a few
weeks ago that would not have been the case. And
I you know, from a psychological standpoint, I'm really nervous
that I am taking the data that I want to
see because obviously we we know, you know, I'm I'm
very open that I voted for Harris. I want Harris
to win. And so when I see this, you know,
(14:14):
and sells her poll, I'm like, yes, also right, like
we're seeing yes, absolutely, this means she's going to win.
This means she's going to win. And I am so
nervous of that tendency because confirmation bias is real, right,
and there are people on Trump's on you know, Trump
supporters who are you know, just as absolutely certain that
Trump is going to win. And we know that the
(14:35):
way betting markets work, right, if you're someone's betting against you,
and both sides always think that they're right, otherwise they
would not be putting money down. And usually everyone thinks
that the other person's the dumb money. No one thinks
that they're the dumb money.
Speaker 3 (14:48):
The betters, by the way, have tightened.
Speaker 1 (14:51):
Also, yeah, let's actually talk about that a little bit
because poly market and betting markets in general. But Polymarket
has made the biggest move because poly Market was the
biggest Trump favorite outlier.
Speaker 2 (15:02):
There are a couple of things here.
Speaker 3 (15:05):
One hypothesis is that this French she was identifies like
some French guy with sort of midwith opinions like.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
Shy trump boarders, I'm French, the French.
Speaker 1 (15:16):
We need your French accent?
Speaker 3 (15:17):
Where shot swamp filltel? I really French, I really do
fore it to do regional American?
Speaker 1 (15:25):
All right, fine, let's say where where's the where's our
French guy from in regional America? All right, let's do it?
Speaker 2 (15:33):
Uh Louisiana? Okay?
Speaker 3 (15:35):
Anyway, But like so, maybe he just ran out of
money that he's willing to bet. And if if he
is now put all the money he's willing to invest
in this bet and kind of capitulate it, then it
kind of falls to this price floor. And I think
that's part of what happened, because like the movement in
polling averages didn't really correlate that well day to day
with movement in the polls except the Seltzer pole. But
the Seltzer pole also changes a narrative a lot. And
(15:56):
so you know, so one story is about this one
trader who impacted the whole market, right. Another story is
that you have lots of people making technical trades because
they think they can read the vibes of the market.
And then you have a reconciliation close to the elections.
So if you get Harris cheap, right, maybe you might
now hedge on some trump but anyway, but it could
(16:17):
be that you revert to the fundamentals. But they converged.
The markets converged toward the models and not the other
way around. And again, I work as a consultant for polymarkets.
I respect both of these techniques. But I think people
don't understand that market sentiment is a thing, particularly in.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Things. Well, I don't know. I guess.
Speaker 3 (16:41):
I guess it's more anchored to some reality than a
lot of things that are are traded. Right, But market
sentiment is a thing and becoming more of a thing,
right when game stop can go rocket one hundred x
based on no fundamental change whatsoever, right or NFTs or
or or you know, dj T, Donald John Trump, DJT stock.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
You know.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Look, and again, as someone who's actively an actual gambler,
I am understand that rich whales are what make gambling
profitable for skilled gamblers. They're a very important part of
the ecosystem. And you have people who are like who
are like, well, he's putting his money behind it.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
It must be you must know something.
Speaker 3 (17:24):
No, he's probably a fucking idiot, right, an idiot will
be right. Fifty one percent of the time, so God
bless him. But like, god, have you ever fucking met
rich people with like strong political opinions?
Speaker 2 (17:33):
They are not.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
Particularly half and they are they are some of my
favorite opponents at the poker table.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
And they are great to having your lifestyle right, But
like they don't they index off these kind of stylized
truths that are not more accurate, I don't think than
the models now when there's no information. If you know,
there's a murder investigation into Kamala Harris's husband that begins tonight, right,
(18:02):
you know, that won't have time to be reflected in
the polls, but it will be reflected by prediction markets,
and so that's quite useful. But like, but they kind
of believe in these halfways superstitious things, and in any event,
they've converged toward the models. I mean, there's a slight
Trump edge in Polly Marker. I think it's you know,
fifty six forty four or something, but much closer than
it had been a couple of weeks ago.
Speaker 1 (18:21):
That's very interesting that there's still a Trump edge there.
And then yet you say that if you were given
a million dollar free roll, you might actually place it
on Harris So this is just this is giving me
and my gambler's mind a little bit of pause to
try to figure out, you know, what are some arbitrage
opportunities right now leading into the election. But I'm interested
(18:46):
to see what will actually happen and how this will
play out. And given the fact that everything is so close,
let's pivot a tiny bit and talk about our predictions
for tomorrow and for whether when we basically think this
race is going to be done, we'll be back right
after this. We've obviously had some close elections last election cycle,
(19:22):
so four years ago, we did not know the outcome
on election day itself. What do we think, you know,
if we were, if we were making some predictions, what
do we think is going to happen this year? Because
obviously there are some people who are giving just very
you know, scary civil warlike predictions that you know, no,
(19:43):
no outcome is going to be accepted, blah blah blah,
all these all these things are going to happen. People
are going to not certify. They're all of these what ifs.
So let's try to talk from a rational, data driven,
not an emotional perspective, not the things I'm afraid of
and try to figure out what do we think is
going to happen tomorrow, What where do the results need
to be, what do the margins need to be like
(20:05):
for the result to be kind of definitive within the
next few days, or or Nate, are you and I
going to be having this conversation for the next month
two months to try to figure out who the hell
won the election and what's happening.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
So, as I think I talked about before, if you
want a non tense election, then you want to be
rooting for a polling air. So this is why my
life sucks either way this nightmare or situation, or you
have a big polling air because like so, if the
polls are off consistently in the same direction, then then
(20:39):
someone could sweep six or seven of the swing states.
And in that case, then I look, I'm sure that
Trump would not happily accept defeat unless it's really really bad.
But yeah, there's a thirty four percent chance that one
candidate sweeps all the swing states, and like another twenty
percent chance that it's six or seven in one direction.
(20:59):
I mean, I've tried to look alonto.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
By the way, those are pretty high percentages. Thirty four
percent is a pretty high percentage.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
Yeah, one in three.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
I've tried to look a lot at uh, exactly how
the night will play out. That's important for the election
night stuff I'm doing. You know, the vote counting should
be faster than last time around because there are fewer
male votes, because you don't have Democrats staying at home
because of COVID as much. Some states have expedited their procedures,
(21:31):
some have not.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
You know, I mean there's rebel.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
Networks call at versus we'll skilled traders know by which
way it's leaning by three am Wednesday morning. I mean,
I'd say seventy percent chance that we'll know by Wednesday
three am with ninety five plus percent confidence.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
Well, that's that's higher than I would have thought.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
Estimate pulled out of my ass Well, you're.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
You're pulled out of ask. Estimate actually reassures me a
little bit because I.
Speaker 2 (22:04):
Was that doesn't mean Trump except the results. Right.
Speaker 3 (22:08):
Let's say, Harris, it's a blue wall plus Nevada plus
North Carolina, one of the more plausible maps, by the way, you.
Speaker 2 (22:15):
Know, that gives her some room to spare.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
Right in that scenario, she could like lose anyone's state
and still have a victory anyone.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
Of the swing stage. She couldn't list California or something.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
And you know, and that outcome might be clear enough
that we'd know it by three four am, although Nevada
takes a long time to count its votes in Pennsylvania's too,
but we might know by three or four am. And
then it's all about the aftermath and about and about
you know, what happens with Trump now. Congress passed reforms
(22:53):
to the vote counting process. Basically, it's actually a pretty
good law in the view of election experts that I
read from. It basically allows the courts to have precedence
over Republican legislature, or Democratic ones for that matter, over
people who were at the state level, state officials who
(23:14):
are trying to interfere with the vote count. And the
courts have not shown any tolerance for Trump's shenanigans. He
lost like all but one of the other He was
like one out of sixty in like court rulings in
twenty twenty. Also, you have in place in all these
states positions people in key positions like governors and secretaries
(23:36):
of state. You know, you have Democrats having a firewall
and almost all, if not all, of these swing states
and at least some of those roles, or in the
case of Georgia, you have Brian Kemp, who is notoriously
not a fan of Trump's tendency to deny that he
lost the election in twenty twenty.
Speaker 2 (23:57):
So so I'm.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Not so worried about like, if Harris wins, she won't
become presidents somehow? Am I worried about violence a little bit?
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (24:11):
Yeah, And just for the record too, I mean, if
if it's a really close Trump when I don't know
what happens, then either people aren't happy.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
I actually I do hope. I'm sorry, Nate, I know
that you said, you know, you're in a very tough spot,
but I do hope that the polling averages are off
in the sense that I hope that it's a more
decisive election result than it is a closer one, because
I think that would just be better for you know,
better for the country in a lot of respects. Obviously,
(24:40):
you know, as we know, I'm biased, So I hope
that that victory is in Kamala Harris's favor. But you know,
I think that this is going to be a crucial election,
not just in terms of who wins, but in terms of,
you know, the future of our democratic institutions, just to
kind of watch to see how they can be stress tested,
right they and whether how much they've weakened versus not,
(25:05):
and what's just going to happen over the next few days.
I do hope, hope that by November sixth, as you said,
so next time we're talking is going to be November six, right,
So we're going to be dropping another Risky Business podcast
in two days. So I hope that you know, nine
am Pacific noon Eastern when we when we speak, that
(25:26):
we will actually know the results of the election. I
think that would be such a wonderful outcome, just just
to know that, Okay, we're not going to have this
protracted battle going on. And to me, to me, that
would be to me that would you know, that's something
that's really an optimistic, an optimistic take, because I definitely
(25:49):
see the scenario we're on the six you and I
are talking again being like, so who do we think
is gonna win this election and what's going to happen?
And I don't want to be having that conversation again
in the sense of wow, like we really can't decide,
and and shit's going down because I do think there
is a lot of uncertainty, and I do think that
there are a lot of things that we just don't
(26:10):
know because this is a largely not unprecedented, but it's
a very different situation than any that's happened during our lifetimes.
And as you say, this is this is the closest
race we've had, right, this is the closest race we've
had during our lifetime.
Speaker 3 (26:24):
I mean, look, I've never had a race where it's
literally fifty to fifty before on election day, and it's
I'm only forecasted for presidential elections, I guess, But like,
you know, look, I was gonna say that, oh, if
you're a Democrat and Trump has to win, then maybe
at least what happened when clearly so you know, it
kind of ends the misery earlier and or avoids the
(26:45):
sorts of you know, whatever that could happen in a
close election. I think if you're somebody who is like
concerned about Trump excesses and overreach, you want a close
election if Trump wins. Conditional on Trump running for a
different reason though, which is that in a close election,
(27:07):
there's a chance that Democrats control still control, probably not
the Senate. Either control the House or keep the Senate
to a margin where Trump can't appoint insane cabinet secretaries
and has some degree of oversight, right that you don't
have Robert F.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Cannedy Junior as a health secretary for example. I'm not joking.
He's talked about it.
Speaker 3 (27:32):
If you have a fifty two excuse me, a fifty
one forty nine up majority in the Senate, you're going
to have some objectors to objectors at RFK Junior. If
it's fifty four seats, then that's a huge difference. So
scenario where like the polling is way off on Trump
and he beats his polls again and again, this is
(27:53):
look this up. I mean, it's unsurprisingly where Republicans beat
their polls in the presidential race and vice versa, the
Senate candidates will do the same thing with very high correlation.
So so yeah, Democrats, I think, really want to avoid
these lands to lide outcome where they are kind of
totally dealt out of power.
Speaker 1 (28:13):
I mean, I obviously agree, but I as people know,
you know that's the outcome I want is a Democratic victory.
But like I said, I'm trying. I'm trying my best, Nate,
to look at the data without that emotional tint right now,
because I think that emotion ain't going to help anyone
other than you know, as we already said, if you
(28:33):
haven't voted yet, please please please go out and vote,
and if you're undecided, please go, you know, please go
and vote tomorrow. I think that that is crucially important.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
That's by the way, let me have you know.
Speaker 3 (28:44):
Yeah, we talk about these seven swing states, and there's
you know, a ninety percent chance that one of them
is what I call the tipping points state.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
But if you're in.
Speaker 3 (28:54):
Iowa or New Hampshire or Virginia or New Mexico or
Minnesota or so Alaska, some of these states are reaches
for the cat ades, but they come up there once
in a while, right, And we're pretty smart about how
we simulate this, and like, if the polls are way off,
you could have some surprising states in place. So if
you're in that broader pin number of swing states, whoever
(29:18):
you have, if you have a preference, I'm not endorsing anybody,
but I would endorse idea of your vote being worth
the time for you to get off your ass and
vote tomorrow. It's going to be easier now because, like,
because you have in moll states this spread of like
methods of voting. The polls aren't as swarmed as much
on election days, so you're not going to have to,
(29:38):
you know, go too far away. Go go one of
those nice artistical coffee shops, right, and you get your sticker.
So I will endorse idea of voting.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
So now you know, with less than twenty four hours
left to go, I am going to let you go
and worry about your final model and polls and looking
forward to seeing what the silver bulletin says tonight. Nate,
as you've already said, you have no idea what it's
going to look like when you run the model for
the last time.
Speaker 3 (30:06):
Just as we were taping this, there was a Marist
National poll, another high quality pul so that is known
for not hurting, that had Harris plus four or so. Look,
I mean, I don't know, I don't know who I'd
been on. People think I'm like tinkering with knobs and shit,
I don't. I have no idea who we had to Well.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Let's see, and I'm very curious. I will be waiting
with baited breath. So with that, let's let's leave. Everyone.
Please please go vote and we will check back in
in forty eight hours to see to see where we are.
Good luck everybody, indeed, good luck America. Let us know
(30:48):
what you think of the show. Reach out to us
at Risky Business at pushkin dot Fm. Risky Business is
hosted by me Maria Kannikova.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
And by me Nate Silver.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
The show is a co production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia.
This episode was produced by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer
is Gabriel Hunter Chang. Our executive producer is J.
Speaker 2 (31:09):
Goldstein. If you like the.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
Show, please rate and review us so other people can
find us too. And if you want to listen to
an ad free version, sign up for Pushkin Plus. For six,
ten and nine a month you get access to ad
free listening. Thanks for tuning in.