There has been a lot of Nate Silver bashing in the last few weeks with some Romney supporters even playing the gay bashing card. That's how personal they take Silver predicting Obama is very likely to win.
He's not the only one-Sam Wang actually has a higher odd of Obama winning-for that matter Intrade now has some pretty good odds for Obama as well, even with traders trying to buy the lead for Romney! Nate, however, is more well known.
Joe Scarborough last week declared that anyone claiming that the race is more than a tossup is a joke. Yet seeing as Nate got 49 out of 50 states right in 2008 and the predictions of pundits come true about one out of two times, who exactly is the joke?
Today the final numbers show Obama rose from 86% likely to win the electoral college to 90% today.
Part of what drove it is that the national polls have turned to Obama in the last few days. Now even Gallup has Romney only up by 1 point among likely voters.
Nate struck back at the coin flip punditry on Colbert declaring that he wouldn't vote for them in a race against Ebola.
Jon Stewart wondered last night where exactly is the accountability of the pundits?
See, unlike Stewart, I do think that this time may be different and that now they will start to be held a little more accountable. What's different is the existence of Nate Silver, Sam Wang, et. al. Finally we have an out from the pundit noise, In the past you could argue against a narrative but have little strong proof to back it up. So most people might somewhat believe the narrative. Now we can check them in real time. This end run around the media noise is what drives the pundits crazy. We are no longer at the mercy of the Joe Scarboroughs, David Gregorys, and David Brookes of the world.