The needle is only a subject of angst because it's had bad news for Democrats. It's often this good (or better)
Here's Florida, just a few months ago
Here's North Carolina, just a few months ago (and the hick up in the estimate around 11PM result was induced by an IRL irregularity in the NC results, not the needle).
Anyway, people on this website (aka democrats) completely forget about this stuff because it was bad news for Democrats.
It would be remembered entirely differnetly if the NC/FL polls said GOP favored, Dems won by 1-3 points, and needle called it from the start. Same with '16
The needle would be beloved on this website if its 2016 performance had been in reverse (if hypothetically, Trump led in the '16 polls, the needle started with Trump at 85% to win, and had Clinton at >95% to win by 1030PM while networks still talked like Trump favored)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Nate Cohn

Nate Cohn Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Nate_Cohn

10 Jan
There's less confidence in the electoral system because people tried to erode confidence in it, not because of the way the election was administered
No 'blue-ribbon' plan could have gotten us out of the mess we found ourselves in
Go through that call between Trump and GA SOS, and think about how many of his assertions would be fixed by, say, a ban on mail absentee voting and a strict photo identification requirement
The answer is: not much of it
You can still assert that someone shredded ballots, or pulled a box from under a table, or that someone wasn't watching, or that there were 'dead' voters based on a file match, or that there isn't a perfect match with poll books, or lie that there are 'more votes than people' etc
Read 4 tweets
9 Jan
Here's how Senate control would have changed over the last decade if DC had been a state:
2010: D (IRL) --> D (with DC)
2012: D --> D
2014: R --> R
2016: R --> R
2018: R --> R
2020: D --> D
Here's how Senate control would have changed over the last decade if DC and Puerto Rico had been states:
2010: D (IRL) --> D (with DC+PR)
2012: D --> D
2014: R --> R
2016: R --> R
2018: R --> R
2020: D --> D
*ALSEN in 2017 is an interesting side-story
If PR/AL were states, then the Doug Jones race in 2017 would have flipped Senate control (which the GOP would win back in 2018), though there's a distinct possibility that Jones wouldn't have won if Senate control was on the line
Read 5 tweets
7 Jan
Republican Senate candidates won the Georgia vote in November. Democrats won it on Tuesday.
The reason: a superior Democratic, and especially Black, turnout…
We won't have an authoritative account for a bit, but based on what I see, there's basically no evidence of significant, net-Democratic vote switching since November.
Instead, turnout held stronger in Democratic areas than GOP areas
One fun way to check the proposition that turnout was decisive: if you take the Ossoff/Perdue tallies in November, and use precinct data to infer what proportion of Biden/Trump voters returned (which is not a safe assumption!) you get Ossoff +.4 with no switching
Read 9 tweets
6 Jan
Ossoff and Warnock are both on track for victory with a greater than 95% chance to win, according to our estimates.
This is not a projection, but the remaining vote--including another 18k DeKalb early votes and nearly 100k absentee votes--overwhelmingly favors the Democrats Image
Ossoff's lead is still just slim enough that you do want to make sure that some of these late absentees and provisionals really materialize to the extent we expect. I'd think we could see some projections in the Warnock race tonight
But the remaining early in-person votes in DeKalb, alone, will give Ossoff the kind of lead that Biden had in the final count, and there's a lot more for him beyond that. So there may not be a call there tonight, but it's not serious doubt
Read 5 tweets
6 Jan
I'm getting a lot of questions about the DeKalb County vote that remains. Apparently an election official said they only had 130k votes left, not 170k in-person early votes as they had previously said.
First and foremost, I think it's quite clear that it's 170k votes.
The state reports the early vote in great detail; and there were definitely 170k votes cast in-person in early voting in DeKalb County.
Now one possibility is that there's a reporting error--say, they uploaded 30k and called it in-person. I see no signs of that. The votes are left.
Read 5 tweets
6 Jan
Results (for Ossoff) so far v. our pre-election expectations:
Absentee: D+4.1 better than we expected
Early: D+.3
Election day: D+1.3
--on turnout--
Early: 100% of expected
Absentee 98.4% (expect the remainder tmro/later)
Election day: 106% (good for GOP; not enough so far)
To circle back to a pre-election question, Ossoff is on track to net-400k out of the advance vote with 56.4%. Perdue on track to get net-370k out of election day, by our estimate, with 64.5%
And the overall turnout estimate is at 4.415 million at the moment, though the public tea leafs on election day ATL-area turnout suggest that will be a bit low
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!