We’ll see, won’t we

Obama supporters overseas are talking up Nate Silver as if he is a silver bullet to the werewolf of Mitt Romney’s campaign.  I just want to put this article on record so I can reference it after the election:

Nate Silver is Mitt Romney’s nemesis. Not intentionally; although he admits to being an Obama supporter, his whole career is predicated on getting his predictions right. Like he did in 2008, when “Poblano” accurately predicted the result of 49 of the 50 states, and all 35 senate races…. In fact, Silver is proving so damaging to their chances that Republican’s are drawing up a strategy for countering him. “Nate Silver continues to lead the Democrat Graveyard whistling choir”, Republican blogger Robert Stacy McCain wrote on Tuesday. National Review decried “Nate Silver’s Flawed Model”. “Everyone but Nate Silver thinks Obama’s lead is evaporating fast”, said Business Insider.  But the truth is we don’t. And the Romney camp knows it.

Here’s a prediction. As the election clock continues to tick down, and the momentum narrative continues to melt away, the attacks on Silver will intensify. We should expect a Fox News feature. More negative blogs. Maybe even a smear or two.  But the number’s don’t lie. At the start of this week, Barack Obama’s chances of winning Ohio were 70 per cent. Today they’re at 75. Wisconsin has moved up to 86 per cent, Nevada 78, Iowa 68, New Hampshire 69, Colorado 57, Virginia 54. Overall, his chance of wining is now put at 73 per cent, his highest for 18 days. That’s not momentum; that’s Omentum.

Barack Obama is holding a steady course to the presidency. But don’t take my word for it. Ask Poblano.

And yet, I seem to recall it wasn’t all that long ago that Obama’s chances were supposedly at 80 percent and Nate Silver was busily informing everyone that Romney’s post-convention bounce was minimal.  I note, furthermore, that the article doesn’t happen to mention 2010, when Silver was still providing five reasons that Democrats could hold the House as late as November 1st.  Nor should we forget that he claimed in August 2011 that the GOP majority was at risk and control of the House would be a tossup in 2012.

I don’t support Romney nor do I have anything personal against Nate Silver.  It’s just that after reading so much of Dawkins, Harris, and Hauser, I have developed a heightened sense for spotting a pseudo-scientific charlatan when I see one.  If things play out as I expect them to play out, with Romney winning an election that isn’t particularly close and the Republicans winning a comfortable majority in the House, Nate Silver will be publicly seen for the fraud I suspect him to be.