Image by Getty Images

By Aiden Pink September 26, 2017

Two of the most prominent political observers in the country got into a Twitter tiff on Tuesday over whose coverage of the 2016 presidential election was more misleading and inaccurate.

It started when Nate Silver—the former New York Times statistical wunderkind who left in 2013 to run his own ESPN-backed website, 538—noted a Haberman report on the Trump White House’s use of private emails, contrasting it with the Times’ wall-to-wall coverage of similar issues for Hillary Clinton:

The story is written in the passive voice. But Clinton’s emails didn’t *just happen* to become a huge story. The NYT was a huge reason why.

Forwarding the News

Thoughtful, balanced reporting from the Forward and around the web, bringing you updated news and analysis of the crisis each day.

Terms(Required)

I agree to the Forward's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Email(Required)

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) September 26, 2017

Haberman hit back by mocking the pollster’s recent track record on political predictions:

It’s this keen understanding of media and politics that you demonstrated with your own modeling https://t.co/IFV9lrE5Ku

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) September 26, 2017

But Silver responded by arguing that he had actually predicted the election better than the Times and other prognosticators:

I guess I’m obliged to point out that our model & our reproting gave Trump a way better chance than you guys did. https://t.co/mbr5z9wdvy

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) September 26, 2017

Haberman ended the tete-a-tete by criticizing Silver for “trolling”:

Things are always more nuanced and complicated than your trolling tweets of your former employer. That’s the point https://t.co/ApJ6WrT4sM

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) September 26, 2017

Contact Aiden Pink at [email protected] or on Twitter, @aidenpink

A message from our CEO & publisher Rachel Fishman Feddersen

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning, nonprofit journalism during this critical time.

Now more than ever, American Jews need independent news they can trust, with reporting driven by truth, not ideology. We serve you, not any ideological agenda

At a time when other newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall and invested additional resources to report on the ground from Israel and around the U.S. on the impact of the war, rising antisemitism and polarized discourse..

Readers like you make it all possible. Support our work by becoming a Forward Member and connect with our journalism and your community.

—  Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

Join our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.

$36 $500

$120 $180 Other amount