@ellencarmichael @ThePlumLineGS My only point is that the datajournalists who judged Land to be a good candidate should have done reporting.
-
-
Replying to @daveweigel
@daveweigel@ellencarmichael@ThePlumLineGS In fairness tho, pt of#datajournalism was more to counter stupid pundit predictions.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @philipaklein
@philipaklein True in general, but the early 538 assessment that Land was good was basically bad punditry@ellencarmichael@ThePlumLineGS4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @daveweigel
@daveweigel Using objective measures to assess candidates is *not* "bad punditry.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jbview
Not in this case,
@jbview. The first 538 take on Land was that she was an “excellent candidate."pic.twitter.com/3hQBbalQCX
6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @daveweigel
@daveweigel@jbview MI Rs tried to find anyone but TLL. Amash, Camp, Rogers, all floated for a reason. But you'd have to be here to know.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wizardkitten
@wizardkitten Actually, wasn't Land the only way they could stave off a Rogers-Amash primary?@daveweigel@jbview1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@daveweigel@jbview Not sure, but I think Rogers already had eye on cashing out. Amash doesn't play nice w/establishment.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@wizardkitten In any case, Rogers Amash primary would have been blast which is why (can't have nice things) we got Land @daveweigel @jbview
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.