I have no idea how much the NYT pays Silver, but they could create some sort of pay scheme such that on any given day, his pay is is a bet on the eventual outcome as a function of the odds he gives one candidate and the time until the election. Something such that as he gets closer, he should be more accurate, so a higher percent of his pay is tied to the outcome.
Wouldn't that bite be horribly uneven? Talking about the results of the election for a week after the election is (for better or for worse) essentially Joe Scarborough's job, but it isn't Nate Silver's (though it is tangentially related).
Having said that, I agree, $1000 is basically meaningless to either of these guys.
Nate probably didn't care about whether he won or lost - it's just these right-wing media windbags say whatever they want, seemingly without consequence.
6 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 26.8 ms ] threadHe should bet that for 1 week after the election, the loser says nothing in public about the result.
That would be a loss with bite.
Having said that, I agree, $1000 is basically meaningless to either of these guys.
Nate probably didn't care about whether he won or lost - it's just these right-wing media windbags say whatever they want, seemingly without consequence.
Good that he deflated that clown.