Most of the concerns I've seen focus on Nate Silver's surprising willingness to give a platform to well-known deniers of global warming:<p><a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/tarnished-silver/" rel="nofollow">http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/tarnished-silver...</a><p>Those are legitimate concerns being raised about the rigor with which Nate Silver is doing his data analysis.
When he picks your people, he is a soothsayer. When he picks the other side, he is an idiot and wrong. What else is new?<p>If the best they've got is the North Dakota and Montana polls, then I think they may be barking up the wrong tree. Both states are really hard to predict based on new population and extreme drop in home telephone lines. I would expect the polling folks to be much better this time around.