NYT public editor: Silver bet 'bad idea'

The New York Times' public editor Margaret Sullivan says Nate Silver's offer to bet on the winner of the presidential election was a “bad idea” that gives “ammunition to the critics” who want to paint him as a partisan.

Silver, the Times’ political statistician, bet MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough $1,000 — and then $2,000 — that President Barack Obama would win the election. Sullivan blasted the wager in a column headlined "Under Attack, Nate Silver Picks the Wrong Defense." “But whatever the motivation behind it, the wager offer is a bad idea – giving ammunition to the critics who want to paint Mr. Silver as a partisan who is trying to sway the outcome,” Sullivan wrote. “It’s also inappropriate for a Times journalist, which is how Mr. Silver is seen by the public even though he’s not a regular staff member. Silver, who spoke with Sullivan by phone Thursday, said the wager is “half playful and half serious.” “He’s been on a rant, calling me an idiot and a partisan, so I’m asking him to put some integrity behind it,” he told Sullivan. “I don’t stand to gain anything from it; it’s for charity.” That’s not how Sullivan sees it.