Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(78,842 posts)
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 10:51 AM Aug 3

No, Nate Silver: Epstein is not the new Russiagate


No, Nate Silver: Epstein is not the new Russiagate
The numbers show the scandal is worse for Trump than you think

By Sophia Tesfaye
Senior Writer
Published August 3, 2025 6:45AM (EDT)


(Salon) Nate Silver is just asking questions. “Is Epstein the new Russiagate?,” the famed statistician wondered in his newsletter this week.

For over a month now, President Donald Trump has faced increasing pressure over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender who authorities say died by suicide in a federal jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The unexpected re-emergence of the Epstein scandal — which is largely due to the Trump administration’s abrupt pivot after promising transparency on the case and its files — has caused a sustained media fury, a rather unique phenomenon in the Trump era. And that seems to be Silver’s main gripe.

Arguing that the scandal is not “6-stories-every-day-newsworthy,” he claimed “the feeding frenzy around Epstein has caused some political junkies to forget that Trump is often impervious to consequences.” To make his point, Silver said the entire saga reminds him of the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, a topic to which the Trump administration has been desperate to divert the media’s attention:

In the way the Epstein story has hijacked the news cycle, and with the constant predictions of spiraling damage to Trump’s political standing, it reminds me of another story that lent itself to episodic coverage: Russiagate.

It’s hard to overstate the extent to which every minor Russia-related revelation in the story made news in 2017 and 2018, completely taking over the Rachel Maddow Show, for instance, from its formerly more policy-wonkish past. Liberals were literally selling prayer candles labeled “pee tape” showing Robert Mueller as a saint-like figure, convinced that the walls were caving in around Trump. Facebook ads from Russian bot farms that made up an infinitesimal fraction of the content voters were consuming in 2016 were blown up into a huge scandal.

I’ll assert that Russiagate didn’t end well for Democrats, but I’ll admit that’s hard to prove. Trump’s approval rating did decline significantly in 2017 — more steeply than so far in his second term — and Democrats did have a pretty good 2018 midterm. What I think is clearer is that the obsessive coverage of the case probably insulated Trump from more serious scandals that came along later.


....(snip)....

Silver also argued “the evidence that the broader public is greatly concerned about the details of Epstein is pretty thin.” He pointed to Google search traffic on the issue, which he noted has been lower than searches on tariffs in April after Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement of a global trade war. But Epstein, unlike tariffs, is a known concept to most Americans. As even Silver admits, the Epstein saga has had “plenty of time for punditry and speculation.” That’s why a Yahoo/YouGov poll found the scandal had the fourth highest “heard a lot” score recorded since 2020. ..................(more)

https://www.salon.com/2025/08/03/no-nate-silver-epstein-is-not-the-new-russiagate/






8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
No, Nate Silver: Epstein is not the new Russiagate (Original Post) marmar Aug 3 OP
The Epstein scandal has quieted for the moment but has built up more "debt" Bernardo de La Paz Aug 3 #1
"Their cynicism is even deeper than their hatred of libs. " customerserviceguy Aug 3 #5
No. I'm not "telling you" that and I'm not saying that. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Aug 3 #6
Sorry customerserviceguy Aug 3 #7
I wasn't *suggesting* it either. I wrote: "Their cynicism is even deeper than their hatred of libs." Bernardo de La Paz Aug 3 #8
Silver's right, "Trump is often impervious to consequences." sop Aug 3 #2
Silver DarthDem Aug 3 #3
It's the SAME scandal. Ursus Rex Aug 3 #4

Bernardo de La Paz

(58,215 posts)
1. The Epstein scandal has quieted for the moment but has built up more "debt"
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 11:04 AM
Aug 3

I call it debt because he pushed it off by promising more disclosures later. People who feel that the public deserves to know more have not gone away or been placated. They are waiting and have not forgotten.

If or when Maxwell testifies or says something it will flare up again. If she whitewashes "the powers that be" or tries to finger only Democrats, it will not make it go away.

Grand Jury transcripts are less than 1 percent of the 100,000 pages of Epstein material. People will know that and want more.

maga was promised prominent Democrats were pedophiles. The regime can't manufacture evidence against them without being found out. It is too big and there are too many eyeballs. If they can't get Democrats they will still want something. They were promised. If they are disappointed they will turn, as some already are. Their cynicism is even deeper than their hatred of libs. They have been whipped into repeated moral panic frenzies over pedophilia and now they have a real case in their teeth and ultimately they will not let go.

customerserviceguy

(25,394 posts)
5. "Their cynicism is even deeper than their hatred of libs. "
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 05:16 PM
Aug 3

So, you're telling me that a possible outcome of this is that some of Trump's voters will realize the error of their ways and vote hereafter for progressive candidates? If they move away from Trump, they'll find another demagogue to follow, no doubt.

customerserviceguy

(25,394 posts)
7. Sorry
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 05:43 PM
Aug 3

I should have said "suggesting that". I've been waiting for the foolish to see the light for so long, that I now think it's impossible for them to do so.

Bernardo de La Paz

(58,215 posts)
8. I wasn't *suggesting* it either. I wrote: "Their cynicism is even deeper than their hatred of libs."
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 05:57 PM
Aug 3

... which means they would give up the hatred of libs before giving up on catching pedophiles. There is a large core that will never vote for politicians the core perceives unshakeably as Marxist and commie and woke (i.e. anti-prejudice).

It does not mean they would give up hating libs, though a few on the fringes would. What I mean is that their cynicism in general and in particular about people who protect pedophiles is so deep that tRump won't be able to wash it away with fakery or sleight of hand or distraction. He made a promise to them and they take it seriously. That promise is the unfulfilled debt.

They are more likely to try to call it in if the economy hurts them, as it really might do. So tRump could collapse from a house of political debt and self-inflicted wounds. It might happen gradually and then all of a sudden.

The other thing that might penetrate deeply in maga minds is the intrusive and overbearing nature of the authoritarian government they voted for, but I have less confidence in that because it requires more cogitation.

Ursus Rex

(434 posts)
4. It's the SAME scandal.
Sun Aug 3, 2025, 12:28 PM
Aug 3

Even they know it and are this cockamamie “Durham Annex” as a way to to project and deflect.

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»No, Nate Silver: Epstein ...