Well, for me, it was usually because of the high quality commentary, wherein folks had rational discussions about the content of a piece rather than resorting to Reddit-style content-free snark that neither educates nor illuminates.

Funny how times change, eh?

All the dissident views about polls being outright wrong were met with disbelief when it was clear to anyone who looked that they were blatantly off. Mainly to create social proof to vote Clinton.

What reality-based approach to predicting Trump's win would you have used? Note; anecdotes are not a reliable approach.

How about one that isn't used only to influence voters?

Read Talebs tweets:

https://mishtalk.com/2016/08/07/nassim-telab-blasts-nate-sil...

https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/794608806072352769