Yes, the corporate press was smug, hubristic, and often hilariously wrong. I think the best journalism came from people outside the normal news. Here are thre

Yes, the corporate press was smug, hubristic, and often hilariously wrong. I think the best journalism came from people outside the normal news. Here are three nontraditional journalists who did excellent work: -- Nate Silver did the best math. His final election prediction is like a crash course in data science. Humble, thorough, quantifies uncertainty, acknowledges that errors may correlate. Explained in plain English and illustrated in a way that would make Edward Tufte proud. He lays out three scenarios (polling average accurate, 3-point error for Clinton, 3-point error for Trump). The latter describes in detail pretty much exactly what ended up happening. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/final-election-update-theres-a-wide-range-of-outcomes-and-most-of-them-come-up-clinton/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/final-election-update-th... -- Chris Arnade got the best stories. He's a former bond trader who now travels the country as a photojournalist, befriending and talking to all kinds of people, mostly working-class and poor. Here's his best work, in my opinion: https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/divided-by-meaning-1ab510759ee7 https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/divided-by-meaning-1ab51075... It was the first thing that really helped me understand Trump voters. -- Finally, Michael Moore nailed it. Months ago, he wrote an essay called Why Trump Will Win, asking his liberal audience to campaign hard and not get complacent. http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/ http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/ It came true pretty much exactly as written. One of his speeches was taken out of context and edited down into an unofficial grassroots Trump ad. It is the single best pitch for Trump that I have heard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxDRqeuLNag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxDRqeuLNag MM really understands the disenfranchised. So many lessons.