Yep. And it's also worth remembering that FiveThirtyEight's thing is that they do analysis based on data as opposed to punditry. Yes, they apply corrections and otherwise filter the data sources. But some people seem to think that Silver should have gotten up a couple days before the election, state that he had a bad feeling about things, and dismiss the best forecast he could make based on some shaky polling data and gone with Trump based on gut feel. Sure, he would have ended up being correct. That would also run counter to the fundamental philosophy of the site.
People forget that Silver's approach is basically weighting polls to figure out what the election will be, and he's the best "poll weigher" out there. But if the polls are systematically wrong, being the best at it is an unimpressive subtlety to the layperson.
To the extent 2018 brings increasingly contentious elections, we will likely see polling to remain inaccurate due to voter unwillingness to state unpopular opinions. In that case, multi-input "big data" approaches may prevail.
(Of course, it's also possible that 2016 is a "top" in terms of divisive rhetoric...only time can tell.)
