"The question is whether [Republicans]’ll net the six pickups necessary to win control of the Senate. If the Republicans win only five seats, the Senate would be split 50-50 but Democrats would continue to control it because of the tie-breaking vote of Vice President Joseph Biden. Our March forecast projected a Republicans gain of 5.8 seats. ... The new forecast is for a Republican gain of 5.7 seats."
Stay tuned to FiveThirtyEight, where the fine tuning gets finer by the day.
June 9, 2014
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
"The question is whether [Republicans]’ll net the six pickups necessary to win control of the Senate,...The new forecast is for a Republican gain of 5.7 seats."
And it'll keep shrinking by the month.
Watch,...
I predict a gain of 2 seats by the dems.
It's strange to see decimal points for a prediction like this.
Maybe they can let the 0.7 of a senator be the senator for DC.
It's not so far fetched. We had that business with Southern blacks having 3/5 of a vote, after all, so there's precedent.
This is only because of the years of slavery and discrimination which evil white people still perpetrate against people of color! Stop disagreeing you racists, and give me money!
Preventative Crack!
Another question, as yet unasked, is whether a Republican majority would be an improvement or a collection of semi-senile Thad Cochrans with appropriator instincts.
He did really well in the 2012 Presidential election.
How did he do in the 2010 Tea Party wave election?
If the Republican goal is to win the Presidency in 2016, 50/50 might be better than an outright win.
The idea that 50/50 goes to the Democrats because Joe Biden will be the tiebreaker suggests a level of intelligence from him we haven't yet seen.
Also, anything less than 52/48 for the Democrats gives the 2 independents from Vermont and Maine who caucus with the Democrats a lot of power.
Moreover, a 5 or 6 seat shift means several Democratic incumbents losing their offices, which will have an affect on the Senate Democrats up for election in 2016.
If Nate predicts this, shouldn't Democrats just give up? Doesn't it mean its settled science? That's what Democrats were telling Republicans in 2012.
Let's go seat-by-seat:
1) Georgia and Kentucky are probably going to stay GOP. Those states are still pretty red and no Democrat incumbent.
2) West Virginia--likely go GOP. Pickup of 1.
3) Arkansas--probably staying Democratic, Pryor's fairly strong there and Cotton isn't getting the headway people had assumed.
4) NH--probably staying Democratic. It's a slightly blue purple state, Scott Brown isn't a bad candidate but he's no juggernaut and they don't seem eager to toss out their Senator.
5) LA--I have a feeling Landrieu is going to hold on to this one in a squeaker. Brings a lot of pork home, long incumbency, and no sign that her opposition is particularly formidable.
6) S. Dakota and Alaska--no idea. Both are reddish states but haven't seen polling on either, and don't know the gist on the GOP opposition.
7) Iowa is a tossup, Michigan is likely staying Democratic.
Not sure if I left out any closely watched races--but by my reckoning the GOP will probably get a pickup as good as four seats and as bad as a net 1. If they remain one or two seats shy of telling Harry Reid not to let the door hit him on the way out, I do hope everyone remembers what a swell idea it was to nominate Christine O'Donnell, Todd Akin, Sharron Angle and Richard Murdouck. Unforced errors!
I am sure that if the Dems hold the Senate, you will get your million dollars and a mule any day.
The Crack Emcee said...
"The question is whether [Republicans]’ll net the six pickups necessary to win control of the Senate,...The new forecast is for a Republican gain of 5.7 seats."
And it'll keep shrinking by the month.
Without a doubt.And then the actual vote will beat the forecast by 20%-30%.
If he's got it calibrated down to the 0.1 level, he might as well add the odds of a Democratic Senator dying in office and his (or her) replacement being appointed by a Republican governor or vice versa.
(Goes and looks at the Wikipedia page of Senators sortable by Age).
Wow, Dianne Feinstein is the oldest Senator and will only turn 81 in a couple weeks. That sort of snuck up on me. I was expecting somebody in his 90s.
As long as the Dems run against Obama's policies, they've got a decent chance. The rats have been jumping ship this year so they must think so as well. Also to prep for Hillary the apostasy will be in full tilt for the next few years. They will say that Obama is an incompetent manager, not that liberal ideas are to blame.
I wont make predictions about how many seats they'll pick up or lose. That way I can't be wrong.
Under Silver's methodology, another way to express a 5.7 seat pickup is as a 70% chance of picking up the 6th seat. That's doesn't sound like much of a toss up.
His sleight of hand is writing the word "toward" in the phrasing "it's shifted ever so slightly — by one-tenth of a seat — toward being a toss-up."
We had that business with Southern blacks having 3/5 of a vote, after all, so there's precedent.
Slaves had 0/5 ths of a vote. 3/5 was to calculate overall population for allocation of representatives to the US House.
Left Bank of the Charles: "If the Republican goal is to win the Presidency in 2016, 50/50 might be better than an outright win."
Nope.
You either control the Senate, or you don't.
Left Bank: "Also, anything less than 52/48 for the Democrats gives the 2 independents from Vermont and Maine who caucus with the Democrats a lot of power."
Those 2 "independents" are on the left left. There is no silver lining having them wielding additional leverage.
I don't put alot of stock in King's (I-ME) alluding to caucusing with the Republicans if they were to take control, although it would not be a reach.
Again, for the Republicans to take the Senate, they have to run the table. Always a dicey proposition.
crack: "And it'll keep shrinking by the month."
Well, if it keeps shrinking by .1 per month from this month up to the election, that would put Silver's forecast at a Republican net 6 seat pickup at 5.2.
Not being privy to Silver's algorithms/raw data though and factoring in the completely valid observation that there is nothing necessarily "linear" about human behavior, all of that means nothing.
@ Left Bank of the Charles
If the House holds the line and there is little, if any, new legislation, President Obama will pass all sorts of regulations through his control of the various Administrative Agencies. While those can be reversed with a new executive the damage will be partly done. And any Democrat will consolidate those new violations of individual sanctity.
If there were Republican control of both House and Senate, President Obama would have to do some of what he wants to do in public. He would have to veto legislation, for example. Obama would have to nominate possible Supreme Court justices who could pass a Republican Senate, for example. Obama would have to take a stand against legislation and would then be accountable for any failures.
As it stands now, Obama has not been accountable for his failures. Deaths in Mexico due to illegal gun running: no accountability. Deaths in Benghazi: Nothing. A flagging economy?
I'm hoping for accountability above all else.
> Slaves had 0/5 ths of a vote. 3/5 was to calculate overall population for allocation of representatives to the US House.
The folks in the North wanted the number to be 0 while the folks in the South wanted the number to be 1.
Certainly too soon to tell. However, a close to 6 pick up before serious campaigning begins with opposition to Obamacare strong through most of the contested states is a good sign. I think that the Republicans are wisely keeping their peace on major campaign issues until people are paying attention.
There is always a chance that Silver is completely wrong, but I think he is fairly honest in his analysis.
They are counting Michigan as Democrat (Gary Peters) over Terri Lynn Land, the Republican former Secretary of State. Land is 2-0 in statewide elections. Peters is 0-1 (failed Attorney General campaign) statewide.
It is high time for Michigan voters to reject the state Democrats who have alone driven Detroit, Flint, Pontiac and Benton Harbor to ruin.
In a 50/50 tie, don't count out a Manchin switch to the GOP
Post a Comment