Senate Elections' Homestretch
We have now entered the homestretch of the 2014 midterm election season, with less than a week to go before Election Day. Many Senate races remain incredibly close, and Democrats got some welcome news this week from far up north.
As always, I interpret these races individually without resorting to "probability modeling" the way some professional poll-watchers do, so I am not going to definitively state that one party or the other has anything like "a 52 percent chance of winning control." Instead, I take a close look at the most recent polling and then contemplate any other factors (which is a fancy way of saying "seeing what my gut tells me") before assigning a state to any particular category.
Feel free to disagree with my picks in the comments. And, for reference, here's what I had to say about the races last week. OK, let's get on with it, shall we?
Safe Republican
Republicans add one state to their safe list this week, as South Dakota increasingly looks solid for Mike Rounds. The independent candidate had one good poll, but has sunk back down to third place, and the Democrat hasn't come anywhere close to leading the race yet. With less than a week to go, South Dakota has to be seen as pretty close to a lock for Republicans.
With this addition, the list in our Safe Republican category grows to fifteen seats: Alabama, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma (both seats), South Carolina (both seats), South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Three of these (Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia) are pickups for Republicans.
Safe Democratic
The list of Safe Democratic seats did not change in the past week: Delaware, Hawai'i, Illinois, Oregon, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Virginia.
However, none of these eleven safe races represent a pickup for Democrats.
Leaning Republican
There was some movement in this category, as South Dakota moves up to Safe Republican and Kentucky moves back to Leaning Republican from our rating of tossup last week.
The Arkansas race has gotten tighter in the polling, but not tight enough to give Democrat Mark Pryor the lead in any poll. Perhaps there's a late-breaking trend that could save Pryor next week, but that's more wishful thinking than anything solid. For now, Arkansas has to remain probable for the Republicans.
In Kentucky, Alison Lundergan Grimes had one good poll which showed she was within one point of Mitch McConnell. Since that time, however, McConnell has shown a bigger lead in the polls. Grimes has waged a tough battle, but it looks like she's going to fall short next Tuesday. While an upset is still possible, the state has to be seen as Leaning Republican.
Louisiana is a tough race to call, because there are really two questions to answer: who will win next Tuesday, and will they win by over 50 percent? If the answer to the latter question is "no," then there will be a runoff election in December. Right now, the chances of a runoff happening are very high, so predicting the outcome of the race is really calling the December election. Mary Landrieu could win on Tuesday only to be defeated in the runoff. Head-to-head polling (with only their two names) shows the Republican with a lead, so for now the race has to be seen as Leaning Republican, no matter who gets more votes next week.
These three races represent a pickup of two states (Arkansas and Louisiana) for Republicans. Overall, this puts them up five seats.
Leaning Democratic
The biggest news from this past week was a few surprisingly good polls for Mark Begich, current Democratic senator from Alaska. All along, I've said that Alaska is a state where polling is not very accurate, so perhaps these numbers aren't as valid as they seem. But also all along, I've been saying that Alaska might be a surprise to everyone on Election Day because of Begich's ground game, which has largely gone unnoticed in the national press. I don't think I've ever rated Alaska as worse for Democrats than a tossup as a result, and this week I'm optimistically moving the state up to Leaning Democratic based on the three recent polls (two of which showed Begich with leads over five percent). If this prediction comes true, it will be very welcome news for Democrats next Tuesday.
I almost moved Georgia down to the tossup category, but still think Michelle Nunn has the edge. The polling is very tight, with both Nunn and David Perdue posting small leads in the past few days. But, like Louisiana, if neither candidate gets over 50 percent next week, there will be a runoff election (in January). So predicting the race means possibly predicting two separate elections. I think that if a runoff happens, Nunn will retain her edge, mostly because of all the late gaffes by Perdue, which will have two months to be fully aired (millions of dollars will be spent here if the runoff election will determine control of the Senate). So I'm leaving Georgia as a Leaning Democratic state for now.
The New Hampshire race seems to have tightened considerably in the polling, but in the majority of the polls Jeanne Shaheen still retains an edge over Scott Brown. An argument could be made that this race is a tossup, but for the time being I'm betting on Shaheen keeping her seat.
North Carolina has been close all along, but Kay Hagen seems to have held onto her slight edge. The state still has to be seen as Leaning Democratic.
The Democrats' situation improved considerably with the addition of Alaska (again, if it comes to pass -- I could always be wrong about it). Adding Alaska doesn't change the overall math, though, since Begich winning wouldn't be a pickup for Democrats. The only state in the Leaning Democratic list which would be a pickup is Georgia.
This would cut the overall lead of Republicans down to plus-four. If I've called all the leaners correct, the total count of Senate seats before considering the tossups would be: 49 Democrats to 48 Republicans.
Too Close To Call
Which leaves only three states that are still Too Close To Call. This category shrank by two states this week, as Kentucky moved to the Republican column and Alaska moved to the Democrats' side.
In Colorado, the polls have given the Republican a slight edge (although the polling remains very close). Democrats are hoping that two things will prove this polling wrong on Election Day: Latino turnout and mail-in voting. Colorado is one of the few battleground states this cycle where Latino voters matter a great deal, and the telephone polling may have been consistently undercounting them. And the state went to all mail-in voting this year, which could boost turnout (although it's not certain which party would benefit). Democrats are also pointing to how Colorado polling has been weighted too far Republican in the last few elections. By the polling itself, the Republican has the edge, but the polling could be wrong.
In Iowa, the polling is pretty much an absolute tie. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see a recount in Iowa, because the margin of victory may be incredibly thin. Republicans have a very slight edge overall in the polling, but it's so small it could be illusionary. My guess is that the vote-counting in Iowa won't be over when everyone goes to bed next Tuesday.
Kansas is still very much up in the air as well. Independent candidate Greg Orman is showing a lead in the polls, but not nearly as big as it first was. Pat Roberts could be in trouble here, but Kansas is one state where a lot of voters still haven't made up their minds. Meaning late-breaking momentum is possible, either way.
As I mentioned, before scoring the Too Close To Call races, the scoreboard stands at 49 Democrats, 48 Republicans. What this means is that Republicans have to sweep this category to gain control of the Senate (assuming all my other guesses pan out, of course). If the Democrat wins in either Colorado or Iowa, it will put control of the Senate out of reach of the Republicans. If Greg Orman wins in Kansas, then there is going to be a very unseemly bidding war between the two parties to entice him to caucus with the majority (he will become the pivot if Republicans pick up Colorado and Iowa, since Republicans need 51 seats for control, whereas the Democrats only need 50).
The picture is even more complicated when considering possible runoff elections in both Louisiana and Georgia. Either or both of these races may also tip the balance of control in the Senate, so look for a monumental amount of money and television ads to be pumped into the runoff races by both sides if this turns out to be the case. We may not know who controls the Senate until after the new Senate convenes in January, in fact (Georgia's runoff would happen after the traditional opening of Congress date).
Early predictions of the midterm Senate races were optimistic, from both sides. After the government shutdown -- which happened only one year ago -- Democrats were confident that the public was disgusted with Republicans and that they'd have an advantage in the midterms. Republicans were later overconfident that this election would be all about Obamacare. Neither has turned out to be true. Republicans were confidently predicting a "wave" election this year, but that too may fall far short. Republican candidates were (according to them) going to win in unlikely Democratic states such as Michigan, Minnesota, and Oregon -- none of which is now in jeopardy for Democrats. Republicans may lose Georgia and Kansas, which would have been considered unthinkable just a few short months ago.
Nevertheless, Republicans are almost guaranteed to pick up seats in both the House and Senate next week. The wave election might not happen -- it may be more of a small ripple -- but Republicans are still going to post gains. The question, though, is whether they can pick up enough to wrest control away from Harry Reid in the Senate -- and from where I sit, that question has not yet been definitively answered.
[Program Note: The final column in my "pick the Senate races" series will be posted on Monday. In it, I will make my final calls for every state and attempt to predict who will control the Senate.]
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Very little has changed in the net class rankings since last week's column.
Dems need to snag at least 5 of the competitive states to retain senate control (usual caucus assumptions apply).
Republicans need to take at least 7 of the competitive races to flip senate control.
My ranked ordered assessment of the CW rankings is that senate control is still too close to call.
Democrats are hoping that two things will prove this polling wrong on Election Day: Latino turnout and mail-in voting.
Democrats shouldn't count on the Hispanic Vote..
http://washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/28/hispanics-on-a-gop-senate-sure-why-not/
Republicans were confidently predicting a "wave" election this year, but that too may fall far short.
I am constrained to point out that it's not just Republicans who have been predicting the wave...
My ranked ordered assessment of the CW rankings is that senate control is still too close to call.
Whatever lets ya sleep at night... :D
Michale
You see, what ya'all fail to take into account is the Obama Factor..
This election IS a referendum on Obama and his policies.. A strong percentage of Americans are voting to express dissatisfaction with the administration.
Practically every state where there is actually a race, Obama has even worse polling numbers than the RCP Poll..
Given these facts, a GOP Wave is inevitable...
Michale
How to Read the Waves
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/10/midterm_elections_may_bring_a_republican_wave_a_guide_to_what_that_would.html
This is a great guide to the upcoming GOP wave....
Michale
TS,
I noticed a comment in yesterday's commentary that I didn't see before..
Since it's appropriate to this commentary as well, I decided to bring it forward and address it...
Republicans are clear favorites, but I think you're a bit overconfident.
Yea, humility is definitely NOT one of my virtues.. :D
"Patience is not one of my virtues. Well, actually I don't have ANY virtues, but if I did.. I am pretty sure that patience would not be one of them."
-Crowley, SUPERNATURAL
:D
Democrats are actually getting some good news from the polls, but it's just no where near enough to tilt the overall odds in their favor, or even get them into the 50:50 range.
Oh yeah, of course. There is bound to be a tidbit of good news here or there that Dems can latch onto..
But, as you say, it's not enough to give Dems hope of actually retaining the Senate...
The central tendency of the NYT, 538 and HuffPO is vibrating near 60:40 on any given day, advantage Republicans. Even WAPO is giving the Dems a 6% chance! But, WAPO is essentially putting a lot of faith in who is ahead in individual state polls. That approach leaves no genuinely competitive states at all. That seems highly risky to me.
But it's not absolute in favor of the GOP.. Until today, Georgia was in the Dem column. Today it's in the GOP column..
Assuming 7-10 competitive races, there are still a lot of plausible paths to Democrats holding the senate.
Plausible does not possible make..
There are a lot of reasonable and plausible ways that I could become a multi-millionaire by this time next year...
But the POSSIBILITY of that happening (again... :D) is not very high...
So yes.. There are some PLAUSIBLE routes that Dems could take to retain the Senate...
But we're talking possible, not plausible..
I think CW has described these paths quite well. At least one path involves a runoff election.
Every run-off poll I have seen has given the election to the GOP candidate...
According to my analysis, the Big 4 don't seem to be calling this cycle as a "wave election."
I have always said that one can put little faith in a Pelosi screaming the Liberal Position or a Limbaugh screaming the Conservative Position... It means very little..
I have always said that one should really sit up and take notice when a Pelosi starts screaming the Conservative position or a Limbaugh starts screaming the Liberal position...
Now THAT means something...
My point?? Many MANY Liberal outlets are calling the exact same GOP wave that Conservative outlets are calling..
THAT means something...
As you've said many times we'll see...but just possibly well after election day.
We will see, to be sure...
But I consider myself an average Joe.. A true representation of Joe SixPack... Or, in my case, a Joe TwelvePack :D
"24 beers in a case. 24 Hours in a day..
COINCIDENCE?? I think not.."
:D
All the polls aside, I go with my gut..
"Yea, will right now, Mac outranks your gut"
-Jeff Daniels, SPEED
And my gut tells me that Americans are fed up with the incompetence of the Democrats. The constant shirking of responsibility for their mistakes... The ongoing and uninterrupted, "It's not our fault!! It's the evil terrorist Republicans who are to blame!! We Demcorats are as pure as the driven snow!!"
That constant fixing of the blame and ignoring the problem that Democrats have seemed to elevate to an art form is why there will be a GOP Wave this election..
I can respect a person, EVEN a politician, who stands up and takes responsibility for their frak-ups...
What I cannot abide, what I simply cannot stand is a weasel who shirks their responsibility and who tries to blame everyone but themselves..
THAT is why my gut tells me that Democrats are going to lose and lose big..
Because THAT is what Democrats have stood for, for the last 4 or 5 years... Always blaming everyone but themselves...
And, with one exception (that I STILL can't fathom) my gut has been pretty damn accurate as of late..
But, as you say...
We shall see...
Michale
As always, I interpret these races individually without resorting to "probability modeling" the way some professional poll-watchers do, so I am not going to definitively state that one party or the other has anything like "a 52 percent chance of winning control." Instead, I take a close look at the most recent polling and then contemplate any other factors (which is a fancy way of saying "seeing what my gut tells me") before assigning a state to any particular category.
Just to make it clear.. I know that CW is not talking probabilities of this or that..
I get that...
" I KNOW!!!! You know.. I get it. I get the concept!"
-Hades, HERCULES
:D
But I just want to make sure that's clear.. I know CW is talking about the individual races and such..
But I am talking about the results of the individual races...
Take GA for example...
WaPo has been all over the map when it comes to Georgia... But there is a history there that favors the GOP.. No GA Senator has been a Democrat since 1930... While that may not be relevant to the election in and of itself, it's a factor that cannot be ignored...
Kansas is another such example.. Sure, Dems tried a bait and switch with Orman, but Kansas is not being fooled... Once the veneer of "Independent" was penetrated, Kansasians saw Orman for what he really is.. A Democrat.. Imagine the uproar from ya'all if the GOP tried such a tactic in New Hampshire.... Ya'all would be apoplectic...
So, while I know that CW is talking individual races, I am talking the sum of the parts..
And the sum of the parts equals a GOP Controlled Senate in all but the most insane and unlikely of the scenarios...
Michale
M (5)
"There is bound to be a tidbit of good news here or there that Dems can latch onto"
When most states are a foregone conclusion, only the tidbits matter. The final outcome is going to hinge on tidbits, some of which are very arcane. Think runoffs.
Regarding WAPO "But it's not absolute in favor of the GOP.. Until today, Georgia was in the Dem column. Today it's in the GOP column.."
WAPO has backed off a bit from it's nearly digital landscape, but still it pegs only Alaska and Georgia as "key" races, with 12 races likely Dem and 20 likely Rep (if you are keeping score, don't forget the 2 states with 2 races). Rep only has to win one of the 2 "key" races to flip the senate, Dem has to win both plus 2 likely Rep, with best chances in the "WAPO universe" being Iowa (13% chance) and either Kansas or Arkansas (each 6%). In a pure wave election model that equates to 6% chance of the Dems retaining Control, WAPO says it's 7%. I have to wonder if the 1% difference isn't Monte Carlo slop, which is noticeable even with hundreds of thousands of runs. WAPO is entitled to its reasoned opinion, and I'm entitled to be somewhat skeptical of it.
The terms possible, plausible and probable are vague in common speech. Possible usually means something close to P>zero. Plausible and probable are sometimes used interchangeably, I use it to signify events that have a logical framework that supports a stated probability. I tend to use probable to mean the most likely outcome.
GOP Wave. Mathematically speaking, a wave election means the states tend to move in packs rather than independently. In the most extreme case (for year's senate election) 1 dice roll vs 37. In less extreme cases its about partitioning variance between global and local elements. It's an important concept, and I've commented about it extensively on the many threads of CW.com. A wave dominated election can really help an underdog if the dog has to run a lot of competitive states in order to win the overall contest. Romney's 2010 hopes depended on it. My Monte Carlo models don't show it being all that important this year, but it has shifted the overall odds about 5% in some landscapes. Republicans seem to be hoping for a wave election this year, but they should be careful about what they wish. If the wave breaks towards the Dems (Obama is somewhat less unpopular on election day than usual) it could push the Dems over the top. It is my gut opinion that most elections are dominated by the wave component, but I haven't adequately researched this hypothesis because it would require gobs of time I don't have.
"WaPo has been all over the map when it comes to Georgia... But there is a history there that favors the GOP.. No GA Senator has been a Democrat since 1930..." If you read the Monkey Cage notes, their model is heavily influenced by historical factors. As near as I can tell (they are coy about details, as are most shops other than Nate's)they are as
Sorry, errant cat induced mouse click, let me finish 7.
As near as I can tell, WAPO state probabilities are based almost entirely on who is ahead in the polls at this late date in the process. There historical analysis says this is a good predictor. I say history rhymes, you need to be very careful about modern shifts in polling practices, and about certain states. I think WAPO is walking a pretty thin limb. There is a fairly chance they'll look stupid, but a bigger chance they'll look smart. Most prognosticators aren't leaning blowout.
Done.
When most states are a foregone conclusion, only the tidbits matter. The final outcome is going to hinge on tidbits, some of which are very arcane.
How can a state have a "forgone conclusion" and yet have any kind of "hinge"ing outcome??
Cornfused...
I think WAPO is walking a pretty thin limb. There is a fairly chance they'll look stupid, but a bigger chance they'll look smart. Most prognosticators aren't leaning blowout.
Most of the other prognosticators of a history of Left Wing ideological bent... WaPo doesn't...
Which is why I take the other prognosticators with a grain of salt, but not so much WaPo...
The GOOD news is, we have only 4 or 5 more days to see who was more right.. :D
Michale
M (9)
Confused? Nothing complicated about this.
There are about 26 races that can be predicted with great confidence. Neither side has enough of these bastions in their column to gain/maintain senate control. There are about 10 other races that are much less predictable, although most of them lean fairly strongly one way or another. Most forecasts indicate neither side can win with just picking up the easy leaners. Final control hinges on a just a few genuinely competitive races. Two races? Five races? Depends on who you ask. Tidbits of the 36 races in play. This is where most of the uncertainty lies. Leave out the safe states, and you get almost the same overall prediction. The tip of the tail wags the dog.
The large proportion of safe races in US politics is probably a major factor in the low turnout of US elections. Most people get the reality - my dissenting vote doesn't matter in this election. Which becomes a self fulfilling assessment over decades of elections.
OK, that clears it up a little.. :D
Thanx...
CW is going to firm up his predictions on Monday..
You be able to do the same?? :D
Michale
Michale
Michale -
Just a general comment...
How's President Romney's first term coming along?
Heh. Couldn't resist.
:-)
-CW
How's President Romney's first term coming along?
OUCH!!! And the ref takes a point away!! :D
Yea, I know.. I deserve that..
But, like I said before.. There were polls that Romneybots could hang their hat on and show that the possibility..
In the here and now, there isn't a single poll that Democrats can point to and say, "See!! We DO have a chance of keeping the Senate!!"
The words "bowing" and "inevitable" come to mind.. :D
Michale
"I'll oppose the anti-Redskins bill" - Ed Gillespie (R-VA)
Whew. I'm so relieved to know that somebody would defend racial slurs against fake threats.
Ed has no horse.
Repeal Obamacare.
Beating a dead horse.
Whew. I'm so relieved to know that somebody would defend racial slurs against fake threats.
Once again.. Playing the race card on an issue that has absolutely nothing to do with racism..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/in-arizona-a-navajo-high-school-emerges-as-a-defender-of-the-washington-redskins/2014/10/26/dcfc773a-592b-11e4-8264-deed989ae9a2_story.html
Here's an idea...
If ya don't have a dog in the hunt, why don't ya butt out...
If you Lefties would worry more about yourselves and less about political correctness, this country would be a LOT better off...
I'm just sayin'....
Michale
The Obama administration is ramping up its campaign to force technology companies to help the government spy on their users.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/the-fbi-s-secret-house-meeting-to-get-access-to-your-iphone-20141030
Go ahead...
Show me how much ya'all's privacy means to you...
Treat Obama exactly as you would treat a GOP POTUS....
Betcha don't.... :D
Michale
Oh crap....
Damn!! I hate Windows 8!!!
Sorry about that. Wrong commentary...
Michale
538 has the GOP taking the Senate up to almost 70% (68.5%)...
I think it's a safe bet that the GOP will own Congress.....
The only real question is how much of the Senate the GOP will own...
You can tell that Democrats are really getting desperate with all the race-baiting and race cards they are playing. Fear mongering Republicans are being taught what REAL fear mongering is by Democrats..
http://www.gopusa.com/news/files/2014/10/hagen_lynching.jpg
I mean, honestly.. How utterly pathetic and contemptible is that??
It's rather ironic.. The Democrat Party has ignored Black Americans for years in favor of their shiny new toy, the Hispanics.. Now that the Dems really NEED Black Americans the Party is crawling back..
I have to say.. The irony is quite delicious... :D
Michale
It seems that Landru has a unique way of winning over voters in Louisiana...
"Obama And I Aren’t Popular In The South Because It’s Racist And Sexist"
-Senator Mary Landrieu
Falsely accuse the voters of racism and misogyny...
Wonder how that's going to work out for her, eh??
Like I said. Democrats are getting desperate... And it shows...
Maybe Landru can blame her loss on The Archons :D
Michale
Let me amend the above comment to put Landru's exact quote...
“To be very, very honest with you, the South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans. It’s been a difficult time for the president to present himself in a very positive light as a leader. It’s not always been a good place for women to present ourselves. It’s more of a conservative place, so we’ve had to work a little bit harder on that.”
Which amounts to the same thing I quoted the first time..
But, since I am a slave to accuracy, I put up the exact quote.. :D
I still think that Landru would be best served by blaming The Archons.. :D
Michale
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-election-day-looking-like-a-referendum-on-competence/2014/10/30/81bccc4c-6067-11e4-91f7-5d89b5e8c251_story.html
Once again, Chuck nails it..
Especially that last part...
The stage is set for a major Republican victory. If they cannot pull it off under conditions so politically favorable, perhaps they might consider looking for another line of work.
Hopefully Krauthammer's words won't turn out to be prophetic...
Michale
Latest message from the Democrat Party..
“Who you vote for is your secret. But whether or not you vote is public record. We will be reviewing voting records .?.?. to determine whether you joined your neighbors who voted in 2014. If you do not vote this year, we will be interested to hear why not.”
Interesting way to encourage people to vote..
Threaten them....
Wow....
Just.... Wow....
Michale
Hay CW,
Can you check the NNL filters??
There's a comment about a message from the Democratic Party that says if you don't vote we will find you....
Interesting campaign strategy...
Michale
Let's try it this way...
http://nypost.com/2014/10/30/democrats-threaten-voters-to-get-to-the-polls/
Michale
In the here and now, there isn't a single poll that Democrats can point to and say, "See!! We DO have a chance of keeping the Senate!!"
except for WaPo, pretty much EVERY poll says that they have a chance. admittedly, it's only a 30-something percent chance, but it isn't zero...
except for WaPo, pretty much EVERY poll says that they have a chance. admittedly, it's only a 30-something percent chance, but it isn't zero...
OK, ya got me on that one.. :D
Point conceded...
Michale
With early vote counts in, it doesn't look good for Democrats...
DRUDGE is reporting GOP votes with a 10% lead over DEM votes...
I have a feeling it's gonna be a long weekend for Democrats...
Michale
GOP Takes The Lead In Colorado...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_COLORADO_ELECTION_EARLY_VOTES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-10-31-18-46-58
"The sport ends... The massacre begins"
-Grand Primus T'Ceal, THE FINAL FRONTIER
Michale
What's so interesting is that the current information on the returns that heavily favor the GOP is that it might prove to be a self-fulfilling prophecy...
Democrat voters who are already dis-illusioned will likely be demoralized even more by the early returns that are so heavily favoring the GOP...
While I recognize the danger of over-hyping the GOP showing in the current elections which would lead to disappointment, it's looking more and more like a huge GOP tsunami is in the making..
Michale
I don't want to spoil the Weigantia Halloween festivities with crude talk of politics.. So I'll keep it here...
So...... Lemme ask...
Assuming the GOP takes the Senate and it IS a "Shellacking Part Duex" as is predicted....
What do ya'all think it means vis a vis a testimonial to the governance of the Democrats??
I mean, the American people aren't voting in Republicans because they want to protest REPUBLICAN governance, right???
Sooo.....
"What does it all mean, Basil???"
-Austin Powers
:D
Michale
Mitch McConnell as any kind of leader would be a nightmare indeed.
He can't do any worse than Reid..
I mean, honestly.. What can you say about a leader who won't bring legislation to the floor that might harm Democrats who are facing re-election??
CW made the point about the War Vote...Get these Senators on record so that the voters know where they stand on the issues...
To paraphrase Captain Jean Luc Picard...
If they are to be damned, let them be damned for who they really are.
What's ironic is that it is this "playing it safe" mentality that is actually HURTING Democrats in the mid-terms.. Without tough votes these Senators can't show that they opposed Obama on unpopular agendas...
To further the TNG reference...
HOISTED BY THEIR OWN PICARD
:D
Michale
538 has moved the chances of a GOP Senate to over 70%...
http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/senate-forecast/
I think we can all agree that whether or not the GOP will take the Senate is no longer a point of contention..
The only point of contention that is left is how big the GOP wave will be...
A ripple or a tsunami...
Michale
M - 32
The Dems have dropped to Romney-esque odds (circa 2012) on the eve of election. The central tendency of the quantitative prognosticators looks to me about 75:25, Republican dominance. Ouch!
Fourteen likely Dem wins, 2 short of control.
Kansas, Georgia, Iowa, Alaska, Colorado, Louisiana and just maybe Kentucky are still in play, so an upset doesn't look impossible, just rather unlikely. If I had to call a most likely outcome, it's looking a net gain of 4 for the Republicans.
Alaska and Colorado seem the best Democratic hopes, Dems consistently outperform polls in Colorado, polls in Alaska are just plain unreliable.
Be careful wishing for waves, if your anticipated Republican wave comes in low, it may be the Democrats last best hope.
Be careful wishing for waves, if your anticipated Republican wave comes in low, it may be the Democrats last best hope.
It's a sad state of affairs when the Democrats "last best hope" is not to have their asses kicked TOO bad.. :D
Such a fall from the heights of post 2008 elections, eh??
"Oh how the mighty have fallen"
-Guinan, STAR TREK TNG, True Q
Michale
M -34
I ran the latest NYT data through my Monte Carlo sim looking at everything from full wave to no wave at all. I used NYT 'cause they tabulate in a way that makes it easy to transfer to my spreadsheet format. All the big 4 that I follow behave similarly when it comes partitioning variance into National and State components.
A strong wave election definitely favors the Dems a bit. A completely local level election gives the Dems about a 25% chance of victory. Adding a tad of wave, just 10%, gives the latest NYT projection of 30% chance of Dems retaining control. (The NYT says they add just a bit of National variance, but specify exactly how much). Adding any more wave quickly takes the Dems into 35% range. Still underdogs, but not a forlorn hope.
My models suggest this election is very knife edge. If polls are under sampling Dems in Alaska and Colorado, the race is a lot closer that many pundits seem to think. If Reps are under polled in NC or NH, their real chances are much improved.
Bottom line, an upset in either direction shouldn't surprise anybody. Anybody who correctly calls all the competitive races is either incredibly good or incredibly lucky, I lean to the latter! Much harder to suss out than O-R 2012.
You gonna be around Election Day??? :D
Michale
I'm taking Tues and Wed off. Paradoxically, that means I'll be more busy than M, Th, F, S, Sun with late fall house chores.
First case of voter fraud confirmed in Rio Arriba Co.
http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S3607682.shtml#.VFaswfnF9tU
If only there were rules in place that makes everyone have a photo ID to vote...
That would eliminate this kind of fraud...
So much for the BS claim that there isn't any fraud..
Michale
"Fear is the last resort for those who have run out of ideas and hope."
-Hillary Clinton
Campaign flyer tells blacks in Alabama to vote or face the honoring of ‘klansmen’
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/2/campaign-flyer-tells-blacks-alabama-vote-or-face-h/
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so pathetically sad....
Michale
The basic moronic-ness of President Obama...
“The Republicans are blocking immigration reform. That’s one more reason we need a Democratic senate.”
We HAVE a Democratic Senate....
And all they have to show for it is a broke, battered and listless country...
Time for a change....
Michale
"We're going to hold the Senate"
-Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz
I would think such delusional behavior would disqualify anyone to serve in any position of responsibility...
Michale
“Shakespeare? I ain’t never hoid of him. He’s not in no ratings. I suppose he’s one of them foreign heavyweights. They’re all lousy. Sure as hell I’ll moider dat bum.”
—Tony Galento, before fighting Joe Louis
M-
I ran 538's last batch of odds through my Monte Carlo model to get another peek at wave effect (national variance component). The best match with Nate's probability of Dems retaining control (.277) is with the proportion of national variance set at a bit less than 0.1, a very weak wave effect. Make the wave much higher and Dem chances of retaining control rise to about 32%.
Dems should crave the wave, even if the payoff only takes them from 1 chance in 4 to 1 in 3!
Results are generally consistent among what I've been seeing over the last month at HuffPO, 538 and NYT. (Not WAPO, which has almost no undecided states in their projection). Dems capture about 14.5 races on average, which is loss of control... but upsets abound in a typical batch of 25 runs, where Dems typically capture anywhere from 10 to 20 seats.
It's a volatile landscape. Republican's shouldn't be counting their chickens, Democrats shouldn't be throwing the towel. Almost no result on Tues is likely to surprise me all that much.