Nate Silver's Senate projection
Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:34 pm
Nate's Senate projection is out. He has Democrats as a little better than 1 in 3 to take the Senate. --Bob
flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... -forecast/
News flash: 25% underdogs have been found to win 1 time in 4. Nate picked up that Donny had a realistic chance to win. Most mainstream media outlets did not.flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... -forecast/
I am tremblin in mah boots.Bob78164 wrote:News flash: 25% underdogs have been found to win 1 time in 4. Nate picked up that Donny had a realistic chance to win. Most mainstream media outlets did not.flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... -forecast/
Ignore Nate's analysis at your peril. --Bob
Nate currently has the Democrats at over 50% in all the tossup states with Democratic senators currently as well as Nevada and Arizona. He also gives them a decent chance in Tennessee and Texas. The problem is that, although they are favorites in all those states, they pretty much have to run the table (or pick up TN, TX, or, less likely, MS) to take the Senate.Bob78164 wrote:Nate's Senate projection is out. He has Democrats as a little better than 1 in 3 to take the Senate. --Bob
Flock, you realize that for your post to make sense, which, admittedly, very few of your posts do, it means that you think the Democrats have a much greater chance of capturing the Senate than what Nate projects.flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... -forecast/
I don't think we should even bother with electing people. Let's just govern by polls! Most politicians do that anyway. Let's cut out the middleman and save tons of money!silverscreenselect wrote:Flock, you realize that for your post to make sense, which, admittedly, very few of your posts do, it means that you think the Democrats have a much greater chance of capturing the Senate than what Nate projects.flockofseagulls104 wrote:https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... -forecast/
The reason they don't make sense to me is that I know how to think without referring to Tucker Carlson or Donald Trump to make the decisions for me.flockofseagulls104 wrote: The reason my posts don't make sense to you is you don't bother to read them.
Remembering Isaac Asimov’s Election Dayflockofseagulls104 wrote:I don't think we should even bother with electing people. Let's just govern by polls! Most politicians do that anyway. Let's cut out the middleman and save tons of money!
They say we're young and we don't knowsilverscreenselect wrote:The reason they don't make sense to me is that I know how to think without referring to Tucker Carlson or Donald Trump to make the decisions for me.flockofseagulls104 wrote: The reason my posts don't make sense to you is you don't bother to read them.
That's only provided that Heidi Heitkamp holds her seat in North Dakota. Polls currently have her running slightly behind Republican congressman Kevin Cramer. If she loses, the Democratic Party would need a third pickup (aside from the obvious targets of Arizona and Nevada) in order to cancel out her loss.Bob78164 wrote:Nate's Senate projection is out. He has Democrats as a little better than 1 in 3 to take the Senate. --Bob
Since I don't wager money on elections there is no peril in me ignoring Nate.Bob78164 wrote: Ignore Nate's analysis at your peril. --Bob
Silver lists Heitkamp as a favorite based on intangibles (fund-raising, historical trends, incumbency, etc.) but gives her chances as 60%. Bill Nelson's chances ate lower, at 55%, while Claire McCaskill is at 72%.Pastor Fireball wrote:That's only provided that Heidi Heitkamp holds her seat in North Dakota. Polls currently have her running slightly behind Republican congressman Kevin Cramer. If she loses, the Democratic Party would need a third pickup (aside from the obvious targets of Arizona and Nevada) in order to cancel out her loss.Bob78164 wrote:Nate's Senate projection is out. He has Democrats as a little better than 1 in 3 to take the Senate. --Bob
There's also plenty of time for a couple of Republicans to dig themselves into a metaphorical grave of macaca proportions. It's only September.silverscreenselect wrote:And a lot of the forecast depends on the popularity of Donald Trump, which took a dive in the last month, thanks to the convictions of Cohen and Manafort, the death of John McCain, and the Woodward book and NYT op-ed. That could also change between now and the election, either because of major developments in the Mueller investigation (major figure indictments), an international crisis and how Trump handles it, and even possibly, the response to hurricane damage.