logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Election Predictions, One Month Out
Raptavio
post Oct 5 2010, 02:15 AM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



All right. Simple questions for debate.

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the Senate after the midterm elections will be?

I'm leaving gubernatorial and state legislature questions off this topic deliberately; if you want to discuss those, start a new topic.

What reasons factor into your predictions?

Here are my answers to the first two questions. I'm leaving the third for later.

I'm predicting (counting Lieberman and Sanders) 53 Democrats, (counting possibly Crist and Murkowski) 47 Republicans in the Senate.

I'm predicting a net loss of 24 Democratic seats in the House, and a net gain of 26 seats by Republicans, leaving a balance of 231-204. (There are currently two vacancies.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Sleeper
post Oct 5 2010, 02:44 AM
Post #2


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



I'm predicting business as usual no matter who wins and the citizens of the United States get screwed in the process.

Seriously, what does it really matter anymore. If anything this "going to drain the swamp" congress has only showed us each side is equally corrupt no matter the parry moniker.

Who ever can fool the public the best is who will get elected. That or comes up with a nifty sound bite.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 5 2010, 04:45 AM
Post #3


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,377
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



I am predicting a Democratic win across the board. I have been predicting this all along.

Conventional wisdom loses. Brainless all things as usual loses. People are hurting big time; the middle class is losing.

Tea party types are useless.

It's back to the beginning. Are you for the rich lazy EDIT or are you for yourself?

Eh, and if I'm wrong . . . I'll be wrong. At least I'll be able to admit it.

But I am not wrong. Let's see how it works out.

This post has been edited by Jaime: Oct 5 2010, 11:38 AM
Reason for edit: Edited to remove vulgarity
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Oct 5 2010, 01:10 PM
Post #4


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



C'mon people, let's see NUMBERS. I want to see who gets closest in a one month out prediction.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Oct 5 2010, 02:17 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



Dick Morris says that a 100 seat gain is not impossible for the Republicans.

According to his polling data, 54 Democratic incumbents are currently behind in the polls and "another 19 where they are within five points and where the Democratic incumbent is under 50% of the vote. That’s 73 likely wins." Real Clear Politics has the House at 190 Democrats, 207 Republicans, with 38 toss ups. All but one of these seats currently held by Democrats and this is an anti-incumbent year. Even if we split these evenly, that gives the Republicans a 226 to 209 edge which is a 46 seat swing. I think it will be higher than 46, maybe around 52 seats.

My prediction: 232 Republicans, 203 Democrats in the House.

For the Senate, RealClearPolitics has it current at 49 Dems, 47 Republicans with 4 toss ups: Washington, Nevada, West Virginia and Illinois. I think Washington will stay Blue while the other three go Republican. My call: A 50/50 Senate.

The Democrats are not running on their "accomplishments" because what they have done is unpopular with the American people. They certainly cannot run on the economy. They have been slightly energized by some of the more fringe candidates that the Tea Party has produced (ahem, Christine O'Donnell). It will blunt the Republican victory slightly, but it can't overcome the backlash against what this Congress has done.

QUOTE(Raptavio @ Oct 4 2010, 10:15 PM) *
I'm predicting a net loss of 24 Democratic seats in the House, and a net gain of 26 seats by Republicans, leaving a balance of 231-204. (There are currently two vacancies.)
This has got to be the MOST optimistic prediction of all time. The average of the President's party in the midterm is around 28 seats lost if I remember correctly. You think they will do better than the historical average? rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by Amlord: Oct 5 2010, 02:21 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Oct 5 2010, 02:36 PM
Post #6


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 236

Dems: 199

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the Senate after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 49

Dems: 49 (plus Lieberman and Sanders)

What reasons factor into your predictions?

1. Majority party tends to lose seats in mid-term elections.
2. Stronger than usual anti-incumbent sentiment.
3. The "enthusiasm gap" favoring Republicans.
4. RCP poll averages and such as of today, to which I'm adding a few more House Dem-to-Rep flips just for kicks (bringing the Dem number to one less than 200).

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Oct 5 2010, 03:36 PM
Post #7


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Amlord, given Dick Morris' track record, I would not place stock in what he says.

And BTW, during the Democratic sweeps, the Dem challenger within five points of the Republican incumbent who was under 50% yielded less than one victory in three races for the Dems. Just so you know.

You're also ignoring likely Dem pickups in the House, like LA-O2, where freshman Republican Joseph Cao already sees the fat lady is on in five.

Anyway, I'm getting into the reasons behind my House predictions later. Right now I'm detailing my Senate prediction.

Let's break this down:

First off, due to Rasmussen polling, which has consistently been an outlier with an in-house bias towards Republicans, many races are closer than believed (like Wisconsin and Kentucky). Still, there are some pretty guaranteed R wins.

The Republicans are going to pick up Arkansas, Indiana, and North Dakota with margins so heavy it's not worth discussing.

Alaska: Wildcard election. Murkowski may pull off the upset of the century and hold her seat. However, the odds of a Democratic pickup here are slim to none.
California: Apart from Fiorina's laughable attempts to run on her record as CEO of HP, Boxer is simply too popular to be unseated. Plus there's spillover from the Whitman debacle in the gubernatorial race. Boxer has a lock here.
Colorado: It's a near thing, but I think the Dems lose Colorado.
Connecticut: The Republicans have a laughable candidate. Another vulnerable Dem turns into a reliable hold.
Delaware: Thank you, Tea Party. What was a sure R pickup has now turned into an all but guaranteed Dem hold.
Florida: This one I just can't tell. It's either going to be Crist or Rubio, and either way I expect Crist to caucus with the Republicans, so call this an R hold.
Kentucky: Thank you, Tea Party. Without Rasmussen, this is too close to call. The polls have been consistently trending blue as Rand Paul's extreme views get brought to light. This will probably be the sole Democratic pickup of the race. Conway in a squeaker.
Nevada: Thank you, Tea Party. Before Angle got the nomination, Reid was a dead duck. Now he's running slightly ahead, and Angle continues to gain negatives. Reid's going to hold his seat.
New Hampshire: Retiring Republican makes this race interesting, but it's an R hold for sure.
Ohio: The Republicans will hold this seat, despite it being open thanks to the retirement of Voinovich.
Pennsylvania: This could surprise me, but I think Toomey's going to take this from Sestak. R pickup.
Washington: This is in no way a tossup. Patty Murray in a walk.
West Virginia: Dems are going to hold this, but it's going to be close.
Wisconsin: Feingold's in trouble, but not as badly as Rasmussen polls suggest. Still, this is an R win.

The other races are guaranteed holds by the incumbent that don't bear mentioning.

So, that's AK, AR, CO, IN, ND, PA and WI pickups by the GOP, and KY pickup by the Dems. The current balance is 59-41. So that yields a net gain of 6 seats for the Republicans. 53-47 Dems.

Most likely one I'm wrong on: Kentucky. This will make the balance 52-48.

As a note, thanks to the influence of the Tea Party, the hopes of the Republicans taking the Senate are dashed. Angle and O'Donnell have ensured the Dems are going to hold the Senate.

I promise my House analysis will be less individualized and more general, talking about the so-called "enthusiasm gap" and the generic ballots.

This post has been edited by Raptavio: Oct 5 2010, 03:38 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 5 2010, 03:54 PM
Post #8


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,377
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ Oct 5 2010, 10:36 AM) *
What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 236

Dems: 199

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the Senate after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 49

Dems: 49 (plus Lieberman and Sanders)

What reasons factor into your predictions?

1. Majority party tends to lose seats in mid-term elections.
2. Stronger than usual anti-incumbent sentiment.
3. The "enthusiasm gap" favoring Republicans.
4. RCP poll averages and such as of today, to which I'm adding a few more House Dem-to-Rep flips just for kicks (bringing the Dem number to one less than 200).


This is exactly why picking numbers is meaningless.

1. Conventional wisdom

2. Only on the Republican side

3. As promoted by the liberal media

4. It is still early . . . Beck has lost his following, and the swing voters have just started hearing about the Republican agenda.

I'll give Republicans 20% of the open seats. It will be a big surprise to all the political theorists, just as the slide downward into the gutter by the Republican Party became a big whopping surprise. The electorate might be angry about what has been going on, but they are not crazy. The pollsters have been ignoring the fact that the electorate is disappointed in President Obama's performance because he is too much like Republicans and not mean enough to truly steamroll over these EDIT.

And when it comes time to vote, the vote will not go the Republican way, as is so fervently hoped for on that side. It certainly won't go for the tea bag types, and since there is no good third alternative, the Democrats will be given another two years to get things right.

- Public option or even single-payer health care reform

- Enough stimulus money to stop the middle class slide into poverty

- Screw the rich, they don't have it so tough

- Enough of the ideology, do things that fix this mess!

- Keep women's reproductive rights, can't afford any more kids right now

- DO NOT PRIVATIZE ANYTHING (big one for vets, young families and elderly folks)

Or I may be wrong. But I don't think so. We will see.

This post has been edited by Jaime: Oct 5 2010, 06:12 PM
Reason for edit: Edited to remove vulgarity
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Oct 5 2010, 03:58 PM
Post #9


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
And when it comes time to vote, the vote will not go the Republican way, as is so fervently hoped for on that side. It certainly won't go for the tea bag types, and since there is no good third alternative, the Democrats will be given another two years to get things right.


What evidence are you using to support this?


QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
- Public option or even single-payer health care reform

- Enough stimulus money to stop the middle class slide into poverty

- Screw the rich, they don't have it so tough

- Enough of the ideology, do things that fix this mess!

- Keep women's reproductive rights, can't afford any more kids right now

- DO NOT PRIVATIZE ANYTHING (big one for vets, young families and elderly folks)


Where in the country is this agenda popular???

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
Or I may be wrong. But I don't think so. We will see.


We'll see all right...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Oct 5 2010, 04:24 PM
Post #10


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
QUOTE(akaCG @ Oct 5 2010, 10:36 AM) *
What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 236

Dems: 199

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the Senate after the midterm elections will be?

Reps: 49

Dems: 49 (plus Lieberman and Sanders)

What reasons factor into your predictions?

1. Majority party tends to lose seats in mid-term elections.
2. Stronger than usual anti-incumbent sentiment.
3. The "enthusiasm gap" favoring Republicans.
4. RCP poll averages and such as of today, to which I'm adding a few more House Dem-to-Rep flips just for kicks (bringing the Dem number to one less than 200).


This is exactly why picking numbers is meaningless.

1. Conventional wisdom
...

Supported by history (see link provided by "Amlord" above).

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
...
2. Only on the Republican side
...

Er, not quite:
QUOTE
...
Independents are the most anti-incumbent, with just 23 percent saying they were inclined to vote to reelect their representative.
...

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0100407209.html

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
...
3. As promoted by the liberal media
...

Latest poll on the matter:
QUOTE
...
When asked if they were “certain” to vote this year, 77 percent of Republicans said yes compared to just 61 percent of Democrats. This 16-point advantage for Republicans is unchanged from last month.
...
Independent voters, meanwhile, did show a jump in enthusiasm from September. Today, 74 percent say they are “certain” to vote – up from 69 percent last month. That’s not good news for Democrats however, as independents are leaning decidedly toward the GOP this fall. Among independents who are most likely to vote, 53 percent say they’re voting for the Republican candidate compared to just 33 percent who say they’ll vote for the Democrat.
...
And, what about the “youth vote” that Democrats were trying to re-inspire? Not so much. Just 53% of 18-29 year old voters say they are certain to vote compared to 80 percent of those 65 years and older and 81 percent among those 50-64 years old. ...
...

Link: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/10/2...favors-gop.html

QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 11:54 AM) *
...
4. It is still early . . . Beck has lost his following, and the swing voters have just started hearing about the Republican agenda.
...

Yes, there is indeed still plenty of time for all sorts of surprises during the next 28 days.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jobius
post Oct 5 2010, 05:44 PM
Post #11


*******
Five Hundred Club

Sponsor
September 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 521
Member No.: 5,538
Joined: October-13-05

From: California
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: None



What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

52 Democrats, 48 Republicans.

What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the Senate after the midterm elections will be?

211 Democrats, 224 Republicans.

What reasons factor into your predictions?

I agree with pretty much all of Raptavio's Senate predictions, except I think Rand Paul wins Kentucky.

For the House, I don't think I can do better than Nate Silver's poll-of-polls modeling. If you haven't been reading his "The Uncanny Accuracy of Polling Averages" series, you should.

Rasmussen does have a "house effect" that favors Republicans, but pretty much everybody has Republicans at least even with Democrats on the generic ballot. Gallup released their first "likely voter" poll yesterday, showing Republicans up 13-18%. This is terrible news for Democrats: because of the urban and minority-gerrymandered districts that go 80%+ Democratic, and the absence of similarly lopsided Republican districts, Democrats usually need something like 53% of the popular vote to get a majority in the House. I don't think they can get that this year.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sleeper
post Oct 5 2010, 07:29 PM
Post #12


********
Who dat!

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,692
Member No.: 386
Joined: January-17-03

From: Florida
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Raptavio @ Oct 5 2010, 07:10 AM) *
C'mon people, let's see NUMBERS. I want to see who gets closest in a one month out prediction.



LOL rolleyes.gif You ask for numbers, and when AMLord gives you numbers you refute them and tell him why he is wrong.

Democrats trail in the generic ballot by 13 and 18 points (depending on high or low voter turnout).
http://www.gallup.com/poll/143363/GO...rm-Voters.aspx

I think Rs have a 20 vote margin in house and will be even in Senate... Possibly 51/49 Rs

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amlord
post Oct 5 2010, 07:44 PM
Post #13


Group Icon

**********
The Roaring Lion

Sponsor

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,884
Member No.: 572
Joined: March-4-03

From: Cleveland suburbs, OH
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Republican



QUOTE(Raptavio @ Oct 5 2010, 11:36 AM) *
Amlord, given Dick Morris' track record, I would not place stock in what he says.

And BTW, during the Democratic sweeps, the Dem challenger within five points of the Republican incumbent who was under 50% yielded less than one victory in three races for the Dems. Just so you know.

You're also ignoring likely Dem pickups in the House, like LA-O2, where freshman Republican Joseph Cao already sees the fat lady is on in five.


I didn't repeat Dick Morris's observations as my prediction for the outcome. I simply cited him to give some perspective from someone with some knowledge in this field. Other prognosticators such as Michael Barone have indicated that a 100 seat victory is not out of the realm of possibility. Barone has a deep knowledge of individual districts and of the history of elections.

I think they are both being overly negative on the Democrats' chances. We all know that the Democrats are experts at turning out the vote by whatever means necessary.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Oct 5 2010, 08:25 PM
Post #14


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Sleeper @ Oct 5 2010, 02:29 PM) *
QUOTE(Raptavio @ Oct 5 2010, 07:10 AM) *
C'mon people, let's see NUMBERS. I want to see who gets closest in a one month out prediction.



LOL rolleyes.gif You ask for numbers, and when AMLord gives you numbers you refute them and tell him why he is wrong.



Perhaps you didn't notice, but this site is called America's Debate. We do dispute one another; that's how the game is played. Just like Jobius disagrees with my call on the Kentucky Senate race, I didn't roll my eyes at him.



QUOTE(Amlord @ Oct 5 2010, 02:44 PM) *
QUOTE(Raptavio @ Oct 5 2010, 11:36 AM) *
Amlord, given Dick Morris' track record, I would not place stock in what he says.

And BTW, during the Democratic sweeps, the Dem challenger within five points of the Republican incumbent who was under 50% yielded less than one victory in three races for the Dems. Just so you know.

You're also ignoring likely Dem pickups in the House, like LA-O2, where freshman Republican Joseph Cao already sees the fat lady is on in five.


I didn't repeat Dick Morris's observations as my prediction for the outcome. I simply cited him to give some perspective from someone with some knowledge in this field. Other prognosticators such as Michael Barone have indicated that a 100 seat victory is not out of the realm of possibility. Barone has a deep knowledge of individual districts and of the history of elections.


Both Barone and Morris are political hacks first. I wouldn't take predictions from James Carville for the same reason.

Nothing is out of the realm of possibility - but out of the realm of probability, oh yes.

QUOTE
I think they are both being overly negative on the Democrats' chances. We all know that the Democrats are experts at turning out the vote by whatever means necessary.

Aww, that's so cute how you make an implication about ballot-box stuffing while giving yourself deniability since you know that you have no rational means of backing that up.

The Gallup poll is an interesting one, because it is a strong outlier from two other recent polls, including a Rasmussen poll that places the generic ballot within the margin of error and a Newsweek poll showing the Dems up by five (the Newsweek poll tends to have a house advantage for Dems as Rasmussen has the reverse), I have a feeling there won't be corroboration there as nothing's happened to cause such a large shift, and the Gallup poll is an outside-the-margin anomaly.

If the other recent polls prove more accurate, as I suspect, then we're talking something near a dead heat, with the trend favoring Democrats, and Obama in campaign mode to add some muscle. An even turnout would suggest a loss of between 26 and 32 seats for the Democrats, by Nate Silver's numbers, and I have a feeling as the enthusiasm gap closes (as it has been according to this poll), we're going to see more Democratic holds than polling suggests right now.

Plus, I have a feeling that whatever remains of the "enthusiasm gap" will not have as profound an impact on turnout as anticipated. As the crazy Angles, O'Donnells and others start to get more press, disgruntled Dems will start to realize that things could be much, much worse and will head to the polls, even if only to hold their noses. Which is why I think that while the Dems will take losses, they'll be less than currently forecast.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Oct 5 2010, 08:36 PM
Post #15


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



What do you predict the Democrat-to-Republican ratio in the House after the midterm elections will be?

Republicans – 224
Democrats – 211

Senate

Republicans – 48
Democrats – 50 +2 (Lieberman and Sanders)

The wave is moving forward and all the misdirection in the world will not save Democrats. The stimulus failed and leaves us with sickening debt. No one I know believes that just “Tax the rich” will come close to closing the gap. Those who did not listen on the spending and healthcare will now pay the price and all those running from Obama (and Obamacare) like the plague will not escape. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/democr...ition-obamacare

And desperate attempts to rewrite history and blame Bush for the entire financial meltdown will not work either. Two years in and Obama owns the problems.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Oct 5 2010, 10:05 PM
Post #16


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,332
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Amlord @ Oct 5 2010, 09:17 AM) *
Dick Morris says that a 100 seat gain is not impossible for the Republicans.

According to his polling data, 54 Democratic incumbents are currently behind in the polls and "another 19 where they are within five points and where the Democratic incumbent is under 50% of the vote. That’s 73 likely wins." Real Clear Politics has the House at 190 Democrats, 207 Republicans, with 38 toss ups. All but one of these seats currently held by Democrats and this is an anti-incumbent year. Even if we split these evenly, that gives the Republicans a 226 to 209 edge which is a 46 seat swing. I think it will be higher than 46, maybe around 52 seats.

My prediction: 232 Republicans, 203 Democrats in the House.

For the Senate, RealClearPolitics has it current at 49 Dems, 47 Republicans with 4 toss ups: Washington, Nevada, West Virginia and Illinois. I think Washington will stay Blue while the other three go Republican. My call: A 50/50 Senate.

The Democrats are not running on their "accomplishments" because what they have done is unpopular with the American people. They certainly cannot run on the economy. They have been slightly energized by some of the more fringe candidates that the Tea Party has produced (ahem, Christine O'Donnell). It will blunt the Republican victory slightly, but it can't overcome the backlash against what this Congress has done.


I'm mostly in agreement with AmLord. Raptavio has Washington pegged...its about as blue a state as their is. I'd be shocked if they went Republican. I'm thinking just splitting the difference on the toss-ups from RealClearPolitics, which would leave it 51-49 Dems.

I don't have a good feel yet for how some of the tea party candidates might fair. I don't think we should write them all off--they DID win the primaries, after all--but I don't have a good feel yet for how that will fall out. I suspect a few will still win, on voter sentiment against Dems alone if nothing else. If we split the RCP difference again, we have the 226-209 edge. I'm going to guess a couple more than that, just on momentum: say 230-205.

That leaves us with a split Congress. I have more hope than Raptavio that this might not be a bad thing as far as getting things done, although I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he were right. It would let us really see if Obama can lead--if he could get them to focus on the areas of agreement it would work, and if he can't, it won't.

I think the bellweather race to follow is Harry Reid, who currently has a 0.6% advantage, which is dropping. Having the Senate Majority leader lose their election can't bode well, and would indicate the Tea Party candidates do indeed have a chance; conversely, if he can pull it out I think it indicates voter sentiment swaying back the Dems way. This race could currently go either way--if you were going to follow one race this is the one I'd pick.

This post has been edited by Hobbes: Oct 5 2010, 10:33 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 5 2010, 10:25 PM
Post #17


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,377
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Seems that these predictions are based on old polling data, while more recent polls are showing a far closer situation.

Oh well, the only poll that will count is the one on Election Day. Dewey Wins!

There's another new thing about these midterms, and that has to do with the SCOTUS ruling that is allowing less than a handful of billionaires to bankroll Republicans. Meanwhile, the Democrats are getting their donations from hundreds of thousands of sources. Let's see, who has more votes based on the number of donations? Why, that would be the Democrats, wouldn't it.

In any case, I base my predictions on psychic vibes and what side of the aquarium the hermit crabs happen to be, from their perspective. So sorry if anyone needs more evidence than that. We aren't trying to solve a murder mystery here, and I'm not trying to sway opinion.

In the end it will come down to who was right and who was wrong. That will be very easy to demonstrate. What's the count now, 27 days? So many opportunities to blunder or nail it. Also many facts rolling in are contradicting Republican assertions, such as TARP being paid back regularly (possibility of making profit too) and the stimulus having saved/created the predicted number of jobs.

The big crowd in Madison, Wisconsin cheered health care reform. Huh. It's as if the Republicans have just been making stuff up. I'll be generous and say they have been misinterpreting things, such as the size of crowd turnouts to tea party rallies.

Maybe the wrongfully destroyed ACORN will work to Republican advantage. Maybe not . . . being that there's been this habit of doctoring videos in ways that are easily identified as dishonest. That comes back to the trust issue.

I predict the trust issue will be popular among 20-20 hindsighted political wonks after the election. You know, like the change issue? Seems to me that I did predict that one right on. I also got the stock market low down to within a week. Those hermit crabs . . . better than an octopus. Should have trusted them to sell at 120% profit instead of the 80% I finally settled on, mainly due to needing the bucks.

Supporting evidence is highly unreliable when it comes to predictions. Ask any weather forecaster.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BecomingHuman
post Oct 6 2010, 01:46 AM
Post #18


*******
Five Hundred Club

Group: Members
Posts: 870
Member No.: 948
Joined: July-30-03

From: San Francisco
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Natural Law Party



Republicans are in an undeniable good place. The question isn't whether they are going to pick up seats, but how many seats they will ultimately pick up.

Its hard to put a precise number on the amount of seats they will win.

I suspect that the conventional wisdom is correct that the republicans will take the house. Intrade currently has the chance of republican domination in the house at 75%.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Raptavio
post Oct 6 2010, 02:34 AM
Post #19


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,515
Member No.: 10,458
Joined: April-27-09

From: Rosemount, MN
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



One wildcard in this race is the influx of soft money due to the Citizens United ruling.

$80 million has flooded the race on the Republican side, half of this from donors that are completely anonymous. (Karl Rove's PAC, for example, has 90% of its funding from three donors.)

More disturbing is that as the $40 million is anonymous, it could be coming from foreign corporations influencing our politics without any way for us to know it.

This influx of money could have an impact on our elections that is, currently, unknown. But mitigating that is Democratic money, not quite matching it but coming mostly from small individual contributions.

Which is another phenomenon that merits consideration.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Curmudgeon
post Oct 6 2010, 04:25 AM
Post #20


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,197
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(AuthorMusician @ Oct 5 2010, 12:45 AM) *
I am predicting a Democratic win across the board. I have been predicting this all along.

And I will second that, based on "All politics is local."

We have been entering polling data based on knocking on doors, as well as polling data based on reaching people by telephone... (No answer, left message, wrong number, no phone number available...) A couple years back, the Republicans were claiming a victory based on robo-calls & polling data. Land lines are nearly obsolete. Cell phone numbers are unpublished.

The folks that are sitting in restaurants spouting the Republican line are retirees. They will go to the polls and vote for the people that have been protecting their Social Security and Medicare.

When I answer a robo-call, I press:
1 (I intend to vote Republican.)
1 (I am likely to vote for the "nerd" on Election Day.)
3 (press 1 if you are male, 2 if you are female, 3 is not an option...)

Recent news stories:

At least 200 properties in the city of Muskegon are listed for less than $20,000...

Muskegon County schools lose 800 students as families move out

Sappi paper plant's contents, and some of Muskegon's industrial history, being carted away

Our economy has been in a major collapse, homes have lost their values, the unemployment rate is likely underreported, businesses are failing, and...

The Republicans are running on platforms that they will eliminate food stamps, eliminate the minimum wage, force victims of rape and incest to carry their babies to term, and even outlaw masturbation. They are bending far to the right to pick up the Tea party voters; but I am predicting that their base will stay home on Election Day, confident that they have already won.

The Tea party "voters," having never voted, will not notice the large signs in front of their neighborhood schools and Fire Houses that say, "Vote today." They will be in their basements trying to learn how to fire their muskets accurately...

The younger workers have cell phones, but most have not acquired enough wealth in this economy to need to vote for Republicans. Unemployment benefits, minimum wages, job security, affordable housing, etc. have got to be major concerns for them. If they make it to the polls, I expect them to vote for Democrats.

Michael Steele was on television this evening claiming that the minimum wage was too high. When he was asked what the minimum wage was, he gave a Sarah Palin type response:
QUOTE('Michael Steele')
"Whether the minimum wage is $7 or $10 or whatever it happens to be in whatever part of the country you live in, the fact is if you don't have a job, that number is irrelevant until you get one," Steele protested. "That'll be your headline: 'Steele doesn't know what the minimum wage is.'" link

He was right. That will be a headline, and a month from now when the Republicans are looking for a scapegoat, Karl Rove will have saved that video clip on his Ipad... If the Democrats win big enough, Michael Steele might even learn what he, as a "businessman," can draw in unemployment benefits. I am certain that if the Republican Party fires him, they will not accept paying his unemployment benefits as a "routine cost of business."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: November 20th, 2018 - 05:19 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.