Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWell, Nate screwed up big.
Missed our getting the Senate seat in North Dakota.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
8 replies, 1439 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Well, Nate screwed up big. (Original Post)
HERVEPA
Nov 2012
OP
AleksS
(1,665 posts)1. Yeah he tends to lean rightwards
Yeah, in 2008 he missed IN going to PBO. He tends to lean a little right.
oldhippydude
(2,514 posts)2. did we get Heidie?
LisaL
(44,974 posts)4. Nobody is perfect.
In 2010 he had Dems losing seats In nevada and colorado and winning In Illinois.
So this year he was wrong on 2 races MT and ND senate seats.
mzteaze
(448 posts)6. I thought this was because polls for Senate/House races are not consistent?
RosedaleGuy
(89 posts)7. Nate calculates PROBABILITIES
...meaning he may say someone has a 90% chance of winning but that doesn't mean they will win. What it does mean is if you take 10 races where he predicts 90% he will be right 9 out of 10 times.
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)8. I know that, thank you. It was intended as humor.