Five Thirty Eight (Nate Silver) has Dems holding Senate - Repubs winning House

[underpants]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/senate-forecast-update-g-o-p-still-seeking-no-51/?partner=rss&emc=rss

[Hamlette]

1. his numbers are totally depressing.

Since he was so accurate in 2008 I suspect he's right now. Bleak.

[blue sky at night]

2. they are going to win fourty seats....

i don't think so.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. I'm thinking the reverse

Of course my opinion is not based on the expertise Nate has. LOL

[JNelson6563]

4. Um, who gives a flying fuck?

Not I. "Nate Silver" lolz.

[Ikonoklast]

5. I just don't think he's right about the House.

The Democrats are still coming on strong, and the Republicans with their Teabagger footsoldiers peaked waaaay too early.

[underpants]

7. I do too

They finished selling their product via the media in August--when no one was paying attention

[Ikonoklast]

8. They pretty much shot their wad fighting HCR.

Since then, it has been generic 'anti-gubbamint, anti-tax, anti-spending' ranting...rather unfocused, no specifics, no real specific agenda; just being 'against' everything.


For the life of me, I just don't see the Teabaggers accomplishing anything of value; they voted some fairly weak candidates out of the primaries and into the general, and scared the crap out of some mainstream Republicans.

They haven't convinced anyone of a liberal bent to join their cause, no matter how many times the media crows that they have disaffected Democrats in their fold.

[Stinky The Clown]

6. My view of Mr. Silver's predictions:

They are based on other people's data and are, therefore, only as good as that data.

In 2006 and 2008, the entire country, including those who own the pollsters, wanted bush and all things connected to bush, banished. A part of effecting that outcome were more honest polls.

That is no longer the case and the polls are as bollixed as they were when they were planning to steal things as they did in 2000 and 2004.

Unless Mr. Silver's prognostications account for that, his chances of getting things correct again are as much about luck as science.

[Jennicut]

9. I think he is very good at what he does, analyzing data. He has analyzed it but how

well is the polling this cycle? That is the question. Gallup's polling is preposterous lately. I think the House could break either way for us, it depends on if Dems actually get out there and vote.

[trotsky]

10. Most every pollster and analyst is making the same assumption:

Namely, that Republican turnout is going to be huge. Bigger than ever. Far bigger than Democratic turnout. Now if that holds true, the Repukes could make some really big gains. But I have a feeling that the Teabag movement is alienating a large number of halfway-reasonable Repukes. It may also be firing up the Teabag footsoldiers, but how likely are they to vote?

We'll just have to wait and see. And get our folks out to the polls!

[onenote]

11. the problem with the House

There are 49 seats up for election in districts where McCain outpolled Obama in 2008. THere are a number of other seats where the Democrat is retiring which makes some of them more vulnerable. Many statewide races are tightening up, remember, there are 435 House seats up and on a district by district basis, a lot of them are not likely to change that much over between now and election day. I am picking some of the closer ones to make contributions, and I hold out hope that we can narrowly hang on, but it would be foolish to think that the news in places like California and Pennsylvania over the last week or so is all that telling about individual House races, either in those states or elsewhere.