2010 Midterms: GOP Wins the House; Government Shutdown in 3...2...1...

Modern Man

rndmhero wrote: »

Stupid question, but what's the split in the house now?

225/178 with 2 vacancies.

Here's the current breakdown of the House races from RealClearPolitics.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html

163 safe GOP seats +9 likely GOP +40 leans GOP

The problem for the Dems is that of the 42 tossup races, 40 are Dem seats. So, even if those go 50/50, that's another 20 pickups for the GOP. That gets the GOP total up to 230 or so.

The Senate is a little bit tougher. The GOP would need to win 6 out of 7 of the toss-up races to get the majority. The good news (for the GOP) is that all 7 are Dem seats. The Dems don't have any Republican Senate seats that they have a good chance of picking up.

videobobbo

Palin could be interesting if the tea party types get into the House and Senate and fail spectacularly. Which is probably pretty likely. It will be hard for her to withstand the onslaught of the GOP establishment, her high negatives with the general public, and her persecution complex.

That being said, I'd rather not see her at the top of the ticket for the GOP, mostly because there is so little to maintain my faith in humanity. Also, a little because maybe she'd win just because her base loves her, and she has two years to get the easily convinced independents on board.

nexuscrawler

OptimusZed wrote: »

Obama is also no Jimmy Carter.

but he may be a Harry Truman

sterling3763

enlightenedbum wrote: »

oldmanken wrote: »

enlightenedbum wrote: »

Predictions: turnout models horribly ("horribly" in this case is like 2.5 points) flawed, GOP picks up 20 seats in the House and 5 in the Senate. Over inflated expectations due to GOP triumphalism for the last two months leads to media declaring "stunning comeback for Democrats" for absolutely no reason. Cognitive dissonance causes Daily Show to be hilarious.

That's very optimistic. I don't see them picking up 60+ in the House, they'll be closer to that than to a 20 pick up. I had a good look at the polling for a variety of seats today, and what instantly jumped out at me is the margins of error. The media is driving a narrative here, and they're basing it on some very soft numbers.

It all depends on how accurate the "likely voter" models are. If the pollsters have it right, Dems lose like 50 seats. If they're off by a point (favoring the GOP) Dems lose 42, if they're off by two points Dems lose 25. I'm saying 2.5 points.

This is just completely unrealistic.

House:
Gallup just released a generic ballot that put Republicans up 15 points. Fivethirtyeight has done the numbers and basically averaged them all out all the predictions (which for the most part are between 5 and 9) to 6.8% in favor of the Republicans. Even if you’re right and there’s a 2.5% error, that still leaves Republicans up by more than 4%. That's the rosiest scenario for us right now.

Senate:
There are five completely safe Republican pick-ups.

Indiana – Coats has a double digit lead
Kentucky – Paul has the a double digit lead as well
Arkansas - Boozman – leads Lincoln by like 30 points
Florida - Rubio – again leading by at least 8 in every poll I’ve seen
Wisconsin - Johnson – again, double digits

Pennsylvania has tightened, but Toomey leads by at least 4. Angle is ahead by a point or two in Nevada. Who knows what will happen in CO, IL and AK. One of those five is going to go the Republican’s way, probably two or three will.

My predictions: House: Republicans pick up ~56 seats. Senate: I’m gonna say 8. I think my Senate picks will hold up, but I’m really afraid that the House pick ups could get into the high 60s.

enlightenedbum

I'm using Nate's numbers from like two days ago.

EDIT: Which are the same numbers. The trend hasn't moved at all.

Captain Carrot

Kentucky and Florida aren't pickups, and Alaska wouldn't be either. All three are currently held by Republicans, so having Republicans win them doesn't increase their caucus size at all.

Undead Scottsman

Captain Carrot wrote: »

Kentucky and Florida aren't pickups, and Alaska wouldn't be either. All three are currently held by Republicans, so having Republicans win them doesn't increase their caucus size at all.

With Miller's fuckups and Murkowski being having lots of potential write-in issues with her ballots, Alaska COULD turn into a loss. Especially since Begich and Bill Clinton just threw their weight behind McAdams. I still think it's going to be Miller though.

Styrofoam Sammich

Alot of this is going to be Republicans taking back seats we got in 2008 that normally lean to the right anyway. Its not so much a massive surge right as AntiBush tide waters receding.

Brian Krakow

I'm not very optimistic about this election but the Republicans netting >50 seats seems unlikely to me.

Jragghen

Brian Krakow wrote: »

I'm not very optimistic about this election but the Republicans netting >50 seats seems unlikely to me.

Prepare to be disappointed.

sterling3763

You're totally right about Kentucky & Florida. Strike them from the list and add North Dakota. That's 4 completely safe pick ups for the Republicans. Washington, Colorado, Illinios, Nevada and Pennsylvania are all up for grabs. Technically, West Virginia and California are as well, but I'm excluding them because I think they are safe.

You're kidding yourself if you think, during a wave year, those will all go in Democrat's favor.

enlightenedbum

Murray is going to win. I think we hold Colorado, Illinois, and based on nothing other than an inexplicable faith in humanity, Nevada.

sterling3763

I say we win Illinois and Washington, but they get Penn, CO and NV.

Taramoor

sterling3763 wrote: »

You're totally right about Kentucky & Florida. Strike them from the list and add North Dakota. That's 4 completely safe pick ups for the Republicans. Washington, Colorado, Illinios, Nevada and Pennsylvania are all up for grabs. Technically, West Virginia and California are as well, but I'm excluding them because I think they are safe.

You're kidding yourself if you think, during a wave year, those will all go in Democrat's favor.

Patty Murray has been pulling away from Rossi the last week or so.

Washington is going Blue this year.

enlightenedbum

Nate Silver wrote:

FWIW, there's about a 4 pt difference between generic ballot polls that included cellphones and those which didn't.

OptimusZed

PA has been closing and closing hard. I'd give Sestak that seat on momentum, since it's a tossup on polling at this point.

Brian Krakow

Jragghen wrote: »

Brian Krakow wrote: »

I'm not very optimistic about this election but the Republicans netting >50 seats seems unlikely to me.

Prepare to be disappointed.

They netted 54 seats in 1994 and that was with tons of ultra-conservative Democratic open seats.

Captain Carrot

Brian Krakow wrote: »

Jragghen wrote: »

Brian Krakow wrote: »

I'm not very optimistic about this election but the Republicans netting >50 seats seems unlikely to me.

Prepare to be disappointed.

They netted 54 seats in 1994 and that was with tons of ultra-conservative Democratic open seats.

And with higher net Republican approval than Democratic, which is not the case this year.

galenblade

The worst part is that for the Senate, there's definitely a better than 50% chance that if it gets to an even split, Lieberman's going to jump ship. So Dems actually need 51 seats to hold.

Modern Man

Brian Krakow wrote: »

I'm not very optimistic about this election but the Republicans netting >50 seats seems unlikely to me.

The problem for the Dems is, from a polling perspective, they only have about 120 safe seats this election, plus 24 "likely" and 20 or so "lean" seats. There are another 82 seats that are either tossups (42) or that lean GOP (40). Of all the 100 or so "lean" and tossup , only 9 are currently held by Republicans.

So, the Dems are on defense everywhere. Even if the parties split those 100 or so seats (which is probably the absolute best-case scenario for the Dems, but it's not likely), the GOP will still pick up quite a few Dem seats.

enlightenedbum

Again, depends on how off the polling is. I think the recent record is something like 5 points (1998).

Jragghen

In all the polling I've looked at, California has been shifting left in all polling in pretty much every seat down the ticket - Governor, Attorney General, Controller, etc. I would find it highly highly unlikely that Fiorina pulls it out, particularly because she's not out campaigning right now (hospitalized with an infection from breast cancer surgery ). Boxer is effectively a lock.

Honestly, except for Brown, it's going to be close in most of the state-wide seats in CA, but I expect the Democrats to do quite strong here. It's the propositions which are the big question mark.

Pay attention to the Attorney General race, as the outcome of that one will determine whether the prop 8 lawsuit goes to federal appeals court or not (and we all know that regardless of the outcome, it'll be going to the SC in that case).

Captain Carrot

Although a lot of those ratings are based on literally a couple of polls by different firms months apart, so take them with some salt.

sterling3763

Someone needs to put their cock on the line. It's not a real prediction unless it's preceeded by "I will eat my..."

Deebaser

I will eat my cock if the republicans win the presidency tomorrow.

Happy?

Jragghen

Deebaser wrote: »

I will eat my cock if the republicans win the presidency tomorrow.

Happy?

You know what, I was going to make a crack about what's going to happen when the Speaker of the House becomes Republican, but fuck it. I'm not going to make that joke.

Captain Carrot

Well, Republicans are pretty big Boehner fans.

joshofalltrades

Where in the country is Boehner biggest?

Brian Krakow

joshofalltrades wrote: »

Where in the country is Boehner biggest?

Florida. They love his stance on deep sea penetration.

videobobbo

I hear Boehner is pretty big in the South.

EDIT: Beat'd.

joshofalltrades

Never gets old. Ever.

DoctorArch

I heard Boehners are orange.

I was disappointed to find out this wasn't the case. Happy Halloween everybody!

TheCanMan

enlightenedbum wrote: »

sterling3763 wrote: »

enlightenedbum wrote: »

It all depends on how accurate the "likely voter" models are. If the pollsters have it right, Dems lose like 50 seats. If they're off by a point (favoring the GOP) Dems lose 42, if they're off by two points Dems lose 25. I'm saying 2.5 points.

This is just completely unrealistic.

I'm using Nate's numbers from like two days ago.

EDIT: Which are the same numbers. The trend hasn't moved at all.

And just to punctuate that, I'll repost what I wrote in the previous thread about this very topic.

TheCanMan wrote:

I was just browsing fivethirtyeight and came across a post explaining just how different the results of the elections can be in regards to small errors in the forcasting/polling numbers.

Here's the link to the post and the juicy bits.

Our projection says that Republicans are favorites in 231 House races, which would reflect a net gain of 52 seats.

But suppose that our forecast is biased against the Democrats by one point across the country as a whole, perhaps because pollsters are overestimating the enthusiasm gap very slightly. Just one point. Well, there are 6 seats in which we have the Republican candidate projected to win by less than 1 full point (it might be a very long election night, by the way). If Democrats hold those 6 seats, the projected Republican gains would be down to 46.

Now suppose that the forecast understates Democratic support by 2 points. There are 8 seats in which we project the Republican candidate to win by a margin of between 1 and 2 points; now these would also be wiped off the board. Now the Republican gains would be reduced to just 38 seats — and the Democrats would hold the House, 218-217!

Read that again: it means that if our forecasts turn out to be biased against Democrats by just 2 points overall, the party becomes about an even-money bet to hold the House.

Now move in the other direction. Say that we’ve underestimated Republicans’ margin by 1 point across the board. There are 8 seats that we’re currently projecting Democrats to hold by less than 1 point. Give those 8 seats to Republicans, and the gains tally grows to 60.

And if the forecast is biased against Republicans by 2 points? Another 5 seats, bringing their total to 65.

We can extend this analysis as much as we want: if the forecasts lowball Republicans by 5 points overall, for instance, we’d expect them to win about 75 seats; a 5-point bias against Democrats, on the other hand, trims their losses to just 22.

ahava

I got canvassed!!

One lone older man (mid 50s) out canvassing the neighborhood for Christine O'Donnell. He caught my liberal self on my way out the door to take my recycling to the recycling center. He asked me very politely if I was voting, and I very politely answered him "Yes". He asked me if I would be voting for Miss Christine, and I said "No." Also very politely.

He then said that in that case, he saw no real point in talking to me. And I replied, very politely, "We can always talk, your time volunteering would just probably be better spent on somebody who's less bleeding heart liberal than I am."

And we parted ways very nicely.



On a side note, it's freaking impossible to get somebody down here to pick up all my old furniture... grrr

enlightenedbum

Yeah I was a bit off in my recollection, general point stands though. I think the polls are slightly off in favor of the GOP so the Dems barely hold the House and all the GOP triumphalism for the last two months is hilarious.

Will anything useful pass in this new Congress? No. Just like if the GOP won.

OptimusZed

TheCanMan wrote: »

enlightenedbum wrote: »

sterling3763 wrote: »

enlightenedbum wrote: »

It all depends on how accurate the "likely voter" models are. If the pollsters have it right, Dems lose like 50 seats. If they're off by a point (favoring the GOP) Dems lose 42, if they're off by two points Dems lose 25. I'm saying 2.5 points.

This is just completely unrealistic.

I'm using Nate's numbers from like two days ago.

EDIT: Which are the same numbers. The trend hasn't moved at all.

And just to punctuate that, I'll repost what I wrote in the previous thread about this very topic.

TheCanMan wrote:

I was just browsing fivethirtyeight and came across a post explaining just how different the results of the elections can be in regards to small errors in the forcasting/polling numbers.

Here's the link to the post and the juicy bits.

Our projection says that Republicans are favorites in 231 House races, which would reflect a net gain of 52 seats.

But suppose that our forecast is biased against the Democrats by one point across the country as a whole, perhaps because pollsters are overestimating the enthusiasm gap very slightly. Just one point. Well, there are 6 seats in which we have the Republican candidate projected to win by less than 1 full point (it might be a very long election night, by the way). If Democrats hold those 6 seats, the projected Republican gains would be down to 46.

Now suppose that the forecast understates Democratic support by 2 points. There are 8 seats in which we project the Republican candidate to win by a margin of between 1 and 2 points; now these would also be wiped off the board. Now the Republican gains would be reduced to just 38 seats — and the Democrats would hold the House, 218-217!

Read that again: it means that if our forecasts turn out to be biased against Democrats by just 2 points overall, the party becomes about an even-money bet to hold the House.

Now move in the other direction. Say that we’ve underestimated Republicans’ margin by 1 point across the board. There are 8 seats that we’re currently projecting Democrats to hold by less than 1 point. Give those 8 seats to Republicans, and the gains tally grows to 60.

And if the forecast is biased against Republicans by 2 points? Another 5 seats, bringing their total to 65.

We can extend this analysis as much as we want: if the forecasts lowball Republicans by 5 points overall, for instance, we’d expect them to win about 75 seats; a 5-point bias against Democrats, on the other hand, trims their losses to just 22.

This is particularly salient in light of the 3-4 point discrepancies between cell phone and non cell phone polling models.

Jragghen

enlightenedbum wrote: »

Yeah I was a bit off in my recollection, general point stands though. I think the polls are slightly off in favor of the GOP so the Dems barely hold the House and all the GOP triumphalism for the last two months is hilarious.

It's not going to be a deterrent to me or anything, but I would actually expect some fringe violence if they don't take the House.

Will anything useful pass in this new Congress? No. Just like if the GOP won.

Depends on whether they'd change the rules in the Senate.

CommunistCow

videobobbo wrote: »

Palin could be interesting if the tea party types get into the House and Senate and fail spectacularly. Which is probably pretty likely. It will be hard for her to withstand the onslaught of the GOP establishment, her high negatives with the general public, and her persecution complex.

That being said, I'd rather not see her at the top of the ticket for the GOP, mostly because there is so little to maintain my faith in humanity. Also, a little because maybe she'd win just because her base loves her, and she has two years to get the easily convinced independents on board.

I'm not sure how they would fail spectacularly. There won't be enough of them to do much and even then I can't imagine they could get any of their crazy ideas past the other parts of congress or branches of government. It also seems to me that the GOP is much more willing to wait around even when their goals aren't met immediately. Roe v Wade wasn't overturned by your legislator who said they would do something about it*....thats ok vote for them or someone like them again next year. Repeat ad naseum for other parts of their platform.

*Yes I know this makes no sense but it doesn't keep GOP reps from campaigning on it.

Captain Carrot

Jragghen wrote: »

Will anything useful pass in this new Congress? No. Just like if the GOP won.

Depends on whether they'd change the rules in the Senate.

They couldn't get a majority of Democrats to agree to it in this Congress, no way there'll be 50 votes for it in the next even with Biden's help.

enlightenedbum

Captain Carrot wrote: »

Jragghen wrote: »

Will anything useful pass in this new Congress? No. Just like if the GOP won.

Depends on whether they'd change the rules in the Senate.

They couldn't get a majority of Democrats to agree to it in this Congress, no way there'll be 50 votes for it in the next even with Biden's help.

Plus some Blue Dogs will survive and they'll be the margin in the House and scared out of their minds.