• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
How can so many prediction models say so many different things?

They all say mostly the same thing. Its not like the difference between 60/40 and 50/50 is that huge. They all are basically calling a tossup. The one outlier to me used to be the Washington Post, but now that they've adjusted down to 50/50, I don't see anyone worthwhile saying anything different.

The Kansas news is the one thing that might change everything, so we'll see how that gets digested by these prediction models.
 
Pretty much everybody turned on him, and rightfully so.
They didn't exactly do it for the right reasons, but whatever.

I've not seen any changes in his models. Its the same thing he's been doing and doing well.

I've turned on him for his stupid site. I still think he's a voice to listen to. Most in this thread seem to just want to hear good news

Huge news. Wow.
Look forward to him caucusing with republicans
 
Well, he kind of torpedoed his own credibility. It's not like it's just a case of not liking what he's saying when it's not in their favor.

I think silver is correct to believe in certain fundamentals regarding a presidential election.

He believes the same is true of senate races. I don't think most of those fundamentals matter in a mid-term election.

He's doing nothing wrong. He has a hypothesis and is testing it. It should be noted that once we're two weeks out, the polls will dictate his model almost completely so we'll see all the guys converge to the same outcome.
 
Look forward to him caucusing with republicans
A pro-choice, anti-Citizens United politician running against a Republican senator is going to caucus with the Republicans

really_house_of_cards.gif
 

HylianTom

Banned
Hopefully it doesn't have to come to that.
You've gotta admit.. for a year that was supposed to be a slam-dunk for the GOP, it would be hysterical to watch the reactions when they come sooooo close and yet fail once again. And it also means we'd likely see more of Uncle Joe - bonus!
 

Wilsongt

Member
Congression recess time during an election year is GOLDEN.

CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA—First term House Republican Robert Pittenger (R-NC) is running unopposed for another term representing North Carolina’s 9th District. At a town hall in suburban Charlotte Tuesday night, he told a small crowd of almost exclusively Caucasian constituents that he will do all he can to address the crisis of tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors arriving at the US/Mexico border.

When a constituent stood up and accused the freshman congressman of not doing enough to secure the border, Pittenger protested that he helped the House of Representatives pass a “very good bill” that would deport both the newly arrived child migrants as well as those commonly known as DREAMers who have been raised in the US. He faulted the Democratic-controlled Senate for refusing to take up that measure.

Pittenger then accused President Obama of “exploiting” and “abusing” a 2008 anti-trafficking law that protects children from Central America from being deported without due process. The President himself considered waiving or amending this law earlier this summer in order to speed deportations, but backed down after an outcry from the international law and human rights community.

When ThinkProgress asked Pittenger if these deportations should continue in the light of reports that some of the children have been killed upon return, he said they should.

“It’s the most egregious, awful crime and a pity, what has happened to these young children,” he told ThinkProgress. “But do you want to open up America’s doors to the entire world? We can’t handle the healthcare and education today for our own population! We have to be sensible about what we our system can manage. So you put them on planes and you send them back.”

Responding to another question from a constituent, Pittenger then claimed that Democrats are at fault for Congress’ failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform because of their insistence on a path to citizenship for some undocumented people.

“I speak to Hispanic radio and newspapers and they’re not talking about that. It’s not even on their mind,” he said. “They want to be here legally and come out of the shadows and work, but I don’t hear them demanding US citizenship. But [Democrats] want to use that and embrace these people for their political agenda.”

A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2012 found that the vast majority of Hispanic immigrants—more than 90 percent of both those with and without legal status—do aspire to become US citizens.

North Carolina’s stance on the current immigration crisis has made the news in recent weeks. Surry County, just a few hours north of Charlotte, passed a resolution this week to keep unaccompanied migrant children out of their region. Among other concerns they cited the already-debunked fear that the children are carrying communicable diseases. Surry joins two other North Carolina counties, Rowan and Brunswick, in passing such a resolution. But other counties, including the city of Charlotte, are making preparations to welcome any children placed with family members. More than 1,400 have already arrived in the state.
 

Chichikov

Member
I've not seen any changes in his models. Its the same thing he's been doing and doing well.

I've turned on him for his stupid site. I still think he's a voice to listen to. Most in this thread seem to just want to hear good news
He uses backward looking weighted poll averaging, which is a fine methodology, but it never warranted the "math wizard" hype he got (and it didn't even always performed better than simple poll averaging).
His simulations and odds were always based on shoddy math, he just now apply that stuff to even less fitting things.

His new website is just terrible, regardless of the math he uses.
 
Democrats have a good shot at picking up at least 7 seats in 2016.

Arizona
Florida
Illinois
Iowa
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin

There's 9 right there.

Then 4 other states in the bible belt
Missouri
Kentucky
Louisiana
Kansas

Georgia perhaps as well.

What if the Democrats hold even(lose MT, SD, WV) while picking up GA, KY, KS this go around. They'd be at 55 still. 2016 could see them pick up to 10 seats or more. That'd be crazy.

Democrats really need to get the House back by 2016.

Then there's Murkowski and Collins bucking the trend of their party more frequently. There may only be 30 hardcore conservatives left in the Senate very soon.
 

Diablos

Member
The liberal turn against Nate Silver has been fascinating to watch lol.
Fuck, if we're all gonna hate on him --

Dude really needs to take a Xanax before he does interviews. I thought he was going to poop his pants when I saw him on The Daily Show.

All this news about non-Silver polling analysis losing GOP momentum is good. We aren't out of the woods yet though.
I do believe liberal bastion Huffpost has the GOP up by a bit too, though. But it was written kind of weird.
Biden breaking the tie would be fun.
 
South Dakota is next!
I hope so. Although I feel like Weiland (the Democrat) could just win in his own right if everyone else splits the vote. In the last debate Weiland and the two independent candidates spent the whole time hammering Rounds which is the only way any of them are going to have a fighting chance, unlike say Florida 2010 where Crist and Meek just attacked each other while letting Rubio skate by.

Daily Kos Elections' model now has Democrats at 56% to keep the Senate, over 46% before Kansas. Don't let the Daily Kos part of the name fool you, DKE supports Democrats but is pretty grounded in their analysis (it's an offshoot of an older site called Swing State Project).

And Nate only bumped Democrats up to 38% because, predictably, he doesn't believe PPP. Whatever.
 

Wilsongt

Member
And Cantor defenders say he is not exactly raking in massive cash.

The former congressman’s initial pay package, with a minimum value of around $4 million over two years, is indeed hardly mammoth by the inflated standards of Wall Street, where top executives and traders can make over $40 million a year and hedge fund titans sometimes top $1 billion annually.


Damn... How is Cantor going to feed his family with ONLY $2 million a year?!

Poor guy... Got shafted.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Damn... How is Cantor going to feed his family with ONLY $2 million a year?!

Poor guy... Got shafted.

I'm not sure why they're comparing his salary to execs and hedge fund traders. He's really not going to be working. Just a name on the board who can make a few phone calls.
 

Article is so bad. So en banc is political but the original ruling wasn't? And the court should ignore the near unanimous rulings everywhere else. But this was the kicker to me:

If Halbig is important enough for the D.C. Circuit to review, then it is also important enough for the Supremes to review.

He's saying if any case is worthy of en banc then en banc shouldn't be used. So, tell me, what's the fucking point of having en banc? What a dolt.
 
What specifically do you doubt about his prediction?
Nate's problem with Senate predictions is his model gives so much weight to state fundamentals that a Democrat running in a red state would be losing even if they'd built up a modest lead in the polls. As an example, his fundamentals give Roberts a 25 point advantage over Orman, who has a 10 point lead in the polls (well, poll). This averages ou to a 2 pt Roberts lead. It also treats Orman as a normal Democrat, which he most definitely is not and this is why the race is even competitive to begin with.

This works fine for the presidential election since that's what the fundamentals are based off of. But it's a lazy way of analyzing Senate contests which are often fundamentally different. This is why his model missed North Dakota and Montana in 2012. "Tester has a lead in polling, but Montana is a Republican state, Likely R." And frankly he should know better.
 

Crisco

Banned
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/58373775-82/obama-islamic-state-terror.html.csp

The first point concerns the actual war on terror that the administration has been waging. It is important to remember that Obama is perhaps the greatest killer of terrorists in American history. This formulation might upset his more liberal supporters, the sort who still haven’t figured out that Islamism poses a dire threat to modernity. And it will anger his more conservative opponents, who believe that he is, if not an actual Muslim, then a Muslim Brotherhood fellow traveler. But I believe that this is a supportable statement.

I really wish more Democrats would step up and defend their party leader with affirmations like that. Obama is a lot of things, but one thing he definitely is not is a dove on terrorism. Dude spent most of 2009-2011 personally murdering people via drone strike approvals.
 
Article is so bad. So en banc is political but the original ruling wasn't? And the court should ignore the near unanimous rulings everywhere else. But this was the kicker to me:



He's saying if any case is worthy of en banc then en banc shouldn't be used. So, tell me, what's the fucking point of having en banc? What a dolt.

President Obama nevertheless appealed the Halbig ruling to a panel where, thanks to the elimination of the filibuster on most judicial nominees, Democratic appointees now outnumber Republican appointees by 8-5; (5)

How about "thanks to a democratically elected President and Senate..."
 
How about "thanks to a democratically elected President and Senate..."

I was actually thinking about the filibuster earlier. Let's say Republicans won the Senate and McConnell takes over. Is there anything stopping them from getting rid of the filibuster entirely? I mean I doubt he would, since it seen there forever, but it's theoretically possible, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom