Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Political Scientists Say Democratic Control [of House] a "Near Certainty"
Political Wire ^ | October 25, 2006 | Taegan Goddard

Posted on 10/25/2006 11:59:44 AM PDT by Torie

In a new research paper, three political scientists attempt to use the results of generic congressional polls to predict the outcome of the midterm elections.

"Via computer simulation based on statistical analysis of historical data, we show how generic vote polls can be used to forecast the election outcome. We convert the results of generic vote polls into a projection of the actual national vote for Congress and ultimately into the partisan division of seats in the House of Representatives. Our model allows both a point forecast-our expectation of the seat division between Republicans and Democrats-and an estimate of the probability of partisan control. Based on current generic ballot polls, we forecast an expected Democratic gain of 32 seats with Democratic control (a gain of 18 seats or more) a near certainty."


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2006; 2006polls; housecontrol; midtermelections; polls
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-155 next last
And there you have it. The black box has spoken.
1 posted on 10/25/2006 11:59:45 AM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv; crasher

FYI.


2 posted on 10/25/2006 12:00:12 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Ping to revisit thread after election.
3 posted on 10/25/2006 12:01:16 PM PDT by JOAT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
And in BREAKING NEWS: These same scientists show that 1,000,000,000 Iraqis have been killed by President Bush!
4 posted on 10/25/2006 12:01:23 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Is that a cloud on yon horizon?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/pruden.htm

Against the prospective new tsunami of great expectations comes the voice of Wall Street money, saying, "Hey, wait a minute." Writes Jim McTague in Barron's, the Dow Jones financial weekly: "Jubilant Democrats should reconsider their order for confetti and noisemakers ... Our analysis, based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data, suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435 [seats]. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-vote majority ... In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three. We ... based our predictions ... on which candidate had the largest campaign war chest, a sign of superior grassroots support. We ignore the polls."

The Barron's analysis is, as you might expect a Wall Street analysis to be, based on cold, hard cash: No sentiment, please, we're all capitalists here. Cash in the stretch not only buys the television commercials -- the meaner the better -- everyone says he hates, but reflects the confidence of the checkbook.

Barron's employed the money test in both 2000 and 2004, and, bucking conventional media wisdom (always a good thing to do), correctly predicted the Republican gains in both years. In the 34 years since 1972, an eternity in politics, the candidate with the most money has won more than 90 percent of the time -- 98 percent, in fact, in the most recent elections. The best of the pollsters can only dream of such results.

5 posted on 10/25/2006 12:02:06 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

They said the same about Kerry in 2004, IIRC.


6 posted on 10/25/2006 12:02:19 PM PDT by Perdogg (Democratic Party - The political wing of Al Qaida)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Larry "Bad Rug" Sabato again?


7 posted on 10/25/2006 12:02:23 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Where I went to school the polysci majors were the ones who couldn't make it in any other major (except education).


8 posted on 10/25/2006 12:02:53 PM PDT by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Same type that predicts catastrophic man-made climate change?
9 posted on 10/25/2006 12:03:01 PM PDT by Edgerunner (Democrats break...Republicans fix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

A near certainty? They must be uysing the "global warming predictor" on elections now.


10 posted on 10/25/2006 12:03:04 PM PDT by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Democrats. French, but more cowardly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

-the only certainty is that hillary clinton is going to take NY state again. To the shame of true NYers.


11 posted on 10/25/2006 12:03:08 PM PDT by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

The 72-hour plan means nothing I assume?

Conservatives...give up...it is hooooooopeeeeelessssssss..

Naah..I'll fight till I can't.


12 posted on 10/25/2006 12:03:27 PM PDT by Armedanddangerous (Master of Sinanju (emeritus))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Generic ballot.....nuf said.


13 posted on 10/25/2006 12:03:56 PM PDT by shankbear (Al-Qaeda grew while Monica blew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NewHampshireDuo

"polisci" I guess


14 posted on 10/25/2006 12:05:20 PM PDT by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I have been expecting a narrow Dem win in the House. But since these "experts" almost always get it wrong . . . .


15 posted on 10/25/2006 12:05:21 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Just like any poll -- unreliable.


16 posted on 10/25/2006 12:05:25 PM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Political Scientists Say Democratic Control [of House] a "Near Certainty"

That settles it: Republican landslide.

17 posted on 10/25/2006 12:05:39 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows (Natalie Maines fears me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
HEY! political scientists is an oxymoron!
18 posted on 10/25/2006 12:05:58 PM PDT by mountainlyons (Hard core conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

The propaganda is deep and persistent..


19 posted on 10/25/2006 12:06:48 PM PDT by hosepipe (CAUTION: This propaganda is laced with hyperbole.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Our staff of 72 democrats and 3 independents who plan to vote democratic contributed to this report..


20 posted on 10/25/2006 12:06:50 PM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32 (At 53, I'm the life of every party I go to, even if it lasts till 8 p.m...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-155 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson