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

Skip to comments.

The Key House Races 2010 - 24 July Update - Big Republican Gains
KeyHouseRaces.com ^ | 24 July 2010 | Interceptpoint

Posted on 07/24/2010 8:54:50 AM PDT by InterceptPoint

Georgia Primary: Austin Scott won the GA-08 primary and will be the GOP nominee running against the incumbent Dem Jim Marshall in November.

The REALLY BIG NEWS is that  were 44 changes in our "Expert" ratings this week. We had major changes by Rothenberg,  a few by Election Projection (as usual), 4 from the mostly quiet Real Clear Politics and a few from Cook. Sabato and CQPolitics were silent this week. 

Here's the summary of the changes to our Experts' ratings:

  • There were a total of 44 updates this week to the 91 Congressional races that we believe are truly in play this year.
  • 37 were favorable to the Republicans
  • 7 were favorable to the Democrats

Those changes moved our index to -.288 from last weeks -.353. That's the most favorable value of our index by far and is the largest change that we have recorded in a single week. This is due primarily to the large number of changes by Rothenberg in favor of the Republicans. The -.288 value means that the average rating of our "Experts" for the 91 races on our list is TOSS-UP but leaning D. If the value of the index gets into positive territory then we will have a Republican landslide in November. And remember, this index started out at -.585 back in April. That was a LEANS D average. Since then the trend has been a continuous re-evaluation by our "Experts' in favor of the Republicans. We expect that trend to continue.

Note that you can always see the latest changes and the current state of the "Expert" evaluations of all of the races on our Master List and an explanation of our methodology on the KeyHouseRaces Experts Page.

Just a reminder: Here is the full schedule for August Primaries:

August 3: Kansas, Michigan and Missouri

August 5: Tennessee

August 10: Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota and a Georgia Runoff if necessary

August 17: Washington and Wyoming

August 24: Alaska, Arizona, Florida and Vermont

August 28: Louisiana

Here is the chart from our EXPERTS page for July 24th. Lots of RED in 4 of the 6 Experts columns. Those are the ones that have changed this week in favor of the Republicans.

District Average Average Sabato CQP EP.com Cook Rothenberg RCP Sabato CQP EP.com Cook Rothenberg RCP District
AL 2 Toss-Up 0.0 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Leans D Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 -1 0 0 AL 2
AR 1 Toss-Up 0.0 Toss-Up Leans D Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 -1 1 0 0 0 AR 1
AR 2 Leans R 1.3 Leans R Leans R Mod R Leans R Likely R Leans R 1 1 2 1 2 1 AR 2
AZ 1 Leans D -1.0 Toss-Up Likely D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D 0 -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 AZ 1
AZ 5 Leans D -0.8 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 AZ 5
AZ 8 Leans D -0.7 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Toss-Up Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 AZ 8
CA 3 Leans R 1.3 Leans R Leans R Mod R Leans R Leans R Likely R 1 1 2 1 1 2 CA 3
CA 11 Leans D -0.8 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 CA 11
CA 47 Likely D -2.5 Safe D Likely D Safe D Likely D Safe D Likely D -3 -2 -3 -2 -3 -2 CA 47
CO 3 Leans D -1.3 Leans D Likely D Weak D Leans D Likely D Leans D -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 -1 CO 3
CO 4 Leans R 0.7 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Likely R Leans R 0 0 1 0 2 1 CO 4
CT 4 Likely D -1.8 Likely D Leans D Mod D Likely D Safe D Leans D -2 -1 -2 -2 -3 -1 CT 4
CT 5 Likely D -1.8 Likely D Likely D Mod D Likely D Likely D Leans D -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 CT 5
DE AL Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 DE AL
FL 2 Leans D -0.7 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Toss-Up Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 FL 2
FL 8 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 FL 8
FL 12 Likely R 2.5 Likely R Likely R Safe R Likely R Safe R Safe R 2 2 3 2 3 3 FL 12
FL 22 Leans D -1.5 Leans D Likely D Mod D Likely D Likely D Toss-Up -1 -2 -2 -2 -2 0 FL 22
FL 24 Toss-Up 0.3 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Leans R Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 1 0 FL 24
FL 25 Leans R 1.5 Leans R Leans R Mod R Likely R Leans R Likely R 1 1 2 2 1 2 FL 25
GA 8 Likely D -2.0 Likely D Likely D Safe D Likely D Leans D Likely D -2 -2 -3 -2 -1 -2 GA 8
HI 1 Toss-Up -0.2 Leans D Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans D -1 0 1 0 0 -1 HI 1
IA 3 Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 IA 3
ID 1 Leans D -0.8 Toss-Up Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 ID 1
IL 8 Likely D -1.8 Likely D Safe D Safe D Likely D Toss-Up Leans D -2 -3 -3 -2 0 -1 IL 8
IL 10 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 IL 10
IL 11 Toss-Up -0.2 Leans D Leans D Weak R Leans D Toss-Up Leans R -1 -1 1 -1 0 1 IL 11
IL 14 Toss-Up -0.3 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans D 0 0 -1 0 0 -1 IL 14
IN 2 Leans D -1.2 Likely D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 IN 2
IN 8 Toss-Up 0.5 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Leans R Toss-Up Leans R 0 0 1 1 0 1 IN 8
IN 9 Toss-Up -0.3 Toss-Up Leans D Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 IN 9
KS 3 Leans R 0.7 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Leans R Leans R Leans R 0 0 1 1 1 1 KS 3
LA 2 Leans D -1.3 Leans D Likely D Weak D Toss-Up Likely D Likely D -1 -2 -1 0 -2 -2 LA 2
LA 3 Likely R 1.7 Leans R Leans R Mod R Likely R Likely R Likely R 1 1 2 2 2 2 LA 3
MA 10 Leans D -0.7 Leans D Leans D Weak R Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -1 -1 1 -1 -2 0 MA 10
MD 1 Leans R 0.7 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Leans R Leans R 1 0 1 0 1 1 MD 1
MI 1 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 MI 1
MI 7 Toss-Up 0.3 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 0 1 0 0 1 MI 7
MI 9 Likely D -1.8 Leans D Likely D Mod D Likely D Safe D Leans D -1 -2 -2 -2 -3 -1 MI 9
MN 1 Likely D -2.3 Likely D Likely D Safe D Likely D Safe D Likely D -2 -2 -3 -2 -3 -2 MN 1
MN 6 Likely R 2.3 Likely R Likely R Safe R Likely R Safe R Likely R 2 2 3 2 3 2 MN 6
MO 4 Leans D -1.0 Likely D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 MO 4
MS 1 Toss-Up 0.5 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 1 0 1 0 0 1 MS 1
NC 8 Toss-Up -0.5 Toss-Up Leans D Weak D Toss-Up Likely D Leans R 0 -1 -1 0 -2 1 NC 8
ND AL Toss-Up 0.5 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 1 0 1 0 0 1 ND AL
NE 2 Likely R 2.0 Likely R Likely R Mod R Likely R Likely R Likely R 2 2 2 2 2 2 NE 2
NH 1 Toss-Up 0.5 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 1 0 1 0 0 1 NH 1
NH 2 Toss-Up 0.5 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 1 0 1 0 0 1 NH 2
NJ 3 Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Leans D -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 NJ 3
NM 1 Leans D -1.3 Likely D Leans D Mod D Leans D Leans D Leans D -2 -1 -2 -1 -1 -1 NM 1
NM 2 Leans R 0.7 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Leans R Leans R 1 0 1 0 1 1 NM 2
NV 3 Toss-Up 0.3 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 0 1 0 0 1 NV 3
NY 1 Leans D -1.0 Likely D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 NY 1
NY 13 Leans D -1.5 Likely D Likely D Mod D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 0 NY 13
NY 19 Leans D -0.8 Likely D Leans D Weak D Leans D Toss-Up Toss-Up -2 -1 -1 -1 0 0 NY 19
NY 20 Leans D -1.3 Leans D Likely D Weak D Leans D Likely D Leans D -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 -1 NY 20
NY 23 Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 0 NY 23
NY 24 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 NY 24
NY 25 Likely D -2.3 Likely D Likely D Safe D Likely D Safe D Likely D -2 -2 -3 -2 -3 -2 NY 25
NY 29 Leans R 1.2 Leans R Toss-Up Mod R Leans R Likely R Leans R 1 0 2 1 2 1 NY 29
OH 1 Leans R 0.8 Leans R Toss-Up Mod R Toss-Up Leans R Leans R 1 0 2 0 1 1 OH 1
OH 2 Safe R 2.8 Safe R Safe R Mod R Safe R Safe R Safe R 3 3 2 3 3 3 OH 2
OH 13 Leans D -1.3 Likely D Likely D Weak D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -2 -2 -1 -1 -2 0 OH 13
OH 15 Leans R 0.7 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Leans R Leans R 1 0 1 0 1 1 OH 15
OH 16 Toss-Up -0.5 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Toss-Up Leans R -1 -1 -1 -1 0 1 OH 16
OH 18 Leans D -0.8 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 OH 18
PA 3 Toss-Up -0.5 Leans D Leans D Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 PA 3
PA 4 Likely D -1.8 Likely D Likely D Mod D Likely D Likely D Leans D -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 PA 4
PA 6 Likely R 1.7 Likely R Leans R Mod R Likely R Likely R Leans R 2 1 2 2 2 1 PA 6
PA 7 Toss-Up 0.3 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 0 1 0 0 1 PA 7
PA 8 Leans D -1.0 Toss-Up Likely D Weak D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up 0 -2 -1 -1 -2 0 PA 8
PA 10 Leans D -1.3 Leans D Leans D Weak D Likely D Likely D Leans D -1 -1 -1 -2 -2 -1 PA 10
PA 11 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Leans D Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 -1 1 0 0 1 PA 11
PA 12 Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Weak D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 0 PA 12
PA 17 Likely D -1.8 Likely D Likely D Mod D Likely D Likely D Leans D -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -1 PA 17
SC 5 Toss-Up -0.5 Leans D Leans D Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 SC 5
SD AL Toss-Up 0.0 Toss-Up Leans D Weak R Leans D Toss-Up Leans R 0 -1 1 -1 0 1 SD AL
TN 4 Likely D -2.2 Safe D Likely D Safe D Likely D Likely D Leans D -3 -2 -3 -2 -2 -1 TN 4
TN 6 Likely R 2.2 Leans R Safe R Safe R Likely R Likely R Likely R 1 3 3 2 2 2 TN 6
TN 8 Toss-Up 0.5 Leans R Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 1 0 1 0 0 1 TN 8
TX 17 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Leans D Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 -1 1 0 0 1 TX 17
TX 23 Likely D -1.7 Likely D Likely D Mod D Leans D Likely D Leans D -2 -2 -2 -1 -2 -1 TX 23
VA 2 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 VA 2
VA 5 Toss-Up 0.5 Toss-Up Toss-Up Mod R Toss-Up Toss-Up Leans R 0 0 2 0 0 1 VA 5
VA 9 Leans D -1.0 Leans D Leans D Mod D Leans D Leans D Toss-Up -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 0 VA 9
VA 11 Leans D -1.2 Leans D Likely D Weak D Leans D Likely D Toss-Up -1 -2 -1 -1 -2 0 VA 11
WA 3 Toss-Up 0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak R Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 1 0 0 0 WA 3
WA 8 Leans R 1.3 Leans R Leans R Mod R Likely R Leans R Leans R 1 1 2 2 1 1 WA 8
WI 7 Toss-Up -0.3 Toss-Up Leans D Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 WI 7
WI 8 Leans D -1.3 Likely D Leans D Weak D Leans D Likely D Leans D -2 -1 -1 -1 -2 -1 WI 8
WV 1 Toss-Up -0.2 Toss-Up Toss-Up Weak D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up 0 0 -1 0 0 0 WV 1
District Average Average Sabato CQP EP.com Cook Rothenberg RCP Sabato CQP EP.com Cook Rothenberg RCP District
Average Toss-Up -0.288 Toss-Up Leans D Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up Toss-Up
Updated 24-Jul-10 -0.411 -0.611 -0.100 -0.367 -0.389 0.144
Rating and Color Code Average Expert
Rating
From To
Safe D -3 -2.5
Likely D -2.5 -1.5
Leans D -1.5 -0.5
Toss-Up -0.5 0
Toss-Up 0 0.5
Leans R 0.5 1.5
Likely R 1.5 2.5
Safe R 2.5 3.5


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: election2010; elections; keyhouseraces; khr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 next last

1 posted on 07/24/2010 8:54:53 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 100%FEDUP; 1010RD; 101voodoo; 1035rep; 1776 Reborn; 2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten; 23 Everest; 2A Patriot; ..

There were a total of 44 updates this week to the 91 Congressional races that we believe are truly in play this year.

37 were favorable to the Republicans

7 were favorable to the Democrats

2 posted on 07/24/2010 9:03:06 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard; historyrepeatz; HiTech RedNeck; hockey mom; hocndoc; HokieMom; Hoodat; ...
Another Ping:

There were a total of 44 updates this week to the 91 Congressional races that we believe are truly in play this year.

37 were favorable to the Republicans

7 were favorable to the Democrats

FreepMail me if you want on or off this list.

3 posted on 07/24/2010 9:06:37 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
great news!!!

c'mon NYers....lets get out there and work for the candidates who have a chance!!! We must take at least three seats and work hard to grab four...it can be done!!!  I will be working w/the Hayworth campaign (NY19- not even my district but she's gotta be the incumbent rat)....pick a close contest and volunteer some effort for that candidate...
4 posted on 07/24/2010 9:09:12 AM PDT by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad; Recovering_Democrat; red flanker; red in brea; RED SOUTH; Red Steel; Red_Devil 232; ...
One More Ping:

There were a total of 44 updates this week to the 91 Congressional races that we believe are truly in play this year.

37 were favorable to the Republicans

7 were favorable to the Democrats

FreepMail me if you want on or off this list.

5 posted on 07/24/2010 9:09:26 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
Let us not get over confidante. I hope the Dems get their butt kicked so bad this fall than some of them will leave their kneeling pads home when going to see the wimp in chief.
6 posted on 07/24/2010 9:11:15 AM PDT by Big Horn (Rebuild the GOP to a conservative party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Thanks for the ping


7 posted on 07/24/2010 9:12:10 AM PDT by GOPJ (..Liberalism is Intolerance..- - Freeper Eric in the Ozarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

What’s up with NY25? The murmurs are that it can be a GOP pick up. I cannot find and polls for this race. You got anything?


8 posted on 07/24/2010 9:14:16 AM PDT by IllumiNaughtyByNature (3(0|\|0/\/\1($ 101: (4P174L1$/\/\ R3QU1r3$ (4P174L. Could it be any more simple?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Thanks for the ping!


9 posted on 07/24/2010 9:19:53 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IllumiNaughtyByNature
What’s up with NY25? The murmurs are that it can be a GOP pick up. I cannot find and polls for this race. You got anything?

Right now our "Experts" are not looking very favorably at NY-25 but we have seen no polling yet. Typically the "Experts" will revise their opinions on a race after they see a couple of polls that look like a trend and appear to be legit. Polls by the candidates are always worth questioning but in many cases that is all we get to see at least early on in the election cycle. If the NY-25 race is really competitive it will show up in the polling.

10 posted on 07/24/2010 9:22:16 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

BTTT


11 posted on 07/24/2010 9:23:48 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
Thanks, I'll be keeping and eye on that one now. It was off my radar, but recently popped up, here on FR so I made a few tweets and googles and got nothing substantial. It could be an interesting one, i need to look at historical and demography a bit.

See ya on the next ping.

12 posted on 07/24/2010 9:25:05 AM PDT by IllumiNaughtyByNature (3(0|\|0/\/\1($ 101: (4P174L1$/\/\ R3QU1r3$ (4P174L. Could it be any more simple?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

There were a total of 44 updates this week to the 91 Congressional races that we believe are truly in play this year.

37 were favorable to the Republicans

7 were favorable to the Democrats


Thanks for the good info.


13 posted on 07/24/2010 9:31:08 AM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

For the second time, please take me off this ping list I never asked to be on.

One more ping from you and I can only assume that you are trolling.


14 posted on 07/24/2010 9:38:13 AM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Oh me of little faith.

The repubs have a way of snatching defeat from the hands of victory.

As an example..Elaine Marshall D,( an old bat BTW) is running against the incumbent Senator Richard Burr R. here in NC.

For at least a month she has been running TV spots tying Burr to Big Oil/BP/ oil spill. Very effective IMHO.

Burr has yet to run any ads let alone a rebuttal.
By the time he gets around to it , it will be too late. People will have made up their minds.

I think Burr is going down this election.


15 posted on 07/24/2010 9:44:38 AM PDT by Vinnie (You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie
The repubs have a way of snatching defeat from the hands of victory.

You said it.

This year they have an ideal opportunity to nationalize the election. Far, far more ideal than even 1994. What with all the *very* unpopular polices of the regime -- stimulus, takeovers, health care, financial reform, Arizona lawsuit....

Yet, I see no indication that they plan to nationalize the election. Hopefully I'm wrong on this.

16 posted on 07/24/2010 10:26:09 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Thanks InterceptPoint for the excellent compilation and efforts. We all need to get as involved as we can in these critical House races!

If you ask me - WA 1 is IN PLAY:

http://www.redstate.com/bot2495/2010/07/13/meet-james-watkins/

Look at those numbers - Indies supporting James Watkins by 35% in mid July - those numbers will continue to trend. I think Watkins has a SERIOUS shot here.

http://www.watkinsforcongress.com/


17 posted on 07/24/2010 10:37:23 AM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Church, Country - 11/2010, 11/2012 - Tea Party like it's 1773 & pray 2 Chronicles 7:14!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Thanks for the good work and good news I.P.


18 posted on 07/24/2010 10:43:06 AM PDT by Kahuna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
Using the expert ratings above, the results of 32,000 simulated elections are listed in the table below. The definitions of the columns are:

Week GOP
House
Seats
P10
GOP
House
Seats
EV
GOP
House
Seats
P90
Probability
of 218
GOP
Gain
09-Apr-10 199 204.77 210 0.18% 25
16-Apr-10 199 205.09 211 0.22% 26
22-Apr-10 200 205.28 211 0.37% 26
01-May-10 201 206.22 212 0.73% 27
08-May-10 201 206.33 212 0.66% 27
19-Jun-10 203 208.44 214 2.29% 29
10-Jul-10 203 208.49 214 2.43% 29
17-Jul-10 203 208.49 214 2.34% 29
24-Jul-10 203 209.25 215 3.37% 30

Here is the cumulative probability distribution of the simulation:

On the Senate side, there was little movement in the Rasmussen polls this week. Most of Rasmussen's polls have the races outside the margin of error, but for those within the MOE, here are the movements during the past week and the separation in the polls.

Using the expert ratings above, the results of 32,000 simulated elections are listed in the table below. The definitions of the columns are:

Week GOP
Senate
Seats
P10
GOP
Senate
Seats
EV
GOP
Senate
Seats
P90
Probability
of 51
GOP
Gain
17-Jul-10 47 48.84 50 6.95% 7
24-Jul-10 47 48.95 50 7.69% 7

-PJ

19 posted on 07/24/2010 10:59:14 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
For the second time, please take me off this ping list I never asked to be on.

One more ping from you and I can only assume that you are trolling.

Trust me. We're not trolling. We just missed your request. Sorry about that.

20 posted on 07/24/2010 11:12:44 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeattleBruce; randita; Impy
If you ask me - WA 1 is IN PLAY:

We're going to do a review of our list in the next couple of weeks. There are a few races where our "Experts" have moved their assessment from SAFE D or LIKELY D to LEANS D. If we see that LEANS D rating from more than one "Expert" the race is likely to make it to the Master List. But really good poll numbers might do it also if the polls are legit. We're starting to put some energy into tracking the polls and good polling tends to wake our "Experts" from their normal slumber. I think that's what happened this week to Rothenberg.

21 posted on 07/24/2010 11:22:47 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
Nice chart.

But...

”GOP Gain” – The difference between the GOP EV and the current number of seats (179), rounded down.

Why round down? Why not just round off. I'd be glad to take a 30.51 and call it a 32. ;)

22 posted on 07/24/2010 11:29:16 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
I thought about that, but the reality is that you can't take a partial seat. Since it's based on the probabilistic mean, I figured that you have to earn it outright, which is why I round down.

Next week, I'll resize the chart to not be so big when posted.

-PJ

23 posted on 07/24/2010 11:44:13 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

No blood, no foul.

Have a nice weekend.


24 posted on 07/24/2010 12:14:52 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

As a point....

There are Cumulative Distribution Functions (CDF’s) and Probability Distribution Functions (PDF’s). There are no Cumulative Probability Distributions. What you showed was a graph of the CDF (sort of).


25 posted on 07/24/2010 12:23:07 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

It has been in my tagline for two years. 2010 will be a 100 seat TSUNAMI! Forget the 30 seat nonsense. No one is saying 50 seats.... I say 100 Seats!

The single greatest realignment of power away from the Democrats since the Southern Delegation walked out to form their own nation in 1861!


26 posted on 07/24/2010 12:34:04 PM PDT by RachelFaith (2010 is going to be a 100 seat Tsunami - Unless the GOP Senate ruins it all...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeattleBruce
A small reminder


27 posted on 07/24/2010 12:35:20 PM PDT by GailA (obamacare paid for by cuts & taxes on most vulnerable Veterans, retired Military, disabled & Seniors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
All the classes that I've taken refer to S-Curves as cumulative probability distributions because they are formed by sorting the outcomes and adding up the individual outcome probabilities. The plots show increasing probability outcomes until you reach 100% probability and the associated outcome.

The cumulative probability distribution shows the probability of the outcome being that result or less.

Perhaps you're thinking of something else?

-PJ

28 posted on 07/24/2010 12:51:02 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
It looks like the terms are used interchangeably.

-PJ

29 posted on 07/24/2010 12:53:26 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Thanks for the ping.


30 posted on 07/24/2010 12:54:33 PM PDT by raybbr (Someone who invades another country is NOT an immigrant - illegal or otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Brown carried MA 10 by 20 points and it leans democrat?


31 posted on 07/24/2010 12:59:32 PM PDT by MSF BU (++)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MSF BU

Seems to me this whole chart leans from a baseline favorable to the Democrats and being a normal election cycle I could understand it. THIS IS NOT A NORMAL CYCLE and the probabilities of it being anything remotely so are really unfounded and unmeasurable.

What I measure is the despiration displayed by the Dem base in calling up the racist crap this early and in all reality as early as the Obamacare vote. The race card is always an issue that is kept in dry storage until October as the final jab. This is waayyyy to early for them to bring out their last cannonball.


32 posted on 07/24/2010 1:19:24 PM PDT by mazda77 (Rubio for US Senate - West FL22nd - JD Hayworth - US Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Bookmarked. Good info and thanks for the ping!


33 posted on 07/24/2010 1:27:50 PM PDT by 1035rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

No they are not used interchangeably by people who know what they are doing.

The CDF must integrate to 1 over the range of the CDF. It is a precise mathematical definition used in probability theory.

There is no such thing as a Cumulative Probability Function.


34 posted on 07/24/2010 1:34:08 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
I'm plotting the results of monte carlo simulations. What would you have me call it?

-PJ

35 posted on 07/24/2010 1:44:56 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Again, there is no such thing as a “Cumulative Probability Distribution”. It’s right up there with Pink Unicorns.

What you showed was something that starts at zero and increases monotonically to 1. THAT is a Cumulative Distribution Function (as I remember those are the only two requirements for both continuous and discrete CDFs). Just wiki the darn thing and learn.

Here, I’ll even do it for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_distribution_function#Properties


36 posted on 07/24/2010 2:09:18 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Question: Working from the Master List, are you counting the GOP Holds into the GOP Gain column?

I’m not sure if you mentioned that or not. There are 9 seats on the list that are now GOP. We need to hold them, plus flip 39 currently DEM seats to achieve 218.


37 posted on 07/24/2010 2:18:58 PM PDT by randita (Visit keyhouseraces.com for a list of vulnerable DEM and must hold GOP House seats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
In the circles I frequent, that's what we call it.

But, since you asked to be off this ping list, I guess it doesn't really matter what I call it.

A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet.

-PJ

38 posted on 07/24/2010 2:19:44 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: randita
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm simply taking the current GOP seat count (179), and subtracting it from the probability-weighted average of the simulation, rounding it down to the lower whole seat, and calling that the GOP Gain. Whether we claim a Democrat seat but lose a GOP seat in exchange is irrelevant. I'm just showing the net result.

-PJ

39 posted on 07/24/2010 2:23:48 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

The circles that you frequent must be full of people that produce power point graphs for those who don’t understand what they are seeing.

I pointed out one small thing that you could have, all by yourself, googled and learned from. Instead you refused to take personal responsibility for what you wrote (”In the circles that I frequent”) and tried to protect your original conception of your credibility.

Sorry guy but blaming others doesn’t make up for a mistake in judgment.

The fact that you talk about things you don’t really understand is one reason why I think this ping list is dumb, D U M B, dumb. Another is that using ensemble averages of data based on different sampling techniques is the oldest dumb mistake of sophomoric self proclaimed statisticians. Since you’re giving me the brush off, I can only assume you don’t want to know about your errors in trying to make do without a formal understanding of the Logistics Regression Function.


40 posted on 07/24/2010 2:34:04 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi
You don't know me, I don't know you. My circles are quite credible, as I'm sure are yours, but I wasn't insulting in how I approached you.

I did google your comments, hence my second post to you. I determined that the distinction was splitting hairs for the purpose here.

If you have an argument with the results of my post, then say so, but don't waste my time on terminology.

-PJ

41 posted on 07/24/2010 2:37:40 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
One more for your list: Miller-Meeks in IA-02:

Polling data shows Miller-Meeks has made IA-2 one of the most competitive districts in the country

42 posted on 07/24/2010 2:39:38 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (No prisoners, no mercy. 2010 is here...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

The chart shows CA -7 and IL -1. However, Fiorina has big upside and Boxer downside potential in CA.

In IL Kirk has only downside potential. He peaked a while ago. Kirk has spent his life telling others what they wanted to hear and/or white lies to make himself look good. Those white lies were minor. But from now to election day he will be plagued with the white-lie-of-the-week coming back to haunt him.

Of course, the Dem is no better with Obama hosting a fundraiser for the guy who squandered the money in the Obama children’s college fund.

NOTA is leading right now. The combine will not let a viable right wing contender on the ballot. So NOTA is likely to be a Green Party candidate. So the votes for the Green Candidate will actually be for NOTA.


43 posted on 07/24/2010 3:05:28 PM PDT by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
I agree with you about Fiorina (I live in California). I don't know about Illinois. All I can say is that these are the latest Rasmussen polls. I assume that future polls will show movements.

Also note that Nevada still shows a lead for Angle even though the MSM seems to indicate that Reid is surging. Also the same in Florida with Rubio vs. Crist.

That's why I'm getting these trends out now, so we can see the changes in predictions as we approach November.

-PJ

44 posted on 07/24/2010 3:17:42 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MSF BU

Brown carried MA 10 by 20 points and it leans democrat?
*****************
Well that’s the cumulative/average opinion of our ‘Experts’. But as you can see from the chart those opinions change - 44 times last week. So stay tuned, even liberal MA might swing our way.


45 posted on 07/24/2010 3:25:36 PM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Rubio, Angle, Paul ... all tea party challengers need at least 2 things:

Stay on message. When the Dems have won in the past it has mostly been by painting the GOP as mean spirited and by framing the campaign such that a vote against the Dem (eg Obama) is racist or some other form of mean-spiritedness.

When the GOP wins (eg Contract with America) it is about real issues and not what Clinton does with Monica. Monica and mean-spiritedness boost talkradio ratings but do not win elections.

The second thing conservative GOP candidates need is for us ... freepers, tea partiers, etc to go talk to our neighbors who are watching the ball game or American Idol. We should not try to convince them about some true but obscure issue, such as the Federal Reserve, we should try to get their vote by being friendly and become the friendly face of the candidate to counter the unfriendly image the other side tries to create.

Some would say money is a 3rd element of a winning campaign. Thyat is not my area of expertise.


46 posted on 07/24/2010 3:33:10 PM PDT by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Okay. That makes sense.


47 posted on 07/24/2010 3:55:59 PM PDT by randita (Visit keyhouseraces.com for a list of vulnerable DEM and must hold GOP House seats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MontaniSemperLiberi; Political Junkie Too; randita
Another is that using ensemble averages of data based on different sampling techniques is the oldest dumb mistake of sophomoric self proclaimed statisticians.

Well don't blame Political Junkie Too for that 'mistake'. I'll take credit for that one. But it is worth noting that this series of 'mistakes' results in a predicted Republican gain of 30 seats in the House. That's pretty much the consensus these days among the political types. So PJToo seems to have 'stumbled' on the right answer. Just lucky I guess.

I'm curious. How would you estimate the number of Republicans seats we are going to have in January 2011?

And one more: What do you think the 'sampling techniques' are? We have 6 experts and 6 opinions. We average those opinions. These guys are reading polls and making their call. I see nothing wrong with averaging those inputs. Subjective IN - Subjective OUT. We're all guessing right now. These guys are simply sampling the polls and the gossip and the funding and the historical data and drawing their conclusions. I wouldn't call this a 'sampling technique'.

48 posted on 07/24/2010 4:08:18 PM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

You’re a dingaling.

If I posted Ensemble averages of future global average temperatures, would you say “That’s pretty much the consensus these days among the climate types”? I don’t think so.

I have no idea what the right answer is. We’ll just have to see. If I were to “predict” the results today, I’d go back and see who has been the best in the past and go with them. That, by most people’s judgment here, is Rasmussen. If I were to average the best prediction with the worst, would you say that was a better answer? Would you say that was “right” answer and you “stumbled upon” it? Well you just did.

Are your “results” even statistically stable? Have you checked?

Remember, you invited me into your discussion and are trying to have the last word.


49 posted on 07/24/2010 4:34:42 PM PDT by MontaniSemperLiberi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Are you still saying a gain of 30 for the GOP?


50 posted on 07/24/2010 5:26:34 PM PDT by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-68 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