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:

- "GOP House Seats P10” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 10%.
- ”GOP House Seats EV” – the expected value (mean) or probability-weighted average of the simulation.
- ”GOP House Seats P90” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 90%. Or, it is the value where the probability of the actual number being higher is 10%.
- ”Probability of 218” – The probability associated with value 218 (the House majority goal).
- ”GOP Gain” – The difference between the GOP EV and the current number of seats (179), rounded down.

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.

- California 1: No change (R -7%)
- Colorado 2: No change (R +5%)
- Florida 1: No change (R +2)
- Illinois 2: No change (R -1%)
- Kentucky 1: +1% (R +8%)
- Missouri 1: No change (R +2%)
- Nevada 2: No change (R +2)
- Ohio 2: +2% (R +6%)
- Pennsylvania 2: +1% (R +7%)
- Washington 2: No change (R +3%)
- Wisconsin 1: No change (R +1%)

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

- "GOP Senate Seats P10” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 10%.
- ”GOP Senate Seats EV” – the expected value (mean) or probability-weighted average of the simulation.
- ”GOP Senate Seats P90” – the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 90%. Or, it is the value where the probability of the actual number being higher is 10%.
- ”Probability of 51” – The probability associated with value 51 (the Senate majority goal).
- ”GOP Gain” – The difference between the GOP EV and the current number of seats (41), rounded down.

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.)

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. ;)

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).

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.)

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.

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson