I like those odds.
BTTT
Great news. Thanks for all the hard work.
I hope it keeps moving in this direction!!!
Thanks! This is looking great, let’s hope the seats keep increasing for the Republicans.
Given that most of the pundits are still behind the curve, I expect that GOP pickups will be far, far north of 44 seats. For the sake of argument, you should move every pundit rating one spot towards the GOP (likely Dem to leans Dem, leans Dem to tossup, tossup to leans GOP, leand GOP to likely GOP, etc.) and run the numbers again to see what happens.
Historically, what is the largest number of seats to swap during an election for either party? Just interested to see if this election is approaching that record.
This is also on your page and it’s interesting to note the different projections. There’s quite a disparity based on the different models but all but one project a Republican takeover.
Republican Pickup Projections
Dick Morris 73
Fred Barnes 60
Unlikely Voter 60
RCP 51
Freedom’s Lighthouse 50
Sabato 47
NYT-Silver 47
Cook 50+
KHR 44
EP 47
Rothenberg 37-45
CQ Politics 36
We Need 39 to Win the House
Heh--this is a good omen. LV paper reporting panic in Reid's camp (Intrade: Angle 55, Reid 44) DSSC now pouring money into Nevada.
When Rand Paul called his opponent a "Democrat, Rand's numbers shot to a 15 point lead.
So how bad is it? "Angle's running the worst campaign in the country, and she could still win." Carville's comments about Sharron Angle could be said of almost any Repub candidate---with a good or bad campaign going. NOTE THAT Not One Democrat is campaigning on their legislative victories, O'care, bailouts, Tarp, and "summer of recovery."
STUCK ON STUPID No matter what progressives do, it backfires against them. Obama is between a rock and a hard place---he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Not even Ohaha giving Rahm Emanuel the bum's rush out of the WH can turn the tide of the Republican tsunami forming offshore---bringing the deluge of Nov 2, 2010.
NEW POLL SHOWS SCHAKOWSKY BELOW 50%
Our new poll data shows that Jan Schakowsky has fallen to 48%, while Republican challenger Joel Pollak is gaining ground at 30%.
Most telling, only 44% of voters say that Schakowsky deserves to be re-elected, while 42% say that it is time to give a new person a chance.
Among those who feel most strongly, only 37% say that Schakowsky deserves to be re-elected, while 38% say it is time to give a new person a chance.
This is a big deal as the seat is considered a "lock" and the District is presumed liberal.
Pollak has a chance to tighten this race even further.
How GOP Lady & I will be feeling come 11-3-10, LOL!
So did the Dems pull the plug on the IL-11 race? I didn’t see Debbie Halvorson’s awful commercial during the 10 o’clock news last night...Go Adam Kinzinger!
The problem with Monte Carlo trials, and statistical models in general, is that they are highly dependent on static assumptions. Small variations from the assumptions can produce results that differ wildly from predictions. (Think Global Warming models).
Lesson: Forget about the predictions. Get out the vote!
outstanding work
“Political Junkie Too, the resident statistical wiz at Freerepublic.com”
Hardly. I’m still waiting on a response to using the Logistics Regression Function. He does not know what the variance of his distributions are. They are not the margin of error. He does not know if the central limit theorem applies. He does not know how to forecast based on a sampling of past data. He has not developed a model to do any sort of Kalman filter.
Anybody can do a Monti Carlo simulation. All one needs is a decent excel add-in. The fact that he’s done a Monti Carlo simulation tells me that he doesn’t know statistics.