Nate Silver Predicts GOP Senate Win in 2014

[Triana]

Cue the hand-wringing in Democratic circles everywhere: Nate Silver says the GOP will probably re-take the Senate in November's elections.

After he ran the table in 2012, correctly predicting the electoral outcomes in every single state, Silver has become something of a modern-day oracle to political junkies.

On Sunday, Silver took to his new FiveThirtyEight website—and his new TV home on ABC—to deliver one of his breathlessly awaited prognostications.

Republicans need six seats to regain control of the Senate chamber. How many seats did Silver think the GOP would win? "Exactly six," he told ABC's Jonathan Karl.

THE REST:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/24/nate-silver-gop-senate_n_5020271.html

[mikeysnot]

1. Now let him predict which seats.

"I want attention, people forgot who I am!"

[Gravitycollapse]

6. You don't know much about Nate Silver, do you?

[mikeysnot]

37. You assume too much.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

40. LoL. just cos the data doesn't fit our desire, doesnt mean he is wrong. nt

[mikeysnot]

44. Didn't say he was wrong now did I?

I said I would be more impressed if he picked which seats were going to flip. Have someone reread and explain what I wrote to clear up any misconceptions you may have had about me...

Making a broad sweeping generalization about taking the senate is part of the wrong wing end game of self fulfilling prophecy.

When he picked the election for the President, he picked it by each state....

So I will say it again. I would be more impressed if he picked the seats.

[bananas]

46. here...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fivethirtyeight-senate-forecast/

<snip>

As always, we encourage you to read this analysis with some caution. Republicans have great opportunities in a number of states, but only in West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana and Arkansas do we rate the races as clearly leaning their way. Republicans will also have to win at least two toss-up races, perhaps in Alaska, North Carolina or Michigan, or to convert states such as New Hampshire into that category. And they’ll have to avoid taking losses of their own in Georgia and Kentucky, where the fundamentals favor them but recent polls show extremely competitive races.

<snip>

[mikeysnot]

47. Wow, so clear-cut and pin-point accurate!

Extremely close races in...... March.

Now we just need some follow-up commentary by Donald Rumsfeld.

?t=1m22s

[Demsrule86]

48. I read that

However, he said a 'chance' and cautioned that November is a long way out...they are counting on Democrats not turning out...lets prove them wrong as we did in Virginia.

[mikeysnot]

50. I concur

My whole point was that his article had lots of "buts" and speculation based analysis based on opinion and other "unknowns". Just appeared to me was he was saying things to get attention, Get his name back in the press.

[bigdarryl]

2. Told you so

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4681523

[Whisp]

3. how could that possibly be?

would it have anything to do with 'democrats' shitting all over the President and ACA and the constant belly aching about whatever the fuck INSTEAD OF hammering on the bagging publicants, they hammer on Obama day in and day out. Could it be that they talk like that at home, to friends and co-workers too and spread that misinformation and lies wide and wider - that Obama is a weak lazy loser and ACA is going to kill you?

well golllllieeeeeee! what a surprise. redux of 2010, but it was the Hamsher set that came here to shit all over the democrats and it worked then.

[Demsrule86]

49. Vote!

We simply can not allow a 2010 repeat...I don't care who is elected in 2016 as president...we must not lose the Senate this year. No president can get anything done without the House or Senate...any Democrat is better than a con.

[L0oniX]

4. Ok ...so don't bother to vote ...got it.

[Capt. Obvious]

13. Your attitude is going to cost us the Senate and House

[L0oniX]

23. Well the wife blames me for everything so I am used to it.

[Gravitycollapse]

5. That's definitely not good. Silver is a great statistician.

He very rarely gets it wrong.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. In politics his track record is too short to determine his consistency

Two Presidential elections which by the way I also predicted with great accuracy using the 'finger in the breeze' method.

[Gravitycollapse]

27. I guarantee you didn't make accurate predications for all the states...

Not simply picking the winner but by how much. This requires great skill. Two election cycles mean probably millions of data points and immense calculation. That he was so accurate in so many predictions is a testament to his talents. He is one of the best statisticians in the world. Certainly better than anyone on this board.

[Capt. Obvious]

29. People on this board also keep failing to mention

his coverage and predictions of the 2008 Dem primary.

Long before anyone else fully grasped what was happening he was spelling out how Obama had the nomination sewn up.

[Gravitycollapse]

30. Some here will attack him simply because he predicts Dems will lose.

They don't understand the seriousness of the situation. As Silver has said, though, these early predictions are not particularly strong. But they can indicate early sentiment. Which is important.

[Capt. Obvious]

33. It's insane

or just immature.

It's like screaming at the tv and calling the weatherman a hack because he predicts rain. Or snow.

[mikeysnot]

45. nate is just trying to get his name back in the game early...

Since the election 2012 he has not been on TV much.

[Rstrstx]

25. This far out he certainly can be

Polling is not as rigorous now as it will be later in the year, he's only as good as the data he gets. Even later this year the quality of the polls won't be as good as they are for a presidential election. Thus his results weren't as great in 2010 as they were in 2008 or 2012. He was also off on some close house races in 2012 simply because there wasn't enough high quality polling data.

Even so, if you look at his predictions, the 6th candidate that would flip the Senate he gives a 50% chance of winning. The reason he gives an edge to the Rs is because the lean Ds are in a slightly weaker position than the lean Rs according to the data he has before him. FWIW I believe he had McCain as a favorite of winning in 2008 at a certain point in the summer- I can't confirm this but it should give you an idea of how accurate polling is this far out.

If anything this should motivate Ds to get off their rears and vote this election. Personally the most important reason I can think of for participating this year lies in the Senate, it could prove crucial should there be a SCOTUS nominee. Bills I'm not so worried about; even if the Rs have both houses there's no way they'll be able to override a veto or even a filibuster (well scratch the filibuster idea, the Rs will probably scrap it as soon as they get in).

[Rex]

7. Wow, with the M$M this desperate this far out from the elections

their GOP paymasters must really be worried! I wonder what they know that has them crapping their pants so soon?

[otohara]

11. Nate Is Not The MSM

I take this seriously and knowing Dem voting habits it doesn't take a brain surgeon to predict this.

I hope this scares the youngsters, women and Hispanics to get off their asses and vote this year because they
sat out in droves in 2010.. Those are the groups who sit out midterms.

[Rex]

12. What I don't understand is why so many Dems showed up to vote in 2006

but not 2010?

[otohara]

15. To Punish Dems?

they demonized Nancy Pelosi and ACA - might have had an effect on turnout.

I'm glad Nate has predicted this now, even though it's early.
It's put the fear in Dems and rightly so.

[Rex]

16. But why? Why would a person punish their own party and themselves?

That just sounds stupid, maybe they felt at ease with Obama in the WH? Whereas in 2006 we were all still in the middle of a nightmare?

[otohara]

18. Unaffliated Voters

who voted for Obama and are generally malcontents who swing back and forth or stay home are the folks deciding elections these days. I remember when phone-banking these people in 2010 - I got a whole lot of negative reactions to Obama. They voted for him in 08, but were unhappy things didn't happen overnight.

[Rex]

20. Yes I remember some people were angry at not getting an instant pony.

I just don't get people that won't go vote. And they are the ones that complain the most imo!

[joeybee12]

39. Howard Dean...nt

[unblock]

8. "predicts" is a bit strong. he's only giving them a slight edge at this stage

[Wounded Bear]

10. Yeah...he doesn't really "predict"...

He just assesses probabilities.

[Gravitycollapse]

31. Probabilities generally only matter according to their predictive power.

There are exceptions but making accurate predictions is the bulk of statistics.

[hfojvt]

14. nice headline

the election is seven months away, but it's already over. That seems to be the message here.

[Rex]

17. I smell desperation this early.

Maybe scared that a huge block of women voters are going D this fall?

[hfojvt]

19. my own fear

is that they will pound this drum for seven months, and in the words of Picard, they will "make it so".

That seems to be the way this usually works.

March - Republicans are gonna win
April - Republicans are gonna win
May - Republicans are gonna win
June - ""
July - ""
August - ""
September - ""
October - ""
November - Dewey defeats Truman

Note to journalists - try reporting NEWS and not PREDICTIONS of FUTURE news.

[Rex]

21. Yes, I think they've caught onto the fact that social engineering works

on a large portion of the American people. You ever think they will go back to investigative journalism? As far as I am concerned - the M$M is just a GOP entertainment cabal.

[hfojvt]

24. sometimes it works for Democrats though

They predicted the Democratic takeover of the House in 2006 for many months before the actual election. They predicted a Democratic Presidential victory over and over and over again, well before the 2008 election. In Kansas, in both 2002 and 2006, they spent many months declaring the inevitable future victory of the "Democrat" Kathleen Sebelius.

[Rex]

26. What we need is a liberal version of the M$M.

I know many will say we have a few, but they still have three entire news stations that work against Democratic control (ABC,CNN,Foxnews).

Well maybe the fact that some are calling it THIS early, will piss off the base! We need the BASE to show up and vote. I think not only will it, but a huge number of women will show up and vote D. Republicans have done everything possible to destroy any goodwill they have with women imo.

Actually I am convinced there was none there to begin with.

[tritsofme]

22. Really bad headline.

His projection is based on the election being held today.

It doesn't mean the political scene will be static for six months, things could get better or worse, but this is where we are today. I don't know why so many people prefer living in pretend-land.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. I predict a lot of politicians begging for donations while promising to get the money out politics.

[spanone]

32. who cares?

not me.

[cbdo2007]

34. love all the replies that don't seem to understand how statistics and Nate Silver's analysis works.

[Gravitycollapse]

41. Most people have no idea how statistical analysis works.

Couple that with a need to deny a possible reality where Republicans win the Senate, I will admit that is a truly terrifying prospect, and you have a mass of individuals who will call statistics Republican witchcraft because they need to keep the demons at bay.

[Capt. Obvious]

42. I've come up with an idea for them

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024720959

[Johonny]

43. Don't you think it has something to do with the headline

Nate Silver doesn't predict the GOP will win the senate at all. He merely is offering that there is a probability greater than 50/50 that they will. As people pointed out the head line doesn't do the guy any favors.

[ErikJ]

35. Obama is going to be vetoing every day.

[NaturalHigh]

36. A little early for that, in my opinion.

My state will undoubtedly send a republican to replace Coburn, but I'm sure not all states are so solidly red.

[Gothmog]

38. I love Nate but he is not perfect

If Nate was always correct, the GOP would be in control of the Senate today http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/senate-democrats-nate-silver-forecast

The Monday memo, written by Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee executive director Guy Cecil, is full of praise for Silver but also picks out four Senate races where Democrats won even though Silver said Republicans would claim the seats: Montana and North Dakota in 2012 and Colorado and Nevada in 2010.

Cecil writes:

All four are senators today because they were superior candidates running superior campaign organizations who made their elections a choice between the two candidates on the ballot. Only three Democratic incumbent senators have lost reelection in the last ten years, and our incumbents are once again prepared and ready

We don't minimize the challenges ahead. Rather, we view the latest projection as a reminder that we have a challenging map and important work still to do in order to preserve our majority.

A day earlier Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com released a new forecast saying that Republicans had a roughly 60 percent chance of winning the six seats they need to take control of the chamber.

This projection is only accurate as of today's polls. The election is not for several months and a great deal will change