Nate Silver: GOP Will Gain 49 In House

[WillParkinson]

Nate Silver: GOP Will Gain 49 In House

Over at FiveThirtyEight, Nate Silver updates his forecasts today to predict that the GOP will pick up 49 seats in the House. That's far fewer than the 100+ being claimed by some Republican flacks, but still enough for the GOP to take the majority by six seats. Silver hedges his bets:

As I have warned repeatedly in the past, we believe that the uncertainty in the forecast is intrinsically quite high, stemming from the unusually large number of seats in play, and from differences of opinion among pollsters in how to calibrate their likely voter models to account for the so-called “enthusiasm gap.” There are only 170 seats that the model thinks of as “safe” Republican — those where their chances of winning are 95 percent or higher. However, there are only 151 seats that the Democrats are at least 95 percent assured of winning.

According to Silver, there's still about a 25% chance for the Dems to hold the House, a result which would, of course, depend on a strong turnout from Democratic voters.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/10/nate-silver-gop-will-gain-49-in-house.html

[FSogol]

1. Get out the vote, everyone.

Pretty Please.

[Extend a Hand]

2. I just got back from early voting in OH

:dem:

[xxqqqzme]

7. Yes, THAT is our job

this time. I'll mail my ballot as soon as I hear back on some 'Board of' races. GOTV y'all.

[liberal N proud]

3. If I were not leaving the country on business, I would be pounding the pavement

[AtomicKitten]

4. "We've got your back, President Obama."

link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gBEi6ovATzJmRxN1zeiSWn67zMRwD9IRARL00?docId=D9IRARL00

On the corner of Collington Road and Route 301, a bright blue poster screams the Democratic Party's wishful thinking at passing cars: "We've got your back President Obama."

The poster, not quite big enough to qualify as a billboard, reflects an unspoken bargain between Obama and black voters: He asks, they deliver.

Last week, Obama asked.:thumbsup:

[chemp]

5. My two are safe

Big leads for both seats in Rhode Island, and we stand to send a new openly gay legislator to join Frank.

[truebrit71]

6. 1) That's bullshit and 2) GOTV and make sure it's bullshit..

..

[Parker CA]

10. Hahahaa. Kick and Rec this post!! GOTV!!!

[tridim]

8. Nate is a victim of his own flawed algorithm.

This isn't baseball Nate.

[FBaggins]

9. Joe's math needs a little work.

Nate's most likely scenario results in a 21 seat majority... not six.

According to Silver, there's still about a 25% chance for the Dems to hold the House, a result which would, of course, depend on a strong turnout from Democratic voters.

Yep... absent some major news item (or a massive failure of polling the likes of which we've never seen)... that's the ballgame right there.

[Cognitive_Resonance]

11. I want to see egg encrusted faces on Wednesday morning. GOTV! nt

[BrklynLiberal]

12. The repukes will be cheating, lying and stealing in every election in which they are involved.

The defense is twofold. GOTV Dems
AND WATCH EVERY MOVE THE REPUKES MAKE. Sadly, there are just not enough poll watchers to cover every possibility.

Even here in NYC there is a major screwup that could mess up the elections..

http://www.wnyc.org/articles/its-free-country/2010/oct/21/ballot-tells-voters-fill-wrong-oval/

Ballot Tells Voters to Fill Wrong Oval
Thursday, October 21, 2010

By John Keefe

Instructions on a sample ballot for the general election tell voters to fill the "oval above" a candidate's name -- when the correct oval is actually below each candidate's name.

In one case, voters trying to vote for Carl Paladino for Governor on the Taxpayers Party line would actually cast a vote for Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins, if they followed the instructions and were using the sample ballot.

The Brennan Center for Justice found the error after obtaining a sample ballot from the city Board of Elections. The center wrote a letter requesting the ballot be fixed before the election. WNYC has not yet reached officials at the Board of Elections for comment.

The incorrect instructions read:

"To vote for a candidate whose name is printed on this ballot, fill in the oval above or next to the name of the candidate."

"For most voters, they'll be able to figure out who to vote for," said Brennan Center Senior Counsel Larry Norden. Unless, he said, they read the instructions. Norden said that even if new ballots can't be printed by election day, the center hopes clarification instructions will be posted in each privacy booth.

On the sample ballot, each candidate and his or her oval are bounded by a box, and in most cases the proper oval is clearly below the candidate's name.

But ballot designers who looked at a similar sample ballot at WNYC's request before the statewide primary expressed concern that sometimes the nearest oval is actually just above the candidate's name -- potentially causing confusion even without the incorrect instructions.

To look at the sample ballot yourself, scroll down and click on the yellow boxes below for detail. The mistaken instructions are on the second page.

[Aramchek]

13. Nate doesn't know what's going to happen. But he pretends like he does.

His paycheck depends on it.

[Statistical]

16. Nate never claimed to know what IS going to happen just the likelihood of it happening.

The insurance company writing a life insurance policy doesn't know WHEN you are going to die they know the likelihood of you living past certain age.

Insurance companies routinely do get individual policies "wrong". Someone takes out a policy and dies in car crash the very next day. Still knowing the probability allows insurance company to write policies so that on average they make money.

[Aramchek]

18. At one time, Nate seemed to know this. No longer. He bought the myth.

[Statistical]

19. Meh. I think if Nate showed a "Score" 20 seats better for the Dems you would sing a different tune.

Nothing changes between 2008 & 2010. Nate used same model.

Now it is possible that Polling is less accurate in 2010 compared to 2008. Nate even aknowledges this potential.

To say he "knew something" and now doesn't reduces the concept of Statistical models down to vodoo and superstition.

He has model which weights and then averages pools.

In 2008 it predicted a Democratic surge. In 2010 it predicts a Republican surge (although smaller than the 100+ seats nonesense some claim).

The only difference is you liked the results in 2008 and don't like them in 2010.

[Aramchek]

20. He does. His prediction is between 19 and 70 seats. What is that really worth?

It covers Nate's ass, that's for sure.

[zipplewrath]

14. A very bad year

"...we believe that the uncertainty in the forecast is intrinsically quite high, stemming from the unusually large number of seats in play, and from differences of opinion among pollsters in how to calibrate their likely voter models to account for the so-called “enthusiasm gap.”

I almost feel sorry for the pollsters. No one really knows who is going to show up, and in what numbers. They can't begin to figure out their models. I have detected very little "enthusiasm" among the non-bagger conservatives around here. The liberals are all voting. The crowd that may decide this election is the fence sitting independents. And again I can't tell from them if they are voting at all.

[Mudoria]

15. From a report on my local news channel

Democratic voters across the country are early voting in larger numbers than the pubs. I wonder if Nov 2nd might not just shock a lot of these prognosticators.

[semillama]

21. In Ohio, early voting shows a 2-1 Democratic favor

I voted early, and my wife is going to as well.

[pstokely]

22. Probably lots of undecided voters

that will wait until Nov 2 to decide if they decide at all

[mzmolly]

17. The thought of Boehner controlling the house

is chilling. Yes - VOTE!