Modeling Politics

Jonathan Chait of TNR makes some good points about establishing the baseline for the upcoming Dem debacle:

It's certainly legitimate to question the policies or the tactics of the Obama administration. But in order to have that conversation, you need to begin with a baseline expectation. What sort of performance should we expect normally? Clearly, in the current environment, it's not rational to expect the majority party to escape any losses whatsoever. If you want to blame the Democrats' loss on bad messaging or wimpy policies or rampaging socialism, then you need to establish how you'd expect them to do given normal messaging and policies.

Political scientist Douglass Hibbs has a model of the election. It takes account of three factors:

1. The presence of a midterm election, which generally results in losses for the president's party.

2. The incumbent party's "exposure" -- the more seats you hold, the deeper into hostile territory you're stretched, and the easier it is to lose seats.

3. Personal income growth, which heavily influences out-party behavior.

The model does not include presidential approval rating. Indeed, it doesn't include anything other than structural factors. That model predicts the Democrats will lose 45 seats in the House.

Sabato says 55; the most recent estimate from Nate Silver was that Reps would pick up 53 seats to bring their total to 232.

If those predictions pan out Obama and Team Progressive will have underperformed by only a few seats.  Now taking a step back, one might wonder whether there was really nothing the Dems could have done to improve the economy (which would have improved personal income growth).  Saying that the Democrats will lose seats because they will take the blame for a weak economy sidesteps the question of whether that blame is fairly placed.  No one thinks that the President has total control over the economy, but would Mr. Chait really argue that the current state of the economy is utterly divorced from anything Obama might have done about it?

But that is not what struck me about this modeling!  What struck me about the data fitted to years past (in the Hibbs paper), is that there was *no* Watergate effect in 1974 and *no* impeachment effect in 1998.

By way of contrast, Republicans did out-perform the model in 2002 and under-perform in 2006; both results could fairly be attributed to terror and Iraq (but see below).

Republicans also underperformed by about 20 seats in 1970, which I would attribute to Cambodia and Kent State.  In 1994, Republicans outperformed by (approximately) a dozen seats, which may be a useful guide to the likely direction and magnitude of mis-estimation this time around.

Still, I remain deeply suspicious of a model that is telling me that the resignation of a President in 1974, or the impeachment of one in 1998, had no impact on the subsequent midterm elections.

Oh well - Prof. Hibbs has been doing this for a long time.

SELF-QUIBBLE:  Matching under-performance and over-performance with non-economic news (as I did above for 1970, 2002 and 2006) makes a certain sense, since this model does not specifically incorporate other variables (Hibbs did make a Presidential "Bread and Peace" model).

On the other hand, every day the financial news includes some good news, some bad news, and the reported market movements.  Sometimes there is an obvious connection; other days, what is obvious is that the reporter simply said, hmm, the market went up so I guess the good news was the driver.  And maybe it was, or maybe the driver was something overlooked by reporters but not investors.

BONUS QUIBBLE:  Just to stick with Watergate, the 1974 data point was used to estimate the model parameters, so in effect, 1974 dragged the model towards itself.  Maybe the model result would be quite different and there would be an obvious 'Watergate effect' if 1974 had been held out of the data used to estimate the model.  Or maybe the weak economy in 1974 created an environment in which Nixon's opponents could force him to resign and in 1999 Clinton survived due to a strong economy bouying his popularity.

Comments

[MarkO]

I thought there would be pictures of models?!?!

[Frau Kobold]

Just be thankful there's no photo of Chait.His writing is ugly enough.Brave TM!

[Jack is Back!]

Pre-mortem's have become the norm these days. Straws in the wind of change. Notice no candidate is using hope as an attraction.

[bgates]

It's certainly legitimate to question the policies or the tactics of the Obama administration.

Is that the fallout from Jon Stewart's reproachful "dude"?

[Dave (in MA)]

The Rs lost 30 seats in the House in 2006. Some other midterms:
'38 FDR -71
'58 Eisenhower -47
'62 Kennedy/Johnson -47
'74 Nixon/Ford -43
'86 Reagan -5
'98 Clinton +5

(from a post I made a few years ago to refudiate a moonbat's claim that the 2006 election constituted a "spanking".) These only include 6th year midterms for Presidents in their 2nd term, however.

[hit and run]

For MarkO:

http://www.ezimages.net/upload/RUDESUBS/AmericanEconomicModel.gif>Pic of Economic Model

It's a metaphor for something. Or a pun. If you're Obama.

[LouP]

"...you need to begin with a baseline expectation. What sort of performance should we expect normally?"

It's a little late for that question, isn't it? As I recall, we could expect kumbaya for everyone, the oceans to stop rising, etc., etc. - all those expectations brought to you, and trumpeted, by the new Messiah, the MSM, college professors, and the Nobel Prize Good Old Boy Club.

[Dave (in MA)]

http://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/aci_092110.php>Midterm Elections: Past and Present

[jwest]

This is a strange midterm election due to the fact that there has rarely (if ever) been back to back waves.

The factor that skewed all the data outside of normal parameters was Obama being the first black candidate. This drove youth/minority/single women voting patterns to extremes. Consequently, the data used to weight polls has been distorted.

Take Delaware for instance. Currently, 107% of the adult population of the state is registered to vote. Because of extensive voter registration drives by democrats in ’06 and ’08, thousands of people who have no intention of ever voting again appear on the roles, which are used to calculate the pool of democrat voters. According to Pew and AP, minorities have the least interest in this midterm, followed by young voters.

There are 48 districts currently held by democrats that voted for McCain in ’08. As a baseline in a non-wave year, democrats would lose these seats. This is a starting point, on top of which additional seats are added due to the strength of the wave.

I’m looking for 92 net gains in the House and 11 in the Senate.

[MarkO]

Oh, hit. That's cold.

[Porchlight]

Pre-butt-kicking face-saving.

[Porchlight]

I like your thinking, jwest.

[DerHahn]

@Dave in MA .. that's interesting because, contra Hibbs, it shows an impeachment effect in 1998.

Since Hibbs inverts the presidental victory margin as part of his formula that might account for why it looks like there is no resignation effect in 1974 after Nixon's landslide in 1972. Nixon was headed for a pretty massive loss in the House anyway if you look at the numbers for Eisenhower and Kennedy/Johnson in Dave's table (BTW, shouldn't that be 1966 instead of 1962 for Kennedy/Johnson?)

[hit and run]

It's a hard job,Mark. But somebody had to choose to do it.

[Danube of Thought]

A nice curve-fitting technique known as "predicting the past."

[ObeliskToucher]

Information availability was quite a bit different in the years prior to 1990 when most people's information came only from the major network news programs, news weeklies, and your local paper.

[Dave (in MA)]

DerHahn, yeah; my typo.

[sbw]

Our cartoonist has drawn a "Red Dog" for me. After the election I hope to send it to new Republican congress critters to encourage them to stand up to the old guard if they want to survive beyond the 2012 election.

[Dave (in MA)]

Hotair headline: "Breaking: Bomb found on Yemen-to-US cargo flight; Update: Fox confirms concern over “several packages”; Update: CBS says 10-20 packages out of Yemen sought; Update: US says it’s AQ, targeting synagogues"

PMSNBCBSABCNN Blaming Bush and/or "teabaggers" to commence in 3... 2...

[Extraneus]

Why does the write-in list show Murky standing out w/ addy, when others are just names? Also, question re: party affil. on list, maybe it's req'd for registered dems & repubs?

[Clarice]

"AQ targetting synagogues"--More of that Islamaphobia again? Let's tie Amanpour to the biggest one in NYC and have her report live.

[MarkO]

Using this hisotrical model, (and I don't mean Kate Moss, whom I saw once in Barney's and can't yet get over it) the Yankees will win the Series.

[daddy]

"Let's tie Amanpour to the biggest one in NYC and have her report live."

Great idea Clarice.

Religion of Peace in action.

As expected, have received some internal e-mail info on the subject, but nothing much different than is on the tube.

KayyyyyyyRooooooo...

[PaulY]

Will massive gerrymandering cause more or fewer gains compared to change in votes. There are more safe seats for both parties as states legislatures concentrate minortity party voters. But are marginal seatts more likely to flip? Generally turnout in safe seats is less because there is less interest. I am in VA with no governor or Senate race but turnout is expected to be 40%, same as projected national turnout. Several D seats are expected to flip.

[peter]

Sabato is a Dem. I've known him since he was President of the student council at U.Va. He's low balling

[narciso]

Well we've known he's been a lying weasel, since he sandbagged Allen in 2006

[Clarice]

I don't know how you model sentiment. This race will go on sentiment. Sentiment about obamacare and wasted TARP money; sentiment about the Holder suit against Arizona and the Black Panther case; sentiment about calling the voters dumb; sentiment about lost jobs and lost opportunity for people and their children; sentiment about the real estate debacle. Hatred of PC and AA. Anger at the nasty arrogance of the president, Reid and Pelosi and the media.Fury at the misrepresentations of the Tea Party . I am sure I left out something.

[Stephanie]

Signs, signs, everywhere are signs.

The new advert on the telly for the coming Windows phone has the trailer music...

Must be the season for the witch.

Hah!

[narciso]

I think you've covered it nicely, Clarice. although you can't forget the absolute blinkeredness that was typified by te embrace of the GZM, but represented appeasement of radical Islam

[Clarice]

now this

American fighter jets have escorted a passenger plane into New York amid a huge security alert on both sides of the Atlantic.

Watch updates live on skynews.com/liveplus

[Melinda Romanoff]

Clarice-

Yes, you left out the coming TARP II, for the MERS-mire, also known as QE2 (Quantitative Easing Part 2, buy all the banks assets (problems) and make the whole thing "go away".

And the largest tax hike ever, with no vote.

But you're right, of course, there's bound to be more.

[Bush League]

Bruce Bartlett;

As I have previously warned, I am very fearful that it will be impossible to raise the debt limit, which would bring about a default and real, honest-to-God bankruptcy — something many Tea Party-types have openly called for in an insane belief that this will somehow or other impose fiscal discipline on out-of-control government spending without forcing them to vote either for spending cuts or tax increases.

....Republicans should savor the period from Election Day to the first day of the new Congress on January 3, 2011. That will be as good as it gets for them; afterwards, it’s all downhill once they have to act, take responsibility, and can no longer blame Democrats for everything bad that happens anywhere. That goes for their allies in the business community, who naively assume that every action of the last two years that they opposed will magically disappear. And it goes double for the Tea Partiers, who have never had to take responsibility for anything. It’s a whole new ballgame in January."

For those Tea-partiers who aren't in love with armed-insurrection and anarchy.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Issues/The-Economy/2010/10/29/GOP-Insurgents-May-Disrupt-Leaders-Plans-and-Go-Rogue.aspx

[Janet the tea-vangelist!]

Hatred of PC and AA.

I think this a huge part of the anger.

[Janet the tea-vangelist!]

**this is a**

[caro]

OT,but I loved the sight of Govs Barbour,Cristie and Pawlenty in Ohio in support of Kasich.There was a sense of good power there.

[glasater]

Ah--Bush League--are you sure you haven't been reading Zero Hedge?

[bunky]

Narciso: never forget what that POS did to Allen.

[Bush League]

"The most influential historian of the day Charles A. Beard forecast doom for FDR in 1934. He wrote: "the disintegration of President Roosevelt's prestige proceeded with staggering rapidity during February and March."

* * *

Reviewing the criticisms leveled against New Deal programs was apparently instructive for the president. Roosevelt listened to his advisors suggesting one or another alternative, one option against another. And then he pondered ... and pondered ... taking his time, much to his aides' frustration. "He knows nothing about economics!" was the usual charge exchanged among them.

Then, suddenly, FDR brightened and seemed to know how and where he wanted to move. His staff remained perplexed, but again Schlesinger gets it right.

"The basic reason for [FDR's] inaction was that he was simply unprepared to act ... [His] inscrutable processes of decision were moving all too slowly within." Concludes Schlesinger, "He could not lead until he knew where he wanted to go."

* * *

In their next edition, Time magazine reported: "Franklin Roosevelt's mood suddenly changed." His whole legislative program was in the pot and boiling ...The Social Securities Bill, the Banking bill, the Utilities Bill, the Wagner Bill, the fate of the NRA ... Suddenly the irritability which had marked his recent actions dropped from him. Pronounced Time: "His 'winter peeve' was over."

Yes, the New Deal was rolling again. Referring to the autumn term of Congress in 1934, just at the time of the November elections, Charles A. Beard radically changed his tune from only a few months before. "Seldom, if ever, in the long history of Congress had so many striking and vital measures been spread upon the law books in a single session."

And the results of mid-term election of November 1934?

The Democrats increased their congressional seats in both houses, increased their governorships, and chalked up a higher proportion of the popular vote. So much for the pundits!"

http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2010/08/historical-perspective-the-1934-midterm-election.html

[Bush League]

"In the 1936 presidential election, the American voter, heeding FDR's inaugural summons to dismiss "nameless, unreasoning fear," ignored Republican fear mongering and responded at the polls by giving Franklin Roosevelt an overwhelming victory. In the Electoral College only Maine and Vermont appeared in the Republican column.

Roosevelt's administration had come under strong attacks, cries of outrage from both the left and the right. From the right it's not very interesting; mainly a brick labeled "socialism" -- heaved through a window while marching through the streets. As one could expect, the financial community fought banking reform legislation every inch of the way -- as we see today with the Administration's proposals -- but eventually the FDIC emerged, to be followed by the Security and Exchange Commission and then the Glass-Steagall bill.

On the other side of the spectrum there were a substantial number of Americans who harbored serious doubts about capitalism. They had suffered through the Great Depression for years with no government intervention, mainly because President Hoover and his cabinet had viewed capitalism as sacrosanct, never to be interfered with through government action.

Efforts made by President Hoover to address the problems were all voluntary. Bankers, when meeting with the president, would nod their assent, but then do nothing. Joining Hoover they acknowledged that feeling hunger or lacking shelter due to being out of work for months and years on end was debilitating, profoundly depressing. But that was the price to be endured for maintaining "free enterprise".

Many Americans blamed the rich people on Wall Street -- and the buccaneering capitalism they represented. The feeling was widespread. Even Herbert Hoover remarked, shortly before his exit from office, "You know, the only trouble with capitalism is capitalists, they're too damn greedy." Quite a change from his earlier statements!

By the winter of 1932-33 many Americans were sick of capitalism. They saw it as a failed system; they saw bankers and financiers as being responsible for their prolonged agony through the previous years of the Hoover administration, and right on into Roosevelt's tenure.

[hit and run]

It was predicted that you would show up,cleo.

And here you are. Like a puppet.

[Rick Ballard]

Careful now, nobody use the dart gun until the nets are ready.

[Sue]

Damn. I never really noticed how freaking good looking Marco Rubio is. http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/251504/mason-dixon-math-isnt-there-anything-rubio-victory>Yes he can. Ooolalala.

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet]

Hope springs eternal, Bush. You are forgetting to mention one thing. However you feel about his political viewpoints, Roosevelt was one of the best politicians in the nation's history.

Sadly for your implied argument, as Lloyd Benson might have said to the Bamster:

I served with FDR, I knew FDR and Mr. President, you're no FDR.

[Bush League]

"Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it." - Winston Churchill

[Rick Ballard]

Hoover and the '30 mid-terms might be slightly more apropos as the historical "model". Except, of course, that the Dem losses in '10 will be much, much higher than Republican losses in '30.

'Cause BHO is no Hoover, either.

[Bush League]

You're a Hoover, Marmalard.

[Rick Ballard]

Coolidge, you idiot. Hoover was a progressive.

[Bush League]

Same smell. Eau de Avarice

[Porchlight]

Hi, Cleo! Good to see you!

I hope you have everything in order for Tuesday - it's gonna be awesome! You know you always have friends here at JOM, so I hope you'll come by at some point during night so we can chat.

Hope you have a great Halloween too! Do you have a cool costume picked out?

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--"Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it." - Winston Churchill--

Churchill didn't say that, dope.

[bgates]

Buck up, Cleo - midway through his only term, Obama's already been reduced to meeting with B-list prog bloggers, so by late 2011 he might be desperate enough to extend White House invites to dorks like yourself who just put incoherent comments on other people's blogs.

[Bush League]

"Do you have a cool costume picked out?"

Gee whiz. I sure do Pooch. It's a real patriot theme, including a three-cornered hat complete with tea-bag chandeliers. Are you gonna have caramel apples to give out or are you going on the cheap again?

[bgates]

Are you gonna have caramel apples to give out

Me, I'll be giving the tykes bags of steamed broccoli with pictures of Michelle on them.

[Clarice]

bgates.....Wills and the others are" B-list prog bloggers.".Oh, no!!!!
Weren't they the highlights of journolist?

[bgates]

Good on you for providing cites btw, Cleo.

[Bush League]

Iggy;

Is there a direct connection between your words and your limbic brain, by-passing the under-sized cortex?

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

You know, as repulsive as Arlen Specter and Lisa Madcowski are, seems to me Crist takes the cake for utter shamelessness and complete lack of scruples in his flip flops and machinations to secure power.

[Bush League]

"machinations"

That's a pretty big word, Iggy.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--Is there a direct connection between your words and your limbic brain, by-passing the under-sized cortex?--

A claim of intended irony is only credible from someone without your track record of unintended idiocies, cleo.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--That's a pretty big word, Iggy.--

Sorry. Google it.

[Porchlight]

Are you gonna have caramel apples to give out or are you going on the cheap again?

We totally have caramel apples! Also full sized Pixy Stix. Those are hard to find but the kids really love them.

Definitely come by in your costume, I really want to see it. You always have the most amazing getups. I don't know how you do it, you're so creative. ;)

Well, I hope you have a great night. Don't be a stranger!

[Captain Hate]

I hope you have everything in order for Tuesday

It looks like the percocet and vodka inventories took a beating earlier today

[bgates]

Clarice, I didn't see any of the juicebox mafia* in that photo. (Maybe Willis ate them.) And look at the rest of that lineup - somebody who writes for Kos? They let John Edwards do that, for cryin' out loud. Then there was a guy who was so obscure I didn't even get Iowahawk's gag about him being a thief. B-list was generous.

*Mickey Kaus plays being a concern troll for the Democrats, but he does want to destroy the country every bit as much as Obama does. Nonetheless, I'll always love that phrase.

[Janet the tea-vangelist!]

going on the cheap

We once toyed with the idea of giving out soy sauce packets...left over from carry-out. Hah! I like the idea of bags of steamed broccoli better though. Hahahahaha

[Jane]

You know, as repulsive as Arlen Specter and Lisa Madcowski are, seems to me Crist takes the cake for utter shamelessness and complete lack of scruples in his flip flops and machinations to secure power

I've never seen a better argument for term limits.

[PaulY]

Obama adopted same failed economic policies Hoover used at start of recession. Cater to unions, raise taxes and increase spending and deficits. Look it up cleo.

[narciso]

"aristotle was not Belgian, and the London Underground, isn't a political movement," Otto, Santayana said that statement about history.

I thought Charlie was the zenith of unscrupulousness, but Lisa's got them beat by a long mile

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--I thought Charlie was the zenith of unscrupulousness, but Lisa's got them beat by a long mile--

Maybe narc, but at least she claims she'll caucus with the Repubs whereas Charlie will do so with the Dems.

[hit and run]

but at least she claims she'll

Her claims are worth exactly what?

If the Dems were poised to retain control -- who do you think she'd be claiming she'd caucus with?

If there were more time left in the election -- and polls showed that she had more chance of picking up McAdams supporters than Miller -- who would she be claiming she'd caucus with?

Taking Murcoosky at her word is worth the paper this comment was written on.

[Frau Schweigsam]

"Well we've known he's (Sabato's) been a lying weasel, since he sandbagged Allen in 2006"
Larry's mother wears macaca boots.

Hey! Silent Cal had a lot of good qualities, I've heard.

"Our country is an exceedingly good example of the fact that if production be encouraged and increased, then distribution fairly well takes care of itself. Other countries, by their actions in stopping production, in penalizing industry and economy, and rewarding indolence and extravagance, have been able to bring about a very general and equal distribution of misery, but no other country ever approached ours in the equal and general distribution of prosperity." Coolidge, 1923

"That tax is theoretically best which interferes least with business. Every student knows that excessively high tax rates defeat their own purpose. They dry up that source of revenue and leave those paying lower rates to furnish all the taxes."

"There is no escaping the fact that when the taxation of large incomes is excessive, they tend to disappear."

"Ultimately, property rights and personal rights are the same thing."

[JM Hanes]

"That model predicts the Democrats will lose 45 seats in the House."

It seems like just yesterday the Chait crowd expected Dems to outperform the models for the next 45 years, doesn't it? It's not hard to understand why he's suddenly interested in establishing a new baseline, but never mind. Anything that leaves the Dems feeling complacent about their losses sounds good to me.

[sbw]

Charles A Beard was forced on us in college in the 1960s. Didn't enjoy reading it. Part of a course on how each generation colors the history it writes.

[Porchlight]

That Cal had a hell of a lot of good sense.

[Porchlight]

Anything that leaves the Dems feeling complacent about their losses sounds good to me.

Me, too, JMH. "Ah well, it won't be so bad" is exactly the kind of thing I think a Democrat might say to herself after she's wound her way through her busy Tuesday, suddenly finding herself at the end of the evening not having voted.

[JM Hanes]

hit:

"Her claims are worth exactly what?"

Her claims are not worth much, but the political math seems clear enough. Murky could beat McAdams, and quite possibly Miller too with a write-in campaign, while there were also a bevy of ways Miller could lose a straight head to head with the Democrat.

I don't think LM was just a sentimental favorite of the Republican old boys' club, I think they did the calculus on keeping a Republican in the Alaska seat one way or the other, and decided to strike a Devil's deal. They would let her proceed without further dressing down, and she would swear allegiance to the caucus in return -- regardless of which constituency put her back in office.

The Dems could try bribing her with the the Energy chair, but she'd pay dearly for a mighty short tenure in hostile waters, when 2012 rolled around. Unless the Dems end up riding a truly miraculous second wave, she'd be a shoe-in for permanent tenure as either chair or ranking member -- with reelection practically guaranteed till the end of days.

[Clarice]

I think that's it in a nutshell, JMH.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--Her claims are worth exactly what?--

Hey. They're worth as much as that other liar Crist's.

[glasater]

Not that anyone could add to JMH's comments but my thought is if LM were to win--Zero would compromise the heck out of her.
He would hold her up as a "reasonable" R because she would go along with his program(s).
Just horrible to contemplate.

[glasater]

Hillbuzz is tweeting some delicious gossip:

Why are so many political operatives moving to South Carolina after November 3rd?

[JM Hanes]

I should have included this gem from President Legal Scholar, per the same link I posted above:

And the filibuster is not part of the Constitution. The filibuster, if you look at the history of it, may have arisen purely by accident because somebody didn't properly apply Robert's Rules of Procedure and forgot to get a provision in there about what was required to close debate. And folks figured out very early, this could be a powerful tool. It was used as a limited tool throughout its history. Sadly, the primary way it was used was to prevent African Americans from achieving civil rights.

[JM Hanes]

Oops, I posted the link in the Keeping Fear Alive page. OTOH, the quote works well enough as standalone entertainment.

[Frau Schweigsam]

Alaska Dispatch reports on Dan Fagan's removal from the air:
"Branch Haymans, an Anchorage financial advisor, was angered by Fagan's show Thursday afternoon. Haymans is a close friend of Murkowski's and has volunteered for her campaign, but is not part of her paid campaign staff.

On Friday morning, Haymans called KFQD and spoke with Joe Campbell, KFQD's program director. Haymans said he told Campbell that he thought Fagan's on-air behavior bordered on election tampering, but didn't threaten legal action or ask for Fagan to be taken off the air.

Campbell did not return a message requesting comment for this story.

"To send people with no legitimate reason other than to create confusion and chaos in an election seemed, to me, to be over the line," Haymans said. "He was no longer a talk show host. He was just a mouthpiece for Joe Miller."

Haymans also said that his phone call to KFQD was not coordinated with the Murkowski campaign in any way."

Riiiiiight...

[Jane]

Wow Glasater - I can't believe we missed it

[Melinda Romanoff]

Jane-

Going at it from another angle, it looks like E.S. & S. voting machines, in use in South Carolina, have a particularly "iffy" reputation. Perhaps not far from Sequoia's machines, now owned by Dominion Voting Systems, whom you might recall has ownership interests by Hugo.

Yes, That Hugo.

As in Chavez.

[Jane]

Well the candidate doesn't choose the voting machine, does he?

[Clarice]

I'm sure that's not it. Wiki confirms my recollection that until shortly before the primary, Hillary was ahead of Obama even though it has a large black population.
If there's anything to the story it probably has to do with some sort of bribery, vote fraud etc from the time of those polls to the election.

I do not doubt Hill Buzz' claim that obama stole the caucuses in Iowa (and I think Texas).

[Melinda Romanoff]

And Nevada.

[glasater]

I think Clarice and Mel have the bead on this one Jane. There was a comment yesterday on a Fox show mentioning S Carolina regarding attorneys going to that state here just before the election but with no explanation why for sure.

Patty Murray is coming to our town at noon today and the local Tea Party has sent a call out to welcome her in style--a protest if you will. I'm going to go and take pictures of the event and will post a photo if I get anything wonderful. However, there is terrible fog here right now and am hoping it burns off...

[Melinda Romanoff]

Jane-

Usually, the Secretary of State bids out the contract for those machines.

No problem there, right George?

[glasater]

I should add that I'll be wearing the Sturbridge tee shirt Jane:)

[Jane]

Yeah Glasater!!!!

[Jane]

I hope something emerges that is bigger than Watergate and then I hope we don't impeach but let him swing in the wind until 2012.

[BR]

Your wish will come true, Jane.

[mark l.]

why not just cut and past everything that lib journalists wrote about the meaning of 2006 elections...

the dems won 31 seats in the house, and 6 seats in the senate.

it provides a 'fig leaf of linearity' to point out that the implications of winning 62 seats is double the implication of winning 31 seats.

I am quite sure, that even nate silver, if willing, could explain how this interpretation doesn't do it justice.

that 1000 year 'reich' of liberalism?
it fell down in it's second year.

cue nelson muntz.

[Walter Sobchak]

Ray Fair at Yale runs an econometric voting model. Here is his latest forecast:

The current forecast (dated October 29, 2010) of the Democratic share of the two-party House vote is 49.22 percent.

http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2008/index2.htm

Intrade (referenced by Hibbs) now shows:

Dems control US Senate after 2010 elections 45.8 49.8

Dems control US House after 2010 elections 7.2 8.9

The Senate number has dropped from the 60% level where it was a couple of weeks ago. Clearly, everyone has given up on the Donks in the House.

[RangerJAGC]

A quibble: you say the model predicts 45 seats lost and Sabato predicts 55, resulting in a "few seats" more. Statistically, this is quite significant because 55 seats would be a gain of about 22% over the model.

[Mike S]

So according to Chait and this prof dude - not to be confused with President Dude - the Dems were doomed (Toomed?) to get crushed this year? Whatever. They want to deny the obvious - they screwed up, big time.

[Estragon]

1970 and 1994 were outliers because both were the first midterms of plurality Presidents.

[Cars]

Wasn't the baseline set by Democrats last year with big talk about how this is the beginning of a new Democrat epoch? Look at Amazon.com, and you'll find at least half a dozen different books about how Democrats are going to rule for the "next 40 years", the Republican party is finished, the conservative movement is dead, etc. Falling from that high to facing an historic tsunami in such a short time can't be typical.

[Walter Sobchak]

Yesterday at 2:35 p.m. I reported that Intrade showed the US Senate elections as:

Intrade (referenced by Hibbs) now shows:

Dems control US Senate after 2010 elections bid- 45.8 ask- 49.8

By nighttime the ask had gone down under 45.

As of a few minutes ago, the numbers were:
B 42.2 A 42.9