How can anyone say the GOP isn't favored to win the Senate?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:42:08 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  How can anyone say the GOP isn't favored to win the Senate?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Author Topic: How can anyone say the GOP isn't favored to win the Senate?  (Read 5105 times)
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 27, 2014, 01:06:33 PM »

Seriously.  Republicans are favored at this point to win in MT, SD, AR, LA, and WV.  That put them up to 50 seats, with them only having to pick-up one seat between NC, IA, CO, and AK (which seem like the most promising pickup opportunities).  Moreover, Republicans are heavy favorites to retain seats in GA and KY. 

How can anyone say that the GOP isn't favored to win in 2014 with a map and electorate that is heavily in their favor as well as a strong class of candidates poised to avoid the same pitfalls of 2012?
Logged
Senator Cris
Cris
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,613
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 27, 2014, 01:15:34 PM »

- AR is a close race, isn't secured for the GOP. But the GOP is still favored to win.
- in LA, if the Democrats will win in November, Landrieu has great possibilities in December runoff.
Logged
dmmidmi
dmwestmi
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2014, 01:28:45 PM »

Seriously.  Republicans are favored at this point to win in MT, SD, AR, LA, and WV. 

"Favored" is the operative word here. One could make the argument that they aren't even favored in Arkansas and Louisiana.

That put them up to 50 seats, with them only having to pick-up one seat between NC, IA, CO, and AK (which seem like the most promising pickup opportunities). 

Yeah, but they'll actually have to win one of those seats--which is far from a certainty.

Moreover, Republicans are heavy favorites to retain seats in GA and KY.  

Yes, they are, and Democrats are favorites in the four races you identified in your previous sentence.

How can anyone say that the GOP isn't favored to win in 2014 with a map and electorate that is heavily in their favor as well as a strong class of candidates poised to avoid the same pitfalls of 2012?

Yes, their candidates this year, on the whole are probably stronger.

I see it this way: six Senate seats flipped in 2006 and 2010. In each of those years, one party had the benefit of a very favorable national environment. This year, that doesn't seem to be the case. We're not in any unpopular wars, there wasn't a horrendous response to a natural disaster, nor was a very divisive piece of legislation passed along party lines.

Six seats is a lot of seats to flip in a year where the national mood barely favors one party over another.
Logged
Dixie Reborn
BeyondTruthAndIdeals
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 817
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2014, 01:35:45 PM »

This forum has more Democrats than Republicans. Therefore, they/it has a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats. Just as Breitbart and Redstate overstate Republican possibilities.
Logged
°Leprechaun
tmcusa2
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,114
Uruguay


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2014, 01:38:31 PM »

I would say that the GOP is more likely to win based on a narrow lead in the polls.
However, many races are close and we could have a situation where control depends
on one seat that isn't finally called for days or even weeks.
Logged
dmmidmi
dmwestmi
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2014, 01:40:58 PM »

This forum has more Democrats than Republicans. Therefore, they/it has a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats. Just as Breitbart and Redstate overstate Republican possibilities.

This forum on the whole underestimated Barack Obama's performance in 2012: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2012 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2010 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2010/pred.php

and Barack Obama's performance in 2008: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php

So, no, the forum on the whole does not have "a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats."
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2014, 01:51:29 PM »

This forum has more Democrats than Republicans. Therefore, they/it has a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats. Just as Breitbart and Redstate overstate Republican possibilities.
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2014, 01:53:08 PM »

This forum has more Democrats than Republicans. Therefore, they/it has a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats. Just as Breitbart and Redstate overstate Republican possibilities.

This forum on the whole underestimated Barack Obama's performance in 2012: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2012 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2010 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2010/pred.php

and Barack Obama's performance in 2008: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php

So, no, the forum on the whole does not have "a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats."

By default they are because there's more Democrats. And I think they underestimated Obama because everyone thought Romney would win Florida.
Logged
dmmidmi
dmwestmi
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2014, 01:57:13 PM »
« Edited: August 27, 2014, 02:17:22 PM by dmmidmi »

This forum has more Democrats than Republicans. Therefore, they/it has a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats. Just as Breitbart and Redstate overstate Republican possibilities.

This forum on the whole underestimated Barack Obama's performance in 2012: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2012 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2012/pred.php

Democrats in the 2010 US Senate: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/SENATE/2010/pred.php

and Barack Obama's performance in 2008: https://uselectionatlas.org/PRED/PRESIDENT/2008/pred.php

So, no, the forum on the whole does not have "a way too optimistic outlook for Democrats."

By default they are because there's more Democrats. And I think they underestimated Obama because everyone thought Romney would win Florida.

I just showed you that the forum underestimates Democratic performance. What part of this is hard to understand?

When "everybody" thinks Romney is going to win Florida, "everybody" is underestimating Democratic performance.

So when someone (you) says, "The forum overestimates Democratic chances/performance because there are more Democrats," they are ignoring facts.
Logged
Dixie Reborn
BeyondTruthAndIdeals
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 817
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2014, 02:20:49 PM »

I just showed you that the forum underestimates Democratic performance. What part of this is hard to understand?

When "everybody" thinks Romney is going to win Florida, "everybody" is underestimating Democratic performance.

So when someone (you) says, "The forum overestimates Democratic chances/performance because there are more Democrats," they are ignoring facts.

That doesn't change the fact that, as Del said, Republicans are favored in at least five races, and have excellent opportunities in many more, yet most Democrats on this forum still say that Democrats are likely to retain the Senate.
Logged
dmmidmi
dmwestmi
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,095
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 27, 2014, 02:35:47 PM »

I just showed you that the forum underestimates Democratic performance. What part of this is hard to understand?

When "everybody" thinks Romney is going to win Florida, "everybody" is underestimating Democratic performance.

So when someone (you) says, "The forum overestimates Democratic chances/performance because there are more Democrats," they are ignoring facts.

That doesn't change the fact that, as Del said, Republicans are favored in at least five races, and have excellent opportunities in many more, yet most Democrats on this forum still say that Democrats are likely to retain the Senate.

Whatever, dude. If you feel like ignoring all other evidence (i.e. "the forum" tends to overstate Republican performance), and go with your gut feeling, fine by me.
Logged
backtored
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 498
Vatican City State


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 27, 2014, 02:41:17 PM »

I tend to agree, Del.  The GOP is clearly favored in LA, GA, and AR, although I concede that any one of those could go Democratic.  And IA, CO, NC, and AK are all pretty close to 50/50--and the GOP only needs one.  It isn't over yet, but it would really take something extraordinary for Democrats to sweep the field and keep their majority.

My hunch is actually that it really could be a stunningly good night for the GOP.  Instead of two years ago when we were all marveling at how well Obama did in places like Florida and Virginia, I suspect that we'll be talking about the GOP doing exceptionally well in places that a lot of people thought they'd lose.
Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2014, 02:44:49 PM »

I would say that the GOP is more likely to win based on a narrow lead in the polls.
However, many races are close and we could have a situation where control depends
on one seat that isn't finally called for days or even weeks.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 27, 2014, 03:01:15 PM »

I didn't think Romney would win Florida. My prediction of the election, like 99% of non-troll/hack Atlas posters was 100% correct because we believe in polls over voodoo.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 27, 2014, 03:03:06 PM »

The Republicans may be favored at this point but that doesn't mean anything, especially when the Democrats are parachuting millions into the close states to be spent between now and November.

The full picture won't be available until the campaigns' finances for this quarter are released but you can get a pretty solid picture based on last quarter's figures plus the current outside spending numbers.

In Arkansas Pryor is sitting on a ton of money while SuperPACs are spending millions attacking Cotton.

In Louisiana, Landrieu has raised twice as much as Cassidy and SuperPACs have already spent 4.5 million just in attack ads.

In NC, Hagan has raised $16 million to her opponent's $4 million, and that's not even counting the $10 million that liberal groups have dumped into the race.

In CO, Udall has triple his opponent's fundraising plus Democratic SuperPAC's have spent more money attacking the Republican than he's actually managed to raise himself so far.

In IA, exact same thing as in Colorado.

In AK the fundraising is just over 2-to-1 but the spending has been 4-to-1.



All I'm saying is don't count your chickens before they hatch. The GOP certainly has the structural advantage here and a Senate majority should be a foregone conclusion but the Democratic Party is still putting up a very costly fight that the GOP doesn't even seem to be noticing.

No matter how good a candidate is, if you allow him/her to be defined by the opponent's attack ads before they even have a chance to respond, then you cede the narrative, the momentum, and ultimately the race.



Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,875


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2014, 03:04:43 PM »

I tend to agree, Del.  The GOP is clearly favored in LA, GA, and AR, although I concede that any one of those could go Democratic.  And IA, CO, NC, and AK are all pretty close to 50/50--and the GOP only needs one.  It isn't over yet, but it would really take something extraordinary for Democrats to sweep the field and keep their majority.

My hunch is actually that it really could be a stunningly good night for the GOP.  Instead of two years ago when we were all marveling at how well Obama did in places like Florida and Virginia, I suspect that we'll be talking about the GOP doing exceptionally well in places that a lot of people thought they'd lose.

Only Republican hacks were marveling at how well Obama did in Virginia. It was obvious he was going to win there.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2014, 04:35:29 PM »

Putting AR/LA in the same group as MT/SD/WV is ridiculous. They're toss ups, meaning Democrats could easily win them, even if the Republicans have a slight edge there at the moment.

Also, McConnell is certainly not a "heavy favorite".
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2014, 04:40:04 PM »

I didn't think Romney would win Florida. My prediction of the election, like 99% of non-troll/hack Atlas posters was 100% correct because we believe in polls over voodoo.

I think I was one of few who overestimated Obama's performance (I gave him NC, though admittedly, this prediction was before the debate performance and I forgot to update it before the election).
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,577
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 27, 2014, 04:49:19 PM »

I tend to agree, Del.  The GOP is clearly favored in LA, GA, and AR, although I concede that any one of those could go Democratic.  And IA, CO, NC, and AK are all pretty close to 50/50--and the GOP only needs one.  It isn't over yet, but it would really take something extraordinary for Democrats to sweep the field and keep their majority.

My hunch is actually that it really could be a stunningly good night for the GOP.  Instead of two years ago when we were all marveling at how well Obama did in places like Florida and Virginia, I suspect that we'll be talking about the GOP doing exceptionally well in places that a lot of people thought they'd lose.

Only Republican hacks were marveling at how well Obama did in Virginia. It was obvious he was going to win there.
Obama's pre-election average lead there, per RCP, was a pathetic 0.3%. Far from 'obvious winner' in my opinion. True, he greatly outperformed the polling on election day, but before the polls closed, Obama was not the 'obvious winner' in virginia.

I didn't think Romney would win Florida. My prediction of the election, like 99% of non-troll/hack Atlas posters was 100% correct because we believe in polls over voodoo.
The RCP polling average showed Romney winning FL by 1.4%.....this was the one state where the polls as a whole got the winner wrong. Heck, Obama's campaign as a whole was so much in belief that FL was likely to go to Romney that they were trying to get Obama to give up on FL in the final weeks. Instead, he essentially said "No, let's keep running ads there, I'll send Biden there, at least we can keep Romney spending time and money there.", and ended up winning FL by about 70,000 votes, mainly due to Romney having a terrible GOTV operation that broke down on election day.



Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,926
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 27, 2014, 05:03:41 PM »

There was a Republican internal just released that showed Landrieu leading, so I would call that Republican favored.

RRH might be a better site for you, they have very favorable ratings for Republicans, they even have Michigan as Lean Republican, I think.
Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 27, 2014, 05:49:31 PM »

There was a Republican internal just released that showed Landrieu leading, so I would call that Republican favored.

RRH might be a better site for you, they have very favorable ratings for Republicans, they even have Michigan as Lean Republican, I think.

I know you're joking a little bit on this, but regarding Red Racing Horses, are you sure you're not mixing them up with another site? They have Michigan as lean Democrat. While the site is operated by conservatives, they don't seem to let that cloud their perception of the races.
Logged
xavier110
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,510
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 27, 2014, 05:51:10 PM »

How can anyone say that? Well, it's because the GOP is very good at screwing everything up (where it's campaigning, legislating, governing, etc) - we'll see if they still blow AR, AK, NC, and so on
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 27, 2014, 07:09:42 PM »
« Edited: August 27, 2014, 07:14:36 PM by Gustaf »

The main thing that looks good for Republicans is obviously that almost every close race is in a Republican state.

My view is that Republicans are basically guaranteed 3 seats (WV, SD, MT). Then we have a bunch of close races: GA and KY for Republicans, NC, IA, CO, AK, AR and LA for Democrats. If the tossups split 50-50 Republicans get 4 seats which means a net gain of 2 for a total net gain of 5. So I keep the Democrats as narrow favourites to hold but it's sort of anyone's guess when you have this number of close races.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2014, 07:38:55 PM »

There is so much mathfail in this thread. Even going with the (questionable) premise that the GOP is "favored" in EACH of the five seats, that by no means suggests they are "favored" to win ALL of them, which is something they need to do. Understanding this doesn't even require Stats 101. Pre-Algebra ought to get the job done.
Logged
Vega
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,253
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: August 27, 2014, 07:42:33 PM »

There was a Republican internal just released that showed Landrieu leading, so I would call that Republican favored.

RRH might be a better site for you, they have very favorable ratings for Republicans, they even have Michigan as Lean Republican, I think.

I know you're joking a little bit on this, but regarding Red Racing Horses, are you sure you're not mixing them up with another site? They have Michigan as lean Democrat. While the site is operated by conservatives, they don't seem to let that cloud their perception of the races.

To be fair, it's not at all a crazy idea to have Michigan as Lean Democrat. I mean, I think almost every site has it as that. Overall though they seem to be quite a okay site.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 12 queries.