PA: Muhlenberg/MC: Sestak 40/Toomey 48 (10/24-10/27) DO NOT ENTER UNTIL 27 DROPS

[Dgov]

I predicted Toomey's demise would start in August.  Maybe the black vote in Philly is the difference? 

Either way, the GOP is losing ground in the final weeks, just like I predicted.

CA is probably gone, WA is probably gone, CO is slipping, DE is gone, PA could be slipping, KY is slipping, MO is tightening and WI may be gone.

How we doing folks?

HAHAHAHA.  Where shall we start?

1:  California is slipping for the Democrats.  Fiorina is closer right now than she's ever been in this race, and looks like an even chance to pull this one off.

2:  Washington is heading down to the wire.  Please give me one poll in the last 3 weeks that suggests this race is "Gone".  PPP themselves just released a poll with Murray up only 2--not a confidence builder for the Democrats.

3: Colorado is slipping towards Tossup.  Buck has gone from about a +3 average to about even.  Again, this just means a close race is going down to the wire--I don't think Buck's ever really had a big lead to begin with.

4: Delaware is gone.  But seeing as who we lost, i don't really count this as a loss for anyone but the GOP big boys.

5: Pennsylvania is again, a Tossup.  Do you think that the GOP can't win in any state that they don't lead by 10 in?

6: Kentucky is still Lean Paul, and likely to stay that way.  This race has been closer than it is now, and I don't see any reason Paul won't be able to pull this one off

7:  Missouri is going to be an R hold.  You can put money on that--A PPP poll showing him up 5 basically means he's going to win barring anything really big happening.

8:  Wisconsin is an easy GOP pickup.  Even the DSCC poll had Johnson up a few points.

Me?  I'm doing fine, thank you very much.  I happen to be busting my balls trying to make sure that first race falls the right way, rather than spending all my time whining on the internet about how major political parties don't bend over backwards to please me.

[Dgov]

1:  California is slipping for the Democrats.  Fiorina is closer right now than she's ever been in this race, and looks like an even chance to pull this one off.

Fiornia was in better shape a month ago.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/california

A Poll has her leading.  That's a first (I think), even if it is her own internal.

[Dgov]

You are my new favorite member right now.

uh . .  Thanks?

[Dgov]

It's a mistake to think Santorum lost only because he was "too extreme" for Pennsylvania.  Moderate Republican Icon Mike DeWine lost in Neighboring Ohio by only a slightly smaller margin, and Ohio is slightly more Republican.

[Dgov]

It's a mistake to think Santorum lost only because he was "too extreme" for Pennsylvania.  Moderate Republican Icon Mike DeWine lost in Neighboring Ohio by only a slightly smaller margin, and Ohio is slightly more Republican.

You must be confusing DeWine with Voinovich. DeWine was a generic bushbot. Not an ideological uberconservative like Toomey is and Santorum talked like he was (and paid a price for it), but not a moderate by any standard either.

Lifetime ACU ratings (why not?) Voinovich 70 (same as Lisa Murkowski btw), DeWine 80 (or comparable to Frank Murkowski ).

You mean the guy who supports Gun Control, Raising the minimum wage, and the ANWAR drilling ban?  He got his ranking from being a Hard-core Social Conservative, and was considerably more Liberal on fiscal issues than the average Republican.

Anyway, my point still stands.  If you consider Pennsylvania to be about 6 points more Democratic than Ohio, he lost by about the same relative margin Santorum did despite playing the "moderate" card repeatedly.

[Dgov]

a Hard-core Social Conservative

Moderate Republican Icon

...

... Yeah, he was the poster child for the SoCon wing of the Republican party.  I don't know what is so hard for you to understand; the guy was a solid Social Conservative and a "Moderate" Economic Conservative.  And he lost big to a Progressive Socialist, while Santorum lost big to a Pro-life Democrat.  That doesn't exactly scream "Ideology doomed him" like some people here think it does.

Oh, and I'd argue Ed Rendell's 21-point win in 2006 was a bigger benefit to Casey than Taft was to Brown.

[Dgov]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

[Dgov]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

[Dgov]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

I'm guessing you flunked Math.....

Lets do the Math then:

100% -38% (Catholic) - 13% (Non-religious) - 5% (Jewish) - 1% (Buddist) - 2% (Islam) -2% (other--see below) = 39% (all other minor religions listed were Protestant or Christian in nature, and I'm willing to bet at least half the "other" is small protestant churches)

39%>38%.  Epic problem-solving fail on your part

[Dgov]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

I'm guessing you flunked Math.....

Lets do the Math then:

100% -38% (Catholic) - 13% (Non-religious) - 5% (Jewish) - 1% (Buddist) - 2% (Islam) -2% (other--see below) = 39% (all other minor religions listed were Protestant or Christian in nature, and I'm willing to bet at least half the "other" is small protestant churches)

39%>38%.  Epic problem-solving fail on your part

Others does not exactly mean Protestant, nor does simply saying Christian, nor does Non-Denominational  ,

Baptist 7%
Methodist 6%
Lutheran 2%
Presbyterian 2%
Protestant (no Denomination given) 2%
Pentecostal 2%
Anglican 2%
Assemblies of God 1%
Evangelical 1%


Thats 25%, now if you add all of Christian (4%) thats 29% and all of others,4%, that is 33%.  Rounding might bring it up slightly higher, but not higher than 38%, and not all of Christians or Others are Protestant.

So the Problem is where the extra 4-5% Comes from in the poll (which we thought was probably rounding error).  Odds are it goes heavily to the Protestants (as they have more denominations to be rounded off)

[Dgov]

Guys, who cares?

I could really careless, I just find it rather interesting he can't do basic math.

*Sigh.  It's like banging my head against a wall here.  Do you have any idea how much more likely .5% rounding error would make difference across 16 separate values (some of which round to Zero) rather than 5?

As for whether or not this matters, I agree it doesn't--I just find it odd that his understanding of math doesn't stretch beyond "38 is bigger than 37" and fails to understand basic logical analysis, and that he sees this as a failure on my part.