MN-Gov: Pawlenty leads Hatch by 3 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 08:27:50 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2006 Elections
  2006 Gubernatorial Election Polls
  MN-Gov: Pawlenty leads Hatch by 3 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: MN-Gov: Pawlenty leads Hatch by 3  (Read 5628 times)
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


« on: January 29, 2006, 07:59:12 PM »

Pawlenty is the man. Hatch will have to run a tremendous campaign to have a shot at winning.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2006, 11:41:47 PM »

Pawlenty is the man. Hatch will have to run a tremendous campaign to have a shot at winning.

Has there ever been a race where you've predicted a more pro-Democratic result than most people expected?

Of course. If someone wants to dig up the House predictions thread from 2004-- if it exists still-- I predicted some Democrats to win that actually lost (and a couple 'questionable' predictions I made were in fact correct, such as Sodrel beating Hill). Also in 2004 I initially predicted Murkowski would lose, though by October I no longer thought that to be the case. Before Swann got hot, I predicted Rendell would easily win in '06 (that probably was not a good guess even then, because Scranton might be able to get close were he the nominee).

Claims that I never think a Democrat will win are factually in error. I am much less biased than most posters in my predictions, probably because I like to bet on things... and in doing so you learn that bias = losses.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2006, 02:11:21 PM »

Lol, you thought Bush was gonna win Washington. You have a definite bias against Democrats.

As Lewis notes above, I did not claim zero bias. There is a certain amount of structural bias (psychologically speaking) that is unavoidable, except perhaps via an exercise of the utmost rigor (which is not really justified for the purposes of posting on a message board).

However, you are factually wrong in claiming I predicted Bush would win Washington state. I never, at any time, believed or posted that Bush had a 50% or greater chance at winning there.

I did (correctly) determine that Bush was undervalued in the Spring of 2004 in certain states. At the time I believed Kerry was likely to wind up with 45-47%; at the lower end of that range, Washington would be in play.

Bush of course blew the first debate which, coupled with some bad luck events-wise, got Kerry up to 48% and change, putting away easily all Democratic states.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2006, 10:57:28 PM »

Then why I am so rarely wrong?
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2006, 01:40:48 AM »


Is this your prediction map for 2004?



Or was there another AUH2O?

lol is that a joke?

I don't ever post prediction maps, by the way. I'm not sure I even can, isn't there something additional you have to do for it to work?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.029 seconds with 14 queries.