Democrats Now Have a Seventy-Per-Cent Chance of Retaining Control of the Senate

a reply to: ketsuko

It's a big country man. I'm just looking at the demographics. The GOP should have started yesterday.

You know what is hilarious..the same people calling BS on this poll have no problem with using polls..when it points their way..

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
You know what is hilarious..the same people calling BS on this poll have no problem with using polls..when it points their way..

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
You know what is hilarious..the same people calling BS on this poll have no problem with using polls..when it points their way..

Typical.

I don't believe in polls just due to the fact they are used as a tool to convince the stupid! Regardless of political affiliations!

Feel better?

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
Typical liberal spin. Don't believe it for a second.

The libs churn out fake polls like this when it get close to election time to sway the stupid people into their corner.

What do the Republicans use? Fake scandals?

I say Republicans because it's obvious that you believe there is a significant difference in the two — but the reality is that both US political parties are actually predominately filled with neoliberals which would put them in the right end of the left-right spectrum.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Back to the topic, about the Senate elections.

Several states have 50%-to-win requirements, are near-tied, and/or also have ballot appearances in litigation. Who is running is in flux. Kansas, Louisiana, maybe more. Sum being, control of the Senate may not be known until the last of the runoffs, the last one if needed, January 6, which is a day after the new Congress convenes. May well have one or two being lawyered for months after, like Minnesota was in 2008, and heck, maybe a switch after that.

If control is not clear after the general election, it will be one runoff at a time, fighting for every vote a la Florida 2000, with all the lawyers, and money, and theatrics the media people can come up with.

This could get lively indeed. Thoughts, anyone?

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
You know what is hilarious..the same people calling BS on this poll have no problem with using polls..when it points their way..

Typical.

I don't believe in polls just due to the fact they are used as a tool to convince the stupid! Regardless of political affiliations!

Feel better?

People do like to use polls to get out the base with worries they may lose. Hey the GOP is going to win if you do not go out and vote look at this poll where they lead by 1 point. The opposite of course makes no sense. Lets fake a poll that says we are winning so out base thinks it is safe to sit at home.

And if I was the GOP would be more worried I will even have a national party in the next decade. Until the traditional GOP gets rid of the tea party they will continue to find themselves completely outside the national norm.

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
You know what is hilarious..the same people calling BS on this poll have no problem with using polls..when it points their way..

Typical.

I don't believe in polls just due to the fact they are used as a tool to convince the stupid! Regardless of political affiliations!

Feel better?

People do like to use polls to get out the base with worries they may lose. Hey the GOP is going to win if you do not go out and vote look at this poll where they lead by 1 point. The opposite of course makes no sense. Lets fake a poll that says we are winning so out base thinks it is safe to sit at home.

And if I was the GOP would be more worried I will even have a national party in the next decade. Until the traditional GOP gets rid of the tea party they will continue to find themselves completely outside the national norm.

So you believe in following the herd whether or not they jump of the cliff, just because a poll said so?

You truly can't be real can you?

Or are you just so gutless as to not reply to one of your comments in another thread that I called you out on that you chose to try an "get me" on this one?

Tell Langley you need more training!

a reply to: seeker1963

I don't think he was insulting any more than I was, which was zero. The GOP is stagnant. They've got to get now.

Well Nate Silver predictions bombed in 2012 and he is using the same model. Sam Wangs record for 2012 he went 49/50 on presidential election and got all senate seats right, here is some trash talk from both people:

Nate Silver-

But if you’re looking for a headline, we have two. First, Republicans are favored to take the Senate, at least in our view; the FiveThirtyEight forecast model gives them a 64 percent chance of doing so.

Republicans have a 63.8% chance of winning a majority.

Democrats have a 36.3% chance of keeping the majority.

There is a 15.6% chance Republicans will control 52 seats and Democrats will control 48 seats.

And Sam Wang replied-

I guess when you’re the King of the Nerds, you have to be willing to engage in a little trash talk. I think this is a good time to administer a lesson in probability – and also question who is doing the “heavy favoring” around here. ...

FiveThirtyEight’s probability is 64% favoring the Republicans, based on a model with polls plus a substantial dose of special sauce (a.k.a. fundamentals).

...

I have to say, this special sauce is messy stuff. Really, the GOP has an 25% chance (3-1 odds) of getting 54 or more seats? I’d put it at more like 5%. Even 53 GOP seats is a fairly outside outcome. If a betting person were offered the chance to put up $3000 against Nate Silver’s $1000 on that outcome…that would be taking his money.

Joking aside, there are two serious points to be made here. First, nobody should be getting excited about any probability that is in the 20-80% range. That includes Nate Silver, who should know better.

Daily Kos

So Wang is using hard data and Silver is sprinkling pixie dust, and you wonder why republicans were so surprised when Obama smashed Romney for president? You believe Silver when he was so wrong in the last elections?

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: seeker1963

I don't think he was insulting any more than I was, which was zero. The GOP is stagnant. They've got to get now.

My response to MrSpad, had to do with his history of constantly promoting the status quo of the government propaganda!

As far as you saying the GOP is stagnant, why are you being nice? The GOP is so freakin desperate that I can hardly stomach anything that comes out of their mouths!

Yet, the Democrats are just as dirty! Why haven't you addressed my original reply to you about following the money??

originally posted by: seeker1963
As far as you saying the GOP is stagnant, why are you being nice? The GOP is so freakin desperate that I can hardly stomach anything that comes out of their mouths!

Yet, the Democrats are just as dirty! Why haven't you addressed my original reply to you about following the money??

I'm Canadian. I think it's in the DNA to be as polite as possible.

The money? That's easy. That's the BIG lobbys. MIC(They get theirs first), Oil(yup #2), Pharm(societal issues), damn, I actually could go on. That's depressing.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: seeker1963
As far as you saying the GOP is stagnant, why are you being nice? The GOP is so freakin desperate that I can hardly stomach anything that comes out of their mouths!

Yet, the Democrats are just as dirty! Why haven't you addressed my original reply to you about following the money??

I'm Canadian. I think it's in the DNA to be as polite as possible.

The money? That's easy. That's the BIG lobbys. MIC(They get theirs first), Oil(yup #2), Pharm(societal issues), damn, I actually could go on. That's depressing.

I know your Canadian! I have been here long enough to realize that! But being polite has nothing to do with nationality!

But are those "CORPORATE INERESTS" you mentioned exclusively loyal to the Republican party?

Their all whores, so what does that make those of us who support them? Slaves?

You tell me!

a reply to: seeker1963

Dude. You said that like you had a choice. Bought and paid for. Us too. See the old Rollerball movie from the 70's. It posited that corporations would run the world in the future(borders mean nothing). They were right.

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: seeker1963

Dude. You said that like you had a choice. Bought and paid for. Us too. See the old Rollerball movie from the 70's. It posited that corporations would run the world in the future(borders mean nothing). They were right.

I wish Weed was legal in the state I live in!

I really want to understand what your saying?????

No one has bought me and I sure as hell ain't paid for.......

a reply to: seeker1963

Check out Rollerball(1975).

Corporations run the world. Sound familiar?

a reply to: LDragonFire

The democrats had control of the White House, House of Representatives, Senate for TWO YEARS .

What did they accomplish?

Did they tackle amnesty?
Did they tackle minimum wage?
Did they tackle gender inequality?

Nope.

So why is this election cycle going to be any different?

a reply to: beezzer

Focus Rabbit!

Wang says 70% chance Democrats win midterms.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: beezzer

Focus Rabbit!

Wang says 70% chance Democrats win midterms.

*yawn*

Goody for Wang.

What will change then?

originally posted by: intrepid
If I was the GOP I'd be more worried about losing the House. Your platform can't just be "We're not Democrats." The hard right will vote for you. The hard left against and the Centrists will look and think, "What are the Rep's doing?"

I think it's a slim possibility that dems could take the House but there's still a lot of apathy and political ignorance out there combined with gerrymandering makes it all but impossible.