2018 Mid-Term Elections

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Since we've been warned about being off-topic in other threads, here is the opportunity to discuss the upcoming November elections.

For Bambino who said "I had a bet with Yssup and Bamscram that Trump would win. Loser left the forum for 3 months. Iffy bet on Trump too. But Trumps new deal helps Auto workers and many other Unions. Let’s see how the Dems try to take this down."

Yes, I remember Iffy stating that Trump would win and if you say you also predicted his victory I will believe you. That's 2 out of many. In my opinion it's too early to accurately assess the positives of the new deal redefining NAFTA. It won't even be voted on until next year. I think at this point in time most voters have made up their minds as to who to vote for in the upcoming elections.

As an addendum to the 2016 election predictions by Larry Sabato on FiveThirtyEight -- he predicted the House breakdown to be 234-201 Republican. Actual results were 241-194 Republican. Very accurate in my opinion He predicted a 50-50 split in the Senate and the actual results were 52-48 Republican.

[bambino]

Nate Silver is the founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight. Larry Sabato is a professor at UVA and political analyst. I don’t think he has anything to do with FiveThirtyEight. And to answer your question, I was the first to offer a bet on the 2016 election. Others can confirm that. But Sabato also predicted a Clinton victory. It’s been said they were wrong because a lot of Trump supporters remain silent or give false information to pollsters. We shall see. Plus, the economy and markets are up. Unemployment at historic lows. Welfare recipients are down. 3rd qtr GDP will be announced a week before the election. I’m guessing it will be higher than 4.2%. One thing Silver and Sabato will agree on, people vote with their wallets or pocketbooks..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bambino

Nate Silver is the founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight. Larry Sabato is a professor at UVA and political analyst. I don’t think he has anything to do with FiveThirtyEight. And to answer your question, I was the first to offer a bet on the 2016 election. Others can confirm that. But Sabato also predicted a Clinton victory. It’s been said they were wrong because a lot of Trump supporters remain silent or give false information to pollsters. We shall see. Plus, the economy and markets are up. Unemployment at historic lows. Welfare recipients are down. 3rd qtr GDP will be announced a week before the election. I’m guessing it will be higher than 4.2%. One thing Silver and Sabato will agree on, people vote with their wallets or pocketbooks..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver

Thank you for correcting me on Larry Sabato. I was looking at various websites and got mixed up on who Sabato worked for.

Yes, the economy is doing very well. And usually when the economy is doing well the approval rating of the POTUS is high, which is not the case today. Obviously there are other factors coming into the opinions of voters. Or maybe the polls are wrong.

Silver is giving Democrats a 78.5% chance of Democrats taking control of the House. Sabato is predicting a net gain in the low to mid 30s, more than enough for Democrats to take control of the House. But Sabato also states that Republicans have a path to hold the House majority. So both Silver and Sabato may believe that people vote based on their wallets but they are both going in the opposite direction.

Like I keep saying, it all depends on which party is the most successful in getting their supporters to the polls. And those voters who are considered Independents are the ones who are going to swing several races one way or the other.

[dilbert firestorm]

with regards to prediction. the poll was correct at least on the Clinton poplar vote turnout.. they did get that part right.


what threw everyone for a loop was that Trump won the electoral college vote. they did not expect that.



this seems to me the failure of the pollsters to put out the correct type of polling.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

with regards to prediction. the poll was correct at least on the Clinton poplar vote turnout.. they did get that part right.


what threw everyone for a loop was that Trump won the electoral college vote. they did not expect that.



this seems to me the failure of the pollsters to put out the correct type of polling.

There have been many, many explanations given by the polling companies as to what went wrong in the electoral college predicting. Here is one explanation.

National polls don’t usually show Electoral College vote counts, and don’t often maintain the granularity to make the kind of state-by-state predictions to make those projections, so their usefulness even in aggregate to forecast elections is limited. Given that electors are determined by congressional representation, that representation is only reapportioned every 10 years, and that the overall number has not increased in over 50 years, there is an increasing discrepancy between the popular vote and the actual outcome of elections, one that will make national overall polls that simulate the popular vote less relevant to predictions over time.*

Forecasting sites and models have keyed into this discrepancy and had success over the past few election cycles by aggregating smaller state and county-level polls, and then forecasting actual Electoral College votes from those aggregates. That approach has obvious advantages, but suffers sometimes from lack of available and reliable data. As a rule, many state and local polls are newer and more volatile than national polls, and several rely necessarily on unorthodox methods to achieve enough proper sample sizes, which are also often much lower than national polls. Also, the baseline statistics from Census products and other large surveys used for “weighting” state and local results become less reliable as they drill down.

Long story short: Statistical power is important, and any misrepresentation of the population in the sample or weights can lead to unusable results.

[Hotrod511]

Seems that people put to much stock polls, just like 2016 Hillary by a landslide :surprise. Polls can be bias just like politics to get voters to stay home and not vote if they feel their choice don't have a chance at winning

[bambino]

I think the Kavanaugh circus will play a major roll. Either way, the Republicans will be fired up about it. Not sure about the Dems. If he goes down they may think mission accomplished and stay home.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bambino

I think the Kavanaugh circus will play a major roll. Either way, the Republicans will be fired up about it. Not sure about the Dems. If he goes down they may think mission accomplished and stay home.

No one seems to be certain at this time which way the Kavanaugh circus will affect the elections.

I can guarantee you that the Democrats will be out in force in November. Here is an interesting article on the subject.

Voter registration data suggests Democrats' longed-for 'blue wave' will crash over Republicans in November


https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...ash-ncna915416

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Hotrod511

Seems that people put to much stock polls, just like 2016 Hillary by a landslide :surprise. Polls can be bias just like politics to get voters to stay home and not vote if they feel their choice don't have a chance at winning

I personally find polls more interesting than individuals on a forum simply stating "Candidate X is going to win" with nothing to support it other than opinion. No poll had Clinton winning in a landslide. Polls had her winning by 2% in the popular vote and that's what happened. Certainly polls can be biased but since the pollsters depend on accurate results in order for people to respect them, it is in their best interests to do their job without bias.

[Old-T]

It is not just a likely Dem turnout in Nov, but the most extreme Bernie followers. The Kavanaugh result will not matter to them--nothing matters to then other than a complete dominance of both Houses. They are just as brainwashed about the divine righteousness of their new-found deity Bernie as the Trump zealots are. Actual issues do NOT matter to them--defeating Trump's agenda, and getting revenge on "main steam Dems who stole the nomination from Bernie" are all that matter.


Look in the mirror--take the worst of the Trump-nuts, change their uniform colors from red to Blue, and THAT is what you are facing with the Dem voters. Brain dead, ideology over reality nut cases. They are not likely to rest if K is not confirmed.

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by bambino

I think the Kavanaugh circus will play a major roll. Either way, the Republicans will be fired up about it. Not sure about the Dems. If he goes down they may think mission accomplished and stay home.

I sincerely HOPE THIS fires up the republican base to vote.

[bambino]

Hey Speedy, I don’t need polls. I see what I see. I’ll bet you the Republicans will hold the House and Senate. Loser leaves the forum for 90 days starting the day after the election. You in?

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Old-T

It is not just a likely Dem turnout in Nov, but the most extreme Bernie followers. The Kavanaugh result will not matter to them--nothing matters to then other than a complete dominance of both Houses. They are just as brainwashed about the divine righteousness of their new-found deity Bernie as the Trump zealots are. Actual issues do NOT matter to them--defeating Trump's agenda, and getting revenge on "main steam Dems who stole the nomination from Bernie" are all that matter.


Look in the mirror--take the worst of the Trump-nuts, change their uniform colors from red to Blue, and THAT is what you are facing with the Dem voters. Brain dead, ideology over reality nut cases. They are not likely to rest if K is not confirmed.

two things old friend ...

1) why do the Democrats continually under-vote given their so-called registered numbers edge ?

2) how many disgruntled Brenie BROS/GALS voted Trump and how many will do so .. again?

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by garhkal

I sincerely HOPE THIS fires up the republican base to vote.

Maybe the old white men.

Republican women will be staying home or voting Democrat.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Maybe the old white men.

Republican women will be staying home or voting Democrat.

voting Republican. like they did in 2016.


remember .. no females would ever vote for Trump .. but a large block did. and not all UN-educated. as some would claim.