Where You Sit Depends on Where You Stand

Nate has updated all three of his forecasts (Senate, House, Governor) in the last three days. The quick scorecard is as follows:


Senate 52 D, 48 R
House 204D, 230R
Governor 19D, 30R, 1I*

*technically, of the five independent candidates (CO, RI, ME, MN, MA), Nate gives the “field” a 50% chance. I’ve listed them in order of likelihood of winning the race, with Tancredo (CO) at 36% and Chafee (RI) at 34% the most likely I winners.

The Senate and Governor forecasts are, for me anyway, becoming old hat, and seem to be relatively stable. There’s been some movement on the Tancredo front in Colorado, but since I think he has no chance of winning, I’m going to ignore that one. Perhaps someone else would like to write up an article about the Governor’s races.

Rather, I’m interested in the House races, which still seem to be fluid.

Nate, Larry Sabato, and a number of other authorities have been predicting +47R (i.e. 208D, 227R) for some time now. Sabato, in particular, relies more on politicial science, while Nate tends to rely more on polling. Sabato will be out with a final forecast on Oct 28.

The “Votemaster” at electoral-vote.com has it at 205D, 207R with 23 tossups but I think he’s too conservative on the tossups. It looks to me like those will go R based on local and national factors so let’s call him 205D, 230R.

Nate does mention some volatility in his forecast: he sets the odds of larger gains at:

60 seats (195D, 240R) at 30%
70 seats (185D, 250R) at 12%
80 seats (175D, 260R) at 3%

No sane person is forecasting a 100-seat wave (i.e. 155D, 280R).

Nate sets the odds of Republican control of the House (i.e. at least 218R) at 80%.

My money is already on the Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM) at about $0.50 on the dollar. Right now, that seems a bad bet (I made it in June) but I can’t sell out, so I have to ride this one to the end. I’m cheered by the fact that I have a 20% chance of not losing my money, but I honestly think the Democrats have lost the House. The IEM has a Republican House takeover at 89% and a Republican Senate takeover at 16%, not far from where Nate puts it.

It looks increasingly like we will have a divided Congress (Republican House, Democratic Senate, Democratic President)  for the first time since 1986, when we had the mirror image in each part of government: Democratic House, Republican Senate, and Republican President. It’s a rare event; the last time it happened before that was in 1932.



About Monotreme

Monotreme is an unabashedly liberal dog lover, writer, and former scientist who now teaches at a University in an almost-square state out West somewhere. http://www.logarchism.com | http://www.sevendeadlysynapses.com
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Where You Sit Depends on Where You Stand

  1. shiloh says:

    Having just posted this in the previous thread … twice as nice! :)Generic LV:Newsweek ~ 10/20 – 10/21 ~ LV 48/45 ~ Dems +3Obama Job Approval:Newsweek ~ 10/20 – 10/21 ~ 54/40 ~ Obama +14My oh my oh my oh my lol as all that winger billionaire, foreign govt. slush fund $$$ down the drain!>Tell me which party is gonna win the close contests and I will tell you who will exceed expectations. ;)Just sayin’ :)as always, please no wagering …

  2. Scott says:

    As I stated in the other thread – I can’t get super ga-ga excited over one poll like this. It’s the first thing that’s shown anything like this in weeks.Would I love to believe that us lefties have finally woken up from our slumber? To steal a phrase, “You betcha!” That said, until I see it corroborated somewhere, I’m skeptical.Still, nice to get good news to start the weekend. 🙂

  3. WA7th says:

    The more I entertain the notion of a split Congress, the more I like the idea of a Majority Leader Schumer, and the more I like the idea of using Yucca Mountain as a nuke dump. Gotta move quickly, though. If you don’t rub their noses in it right away, then they won’t realize what they did wrong.

  4. WA7th says:

    Sorry if I plagiarized that thought from anyone who may have said the same thing last week.

  5. Bart DePalma says:

    “Nate does mention some volatility in his forecast: he sets the odds of larger gains at:60 seats (195D, 240R) at 30%70 seats (185D, 250R) at 12%80 seats (175D, 260R) at 3%”You notice that Nate is only offering these hedged forecasts in one direction. He is covering himself.

  6. robert verdi says:

    I think we will win the house and RCP has moved the GOP number to 220 projected house wins and that is assuming Democrats win every toss up. With that said the Senate looks like a bridge to far. As for the Tsunami, I will believe it when I see it.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/2010_elections_house_map.html

  7. robert verdi says:

    Yucca should be used and Obama’s decision to shut it down after the investments made it was wrong. In particular I believe the politics trumped the science, something the President promised not to do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s