Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 3/31 (295 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Candidate quality is good (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MetroGnome

    but quantifying it is bad.

    hmm, those who outraise their opponents win 90% of the time. I'd say there's a correlation there.

    If John Sides is a top academic, I fear for this country. I'm not cherry picking specific examples. I'm saying he's a lunatic for parading this sorry excuse for a model around.

    Even if you can't find it within yourself to criticize the inputs, the outputs should give you serious cause for concern. As mentioned, his model puts out that it's equally likely for Republicans to win ten seats as it is that they win five.

    To take ten seats, they need to do the following:

    Take IA.
    Take NH.
    Take CO.
    Take AK.
    Take AR.
    Take MT.
    Take SD.
    Take WV.
    Take NC.
    And take LA.

    Tell me, does this strike you as remotely possible given the current situation? And does it strike you as equally likely that they only take WV, SD, AR, MT, and one of NC/LA/AK? If it does, then we're gonna have words, you and I.

    Such is the problem with running a monte carlo analysis using a gaussian distribution on freaking senate races.

    TX-17 (Bill Flores-R), TX Sen-14 (Kirk Watson-D), TX HD-50 (Celia Israel-D). Senate ratings map (as of 3/10/14)

    by Le Champignon on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 11:24:56 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RevolutionRock, MichaelNY

      It's much more than remotely possible. It's on the bad side of plausible. I'd worry about Michigan before Iowa or New Hampshire, though.

      You don't fight the fights you can win. You fight the fights that need fighting. -President Andrew Sheppard (D-Wisconsin)

      by Gpack3 on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 01:09:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site