Skip to main content

View Diary: Special Elections foreshadow change in Democratic fortunes (51 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, it is a technicality (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drobertson, ArkDem14

    but in 2010 those votes would have made a difference, so it falls under the criteria for exclusion. You can disagree with the exclusion of elections affected by third parties, but you can't argue that they deliberately omitted an unfavorable result or followed inconsistent standards.

    21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

    by sapelcovits on Mon May 23, 2011 at 04:37:50 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well, yes, I can. It's bullshit. (0+ / 0-)

      Affected by third parties in an analysis that looks at percentages and not as binary results (won/lost) means that you exclude parties who get a significant percentage of support because that's the measure you're looking at, not parties who had the potential to influence the binary result, because if you're looking at the change from 2010, it doesn't matter whether 2010 had a result of 50.01 or 49.99%.

      If those are supposed to be consistent standards, they're standards picked only for the reason that they result in awfully convenient results.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site