Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"Do Democrats Have a Shot at the House?" By NATE SILVER at the NYTimes
Do Democrats Have a Shot at the House?By NATE SILVER at the NYTimes
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/do-democrats-have-a-shot-at-the-house/
"SNIP.................................................
The results of special elections for House seats can also be indicators, but they should be employed carefully. However, the special-elections scorecard was mixed. Things look a little more respectable for Democrats now that they retained Gabrielle Giffordss seat in Arizona in a special election earlier this month. But they had an awful day in September, when they lost Anthony Weiners seat in New York and were blown out in what had looked like a competitive race in Nevada. On the other hand, Democrats did flip a Republican seat in upstate New York earlier last year, when their candidate Kathy Hochul campaigned on a platform that hit her Republican opponent on the cuts the Republican budget proposed to entitlement programs.
Taken as a whole, the set of special elections might suggest that races for the House could be more localized and idiosyncratic than in 2006, 2008 or 2010, rather than there being a wave in either direction. The Democrats need to gain a net of 25 seats to take control of the House, probably more than they could realize just by happening to win a lot of coin flips at the district-by-district level.
So where does the Democrats upside case come from? There is always the statistical probability that the economy will grow by a faster-than-expected rate in the second half of the year. Economists expect the economy to grow by about 2.3 percent over the next two quarters. But economic forecasting is an extremely rough science and surprising results occur more often (and both to the upside and the downside) than forecasters might like to acknowledge. We could be back in a recession by the end of the year, or we could be creating 200,000 jobs per month.
Even the economic upside case, however, would not be an unambiguous good for Democratic Congressional candidates. It would likely help President Obama, and in presidential election years, a large number of people do not pay much attention to House races, enabling the winning presidential candidate to have some coattails down the ballot. Apart from these coattail effects, though, the impact of economic performance is rather ambiguous in races for the Congress when control of government is divided.
.....................................................SNIP"
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
6 replies, 3298 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Do Democrats Have a Shot at the House?" By NATE SILVER at the NYTimes (Original Post)
applegrove
Jun 2012
OP
She seemed confident, didn't she? Still a lot of work needed to make it happen.
freshwest
Jun 2012
#4
The Weiner seat was lost because of low turnout. The GOP winner got fewer votes than he won
libinnyandia
Jun 2012
#3
freshwest
(53,661 posts)1. OMG, I hope they are right. Finally get some good done.
oldhippydude
(2,514 posts)2. didn't Nancy Pelosi talk like it was a done deal
a couple of weeks ago?
freshwest
(53,661 posts)4. She seemed confident, didn't she? Still a lot of work needed to make it happen.
libinnyandia
(1,374 posts)3. The Weiner seat was lost because of low turnout. The GOP winner got fewer votes than he won
as the loser in 2010.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)5. The Democrats in his district were angry with the Democratic Party for
dropping Weiner. I consistently saw 60-67% wanting their congressman to stay, but he was quickly dismissed by his own party and I believe that's where the lack of enthusiasm and lack of turnout resulted from.
Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)6. I think it turns out like Wisconsin
or some of the other situations where the Ds had a shot at something, got close, but fell short.
I think they make up ground, and might even make it really close, but I just don't see a 25 seat gain.