# GOP still trending to win Senate **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 13, 2014, 10:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426 "2014-08-13T10:52:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/401 "2014-09-08T17:42:08Z")
Actually, that’s your argument if you believe Democrats would hold the Senate if the election were held today. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/402 "2014-09-08T18:12:59Z")
I predict that Demopublicans will retain control of the House, the Senate and the White House for the foreseeable future, and that until that changes, nothing much will change. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/403 "2014-09-08T19:55:26Z")
Actually, you’re mistaken. there is a 90% chance that independents will decide who controls the Senate. Sanders is the only sure thing of the three, should Orman be elected. Angus King has made noises about defecting before. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/404 "2014-09-08T20:01:26Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > He can’t even help himself when it’s not a partisan issue. “Pulling out of IRaq wasn’t my idea.” [Pulling out of Iraq was not his choice.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement) > [@](#): > > The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq) was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. Are you saying we should have remained in Iraq whether the Iraqi government we created wanted us there or not, in violation of its sovereignty? (America - fuck, yeah! We don’t ask permission - we just go where we want!) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/405 "2014-09-08T20:19:52Z")
Absolutely not. It is true that we would have had to pull out regardless of who was President. But Obama campaigned on getting us out and bragged about getting us out. Until it became a problem, where he reverted to form: “I had nothing to do with it! It’s someone else’s fault!” And BTW, his current profile in courage on immigration… inspiring, really. He can’t even be bothered to spin anymore, he just came right out and said it was about the politics. Good on him. That’s actual change. Or he’s just too tired to pretend anymore. I think he was trying to provoke the Republicans to impeach him. And that’s why you should know your enemy. He’s internalized the liberal critique of the Republican Party. ANd he ended up being so wrong that it put him in an embarrassing situation. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/406 "2014-09-08T20:43:56Z")
Dammit, that imperial dictator with no respect for the law _isn’t doing anything_! How daren’t he! ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/407 "2014-09-08T20:48:32Z")
Its less what he does and doesn’t do than his unwillingness to take responsibility for it. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/408 "2014-09-08T21:13:40Z")
Braley is moving ahead: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/ia/iowa\_senate\_ernst\_vs\_braley-3990.html](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/ia/iowa_senate_ernst_vs_braley-3990.html) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/409 "2014-09-08T21:42:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Absolutely not. It is true that we would have had to pull out regardless of who was President. But Obama campaigned on getting us out and bragged about getting us out. Until it became a problem, where he reverted to form: “I had nothing to do with it! It’s someone else’s fault!” That’s not what he’s said. He’s taken credit, and bragged about it, because it’s very popular. And then when he’s criticized by Republicans, he points out that this was the Bush administration’s policy, at the end of his term, as well. So you’ve got this totally wrong. > [@](#): > > And BTW, his current profile in courage on immigration… inspiring, really. He can’t even be bothered to spin anymore, he just came right out and said it was about the politics. Good on him. That’s actual change. Or he’s just too tired to pretend anymore. I think he was trying to provoke the Republicans to impeach him. Wow, for once you actually criticize Obama in a reality-based way. I applaud you… > [@](#): > > And that’s why you should know your enemy. He’s internalized the liberal critique of the Republican Party. ANd he ended up being so wrong that it put him in an embarrassing situation. And then you sink yourself with this total nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/410 "2014-09-08T21:45:54Z")
You don’t think it was a ploy to get them trying impeachment? Given how much Democrats built their message around impeachment for awhile there, I can’t imagine it’s coincidence that Obama dropped his immigration plan soon after Democrats realized impeachment wasn’t going to happen and it wasn’t a useful campaign issue. Much to their chagrin. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/411 "2014-09-08T21:59:38Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Silver doesn’t use punditry. He uses history. … Every pundit cites history. As to what Wang thought about Seante races … cite please. [Here’s](http://election.princeton.edu/2014/05/27/democrats-currently-ahead-for-senate-control-but-for-how-long/) his post regarding the Senate races back in May. > [@](#): > > … in an election today, Democrats would retain control of the Senate with about 67% probability. … As to [specific races](in an election today, Democrats would retain control of the Senate with about 67% probability.), he first discussed them a month later. > [@](#): > > six races are currently on the knife’s edge, and will determine control. They are: Alaska, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, and Louisiana. At the time he thought AR was far enough in GOP territory as to not be knife edge. Which exact races did he discuss how strong the Democratic incumbants were that are now in question? Again though, 65% one way, 70% the other … is still pretty wide open either way. Wang has emphasized that and Silver has emphasized uncertainty as well. And again, these predictions will be very subject to changes. If those are changes that reflect nationwide shifts in perceptions then the whole calculus shifts. I trust Wang’s analysis and I still wouldn’t take a bet without real good odds. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/412 "2014-09-08T22:10:43Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > You don’t think it was a ploy to get them trying impeachment? I mostly agreed with you on this part, though this was probably just a tertiary side-benefit and not the primary goal. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/413 "2014-09-08T22:11:45Z")
Their predictions are going to change the closer we get to the election and the more polls come out, that makes their current predictions fairly worthless. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/414 "2014-09-08T22:51:29Z")
Worthless because they might, nay likely will, change along the way, as more data becomes available? Only the absolute and unchanging is worth anything? These analyses are worth a lot even if what they are worth is telling us that it is really too close to call as a few, currently likely to be close, elections will swing the balance of power, and those might all be influenced one way or the other by unpredictable future events which may ir may not occur. They are not each telling us that one or the other party has a 90% plus chance of winning control on election day. If you require that for a model to be of value then worthless they are. Many of us however see informed, data-based, reads as of value even if they tell us it is too close too call from here. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2014, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/415 "2014-09-08T23:33:51Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Probably true that polls in May are not wonderful predictors for close races. The question however is whether or not polls even then are marginally better than throwng lots of punditry, I mean “fundamentals”, at the question instead? Not sure I know the answer either. It’s not punditry. Fundamentals have a long history and a solid track record in Presidential elections: IIRC Fair published his first pure-fundamentals model in 1980. Fair also has an off year model, which doesn’t perform as well. Hey, I try not to pretend that all the evidence points in a single direction. Sam Wang may deserve greater weight than 538, but the fact is 538 is more consistent with the other models: SW carves out his own space in this election. Which is good for learning, actually. > [@DigitalC](#): > > Their predictions are going to change the closer we get to the election and the more polls come out, that makes their current predictions fairly worthless. They are worth far more than 90%+ of the horse race commentary you read in the media. But you have to be statistically numerate to some extent. Using the weather example, 10 day forecast probabilities routinely shift as you get closer to the day the actual weather takes place. That doesn’t make the 10 day forecast useless. Heck, 1 year forecasts are also worth something: it’s fair to say that the chance of rain in August is a lot higher in upstate New York than in the Central Valley of California. Yet you will still see shifts in probabilities as you approach a day that rains. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2014, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/416 "2014-09-09T00:09:51Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > … Fundamentals have a long history and a solid track record in Presidential elections. … Long history I’ll grant. More of a solid history than flipping a coin I’ll grant. But solid in comparison to polling data, when even a moderate amount of polling is available? I see no evidence to support that. Basically if you have nothing else to go on then “fundamentals” (e.g. “The President’s party is at a disadvantage in midcyle mid-terms”) are better than nothing. But how much do they add when you have something else to go on? [Wang’s point](http://election.princeton.edu/2012/08/28/models-vs-measurements/), if he is to be believed, is that each one adds its own additional error bar, or as he puts it, each adds additional noise as well as additional signal and the more you add the more the additional noise obscures the signal. Fundamentals are great at predicting past events … but future ones? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2014, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/417 "2014-09-09T08:50:36Z")
But polls have to be put in their place. Long before an election, a poll will tend to reflect name recognition to a large extent. Otherwise Sam Wang could confidently predict that HIllary Clinton has a 98% chance of being President. Of course, he could have made a similar prediction in Aug. 2006 as well. A poll taken before the candidates are finalized is a poll taken before a campaign has really gotten started, and thus of limited use. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2014, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/418 "2014-09-09T08:52:21Z")
I guess Rothenburg couldn’t let Wang make all the bold predictions himself: [http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/elections-2014-stu-rothenberg-senate-republican-gains/](http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/elections-2014-stu-rothenberg-senate-republican-gains/) Even though his model doesn’t say it, he predicts a sizeable GOP wave. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2014, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/419 "2014-09-09T14:55:47Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I guess Rothenburg couldn’t let Wang make all the bold predictions himself: > > [http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/elections-2014-stu-rothenberg-senate-republican-gains/](http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/elections-2014-stu-rothenberg-senate-republican-gains/) > > Even though his model doesn’t say it, he predicts a sizeable GOP wave. I see that Mr. Rothenburg is making his predictions on the basis of instinct and history. In short, punditry. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2014, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426/420 "2014-09-09T15:19:52Z")
If his model doesn’t say it, why is he? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-still-trending-to-win-senate/695426.md?page=22)