GOP still trending to win Senate

Think of it like this: you call a big bet to draw one card to an inside straight. That decision is wrong at the moment you make it, because the odds bite the big green binach. Now, beat those odds and hit, you are then “right”, and will get paid off.

But you were still wrong. And the smart guy who sees you win all that money making that decision will mark you down for a fish, and he’ll be right.

On a site supposedly interested in fighting ignorance, I am asking for the cadre of SDMB liberals to acknowledge when their side is lying during the debate, as opposed to waiting until the end and then asserting that obviously everyone knows their politicians were lying, and what’s the big deal?

So I guess liberals will be lining up to bet me next time?

Be careful what you wish for. I’ve bet with you four times and won three. By my count, I’m up $200. So if I come out, you can count on a lighter wallet.

I don’t quite agree.

You may recall that first bet i conceded to you, but the issue was not my failure of prediction, but with an inartfully phrased bet. I lost that bet because I did not define terms, NOT because I was wrong about the subject matter.

Still, you’re doing better against me than anyone else is.

I hope we can find something else to bet on.

I was happy to bet on the underdog with those odds. Bricker, PM me details of where to send your winnings.

Isn’t that exactly the sort of economic growth that Republicans say can’t happen?

“Clinton doesn’t deserve credit for eliminating the deficit because he was just lucky to be in office when investors were making a fortune during the Internet boom.”
“We dare not return to Clinton era taxation levels because they will stifle investment and hurt the economy.”

They can’t both be true.

Will do!

Here are the results of the chances you liked, and topped with result of your “distinct possibility:”

CO – Gardner (R) 50% over Udall (D) 45%
IA – Ernst (R) 52% over Braley (D) 42%
MI – Peters (D) 53% over Land (R) 44%
GA – Perdue (R) 53% over Nunn (D) 45%
KY – McConnell (R) 56% over Grimes (D) 41% (distinctly)

Same goes for me – congrats on winning the bet.

Thank you, on behalf of the Little Sisters of the Poor. No need for PM in this case; their address is quite public:

Donate online at https://littlesistersofthepoorwashingtondc.weshareonline.org/ws/opportunities/HonorariumGift

Or by paper check/mail:

Little Sisters of the Poor
Jeanne Jugan Residence
4200 Harewood Road, NE
Washington, DC 20017-1511

The check is in the mail. Actually, I did an e-check through my bank, which will print out and physically send the check. It will probably take a few days to process and get into the mailbox. If you want proof, I can probably provide a screen shot to you in a few days.

I trust you.

Does that mean you’d love to continue giving 3:1 odds in any election that 538 calls as a toss-up? Or was there something special about this election that made you not believe the August predictions?

I can’t quite tell how far down the partisan rabbithole you’ve gone. On one hand, you now talk like Ann Coulter, complaining that Democrats lure poor voters into dependency on Democratic leadership, and other John Birch rhetoric that seems inconsistent with your previous relatively moderate ideology. But on the other hand, this could just be the kind of fake hyperpartisan poking at liberals that you discussed engaging in earlier in this thread. If your view really is that liberals who believe in polling are deluded, then maybe it’s not just an act?

So here’s what 538 now says:

That is sure mysterious strange and unusual. No earthly human could have predicted that ahead of time.

Huh? I think you’re missing the point.

Are you saying that you knew the polls were skewed in favor of Democrats this election? Did you also know when they were skewed against Democrats in previous elections?

You seem to be suggesting that the existence of skew is commonplace. And it is. What most people don’t believe is that it can be reliably predicted. Are you claiming otherwise?

I have no idea how 538 will conduct themselves next time, and I certainly won’t tie a bet or odds thereon to 538’s predictions.

But I will continue to offer bets on elections. It may be that 538 agrees with me and thus I’ll find few takers. Indeed, even now it irks me that the loudest talkers are the most reluctant to bet – they revel in their credulous audience and avoid any consequence for being wrong. Instead, I get bets from the more moderate and careful folks, and only when my predictions don’t run along conventional lines.

I believe in polling, as long as it’s understood that polling is almost always biased and polling aggregators accentuate that bias.

Yes. I think that polling, divorced from what Silver calls “fundamentals,” is fundamentally lopsided, no pun intended. And I think that wishful thinking continues to serve as a placeholder for honest introspection.

This is unresponsive to my questions. You think it is “fundamentally lopsided” in a consistent direction, or not? And if not in a consistent direction, you think you can guess the direction from election to election?

Vote Republican and prove that government is stupid, ineffective, corrupt and wasteful.

You’d have thought the country would have learned its lesson 2001-2009.