Here it is, Predict the makeup of the Senate.
Lipstick on a moose.
I’m assuming that we are counting the “independents” as “Democrats”, since they caucus with them…
Montana is the toughest Senate race to call.
Very little polling data, a pro-gun first term Dem incumbent who rode the 2006 anti-GOP wave.
As a liberal I want that one more than the other tossups.
In what world do the Republicans get 55+ seats in the Senate? I want what those 3 folks who voted this way are smoking.
53-47 d
Dean Chambers from UnSkewedPolls.com gives the Democrats a 52–48 edge. I think that’s also what Nate Silver has. I’m going with Chambers being more likely to be wrong than Silver to be right, so I’ll take 53–47. Though I really don’t know which one #53 is going to be.
And, yeah, whoever’s got Republicans at 55+, you’re seven seats more favorable to them than Dean Chambers. That’s kind of insane.
Republicans gain 1 seat. Whatever that works out to in your poll.
53-47 as per the mode of Nate Silver’s distribution. (Mean is currently 52.4) Other statistical exercises lean more Democratic than he does, so I rounded upwards.
Current Senate (51+2=53) - 47. FWIW, John Mace is closer to the statistical mean of Nate’s model than I am.
Eyeballing the frequency distribution:
Odds of 53-47: Something over 20%
Odds of 52-48: Something over 20%
Odds of 55-45 or better for the Dems: 10-15% range
Odds of 50-50: Complicated, because the Senator from Maine could sign in as a Republican.
Odds of 49-51 or better for the Republicans: bigger than 5%. Unlikely, but can’t rule it out. Also there’s the Maine complication.
Interestingly, I’ve been reading that the Senate may not change much or at all in partisan makeup, but it looks likely to get more liberal. That could make things interesting.
On an earlier poll, I think I said 52 Dems felt right to me. Now I’m thinking 54.
Wow, even unskewedpolls.com is part of the mainstream liberal media now, predicting a win for the Democrats in the senate?
Time to start up trulyunskewedpolls.com, methinks!
Well, there’s only one independent running for re-election, and yeah, he both caucuses with them, and votes with them most of the time, so it would be a little silly to put Bernie in his own “area” of the poll.
Plus Angus King, the Independent in Maine who will likely join the Dem caucus.
Ahh, didn’t know about him, thanks. I just thought that maybe someone else didn’t know Lieberman was retiring.
Right now it’s 53 (if you include the independents) to 47.
My prediction: Dems will lose Nebraska and pick up Massachusetts and Indiana.
So 54 - 46.
Crazy stuff. I would have given this zero chance six months ago.
I picked 52 D to 48R although really it should be 50-48-2 with Vermont and Maine being the independents. I still count Senator Lisa Murkowski as a Republican eventhough she was re-elected in 2010 as an independent after losing in the Republican primary.
Murkowski is definitely a Republican.
The independents are Lieberman and Sanders, with Lieberman retiring.
I think the Dems will lose North Dakota + Nebraska + Montana and pick up Massachusetts. The GOP will lose Maine to an independent. The Dems will win the Connecticut seat held by retiring Senator Lieberman (independent).
It’s tough to call though. Indiana, Montana, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Virginia could go either way.
As I said already, I still count Murkowski as a Republican even though she switched to independent in order to beat the Republican nominee Joe Miller as a write-in candidate for the Alaska seat in the US Senate 2010 election. Lieberman took a similar route to re-election in 2006 after he lost in the Democratic primary, but he wasn’t a write-in candidate.