Posted on 10/27/2010 7:05:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
Edited on 10/27/2010 7:24:24 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON -- At some point in an election cycle, out of exhaustion and desperation, commentators turn to actual experts. So I recently posed several questions to Charlie Cook of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.
Question: Is this a wave election? Yes, but the wave seems to have crested. "This is approximately where the 1994 election was -- something in the range of eight Senate seats, 52 House seats," says Cook. "A month ago, there was a chance it could have gone from gigantic to titanic. But the possibility of Republican House gains in the 60s or 70s has declined in the last month."
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Pat Toomey, in a state next door to Delaware, is pulling away from Sestak. So much for that notion.
Cook yesterday, 10/26 [note bolded]:
"October 26, 2010 The Cook Political Report's pre-election House outlook is a Democratic net loss of 48 to 60 seats, with higher losses possible. A turnover of just 39 seats would tip majority status into Republican hands. The midterm maelstrom pulling House Democrats under shows no signs of abating, if anything it has intensified."
And I call BullClinton on that. Just as Al Franken didn't spill into other races, neither do others. All politics is local and then national but never about some other candidate in some other state
Ouch, that’s gonna leave a mark. If Cook was that wrong in ‘94 and his skills haven’t improved we could well see 100 seats flip to R.
Looks like Gerson is today’s seat warmer at the Wash Post Wishful Thinking desk.
Gerson is the horn of the RINO.
These folks are no more plugged into thing that you and I are.
So they are looking to cover themselves if things don’t go as well as expected. Better to be under than over as far as credibility goes. If they say 100, and it turns out to be 60-70, then they are shot. If the predict 50 and it turns out to be 60-70 then they are still credible.
I suspect that it is going to be more like 80-90 in the house and 10-11 in the senate. The anger out there at the democRATS is much higher than they are able to imagine from their lofty perches inside DC.
Thank you for post #9. Very enlightening. Seems like Cook and Morris have about the same track record.
Coupled with Republican enthusiasm, it's going to be a bloodbath for the Dems, and Obama’s nightmare.
hilarious!! :)
Most of the polls I've reviewed have either oversampled Democrats - even among "likely voter" cohorts - or alternatively, have failed to account for a shift away from party identification as a means of predicting electoral behavior.
We'll see. But as of now, I'm pretty confident that the Democrats are in a heap of trouble nationwide, with only a few high-profile races moving counter to the trend. Some states, having lost sizable portions of their middle class, are captive to perpetual Democrat lever-pullers, and there's not a thing the GOP can do about it, no matter who they run for office.
Amen!
Three call ins are interesting in there tone.
O'Donnell will win Tuesday. http://www.wdel.com/story.php?id=611976676638
I have a question. We’re always hearing this election being compared to 1994. Now I still remember 94. Sure there were some of us who couldn’t stand Clinton but he hadn’t rammed bill after bill down our throats. A third party hadn’t formed in opposition. Long time incumbents weren’t thrown out in the primaries. The mood in 94 seemed meek compared to today. Am I hoping for too much?
I really don’t know what’s going to happen next Tuesday, but one thing is for sure. This election will not be anything like any other election in our lifetime, and using previous elections as a basis for predicting this one is an exercise in futility.
I think there was a bit of a lull, but the NPR scandal reignited the GOP base, and the TP overall.
Pesonally, I think the GOP picks up 70 plus seats, and at least the ten seats required to win back the Senate.
We’ll see.
I agree. I take everything he says with a grain of salt
You are off on Hume’s assessment. I saw him on Hannity and his comment was that he was not trusting the polls because he did not think that they included proper intensity. That is why he was suprised the GOP was not farther ahead.
I agree. I have noticed that the polls are factoring in ‘08 Rat intensity with Obummers recent barnstorming. His approvals are in the mid 30’s. Clinton and Biden are campaigning to empty venues. GOP early ballots are outpacing Dims where they shouldn’t.
Something is not adding up and that makes sense because midterms usually leave the pollsters looking stupid.
It does?
Haven't seen any evidence that GOP zeal to vote has 'crested'.
LOL! Good find!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.