..yes, experts are always right...
whatever...
Talk about an exercise in futility.
Garbage in, garbage out...
after six years of constant barrage of democratic talking points, demagoggery, and smearing a good many good people, if the democrats CAN'T capture both houses, they ought to fold up shop.
I mena if they can't take addvantage of all this, then they should give it up, and give Soros his money back.
Ther's only one problem, the polls are all weighted towards demoRATS 10-12%.
"Political Scientists Say Democratic Control [of House] a "Near Certainty""
I always thought the term "political science" was an oxymoron.
And Don Carlos predicts that as early as Nov 8th, the 'Rat rallying cry will be "we demand a recount", "systematic disenfranchisement", and "widespread voter fraud"!
Just watch!
Not really scientists, or politicians:
The American Political Science Review (APSR) continues to be the foremost scholarly research journal of political science.
APSR presents peer-reviewed research articles by political scientists of all subfields. Areas covered include political theory, American politics, public policy, public administration, and international relations.
Lumberjacks!
..yes, experts are always right...
Political science is the highest science, but also the least mathematical science. Applying mathematics to election prediction should be left to actual scientists not political scientists--who do better when they stick to the ancient methods of contacting the spirit world.
Generic samples, even if sufficiently large (and culled to exclude unregistered and unlikely voters) ignore regional variation, demographic concentration, voter intensity, and a whole lot of other things that determine the outcome of individual races. Like turnout, for example. Or weather. Or ground-game efficiency (how many personal contacts do I need to make to increase turnout by "x" percent in one key district?)
This is just more FUD from the Democrat-Media Complex.
NJ Supremes just handed the election to the Republicans, who will hold the House by a nose.
I believe now, more than ever, that Republicans will retain control of both the House and the Senate. Maybe only by a slim majority but I think we'll still have the majority.
Never trust a political "scientist" to know beans about statistics.
---
Let's break this statement down:
"Political Scientists" are College Professors, since no sane corporation would ever pay anyone to sit around and BS.
"Near Certainty" for an future event is a "Wish"
So, a rough translation is: "College professors wish for Democratic party control of the House of Representatives."
...hardly a surprise there...and well worth ignoring.
http://polmeth.wustl.edu/retrieve.php?id=657
They checked their equations against 2004 info instead of another off-year election.
It's so obvious they should have used 2000 info that it makes one wonder if they secretly did and it failed LOL!
Maybe this paper is a joke...
Gambling was the quickest, women was the most pleasurable and believing experts was the most certain.
Do not lose hope or heart.
Regards, Ivan
Actually, this has value because it's near the election. If these guys then match the actual results to their model's prediction, they can then try to figure out why there were deviances and then improve their model.
In other words, past correlation does not predict future results.