Posted on 02/20/2014 8:32:22 PM PST by neverdem
A few weeks ago, I produced two Senate analyses. One focused on the relationship between the president’s job approval, the fate of Senate Democrats during the 2010 and 2012 elections, and what that would mean if this relationship continues through 2014. The second looked at Republican vulnerability in 2016 using a similar standard.
The first piece concluded that, based on President Obama’s job approval rating, Democrats have substantial vulnerability in 2014. This vulnerability is deeper than many analysts are willing to consider right now. Over the past two cycles, the president’s job approval has explained 58 percent of the variance in competitive Senate races in any given state. Given Obama’s current weak numbers, this seemingly bodes poorly for Democrats. Remember, the midterm map is the “reddest” Senate map Democrats have had to defend while Obama has been president. Their overexposure makes it something of a perfect storm scenario if things do not improve. This doesn’t mean that the problems are insuperable for Democrats. It simply means that the playing field is stacked heavily against them.
The second piece took a somewhat different tack. Instead of just looking at the playing field for 2016, it used that playing field as the basis for a simulation run in a neutral year to help better quantify Republican exposure. It concluded that unless 2016 turned out to be a good Republican year overall, that Republicans would probably have to win 53 or 54 seats in 2014 to feel good about their chances of holding the Senate two years later.
The present article takes the technique used in the second piece and applies it to the playing field described in the first. In other words, this is a “Monte Carlo simulation” to try to better quantify the amount of exposure Democrats are under this time...
(Excerpt) Read more at dyn.realclearpolitics.com ...
A little analogy here. The U.S. women hockey team decided to play prevent defense, up 2 to 0 with four minutes left in the third period. This is what the GOPe is doing and we know how that worked out. Bad news for us f they don’t fight back.
Been saying that for years. There is no way that the Dimmies would be setting such precedent if they though they had a chance of losing the Senate.
Is this the same post you used last election?
(1) Since 2012, Democrats have registered another 1 million Socialist immigrants, and the GOP has lost a couple hundred thousand voters because of the birth-death imbalance.
(2) The author assumes that Democrats will fail to turn out their voting base, even though the Democrat Party is totally focused on 2014 turn out.
(3) 80% of ObamaCare enrollees have signed up for free Medicaid or heavily subsidized policies. Since the GOP has no intention of repealing O-Care, and since the GOP has proposed no serious alternative to O-Care, why does the GOP think this issue will hurt Democrats?
I'm sticking to my 2014 prediction:
We gain 2 seats in the Senate.
We lose several seats in the House.
Part of it depends on whether or not the democrats play dirty or semi-fair.
“The Democrats are going to lose big this next election, voters are going to remember their lies about Obamacare.”
I hope so, but so many people respond to nonsense propaganda (”war on women” and such) that I no longer assume anything. Obama’s re-election was a frightening example of what propaganda can do; Americans were worse off by every measure, and the incompetent token won anyway.
Many Conservatives are the most defeatist people I have ever seen.
I bet the out in the open take over of the media is one of the facets of their plan to win in November.
That and amnesty.
If we had a real Conservative running for President, we would have run that election.
“If we had a real Conservative running for President, we would have run that election.”
Probably, but there doesn’t seem to be enough conservatives to get one through the primaries. As long as Republicans let the leftist media determine their game plan, I’m not holding my breath...
Agreed! We keep letting the Establishment GOP divide our vote looking for the ‘perfect’ Conservative candidate-he doesn’t exist.
Increasingly Progressive Electorate + Ballots Found In The Trunk At The Last Minute + Military Ballots Left In The Trunk At The Last Minute = Progressive Victory.
(Not to mention dead people voting, people carrying night sticks at polling places, Mickey and Minnie Mouse registering....)
IMHO
It's the voters that need to vote in anyone GOP, regardless of the GOP standing on the issues, then once in power change the GOP from the inside out. As long as the Democrats have power the GOP AND the TEA party will have none. Voters need to bite the bullet and vote AGAINST Democrats instead of voting FOR either Republicans or TEA party candidates. Sux but that's the way of the world of numbers. Again, the GOP can be gutted from the inside out once they get back into power, back toward Constitutional constructionist principles.
If we had a real Conservative running for President, we would have run that election.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
‘Problem’ goes back (full bore) to Clinton’s 2nd term.
“We” ran Bob Dole more for ‘he is a good guy and it is his turn’.
I can imagine with a good, viable candidate enough D’s would have crossed over as they were disgusted with Clinton’s shenanigans.
Scary part about Bush II the likes of algore very nearly walked away with that election.
BUT his spending and definitely ‘misusing’ the opportunity to do ‘real change’ with an R Presidency, R Senate and R House - may have turned a lot or R’s to vote for ANYONE decent, luckily ‘they’ ran JF’nK, and he lost.
Team Romney and the RNC virtually destroyed the other R’s with the tenacity of a Pit Bull but turned into Lap Dogs when he ‘won’ the nomination and they apparently didn’t dare ‘lay a glove’ on BO.
That is reminiscent of Romney in his Senate race to unseat T Kennedy....had a double digit lead LATE in the race, then basically morphed into Teddy Boy - then, mysteriously, ended up Guv.....Wonder what that cost the Kennedy dynasty?
Notice I didn’t even mention the mcclame fiasco - he was getting his hat handed to him until Palin came along, THEN she ‘stole the thunder’ - definitely was the perfect foil for BO - but mclame camp and RNC were hell bent on destroying Palin.....
Guess they figure no one would ever vote a Black guy into office, much less a Black guy with a ‘funny’ name.
IMNSHO the Limbaugh ‘Operation Chaos’ designed to oust Hillary was more that RL basically had the same ‘thought’ that a Black guy with a ‘funny name’ would be lucky to get the D primary, not even thinking of him winning the ‘Big Prize’.
California wants to break into 6 parts.
That would give the Dems another 8-10 Senators.
Just great!!
Been saying that for years.
I mean really a President that BRAGS he will make gasoline much more expensive AND STILL gets elected?...
There much more evil afoote’ than the normal evil..
This doesnt compute... normally this would kill any candidancy..
The voting booths are INDEED RIGGED..
The Democrats are going to lose big this next election, voters are going to remember their lies about Obamacare.
BOY!.... are YOU in for a surprise...
It’s not who votes that counts BUT him who counts the votes..
And they can’t cheat if it isn’t close.
And they can’t cheat if it isn’t close.
They WILL cheat even then...
If the vote is close.... THE END RESULT MAY NOT BE..
What turnip truck did you fall off of?..
Some precincts may be “fairly” honest..... BUT... Most will not be..
Especially in the Northeast.. and Left Coast.. but not only there..
What is it about NO VOTER I.D.. “laws” that gets past you...
Knock Knock.... Anybody in there?..
No one is talking about the Northeast or West Coast states, which are heavily 'blue'.
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.