US Senate: Massachusetts

Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#101

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:49 pm

Real Nate's got her at 91.7%. That seems a little more than a lean to me... :-kI view Real Clear Politics labeling similar to Rasmussen polling. If RCP is labeling a race as "Leans Democratic" the Democrat is probably ahead by more than just a smidgen.That's why I just go to 538 or the PEC to get an honest interpretation of all the data.Rather than rely on Real Clear Politics, 538 or any other site to tell me what the polls suggest I visit RCP because they offer a large number of polls. I determine which of these polling organizations are to be believed, which should be adjusted (and by how much) and which should be ignored.





I wrote something about this last May and commented whom I trust more.


http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopi ... 28#p381528

borealis
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:06 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#102

Post by borealis » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:09 pm

Joe: I certainly trust you more than the others. I am glad you're one of us. Although you are busy crunching numbers now, how does the House look post- election from your data? Gop still in control?

Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#103

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:20 pm

Off Topic
Joe: I certainly trust you more than the others. I am glad you're one of us. Although you are busy crunching numbers now, how does the House look post- election from your data? Gop still in control?I haven't reviewed anywhere near enough races to make that prediction regarding the House. I've concentrated on just a few I'm interested in.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#104

Post by Slartibartfast » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:24 am

That's why I just go to 538 or the PEC to get an honest interpretation of all the data.Rather than rely on Real Clear Politics, 538 or any other site to tell me what the polls suggest I visit RCP because they offer a large number of polls. I determine which of these polling organizations are to be believed, which should be adjusted (and by how much) and which should be ignored.





I wrote something about this last May and commented whom I trust more.


http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopi ... 381528Most people have neither the time nor the ability to do that. Also, I don't think you should lump RCP in with 538 and the PEC---they are very different things. RCP is just an average and I wouldn't trust much more than the sign of the derivative of the trend line (the direction in which the race is changing); 538 is a hybrid polling/economic model with a fairly open methodology which takes into account pollster house effects, past accuracy, and movement from the last poll; and the PEC is a mathematical calculation of the odds from a pure state-level polling model with a completely transparent methodology. The predictions at both 538 and the PEC are the result of nuanced scientific analysis which is compared to real data as much as possible [/break1]princeton.edu/2012/10/28/a-presidential-prediction-challenge/](you can find some metrics to measure the quality of election models here). While I do respect the fact that you know what you're doing, I can't quantify your subjective educated opinion, nor can I easily compare your prior performance to any benchmarks---something I can do with Sam and Nate.
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#105

Post by Slartibartfast » Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:27 am

Joe: I certainly trust you more than the others. I am glad you're one of us. Although you are busy crunching numbers now, how does the House look post- election from your data? Gop still in control?The [/break1]princeton.edu/2012/10/24/house-prediction-update-and-travel-advice/]PEC has an 18-33% chance of the House flipping (as of Oct. 24th). l haven't seen any predictions at 538 yet.
Edit: The PEC link also identifies districts where you can get the most bang for your buck...
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#106

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:17 am

Most people have neither the time nor the ability to do that. Also, I don't think you should lump RCP in with 538 and the PEC---they are very different things. RCP is just an average and I wouldn't trust much more than the sign of the derivative of the trend line (the direction in which the race is changing); 538 is a hybrid polling/economic model with a fairly open methodology which takes into account pollster house effects, past accuracy, and movement from the last poll; and the PEC is a mathematical calculation of the odds from a pure state-level polling model with a completely transparent methodology. The predictions at both 538 and the PEC are the result of nuanced scientific analysis which is compared to real data as much as possible [/break1]princeton.edu/2012/10/28/a-presidential-prediction-challenge/](you can find some metrics to measure the quality of election models here). While I do respect the fact that you know what you're doing, I can't quantify your subjective educated opinion, nor can I easily compare your prior performance to any benchmarks---something I can do with Sam and Nate.I'm not a statistician; I'm just a political junkie who has viewed a few poll results (thanks for the flattering comments). I attempt to determine if any of the polls for a particular race seem out of line and try to remember if there were any similar occurrences for the same polling organization either earlier or in other races. Some like Public Policy Polling or Rasmussen Reports make it fairly easy because they're consistent. Some like Gravis Marketing scream WTF at you. There are others who don't stand out like a sore thumb initally but grab my attention later and many I've never heard of.Rather than claim any scientific method I'm not trained in, my determinations regarding who to believe and how much are more closely aligned with a casino security attention grabber. The JDLR method works well in many fields.JDLR = Just Doesn't Look RightYou're right. My comments are subjective opinion which is why I'm paid so much for them.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#107

Post by Slartibartfast » Wed Oct 31, 2012 3:38 am

You're right. My comments are subjective opinion which is why I'm paid so much for them.Which doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing your comments---I've found them interesting since reading all of the info you posted on the floods in 2011---I just put more weight on Nate and Sam's models (due to my own subjective bias).
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#108

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:52 pm

Public Policy Polling's final result shows Elizabeth Warren leading Sen Scott Brown 52-46.Scott Brown has a 52/36 approval rating. Usually Senators with those kinds of approval numbers are safe for reelection. But Warren needed to do 2 things in this campaign: solidify the Democratic vote behind her and reduce Brown's advantage with independents. She's succeeded on both of those fronts. 84% of Democrats are planning to vote for her, only slightly less than the 88% of Republicans Brown's winning. And Warren's deficit with independents is only 21 points at 59-38. In a vacuum that might sound pretty bad, but our final poll of the 2010 Massachusetts Senate special election found Brown defeating Martha Coakley 64-32 with them so Warren's really made up a fair amount of ground on that front.[/break1]publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/11/democrats-likely-to-win-ct-ma-senate-races.html#more]http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... .html#moreWarren campaigned hard for voter's trust unlike Coakley who believed she didn't need to.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44875
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

US Senate: Massachusetts

#109

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:00 pm

Glad to see Scott Brown go, if that's what happens. Despite not being a RWNJ he caucused with them, filibustered with them, and usually voted with them. He deserves to be associated with them in voters' minds much as he associated with them when it usually counted.

MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#110

Post by MaineSkeptic » Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:04 pm

Glad to see Scott Brown go, if that's what happens. Despite not being a RWNJ he caucused with them, filibustered with them, and usually voted with them. He deserves to be associated with them in voters' minds much as he associated with them when it usually counted.And he's a nasty sonofabitch too. Also.

User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#111

Post by esseff44 » Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:12 pm

Glad to see Scott Brown go, if that's what happens. Despite not being a RWNJ he caucused with them, filibustered with them, and usually voted with them. He deserves to be associated with them in voters' minds much as he associated with them when it usually counted.And he's a nasty sonofabitch too. Also.I am glad to see him go but not as much as I am glad that Warren will be a Senator. We just need 99 more of her ilk.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44875
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

US Senate: Massachusetts

#112

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:14 pm

Clinton/Warren 2016orFranken/Warren 2016

AnitaMaria
Posts: 4360
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#113

Post by AnitaMaria » Sat Nov 03, 2012 7:30 pm

Glad to see Scott Brown go, if that's what happens. Despite not being a RWNJ he caucused with them, filibustered with them, and usually voted with them. He deserves to be associated with them in voters' minds much as he associated with them when it usually counted.His victory was an important victory for tea baggers, even though he was not one of them. He was elected at a time when tea bagger momentum was building. Many, many people assumed that he was one of them and that if Massachusetts would go tea bagger, the whole country was now their playground. Of course, they have seriously overplayed their hand. I think we will see that reflected next week. History will probably forget the role Martha Coakley played in feeding the far right anti-Obama lunatics, but I won't. :madz:

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

US Senate: Massachusetts

#114

Post by SueDB » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:18 am

Clinton/Warren 2016orFranken/Warren 2016How about Al Franken/Jill Stein? the Franken Stein Ticket......WoooHooo!
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#115

Post by Slartibartfast » Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:57 am

I am glad to see him go but not as much as I am glad that Warren will be a Senator. We just need 99 more of her ilk.You're wrong---we only need 97 (I'm not giving up Bernie Sanders or Al Franken)---although it will be 99 if the :geezer: steals two of them for his dream ticket...
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#116

Post by esseff44 » Sun Nov 04, 2012 2:20 am

I want Warren to spend enough time in the Senate to change the climate in that chamber. Okay, which other Senators would you not want to give up in favor of someone better? There are some big shoes there that haven't been filled. We need some more statesmen and stateswomen. Whose on your list of keepers?

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#117

Post by Slartibartfast » Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:30 am

I want Warren to spend enough time in the Senate to change the climate in that chamber. Okay, which other Senators would you not want to give up in favor of someone better? There are some big shoes there that haven't been filled. We need some more statesmen and stateswomen. Whose on your list of keepers?Warren (should she win)FrankenSandersWhitehouseKlobuchar (sp?)Stabenow & Levin (currently my Senators---with Granholm as my choice for a backup)Sherrod BrownI'd consider adding Kerry to that list (although I'd be okay with giving him up for the Secretary of State gig, assuming Hillary needs to free up her time to run for president...) and Gillibrand might make it with a little more seasoningI think the odds of replacing the people on that list with someone better aren't that great...
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
MRich
Posts: 791
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:07 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#118

Post by MRich » Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:43 pm

NBC just called the race for Elizabeth Warren

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44875
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

US Senate: Massachusetts

#119

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:48 pm

Excellent.

ducktape
Posts: 5334
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

US Senate: Massachusetts

#120

Post by ducktape » Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:51 pm

:-bd :-bd \ :D / \ :D /

chancery
Posts: 1628
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:51 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#121

Post by chancery » Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:01 pm

thank goodness.

User avatar
Patagoniagirl
Posts: 3741
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:15 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#122

Post by Patagoniagirl » Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:01 pm

Just woke up the old folks in the room next door! Screaming with Glee!!!!! Warren kicked an asshole's ass! Wooohooo! Yipee!

borealis
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:06 am

US Senate: Massachusetts

#123

Post by borealis » Wed Nov 07, 2012 2:00 am

I want Warren to spend enough time in the Senate to change the climate in that chamber. Okay, which other Senators would you not want to give up in favor of someone better? There are some big shoes there that haven't been filled. We need some more statesmen and stateswomen. Whose on your list of keepers?Warren (should she win)FrankenSandersWhitehouseKlobuchar (sp?)Stabenow & Levin (currently my Senators---with Granholm as my choice for a backup)Sherrod BrownI'd consider adding Kerry to that list (although I'd be okay with giving him up for the Secretary of State gig, assuming Hillary needs to free up her time to run for president...) and Gillibrand might make it with a little more seasoningI think the odds of replacing the people on that list with someone better aren't that great...DURBIN!

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 7047
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

US Senate: Massachusetts

#124

Post by Slartibartfast » Wed Nov 07, 2012 5:17 am

Warren (should she win)FrankenSandersWhitehouseKlobuchar (sp?)Stabenow & Levin (currently my Senators---with Granholm as my choice for a backup)Sherrod BrownI'd consider adding Kerry to that list (although I'd be okay with giving him up for the Secretary of State gig, assuming Hillary needs to free up her time to run for president...) and Gillibrand might make it with a little more seasoningI think the odds of replacing the people on that list with someone better aren't that great...DURBIN!My bad :oops: I think that Baldwin might belong on the list as well...
"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 12186
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Mainely in the plain
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

US Senate: Massachusetts

#125

Post by Whatever4 » Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:14 am

Governor Patrick is rumored to be considering appointing Barney Frank as interim Senator to fill Kerry's seat. Would be a nice capstone to a distinguished career. Half the MA congressional delegation is rumored to be interested in the seat. Representatives Capuano, Markey, Lynch, Tsongas. Also Ted Kennedy Jr. Martha Coakley has wisely said she isn't interested. On the Republican side, if Brown says no, former Gov. William Weld or Charlie Baker. None of these guys would be a Republican outside New England. (Source: the local diner crowd this morning. The cook started swearing in Greek when someone mentioned Coakley. Capuano is the rep for my district, Frank was the rep for the diner's district even though it's only a block away. Now it's Joe Kennedy III. Gotta love local politics. BTW, my diner nickname is "the Bride," not related to Frankenstein or Kill Bill.)
"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (I-ME)

Post Reply

Return to “U.S. Senate”