Jump to content
270soft Forum
admin_270

Congress Forever 2010 Version Info

Recommended Posts

Insider info: ROAR

Bill Shuster (PA-9) has a last-minute opponent; Tom Connors. I have honestly never heard of him myself but, whatever. There you go. lol

Researched Connors a little bit; he's the mayor of Altoona. Which, by the way, is not located in PA-9. He won't carry much weight and it looks like he's a write in. When I posted before, I thought he was actually on the ballot. Feel free to place Shuster like 95 points ahead; no one's heard of him, he doesn't live in the district, and he may or may not be a write in. Your call. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does Marco Rubio lead? He's behind in all polls.

Crist should start stronger.

And Rop Portman leads in moste of the polls as well.

And the highsore bonus/penalty for Inouye should be higher ... he's PPT, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does Marco Rubio lead? He's behind in all polls.

Crist should start stronger.

And Rop Portman leads in moste of the polls as well.

And the highsore bonus/penalty for Inouye should be higher ... he's PPT, after all.

Portman's been trailing slightly in most non-Rasmussen polls of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the RCP average is usually best, which means Fisher leads BARELY with 0.2%. Inuoye is running against "unknown"; his poll numbers really don't matter too much. But I suppose they could be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inuoye has an opponent!

Republican John Roco: http://roco4senator.blogspot.com/

Rasmussen is the only poll to have done anything with it, but they have Inuoye up 48 points; 68-20%.

EDIT: John Thune still goes unopposed. A Qunnipiac poll also exempted Joe DioGuardi from a poll for New York Senate against Gillibrand; I don't know why yet but it's worth looking into.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric Wargotz is likely to be the Republican nominee for Senate in Maryland.

Ron Johnson is likely to be the Republican nominee for Senate in Wisconsin.

Heidi Heitkamp is likely to be the Democratic nominee for Senate in North Dakota.

RCP averages Chuck Grassley to be at least 17% ahead over Roxanne Conlin for Iowa Senate.

RCP averages Mark Kirk to be 2% ahead over Alexi Giannoulias for Illinois Senate.

RCP averages Pat Toomey to be 2.3% ahead over Joe Sestak for Pennsylvania Senate.

RCP averages the Ohio Senate race to be a perfect tie.

RCP averages Charlie Crist to be 4% points over Marco Rubio and Kendrick Meek for Florida Senate.

RCP averages Kelly Ayotte to be 11.2% points over Paul Hodes for New Hampshire Senate.

RCP averages Barbara Boxer to be 2.5% points over Carly Fiorina for California Senate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric Wargotz is likely to be the Republican nominee for Senate in Maryland.

Ron Johnson is likely to be the Republican nominee for Senate in Wisconsin.

Heidi Heitkamp is likely to be the Democratic nominee for Senate in North Dakota.

RCP averages Chuck Grassley to be at least 17% ahead over Roxanne Conlin for Iowa Senate.

RCP averages Mark Kirk to be 2% ahead over Alexi Giannoulias for Illinois Senate.

RCP averages Pat Toomey to be 2.3% ahead over Joe Sestak for Pennsylvania Senate.

RCP averages the Ohio Senate race to be a perfect tie.

RCP averages Charlie Crist to be 4% points over Marco Rubio and Kendrick Meek for Florida Senate.

RCP averages Kelly Ayotte to be 11.2% points over Paul Hodes for New Hampshire Senate.

RCP averages Barbara Boxer to be 2.5% points over Carly Fiorina for California Senate.

Not for nothing, but the 538 modeling of the six non-Charlie Crist races you mention are more favorable to the Democrats by an average of 2.8 net points, and are more favorable to the Democrats in every single case. And while historical evidence may suggest that simple averages work just as well as fancy stuff like pollster.com and 538 feature, it might be different in a situation where the most prolific pollster by far disagrees so much with every other pollster about what the electorate will look like. Not, of course, that Rasmussen might not be right, it's just that we don't know if they are yet, and it's kind of a binary thing: either Rasmussen is right, in which case Democrats are seriously in trouble, or they aren't, in which case losses, especially in the Senate, will be minimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the purposes of the game, the best (and least controversial) way to go is just to take the median averages of ALL the pollsters and update them from time to time. You can't just eliminate one pollster because you don't like them. I don't trust the PPP, the DailyKos, PPIC, and sometimes even Reuters. Does that mean we should eliminate all of them because I don't like them?

If Rasmussen was deliberately skewing the poll numbers, then he wouldn't be a respected pollster and his polls wouldn't be used. He is; they are; so we shouldn't exclude them because we don't like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two new polls out which have Fiorina ahead in CA.

So I'd say it's a tie.

Where is the other poll? I saw SurveyUSA put Fiorina 2 points ahead, but I haven't seen another?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the purposes of the game, the best (and least controversial) way to go is just to take the median averages of ALL the pollsters and update them from time to time. You can't just eliminate one pollster because you don't like them. I don't trust the PPP, the DailyKos, PPIC, and sometimes even Reuters. Does that mean we should eliminate all of them because I don't like them?

If Rasmussen was deliberately skewing the poll numbers, then he wouldn't be a respected pollster and his polls wouldn't be used. He is; they are; so we shouldn't exclude them because we don't like them.

It's not necessarily that he's deliberately skewing the poll numbers, he just has a different vision of the electorate than other pollsters. All pollsters make assumptions about who will actually turn out come November (or whenever an election is), and those assumptions can make a big difference. And there's pretty strong evidence that Rasmussen thinks the electorate will look very different from what anyone else thinks. So it's not even necessarily that Rasmussen thinks such-and-such a race is GOP+3 while everyone else thinks it's DEM+3, or whatever, it's just that Rasmussen thinks the whole November electorate will be a handful of points more pro-Republican (and especially pro-Tea Party) than other pollsters do. He might be right, but in a sense it's just binary: either he's right or he isn't. And taking the average allows the view of a given race to be dramatically impacted by how much Rasmussen has polled it. If there are races he's ignored, they'll look artificially pro-Democratic compared to the average across the whole nation, while races he dominates the polling of will look artificially pro-Republican.

Also, R2K has been shown to be basically fraudulent, and DailyKos has fired them. And PPP has a pro-Republican house effect as well, compared to the "average" of pollsters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all fine and good, but we are not pollsters ourselves. It's really not our choice to decide one way or another who is removed and who is not. A median average, for our purposes, is the best way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RCP averages Patty Murray to be 2.0% points ahead of Dino Rossi in Washington Senate.

EDIT: RCP averages Russ Feingold to be 2.0% points ahead of Ron Johnson in Wisconsin Senate.

EDIT: RCP averages Charlie Crist to be 5.2% points ahead of Marco Rubio in Florida Senate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has been mentioned already, but according to Real Clear Politics, the Wisconsin Senate election is way closer than the game has it (Feingold is up an average of 1.8; the most recent poll by Rasmussen Reports has him down 2).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nevada - (Mason-Dixon) Reid 43, Angle 42

(Rasmussen) Reid 45, Angle 43

Oregon - (Survey USA) Wyden 53, Hoffman 35

Florida - (Quinnipiac) Crist 39, Rubio (Rufio!) 33, Meek 13

(Quinnipiac) Crist 37, Rubio 32, Greene 17

Washington - (Rasmussen) Murray 48, Didier 45

Murray 49, Rossi 47

Pennsylvania - (Rasmussen) Sestak (Steak) 39, Toomey 45

Missouri (Rasmussen) Blunt 49, Carnahan 43

(Mason-Dixon) Blunt 48, Carnahan 42

New Hampshire (UNH) Ayotte 45, Hodes 37

(PPP) Ayotte 45, Hodes 42

California (PPIC) Boxer 39, Fiorina 34

(PPP) Boxer 49, Fiorina 40

Wisconsin (Rasmussen) Feingold 46, Johnson 48

Illinois (Rasmussen) Giannoulias 43, Kirk 41

Colorado (Rasmussen) Buck 48, Bennet 42

(Rasmussen) Norton 48, Bennet 39

New York B (Quinnipiac) Gillibrand 48, Blakeman 27

Kentucky 6 (Cn2/Braun Research) Chandler 46, Barr 32

New Mexico 1 (SurveyUSA) Barela 51, Heinrich 45

North Dakota AL (Rasmussen) Pomeroy 46, Berg 49

Arkansas (Rasmussen) Boozman 60, Lincoln 35

Virginia 9 (SurveyUSA) Boucher 52, Griffith 39

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inyoue has three Republican opponents: Cam Cavasso, John Roco, and Eddie Pirkowski. Roco leads the pack; Inyoue 68% Roco 20%

There is not and there will not be a candidate to battle John Thune for South Dakota; the primary is dead and gone with absolutely no Democratic challengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the last US combat units left Iraq today, and in light of recent legislation on immigration, as well as the change in tone in Health Care rhetoric since Congress passed their bill monthes ago, maybe the stance wording for the Health Care, Immigration, and Iraq issues should be updated in both the 2010 House and Senate scenarios from the 2008 defaults. I plan to do as much in my Washington Senate 2010 race scenario for P4E2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that issues should be changed forthcoming.

Technical note: the U.S. has 6 combat brigades in Iraq, slightly re-tooled and renamed.

Anthony Burgoyne

http://www.TheorySpark.com

Games that spark the political imagination!

Given the last US combat units left Iraq today, and in light of recent legislation on immigration, as well as the change in tone in Health Care rhetoric since Congress passed their bill monthes ago, maybe the stance wording for the Health Care, Immigration, and Iraq issues should be updated in both the 2010 House and Senate scenarios from the 2008 defaults. I plan to do as much in my Washington Senate 2010 race scenario for P4E2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...