Nate Silver predicts Repub takeover of House

Political numbercruncher Nate Silver of (now affiliated with the NYTimes), calculates that the Repubs have a two-thirds likelihood of taking control of the House.

As he does with other political math problems, Silver’s methodology seems to crunch together most or all of the factors that other analysts use to project results.

In addition, writes Silver:

“According to the model, Republicans have about a one-in-three chance of winning at least 54 seats, their total in 1994, and nearly a one-in-four chance of gaining at least 60.”

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (3)

  1. Submitted by Ray Schoch on 09/13/2010 - 09:27 am.

    Silver may well be correct, which would be depressing enough, but even more depressing is the realization that Republicans have no idea what they’re doing, either, and the tea partiers are intellectual children.

    The vision of John Boehner as Speaker of the House isn’t scary, particularly, it’s just sad. As Jim Kunstler said this morning on his website, we no longer speak clearly to each other, but beat drums instead. That’s not a problem-solving technique…

  2. Submitted by Hénock Gugsa on 09/13/2010 - 12:22 pm.

    It is still an “if” situation. But if and when Republicans ascend to power like they did in ’94, we can expect them to go on witch hunts, and dirt-digging jaunts for as long as they can. That is what they did back then, and that’s what they would do again.

    Special prosecutors a-la-Kenneth-Starr will be back investigating (persecuting) the Obamas and other democrats who have been thorns on the Republicans’ derrieres.

    That would also serve as a major distraction to the nation as Republicans quietly (in the background) repeal all “progressive” bills one by one.

    Unless the electorate wakes up and realizes what is going on (i.e. remember, learn, and understand history), we will have no one to blame but ourselves for our condition. As the great bard says, “The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves….”

  3. Submitted by Steve Rose on 09/13/2010 - 02:03 pm.

    Ray (#1):

    I too read Jim Kunstler’s words on his website: “we no longer speak clearly to each other, but beat drums instead.”

    In the political arena, the loud mouth with whom you agree is a patriot, and the one whom you disagree is an obstructionist who must be silenced.

    We need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that politics was once civil. There is a lot at stake, and politicians fight with all they have available. They do it on both sides of the aisle; they always have.

    A couple examples of some less than fair and friendly play. Three years following the defeat of the Nazis in World War II, Harry Truman made an analogy between the Republicans and the Nazis. During the 1860 political cycle, opponents of Abraham Lincoln referred to him as an “ape” and “stupid”. Back in 1828, opponents of Andrew Jackson charged that he was a cannibal, a murderer, and that his wife was a prostitute.

    How long ago did the dialogue get poisoned?

Leave a Reply