Why the 2014 Mid-Terms were so unimportant - Nate Silver

[SassyIrishLass]

I think you have us confused with Ireland!

Clown avatars are easily ignored, batter up?

You don't seem to be finding very easy. They're having the desired effect. Thank you.

She does have her panties in a wad, huh?

Over some clown that believes some hack like Silverman? Pulease, clown face. You don't realize this but you're sort of the board hack, people laugh at you

You mean the Hack that has accurately predicted every race, both Presidential and Mid-Term for the last decade or so? Is that the Hack you are talking about?

Shush, clown. Nobody takes you serious other than other clowns

 

[JimH52]

I think you have us confused with Ireland!

Clown avatars are easily ignored, batter up?

You don't seem to be finding very easy. They're having the desired effect. Thank you.

She does have her panties in a wad, huh?

is that all you woman hater liberals can do, is trash smart girls? ******

He's a nothing....all libturds are.

Yup, best to just ignore him. It will help you sleep better at night, since your love life is in shambles....

 

[Wyatt earp]

I think you have us confused with Ireland!

Clown avatars are easily ignored, batter up?

You don't seem to be finding very easy. They're having the desired effect. Thank you.

She does have her panties in a wad, huh?

is that all you woman hater liberals can do, is trash smart girls? ******

He's a nothing....all libturds are.

of course a dumb **** that post a link from May 2014 as a OP

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Clown avatars are easily ignored, batter up?

You don't seem to be finding very easy. They're having the desired effect. Thank you.

She does have her panties in a wad, huh?

is that all you woman hater liberals can do, is trash smart girls? ******

He's a nothing....all libturds are.

of course a dumb **** that post a link from May 2014 as a OP

Desperation....

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Clown avatars are easily ignored, batter up?

You don't seem to be finding very easy. They're having the desired effect. Thank you.

She does have her panties in a wad, huh?

is that all you woman hater liberals can do, is trash smart girls? ******

He's a nothing....all libturds are.

Yup, best to just ignore him. It will help you sleep better at night, since your love life is in shambles....

Gawd you're lame...but you're a clown

 

[blackhawk]

I wonder if the left would consider the 2014 midterm results unimportant if the Democrats had keep control of the Senate and picked up seats in the House?

 

[JimH52]

Just keep watching the "Hack" Silver and see how close his predictions will come to reality. Or you could listen to Karl who is still sure Mitt won Ohio in 2012.....

Silver is saying what many of us have been saying for months. 2014 was an anomaly and was due to extremely low turnout. 2016 is going to be a very different game. The GOP can only hope and pray for low turnout.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Just keep watching the "Hack" Silver and see how close his predictions will come to reality. Or you could listen to Karl who is still sure Mitt won Ohio in 2012.....

Silver is saying what many of us have been saying for months. 2014 was an anomaly and was due to extremely low turnout. 2016 is going to be a very different game. The GOP can only hope and pray for low turnout.

^^^^^^^^

 

[g5000]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

Nate Silverman widely missed the mark in the UK general election, so he is hardly infallible.

The 2014 US election had the lowest voter turnout in 72 years, and the GOP always does well in low voter turnout elections. Thus, they do their best to suppress turnout.

As for 2016, there is no way it will have a record turnout. It will have a higher turnout than 2014, only because it is a presidential election. But it will probably have the lowest turnout in a presidential year since WWII.

America is sick of both parties. Barely a third of voters voted last time, and I would be very surprised if half vote in 2016. We will have a choice of an utterly corrupt Hillary Clinton or a Republican with his head up his ass.

Americans have figured it out. Neither party has any intention of ever balancing the budget or solving any other problems. They are beholden to whoever writes the biggest checks to help them keep their seats in the American Politboro.

 

[JimH52]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

Nate Silverman widely missed the mark in the UK general election, so he is hardly infallible.

The 2014 US election had the lowest voter turnout in 72 years, and the GOP always does well in low voter turnout elections. Thus, they do their best to suppress turnout.

As for 2016, there is no way it will have a record turnout. It will have a higher turnout than 2014, only because it is a presidential election. But it will probably have the lowest turnout in a presidential year since WWII.

America is sick of both parties. Barely a third of voters voted last time, and I would be very surprised if half vote in 2016. We will have a choice of an utterly corrupt Hillary Clinton or a Republican with his head up his ass.

Americans have figured it out. Neither party has any intention of ever balancing the budget or solving any other problems. They are beholden to whoever writes the biggest checks to help them keep their seats in the American Politboro.

How can you honestly say 2016 will have the "lowest turnout in a presidential election since WWII?" With a woman at the top of the ticket for the first time in US History, the female vote will be huge and the RW loons will be drooling all the way to the polls. As for the UK, everyone drastically miscalculated that election. But Silver know US politics.

 

[JoshuaZ]

Nate Silverman widely missed the mark in the UK general election, so he is hardly infallible.

The 2014 US election had the lowest voter turnout in 72 years, and the GOP always does well in low voter turnout elections. Thus, they do their best to suppress turnout.

As for 2016, there is no way it will have a record turnout. It will have a higher turnout than 2014, only because it is a presidential election. But it will probably have the lowest turnout in a presidential year since WWII.

America is sick of both parties. Barely a third of voters voted last time, and I would be very surprised if half vote in 2016. We will have a choice of an utterly corrupt Hillary Clinton or a Republican with his head up his ass.

Americans have figured it out. Neither party has any intention of ever balancing the budget or solving any other problems. They are beholden to whoever writes the biggest checks to help them keep their seats in the American Politboro.

Point about the UK general seems accurate. Most of the rest seems off.

I'm curious, 1996 had a voter turnout of 49%. If someone offered to bet you $20 that voter turnout percentage for this election will be at least 49%, would you take it?

 

[konradv]

Americans have figured it out. Neither party has any intention of ever balancing the budget or solving any other problems. They are beholden to whoever writes the biggest checks to help them keep their seats in the American Politboro.

Support public financing of elections. When WE write the checks, they'll have listen to us instead of the special interests.

 

[konradv]

I wonder if the left would consider the 2014 midterm results unimportant if the Democrats had keep control of the Senate and picked up seats in the House?

In that case the Republicans would be reminding them of it.

 

[blackhawk]

I wonder if the left would consider the 2014 midterm results unimportant if the Democrats had keep control of the Senate and picked up seats in the House?

In that case the Republicans would be reminding them of it.

I'm sure some would but it would not change the fact that they were Important and mattered just as they do now.

 

[chikenwing]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

LOL always that way when you lose right?
Also a huge assumption that there will be a women at the top of the ticket.

 

[JoshuaZ]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

LOL always that way when you lose right?
Also a huge assumption that there will be a women at the top of the ticket.

What chance do you estimate that the top of the ticket will not be a woman?

 

[chikenwing]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

LOL always that way when you lose right?
Also a huge assumption that there will be a women at the top of the ticket.

What chance do you estimate that the top of the ticket will not be a woman?

80-20

 

[chikenwing]

The 20 % being the Repubs nominate a women,Hillary isn't going to get the nod from the dems

 

[JoshuaZ]

The 2014 Election Is the Least Important in Years FiveThirtyEight

Yes, the Republicans worst nightmare is back. Nate Silverman calls them the way he sees them. He is a impartial political scientist and leaves partisanship at the door. He predictions are hardly ever wrong. This is a great read!

The 2014 elections turned out as expected. The turnout was historically low. In 2016, with a woman for the first time at the top of a political ticket, you can expect a record turnout. Not so good for the GOP.......

LOL always that way when you lose right?
Also a huge assumption that there will be a women at the top of the ticket.

What chance do you estimate that the top of the ticket will not be a woman?

80-20

Interesting. Two questions: first, why do you think Hillary has so little chance?

Suppose someone offered to make a bet where if the top of the ticket is a woman you get $10, and if not, you pay $20, would you take it?

 

[JoshuaZ]

The 20 % being the Repubs nominate a women,Hillary isn't going to get the nod from the dems

That's very interesting. Can you explain your reasoning?