The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
Democratic bigwigs are now attempting to portray the two special elections yesterday--particularly the Republican victory in New York City--as the result of local issues. Silly them.
From "Five Thirty Eight," Nate Silver's political blog in the New York Times:
One crude way to forecast the results you might expect to see out of a House race is through its Partisan Voting Index, or P.V.I., a measure of how the district voted relative to others in the past two presidential elections.
The Nevada Second, for instance, has a P.V.I. of Republican plus-5, meaning that the Republican candidate would be expected to perform 5 points better there than a Republican might nationally. Since a vote for the Republican is (usually) a vote against the Democrat, you need to double that number to project the margin of victory. In this case, that would imply a Republican win by 10 points given average candidates and a neutral overall political environment.
The Republican Mark Amodei, however, leads by 22 points as of this writing, an easy victory, meaning that he overperformed the P.V.I. by 12 points.
Meanwhile, Mr. Turner’s winning margin in the New York district, 8 percentage points as of this writing, represents a 18-point G.O.P. swing from the P.V.I.-projected results.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
That's not quite the way the Veep said it, but yeah, that'll do.
Edited on Sep 14, 2011 at 1:44pmApr '11
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
I have lived all my life in NYC and I never expected to see a local race where a jewish area voted against an orthodox jewish democrat and for a conservative republican.The race was all about obama as both sides were attacking the former Messiah.....this was an earthquake in so many ways.First of all it exposed the concerns in the jewish community about Obama and his hostility to israel.It also opened a lot of eyes as to how weak obama really is and what a drag he could possibly be next year.His poll numbers are artificially high since so many people have so much emotional energy invested in him.That said,his numbers on the economy and health care tell you better where he stands and if things do not improve I would expect to see his approval numbers move down over time to reflect the numbers on the economy.
Sep '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
Stupendous! Especially good are the credits. Boy, I needed a laugh! Thanks, E.J.
Apr '11
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
I'm reporting you all to attackwatch!
Sep '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
That this fellow is associated with the Tea Party is especially meaningful to me. I wonder if Judith Levy thinks it reflects on the historical tendency among American Jews to stick with Democrats.
Jun '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
Peter Robinson
Unless I'm mistaken the above sentence doesn't make sense.
My logic being the R got 1.22 votes for every 1 vote the D got. If we say that the votes for the Democrat = X, then X + 1.22X = 100 total votes. Solving for X yields 45.045 or approximately 45 D votes compared to 55 (100 - 45) R votes for a difference of 10 votes (55 - 45) or 10/45 = 0.22 or 22% margin of victory over the D. It's been a while since I've done simple algebra, so please someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Jun '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
Sorry I should have added the following:
The expected results based on a 5% R favourability would then be X + 1.05X = 100 or X = 49 D and 51 R (100 - 49) votes. Actual results were 55 to 45, therefore, the performance relative to P.V.I is 9/45 = 0.2 or 20% (55 actual votes - 51 expected votes = + 4 votes. Add 4 over-performance to + 5 votes expected favour-ability = 9 votes).
Edited on Sep 14, 2011 at 2:01pmMay '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
The key is "don't get cocky, kid." There is a long way to go, and the bad guy lefties will unite eventually to battle the terrible threat in 2012. Every union member in NY state will be there dragging little old sick ladies to the polls and pulling the levers for them.
Michael Barone points out that NY-9 was indeed a great win, but not the unbelievable turnaround that some on our side claim based on the district number since 1923, because redistricting has indeed made it less liberal. There were Republicans representing the Queens areas in the 1960's. So this is a 50 year drought broken, not 90.
Jul '10
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
I look for Nancy Pelosi's analysis saying that in certain ways this can be seen as a Democratic victory. Botox will keep her chin from trembling.
Sep '11
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
While I'm just as giddy as anyone else in crowing about this victory, I have to admit that Nancy Pelosi was correct in saying that this wasn't entirely a referendum on President Obama.
Consider these points:
All of that said, the Democrats (and their auxiliaries at MoveOn.org and DailyKos) panicked last week and dumped over $600,000 into this race at the last minute. So it wasn't just local. But there certainly was a local dimension.
Jul '11
Re: The Special Elections Were a Really Big Deal
Cas, you're making the problem more complicated than it is. A 22 point margin means that the Rep won 61-39, a 22 point difference. Normally a republican should win 55-45 (10 point margin). Therefore, Mr. Amodei outperformed the PVI by 12 points. No algebra required.
-E