October 31st, 2010
Looking at nothing but the same numbers everyone else is looking at, it strikes me that a 60-seat swing in the House is the most likely outcome but that 70 seats is firmly within the realm of the possible. And that if Republicans have a good day, where things break right for them, 80 seats (and beyond) are possible. Maybe this is a crazy reading. You will have your own thoughts, I’m sure.
We can all lay down predictions tomorrow, when I’ll put up a crystal ball thread.
-
Let’s use a PERT model:
Optimistic + (4X Most Likely) + Pessimistic/6
Optimistic = 80 seats
Most Likely = 60 seats
Pessimistic = 50 seats
80+240+50=370
370/6= 62 seats -
SkinsFan,
I don’t think you can classify Ross as a “Big loser” yet. He and Reihan did not argue that the GOP needed to “embrace big government”. That is a gross mischaracterization of their book and their ongoing arguments related to policy (check out NRO’s “The Agenda” for Reihan’s smart policy blog). I don’t always agree with their policy ideas but their main argument is that the GOP needs to figure out how to meaningfully address working class/lower middle class problems in order to stay relevant and successful. Obviously the GOP can be successful in this election by pointing to Obama’s Administration and saying “we are different”. But after they win, the question remains will they deal with real problems? By the way, I do think you are closer to the mark with Frum, and I remain optimistic that the new Republican Congress will attempt to confront problems in a grown-up manner (i.e. cut popular spending). But we’ll see…
-
Jeff,
While I may have over-simplified Douthat’s argument (I like and agree with both men on most issues), I don’t think it qualifies as a gross mischaracterization.
You are correct that winning elections and governing are separate, and Douthat and Salam mostly discuss the latter. However, if you’ve read Douthat in the past 12-18 months in the NYT you’ll find that he routinely suggests that the GOP should avoid being the “party of no” and find areas of compromise with the Dems. He may be right about governing, but flat out wrong about winning elections. The simple fact is you can’t govern without winning elections first. If the GOP had taken his advice, they would not be poised for the biggest wins in a generation. In my book, that makes Douthat a big loser. -
SkinsFan,
Good point about the importance of positioning yourself in the right place to win elections. Are you really Last wearing a sock puppet?
-
Nope, just think alike. Besides, would JVL call himself a Skins fan?
-
I think it’ll be a big mistake by everybody to see the election results as an endorsement of the GOP. The blast furnace energy from the right in this cycle is primarily being driven by disgust with the amoral politicians for life from both parties who’ve built their careers by bankrupting this country. Please remember that the first casualties of this battle weren’t Democrats, but Republicans like Murkowski, Crist, and Castle. If Republicans get control and then go native again like they did post ’94 we’ll kick them in the teeth so hard they’ll envy what happens to the Democrats on Tuesday.
-
ShoelesJoe: I don’t think too many will interpret this election as an endorsement of the GOP as much as it will be interpreted as a rejection of the Dems/Obama. That said, even if the GOP take over and accomplish nothing, it is far more likely that their gains would be slowly rolled back over the course of 2-4 election cycles than yet another wave election in 2012 or 2014. The odds are so stacked in favor of incumbents that these sort of elections only happen once every 20 or so years. All I really care about after this election is that the “Pretty Young Things ™” in the media get their comeuppance. I’m looking at you, Juicebox Mafia, Nate Silver, Ross Douthat, Dave Weigel, et al… You don’t know shit, so shut your mouths and pay your dues like everyone else.
SkinsFanPG November 1, 2010 at 9:47 am
BTW: Next week, when we analyze the “winners and losers” of this election cycle, don’t we have to include Ross Douthat (and Reihan Salam) as BIG losers? They wrote a book which basically said that in order for the Republican Party to remain politically viable in the post-2008 era, the GOP would have to co-opt the Dem agenda and embrace big government. Isn’t that the EXACT OPPOSITE of what the GOP did, which now appears will lead them to historical success? Other huge losers: Frum, Parker, Buckley, Sullivan, etc…