Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Nate Silver redefines wave to declare that 2018 was a wave election...

Generally when you think about the concept of a "wave election" you think about one Party winning a whole bunch of seats, possibly flipping both chambers, and basically leaving the other Party openly licking their wounds.

In this vein, there has been some liberal criticism of the President for not acknowledging his awful defeat in the midterms. People point to George W Bush's acknowledgment that Republicans took a "thumping" in 2006, and Barack Obama's acknowledgement that his Party took a "shellacking". Certainly many on the left would like to hear Trump say something similar.

But does what Trump does, and in this case Trump is claiming victory. In his mind, the increase in Senate seats (thus an easier path for him to nominate cabinet members and Judges) was a win "for him". He also seems pretty happy with himself for his the success of Senate candidates that he stuck his neck out for. The reality is that Trump may not actually see this like the left does. This obviously has rankled liberals to the point of another fit of rage.

_______

But let's be clear. In 2006, the Democrats took over both the House and the Senate and claimed a clear majority of the Governor's seats. More to the point, the thumping was so overwhelming that not a single Democratic incumbent lost a race in 2006. Like 2018, Republicans lost over 30 seats in the House, but they also lost 6 Senate and Governor's seats.

In 2010, the Democrats lost an amazing 63 seats in the House, 6 seats in the Senate, and 6 seats in the Governor's races. They also lost 680 seats in state legislative races. This was one of the most lopsided midterms in history. According to a metric created by Sean Trende, only the 1994 contract with America Gingrich revolution was a larger wave.

Drilling into the metric set up by Trende, a wave would come in at around 40 points (which is an objective complicated formula to measure gains by one party or the other). By Trende's definition, there have been only  five "wave" elections. This would sort of make sense, as you have to make some distinction from a "wave" election to something that was just a "good result". Certainly everytime a chamber flips,  you cannot demand that it was a "wave".

In fact, according to Trende's definition, the 2006 thumping fell short of being a "wave" calculating out to 30 points and placing 8th in terms of election results for one Party or the other. While some may quibble whether or not that election should be defined as a wave, Trende is being objectively consistent. By that measure, certainly if 2006 is not a wave, then 2018 isn't one.

By this same metric, the 2018 election scored a 24. It didn't even penetrate the top ten for election success. Much of this falls to the simple point that the Democrats lost four incumbents in the Senate and lost Senate seats overall, allowing the Republicans to increase their majority in that chamber. Moving down the ballot, while there were losses at the state legislative level, they were approximately half of what we saw in 2010.  Certainly 2018 remains a good outcome for Democrats, but falls far short of previous elections, and likely short of many expectations going in.

_______

So how did Nate Silver determine that this was a "wave election"? Basically by ignoring the underlying concept that wave elections are about net results. Like everything that is Nate Silver, he decided to redefine traditional parameters and traditional methodology. For example, attempting to declare that voter turnout can be seen as one parameter, and then total votes as another parameter (as if they are not actually the same parameter). He cites things as voter turnout among hispanics, voter turnout of young people, as well as the fact that Independent broke for Democrats as being responsible for making 2018 a "wave" election. At the end of the day, Silver's opinions sounds more to me like a normal analysis of why Democrats had a "good" year, and fall way short of explaining why a Party that lost seats in one chamber, fell well short of expectations, but still had a historical "wave" result.

This is nothing new to the twenty first century political gamesmanship. If you cannot claim something is what you want it to be, you simply do away with the old definition and replace it with one you made up on the fly.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lol, losing is the new winning.🎈

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

+39 and a significant majority of Democratic voters. Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin are among those involved. 2 or 3 Senate seats are temporary.

Anonymous said...



Roger Amick said...

+39 and a significant majority of Democratic voters.



let me guess. you fell for that "house popular vote" bullshit too, eh alky?

it's not a thing no matter how many juicebox mafia kiddies try to vox-splain it to be.


Anonymous said...



as much of a fucking fraud as he is, you really havre to hand it to nate. no matter how wrong he is, no matter how he has to contort himself into a fucking pretzel to explain his analysis and how he backed into his numbers, the liberals like alky hang on his every utterance. and the fucking guy keeps making bank on all of that liberal ignorance.

good for him.

Indy Voter said...

I disagree with where Silver is ranking this year, and would put it behind 2006 in its impact (and 2006 is behind both 1994 and 2010). I do think all four years should be considered wave years, but as Sean Trende notes, different people have different thresholds for what constitutes a wave. His threshold is higher than mine.

What is amazing is how many votes were cast in the election. Close to 120 million. Almost 50% more than in 2014. I have no idea what this portends for 2020, however. Silver notes that total House votes for Democrats will be only slightly below the 2016 votes for Trump, and thinks this means Trump is in trouble in 2020. I'm not on board with that argument, but not that Trump will be in trouble in 2020 (Trump has been in trouble for 2020 since he was elected in 2016).

C.H. Truth said...

+39 and a significant majority of Democratic voters. Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin are among those involved. 2 or 3 Senate seats are temporary.

Roger...

by definition those Senate wins are good for six years, and with incumbents in those red states, likely much, much longer.

There were 10-15 Congressional seats settled by less than a percentage point. By definition all of them are up in two years, and many will flip back unless the Democrats can repeat 2018.

So I am very confused by what you deem to be logic.

C.H. Truth said...

Indy - I tend to think of a wave where there isn't a competing dialogue. It's hard to ignore that four Democratic Senators lost seats, and that the Republicans expanded their majority in that important chamber. By many accounts, Republicans were fairly happy with 2018 (all things considered).

While I may see more than just five wave elections (as Sean does) - I would still (as a minimum requirement) suggest that you have to gain across the board to way you won in a wave.

Two out of three aint bad... but there ain't no way that the Democrats can stop Trump from getting his Justices and Cabinet members confirmed now.

Myballs said...

When both parties can take away something positive, its not a wave election.

anonymous said...

Good girl....calling a spade a spade and sounding like our favorite Rat hole.....!!!


Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday slammed President Donald Trump as "Saudi Arabia's bitch" in the latest scathing criticism of the commander-in-chief's extraordinary statement this week to stand by the country's rulers despite the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The Hawaii Democratic congresswoman made the remarks in a brief and blistering tweet Wednesday afternoon.

"Hey @realdonaldtrump: being Saudi Arabia's bitch is not 'America First,'" wrote Gabbard, a 37-year-old Iraq War veteran who at various points has been considered a rising star in her party.

anonymous said...

you fell for that "house popular vote" bullshit too, eh alky?

Your mean that 9% LOSS YOU SUFFERED, RAT HOLE??? Maybe you can provide an alternate fact to disprove that....with a link would be fine....asswipe...

Anonymous said...

Confused and lashing out, no way to be Denise, after all losing seat Seats is winning.

Anonymous said...




Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday slammed President Donald Trump as "Saudi Arabia's bitch" in the latest scathing criticism of the commander-in-chief's extraordinary statement this week to stand by the country's rulers despite the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.


yeah...

she probably should've sat this one out -


How Tulsi Gabbard became Assad’s mouthpiece in Washington

The Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria has had a quiet but well-funded lobbying effort in Washington since well before he began murdering his own people. But that influence campaign’s clearest triumph came only this month, when it succeeded in bringing Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) to Damascus and having her parrot Assad’s propaganda on her return.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-tulsi-gabbard-became-assads-mouthpiece-in-washington/2017/01/29/215e9c70-e4bf-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.56e29af30d5a


so let's see...

khasshogi is one dead moose-limb, vs. hundreds of thousands of dead moose-limbs at the hands of assad.

gabbard wins on body count!!!


caliphate4vr said...

California Legislature Unveils Plan To Raise Taxes On Wildfires Until They Move Out Of State

SACRAMENTO, CA—As California authorities scramble to deal with the unprecedented destruction wrought by the 2018 rash of wildfires across the state, the legislature has announced a foolproof plan to get rid of the devastating fires. The legislature will sharply increase taxes on the fires each and every year until they finally have had enough and agree to move to a more fire-friendly state.



Governor Jerry Brown announced the plan at a special press conference, vowing to nickel and dime the wildfires to the point where they just can't take it anymore. Initial fees will include a 10% tax on flames, a 25% "luxury" tax on smoke and ashes, and a 40 cent per square foot tax on acreage burned.

"Just as we've done with various businesses and private individuals, we will levy ever-increasing taxes on the fires," he said proudly. "Once they realize they're being taxed to death, they'll move on to greener pastures like Texas or Arizona." Brown said the taxes will be earmarked for public funding and pensions, but quickly added the state will likely "blow through the cash" on crazy pet projects faster than they could bring it in.

More conservative states immediately criticized Brown's plan, complaining that the fires will simply come over to their states and ruin things.

"We don't want 'em," said Texas governor Greg Abbott. "Stay over there, and stay out of our state. We have our own fires to deal with, not to mention all the crazy progressives you keep sending our way."

anonymous said...

Pauline making fun of fire victims....too bad he isn't being burned out of his condo.....Yep, hilarious article indicative of a low life salesman who has no class....Sad this is all you post anymore....HA HA!!!

caliphate4vr said...

Oh look fatty is trolling, as always. I imagine with your miserable life that’s all you’ll be doing on this 4 day weekend. Tell us all how wonderful the Golden Corral Thanksgiving dinner is.

BTW my son was named to the second All SEC team for rugby

Get a life

LMAO

Anonymous said...

Oh look fatty is trolling, as always.

Trolled you perfectly loser.....Thanx for the idiocy you post in a never ending delusion that you are funny.,...Go win a vacation, looks like you have a lot of stress making sales quota....LOLOL BTW, I care less about your retarded son who will never amount to the pile of shit you think is a life!!!!!! Second string is all you are....LOLOLOLOL

caliphate4vr said...

At least my spawn don’t have rotten vaginas

LMAO

anonymous said...

e4vr said...
At least my spawn don’t have rotten vaginas

Yeah....you prefer second place retards like their loser old man...BWAAAAAAAAA!!!! Nice try though loser....no wonder why you sell....no sense of worth...LOLOLOL

caliphate4vr said...

He’s a sophomore fatty, BTW note, unlike your little needledick I was able to pass on a “Y” chromosome

I was able to hit the bottom

LMAO

anonymous said...

He’s a sophomore fatty, BTW note,

a sophomoric reteard pauline??? The only thing you passed on is being a fucking son of a loser salesman who thinks winning vacations is better than salary....The only bottom you hit was in your wife's ass.....LOLOLOL

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

In a rare moment of direct criticism, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts rebuked President Trump on Wednesday for the president's description of a federal judge who ruled against his asylum policy as "an Obama judge." Within hours, the president fired back on Twitter, launching an unusual conflict between the executive and judicial branches.


"We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges," Roberts said in a statement. "What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them."

"That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for," Roberts said. Roberts has never responded to any president so directly and publicly before.

caliphate4vr said...

reteard???

I’d say you’re the RETARD

You’re so easy....

LMAO

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

You left logical thinking when Trump was elected President by a minority vote.

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Not since the Watergate scandal have Democrats run up such a large margin of victory in midterm House races, NBC News data showed.

With votes continuing to be tallied more than two weeks after Election Day, Democrats hold a lead over Republicans in the House popular vote by more than 8.6 million votes.


That's the largest total victory in a midterm House election since Democrats defeated Republicans by more than 8.7 million votes in 1974,
just months after President Richard Nixon resigned from office in disgrace.


And the number is continuing to inch up.

As of noon on Wednesday, Democratic House candidates won 58,990,609 votes while their Republican counterparts pulled in 50,304,975. That means that, so far, Democrats won 53.1 percent of all votes counted while Republicans earned 45.2 percent.

Democrats currently hold a 234 to 199 edge over Republicans in the incoming House, which will start in January, according to NBC News. NBC News has yet to call two races — Georgia's 7th Congressional District and Utah's 4th Congressional District.


So far, Democrats have a net gain of nearly 40 House seats.

caliphate4vr said...

hey rog, here’s what Caterpillar calls a rake

Trump is right again!! MAGA

Anonymous said...

Yep, again!🏅🏆

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

The chief justice of the Supreme Court made a public statement. I don't recall anything like this before Trump.

Once again he is attacking the institutions of government that have been ruling the country since the Constitution became the Supreme law of the country.

He's a very dangerous man who wants to be a virtual dictator.

caliphate4vr said...

All it proves is constitutionalists judges aren’t partisan hacks, unlike the last 3 you have left

And soon to be 2

caliphate4vr said...

And let us know when Trump calls out SCOTUS as Bumble did in a SOTU address

Indy Voter said...

2018 was more than twice the size of the electorate in 1974, so absolute difference is a pretty meaningless statistic. From a percentage difference of vote standpoint, this year is almost identical to 2006. But there were 30 million more votes cast in 2018.

Myballs said...

Roberts is delusional if he thinks 9th circuit isn't very liberal. Most overturned in the country for a reason.

Anonymous said...

Nancy Polosi is making deals with Pres. Trump.

Anonymous said...

"Roberts is delusional if he thinks 9th circuit isn't very liberal. Most overturned in the country for a reason."

He is a child when it comes to politics. Of course there are Clinton judges and Obama judges.

Anonymous said...

jejune Roger

Coldheartedtruth Teller said...

Roberts was appointed by George Bush

anonymous said...

Anonymous Myballs said...
Roberts is delusional if he thinks 9th circuit isn't very liberal. Most overturned in the country for a reason.

Our loser from NY once again needs to expand the places he thinks he gets news from...Fox is not reputable site when hannity is on the air.....LOLOLO

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/