After a poll came out with a clear ALP win in Vic election I posted this:

Mod Lib
Posted Friday, October 29, 2010 at 10:10 pm | Permalink
Confess, I comPletely misread this one (althogh no a Victorian so can be excused)! I thought this was going to be a surprise cliffhanger with narrow minority gov , similar to feds. oh well, lets see how it turns out.

US elections:

Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 12:46 am | PERMALINK

I was out, so sorry for the delay! However, I am not changing my earlier prediction-
Obama 332 (just minor changes to margins):

Minnesota: +5

Wisconsin: +5

Nevada: +5 …. now +4

Ohio: +1 … now +2

Colorado: +2 … now +1

Virginia: +1

New Hampshire: +1 … now +2

Iowa: +2 … now +3

Florida: +0.1 … now +0.5

North Carolina: -2.0

Obama 50.8%

Romney 48.0%

and the Senate:

[236
 Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 12:48 am | PERMALINK


Senate predictions (draft 2) = 54

That is made up of 47 safe Senate seats, including Maine Independent King, plus:

Mass: Dem (Warren) +5

Conn: Dem (Murphy) +5

Missouri: Dem (McCaskill) +5

Wisconsin: Dem (Baldwin) +2

Virginia: Dem (Kaine) +1

Indiana: Dem (Donn) +1 … now +4

Montana: Dem (Tester) +1

Nevada: Rep (Heller) -1

Nth Dakota: Rep (Berg) -3

Arizona: Rep (Flake) -3

Nebraska: Rep (Fisher) -5

…particularly proud of the Montana prediction as few predicted that correctly.

Also, although I missed North Dakota, I did say Heitkamp was running a great grassroots campaign, and in the end she just won so not such a bad prediction to say she would just lose in a very red state in a bad year for the Dems. She actually did brilliantly to take it.

In the state election on the same day as the Pres.poll the Democrats captured 2/3 of the state seats and all major state officers.
They carried a referendum for icreased taxes on the rich by lands tax and death duties…thus helping the ailing school system and the medical services too
a great article on the demographic changes there

http://prospect.org/article/future-white-mans-party

Can you believe that the Democrats won the popular House of Representatives vote with a current margin of 500,000 votes, yet they didn’t go close to claiming even 50% of the seats?

Yes I can

That’s because Republicans at a state level have drawn some of the most idiotic looking electoral boundaries of all time.

True. Apparently the advantages of incumbency are so great that only about 10% of seats are even contests. They are walkovers for one party of the other.

The question was who is more to blame for current American economic problems.

Response: Obama 38% George W Bush 53%.

The Republicans tried to remove Obama by blaming him for the state of the economy, since this was really the only serious argument for not giving him another term. Outside of existing Republican sympathisers (32% of respondents were registered Republicans) practically nobody agreed with them.

And those who did buy it probably included a lot of ex-Republicans who now identify as independent, a trend which explained both the Democrat lead in party ID and the fact that Independents skewed Republican but the Republicans were still unable to win.

Politics made simple.

Still can’t seem to find exact results for the NE-2 electoral college vote…..

I know Obama lost it clearly, but would be interested to see the swings if anyone can get there hands on it. What I can find is:
1. House NE-2 district only went to the Republicans by 2.4% (hardly a landslide!)
2. Presidential NE-2 is largely Douglas county which went Romney by 4%
3. Presidential NE-2 also includes the urban part of Sarpy County (the whole of Sarpy went Romney 61-37)

…it would just be interesting to see how Obama would have done on NE-2′s old boundaries

Someone suggested that the $600 million that super-PACs spent to defeat Obama may have sti9mulated economic activity enough to ensure his re-election!

Although, realistically, looking at the size of the US economy, that’s unlikely. But still, even if slightly true, it is very much the textbook definition of irony!