Predicting the 2006 elections

[Maoilbheannacht]

Here are a couple of websites I came across attempting to predict the 2006 elections this fall. I'm not sure how accurate they are and I assume their probably based on some type of an average of polling data much like several websites attempted to do in 2004.

http://www.electionprojection.com/

They predict for the Senate:

GOP 51
DEM 47
IND 2

For the House:

GOP 225
DEM 210
IND 0



http://www.electionprojection.com/

They predict for the Senate:

GOP 50
DEM 48
IND 2

For the House:

GOP 218
DEM 217
IND 0




So, according to these guys, the Democrats will gain some in both the House and the Senate, but not enough to take back either one.

 

[anitram]

Perhaps a more impartial site than that of an obvious GOP blogger would be better?

 

[U2DMfan]

Aren't those the same link?

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Aren't those the same link?

http://electionpredictions.blogspot.com/

http://www.electionprojection.com/

Those are the correct links. My mistake.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Perhaps a more impartial site than that of an obvious GOP blogger would be better?

This is the other site http://electionpredictions.blogspot.com/

I did not read much of their stuff so I don't know if they are REP, DEM or IND.

 

[anitram]

Here is something a bit more balanced from USA Today:

As the Labor Day weekend launches a final nine weeks of campaigning, USA TODAY/Gallup Polls in five key states show Democrats poised to gain Senate seats but facing an uphill battle to regain control.

Democrats seem more likely to carry the House in the Nov. 7 elections, which are being shaped by voters' unease over Iraq, jobs and health care and a sense that the nation is on the wrong track.

"The environment for the majority party is extremely bad," says political scientist David Rohde of Duke University. "There's certainly plenty of time for things to be shaken up ... (but) it would take something really huge" to turn around GOP fortunes.

In the House, the number of seats independent analysts rate as up for grabs has been swelling. Since January, Stuart Rothenberg of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report has doubled the number ranked "most competitive." Of 39 seats now in that category, 35 are held by Republicans. He predicts Democrats will pick up the 15 seats they need to control the House.

In the Senate, Democrats need to gain six seats, which would require winning at least two races where Republicans are now favored. The statewide polls found some GOP senators already in trouble:

• In Pennsylvania, Sen. Rick Santorum trailed Democrat Bob Casey by 18 percentage points among likely voters, by 14 points among registered voters.

• In Ohio, Sen. Mike DeWine was behind Democrat Sherrod Brown by 6 points among likely voters, by 2 points among registered voters.

• In Montana, three-term Sen. Conrad Burns, who has faced questions in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal, was in a close race with Democrat Jon Tester. Tester led by 3 points among likely voters; Burns led by 2 points among registered voters.

• In Missouri, Sen. Jim Talent held a 6-point lead among likely voters over Democrat Claire McCaskill. The two were tied among registered voters.

• In Minnesota, where Republicans hope to pick up an open seat, Democrat Amy Klobuchar led Republican Mark Kennedy by 10 points among likely voters, by 7 points among registered voters.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Here is something a bit more balanced from USA Today:

So this would suggest that the most wildly optimistic projection for the Democrats would be to pick up 35 house seats. An exact reversal, of the current make up of the House, at the moment would require the Democrats to pick up 29 seats in the House.

 

[BonosSaint]

What will happen will happen.

 

[nathan1977]

These days, calling an election three months before is about as useful as calling an election the day of/night of/day after.