>>>>>>
>>
>>>Bill, again, what I said was that the Obama camp was quite nervous, especially after the first debate and after the Benghazi debacle that led the administration to characterize a planned attack as "spontaneous". They were nervous.
>>
>>I can't speak for other people, but I was never nervous.
>>I followed Nate Silver's 538 column in the NYT.
>
>OK, you weren't nervous. The administration was. That is a fact.
>
>Yes, Silver was quite accurate in the 2012 election. He wasn't nearly as accurate in the 2014 mid-terms.
>
If you look at his methodology, that's understandable.
He uses other peoples' polls as his data source.
A presidential race is polled ad nauseum , so he has lots of data.
The house has few polls. If there were two polls of the race in my district - the 14th, that would have been a lot.
There would be more in the senate, but again, nothing like what he had to work with in 2012.
Before you start counting your veto-proof votes in the senate, look ahead to the next big senate election.
Although the repubs like to blame Obama for their recent romp, many of the people I follow predicted a large swing to the repubs long before the ACA debacle just based on the election map- retirements, incumbents seats in play in contested states, etc.
None predicted what happened, but most predicted a large repub gain.
Those same people see a reverse pattern ahead, so stay tuned.