The Goat Pen

Anywho, Mitt keeps talking about oprama being desperate and that may be a case of the pot calling the negro's kettle black.

The best electoral college forecast I can find for Mitt is RCP's. And it says oprama only needs 33 votes out of 110 toss ups remaining.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... e_map.html

Professor Tiger wrote:Just checked the Real Clear Politics electoral college map.

Obama has 247 electoral votes to Romney's 191. 270 EV's are needed to win.

The good news for Romney is Missouri just moved into his column. That's because his lead in the polls there reached 6%.

The bad news for Romney is he is still losing in 7 out of the 8 tossup states. The worse news is he is losing in two of those tossup states (Nevada and New Hampshire) by increasing margins. They are approaching that 6% threshold where they will be in the Obama column. That would give Obama 257 votes. That means Obama would only need THIRTEEN more EV's to win.

There are a lot of ways Obama can win those 13 remaining EV's. He could simply win any one of NC, VA, FL, OH. Or he could win CO and IA. By contrast, Romney must win almost all of these states to win.

Romney had better change that map in a hurry or there are going to be a lot of Republicans jumping off ledges on November 7.

Polls didn't show this either.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/2010_ ... CwiZUSE87B

Poll: Ahead of 2010 Midterm Elections, Incumbent Support Its Lowest Since 1994

A third of registered voters are inclined to reelect their representatives in Congress, the fewest since the Republican Party rode voter discontent to control of the House and Senate 16 years ago, according to a new ABC News-Washington Post poll.

Nearly six in 10 said they'll instead look for someone new come the fall elections.

The impact on congressional races is uncertain, and the finding may chill incumbents of all stripes. But the dynamic does have a partisan cast: Republicans and swing-voting independents alike are far more likely than Democrats to be looking for change in Congress.

THE_WIZARD_ wrote:Biden makes Dan Quayle look like a genius.

Polls didn't show this either:

The following were predictions of the outcome of the 2010 United States House of Representatives elections.

RealClearPolitics.
As of November 2, 2010, RCP projected the Republicans would take 224 seats, the Democrats would take 167, and 44 races were toss-ups.[46]

Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight (New York Times)
As of November 2, 2010, Nate Silver's prediction model projected the Republicans would win (on average) 232.2 seats, and the Democrats would win 202.8.[47]

Patrick Ishmael, Hot Air.com
Ishmael predicted on October 31, 2010, that Republicans would win a net of 63 seats, +/- 3 seats.[48] Rasmussen Reports cited Ishmael's calls in its election preview.[49] The week before, Ishmael predicted a net Republican pickup of 62-65 seats.[50]

Crystal Ball
As of November 1, 2010, Larry Sabato predicted, "If the election were held today: + 55 Republican House seats".[51]

Charlie Cook
On October 26, 2010, The Cook Political Report raised its House forecast to "a Democratic net loss of 48 to 60 seats, with higher losses possible."[52] In a February 2010 interview with National Journal, he said that "it's very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don't lose the House. It's very hard."[53]

Rasmussen Reports
On November 1, 2010, Scott Rasmussen predicted the Democrats "will likely lose 55 or more seats in the House"."[54]

Rothenberg Political Report.
On October 28, 2010, Rothenberg Political Report predicted "Likely Republican gain of 55-65 seats, with gains at or above 70 seats possible."[55] In April 2010, Stuart Rothenberg wrote on his blog that "…the atmospherics remain strongly behind the GOP, and major Republican House gains are extremely likely" and that "it's clear that the battleground is almost entirely on Democratic soil. Obviously, control of the House is at risk."[56]