COMPLETE COLLAPSE–> Nate Silver: No One Should be Surprised if Democrats Only Pick Up 19 Seats and F

Hope he does.

Loved it when the crowd sang amazing grace as she was being wheeled out.

 

It’s up to the House of Representatives to accuse the president of treason, bribery or "high crimes and misdemeanors". and then a majority vote.

If it’s voted through, the president is impeached. But this doesn’t mean he’s been convicted. For that to happen, it’s kicked over to the Senate.

The Senate acts as the judge and jury. It’ll hear evidence, and if two-thirds vote to convict, the president is out the door.

Never gonna happen

 

Impeachment begins in the House. The House, through majority vote recommend impeachment. The impeachment is decided in the Senate and a 2/3 super majority of Senators is required. Even with a majority vote in the House, nothing will get by the Senate without some concrete evidence that demands impeachment. If the Steele dossier and Kavanaugh hearing are a sign of anything, I doubt any evidence of a crime will ever surface.

 

Bill Clinton.

 

No way Trump gets convicted by a GOP Senate.

That said: There was Zero Chance that Bill Clinton would get convicted, but the GOP still put him through a ludicrous show trial.

 

Yes, I did know that....but it remains true that if the Donkeys have a majority on the House, Trump is 'headed towards/to impeachment.'

 

Tell him that Monica says 'Hi.'

 

You might need a crime first (which you don't have) then you will need 2/3 Senate vote to remove him. Thats a bigger hail mary than the original Russia collusion theory.

 

Oh...there will be a crime. He will be done just like Al Capone was......the Tax Man will get him, if no-one else does.

 

You have to ask yourself why someone would post an article about Nate Silver (only one 's' for those playing at home) telling us what he thinks, but source it from some rabidly right wing website. Silver (still only one 's') has his own website and his views in his words are scarily easy to find.

Had the OP bothered to read that he might have discovered that Silver (stubbornly maintaining a lone 's') still gives the Dems an 85% chance of winning the House and he is still saying there is a chance they won't - a 15% chance to be precise. He is also saying the Dems only have a 20% chance of winning the Senate, and has been quite consistent on that. So much for that 'pro-Democrat bias'.

So, just to recap. Nate Silver only has one 's'. His predictions have not undergone a significant statistical change in weeks, maybe months. For some reason the OP feels the need to misrepresent this. Perhaps there is some guy called Silvers out there and he has confused the two. Makes more sense than not bothering to just check what the guy has to say on his own website.

Here is Nate Silver's final election update (popped in a second s for you, but with appropriate punctuation). Now, I should warn conservatives that it takes more than 2 minutes to read and has some big words. As far as I'm aware he doesn't have a youtube channel full of angry lectures or nice graphics with slow, soothing voiceovers telling you what you want to hear. So, most of you probably won't find out what he actually thinks.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...-the-house-but-theyre-pretty-clear-favorites/

 

Musty cigar anyone?

 

Yes but there is another factor, detrimental to dems as well.

Red state democrats.

They are still trying to walk the fine line between full on marxists like urban dems and being "moderate".

Those dems in republican leaning states, both senate and house are going to have a real tough time explaining themselves.

Thats besides the fact that it will never happen.

The lefties here bitterly clinging to dreams of impeachment, without merit-are in for a rude awakening.

 

He committed a crime, it was so bad he had to go on TV and confess, after lying directly to the American people.

Trump has done nothing worthy of impeachment.

And yet dems, particularly lefties are bitter clingers.

Its almost as bad as the hillary for potus crowd, you know?

 

I think you have, with an assist by the very very very misleading gateway pundit, a clear case of innumeracy. Nate Silver didn't 'go' from an 84 percent chance of the dems taking the house 'to' the democrats may only pick up 19 seats and fail to take the house. Those two statements are exactly the same. If there is an 84 percent chance that the dems take the house, it stands to reason that there is a 16 percent chance that they don't (ie only picking up 19 seats).

Doctor: There is a 98 percent chance that you will survive the operation Mr Gatewood
Gatewood: well with odds like that, go ahead and cut away Doctor!
Doctor: Obviously there is a 2 percent chance that you will die
Gatewood: GET ME OUT OF HERE YOU QUACK!!!!!

I think bigfella's post eloquently says it all, so I won't pile on, but you really should read nate silver's article, if only to give you some real food for thought as to how misleading those gateway articles you are reading are. And funnily weren't you accusing Silcer's site of trying to use numbers to influence voters (notice that silver has stayed constant) and isn' that in fact EXACTLY what that Gateway article is trying to do (as opposed to Silver that you may THINK is trying to influence votes, we KNOW gateway is because it was a provably dishonest article) By the way they have adjusted to odds of dems taking the house UP to 85.7 now.

 

The Democrats will claim that it's a "mandate" and a "referendum" if they get the house by one seat. They will call it "divisiveness" if they don't get control of the house. If they really lose they will call it "right wing hate" and scream "voter fraud" or "rigged election".

 

I have been looking at a lot of poll data lately. One thing I have noticed on 538 is that Nate uses a lot of vague explanations about how his predictions work with some magic formula that involves all these factors but doesn't really specify what factors and how much they sway his predictions. Another thing I have noticed is that most of the polls on his site are Democrat pollsters. Not all but most. The last thing I noticed is that he gives a much higher rating to some pollsters than other grading agencies. He also explains his bias with BS weasel words and vague explanations. If is off this time the validity of his site and his predictions will be comparable to CNN.

 

They will add all the votes that Democrats got in the whole country and compare them to the votes that Republicans cast in the whole country and claim that they won the "popular vote".

 

Or what futon they should buy for their basement bedroom.

 

I watched part of that rally. There was a lot of energy there.

 

Conservative woman:



Liberal woman:





Conservative vs Liberal:

 

Let me sum up your argument. Nate Silver is right because he says so and if you don't believe it go to his website and read about how he says he's right.

 

Yeah. Democrat Monica, the self propelled, orally programmable (pun intended), human humidor.

Here, have a video about a blue dress. It sucks as much as Monica did:

 

Take it back to austrialia, bro.

 

Let me sum up this thread: a Right Winger posts a wildly misleading and demonstrably wrong article. A non right winger demonstrates through logic and source material that the original poster is wrong. A RW wingman to the OP uses memes to insult liberals, and then tries to insult the logically, well written non-liberal post with kindergarden logic and taunts.
Do you actually have any information, facts, or arguments to bring to the table?

Nevermind. I ust calculated the time difference and realized it's 1 AM where you are. You're obviously drunk

 

You should stick to misreading what people write and abandon summarizing. You don't read what people write well enough to summarize it accurately. You seem to confuse what you want to pretend they meant with what they actually said.

Nate Silver is right about what Nate Silver thinks. So, when Nate Silver says he thinks there is an 85% chance the Dems will win the house and someone quoting Gateway Pundit and consistently spelling Nate Silver's name incorrectly claims otherwise then obviously you listen to Nate Silver. No sane person with a mental age above about eight would think otherwise.

None of this speaks to the accuracy of the prediction, but since the OP misstated what that prediction was then that is a secondary issue. I have no idea if Silver's prediction is correct. I do know that I trust him to tell me what his prediction is 100% of the time. The OP, not so much.