Election forecasts cloudy with a chance of being dead wrong (WaPo's Millbank)

[chimpymustgo]

Millbank is a mess of imperfection...but he catches the zeitgeist today. I'll stay up for the fat lady.

By Dana Milbank
Monday, November 1, 2010; 6:08 PM

Election results won't come until Tuesday night at the earliest. But luckily, you don't have to wait. This is because you have prognosticators.

The Economic Club of Washington hosted three of this species Monday for a luncheon and panel discussion titled "The Mid-Term Election Results a Day Early."

Pundit No. 1, Time magazine's Mark Halperin, informed the assembled lawyers and business people how many seats Republicans will gain in the House: "at least 55, and I think it could be as many as 85." While admitting his predictive science is imperfect, Halperin added: "If you want an exact number, 75.2."

"I'm going with 58," offered pundit No. 2, ABC News's Claire Shipman.

"It's possible it could be lower than 50," submitted pundit No. 3, Politico's Jim VandeHei. Or, he added, "Maybe 8. I don't think it's inconceivable it could be much bigger both in the House and Senate than everyone's anticipating."

So, to recap: Republicans will probably gain 75 seats, or perhaps 58, but their possible pickup range is from 55 to 85 -- except if it's lower than 50, or higher than 85.

-edit-

Shipman forecast that Nancy Pelosi would retire in six months. VandeHei forecast that Defense Secretary Bob Gates would step down early next year. Halperin forecast that with Republican gains in the House of more than 68 seats, the party would also seize control of the Senate.

Naturally, the three pundits pulled all such predictions straight out of their imaginations. Of the three, Halperin was the most prolific. He predicted: that Hillary Clinton may switch jobs with Vice President Biden; that write-in candidate Lisa Murkowski will win the Alaska Senate race handily; and that Carly Fiorina could beat Sen. Barbara Boxer in California as part of a GOP wave.

But when asked to predict "the biggest surprise" of the election, VandeHei offered a real shocker: Democrats keep control of the house. This, he said, "would actually prove what we all know: That conventional wisdom is always wrong."

Seems you'll have to stay up late Tuesday night after all.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/01/AR2010110105051.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&sid=ST2010110105606

[AspenRose]

1. Halperin is full of it.

Why the hell bother having elections? Just let the media kingmakers decide! :nuke:

Shit.

[chimpymustgo]

2. They ALL are. The CERTAINTY of their PREDICTIONS is astonishing.

[NYC Liberal]

3. Exhibit A:

The political pundits are just as full of it, they all are.