McConnell is in a far weaker position than most people realize

[kurtcagle]

There is at least a 25% chance that the Democrats will take control of the Senate in 2021, if boh Orsoff and Warnock win, and as much as the GOP is spending in Trump's frivolous lawsuits, this is going to keep spending to support the GOP Georgian candidates down considerably. However, there is a 50% chance that at least one of the two candidates will be elected. At that point, the new Senate is 49/51 Dem/GOP. Worse-case scenario, the Dems are down two.

A lot of people are worried that McConnell will be obstructionist, but the reality in the second scenario is that he can't. He cannot afford a single defection in the ranks. He can't give Collins or Murkowski a "vote in conscience" without losing votes, and the chances that he can retain the fillibuster are now slim. He's also going to have to worry about someone in the GOP ranks choosing to caucus with the Democrats if crossed too many times.

What this means is that for the first time in a while, the GOP is going to have to do something they collectively hate - they are going to have to compromise in the Senate. Also keep in mind that Romney is waiting in the wings. He may end up going for the Presidency in 2024, but he may also decide that he may want to be Senate Majority Leader instead. I don't like Romney, but I think he is far more likely to build a moderate caucus in the process to undermine McConnell, and I think of the two, he is the more principled.

So, while not ideal for the Democrats, I don't think the situation is near as bad as some have portrayed it.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

1. Maybe

We'll get lucky and McConnell will have a heart attack,catch covid or trip up some stairs crack his head and go into a coma.

I hate that turtlepigshitfacedasshole..

[Boogiemack]

32. Especially if he is in the hospital before the run-off. nt

[Frasier Balzov]

2. Did you forget the filibuster?

That remains in a 49/51 world.

[tritsofme]

3. What do you mean the chances he can retain the filibuster are slim?

There is 0% chance that filibuster rules are changing next year, even if we sweep Georgia, as Manchin has shut the door on that.

That means aside from nominees, it will take 60 votes to move anything of substance through the Senate whether we are in the minority or majority. Taking back the majority is so important, because without it, Biden won’t even get his team.

[Celerity]

4. Your maths are off. Just because there is a 25% chance of us winning both

Last edited Fri Nov 20, 2020, 04:54 AM - Edit history (1)

seats in the GA run-off (for this example I will agree to use 25%) does not mean that there is thus a 50% chance of winning one. Probability calculations do not work like that with correlated (and some independent) variables.

Also, the filibuster is going nowhere and requires 60 votes to end. McTurtle will use it as a sledgehammer if we actually do get to 50-50, and even if he has a 52-48 majority but some Rethugs break lines.

[mr_lebowski]

7. If you start with assumption there's a 25% chance of winning both, that typically implies each is a

Coin flip.

Thus, the 4 equally likely possible outcomes are:
D-D
D-R
R-D
R-R

Thus, winning (exactly) 1 has a 50% chance (2/4).

But winning at LEAST 1 ... has a 75% chance (3/4).

Now, if you think either or both of the two has a value different than a 50% chance (not a coin flip), that changes the calculations.

[Celerity]

10. That is not how probability works in multivariate calculations

There are too many correlated variables to make the claim that is being made.

[mr_lebowski]

12. Okay, but if you are going to reject the 50%, then you should also reject the 25% ...

because you are then fundamentally arguing that you don't have a coin-flip situation.

They're either both right or both wrong.

[Celerity]

15. I do not care about coin flips. The odds of winning one seat

are not twice as likely as winning two. Both our candidates are on the same ballot. There will be very little ticket splitting as to ticket split does the same as voting straight Rethug, ie. it leaves them in control of the Senate.

The only remotely possible scanarios aiding the chances of us winning just one would be the ultra rare cases where a Dem voter is so racist that they vote for Ossoff but would rather give Senate control to the Rethugs than vote for a black man (who is running against a proven (in all but a court of law) criminal grifter as well.), OR a person of colour (almost certianly they would be black) coming out to vote for Warnock but then saying 'Naw, I will pass on the white guy.' (again knowing full well that that decision means the racist Rethugs maintain Senate control.)

[mr_lebowski]

18. I was just confused why you seemed to accept 25% as the likelihood of winning both

But didn't accept that it would then follow that there's a 50% chance of winning exactly 1.

Both those number derive from 'coin flip odds'. So if you deny that it's a coin flip scenario (and I agree that it's not) then you'd logically reject both the 25% and the 50% numbers.

That's all I was getting at

[unblock]

20. If the probability we win both races is 25%, then

The probability we win race y times the probability we win race z is 25%.

One possibility is each race is 50%. In that case, it's 50% to win exactly one race (25% win y lose z, plus 25% win z lose y).

Another possibility is one race is 25% and the other is 100%. In that case, it's 75% to win exactly one race (when we lose the 25% race).

There are many possibilities in between.

In all cases, the probability of winning exactly one of the races is at least 50% to win.


All this assumes the variables are independent. If the variables are correlated, it becomes less likely to have a split decision. If they're are perfectly correlated, the the probability of winning exactly one race becomes zero.

[Celerity]

21. There are enough correlated variables to ensure a likelihood of far

less chance that we pull one seat verus both or none. That is my whole point. To say the outcome of a split is literally TWICE as likely as either winning 2 or none is simply wrong.

[unblock]

24. It all makes much more sense now that you edited post #4

Of course, now the whole subthread looks silly though



Cheers!

[kurtcagle]

29. The point I'm making here is that assuming there is no correlation between the two,

25%/50%/25% just represents the odds of two likely close races happening has these as minima.

Yes, you are right, of course - the races are highly correlated. I suspect that most people will either vote for both or against both, independent of the actual merits of the candidates, and I'd be hard-pressed to give a good estimate, though I'd favor the Democrats winning both by 1-1.5% over the Republicans, and with paper ballots (which I believe are being used) I'd actually push it up to about 2.5%, but I don't think it's going to be a blowout either way.

I also find that the Georgia SOS actually seems to have some integrity. That gives me more confidence that the vote will likely be legitimate, and likely in our favor.

[Celerity]

30. Fair enough

[Rstrstx]

16. This is definitely NOT random probability

The party with the more motivated base will likely win both seats, though there may be a slight degree of ticket splitting. Right now I’d take a split, however unlikely, as that means we’d only have to net one more seat in ‘22 (assuming we don’t get a Doug Jones-style miracle. How is old Chucky doing by the way?). It would also be easier to sway just one senator like Collins to change their affiliation to Independent if McConnell becomes obstructionist in the extreme. Even just the threat of such a scenario may give him pause (for once one of her sternly worded letters of concern may actually accomplish something).

[unblock]

11. I think what was meant was a 50% chance of exactly one or the other democrat winning

Assuming each race is an independent coin toss, 25% chance we win both, 25% chance we lose both, 50% chance we win one and lose the other.

Of course, we may be a bit over or under 50% on one race of the other. More important, the two races probably are actually not very independent. Most people will be voting straight party line, even more than usual in senate races because party control is on the line.

So I expect the all or nothing outcomes to be more likely than the split decisions.

[mr_lebowski]

13. I like how you think UB ...

See directly above

[Celerity]

17. It doesn't work that way, see my additional replies, especially #15

[unblock]

22. It does work that way based on your assumption but it's clear now you misspoke.

You said "Probability calculations do not work like that with two independent variables."

But yes, they do. In other posts it's clear you believe the variables are highly correlated, which certainly makes sense in this case, and which certainly would change the math. So I agree with everything you said, we just would have gotten there faster if you had added that assumption originally.

All that said, if the probabilities are indeed highly correlated, I would hope that our probability of winning both seats are rather more than 25%....

[Celerity]

23. All good, and I meant to include correlated variables as well

I apologise for the confusion, I do not often post whilst on the tunnelbana (subway).

[unblock]

25. It's all good!

I was guessing uk, but now apparently Stockholm?

[Celerity]

26. yes, Stockholm (but I grew up in London, near the South Kensington tube station, so right on

both accounts, lol).

cheers

[meadowlander]

14. It's the same pool of voters in both elections

so the odds are much greater that one party will win both seats than that there will be a split. It comes down to whether more Democrats turn out (flipping two seats) or more Republicans turn out (retaining two).

[Celerity]

19. Thank you! I am just gobsmacked that this is a hard concept to grasp.

Ticket splitting is nor only highly unlikely anyway, but even more so as the outcome of doing so (Rethuhs maintain Senate control) same as voting straight Rethug.

In reply 15 I laid out the only two (ultra unlikely) scenarios as to why a Dem would ticket split (there are none for a Rethug, barring mental illness or some personal grudge lol) and both are crazy.

[True Blue American]

5. I just read that Romney

Wants to be Leader. I think he would win. Even John Cornyn is speaking out. They do not like being simply the party of no.

[Rstrstx]

31. Yeah there are some scenarios where this could pan out

[Blue Owl]

6. I hope McConnell dies

a horrid, gruesome death; shrieking as he descends into the demonic hell of his own making... with not one drop of mercy spared for his God-forsaken soul as it is ripped into shreds and burned in the pit of fire and brimstone...

[mr_lebowski]

9. I like how you think Blue ...

Pretty much always

[SunSeeker]

27. If there was a God, that would have been McConnell's fate long ago. nt

[Indykatie]

8. Romney or Any Other Semi Sane Republican Has NO Chance of Securing the GOP Nomination

That's the price Repubs have paid for evolving into a party where more than 70% are right wing nut jobs. His only chance would be if the RWNJ vote is split 3 or 4 ways throughout the primary.

[Mike Nelson]

28. Hmm...

... there will be a group of Republicans, around three and led by probably Romney... they will meet with Joe Manchin and Biden's team, I hope. Moscow Mitch will find himself overruled, hopefully. He can either get with the program, or retire. Personally, I would "shut him out" and give him the message he should retire.