Good political analysts

[Ladoga]

Sean Trende and David Byler examine the current strength of the Republican Party - and thus the Democratic Party - determining the strength of each. Lots of charts and graphs. Lots of data displayed and explained.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...the_strongest_its_been_in_decades_126633.html

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Meh. It's an interesting article. Fun. But they don't demonstrate why their index should have any predictive power. A closer look at their graphs seems to show that it actually confirms one piece of conventional wisdom: the president's party does poorly in midterms.

I do notice one thing, though. Rebounds during reelection aren't enough to make up for midterm drops. I'm sure you see the obvious implication of this, but here it is: the party strength index presented her may be nothing more than an inverse measurement of how much time the party has spent in the White House recently.

More robust analyses are still much more helpful for looking forward. This article was cute, but probably not very valuable.

 

[Ladoga]

Meh. It's an interesting article. Fun. But they don't demonstrate why their index should have any predictive power. A closer look at their graphs seems to show that it actually confirms one piece of conventional wisdom: the president's party does poorly in midterms.

I do notice one thing, though. Rebounds during reelection aren't enough to make up for midterm drops. I'm sure you see the obvious implication of this, but here it is: the party strength index presented her may be nothing more than an inverse measurement of how much time the party has spent in the White House recently.

More robust analyses are still much more helpful for looking forward. This article was cute, but probably not very valuable.

No one claimed it has any "predictive power". That's your strawman - again and again. It claims, with significant justification, to describe the CURRENT circumstance relative to the Republican Party's (and in the obverse, the Democratic Party's) strength. Note the 5 factors. Simple arithmetic gets you that - if you do it. It is an accurate portrayal of the current status of the Republican Party. It doesn't claim to be a predictor.

In court, a judge would, upon a proper motion, require you to answer the question asked. This isn't law school anymore or the bar exam. The requirement is to answer the question, not make up one you want to answer. Or, you could just not answer at all.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

No one claimed it has any "predictive power". That's your strawman - again and again. It claims, with significant justification, to describe the CURRENT circumstance relative to the Republican Party's (and in the obverse, the Democratic Party's) strength. Note the 5 factors. Simple arithmetic gets you that - if you do it. It is an accurate portrayal of the current status of the Republican Party. It doesn't claim to be a predictor.

In court, a judge would, upon a proper motion, require you to answer the question asked. This isn't law school anymore or the bar exam. The requirement is to answer the question, not make up one you want to answer. Or, you could just not answer at all.

It's not a straw man. These types of indices are ONLY valuable insofar as they have predictive power.

In fact, the article acknowledges this by contrasting the authors' own conclusions with the conventional wisdom of GOP demographic problems. They explain it away: demographic problems only exist in the electoral college. Whether you buy their explanation or not, they are clearly claiming predictive value for their model.

 

[Rusty G]

Sean Trende and David Byler examine the current strength of the Republican Party - and thus the Democratic Party - determining the strength of each. Lots of charts and graphs. Lots of data displayed and explained.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/19/the_gop_is_the_strongest_its_been_in_decades_126633.html

Here are a couple of very simplistic observations:
1) Not a big dog in the hunt regarding predictive power, but in the 2nd paragraph the writers state "In this article, we do three things. First, we recap our methodology. Second, we update the methodology for 2014, and we look forward to 2016." Sounds like they think it can be used to predict.

2) In the first chart one thing is clear -- the Republican strength has reduced during every Republican presidency analyzed. Reagan from -10 to -40 appears to be the least reduction. Likewise the Republican strength has increased during every Democratic president. Hmmm, now that I think about it, the fact that strength is cyclical and is at it's height for a party when a change in the white house occurs is not the most insightful analysis. Although it's always nice to demonstrate with statistics what appears to be intuitive.

3) When you consider the 5 components of the index, it's not surprising that the R's come out ahead, since they dominate at the state level and in the house. I think a more insightful analysis would suggest why this is the case. These guys seem to be pointing out the obvious to crow about the strength of the Republicans. I'm not surprised you find them "good political analysts".

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

2) In the first chart one thing is clear -- the Republican strength has reduced during every Republican presidency analyzed. Reagan from -10 to -40 appears to be the least reduction. Likewise the Republican strength has increased during every Democratic president. Hmmm, now that I think about it, the fact that strength is cyclical and is at it's height for a party when a change in the white house occurs is not the most insightful analysis. Although it's always nice to demonstrate with statistics what appears to be intuitive.

That's what I took from it, too. Coming to the end of a second Democratic two-term President in 24 years, and based on the historical patterns in their index, it only makes sense the Republicans would rate highly right now. Had either Clinton or Obama been a one-term President, I bet the index would be noticeably lower right now.

 

[Ladoga]

Here are a couple of very simplistic observations:
1) Not a big dog in the hunt regarding predictive power, but in the 2nd paragraph the writers state "In this article, we do three things. First, we recap our methodology. Second, we update the methodology for 2014, and we look forward to 2016." Sounds like they think it can be used to predict.

2) In the first chart one thing is clear -- the Republican strength has reduced during every Republican presidency analyzed. Reagan from -10 to -40 appears to be the least reduction. Likewise the Republican strength has increased during every Democratic president. Hmmm, now that I think about it, the fact that strength is cyclical and is at it's height for a party when a change in the white house occurs is not the most insightful analysis. Although it's always nice to demonstrate with statistics what appears to be intuitive.

3) When you consider the 5 components of the index, it's not surprising that the R's come out ahead, since they dominate at the state level and in the house. I think a more insightful analysis would suggest why this is the case. These guys seem to be pointing out the obvious to crow about the strength of the Republicans. I'm not surprised you find them "good political analysts".

Its utility in predictions is only to establish the current base line - where are we now, where do we begin.

You do that by compiling the current status of the party and its office holders - comparing over time - that's what they did.

No where - other than as mentioned to determine the current starting point - does the article and analysis enter into prediction. Sean Trende is highly respected and very well known within the political analysis field.

 

[Ladoga]

That's what I took from it, too. Coming to the end of a second Democratic two-term President in 24 years, and based on the historical patterns in their index, it only makes sense the Republicans would rate highly right now. Had either Clinton or Obama been a one-term President, I bet the index would be noticeably lower right now.

The important data points in the study are the change in Republican office holding - Governors, US Senate, US House, state legislatures. The immense gains in those positions by Republicans establishes the current base line.