Political Over/Under

[kazoolaw]

Not to worry TS, I truly appreciate the show it puts on.

[kazoolaw]

Sorry, a return to post 75 : "drive by poster."
Author assumes the reader won't return to post 1 to see who the OP was.
Author wants to return to this "wonderful topic." Hasn't posted two numbers in response to the original post.

[Chuck Naill]

You want a guess? 217-204 or a Republican majority.

[kazoolaw]

Thanks Chuck.
My Senate number (+4) is looking pretty bad.

[TSherbs]

Who ended up closest?

[kazoolaw]

Well, first a confession that I screwed up "Over/Under." Used correctly, it sets a number and then the bettor/guesser/political pundit guesses whether the actual result is above or below the number. I set it up to look more like an prediction of the number.

At any rate, I set the number at +4 seats gained by the Republican in the Senate. The House number was a +10.

Plugging "election results 2022" into google gets:

Senate: Dems +1, Repubs -1. (48 to 49)
House: Dems -9, Repubs +8. (213 to 220)
https://www.google.com/search?q=elec...client=gws-wiz

Bold2013: Repubs Senate +2. House +8

dneal initially agreed with Bold, then went House Dem 218, Repubs 217.

724Seney agreed with Bold


Chuck Naill: 217-204. or Republican majority.

Bold hit the Repub House gain exactly.

No one predicted the loss of a Senate seat by the Repubs.

Thanks for playing, and sorry for my mistake.

[dneal]

My 218/217 "prediction" was tongue in cheek. Most of the remaining races at the time were in states with mail-in balloting, and 218 is the number required to control the house.

[kazoolaw]

My 218/217 "prediction" was tongue in cheek. Most of the remaining races at the time were in states with mail-in balloting, and 218 is the number required to control the house.

Tongue in cheek was closer than those who never hazarded a guess.
Only real problem: I forgot to have everyone buy in, so no cash prizes.