6 Comments
User's avatar
Patti Crane's avatar

Thank you for updating, Carl Allen. Osborn in Nebraska seems to be the real deal, based on three online events I've attended with him, and on comments from friends who met with him in person. Worth the effort.

Expand full comment
Michael's avatar

In my head, and not looking at data, I put Osborn in the "Evan McMullen" category. DO the polls (or something else) suggest we should be more optimistic about Osborn than McMullin. I do agree that he is worth an investment because the alternative options for the Dems look so bleak.

The interesting scenario is where Osborn wins and his decision decides which party controls the Senate. Maybe he'll ask to be the Senate Majority Leader!

Expand full comment
Carl Allen's avatar

The difference between Osborn and McMullin is that in Nebraska Osborn is the 2nd candidate, not running uphill against a 3rd party

Expand full comment
Michael's avatar

Was not true for McMullin when he ran for POTUS, but when he ran against Mike Lee for Senate, the Dems stood down as in Nebraska.

Expand full comment
Benjamin Grayzel's avatar

Is there a reason you aren't comparing against the Economist's model? You said you wanted consistency with Morris but I always considered Andrew Gelman the chief architect rather than Elliot Morris - and Morris definitely made new models for 538 this cycle. (I privately think the Economist is the best Senate/House model in the field right now).

Expand full comment
rebecca wilova's avatar

Thank you. Based on your previous posts I’ve happily kicked in a few dollars for Osborn. Playing for all the marbles, indeed.

Expand full comment