Hubbry Logo
Stuart RothenbergStuart RothenbergMain
Open search
Stuart Rothenberg
Community hub
Stuart Rothenberg
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Stuart Rothenberg
Stuart Rothenberg
Stuart Rothenberg
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Stuart Rothenberg (born 1948) is an American editor, publisher, and political analyst. He is best known for his biweekly political newsletter The Rothenberg Political Report, now known as Inside Elections. He was also a regular columnist at Roll Call[1] and an occasional op-ed contributor to other publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Orlando Sentinel.[2]

Key Information

Biography

[edit]

Rothenberg lived in Waterville, Maine, while attending Colby College before relocating to Connecticut to earn his Ph.D. at the University of Connecticut.[2] For a time, he settled in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, to teach political science at Bucknell University. He also taught at the Catholic University of America.

In addition to his writing, he has been frequently featured in news broadcasts and worked with CNN as a political analyst for over ten years. He has served as a political analyst for CBS News and Voice of America. He is also a guest contributor for Political Wire.

Rothenberg is known for his prediction in early 2009 that the GOP's chances of winning back the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010 were "zero".[3] Rothenberg later would change his prediction as the economy worsened and polls reflected increasing support for Republicans through the Tea Party protests. The Rothenberg Political Report projected Republicans would gain 55–65 seats in the House of Representatives[4] (they gained 63) and 6–8 seats in the Senate[5] (they gained 6).

In the weeks before the election of Donald Trump as U.S. President, Rothenberg wrote an opinion piece for The Washington Post headlined "Trump's path to an electoral college victory isn't narrow. It’s nonexistent". Rothenberg stated, "Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, once part of the Trump scenario, have never been 'in play'". Trump would go on to win all three of the battleground states.[6]

In 2015, the Rothenberg Political Report changed its name to The Rothenberg & Gonzales Political Report, with long-time collaborator Nathan Gonzales taking over as editor and publisher.[7] In 2017, the publication was renamed to Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales. Despite the name change, Rothenberg continued to work with Inside Elections as a senior editor.[8]

Rothenberg is married and the father of two children. He is currently a resident of Potomac, Maryland.

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Stuart Rothenberg

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

is an American political analyst, editor, and publisher specializing in non-partisan evaluations of U.S. congressional, senatorial, and gubernatorial elections. Rothenberg founded and served as editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report for more than two decades, delivering biweekly assessments of campaign dynamics and electoral prospects based on polling data, candidate fundamentals, and historical precedents. He holds a Ph.D. in from the , earned in 1977, and began his professional trajectory teaching at and . Throughout his career, Rothenberg has contributed columns to for over 20 years and , while appearing as an election-night analyst on PBS NewsHour, CNN, CBS News, and other outlets, emphasizing empirical indicators over partisan narratives. His op-eds have appeared in and , underscoring a reputation for straightforward, data-informed commentary on political trends and Capitol Hill decision-making. Currently, as senior editor at Inside Elections, Rothenberg maintains his focus on objective race ratings and forecasts, blending academic rigor with practical political insight.

Early Life and Education

Family Background and Upbringing

Stuart Rothenberg was born in 1948 to Murray Rothenberg (1923–1998) and Edythe Rothenberg (née Resnick, 1916–2010). His mother, born in , New York, married Murray Rothenberg, with whom she had two sons. The family maintained ties to the New York area, where Murray resided in as of 1950. Rothenberg grew up in , developing an early affinity for the New York Yankees as a lifelong fan. Edythe's maternal lineage traced to Bertha Gelles (1881–1965) and Nathan Resnick, reflecting Eastern European Jewish immigrant roots common in early-20th-century New York Jewish communities. Limited public details exist on specific childhood influences or dynamics, consistent with Rothenberg's professional focus on political analysis rather than personal narrative.

Academic Achievements and Influences

Rothenberg received a Bachelor of Arts degree cum laude in government from in . He subsequently attended the , earning a in in 1972 and a in in 1977, with a specialization in and . After completing his doctorate, Rothenberg taught political science at in , initially as a replacement for three years, and later at the in Washington, D.C. A key academic influence during his graduate studies at the was Professor Garry Clifford, who taught a course on U.S. foreign policy amid the . Rothenberg credited Clifford with helping him overcome personal nervousness and develop greater self-confidence in his scholarly pursuits; the two remained friends until Clifford's death.

Professional Career Beginnings

Entry into Political Journalism

Following the completion of his Ph.D. in from the in 1977, Rothenberg served as a sabbatical replacement teaching at in for three years. In 1980, he moved to , and entered by joining the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative advocacy organization founded by , where he contributed to The Political Report, its weekly newsletter focused on electoral analysis and conservative political developments. Rothenberg's initial responsibilities at the foundation involved writing articles on congressional races and voter trends, drawing on his academic background in . Within five months of joining, he advanced to editor of The Political Report, overseeing its content and establishing a reputation for accurate handicapping of elections. The newsletter, initially edited by others like Susan Marshner, provided Rothenberg with early exposure to non-partisan race ratings and insider perspectives on dynamics, though produced within a conservative framework. This position represented Rothenberg's professional pivot from academia to practical political reporting, emphasizing empirical assessment of viability over ideological advocacy. His work there laid the groundwork for independent analysis, as he later reflected on the foundation's role in sharpening his focus on data-driven predictions amid the Reagan-era political shifts.

Initial Publications and Roles

Following his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Connecticut in 1977, Rothenberg taught political science at Bucknell University in Pennsylvania for three years and later at Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.. Rothenberg transitioned to political journalism by joining the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative think tank founded by Paul Weyrich, where he initially worked on The Political Report, a newsletter analyzing political trends and elections. Within five months, he advanced to editor and director of the foundation's political division, overseeing content that included interviews on party realignments conducted in 1985. In this role, Rothenberg co-authored his first book, The Evangelical Voter: Religion and Politics in America, with Frank Newport, published in 1984 by the foundation's Institute for Government and Politics; the work drew on a nationwide survey to examine evangelical influences on U.S. voting patterns. These editorial duties and scholarly output at the Free Congress Foundation marked Rothenberg's entry into nonpartisan political forecasting, distinct from his prior academic focus on international relations. By 1989, Rothenberg acquired The Political Report from the foundation, rebranding it as an independent publication and expanding its scope to congressional and gubernatorial races.

Establishment of The Rothenberg Political Report

Founding and Initial Focus

Stuart Rothenberg took over a small in 1989 and redeveloped it into The Rothenberg Political Report, a biweekly Washington-based publication dedicated to nonpartisan . The report quickly gained recognition for its of congressional races, emphasizing competitive and contests through qualitative insights from interviews with over 150 candidates per cycle and quantitative assessments including polling data and historical electoral trends. From its inception under Rothenberg's leadership, the publication aimed to deliver dispassionate forecasts and commentary for political professionals, campaign strategists, and observers, distinguishing itself by avoiding partisan in favor of evidence-based projections on race outcomes and shifts in congressional control. Early issues extended coverage to gubernatorial races and presidential when relevant, but maintained a core emphasis on federal legislative battles, reflecting Rothenberg's background in and academic focus on American elections. This approach positioned the report as a key resource amid the competitive landscape of midterm and presidential cycles, where it provided subscribers with ratings systems to gauge vulnerability in specific districts and states.

Development of Race Ratings System

Stuart Rothenberg established The Rothenberg Political Report in 1989 by taking over and reorienting a small existing toward nonpartisan analysis of congressional and other races. Early iterations of the publication incorporated race ratings to assess the likely outcomes of competitive s, drawing on Rothenberg's prior experience in and academic background in electoral dynamics. These initial ratings focused primarily on U.S. contests, categorizing them into tiers such as "," "Likely," "Lean" (or "Tilt"), and "Toss-up" for each party, reflecting qualitative judgments of strength, quality, and fundamentals rather than probabilistic modeling. The system's methodology evolved through iterative refinement in the early 1990s, incorporating extensive shoe-leather reporting alongside quantitative inputs. emphasized direct interviews with over 150 congressional candidates and operatives per election cycle, supplemented by analysis of historical voting patterns, demographics, and available polling —both and private, partisan and nonpartisan. This hybrid approach prioritized causal factors like national political environments and local shifts over aggregate poll averages, with ratings updated biweekly to account for campaign developments. Collaboration with contemporaries like helped standardize nonpartisan practices, distinguishing 's work from purely poll-driven forecasts by integrating insider perspectives from party strategists. By the mid-1990s, the ratings expanded to and gubernatorial races, as evidenced by comprehensive reelection assessments published in September 1997, which highlighted vulnerable incumbents based on combined metrics of vulnerability. The framework's durability stemmed from its resistance to over-reliance on short-term polling volatility, instead weighting structural elements such as impacts and disparities; for instance, post-2000 analyses underscored how reapportionment solidified many incumbents' advantages. Over time, feedback from political observers and decision-makers refined the tiers, ensuring ratings influenced without claiming predictive certainty.

Contributions to Mainstream Media Outlets

Columnist at

Rothenberg began contributing columns to , a Capitol Hill-focused newspaper, with his first piece appearing in June 1992. Over the subsequent two decades, his regular columns offered non-partisan analysis of congressional elections, emphasizing competitive House and Senate races through assessments of candidate quality, district fundamentals, and partisan leanings rather than short-term polling shifts. His work at integrated insights from The Rothenberg Political Report, including proprietary race ratings that categorized contests as safe, likely, leaning, or toss-ups based on historical voting patterns and structural factors. Columns frequently highlighted under-the-radar dynamics, such as incumbent vulnerabilities or the impact of nationalized on local contests, providing lawmakers and campaigns with grounded forecasts amid polarized environments. In May 2016, after 24 years, ended his formal relationship with , citing editorial disagreements over the paper's pivot toward daily news coverage—such as real-time Trump-related stories—at the expense of its traditional emphasis on congressional elections and policy substance. He relocated his column to RothenbergGonzales.com, maintaining its focus on electoral analysis. Despite the departure, Rothenberg has continued publishing occasional columns in , with contributions as recent as February 2025 critiquing post-election mandates and October 2025 assessing Democratic gubernatorial prospects. These pieces sustain his signature approach, prioritizing empirical electoral metrics over partisan narratives, and reflect ongoing demand for his independent perspective in a media landscape often criticized for sensationalism.

Analysis for CNN, Washington Post, and Others

Stuart Rothenberg provided political analysis for as a regular contributor, appearing on programs such as to discuss congressional races, presidential campaigns, and electoral trends during the 1990s and into the early 2000s. His segments often highlighted competitive districts and the factors influencing and outcomes, drawing on data from his to offer nonpartisan assessments of viability and voter sentiment. This role positioned him as a go-to expert for television audiences seeking insights beyond partisan commentary, with appearances focusing on real-time developments like the 1996 and 1998 midterm cycles. Rothenberg contributed opinion columns to , particularly during the 2016 election cycle, where he analyzed polling data, campaign strategies, and structural advantages in presidential and congressional races. In September 2016, he argued that Hillary Clinton's narrow lead over was more substantial than apparent, citing demographic shifts, economic perceptions, and historical midterm patterns that favored Democrats in down-ballot contests. Earlier that year, in August, he described Trump's path to victory as requiring a "miracle," emphasizing Clinton's organizational edge and Trump's polling deficits in key states. Following Trump's win, Rothenberg published a reflective piece in November 2016 admitting his misjudgment, attributing it to underestimating while underscoring the rarity of such upsets in modern elections. These columns exemplified his approach of integrating quantitative metrics with qualitative observations, often challenging prevailing narratives based on empirical discrepancies in surveys. Beyond and The Washington Post, Rothenberg offered analysis through guest appearances on , where he commented on legislative impacts and election forecasts in over 100 segments spanning decades, including post-2010 midterm dissections and 2012 presidential previews. He also provided insights for outlets like and various radio programs, focusing on nonpartisan handicapping of gubernatorial and races, though these were less formalized than his CNN tenure. His broader media presence reinforced a for data-driven commentary amid increasing polarization, with analyses frequently referenced in discussions of electoral volatility.

Later Career and Ongoing Work

Association with Inside Elections

In 2015, The Rothenberg Political Report was renamed The Rothenberg & Gonzales Political Report, with Nathan L. Gonzales assuming the role of editor and publisher while Stuart Rothenberg stepped back from daily operations after leading the publication for 25 years since acquiring it in 1989. This change positioned Gonzales to guide the newsletter's future, with Rothenberg continuing to provide advisory input and maintain his focus on external writing and analysis. The publication fully rebranded as Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales in January 2017, marking a new chapter that emphasized enhanced nonpartisan analysis of U.S. , , gubernatorial, and presidential campaigns through quantitative and qualitative data. , as the founder of the original report, transitioned into the role of Senior Editor at Inside Elections, where he offers ongoing support and contributes to its editorial direction without primary operational responsibilities. As Senior Editor, Rothenberg has remained involved in Inside Elections' nonpartisan efforts, drawing on his decades of experience in competitive race ratings and political forecasting. The firm, under this structure, continues to produce race ratings and commentary independent of partisan influence, with Rothenberg occasionally featured in discussions on the evolution of such analysis, as in a July 2025 episode highlighting his foundational contributions to modern nonpartisan political . This association underscores Rothenberg's enduring influence on objective election coverage amid the newsletter's adaptation to digital delivery and expanded team resources.

Recent Columns and Commentary (Post-2020)

Following the 2020 elections, Stuart maintained his role as a columnist, producing regular analyses of electoral trends, candidate strategies, and partisan dynamics. His columns emphasized empirical observations from polling data, historical precedents, and voter behavior, often critiquing overreliance on national narratives over district-specific realities. For example, in a , 2021, piece, awarded end-of-year honors to political figures and events, praising Republican gains in and while highlighting Democratic missteps in messaging on and cultural issues. Rothenberg's post-2020 commentary frequently addressed Republican primary contests and general election vulnerabilities. On January 13, 2021, he argued that intra-GOP divisions over the Capitol events were superficial and likely to resolve quickly post-inauguration, citing unified party responses in as evidence of underlying cohesion. In April 2024, he evaluated Rep. Elise Stefanik's potential as a vice-presidential pick for , noting her appeal to the GOP base but questioning her readiness for national scrutiny based on past debate performances. Similarly, a September 23, 2024, column asserted that Trump's persistent personal liabilities—such as inflammatory rhetoric—remained his greatest electoral hindrance, drawing on voter surveys showing erosion among independents. Ahead of the 2024 cycle, Rothenberg dissected key battlegrounds and candidate flaws. His February 5, 2024, analysis identified swing states like , , and as decisive, projecting tight margins based on 2020 turnout patterns and economic sentiment indicators. He critiqued 's January 2024 primary showings in "Close but no cigar for Nikki Haley" on January 22, 2024, attributing her near-misses in and to insufficient base mobilization despite moderate voter support. For , a April 24, 2023, column questioned his campaign's erratic pivots, labeling them as inconsistent with Florida's governance record and early polling leads. Rothenberg's annual retrospectives underscored recurring themes of polarization and institutional strain. In "Rothenberg’s Best and Worst of 2023" on December 11, 2023, he lauded figures like Speaker Mike Johnson for stabilizing House Republicans while decrying Biden's age-related gaffes and McCarthy's ouster as self-inflicted wounds. Post-2024 election, his November 18, 2024, review nominated Trump for "best comeback" amid Republican sweeps but awarded "worst judgment" to Democratic strategists for underestimating working-class shifts, supported by exit poll data showing gains among Hispanic and Black male voters. Into 2025, columns like "The 1.47 percent mandate for chaos" on February 18 examined Trump's narrow popular vote edge, warning of governance risks from slim majorities and referencing historical parallels to divided-government gridlock. As senior editor at Inside Elections since the early 2010s, Rothenberg contributed to nonpartisan race ratings and forecasts, including the October 23, 2025, 2026 overview, which rated most Republican-held seats as safe amid Democratic map disadvantages and retirements in states like and . His work there integrated quantitative metrics like scores with qualitative assessments of candidate fundraising and local scandals, maintaining a focus on probabilistic outcomes over deterministic predictions.

Analytical Methods and Forecasting Accuracy

Methodology for Election Predictions

Rothenberg's methodology for election predictions centered on a qualitative system that categorized congressional races into tiers such as , Likely, Leans/Tilt, and Toss-up for each major party, reflecting the projected likelihood of a party holding or gaining the seat on Election Day rather than current polling snapshots. This approach, pioneered in The Rothenberg Political Report, eschewed rigid statistical models in favor of expert judgment integrating district-specific and national factors, with ratings updated periodically as new information emerged. Key considerations included historical voting patterns and district partisanship, assessed via metrics like partisan voting indices derived from recent results, alongside demographic shifts such as changes in racial composition or that could influence voter behavior. Incumbency provided a baseline advantage, but ratings adjusted for open seats or vulnerable incumbents based on factors like announcements or scandals. quality—encompassing strength, , and —was weighed heavily, as was campaign infrastructure, including fundraising totals and independent expenditures, which Rothenberg viewed as indicators of organizational viability. District-level polling, when available and deemed reliable, informed late-cycle shifts, though emphasized triangulating polls with fundamentals to avoid overreliance on potentially volatile surveys. The national political environment played a pivotal role, with Rothenberg evaluating macroeconomic conditions, presidential approval ratings, and midterm dynamics to gauge potential waves favoring one party, such as anti-incumbent sentiment or coattail effects. No single formula dictated ratings; instead, weights evolved across the cycle—early assessments prioritized structural elements like district history and candidate recruitment, while closer to Election Day, real-time developments like polling trends or unique events (e.g., legal issues or endorsements) could prompt reclassifications. This forward-looking projection aimed to forecast final outcomes, maintaining consistency even amid narrowing polls if underlying fundamentals suggested resilience, as seen in cases where races remained "Likely" for the favored party despite tightening surveys.

Empirical Track Record and Critiques

Rothenberg's Rothenberg Political Report, later rebranded as Inside Elections, has been evaluated through specific election outcomes rather than comprehensive, peer-reviewed accuracy studies across cycles. In the 2006 midterms, his final forecasts accurately anticipated Democratic gains sufficient to flip both the (net +31 seats for Democrats) and (net +4 seats), attributing the shift to public dissatisfaction with the and Republican incumbents. Closer to the 2010 midterms, his predictions identified numerous Republican-favorable races, aligning with the eventual GOP net gain of 63 seats and 6 seats, though early assessments underestimated the anti-incumbent wave. A notable critique arose from an 2009 column in which Rothenberg assessed Republican prospects for retaking the as "zero," citing stable Democratic majorities, improving economic indicators under Obama, and lack of a visible GOP wave at that juncture. This view faced ridicule post-election, as Republicans not only gained control but achieved their largest House swing since 1948; detractors argued it reflected overconfidence in polling and insider reporting, ignoring brewing Tea Party momentum and voter backlash against the . Rothenberg defended the statement as a snapshot of April conditions, not a fixed , emphasizing that long-range forecasts inherently risk volatility from unforeseen events like economic downturns or scandals. His qualitative ratings—categorizing races as Safe, Likely, Lean, or Toss-up—have informed probabilistic models by outlets like , which averaged them with competitors such as Cook Political Report for district-level probabilities, suggesting perceived empirical value in final assessments. However, critics have noted potential conservatism in ratings, with some races shifting dramatically late (e.g., underestimating GOP surges in open seats during wave years), and a reliance on data and polls that may lag shifts. Comprehensive post-mortems, such as those comparing forecasters' seat predictions to actual results, indicate Rothenberg's errors in aligned with broader industry challenges in capturing midterm volatility, but specific win-probability accuracies remain under-documented compared to quantitative models.

Influence and Legacy in Political Analysis

Impact on Campaigns and Media

Rothenberg's Rothenberg Political Report, established in the mid-to-late , provided detailed race-by-race ratings on congressional and other contests, enabling campaigns to gauge competitiveness and prioritize resource allocation such as and spends. These assessments, incorporating both quantitative polling data and qualitative insights from party operatives, helped candidates and party committees identify "tilt" races—those leaning toward one party but remaining contestable—prompting strategic adjustments like intensified ground efforts in targeted districts. For instance, joint interviews with fellow handicapper evolved into mandatory engagements for serious candidates, offering off-the-record feedback from committee insiders that directly informed campaign tactics. In media ecosystems, Rothenberg's ratings served as authoritative benchmarks, frequently cited in outlets to frame narratives around electoral viability and shift coverage toward high-stakes races, thereby amplifying public and journalistic focus on districts he flagged as pivotal. His regular appearances on networks like and from the onward disseminated these analyses to broader audiences, establishing a template for nonpartisan that influenced how journalists evaluated and reported on polling trends and vulnerabilities. Over 25 years, the report's reputation for dispassionate synthesis of data cultivated trust among reporters, who relied on it to contextualize fragmented campaign developments rather than isolated events. This dual influence fostered a more structured approach to political competition, where campaigns responded to external validations of race openness, and media adopted standardized metrics for scrutiny, though critics later noted that such ratings could inadvertently reinforce incumbency advantages by signaling safer investments for donors and parties. Rothenberg's emphasis on empirical patterns over partisan sustained the report's utility amid evolving media landscapes, transitioning seamlessly to successors like Inside Elections, which perpetuated its role in guiding strategic and analytical priorities.

Recognition and Non-Partisan Stance Amid Polarization

Rothenberg's commitment to non-partisan analysis has earned him recognition as a leading figure in objective political forecasting, with his Rothenberg Political Report consistently billed as a non-partisan dedicated to dissecting congressional races based on empirical indicators rather than ideological preferences. This reputation persisted into his tenure as senior editor at Inside Elections, where the publication maintains a non-partisan mandate in evaluating U.S. House, , and gubernatorial contests through data on candidate strength, district fundamentals, and polling trends. Colleagues and event organizers have highlighted his and Charlie Cook's joint presentations as exemplars of balanced, non-partisan commentary on legislative and electoral dynamics, free from partisan advocacy. In an era of heightened , marked by deepening partisan divides and media fragmentation since the mid-2010s, Rothenberg's approach has stood out for its resistance to echo-chamber biases, prioritizing verifiable electoral mechanics over narrative-driven speculation. His assessments, often critiquing strategies from both major parties—such as underestimating outsider surges in while accurately incumbency vulnerabilities—have been praised for embodying analytical amid pressures for alignment with prevailing partisan winds. This stance aligns with broader acknowledgments of his work as providing independent, objective insights, as evidenced by 's designation of him as one of the nation's top political analysts focused on congressional and statewide races. Rothenberg's non-partisan framework has influenced discussions on electoral volatility, where he emphasizes candidate-specific factors and structural advantages over generalized partisan waves, offering a to increasingly polarized models. His ongoing contributions, including columns and speaking engagements, continue to be sought for their detachment from partisan incentives, reinforcing his legacy as a bulwark against in .

References

  1. https://insideelections.com/contributors/stuart-rothenberg
  2. https://today.uconn.edu/2021/03/talking-politics-with-roll-call-columnist-stu-rothenberg-77-ph-d/
  3. https://www.leadingauthorities.com/speakers/stuart-rothenberg
  4. https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/9KGF-YK3/murray-rothenberg-1923-1998
  5. https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/palmbeachpost/name/edythe-rothenberg-obituary?id=21734170
  6. https://twitter.com/StuPolitics/status/1844558573386281314
  7. https://today.uconn.edu/2014/10/one-on-one-with-political-guru-stu-rothenberg/
  8. https://rollcall.com/2023/10/30/the-religious-right-takes-control-of-the-house/
  9. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/gen/bios/rothenberg/
  10. https://liberty.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/api/collection/p17184coll12/id/54923/download
  11. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/religion-and-the-presidential-election-by-paul-lopatto-new-york-praeger-publishers-1985-pp-xii-179-3295-the-evangelical-voter-religion-and-politics-in-america-by-stuart-rothenberg-and-frank-newport-washington-institute-for-government-and-politics-of-the-free-congress-research-and-education-foundation-1984-pp-vi-176-595-paper/A653AC09484C989D1FB3555C49E51E72
  12. https://insideelections.com/news/article/what-happened-to-the-rothenberg-political-report
  13. https://insideelections.com/news/article/podcast-episode-50-nonpartisan-political-analysis-stuart-rothenberg
  14. https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/09/25/spotlight/rothenberg/ratings.html
  15. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/13/us/redistricting-2002-produces-no-great-shake-ups.html
  16. https://www.rollcall.com/2012/06/11/reflections-on-20-years-as-accidental-columnist/
  17. https://rollcall.com/category/stuart-rothenberg-columns-archive/
  18. https://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/05/stu-rothenberg-parts-ways-with-roll-call-223478
  19. https://rollcall.com/author/stuart-rothenberg/
  20. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/bios/frames/cnn/rothenberg.html
  21. https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/analysis/
  22. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/09/13/why-im-skeptical-of-polls-showing-trump-gaining-on-clinton/
  23. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/08/09/donald-trump-needs-a-miracle-to-win/
  24. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/15/anyone-for-a-second-helping-of-crow/
  25. https://www.c-span.org/person/stuart-rothenberg/2357/
  26. https://insideelections.com/news/article/a-new-chapter-from-rothenberg-to-inside-elections
  27. https://rollcall.com/2021/12/02/rothenbergs-best-and-worst-end-of-the-year-awards-for-2021/
  28. https://rollcall.com/2021/01/13/the-divide-in-the-gop-isnt-that-deep/
  29. https://rollcall.com/2024/05/08/elise-stefanik-for-veep/
  30. https://rollcall.com/2024/09/23/trumps-biggest-problem-remains-trump/
  31. https://rollcall.com/2024/02/05/the-states-that-matter-in-2024/
  32. https://rollcall.com/2024/01/22/close-but-no-cigar-for-nikki-haley/
  33. https://rollcall.com/2023/04/24/what-is-ron-desantis-dedoing/
  34. https://rollcall.com/2023/12/11/rothenbergs-best-and-worst-of-2023/
  35. https://rollcall.com/2024/11/18/rothenbergs-best-and-worst-of-2024/
  36. https://rollcall.com/2025/02/18/the-1-47-percent-mandate-for-chaos/
  37. https://insideelections.com/news/article/2026-senate-overview-republicans-holding-on
  38. https://insideelections.com/news/article/pulling-back-the-curtain-on-race-ratings
  39. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics/article/election-forecasting-and-public-opinion-polls/240362D369B247BD536D1C220E7E7022
  40. https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/sitroom/date/2006-11-02/segment/03
  41. https://www.npr.org/2010/11/01/130982777/midterm-predictions-house-senate-gubernatorial
  42. http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/news/article/april-madness-can-gop-win-back-the-house-in-2010
  43. https://newrepublic.com/article/80998/stuart-rothenberg-loses-it
  44. https://fivethirtyeight.com/methodology/how-fivethirtyeights-house-and-senate-models-work/
  45. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/10/how-political-prognostication-can-go-wrong.html
  46. https://uwf.edu/media/university-of-west-florida/colleges/cassh/departments/government/cdocs/I.B.26-Cuzan-2010-Predicting-the-Results-of-the-2010-Elections-for-the-U.S.-House-of-Representatives-Bucharest.pdf
  47. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2025/how-political-reporting-changed-handicapping-election-modeling/
  48. https://www.vpm.org/npr-news/2010-09-13/about-the-election-scorecard
  49. https://insideelections.com/contributors
  50. https://www.leadingauthorities.com/uk/speakers/charlie-cook-stuart-rothenberg
  51. https://www.aei.org/articles/in-hyperpartisan-era-only-candidates-can-change-outcomes/
  52. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jan/11/stuart-rothenberg-and-the-arrogance-of-honesty/
  53. https://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/02/09/rothenberg.column/index.html
  54. https://washingtonmonthly.com/2022/11/01/will-the-midterms-be-a-wave-election-and-does-it-matter/
  55. https://www.leadingauthorities.com/speakers/video/political-duo-charlie-cook-and-stuart-rothenberg
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.