| Reuters/Ipsos | 8/3 - 8/7 | 1479 RV | 41 | 39 | Democrats +2 |
| Economist/YouGov | 8/5 - 8/7 | 1289 RV | 44 | 41 | Democrats +3 |
| IBD/TIPP | 7/26 - 8/2 | 878 RV | 45 | 45 | Tie |
| Rasmussen Reports | 7/29 - 8/2 | 2500 LV | 45 | 41 | Democrats +4 |
So does this "fly in the face" of what happened in Ohio 12 where it would appear that the Democrat O'Connor outpaced the district by around 9-10 points? Well, maybe and maybe not. As has been pointed out by many, reading too much into special elections is a recipe for getting things wrong. You are still comparing apples to oranges.
As a rule of thumb, Democrats generally have a better turnout during Presidential years, than they do during midterms. There are many Democrats motivated by national politics and Presidential politics in particular. Even if they are not there to vote for the congressional candidate, they will still do so and vote Democrat. On the flip side, Republicans generally fall off less during the midterms, because they traditionally care more about the local races, local levies, and other things that will be on the ballot in November. Even if they are not specifically there for a congressional candidate, they will still vote in those races, and vote Republican.
Special elections offer no other incentive to come to the poll other than to vote in that one race. Therefor only the most motivated of the motivated will show up.
Now does that mean that there higher turnout in a special election means nothing? Of course not. In the Ohio 12 race, there were some highly Democratic areas that had a turnout that was higher than it was in 2016. That obviously matters. But they still lost the race, even though Republican turnout was well below even a normal midterm. Certainly we know GOP turnout will be much higher in the mid terms. So the question becomes, does the Democratic turnout have as much needle room to improve?
I will continue to believe that Democrats will pick up seats in the House (the Senate is a different prospect). But I believe the difference between picking up some seats and the "wave" that some people are projecting is going to hinge on whether or not the economy is still strong three months from now. It's always hard for those in the "mushy middle" to vote against their own pocketbooks. I think that this is being reflected in the recent tightening of the generic ballot.
Special elections offer no other incentive to come to the poll other than to vote in that one race. Therefor only the most motivated of the motivated will show up.
Now does that mean that there higher turnout in a special election means nothing? Of course not. In the Ohio 12 race, there were some highly Democratic areas that had a turnout that was higher than it was in 2016. That obviously matters. But they still lost the race, even though Republican turnout was well below even a normal midterm. Certainly we know GOP turnout will be much higher in the mid terms. So the question becomes, does the Democratic turnout have as much needle room to improve?
I will continue to believe that Democrats will pick up seats in the House (the Senate is a different prospect). But I believe the difference between picking up some seats and the "wave" that some people are projecting is going to hinge on whether or not the economy is still strong three months from now. It's always hard for those in the "mushy middle" to vote against their own pocketbooks. I think that this is being reflected in the recent tightening of the generic ballot.
23 comments:
regarding the economy and its impact on the mid terms, this should prove helpful:
Gross Domestic Product, 3rd quarter 2018 (advance estimate)
October 26 8:30 am
https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/news_release_sort_national.htm
There's no denying the fact that Democrat are motivated by their hate for Trump but does that mean a "blue wave" where they run the table (and they have to run the table) or simply that the Democrat running in a Democrat district wins by 70% instead of 60%.
What's going for the Democrats:
1. History. The out party always picks up seats in a midterm election.
2. Unprecedented anti-Trump motivation. This may not be as big of an advantage as some people think.
What's going for the Republicans:
1. The economy. People are reluctant to change leadership when times are good.
2. A base of reliable voters. Turnout has never been a really big problem for the GOP.
3. Demographics and districting. Democrats are no longer a nationwide party. They are confined to the Northeast. West Coast, and Islands of metropolitian districts in the heartland.
My feeling is that the GOP will hold serve in the house (barely) and increase it's majority in the senate by three or four seats.
Problem for dems is, they do well when they run centrist candidate (lamb, O'Conner) but the party keeps moving more left every week and every month.
And trump's approval among blacks is up over 20%. That's a big problem for dems.
The Cook Report makes a valid point.
In a neutral political environment, Ohio's 12th CD wouldn't have been competitive. Republicans redrew it in 2011 to be a safe seat, President Trump carried it by 11 points in 2016 and the party holds a two-to-one voter registration edge there. Yet Balderson appears to have hung on by a single point, the same margin as in the May GOP primary where he beat a Jim Jordan-backed candidate who probably would have lost to O'Connor.
The big question is the political environment on or around the election day. If the turnout we saw in the Ohio 12th district continues the house will give the Democrats control of the house by approximately 23 seats.
Looking at the Ohio 12th district that Governor Kasich late political ad gave the Republican not a late rally by President Trump.
https://www.cookpolitical.com/analysis/house/house-overview/house-rating-changes-five-gop-held-seats
He points out that in Washington state there are five Republican districts that are likely to flip.
The areas where the white, educated suburbs where Trump carried by less than 10% the women will come out in droves to vote for the women candidates are on the Democrats side.
The tarrifs imposed by the President may deserve credit for the possibility that even in deep red midwestern states even in South Dakota the last poll shows the Democrats have a chance. They have only one congressional seat and IF in Rapid City, Sioux Falls, Aberdeen and Pierre the educated vote turnout in record numbers and the rural areas turnout is as low as in Ohio the Democrats can pull this one out of the hat.
The Democratic candidates can't be anti Trump and win. They have to run in health care and Social Security. The Republicans will as usual provide attacks against the idea of Medicare reform.
The taxes will go up. But the costs of employer provided benefits go away as will the cost of personal health care costs. The President has given the Democrats a gift with the first Trumpcare plans exclude previous conditions coverage.
If your child was born with a kidney problem, the President's endorsed health care insurance would not cover the cost of the kidney transplant.
There will be a blue wave but its going to have pink waves in the rural areas despite low turnout, the women will give the Democrat enough votes to eak out a victory.
Kerry in a landslide
Anonymous caliphate4vr said...
Kerry in a landslide
heh. no shit.
so this year it's white women who are going to drag the donks to victory. it couldn't be the same women who hillary told us voted the way their husbands told them, could it?
what the alky won't admit is that white suburban married women vote GOP.
rog needs the single "julia's" that can't land a husband and need uncle sugar to pick up their tab. like that feckless racist c*nt the ny times just hired.
If your child was born with a kidney problem, the President's endorsed health care insurance would not cover the cost of the kidney transplant.
that's because the low cost plans trump just made available aren't designed to cover that shit and you know it.
cali, help us out here -
If your child was born with a kidney problem, the President's endorsed health care insurance would not cover the cost of the kidney transplant.
Why not. Did these people lose their employer sponsored coverage?
BTW oh he who knows nothing of which he speaks, temp plans are just that temp plans. They are designed for people transitioning between jobs and don’t want to pay for COBRA.
Well let's see how many people who are going to be between jobs in November?
Because of the tarrifs imposed by the President are going to cost 4,000 jobs at Volvo in South Carolina and 45,000 jobs at BMW.
How many of the white married women are going to get out and vote for the Republican candidate in their congressional district?
The side effects are going to be a serious problem for the Republicans.
Harley Davidson is moving manufacturing outside the country because of the tarrifs imposed by the President.
The Tweetedent will leave us with a recession by 2020.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Well let's see how many people who are going to be between jobs in November?
if they are they won't be for long. in case you haven't noticed we're at full employment, genius.
this ain't the 0linsky food stamp and welfare economy anymore.
and harley? they were in decline anyway. millenials are largely pussies. they don't ride anything more complex than a skateboard or the google bus.
“Tariffs are working big time,” Trump announced this week, though his tariffs have provoked layoffs and plant closures and forced Trump to announce $12 billion in emergency aid to farmers.
Element Electronics, a consumer electronics company in South Carolina, says it will be closing its plant in Winnsboro due to tariffs imposed by President Trump.
$12.5 billion to farmers.
Success Republican style.
Bill Clinton generated 21 million jobs and almost balanced the budget.
Actually Roger
BMW (who has been cutting workers for about ten years) is only "threatening" that they would cut jobs if Trump put a tariff on foreign cars. Of course they would be upset. They sell a lot of cars here, and would probably lose "bigly" if they had to deal with tariffs.
btw... have you ever been to Europe? Ever been to a "Chevy" or "Ford" dealership in Europe? No? Why is that? Because European tariffs on American cars makes it impossible for us to sell cars in Europe.
So please explain why it's okay that Europeans make it impossible for American cars to be sold in Europe, but are upset that it might become harder for them to sell their cars here?
Doesn't that sound hypocritical? or is the hypocrisy exactly why you like it?
Genius
0linsky food stamp and welfare economy
I am upset because that the tarrifs make it harder for them to sell their American built cars here.
Doesn't that sound hypocritical? or is the hypocrisy exactly why you like it?
Bill Clinton generated 21 million jobs and almost balanced the budget.
do you really want to unpack this statement and get down to brass tacks on it, alky?
i remember bubba's dot com vaporware economy because i was in the thick of it, and i'm not going to let you get away with lying about it.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Genius
0linsky food stamp and welfare economy
genius? skeets thought so. and i can see why. government dependency serves the democrat agenda. democrats require a permanent underclass to stay in power.
"Pink Wave"
Roger, how many Cortez supported canidate won?
I am upset because that the tarrifs make it harder for them to sell their American built cars here
Mercedes and Volvo do not make the bulk of their cars "here" Roger. They are still foreign car companies who have the advantage of selling both here and in Europe.
Our "big three" have the disadvantage of having the European market basically shut off to them.
(who has been cutting workers for about ten years)
Where??? Another bit of alternate facts or just more trump chump BS??????
NOC Stock PLunge
April 20, 2018 $356.00 closed
Aug. 9, 2018 $291.43 −3.52 (1.19%)
It was
Blogger KD said...
NOC Stock Plunge
KD shitting his brains again....Yes it has gone down....SO FUCKING WHAT!!!!!!!! Ass hole douche nozzle....
Had to go back a LONG way to find the most recent election thread. The generic ballot is a lot worse for Republicans today than it was 26 days ago, when this post was written.
Post a Comment