Jump to content

2018 - Elections and Trends

atomheartbevo

By atomheartbevo
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What's the deal with Quinnipiac?  Seems like all of their recent polls are absurdly pro-Republican.

Their party ID gap between the previous poll and this one was like 66% lower.

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 6.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bozo_Casanova
Bozo_Casanova

You said it in the only way that matters: you voted for it. 

Gatorubet
Gatorubet

I told my friends at work today to get ready for some excuse destroying reality.   We are no longer going to be able to excuse the behavior of voters in this election as 'being foolish', 'hoping Trump

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Fire protection. Police protection. Local road construction and maintenance. Interstate highway construction and maintenance. Airport operation, air traffic control, airline safety

SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What's the deal with Quinnipiac?  Seems like all of their recent polls are absurdly pro-Republican.

 

26 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Their party ID gap between the previous poll and this one was like 66% lower.

QPac had that huge D+14 at the beginning of last month we were discussing (I predicted it would be the high water mark), so that one was absurdly pro-D if anything.  If it is just a matter of what Js1 says, then their ability to sample and weigh properly seems like it sucks especially for such a generally well respected poll.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted

Does anyone remember that LATimes/USC poll during 2016 that always had Trump ahead of Hillary by at least 2 points?

While that poll wasn’t a great indicator of public opinion, I actually loved the methodology because it was really measuring people changing their mind. 

IIRC they took a fixed group of 800-1200 people that were designated to participate in the poll throughout the election season.

They would draw something like 400 random samples from the larger group to get their poll numbers and they did It daily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted

I also bet the polls are way off in this race and will further people's arguments that they don't mean anything.  I will put money that multiple representatives with double digit leads in the last poll end up losing.  I think voter turnout in this election will be crazy and render a lot of the models basically useless.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted
Just now, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I also bet the polls are way off in this race and will further people's arguments that they don't mean anything.  I will put money that multiple representatives with double digit leads in the last poll end up losing.  I think voter turnout in this election will be crazy and render a lot of the models basically useless.  

Agreed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I also bet the polls are way off in this race and will further people's arguments that they don't mean anything.  I will put money that multiple representatives with double digit leads in the last poll end up losing.  I think voter turnout in this election will be crazy and render a lot of the models basically useless.  

I mean, this basically happens every time.  A lot of House races in 2010 and 2014 rolled with the wave that were unexpected because it is REALLY HARD to poll House districts. On the flip side, some "toss-up" districts may stick GOP because the wave isn't going to be uniform. 

Same thing happened in the Senate races.  A bunch of races in 2014 considered "toss-up" or lean D (NC) all rolled in one direction.  RCP had 8 seats considered "toss-up" in polling and 7/8 went GOP.

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I mean, this basically happens every time.  A lot of House races in 2010 and 2012 rolled with the wave that were unexpected because it is REALLY HARD to poll House districts. On the flip side, some "toss-up" districts may stick GOP because the wave isn't going to be uniform. 

This is going to be different.  Whether people know it or not, we are under attack by forces foreign and domestic and the ballot box is the last line of defense.  I believe the people that actually care recognize this, at least subconsciously. 

I also realize this is ironically how the tea baggers felt in 2010 but this time it’s not manufactured by billionaires responding to Obamacare and higher taxes. 

 

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13411

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

I also bet the polls are way off in this race and will further people's arguments that they don't mean anything.  I will put money that multiple representatives with double digit leads in the last poll end up losing.  I think voter turnout in this election will be crazy and render a lot of the models basically useless.  

How many double digit leads in the last poll for 2014 or 2016 lost in the actual election?

(And I don't mean for races where the last poll was 4-6 months before the election)

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 683

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is going to be different.  Whether people know it or not, we are under attack by forces foreign and domestic and the ballot box is the last line of defense.  I believe the people that actually care recognize this, at least subconsciously. 

 

 

i have no faith that anyone cares or recognizes this.  i am not giddy as a schoolgirl, and instead am very anxious of how the elections will go.  i keep think everyone sees through the buffoonery of this president, that he has made america worse again, and show up to vote accordingly.  i just am not sure that it won't be another red wave all over again.  it's a recurring nightmare of mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14504

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

I don't think this is working out for her.

 

That's a spectacularly shitty ad.

To the previous post, exactly.  It makes Ojeda look better, if anything.  "Slamming Donald Trump with Hateful Personal Attacks?"

Like what?  Then we get, "Put the phone down and kick your kids out of the White House"  M'kay.

Edited by Aqua Buddha
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman 3903

Posted
Posted
On 10/2/2018 at 6:46 PM, Gil Bang said:

In other news, Bill Maher donated 1 million this cycle.

Reportedly, a big chunk of that money is going to Bresden in Tennessee..... He has lost a little ground lately and was 5 down in the latest poll.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/senate/tennessee/

Latest polls

We've collected 22 polls for the Tennessee Senate election. We’re adjusting poll results in three ways: Polls of registered voters or all adults are adjusted to a likely-voter basis; older polls are adjusted based on shifts in the generic congressional ballot since the poll was conducted; and polls are adjusted for house effects (the tendency for a firm’s polls to lean toward Democrats or Republicans). Polls with larger sample sizes and those conducted by higher-quality polling agencies are given more weight, as are more recent polls.

  ADJUSTMENTS  
DATES POLLSTER SAMPLE WEIGHT
BREDESEN
BLACKBURN
MARGIN LIKELY VOTER TIME-LINE HOUSE EFFECTS ADJUSTED MARGIN
SEP 29-OCT 2
Fox News/Anderson Robbins Research/Shaw & Co. Research 666 LV
1.48
43% 48% R+5.0 — dem-arrow.png <0.1 dem-arrow.png 1.6 R+3.4
SEP 9-24
SurveyMonkey 1,609 RV
0.41
42% 42% EVEN 0.4 gop-arrow.png 0.2 gop-arrow.png dem-arrow.png 1.5 D+0.8
SEP 16-18
Vox Populi Communications 567 LV
0.64
51% 49% D+2.0 — 0.2 gop-arrow.png dem-arrow.png 0.2 D+1.9
SEP 11-15
SSRS 723 LV
0.78
50% 45% D+5.0 — 0.3 gop-arrow.png 1.1 gop-arrow.png D+3.5
SEP 10-12
Triton Polling & Research 1,038 LV
0.60
45% 48% R+3.3 — 0.3 gop-arrow.png dem-arrow.png 3.0 R+0.7
SEP 8-11
Fox News/Anderson Robbins Research/Shaw & Co. Research 686 LV
0.33
44% 47% R+3.0 — 0.3 gop-arrow.png dem-arrow.png 1.6 R+1.8
AUG 25-28
Marist College 538 LV
0.36
48% 46% D+2.0 — 0.2 gop-arrow.png 1.0 gop-arrow.png D+0.7
AUG 9-11
Gravis Marketing 620 LV
0.14
44% 48% R+4.0 — dem-arrow.png <0.1 dem-arrow.png 2.1 R+1.8
JUL 11-14
Emerson College 657 RV
0.06
43% 37% D+6.0 0.4 gop-arrow.png dem-arrow.png 0.1 0.9 gop-arrow.png D+4.9
JUL 10-11
Public Policy Polling 
D
583 LV
0.04
44% 41% D+3.0 — dem-arrow.png 0.1 2.1 gop-arrow.png D+1.1
Weighted averageR+0.1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13411

Posted
Posted
Just now, thrillhammer said:

prepare thy anus, it could happen.

Yeah.  I don’t think many voters would shift from democrat to republican voting because of kavanaugh but it might encourage some republicans to vote.  But I don’t think it’s becaue they really care about kavanaugh, it’s more that the democrats are getting one over the republicans with a sexual assault investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Yeah.  I don’t think many voters would shift from democrat to republican voting because of kavanaugh but it might encourage some republicans to vote.  But I don’t think it’s becaue they really care about kavanaugh, it’s more that the democrats are getting one over the republicans with a sexual assault investigation.

Except if they vote to confirm him in the next few days, then what?  5 weeks until Election Day is a lifetime to keep them enthused to show up and vote after they got their way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13411

Posted
Posted
Just now, Js1 said:

Except if they vote to confirm him in the next few days, then what?  5 weeks until Election Day is a lifetime to keep them enthused to show up and vote after they got their way.

And that is how the issue could shift in the other direction.  Confirm kavanaugh and some women won’t vote republican. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 683

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

And that is how the issue could shift in the other direction.  Confirm kavanaugh and some women won’t vote republican. 

i'm hoping you're right, that there's a backlash for ramming this through.  he is going to weaken the court and doesn't deserve to be on the bench.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

i'm hoping you're right, that there's a backlash for ramming this through.  he is going to weaken the court and doesn't deserve to be on the bench.

Deserve ain't got nothing to do with it, anymore :( Ask Garland about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bateshorn

Bateshorn 9898

Posted
Posted (edited)

For all the "GOP IS BACK, CUZ KAV!!!!" hot takes banging around (and there are clearly being taken seriously inside the GOP, because Fox has suddenly decided to go all Kav, all the time), the Access Hollywood tape dropped on Oct. 7, and less than a week later, it looked like Trump was going to possibly lose by double digits.  The memory half life on these things is very, very short. 

Really the question is what happens on the confirmation vote and how it plays going forward. IF Kav fails and this drags out for 3 more weeks through a Barrett or Hardiman nomination, then I could see this being a Nov. issue.  If Kav is confirmed early next week, I just don't see this bump in enthusiasm (assuming it's an actual bump and not just a fortuitous bunching of polls)  lasting for another month.

Edited by Bateshorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted

LA Times did the competitive California districts:

  • CA-10: Harder(D) 50% - Denham(R) 45%

  • CA-22: Janz(D) 45% - Nunes(R) 53%

  • CA-25: Hill(D) 50% - Knight(R) 46%

  • CA-39: Cisneros(D) 49% - Kim(R) 48%

  • CA-45: Porter(D) 52% - Walters(R) 45%

  • CA-48: Rouda(D) 48% - Rohrabacher (R) 48%

  • CA-49: Levin(D) 55% - Harkey(R) 41%

  • CA-50: Campa-Najjar(D) 47% - Hunter(R) 49%

 

5 or 6 seat pickup right there, which is 25% of what the Democrats need for the House. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

That CA-22 poll is the first I've seen that competitive-ish.

It's fucking insane those people can continue to support Nunes given all the obvious evidence he intentionally withheld information in the House's investigation of the Russian scandal. I am somewhat familiar with the area too, my wife is from Fresno. I know there are a lot of dipshit weird farmers in the central valley that love them some small government, but they are going to actively harm their working base if they can't get the migrant workers they desperately need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dertyberd

Dertyberd 394

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

It's fucking insane those people can continue to support Nunes given all the obvious evidence he intentionally withheld information in the House's investigation of the Russian scandal. I am somewhat familiar with the area too, my wife is from Fresno. I know there are a lot of dipshit weird farmers in the central valley that love them some small government, but they are going to actively harm their working base if they can't get the migrant workers they desperately need.

He's owning libs, taking on the deep state, and is a victim of the liberal media.  Of course he's winning in a heavy R district.  Trump out front shoulda told you.  

 

November 6th can't get here fast enough.  This has felt like the longest year of my life in terms of news and constant noise.  Time to have a congress that will hold actual hearings/investigations so the WH can't manufacture a new scandal to get out of bad news stories.   I do believe public hearings will go a long way in toning down of the Trump reality show.  It will be true must see TV if done correctly and can guide the news narrative away from Twitter.  

God help us all if R's retain the House.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85102

Posted
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

It's fucking insane those people can continue to support Nunes given all the obvious evidence he intentionally withheld information in the House's investigation of the Russian scandal. I am somewhat familiar with the area too, my wife is from Fresno. I know there are a lot of dipshit weird farmers in the central valley that love them some small government, but they are going to actively harm their working base if they can't get the migrant workers they desperately need.

Devin Nunes won that seat by 35.2 points 2 years ago and 44 points in the last midterm.

8 points is amazing, honestly.  Trump won it by 9.5

Nunes at 53% and Janz at 45% means about 5% have already switched from R to D since the primary in June (Nunes was at 58.1% and the 3 Dems combined for 39.9%)

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13411

Posted
Posted

There was also that weird report how the Nunes family (parents, brother) has moved their farm to Iowa but few people in CA seem to be aware of it.  Nunes is thought to hold court in an uncle's CA farm when he shows up in that area.    While no one knows for certain, it's assumed Devin Nunes has a financial interest in the Iowa farm only.

FYI, I'm not suggesting anything shady or illegal about the family moving to Iowa.  It's just an odd fact that is kept very quiet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voldemort86

Voldemort86 2259

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, thrillhammer said:

prepare thy anus, it could happen.

I see the Kavanaugh hearing only effecting the senate. 

The dynamics in the house ( democrats way outraising GOP) and the unusually high democrat vote totals in the primaries this year are not going to be reversed by a likely Supreme Court justice who likes beer. Lots of experts have been saying that the democrats have had a great shot of taking the house for months now.

 

govenor races are usually just statewide politics. I still expect the democrats to do well on that front. The Dems have 17 governorships now and should have at least 23 after election night.

 

the senate is where Kavanaugh could have an effect. The close races are being fought in primarily republican states. Unfortunately, Democrat incumbents with razor thin leads like mccaskill, Donnelly, and nelson could lose their seats because of it.

if I’m wrong and we see a red wave because of a Supreme Court hearing, then this country is more messed up then any of us ever thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104585

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

To be fair, this is valid.  Our archaic election regulations only accept hand-signed forms.  Digital signatures don't count.  The third-party group fucked this up.

Is that true?

Here's the relevant provision from the Texas Uniform Electronic Transactions Act:

Quote

Sec. 322.007. LEGAL RECOGNITION OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS, ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES, AND ELECTRONIC CONTRACTS. (a) A record or signature may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form.

(b) A contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation.

(c) If a law requires a record to be in writing, an electronic record satisfies the law.

(d) If a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law.

Unless the relevant election code provision (and I couldn't find a cite to it -- I'd like to read it) is so specific as to necessarily exclude an electronic signature, the SOS seems wrong here.

BUT, it's EXACTLY the play I would expect.

Edited by Brisketexan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13411

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

To be fair, this is valid.  Our archaic election regulations only accept hand-signed forms.  Digital signatures don't count.  The third-party group fucked this up.

I get that govt agencies and their rules can be a pain to work with, but the best method is to follow their rules to a T.  If the document says signature, freaking put pen to paper.    Make the govt worker's job as easy as possible for them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

To be fair, this is valid.  Our archaic election regulations only accept hand-signed forms.  Digital signatures don't count.  The third-party group fucked this up.

Don't be fooled by this nonsense.  A person has expressed an intention to register to vote by making a physical act to put a signature on a piece of paper.  This is exactly what suppression is:  the codification of inanities to justify denial of your attempt to vote.  There are a 1000 other scenarios where an electronic sig is valid, so there is no reason to treat this different in the abstract sense, and I'm not even sure the election code requires actual ink on paper.  (can't tell if this is the right provision:  https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/laws/petitions.shtml -- just says it has to be in signer's handwriting)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...