2018 Congressional Generic Ballot and House Polls Megathread - the original

[Virginiá]

2006 was GW’s 2nd midterm.  2nd midterms have been often very bad elections for the incumbentPresidential party.  The economy was middling.  The Iraqi  war was not going well. The current tribal nature of the parties had nots set up yet.  Plus there was Mark Foley’s sex scandal.

I think you are maybe overestimating the number of "locked in" partisans. No doubt they make up a substantial chunk of the electorate, but there are more than enough Independents who are flippable, and these voters are generally the group waves hinge on, and has been true in just about every R/D wave since at least 2006. There also appears to be a pretty big enthusiasm advantage that is not abating. So you're not going to see another 2014-type situation, where Democratic turnout is lagging.

You're right though, the economy is doing well and there is no deeply unpopular war. By all measures, Trump's approval rating and thus the GOP's generic ballot polls should be excellent. But that isn't the case. Your boy Trump and his persistent strong unpopularity is bringing down the house around you guys, what with his constant drama and scandal and all. This is what pundits and analysts keep pointing out - the economy alone indicates a normal, run-of-the-mill president would be enjoying good approval ratings, yet that isn't the case with Trump, and it's no mistake why.


I keep getting this feeling that (and maybe not you per se) many Republicans have gotten so used to midterms always breaking their way (since 10+ years is a long time), and heard so many times in the Obama era that "Republicans gerrymandered a strong majority" and "Democrats don't vote," that you guys have forgotten just how bad things can actually get for an unpopular Republican president and his or her party.

A Democrat 7.3% generic lead in 2018 might reflect a very different electoral layout than a similar advantage in 2006. Generally the GOP does somewhat better than its generic. It is also likely that the Democrat advantage may be based on very strong numbers in the northeast and the west coast.   Thus the GOP may do fairly well in Trump carried states and especially in the Senate.

Not to say I agree with you (I don't), but a lopsided wave that takes place mostly on the West Coast and Northeast would be rather powerful for Democrats. Consider that the 7 - 8 California seats we need, 1 in Arizona, 1 - 2 in Washington, upwards of 3 in Pennsylvania (a new map seems likely, but even without one...), 5 - 6 in New York (?), ~3 in New Jersey, 1 in Maine, and then throw in a decent number of vulnerable seats around the country that would get picked off in any decent year for Democrats, like 2 - 3 in Florida, 1 in Colorado, 1 in Nebraska, 2 in Iowa, and so on...

You see where I'm going with this? A lopsided wave in the areas you suggested may actually be really good for Democrats. It implies that Republicans in the NE and WC are liable to lose seats that seem like Likely R now just because people don't assume it'll be so concentrated, right?

Anyway, just saying.

[Virginiá]

Reuters Ipsos went from D+5 to D+6. Not enough to take the House.

Actually, +6 is just a tad below the line of what some think Democrats need. Sabato posted an analysis that suggests it might be possible with around 6. I think he may have even went lower.

Either way, I'm pretty sure most users who follow this thread know the popular vote range Democrats need to get by now. It's been discussed quite a bit.

[Virginiá]

The shutdown was so shortlived and so inconsequential, I doubt it is going to have long-term ramifications for the Democrats.

This was probably the case no matter who was blamed, unless it was maybe a weeks-long shutdown a month or two before the election, where it then would have factored heavily into campaign strategy.

[Virginiá]

Clearly Democrats are doomed. LimoLiberal's hot take is all we need to pay attention to.

[Virginiá]

Clearly Democrats are doomed. LimoLiberal's hot take is all we need to pay attention to.

Have you guys considered banning the moron that's cheerfully sh**tting everywhere?

I can't ban him, and I'm probably in a minority if not alone among the mods who think career trolls like him should be banned.

But if he keeps posting commentary meant to incite arguments then I'll consider moving his posts and threads to a single megathread.

[Virginiá]

Democrats will win big in 2018....ignore the polls.

The last ABC poll taken before the 1994 midterms showed it a 4% lead for the GOP

Again, look at the signal (retirements, fundraising, enthusiasm,etc...) and not the noise (polls, dumbass pundits, LimoLiberal)

Look at the polling from 1994 for example:

I'm plenty sure the polls will eventually bounce back, or at least maintain what they are now (7% give or take). Keep in mind that Democrats under-performing polls is not a given. If Democrats won the House PV by 7%, that would be a wave just shy of 2006, and if they got 9%, it would be a bit better. So this idea that 7.3 on the RCP average should have Democrats panicking is downright comical. It shows just how far the bar has been lowered by conservatives trying to fight a narrative that they are on the outs this year.

For the first time since 2008, the fundamentals are all strongly on the side of the Democratic Party. Candidate fundraising, historic recruitment, almost historic number of retirements, a consistent and sometimes quite large enthusiasm gap, chronically low approval ratings of an unpopular Republican president and the shift of high-turnout white college grads to the Democrats all bodes well for the party to perform strongly in November.

That being said, we still have a long way to go until the election, so both Democrats and Republicans are likely to see the polls swing back and forth a bit. It's not worth obsessing over each swing as if that is for sure what it will be in November.

[Virginiá]

^ I don't agree with placing so much emphasis on the "Contract for America" thing (I recall reading that they only laid it out a month or two before the election and most people weren't even aware of it), but I do agree with a number of the things you laid out in your previous post. There is only so much emphasis you can place on generic ballot polls, and they best thought of as one part of a multi-part model. That is one thing I learned from 2016. Polls were the only thing that truly indicated a possible wave, while everything else seemed to point to a closer race, or at least not a wave.

That being said, the polls are still important, but there is still a lot of room to move either way. If you think the average of D+7 right now with a MoE of 3 points is where things currently stand at, then it could go anywhere from D+4 to D+10, which is the difference between a probable GOP majority and a probable Democratic majority.

[Virginiá]

More evidence that Morning Consult poll is absolute trash:

Dems only lead the GOP by 4 points when it comes to which party the public trusts more on healthcare, and yet, the GOP leads by 6 points on immigration despite the fact DACA is popular and championed by the Democrats. MC is garbage.

Republicans also led by +5 in a single 2008 poll (USA Today/Gallup) and in 2006, they had a couple tied polls month(s) before the election.

Republicans/Trump have recovered some since late December - that's not in question imo, so I'm not surprised to see MC with very favorable results for them, but I'm pretty sure that the state of the environment is not R+1 right now. Given the fundamentals of this year and literally every other non-poll marker (retirements/fundraising/recruitment/special elections/etc) being enormously in favor of Democrats, I'm very confident this election is going to go badly for Republicans. The only question is how badly - D+12 would be substantially worse than D+7, for instance.

I think if Democrats are poised to blow it, we'll probably see them in the lower end of mid-single digits in September/October with even more tightening in the last couple weeks. Other than that, there is just too much going wrong for Republicans to think otherwise.

[Virginiá]

https://static.texastribune.org/media/documents/ut-tt-2018-02-summary-1.pdf?_ga=2.225578778.1647027925.1519049485-1170111650.1519049485 on page 9/19, GOP leads Generic Congressional Ballot by 3 in Texas.

For reference, in 2016 the GOP won 57-37. Sessions, Hurd, and Culberson are probably f**ked if this is right.

More than just those 3 would be screwed if Republicans only won the House popular vote by 3 points in Texas.

[Virginiá]

https://static.texastribune.org/media/documents/ut-tt-2018-02-summary-1.pdf?_ga=2.225578778.1647027925.1519049485-1170111650.1519049485 on page 9/19, GOP leads Generic Congressional Ballot by 3 in Texas.

For reference, in 2016 the GOP won 57-37. Sessions, Hurd, and Culberson are probably f**ked if this is right.

A lot more than just those 3 would be screwed if Republicans only won the House popular vote by 3 points in Texas.

Hmmmn, probably not. All the other districts have been carried by Trump by at least 10 points. Unless the swings are concentrated in some areas.

The swing wouldn't be even at all though. For instance, among other districts, Clinton's improvement disproportionately hit these districts:

TX-21
TX-22
TX-24
TX-32

Absurdly Republican seats like TX-19 and TX-36 barely moved at all, and in fact in those two cases went more for Trump than they did for Romney.

So if I had to guess, Marchant and Smith's seats might be candidates for competitive seats under R+3 House PV in TX, even if not by much.

[Virginiá]

That PPP polling suggests the Republicans have made significant gains since November. Patriot Majority had PPP poll some of the districts in November, and look at the changes.


Went from D+12 in CA-25 to D+2
Phillips led in MN-03 by 4 and now leads by 3
Generic D led Frelinghuysen in NJ-11 by 2, Sherill now is down by 2 to Generic R
Generic D led Faso by 6 in NY-19, and now is tied.

Massive R swings. No wonder some House Ds are in panic mode.

Will you delete your account if the House flips?

No? I'll be extremely happy?

I don't really get why you're making so many conclusions and sounding alarms after every poll. Your reactions and prognostications from polls read like you're an on-edge activist in October, not February. Seriously, just calm down already lol

Maybe try posting polls without any commentary for a change, regardless if it is good or bad for Democrats.

[Virginiá]

^ But the Moderator who handles bans is a Republican lol

The issue is that almost everyone thinks you are a concern troll. You also have a tendency to post redundantly that is borderline spam. You created like 5 similar threads for the top California House races within a span of just a day or two. And over on the General Discussion board, sometimes its like someone pulled a "generic liberal stereotypes" string hanging off your back and you spew a bunch of a "White Racist" "Bigot" statements in a paragraph rife with run on sentences. Those are just the quirks that come to mind at 2:36am, for the record.

I don't know, I mean in my personal opinion, you seem like someone who legitimately trying to screw with people here. At this point, I don't particularly care if you say D+30 or R+30 in every post you make (although one of them would still be another reason you doubt your intentions). You seem to press way too many buttons for a user with innocent intentions.

[Virginiá]

Poliquin gonna get BTFO.

https://www.centralmaine.com/2018/02/23/new-poll-finds-trump-unpopular-poliquin-in-tight-race/

Trump at 52% disapproval in ME-2

I don't think it was ever appropriate to consider Poliquin safe or even leans R (but I have seen some people thinking so on here), given this district's past performances. Republicans over-performed in Maine in 2016 - their performance in Maine's Congressional elections was their best in over 15 years. They didn't even come close to that 2014.

Interesting.  He won a majority there, didn't he?

51-41 Trump.

[Virginiá]

CNN is no stranger to absurd polls in Dem-favoring midterms. In 2006, they had polls such as D+20, D+11, D+16 and D+21. That makes them sound unreliable I guess, but CNN only has those results in Democratic wave years, so perhaps they are meaningful after all 

[Virginiá]

The CNN poll has pushed the 538 average to D+10.0, the first time in several weeks that it's been in double digits.

And in Atlas-time, that is like, years. Especially with LimoLiberal poking people in the eye with every slightly sucky poll.

[Virginiá]

^ Is the GOP winning the House PV by 9 points in 1930 accurate? That is incredible if so. That would be unfathomable today, especially given the circumstances of the economy at the time. Republicans lost like 50 seats in 1930. Did they win the House PV by like 15-20 points in 1928?

[Virginiá]

People here are getting way too worked up about a weird kid in high school seeking validation.

Agreed. I think the main thing is that I have a democratic avatar (and am a democrat) but I am not rosy about their chances in November. I think it would be fine if I had a republican avatar, but that would be dishonest.

Fake news!

You deliberately try to provoke people with hot takes on practically every single poll you post. You have also practically admitted (implicitly and more) that you troll. If you wanted to be more professional about it, you should stop editorializing every single data point as if you can actually predict what will happen from that. So saying "collapse!" "very bad news for Democrats" just because one poll came out is not only annoying (as you well know) but stupid as well. To take your shtick seriously for a moment, I mean, for every +2 or +1 from Rasmussen you can muster, there are double digit polls from QU, CNN and such, so all your hot takes really say is that you have an idea of the midterm that you prefer to stick to even though it's at best no better than 50% chance at being right, although arguably notably less given that the only thing you can use to back up your idea is a few polls here and there whereas everyone is using a combination of polls and the fundamentals (enthusiasm, special election wins, midterm dynamic, presidential approvals, recruiting/fundraising, etc).

(sorry people who have LL on ignore, plz forgive)

[Virginiá]

Jesus Christ, the Republicans are so hell-bent on trying to cut down the "Blue Wave" rhetoric that they are using primary numbers from a heavy Republican state to prove a point that isn't there? That is fuc**** pathetic. They are ignoring everything else: the fundraising numbers, the enthusiasm gap, the special elections, the generic ballot, candidate quality, etc. They are really setting themselves up for major disappointment in November, and that NYtimes article doesn't make any sense.

Every time Democrats get excited by some new statistic that seems to buttress their claims of a wave, but later on falls flat or doesn't come true, they give Republican officials an opening to try and shift the narrative, even if the statistic people were getting excited by isn't as predictive as they may have thought. It doesn't matter how useful said stat is, Republicans will use it against Democrats if it doesn't work out in their favor. Although I'm not really sure what the point of this messaging battle is past influencing candidate recruitment, which is increasingly unnecessary with filing periods coming up all over the place.

[Virginiá]

(Also: is 1994 really considered a bigger wave than 2010?)

I guess it depends on how you want to look at it. Republicans gained more govs/Senate seats in 1994 but the House PV magin for Republicans was very similar. Geographical sorting and the downfall of split-ticket voting was pretty damaging for Democrats in 2010+

[Virginiá]

From the dearly departed:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Virginiá]

I'm kind of curious how high Trump's approval can go while still resulting in a D wave. Obama was basically neutral/low disapprove in 2010 (Gallup) - maybe somewhere between -1 and -3, and Democrats got blown out in that midterm, losing the House PV by around 6.8%. The polls have expanded and tightened but every other metric still indicates a wave. Aggregated special election results+turnout, recruitment/donors, general midterm backlash effect and even strong approve/disapproves for Trump.

Either way, I'm not too concerned. Democrats are in much better shape than Republicans were in March 2010, polling-wise. My bet is that the environment begins to shift towards Democrats in the last few weeks and solidifies from there on out, regardless of where it was beforehand.

[Virginiá]

Also, the enthusiasm gap has remained fairly static meaning the people Trump has pissed off are just as motivated as ever. The GOP figured these people would just lose interest after seeing that extra $1.50 in their paycheck but so far it hasn't played out that way

I can certainly understand why regular people would think that - it seems like common sense that voters would reward the politicians who gave them a tax cut, but if actual politicians thought this too, well that level of stupidity is almost criminal. How many midterm elections do we have to have before people realize that almost nothing else matters except the president, particularly when they are very unpopular. It's really hard to neutralize that kind of problem, short of say, the president giving every voter in America a million dollars in cash.

Taxes don't drive people to vote. Congress doesn't either. It's always that single person in the White House, and it's been like this for generations.

[Virginiá]

Exactly, look at the exceptions. 2002 - Bush's approvals were still sky high after 9/11 | 1998 - People thought Impeachment was stupid

I agree. I would also point out that in 1998, Clinton's approvals were over 60% (and over 65% in Oct/Nov 1998). That was probably why people disagreed with impeachment in the first place. It's really quite amazing that Republicans thought the impeachment of a popular president would be a winning issue to begin with 

If Republicans managed to neutralize this wave with Trump having his approval ratings underwater, that would be the first time in history that it has happened - or at least since polling became a thing.

[Virginiá]

New Jersey Congressional Ballot, Stockton Poll 3/22-29

https://stockton.edu/hughes-center/polling/documents/2018-0404-poll-wfs-2.pdf

Democrats - 48
Republicans - 32

D+16.

In 2016, Democrats won 54-46 (D+8) in the House of Representatives vote in the state of New Jersey.

For all the talk of California and Texas get the path to the house might end up running through NJ and Pennsylvania

We'll see. Democrats will probably need to get D+16 or more to have a major sweep of NJ House seats. The most they've gotten over the past 10 years is something like D+13 -/+

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_New_Jersey,_2012
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_New_Jersey,_2008

Lucky for Republicans, NJ is not as consistently Democratic downballot as it is at the presidential level.

[Virginiá]

Also, fwiw, the 2017 legislative elections do give us hope for a possible House sweep in November. They did considerably better than Murphy:

Senate popular vote: D+18.4
General Assembly popular vote: D+16.7

If Democrats could win by 18 points, I think that might get the delegation to at least 11-1

Related: Does anyone have a congressional district map of the New Jersey gubernatorial election results?

https://twitter.com/jmilescoleman/status/930443967627517952