2020 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread v2

[WD]

Generic ballot - USC Dornsife

Democratic 49.5% (-1.2)
Republican 45.6% (+0.9)

https://election.usc.edu/

It looks like some people are going to vote for Biden and Republican Congresspeople in order to "put a check on Biden". Of course, these people are idiots.

Ummm, Dems are ahead in the GCB?

Not to mention, the USC poll has been kinda noisy the past couple days. It was sitting at D+8 for like 2-3 weeks straight according to 538 so it appears this is just a likely wonky sample

RCP and 538 have the GCB at around D+7, which is exactly what Biden’s lead is. They will be few if any people voting for a “check” on Biden. Ticket splitting will not really be prominent in this election.

[VAR]

Generic ballot - USC Dornsife

Democrat 50.1% (+0.6)
Republican 45.3% (-0.3)

https://election.usc.edu/

[wbrocks67]

Generic ballot - USC Dornsife

Democratic 49.5% (-1.2)
Republican 45.6% (+0.9)

https://election.usc.edu/

It looks like some people are going to vote for Biden and Republican Congresspeople in order to "put a check on Biden". Of course, these people are idiots.

Ummm, Dems are ahead in the GCB?

Not to mention, the USC poll has been kinda noisy the past couple days. It was sitting at D+8 for like 2-3 weeks straight according to 538 so it appears this is just a likely wonky sample

RCP and 538 have the GCB at around D+7, which is exactly what Biden’s lead is. They will be few if any people voting for a “check” on Biden. Ticket splitting will not really be prominent in this election.

Especially when most polls show people are equally likely to think Trump/biden will win, and in many circumstances, more think Trump will actually win.

[VAR]

Generic ballot - USC Dornsife

Democrat 50.4% (+0.3)
Republican 45.2% (-0.1)

https://election.usc.edu/

[VAR]

DCCC reserves another $2.6 million.

San Antonio (TX-21, TX-23): $1.0M
Atlanta (GA-06, GA-07): $771K
New York City (NY-02): $650K
Binghamton, Syracuse & Utica (NY-22): $340K
Indianapolis (IN-05): $90K
Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Des Moines & Rochester (IA-01): $35K
Amarillo, Albuquerque, El Paso, Odessa (NM-02): $30K

[VAR]

Generic ballot - USC Dornsife

Democrat 50.7% (+0.3)
Republican 44.4% (-0.

[VAR]

Generic ballot - Economist/YouGov

LV
Democrat 48%
Republican 41%

RV
Democrat 46% (-5)
Republican 39% (+1)

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/8nwf5tw7g2/econTabReport.pdf

[wbrocks67]

Civiqs tracker - 9/8

Dems 52
Reps 43

https://civiqs.com/results/vote_house_generic_2020?uncertainty=true&annotations=true&zoomIn=true

[Roll Roons]

Politico also came out with House and Senate rating changes today. Predictably for this cycle, most of them are in favor of Dems. 

House leftward:
AK-AL (Likely R to Lean)
AZ-06 (Lean R to Tossup)
CA-03, CA-24, CA-31 and CA-36 (All Likely D to Safe)
CA-39 (Tossup to Lean D)
CO-03 (Likely R to Lean)
CT-02 (Likely D to Safe)
GA-06 (Tossup to Lean D)
IN-05 (Lean R to Tossup)
KS-02 (Likely R to Lean)
MI-08 (Tossup to Lean D)
MT-AL (Likely R to Lean)
NE-01 (Safe R to Likely)
NE-02 (Lean R to Tossup)
NJ-02 (Lean R to Tossup)
NY-02 and NY-24 (Lean R to Tossup)
NC-11 (Safe R to Likely)
OH-10 and OH-12 (Both Likely R to Lean)
SC-02 (Safe R to Likely)
WA-10 (Likely D to Safe)

House rightward:
FL-25 (Likely R to Safe)
FL-26 (Lean D to Tossup)
IA-02 (Lean D to Tossup)
WA-03 (Lean R to Likely)

Senate:
CO (Tossup to Lean D)
KS (Likely R to Lean)
SC (Likely R to Lean)
TN (Likely R to Safe)

[MT Treasurer]

Senate:
CO (Tossup to Lean D)

Bold.

[wbrocks67]

Generic ballot - USC/Dornsife

Dem 50.8 (+0.1)
Rep 44.0 (-0.4)

[VAR]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

[SnowLabrador]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

[wbrocks67]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

LV sample is subjective, since we don't know their LV screen, but their +6 RV is not that much different from the May +8.

[ElectionsGuy]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

[wbrocks67]

USC Dornsife

Dem 51
Rep 44

[Mr.Phips]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

Lol the House ain’t flipping if Biden wins.

[ElectionsGuy]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

Lol the House ain’t flipping if Biden wins.

Right. I didn't say that.

[MT Treasurer]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

Or maybe it’s just one poll (didn’t you bash Monmouth before because they’re supposedly way too D-friendly/have way too small sample sizes?) and we’d do well to track the average instead (as of today, it’s +6.5 according to FiveThirtyEight and +6.0 according to RealClearPolitics)?

Besides, polling of individual races is more in line with a D+7-9 environment than a +3-4 one, and both parties aren’t exactly behaving like they expect the House to be very competitive. It would take a red wave to narrowly flip the House, especially given how awful Republican recruitment and strategy has been in many of these races, but there’s no reason to believe there will be a red wave this year.

[Landslide Lyndon]

We had the same conversation back in July when the NBC/WSJ poll was D+4.
When something looks like an outlier then it's probably an outlier.

[ElectionsGuy]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

Or maybe it’s just one poll (didn’t you bash Monmouth before because they’re supposedly way too D-friendly/have way too small sample sizes?) and we’d do well to track the average instead (as of today, it’s +6.5 according to FiveThirtyEight and +6.0 according to RealClearPolitics)?

Besides, polling of individual races is more in line with a D+7-9 environment than a +3-4 one, and both parties aren’t exactly behaving like they expect the House to be very competitive. It would take a red wave to narrowly flip the House, especially given how awful Republican recruitment and strategy has been in many of these races, but there’s no reason to believe there will be a red wave this year.

It is one poll, and yes Monmouth does have a slight D bias and small samples. The fact that it's a +4 D lead with Likely voters should be notable. I'm not predicting that's whats going to happen (see the bolded above). I'm pointing out that it's a critical point where the House comes into play, and that tightening has become a trend. But to you, it seems pointing something out is conflated with a prediction, as you recommended a post that was a strawman. This isn't the first time either.

We haven't had very much polling in House races this year, and most of it has been internals for either party. Given that Republicans didn't even realize a lot of races that got no attention were competitive in '16, I don't expect many of them to realize some of their targets this year either. Their party elites are even more out of touch with reality than the Democrats, so it's not surprising. If a D+3 PV is a "red wave" (which is where the house could flip) than I don't know what else to say.

[Xing]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

While I would normally agree, I do think that Republicans are targeting the wrong seats to have a real shot at the House if the PV is D+4. They'd gain seats, yes, but the fact that they're not paying much attention to seats like PA-08 or WI-03, while going heavily after seats like CA-21, CA-39, FL-26, TX-07, etc. suggests that they're too focused on gaining back seats that are probably lost for them in the current alignment while ignoring seats that they didn't win in 2016 but that are trending their way and could be winnable. They also haven't done a great job with recruitment this cycle, with a few notable exceptions.

[VAR]

Opinium - Generic ballot

Democrat 53% (-3)
Republican 46% (+3)

https://www.opinium.com/resource-center/bidens-bounce-fades-but-retains-lead-over-trump/

[wbrocks67]

Generic ballot - Monmouth

LV
Democrat 49%
Republican 45%

RV
Democrat 49%
Republican 43%

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/documents/monmouthpoll_us_091020.pdf/

This is terrifying.

A +3/+4 lead is right around where the House flips. Not even kidding, this is getting way less attention than it needs to get. Before the summer the Democrats often did better in the generic ballot than Biden did in the presidential, now it seems to be the opposite in most polls. I would still bet on the House remaining Democratic of course but these kinds of margins suggest the Democrats will definitely net lose seats, not gain seats like I've seen so many times on this forum. It also suggests some of these Dem internals for CDs are completely out of line with reality, as I've pointed out recently (and people have gotten upset and tried to defend the polling which suggests 10-20 point Dem trends in multiple Republican leaning districts)

Or maybe it’s just one poll (didn’t you bash Monmouth before because they’re supposedly way too D-friendly/have way too small sample sizes?) and we’d do well to track the average instead (as of today, it’s +6.5 according to FiveThirtyEight and +6.0 according to RealClearPolitics)?

Besides, polling of individual races is more in line with a D+7-9 environment than a +3-4 one, and both parties aren’t exactly behaving like they expect the House to be very competitive. It would take a red wave to narrowly flip the House, especially given how awful Republican recruitment and strategy has been in many of these races, but there’s no reason to believe there will be a red wave this year.

It is one poll, and yes Monmouth does have a slight D bias and small samples. The fact that it's a +4 D lead with Likely voters should be notable. I'm not predicting that's whats going to happen (see the bolded above). I'm pointing out that it's a critical point where the House comes into play, and that tightening has become a trend. But to you, it seems pointing something out is conflated with a prediction, as you recommended a post that was a strawman. This isn't the first time either.

We haven't had very much polling in House races this year, and most of it has been internals for either party. Given that Republicans didn't even realize a lot of races that got no attention were competitive in '16, I don't expect many of them to realize some of their targets this year either. Their party elites are even more out of touch with reality than the Democrats, so it's not surprising. If a D+3 PV is a "red wave" (which is where the house could flip) than I don't know what else to say.

Eh, I wouldn't say Monmouth has a D bias this cycle. If anything, most of their state polls besides the July PA one have had a bit of an R slant, especially the GA and IA polls.

[MT Treasurer]

It is one poll, and yes Monmouth does have a slight D bias and small samples. The fact that it's a +4 D lead with Likely voters should be notable. I'm not predicting that's whats going to happen (see the bolded above). I'm pointing out that it's a critical point where the House comes into play, and that tightening has become a trend. But to you, it seems pointing something out is conflated with a prediction, as you recommended a post that was a strawman. This isn't the first time either.

We haven't had very much polling in House races this year, and most of it has been internals for either party. Given that Republicans didn't even realize a lot of races that got no attention were competitive in '16, I don't expect many of them to realize some of their targets this year either. Their party elites are even more out of touch with reality than the Democrats, so it's not surprising. If a D+3 PV is a "red wave" (which is where the house could flip) than I don't know what else to say.

I use the "recommend" option to express "agree" rather than "like" (otherwise I’d be way more hesitant about using it because it does create a toxic atmosphere in many cases). Anyway, my point was more that if you consider Monmouth’s methodology fundamentally flawed, why would you trust their numbers in this particular case? In some of your previous posts, you’ve even suggested that pollsters aren’t trying to reach Republican voters, yet you’re quick to buy into national polling whenever it suits your narrative of a tight race/more Republican-friendly environment.

I agree with you that Republican strategists are completely incompetent and unable to come up with an effective target map which isn’t based on districts' PVIs/voting patterns from three elections ago, but I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Republicans have been releasing far fewer internals than Democrats this cycle and would instead take that as a sign that the environment hasn’t markedly improved for the party since 2018, although I’m sure you’ll disagree. You could also make a case that a 3-4-point PV loss won’t be enough to actually flip the House due to the redrawn Congressional maps under the Trump presidency, Republican recruitment failures, an ineffectual Republican strategy/target map (see xingkerui's post), the proportion of Democratic/Republican incumbents as opposed to two years ago, and the sheer number of Democratic pick-up opportunities in TX alone.

It’s completely reasonable to predict that Republicans will hold the Senate, but I don’t see how the math is there in the House this year. They could come close on a good night, but even narrowly flipping it would require an unprecedented (for this cycle) shift in the environment. We can debate what constitutes a "red wave" until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is that the absolute best-case scenario for Republicans is still a much closer result than any Democratic best-case scenario.

In any case, I don’t see why polling would suddenly tighten from +6-8 to +3 when this kind of Democratic environment has been stable for years now. Maybe I’d be more inclined to subscribe to your theory if 2018 hadn’t been such an unmitigated disaster for Republicans or at least seen significant tightening in the home stretch, but this seems to me to be a case of wishful thinking on your part when one considers the big picture (although I’d love to be proven wrong).