Congressional Primary Results Megathread: AR, GA, KY & TX (Runoff) - May 22

[Nyvin]

Texas usually has horrendous turnout in elections overall, let's hope there is a surge in turnout just for the sake of that fact.

[Nyvin]

Democrats could double their turnout from 2014, but there is no enthusiasm. HAHAHA!

O'Rourke would need to get more votes than Cruz to show there's any enthusiasm according to some on here.

[Nyvin]

Democrats could double their turnout from 2014, but there is no enthusiasm. HAHAHA!

Republicans are extremely talented at deluding themselves. Just look at how many of them sincerely believe that Trump cares about poor people, lol

The only delusion here is the fact that GOP percentages have been maintained from previous years  and the red avatars here haven't countered the fact with hard numbers.

The 2012 primary for Senate was 1,406,648 votes for the GOP and 497,487 votes for the Democrats.   (Dems got 26% of the total)

The 2014 primary for Senate was 1,314,556 votes for the GOP and 510,009 votes for the Democrats.  (Dems got 28% of the total)

Even by the wildest swings going forward it's going to be a big improvement for Dems tonight.  

Currently it's 1,114,434 for the GOP and 711,300 for the Democrats (Dems getting ~39% of total) with roughly 44% of results in.

[Nyvin]

The only delusion here is the fact that GOP percentages have been maintained from previous years  and the red avatars here haven't countered the fact with hard numbers.

Special elections are notorious for being won based on which side is fired up the most, and it does indeed point to a surge of enthusiasm on the left. You don't even need raw turnout numbers for that either. You can tell by the surge of candidates and fundraising as well.

If the final TX numbers are standard for Democrats, then maybe at best, all you've established is that Texas Democrats aren't as fired up as the national environment. If you're going to make this argument, consider all factors and not turnout numbers from one state during a primary.

I wasn't making any judgments about national politics or trends. As for Texas, though, there were rumblings among the Sunbelt Strategy/Hillary crowd (especially here on Atlas) that Texas was the new California...and I wanted to specifically dispute that.

That's crazy.   Texas has a loooooooong way to go before it becomes competitive.   I don't know of anyone saying Texas was going to be competitive statewide in 2018, even though Trump is historically unpopular there.

The real story here is that the state is indeed changing, the vast majority of "new votes" are going to the Democrats.  It might not be 2018 or even 2020, but Texas most definitely won't be the same state come another 6-8 years at this rate.

[Nyvin]

Why is the 32nd not considered more competitive (even compared to the 7th), considering the Republicans and Democrats just about tied in the primary there last night?

Probably since Pete Sessions is seen as the stronger incumbent compared to Culberson and Hurd

[Nyvin]

As long as TX whites vote 70+ for GOP then it will not be competitive for the near future. VA/CO flipped mainly because whites, every TX blue scenario relies on Latinos and misses the white voters in the equation.

Clinton made gains in Texas mainly on the backs of whites.

No she made gains in the margins due to many Never Trump Republicans voting for Gary Johnson

That makes no sense.   In 2012 Obama got 3,308,124 votes in Texas, in 2016 Hillary got 3,877,868.    The Republican vote barely changed from 4,569,843 Romney to 4,685,047 Trump (while the state gained over 2 million people in those four years inbetween).


Gary Johnson's vote total only went up by 200k,  even if you add all those to Trump's total (which is not statistically correct, but let's just say it is), the state still would've trended Dem.   And that ignores that Jill Stein's vote total went up by 45k as well.

[Nyvin]

As long as TX whites vote 70+ for GOP then it will not be competitive for the near future. VA/CO flipped mainly because whites, every TX blue scenario relies on Latinos and misses the white voters in the equation.

Clinton made gains in Texas mainly on the backs of whites.

No she made gains in the margins due to many Never Trump Republicans voting for Gary Johnson

I mean, a lot of Republicans in TX also crossed over for Hillary. You don't just go from -17 to -9 because of Gary Johnson (who only got 3% of the vote). Some of the suburban districts shifted over 20 points over for Hillary.

There was a pretty big margin shift (17 point margin shift in fact) among college educated whites to Hillary, so yeah, Hillary did make gains due to college educated whites.

Obama won 41.4% of vote in 2012 , Hillary won 43.2%(thats not much of an increase).

It is if you consider that she lost three points compared to Obama nationally.

It also ignores that third party vote surged.   Romney won 57% of the vote, Trump won 52%.   When the two are taken together, that's quite a shift.

[Nyvin]

Even though it's just 1%,  Ives and Rauner are actually pretty close, lol

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Nyvin]

It's really looking like Republican turnout is awful,  even with the competitive Gov primary.

[Nyvin]

Will is 100% in

I think Lipinski will hold that ~1500 margin for the remainder....unfortunately.

[Nyvin]

What this really shows is that Lipinski is NOT popular with Democrats, and that Rauner is NOT popular with Republicans.

Of course Lipinski will skate through easy re-election in November against Arthur Jones, but the future of IL-3 definitely doesn't have Dan in it.

Rauner definitely is getting squeezed by both sides,  which might make re-election a bit harder for him (it's already a difficult climb).   If he looses too much conservative support and R turnout shrugs in November he's going down.

[Nyvin]

206/210 precincts

Harris 17,036 48.51%
Pittenger 16,238 46.24%

Harris's lead is actually widening a bit.

Yeah, that's over, Pittenger lost.

[Nyvin]

Looks like Ohio and Indiana are unmitigated disasters for the Dems based on the turnout numbers, especially with Indiana practically ensuring Donnelly is a 1-termer.  

Uhhh...no, not at all.

[Nyvin]

Barletta is doing god awful against a C grade opponent.

[Nyvin]

Saccone and Morganelli losing. What a night.

Isn't Morganelli still leading or did it flip again?

[Nyvin]

What is Eastman like? As in specific issues. Is she the more progressive candidate?

She's very clearly to the left of Ashford, at least with abortion and environment.

[Nyvin]

This is shaping up to be a VERY good night for the Dems. They're outpacing the GOP in votes, Fetterman being on the ticket with wolf will boost Western PA democrats.

Lol they're losing a historically democratic seat in Washington county by 9 points.

...that Trump won by over 15%...

[Nyvin]

Wild up 800 votes with 65% in

Good...Susan Wild is the better candidate both for the Dem party and the general election. 

[Nyvin]

Ashford was lazy and a very poor campaigner.   Eastman will do fine in the GE.   Stop with all the hype.

Ashford won in 2014 due to a horrible opponent, not due to his own appeal.