2018 Congressional Generic Ballot and House Polls Megathread - the original

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

The southern realignment didn't actually finish completion until 2012. Many Arkansas dems held on even in 2010.

I guess you could say it didn't end until 2014 if you count John Barrow somehow surviving until then... but I wouldn't.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Thank god. Finally a high quality pollster.

Looks like PA-01 is a tossup with Fitzpatrick slightly favored

I hope Monmouth does a bunch of other polls.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

GOP party favorability is 43-47

Dem party favorability is 44-44

That's... unusually high for both parties.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

What makes Fitzpatrick so popular?

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Rossi is a strong candidate and would be a good rep, just like Reichert was. He won't win by as much as he's polling now, but probably wins by about 2-3%.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Love will win imo. That district is very conservative and they have finally started liking her

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Love will win imo. That district is very conservative and they have finally started liking her

Why aren’t they telling pollsters, then?

Lol, she's been winning every poll even vs a fantastic recruit like McAdams. This district is v conservative. Yes, Love barely won in 2014, but she improved a lot in 2016 and is still winning every poll

Mcadams is winning indies 60-25 and still not winning... that just goes to show how repub this district is

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Also from NBC/Wall Street Journal:

Democrats didn't end up turning out that well in 2006, though. They just landslided among independents.

And while the 2014 dem enthusiasm was about the same as 2010, dems turned out way worse in 2014 than 2010 (2010 wave was more independents massively going GOP... dems turned out *okay* in 2010).

I think the enthusiasm question is honestly not helpful at all for figuring out turnout. My theory is that dems will have a 2-3 pt dem favored turnout gap in places where their base skews old (rural white midwest generally), and a 1-2 pt gop favored turnout gap in places where their base skews very very young (Orange County, Suburban TX)

College educated white dems will turn out very well... miniorities will probably have a bit lower turnout (specifically Latinos who skew younger than other races).

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Glad to see Joe Manchin get a sex change and run in Ohio as a Green

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Crickets from all the concern trolls and conservative pundits now, lol.

The new evidence does suggest movement toward the Dems. However, I thought GCB didn't matter, since all we have to do is average special elections and that's better than taking surveys?

Combine the two IMO

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Crickets from all the concern trolls and conservative pundits now, lol.

The new evidence does suggest movement toward the Dems. However, I thought GCB didn't matter, since all we have to do is average special elections and that's better than taking surveys?

Combine the two IMO

Yeah, special elections seem like reasonable indicators when you have a lot of them, and combined with the GCB + other more indirect factors like fundraising, recruitment, party that controls the WH, they are useful for indicating potential.

-

To mencken's post - Republicans were leaning heavily on the GCB to back their anti-Dem wave claims, so it stands to reason that once the GCB swings against them again, their narrative falls apart.

For us Democrats who have argued a wave is coming based on numerous factors, such as special elections, the GCB, and the stuff I mentioned above, this is just one more reason for us to stand by our predictions.

My issue with using the specials average is they are highly inaccurate if the environment changes significantly near the end. If the environment is consistent, though, they are usually a slightly better (but still flawed) indicator of the midterm results than the GCB.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Crickets from all the concern trolls and conservative pundits now, lol.

The new evidence does suggest movement toward the Dems. However, I thought GCB didn't matter, since all we have to do is average special elections and that's better than taking surveys?

Combine the two IMO

Yeah, special elections seem like reasonable indicators when you have a lot of them, and combined with the GCB + other more indirect factors like fundraising, recruitment, party that controls the WH, they are useful for indicating potential.

-

To mencken's post - Republicans were leaning heavily on the GCB to back their anti-Dem wave claims, so it stands to reason that once the GCB swings against them again, their narrative falls apart.

For us Democrats who have argued a wave is coming based on numerous factors, such as special elections, the GCB, and the stuff I mentioned above, this is just one more reason for us to stand by our predictions.

My issue with using the specials average is they are highly inaccurate if the environment changes significantly near the end. If the environment is consistent, though, they are usually a slightly better (but still flawed) indicator of the midterm results than the GCB.

And how do you know if the environment changes?

If the GCB goes from say, an average of D+8 in June to R+2 in Oct, it's obvious that the environment has changed.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

It definitely got him through the primary.

It did make him weaker in the general, but he was vs Hillary, so he was still able to win anyways.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

It definitely got him through the primary.

It did make him weaker in the general, but he was vs Hillary, so he was still able to win anyways.

He got through the primary due to
     
       1. Divided Field
       2. Democrat help : http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-reveals-dnc-elevated-trump-to-help-clinton/
       3. Joe Scarborough and his girlfriend Mika
       4. Jeb Bush, Joe Scarborough, and Cuz destruction of Rubio the only candidate who could have defeated both Trump and Hillary.  I admit Rubio assisted.  But a united front would have carried him through.

I dunno. I think Ted Cruz would have been the only person who could beat him in a 1v1. And even then I doubt it. Trump got in the high 40s despite the divided field.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

Why would a Trump + 11 seat be a bellweather when Hillary won by 2, and the average seat is only 2.1 points to the right of Hillary's results.

Sure, it's an open seat, but Balderson seems like a better candidate than O'Connor.