2018 Congressional Generic Ballot and House Polls Megathread - Part 3

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

This race isn't getting triaged. These polls are great for the GOP to be only down 3 in a Dem internal.

LMAO down 3 points, GCB in the district is D+10, Axne winning 22% of Republicans. Young would be lucky to lose by less than 10 points at this point.

If Iowa ends up with a 3-1 Dem Congressional delegation come January 2019, it becomes a swing state in 2020.

A 4-0 Dem Congressional delegation is not out of the question. Steve King could lose.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Talley Sergent actually competitive?

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Come on IA-04, please do the country a massive favor, and remove Steve King from Congress.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/1047497649446965248

Yikes!

This District voted for Romney by more than Romney won statewide!!!!!

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

To be honest, I find the potential consequences towards the future of the Senate not flipping in 2018 to be extremely horrifying, regardless of how well Democrats do overall. To me, Republicans holding the Senate automatically means that it was a disastrous year.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

<trolling>

Enough with your trolling. People are tired of listening to your trolling.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

<trolling>

Enough with your trolling. People are tired of listening to your trolling.

This is why I have him on Ignore.

That is a good idea actually. I just added him to my ignore list. Thank you for the idea.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Anyone see that wild CLF poll with Hurd up by 25?

Junk poll.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

FL-26 DCCC/GBA Strategies: Mucarsel-Powell (D) 50, Curbelo (R-inc) 48

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/mucarsel-powell-narrowly-leads-curbelo-dccc-poll-floridas-26th-district

Note: This is separate from DMP's own recent internal showing her up 49-48.

Does anyone think Dems could win FL-26 and lose FL-27? Or were Dems just concern trolling by releasing the polls showing a close race in FL-27?

Perhaps Democrats released their worst FL-27 internal because they wanted to lure Republicans into burning money there.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

I have had WI-07 at just Lean R for a while at this point. Sean Duffy leading by 7 seems a bit high to me if anything.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

North Carolina (SurveyUSA):

Democrats 48
Republicans 43

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=3ce61747-3fa0-497c-8112-436784634eb4

With NC being R+3 in PVI, this translates to a national margin being D+8.

Actually, it would be D+11 since PVI of R+3 means that a nationally tied election would give the area a 53-47 R win.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

The Barr +2 R internal and the McGrath +7 D internal both say the exact same thing when the deduct 4/5 points for an internal rule is applied to both of them.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

NRCC has cancelled their ad buys in TX-23 for the remainder of the campaign. The polls must be looking very good for Hurd.

The polls must be looking really bad for Hurd. This is definitely a triage.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Reminds me of Overtime polls. Except, Overtime had the benefit of guessing the Iowa Caucus correctly so people believed they were real. But then they horribly bombed super Tuesday. Ahhhh, simpler times.

Please provide a citation for the existence of this poll thing. I want to hear more.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Reminds me of Overtime polls. Except, Overtime had the benefit of guessing the Iowa Caucus correctly so people believed they were real. But then they horribly bombed super Tuesday. Ahhhh, simpler times.

Please provide a citation for the existence of this poll thing. I want to hear more.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=224691.0

Looking back on it, they actually did a decent job at guessing both Iowa and Nevada.

But then they showed Hillary winning the Arkansas Primary by 5 points and the rest is history.

Its actually kind of fun to read some of the posters slowly piece together the fact that the guy running Overtime was just making things up.  

So much nostalgia in that thread. It's hilarious how many people bought into that obvious fake junk even after it was objectively debunked. Atlas gonna Atlas.

Even funnier is the fact that Dave Liep himself was the person who added one of their polls to the database.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Jefferson County is the whole ballgame in the Senate race.

How about St. Charles and Clay?

In an even race McCaskill is almost certainly going to win Clay County and lose St. Charles. Margins are important but I think things will be fairly predictable there. If McCaskill can win Jefferson County though, that will take a big bite out of Hawley's votes margin, and if she can run up a lead there, it will make a big difference.

Will Ann Wagner win?

Ann Wagner will probably win unless McCaskill is carrying the District by at least 20 points.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Lets see how different their GA-06 poll is from the probably fake Coronado Poll.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Holding the Senate was supposed to be a longshot for Republicans ever since they lost Alabama.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Honestly, given how absurd the early voting turnout has been in some states, and the predictions of the highest midterm turnout in ~50 years, if that is indeed the case, I could see Democrats over-performing their generic ballot numbers. Normally I'd be skeptical of that in a midterm due to the demographics of the Dem coalition, but high turnout absolutely makes that possible.

How does HIGH turnout benefit Democrats this cycle?! Democrats are clearly more enthused about the elections this year, and this means that if we have a low turnout election, it is because Republicans are not showing up. I want low turnout.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Honestly, given how absurd the early voting turnout has been in some states, and the predictions of the highest midterm turnout in ~50 years, if that is indeed the case, I could see Democrats over-performing their generic ballot numbers. Normally I'd be skeptical of that in a midterm due to the demographics of the Dem coalition, but high turnout absolutely makes that possible.

How does HIGH turnout benefit Democrats this cycle?! Democrats are clearly more enthused about the elections this year, and this means that if we have a low turnout election, it is because Republicans are not showing up. I want low turnout.

That was my thought as well—that a best case scenario is enthused Democrats and Independents voting Democrat, but depressed Republican turnout. High turnout to me means Republicans are showing up to support their guy.

I would think high turnout means more young people / POC are voting. Older and wealthier people pretty much vote in every election, and they are more Republican-leaning. The parts of society that fill in the gaps made between presidential -> midterm years are disproportionately Democratic.

You are probably speaking from a skewed memory that remembers 2014 and 2010 in more detail because they were more recent, and therefore, putting more weight into what happened those years compared to other midterms.