Virginia Mega Thread: The Youngkin Administration

[wbrocks67]

People here are really taking a Youngkin internal at face value?

It IMO gives us more value than Early Voting #s to be honest.

Except for the fact that early voting #s are actual votes, versus an internal from a campaign, that can really juiced up #s that may or may not be close to reality.

And I've maintained that as far as we can tell, the only thing we can definitively glean from the EV is that both sides are engaged.

[wbrocks67]

This is pretty cool

https://twitter.com/mcbyrne/status/1455309096538845187

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/MaryMargOlohan/status/1455340686182584327?s=20

https://twitter.com/justinhintontv/status/1455340064452587522?s=20

Doesn't look all that big to me....

Idk, it's definitely bigger than TMac's "rally", but as other users have already said, rallies don't matter

T-Mac's final rally looks like the biggest one he's had since the Biden rally, just FYI. lmao but in reality, crowd size means nothing

https://twitter.com/MarkHerringVA/status/1455323196362739716

[wbrocks67]

I do think it's curious that Q-pac likely spiked their poll.

Makes me think it might've had a T-Mac lead, because if they found a Youngkin lead of like +6, it wouldn't be the only one, since Fox also had one.

[wbrocks67]

Early votes and mail ballots are being counted as we speak, so both should be among the first batches to dump tonight.

Should also be noted that initial exit polls may skew R a bit. The initial CA exit poll for example had Biden +15 approval, but ended up at +23 approval by the end of it.

But I'm gonna try and compile exit poll data for 2016-present to compare to initials tonight just for fun

[wbrocks67]

"X didn't publish poll - must be a good news for T-Mac!". You basically unskew the non-existence of a poll!  

Why would they spike a Youngkin lead when most polls we've gotten in recent days either have a low Youngkin lead or Fox with a +8 Youngkin lead? Media says he has the 'momentum', so a T-Mac lead would certainly go more against the grain

[wbrocks67]

Here is past election exit polls for VA:

MEN
2016: R+9
2017: R+2
2018: R+1
2020: D+1

FEMALES
2016: D+17
2017: D+22
2018: D+31
2020: D+23

18-29
2016: D+18
2017: D+39
2018: D+36
2020: D+29

30-44
2016: D+13
2017: D+24
2018: D+23
2020: D+20

45-64
2016: R+3
2017: R+1
2018: D+5
2020: D+5

65+
2016: R+7
2017: R+6
2018: D+14
2020: R+9

Whites
2016 (67%): R+24
2017 (67%): R+15
2018 (68%): R+10
2020 (67%): R+8

Blacks
2016 (21%): D+79
2017 (20%): D+75
2018 (22%): D+84
2020 (18%): D+79

Latino
2016 (6%): D+35
2017 (6%): D+35
2018 (6%): n/a
2020 (7%): D+25

White College+
2016: R+4
2017: D+3
2018: D+4
2020: D+7

Democrats
2016 (40%): D+86
2017 (41%): D+94
2018 (38%): D+92
2020 (36%): D+92

Republicans
2016 (33%): R+82
2017 (30%): R+91
2018 (31%): R+78
2020 (34%): R+81

Indies
2016 (26%): R+5
2017 (28%): R+3
2018 (31%): D+14
2020 (30%): D+19

[wbrocks67]

What's interesting to me most is the Whites -

Whites
2016 (67%): R+24
2017 (67%): R+15
2018 (68%): R+10
2020 (67%): R+8

Most polls this year have expected Whites to be 70-72% of the electorate, which would be more than the 4 most recent elections.

Depends on black turnout too. They've gone from as low as 18% but as high as 22%.

[wbrocks67]

"X didn't publish poll - must be a good news for T-Mac!". You basically unskew the non-existence of a poll!  

Why would they spike a Youngkin lead when most polls we've gotten in recent days either have a low Youngkin lead or Fox with a +8 Youngkin lead? Media says he has the 'momentum', so a T-Mac lead would certainly go more against the grain

You can apply same logic and say they had Youngkin +15.

The main point, though, that there is 0 (zero) evidence, they've "spiked their poll", but you pretend, that it's almost a fact. "likely". Eh, whatever.

Dude put me on ignore if you're that upset over my posts.

[wbrocks67]

Turnout reports begin!

Almost 200 voters at Falls Church at 7am

https://twitter.com/davebjerke/status/1455493940975706114

[wbrocks67]

Let's flash back to Election Day 2017, when certain "pundits" wrote of "exit poll data" that "didn't look good for Northam"....at midday.  

Be wary of your sources and use common sense, folks

(Now, back to reading about children who were kidnapped by Bigfoot.)

Yeah, I explicitly remember Ben Tribbet on election day being like

> Morning: looks great for Northam!
> Midday: omg! looks terrible Northam!
> afternoon: omg! looks great for northam!

i was like wut

[wbrocks67]

High election day turnout is bad for McAuliffe.

Not in Falls Church.

Yeah, I'm much more interested in the SW turnout. It appears the super white liberal areas are seeing good turnout.

[wbrocks67]

This is the same guy who was a mess election day 2017.

This time, he's not including the nearly 2,000 VBM votes in Charlottesville on top of the 4500 early votes.

https://twitter.com/notlarrysabato/status/1455532521207250945

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1455534831861964808?s=20

So based on early reports, it seems turnout is looking pretty comparable to 2017.

[wbrocks67]

To illustrate why this is useless, Dave Wasserman of all people just tweeted out something about dems underperforming in Chartsoville that was based on a misunderstanding of a data-set that didn't include early votes.

did he backtrack? you'd think Wasserman at least would know better

[wbrocks67]

Wasserman is predicting 2.8M-3.1M total turnout, but 2M on Election Day seems unlikely.

[wbrocks67]

Expectation setting from McCarthy?

https://twitter.com/Olivia_Beavers/status/1455542966035140617

[wbrocks67]

If anything, it looks like we're aiming for 2.5-2.6M, aka 2017 turnout. Could be wrong, but even 2.8M seems like a heavy lift.

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/notlarrysabato/status/1455553552743604232?s=21

what the hell does this tweet even mean? 

This is the guy who was a hot mess in 2017 and was dooming in the middle of the day saying turnout looked terrible for Dems/Northam.

[wbrocks67]

Expectation setting from McCarthy?

https://twitter.com/Olivia_Beavers/status/1455542966035140617

He's right though.  A close loss is a win for Republicans and signals big gains next year.  A win tonight signals even larger gains for them next year.

A close loss means nothing but the fact that Biden and Dems are unpopular right now b/c they're not getting anything through. A lot can change in an entire year.

Look at Biden - in August he still had a +7 approval on average. Now it's -7. That's a 14% change in just 2 months. A lot can happen - good or bad - between now and next November

[wbrocks67]

I have very little interest in any one side winning, as I'm just observer, but it strikes me as very bizarre to declare quasi-victory at 10:30 before any vote counts are revealed. Why set yourself up for such potential failure?

Hugh Hewitt has been a hot mess for years now, so not too surprising there

[wbrocks67]

This is a bloodbath.
https://twitter.com/notlarrysabato/status/1455532521207250945?s=21

We already talked about this on the last page. This guy didn't include the 2000+ VBM that were counted (or that are still coming)

[wbrocks67]

What was Falls Church turnout in 2017 and 2020?

[wbrocks67]

Bruh... If this is true... I wish
https://twitter.com/nedryun/status/1455555600990056452?s=20

Source: Someones A**

Twitter bio:

Conservative Christian. Love @BeccaRyun. Dad of 4. Jayhawk. CEO @AM_National, @VoterGravity
. @theamgreatness Senior Fellow.

[wbrocks67]

Sounds like a turnout surge in Republican areas.

https://twitter.com/notlarrysabato/status/1455557554856202245

Again, he could be right, he could be wrong. But his prognostications were a mess on election day 2017.