2022 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread

[wbrocks67]

FWIW, Civiqs has remained steady

https://twitter.com/DrewLinzer/status/1585671635851280385

[wbrocks67]

Damn, no wonder Scheller dropped $700K of her own money into the race. Wild raised $500K+ in just 18 days!

https://twitter.com/CATargetAlt/status/1585699342131859475

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1585708567344009216

Time to read the tea leaves, everyone.

I'm shocked Greg Price of all people is posting this, considering it makes Dems look.... not bad.

[wbrocks67]

Also figure there may have been a sugar high of sorts in GA after the initial Walker allegations (averaging going up to above Warnock +4) and now it's coming back down to earth.

[wbrocks67]

Also figure there may have been a sugar high of sorts in GA after the initial Walker allegations (averaging going up to above Warnock +4) and now it's coming back down to earth.

Look at the last several polls. It’s literally all the trash ones on the right.

https://twitter.com/vanceulrich/status/1585843044011515905?s=46&t=ZHoLiKYYsgAIRxzKT9NGUg

I also don’t understand why anyone is taking GOP pollsters at their word on CA-27, this one has no business being in a lean R category.

This is misinformation

CA-27 2020 at this time: 52% D 25% R
CA-27 now: 46% D 32% R

R +13 shift

CA-47 2020: 45% D 28% R
CA-47 now: 42% D 34% R

R +9 shift

CA-49 2020: 46% D 29% R
CA-49 now: 41% D 36% R

R +12 shift

Southern California is the single biggest GOP over-performance at this time.

are these using old lines vs new lines?
also, do you have links for 2020 early vote?

[wbrocks67]

538's pre-election survey using Ipsos is D+1, 49-48.

An Ipsos poll with less than 30% undecided? It's not possible!

[wbrocks67]

These are the latest reports from 10/1-10/19:

GA:
Warnock (D) $12.2M
Walker (R) $5.9M

NV:
Masto (D) $9.1M
Laxalt (R) $2.2M

OH:
Ryan (D) $9.1M
Vance (R) $2.3M

PA:
Fetterman (D) $8.8M
Oz (R) $5.5M - includes $1.5M loan

FL
Demings (D) $7.8M
Rubio (R) $2.4M

WI
Barnes (D) $8.5M
Johnson (R) $2.6M

NC
Beasley (D) $4.9M
Budd (R) $1.5M

AZ
Kelly (D) $6.3M
Masters (R) $2.4M

CO
Bennet (D) $1.2M
O’Dea (R) $754K - may include self-funding

NH
Hassan (D) $2.3M
Bolduc (R) $604K

MO
Valentine (D) $4.3M - likely includes self-funding
Schmitt (R) $525K

UT
Lee (R) $1.25M
McMullin (I) $1.2M

WA
Smiley (R) $3.7M
Murray (D) $880K

IA
Franken (D) $1.04M
Grassley (R) $490K

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FgIOXw5VsAE6AY1?format=png&name=large

[wbrocks67]

the GOP should thank god for the outside spending. That's what's helping to save them at the end of the day. These totals are mostly just horrific for many of them - Laxalt, Vance, Budd, Masters, Bolduc, even Johnson, who is usually a better fundraiser.

[wbrocks67]

D+1 from Tufts. Never heard of them, though.

https://twitter.com/stella2020woof/status/1586003478949908480

[wbrocks67]

Rasmussen is back up to R+7 today, so that put a stop to any momentum Ds had on the ballot tracker, lol.

[wbrocks67]

Something of note is that in a lot of these R+4/5 polls, they usually have women tied among D/R.

[wbrocks67]

I don't think there's more variance than normal in generic ballot polls.  It's just we perceive more variance because the race is so close.  Check out the generic ballot polls from 2006...they range from D+4 to D+20 just in the last 3 days of the campaign:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2006_generic_congressional_vote-2174.html#polls

This is an excellent point.  There's a saying that polls can tell you whether a race is close, but they can't tell you who's ahead in a close race.  Polls generate a probablistic range of support levels, and that simply doesn't map perfectly to a binary result like the outcome of an election.

This is why IMO the polls generally point to a neutral environment/tied. We're consistently seeing up to D+5 on one end, and up to R+5 on the other end.

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/stella2020woof/status/1586121712336265218?s=46&t=zQKyG7h...

[wbrocks67]

The Political Environment is much more worse then Democrats will admit to themselves.

Consider this: President Biden is going to New York State to save Kathy Hochul and to New Mexico to save Michelle Lujan-Grisham? C'mon! That doesn't pass the smell test.

This reminds me when President Obama campaigned for Pat Quinn in Illinois and Anthony Brown in Maryland during the 2014 Midterms and they both still lost + it wasn't even close in both Races.

I agree with this. Democratic leaders, strategists, and donors certainly are not on the "offensive", and are not acting as if they are leading the Generic Ballot right now. Yet there are still people who insist that Democrats are winning and that they are poised to sweep the elections in a few weeks.

Quite frankly, even if the Democrats were leading on the GCB right now, they would never be "acting" like it in public, especially after so many polling errors in the past. Even if the Dems were up by 10, there would still be an entire aura of "is it even real?"

Plainly, these days, because people are so burned by polls, only a Republican lead among polls is to be trusted. Even a Dem is leading, there is still whispers of, "but are they really?"

[wbrocks67]

The Political Environment is much more worse then Democrats will admit to themselves.

Consider this: President Biden is going to New York State to save Kathy Hochul and to New Mexico to save Michelle Lujan-Grisham? C'mon! That doesn't pass the smell test.

This reminds me when President Obama campaigned for Pat Quinn in Illinois and Anthony Brown in Maryland during the 2014 Midterms and they both still lost + it wasn't even close in both Races.

I agree with this. Democratic leaders, strategists, and donors certainly are not on the "offensive", and are not acting as if they are leading the Generic Ballot right now. Yet there are still people who insist that Democrats are winning and that they are poised to sweep the elections in a few weeks.

Quite frankly, even if the Democrats were leading on the GCB right now, they would never be "acting" like it in public, especially after so many polling errors in the past. Even if the Dems were up by 10, there would still be an entire aura of "is it even real?"

Plainly, these days, because people are so burned by polls, only a Republican lead among polls is to be trusted. Even a Dem is leading, there is still whispers of, "but are they really?"

The Democratic campaigns are probably seeing concerning numbers in their own internals, and are acting accordingly. I would expect for there to be a much more aggressive investment of Democratic time, money, and resources into Republican-leaning districts and states if they truly felt that they held a dominating lead in the Generic Ballot. Instead - aside from the Hofmeister-Stitt rate in Oklahoma and the Oz-Fetterman race in Pennsylvania - they are clearly on the defensive at this point, and are calling in national support for their candidates in states such as Oregon, New Mexico, and now, New York, which should not be in danger for them. I don't think we would be seeing Biden and Obama going to these states if they weren't concerned about those races.

Well there was also 2020, where Democrats were kind of fooled into thinking they should go for other GOP districts than they shouldn't have, so whether or not Dems have a lead, I think it's smart just to go for the ones that you absolutely need first and foremost. Even if you have a lead or not.

Oregon is a more specific case with the GOV race, they needed to nationalize it a bit to sink Johnson and scare Dem voters back into Kotek's column. Grisham may be in a bit of trouble, but most of the polls (sans Trafalgar) and the EV don't really indicate that, and Biden may still be relatively popular in New Mexico, so may not be a huge surprise he's going.

Is Biden planning on doing a rally in New York or something? I didn't see that. I saw he did an event with Hochul/Schumer yesterday, but that looked like more of the usual small-time stuff.

[wbrocks67]

The Political Environment is much more worse then Democrats will admit to themselves.

Consider this: President Biden is going to New York State to save Kathy Hochul and to New Mexico to save Michelle Lujan-Grisham? C'mon! That doesn't pass the smell test.

This reminds me when President Obama campaigned for Pat Quinn in Illinois and Anthony Brown in Maryland during the 2014 Midterms and they both still lost + it wasn't even close in both Races.

I agree with this. Democratic leaders, strategists, and donors certainly are not on the "offensive", and are not acting as if they are leading the Generic Ballot right now. Yet there are still people who insist that Democrats are winning and that they are poised to sweep the elections in a few weeks.

Quite frankly, even if the Democrats were leading on the GCB right now, they would never be "acting" like it in public, especially after so many polling errors in the past. Even if the Dems were up by 10, there would still be an entire aura of "is it even real?"

Plainly, these days, because people are so burned by polls, only a Republican lead among polls is to be trusted. Even a Dem is leading, there is still whispers of, "but are they really?"

The Democratic campaigns are probably seeing concerning numbers in their own internals, and are acting accordingly. I would expect for there to be a much more aggressive investment of Democratic time, money, and resources into Republican-leaning districts and states if they truly felt that they held a dominating lead in the Generic Ballot. Instead - aside from the Hofmeister-Stitt rate in Oklahoma and the Oz-Fetterman race in Pennsylvania - they are clearly on the defensive at this point, and are calling in national support for their candidates in states such as Oregon, New Mexico, and now, New York, which should not be in danger for them. I don't think we would be seeing Biden and Obama going to these states if they weren't concerned about those races.

Well there was also 2020, where Democrats were kind of fooled into thinking they should go for other GOP districts than they shouldn't have, so whether or not Dems have a lead, I think it's smart just to go for the ones that you absolutely need first and foremost. Even if you have a lead or not.

Oregon is a more specific case with the GOV race, they needed to nationalize it a bit to sink Johnson and scare Dem voters back into Kotek's column. Grisham may be in a bit of trouble, but most of the polls (sans Trafalgar) and the EV don't really indicate that, and Biden may still be relatively popular in New Mexico, so may not be a huge surprise he's going.

Is Biden planning on doing a rally in New York or something? I didn't see that. I saw he did an event with Hochul/Schumer yesterday, but that looked like more of the usual small-time stuff.

https://twitter.com/redistrict/status/1586085207827890177?s=46&t=IQbLk_K4EEYQSm0QtNQP9A

I would like another round of polls. But is NV-1 just another Vegas polling problem? That might be ground zero for low response/transient population.

For NJ-7 I would like some proof, Kean has a lot of Christie’s political hacks around him with plenty of ties to national media for years.

Yeah, NV-01 is a good question. Siena undercounted Dems considerably in their 2018 NV poll, but it's possible that was an anomaly.

I'm unsure about NJ-07 too. Malinowski actually seems to be putting up a good fight. I feel like prior to the last few months, people assumed he was all but dead. He's raised way more than Kean, and the district is pretty educated. I'm not sure where the tangible signs are that he's struggling a lot.

[wbrocks67]

Honestly, that would not be a terrible House result if <45 year old composite is only 27%. That would mean a total young voter collapse.

[wbrocks67]

It would be deliciously hilarious if this year is somewhat a reverse of 2020 when Dems waded into areas that they thought were competitive that weren't, spent money they shouldn't have, and then realized they could've used that money for districts that actually mattered.

I don't think Brownley is actually in trouble, but it is interesting to note that the Biden #s inflate it quite a bit. The vote in the primary was only D+8.

[wbrocks67]

Still some conflicting data, but based on the spending decisions by both D and R national groups and the trends in certain statewide races/polls (NY-GOV, WA-SEN, FL, etc.), I’m increasingly getting the impression that the bottom is falling out for Democrats. Not changing my prediction of a 'normal' R-leaning night (52R-48D in the Senate, ∼240R-195D in the House) yet, but I think a complete GOP sweep (54R-46D in the Senate, ∼250R-185D in the House) is a very possible outcome at this point.

I think it also surprisingly hasn't been brought up that no one is really connected the NY-19 polling issues this summer to the NY-GOV polling now. They could be totally unrelated, but it will be interesting to look at in hindsight depending on what happens.

[wbrocks67]

Is PA-12 literally just because of the Mike Doyle name sharing?

Yep

[wbrocks67]

NRSC spending in CT. HMP spending in NY25. Maybe it's possible that both sides are making some ridiculous spending mistakes right now!

https://twitter.com/MediumBuying/status/1587245416072060928

[wbrocks67]

GOP is certainly getting cocky, and we saw that how worked out for Dems in 2020.

[wbrocks67]

GCB polling:

Morning Consult midterm tracker - tied - 46/46
https://morningconsult.com/2022-midterm-elections-tracker/

Cygnal (R) - R+2 - 49/47
https://www.cygn.al/october-national-voter-trends-panel/

Fabrizio(R)/Impact (D) - R+2 - 46/44
https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-prospects-rise-amid-economic-pessimism-wsj-poll-finds-11667295002?st=vg18ueadts8mbog&reflink=article_copyURL_share

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/pollsterguy/status/1587403364077273089

Enough said! Bill is right. Democrats not releasing their own Data because things are looking increasingly grim.

That's not really an accurate picture of it though - most of the GOP polls being released are not internals. A few are, but so are a few D ones.

Most of the GOP polls that are coming out from outlets that lean R or partner with GOP outfits (like Insider Advantage, not a GOP poll, but partners with right wing websites, etc.) Same with co/efficient, Wick, etc. They're not internals.

[wbrocks67]

Is Democrats internal polling varying wildly from public polling or something?

https://twitter.com/ercovey/status/1587504980445085700