POLITICO: WA primary results point to 'neutral' midterm environment

[wbrocks67]

The results in WA line up kind of perfectly with the GCB being tied right now then.

https://twitter.com/PoliticoScott/status/1559525277415473156

[Sir Mohamed]

They could be onto something, though I'm not sure we can really take primaries as a guidance for the general. The House is still very likely to flip, unfortunately.

[wbrocks67]

They could be onto something, though I'm not sure we can really take primaries as a guidance for the general. The House is still very likely to flip, unfortunately.

The article says it right there - WA primaries are different than the rest have generally been a good predictor.

[Xing]

Perhaps the most surprising thing to happen yet this cycle: Politico writes a “Dems not in disarray” article.

[RI]

Washington's primary has a slightly different electorate than its general. The primary tends to see very low independent turnout and decent partisan turnout, with Republicans usually turning out at a few percent points higher rate than Democrats. In the general, more voters of all types cast ballots. Democrats usually increase a bit more (driven by non-white and younger voters) than Republicans while independents surge and greatly increase their share of the electorate, albeit still to an overall lower level than partisans. The effects were partially off-setting: the increase in Democratic voters from the primary to the general was partially balanced by independents being somewhat more R-leaning than the overall primary electorate.

Democrats used to see a sizeable gain from the primary to the general on balance as the turnout effect dominated. As the Democratic electorate has shifted toward higher turnout, higher education voters, this gain has shrunk to essentially zero in 2018 and 2020.

This is why the primary is now a good predictor of the general: the two partisan effects almost completely counterbalance. However, the predictive power only remains until that balance is broken, internally or externally. If, for example, a particularly left-leaning set of independents were more motivated to vote in the primary, then you'd expect a more right-leaning general election set of independents to outweigh the relative surge in Dem turnout (unless Dem turnout was monstrous).

[coloradocowboi]

They could be onto something, though I'm not sure we can really take primaries as a guidance for the general. The House is still very likely to flip, unfortunately.

Well, yes but that was a foregone conclusion with the brutal, frankly racist gerrymanders put in place by Texas and Florida Republicans. Dems can’t blame themselves, moderates, or progressives for that. All we can do is fight back as hard as we can

[Xing]

However, the predictive power only remains until that balance is broken, internally or externally. If, for example, a particularly left-leaning set of independents were more motivated to vote in the primary, then you'd expect a more right-leaning general election set of independents to outweigh the relative surge in Dem turnout (unless Dem turnout was monstrous).

This is certainly true, though of course it cuts both ways. The WA-03 and WA-04 primaries are obvious examples of races where the combined D/R vote of the primary was significantly more Republican than the November election will be. There are races where this is less clear but could end up happening, like WA-08.

[wbrocks67]

However, the predictive power only remains until that balance is broken, internally or externally. If, for example, a particularly left-leaning set of independents were more motivated to vote in the primary, then you'd expect a more right-leaning general election set of independents to outweigh the relative surge in Dem turnout (unless Dem turnout was monstrous).

This is certainly true, though of course it cuts both ways. The WA-03 and WA-04 primaries are obvious examples of races where the combined D/R vote of the primary was significantly more Republican than the November election will be. There are races where this is less clear but could end up happening, like WA-08.

That's why I think it's best to just go off the Senate turnout considering that is pretty much a general proxy for D-R with likely little crossover voting.

Yet, you have some like JMC on Twitter who are convinced it should be based on house vote, despite the large evidence that especially this year there was large crossover vote.

[Senator Incitatus]

Only had time to skim this article but didn't see much mention of trends beyond:

The party vote shares in Washington primaries have been a reliable indicator of general election outcomes there over the past decade — and while Washington leans more toward Democrats than the U.S. as a whole, swings in the states’ margins over the past decade have largely mirrored the rest of the country, according to a POLITICO analysis of the results.

Without any further explanation, this seems dubious (at least as a predictive measure) in a state that has trended Democratic in every presidential election since 2000, inclusive. I buy that Washington is becoming far less predictive of the national environment much more readily than I buy that Washington is predictive of the national environment but large Republican primary turnout (and registration) advantages in nearly every other state are not.

[wbrocks67]

Only had time to skim this article but didn't see much mention of trends beyond:

The party vote shares in Washington primaries have been a reliable indicator of general election outcomes there over the past decade — and while Washington leans more toward Democrats than the U.S. as a whole, swings in the states’ margins over the past decade have largely mirrored the rest of the country, according to a POLITICO analysis of the results.

Without any further explanation, this seems dubious (at least as a predictive measure) in a state that has trended Democratic in every presidential election since 2000, inclusive. I buy that Washington is becoming far less predictive of the national environment much more readily than I buy that Washington is predictive of the national environment but large Republican primary turnout (and registration) advantages in nearly every other state are not.

I mean, one point is the NRSC claiming that Smiley had a chance because of a 'red wave.' WA had nearly 2M primary votes and Rs still lost by nearly 15% in the Senate race.

If the environment was good for Rs, you'd still expect them to put up some type of performance in that race, even in a state like WA.

[President Johnson]

This might be accurate, at least if the current picture keeps largely unchanged, but why should a single state be an indicator for the national environment? And just because it was so in the past, well... patterns remain patterns until they aren't.

[It’s so Joever]

This might be accurate, at least if the current picture keeps largely unchanged, but why should a single state be an indicator for the national environment? And just because it was so in the past, well... patterns remain patterns until they aren't.

Are you suggesting Vigo County won’t vote for the winner of the 2020 election?

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Perhaps the most surprising thing to happen yet this cycle: Politico writes a “Dems not in disarray” article.

And it comes during an election where folks are expecting* a GOP wave.


*If the next 2 months ends up looking like a "normal" modern midterm cycle

[kwabbit]

At the moment, it's a neutral environment where Dems would likely keep the Senate and the House would be a tossup. The Democrats have had a good few months electorally from Trump facing scrutiny, Dobbs backlash, and legislative accomplishments. If persistently anti-GOP news can dominate until November, this could be a trend-defying midterm. But most of the time the debate becomes centered on the current administration's weaknesses.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I don't know if we should discern that just from this data point, but it is one of several that may suggest this, at least for right now. Then again, Clallam County is the new best national bellwether. And I'll take a neutral environment for sure. Neutral probably benefits Democrats as much as a true Democratic environment since it could make candidate quality matter more.

[It’s so Joever]

I don't know if we should discern that just from this data point, but it is one of several that may suggest this, at least for right now. Then again, Clallam County is the new best national bellwether. And I'll take a neutral environment for sure. Neutral probably benefits Democrats as much as a true Democratic environment since it could make candidate quality matter more.

This is a new level of big brain.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I don't know if we should discern that just from this data point, but it is one of several that may suggest this, at least for right now. Then again, Clallam County is the new best national bellwether. And I'll take a neutral environment for sure. Neutral probably benefits Democrats as much as a true Democratic environment since it could make candidate quality matter more.

This is a new level of big brain.

Well, it's mostly out of low expectations. Given how this year was looking for awhile a neutral environment might as well be a Democratic wave.

[Mr. Smith]

All truisms are until they aren't.

[Senator Incitatus]

At the moment, it's a neutral environment where Dems would likely keep the Senate and the House would be a tossup. The Democrats have had a good few months electorally from Trump facing scrutiny, Dobbs backlash, and legislative accomplishments. If persistently anti-GOP news can dominate until November, this could be a trend-defying midterm. But most of the time the debate becomes centered on the current administration's weaknesses.

This is, of course, evidence that we are ruled (though decreasingly so, I believe) by the producers of cable news and the people who pay their salaries.