TX-SEN: True to Form

[Holmes]

Beto was interviewed on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert last night.

He did all right, I guess. He's very telegenic and came off as sort of adorkable in the first few minutes. That said, he also seemed kinda nervous and snapped into what I assume is his stump speech for most of the interview. He delivered his lines well but seemed like a garden variety politician to my ear. Maybe people from Texas would respond to this sort of thing better?

Going on a liberal elite show, great strategy. Beto gonna lose and Atlas will be the only place even moderately surprised.

If you really think the only place that would be surprised by a Beto loss is Atlas then you should visit other sites. Or go outside.

[NOVA Green]

This notion that swing voters are wise and thoughtful centrists is one that needs to be dispelled. 

I'll drink to that. It is definitely a fiction that must be dispelled.

Cruz Will Win, you have definitely popped up at the top of my radar, as not only one of the best most recent Atlas posters, but additionally win extra points for style and humor....

[Ronnie]

This notion that swing voters are wise and thoughtful centrists is one that needs to be dispelled. 

I'll drink to that. It is definitely a fiction that must be dispelled.

Cruz Will Win, you have definitely popped up at the top of my radar, as not only one of the best most recent Atlas posters, but additionally win extra points for style and humor....

I knew there was something amiss about what I said when I posted it, but I didn't realize what it was until his reply, lol.

[The Mikado]

Beto was interviewed on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert last night.

He did all right, I guess. He's very telegenic and came off as sort of adorkable in the first few minutes. That said, he also seemed kinda nervous and snapped into what I assume is his stump speech for most of the interview. He delivered his lines well but seemed like a garden variety politician to my ear. Maybe people from Texas would respond to this sort of thing better?

Going on a liberal elite show, great strategy. Beto gonna lose and Atlas will be the only place even moderately surprised.

Since when is The Late Show an "elite" program? It's been a consistently highly rated network show for like 30 years now. Draws ~4 million viewers a night. There's nothing elite about late night network comedy (this feels insanely obvious).

[Zaybay]

This notion that swing voters are wise and thoughtful centrists is one that needs to be dispelled. 

I'll drink to that. It is definitely a fiction that must be dispelled.

Cruz Will Win, you have definitely popped up at the top of my radar, as not only one of the best most recent Atlas posters, but additionally win extra points for style and humor....

I agree, even though we disagree on the Siena polling and its quality, its clear that you know what you are talking about, and are highly knowledgeable in politics. To that, I tip my hat(or some other sign of respect, I dunno)

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Cruz Will Win, you have definitely popped up at the top of my radar, as not only one of the best most recent Atlas posters, but additionally win extra points for style and humor....

I agree, even though we disagree on the Siena polling and its quality, its clear that you know what you are talking about, and are highly knowledgeable in politics. To that, I tip my hat(or some other sign of respect, I dunno)

Likewise to both of you - unfortunately I couldn't find a picture of Ted Cruz tipping his hat. He is apparently just not that kind of guy. So this from a two-time loser of statewide Texas elections will have to do.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Beto is taking no PAC money and running a free campaign, he can win an upset race, due the tsunami.  Beware of the TX House races that can pull Beto over the top TX-7 and TX-32

[junior chįmp]

Is this the end of Lyin Ted?

https://mobile.twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1040628846813487105

[Antonio the Sixth]

Cruz will probably win but the "muh there's no way he loses!!" shtick is getting dumber and dumber by the day. It's really not rocket science: a candidate that's behind by 2 or 3 points in polling averages two months before the election has a significant chance to win their race. Everything else (like "where's muh coalition??") is irrelevant nonsense.

[Indy Texas]

Cruz will probably win but the "muh there's no way he loses!!" shtick is getting dumber and dumber by the day. It's really not rocket science: a candidate that's behind by 2 or 3 points in polling averages two months before the election has a significant chance to win their race. Everything else (like "where's muh coalition??") is irrelevant nonsense.

My guess is he wins but by an embarrassingly close margin, like when Mark Warner won 49-48 in 2014 against Ed Gillespie.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Cruz will probably win but the "muh there's no way he loses!!" shtick is getting dumber and dumber by the day. It's really not rocket science: a candidate that's behind by 2 or 3 points in polling averages two months before the election has a significant chance to win their race. Everything else (like "where's muh coalition??") is irrelevant nonsense.

Even assuming that the polls are actually projecting a realistic electorate (not a very safe assumption in Texas), Beto's poll numbers are nothing to write home about. He has not led in a single poll, and his polling is about the same as Bill White's was in 2010.

Beto is only behind by 1 point, 39-38, in the latest poll, you say? (Emerson, 8/22 - 8/25)

Well, Bill White was also only behind by 1 point, 42-41, in the HRC/TexasWatch poll conducted at the same time in 2010 (8/25 - 8/29).

The 5 most recent polls at this time in 2010 had Rick Perry up only by an average of 4.2 points against Bill White in the TX Governors race.

And the 5 most recent polls currently have Cruz up by an average of 4.4 points against Beto in the current TX Senate race.

Also notice that all of these polls showing Beto seeming to be close have high undecideds (something in common with the polls that showed Bill White close). There's a reason we haven't seen any polls with Beto anywhere close to 50%.

(polling data from RCP)

Given that Beto is running in a much more favorable overall national environment than Bill White was, it is pretty telling that he can't even poll any better than Bill White polled.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Cruz will probably win but the "muh there's no way he loses!!" shtick is getting dumber and dumber by the day. It's really not rocket science: a candidate that's behind by 2 or 3 points in polling averages two months before the election has a significant chance to win their race. Everything else (like "where's muh coalition??") is irrelevant nonsense.

Even assuming that the polls are actually projecting a realistic electorate (not a very safe assumption in Texas), Beto's poll numbers are nothing to write home about. He has not led in a single poll, and his polling is about the same as Bill White's was in 2010.

Beto is only behind by 1 point, 39-38, in the latest poll, you say? (Emerson, 8/22 - 8/25)

Well, Bill White was also only behind by 1 point, 42-41, in the HRC/TexasWatch poll conducted at the same time in 2010 (8/25 - 8/29).

The 5 most recent polls at this time in 2010 had Rick Perry up only by an average of 4.2 points against Bill White in the TX Governors race.

And the 5 most recent polls currently have Cruz up by an average of 4.4 points against Beto in the current TX Senate race.

Also notice that all of these polls showing Beto seeming to be close have high undecideds (something in common with the polls that showed Bill White close). There's a reason we haven't seen any polls with Beto anywhere close to 50%.

(polling data from RCP)

Given that Beto is running in a much more favorable overall national environment than Bill White was, it is pretty telling that he can't even poll any better than Bill White polled.

If you want to make a case that Texas polls systematically overestimate Democrats, you're going to need more evidence than just cherry-picking one election cycle.

Cruz is currently up 3.7 points in 538's adjusted polling average, which is the best metric we have. That translates into a 69% chance of victory. Anything you try to add on top of that is just baseless spin.

[Zaybay]

Cruz will probably win but the "muh there's no way he loses!!" shtick is getting dumber and dumber by the day. It's really not rocket science: a candidate that's behind by 2 or 3 points in polling averages two months before the election has a significant chance to win their race. Everything else (like "where's muh coalition??") is irrelevant nonsense.

Even assuming that the polls are actually projecting a realistic electorate (not a very safe assumption in Texas), Beto's poll numbers are nothing to write home about. He has not led in a single poll, and his polling is about the same as Bill White's was in 2010.

Beto is only behind by 1 point, 39-38, in the latest poll, you say? (Emerson, 8/22 - 8/25)

Well, Bill White was also only behind by 1 point, 42-41, in the HRC/TexasWatch poll conducted at the same time in 2010 (8/25 - 8/29).

The 5 most recent polls at this time in 2010 had Rick Perry up only by an average of 4.2 points against Bill White in the TX Governors race.

And the 5 most recent polls currently have Cruz up by an average of 4.4 points against Beto in the current TX Senate race.

Also notice that all of these polls showing Beto seeming to be close have high undecideds (something in common with the polls that showed Bill White close). There's a reason we haven't seen any polls with Beto anywhere close to 50%.

(polling data from RCP)

Given that Beto is running in a much more favorable overall national environment than Bill White was, it is pretty telling that he can't even poll any better than Bill White polled.

If you want to make a case that Texas polls systematically overestimate Democrats, you're going to need more evidence than just cherry-picking one election cycle.

especially considering that, currently, the national environment has flipped by 16 points since 2010.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

If you want to make a case that Texas polls systematically overestimate Democrats, you're going to need more evidence than just cherry-picking one election cycle.

Cruz is currently up 3.7 points in 538's adjusted polling average, which is the best metric we have. That translates into a 69% chance of victory. Anything you try to add on top of that is just baseless spin.

Heck, look at 2016. There's a string of polls there as well showing it reasonably "competitive"

Texas Tribune/YouGov*   10/14 - 10/23   959 LV   45   42   Trump +3
CBS News/YouGov*   10/20 - 10/21   1031 LV   46   43   Trump +3
WFAA-TV/SurveyUSA*   10/10 - 10/12   638 LV   47   43   Trump +4
University of Houston*   10/7 - 10/15   1000 LV   41   38   Trump +3

It has often been the case in the past that polls well before the actual election. Republicans do generally go up again in the polling averages closer to election day, partly because the number of undecideds is overstated in earlier polls (exactly as in the Emerson poll showing Beto down 1, 38-37). But this has happened many times before.

It is not remotely a new phenomenon for Democrats to think that they can win Texas, hyping it up with a bunch of breathless national news articles, and then not winning Texas once the actual electorate shows up.


What *could* be different this time, potentially, is if white college-educated suburbanites swing hugely Democratic. But for that to be enough for a Democrat to win Texas, the swing would have to be truly immense, beyond anything that is currently indicated by the available data.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

The NYT/Siena poll that they are starting today in TX-07 will be a big deal with regards to TX-SEN - in some ways it probably adds more information about TX-SEN than another statewide poll would.

They are polling the Senate race as well as the House race.

In TX-23 (a Clinton district), NYT/Siena had Cruz winning 50-46, with Beto only even barely overperforming Ortiz-Jones in the House race (she was down 50-43).

TX-07 is exactly the sort of district with lots of college-educated whites in Houston where Beto needs to massively overperform in order to have any sort of chance. He needs the same sort of trend of improving beyond Clinton, on probably a larger scale, as occurred in Northern Virginia in 2017 VA-GOV.

So it will be interesting and very informative to see what the Senate race looks like in TX-07. Will it be the same sort of burbstomping as we have seen in the NYT/Siena polls of MN-03 and CO-06 (so far)? That's what Beto needs it to be.

[Zaybay]

The NYT/Siena poll that they are starting today in TX-07 will be a big deal with regards to TX-SEN - in some ways it probably adds more information about TX-SEN than another statewide poll would.

They are polling the Senate race as well as the House race.

In TX-23 (a Clinton district), NYT/Siena had Cruz winning 50-46, with Beto only even barely overperforming Ortiz-Jones in the House race (she was down 50-43).

TX-07 is exactly the sort of district with lots of college-educated whites in Houston where Beto needs to massively overperform in order to have any sort of chance. He needs the same sort of trend of improving beyond Clinton, on probably a larger scale, as occurred in Northern Virginia in 2017 VA-GOV.

So it will be interesting and very informative to see what the Senate race looks like in TX-07. Will it be the same sort of burbstomping as we have seen in the NYT/Siena polls of MN-03 and CO-06 (so far)? That's what Beto needs it to be.

Remember, this is just a house poll, dont read too much into it. Also, the TX-23 one is kinda defunct, even Nate says that the methodology was screwed there and didnt get an accurate results, so dont consider that one in an analysis.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

even Nate says that the methodology was screwed there and didnt get an accurate results.

Do you happen to have a link for that?

I would agree personally that there are problems with the 18-29 sample, but if that were fixed it would only shift the result slightly, so I am not sure that it makes sense to throw out/disregard the poll entirely just because of that.

The other point is that even if the TX-23 poll was too GOP friendly, that would have had the same basic effect on the House poll than the Senate poll. So it is still significant that Beto was only barely over-performing Ortiz-Jones (and Cruz not even under-performing unbeatable titan Will Hurd at all).

On the other hand, it is probably unrealistic to think that Beto will overperform significantly with Hispanics or get huge Hispanic turnout, so the TX-23 result could maybe be workable as long as he is getting unprecedentedly huge swings with suburban whites.

[new_patomic]

Would it be fair to say that the real way to tell if Beto has a chance is if he starts polling in the mid-high 40s? It seems like even with close poll results Democrats have trouble doing better than 43 in most of these Texas polls, which given the tilt of undecideds kills them.

[Zaybay]

even Nate says that the methodology was screwed there and didnt get an accurate results.

Do you happen to have a link for that?

I would agree personally that there are problems with the 18-29 sample, but if that were fixed it would only shift the result slightly, so I am not sure that it makes sense to throw out/disregard the poll entirely just because of that.

The other point is that even if the TX-23 poll was too GOP friendly, that would have had the same basic effect on the House poll than the Senate poll. So it is still significant that Beto was only barely over-performing Ortiz-Jones (and Cruz not even under-performing unbeatable titan Will Hurd at all).

On the other hand, it is probably unrealistic to think that Beto will overperform significantly with Hispanics or get huge Hispanic turnout, so the TX-23 result could maybe be workable as long as he is getting unprecedentedly huge swings with suburban whites.

Its on his twitter, he talks about how young voters in TX-23 and VA-05 are being weighed poorly, and that this also effected WV-03, causing the Young vote, with around 30 people, to represent 90 people, and with these voters being GOP, even though previous indications have shown they are majority D in the district, you get off results.

Nate even thinks it may hit this district:

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1040703717417398272

This is why I suggest not reading too deeply into these polls.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems don't need TX or TN, due to the fact there is a SSM ban on the TN ballot and Beto is running to the left on social issues.  MS, AZ and NV would do just fine.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Would it be fair to say that the real way to tell if Beto has a chance is if he starts polling in the mid-high 40s? It seems like even with close poll results Democrats have trouble doing better than 43 in most of these Texas polls, which given the tilt of undecideds kills them.

That would definitely be a better indicator.

There have been many polls in various races in the past that are something like 40-38 or 43-41, but none that have been something like 49-47 or 49-48.

The one partial exception is actually Obama '08, where Obama was polling very well in General election matchups during/shortly after the contested Texas primary. There was one SUSA poll where he was only losing 47-46 to McCain. But still, even that is 46, still a long way from 50.

[aaroncd107]

Rafael and Robert are set for 3 debates!
Dallas on Friday, September 21
Houston on Sunday, September 30
San Antonio on Tuesday, October 16

https://twitter.com/betoorourke/status/1040710954881888257?s=21

[NOVA Green]

even Nate says that the methodology was screwed there and didnt get an accurate results.

Do you happen to have a link for that?

I would agree personally that there are problems with the 18-29 sample, but if that were fixed it would only shift the result slightly, so I am not sure that it makes sense to throw out/disregard the poll entirely just because of that.

The other point is that even if the TX-23 poll was too GOP friendly, that would have had the same basic effect on the House poll than the Senate poll. So it is still significant that Beto was only barely over-performing Ortiz-Jones (and Cruz not even under-performing unbeatable titan Will Hurd at all).

On the other hand, it is probably unrealistic to think that Beto will overperform significantly with Hispanics or get huge Hispanic turnout, so the TX-23 result could maybe be workable as long as he is getting unprecedentedly huge swings with suburban whites.

Well, that's one of the things that I have started looking at when it comes to TX-CD-23...

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=300604.0

Bexar County is pivotal and accounts for 50% of the Vote Share of CD-23, as well as the most Republican "Vote Bank" within the CD.

Yet it accounted for the largest chunk of swings between '12 and '16 for US-PRES of just about any County in CD-23.

This is one of the most Republican parts of the District, and swung heavily against Trump in '16, mainly as a result of Anglo voters in the San Antonio (SA) 'Burbs....

Is it reasonable to expect these same communities will not swing even further in the US-TX-SEN race this November, considering that Anglos tend to vote in much higher levels in Midterm elections in TX compared to many other communities that are more heavily "Minority" when it comes to race/ethnicity/country of origin, etc....?

Not buying your argument when it comes to using TX-23 as an example, because it actually defies what the raw data and electoral history tells us about where the actual major swings in Texas occurred between the '12 > '16 US PRES race.

Part of the factor also has to do with the compare/contrast model of voter turnout for "off-year elections" in CD-23 from '12 > '16. Not convinced that drops in Latino turnout caused the district to flip 'Pub, but the current 'Pub incumbent might just be able to squeak it out regardless of national environment...]

Key battles of TX are going to be in the major Metro areas of the State, and to what extent BETO can keep down the crazy 'Pub numbers in recent years from EastTex and WestTx, and "just how unpopular is Ted Cruz among Texans when they start to consider an alternative choice.....?).

[wbrocks67]

It's a small sample size right now, but interesting so far in TX-07:

Culberson (R) 50% - Fletcher (D) 49%
O'Rourke (D) 52% - Cruz (R) 44%

O'Rourke is outrunning Fletcher by a nice margin. Looks like a nice little chunk of possible Culberson/O'Rourke crossover voters.

If this is the end result, where Clinton won by +1.4, and O'Rourke wins by 8, that's a great margin for him there. But we'll see what happens in the end.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.

Well, that's one of the things that I have started looking at when it comes to TX-CD-23...

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=300604.0

Bexar County is pivotal and accounts for 50% of the Vote Share of CD-23, as well as the most Republican "Vote Bank" within the CD.

Yet it accounted for the largest chunk of swings between '12 and '16 for US-PRES of just about any County in CD-23.

This is one of the most Republican parts of the District, and swung heavily against Trump in '16, mainly as a result of Anglo voters in the San Antonio (SA) 'Burbs....

Is it reasonable to expect these same communities will not swing even further in the US-TX-SEN race this November, considering that Anglos tend to vote in much higher levels in Midterm elections in TX compared to many other communities that are more heavily "Minority" when it comes to race/ethnicity/country of origin, etc....?

Not buying your argument when it comes to using TX-23 as an example, because it actually defies what the raw data and electoral history tells us about where the actual major swings in Texas occurred between the '12 > '16 US PRES race.

What is my argument that you refer to that you say you are not buying? I am not sure what you think I am arguing.



With respect to TX-23, the NYT/Siena poll had Hurd winning college-educated whites 69% - 23% (almost the same as non-college educated whites). Obviously there is a large MOE there since the sample is only 153 people, but if the "true" numbers are anything close to that, it is not remotely what Dems need to make TX competitive.