2018 Congressional Generic Ballot and House Polls Megathread - the original

[KingSweden]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

Except in, say, WV or ND.

Though those states are quirky enough that it could be a wash.

[Greedo punched first]

Tulchin Research-CA-39: Cisneros 20, Kim and Huff with 14

A Cisneros internal, I believe, so grain of salt

Do you take the Change Research polls (non-internals, Cisneros is leading Democrat) with a grain of salt?

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

How did educated whites vote in 2006?

How did uneducated whites vote in 2014?


The tradeoff is not good imo. More uneducated whites vote than educated whites in basically every state, besides maybe Massachusetts. There's an even bigger difference in highly competitive Senate seats in places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Nevada.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

How did educated whites vote in 2006?

How did uneducated whites vote in 2014?


The tradeoff is not good imo. More uneducated whites vote than educated whites in basically every state, besides maybe Massachusetts. There's an even bigger difference in highly competitive Senate seats in places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Nevada.

I interpreted it a little differently: that educated whites were polling strongly D (since 2006 was a D wave) this year, while uneducated whites were polling strongly R.  That would be consistent with other polling this year; and since it also seems that educated voters are highly motivated this year, that would overall be good news for the Democrats.  But your point about the effect in certain states being potentially bad for them is well taken.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

How did educated whites vote in 2006?

How did uneducated whites vote in 2014?


The tradeoff is not good imo. More uneducated whites vote than educated whites in basically every state, besides maybe Massachusetts. There's an even bigger difference in highly competitive Senate seats in places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Nevada.

I interpreted it a little differently: that educated whites were polling strongly D (since 2006 was a D wave) this year, while uneducated whites were polling strongly R.  That would be consistent with other polling this year; and since it also seems that educated voters are highly motivated this year, that would overall be good news for the Democrats.  But your point about the effect in certain states being potentially bad for them is well taken.

It's just impossible to say whether this is a good or bad thing without knowing the exact numbers.

However, in every state, uneducated whites outnumber educated whites. While midterm turnout will increase educated white turnout, I'd expect only possibly Massachusetts and Maryland to have more educated whites turning out. A 5 point gain among educated whites for a 5 point loss among uneducated whites is a pretty bad trade overall.

[KingSweden]

Tulchin Research-CA-39: Cisneros 20, Kim and Huff with 14

A Cisneros internal, I believe, so grain of salt

Do you take the Change Research polls (non-internals, Cisneros is leading Democrat) with a grain of salt?

No, that one Id lend more credence to.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

I think it boads well for the Democrats, especially in the Northeast where the bulk of their gains will come from.

[Tartarus Sauce]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

How did educated whites vote in 2006?

How did uneducated whites vote in 2014?


The tradeoff is not good imo. More uneducated whites vote than educated whites in basically every state, besides maybe Massachusetts. There's an even bigger difference in highly competitive Senate seats in places like West Virginia, Indiana, and Nevada.

I interpreted it a little differently: that educated whites were polling strongly D (since 2006 was a D wave) this year, while uneducated whites were polling strongly R.  That would be consistent with other polling this year; and since it also seems that educated voters are highly motivated this year, that would overall be good news for the Democrats.  But your point about the effect in certain states being potentially bad for them is well taken.

It's just impossible to say whether this is a good or bad thing without knowing the exact numbers.

However, in every state, uneducated whites outnumber educated whites. While midterm turnout will increase educated white turnout, I'd expect only possibly Massachusetts and Maryland to have more educated whites turning out. A 5 point gain among educated whites for a 5 point loss among uneducated whites is a pretty bad trade overall.

I don't see much evidence in the special elections that non-college educated Whites are that strongly breaking for the GOP though, and the special elections highlight actual voter behavior rather than polls. While Democrats might not do as well with non-college educated Whites as they did in 2006 and while it might still be the best demographic for the GOP during the midterm, the idea that there will be that drastic a tradeoff at all is suspect.

If Democrats are winning big, they'll be doing much better with all demographic groups than they have the previous midterms. If anything there's likely to be huge gains among college-educated Whites and a fairly decent performance among non-college educated Whites.

[PoliticalShelter]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

Well I found this graphic that is of relevance:

[LimoLiberal]

Cisneros vs. Huff makes CA-39 a Lean Dem race. Would be hilarious if Young Kim doesn't make it to the runoff.

[Politician]

Cisneros vs. Huff makes CA-39 a Lean Dem race. Would be hilarious if Young Kim doesn't make it to the runoff.

Yep, definitely. When even Limo says the Democrats would be favored, they probably would be.

[KingSweden]

I’ve presumed Young Kim would be the nominee for long enough I have no idea who Bob Huff is.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

https://twitter.com/HotlineJosh/status/999314587194417152

I think this tradeoff would make the Democrats quite happy.

Well I found this graphic that is of relevance:

Again, the exit polls are notoriously awful at getting the margins for educated whites. Exit polls wayyyy over sample educated whites, which leads to them making the educated white margin a lot more GOP than it actually is.

Obama won or got very close to winning educated whites in 2012. The issue is there are far, FAR more uneducated whites that vote than educated whites. Look at how democrats won 15/16 of the most educated districts (GA-06 didn't go dem by 1.5%). I believe they won 14/16 or so in 2012. Also, educated whites are far more common in uncompetitive states (like New England, Texas, California, etc.) besides Colorado and Virginia.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Reuters/ISPOS

Democrats: 40% (+2)
Republicans: 37% (-/-)

Democrats improving.

Strangely, the amount of Dems and Reps surveyed are the same... So I highly doubt that it's accurate. I think we all expect more Democrats to vote on Election Day than Republicans.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/2018-reuters-tracking-core-political-05-23-2018.pdf

[Skill and Chance]

Reuters/ISPOS

Democrats: 40% (+2)
Republicans: 37% (-/-)

Democrats improving.

Strangely, the amount of Dems and Reps surveyed are the same... So I highly doubt that it's accurate. I think we all expect more Democrats to vote on Election Day than Republicans.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/2018-reuters-tracking-core-political-05-23-2018.pdf

That wouldn't flip the House, but contrary to the CW, I think D+4-5 would. 

[Devils30]

These polls with 23-25% undecided are absurd. It's okay to push leaners a little bit.

[henster]

Why are people obsessing over every movement of the Reuters poll?

[heatcharger]

http://shadyshak.com/



Terrible news for the Comstock campaign if she had to use this explosive oppo research against her primary opponent.

[Young Conservative]

Reuters/ISPOS

Democrats: 40% (+2)
Republicans: 37% (-/-)

Democrats improving.

Strangely, the amount of Dems and Reps surveyed are the same... So I highly doubt that it's accurate. I think we all expect more Democrats to vote on Election Day than Republicans.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/2018-reuters-tracking-core-political-05-23-2018.pdf

+3 seems more likely than +1. I think this poll is probably more accurate and the last one was just a blip.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Your pic on the bottom sums up my reaction

[Young Conservative]

Did you read the website? Is the stuff on it true?

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Your pic on the bottom sums up my reaction

[wesmoorenerd]

Oof. Jorts are a sin, Comstock is totally safe now.

Chances are either those allegations on the website either help or destroy Comstock. I'm surprised this is even coming up, though, considering I wasn't even aware she had a primary opponent.

[LimoLiberal]

Why the heck was my post deleted for trolling? I'm repeating it again in case there was a misunderstanding.

Holy sh*t. Paid for by Comstock for Congress. She sees something in her numbers...


I don't know how someone got trolling from that... I'm pretty clearly implying that Comstock must see weakness with Republican primary voters in her internal polling, hence the attacks.

[Bidenworth2020]

that was probably a glitch limo