2018 Congressional Generic Ballot/House Polls Megathread 2 - no debates please

[YE]

So, from what I gather, it has been a good couple of polling weeks for the Democrats. Lots of good internals being released.

That explains why you weren’t posting.

Nah, I was without technology for 3 weeks out of the country.

Fair enough.

[Dr. Arch]

OH NO HE'S BACK

It was nice while it lasted.

Bagel has been a worthy substitute.

Outside of the OH-12 thread, not even close.

[136or142]

-snip-
Pennsylvania 1st fundraising totals:

Scott Wallace (D)   $5,379,968   $3,678,327   $1,701,641   06/30/2018
Brian Fitzpatrick (R) • $2,313,762   $807,445   $1,652,086   06/30/2018

You think Scott Wallace having already raised over $5 million might (likely mostly self funded) might have had something to do with this second quarter fundraising figures?

Leslie Cockburn. Not hard to determine who looked bad based on what?  Based on the biases of journalists, based on your own personal bias?

Last quarter, in terms of raw total contributions (so not including self-funding or loans, just purely contributions from outside influences) Wallace raised $303,938.61 to Fitzpatrick's $424,739.53. For an affluent, politically aware district, those are absolutely pathetic numbers for Wallace. Not only should he be outraising Fitzpatrick, he should be breaking 500K without a sweat. His base isn't enthusiastic for him, and to claim otherwise is ignorant of the facts.

Dude, with all due respect, we're clearly not going to see eye to eye on Cockburn. From my perspective every shred of reporting I saw on the Bigfoot situation cast her in an objectively terrible light. I'm not going to be able to convince you of that, so I'm going to stop trying.

Please don't continue to try.  That you don't realize the significance of Wallace having already raised over $5 million with nearly $1.75 million cash on hand doesn't suggest positive things about you.  A great deal of candidate fundraising is done personally by the candidate, and I suspect Wallace hasn't done any of that.

Cockburn.  You have your opinion, the journalists have their opinions, whether the voters in the district share those opinions or not is an entirely different matter.  That you base your opinion based on the biases of journalists also doesn't suggest positive things about you.

Your ignorance is astounding. Wallace having raised over $5 million is great, but that doesn't change the fact that the overwhelming majority of that is from self-funding. Last quarter, Wallace raised $303,938.61 from voters, while he self-funded $2,334,000.00. A candidate can pour as much money has they want into a campaign and still be a terrible candidate. His base has no enthusiasm, stop trying to use purposefully misleading statistics to make your point.

Again, I'm not going to bother arguing about Cockburn here. Feel free to continue to act like other people don't have the right to their own perspectives on an issue. One minor caveat: people will continue ignoring you if you continue to be an asshole.

Wallace, purposely misleading statistic?  I mentioned every time that his large fundraising totals were likely due to self funding.  It seems you can't even read properly either.  For most challengers, raising over $300,000 from voters in a single quarter is very good to excellent depending on the district.  

Cockburn, you have a right to your own perspective.  Stating your perspective as if it's fact is quite another matter.

"A great deal of candidate fundraising is done personally by the candidate, and I suspect Wallace hasn't done any of that." Now you're literally walking back things you said less than an hour ago. Don't try and rewrite history here, and definitely don't accuse me of not reading your very clear statements properly.  Anyway, raising over $300,000 from voters in a single quarter is usually alright, but not in this case. This is an affluent, competitive, suburban district that should theoretically be one of the most competitive of the cycle. When you also take into consideration that the national environment has led to monstrous Democratic fundraising totals this cycle, Wallace's totals are a clear and noticeable anomaly. That clearly says something about him as a candidate.

There's a strong consensus that Cockburn is the weakest Democrat in any competitive district this cycle. That's a shared perspective. There's no real way to quantify a candidate's strength when there hasn't been polling, so the best thing we can go off of is qualitatively evaluating a candidate's strengths and weaknesses. Ask any election nerd worth their salt and a majority of them will agree Cockburn is the weakest Dem candidate of the cycle. That's been clear to me personally for a long time. You can feel free to disagree, but you're in the minority and there's no real objective way to quantify these things.

"A great deal of candidate fundraising is done personally by the candidate, and I suspect Wallace hasn't done any of that." Now you're literally walking back things you said less than an hour ago. Don't try and rewrite history here, and definitely don't accuse me of not reading your very clear statements properly. 

I can see your point, however you should have been confused since that clearly contradicts what I wrote that 'much of his $5 million is likely self funded.'

What I meant by that is that a great deal of fundraising is done by the candidate personally calling on the phone and asking for donations.  Since Wallace has the ability to fund, I doubt that he has done any of that.  Obviously that reduces the amount that he has raised from non personal sources and that needs to be taken into account when judging his non self funded fundraising totals.

Strong consensus from who and where that Cockburn is the 'weakest candidate'?

Fair enough, but even among wealthy candidates there's a clear anomaly with Wallace. It's really impossible to know how much of an effect that has.

Here on Atlas, on Election Twitter, pretty much any place there's free discussion on elections, there's been something of a consensus that Cockburn is the weakest candidate. In fact, I posted a thread about weak Dem house candidates and Cockburn was on every list. If we got third opinions here the answer would be the same.

I don't want to reopen this debate, but I do want to show that how big a deal the candidate personally phoning for money is and the related why it's almost certain that Wallace isn't phoning anybody:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/against-all-odds-democrats-pour-money-into-longshot-races

Near Fort Worth, Democrat Jana Lynne Sanchez has raked in more than $358,000 and has campaigned through summer with more money than her heavily favored Republican opponent, Ronald Wright. They’re both running to replace GOP Rep. Joe Barton, who represented the district for more than 30 years but abandoned plans for re-election after a nude photo of him circulated online.

Sanchez bemoaned the “fish fries and pancake breakfasts” that candidates used in the past to raise money and spends six hours a day on the phone, competing with a half-dozen campaigns that she said are “sucking up most of the money” from big donors. On her list of ways to spend that money: hiring a campaign manager who has previous flipped a Republican district.

“People who say, ‘Money doesn’t vote,’ have never run a campaign,” Sanchez said.

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

What’s causing the Democrats to head south in the polls?

[Dr. Arch]

What’s causing the Democrats to head south in the polls?

Nothing. It's the normal trend line, historically speaking. After this dip, it's all up if history repeats itself.

Why the pattern? Great question.

[IceSpear]

What’s causing the Democrats to head south in the polls?

Indeed, I'm also dying to know what caused the Republicans to tick up a single point in the average.

[GeorgiaModerate]

What’s causing the Democrats to head south in the polls?

Summer is ending.  They're heading south for the winter.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

What’s causing the Democrats to head south in the polls?

Investors B.S. Daily has a single laughable poll from 10 days ago that's a tie, and 538 inexplicably gives it more weight than much more recent polls that are D +9.

[henster]

Seems like we go through this every month now.

[Virginiá]

Didn't GEM's magic graph predict this dip in the polls?

[GeorgiaModerate]

Didn't GEM's magic graph predict this dip in the polls?

Yes.

[Badger]

Virginia GCB: D+19

https://twitter.com/VCUnews/status/1027179711426953217

Virginia should change its name to New Maryland.

I can hear Harry Byrd spinning in his grave.

That's actually the Turning of a spit as he roasts in hell.

[Badger]

So, from what I gather, it has been a good couple of polling weeks for the Democrats. Lots of good internals being released.

That explains why you weren’t posting.

Nah, I was without technology for 3 weeks out of the country.

What would it take to buy you a ticket for the remaining months before the election?

To save money, we're willing to make it a one-way ticket.

[Gass3268]

NJ-03 poll coming tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/1029013352490651648

[Hindsight was 2020]

NJ-03 poll coming tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/1029013352490651648

My body is ready

[wesmoorenerd]

NJ-03 poll coming tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/1029013352490651648

My body is ready

Prediction: MacArthur up one

I've always had a good feeling about this race. MacArthur is strong but somewhat overrated, and Kim (like all of the NJ candidates this year) is a stellar candidate. Still probably the second least likely to flip of the five GOP held NJ seats, but it's a solid tossup, maybe Tilt R.

[GeorgiaModerate]

CA-45: Global Strategy Group (D), July 26-31, 500 likely voters (live caller poll)

Mimi Walters (R, inc) 45%
Katie Porter 44%

[Zaybay]

NJ-03 poll coming tomorrow:

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/1029013352490651648

My body is ready

Prediction: MacArthur up one

I've always had a good feeling about this race. MacArthur is strong but somewhat overrated, and Kim (like all of the NJ candidates this year) is a stellar candidate. Still probably the second least likely to flip of the five GOP held NJ seats, but it's a solid tossup, maybe Tilt R.

I agree with this sentiment. Dems have been doing rather excellently in NJ, and Kim is a great candidate. MacArthur lost a lot of popularity in the Healthcare/Taxcut debacles at the end of 2017, and, unlike with some other GOP candidates, using these against him will actually stick, really stick.

Im going to be optimistic, and say Kim+3

[wesmoorenerd]

Ipsos/Reuters, June 24-28, 1810 registered voters

D 45 (+4)
R 35 (-2)

Friendly reminder that the Ipsos/Reuters GCB is incredibly volatile and should be taken with a grain of salt

[IceSpear]

Ipsos/Reuters, June 24-28, 1810 registered voters

D 45 (+4)
R 35 (-2)

Friendly reminder that the Ipsos/Reuters GCB is incredibly volatile and should be taken with a grain of salt completely ignored.

[ajc0918]

CA-45: Global Strategy Group (D), July 26-31, 500 likely voters (live caller poll)

Mimi Walters (R, inc) 45%
Katie Porter 44%

Mimi Imfurst Walters was number third one in the voting I could NOT believe it

[BudgieForce]

CA-45: Global Strategy Group (D), July 26-31, 500 likely voters (live caller poll)

Mimi Walters (R, inc) 45%
Katie Porter 44%

Mimi Imfurst Walters was number third one in the voting I could NOT believe it

Do not attack her fans. 

[Virginiá]

Guys, can we all do each other a favor and try to keep page(s)-long arguments out of these poll/candidate megathreads? Even if someone could PM me before it turns into 2 pages of massive posts with 438192312 embedded quotes, that would be nice, because it's a pain in the ass to have to split pages of posts out, as the split tool isn't exactly the most user-friendly tool we have. This thread really isn't the place for multi-page arguments that quickly go off-topic, especially when it starts crowding out posts that actually belong here.

I'm saying this because this must be like the 3rd or 4th time in the past 5 days or so that I've had to do mass deletions or thread splits because no one was content to just walk away from an argument or at least move it to a new thread.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Guys, can we all do each other a favor and try to keep page(s)-long arguments out of these poll/candidate megathreads? Even if someone could PM me before it turns into 2 pages of massive posts with 438192312 embedded quotes, that would be nice, because it's a pain in the ass to have to split pages of posts out, as the split tool isn't exactly the most user-friendly tool we have. This thread really isn't the place for multi-page arguments that quickly go off-topic, especially when it starts crowding out posts that actually belong here.

I'm saying this because this must be like the 3rd or 4th time in the past 5 days or so that I've had to do mass deletions or thread splits because no one was content to just walk away from an argument or at least move it to a new thread.

[Zaybay]

Guys, can we all do each other a favor and try to keep page(s)-long arguments out of these poll/candidate megathreads? Even if someone could PM me before it turns into 2 pages of massive posts with 438192312 embedded quotes, that would be nice, because it's a pain in the ass to have to split pages of posts out, as the split tool isn't exactly the most user-friendly tool we have. This thread really isn't the place for multi-page arguments that quickly go off-topic, especially when it starts crowding out posts that actually belong here.

I'm saying this because this must be like the 3rd or 4th time in the past 5 days or so that I've had to do mass deletions or thread splits because no one was content to just walk away from an argument or at least move it to a new thread.

sorry about that Virginia. Ill try to keep it to a minimum next time.