CONGRESSIONAL RESULTS MEGA THREAD

[wbrocks67]

It's really interesting which House Dems collapsed but which ones did really well. Luria did really well in VA-02, while McBath nearly up 10% in GA-06.

[MT Treasurer]

Espy is doing pretty good so far, running a whole 7 points ahead of Biden. I can't really imagine MS voters care about CHS's gaffe's too much considering Graham and every other Republican did fine. Must be Espy actually running a good campaign.

Mostly under the radar + much less nationalized than MT/SC/KY = benefits Democrats.

[VAR]

UT-04
Owens (R) 48.0%
McAdams (D) 47.2%

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Espy is doing pretty good so far, running a whole 7 points ahead of Biden. I can't really imagine MS voters care about CHS's gaffe's too much considering Graham and every other Republican did fine. Must be Espy actually running a good campaign.

You mean the margin is 7 pts less, he's 3.3 pts ahead of Biden. But I agree he's a relatively strong candidate.

[ChiefFireWaterMike]

Does Young Kim have a chance?

At the way votes are coming in, I'd say 40%. No one in the CAGOP, including Jessica Patterson, the chairwoman, thought we would flip any Orange seats.

[wbrocks67]

What's up with the likes of Lauren Underwood & Susan Wild? Looking at the current margins, I'd guess mail-in ballots would probably help them, but does anybody have more insight as to whether or not they'll be saved in the end?

Susan Wild should be okay, but IDK about Underwood

Wasserman thinks Underwood is the favorite. Make of that what you will.

It appears there is a lot of IL mail in ballots out. So those probably take her over the edge.

Rita Hart has now taken the lead in IA-02, albeit by only like 200-300 votes

[wbrocks67]

UT-04
Owens (R) 48.0%
McAdams (D) 47.2%

Given what happened with Dems across the country in swing seats, I'm pleasantly surprised McAdams may actually hang on

[Ye We Can]

Does Young Kim have a chance?

At the way votes are coming in, I'd say 40%. No one in the CAGOP, including Jessica Patterson, the chairwoman, thought we would flip any Orange seats.

Id say so.  It seems like the remaining votes might have enough of a GOP lean for her to win.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Ok, so I haven't posted on this board for months.

Biden is president-elect, yet I come on here and numerous dems are treating 2020 election as some sort of loss for dems. wtf?

who cares about downballot? Nobody remembers presidential election years by what happens in house and senate.

The dems won the 2020 election, end of story.

Justice Merrick Garland is glad to know only the Presidency matters.

[Mr.Phips]

Ok, so I haven't posted on this board for months.

Biden is president-elect, yet I come on here and numerous dems are treating 2020 election as some sort of loss for dems. wtf?

who cares about downballot? Nobody remembers presidential election years by what happens in house and senate.

The dems won the 2020 election, end of story.

Justice Merrick Garland is glad to know only the Presidency matters.

Haha yep.  Without the Senate, Dems will never get to appoint another Justice.

[Tekken_Guy]

UT-04
Owens (R) 48.0%
McAdams (D) 47.2%

Given what happened with Dems across the country in swing seats, I'm pleasantly surprised McAdams may actually hang on

Owens is a QAnon nut. Against anyone else, he would have lost. And we would have known it by now.

[Hassan 2022]

For all the talk of the Dems doing awful in the House races, I don't really see it that way. It was really only the ones who were basically DOA (specifically Peterson), typically heavily Republican district representatives like Rose and Horn, and the South Florida ones who lost. Overall not bad.

[Torie]

For all the talk of the Dems doing awful in the House races, I don't really see it that way. It was really only the ones who were basically DOA (specifically Peterson), typically heavily Republican district representatives like Rose and Horn, and the South Florida ones who lost. Overall not bad.

The number os seats the Pubs won in seats Clinton won is quite substantial so no.

[Hassan 2022]

For all the talk of the Dems doing awful in the House races, I don't really see it that way. It was really only the ones who were basically DOA (specifically Peterson), typically heavily Republican district representatives like Rose and Horn, and the South Florida ones who lost. Overall not bad.

The number os seats the Pubs won in seats Clinton won is quite substantial so no.

True, but the Dems are holding onto a good chunk of the seats they won in suburban districts that they flipped in 2018 (Casten, Luria, Spanberger, Schrier, Porter, Levin, Stevens, Slotkin, etc.).

[Pollster]

It does seem that many of the 2018 Dems who lost are in seats where Clinton's performance was inflated or where the long-term trend is ugly for Dems (or both), whereas the ones who held on are in seats that are the exact opposite.

[GALeftist]

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1324694301234921474

Spanberger btfo

However yeah I agree that the main story of 2020 is just a mediocre performance, not a horrible one. Democrats even stand to flip some seats trending their way. Also Democrats please stop hiring Robby Mook I am literally begging you

[Pollster]

They should honestly call both WA-03 and WA-08. WA-03 isn't even going to be lose, and while WA-08 could end up narrowly within 5%, Jensen isn't making up the gap.

As for the discussion of the Squad/centrist/M4A, I'll repeat my talking point: Messaging, messaging, messaging is everything.

Any idea why dems are so bad at messaging?

A few reasons.

1. Frustration: A lot of Democrats who are understandably fed up and tired at a lack of meaningful change on a number of issues want to make over-the-top slogans to try and draw attention to an issue. I think people who disagree should understand that this is a big part of where these overly simplistic proclamations come from, even if it's not a politically good strategy.

2. Lack of contact with those who aren't like-minded: It's not universally true that liberals live in a bubble, but many do, and simply don't understand how their messaging could be interpreted in a different way. Too many also push away those who criticize their messaging, even if they agree with the underlying goal.

3. Complicated ideas, simple slogans: Some ideas on the left are quite complex, and it's hard to find an accurate, succinct way of expressing those ideas. It's also hard to avoid using words that have a negative connotation in politics.

There are probably more, including the messengers themselves, but these are some big ones.

Well that's something certainly, I never understood their problems. Do you think that Bernie/Squad hurt a lot?

This is a good run down, particularly number 2. Many squad-types work under the "people will like and vote for us once they hear our message" assumption and make no effort to understand their own lack of appeal where it persists, and why their message is not considered a positive one by many voters (even left-leaning ones). Katie Porter seems to have gotten a very strong handle on it.

Katie Porter does a very good job connecting with voters personally, far better than Mike does, who does it well. Idk if anything should be brought from Katie's win.

This seems like a massive self-contradiction.

I also don't know who/what you're referring to with regards to Mike.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1324694301234921474

Spanberger btfo

However yeah I agree that the main story of 2020 is just a mediocre performance, not a horrible one. Democrats even stand to flip some seats trending their way. Also Democrats please stop hiring Robby Mook I am literally begging you

Err...no, not really.  I think Spanberger is being kinda silly, but this is a very weak response from AOC.

[ChiefFireWaterMike]

They should honestly call both WA-03 and WA-08. WA-03 isn't even going to be lose, and while WA-08 could end up narrowly within 5%, Jensen isn't making up the gap.

As for the discussion of the Squad/centrist/M4A, I'll repeat my talking point: Messaging, messaging, messaging is everything.

Any idea why dems are so bad at messaging?

A few reasons.

1. Frustration: A lot of Democrats who are understandably fed up and tired at a lack of meaningful change on a number of issues want to make over-the-top slogans to try and draw attention to an issue. I think people who disagree should understand that this is a big part of where these overly simplistic proclamations come from, even if it's not a politically good strategy.

2. Lack of contact with those who aren't like-minded: It's not universally true that liberals live in a bubble, but many do, and simply don't understand how their messaging could be interpreted in a different way. Too many also push away those who criticize their messaging, even if they agree with the underlying goal.

3. Complicated ideas, simple slogans: Some ideas on the left are quite complex, and it's hard to find an accurate, succinct way of expressing those ideas. It's also hard to avoid using words that have a negative connotation in politics.

There are probably more, including the messengers themselves, but these are some big ones.

Well that's something certainly, I never understood their problems. Do you think that Bernie/Squad hurt a lot?

This is a good run down, particularly number 2. Many squad-types work under the "people will like and vote for us once they hear our message" assumption and make no effort to understand their own lack of appeal where it persists, and why their message is not considered a positive one by many voters (even left-leaning ones). Katie Porter seems to have gotten a very strong handle on it.

Katie Porter does a very good job connecting with voters personally, far better than Mike does, who does it well. Idk if anything should be brought from Katie's win.

This seems like a massive self-contradiction.

I also don't know who/what you're referring to with regards to Mike.

I just meant as in messaging, because it's not ads or mailers, it's her personally that helped swing the district so hard. That means I don't think they can just copy what she did effectively elsewhere without someone as good at connecting with voters on a personal level as her. Mike would be Mike Garcia, from CA-25, the congressman there, whom I'm a staffer for, I've found he's very good at connecting with voters, but from the time I met Katie, and what I know from the GOP campaign down there, she's far better.
Sorry if I didn't make sense before or now, I've got no sleep in me.

[Tekken_Guy]

They should honestly call both WA-03 and WA-08. WA-03 isn't even going to be lose, and while WA-08 could end up narrowly within 5%, Jensen isn't making up the gap.

As for the discussion of the Squad/centrist/M4A, I'll repeat my talking point: Messaging, messaging, messaging is everything.

Any idea why dems are so bad at messaging?

A few reasons.

1. Frustration: A lot of Democrats who are understandably fed up and tired at a lack of meaningful change on a number of issues want to make over-the-top slogans to try and draw attention to an issue. I think people who disagree should understand that this is a big part of where these overly simplistic proclamations come from, even if it's not a politically good strategy.

2. Lack of contact with those who aren't like-minded: It's not universally true that liberals live in a bubble, but many do, and simply don't understand how their messaging could be interpreted in a different way. Too many also push away those who criticize their messaging, even if they agree with the underlying goal.

3. Complicated ideas, simple slogans: Some ideas on the left are quite complex, and it's hard to find an accurate, succinct way of expressing those ideas. It's also hard to avoid using words that have a negative connotation in politics.

There are probably more, including the messengers themselves, but these are some big ones.

Well that's something certainly, I never understood their problems. Do you think that Bernie/Squad hurt a lot?

This is a good run down, particularly number 2. Many squad-types work under the "people will like and vote for us once they hear our message" assumption and make no effort to understand their own lack of appeal where it persists, and why their message is not considered a positive one by many voters (even left-leaning ones). Katie Porter seems to have gotten a very strong handle on it.

Katie Porter does a very good job connecting with voters personally, far better than Mike does, who does it well. Idk if anything should be brought from Katie's win.

This seems like a massive self-contradiction.

I also don't know who/what you're referring to with regards to Mike.

Mike Garcia perhaps?

Nevertheless, I'm not sure about this idea. Everyone thought the same thing about Joe Cunningham and Max Rose. I thought Rose was going to cruise to re-election at the beginning of the year.

[ChiefFireWaterMike]

They should honestly call both WA-03 and WA-08. WA-03 isn't even going to be lose, and while WA-08 could end up narrowly within 5%, Jensen isn't making up the gap.

As for the discussion of the Squad/centrist/M4A, I'll repeat my talking point: Messaging, messaging, messaging is everything.

Any idea why dems are so bad at messaging?

A few reasons.

1. Frustration: A lot of Democrats who are understandably fed up and tired at a lack of meaningful change on a number of issues want to make over-the-top slogans to try and draw attention to an issue. I think people who disagree should understand that this is a big part of where these overly simplistic proclamations come from, even if it's not a politically good strategy.

2. Lack of contact with those who aren't like-minded: It's not universally true that liberals live in a bubble, but many do, and simply don't understand how their messaging could be interpreted in a different way. Too many also push away those who criticize their messaging, even if they agree with the underlying goal.

3. Complicated ideas, simple slogans: Some ideas on the left are quite complex, and it's hard to find an accurate, succinct way of expressing those ideas. It's also hard to avoid using words that have a negative connotation in politics.

There are probably more, including the messengers themselves, but these are some big ones.

Well that's something certainly, I never understood their problems. Do you think that Bernie/Squad hurt a lot?

This is a good run down, particularly number 2. Many squad-types work under the "people will like and vote for us once they hear our message" assumption and make no effort to understand their own lack of appeal where it persists, and why their message is not considered a positive one by many voters (even left-leaning ones). Katie Porter seems to have gotten a very strong handle on it.

Katie Porter does a very good job connecting with voters personally, far better than Mike does, who does it well. Idk if anything should be brought from Katie's win.

This seems like a massive self-contradiction.

I also don't know who/what you're referring to with regards to Mike.

Mike Garcia perhaps?

Nevertheless, I'm not sure about this idea. Everyone thought the same thing about Joe Cunningham and Max Rose. I thought Rose was going to cruise to re-election at the beginning of the year.

Yea It's Mike Garcia, I've been a staffer with him since December.

[GALeftist]

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1324694301234921474

Spanberger btfo

However yeah I agree that the main story of 2020 is just a mediocre performance, not a horrible one. Democrats even stand to flip some seats trending their way. Also Democrats please stop hiring Robby Mook I am literally begging you

Err...no, not really.  I think Spanberger is being kinda silly, but this is a very weak response from AOC.

Did you read the whole thread? I haven't looked at the expenditures of these candidates, but it does seem compelling if, indeed, these candidates aren't spending appreciable sums on TV the week before election. I think the point about Tlaib and Omar might have missed the mark, since if I recall correctly both underperformed Biden, but they clearly have strong ground game or they wouldn't have won their primaries, so maybe they did help boost Biden in those states. Who knows. It's also true that – as I've said previously – most, if not all, of the House reps who went under were moderates, not progressives.

[Hassan 2022]

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1324760084610719753

All Dem incumbents in PA are likely safe now. Wild and Lamb are ahead and now the Cartwright race has been called.

[Bootes Void]

Rooby Mook is a curse, dont hire him. basically a reverse Dick Morris

[Hassan 2022]

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1324761178590138371