NV-SEN 2022: Roll the Dice

[Burke Bro]

The contrarian in me is raging after reading through some of these comments.

So here’s the case for a Cortez-Masto win.

Latinos have shifted to the Republican Party in the past few years. Democrats, it’s been argued, have focused too much on social issues and appealing to white college educated voters at the expense of economic issues that are much more relevant with working class Latino voters. Biden in 2020 made little effort to reach out to Latino voters during the election and Trump ran ads in Spanish campaigning hard against the lockdowns which hurt small business and playing up fears about Venezuela/Cuba. Some Latinos, who had long been rank and file democratic voters, felt as though democrats didn’t care about them liked the engagement they got from Trump.

But there are two sides to this coin. If Republicans fail to engage Latino voters in a meaningful way, they too risk taking their votes for granted. This is something I’ve been worrying about a lot lately. Related to this is the importance of representation. Of all the house democrats who lost re-election in plurality latino districts in 2020, all of them lost to minority republicans. It makes a difference to run candidates that at least have some understanding or connection to your culture. This isn’t some new or woke idea, its candidate recruitment 101. Trump’s own machismo business owner personality was something that was relatable to Latinos. As was Obama’s experience a nonwhite man and son of an immigrant. And Bush’s fluency in Spanish.

Masto’s re-election hinges on mobilizing Latino voters to get to the polls and stopping Laxalt from making deep enough inroads with Latinos. That’s going to be difficult for her, but the fact that Laxalt is a Georgetown educated white guy who used his family’s political connections to get into the AG office without the appropriate experience makes it easier. From what I’ve seen and heard, she frequently mentions her family’s immigrant roots and is very proud about her status as the only Latina in the senate.

[Brittain33]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The Latino vote is not a monolithic block. Evidence urban Latinos have shifted Republican in a huge, sustained way outside of Florida and Texas is scant, and the CA recall seems to actively push against this being a nationwide thing. Case in point: CA-51 voted against recall with No getting over...65% of the vote.
Not all Latinos vote the same. That was not true when Ds were running strong with them in the 2010s, and it's not true now.

[Calthrina950]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

[Torie]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=527941.0

[Brittain33]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I don’t expect you to monitor all my posts, but maybe don’t claim to be an expert on my mindset and what I believe, because you can get it quite wrong.

This is what I posted on Saturday, when asked if I believed in the RCP average:

Ask me after Selzer drops this evening

And on the polling thread:

There goes my hopium. I’m embracing the moderate doom.

It’s a stressful time but it never hurts to read with an open mind and listen.

I expect Republicans to have either a sizable win or a modest win tomorrow, and am hoping for the latter. I consider NV-SEN a tossup because of that state’s unique history of polling misses favoring Dems.

[Dani Rose]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I have a question, by which I mean as little offense as I can: do you think you could possibly make an argument in worse faith?

[wbrocks67]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I don’t expect you to monitor all my posts, but maybe don’t claim to be an expert on my mindset and what I believe, because you can get it quite wrong.

This is what I posted on Saturday, when asked if I believed in the RCP average:

Ask me after Selzer drops this evening

And on the polling thread:

There goes my hopium. I’m embracing the moderate doom.

It’s a stressful time but it never hurts to read with an open mind and listen.

I expect Republicans to have either a sizable win or a modest win tomorrow, and am hoping for the latter. I consider NV-SEN a tossup because of that state’s unique history of polling misses favoring Dems.

For some reason, Calthrina is obsessed with telling people how they're feeling

[Calthrina950]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I have a question, by which I mean as little offense as I can: do you think you could possibly make an argument in worse faith?

It is not in bad faith. Many of the people on this forum consistently overstate Democratic prospects and think we are on the brink of a "blue wave" or a "Dobbs backlash" tomorrow. And many of the people on this forum believe that everything is going absolutely fine, that Biden is a great President, and that it is necessary to stop Republicans from winning, lest democracy be destroyed.

[GeorgiaModerate]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I have a question, by which I mean as little offense as I can: do you think you could possibly make an argument in worse faith?

It is not in bad faith. Many of the people on this forum consistently overstate Democratic prospects and think we are on the brink of a "blue wave" or a "Dobbs backlash" tomorrow. And many of the people on this forum believe that everything is going absolutely fine, that Biden is a great President, and that it is necessary to stop Republicans from winning, lest democracy be destroyed.

You know what?  You're absolutely right.  Some of the Democrats on this forum clearly do feel that way.  I agreed with you; feel better now?

However, there are also some of us Democrats who don't feel that way; for example, I'm personally expecting a modest R win, while acknowledging there is more uncertainty in this election than any in the 50+ years I've been following them.

There are also a fair number of Republicans who insist there will be a red tsunami tomorrow.

However, you call out only the first of those three groups.  It's tiresome.  Most of us would prefer you not carp at people, but if you must, then at least do it equally.

[Calthrina950]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I have a question, by which I mean as little offense as I can: do you think you could possibly make an argument in worse faith?

It is not in bad faith. Many of the people on this forum consistently overstate Democratic prospects and think we are on the brink of a "blue wave" or a "Dobbs backlash" tomorrow. And many of the people on this forum believe that everything is going absolutely fine, that Biden is a great President, and that it is necessary to stop Republicans from winning, lest democracy be destroyed.

You know what?  You're absolutely right.  Some of the Democrats on this forum clearly do feel that way.  I agreed with you; feel better now?

However, there are also some of us Democrats who don't feel that way; for example, I'm personally expecting a modest R win, while acknowledging there is more uncertainty in this election than any in the 50+ years I've been following them.

There are also a fair number of Republicans who insist there will be a red tsunami tomorrow.

However, you call out only the first of those three groups.  It's tiresome.  Most of us would prefer you not carp at people, but if you must, then at least do it equally.

I'm responding the way that I am because I've grown increasingly frustrated at much of what I've seen on here over the past few weeks. There have been double standards, applied constantly and frequently over the years, about which pollsters should be trusted, which analysts should be well regarded, and the reasoning behind why individuals vote the way that they do. There are also double standards with regards to how well campaigns are run and which political candidates are better, and which ones are worse. These double standards, I had hoped, should have vanished after the last three election cycles, but instead, they have perpetuated and gotten worse.

If I sound like I've been hysterical over the last weeks, it is not out of some desire to "own the libs" or to rile up tensions. It's a response to what others have done here for a long time, and refuse to admit to.

[iceman]

this is looking like the state that would be a disappointment for the GOP once again.

[bagelman]

Wow. I find it hard to bet against Ralston, but he’s really stepping out on a limb. Still, it’s like going against Selzer in Iowa or Marquette in Wisconsin.

Ralston really hates Laxalt and is making the exact same prediction -- same margin, tone, vibes, and reasoning -- as when he thought Ross Miller would beat Laxalt in 2014:

AG: The most expensive contest in the state, almost entirely bereft of substance. We may never see a race like this again. I hope. I understand the partisan imperative to stop Secretary of State Ross Miller before he gets on the gubernatorial track. But some Republicans, including some prominent ones, have been willing to elevate someone manifestly unqualified for the job, piggybacking on Adam Laxalt's grandfather’s relationships to raise money, trying to paper over his lack of experience and horrific law firm review and hyping his military record, to defeat the secretary of state. It is no accident that every major newspaper, including the conservative RJ, endorsed Miller after meeting Adam Laxalt. But it may not matter. Miller has been his own worst enemy. His campaign has not been stellar. He gave the Laxalt campaign and the Republican Attorneys General Association all the ammunition they needed by his social media frivolousness and obvious hypocrisy on gift acceptance. In all the years I have covered politics, though, nothing has so offended me in a major race as much as Team Laxalt’s attempt to portray anyone who questioned the candidate’s evolving/conflicting stories about his military service as somehow attacking said service and anyone who has ever served. It is, to quote another candidate this year, simply un-American. I still think this race could go either way. But I must choose. The bottom line: I think Washoe saves Miller. Barely. Miller, 46 percent; Laxalt, 44, percent; Jonathan Hansen, 6 percent; none of the above, 4 percent.

Same margin, same "the Democrat has really not run a great campaign here" observation, same "Washoe will hopefully save the Democrat because Laxalt is a bastard". (In fact, if you drill further down, he's predicting that Horsford wins for the same reason -- his opponent has poor name recognition -- that he thought Horsford would win in 2014, though he's more confident this time around; 4 points versus 2 then.)

I hate to agree with you on this but I do. It is plausible that Ralston is allowing his disdain for Laxalt to cloud his judgement.

On the subject of universal swings not happening, I find it more believable that Nevada would trend rightward relative to the rest of the nation than the other way round, from what I've heard about gas prices in Vegas these days. I could be wrong of course.

[President Johnson]

Is there any chance Laxalt can win Clark County?

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Is there any chance Laxalt can win Clark County?

Nope, but if the bottom really falls out for Dems Lombardo could narrowly take it.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Is there any chance Laxalt can win Clark County?

Nope, but if the bottom really falls out for Dems Lombardo could narrowly take it.

That makes sense.

[ꙮ]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well.

Where? Are you allergic to arguing against points that people are actually making?

[South Dakota Democrat]

Evaluation of the candidate’s quality isn’t the same thing as “personal dislike.” If I observed that Ted Cruz would struggle as a presidential candidate because he comes across as smug and insincere, that’s not my personal dislike, that’s my assessment of why he’s potentially weak with swing voters.

Now, it is very easy to project one’s own vibes and call it an independent assessment, sure. But he’s Ralston and nor a random Twitter troll, so he’s putting his reputation on the line.

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada. It doesn't work like that, and given how people here tend to dismiss the arguments and predictions of those who they disagree with or don't view as credible, it shouldn't be an expectation. If Ralston is correct, then he is correct. But his analysis seems to be heavily biased and is certainly at odds with what he had been saying for weeks about the early vote.

Yeah, that's not a strawman argument or anything.

[South Dakota Democrat]

You seem to be implying that we should take Ralston's word as gospel and immediately declare Masto the winner in Nevada.

What an interesting thing to read into my post! Let me help you out - you are mistaken.

I am not. People on here are reacting precisely as I would have expected. We might as well call the election as over now and say that Democrats have the Senate and possibly the House as well. Republicans are going to significantly underperform tomorrow, and are going to be rejected by voters because of 1/6, Trump, and Dobbs. That's what people on here firmly and sincerely believe.

I have a question, by which I mean as little offense as I can: do you think you could possibly make an argument in worse faith?

It is not in bad faith. Many of the people on this forum consistently overstate Democratic prospects and think we are on the brink of a "blue wave" or a "Dobbs backlash" tomorrow. And many of the people on this forum believe that everything is going absolutely fine, that Biden is a great President, and that it is necessary to stop Republicans from winning, lest democracy be destroyed.

You know what?  You're absolutely right.  Some of the Democrats on this forum clearly do feel that way.  I agreed with you; feel better now?

However, there are also some of us Democrats who don't feel that way; for example, I'm personally expecting a modest R win, while acknowledging there is more uncertainty in this election than any in the 50+ years I've been following them.

There are also a fair number of Republicans who insist there will be a red tsunami tomorrow.

However, you call out only the first of those three groups.  It's tiresome.  Most of us would prefer you not carp at people, but if you must, then at least do it equally.

I'm responding the way that I am because I've grown increasingly frustrated at much of what I've seen on here over the past few weeks. There have been double standards, applied constantly and frequently over the years, about which pollsters should be trusted, which analysts should be well regarded, and the reasoning behind why individuals vote the way that they do. There are also double standards with regards to how well campaigns are run and which political candidates are better, and which ones are worse. These double standards, I had hoped, should have vanished after the last three election cycles, but instead, they have perpetuated and gotten worse.

If I sound like I've been hysterical over the last weeks, it is not out of some desire to "own the libs" or to rile up tensions. It's a response to what others have done here for a long time, and refuse to admit to.

No one cares that you're frustrated.  Stop responding to arguments that weren't made and being so nasty to everyone for no reason.

[Yoda]

This is clearly Ralston signaling “I don’t know what’s going on but I would feel bad if I made no prediction so I will use my gut feeling to break Tossup races”

Stop it. His prediction that CCM ultimately hangs on was doing wonders for my electoral anxiety

[GeorgiaModerate]

This is clearly Ralston signaling “I don’t know what’s going on but I would feel bad if I made no prediction so I will use my gut feeling to break Tossup races”

Stop it. His prediction that CCM ultimately hangs on was doing wonders for my electoral anxiety

I wonder if we could get the makers of Xanax to sponsor the site on election nights.

[Yoda]

I’ll leave you with this:

NV-1 (2020): D+9
Ralston prediction: D+4

2020 -> 2022 swing: R+5

NV-3 (2020): D+7
Ralston prediction: R+2

2020 -> 2022 swing: R+9 

NV-4 (2020): D+8
Ralston prediction: D+4

2020 -> 2022 swing: R+4

....yet:

NV (2020): D+2
Ralston prediction: D+2

2020 -> 2022 swing: R+0

aka:

"I really don’t want Democrats to lose the Senate."

"I detest Adam Laxalt."

Nothing more needs to be said.

Candidates matter. Also, voters understand that control of the Senate is at stake, and Nevada is a pro-choice, lean-blue state. Also, polls.

[Wormless Gourd]

https://split-ticket.org/2022/11/07/our-final-senate-ratings/

Found an article laying out some data-based arguments for why Cortez-Masto may be favored, and gives some numbers to the points that Ralston didn't include for in his prediction.
In summary;
- Expects reg. Democrats to hit a 50,000 mail advantage in Washoe/Clark before Tuesday as in 2018
- Expects overall early vote advantage to be D +15,000-20,000
- Expects election day R turnout to be insufficient in wiping out this early advantage
- Expects more Democrats will show up on election day vs 2020, partly because of the Reid machine turnout legacy.

[kwabbit]

https://split-ticket.org/2022/11/07/our-final-senate-ratings/

Found an article laying out some data-based arguments for why Cortez-Masto may be favored, and gives some numbers to the points that Ralston didn't include for in his prediction.
In summary;
- Expects reg. Democrats to hit a 50,000 mail advantage in Washoe/Clark before Tuesday as in 2018
- Expects overall early vote advantage to be D +15,000-20,000
- Expects election day R turnout to be insufficient in wiping out this early advantage
- Expects more Democrats will show up on election day vs 2020, partly because of the Reid machine turnout legacy.

Even under those very favorable assumptions, CCM would not win by 2pts. Unless they are expecting E-Day to be tied. +15-20k in early with a tied e-day is 1.5-2% win. If e-day turnout is 230k (as Samuelson on twitter estimated), you'd need Laxalt win e-day by 7-9pts to win. That seems like a very easy lift. I don't see how one could argue e-day would be tied. Trump won it by 35pts in 2020 and while voting mode differences might be smaller, setting them equal to early just seems flawed.

The range for tomorrow seems like CCM+0 to Laxalt +5. I think CCM could still win, but I don't see how anyone could expect that she wins by 2pts.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://split-ticket.org/2022/11/07/our-final-senate-ratings/

Found an article laying out some data-based arguments for why Cortez-Masto may be favored, and gives some numbers to the points that Ralston didn't include for in his prediction.
In summary;
- Expects reg. Democrats to hit a 50,000 mail advantage in Washoe/Clark before Tuesday as in 2018
- Expects overall early vote advantage to be D +15,000-20,000
- Expects election day R turnout to be insufficient in wiping out this early advantage
- Expects more Democrats will show up on election day vs 2020, partly because of the Reid machine turnout legacy.

That is a very well written article.  The emergence of Split Ticket has been a pleasant surprise this election season.