2022 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread

[GeorgiaModerate]

Good thread here talking about the RCP unskewing thing. Click to read the whole thing.

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1579166366380478471

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

A big question I have about the whole “partisan nonresponse” thing….why isn’t this issue solved by weighting or stratifying on 2020 presidential vote?

I.e. Why wouldn’t a Wisconsin sample be representative if the sample reports being Biden +1 in the 2020 vote?  Aren’t you guaranteeing a representative number of Trump voters in that case?

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

A big question I have about the whole “partisan nonresponse” thing….why isn’t this issue solved by weighting or stratifying on 2020 presidential vote?

I.e. Why wouldn’t a Wisconsin sample be representative if the sample reports being Biden +1 in the 2020 vote?  Aren’t you guaranteeing a representative number of Trump voters in that case?

Well nobody really knows the electorate composition. Personally I think the higher propensity of Biden voters makes up for the difference but it depends.

[OSR stands with Israel]

A big question I have about the whole “partisan nonresponse” thing….why isn’t this issue solved by weighting or stratifying on 2020 presidential vote?

I.e. Why wouldn’t a Wisconsin sample be representative if the sample reports being Biden +1 in the 2020 vote?  Aren’t you guaranteeing a representative number of Trump voters in that case?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=408952.0

The sample here was Clinton +1 in MN and Trump +8 in TX and yet the poll was widely off

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

A big question I have about the whole “partisan nonresponse” thing….why isn’t this issue solved by weighting or stratifying on 2020 presidential vote?

I.e. Why wouldn’t a Wisconsin sample be representative if the sample reports being Biden +1 in the 2020 vote?  Aren’t you guaranteeing a representative number of Trump voters in that case?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=408952.0

The sample here was Clinton +1 in MN and Trump +8 in TX and yet the poll was widely off

That was a D+13 sample lol. I remember that one.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Another item for the RCP discussion:

https://twitter.com/StevenSingiser/status/1579287037840355328

[politicallefty]

I've wondered for years why so many people follow RCP. It's been clear for as long as I can remember that they're a right-wing outlet.

[wbrocks67]

I've wondered for years why so many people follow RCP. It's been clear for as long as I can remember that they're a right-wing outlet.

It's odd to me why national journalists consistently cite their polling average pages as well when we have 538's, which also include nearly every damn poll instead of RCP's selective list.

[HidingCommentary]

I've wondered for years why so many people follow RCP. It's been clear for as long as I can remember that they're a right-wing outlet.

Their aggregate is still okay, even though they seemingly have a biased towards which outlets get included and which don't.

Its also cool that they keep their old aggregates from prior elections up. Being able to look through +20 years of election polling is a really handy resource. 

[Person Man]

Another item for the RCP discussion:

https://twitter.com/StevenSingiser/status/1579287037840355328

I mean, I agree but it W overperformed by as much as Trump, by about 3-4 points each time, you would be looking at him getting to 350 EVs in 2000 and probably 340 in 2004. So, they can still be right by chance if Democrats stay home and Republicans do really well with undecideds.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

A big question I have about the whole “partisan nonresponse” thing….why isn’t this issue solved by weighting or stratifying on 2020 presidential vote?

I.e. Why wouldn’t a Wisconsin sample be representative if the sample reports being Biden +1 in the 2020 vote?  Aren’t you guaranteeing a representative number of Trump voters in that case?

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=408952.0

The sample here was Clinton +1 in MN and Trump +8 in TX and yet the poll was widely off

The fact that you can cherry-pick a couple polls that are wrong from the previous cycle doesn’t explain why they would be wrong in the future, or even why they were wrong in this instance.  (And really Biden +11 in MN wasn’t even that far off.)

If a poll correctly samples or weights on 2020 vote, who exactly arew we worried about over- or under-sampling?

[Gracile]

Sean Trende also wrote a whole chapter in a book about the 2018 elections trying to debunk that it was not a wave election/favorable for the Democrats. Suffice it to say, the people at RCP certainly have some...peculiar opinions.

[Person Man]

Sean Trende also wrote a whole chapter in a book about the 2018 elections trying to debunk that it was not a wave election/favorable for the Democrats. Suffice it to say, the people at RCP certainly have some...peculiar opinions.

They are pushing their version of The Emerging Democratic Majority.

[Brittain33]

I can’t believe I’m doing this, but… I’m going to defend RCP’s 2000 prediction.

Given, they are Republican hacks and put a thumb on the scale. It was true then and it’s true now.

But, going back to 2000:

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there.

Presidential elections were less and differently polarized. Remember that in 2000, the previous Republican win was in 1988 by Bush’s father, and the map was a landslide.

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

If you sketched out a best-case scenario based on polling and assumed America was completely ready to swing back to 1980-1992 Republican margins, you would draw this map.

[wbrocks67]

People who have not revealed Q3 fundraising yet-

NV - Laxalt
WI - Johnson
NC - Budd, Beasley
AZ - Masters
NH - Hassan
OH - Vance

[Gracile]

I can’t believe I’m doing this, but… I’m going to defend RCP’s 2000 prediction.

Given, they are Republican hacks and put a thumb on the scale. It was true then and it’s true now.

But, going back to 2000:

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there.

Presidential elections were less and differently polarized. Remember that in 2000, the previous Republican win was in 1988 by Bush’s father, and the map was a landslide.

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

If you sketched out a best-case scenario based on polling and assumed America was completely ready to swing back to 1980-1992 Republican margins, you would draw this map.

Both Bush and Gore made stops in CA, IL, and WA during the last two months of the 2000 campaign (amusingly, in retrospect, at roughly the same time visiting states that are now Safe R like WV, TN, and AR). It's probably important to remember the 2000 campaign occurred before the general outline of our current electoral map was established after the 2000 election.

[MT Treasurer]

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there. [...]

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

This is off-topic, but since I also discussed this with another user recently, I’d again note that it cannot be overstated how close the Bush campaign came to blowing a solid lead/utter EC rout in the final 2-3 weeks of the 2000 campaign-

https://youtu.be/Cmu_2TWgTXc

We’re very used to Republicans making up ground as we get closer to the election or undecideds breaking heavily Republican, and usually at least one of those things does happen, but 2000 was a truly remarkable exception to that pattern.

[wbrocks67]

The Civiqs tracker has apparently come online (seems to have been hidden for a while but now it's public), and shows D+4 on the GCB, 49-45.

Similar to what the Morning Consult online tracker has found.

https://civiqs.com/results/vote_house_generic_2022?uncertainty=true&annotations=true&zoomIn=true

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/1579501726209814529

[soundchaser]

The Civiqs tracker has apparently come online (seems to have been hidden for a while but now it's public), and shows D+4 on the GCB, 49-45.

Similar to what the Morning Consult online tracker has found.

https://civiqs.com/results/vote_house_generic_2022?uncertainty=true&annotations=true&zoomIn=true

This is surprising, given how bearish they are on Biden's approval.

[Spectator]

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there. [...]

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

This is off-topic, but since I also discussed this with another user recently, I’d again note that it cannot be overstated how close the Bush campaign came to blowing a solid lead/utter EC rout in the final 2-3 weeks of the 2000 campaign-

https://youtu.be/Cmu_2TWgTXc

We’re very used to Republicans making up ground as we get closer to the election or undecideds breaking heavily Republican, and usually at least one of those things does happen, but 2000 was a truly remarkable exception to that pattern.

Obama 2008 and 2012 seem to be the other exceptions. Other than that, Republicans have overperfored every cycle vs. expectations, except maybe in 2010. I think 2010 was more of a dud for the GOP at the Senate and gubernatorial level compared to the narrative of GOP winning 60 House seats or whatever.

[Person Man]

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there. [...]

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

This is off-topic, but since I also discussed this with another user recently, I’d again note that it cannot be overstated how close the Bush campaign came to blowing a solid lead/utter EC rout in the final 2-3 weeks of the 2000 campaign-

https://youtu.be/Cmu_2TWgTXc

We’re very used to Republicans making up ground as we get closer to the election or undecideds breaking heavily Republican, and usually at least one of those things does happen, but 2000 was a truly remarkable exception to that pattern.

Obama 2008 and 2012 seem to be the other exceptions. Other than that, Republicans have overperfored every cycle vs. expectations, except maybe in 2010. I think 2010 was more of a dud for the GOP at the Senate and gubernatorial level compared to the narrative of GOP winning 60 House seats or whatever.

It appears as if there are more exceptions than instances but I guess since 2014, this has been the case. Although you could say that Democrats were lazy in the senate in 2018.

[Spectator]

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there. [...]

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

This is off-topic, but since I also discussed this with another user recently, I’d again note that it cannot be overstated how close the Bush campaign came to blowing a solid lead/utter EC rout in the final 2-3 weeks of the 2000 campaign-

https://youtu.be/Cmu_2TWgTXc

We’re very used to Republicans making up ground as we get closer to the election or undecideds breaking heavily Republican, and usually at least one of those things does happen, but 2000 was a truly remarkable exception to that pattern.

Obama 2008 and 2012 seem to be the other exceptions. Other than that, Republicans have overperfored every cycle vs. expectations, except maybe in 2010. I think 2010 was more of a dud for the GOP at the Senate and gubernatorial level compared to the narrative of GOP winning 60 House seats or whatever.

It appears as if there are more exceptions than instances but I guess since 2014, this has been the case. Although you could say that Democrats were lazy in the senate in 2018.

Aside from Florida, Democrats did as well in the Senate as you could possibly have expected them to in 2018.

[Senator Incitatus]

There was ample polling evidence during the campaign supporting the idea that Bush could win big. It wasn’t a consensus and it wasn’t the case in the final weeks, and some polls turned out to be duds, but data was there. [...]

Red California, Illinois, and Washington were unlikely in 2000 but not nearly as unthinkable as they are now.

This is off-topic, but since I also discussed this with another user recently, I’d again note that it cannot be overstated how close the Bush campaign came to blowing a solid lead/utter EC rout in the final 2-3 weeks of the 2000 campaign-

https://youtu.be/Cmu_2TWgTXc

We’re very used to Republicans making up ground as we get closer to the election or undecideds breaking heavily Republican, and usually at least one of those things does happen, but 2000 was a truly remarkable exception to that pattern.

Good stuff, thanks. If you want more, there's this:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXhGjmFhHbI

This channel has nightly news clips from the entire race (and for many other races), but this video is the last week. Surprisingly, he hasn't made a playlist for Campaign 2000 (only election day and the aftermath) but did just put out one for 2004.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Idk if this is the right thread to make this observation, but does anyone else feel like we really hit a brick wall with the state polling in the last week or so? Like there's been next to nothing coming out, even from the garbage pollsters.