2022 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread

[Aurelius]

Data for Progress just released a R+3 GCB poll with a huge sample (N>4,000). Leaning closer to R+4 now.

[SnowLabrador]

The only good thing about what increasingly looks like an absolute bloodbath across the board is that it will make it easier to finally get rid of these ancient morons running the Democratic party into the ground.

I hope you're right. Not about the bloodbath, but about cleaning house in Democratic leadership. I've said this a lot lately, but whatever you say about the GOP, they at least know that they need to switch up their Congressional leadership every few cycles. It's no wonder they seem more in touch than the Democrats do to so many voters.

That being said, even if it's a bigger shellacking than 2010 or 2014, I don't see Democrats changing course. They'll decide that they didn't surrender enough. They never, ever learn.

Of course, the lion's share of the blame has to rest with the voters. Right now, women are dying all over the country because they can't get an abortion, we're approaching more and more climate tipping points, and the Supreme Court is poised to eliminate even more rights. And yet, swing voters are willing to overlook all of that because they have to pay a couple cents more per gallon.

[wbrocks67]

Data for Progress just released a R+3 GCB poll with a huge sample (N>4,000). Leaning closer to R+4 now.

D4P has shown an R lead on the GCB nearly the entire cycle.

[Vosem]

Early-voting figures suggest either

1) A very large change in who votes early, and for what reason; or
2) A double-digit national Republican victory, significantly larger than 1994/2010.

So I'd have to say yes.

You are delusional if you think this is going to happen.

FL early voting as of October 14 went from 52%-29% D/R to 41%-38%, which is a 20-point swing (ie, to R+16-17 nationally); NC is a few points short of that. Early voting isn't the most reliable indicator of anything (I remember in 2014/2016 it kept overestimating Democrats, because over time they started voting early more and more), but this indicates some kind of big shift. It's probably likelier to be option 1 (simple way this could be true would be if there is a new population of really really enthusiastic Republican voters that vote early that wasn't present for previous strong Republican years, without these people necessarily even being that numerous), but the mind drifts to option 2, just for how consequential it would be.

That being said, even if it's a bigger shellacking than 2010 or 2014, I don't see Democrats changing course. They'll decide that they didn't surrender enough. They never, ever learn.

To win they should surrender on taxes and federal spending programs.

[Devout Centrist]

To win they should surrender on taxes and federal spending programs.

Note: This is political suicide.

[Ferguson97]

To win they should surrender on taxes and federal spending programs.

You have the absolute worst political instincts out of anyone on Atlas, and I'm not exaggerating. TheReckoning would run a more competent campaign than you.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Early-voting figures suggest either

1) A very large change in who votes early, and for what reason; or
2) A double-digit national Republican victory, significantly larger than 1994/2010.

So I'd have to say yes.

You are delusional if you think this is going to happen.

FL early voting as of October 14 went from 52%-29% D/R to 41%-38%, which is a 20-point swing (ie, to R+16-17 nationally); NC is a few points short of that. Early voting isn't the most reliable indicator of anything (I remember in 2014/2016 it kept overestimating Democrats, because over time they started voting early more and more), but this indicates some kind of big shift. It's probably likelier to be option 1 (simple way this could be true would be if there is a new population of really really enthusiastic Republican voters that vote early that wasn't present for previous strong Republican years, without these people necessarily even being that numerous), but the mind drifts to option 2, just for how consequential it would be.

That being said, even if it's a bigger shellacking than 2010 or 2014, I don't see Democrats changing course. They'll decide that they didn't surrender enough. They never, ever learn.

To win they should surrender on taxes and federal spending programs.

2020 younger people showed up because George Floyd and stimulus checks what's the incentive for 20 yr olds to vote, when Ds lose it's only  due to 20/25 yrs olds not voting

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

This is what Vosem predicts will happen if Dems don't embrace axing social security and Medicare:

[Adam Griffin]

To win they should surrender on taxes and federal spending programs.

So basically get rid of the things people actually like about Democrats, and just go full woke cancel-culture corporatism? Seems legit.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

These pollsters are deliberately trying to push down D Sen numbers so they can get an R H and CBS has Rs at 224/211 but some are projecting 230 R Seats I won't believe it until the Rs actually win something for a change

[jamestroll]

This is what Vosem predicts will happen if Dems don't embrace axing social security and Medicare:

No credible politician is seriously considering ending medicare, medicaid, and social security lol. But they do want to weaken them.

[izixs]

This is what Vosem predicts will happen if Dems don't embrace axing social security and Medicare:

No credible politician is seriously considering ending medicare, medicaid, and social security lol. But they do want to weaken them.

I don't know, those Republicans who want to force constant reauthorization for social security and the like seem to be setting it up for an easy end to one or all of those. Especially if the filibuster remains the next congress after such a change where the Dems are in charge. Republicans filibuster the reauthorization so the Democrats take the fall for not defending the programs while the Republicans end some of the most successful government programs we've ever had.

[wbrocks67]

Outside GOP group dropping nearly $1M on UT-SEN :eyes:

https://twitter.com/CATargetAlt/status/1584002956151529472

[MillennialModerate]

When does the NBC poll come out

[Devils30]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

[wbrocks67]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

Seems pretty consistent with a lot of the polls that we've gotten that are like D+1/tied among RV and like R+1/R+2 among LV.

The irony of this poll is that it's gone from R+2 in Aug, tied in Sept, and now D+1 in October among RV. Bidens approval also unchanged from last month (45/52). Makes you wonder if a lot of the whole "the environment has changed" is overblown.

[Person Man]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

Seems pretty consistent with a lot of the polls that we've gotten that are like D+1/tied among RV and like R+1/R+2 among LV.

The irony of this poll is that it's gone from R+2 in Aug, tied in Sept, and now D+1 in October among RV. Bidens approval also unchanged from last month (45/52). Makes you wonder if a lot of the whole "the environment has changed" is overblown.

Maybe the polls will settle on “red ripple”.

[Mr.Phips]

My thinking of the popular vote being R+4 looks pretty spot on right now.  Maybe without Dobbs it would have been my original R+7 prediction.

[AncestralDemocrat.]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

Seems pretty consistent with a lot of the polls that we've gotten that are like D+1/tied among RV and like R+1/R+2 among LV.

The irony of this poll is that it's gone from R+2 in Aug, tied in Sept, and now D+1 in October among RV. Bidens approval also unchanged from last month (45/52). Makes you wonder if a lot of the whole "the environment has changed" is overblown.

Yes it's overblown because one poll meets your priors and every other pollster shows a shift to republicans.

[axiomsofdominion]

If Dems actually cared about winning they'd let guns go. This is the single most effective strategy with the lowest political cost and realistically it costs fewer lives than other potential switches.

The upside/downside for just deciding to let the gun control issue sit, and actively promoting that in messaging, is *way* slanted to upside.

The other good option would be to present and campaign on, nation wide, a more conservative Bernie Sanders 2016 style immigration policy.

Anyone who says the best strategy for them is to cut spending should be banned from politics websites for being politically illiterate.

[MillennialModerate]

My thinking of the popular vote being R+4 looks pretty spot on right now.  Maybe without Dobbs it would have been my original R+7 prediction.

mUh dO0mEr!!!!


Nah, you’re probably spot on

[axiomsofdominion]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

Seems pretty consistent with a lot of the polls that we've gotten that are like D+1/tied among RV and like R+1/R+2 among LV.

The irony of this poll is that it's gone from R+2 in Aug, tied in Sept, and now D+1 in October among RV. Bidens approval also unchanged from last month (45/52). Makes you wonder if a lot of the whole "the environment has changed" is overblown.

The poll that shows the "movement" is overblow is Trafalgar. Been rock steady for months. Heck their best poll for Rs was frigging September. Also their Senate polls have been rock steady. Maybe a 1% move to R since August/September.

[Unelectable Bystander]

When does the NBC poll come out

NBC has 47-46 D with RV and 48-47 R with LV. Not really any change from prior polls. Gives GOP a big enthusiasm edge though.

Correct me if I’m wrong. Hasn’t NBC showing *any* GOP lead always lead nationwide GOP wins historically? I thought they were notorious for showing competitive GCB’s in red years and being accurate in blue years.

[izixs]

If Dems actually cared about winning they'd let guns go. This is the single most effective strategy with the lowest political cost and realistically it costs fewer lives than other potential switches.

The upside/downside for just deciding to let the gun control issue sit, and actively promoting that in messaging, is *way* slanted to upside.

The other good option would be to present and campaign on, nation wide, a more conservative Bernie Sanders 2016 style immigration policy.

Anyone who says the best strategy for them is to cut spending should be banned from politics websites for being politically illiterate.

The trouble with shifting right on guns or immigration is that for the time being and for likely a very long time into the future, the Republican party will continue to assert, even with zero supportive evidence, that the Dems are for gun grabbing and open boarders. And their base will eat it up. And that includes folks that if they actually believed the Dems were more conservative on these issues they'd be open for voting Democrat. But the whole culture of the right has enforced an intense social isolation and cult level of insulation to any outside information gaining traction. There is no point in moderating generally on these issues to win them over. And plenty of downside to reducing their own base for the Democrats as they once again abandon their own to appeal to the unpersuadable.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

If Dems actually cared about winning they'd let guns go. This is the single most effective strategy with the lowest political cost and realistically it costs fewer lives than other potential switches.

The upside/downside for just deciding to let the gun control issue sit, and actively promoting that in messaging, is *way* slanted to upside.

The other good option would be to present and campaign on, nation wide, a more conservative Bernie Sanders 2016 style immigration policy.

Anyone who says the best strategy for them is to cut spending should be banned from politics websites for being politically illiterate.

The trouble with shifting right on guns or immigration is that for the time being and for likely a very long time into the future, the Republican party will continue to assert, even with zero supportive evidence, that the Dems are for gun grabbing and open boarders. And their base will eat it up. And that includes folks that if they actually believed the Dems were more conservative on these issues they'd be open for voting Democrat. But the whole culture of the right has enforced an intense social isolation and cult level of insulation to any outside information gaining traction. There is no point in moderating generally on these issues to win them over. And plenty of downside to reducing their own base for the Democrats as they once again abandon their own to appeal to the unpersuadable.

Mary Pelota supports gun rights and she won a House seat in Trump +10 Alaska and has numerous GOP endorsements...