2022 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread

[wbrocks67]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/upshot/elections-poll-ca25-3.html

Polls have missed here before...the 25th is the old version of the 27th.

and Smith's own internal had her +6, which at worse would probably mean around a tied race... just like the primary result indicated (a tossup, etc.)

[Calthrina950]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/upshot/elections-poll-ca25-3.html

Polls have missed here before...the 25th is the old version of the 27th.

and Smith's own internal had her +6, which at worse would probably mean around a tied race... just like the primary result indicated (a tossup, etc.)

Garcia, if he wins, will only do so by a narrow margin. But the fact that the national Democratic Party is concerned about this race and that they are pulling funding from here speaks volumes. They certainly made a mistake by backing Smith again.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/upshot/elections-poll-ca25-3.html

Polls have missed here before...the 25th is the old version of the 27th.

and Smith's own internal had her +6, which at worse would probably mean around a tied race... just like the primary result indicated (a tossup, etc.)

No matter what's happening, something strange is going on in CA-25. Either Garcia's the Charlie Dent of Northern LA County or there's a strange mix of factors combining to make the Ds pull their ads. Money needed elsewhere? Relative lack of willingness to spent these sums for just one seat? Good private internal polling for Smith?

[Calthrina950]

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

[Ferguson97]

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Every Republican? Has there every been a midterm where every incumbent of the challenging party won?

[Calthrina950]

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Every Republican? Has there every been a midterm where every incumbent of the challenging party won?

It happened in 1994. Not a single Republican incumbent lost reelection that year in the House, although Democrats did pick up four open seats.

[Roll Roons]

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Every Republican? Has there every been a midterm where every incumbent of the challenging party won?

2006 and 1994, although Democrats did pick up four open seats in the latter.

[MT Treasurer]

Maybe they're trying to be clever by claiming it's because he's allegedly strong, when they have internals showing him actually losing and in fact Smith doesn't need the money.

no

I threw it out as a serious possibility and I stand by that. Of course, neither you nor I are inside the Democrats' campaign structure and seeing their unpublished internals, which would provide the answer for this...

No, it’s not a serious possibility, it’s a weird Baghdad Bob-style conspiracy theory designed to put a positive spin on something that is an unambiguously bad sign for your party.

It also doesn’t make sense, regardless of the perspective from which you entertain it. Think about it:

You don’t cancel those types of reservations in any race in which there’s still a serious risk that you’re going to lose. If your theory that Smith is so far ahead that national Democrats (or at least this PAC) view the race as a done deal, then surely Garcia's own internals/national Republicans' polls would reflect that. And in that case, they surely wouldn’t be 'tricked' by that statement/narrative but be busy pressing the 'panic' button.

Unless you’re implying that Republicans aren’t conducting their own internal polling here, which makes even less sense.

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Disagree — this doesn’t necessarily mean that people like Chabot or Bacon are safe.

[Calthrina950]

Maybe they're trying to be clever by claiming it's because he's allegedly strong, when they have internals showing him actually losing and in fact Smith doesn't need the money.

no

I threw it out as a serious possibility and I stand by that. Of course, neither you nor I are inside the Democrats' campaign structure and seeing their unpublished internals, which would provide the answer for this...

No, it’s not a serious possibility, it’s a weird Baghdad Bob-style conspiracy theory designed to put a positive spin on something that is an unambiguously bad sign for your party.

It also doesn’t make sense, regardless of the perspective from which you entertain it. Think about it:

You don’t cancel those types of reservations in any race in which there’s still a serious risk that you’re going to lose. If your theory that Smith is so far ahead that national Democrats (or at least this PAC) view the race as a done deal, then surely Garcia's own internals/national Republicans' polls would reflect that. And in that case, they surely wouldn’t be 'tricked' by that statement/narrative but be busy pressing the 'panic' button.

Unless you’re implying that Republicans aren’t conducting their own internal polling here, which makes even less sense.

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Disagree — this doesn’t necessarily mean that people like Chabot or Bacon are safe.

I didn't say that they were safe. I said that a Republican wave of that magnitude could very well carry every incumbent across the finish line.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Maybe they're trying to be clever by claiming it's because he's allegedly strong, when they have internals showing him actually losing and in fact Smith doesn't need the money.

no

I threw it out as a serious possibility and I stand by that. Of course, neither you nor I are inside the Democrats' campaign structure and seeing their unpublished internals, which would provide the answer for this...

No, it’s not a serious possibility, it’s a weird Baghdad Bob-style conspiracy theory designed to put a positive spin on something that is an unambiguously bad sign for your party.

It also doesn’t make sense, regardless of the perspective from which you entertain it. Think about it:

You don’t cancel those types of reservations in any race in which there’s still a serious risk that you’re going to lose. If your theory that Smith is so far ahead that national Democrats (or at least this PAC) view the race as a done deal, then surely Garcia's own internals/national Republicans' polls would reflect that. And in that case, they surely wouldn’t be 'tricked' by that statement/narrative but be busy pressing the 'panic' button.

Unless you’re implying that Republicans aren’t conducting their own internal polling here, which makes even less sense.

You do realize that there is a difference between private internals and publicly released internals, right? Right? There's a reason I put "private" in there. It's Janus-faced...campaigns have generally really accurate private internals, and then publically released ones they put out to fuel narratives or do other things. Obviously, duh, both sides are conducting their own internals, every campaign worth their salt, and many that don't, do that.
Of course, if campaigns get nothing in return for a cancelled ad buy, then this entire thing is irrelevant.
In any case, I don't think that what I'm arguing is quite as silly as claiming that cancelled ad buys in a Biden+14 or so seat means the D is doomed...even if that D is named Christy Smith...
Cancelled ad buys and a (possible) GOP wave vs. an incumbent who votes as though he represents AL-04 and redistricting that gave the seat a bunch of urban Latino precincts that are probably rather inflexible in their D partisanship, and the fact that fundamentals (don't you say fundamentals are important? I agree with you strongly on that) suggest that Garcia faces long odds.
I'm not going to believe Garcia is favored in a situation where there are there is a dearth of polls. Right now the balance is still in Smith's favor. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If I'm right and you are wrong - I am entitled to collect my accolades.

[Ferguson97]

I'll be so bold to predict that if Garcia wins reelection, then every Republican incumbent in the House will be reelected. It's hard for me to see Valadao or Flores losing on such a night.

Every Republican? Has there every been a midterm where every incumbent of the challenging party won?

2006 and 1994, although Democrats did pick up four open seats in the latter.

Alright then I'll bet that it doesn't happen. This isn't a 2006/1994 environment. It's 2014 or 2016.

[MT Treasurer]

You do realize that there is a difference between private internals and publicly released internals, right? Right? There's a reason I put "private" in there. It's Janus-faced...campaigns have generally really accurate private internals, and then publically released ones they put out to fuel narratives or do other things. Obviously, duh, both sides are conducting their own internals, every campaign worth their salt, and many that don't, do that.

Okay, but if both sides are conducting their own internals, why is it "clever" to fuel the narrative that Garcia is in the driver's seat? You didn’t address that part anywhere in your post even though you based your entire theory on it:

Maybe they're trying to be clever by claiming it's because he's allegedly strong, when they have internals showing him actually losing and in fact Smith doesn't need the money.

Also, with all due respect, if "an incumbent who votes as though he represents AL-04" and those "urban Latino precincts ... probably [being] rather inflexible in their D partisanship" are some of your strongest arguments as to why this cancelation isn’t bad news for Smith, then I think it’s going to be a rather grim night for House Democrats.

You’re right about "fundamentals" being important (and it’s arguably the only reason why Smith even has a chance this year), but as you also know, I believe that no election is predetermined by uniform PVI shift. Garcia is vulnerable, but "Biden +13 seat ololo" a very simplistic way of looking at things, and one that’s certainly not backed up by the jungle primary results of this year. It’s not a good sign for Democrats that Republicans already received a (bare) majority of votes in this district in June.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

You do realize that there is a difference between private internals and publicly released internals, right? Right? There's a reason I put "private" in there. It's Janus-faced...campaigns have generally really accurate private internals, and then publically released ones they put out to fuel narratives or do other things. Obviously, duh, both sides are conducting their own internals, every campaign worth their salt, and many that don't, do that.

Okay, but if both sides are conducting their own internals, why is it "clever" to fuel the narrative that Garcia is in the driver's seat? You didn’t address that part anywhere in your post even though you based your entire theory on it:

Maybe they're trying to be clever by claiming it's because he's allegedly strong, when they have internals showing him actually losing and in fact Smith doesn't need the money.

Also, with all due respect, if "an incumbent who votes as though he represents AL-04" and those "urban Latino precincts ... probably [being] rather inflexible in their D partisanship" are some of your strongest arguments as to why this cancelation isn’t bad news for Smith, then I think it’s going to be a rather grim night for House Democrats.

You’re right about "fundamentals" being important (and it’s arguably the only reason why Smith even has a chance this year), but as you also know, I believe that no election is predetermined by uniform PVI shift. Garcia is vulnerable, but "Biden +13 seat ololo" a very simplistic way of looking at things, and one that’s certainly not backed up by the jungle primary results of this year. It’s not a good sign for Democrats that Republicans already received a (bare) majority of votes in this district in June.

I was saying "trying to be clever". Not out-and-out clever. They think they're doing some clever move, but this won't dissuade R money. As for Rs, Rs also have an incentive to fuel a wave narrative even if it doesn't actually make sense or reflect reality (there are exceptions to this). There's a chance it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
So it's basically a combination of two ploys managing to meet at the same end point, though with widely variable outcomes.
As for my usage of "probably", these are terminology I wouldn't stress as being too important - I tend to use a lot of moderating language when I talk about the possibilities. Moreso than almost all other people.
I also think this race will be somewhat localized and not really say too much about the broader environment (it could say a lot about how CA Latinos turn out). This specific race will come down to Latino turnout (there needs to be good turnout in urbanized Latino precincts for Smith), candidate quality on the margins, and how much of a boost (if any) Ds get from the June primary. History suggests Ds would improve their standing enough to wipe out the R majority from June, but in a race like this, who knows? In any case, there's a lot going on here, ad buys are just one piece of the broader puzzle.

[Roll Roons]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1584995991174139906?cxt=HHwWhMDShZrdhP8rAA...

[soundchaser]

What are they going on for Spanberger apart from "vibes, I guess"?

[kwabbit]

KS-03 has been a mystery the entire cycle. I’ve figured that Davids has been slightly favored, but there’s been a single released poll. This poll was part of the funky batch RMG released for the term limit pac that was largely anti incumbent. I guess Cook is privy to some good internals for Davids.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1584995991174139906?cxt=HHwWhMDShZrdhP8rAA...

My ratings would be the following:
AK-AL Lean D
CA-49 Lean D
CT-05 Lean D
IA-02 Likely R
KS-03 Tossup
NY-17 Tossup
NC-01 Lean D
VA-07 Tossup
VA-10 Likely D
WI-03 Likely R

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Some of these ratings changes are somewhat puzzling. NY-17? Of course, Sean Patrick Maloney probably doesn't have too much to worry about, he's survived close races before.

[scutosaurus]

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1584995991174139906?cxt=HHwWhMDShZrdhP8rAA...

Are we really doing the VA-10 thing again

[Ferguson97]

Good news about Sharice Davids, I couldn't get a read on that race.

[wbrocks67]

VA-10 gets moved right but KS-03 gets moved left? Blue district Democrats are struggling but NC-01 is moved to the left? A lot of this doesn't really make sense.

[Devils30]

VA-10 gets moved right but KS-03 gets moved left? Blue district Democrats are struggling but NC-01 is moved to the left? A lot of this doesn't really make sense.

So magically the Dems are gaining where they did well this summer (KS-3, Alaska) and not being downgraded in NY-19 but the bottom is falling out in NY-17, Oregon and educated districts like Levin in CA? Polling firms are clearly having issues again and this time they might be missing everyone all around.

[wbrocks67]

VA-10 gets moved right but KS-03 gets moved left? Blue district Democrats are struggling but NC-01 is moved to the left? A lot of this doesn't really make sense.

So magically the Dems are gaining where they did well this summer (KS-3, Alaska) and not being downgraded in NY-19 but the bottom is falling out in NY-17, Oregon and educated districts like Levin in CA? Polling firms are clearly having issues again and this time they might be missing everyone all around.

Yeah, this is what I don't get. If the bottom was falling out in bluer areas, then NY-19 should've been downgraded, and I wouldn't expect a suburban district like KS-3 to get upgraded bluer, while a generally more bluer area (like CA-49) gets downgraded lower.

Kind of like how I feel about CT. Clearly the bottom is not falling out for Lamont or Blumenthal, most polls have them up by double digits. But somehow the bottom is falling out for.... Hayes in CT-05? An incumbent who hasn't really had any issues before? It just doesn't make sense to me.

[kwabbit]

VA-10 gets moved right but KS-03 gets moved left? Blue district Democrats are struggling but NC-01 is moved to the left? A lot of this doesn't really make sense.

So magically the Dems are gaining where they did well this summer (KS-3, Alaska) and not being downgraded in NY-19 but the bottom is falling out in NY-17, Oregon and educated districts like Levin in CA? Polling firms are clearly having issues again and this time they might be missing everyone all around.

Yeah, this is what I don't get. If the bottom was falling out in bluer areas, then NY-19 should've been downgraded, and I wouldn't expect a suburban district like KS-3 to get upgraded bluer, while a generally more bluer area (like CA-49) gets downgraded lower.

Kind of like how I feel about CT. Clearly the bottom is not falling out for Lamont or Blumenthal, most polls have them up by double digits. But somehow the bottom is falling out for.... Hayes in CT-05? An incumbent who hasn't really had any issues before? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Congressional races are still somewhat local and the campaigning matters. Kansas looks good for the Democrats this year and Davids is a good campaigner.

I think Levin is being downgraded in part because early vote data looks good for the GOP in OC and SD county.

[wbrocks67]

VA-10 gets moved right but KS-03 gets moved left? Blue district Democrats are struggling but NC-01 is moved to the left? A lot of this doesn't really make sense.

So magically the Dems are gaining where they did well this summer (KS-3, Alaska) and not being downgraded in NY-19 but the bottom is falling out in NY-17, Oregon and educated districts like Levin in CA? Polling firms are clearly having issues again and this time they might be missing everyone all around.

Yeah, this is what I don't get. If the bottom was falling out in bluer areas, then NY-19 should've been downgraded, and I wouldn't expect a suburban district like KS-3 to get upgraded bluer, while a generally more bluer area (like CA-49) gets downgraded lower.

Kind of like how I feel about CT. Clearly the bottom is not falling out for Lamont or Blumenthal, most polls have them up by double digits. But somehow the bottom is falling out for.... Hayes in CT-05? An incumbent who hasn't really had any issues before? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Congressional races are still somewhat local and the campaigning matters. Kansas looks good for the Democrats this year and Davids is a good campaigner.

I think Levin is being downgraded in part because early vote data looks good for the GOP in OC and SD county.

I mean, if we're going by the early vote data then Christy Smith should be Lean D, lol. (That's the only thing that makes me question the whole "triaging" thing - it's still early but it's D+13 in the early vote so far, the biggest out of all the competitive CA races)