Monmouth-VA: RV: McAuliffe +5 | LV: McAuliffe +3 or +7

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/JacobRubashkin/status/1442534510575292426?s=20

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

A range of potential electorate scenarios* shows McAuliffe ahead by anywhere from 3 points (48% to 45%) to 7 points (50% to 43%) depending on the likely voter model. Youngkin does better when more low-propensity voters are included in the mix. Specifically, McAuliffe has a lead among voters who have cast ballots in every general election since 2016 (51% to 44%) and those who participated in 4 of the last 5 general elections (49% to 43%). Among those who voted in only 2 or 3 elections and are considered less reliable voters, the race is much closer (44% for McAuliffe and 42% for Youngkin).

When the potential electorate is limited to voters who cast ballots in the 2017 gubernatorial election, McAuliffe holds a 51% to 43% margin, which is nearly identical to the winning Democratic margin that year. Youngkin does have an advantage among voters who describe themselves as being more enthusiastic about this year’s race compared to past gubernatorial elections. The Republican nominee has a 57% to 40% lead among this group, which makes up 33% of all registered voters.

“Youngkin seems to do better if the turnout is unusually high, while McAuliffe does better if turnout is just slightly above average for a gubernatorial race. Youngkin has an enthusiasm advantage, but the problem with enthusiasm is that it’s not always a good barometer for turnout, particularly when early voting and mail balloting options make it easier for less engaged voters to turn out,” said Murray.

So it might be a close race, if R's higher enthusiasm turns into higher turn-out (among less reliable R voters), and not so close otherwise. Who could knew!?

[Pollster]

Youngkin does better when more low-propensity voters are included in the mix. Specifically, McAuliffe has a lead among voters who have cast ballots in every general election since 2016 (51% to 44%) and those who participated in 4 of the last 5 general elections (49% to 43%). Among those who voted in only 2 or 3 elections and are considered less reliable voters, the race is much closer (44% for McAuliffe and 42% for Youngkin).

“Youngkin seems to do better if the turnout is unusually high, while McAuliffe does better if turnout is just slightly above average for a gubernatorial race.

Such a result would be a great vindicator for the "low-turnout Trump voters" theory proponents.

[Skill and Chance]

This feels right to me.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Good news even in a Govt Shutdown situation, TMac is gonna win

[wbrocks67]

This is not a toss-up race.

[Alben Barkley]

Youngkin never had a chance FYI.

Youngkin does better when more low-propensity voters are included in the mix. Specifically, McAuliffe has a lead among voters who have cast ballots in every general election since 2016 (51% to 44%) and those who participated in 4 of the last 5 general elections (49% to 43%). Among those who voted in only 2 or 3 elections and are considered less reliable voters, the race is much closer (44% for McAuliffe and 42% for Youngkin).

“Youngkin seems to do better if the turnout is unusually high, while McAuliffe does better if turnout is just slightly above average for a gubernatorial race.

Such a result would be a great vindicator for the "low-turnout Trump voters" theory proponents.

It's not even so much a "theory" at this point as something I just assume to be obviously true and base literally all my predictions now on that assumption.

[SnowLabrador]

According to Cook Political Report, early-voting numbers have been sluggish in blue-leaning areas, which is why they are moving the race to tossup. McAuliffe probably wins by 2-3 points in the end, but that's still a very good result for Republicans that will give them more momentum.

[wbrocks67]

According to Cook Political Report, early-voting numbers have been sluggish in blue-leaning areas, which is why they are moving the race to tossup. McAuliffe probably wins by 2-3 points in the end, but that's still a very good result for Republicans that will give them more momentum.

They've been sluggish everywhere in VA because they don't really have a history of early voting/mail voting.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Polls really need to stop being such yellow-bellies and commit to one damn finding already! These polls where they are hedging their bets are not as helpful as they might think.

Anyway, tirade aside, I hope the McAuliffe+7 margin is where we end up. That's been my prediction, more or less, since Dumbkin got the nomination.

[Matty]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

[Xing]

Yawn, McAuliffe will win, even if it's not by a particularly impressive margin.

[Progressive Pessimist]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

Let's wait for the results before we say for sure that this is a guaranteed underperformance by a Democrat.

Anyway, I don't think it's really fair to compare this election to the presidential election. The better comparison would be to Northam's victory from four years ago.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

It's not even October and the goalposts have already been moved from "Dems winning by less than 5% would be disastrous" to "Dems winning by less than 10% would be disastrous"

[Matty]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

It's not even October and the goalposts have already been moved from "Dems winning by less than 5% would be disastrous" to "Dems winning by less than 10% would be disastrous"

Do you honestly think the political climate is good for the dems right now?

You have a president with some of the lowest approvals at this point in a term, beaten only by the Orange idiot .

You have an agenda on life support in congress and will probably end up being a means-tested shell of what it was

[Skill and Chance]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

Let's wait for the results before we say for sure that this is a guaranteed underperformance by a Democrat.

Anyway, I don't think it's really fair to compare this election to the presidential election. The better comparison would be to Northam's victory from four years ago.

Northam barely did 1% worse than Biden, though.  The geographic distribution was meaningfully different if that's what you mean?  Northam did a bit better than Biden in Hampton Roads and the West, but notably worse in Richmond and outer NOVA.  Taken literally, that's what this poll shows for McAuliffe.

[vitoNova]

I keep receiving handwritten letters postmarked from San Francisco imploring me to vote absentee for Terry McAullife.

I doubt junk mail from San FranSICKo is an effective method to get a Toby Keith Democrat in Hampton Roads to finally relent and vote for Daddy Mac.

[wbrocks67]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

It's not even October and the goalposts have already been moved from "Dems winning by less than 5% would be disastrous" to "Dems winning by less than 10% would be disastrous"

Do you honestly think the political climate is good for the dems right now?

You have a president with some of the lowest approvals at this point in a term, beaten only by the Orange idiot .

You have an agenda on life support in congress and will probably end up being a means-tested shell of what it was

Given our polarization and Biden's pretty bad news cycle, -3-/4 nationally when he only won by 4 is not bad at all, compard to Trump's -16 at the same time in 2017.

Also, you can't mention past presidents approvals without mentioning how much more polarized we've become. It's not comparable

[Progressive Pessimist]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

Let's wait for the results before we say for sure that this is a guaranteed underperformance by a Democrat.

Anyway, I don't think it's really fair to compare this election to the presidential election. The better comparison would be to Northam's victory from four years ago.

Northam barely did 1% worse than Biden, though.  The geographic distribution was meaningfully different if that's what you mean?  Northam did a bit better than Biden in Hampton Roads and the West, but notably worse in Richmond and outer NOVA.  Taken literally, that's what this poll shows for McAuliffe.

Well yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying alongside the fact that off-year turnout will probably be more similar to the last gubernatorial election. McAuliffe by default was going to not have the appeal Northam did in Hampton Roads, Tidewater, etc. but also probably won't win Lynchuburg and Virginia Beach like Biden did. And those aren't necessarily because Youngkin is such a great opponent.

[MT Treasurer]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

I haven’t seen anyone other than extremely partisan Democrats claim that Youngkin is running a "bad" campaign.

[Matty]

People keep on saying Youngkin is running a bad campaign, yet if you believe the polls, he is keeping a democrat +10 state relatively close

Would you be calling it a bad campaign if a dem was keeping things close in South Carolina?

I haven’t seen anyone other than extremely partisan Democrats claim that Youngkin is running a "bad" campaign.

Moderate dems like non swing voter say he is running a bad campaign

[Senator-elect Spark]

The status quo obviously is not good right now. Biden's unpopularity will be costly down ballot. Even still, I expect TMac's winnowed margin to hold by 2-3 percentage points right now.

[wbrocks67]

The status quo obviously is not good right now. Biden's unpopularity will be costly down ballot. Even still, I expect TMac's winnowed margin to hold by 2-3 percentage points right now.

People are really overblowing Biden's 'unpopularity' IMO, and we also don't know how the current bills will affect his standing one month from now.

[kwabbit]

Youngkin’s running a fine campaign, but he hasn’t staked any bold or new positions separate from Trump/Republican orthodoxy to actually compel many Biden voting independents to vote for him. He’s been playing to lose by 5, he needs to play to win to actually change this race from the monotonous lean D it’s always been to this point.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

I’m not sure why anyone here thinks Youngkin is running a good campaign. The guy refuses to take a position on anything.