Looking at Senate Primary Turnout so far..

[wbrocks67]

NYT is saying there is still 130K votes out in the Dem primary in Cook? Not sure if it's accurate, but I don't think the current margin (51D/49R) holds

[Minnesota Mike]

This whole project is pretty worthless. You really need to look at turnout case by case and factor in if the races are contested and competitive and what other races were on the ballot that drove turnout. This year there are a lot more competitive statewide races on the Republican side so of course Republican turnout is higher.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Soild victory for Democrats in Maryland

[wbrocks67]

Maryland is one of the few states so far that has had competitive primaries on both sides (GOV), so I think that one is good to look at for turnout comparisons.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Nothing amazing for Dems in the turnout race tonight. They won WA as expected, but are narrowly trailing in AZ. GOP wins big in MO/KS.

[wbrocks67]

Nothing amazing for Dems in the turnout race tonight. They won WA as expected, but are narrowly trailing in AZ. GOP wins big in MO/KS.

Not true at all, pure Democratic turnout in KS is looking to be *higher* than GOP turnout.

https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/1554793880180113410

Not just that, but turnout in 2018 was R+34, 67-33. It was R+24 last night, 62-38. And that of course with ballot aside, no major competitive statewide D primaries as opposed to 2018.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

A mixed bag tonight for both sides. Dems get easily their best performance so far, netting 78% of the turnout in Vermont. But the GOP gets 57% in Wisconsin, placing serious doubt on that being a pickup opportunity for Dems. Connecticut is a little weird, as a lack of contested primaries leads me to use the SOS race. But for what it's worth, D's got 55% there.

[Roll Roons]

A mixed bag tonight for both sides. Dems get easily their best performance so far, netting 78% of the turnout in Vermont. But the GOP gets 57% in Wisconsin, placing serious doubt on that being a pickup opportunity for Dems. Connecticut is a little weird, as a lack of contested primaries leads me to use the SOS race. But for what it's worth, D's got 55% there.

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

[wbrocks67]

A mixed bag tonight for both sides. Dems get easily their best performance so far, netting 78% of the turnout in Vermont. But the GOP gets 57% in Wisconsin, placing serious doubt on that being a pickup opportunity for Dems. Connecticut is a little weird, as a lack of contested primaries leads me to use the SOS race. But for what it's worth, D's got 55% there.

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

Do people blatantly ignore things like this on purpose or are they just being ignorant?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Dems with a new high in Hawaii, getting 82% of the turnout!

[wbrocks67]

Dems with a new high in Hawaii, getting 82% of the turnout!

JMC was saying on Twitter that Dems got 88% of the turnout in 2018? Or is he going off of house races vs. statewide races? (he does that sometimes.... likes to twist the data when it make no sense, like this year basing WA statewide turnout on the House races and not the Senate race, despite much crossover voting in the house races...)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Females voted in OH Sen primary for Vance and will turnaround and vote for Ryan and DeWine isn't safe he's probably up 51/43 not 46/30 like the only poll we have but Nan W has a better chance than Beto but lower chance than Crist to flip OH

Since Ryan has been averaging 5.5 in the polls Nan W is getting more confident she is gonna win she was on MSNBC saying she will win

Beto is down 51/43 as well, obviously, females are playing around with the primary vote how we get clobbered in OH primary and Ryan average lead is 5.5 and Fetterman too Oz got female vote because Oprah and Barbara Walters own View and OWN BUSINESS


That's why an RH isn't inevitable we can get a range from 235/210 R seats and 51/60 D Sen seats obviously, it's a 50 chance we get Divided Govt and 40 percent chance of Secular Trifecta and 10 percent chance of R Congress


Obviously, if we get SECULAR TRIFECTA it's gonna be 55/45 Sen and 218/217 DH divided Govt 218/217 RH and 52/48 SEN

Rs aren't getting infamous 245 RH and 54 RS like Progressive Moderate has it he has never changed his map

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Dems with a new high in Hawaii, getting 82% of the turnout!

JMC was saying on Twitter that Dems got 88% of the turnout in 2018? Or is he going off of house races vs. statewide races? (he does that sometimes.... likes to twist the data when it make no sense, like this year basing WA statewide turnout on the House races and not the Senate race, despite much crossover voting in the house races...)

I was just referring to the fact that HI is the most democratic state for this year's  Senate Primaries. However, It does appear the GOP did even worse in 2018.

[GALeftist]

TBH I don't really see the point in reading too much into the primary tea leaves in states not names California and Washington. On the state level there are just way too many things other than the national environment that could influence relative vote numbers such as competitiveness, registration lag, open vs. closed primaries, ballot measures, etc. (I recognize that you can't easily measure this stuff, but it does exist, if you deny it has any effect idk what to tell you.) Maybe at the end of the primaries all this stuff more or less cancels itself out in the aggregate, but for now I'm v hesitant.

[wbrocks67]

TBH I don't really see the point in reading too much into the primary tea leaves in states not names California and Washington. On the state level there are just way too many things other than the national environment that could influence relative vote numbers such as competitiveness, registration lag, open vs. closed primaries, ballot measures, etc. (I recognize that you can't easily measure this stuff, but it does exist, if you deny it has any effect idk what to tell you.) Maybe at the end of the primaries all this stuff more or less cancels itself out in the aggregate, but for now I'm v hesitant.

Well, I think the biggest thing is just the competitiveness. You just can't compare when one side has competitive primaries and the other side doesn't. And then comparing it to 2018, when the Dem side had a lot more competitive primaries compared to this year where they don't is just not worth it imo. If the situation is the same (i.e. in Maryland where both sides had a competitive campaign) then I think it's worth it - and in places like CA, WA, etc.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

TBH I don't really see the point in reading too much into the primary tea leaves in states not names California and Washington. On the state level there are just way too many things other than the national environment that could influence relative vote numbers such as competitiveness, registration lag, open vs. closed primaries, ballot measures, etc. (I recognize that you can't easily measure this stuff, but it does exist, if you deny it has any effect idk what to tell you.) Maybe at the end of the primaries all this stuff more or less cancels itself out in the aggregate, but for now I'm v hesitant.

The individual results don't always pan out, Hillary obviously didn't carry  LA in the 2016 General despite its primary turnout result. But the story told by the overall picture tends to be accurate (here it appears to be GOP gets a majority in the Senate).

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

In Alaska, all GOP candidates combine for just shy of 89% of the vote. However, I wouldn't put too much stock in this - a lot of Dems were clearly voting Murkowski.

In Florida, where a lack of contested primaries sends us to the Agriculture Commissioner's Race, the GOP got 54% of the turnout. A win, yes, but it's tight. Potentially encouraging. Even more remarkably, if I substitute in Senate or Governor numbers on the Democratic side, the GOP advantage narrows to 52%(!). Still don't see any way Demings or Crist actually wins, but this could mean good things for dems in closer contests.

Our only remaining big data point is New Hampshire on the 13th. I will add LA's jungle result to the map when it happens, but considering that's held concurrently with general elections in all the other states, it's not much to look at.

[wbrocks67]

The turnout in FL doesn't look so bad for Dems when you realize that Indies are 1/3 of the electorate and they'd be a deciding vote.

However, they could just as easily go heavily Rep in the GE.

[MT Treasurer]

Democrats had quite a few contested/high-profile primaries, while Republicans basically had nothing statewide, so you have to wonder if this still applies....

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

Do people blatantly ignore things like this on purpose or are they just being ignorant?

[wbrocks67]

Democrats had quite a few contested/high-profile primaries, while Republicans basically had nothing statewide, so you have to wonder if this still applies....

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

Do people blatantly ignore things like this on purpose or are they just being ignorant?

Not sure what you're point is since I'm pretty sure I posted in some other thread that this was good for the GOP.

Dems can be happy with their turnout b/c it was good, but GOP's was still better, at least raw turnout wise, with not much going on. I'm sure some of the downballot races helped, but yeah.

Essentially Dems would really need Indies to go their way to have a chance in the GE. If they're even just 50/50, there's not really a path.

[Koharu]

A mixed bag tonight for both sides. Dems get easily their best performance so far, netting 78% of the turnout in Vermont. But the GOP gets 57% in Wisconsin, placing serious doubt on that being a pickup opportunity for Dems. Connecticut is a little weird, as a lack of contested primaries leads me to use the SOS race. But for what it's worth, D's got 55% there.

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

Also, there were a fair number of folks who crossed over to vote Republican in Wisconsin's primary as the senate was the main Democratic draw and everyone dropped to give it to Barnes prior to election day. It's anecdotal, but in Dane county, a number of people mentioned voting in the Republican primary rather than the Democratic one because they wanted to affect the race for the Republican governor candidate. Since Wisconsin doesn't require party registration, people can choose which party's primary to vote in super easily.

[GALeftist]

Democrats had quite a few contested/high-profile primaries, while Republicans basically had nothing statewide, so you have to wonder if this still applies....

I still think Ron Johnson is a slight favorite, but tbf, Republicans had a very hotly contested gubernatorial primary in Wisconsin while Democrats really had nothing statewide.

There's a simple way to resolve this contradiction: In general, competitive primaries have been on the Republican side, favoring Republican turnout by some significant amount; in Florida, this dynamic was reversed, favoring Democratic turnout by some significant amount.

Do people blatantly ignore things like this on purpose or are they just being ignorant?

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

GOP receives 60% of the turnout in New Hampshire.


Assuming a hold for the GOP in LA, which holds its jungle primary on election day, the final prediction by this method is a 4 seat gain for the GOP.

[UncleSam]

This is basically the only indicator in the GOPs’ favor.

I don’t think it is particularly predictive, however. It implies the GOP base is more energized, as would be expected. HOWEVER the GOP nominated a laundry list of awful candidates in basically every senate race, and when you combine that with massive Dem fundraising advantages, incumbency advantages in many states, and Dobbs it seems very likely Rs will lose the I vote in many competitive senate races.

I do think that the results are indicative of the pecking order of races, however. For example, GA and OH were VERY R in the primaries, more so than NC / FL (which in turn were more R than PA / WI). Implies that the tiers of races probably roughly follow that pattern in the general, even though conventional wisdom says GA should be much more Dem than FL or NC (and may still be of course).

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This is basically the only indicator in the GOPs’ favor.

I don’t think it is particularly predictive, however. It implies the GOP base is more energized, as would be expected. HOWEVER the GOP nominated a laundry list of awful candidates in basically every senate race, and when you combine that with massive Dem fundraising advantages, incumbency advantages in many states, and Dobbs it seems very likely Rs will lose the I vote in many competitive senate races.

I do think that the results are indicative of the pecking order of races, however. For example, GA and OH were VERY R in the primaries, more so than NC / FL (which in turn were more R than PA / WI). Implies that the tiers of races probably roughly follow that pattern in the general, even though conventional wisdom says GA should be much more Dem than FL or NC (and may still be of course).

WI was more R than FL (WI was 57%, FL was 54% or so)