Election models megathread

[Politician]

The "lite" version "based solely on polls" is absolutely amazing, please go check it out.

[Politician]

MI-3 (Meijer, Biden +9): "Likely R", 90% chance of GOP hold
MI-10 (open, Trump +1): "Lean R", 73% chance of GOP hold

WI-GOV (Biden +<1): "Lean D", 64% chance of DEM hold
OR-GOV (Biden +16): "Lean D", 63% chance of DEM hold

Ok.

IDK about the first set, but the second set isn't a good comparison. WI has a dem incumbent running. OR is an open seat with a deeply unpopular governor (and the house majority leader is the dem nominee - at least somewhat tied to that governor), there is also an independent who has strong financial backing running named Betsy Johnson. She is a democrat turned independent who will take a lot of votes - though it's unclear from who. She is backed by Phil Knight (NIKE) and as I am visiting my family in Oregon since early June, Betsy Johnson has absolutely bombarded the airwaves with ads, with nothing from Tina Kotek or Drazan so far (I'm in Salem). So basically, it is very uncertain.

Evers is also a (somewhat) unpopular governor who only won by a point in a D+9 tidal wave. He's obviously more vulnerable than Kotek to anyone who doesn't worship fake "polls".

(Not like Kotek is safe or Evers is DOA)

[Politician]

1st update and Republicans are up to a 55% chance to control the Senate. What's changed in the last 24 hours?

Dem internals came out showing them tenously leading in NV, which caused 538 to improve their % odds for Laxalt.

[Politician]

Yes: my big takeaway on election night 2018 is that a bunch more seats could have gone Republican if anyone had realized they were competitive. Models overstated the margins big time in some races Democrats won, implying they were completely safe: Ohio (11.6 vs. 6.80), Michigan (11.3 vs. 6.5), West Virginia (7.5 vs. 3.3). And massively understated Blackburn (5.3 vs. 10.80) and Cramer (4.6 vs. 10.80).

I understand the frustration at seeing elections written of as uncompetitive finish off close, but I don’t think you can draw the conclusion that they could have swung even further to a Republican win. Midterm turnout in 2018 was extremely high, more like a Presidential election, which was unprecedented. The surge in invisible Republican voters was already banked in the elections finishing closer than projected - that shows how some people were missed by polls or avoided them. But with polarization and turnout so high, there was no reservoir of untapped voters OR swing voters who would have gone the other way that would have pushed a Renacci over the top. To expect that is to count those invisible Republican voters twice - once when the candidates overperformed the polls, and a second time “if they only knew…” but they can only vote once.

You also forget Republicans ran bad candidates in WV and OH (and completely gave up on the latter). With Jenkins in WV and a competent Republican campaign in OH, they could definitely have won both races.

[Politician]

Not sure if already been discussed but the FOX NEWS House Forecast is now up too...

That forecast is absolutely nuts. TX-32 as Likely D? It was Biden +33 lol

[Politician]

They're overrating incumbents as usual. Malinowski has a 64.5% chance of winning but Republicans have a 60.1% chance to flip OR-4?

[Politician]

We're literally about to enter a recession, all fundamentals point to a red wave and all these Demohacks can come up with is "muh Dobbs" and "muh summer polls". Gets old.

[Politician]

The slew of good polls for Warnock over the last few days have...improved Walker's chances in the Deluxe model? Classic remains the way to go.

MTE lmao. Warnock has now led in even more polls now, with higher margins, than again the single Walker poll that had him up 2. Yet Walker *still* is at 51% chance in Deluxe. Their model for that state makes no sense.

Don't gaslight. You know summer polls overrate Democrats.