NV Sen - Emerson- Laxalt +5

[Pollster]

Poll has no actual undecided voters and does not appear to have a Spanish-language component.

Does not mean it will be wrong, but likely missed key corners of the electorate.

Your assuming that would make this poll r biased but I'm not so sure about that. We don't know how much the Latino vote has shifted

May I ask on what grounds you are making this assumption about my assumptions?

[AnOdyssey]

Emerson had Heck winning by 4 points in the in the final weeks of the 2016 election, so I wouldn't be dooming yet.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Did Emerson get the district borders right this time?

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Did Emerson get the district borders right this time?

I mean they had to or there's no way NV 01 would be that Red lol
But yeah that NM poll was pretty pathetic

[VBM]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

Yeah, it's gonna be a long decade now.

[Mr.Phips]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

The only thing Dems got out of Biden’s presidency was KBJ.  

[Mr.Phips]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

Yeah, it's gonna be a long decade now.

Yeah, I am still waiting for someone to map out a path back to Dems regaining the senate before 2032 and therefore being able to replace Alito and Thomas.  Not being able to replace those two guarantees a right wing Supreme Court probably until the 2050s at least.

[wbrocks67]

This has.... Masto losing Hispanics by 13%

[SnowLabrador]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

I hate to say it, but I'm starting to almost regret my vote for Biden in 2020.

[Mr.Phips]

It’s over. 53-47 senate, 240+ House seats, 2024 is Safe R.

It’s pretty obvious that Trump narrowly winning in 2020 (preferably by messing with the mail in ballots than by legitimately getting more votes in the swing states) would have been the best outcome in the long term for Democrats. Inflation would happen under Trump. Trump would probably botch the Ukraine-Russia situation, and Dems would be basically guaranteed a blue tsunami in 2022. The pendulum swung back too soon.

I hate to say it, but I'm starting to almost regret my vote for Biden in 2020.

Glad I wrote in a friend.  I knew Dems were biting into a poisonous apple with Biden’s win.

[Calthrina950]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

[iceman]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

The GOP seems to be overperforming in the early vote in the competitive states except for Pennsylvania. Makes me think that the senate may end up 50-50 with Nevada and Pennsylvania switching.

[wbrocks67]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

You must've missed yesterday's late dump, b/c this isn't true.

[Calthrina950]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

The GOP seems to be overperforming in the early vote in the competitive states except for Pennsylvania. Makes me think that the senate may end up 50-50 with Nevada and Pennsylvania switching.

Apparently, Republicans rely heavily on the election day vote in Pennsylvania. We'll see what happens there. But aside from Pennsylvania and arguably Michigan, the early vote is generally much worse for Democrats this year than it was in 2018 and 2020.

[Calthrina950]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

You must've missed yesterday's late dump, b/c this isn't true.

No, I saw it, but Democrats are still underperforming their 2018 and 2020 benchmarks. They are obviously winning the early vote, but not to the extent that they need, and turnout is down.

[Torie]

Laxalt has this in the bag at this point. Interesting how Titus hasn’t increased vote share at all in the past several months. Horsford doing better than Titus is also interesting. Clearly, Nevada was a dummymander.

Is Titus running in the new NV-1 (Henderson) or the new NV-4 (North Las Vegas)?

As much as I want CCM to win, Laxalt is probably favored even if this poll failed to include Spanish-speaking Latinos.

Titus is running in the new NV-1. Horsford is running in NV-4. The fact that this poll did not include Spanish speaking Latinos probably is a detriment to it but doesn’t detract that it’s a very good poll for republicans in Nevada.

How many Hispanics who vote in Nevada do not understand English well enough to answer a poll in English?

[It’s so Joever]

Why are we even looing at polls for Nevada when we have Ralston's blog now? At this point I don't care what the latest D/R hack firm says.

[kwabbit]

Laxalt is clearly in the driver's seat. The early vote numbers do not look good for Democrats at all in Nevada, and Ralston has begun to sound the alarm.

You must've missed yesterday's late dump, b/c this isn't true.

That dump moved things from a 2/10 for Dems to a 4/10. Ralston is still pessimistic about Dem chances, partially because the GOP is doing very well among the rurals.