IA-01: Blum up 7 in his internal

[Heisenberg]

This is an internal, so take with a grain of salt, but Rod Blum leads his challenger 50-43 in this poll.

Blum: 50
Vernon: 43
Undecided: 7

https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/322089272/Iowa-1st-Congressional-District-Race-Polling-Memo-8-26-16#fullscreen&from_embed

This is the second Blum internal I've seen (the other was from early April), and both had him up. This race will be competitive.

[windjammer]

Obama won this district by 13 points,
It won't be competitive

[KingSweden]

Good point on RRH about how Trump's over performance in Iowa could help carry Blum. I'm skeptical, especially since RRH tends to be Kos-level bullish on Congressional races, but I think it's a fair point. This could be closer than thought

[Bismarck]

Yeah Blum is probably not up by this much but I think he has a decent shot of over performing by a bit, so if Trump holds up in Iowa he could hold on.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This is an internal, so take with a grain of salt, but Rod Blum leads his challenger 50-43 in this poll.

Blum: 50
Vernon: 43
Undecided: 7

https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/322089272/Iowa-1st-Congressional-District-Race-Polling-Memo-8-26-16#fullscreen&from_embed

This is the second Blum internal I've seen (the other was from early April), and both had him up. This race will be competitive.

Nah, Blum's toast.  I'd be surprised if he keeps it in single-digits.

[Xing]

Keep in mind the difference between internals in Indiana and public polling. This probably means Blum is down 5 or so at best. I don't think he can hang on unless Trump wins Iowa by at least 4%.

[The Other Castro]

Isn't this Kellyanne Conway's polling company?

[DrScholl]

Isn't this Kellyanne Conway's polling company?

It is.

[Heisenberg]

Good point on RRH about how Trump's over performance in Iowa could help carry Blum. I'm skeptical, especially since RRH tends to be Kos-level bullish on Congressional races, but I think it's a fair point. This could be closer than thought

I first saw this on RRH (yes, I know that they're considered the Republican version of Daily Kos). Someone said that 538 rates this firm a B but I couldn't confirm it (did not see this company on 538's list). The district is a few points to the left of Iowa. I have no doubt that Blum will overperform Trump, but whether it is enough remains to be seen. I predict that if Trump wins Iowa, he pulls Blum across. If not, he's toast.

BTW, I also saw a WI-08 poll on RRH. I'll post that one too.

[Mr.Phips]

This district is not in the part of Iowa where Trump will do well. Where Trump will overpeform is the third and fourth districts.  Even if Trump wins the state, both the first and second district will still likely go for Clinton by double digits.

[Heisenberg]

This district is not in the part of Iowa where Trump will do well. Where Trump will overpeform is the third and fourth districts.  Even if Trump wins the state, both the first and second district will still likely go for Clinton by double digits.

The fourth is clearly Trump area, but I'm not sure about the third (Des Moines is in the 3rd). It has Des Moines, which was very friendly to Rubio in the caucus. Trump also did well in the Mississippi River counties, winning all but two of them.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

This district is not in the part of Iowa where Trump will do well. Where Trump will overpeform is the third and fourth districts.  Even if Trump wins the state, both the first and second district will still likely go for Clinton by double digits.

No, if Trump wins Iowa, he will have to keep it close in the eastern half of the state, particularly this district. That's where the "MUH BLUE COLLAR WHITES" are that Trump thinks he can win.

[Mr.Phips]

This district is not in the part of Iowa where Trump will do well. Where Trump will overpeform is the third and fourth districts.  Even if Trump wins the state, both the first and second district will still likely go for Clinton by double digits.

No, if Trump wins Iowa, he will have to keep it close in the eastern half of the state, particularly this district. That's where the "MUH BLUE COLLAR WHITES" are that Trump thinks he can win.

When Bush won the state in 2004, he still lost this district by about 9 points.

[Young Conservative]

Obama won this district by 13 points,
It won't be competitive

It definitely will be. Iowa is growlingly Republican and theres always an incumbent advantage (unless they are incredibly unpopular, which he isn't.) Also, Vernon has raised less than blum (only by 50k in a multimillion dollar race), but she's spent almost all her money while he has over 1 million left.

[IceSpear]

Blum will be handily defeated.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

[Ebsy]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

[/]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

...

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

Still living in your bubble, I see.  Hope you're enjoying it.

[they don't love you like i love you]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

[100% pro-life no matter what]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

The fact that it has gone from the most Democratic state in the nation in 1984 to a swing state with a PVI of D+2 today?

[they don't love you like i love you]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

The fact that it has gone from the most Democratic state in the nation in 1984 to a swing state with a PVI of D+2 today?

Ah, the old trend line fallacy. By that same logic Virginia would vote identically to New York in 10 years.

...and no Republican has won in 8 years, and that no Republican has won over 50% in in 22 years. So going from that to completely unwinnable for any Democrat in a statewide in only 10 years, when the state's non-white population is rapidly increasing (which didn't happen much from 1984 to about 2000) would be one hell of a steep slope.

[Maxwell]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

The fact that it has gone from the most Democratic state in the nation in 1984 to a swing state with a PVI of D+2 today?

you mean the state where the State Republican Party has been practically obliterated?

[Kingpoleon]

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

The fact that it has gone from the most Democratic state in the nation in 1984 to a swing state with a PVI of D+2 today?

But it has a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators and has voted Democratic every year since 1984! A similar reason to why West Virginia was easily won by Kerry in 2004, and Obama in 2008 and 2012.

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

The LA-AR-MO-IA-MN stack is going completely like the TX-OK-KS-NE-SD-ND one, and within 10 years, Democrats will not have any non-inner city seats in any of those five states and will not be competitive in any statewide elections.

And the signs of that in MN are?

The fact that it has gone from the most Democratic state in the nation in 1984 to a swing state with a PVI of D+2 today?

Minnesota is unique as a state that had basically no trend from 2008 to 2012. It was 3 points more D than the nation both times. No sign of a missourification.