NV-Sen - Global Strategy Group (D): Heller +3 against Unknown Democrat

[The Other Castro]

Dean Heller - 41%
Unknown Democratic Candidate - 38%

This poll of 600 likely 2018 Senate voters was conducted over 12/16-12/20, and appears to have been on behalf of Planned Parenthood.

http://ppfa.pr-optout.com/ViewAttachment.aspx?EID=mr9WXYw4u2IxYnni1dBRVtSohmtvau6gQqPe9gBsWMk%3D

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

If Planned Murderhood is showing Heller leading, he's clearly the early favorite in the race. Not safe though.

[DrScholl]

Not good for an incumbent.

[Gass3268]

If Planned Murderhood is showing Heller leading, he's clearly the early favorite in the race. Not safe though.

lol

[Figueira]

Planned Murderhood

That reminds me I need to donate to them again.

Anyway, I'm sure Hagan and Udall were early favorites as well. This race will be determined primarily by how Trump is doing.

[MT Treasurer]

Even ignoring the fact that this is a Planed Parenthood poll, polls at this point in time are meaningless. Heller is basically the definition of generic R and doesn't have much crossover appeal, so this race will be decided by Trump's, the GOP's and maybe Congressional Democrats' approval ratings. He got very lucky in 2012, and I suspect he'll be out of the Senate after 2024 anyway, even if he wins in 2018.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Early on, the generic opponent usually tends to do better than any specific candidate, and it is an in-house poll for a very left-wing organization.  Even with that, it still shows Heller ahead now.  It may tighten to a close race, but Heller is clearly significantly ahead right now (let the unskewing begin!).

[GlobeSoc]

This poll is unsurprising. Where are the polls for red state democrats?

[Xing]

This tells us... just about nothing! I expect Heller to have a tough re-election bid, especially if Trump is unpopular.

[Figueira]

Will be interesting to see whether Nevada's "anti-bellwether streak" in Senate elections continues.

1994: Republican landslide, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2000: Very good year for Democratic Senate candidates, but Republicans pick up the open NV seat
2004: Republicans gain 4 seats in the Senate, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2006: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2010: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2012: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2016: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2018: ? ? ?

2016 was not a "Republican wave" by any stretch of the imagination. It was a Republican year though at least in Congressional electioms. Interesing pattern.

[Xing]

Will be interesting to see whether Nevada's "anti-bellwether streak" in Senate elections continues.

1994: Republican landslide, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2000: Very good year for Democratic Senate candidates, but Republicans pick up the open NV seat
2004: Republicans gain 4 seats in the Senate, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2006: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2010: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2012: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2016: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2018: ? ? ?

That is interesting, though it's probably just coincidental. I suppose it's possible that Trump could be wildly unpopular, but Heller gets a terrible opponent... or that Republicans score a lot of pick-ups, but Heller doesn't run a great campaign, and faces a decent opponent. We'll see.

[Figueira]

Will be interesting to see whether Nevada's "anti-bellwether streak" in Senate elections continues.

1994: Republican landslide, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2000: Very good year for Democratic Senate candidates, but Republicans pick up the open NV seat
2004: Republicans gain 4 seats in the Senate, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2006: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2010: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2012: Democratic wave year, but Republicans hold the NV seat
2016: Republican wave year, but Democrats hold the NV seat
2018: ? ? ?

That is interesting, though it's probably just coincidental. I suppose it's possible that Trump could be wildly unpopular, but Heller gets a terrible opponent... or that Republicans score a lot of pick-ups, but Heller doesn't run a great campaign, and faces a decent opponent. We'll see.

It could also be a Democratic year in which Heller loses, but Heitkamp, Tester, etc. still lose because they're in conservative states. That could make Nevada look like an anti-bellwether even though it would really be an effect of Nevada being an anti-bellwether in the past.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Early on, the generic opponent usually tends to do better than any specific candidate,

Is there any evidence of this?

[Kingpoleon]

^That's actually a good point, but you could argue that the last four losing candidates were simply incapable of taking hold of the wave because of their flaws (Carter, Angle, Berkeley, and Heck). The other races in Nevada seemed to be much more in line with the wave: Dem row office near-sweep in 2006, R's winning the House seat/gubernatorial seat in 2010, Obama winning comfortably in 2012; 2016 seemed to be a Democratic wave in Nevada isolated from the national landscape--they regained the legislature easily, won 2 House seats, and HRC/Masto won.

What were the flaws of Carter and Heck?

[Nyvin]

Early on, the generic opponent usually tends to do better than any specific candidate,

Is there any evidence of this?

I thought it was the exact opposite...