Talk Elections

National, state, and district polls

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/?ex_cid=rrpromo

Can this be the house polling thread too? Like 2018 "Congressional Generic/House Polls"? So we can put district polls in here when they start trickling out.

Good idea. I'll update the title.

Just to start off the new thread, here are the 5 latest generic ballot polls in the 538 database.  Some of these may have been reported in the other thread, but I don't think they all were.

Pew Research, Jan 10-15, 1215 RV       D 53, R 39 (D+14)
Ipsos/Reuters, Jan 11-15, 1299 RV       D 41, R 35 (D+6)
Morning Consult, Jan 11-16, 1993 RV    D 41, R 38 (D+3)
Quinnipiac, Jan 12-16, 1212 RV            D 50, R 39 (D+11)
YouGov, Jan 14-16, 1309 RV                D 42, R 36 (D+6)

Current 538 average: D 47.5, R 39.3 (D+8.2)

LA Times/USC (National):

Democrats 51%
Republicans 40%

Source (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-poll-20180119-story.html)

Probably going to get a Generic Ballot poll later today from NBC/Wall Street Journal.

Another live caller poll showing Democrats are not winning the generic ballot enough to win the house.

https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/954476501965164544

NBC/WSJ 1/19
 
D+6 (-5)

I think 4-6 is enough.

Live caller polls released in the past few days:

Qpac: D+11 (-6)
Marist: D+6 (-7)
NBC/WSJ: D+6 (-5)
Pew: D+14 (no prior poll)

That's a collapse if I've ever seen one.

>D+14
>Collapse

3/4 polls had Democrats losing 5-7 points. Collapse.

It's gonna be a long 10 months if you overreact to everyone movement in the GCB polls.

I’ve seen anywhere between 4-8 points as necessary to retake the House. Average is better than that now.

Josh Kraushaar speculates that the movement to Rs is a result of the incredible economy and the tax cut allowing Rs to take credit for it.

If that's true, their average standing will only improve going into November as the economy keeps growing.

Imagine if the GCB actually did end up as D+11, and we get LimoLiberal posting about how it's a disaster that Democrats only picked up 50 seats instead of the 100 they could've gotten if not for the tax reform bump. :'(

Still too early. Good god people think shifts in either direction will matter much in November. Right now, 538 and RCP have the dems up by 8 points in the generic ballot, but I'm certain it'll be a different story in a few weeks, let alone November.

Unfortunately, logical posts like this are ignored here. Good try though. ;)

Ipsos/Reuters (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1212Y17/filters/PD1:1), Jan 14-18, 1261 RV

D 42 (+1)
R 36 (nc)

HUGE SURGE!

+100. Exactly my thoughts too. That's exactly the reason why i don't make any final predictions until 1 month before election day.

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/21/politics/cnn-poll-midterm-elections-generic-congressional/index.html

D: 49%
R: 44%

Thanks for actually formatting that.

Not sure why CNN is running with at as a bad number for Dems.

It's a bad trend for D's relative to previous CNN polls.  Their last two results were D+18 in December and D+11 in November.

The last poll (pre-tax reform) was:
D:56
R: 38

Democrats lost 7 points, Republicans gained 6 points.

lol I just woke up.

My real reaction to this poll:

The Democrats are not going to take the House.

Do we have any theories here? Is the shutdown repolarizing Republicans to their party? Or is there a tax cut bump for Republicans?

It's just Pelosi's tax reform bump fading(Dems surged due to tax reform despite idiotic takes that it helps the GOP).

Likelier that D+18 was a crazy outlier

Tax reform made gop leaners whether its republicans who said they werent going to vote or partisan republicans claiming to be independents. Started saying they were going to vote.  Also the longer this shutdown goes on the worse it will be for congressional dems.

Our lead in the GCB is sub-7 (per 538) for the first time in a long time. Consider me very worried.

Wow. If that trend keeps up, Republicans will be leading by 125 points in November.

This poll was pre-shutdown.

I wouldn't get too worried over short term swings like these. The overall pattern remains very favorable for Democrats.

Folks it's January

Another thing to consider is that CNN's results on this question have been fairly noisy.  The history since they started asking it monthly:

Aug D+9
Sep D+6
Oct D+16
Nov D+11
Dec D+18
Jan D+6

Having said that, it's clear there's been some closing of the margin on the generic ballot in the last month.

Well, I'm not happy, but Dems leading the congressional ballot by 7 points is still a very good result for Dems for a midterm. It just eats through any cushion we had. Mark me down as a complete disbeliever in "trends" and extrapolation.

When was the last time either party won the GCB by double digits? Even in 2010 & 1994 it was only around +7. I think the notion that Dems have to win the House by X number is unfounded.

Yeah but we've been in pre-shutdown Trump-vs-Schumer mode for a week....

It's just noise created by response rates.

I think Dems will narrowly miss taking the House, big gains in CA,PA,NY and other suburban districts but middling elsewhere notably the rust belt to get to the 210-216 range. Hopefully Pelosi will finally get the boot then.

Why, because a couple of polls 10 months out have moved back towards the incumbent party? They'll head the other direction soon enough.

Don't you know that trends in the generic ballot stay that way forever? That's why Democrats won by 30 in 2014.

Look, Folks, we live in a bubble on this site. Can we at least recognize that?

Pelosi got a YUGE bump out of tax reform, now it's taping off. Though it looks like she might get another YUGE bump, a SHUTDOWN BUMP(or SHUTDOWN SLUMP when talking about Trump & the GOP) so that could further inflate Democrat numbers.

It’s January and there’s nothing better to talk about, I guess, but the pantswetting over a wildly swingy CNN poll isn’t healthy for anyone - nor is arguing over it

Yep. There's 288 days and at least 30 new Trump controversies left until the election.

Dude, the LV screen on the CNN poll has Democrats up 15. Chill.

Wasn’t that the enthusiasm gap, rather than the LV screen?

I'll take the over on the number of controversies.

Nate Cohn's thoughts on this:


And Harry Enten's:

Everyone needs to stop freaking out.

The same CNN poll mirrors the same edge the Dems had janurary 2006.

2006 and 2018 are quite different midterms.

2006 was GW’s 2nd midterm.  2nd midterms have been often very bad elections for the incumbentPresidential party.  The economy was middling.  The Iraqi  war was not going well. The current tribal nature of the parties had nots set up yet.  Plus there was Mark Foley’s sex scandal.

Regardless of whether Trump is re-elected, 2018 will be his 1st midterm.  There will be no 2nd term drag.
The economy is doing well.   I believe the tax cut will be viewed favorably. A tribal nature of voting has seemingly set up.
 
A Democrat 7.3% generic lead in 2018 might reflect a very different electoral layout than a similar advantage in 2006. Generally the GOP does somewhat better than its generic.  It is also likely that the Democrat advantage may be based on very strong numbers in the northeast and the west coast.   Thus the GOP may do fairly well in Trump carried states and especially in the Senate.

In addition any generic average including a Pew poll is highly suspect.

I understand polls are just a snap shot of the possible election outcome at the time of the poll.

The crazy thing is that most of the posters here, including me, let these polls effect our emotional well being.

Hey Arkansas 1st midterms are normally as bad for president as second

I think you are maybe overestimating the number of "locked in" partisans. No doubt they make up a substantial chunk of the electorate, but there are more than enough Independents who are flippable, and these voters are generally the group waves hinge on, and has been true in just about every R/D wave since at least 2006. There also appears to be a pretty big enthusiasm advantage that is not abating. So you're not going to see another 2014-type situation, where Democratic turnout is lagging.

You're right though, the economy is doing well and there is no deeply unpopular war. By all measures, Trump's approval rating and thus the GOP's generic ballot polls should be excellent. But that isn't the case. Your boy Trump and his persistent strong unpopularity is bringing down the house around you guys, what with his constant drama and scandal and all. This is what pundits and analysts keep pointing out - the economy alone indicates a normal, run-of-the-mill president would be enjoying good approval ratings, yet that isn't the case with Trump, and it's no mistake why.


I keep getting this feeling that (and maybe not you per se) many Republicans have gotten so used to midterms always breaking their way (since 10+ years is a long time), and heard so many times in the Obama era that "Republicans gerrymandered a strong majority" and "Democrats don't vote," that you guys have forgotten just how bad things can actually get for an unpopular Republican president and his or her party.



Not to say I agree with you (I don't), but a lopsided wave that takes place mostly on the West Coast and Northeast would be rather powerful for Democrats. Consider that the 7 - 8 California seats we need, 1 in Arizona, 1 - 2 in Washington, upwards of 3 in Pennsylvania (a new map seems likely, but even without one...), 5 - 6 in New York (?), ~3 in New Jersey, 1 in Maine, and then throw in a decent number of vulnerable seats around the country that would get picked off in any decent year for Democrats, like 2 - 3 in Florida, 1 in Colorado, 1 in Nebraska, 2 in Iowa, and so on...

You see where I'm going with this? A lopsided wave in the areas you suggested may actually be really good for Democrats. It implies that Republicans in the NE and WC are liable to lose seats that seem like Likely R now just because people don't assume it'll be so concentrated, right?

Anyway, just saying.

I've already said that I am expecting a 25-30 seat shift in the House to the Democrats.

I go back before 2006 to 1992 and 1994.  In 1992, despite a Clinton victory, the GOP gained 9 seats in the House.  That was the first sign that something might be wrong for the Democrats; in 1994, the GOP gained another 54 seats.

In 2016, the Democrats gained 7 seats in the House, so that might be the sign that they will do very well in 2018.  In part, the Democrats claim that they would take the House and that they thought "only" a 10 seat gain would be a bad night, this hid what would have been a very good sign.

In PA, I would look at these 4 seats, PA-6, PA-7, PA-8, and PA-4.  The latter is because the popular incumbent, Dent, is leaving; Morganelli, if he gets the Democratic nomination, is fairly conservative.  The first three the have a Cook PPI of 1-2 R.

Abc has dems up 12 and winning indies by 16 https://mobile.twitter.com/ThisWeekABC/status/955411033031626752

This seems to be the major finding of this poll:

Another one is that the lead is 12 among RV but grows to 14 among LV.  This supports the idea that increased D enthusiasm is filtering into the LV screens.

WTF is wrong with you men?

Nothing from LimoLiberal on this one, but he's happy to tout NRCC internals showing bad Dem numbers.

LimoLiberal has posted plenty of poll results that are bad for Republicans.

King Lear is the really bad offender. Limo oscillates

Being up more on likely voters should be very reassuring.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-poll

While Trump's approvals were hurt by the shutdown, it seems as though it has helped the GOP on the generic ballot (now with 6.5 points).

No idea why the ABC poll isn't in there.

It hasnt been updated in a day.

No matter how many times I reload.

To get a sense of how much this will affect the average, the last ABC/WaPo poll was D+11 (this is D+12) and took place October 31st/Nov 1st

It moved it from D+6.7 to D+7.4

No longer a sub-7! Woo!!

Morning Consult goes from D+3 to D+6.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/

Happy! :)

If anything, it's somewhat odd how the generic ballot polls have been lagging behind the changes in Trump's approval rating.

CA-39: Young Kim (R) leads potential Democratic challengers

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/01/18/cd39-did-beltway-prognosticators-overreact-to-royce-retirement/

Remington Research, and they don't give the actual poll release so take it with a grain of salt.

But it shows generic ballot 47-47 TIED, and Trump approval 45-49 (in a district he lost by 8 points!).

There is two matchups between Assemblywoman Young Kim (R), who has the endorsement of Royce, and possible democratic challengers.

Kim (R): 41
Cisneros (D): 38

Kim (R): 42
Tranh (D): 33

One of the worst polls I've seen for Democrats since the 2016 election.

Kim won't win

Lol Remington, can move this to Likely D.

lol a GOP internal showing their candidate with way under 50% of the vote is "very bad for dems".

Actually it's bad news for John McCain.

Yeah, and Issa is up 17 too. They retired solely because they wanted to spend more time with their family!

Lol at the casual racist remark thrown in here.

Mods, srsly

What is the racist remark? I wrote nothing racist consciously in the original post.

Edit: Oh it was King Lear's post, not mine.

I think the Cali seats are going to be a lot tougher than people think. The whole 'sanctuary state' stuff may be energizing conservatives there.

Reuters Ipsos went from D+5 to D+6. Not enough to take the House.

Virginia's on the ball apparently

I question the effectiveness of "SANCTUARY CITIES HISPANICS ILLEGALS KILL YOUR CHILDREN" in districts that are 20-40% Hispanic when it was completely unsucessful in Virginia.

Gillespie also failed epically in suburban districts, and basically all of the California seats are suburban.

Actually, +6 is just a tad below the line of what some think Democrats need. Sabato posted an analysis that suggests it might be possible with around 6. I think he may have even went lower.

Either way, I'm pretty sure most users who follow this thread know the popular vote range Democrats need to get by now. It's been discussed quite a bit.

I love also how the pollster mentions the "Democrat" party.

It's clear the Democrats have a massive problem. Yougov went from D+6 to D+4 this week even as Trump's approval went down. Disastrous month.

Ipsos and Morning Consult both showed increases.

Honestly Limo, you gotta stop obsessing over every single poll that releases.

What? Royce won reelection to this district with 57% of the vote. Stop trolling.

Republicans are nearing extinction as a party as their collapse continues in a new Quinnipiac poll:

51% Democrats (+1)
38% Republicans (-1)

Source (https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2515)

If this is true, it’s going to be worse then I thought, by the way can you post the yougov poll?

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/mhd1jcnn1c/econToplines.pdf

Question 81. 41-37.

yeah whoa you guys are so smart. the numbers going down means democrats wont do good, i cant belive that they dont see that???? there so dumb that even TRUMP has insmarted them

The new gimmick was funny for about one post, Doc. :P

The shutdown was so shortlived and so inconsequential, I doubt it is going to have long-term ramifications for the Democrats.

I like that! We should stop trying to bring Limo and Lear to reason and just fight fire with fire!

Geometric progression of humor (use a joke once, you're a wit; use it twice, it decreases by half).

This was probably the case no matter who was blamed, unless it was maybe a weeks-long shutdown a month or two before the election, where it then would have factored heavily into campaign strategy.

Jesus christ, is any republican even going to be left after this? Total disaster for the GOP - imagine what happens in a recession.

Democrats surging as people realize how bad tax reform was.

FOX

Dems: 44%
GOP: 38%


They had Trump's approval rating rebound. This is absolutely catastrophic for the GOP if the Democrats are leading by this much in a Fox poll.

change from last poll

44 (-6)
38 (+3)

Yeah, Fox isn't an R-baised pollster. These findings aren't great for Dems, but they're not awful either.

A +7 lead seems a safe bet right now.

Fox isn’t GOP biased. It’s a reliable pollster.

Their night TV is just talk radio on air now, but their polling remains accurate. Their news team isn't bad either (Smith/Wallace/Baier)

Democracy Corps/Greenberg Poll: Democrats +11 on Generic Ballot
 (http://www.democracycorps.com/National-Surveys/2018-at-a-breaking-point/)

Quinnipiac:
Democrats 51
Republicans 38 (https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2515)

January seems to be a bit of a “choose your own adventure” month thus far

IMHO - "choose a pollster you are comfortable with, and believe him only..."

There was also a wide variation in polls near the end of both VA-GOV and AL-SEN, although a lot of that was due to differing likely voter screens.  But most of the generic ballot polls are RV, so it wouldn't be as much of a factor.

I think Mourning Consult does a LV screen like Rassy, even this far out.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM

I don't see how the Dems make gains with numbers like this.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2018/01/25/mia-love-has-a-small-lead-over-ben-mcadams-in-exceptionally-close-race-to-represent-utah-in-congress-new-poll-shows/

UT-4: Love 47, McAdams 42

.....

???

I love that Trump approval number. 42-56. In a district he won 39-32-22.

It is quite worrying that their are so many undecideds in these polls, this poll has 11% undecideds, and if past elections (ie. 2016 and 2014) are any guide, we know undecideds tend to break Republican. This means that to be safe you really should cut the Democratic lead in half in most of these polls with high undecideds.

It is quite worrying for Republicans that their are so many undecideds in these polls, this poll has 11% undecideds, and if past elections (ie. Virginia and Alabama) are any guide, we know undecideds tend to break Democratic. This means that to be safe you really should double the Democratic lead in most of these polls with high undecideds.

A Limo vs King Lear pissing match, kill me now

It's like those threads on reddit where two bots reply to each other endlessly.

Why are you picking a fight with me? don't you realize I'm one of the only people that stick up for you here.

Friendships are overrated.

RIP a coveted and forever alive in my heart Atlas relationship

Democrats should do well in the current Political Environment. However they have one big Albatros breathing around their necks: Nancy Pelosi. IF Democrats retake the House it would have once again Pelosi as Speaker. Pelosi is even more unpopular than Hillary Clinton was during the 2016 Race. If Republican Congressional Candidates can attach Pelosi to the hip of their Democratic Counterparts Election Night 2018 could still be very close and interesting.

Secondly, for the last four years Congressional Democrats are basically running a single issue Campaign with their "War on Women Crap" & Minimum Wages. That backfired spectacularly in 2014 & 2016 as Men came out in droves to support Republicans & Trump.

The issue is that for the Republicans, Pelosi has not been proven to negatively affect the Democrats significantly lately. They tried this in both GA-06 and Montana and both those races we're still a lot closer than they probably should've been.

Voters for whom Pelosi is a strong negative are probably motivated Republicans already, so the net effect of focusing on Pelosi is likely to be minor.

This seriously cracked me up

Ipsos/Reuters (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1212Y17/filters/PD1:1), Jan 21-25, 1960 RV

D 42, R 35 (no change from previous survey)

Voters for whom Trump is a strong negative are probably motivated Democrats already, so the net effect of focusing on Trump is likely to be minor.

(The above is a patently absurd statement meant to demonstrate the absurdity of another, similarly absurd statement)

Not really.  I suspect Trump's disapproval among non-Democrats is higher than Pelosi's among non-Republicans.

Yeah I'm pretty sure far more people know and are annoyed by Trump than Pelosi. Pelosi hasn't gotten nearly as many headlines as Trump (who is omnipresent in the news) in the past year.

Colorado

https://www.colorado.edu/lab/aprl/sites/default/files/attached-files/2017_colorado_political_climate_report.pdf

Trump approval: 34/63
Generic ballot: Dems 56 / Reps 37

CO-06 and CO-03 fall easily with these numbers. Gardner is also at -23% approval so he might be DOA in 2020.

Rasmussen is doing some generic ballot polls now.

1/28, 2018 Generic Ballot

Democrats: 45
Republicans: 37

D+8

These numbers are a little better for Democrats then I would expect from Rasmussen, considering their very accurate Likely voter model (which usually screens out Low-turnout Democratic voters). However, I don’t think a 45-37 lead is that impressive for Democrats considering theirs 18% undecided, and if those break Republican, then Democrats would be in big trouble.

But if those undecideds break Democratic, then It'll be a huge D landslide.

Who knows!

Oh, and one thing that I keep noticing. For an incumbent party, being consistently stuck in the mid to high 30's isn't that great.

Looks like likely voters are Democrats because of YUGE ENTHUSIASM AND ENERGY and Republicans EMBARASSED AND CHOKING.

Inside sources are telling me the Democratic generic ballot lead on this poll will be below 5: https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/958556597369868288

The tweet is by Monmouth and it says:


No need to see what Limo said.

Fixed it.

Yougov/Economist 1/30

Democrats: 42
Republicans: 37

D+5, not enough to win the House. Collapse.

And Reuters/Ipsos went from D+8 to D+7.

This is an improvement from their previous poll which was

Democrats: 41
Republicans: 37

You expect Limo not to be a hack

Seems a bit ambitious. I’ll say D+7 or D+8

https://twitter.com/PollsterPatrick/status/958757096723566592

"Not for nothing, as the kids say. But we're releasing some poll numbers in 20 minutes that could represent a blip or might portend a shift in public opinion. Some news day, eh?"

You are not even a good troll.

Monmouth

Democrats: 47 (-4)
Republicans: 45 (+9)


Holy hell.

Nancy Pelosi seen bawling her eyes out in the corner.

So much for those predictions, huh?

Anyway, it's still very early.

That's an outliner if I've ever seen one

Meh. Not concerned.

Trump has a 42% approval rating in that poll.

If he is hanging around that number, then it doesn't matter what the generic ballot lead is.

Please don't quote the moron, thanks.

The approval rating suggests this is a reversion to the mean from a December outlier. This actually corresponds pretty well with what Monmouth was showing for most of the year.

This. The economy has never been a major factor in midterms... well, sometimes it has but the popularity of a president is more important.

Yeah, if the President starts cranking out 50%+ approval ratings then I will be concerned. But he is hanging around the high 30's to early-mid 40s then his party is going to be in trouble in November.

Clearly Democrats are doomed. LimoLiberal's hot take is all we need to pay attention to.

To add to my point. Trump had a 43% approval rating in the exit polls here in VA during the election in November.

The GOP was completely wiped out.

Have you guys considered banning the moron that's cheerfully sh**tting everywhere?

This poll isn't great for Dems, but there is nothing to worry about. Of course they should still look at it and fix their strategy, but there were polls similar like this where the Democrats were beating the GOP in 2010 and then lost. We need to look at the environment and history, both of which heavily favor the Democrats.

* Dem candidates outraising Reps by miles
* Record number of GOP politicians resigning
* Highly unpopular President

Exactly. Living and dying by every wiggle in the generic ballot is pointless, but we are who we are.

Aren’t those the words to a Kesha song?

The moron that correctly predicted the results of a poll before it was released... and has been the only person who correctly identified the Trump and GOP surge in polling.

Yeah, you're still a moron. Why? Well, let me lay this out for you: it's one poll, you thought the PA35 special election was going to be competitive despite the fact the Democrat won with 75% of the vote, you thought an overcast in northern Virginia would cost Ralph Northam the election, you think little bumps in the approval ratings means a surge, and you talked about a "collapse" in the Economist poll despite the fact the Democrats INCREASED their margin from the last one.

His approvals are going up though...fox, cnn, and mounmouth  have all shown upticks. Democrats shouldn’t take their natural advantage this year for granted, especially when the DNC is 200k away from insolvency when the GOP has millions in cash on hand plus the Koch network.

I can't ban him, and I'm probably in a minority if not alone among the mods who think career trolls like him should be banned.

But if he keeps posting commentary meant to incite arguments then I'll consider moving his posts and threads to a single megathread.

Even with that Monmouth poll, the RCP average still has the Democrats up by 7.5

"Throw it in the average" is always the best answer for an outlier.

Yawn....these the same polls that had Hillary winning in a landslide? Rofl

I tend to think that individual moderators should be trusted with the power to ban people instead of being forced to hand trolls off to whatever convoluted deliberation process Dave makes you guys go through, but I guess I'm in the minority.

Bad poll - FAKE NEWS

Good poll - WINNING!!! #MAGA

Did they move to a different screening model? Hard to understand that large a shift otherwise.

That being said, my first paycheck came through under the new tax plan and I greatly appreciate the extra money. My guess is this poll is a response to seeing larger paychecks, but there will be many news cycles between now and the midterms. If history has shown us anything, it is that, while good for the president temporarily, larger paychecks and a stalwart economy will be afterthoughts after another bad tweet or three in the coming months - time has that impact on people.

Still, don't understand the argument that this isn't an R surge (and a predictable one at that) due to the tax cuts. Rs have clearly gained ~5 points on the generic ballot in the last month or so. Dems should probably stop trying to say the tax cuts are a disaster until they actually cause some damage, it's just bad strategy to try to tell people that them making more money is harmful, especially if there's no caveat of reduced employment options to go with it.

For concern trolls like Limo...

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2010_generic_congressional_vote-2171.html (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2010_generic_congressional_vote-2171.html)

You'll underperform the Generic Ballot by 3?

Lol. They can't accept that the blue wave is crumbling.

@Madigan you missed the point.

@LimoLiberal Obviously you didn't click on the link.

Yeah, you two missed the point. Go look at the polls in January 2010 and then look at the final result in November 2010.

From D+2 to R+9

For the love of God... The opposition party (GOP) consistently outpolled the Democrats by significant margins. They dipped in the summer and the Dems lead a few polls but the GOP ultimately won big.

Right now the Dems and the GOP have switched places.

You're so daft.

+6 was big for Rs, but it might not be enough for Dems now with all the gerrymandering.  We'll see.  :P

The point is even when generic ballot polls showed the party in power doing fine. The environment and the President's approval rating were the bigger indicator.

Perhaps it'd be better if we just all logged off and came back in November because this sucks.

Yep. That's what I'm going to do. I'll be back in late February for the Pennsylvania special election. These polls give me so much anxiety because I genuinely think that our country will crumble if Republicans still hold power in 2019. I know all of you think that I'm a secret Republican or that King Lear is my sock or that I post on RRH, but no. I'm a Democrat who believes that the Republicans and Trump will win over voters this year.

Anyways, bye. I'll hope for some good polls in the mean time.

Feel free to celebrate ;)

I think a mental health break away will do you some good because you get seriously wayyyy too worked up about every little poll

We need a T- avatar for the dedicated trolls. ;)

Please don’t leave, your one of the few voices of reason on this forum, without you here it’s just going to be me trying to convince my fellow Democrats not to be overwhelmed with hubris again.

Good

It's entirely possible to acknowledge that the Dems might not take either chamber of congress without declaring that they're doomed in every single post.

Decided to come back just because of this mean comment.

RCL shows the collapse of the Democratic margin in several polls from December to January:

CNN  +18 to +5
Monmouth +15 to +2
Reuters/Ipsos +12 to +6
Economist/Yougov +9 to +5
NBC News/Wall St. Junk.  +11 to +6

Does this mean no Democrat wave in the House? Possibly.  Possibly not. 

However, these changes indicate the GOP might be able to reduce the size of the wave. They also indicate the GOP might be able to pull off a Senate wave.

The main reason for the wave in 2010 was the low turnout of younger Democrat voters compared to older GOP voters.  A Democrat wave this year depends on the reversal of these turnouts. If the GOP is able to reduce the difference in turnout, it can reduce the wave in the House and create the GOP wave in the Senate. This is possible because older voter have a history of turning out well in midterms.

Unlike LimoLiberal I look forward to such a turn of events.

A senate wave?
Okay who is beating Brown? Tester? Baldwin? Casey? Stabenow?

This thread is turning into a 4 way circle jerk between various troll sock accounts

Democrats led in generic ballot polls as late as October 2010 and November 2014. It's January. You all need Xanax.

A GOP Senate wave would result from keeping Nevada and Arizona and picking up Missouri, Indiana, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Florida and/0r Pennsylvania.

Do I think it will happen? No.  But then I did not think Trump would win.

lol@PA being more likely to flip than MT. And of course strong incumbent Dean Heller still wins in your scenario.

A PPP poll in June had Feingold ahead of Johnson 50% to 37%:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/PPP_WI_June_2016.pdf

A Monmouth poll in late August had Feingold ahead 54% to 41%

Only one published poll in October had Johnson in the lead.

https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/senate/wi/wisconsin_senate_johnson_vs_feingold-3740.html#polls

You just cannot live by polls.  Never give up at least in a state where your party has a good base.

For the record, you are not alone. :P

Is it a fair assessment to say that the closing we are seeing is some share of Republican voters feeling better about their party and coming home to supporting it in the generic ballot? I'm looking at Monmouth where the Dem top line isn't different from other top lines, but the Republicans at 45% are much higher than other polls having Republicans in the 30s.

Yes, I'm aware it's one poll.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/02/01/that-upcoming-democratic-rout-suddenly-its-looking-far-less-certain/?utm_term=.08fad78eabb1

Calling it now: at the very least, Dems pick up 25 seats. Fundraising and the national environment favor them compared to the GOP.

The national environment, fundraising, and human capital of candidates are what's going to help the Dems win. These doomsday posts about their chances "dying" are knee-jerk reactions to the Monmouth poll.

My feeling is that an increase in Trumps approval will correspond to better congressional poll results for Republicans. 

Here's my theory.  Trump has been cast as a Radical Republican. I think people see congressional lawmakers as more centrist and appropriate. If more people approve of Trump that indicates to me that people are not just leaning Republican, but becoming base supporters of Trump.  As a consequence, Republicans will have a larger base to work with during the mid-term elections. 

I think the key number is 47 for Trump's approval ratings.  That would represent a 6 points swing and save the Republicans from any meaningful losses.  Remember that Trump won the election with 46% of the vote and congressional Republicans dominated.  If he starts to exceed 48, the Democrats are in big s##t trouble.  Over 50% and it becomes a disaster. 

You didn't see this number correspond with Obama's approval rating, because Democrats don't show up in big numbers during mid-term elections and Democrats were not viewed so favorably in many congressional districts.  Obama seemed reasonable and centrist to the blue collar voter, but Democrats did not.  We have the opposite situation working today in which people view Republicans more favorably than Trump. 

Polls have showed that Trump's favorable rating is much higher than the Republican party's...

This is a myth. In truth, turnout is usually in flux and depends on the electorate base of the parties. With Republicans bleeding educated voters, who turn out in good numbers historically, the opposite is easily possible in a midterm with a president like Trump. In fact, most elections we've seen so far since 2016 have seen massive swings against Republicans in what are supposed to be extremely low turnout elections.

We'll see what happens in 2018, but you're getting ahead of yourself here.

Democrats will win big in 2018....ignore the polls.

The last ABC poll taken before the 1994 midterms showed it a 4% lead for the GOP

Again, look at the signal (retirements, fundraising, enthusiasm,etc...) and not the noise (polls, dumbass pundits, LimoLiberal)

Look at the polling from 1994 for example:

()

I'm plenty sure the polls will eventually bounce back, or at least maintain what they are now (7% give or take). Keep in mind that Democrats under-performing polls is not a given. If Democrats won the House PV by 7%, that would be a wave just shy of 2006, and if they got 9%, it would be a bit better. So this idea that 7.3 on the RCP average should have Democrats panicking is downright comical. It shows just how far the bar has been lowered by conservatives trying to fight a narrative that they are on the outs this year.

For the first time since 2008, the fundamentals are all strongly on the side of the Democratic Party. Candidate fundraising, historic recruitment, almost historic number of retirements, a consistent and sometimes quite large enthusiasm gap, chronically low approval ratings of an unpopular Republican president and the shift of high-turnout white college grads to the Democrats all bodes well for the party to perform strongly in November.

That being said, we still have a long way to go until the election, so both Democrats and Republicans are likely to see the polls swing back and forth a bit. It's not worth obsessing over each swing as if that is for sure what it will be in November.

Why go all the way back to 1994? Just look at 2014.

Oh I admit it.  I'm totally getting ahead of myself.  There are so many variables at play with Trump and Anti-Trump politics.  I'm just theorizing based on the data that pops out to me.  Now I'm gonna go super nerdy with my theory by pointing to data I think will be important and selectively pick data that support my theory.

Let's analyze Generalissimo's 1994 poll results.  Democrats were tied with Republicans right before the election.  In Mid-August Clinton's approval rating was 39%, but bumped up to 46% before the mid-term elections (aka the Republican Revolution).  Clinton's numbers averaged out to 42.5%.  The Democrats only received 44.8% of the votes.  In 2010, Obama's approval rating was around 44-46% before the election, and Democrats received 44.9% of congressional votes.  In both these elections, the Republican Party received 52% of the vote, which is lower but pretty close to the Presidential disapproval level.  

In 2006, Bush's approval rating was between 37% and 44% before the election.  That averages out to 40.5%.  Republicans received 44% of the vote, while Democrats received 52%, despite a disapproval of 51-58%.  

In the last election, Trump garnered 46% of the popular vote and Republicans won elections by good margins.  This indicates to me that Trump's poll numbers and approval do not correlate Republican voter share at the congressional level.  Now I don't think its fair to compare Presidential elections years with mid-term elections, but I think Trump's approval is likely a baseline for Republicans.  

In sum, I think Presidential Approval polls are nice indication of the incumbent party's base support in a midterm election. In terms of voter share, Democrats and Republicans seem capped at 52-53%, despite high approval rating, but Republicans receive a greater benefit from this cap because of districting.  Generally, I would add 2-2.5% more points to Trump's average approval rating a couple of months before the election.  Let's call it the Trump Rules.  I would also add an additional .75% to it for every additional point Trump falls below 43% to account for political climatology.  If I had to put my chips all-in blind, I would call it 51-53% to 46-47.5% in favor of the Democrats in terms of voter share.

In November, I will look back at this post and conclude that I must have been hammered at 4:55PM on a Thursday.

You know what pisses me off about this whole congressional ballot affair?
When Democrats have a 10+ point lead, political journalists say "it's too early, you don't know what's goin' to happen, Republicans will come home".
But when the lead shrinks to 5-6 points, "Democrats are blowing it, they got the wrong message, Middle America hates Pelosi and LOVES Trump".

Try to have some fycking consistency people, is it that difficult?

2014 should of come as no surprise due to a political phenomenon known as the 6 year itch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-year_itch)

1994 was unique because nobody thought the GOP would take over Congress. There was an article not too long ago about the 1994 mid-terms that talked about how Gingrich was like the only person in the Republican Party who thought they would take over the House because he looked at the underlying fundamentals and avoided the polls (most of which showed a close race). He noticed that the House had become a gerontocracy of an old and out of touch generation and that in every Congressional election year, the amount of Boomers in Congress began to increase. For Example:

1975-1% of Congress was made up of Baby Boomers
1977-2%
1979-4%
1981-6%
1983-11%
1985-12%
1987-16%
1989-21%

(The data I have available ends in 1989)

Extrapolating from these trends, Gingrich realized that the generational fundamentals alone would lead Republicans to victory in 1994. Basically, the same thing is going to happen now in reverse and all these old Boomer jagoffs are about to get tossed out.

These are things nobody looks at. So many people on Atlas jerk off endlessly to polls and useless data but if you want to make predictions, you have to come at it from every angle possible. Look at enthusiasm, donations, the collective feeling at the time, the generational dynamics, the party in power, the economy, etc...

Data and polling alone is useless

^^^

Gingrich is a much cannier analyst of American politics than he gets credit for

Here's the article  (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/how-the-clinton-gingrich-years-became-the-good-old-days-republicans-revisit-1994/2018/01/02/a98ed2ae-dc2b-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.537b11734aae)or anyone interested.

^ I don't agree with placing so much emphasis on the "Contract for America" thing (I recall reading that they only laid it out a month or two before the election and most people weren't even aware of it), but I do agree with a number of the things you laid out in your previous post. There is only so much emphasis you can place on generic ballot polls, and they best thought of as one part of a multi-part model. That is one thing I learned from 2016. Polls were the only thing that truly indicated a possible wave, while everything else seemed to point to a closer race, or at least not a wave.

That being said, the polls are still important, but there is still a lot of room to move either way. If you think the average of D+7 right now with a MoE of 3 points is where things currently stand at, then it could go anywhere from D+4 to D+10, which is the difference between a probable GOP majority and a probable Democratic majority.

I agree that policy positions don't matter at all. All election victories can be attributed, for the most part, to factors outside of the candidates control. The Great Society never would of happened if Kennedy hadn't had his head blown off or had Kennedy chosen someone inexperienced as his VP (only LBJ could of rammed that legislation through). Good quality candidates are made my the historical moment and policy positions come from one party trying to snap up coalitions to create a dominant enough coalition to legislate. But candidates and policies alone do very little to win elections all on their own. Unfortunately, this is what the centrist wing of the Democratic Party doesn't understand.

I’ve acually met giant-killer George Nethercutt a few times. Very nice man, said I had a pretty wife and has a remarkable handshake.

NBC/Survey Monkey

Democrats: 45%
Republicans: 39%

I couldn't find a previous NBC/Survey Monkey poll, but according to 538 the last NBC poll was with Wall Street and it was

Democrats: 49%
Republicans: 43%

Those aren't really comparable (other than in the sense that all generic ballot polls are comparable).  They're different polling organizations, and the SurveyMonkey poll is of all adults while the NBC/WSJ one is of registered voters.

D+6 in both models, hmm?

Here's 270 to win Forcast(They still have the GOP winning the House):


https://www.270towin.com/2018-house-election/

It's just a map version of the Sabato ratings.

Per DKE... ABC has a poll showing GCB at D+14

Told you guys. Stick to da fundamentals

ABC has dems up 14 but more importantly have a massive enthusiasm gap as 51% of dems are "highly motivated to vote" vs only 34% rep http://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/strength-party-strongholds-key-midterm-outcomes-poll/story?id=52795264&__twitter_impression=true

Republicans lead by only 6% in ALL of the districts they hold.

()

The GOP is finished. Libs using extra monies from Trump tax scam to send to lib candidates

That actually looks like a depolarization effect.

This is actually what I'm doing with my extra $12 per paycheck. I already have a Costco membership.

That's all you ever post in these types of threads I swear.

Because elections are predictable if you know what to look for. This site absolutely loses it with 1 bad poll while ignoring the special election victories in deep red districts, gobs of money being raised, Trump's abysmal approval rating, etc...

FWIW, this poll was conducted Jan. 15-18 and the topline of D+14 was released on Jan. 22.  (Source)  (http://www.langerresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/1194a32018Midterms.pdf)The additional details on the enthusiasm gap were embargoed until today.

Except unlike 2010 and 2014 the GOP is more popular than Trump (in 2010 Obama was more popular than the Dem Party)

That's like saying that plague is more popular than Ebola.

No, they're not.  Don't confuse their result in the generic ballot with their popularity.

CNN  (https://pjmedia.com/trending/cnn-poll-approval-ratings-democratic-party-republican-party-collapse/)Nov 2017: 30% approval

CNN/SSRS (https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/24/politics/cnn-poll-republican-party-approval/index.html) Sep 2017: 29%

Gallup  (http://news.gallup.com/poll/24655/party-images.aspx)Sep 2017: 36%

The GOP had a 43% favorable rating vs Trump 49% approval in Alabama. Trump is more popular than the gop in basically every poll I've seen.

"Maybe it's just noise!"

-Nate Silver

I’m trying to decide what the best way to interpret that poll’s enthusiasm gap numbers are.

According to Kyle Kondik, Clinton won the Democratic districts by 34 (now 38), while Trump won the Republican districts by 21 (now 6). That actually makes a lot of sense, as Democrats can't really outperform in the big cities and it also fits perfectly to the special election results in KS-4, MT-AL, SC-05 and various state legislative elections that happened over the last year.

That actually comports with the swings we’ve seen, almost exactly

()

Wow, it's even larger than it was for Republicans in 2010...

But they lead.. Of course, as distribution is very nonuniform (Republican margin in TX-13 will be far more then in NY-24),  that means that Democrats will win districts, but may be - less, then they expect. And they don't need 64-26 margin in their districts - yeah, that means, that there is minimal danger to lose substantial number of them, but it adds nothing to their numbers.

Lol, what, how dumb are you? If Republicans lead by only 6 on average in all the districts they hold, they would lose plenty. As was already pointed out, what this suggests is that about 80% of the national swing is happening in Republican districts with only about 20% happening in Democratic districts.

What was your PhD in again?

Funny how 538 hasn't updated their tracker with the ABC News poll yet. Guess they gotta keep their "what happened to teh Democratic wave" story on the front page.

Nothing funny about it.  As I pointed out upthread...this poll was conducted from Jan 15-18.  The D+14 topline was reported on Jan 22 and has been included in the 538 average for some time (click "Show More Polls" because it's old enough to have fallen off the initial list).  It's only the enthusiasm gap numbers that were released later.

Back to out regularly scheduled programming of Blue Wave Imminent!

It's interesting how similar the shapes of those two curves are.

Incumbent parties probably usually get a holiday bump followed by a SOTU bump near this time, then keep declining again. Then I guess a slight recovery in August (which I'm sure will make some posters here pee their pants), then more decline until most voters make up there minds near the end. Slight uptick for the incumbent party at the end from some voters coming home at the last minute.

IBD/TIPP (https://www.investors.com/politics/tax-cut-popularity-surges-trump-approval-2018-elections/), Jan 25-Feb 2, 900 adults

D 46, R 41 (D+5)

I don't find a previous one to compare this with.

https://twitter.com/PoliticsReid/status/960876827517571072

Devastating numbers.

This is the rare poll where Congressional GOP outpolls Trump, if that’s the case

They also have re-elect numbers. Knight is confirmed DOA as we sit and Rohrabcher is in real trouble.

()

()

I’ve never seen “inclination to vote” used before in a poll

Well the swings in both seats are similar. 24% swing against Knight compared to 2016, and 27% against Rohrabacher in CA-48. All Clinton district Republicans will fall, and Nunes, Hunter and McClintock will sweat.

This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison with past elections. Incumbents always look bad in these matchups.

Another fun graph:

()

Quinnipiac, Feb 2-5, 1333 RV (https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us02072018_uefy24.pdf/)

D 49, R 40 (D+9)

Their previous poll was 51/38 (D+13).

YouGov, Feb 4-6, 1500 adults (1320 RV) (https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/5qt1ka60gv/econTabReport.pdf)

D 43, R 37 (D+6)

Their previous poll was 42/37 (D+5).

YouGov’s shift is basically noise, if only +1 to D’s.

They have consistently been within a very narrow range on the generic ballot since the beginning of December (8 surveys).

Makes sense.

These two shapes really are similar, just shifted about 10 points downward. If this continues, we'd be due for a House PV in 2018 just shy of D+15

....oh my god

sidenote: what happened in 1998??

Bill Clinton, Impeachment of

Ah, of course.

Im also noticing that, outlier nonwithstanding, this shows that special elections undershoot Dem performances (1988, 1996, 2002, 2006, 2008, 2012) more than it overshoots Dems (2000, 2014). It's even undershot Dems by huge amounts before. If the difference observed in 2006 is observed again in 2018, that's a D+17 election.

I'd guess that is due to lower Democratic turnout and given the enthusiasm gap that seems less likely to hold true this year.

Does the "special elections index" do anything to control for which party is the incumbent in the special election?  The thing with special elections is that, by definition, whoever is the incumbent in that party isn't running, and so has no incumbency advantage.  Whereas in the midterms as a whole, there are plenty of seats up where the incumbent is running....but if the special elections are held in both Dem- and GOP-held districts, then I guess this effect cancels out.

In 2017, almost all (all?) of the special elections were held in Republican-held seats.  Was that the case in past years as well, that the incumbent party was the one holding all the seats that were up in special elections?  If not, then I'm not sure if this past year's results are going to be so predictive.

That usually is the case, because the incumbent party's numbers are inflated by House members going to the cabinet, for instance

That would only be relevant in the first year of a presidency though (there usually aren't so many vacancies to fill when a president's in his 3rd, 5th, or 7th year in office), and the graph shown above is for every single congressional election, not just midterms after a president's first two years in office.  And even with that, I think Trump made more appointments from the House than most other presidents.  According to this, for example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_special_elections_to_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

George W. Bush made only one appointment of a sitting member of the House in 2001, and so just 4 out of 7 of the special elections that year were Republican-held seats.  Whereas 5 out of the 6 special elections in 2017 were Republican-held seats.

Now that the GOP's bump has receeded, back to our 🌊 tsunami

New Marist Poll - Generic Congressional Ballot D's Lead By 11
 (http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/us180205/Marist%20Poll_National%20Nature%20of%20the%20Sample%20and%20Tables_February%202018.pdf)

That's 49/38 D.  Their previous poll (last month) was 46/40 D.

DOOOOOOOOOM

In all seriousness that’s a good poll, but it’s only one poll; and I’m not getting excited unless I see corroboration

G. Elliot Morris' graph of historical data suggests we should be nearing the high point for the White House Party.

Also don't look now, but the average is up to ~7.5 D, up about 2.5 points from earlier in the week.

Beautiful!

Nah, that will be probably in September after Labour Day.

Based on the graph it appears they get a bump there, but not to the extent of the post-Holidays/SOTU bump.

Yeah. The bump is smaller and so is their absolute position on the GCB

Ipsos/Reuters, Feb 4-8, 2141 RV

D 41 (-2)
R 38 (+3)

I wonder what the reason for this downturn is

Just Rs coming home or a reaction to the budget bill discussions / immigration talks?

Dems can win anywhere between 11 and 42 seats in the House.  This is a violatile electorate, the last 3 Presidents they have lost 1 or both houses of Congress.

NEW POLL: PA-15 (current version)

http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/capitol-ideas/mc-nws-15th-district-congress-poll-dent-trump-casey-20180208-story,amp.html?__twitter_impression=true

Remember this is a Trump +8 district

Generic D: 38
Generic R: 35

• Casey above water 34-31
  Wolf above water 37-32
  Trump disapproval 56%, approval not given.
  Tax bill above water 42-39
  Dent highly popular.

The voters in this district can't make up their mind on anything besides Trump apparently.

Also it says Trump's approval in the district is 40%.

Cool cool. But the PA-15 in the redistricting the legislature made is very different, and while hat map probably won't be approved, it's probably not a stretch to believe it will end up have very different lines.

With this poll, it is pretty safe to say that a compact Leigh Valley district would go Democratic.

This is fascinating. The Upshot at the NYT estimates that the impact of court-ordered redistricting in Pa., Va., Florida, and NC, Republican retirements, and Democratic recruitments has added the equivalent of 2 points to the Democratic advantage on the generic ballot. In other words, it's made it easier for Democrats to take control equivalent to 2 points on the generic ballot but in a way that won't show up in the polls.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/12/upshot/big-republican-advantages-are-eroding-in-the-race-for-house-control.html

Funny how the gerrymandering of California and Maryland is ok but NC and VA isn’t.

California wasn’t gerrymandered.

1. California isn't gerrymandered.
2. Maryland is actually being challenged in the courts and could be overturned along with a bunch of other maps, FWIW.
3. Nothing in the article nor my summary said anything about gerrymandering being ok or Dem gerrymandering being ok. There is no value judgment. (That said, I'm on the record everywhere that gerrymandering sucks whoever does it.)
4. No one mentioned Ohio, either. Does that mean they're ok with that Republican gerrymander?

Exactly, lol. What hackish thing to say. You know if CA were gerrymandered, Ds would have another 10 seats or something around those lines.

Just because it has a “nonpartisan districting Committee” doesn’t mean it isn’t gerrymandered. Especially when criteria for districting is matching so called “communities of interest.”

Nevertheless, California wasn't gerrymandered.

You have yet to put forth a shred of evidence that CA is gerrymandered.

Matching up communities of interest actually works in favour of Republicans, because those black, Hispanic communities have to be in the same seat, basically packing Democratic voters into D+30, when they could be used to create multiple D+7 seats in the same area.

Democrats would have 10 more safe seats in California if it was gerrymandered in favor of democrats.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/california/#Dem

Young Conservative, do you ever start to feel bad whenever you post nonsense that is easily disproven? You do this a lot.

It's February. You shouldn't get excited (or bummed) regardless.

How is it possible to look at the grotesque shapes that are California's congressional districts and not conclude it is gerrymandered.

Just because it doesn't increase partisan advantage in one direction or the other doesn't make a map ok. Districts should be drawn based on county lines, compactness, and keeping traditional communities together. California's map (along with most others in this country) fails to do that spectacularly.

()

https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2018/2/12/17001984/forecast-good-news-dems

VRA.

Rothenberg on the generic ballot: https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/the-generic-is-falling-the-generic-is-falling

Subtitle: A deeper look at polling shows a fairly consistent Democratic advantage.

https://twitter.com/JamesArkin/status/963444553964511232

Yikes. Red alert.

who care about partisan polls?

It's a Dem group, isn't it?

People are willfully ignoring evidence.

The amount of projection from limoliberal onto better posters is sort of incredible.

Dems will win the House, calling it. It's a wave and will only get bigger. LimoLiberal will be humiliated and make an 'apology'. Nail it down, bookmark it, carve it in, it will happen.

Ipsos/Reuters (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1212Y17/filters/PD1:1), Feb 8-12, 1268 RV

D 43, R 35 (D+8)

Previous poll was D 42, R 37

538 average is up to D+7. I wonder when that Priorities USA poll was taken.

I don’t believe 538 includes internal polls in their average

I actually think the Garin-Hart-Yang / Global Strategy Group D+4 poll is the Priorities USA poll.

Morning Consult

R+1

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/14/trump-polling-democrats-republicans-407315

Despite more independents backing dems and more republicans crossing over than dems, this poll somehow spit out R+1. Idk how they managed to poll more Republicans than dems even though dems outnumber republicans by 5%. With a more realistic sample, this poll would be D+6.

Consult feels like a joke pollster with all the crazy high Trump approvals they come out with.

So Consult swings toward the GOP while Reuters swings toward the Dems? Taking into account the Dem victory in Florida yesterday, and the decent results in Minnesota Monday, I'm inclined to believe the numbers haven't changed much.

Didn't they also have yesterday Trump with majority approval only in 19 states?
And he was underwater in every big state, except Florida.

As if having Trump barely underwater in Virgina wasn't enough to prove that Morning Consult poll is a joke

Morning Consult has consistently been R friendly. Taking into account the swings in the special elections, the fundraising numbers, the enthusiasm of the left, and Trump's general unpopularity, I'd say Ispos is more in-line with the current state of the midterms.

Anyways, I expect the vast majority of undecideds to break for the Democrats in November, and Consult's poll shows a lot of them.

The Hill is already ovulating over the MC poll...

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/373761-poll-gop-erases-dem-advantage-on-generic-ballot-ahead-of-midterms (http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/373761-poll-gop-erases-dem-advantage-on-generic-ballot-ahead-of-midterms)

Who is this undecided? Can they run in all 468 Congressional seats up for election?

PA 18 will be the first good test.   Trump is almost even in approval in PA in the Morning consult poll.  Both parties are significantly involved.nt the issue.  What

I believe the Democrats need to take Trump’s bargain on immigration, if they do not want a backlash.  The majority actually support the parts of the bargain.  Then you can hope Trump’s base revolts against nearly 2 million in effect given amnesty.

But then what do I know about how Democrats think?  You may want the issue.  Whatever!

Just putting this here so we have a record: https://twitter.com/meredithk27/status/963614105717362688

Cathy McMorris-Rodgers: 47
Lisa Brown: 43

-6 job approval.

PA 18 will be Saccone +8 imo. Trump won it by almost 20 and the gop is investing a ton into it.

Wait, so a poll where Trump won the sample by 7% has Republicans up by 1%? This is a good thing for Republicans?

My lord this poll is trash!

If he did, the swing will count.

This exactly, 53-45 Saccone.

Morning Consult isnt a joke pollster, they're just not very good. They never released any state polls in 2016 and their national daily tracker was questionable at best.

I heard on Twitter that PPP has a new poll that has dems up 8 on CGB

PPP: D 49/41

https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/polls/democrats-lead-8-points-generic-house-ballot-nationally/

A 3 point swing from the Democratic peak in December, which isn't bad. Democrats lost 2 points, Republicans gained 1.

+8 in the GCB is not bad in a poll where Pres approvals are only -6

Do you think that failing to get forensic analysis on the yearbook set the Dems back on the generic ballot, Arkansas Yankee? That could explain the R+1 we're now citing.

Not to mention the major difference: the Democrats controlled the White House during those two elections, and they don't this year.  The out-party typically gets a boost in midterms.

Yougov went from D+6 to D+4.

PPP for Matt Heinz in AZ-02 (McSally's old seat)

Both Dems are matched up against Lea Marquez Peterson, presumed R nominee

Heinz (D) leads by 14 (45-31)

Kirkpatrick (D) leads by 9 (43-34)

Trump is only below water in job approval 45-51. He lost AZ-02 45-50.

https://www.scribd.com/document/371462388/AZ-02-PPP-D-for-Matt-Heinz-Feb-2018

"only" below water. a -9 approval in ARIZONA is enough for it to flip for even the most mediocre Dem candidate.

He is -6 in job approval in a district he lost by 5. That bodes well for him statewide. I think you're misunderstanding my post.

-6 in a Clinton/Republican district? Wow, that's awesome news for the Democrats!

More evidence that Morning Consult poll is absolute trash:

Dems only lead the GOP by 4 points when it comes to which party the public trusts more on healthcare, and yet, the GOP leads by 6 points on immigration despite the fact DACA is popular and championed by the Democrats. MC is garbage.

Republicans also led by +5 in a single 2008 poll (USA Today/Gallup) and in 2006, they had a couple tied polls month(s) before the election.

Republicans/Trump have recovered some since late December - that's not in question imo, so I'm not surprised to see MC with very favorable results for them, but I'm pretty sure that the state of the environment is not R+1 right now. Given the fundamentals of this year and literally every other non-poll marker (retirements/fundraising/recruitment/special elections/etc) being enormously in favor of Democrats, I'm very confident this election is going to go badly for Republicans. The only question is how badly - D+12 would be substantially worse than D+7, for instance.

I think if Democrats are poised to blow it, we'll probably see them in the lower end of mid-single digits in September/October with even more tightening in the last couple weeks. Other than that, there is just too much going wrong for Republicans to think otherwise.

Yeah, this poll is garbage.  For one thing, the demographics don't add up.  Their raw data says (https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000161-915b-d53a-a5f5-b57fafea0000 page 18):

White 1617 81%
Hispanic 178 9%
Black 255 13%
Other 113 6%

Those percentages add up to 109%.

The percentage whites seems to be the most off. Imagine if this were just a weighting error?

Genertic Ballot Amoung Likley Voters in PA-18:

Republicans 43%
Democrats 40%

Source (https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_PA_021518/)

The GOP should be sh**tting themselves over that PA18 poll.

Bear in mind this district is R+11

Trying to have a running record of all polls here.

Essentially a tie between Democratic candidates and Republican candidates. However, Republicans are benefiting from fewer candidates.

^The undecideds appear to be more liberal leaning as well.

Ipsos/Reuters, Feb 11-15, 1241 RV (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1212Y17/filters/PD1:1)

D 42 (nc)
R 36 (-1)

No signs of recovery for Democrats even after what should've been a bad few weeks for Republicans.

I think the second moment of public opinion is shifting moreso than the first. In other words, Rs both had a positive shift and momentum over the last month or so. Now, momentum is shifting back to the Democrats, just the short term trend isn't showing it yet.

In other words....standard operating procedure of all.midterms going back 70 years

In light of the Florida shootings, I expect the momentum to shift back to the Democrats.

Hispanic isn’t marked as its own race. You can be White/Hispanic or Black/Hispanic. It seems like the poll identified 9% as Hispanic and White, so if you get rid of that overlap it tallies up to 100%.

That makes sense.  Good catch.

https://static.texastribune.org/media/documents/ut-tt-2018-02-summary-1.pdf?_ga=2.225578778.1647027925.1519049485-1170111650.1519049485 on page 9/19, GOP leads Generic Congressional Ballot by 3 in Texas.

For reference, in 2016 the GOP won 57-37. Sessions, Hurd, and Culberson are probably f**ked if this is right.

More than just those 3 would be screwed if Republicans only won the House popular vote by 3 points in Texas.

Hmmmn, probably not. All the other districts have been carried by Trump by at least 10 points. Unless the swings are concentrated in some areas.

@gelliottmorris

#New PA cong. map increases D chance of winning the House majority by 4%. They only need a 6.8% generic ballot margin now (down from 7.7) to be favored.

Diff. will be closer to 10% in Nov when uncertainty from polls is ⬇️. Redraw is a very big deal.

TX-02 and TX-21 are outside possibilities

The swing wouldn't be even at all though. For instance, among other districts, Clinton's improvement disproportionately hit these districts:

TX-21
TX-22
TX-24
TX-32

Absurdly Republican seats like TX-19 and TX-36 barely moved at all, and in fact in those two cases went more for Trump than they did for Romney.

So if I had to guess, Marchant and Smith's seats might be candidates for competitive seats under R+3 House PV in TX, even if not by much.

Can we talk more about the fact that a political party needs to win by 6 + percentage points of the popular vote to even begin to think about wielding political power, and how any Republican can defend this as anything but a gross abrogation of a democratic system of government.

This is a by effect of the FPTP system. That said, eliminating gerrymandering fixes much of the disparate effects.

Not to mention even a 17 point shift from +20 statewide to +3 is going to endanger "mere" +10 or even +15 Trump seats (caveats about shifts not being uniform being noted).

New SurveyUSA poll for CA-49 primary. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California,_2018#District_49)
Sample size: 510
Margin of error: ±5.4%
Doug Applegate (D): 18%
Rocky Chavez (R): 17%
Diane Harkey: 10%
Mike Levin (D): 8%
Kristin Gaspar (R): 7%
Sara Jacobs (D): 5%
Brian Maryott (R): 2%
Josh Schoonover (R): 2%
Paul Kerr (D): 1%
Jordan Mills (Peace & Freedom): 1%
Christina Prejean (D): 1%
Joshua Hancock (L): 0%
Other: 1%
Undecided: 27%

Quinipiac has D+15. 53 - 38.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2521

COLLAPSE

Republicans and Trump's numbers really took a hit with this recent shooting, at least according to Q.

I kind of doubt that.

Historically, parties tend to see a bump early in the cycle, but things tend to regress as we enter the spring.

This is an outlier but this does point to January's numbers just being a small bump

*whistles*

Let’s see this corroborated, though.

For comparison, their previous poll (Feb 2-5) was 49/40 (D+9).

It does make sense if both Gallup and Rassy are showing a decline for Trump.

Y'know, no one is going to learn their damn lesson. We're gonna repeat the doomsaying of the past few weeks within two months or so.

Yes, but what will be the trend of the doomsaying? ;)

The national median house district before the Pennsylvania remap was R+3 (this might have changed post-PA) which means that democrats need a ballot advantage of 3 or more to overcome said seat. The big hump - which republicans  would also face if they were attacking a D majority, comes from incumbency advantage, and that is relative. In some cases, like FL-26 and MN-07 incumbency matters a whole lot. In others, like NH-01 and NV-04, it mattered very little. The average seems to be between 3-4 points, meaning that with the present map, Ds need a ballot advantage of 6-7, and Rs would need a ballot advantage of 0-1 to take control. Under a entirely fair map, both parties would probably need a 4 point lead to take control.

Quinnipiac poll not being corroborated at all. Reuters/Ipsos goes from D+6 to D+6.

Goddamn it this made me chuckle

Gold standard Quinipiac nailed VA-Gov.

The Democrats are regaining steam. They are up to +8.5 over at 538 and +7.6 at RCP. I expect them to further expand in the coming weeks.

#ButHensterToldMeThatGunControlIsALosingIssue

Btw, the Q poll puts the Dems back to where they were BEFORE the tax bill was passed. Sorry, Limo.

Lol'd here. ;D

I don't know where to put this but Texas early voting started today and in Harris county rep Ev turnout is up 25% from 2014 while dem Ev turnout is up 300% from 2014!!!! https://mobile.twitter.com/profJKAiyer/status/966125899186950146

Would love to see these. But behind the politico pro wall.

https://twitter.com/POLITICOPro/status/966297705575264257

That's annoying.

who in the hell has politico pro?

In all likelihood, they’re probably useless morning consult polls that show Generic D leading Generic R 41-40 in WA-08 or something

Ipsos/Reuters, Feb 15-19, 766 RV (http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1212Y17/filters/PD1:1)

D 42 (nc)
R 35 (-1)

Third consecutive poll they've had D at 42, while R has gone from 38 to 36 to 35.

Tax bill enthusiasm wearing off?

The swell of short-term bonuses/hiring announcements was unsustainable.

PPP polled 14 House districts.
Don't have time to write more details so feel free to do so.

https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/2c7561_1536971fc62f48d080ed80a77ed8708c.pdf (https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/2c7561_1536971fc62f48d080ed80a77ed8708c.pdf)

()
Took a screenshot of the data...hope it shows up...

Scary numbers for the GOP.

These are pretty meh to be honest. Super close races for all.

CA-25: Generic D leads Knight (R, i) 44-42 (D+2)
CA-39: Generic D leads Generic R 45-43 (D+2)
CA-49: Generic D leads Generic R 50-41 (D+9)
FL-27: Generic D leads Generic R 54-39 (D+15)
IA-1: Finkenauer (D) leads Blum (R, i) 43-42 (D+1)
KS-2: Davis (D) leads Generic R 44-42 (D+2)
KY-6: Generic D leads Barr (R, i) 44-43 (D+1)
ME-2: Generic D leads Poliquin (R, i) 45-44 (D+1)
MI-11: Generic D leads Generic R 45-42 (D+3)
MN-3: Dean Phillips (D) leads Paulsen (R, i) 46-43 (D+3)
NJ-11: Mikie Sherill (D) losing to Generic R 40-42 (R+2)
NY-19: Generic D tied with Faso (R, i) 42-42 (tied)
TX-23: Generic D losing to Hurd (R, i) 43-44 (R+1)
WA-8: Generic D leads Dino Rossi (R) 44-43 (D+1)

Mildly concerning numbers for the GOP in the Midwest and California. Undeniably great for them elsewhere considering the National Generic ballot.

CA-25 (Steve Knight):

Knight approval: 36/44
Trump approval: 40/55

Knight/D: 42/44

CA-39 (Open):

R/D: 43/45

CA-49 (Open):

R/D: 41/50

FL-27 (Open)

R/D: 39/54

IA-01 (Blum):

Blum approval: 37/47
Trump approval: 40/55

Blum/Finkenauer: 42/43

KS-02 (Open):

R/Davis: 42/44

KY-06 (Barr):

Barr approval: 48/41
Trump approve: 50/45

Barr/D: 43/44

ME-02 (Poliquin):

Poliquin approval: 41/49
Trump approval: 43/52

Poliquin/D: 44/45

MI-11 (Open):

R/D: 42/45

MN-03 (Paulsen):

Paulsen approval 38/46
Trump approbal: 40/56

Paulsen/Phillips: 43/46

NJ-11 (Open):

Sherill/R: 40/42

NY-19 (Faso):

Faso approval: 37/44
Trump approval: 47/49

Faso/D: 42/42

TX-23 (Hurd):

Hurd approval: 46/31
Trump approval: 42/52

Hurd/D: 44/43

WA-08 (Open):

Trump approval: 43/52

Rossi/D: 43/44

In regards to those polls:

since when did will hurd become so popular?

Hurd was never unpopular... TX-23 is one of those districts that turnout makes the difference in winner, like NH-01.

He’s one of the few bipartisan GOP congressmen.

he wasn't unpopular but he barely won in 2016

also what the heck is going on in kansas? didnt trump win there by 20?

Brownback fatigue and Davis is a good candidate.

To be honest, this polling indicates that Democrats only have a relatively small (3 or 4 point) generic ballot lead, because the only seats where Democrats are leading by a statistically significant margin are CA-49 and FL-27, while the rest of the seats are basically coin flips. This dose not corealate with the 7 point lead in the RCP average, or let alone the 15 point lead in Quinnapack.

First of all PPP has been one of the more conservative leaning pollsters lately, I'm sure it will end up being over a 10 point advantage for the Dems.

That PPP polling suggests the Republicans have made significant gains since November. Patriot Majority had PPP poll some of the districts in November, and look at the changes.


Went from D+12 in CA-25 to D+2
Phillips led in MN-03 by 4 and now leads by 3
Generic D led Frelinghuysen in NJ-11 by 2, Sherill now is down by 2 to Generic R
Generic D led Faso by 6 in NY-19, and now is tied.

Massive R swings. No wonder some House Ds are in panic mode.

Except they're not...

Trolling will get you no where in life.

Will you delete your account if the House flips?

FTFY

No? I'll be extremely happy?

Try to point out some positives too, sheesh. I'm not saying ignore the negatives, but your tale nearly all the time is solely the sky is falling down.

Yea it's obvious the house is going to flip. The new Pennsylvania map also doesn't help the GOP's causes.

NEW YouGov/Economist poll:

(2/18-2/20)

Democrats: 43% (+1)
GOP: 35% (-3)

Collapse

YouGov has been one of the closer polls on the generic ballot.  I don't think they've had a spread that large since December.