ND-SEN: But you are, Blanche, you are

[Pollster]

While I do agree with the pollster that the electorate shown in the Cramer+16 was complete garbage, the numbers shown by the pollster for Political ID are waaaaay too rosy.

I would personally say an electorate around 48% R, 20% I, and 32% D, but hey, Im no expert on ND Political Identification politics.

Have only ever worked in North Dakota once, but this looks similar to the model we used, adjusted for population change.

[KingSweden]

While I do agree with the pollster that the electorate shown in the Cramer+16 was complete garbage, the numbers shown by the pollster for Political ID are waaaaay too rosy.

I would personally say an electorate around 48% R, 20% I, and 32% D, but hey, Im no expert on ND Political Identification politics.

I’d be inclined to agree with this, which probably points to a low single digit Cramer win

[Zaybay]

While I do agree with the pollster that the electorate shown in the Cramer+16 was complete garbage, the numbers shown by the pollster for Political ID are waaaaay too rosy.

I would personally say an electorate around 48% R, 20% I, and 32% D, but hey, Im no expert on ND Political Identification politics.

I’d be inclined to agree with this, which probably points to a low single digit Cramer win

Personally, thats my prediction as well. As I keep saying, she is down, but she still has a chance, though it is slim.

[ElectionsGuy]

All October polls in ND 2012 average out to Berg +4. In last 4 polls over September/October Cramer leads by an average of 10. This won't be a repeat of 2012. That guy thinks he knows what's up but he's in for a rude awakening come election day.

[MT Treasurer]

Another day, another barrage of Tweets telling us how well Heitkamp is doing in private/Democratic/internal polls and that she’s actually leading here. What’s new?

[RI]

Another day, another barrage of Tweets telling us how well Heitkamp is doing in private/Democratic/internal polls and that she’s actually leading here. What’s new?

Yet they never seem to release them.

[The Free North]

In 2012, the polls were significantly tighter than they have been here.

[IceSpear]

Another day, another barrage of Tweets telling us how well Heitkamp is doing in private/Democratic/internal polls and that she’s actually leading here. What’s new?

Yet they never seem to release them.

[Zaybay]

It seems to be that all of the polls are in agreement on some factors:
1. Heidi will win almost all Dems
2. Heidi will win around 15-20% of Indies over Cramer
3. Heidi will win 10-20% of Rs

Where the conflict stems is the percentage of each group. Fox says around 50% Rs, 20% Is, and 30%Ds, and the new pollster saying 60%Rs, 10%Is, and 30%Ds, and with the 2012 pollster saying 45%Rs,20%Is, and 35%Ds.

[Pandaguineapig]

It seems to be that all of the polls are in agreement on some factors:
1. Heidi will win almost all Dems
2. Heidi will win around 15-20% of Indies over Cramer
3. Heidi will win 10-20% of Rs

Where the conflict stems is the percentage of each group. Fox says around 50% Rs, 20% Is, and 30%Ds, and the new pollster saying 60%Rs, 10%Is, and 30%Ds, and with the 2012 pollster saying 45%Rs,20%Is, and 35%Ds.

Dude let it go, she's done

[IceSpear]

It seems to be that all of the polls are in agreement on some factors:
1. Heidi will win almost all Dems
2. Heidi will win around 15-20% of Indies over Cramer
3. Heidi will win 10-20% of Rs

Where the conflict stems is the percentage of each group. Fox says around 50% Rs, 20% Is, and 30%Ds, and the new pollster saying 60%Rs, 10%Is, and 30%Ds, and with the 2012 pollster saying 45%Rs,20%Is, and 35%Ds.

Dude let it go, she's done

No surprise a Republican hack wants the Democrats to concede all the competitive races.

This isn't a competitive race. Didn't you just say yesterday it was safe R? lol

[cinyc]

So Atlas was less hackish in 2010?

Atlas was, is and will always be hackish.

[IceSpear]

So Atlas was less hackish in 2010?

Atlas was, is and will always be hackish.

True, but I have no doubt that if the 2010 Arkansas Senate race took place today we'd have at least a few posters insisting Blanche still had a chance. So if BRTD's memory is accurate, then Atlas must have been less hackish back then.

[cinyc]

So Atlas was less hackish in 2010?

Atlas was, is and will always be hackish.

True, but I have no doubt that if the 2010 Arkansas Senate race took place today we'd have at least a few posters insisting Blanche still had a chance. So if BRTD's memory is accurate, then Atlas must have been less hackish back then.

I am sure that if you were to go back to the 2010 Arkansas Senate race threads, you'd find a few posters delusional enough to think Blanche had a chance.

For example: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=125194.75

[IceSpear]

So Atlas was less hackish in 2010?

Atlas was, is and will always be hackish.

True, but I have no doubt that if the 2010 Arkansas Senate race took place today we'd have at least a few posters insisting Blanche still had a chance. So if BRTD's memory is accurate, then Atlas must have been less hackish back then.

I am sure that if you were to go back to the 2010 Arkansas Senate race threads, you'd find a few posters delusional enough to think Blanche had a chance.

For example: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=125194.75

LOL, nice find. So BRTD's memory was wrong. Somehow I'm not surprised.

I find it interesting that Rasmussen did a monthly poll of AR around the 17th, except in September.

I think Lincoln's numbers have improved but they just don't want to admit it. 

I believe the Ispos poll indicates that Lincoln has risen from below 30 to just at 40.

The Talk Buisness poll was methodologically unsound. 

Of course, Arkansas is a very Democratic state, and being under 40 for any reason is a bad sign if you're a Democrat. 

Lincoln's 1998 opponent, John Boozman's brother, was a one-man gaffe machine.

The only way Lincoln can win is A. Boozman has a big gaffe and B. Dixiecrats come back to Lincoln. 

LOL, this person unironically sounds like some of our current posters.

[MT Treasurer]

I wish Lincoln and Pryor could switch seats. Lincoln would have won in 2008 and Pryor could have made it through 2010.

Dynastic names are always helpful.

That nostalgia

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

LOL at the delusion. Im pretty optimistic about the democrats this year but seriously. Heitkamp is finished. Why are you wasting your time pinning your hopes on someone who only votes with the party half the time and is basically republican-lite? If you want any chance of controlling the senate, put your focus into TX. Beto is polling the best and is an actual democrat. Come on Zaybay!

[Zaybay]

LOL at the delusion. Im pretty optimistic about the democrats this year but seriously. Heitkamp is finished. Why are you wasting your time pinning your hopes on someone who only votes with the party half the time and is basically republican-lite? If you want any chance of controlling the senate, put your focus into TX. Beto is polling the best and is an actual democrat. Come on Zaybay!

What? I never said she was gonna win. Just pointed out methodology flaws in the 3 state polls we have so far, and how it has varied from 60% Rs, to 49%Rs(which is higher than 2016, BTW, it was 47%R), among other groups. Besides, we dont need to "Focus our energy" on one state, be it TN, MS, TX, or ND, because the Ds are rather well funded, and can focus on literally all of them, as they are now.

As I said before, and I will say it again, she is not favored, but she is also not DOA.

[TML]

LOL at the delusion. Im pretty optimistic about the democrats this year but seriously. Heitkamp is finished. Why are you wasting your time pinning your hopes on someone who only votes with the party half the time and is basically republican-lite? If you want any chance of controlling the senate, put your focus into TX. Beto is polling the best and is an actual democrat. Come on Zaybay!

What? I never said she was gonna win. Just pointed out methodology flaws in the 3 state polls we have so far, and how varied it has varied from 60% Rs, to 49%Rs(which is higher than 2016, BTW, it was 47%R), among other groups. Besides, we dont need to "Focus our energy" on one state, be it TN, MS, TX, or ND, because the Ds are rather well funded, and can focus on literally all of them, as they are now.

As I said before, and I will say it again, she is not favored, but she is also not DOA.

Agreed. In fact, just a few days ago 538 published an article stating that there is overpolling in some races and underpolling in others. It gives this ND race as one of their "underpolled" races, which means that they think there should be more high quality polling here in order to forecast the outcome with greater certainty (at this point, they think Heitkamp has at least a 30% chance of winning according to their classic & deluxe models, which, although low, does mean that we should not be terribly surprised if she does end up winning).

[MycroftCZ]

Heitkamp's down but this state has NO VOTER REGISTRATION and we have a poll with only 9% of people identified as Independents. That Cramer +16 poll is complete junk and if you move the numbers to 45% R, 35% D, and 20% Independent, Heitkamp's got a slim lead. 

[Pandaguineapig]

Heitkamp's down but this state has NO VOTER REGISTRATION and we have a poll with only 9% of people identified as Independents. That Cramer +16 poll is complete junk and if you move the numbers to 45% R, 35% D, and 20% Independent, Heitkamp's got a slim lead. 

Yes yes unskew those polls

[Zaybay]

Heitkamp's down but this state has NO VOTER REGISTRATION and we have a poll with only 9% of people identified as Independents. That Cramer +16 poll is complete junk and if you move the numbers to 45% R, 35% D, and 20% Independent, Heitkamp's got a slim lead. 

Yes yes unskew those polls

To be fair, those are just the 2016 numbers, though a bit D friendly in my book.

[Pandaguineapig]

Heitkamp's down but this state has NO VOTER REGISTRATION and we have a poll with only 9% of people identified as Independents. That Cramer +16 poll is complete junk and if you move the numbers to 45% R, 35% D, and 20% Independent, Heitkamp's got a slim lead. 

Yes yes unskew those polls

To be fair, those are just the 2016 numbers, though a bit D friendly in my book.

I know, all the polls have her down double digits and the recent cycle has been dominated by her doxxing domestic abuse victims but if you want to believe she still has a shot (just like you believed Jealous was ahead in Maryland) go ahead

[Zaybay]

Heitkamp's down but this state has NO VOTER REGISTRATION and we have a poll with only 9% of people identified as Independents. That Cramer +16 poll is complete junk and if you move the numbers to 45% R, 35% D, and 20% Independent, Heitkamp's got a slim lead. 

Yes yes unskew those polls

To be fair, those are just the 2016 numbers, though a bit D friendly in my book.

I know, all the polls have her down double digits and the recent cycle has been dominated by her doxxing domestic abuse victims but if you want to believe she still has a shot (just like you believed Jealous was ahead in Maryland) go ahead

Ooof, you got me, I though a race may get closer back in June, and I was wrong, I should be ashamed.

All Im doing is pointing out that the numbers the poster used are almost exactly the 2016 numbers, giving 2% more to Rs and 2% more to Is, giving an electorate of 31% Ds, 47% Rs, and 22% Is. Not claiming anything, just laying down numbers. I personally dont like to go based off a hunch, unlike you do whenever an R is leading a race by more than 1 in a single poll.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There's a difference between, 'has a chance', and 60/40 atlas belief that Heitkamp will win.