Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 14, 2019, 05:27:10 am
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active

  Atlas Forum
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections
  2019 & Odd Year Gubernatorial Election Polls (Moderators: Brittain33, VirginiŠ)
  VA-Monmouth: Gillespie +1
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: VA-Monmouth: Gillespie +1  (Read 2943 times)
Congressman Dwarven Dragon
Wulfric
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 17, 2017, 04:28:32 pm »

@IceSpear: In case you're not aware, the official excuse for Dems not being able to beat Assaulterforte in MT (I refuse to call him by his real name after his actions), is that most of the vote was cast during early voting.

I'm pretty sure most Democrats agree that it had more to do with the fact that Quist by all accounts proved to be a piss-poor candidate despite initially looking solid on paper.

I was referring to the excuse for why the assault didn't have much effect, rather than the excuse for why Quist wasn't ahead before the assault.



Even though it's an outlier, it's pretty embarrassing for Dems that this is even close. If Hillary was president Gillespie would probably be a shoo in.

Maybe yes, Maybe no. Virginia has become pretty inelastic, stuck between D+1 and D+6 for all races between 2005-2016, with the exception of the 2008 senate race, which was "Moderate Dem vs. Total Gadfly", and the 2009 gubernatorial election. However, in the long-term nationally, it is probably better strategically for dems that they lost the presidency. With Trump as President, dems have a chance at breaking even in the senate in '18, maybe even a net gain of 1 seat. With Hillary as President, the GOP would have a shot at 60 seats.

If Hillary had won, she would've done better downballot taking a few seats away from the GOP.

Compare the downballot performance of 2012 vs 2016, it's very clear that the GOP overperformed in 2016. Part of that can be attributed to Hillary's GOP courtship strategy.

Depends. If Hillary had just barely eked out narrow wins in MI, WI, PA, she would have won the presidency narrowly, but downballot results probably stay the same.  If she had won by something more like Obama's margin, then yeah, you have a point.

You need to remember though it wasn't just Trump who outperformed the polls, those GOP downballot candidates also outperformed the polls. So, the same phenomenon that helped Trump in the end, also helped them.

We know that Comey made his decision to go public based on a forged russian document.

If we assume that each GOP downballot candidate outperforms or underperforms Trump to the same degree as they did in real life, and adjust the presidential result the 1% that is needed for Hillary to win WI, MI, PA, no senate race flips. (Although Toomey's race becomes perilously close at R+0.43)
Logged
Cactus Jack
azcactus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,971
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 17, 2017, 04:32:05 pm »

Hey everyone, let's quote all of Greedo's posts from today on the night of November 7th/morning of November 8th.

Better idea: let's just throw him in the oubliette with Cora and the rest of our recent garbage posters.
Logged
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,685


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 17, 2017, 04:35:56 pm »

Itís funny that the left will always say junk poll when it doesnít favor their side. Polling numbers change and so do peopleís opinions.
Go look on the main VA post I have gotten tons of hate because I called the polls with 11 point leads for northam junk
Also getting hate for saying Gillespie is going to win.

All we can do is wait and see.
Logged
Bevinevitable
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,450
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 17, 2017, 04:38:02 pm »

@IceSpear: In case you're not aware, the official excuse for Dems not being able to beat Assaulterforte in MT (I refuse to call him by his real name after his actions), is that most of the vote was cast during early voting.

I'm pretty sure most Democrats agree that it had more to do with the fact that Quist by all accounts proved to be a piss-poor candidate despite initially looking solid on paper.

Why is it that the Dems need stellar candidates to win, but the GOP can nominate and elect Trump, Greg Gianforte, Roy Moore, Roy Blunt, Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts, Thom Tillis, Rick Scott, Paul LePage, etc. etc. without repurcussions?

I think Dems need to start accepting that deplorables are unwinnable and Republicans are far more "locked in" than Democrats are. Times have changed drastically since Akin/Mourdock, both of whom were exceptions to begin with. If Democrats routinely nominated candidates as piss poor as that above list we'd be a permanent minority. Even lazy but otherwise harmless milquetoasts like Martha Coakley and Anthony Brown end up losing in the most Democratic states in the country. When Dems imported some rich guy to run in an evenly split upstate NY seat, something Republicans do on the regular with occasional success, he lost by like 57 points, lol. The double standard is real.
Logged
dfwlibertylover
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,152
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 17, 2017, 04:38:28 pm »

Well, at least we finally got a poll showing Gillespie up.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,497


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 17, 2017, 04:39:15 pm »


If we assume that each GOP downballot candidate outperforms or underperforms Trump to the same degree as they did in real life, and adjust the presidential result the 1% that is needed for Hillary to win WI, MI, PA, no senate race flips. (Although Toomey's race becomes perilously close at R+0.43)

Or how about this? The Comey's announcement caused a uniform 3% swing of voters who were otherwise ready for Hillary/Feingold to win to Trump/Johnson. That's why both Trump & Johnson overperformed the polls.

Look at the polling for Bayh pre-Comey announcement.
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,774
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 17, 2017, 04:41:26 pm »

Hey everyone, let's quote all of Greedo's posts from today on the night of November 7th/morning of November 8th.

Better idea: let's just throw him in the oubliette with Cora and the rest of our recent garbage posters.
LOL I'm not even a troll besides I'm have been in conjunction with NOVA Green working on a project that will not have partisan lean at all I think both republicans and democrats will like what working on.
Logged
Bernie Has No Path
ShadowOfTheWave
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,723
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 17, 2017, 04:42:13 pm »

"Fiscal conservative, social liberal" Northam not good enough for VA?  I thought he'd be a perfect fit. What a disgrace this country is if Gillespie wins this race. I guess muh culture war trumps literally everything else.
Logged
Congressman Dwarven Dragon
Wulfric
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 17, 2017, 04:46:36 pm »

@IceSpear: In case you're not aware, the official excuse for Dems not being able to beat Assaulterforte in MT (I refuse to call him by his real name after his actions), is that most of the vote was cast during early voting.

I'm pretty sure most Democrats agree that it had more to do with the fact that Quist by all accounts proved to be a piss-poor candidate despite initially looking solid on paper.

Why is it that the Dems need stellar candidates to win, but the GOP can nominate and elect Trump, Greg Gianforte, Roy Moore, Roy Blunt, Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts, Thom Tillis, Rick Scott, Paul LePage, etc. etc. without repurcussions?

I think Dems need to start accepting that deplorables are unwinnable and Republicans are far more "locked in" than Democrats are. Times have changed drastically since Akin/Mourdock, both of whom were exceptions to begin with. If Democrats routinely nominated candidates as piss poor as that above list we'd be a permanent minority. Even lazy but otherwise harmless milquetoasts like Martha Coakley and Anthony Brown end up losing in the most Democratic states in the country. When Dems imported some rich guy to run in an evenly split upstate NY seat, something Republicans do on the regular with occasional success, he lost by like 57 points, lol. The double standard is real.

Deplorables, per Hillary's comments, are half of Trump's supporters. 46% (Trump's NPV total) * .5 = 23% of the country consists of deplorables. Quit acting like deplorables are 40% or something.
Logged
uti2
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,497


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 17, 2017, 04:49:29 pm »

If 3% of voters were solidly in the D camp, and solidly moved to R following Comey's announcement, that would cause a 6% swing in the results.
Logged
Bevinevitable
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,450
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 17, 2017, 04:49:51 pm »

@IceSpear: In case you're not aware, the official excuse for Dems not being able to beat Assaulterforte in MT (I refuse to call him by his real name after his actions), is that most of the vote was cast during early voting.

I'm pretty sure most Democrats agree that it had more to do with the fact that Quist by all accounts proved to be a piss-poor candidate despite initially looking solid on paper.

Why is it that the Dems need stellar candidates to win, but the GOP can nominate and elect Trump, Greg Gianforte, Roy Moore, Roy Blunt, Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts, Thom Tillis, Rick Scott, Paul LePage, etc. etc. without repurcussions?

I think Dems need to start accepting that deplorables are unwinnable and Republicans are far more "locked in" than Democrats are. Times have changed drastically since Akin/Mourdock, both of whom were exceptions to begin with. If Democrats routinely nominated candidates as piss poor as that above list we'd be a permanent minority. Even lazy but otherwise harmless milquetoasts like Martha Coakley and Anthony Brown end up losing in the most Democratic states in the country. When Dems imported some rich guy to run in an evenly split upstate NY seat, something Republicans do on the regular with occasional success, he lost by like 57 points, lol. The double standard is real.

Deplorables, per Hillary's comments, are half of Trump's supporters. 46% (Trump's NPV total) * .5 = 23% of the country consists of deplorables. Quit acting like deplorables are 40% or something.

I happen to think Hillary was being very generous and diplomatic with that comment. Wink
Logged
Congressman Dwarven Dragon
Wulfric
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,822
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 17, 2017, 04:52:42 pm »

If 3% of voters were solidly in the D camp, and solidly moved to R following Comey's announcement, that would cause a 6% swing in the results.

I think that's probably an overestimation of the Comey effect. I could see half of that though, which would be enough to get Kander and McGinty over the top, so there's your Manchin Majority. Of course, it's not as if dems would be able to do much of anything with that sort of majority.
Logged
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,860
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2017, 04:55:26 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.
Logged
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,685


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 17, 2017, 04:59:45 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.

I think it's because a majority of us our drama queens.
Logged
Bevinevitable
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,450
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 17, 2017, 05:06:18 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.

Well, Roanoke is junk and should be ignored. The other has Northam ahead, but still shows a significant narrowing of the race since their last poll. My posts were mostly referring to how the race was close at all, not how Gillespie was ahead/gonna win. I still think Northam is ahead and the favorite.
Logged
Malcolm Stands with Landslide Lyndon on Principle
jdb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18,427
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 17, 2017, 05:07:14 pm »

@IceSpear: In case you're not aware, the official excuse for Dems not being able to beat Assaulterforte in MT (I refuse to call him by his real name after his actions), is that most of the vote was cast during early voting.

I'm pretty sure most Democrats agree that it had more to do with the fact that Quist by all accounts proved to be a piss-poor candidate despite initially looking solid on paper.

Why is it that the Dems need stellar candidates to win, but the GOP can nominate and elect Trump, Greg Gianforte, Roy Moore, Roy Blunt, Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts, Thom Tillis, Rick Scott, Paul LePage, etc. etc. without repurcussions?

I think Dems need to start accepting that deplorables are unwinnable and Republicans are far more "locked in" than Democrats are. Times have changed drastically since Akin/Mourdock, both of whom were exceptions to begin with. If Democrats routinely nominated candidates as piss poor as that above list we'd be a permanent minority. Even lazy but otherwise harmless milquetoasts like Martha Coakley and Anthony Brown end up losing in the most Democratic states in the country. When Dems imported some rich guy to run in an evenly split upstate NY seat, something Republicans do on the regular with occasional success, he lost by like 57 points, lol. The double standard is real.

Roberts was in hindsight never gonna lose, Gianforte would've lost to a better candidate, Moore hasn't won yet and is being held to single-digits by a weak b-lister in most polls in friggin' Alabama.  The rest of those races would've been won by Democrats had they not taken place in a Republican wave year (or in Trump's case, had we run a remotely competent candidate).
Logged
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,685


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 17, 2017, 05:08:21 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.

Well, Roanoke is junk and should be ignored. The other has Northam ahead, but still shows a significant narrowing of the race since their last poll. My posts were mostly referring to how the race was close at all, not how Gillespie was ahead/gonna win. I still think Northam is ahead and the favorite.

The CNU poll shows movement within the MoE.
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,774
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 17, 2017, 05:10:32 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.
Says a left wing democrat

Seriously this is a big deal Gillespie hasn't had a lead in 1 poll since the primary till now.
Logged
superbudgie1582
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,685


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 17, 2017, 05:18:22 pm »

Atlas is once again being biased for a Republican. There are two other polls out that show Northam leading, so this one is the outlier out of recent polling.
Says a left wing democrat

Seriously this is a big deal Gillespie hasn't had a lead in 1 poll since the primary till now.

Polls are never a big deal.
Logged
Totalitarian Contrarian
Mumph
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,231


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 17, 2017, 05:22:29 pm »

I mean, I still think Northam will edge him, but why the surprise? Gillepsie isn't a trash tier candidate, as we've seen.  If anything he's a very personally strong candidate imo.
Logged
VirginiŠ
Virginia C
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,591
Ukraine


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 17, 2017, 07:21:57 pm »

They still have a shot at 60 seats now, lol. We really have no idea what the political environment will be like in a year.

Historically that is highly unlikely. Even in a favorable midterm, the party that controls the White House almost always has trouble ousting incumbent opposition party Senators. It's not to say Democrats won't lose some, but 8 would be GOP wave numbers and with Trump in office it's hard to argue even for a neutral year when he is digging their party into a ditch with the electorate.

It's undeniable the Republican Party's strength right now, but that came from a succession of favorable election years under what was an unpopular Democratic president (save for his entry, reelection and leaving office). Republicans aren't invincible, rather I think that 8 years is a long time and that is how long it has been since Republicans had a deeply unpopular president wrapped around their necks.

As it stands now, it's actually pretty remarkable things went downhill for Republicans so fast. It took Republicans a lot longer to start posting consistently comfortable leads in the generic ballot than it did for Democrats in 2017.

we're currently in a pro-D political environment that rivals if not eclipses 2006/2008, yet actual election results have not lined up with this reality outside of a couple crimson red seats Dems didn't try in (KS/SC.) It seems like every time Dems actually try in a race, they end up bungling it somehow (GA, MT, and now possibly VA.)

To be fair, Georgia's race was not really a friendly district - there are a lot more that are better targets and with electorates more friendly to Democrats. Coming in at around Clinton's numbers could have been the best Ossoff could do at this point, given how fast the district moved towards Democrats already. As for Montana, well even as he assaulted a reporter, most of the vote was already in at that point. Had he done it maybe a week or two prior, we could be having a different discussion. Suffice to say that there is a reason Trump picked incumbents from these districts, and not, say, people like Coffman, Upton or LoBiondo.

Point is, those Congressional races were all in tough, deeply conservative districts, ones Republicans probably wouldn't even expect to lose in a wave. If you look at the performance of Democrats in the oodles of legislative special elections, they have made decent gains and over-performed quite a bit. I think the average of it is +11 or +12 points better than they should, which even surpasses most of the generic ballot leads.

There was a Cook article (link) recently that went over something I've been saying for a while now, and that is that Virginia's gubernatorial race isn't the one to watch. It's the HoD races. That is where people's default opinions / opinions of the president tend to play out. It's easier for a single Republican candidate to wage an effective campaign for a single high-profile statewide race, but all those smaller races that people are largely in the dark about are where you see a potential wave building. So far Democrats have been posting pretty tall leads in the HoD generic ballot, which could translate to substantial gains. Maybe not enough to flip it, given all the incumbents Republicans have, but enough to use 2019 to build a majority.


I get your pessimism, I think it's warranted in some respects (NJ Democrats should be performing better given the state's leanings, but oh well), but after the Obama years, I find the energy on the left and current special election results (as a whole) rather encouraging
Logged
JonHawk
JHawk
Full Member
***
Posts: 211


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 17, 2017, 07:44:16 pm »

I think Northam will take this, but if Gillespie holds it within 2 points should be a "moral" win for the VA Republicans.
Logged
Lothal1
Full Member
***
Posts: 229
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 17, 2017, 07:49:17 pm »

Some SERIOUS denial here... How come the GOP in Virginia seemingly outperform every poll? 2014 Ed vs Mark Warner (most popular politician in the state) was D+9 on election day, yet became D+1 barely. Cuccinelli was down D+7 and barely won by D+2. Polls are skewed, folks.
Logged
Bagel23
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,540
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: -1.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 17, 2017, 07:56:24 pm »

Some SERIOUS denial here... How come the GOP in Virginia seemingly outperform every poll? 2014 Ed vs Mark Warner (most popular politician in the state) was D+9 on election day, yet became D+1 barely. Cuccinelli was down D+7 and barely won by D+2. Polls are skewed, folks.

Every one of y'all casually ignore 2016...
Logged
Ebsy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,759
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 17, 2017, 08:07:55 pm »

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC