King Lear's concern trolling megathread

[King Lear]

It looks like Sabato's proving his Hackery, in thinking that Speaker Ryan will lose reelection and projecting a Democratic House takeover 8 months before the Midterms. He better hope he's right, because if he blows his prediction's this year, his website going to go out of business, LOL.

[King Lear]

Two more Democrats are in. Suzi Park Leggett (D-Garden Grove, which is in CA-46, CA-47, and CA-48) and Herbert Lee (D-Rowland Heights, which is in CA-39) are in.

This is really bad news for the Democrats, they are now in real (if not imminent) danger of missing the Top-two in CA-39. Part of me suspects that half of these “Democrats” running in competitive California House Races are being bankrolled by the Republicans, to lock Democrats out of the Top-two runoff.

[King Lear]

CNN Breaking News: Republicans projected to win 60-Seat Senate Supermajority
If the Democrats continue the failed strategies of 2016 (obsessing over Trump scandals most voters don’t care about), they will lose 9 Senate seats this year (WV, ND, MT, IN, MO, OH, FL, WI, and PA) and subsequently face a Republican Supermajority that will transform America into a place they won’t even recognize.

[bagelman]

Dose anyone else think everyone but King Lear needs a does of reality?

Trending from Democratic to Republican is like riding an escalator up a floor at the mall. Sure, on very rare occasion you'll be so enthralled by a passing black man that you fall backward, but inevitably you'll remember that you're white and racist and keep riding it up.

Anyone who voted for Trump is locked in permanently. If you think otherwise your dreaming (and btw if you Democrats want to win youll give up on dreamers and overreacting metoo-ers)

/s

I would go even further. Democrats can only win if they adopt the most fiscally populist, socially conservative platform, possible.

History has a number of examples of such parties. Some of which were extremely successful. One was able to control every level of government in their nation for twelve years!

Yes, I think it's clear. Democrats have a lot they could learn from the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. It'll appeal to the white working class and get rid of those pesky social issues. Guaranteed decade in power, at least!

I know you're just trying to troll KL, but this is stupid. The Nazis were voted into power by muh moderate "dynamic and moving forward" rich boys of their day.

[King Lear]

Let’s say in the weeks before the 2018 Midterms, Democrats are leading the generic ballot by about 5 points, and Trumps approval rating is in the Low to mid 40s, causing Democrats (in the media and on this website) to be relatively confident of a good Midterm result (flipping the House and holding their Senate seats). However, when Election Day comes Democrats only gain 5-10 House seats, and lose 7 Senate seats (WV, ND, MT, IN, MO, OH, and FL), while only winning the National House vote by a meager one point. How would the Atlas react to that scenario?

[King Lear]

Morning Consult, March 26-27, 1997 RV

D 41 (-1)
R 37 (-1)

(No net change)

Wow, this poll is bad news for Democrats, a 4 point lead will definitely not flip the House (the worst they can do and still win the House is a 6 point lead).

[King Lear]

She didn’t harass anybody herself, not worth resigning over.

I totally agree, if Democrats continue this self-defeating behavior of forcing their politicians to resign after every minor indiscretion, we’ll be left with zero seats in the House and Senate. This is the same reason I was against Frankens resignation, and believe the #metoo movement has been a drag on Democrats this election cycle.

[Virginiá]

She didn’t harass anybody herself, not worth resigning over.

I totally agree, if Democrats continue this self-defeating behavior of forcing their politicians to resign after every minor indiscretion, we’ll be left with zero seats in the House and Senate. This is the same reason I was against Frankens resignation, and believe the #metoo movement has been a drag on Democrats this election cycle.

You think everything has been a drag on Democrats in this election cycle, which I guess isn't that surprising since you also thought Jones and Lamb would lose, think Democrats are going to lose anywhere from 6-10 Senate seats this November, and worship Rassmusen polls.

[Sadader]

She didn’t harass anybody herself, not worth resigning over.

I totally agree, if Democrats continue this self-defeating behavior of forcing their politicians to resign after every minor indiscretion, we’ll be left with zero seats in the House and Senate. This is the same reason I was against Frankens resignation, and believe the #metoo movement has been a drag on Democrats this election cycle.

I know this is concern trolling, but you’e a legitimately bad person if you’re against an anti sexual assault movement because it leads to politicians you like having to resign.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

She didn’t harass anybody herself, not worth resigning over.

I totally agree, if Democrats continue this self-defeating behavior of forcing their politicians to resign after every minor indiscretion, we’ll be left with zero seats in the House and Senate. This is the same reason I was against Frankens resignation, and believe the #metoo movement has been a drag on Democrats this election cycle.

I know this is concern trolling, but you’e a legitimately bad person if you’re against an anti sexual assault movement because it leads to politicians you like having to resign.

King Lear is a morally depraved person that thinks he is smugly superior to the people around him (how he makes fun of WWC for being racists etc).

[Torie]

The bit I bolded punched the ticket to get this post in here.

As much as I'm not pleased with the Centrist wing of the Democratic Party (of which Hillary Clinton is a central figure), I had no problem voting for Hillary in 2016, because of how lousy Trump was. Honestly, I believe the Democrats would have been much better of if She won, because, they would have had a Senate majority, a Supreme Court majority, would have defeated Republicans in three consecutive presidential elections, and the Bernie wing would have forced her to the Left on economics and foreign policy. Instead, Trump won with a blatant appeal to White identity politics, and this has forced Democrats to talk even more about cultural issues (and even less about economics), which in turn has excasterbated the Racial, Religious, and cultural divides in American politics, thus putting Democrats in a position to get wiped out this Midterm without holding the White House (if they would have been wiped out in 2018 with a President Clinton, they would have at least had a shot to hold the Presidency in 2020 if Republicans nominated another whack job).

[King Lear]

The bit I bolded punched the ticket to get this post in here.

As much as I'm not pleased with the Centrist wing of the Democratic Party (of which Hillary Clinton is a central figure), I had no problem voting for Hillary in 2016, because of how lousy Trump was. Honestly, I believe the Democrats would have been much better of if She won, because, they would have had a Senate majority, a Supreme Court majority, would have defeated Republicans in three consecutive presidential elections, and the Bernie wing would have forced her to the Left on economics and foreign policy. Instead, Trump won with a blatant appeal to White identity politics, and this has forced Democrats to talk even more about cultural issues (and even less about economics), which in turn has excasterbated the Racial, Religious, and cultural divides in American politics, thus putting Democrats in a position to get wiped out this Midterm without holding the White House (if they would have been wiped out in 2018 with a President Clinton, they would have at least had a shot to hold the Presidency in 2020 if Republicans nominated another whack job).

If Democrats lose 5 or more Senate seats, and gain less then 10 House seats, in the 2018 Midterms, will everyone apologize for calling me a hack?

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

The bit I bolded punched the ticket to get this post in here.

As much as I'm not pleased with the Centrist wing of the Democratic Party (of which Hillary Clinton is a central figure), I had no problem voting for Hillary in 2016, because of how lousy Trump was. Honestly, I believe the Democrats would have been much better of if She won, because, they would have had a Senate majority, a Supreme Court majority, would have defeated Republicans in three consecutive presidential elections, and the Bernie wing would have forced her to the Left on economics and foreign policy. Instead, Trump won with a blatant appeal to White identity politics, and this has forced Democrats to talk even more about cultural issues (and even less about economics), which in turn has excasterbated the Racial, Religious, and cultural divides in American politics, thus putting Democrats in a position to get wiped out this Midterm without holding the White House (if they would have been wiped out in 2018 with a President Clinton, they would have at least had a shot to hold the Presidency in 2020 if Republicans nominated another whack job).

If Democrats lose 5 or more Senate seats, and gain less then 10 House seats, in the 2018 Midterms, will everyone apologize for calling me a hack?

Congressman Rick Saccone approves of this post

[Virginiá]

If Democrats lose 5 or more Senate seats, and gain less then 10 House seats, in the 2018 Midterms, will everyone apologize for calling me a hack?

Sure

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems aren't gonna lose 5 senate seats and  gain less than 10 House races.

[Torie]

The bit I bolded punched the ticket to get this post in here.

As much as I'm not pleased with the Centrist wing of the Democratic Party (of which Hillary Clinton is a central figure), I had no problem voting for Hillary in 2016, because of how lousy Trump was. Honestly, I believe the Democrats would have been much better of if She won, because, they would have had a Senate majority, a Supreme Court majority, would have defeated Republicans in three consecutive presidential elections, and the Bernie wing would have forced her to the Left on economics and foreign policy. Instead, Trump won with a blatant appeal to White identity politics, and this has forced Democrats to talk even more about cultural issues (and even less about economics), which in turn has excasterbated the Racial, Religious, and cultural divides in American politics, thus putting Democrats in a position to get wiped out this Midterm without holding the White House (if they would have been wiped out in 2018 with a President Clinton, they would have at least had a shot to hold the Presidency in 2020 if Republicans nominated another whack job).

If Democrats lose 5 or more Senate seats, and gain less then 10 House seats, in the 2018 Midterms, will everyone apologize for calling me a hack?

Gaining less than 10 seats would be a big disappointment for the Dems, but it is possible. But that cannot be characterized as a "wipe out." 5 or more Senate seats comes closer to a "wipe out."  That is highly unlikely, or to put it another way, remote. If you had just said the Dems will gain less than 10 house seats, I would not have deemed your post to be particularly worthy of being in here. But given your most enthusiastic hyperbole, I find it a most worthy candidate myself.

You may find this hard to believe, but I am not that that partisan a Dem, and have no particular drive to hack for them. The Pubs these days however give me plenty of material with which to bash them, and I certainly hope that Virginia is not constrained to apologize to you after the election.

[Virginiá]

I think part of the problem with King Lear is that he doesn't really try to defend his predictions. Sometimes he'll respond to someone he thinks is affirming his own prediction(s), and sometimes he may engage briefly with people, he rarely engages in the back-and-forth that other users will do. There are some users here, like PNM, DTC, etc, who will intelligently defend their theories with well-thought out posts (even if they like to troll sometimes). You can have an intelligent conversation with them, and be assured they know what they are talking about. Ditto for lots of other users.

But with King Lear, for a while before his stint on mod review, it was like his only purpose on these boards was to carpet bomb threads with his very generous R-favoring predictions, and then leave, like a fart in the wind. From what he has posted, I'm not sure it's clear why he actually thinks Republicans are favored. It's like one day he just decided Republicans would do well, and that was that. He brushes aside some of the best predictors - approval ratings and the generic ballot, widely accepted by analysts, with no real reason. I've tried to debate him on this before, such as when he mentioned 2002 as being proof that the president's party can do well in midterms, casually ignoring the fact that in 2002, Bush's approval rating was nearing 70%. Ditto for 1998 too.

Either way, I still think he is more likely to be a troll than not. But, who knows. Maybe time will tell.

[Torie]

I kind of avoid predictions these days because the environment is so volatile, and I have lost some confidence in predicting what voters will do, because the metrics have changed quite a bit, and don't fit prior models. But since I have not made any, and in case anyone is remotely curious, my not all that informed guess is that the over under for the House at the moment is about a gain of 20 seats in the House (remember it is gerrymandered still, worth about 10 seats for the Pubs all things being equal), with control in near equipoise. However, it is a heck of a lot more likely that the Dems gain 30 seats, than just 10 seats, because the bell curve is skewed. Thus it is considerably more likely that the Dems take control of the House than gain just 10 seats. As to the Senate, who knows, but my wild guess is no change.

And I am not going to document these numbers right now. I'm too tired, and not all that confident anyway. Hopefully they are not deemed so modest, that I am labeled a "concern troll" lite.

[Virginiá]

And I am not going to document these numbers right now. I'm too tired, and not all that confident anyway. Hopefully they are not deemed so modest, that I am labeled a "concern troll" lite.

Don't worry, if you're a troll, you're still our troll  :*

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

I'm still not convinced that voters have changed their minds since around May of last year. Special election results have been mostly the same since around then. People don't change their political minds every 5 seconds because most people aren't following politics super closely, events like Rob Porter probably don't impact people's choices between D and R much, and the people who are closely engaged right now are voters that are tend to be more polarized anyways.

Well, actually, special elections have become a lot more pro D lately, but since that goes against what I'd expect with Trump's rising approvals, the tax cuts, and good economical news, I assume that is just a result of where the special elections have been.

Anyways point is I... don't see any evidence that people have actually changed their minds since May. The polls seem to be doing a poor job capturing the actual people who are voting in these elections.

[Holy Unifying Centrist]

If Democrats lose 5 or more Senate seats, and gain less then 10 House seats, in the 2018 Midterms, will everyone apologize for calling me a hack?

Son please...after the midterms your next talking point will be that Trump can easily win re-election after the Dem wave since both Clinton and Obama won re-election after GOP wave years.

It's 2018.


Democrats win the house PV by 15%.


A certain user R-CA says, "Well, Obama lost by 6.8% in 2010 and then won by 3.9% in 2012. That's a 10.7 point swing. That same 10.7 point would lead to Trump losing by 4.3%. Trump could easily win reelection even while losing by 4.3% because democrats will nominate Kamala Harris (btw I dont understand transgenders) just to make gains in identity politics #metoo areas like Orange County California and Suburban Texas while still very narrowly losing the rust belt by 0.00001%."

[King Lear]

I think part of the problem with King Lear is that he doesn't really try to defend his predictions. Sometimes he'll respond to someone he thinks is affirming his own prediction(s), and sometimes he may engage briefly with people, he rarely engages in the back-and-forth that other users will do. There are some users here, like PNM, DTC, etc, who will intelligently defend their theories with well-thought out posts (even if they like to troll sometimes). You can have an intelligent conversation with them, and be assured they know what they are talking about. Ditto for lots of other users.

But with King Lear, for a while before his stint on mod review, it was like his only purpose on these boards was to carpet bomb threads with his very generous R-favoring predictions, and then leave, like a fart in the wind. From what he has posted, I'm not sure it's clear why he actually thinks Republicans are favored. It's like one day he just decided Republicans would do well, and that was that. He brushes aside some of the best predictors - approval ratings and the generic ballot, widely accepted by analysts, with no real reason. I've tried to debate him on this before, such as when he mentioned 2002 as being proof that the president's party can do well in midterms, casually ignoring the fact that in 2002, Bush's approval rating was nearing 70%. Ditto for 1998 too.

Either way, I still think he is more likely to be a troll than not. But, who knows. Maybe time will tell.

You have a point, in that I don’t defend my predictions as much as others do. The main reason I don’t, is because, if I stated the reasoning behind my predictions most users would just consider it more concern trolling and it would just increase the likelihood of me being banned. However, since your asking, I’ll tell you that the main reasoning behind my predictions is that after watching Wall-to-Wall News Coverge of the 2016 Presidential Election (primarily from CNN), that was saying constantly that “Trump is finished”, “Hillary Clinton has a 272 Electoral Vote Blue Wall”, “Democrats are going to flip the Senate”, and “Paul Ryan’s worried the House is in Play”, only to watch on Election night Hillary Clinton get slaughtered in the Electoral College (while at the same time winning the popular vote because of a ridiculous margin in California), and Democrats gain a measly 2 Senate seats and 6 House seats, I’m extremely suspicious of this “Blue Wave” narrative from the News Media. Yes, I understand that the polls show Democrats with a big generic ballot lead and Trumps approval in the Low 40s, but it’s pretty easy to forget that in 2016 the polls had Hillary leading Trump by the mid to high single digits, and Democrats with a small lead in the generic ballot throughout the year, while Trumps favoriblity numbers were always in the toilet. I also understand that Democrats have won special elections for dozens of state legislative seats, a House seat, and a Senate seat, However most of the state legislative races have extremely low turnout, the Senate Race featured a Republican pedophile, and the House Race featured a Democrat that was Conservative on social issues. Finally, I don’t deny that Democrats have a 40% chance of flipping the House, but that still means there’s a 60% chance they blow it. Meanwhile, I would only give them a 20% chance of flipping the Senate, because due to how bad the map is, the median outcome is probably R+4 (Republicans gain WV, ND, MT, IN, and MO while Democrats gain NV).

[King Lear]

No one show Lear https://mobile.twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/980142373631033344

What’s so great about that chart, their underperforming 2006, LOL.

[Virginiá]

You have a point, in that I don’t defend my predictions as much as others do. The main reason I don’t, is because, if I stated the reasoning behind my predictions most users would just consider it more concern trolling and it would just increase the likelihood of me being banned.

Then you are entertaining a self-fulfilling prophecy. People already have concluded you are concern trolling. You can really only go up by attempting to defend your predictions.

However, since your asking, I’ll tell you that the main reasoning behind my predictions is that after watching Wall-to-Wall News Coverge of the 2016 Presidential Election (primarily from CNN), that was saying constantly that “Trump is finished”, “Hillary Clinton has a 272 Electoral Vote Blue Wall”, “Democrats are going to flip the Senate”, and “Paul Ryan’s worried the House is in Play”, only to watch on Election night Hillary Clinton get slaughtered in the Electoral College (while at the same time winning the popular vote because of a ridiculous margin in California), and Democrats gain a measly 2 Senate seats and 6 House seats, I’m extremely suspicious of this “Blue Wave” narrative from the News Media. Yes, I understand that the polls show Democrats with a big generic ballot lead and Trumps approval in the Low 40s, but it’s pretty easy to forget that in 2016 the polls had Hillary leading Trump by the mid to high single digits, and Democrats with a small lead in the generic ballot throughout the year, while Trumps favoriblity numbers were always in the toilet.

Coincidentally, this is what Republicans have been saying, mostly because there is nothing else they can say, as almost every marker shows them losing bigly. They revert back to "the polls said we'd lose in 2016 too!" It's not really a good defense. You're basically saying, they were slightly off one time, so they will be again, because reasons.

That is one of the laziest reasons to believe in your predictions. And I'm not saying that just because I disagree with you or because I think you're probably a troll. Like, believing the polls are wrong because they were slightly off in 2016 doesn't actually give you any insight into 2018's elections. All it does is give you a creative license to go wild with your predictions and fend off any criticism by saying "nope everything/everyone else is wrong and I'm probably right." Like, do you think every time the polls favor Democrats, they actually favor Republicans, but secretly? So how are Democrats ever supposed to win? Using your logic, there is no scenario where Democrats ever win, because polls showing them winning are wrong, and polls showing Republicans winning are right. That means in your world, Democrats can only ever win by sheer luck. No offense Lear, but the factors everyone else is using - generic polls, who controls the white house, approval ratings of president, special election results, fundraising/recruitment - these all have more predictive power than "the polls were wrong in 2016." Some of them have a blatant correlation with midterm losses for the president's party. That you just brush these off is why it seems like your theories are not anchored in reality. Their is no actual basis for them by your own admission. You just kind of decided Republicans would do well, and that was that. Any facts that contradict them are tossed aside. That is a incredibly bad way to go about prediction elections.


FWIW, the national polls in 2016 were not off by that much. The last week or two in that election showed a race tightening, and Clinton's final 2.1% margin was within the MoE of some of those last polls. Some state polls were off by more. So you have no good reason to doubt the 2016 national presidential polls.

RCP: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

Clinton +3.3 / Outcome: Clinton: +2.1

RCP Generic poll 2016: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2016_generic_congressional_vote-5279.html

Democrats +0.6 / Outcome: Republicans +1.1

Speaking as someone who watched the generic polls unfold in 2016, they were definitely weaker than this cycle. Their ceiling in 2016 was much lower than 2018's. In hindsight, it should have been clear that Obama being in the White House and Clinton's weakness as a candidate was going to hinder Democrats no matter how much Trump sucked.

but that still means there’s a 60% chance they blow it. Meanwhile, I would only give them a 20% chance of flipping the Senate, because due to how bad the map is, the median outcome is probably R+4 (Republicans gain WV, ND, MT, IN, and MO while Democrats gain NV).

See, was that even necessary? You've posted your ranges of predictions all over this forum several times over. This was a thread to defend the basis of them, not to regurgitate them.

[King Lear]

This polling is pretty mediocre to be honest (especially the surveys of FL-26 and CA-10). I'm surprised that the DCCC was so eager for everyone to see these weak polling numbers, LOL.