2018 Congressional Generic Ballot and House Polls Megathread - the original

[Arkansas Yankee]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

[BudgieForce]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

[BudgieForce]

Good for Comstock. Crimes against fashion need to be called out.

[KingSweden]

The wearing of jorts past the age of 20 should frankly be a capital offense so Barbara is doing God’s work here

[KingSweden]

Why are people obsessing over every movement of the Reuters poll?

It’s Memorial Day week and Atlasians need fapping material

[Adam Griffin]

The big news on that site is that he's a cuck who wants to see his wife get plowed on a big pile of money

[KingSweden]

The big news on that site is that he's a cuck who wants to see his wife get plowed on a big pile of money

Yeah that site was a rabbit hole now wasn’t it

[Pericles]

Shady Shak sounds bad. Sure, Comstock may be nasty in doing this, but it's good to know. If I were a Republican I'd vote for Comstock, Shady Shak is a no go now that I know this info.

[DINGO Joe]

http://shadyshak.com/



Terrible news for the Comstock campaign if she had to use this explosive oppo research against her primary opponent.

Good work, link of the day.  Can Comstock fend off a Shak attack?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The jorts bit was just clickbait. The porn tweets are the real juicy stuff.

[KingSweden]

So who’s gonna unironically endorse this guy?

[heatcharger]

The big news on that site is that he's a cuck who wants to see his wife get plowed on a big pile of money

There are two other major pieces of info to note:






While the latter may be a net positive for him, the hope is that not having a well-fed 401k is the killshot among VA-10 Republicans.

[user12345]

I'll have to side with Comstock on this. His outfit is horrendous.

[The Arizonan]

I wonder how many Trump supporters will vote for this guy.

[Xing]

Likely D -> Titanium R

[Arkansas Yankee]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

[Devout Centrist]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

1938, 1942, 1946, 1950, possibly 1954, 1958...c'mon dude, a google search would have shown otherwise.

[OSR stands with Israel]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

1930, 1934, 1938, 1942, 1946, 1950, possibly 1954, 1958...c'mon dude, a google search would have shown otherwise.

1934 was the opposite of a wave

[Lachi]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

1930, 1934, 1938, 1942, 1946, 1950, possibly 1954, 1958...c'mon dude, a google search would have shown otherwise.

1934 was the opposite of a wave

I'm assuming he meant 1932.

[Brittain33]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

You also predicted Roy Moore would win, too.

Your posts follow a general theme: Republicans are winners, Republicans are in charge, Democrats will lose and anything they do to fight their fate is futile and will only help Republicans. This speaks more to a psychological imperative many Republicans feel to be in charge and the winners in society than an actual analysis of the issues.

[Devout Centrist]

We had anti administration waves in 2006, 2010, and 2014.  Actually history would mitigate against a 4th similar wave.

Evidence of different projections for college educated and non college voters would support such a likelihood.

In 2016 we all know the nation voted like 2 different nations. It may be that division will continue in 2018.  It may we’ll be that national generic polls may well mask this division.

You know in 2016 we were all surprised Trump was elected, that the GOP retained the Senate, and the GOP did not lose more seats in the House. Surprise again.

Midterms are almost always bad for the party in the white house. Its not a recent trend that started in 2006.

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

1930, 1934, 1938, 1942, 1946, 1950, possibly 1954, 1958...c'mon dude, a google search would have shown otherwise.

1934 was the opposite of a wave

I suppose so, if we use the ‘opposite party’ definition.

[Stranger in a strange land]

I live right next to the district and I had never heard of this guy until today. If anything, she's giving him free publicity, and the penis enlargement tweets will make MAGA Chuds (who are a minority of Republican primary voters in the district, but a substantial one) MORE likely to support him.

[Politician]

Likely D -> Titanium R

[Virginiá]

Not Always

In 2002 the GOP gained 8 House seats and 2 Senate seats
In 1998 the GOP actually lost 4 House seats and the Senate numbers did not change
In 1990 the GOP only LOST just 7 seats in the House and 0 in the Senate
In 1982 the Senate was unchanged, the GOP LOST 26 in the House
In 1978 the GOP gained 15 in the House and 2 in the Senate
In 1970 the GOP lost just 2 in the House and gained 3 in the Senate
In 1962 the GOP lost 4 in the House and only gained one in the Senate.

Since 1896 there have never been four successive midterm wave elections.  I do not believe before 1896 either

1990, 1998 and 2002 also had a president who was super popular at the time. Clinton and GWB had approval ratings in the range of 60 - 70% in 1998 and 2002, respectively. Popular presidents rarely have bad midterms because their approval rating is kind of a barometer of public opinion towards their stewardship of the country. Literally never before has a president with approval ratings below 50% not lost big in their midterms, and there is a reason for that. You'll find the same thing to be true in 1962. JFK had >60% approvals.

I'm not saying Trump can't have a good midterm, but rather that if he was going to have a good midterm, his approval ratings would show it. He would have to improve his numbers by at least 15 points more or so.

[Virginiá]

@Virginia

You’re forgetting that trump being at 42% basically means he’s at 60%, so checkmate libs

rats! I always forget the magic R bonus points!