2018 Congressional Generic Ballot/House Polls Megathread 2 - no debates please

[Virginiá]

Whew, it's going to be a good night if those are the final numbers. Democrats didn't even win close to D+8 in Wisconsin in 2006 and 2008 (surprisingly).

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

It will make a difference in MN, with Lewis being a goner with those numbers and the Nolan/Walz seat being safe...but D+8 isn’t enough to win Duffy or Ryan’s seat. Michigan is too gerrymandered; this will only get Dems MI-11. All that for 2 districts in the Upper Midwest.

[Beet]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

[Torie]

Trump seems working hard to build up a blue wave. When the wave appears to be abating a bit, he gets active again agitating the waters to push it back up. He's clearly a Dem mole put up by them on a search and destroy mission of the GOP. The only little glitch in the Dem plot is that in the process he was "accidentally" elected POTUS.

[BudgieForce]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

Its Marist. I know its a rare sight here, but they're among the better pollsters.

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

Hmm, another thing to consider too. No poll expected the Rust Belt/Midwestern collapse of Hillary to the extent of what went down election night.

[BudgieForce]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

Hmm, another thing to consider too. No poll expected the Rust Belt/Midwestern collapse of Hillary to the extent of what went down election night.

If it makes you feel better, but I think its very possible the midwest is reverting back to pre-2016 lean dem levels. Hillary isnt on the ballot. The Obama voters who went Trump arent suddenly solid Republican votes in future elections.

[Zaybay]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

These numbers are collaborated by MC and other polling. So I would say they are rather realistic. Also, as the non college educated voters have been the one to turn against Trump in the midwest, polling more would probably lower his approval even more


Disappointing that they didnt show the primary and general numbers today, now I got to wait another day.

[KingSweden]

It will make a difference in MN, with Lewis being a goner with those numbers and the Nolan/Walz seat being safe...but D+8 isn’t enough to win Duffy or Ryan’s seat. Michigan is too gerrymandered; this will only get Dems MI-11. All that for 2 districts in the Upper Midwest.

MI-8 and possibly MN-3 would be in striking distance with these numbers, not to mention some rough times further downballot where candidates have less insulation with personal popularity

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Preference for Congress (Marist/NBC)

MI: D+9
MN: D+12
WI: D+8

July 15-19, RVs

Looks like Minnesota could have only one Republican in their delegation come January 2019...

[junior chįmp]

Preference for Congress (Marist/NBC)

MI: D+9
MN: D+12
WI: D+8

July 15-19, RVs

Looks like Minnesota could have only one Republican in their delegation come January 2019...

Hopefully....Dems can always gerrymander that district out of existence too

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Is that whiny crybaby Stewart Mills III running again?

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Is that whiny crybaby Stewart Mills III running again?

No

[IceSpear]

It would seem like the Trump strategy of just enthusing the Republican (Trump) base voters is really falling flat.  

I don't think Trump's "strategy" has anything to do with it. Obama had the exact opposite strategy: bending over backwards to please people outside his base (even though he won by big margins in the PV/EV, unlike Trump who lost the former and barely won the latter by the skin of his teeth) and the backlash against Democrats in 2010 is likely to be stronger than the backlash against the Republicans in 2018 will be. It's just as simple as the "swing voters" getting tired of the party in power at record speed, and voting for the only other alternative, as well as the losing base being far more enthusiastic and turning out at higher rates than the winning base.

[Brittain33]

Muh Collin Peterson lean r

[Tartarus Sauce]

Preference for Congress (Marist/NBC)

MI: D+9
MN: D+12
WI: D+8

July 15-19, RVs

Looks like Minnesota could have only one Republican in their delegation come January 2019...

Hopefully....Dems can always gerrymander that district out of existence too

It won't exist anyway after the next round of redistricting.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Preference for Congress (Marist/NBC)

MI: D+9
MN: D+12
WI: D+8

July 15-19, RVs

Looks like Minnesota could have only one Republican in their delegation come January 2019...

Hopefully....Dems can always gerrymander that district out of existence too

I thought Minnesota has nonpartisan redistricting laws.

[Virginiá]

Two things to take away from Minnesota:

1. It's possible to get D+12 and not actually pick up MN-2 or MN-3. This was what happened in 2012, although Bachmann just barely scraped by, so I'd say it is likely that Democrats net up at least one seat with that margin.

2. Democrats could get a 7-1 delegation relatively easily as well, so long as their votes are more spread out. Given trends that accelerated in 2016, I'd like to think their votes are more spread out this time, instead of running up the score in currently-held seats.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Two things to take away from Minnesota:

1. It's possible to get D+12 and not actually pick up MN-2 or MN-3. This was what happened in 2012, although Bachmann just barely scraped by, so I'd say it is likely that Democrats net up at least one seat with that margin.

2. Democrats could get a 7-1 delegation relatively easily as well, so long as their votes are more spread out. Given trends that accelerated in 2016, I'd like to their votes are more spread out this time, instead of running up the score in currently-held seats.

Well 2 shouldn’t be too hard seeing as Lewis is on a campaign of personal destruction and something must be going on in 3 because Erik’s first ad of the midterm is hiking attacking Trunp over his environmental policy. So Erik must of saw something in his polling to prompt that

[Skill and Chance]

Preference for Congress (Marist/NBC)

MI: D+9
MN: D+12
WI: D+8

July 15-19, RVs

Looks like Minnesota could have only one Republican in their delegation come January 2019...

Hopefully....Dems can always gerrymander that district out of existence too

I thought Minnesota has nonpartisan redistricting laws.

Nope, it's the standard legislative process with governor's veto, but there hasn't been unified control in a very long time.  2011 was D Gov/R legislature, 2001 was Independent Gov/D senate/R house, 1991 and 1981 were both R Gov/D legislature.

[Tender Branson]

So ... Senate and Governor polls for the 3 states will be released today then ?

[IceSpear]

The Quinnipiac poll has college educated whites at D+13 and non college whites at R+11.

Nobody tell RINO Tom.

[Florida Man for Crime]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

Hmm, another thing to consider too. No poll expected the Rust Belt/Midwestern collapse of Hillary to the extent of what went down election night.

After an election, pollsters always look to see where they were wrong, and why. They will have noted the issue of underpolling non-college educated voters and should generally have changed their methodology to reflect that for 2018. So while they may have been underpolled in 2016, they are unlikely to be underpolled in 2018 as well. Pollsters do not like to be wrong 2 times in a row for the same reason. Instead, they prefer to be wrong 2 times in a row for a cycle of alternating reasons.

[Gass3268]

So ... Senate and Governor polls for the 3 states will be released today then ?

Yeah, as a way to spread out the impact.

[cp]

This poll seems pretty unrealistic. I believe he's underwater, but not by that much, which calls the GCB numbers into question too. As we've seen with polls, non college educated voters tend to be underpolled.

Hmm, another thing to consider too. No poll expected the Rust Belt/Midwestern collapse of Hillary to the extent of what went down election night.

After an election, pollsters always look to see where they were wrong, and why. They will have noted the issue of underpolling non-college educated voters and should generally have changed their methodology to reflect that for 2018. So while they may have been underpolled in 2016, they are unlikely to be underpolled in 2018 as well. Pollsters do not like to be wrong 2 times in a row for the same reason. Instead, they prefer to be wrong 2 times in a row for a cycle of alternating reasons.

You don't need to look any further than the UK to show this mindset in effect. Pollsters so over-corrected of the 2015 polls that they created the opposite effect in 2017.