From 2018 To Beyond: Starting with Detailed 2018 Election Night Coverage

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

10:10 PM EST: MISSOURI, TEXAS, AND UTAH SENATE RACES CALLED (CONTINUED)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

10:10 PM EST: MISSOURI, TEXAS, AND UTAH SENATE RACES CALLED (CONTINUED)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gubernatorial Results and Exit Polls:

Governorships called: 9 D --- 13 R

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[KaiserDave]

Ew Cruz wins. But looks like Dems have a reasonable shot at the senate. Very slim.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Ew Cruz wins. But looks like Dems have a reasonable shot at the senate. Very slim.

I don’t think there’s mathematically a chance for dems to take the senate here. They needed to gain 2, which they likely will in NV and AZ, but IN flipped, and ND might as well. There’s no other R incumbent to gain from. Barring a recount flipping IN, and Heitkamp squeaking by in ND, I don’t see it happening.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Ew Cruz wins. But looks like Dems have a reasonable shot at the senate. Very slim.

I don’t think there’s mathematically a chance for dems to take the senate here. They needed to gain 2, which they likely will in NV and AZ, but IN flipped, and ND might as well. There’s no other R incumbent to gain from. Barring a recount flipping IN, and Heitkamp squeaking by in ND, I don’t see it happening.

Yeah, at this point the odds of a Dem Senate look very unlikely, and to do it you would probably need something unexpected like an IN recount changing things or MS-SEN special being quite unexpected. On the other hand, the House looks to me pretty solid for Dems at this point, and we still have some big poll closings coming up at 11 (California in particular). Dems have also already made some big Gov pickups - but also not the best case scenario, having lost OH, and WI is looking like Walker could hold.

[libertpaulian]

I still don't see how Donnelly loses if Beto came -this- close to winning and if Claire manages to win.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I still don't see how Donnelly loses if Beto came -this- close to winning and if Claire manages to win.

It doesn't seem the most likely, but on election night you are likely to be surprised one way or another as well by some races. The good thing about making the results semi-random is you do actually get some surprises this way.

[2016]

The House will go Democratic. There are enough Safe Democratic Seats on the West Coast to push the Democrats over that Magic Number of 218.

Meanwhile, with those calls in Texas & Utah Democrats have all but being cut off from a Senate Majority. The best they can do now is to get to a 50-50 Tie. For that to happen though they would have to win AZ (where they are leading by a lot at the moment), NV, MT and ND (where they are the Underdog). Republicans meanwhile are hugely favoured in the MS-Senate Special Runoff. Missouri though ought to be a big Disappointment for the NRSC.
A big surprise though is the Minnesota Senate Special which hasn't been called yet and where Tina Smith has a 60K+ Vote lead with 65% in. Well, there is always be a "sleeper" Race on Election Night and it looks to be that one.

Coming into the Night
23 Democratic Holdovers
42 Republican Holdovers

Senate At This Hour Based on CNN Calls
41 Democrats
49 Republicans

The real surprises are the Governor Races though. Wisconsin where Scott Walker was supposed to be done by A LOT has 83% counted and Walker has a 201,456. That seems to me a tall order for Evers to make up here. If Walker wins his Turnout Machine combined with Speaker Ryan and former RNC Chair Priebus delivered once again. It would also be a big Victory for Conservatives. On the other hand Republicans ought to be pretty nervous what is happening in South Dakota and Kansas.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Some good quality analysis, 2016. I think it deserves to be formalized into the timeline!

10:10 PM EST: MISSOURI, TEXAS, AND UTAH SENATE RACES CALLED (CONTINUED)

Wolf Blitzer: "And we are now going to go to Anderson Cooper and our panel for some analysis."

Anderson Cooper: "We've got a new panelist joining us, 2016. How is the House looking to you?"



2016: "The House will go Democratic. There are enough Safe Democratic Seats on the West Coast to push the Democrats over that Magic Number of 218."

Republican Strategist: "You know, at this hour, I can't really disagree with that. I am hopeful that we will hold down the size of the Democratic majority in some of these races that are very close right now, and we will be in a position to win back the House in 2020 when President Trump is re-elected. But yes, at this point I think it is safe to say that the House is lost."

Democratic Strategist nods

2016: "Meanwhile, with those calls in Texas & Utah Democrats have all but being cut off from a Senate Majority. The best they can do now is to get to a 50-50 Tie. For that to happen though they would have to win AZ (where they are leading by a lot at the moment), NV, MT and ND (where they are the Underdog). Republicans meanwhile are hugely favoured in the MS-Senate Special Runoff. Missouri though ought to be a big Disappointment for the NRSC."

2016: "A big surprise though is the Minnesota Senate Special which hasn't been called yet and where Tina Smith has a 60K+ Vote lead with 65% in. Well, there is always be a 'sleeper' Race on Election Night and it looks to be that one. Here's the status of the Senate at the moment:"

(Senate status coming into the night and at this hour is displayed on screen)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Anderson Cooper: "How about the Gubernatorial races?"

2016: "Well, Anderson. The real surprises are the Governor Races. Wisconsin where Scott Walker was supposed to be done by A LOT has 83% counted and Walker has a 201,456. That seems to me a tall order for Evers to make up here. If Walker wins his Turnout Machine combined with Speaker Ryan and former RNC Chair Priebus delivered once again. It would also be a big Victory for Conservatives. On the other hand Republicans ought to be pretty nervous what is happening in South Dakota and Kansas."

Democratic Strategist: "I will admit, I am very worried about Wisconsin right now. The results are, frankly, not good. I think we do have some votes out in Madison, but Wisconsin is not looking good. And as 2016 says, I am optimistic about South Dakota and Kansas. And in Georgia, I think we can win that runoff and pick up the Governorship there as well."

Republican Strategist: "You know what else? Look at the House races in Wisconsin. In WI-01, that's Paul Ryan's seat. The Democrats thought they could pick that one up. But right now we are 86% in, and we have a terrific Republican candidate, Bryan Steil he is leading Randy Bryce 53.1%-46.8% right now, with 86% in. So I think not only is Governor Walker going to be re-elected, but we are going to hold every House seat in Wisconsin. And I think that is an extremely good sign for President Trump, looking forward to 2020. He is going to be re-elected, and he is going to win Wisconsin once again. And as for Georgia, I can't remember the last time a Democrat won a runoff for statewide office."

Democratic Strategist: "But look at WI-06. We are ahead there by more than a point, with 77% in. And as for signs for 2020, just look over at Michigan and Pennsylvania, where the Republicans are getting demolished as we speak. So I think in 2020, Democrats are going to win back working class white voters that swung to Trump in 2016, and we're going to defeat President Trump."

Anderson Cooper: "Well, one way or another, it is going to be interesting. We will see, we will see."

[Huey Long is a Republican]

I'm shocked about WI and WY Senate races. The fact that Barrasso is under 50 with 67% in might convince him to give up for Wyoming. WI however, is interesting. 83% is in and it's a 7.6% gap between the two. That could mean that once it gets around 93-95% it's called, but it'll be within 3-5% for Baldwin. Meanwhile, it's currently not too good for Cramer but it's likely because Bismarck is largely coming in for Heitkamp. As more of the vote comes in, I think Cramer will begin to dominate as Heitkamp's vote against Kavanaugh will come back to bite her as the night continues. Montana will be interesting. IIRC, Tester is reasonably popular and Rosendale is an unknown in the state. Trump is also reasonably popular there as well, so he could pull Rosendale, but it could be a 2012 situation where it's in the 40s percentage wise. We'll know once around 25%-30% of the vote is in, as the cities will come in first but more of the vote comes in later on. Even if Tester doesn't win, he'll be wounded for the future. Arizona is going to Sinema, it'll just depend on when it's called and her lead. NV is going to be tricky. After Las Vegas comes in, we'll have to see how the rest of the state goes. Rosen will win it, but it'll be determined by how much it goes for her. If it's small, Heller wins, but if it goes for her in a moderate or big way, she wins. Either way, the senate suspense is real.

EDIT: Another big surprise is MN-Special. 65% in and it's a 4.1% gap between the two. Even if 35% is left, it's clear Franken's scandal really hurt the Democrats in the seat and the fact it isn't called yet is really telling. It could be the reason why WI is close but I'm very interested in these results and if this was real, I would be on my second cup of coffee and my third bowl of popcorn by now.

[2016]

I'm shocked about WI and WY Senate races. The fact that Barrasso is under 50 with 67% in might convince him to give up for Wyoming. WI however, is interesting. 83% is in and it's a 7.6% gap between the two. That could mean that once it gets around 93-95% it's called, but it'll be within 3-5% for Baldwin. Meanwhile, it's currently not too good for Cramer but it's likely because Bismarck is largely coming in for Heitkamp. As more of the vote comes in, I think Cramer will begin to dominate as Heitkamp's vote against Kavanaugh will come back to bite her as the night continues. Montana will be interesting. IIRC, Tester is reasonably popular and Rosendale is an unknown in the state. Trump is also reasonably popular there as well, so he could pull Rosendale, but it could be a 2012 situation where it's in the 40s percentage wise. We'll know once around 25%-30% of the vote is in, as the cities will come in first but more of the vote comes in later on. Even if Tester doesn't win, he'll be wounded for the future. Arizona is going to Sinema, it'll just depend on when it's called and her lead. NV is going to be tricky. After Las Vegas comes in, we'll have to see how the rest of the state goes. Rosen will win it, but it'll be determined by how much it goes for her. If it's small, Heller wins, but if it goes for her in a moderate or big way, she wins. Either way, the senate suspense is real.

EDIT: Another big surprise is MN-Special. 65% in and it's a 4.1% gap between the two. Even if 35% is left, it's clear Franken's scandal really hurt the Democrats in the seat and the fact it isn't called yet is really telling. It could be the reason why WI is close but I'm very interested in these results and if this was real, I would be on my second cup of coffee and my third bowl of popcorn by now.

Well, if this were real Results at 10.10pm ET on Nov. 6th I'll take it as a Republican. Yes, I would be a bit disappointed losing Missouri Senate and Florida Governor but otherwise it would be fine with me. I would be absolutely thrilled winning Ohio Governor and having the Moderate Governors like Phil Scott (Vermont), Chris Sununu (NH), Charlie Baker (MA) and Larry Hogan (MD) reelected. I also would feel really good about Wisconsin. That would be a good Platform to run after the Trump Aera.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I'm very interested in these results and if this was real, I would be on my second cup of coffee and my third bowl of popcorn by now.

LOL, I ate 3 bowls of popcorn on election night 2016. I felt a bit sick after that, but it was worth it.

[Huey Long is a Republican]

I'm very interested in these results and if this was real, I would be on my second cup of coffee and my third bowl of popcorn by now.

LOL, I ate 3 bowls of popcorn on election night 2016. I felt a bit sick after that, but it was worth it.

Lol, I've ate four burgers without getting sick, so you get used to it if you Train yourself

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

The model you posted in the excel sheet seems dumb. It seems to end up closer to a uniform swing from 2014 than an approximation of what could happen in 2018.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

The model you posted in the excel sheet seems dumb. It seems to end up closer to a uniform swing from 2014 than an approximation of what could happen in 2018.

Could you be more specific about what seems wrong to you?

Here are some density plots of the % swings across Congressional districts with the default settings (counting the # of congressional districts that swing vertically on the graphs, and the size of the swing is the horizontal axis, so for example .1 on the x axis means a 10% swing):







So it is definitely not a uniform swing. The swing is roughly normally distributed, but maybe a bit skewed, but it is definitely not uniform.

In general the largest swings are in districts like GA-06, IL-06, and TX-07 where there were large swings to Clinton, and the smallest (or negative) swings are in districts like OH-06, MN-07, and OH-13 that are particularly Trumpy.

Note this takes out districts where there is 0 swing because the race is uncontested (hence no swing is possible).

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

For starters, NJ-02 seems to stay Republican far more often than it should based on how the 2018 elections are going in your model.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

For starters, NJ-02 seems to stay Republican far more often than it should based on how the 2018 elections are going in your model.

I think NJ-02 is pretty widely acknowledged to be a case where candidate quality, as opposed to just the demographics/trends of the district, has made a significant difference. In reality it is only locked down because Jeff Van Drew is a very strong candidate and Seth Grossman a very weak one. But anyway, the purpose of this was not to be perfectly accurate for all 435 CDs, just to provide a rough starting point.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

10:20 PM EST: MN-GOV CALLED, DEMOCRATIC GAINS MOUNT IN THE HOUSE


Minnesota Governor-Elect Tim Walz

November 6, 2018, 10:20 PM EST: ELECTION NIGHT, CNN Headquarters, Washington D.C.
CNN: THE SITUATION ROOM - CNN'S ELECTION DAY HEADQUARTERS

...

Wolf Blitzer: "We've got news from Minnesota. That's right, Tim Walz, the Democrat, has won the Gubernatorial election in Minnesota. John King has an update on the situation in the House."

John King: "Well, we've just heard from our panel that they all seem pretty confident at this point that Democrats are going to take control of the House. But the size of the Democratic majority is still an open question, and we are going to drill down into the individual races now."

John King: "Since we last looked at it, we've had some big gains for the Democrats, but also some big holds for the Republicans. So far, among races that we have called, the Democrats have 170 seats, and 158 for the Republicans. MI-07 is extremely close right now, with 99% in. The Democrats are up 134,618 votes to 134,341 there."

John King: "The first big Demoratic pickup, PA-10, the Harrisburg-area seat we were looking at earlier. This was sort of a sleeper race that only became at all competitive after the redistricting in Pennsylvania, and Republican Scott Perry appears to have narrowly lost to Democrat George Scott, 101,260 votes to 100,801."

John King: "Another big Democratic pickup in Texas, the West Houston TX-07. This used to be George H.W. Bush's Congressional district, a rock solid Republican district for Decades. But this district swung hard against Trump, and Hillary Clinton won it in 2016. Now the Republican incumbent John Culberson has gone down 49.7%-48.1%, with 99% reporting."

John King: "Also in Texas, take a look at TX-24 in the suburbs between Dallas and Fort Worth. We haven't called this one yet, but it is 99% in, and Republican incumbent Kenny Marchant is down 49.4%-47.9% to Democrat Jan McDowell. If that lead holds, this will be a major shocker, possibly the biggest one of the night so far. McDowell raised very little money and did not get any help from Democrats until a little bit very late into the game, in late October/early November in the last few days the Democratic National Campaign Committee came in here. Beto O'Rourke has carried this district in the Senate race - and possibly, though we will have to see - carried McDowell over the finish line."

John King: "Minnesota's 3rd district, also a big pickup for Democrats in the Minneapolis suburbs. And in nearby MN-02, in the southern Minneapolis-St. Paul suburbs, Democrat Angie Craig is up more narrowly with 92% in. Democrats also picked up AZ-02, and held AZ-01, and picked up NY-22."

John King: "Republicans appear to have held OH-14 by just 53 votes, although there will be a recount there. A close call for David Joyce, but maybe it still goes the other way in a recount. We've also just called MO-02 for Republican Ann Wagner, a narrow win of about .5%, a bit more than 1000 votes, for her with 99% reporting."

Anderson Cooper: "And our panel has some analysis of the Senate races. We have another panelist joining us. First, what's your broad reaction to tonight so far as a whole? How are you feeling overall?"



2016: "You know, Anderson, I'll take it as a Republican. Yes, I am a bit disappointed losing Missouri Senate and Florida Governorm but otherwise it is fine with me. And you know what else, Anderson? I am absolutely thrilled winning Ohio Governor and having the Moderate Governors like Phil Scott (Vermont), Chris Sununu (NH), Charlie Baker (MA) and Larry Hogan (MD) reelected. I also feel really good about Wisconsin. If we can just hold on there, it will be a good platform to run after the Trump era."

Anderson Cooper: "And what about to you?"

New Tennessean Politician: "I'm shocked about WI and WY Senate races. The fact that Barrasso is under 50 with 76% in might convince him to give up for Wyoming."

Republican Strategist: "But the exit poll had Barrasso up 55-36, and CNN called the race an hour ago."

Democratic Strategist: "Could it be that CNN made a mistake calling the race so early based just on the exit poll? You know, I think this could just be a reflection of what a great candidate Gary Trauner is, the Democrat running there. You know, in 2006 Trauner ran for the House of Representatives seat in Wyoming, and he only lost 47.8% to Barbara Cubin's 48.3%. So I think maybe Gary Trauner has run a very strong campaign under the radar, while nobody has been paying attention, and nobody noticed."

John King: "Well, we called it with 19% in, and at that point the results seemed to be matching the exit polls."

New Tennessean Politician: "We are now at 76% in, and Barrasso is up 49.9% to 39.5%, pretty underwhelming for a Republican in Wyoming. Also, WI is interesting. 83% is in and it's a 7.6% gap between the two. That could mean that once it gets around 93-95% it's called, but it'll be within 3-5% for Baldwin.

John King: "Wait, we just got some more votes in. 86% in now, and Baldwin leads by 9.4% now. Looks like some votes from Milwaukee."

New Tennessee Politician: "Meanwhile, it's currently not too good for Cramer but it's likely because Bismarck is largely coming in for Heitkamp. As more of the vote comes in, I think Cramer will begin to dominate as Heitkamp's vote against Kavanaugh will come back to bite her as the night continues. Montana will be interesting. Tester is reasonably popular and Rosendale is an unknown in the state. Trump is also reasonably popular there as well, so he could pull Rosendale, but it could be a 2012 situation where it's in the 40s percentage wise. We'll know once around 25%-30% of the vote is in, as the cities will come in first but more of the vote comes in later on. Even if Tester doesn't win, he'll be wounded for the future."

Republican Strategist: "Well, now we are up to 20% in in Montanta, and Rosendale is leading 62.4% to 35.9%."

Democratic Strategist: "Well, I think the real question are President Trump's remarks about Tester from early in the evening, calling Tester, and I hate to repeat it, "Tester the Molester." Such insulting remarks."

Anderson Cooper: "Yes, those remarks from President Trump earlier in the evening, at the Rosendale Rally, just before polls started closing in the East Coast. But they were still open in Montana. I must add that CNN has not been able to verify any evidence supporting President Trump's remarks. Those remarks are totally unsubstantiated, have been denied strenuously by the Tester campaign, and the White House press office has distanced themselves from them."

Republican Strategist: "But still, they may have had a late-breaking impact on the race. I'm just not sure, if so, what impact they would have had, and frankly whether it would have helped or hurt Tester."

New Tennessee Politician: "Arizona is going to Sinema, it'll just depend on when it's called and her lead. NV is going to be tricky. After Las Vegas comes in, we'll have to see how the rest of the state goes. Rosen will win it, but it'll be determined by how much it goes for her. If it's small, Heller wins, but if it goes for her in a moderate or big way, she wins. Either way, the senate suspense is real."

John King: "Look over here on the magic wall. 20% in from Nevada so far, Rosen up 62.1% to 35%. You can see that is all from Clark County so far, the vote from Las Vegas."

New Tennessee Politician: "Another big surprise is MN-Special. 71% in and it's a 2.0% gap between the two. Even if 29% is left to report, it's clear Franken's scandal really hurt the Democrats in the seat and the fact it isn't called yet is really telling. It could be the reason why WI is close but I'm very interested in these results and if this was real, I would be on my second cup of coffee and my third bowl of popcorn by now."

Republican Strategist: "Compare that to the other Senate race with Klobuchar - she is up 65.8% to 31.3% with 84% in on that race. Really a shocking performance by Tina Smith in comparison to that. This race looks like it is still very much in play, possibly it could even be a surprise Republican pickup. But even if not, this suggests to me that President Trump could have a very real shot to put MN into play in 2020, and maybe this time win its electoral votes."

Democratic Strategist: "I am hearing, though, that there may be a lot of vote out from Minneapolis in that race. You guys are getting ahead of yourselves here. Look, all the other races in Minnesota are going very well for Democrats so far. Yes, this one is worryingly close so far, but let's wait and see the rest of the votes as they come in."

...

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

10:20 PM EST: MN-GOV CALLED, DEMOCRATIC GAINS MOUNT IN THE HOUSE (CONTINUED)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

10:20 PM EST: MN-GOV CALLED, DEMOCRATIC GAINS MOUNT IN THE HOUSE (CONTINUED)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gubernatorial Results and Exit Polls:

Governorships called: 10 D --- 13 R

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

[2016]

Another Observation after these latest Results came in.

If you look at the House Popular Vote most Polls had us down 11-13 Points, now we're within 10. Obviously California & Washington haven't closed yet but still I think that is an Improvement. If I remember correctly your Network here CNN had Republicans down 63-33 among Women on the National Ballot in early October. I'm not seeing that right now based on the Results we have thus far. Republicans won a Net of 63 Seats in the House in 2010 and 58 in 1994 and Democrats will be nowhere near that margin tonight.

When we look at the Senate and especially those two Special Elections in MN & MS we need to keep in mind that Appointed Senators trend to do worse when they face Voters for the first time. That's why Cindy Hyde-Smith has been pushed into a Runoff and Tina Smith has a closer Race than expected. Remember the 2010 CO Race when appointed Senator Michael Bennet won by a nose. In 2016 he won comfortably then.
When you look at the Arizona Numbers they seem to me a bit off. Sinema has a 170K Vote lead while in the AZ-GOV Incumbent Ducey leading by 15K or so. In NV-SEN I'm going to wait until Reno & Elko start reporting Results before drawing to any conclusions. Nevada hasn't voted out an Incumbent Senator in over 20 years. That Race could be similar close to the Reid-Angle Race of 2010. I'm feeling very confident about North Dakota, Montana showing encouraging signs too but of course it's early. What Trump said won't make a Difference I think because most of the people already made up their mind.

Looking at the Governor Races it looks like Walker will hang on. Evers has cut the lead by about 50K but we now have 92% in. In Kansas & South Dakota it depends where the Vote is coming from. In 2014 Western Kansas saved Senator Pat Roberts against Greg Orman and a similar scenario could play out in both Kansas and South Dakota. Noem would be a terrific Governor for SD. AZ-GOV could go either way now.

[OBD]

At this point McSally needs the remaining vote to be, like, 70-75% in her favor according to my calculations. I would feel safe calling the race for Sinema.

It's too early to draw anything from the 10:00 states, but, um, what's happening in Idaho. It's probably a fluke but massive NUT if those are the actual results.

Why not call NM-Gov, it's numerically impossible for the Republicans to win there.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

It's too early to draw anything from the 10:00 states, but, um, what's happening in Idaho. It's probably a fluke but massive NUT if those are the actual results.

Probably just randomness in the results (I probably have the variances on how much the first results can vary from the final results a bit too high), but who know?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It says it is 87% in, but that is only 87% with rounding. It is probably 86.51% in or something like that. So technically it is still numerically possible (albeit extremely unlikely) to go the other way. The race is called automatically with a formula, so while it is true in reality that it is essentially over, it won't get called until it is literally completely numerically impossible to go the other way.

Keep in mind also that races that say they are 100% in can also be 99.51% in.

[Gass3268]

Have to admit that an almost 17 point difference between the Wisconsin Senate race and Wisconsin Governor race makes little sense to me. Just looking at the house numbers in Wisconsin, it should be an across the board Democratic sweep.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Have to admit that an almost 17 point difference between the Wisconsin Senate race and Wisconsin Governor race makes little sense to me. Just looking at the house numbers in Wisconsin, it should be an across the board Democratic sweep.

that indicates to me that mostly R areas are reporting in the GOV race. Seems odd to me precincts are reporting for different races at different times.