Actually…
January 26, 1998: Lies on national TV - “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”
August 17, 1998: Comes clean on national TV - “I did have a relationship with Ms. Lewinsky that was not appropriate.”
December 19, 1998: House votes to impeach.
February 12, 1999: Senate votes to acquit.
Then I misremembered. Was it after his contempt trial then?
Modnote to all: Clinton is not running. Please drop this side bit.
I feel like we’re not talking about Nevada enough. There’s a couple mentions in this thread, but nothing really in depth.
Looks like it’s boring Democrat versus relatively non-insane Republican.
Catherine Cortez Masto (D) beat Joe Heck to fill the open seat vacated by Harry Reid in 2016. Cortez Masto won by about 27k (+2.43%) votes out of ~ 1 million cast, but notably did not get a majority of the vote. The third place vote getter was perennial Nevada dark horse, “None of these candidates.”
Her opponent, Adam Laxalt, has both won and lost statewide races before. He was elected Attorney General of Nevada in 2014, but lost a bid for Governor in 2018. He doesn’t appear to be a ‘Big Lie’ candidate, but he is certainly Big Lie adjacent. He was the Trump 2020 Nevada co-chair a claimed there was fraud immediately after that election and has had notable Big Liar Ric Grenell (nutty former DNI) campaigning for him.
This race, which could be quite close and important, is getting very little national coverage. Celebrity driven races seem to be sucking all the air out of the room.
Is anyone in Nevada that can let us know what’s going on? What issues are each candidate focusing on?
I’ll go look for some campaign ads on both sides I guess.
I’m not in Nevada but I don’t think it is a big mystery. Nevada is very purple. Cortez-Masto is, as you said, a boring candidate. Laxalt is a non-crazy GOPer with a legacy name. In that situation I expect Laxalt will win. If Biden were more popular that might make a difference.
The Nevada race is just as important as any other close senate race. I just think it should be getting more attention.
It reminds me of the 2020 Maine race. Early polling showed Collins and Gideon, and then polling down the stretch was extremely sparse, and news coverage of the race dried up. Collins ended up winning by 9 points, but no one was shocked, but only because no one was paying attention.
Senate seats are fungible when it comes to senate control. I feel like every reasonably close race should get roughly equal media attention.
But that’s not how the Media works. Herschel Walker gets more clicks and eyeballs on screen so every time Herschel Walker tells a story about a bull abandoning his children to impregnate three other cows (really? yes, really) every pundit is going to throw two cents in about that.
That said, I don’t think this is a mystery. I just don’t like it.
I don’t disagree it is an important race nor do I disagree it should be getting more news coverage. But your mention of the 2020 Maine race is a good example of why maybe it isn’t. That race was expected to be close all the way to the finish but in reality it wasn’t.
I saw mention in another thread that Democrats tend to look better in polls but fall short on Election Day. It seems to me this is pretty much true. Why? I don’t really know.
The last few rounds, Republicans refused to answer pollsters even more often than Democrats.
Pollsters want to make the correct call, and will put in adjustments (not an actual finger on the scale for Democrats, but something that may correlate with it a bit). So this really is a case of past performance not being predictive of future results.
Pretty sure this isn’t true. I’ll try to find some data to back it up, but if pollsters were consistently off in the same direction in aggregate they would make adjustments. For the most part, they know what they’re doing.
Here you go: The Polls Are All Right | FiveThirtyEight
Scroll down to: Polling bias shifts from election to election.
Yes but that was 2018 (before the midterms that year). The polls in 2018 and 2020 were also pretty tilted against the GOP (2020 in particular).
Pollsters are really trying to figure out how to deal with the fact that nobody answers pollsters calls anymore (and GOP-leaning voters even more so). Trafalgar and other “non traditional” pollsters are the most aggressive about this, but there results are also colored by the fact that they are pretty clearly funded by GOP interests most of the time.
Depressingly, Ron Johnson is now polling ahead of Mandela Barnes for the Wisconsin Senate seat.
In a new poll, Johnson has a 6 percentage point lead; that gain has come largely from gaining support among independent voters, with whom Barnes had held a large lead back in August.
This reinforces my views that “independent voters” are…wait, we aren’t in the pit. Let’s call them low intelligence folks that are easily swayed by propaganda.
Obligatory link:
Spot on! 
Hilariously, infuriatingly so!
I do wish we could see some more recent polling on Pennsylvania.
538 still has Fetterman at 72 out of 100 but as of right now PredictIt has him down to 54 out of 100.
(And yes, I understand the “noise” that could be baked into PredictIt) but to say I’m feeling a little bit nervous about that one is an understatement.
85 second video from 538 on the Nevada senate race and why it’s the most likely seat for Republicans to flip.
The latest 538 projection has Democrats down to 65-35 to keep the Senate (from a peak of 71-29 in September).
I’m not making predictions, in part because:
Pre-election polls in 2020 had the largest errors in 40 years
Ignoring the polls, the economy should lead to this being a GOP year, except that their candidate quality is often low.