Although it must be noted that that site was running 58% probability of a Democratic House on the same day end of December that the aggregate tracker was running D+13.
I’m not completely sure what made the betting markets so much more sure of a D win on April 11 when the tracker was running D+6.6 (only 1.4 more than today) than when the tracker was D+13.
No question I’ll feel better seeing the tracker get back over 7 and closer to 8, and there is some sense of deflating enthusiasm in the air. But I don’t want to Chicken Little yet either.
I haven’t kept up with the predictits lately but I would be surprised if Democrats didn’t, at minimum, pull nearly even with the GOP in the House, and my sense is that they’ve got a very good chance at retaking that chamber, even if by just one or two members. Even if hopes are fading of a “blue wave” (and I never fully believed it would be a tsunami), the fact is that there’s a lot working against the republicans.
History, for instance, will probably work against Republicans. More often than not, the activism that fuels mid-term races works in favor of the party that’s not in power. So that alone should help democrats.
But what’s worse still for the GOP is the number of retiring members. We’re talking many solid multi-term incumbents deciding simply to quit. Which brings to mind two things: they see something in the tea leaves the average person doesn’t, and two, they’re fed up with the direction of their own party and won’t lift a finger to help their successors.
The Senate, OTOH, seems pretty much like a lock for the GOP. They might even pick up a seat or two.
I have paradoxical views of the Democrats’ predicament in the midterms. On the one hand, it really wouldn’t surprise me if the Republicans maintain control of the House, given that that chamber is gerrymandered to within an inch of its life. OTOH, if the Dems can’t turn the GOP’s 2017 healthcare fiasco into an outright shellacking for the Republicans at the polls, then the Democrats are basically worthless as a party. Paradox!
Still, if the Dems win the House popular vote by 5 points or more yet don’t retake the chamber, then that will call into question several genuine questions about the legitimacy of the US government, as if those questions weren’t bad enough already given that HRC got 3 million more votes than Trump in 2016.
That said, I am slightly more optimistic than most that the D’s will retake the Senate. I don’t think that they are favored to win it, mind you, but I’d put their odds at roughly 30%. That’s largely fueled by Jones’s win in Alabama (!) and Lamb’s win in PA. I think the tell on election night will be whether McCaskill wins in Missouri or not. Between the two chambers, I would infinitely prefer for the Dems to retake the Senate rather than the House; that would mean Trump gets no more judges for the rest of his term.
Predictwise shows 22% as the chance for D+I to get 51 Senate seats. This seems wildly optimistic to me.
Note that the pederast Roy Moore got 67% of the white vote in Alabama. He lost only because the R usually gets an even larger share of the white vote there. That’s 67% of ALL whites — if you consider just non-college white males, the number is 80%. Yes, that’s better than the usual 90+% but rumors that significant numbers of the angry rednecks of Flyoverland are finally coming to their senses are exaggerated.
But I don’t expect the D’s to do much even if they win the Senate. As long as Trump doesn’t nominate someone like Don Junior or Roy Moore, the hounds will screech and browbeat the D’s into acquiescence. Look how they caved and let DACA kids be deported.
Can you rephrase this? I’m unsure of your meaning.
Democrats have opportunities to make a statement in smaller and more local races, but I suspect that the divergent wings within the party are going to seriously hamper them in statewide and presidential elections. The Balkanization of the electorate is a potential danger for both parties, actually, but the fringes on the right have the ability to unify in ways that the fringes on the left may find challenging.
Really? From what I’ve seen, the Democratic factions are much more united than the Republicans. I mean, look at how little the Republicans have been able to accomplish even with control of all of the reins of government.
The problem is people just want to be savages, not everyone of course, but the more sizable portion of the electorate does. Trump comes along and he’s like “it’s ok to be a savage” and the democrats just say he’s a big mean fella that’s trying to oppress you - keep crying into your dollar store wheaties about how much of a victim you are and we’ll save you, we’ll make you feel good about yourself, we’ll make you feel like you’re relevant, that you matter. And then the economy gets better and he’s like “you can be a savage too, look at all this winning” and people just start wanting shit, they don’t care how they feel, they just want stuff now, and they start to believe Trump can deliver - like he’ll fuck everyone over for your benefit.
I predict unprecedented minority turnout for the Republican party in the next presidential election.
That November is a long way away is well established, lots can happen from major events to just flagging energy as nothing major happens, but “one or two polls”? While the op was focused on just one or two most of the discussion is in reference to the aggregate tracker(s) with a side of special elections. The aggregate tracker still has noise, is not a perfect predictor, and caution may be wise in reacting too much to one or two weeks of one way or the other, but it is not just one or two polls.
To my eye the tracker seems to not show much improvement for the R side as opposed to a drop of D support over the month. Why would that be occurring?
In any case I think it speaks to the importance of individual D candidates giving positive messages for their district so voters can choose them affirmatively and not just say they don’t like the Rs.
You’re using the same misguided thought process that lead many people to believe that the configuration of the electoral college would give Hilary Clinton an insurmountable advantage.
I saw a massive billboard on the freeway yesterday looking for construction workers to hire which is something I had never seen before. It’s literally an advertisement to vote Republican. Maybe Mueller should investigate if the Russians funded it?
I don’t see how the Democrats flip the House when the employment situation is so good.
How is a billboard looking for more immigrant labor (because let’s face it, that’s who such a billboard is targeted at, in southern California) an ad for the party that wants to eliminate all immigrants?
