It is WAY too early to predict anything - especially in these crazy times. The polls could swing to the Republicans and back to the Democrats several times before the election - and the election could still be decided based on the issue in the public’s mind at election time - including issues not even on the radar screen yet. …/QUOTE]
All possible. Also possible that polls two days before could be way off. But how often has such occurred vs how often have the aggregate trackers and the special election results this far back been fairly reliable predictors of midterm election results?
Past performance is no guarantee of future results … of course. But it does still inform.
And that past performance is that even 18 to 24 months (!) before the midterms the aggregate poll tracker has a pretty good predictive value.
But of course
The big question will be if Democrat advantage enthusiasm gap that has resulted in the special election swings D-ward by about 17 holds or fades.
It’s a little less crazy with mid-terms b/c there’s no electoral college, which was why I, and Nate Silver, refused to count out Trump even when the odds were in Hillary Clinton’s favor. If a candidate has a reliably 4-8% point lead from September through the end of October, then the chances of a stunning upset are probably 1-5%. In Hillary’s case, she was fluctuating from 0-4%, or averaging a 2% lead, which she carried into election day. Unfortunately, the way that the EC vote broke down, it wasn’t enough.
Mid-terms are more straightforward. If the Dems have a generic ballot lead of 5-10%, they’re going to have a good night. Question is, just how good.
For sure. And if I had to bet today, at even odds I’d bet that the Democrats take back the House. I’m just saying don’t swaat the day-to-day swings one way or the other months out from an election.
I would also be careful about using past correlations in the Trump era. There have been some seismic shifts in the culture, the media, and in politics. I think we are in somewhat uncharted territory here. The current era is far more volatile, and I’m not sure the old rules stull apply.
For example, here in Alberta we have always been considered by far the most conservative province in Canada. We’ve elected nothing but right-wing governments, usually by huge margins, for our entire modern history. And in our last election, the conservatives were up by 20 points just a week or two before the election - and lost to a party of socialists that a few months earlier couldn’t get elected to anything outside of Edmonton.
Maybe they do not. But polls have been as accurate as they had been or better. And if anything the numbers have been less volatile than they have been in other cycles. Trump’s approval-disapproval numbers for example have travelled in a very narrow window, “the narrowest of any president to this point in his term.”
Dipping outside of that stable range for more than a day or two, be it Trump approval/disapproval or the generic House tracker, shouldn’t be overreacted to, but neither is it to be totally dismissed.
POTUS seems pretty capable of motivating the opposition for the next two and a half years. There doesn’t seem to be the slightest indication that he will become more acceptable to Dem-leaning voters in the interim.
(I hope it’s acceptable to snip your quote down to the specific part I wanted to reply to. If not, apologies to all.)
To the parenthetic - I for one appreciate when a pertinent to the response part of a post is quoted, rather than the whole thing - so long as it is not done in a way that changes the meaning by stripping context.
As to the main thrust - “acceptable”? No. As horrific? Maybe. But even if so voters can become acclimated to a level of horrible and no longer as motivated by it. He’s moved the Overton window in regards to behavior of leadership to the disgusting side.
Anyway my comment was less over the next two and a half years but November. Current enthusiasm as reflected in special elections would predict greater D turnout than R turnout in a midterm year relative to a presidential year. That’s a flip from the typical. Will that hold to November and beyond? Or will Trump’s actions become like car accidents, so frequent that they hardly anyone pays attention when they occur?
I’d have to see a special election where Democrats underperformed to be sure, but wouldn’t it be just like Democrats to sustain enthusiasm for 18 months and then peter out in the last 6 before the midterm?
Democrats seem to care more about illegal immigrants than their base of millions of poor Latinos and African Amercian’s.
At least that is what one would think by judging on how the media covers them.
Meanwhile, unemployment for Latino’s and African Americans is at an all-time low. It won’t be easy for these groups to fins such facts on left-leaning sources, but one can hope they are learning from personal experiences.
Fox News and right-wing talk radio are only part of “the media”. Most of the rest of the media does not portray the Democrats as GOP and Trump propagandists would like.
From what my black and Latino family and friends tell me, they’re learning from experiences like spikes in hate crimes, spikes in white supremacist motivation and rallies like in Charlottesville, and the President’s rhetoric which has encouraged and motivated many of these white supremacists (along with explicitly praising those at Charlottesville), that this President is, at best, indifferent to white supremacism and racism, and at worst, actively in favor of them.
The whole article is quite good, but I’d like to draw attention to the six graphs in the article. Each is a slightly different look at the the jobs recovery over time. What strikes me is that in every single graph things now just seem to be a continuation of trends established over the last five or six years. None of the graphs show a dramatic change from Obama to Trump.
Things are in very good shape now. Things were in pretty good shape and trending positively when Trump took the wheel.
Trump actively in favor of racism and white supremacism? That is a serious charge. ** Prove that. **
Hate crimes were up high under Obama too. Yes, they are terrible, let us look at who is committing them as you are trying to suggest they are Trump supporters.
2017 data: The hate crimes recorded last year included nine murders and 24 rapes, the report said. Of the 5,770 known offenders, 46 percent were white and 26 percent were African-American.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 12.3% of the U.S. population is black.
What does this mean? It shows that African Americans who are about 12.3% of the population comment a higher percentage ( 26% of hate crimes ) of the hate crimes than other ethnic groups. I don’t need to remind you how the African American vote is broken down. 75%+ Democratic
He praised white supremacists in Charlottesville, repeated and retweeted white supremacist lies and fake statistics, spread a racist and evidence-free conspiracy theory about Barack Obama for many years, said that a judge couldn’t do his job because he’s “Mexican”, called immigrants “animals”, and much, much more. These are all facts (that Trump said and did these things). Again, I don’t know what’s in Trump’s mind, but by his actions and words he’s either indifferent to white supremacism and racism or in favor of them.
You offer no cites and very questionable (and indecipherable) numbers. Here are some actual cites with data about the spike in hate crimes since the rise of Trump:
By the last cite, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, and anti-minority hate crimes outnumber anti-Trump-supporter (and anti-white) hate crimes by about 50 or 100 to 1 in the period after the election.
Not to overly focused on the day to day but the tracker being back in its usual range, its center of gravity for a long time, now D+7.5, does help reduce my anxiety some.
Silver Lining, the article you plagiarized that from is actually about how hate crimes are since Trump’s election, and how blacks are the victims of a disproportionate amount of it.
And even reacting to one week of aggregated results in a tracker and that aggregated trackers trend lines may be of limited pointedness. But the drop in the aggregated D number to under 45 when its stable base had been 46 to 48 was still enough to gulp at and I am still relieved to see it was just a blip. Today the tracker back to D of 47.4 and D+8.