Agreed.
I’m not familiar with those pollsters, but they’ve all come out with polls recently showing AES up by only 1 or 2 points, which I guess would be within the margin of error if you only looked at those polls. Emerson, NYT and something called “Wedgewood” have had AES winning by 3-6 points recently. Nate Silver currently predicts a 5 point AES win (so, he thinks he will outperform his polls by +1.5 after adjustments for fundamentals and expert opinion).
Speaking of Nate Silver (this info is paywalled on his site): he currently gives the Democrats a 74% chance of winning the Senate (which would require winning four seats). He thinks the median outcome would be a 5 seat Democratic pickup, and the modal outcome would be 6 seats. To a 95% level of certainty, the Democrats will win between one and nine seats.
State by State, in order of probability of Dem win:
Dems hold GA 97%, NH 93%, MN 89%, MI 81%
Dems flip NC 95%, OH 75%, ME 72%, TX 72%, AK 63%, IA 59%, KS 50%, NE 30%, SC 24%, FL 10%, MS 4%
A 72% chance of Dems flipping Maine? I want some of what Nate is smoking. Every poll I’ve seen to date shows the race between Collins and Jackson as being within the MOE.
Just to clarify, Nate Silver is not a pollster. He created a model. Since he got the model started — about two months ago, I think - he has had no control over its output. All the decisions — about which pollsters to weigh (trust) more, etc. - were made months ago.
So if you want what he’s smoking, actually you want whatever he smoked several months ago. The bong water from that night is pretty stinky at this point.
Some pretty high quality polling (both Marist and Wapo) had Jackson up by 4. This is obviously one of the races I’m most wary of since Collins outperformed polling by 20 points in 2020. But A lot has happened between now and then. Strong incumbents are strong until they aren’t.
Exactly. The way for the Democrats to keep me voting for them is not to nominate antisemitic extremists like AES. If the Rogers wins the election, Democrats will have no one to blame but themselves.
Well, his polling average has Jackson with a 2.7% lead, which is close to the margin of error – close enough that he only has a 72% chance of winning. But you’d sure rather be up than down by 2.7%.
His model slightly weights some factors other than polls, though; considering the national climate, Maine’s partisan lean, Collins’ incumbency, and the opinions of experts, he thinks Jackson is probably ahead by 3.2%,and the 72% figure is based on that slightly higher number.
Also, 72% is LOW. It is not at all far from a coin flip. Just ask a certain former Ms. Rodham.
(I was kinda ninja’d by ThingFish)
Cite?
Maine is actually a weird outlier in his analysis. In almost every State, the non-polling based factors, or “fundamentals” point in generally the same direction. But in Maine, the fairly insignificant overall 0.5% shift in estimated vote based on these factors represents the estimated average of wildly different trends.
On the one hand, the national environment is very blue, and Maine is a Democrat-leaning State even at baseline. On the other, Collins is an incumbent, and the Maine Democratic Party embarrassed itself badly earlier in the race. Depending on how you weight those factors, you could make a case that Collins should actually be heavily favored, which you really can’t do for the Republicans in Michigan or Texas.
Just because Paxton is a terrible candidate, and even of Talarico wins, it does not mean Texas has “gone blue”.
He has a “scary” name. 
And pretty progressive. Paxton was a bad choice for the GOP, El-Sayed was a poor choice for the Dems.
Do you have any evidence that El-Sayeds "entire family: belongs to that org? What I can see is that his half-sister posted some stuff about that org, and there are reports that his mother has links to that org before she moved to the US. And all the reports and links are from some pretty spurious places, such as NY Post and Fox, plus of course the usual garbage from YouTube etc.
My bad. Purple was the color I meant. TX has been solidly red for 30 years. Any shift in that is a threat to the GOP in national elections just as CA or NY being seen as purple would freak out the Ds.
But that’s probably a topic better for another thread.
Beto only lost by 2.6 points in 2018, when Trump’s approval was 5-10 points higher than it is today. There’s nothing magic about TX, it’s about as red as Iowa or Ohio, and in an election where those states flip, TX is likely to flip as well.
Two things to mention here:
1: A poll result that has a Democrat ahead but within the margin of error means that the Democrat has a more than 50% chance of winning that seat. How much more than 50% depends on how large the lead is relative to the margin of error.
2: An average or other compilation of multiple polls will have a smaller margin of error than any one poll by itself. It’s quite possible that he’s inside the margin of error of each individual poll, but outside the margin of error of the aggregate.
Motivated reasoning though is hard to change.
Yeah farmers feel the pinch of diesel hard. Rural drivers have to drive farther and often have trucks. Objectively there is more exposure to the pain points.
Yet even though it is moving a bit many Republicans and leaners think things are fine! At least as of July /
Most Republicans continue to say Trump’s policies have either improved economic conditions (42%) or not had much of an effect (29%).
Okay some movement since then … consumer sentiment drop most among Independents, then Republicans, and lastly Democrats … probably because Democrats were already low!
These are the sort of non-polling data that informs Silver’s model.
By my quick count, 24 county-level Democratic Party organizations endorsed Jon Tester for U.S. Senate in 2024:
And as of less than three weeks before the election, it looks like Bankhead has been endorsed by only ten county Democratic organizations:
Normally, I don’t believe is second-guessing polls. But I’m thinking that when Montana Democrats come to the polls, the slips of paper being handed out, by the local Democrat responsible to do that, will mostly show a check mark next to Seth Bodnar’s name. This should lead Bodnar to doing a bit better than polls, which cannot capture that anomaly, predict. Unfortunately, from an anti-GOP perspectives, I’m reading that most Montanans vote by mail, so I doubt it will help enough.
In Montana they’re allowed to do that at the polls?
I don’t think so… IIRC, when I lived there, no electioneering material was allowed even standing in line (no matter how far the line was from the door of the polling place).
In NY, you can’t even be wearing a tshirt with a candidate’s name. No electioneering within 100 feet of the polls.
Nope. TX is about as red as LA, AR and OK.
Cornyn would be taking this race in a walk and Talarico would be doing much worse than Beto did. But because MAGA is running the GOP in TX the voters went with Paxton, a crook, philanderer and bigot because they were told to do so by DJT. In any of the states you mention Paxton would be losing by double-digits but instead he is running neck and neck with Talarico.