How do you think tomorrow's House elections will go?

[Cleaner44]

Now that we are 1 day away from the midterms I thought it would be interesting to get people's opinions and predictions. Specifically I am thinking about the United States House of Representatives.

The MSM has been pushing the narrative that the Blue Wave™ was all but certain. I notice since this weekend they are now walking that back a bit, in what I interpret as an attempt to salvage credibility.

Personally I have been predicting for months that Republicans will hold the House. I still hold that opinion. That certainly puts me in the minority over at Predictit.org which I am happy about because that means I will get a bigger payout if and when I am correct.

Anyone else want to share their opinions and predictions?

Official numbers for current seats:
https://pressgallery.house.gov/member-data/party-breakdown

235 Republicans
193 Democrats
0 Independents
7 Vacancies

218 are need for the majority.

[CaptUSA]

Needs a poll.



Like the 37 other threads on this topic. ;)

[Cleaner44]

Needs a poll.



Like the 37 other threads on this topic. ;)

Sorry it took a moment for me to write the choices!

What are your thoughts?

[donnay]

I think it is definitely favorable for Republicans to gain more seats.

A Red Tsunami!

[Aratus]

Control may be 3 seats short of a full flip, or it may flip.
The Senate changing plus or minus by three senators has
DJT either happier or in extreme hot water and then some!
A power vacuum in the wake of Paul Ryan's departure is
about to magnify and amplify any changes n the House.

[CaptUSA]

What are your thoughts?

I don't care about the red vs. blue game. I just hope lots of incumbents lose. The more, the better.

[oyarde]

LBJ & Obama pretty well ruined the future of the Dem party where I live for at least a few more decades I think .

[Cleaner44]

I think it is definitely favorable for Republicans to gain more seats.

A Red Tsunami!

Me too.

Liberals seem to believe Nate Silver because he tells them what they want to hear. He said Hillary was 92% chance to win in 2016 and he has been saying Democrats are something like 82% or something to win the House. I see his political predictions about as convincing as his hairdo.

https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/fe9349d/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fe2%2F8b%2 F8f80a99f41509b19407b52f431bb%2F20160510-nate-silver-getty.jpg

[Cleaner44]

I don't care about the red vs. blue game. I just hope lots of incumbents lose. The more, the better.

So you don't want to make any prediction? That's no fun. There is no shame in being wrong, it is just something to do to see if any of us are reading the situation accurately.

[dannno]

Me too.

Liberals seem to believe Nate Silver because he tells them what they want to hear. He said Hillary was 92% chance to win in 2016 and he has been saying Democrats are something like 82% or something to win the House. I see his political predictions about as convincing as his hairdo.

https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/fe9349d/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2Fe2%2F8b%2 F8f80a99f41509b19407b52f431bb%2F20160510-nate-silver-getty.jpg

He's already hedging

Nate Silver says Dems could retake House, or not: 'Both extremely possible'

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/414759-nate-silver-says-dems-could-retake-house-or-not-both-extremely



The media started hedging the moment they began trotting out that "Republicans are suppressing voters!" nonsense.

[Cleaner44]

He's already hedging

Nate Silver says Dems could retake House, or not: 'Both extremely possible'



https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/414759-nate-silver-says-dems-could-retake-house-or-not-both-extremely



The media started hedging the moment they began trotting out that "Republicans are suppressing voters!" nonsense.

What a brave stance for him to take. Dems might win or they might not. Capt Obvious also tells us that water is wet!

[CaptUSA]

So you don't want to make any prediction? That's no fun. There is no shame in being wrong, it is just something to do to see if any of us are reading the situation accurately.

No, I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear... I don't care about the red vs. blue game, so I don't pay much attention to who is ahead or behind... I really can't make a prediction other than to say that individual liberty will most likely lose. But I do hope lots and lots of incumbents lose.

[Cleaner44]

Control may be 3 seats short of a full flip, or it may flip.
The Senate changing plus or minus by three senators has
DJT either happier or in extreme hot water and then some!
A power vacuum in the wake of Paul Ryan's departure is
about to magnify and amplify any changes n the House.

I am not sure that I follow what you mean with control.

I feel very confident that Republicans will hold the majority in the Senate and may end up with 54 seats.

[Cleaner44]

No, I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear... I don't care about the red vs. blue game, so I don't pay much attention to who is ahead or behind... I really can't make a prediction other than to say that individual liberty will most likely lose. But I do hope lots and lots of incumbents lose.

I have no doubt that individual liberty will suffer, that to me is always a given.

I do want to see the Democrats lose as I see them as more of a threat to individual liberty than Republicans, given that the official platform of the left is to worship the cult of BIG GOVT.

[oyarde]

I am not sure that I follow what you mean with control.

I feel very confident that Republicans will hold the majority in the Senate and may end up with 54 seats.

Maybe as high as 55 to 58 is possible at this point .

[CaptUSA]

I have no doubt that individual liberty will suffer, that to me is always a given.

I do want to see the Democrats lose as I see them as more of a threat to individual liberty than Republicans, given that the official platform of the left is to worship the cult of BIG GOVT.

Lol - whereas with the Republicans, that's their "unofficial" platform. Good choice. ;)

[Cleaner44]

Lol - whereas with the Republicans, that's their "unofficial" platform. Good choice. ;)

Well there is a good reason that Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie and Justin Amash are Republicans. It was Ron that encouraged me to register as a Republican and I don't regret listening to him at all.

I also think that we have pushed the GOP more toward a libertarian position than they were 10 years ago.

I certainly can't depend on the Libertarian party and Bob Barr or Bill Weld to individual liberty. :p

[Swordsmyth]

Maybe as high as 55 to 58 is possible at this point .

An outside chance of 60.

[Swordsmyth]

Well there is a good reason that Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Thomas Massie and Justin Amash are Republicans. It was Ron that encouraged me to register as a Republican and I don't regret listening to him at all.

I also think that we have pushed the GOP more toward a libertarian position than they were 10 years ago.

I certainly can't depend on the Libertarian party and Bob Barr or Bill Weld to individual liberty. :p

And the Demoncrats keep getting more tyrannical every day.

There was a time when there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties but that was long ago.

[Cleaner44]

An outside chance of 60.

I have no doubt that the GOP will hold the Senate.

I really hope that the GOP net gains even 1 new seat in the House, just so the Marxist Democrats will get a slap in the face.

[Swordsmyth]

I have no doubt that the GOP will hold the Senate.
Yup, I really want to see them get 60 so that the filibuster goes away, the left will really go insane expose their real sanity level.


I really hope that the GOP net gains even 1 new seat in the House, just so the Marxist Democrats will get a slap in the face.
I'm fairly certain they will hold the house but I don't know by how much, I would love to see them make gains, we might actually see CALExit etc.

[Zippyjuan]

Control may be 3 seats short of a full flip, or it may flip.
The Senate changing plus or minus by three senators has
DJT either happier or in extreme hot water and then some!
A power vacuum in the wake of Paul Ryan's departure is
about to magnify and amplify any changes n the House.

Republicans will keep the Senate. The close seats are currently held by Democrats (they have 26 of 33 currently being voted on so to gain two seats and get the majority need to win 28 of 33 races). House they will probably get a majority. One thing for certain, turnout will be huge by non- presidential election standards. Both sides trying to scare the crap out people so they will vote against the other side. Pols used to argue about issues but have come to the realization that fear is a better motivator. Hate thine enemy. That is why Trump is out talking about Hispanics hundreds of miles away instead of the economy- fear of foreigners will draw more voters out. If they are happy about the economy, they may stay home satisfied.

I prefer it when one party does not control all the levers of power- helps keep them in check.

[Schifference]

And the Demoncrats keep getting more tyrannical every day.

There was a time when there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two parties but that was long ago.

Then came inflation.

[Cleaner44]

Republicans will keep the Senate. The close seats are currently held by Democrats (they have 26 of 33 currently being voted on so to gain two seats and get the majority need to win 28 of 33 races). House they will probably get a majority. One thing for certain, turnout will be huge by non- presidential election standards. Both sides trying to scare the crap out people so they will vote against the other side. Pols used to argue about issues but have come to the realization that fear is a better motivator. Hate thine enemy. That is why Trump is out talking about Hispanics hundreds of miles away instead of the economy- fear of foreigners will draw more voters out. If they are happy about the economy, they may stay home satisfied.

I prefer it when one party does not control all the levers of power- helps keep them in check.

Who is they in your prediction? Not sure which party you mean.

[Zippyjuan]

Who is they in your prediction? Not sure which party you mean.


The close seats are currently held by Democrats (they have 26 of 33 currently being voted on so to gain two seats and get the majority need to win 28 of 33 races). House they will probably get a majority.

Sorry- Dems will probably get a majority of the House. Republicans keep the Senate.

[jllundqu]

I have no idea what will happen. I'm confident the reps will expand the senate. Not so confident that they can hold the house, although that would be epic. I'd love to see the riots and political assassinations that would result from the left collectively exploding if that were to happen.

We will see.

[Schifference]

Gain seats in house. Voted

[Anti Federalist]

Lol - whereas with the Republicans, that's their "unofficial" platform. Good choice. ;)

Again, just for the record, I'm not straw hat "Rah rah rahing" here, but for me, personally, professionally and financially, due to GOP representation at a state and federal level,my prospects for increased earnings, reduction of government in my life, and personal liberty have improved.

It's a three step forward two step back sort of thing of course.

In an imperfect world and all that...

[timosman]

Nate Silver loses more hair?:cool:

[Cleaner44]

Again, just for the record, I'm not straw hat "Rah rah rahing" here, but for me, personally, professionally and financially, due to GOP representation at a state and federal level,my prospects for increased earnings, reduction of government in my life, and personal liberty have improved.

It's a three step forward two step back sort of thing of course.

In an imperfect world and all that...

For sure. I am certainly happy for the tax cut and that is never an option with Democrats. Republicans have their problems, but the gap between the 2 parties has widened over these last 10 years in my opinion.

[dannno]

I have no doubt that the GOP will hold the Senate.

I really hope that the GOP net gains even 1 new seat in the House, just so the Marxist Democrats will get a slap in the face.

They will just blame it on voter suppression.

[specsaregood]

For sure. I am certainly happy for the tax cut and that is never an option with Democrats. Republicans have their problems, but the gap between the 2 parties has widened over these last 10 years in my opinion.

especially since the Democrats finally gave up any pretense of being the anti-war party.

[Ender]

Where's the "2nd verse same as the 1st" option?

[dannno]

Where's the "2nd verse same as the 1st" option?

You are a bit behind the times..

[oyarde]

Republicans will keep the Senate. The close seats are currently held by Democrats (they have 26 of 33 currently being voted on so to gain two seats and get the majority need to win 28 of 33 races). House they will probably get a majority. One thing for certain, turnout will be huge by non- presidential election standards. Both sides trying to scare the crap out people so they will vote against the other side. Pols used to argue about issues but have come to the realization that fear is a better motivator. Hate thine enemy. That is why Trump is out talking about Hispanics hundreds of miles away instead of the economy- fear of foreigners will draw more voters out. If they are happy about the economy, they may stay home satisfied.

I prefer it when one party does not control all the levers of power- helps keep them in check.
If I was the opponent of one of those 26 I would be out knocking on doors letting them know my opponent voted against tax cuts and voted for fines for healthcare .

[CCTelander]

Where's the "2nd verse same as the 1st" option?


I know, rigjt? Asid from TheTexan having another votegasm, nothing will change.

[nobody's_hero]

Needs a poll.



Like the 37 other threads on this topic. ;)

Most of those thread polls can be summed up as "how badly will the republicans lose?" Granted a few of them offer a "break even or slightly increase seats" choice of some variation. Loaded poll questions are loaded.

[nobody's_hero]

I prefer it when one party does not control all the levers of power- helps keep them in check.

A myth if there ever was one. Conservatives will go along to get along with liberals if the liberals take power, but can you name one time when the democrats have ever walked to meet conservatives halfway on something conservatives wanted? And if you can manage to strain hard enough to find such an instance, please describe what power was "kept in check"?


Bipartisanship has f'ked this nation in both ends just as much if not more than a unified government.

[Zippyjuan]

If I was the opponent of one of those 26 I would be out knocking on doors letting them know my opponent voted against tax cuts and voted for fines for healthcare .

Actually according to polls, people like the healthcare thing and aren't that crazy about the tax cuts. One reason you don't see Republicans talking those things up. Trump suggested a middle tax cut just a couple weeks ago because most people felt they weren't benefiting from the tax cuts while the rich were. The message doesn't sell. Fear does so they are hyping the caravan instead.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/23/fox-news-poll-obamacare-gop-tax-cuts/1074570002/


Fox News poll: Voters like Obamacare more than GOP tax cuts

WASHINGTON – Obamacare is more popular with American voters than the Republican-enacted tax cuts, according to a new Fox News Poll.

Slightly more than half of voters – 51 percent – had a favorable opinion of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

In contrast, only 40 percent of voters had a favorable view of the 2017 tax cuts championed by congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump, according to the Aug. 19-21 poll of more than 1,000 registered voters. The poll has a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

Democrats have made health care a big issue in the upcoming congressional midterm elections, charging that Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress have worked to undermine gains made by Obamacare in the affordability and quality of health care coverage.

Republicans, meanwhile, are campaigning on their tax cuts, which they say have spurred economic development and created jobs.

Voters expressed a higher opinion of Democrats than Republicans in the poll, with 50 percent saying they have a favorable view of the Democratic Party and 39 percent expressing a favorable view of the Republican Party.



More at link.

[TommyJeff]

House:
219 Republicans
216 Democrats
1 independent

senate:
52 Republicans
48 Democrats/other

[Schifference]

Actually according to polls, people like the healthcare thing and aren't that crazy about the tax cuts. One reason you don't see Republicans talking those things up. Trump suggested a middle tax cut just a couple weeks ago because most people felt they weren't benefiting from the tax cuts while the rich were. The message doesn't sell. Fear does so they are hyping the caravan instead.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/23/fox-news-poll-obamacare-gop-tax-cuts/1074570002/


More at link.

Obviously Russian meddling does not sell. I have not heard about Russia for some time.

[Swordsmyth]

Actually according to polls, people like the healthcare thing and aren't that crazy about the tax cuts. One reason you don't see Republicans talking those things up. Trump suggested a middle tax cut just a couple weeks ago because most people felt they weren't benefiting from the tax cuts while the rich were. The message doesn't sell. Fear does so they are hyping the caravan instead.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/23/fox-news-poll-obamacare-gop-tax-cuts/1074570002/



More at link.
LOL

[oyarde]

Actually according to polls, people like the healthcare thing and aren't that crazy about the tax cuts. One reason you don't see Republicans talking those things up. Trump suggested a middle tax cut just a couple weeks ago because most people felt they weren't benefiting from the tax cuts while the rich were. The message doesn't sell. Fear does so they are hyping the caravan instead.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/23/fox-news-poll-obamacare-gop-tax-cuts/1074570002/



More at link.
If we ever get to the point that that is real . That people like taxes and fines then I see little hope of any significant improvements until the next economic collapse .

[specsaregood]

I don't really know how things will turn out, but I hope the GOP keeps both the house and senate, partly because I'd agree with their claimed positions for the most part; but mostly for the laughs. The laughs will be epic if the DNC fails all around.

[Zippyjuan]

especially since the Democrats finally gave up any pretense of being the anti-war party.

and Republicans gave up on being the Fiscally Responsible/ small government party.

[dannno]

and Republicans gave up on being the Fiscally Responsible/ small government party.

Compared to what?

The fact is the Republicans are still way more small government oriented than the Democrats. The only thing the Democrats had going for them was they were anti-war. And that made them about equal to the Republicans. Without that, they have nothing, and the Republicans are now a million times better than the Democrats.

[spudea]

Cue this narrative tomorrow night:

https://i.redd.it/dnvp9pw7qbw11.jpg

[Cleaner44]

Where's the "2nd verse same as the 1st" option?

So what is your prediction?

This isn't about are Republicans better than Democrats, its just a discussion as to who will control the House. Feel like sharing your thoughts?

[dannno]

Cue this narrative tomorrow night:

https://i.redd.it/dnvp9pw7qbw11.jpg

Watch out for the voter suppression narrative too.. I guess that's kinda the same thing tho.

[aGameOfThrones]

Yup, I really want to see them get 60 so that the filibuster goes away, the left will really go insane expose their real sanity level.


I'm fairly certain they will hold the house but I don't know by how much, I would love to see them make gains, we might actually see CALExit etc.

They could win 62, all those blue seats got competition

[Ender]

So what is your prediction?

This isn't about are Republicans better than Democrats, its just a discussion as to who will control the House. Feel like sharing your thoughts?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLnTWxpTQt4

[Zippyjuan]

Compared to what?

The fact is the Republicans are still way more small government oriented than the Democrats. The only thing the Democrats had going for them was they were anti-war. And that made them about equal to the Republicans. Without that, they have nothing, and the Republicans are now a million times better than the Democrats.

Both like big government. They just like to spend their money on different things. Dems like social programs and Reps like the military and police. Have they reduced government spending now that they control the Presidency and both houses of Congress?

[TheTexan]

I know, rigjt? Asid from TheTexan having another votegasm, nothing will change.

I think this year it might get messy.

[Ender]

Compared to what?

The fact is the Republicans are still way more small government oriented than the Democrats. The only thing the Democrats had going for them was they were anti-war. And that made them about equal to the Republicans. Without that, they have nothing, and the Republicans are now a million times better than the Democrats.

No, they just say buzz words to make their constituents happy- Republicans have always spent YUGE amounts of money. And the ME wars were started under Republicans; the Dems are no different.

[Anti Globalist]

I see a red tsunami.

[dannno]

No, they just say buzz words to make their constituents happy- Republicans have always spent YUGE amounts of money. And the ME wars were started under Republicans; the Dems are no different.

Sorry, Democrats want to spend even more... and give us even less liberty.

That is not an opinion, that is an obvious fact.

[Ender]

Sorry, Democrats want to spend even more... and give us even less liberty.

That is not an opinion, that is an obvious fact.

No, it is not.

The smallest spending in the last several presidencies was with Carter & Clinton.

And the Repubs brought us the Patriot Act.

[Swordsmyth]

Both like big government. They just like to spend their money on different things. Dems like social programs and Reps like the military and police. Have they reduced government spending now that they control the Presidency and both houses of Congress?

It's nice for your side that the RINOs and the stupid filibuster rule int the Senate get in the way.

[Swordsmyth]

No, it is not.

The smallest spending in the last several presidencies was with Carter & Clinton.

Who held Congress?

[dannno]

No, it is not.

The smallest spending in the last several presidencies was with Carter & Clinton.

Under a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS!!!

Thank you for proving my point.

Although the real point is, that democrats want to drastically increase social spending programs, single payer healthcare, free education, etc.. Republicans don't want to do that. Many of them legitimately want to shrink government.

Like I said, you are living in the past.






And the Repubs brought us the Patriot Act.

And the dems have upheld it and since done worse....

[CCTelander]

No, it is not.

The smallest spending in the last several presidencies was with Carter & Clinton.

And the Repubs brought us the Patriot Act.


From the first part of the "Ask Ron Paul" vid:

"...what we have today is a two party system. I think it's tragic. I think the two parties are exactly alike and when people ask me about this I say 'You know I'm waiting, they say "we need to solve this problem, we need a third party." I say no I think what we need is a second party.' " - Ron Paul

[Cleaner44]

Compared to what?

The fact is the Republicans are still way more small government oriented than the Democrats. The only thing the Democrats had going for them was they were anti-war. And that made them about equal to the Republicans. Without that, they have nothing, and the Republicans are now a million times better than the Democrats.

Democrats also used to stand for the 1st Amendment, but not anymore. Now they hate free speech. Anything that isn't in the Communist Manifesto is now hate speech.

Democrats used to be the party of working class union trademen, but now they hate them too. Democrats despise "uneducated" dolts that work with their hands.

Their identity politics have painted them into a corner.

[Cleaner44]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLnTWxpTQt4

The question is:

How do you think tomorrow's House elections will go?

If you don't care, why join the thread?

Normally you share some interesting thoughts but today you give me the sads.

[Zippyjuan]

Under a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS!!!

Thank you for proving my point.

Although the real point is, that democrats want to drastically increase social spending programs, single payer healthcare, free education, etc.. Republicans don't want to do that. Many of them legitimately want to shrink government.



So how much have they shrunk the government with Trump and his Republican House and Senate? They have the power to do what they want. They can't blame the other party.

[Swordsmyth]

So how much have they shrunk the government with Trump and his Republican House and Senate? They have the power to do what they want.
That isn't true, the RINOs and the filibuster are in the way.

[Zippyjuan]

That isn't true, the RINOs and the filibuster are in the way.

Yeah, yeah. You think everybody is a RHINO. Or a Communist. Got it. We have to blame somebody else. Can't be our fault.

[TheTexan]

It'll be a bummer if the Democrats get control of the House. Think about all the great things the Republicans want to do, that they won't be able to do :(

[Swordsmyth]

Yeah, yeah. You think everybody is a RHINO. Or a Communist. Got it.
Most politicians are one or the other.


We have to blame somebody else. Can't be our fault.
It generally is the fault of those that insist on increasing or maintaining the spending or they won't vote in favor of the budget.

[CCTelander]

Under a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS!!!

Thank you for proving my point.




Democrats had complete control of both the House and Senate by significant margins under Carter, and likewise until 1995 under Clinton.

(ETA: [Under Bush Jr.] for clarity) Republicans controlled a majority in the Senate and maintained a majority in the House (except for the first couple of years where they had parity) until 2007 when the Dems won Majorities in both houses. Spending was rampant.

You're "misremembering."

[106459]

So you don't want to make any prediction? That's no fun. There is no shame in being wrong, it is just something to do to see if any of us are reading the situation accurately.

Ha. It is very hard to predict something when there is extreme bias, at least for me :). It really is extremely hard to tell. I don't believe in the blue wave, the media has severely over-hyped that.

However, PredictIt is probably the most accurate/realistic source we have (people putting their money where their mouth is). Unless I'm reading it incorrectly, it looks like they believe there is only a 13% chance of R's losing the senate, which makes sense because it's 1/3rd the seats and the races are favorable, I'm pretty sure it's Rs will gain a few seats, somewhere around 55.

-The house, I'm definitely concerned, it seems 71% in favor of Democrats, 36% in favor of Republicans, so one side is overconfident on PredictIt haha. I have a fear Rs will narrowly lose the House.

One thing is for sure though, this time is shaping up to be different. Record new voter registrations, early voting far surpassing the 2014 midterms (from articles I've read, haven't kept the statistics handy). There's conflicting bellwethers, the historical trend of the majority party losing seats in the midterms, vs Trumps 2nd all time highest approval with Republicans & the fact that they have higher voter turnout during midterms. No one knows how the voter registrations will go ... I've heard that the new Generation (Gen Z) is more conservative than millenials, but Trump isn't a very popular President outside the R party, and it seems this election is very much a referendum on him.

So, my prediction stays that Rs keep/make gains in the senate, and narrowly lose the House. I'm sure it will make for great theater, and why miss an opportunity for a grand circus?

I'm definitely concerned about the reading of the situation though. It has a similar feeling to the Kavanaugh hearing, where Rs were convinced that Kavanaugh had a good hearing and the nails were in the coffin ... nope, I walk into work the next day, the number of times I've had to hear "I like beer", "you ever play quarters?" is unbelievable, coupled with all the CNN coverage that he was unfit because of an emotional outburst.

Much like with this election, the family I've talked to wasn't even informed by the media that Rs will be keeping the Senate. So it would seem everyone is enjoying the comfort of their respective bubbles. I'd say the frenzy has ratcheted up, we'll see when the dust settles.

[Cleaner44]

Ha. It is very hard to predict something when there is extreme bias, at least for me :). It really is extremely hard to tell. I don't believe in the blue wave, the media has severely over-hyped that.

However, PredictIt is probably the most accurate/realistic source we have (people putting their money where their mouth is). Unless I'm reading it incorrectly, it looks like they believe there is only a 13% chance of R's losing the senate, which makes sense because it's 1/3rd the seats and the races are favorable, I'm pretty sure it's Rs will gain a few seats, somewhere around 55.

-The house, I'm definitely concerned, it seems 71% in favor of Democrats, 36% in favor of Republicans, so one side is overconfident on PredictIt haha. I have a fear Rs will narrowly lose the House.

One thing is for sure though, this time is shaping up to be different. Record new voter registrations, early voting far surpassing the 2014 midterms (from articles I've read, haven't kept the statistics handy). There's conflicting bellwethers, the historical trend of the majority party losing seats in the midterms, vs Trumps 2nd all time highest approval with Republicans & the fact that they have higher voter turnout during midterms. No one knows how the voter registrations will go ... I've heard that the new Generation (Gen Z) is more conservative than millenials, but Trump isn't a very popular President outside the R party, and it seems this election is very much a referendum on him.

So, my prediction stays that Rs keep/make gains in the senate, and narrowly lose the House. I'm sure it will make for great theater, and why miss an opportunity for a grand circus?

I'm definitely concerned about the reading of the situation though. It has a similar feeling to the Kavanaugh hearing, where Rs were convinced that Kavanaugh had a good hearing and the nails were in the coffin ... nope, I walk into work the next day, the number of times I've had to hear "I like beer", "you ever play quarters?" is unbelievable, coupled with all the CNN coverage that he was unfit because of an emotional outburst.

Much like with this election, the family I've talked to wasn't even informed by the media that Rs will be keeping the Senate. So it would seem everyone is enjoying the comfort of their respective bubbles. I'd say the frenzy has ratcheted up, we'll see when the dust settles.

PredictIt is useful, but not reliable because of propaganda. I bought shares of Trump to win for .20 because 80% of the people believed the BS that Hillary was a lock to win. That was easy money for me. This time I bought shares for the GOP to keep the house for about .33 because most people there are accepting the Blue Wave propaganda. Win or lose it is well worth the risk because there is no way that the Dems are 66% chance to win in my opinion.

[106459]

PredictIt is useful, but not reliable because of propaganda. I bought shares of Trump to win for .20 because 80% of the people believed the BS that Hillary was a lock to win. That was easy money for me. This time I bought shares for the GOP to keep the house for about .33 because most people there are accepting the Blue Wave propaganda. Win or lose it is well worth the risk because there is no way that the Dems are 66% chance to win in my opinion.

I'd agree - I don't think its 66% in the Dem's favor either, make enough of those bets over time and you'll pocket some money.

One of my more enjoyable reads today (if the image will post through):
https://imgur.com/a/T7WdtfP
https://twitter.com/salilstatistics/status/1023753555281248256

[r3volution 3.0]

The Dems will win the House, pretty well guaranteed.

By how much?

I expect they'll end up with 230-235 seats (they only need 218).

FOR THE RECORD, the latest (presumably last) RCP average is Dems +7.3. The latest/last 538 House forecast (based on, but distinct from the polling, mind you) has the odds of the Dems taking at the House at 87.4%, with the most likely result being that the Dems end up with 234 seats. The latest/last Cook Political Report (likewise based on but distinct from the polls), has the Dems winning 30-40 seats, which gives about the same result.

Vote hard (and, where possible, LP [or CP]).

[XNavyNuke]

If someone gave me 100 FRNs to bet with, I'd say Dems takes 30 seats in the House and the Senate ends up 50/50 split. Not that it matters much. The choices are between bat feces crazy socialists and bat feces crazy statists. Still waiting for the urban archipelago to have their Harper's Ferry moment.

XNN

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Early voting has been interesting...

[eleganz]

The Dems will win the House, pretty well guaranteed.

By how much?

I expect they'll end up with 230-235 seats (they only need 218).

FOR THE RECORD, the latest (presumably last) RCP average is Dems +7.3. The latest/last 538 House forecast (based on, but distinct from the polling, mind you) has the odds of the Dems taking at the House at 87.4%, with the most likely result being that the Dems end up with 234 seats. The latest/last Cook Political Report (likewise based on but distinct from the polls), has the Dems winning 30-40 seats, which gives about the same result.

Vote hard (and, where possible, LP [or CP]).

Seriously how fun is it if you're just going to parrot what literally everyone else is saying?

Dems take 16-22, media will blame pollsters over assumptions on dem "surge" turnout.

Lots of liberal tears and a happy me, due to holding off the socialist agenda.

[Swordsmyth]

A big time gambler who won on Brexit and Trump is so confident that the polls are wrong and that Republicans will maintain control of the House that he has traveled to London to bet $130,000 on the outcome.
Trial lawyer Robert Barnes’ wager that the GOP will retain Congress is relatively large given that “the entire U.S. primaries betting market is in the single millions in the U.K. and Ireland,” according to Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-05/midterm-elections-why-one-punter-thinks-democrats-will-lose).
UK bookies Ladbrokes even tweeted out a picture of Barnes to mark the occasion.

Great to meet top US political punter @Barnes_Law (https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) who has flown over to have £100k on the GOP to hold on to a House majority. pic.twitter.com/O83dYHl0sN (https://t.co/O83dYHl0sN)
— Ladbrokes Politics (@LadPolitics) November 2, 2018 (https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1058481230843383809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Barnes stands to win an additional £50,000 on top of his £100,000 stake on odds of around 3/2, with the lawyer saying that he is as confident of winning as when he bet big on Brexit and Trump, both outcomes which the polls said would never happen. He’s also placed a separate bet on Republicans expanding their majority in the Senate.
Barnes, who boasts of his “high-profile wins for clients in civil, criminal and constitutional law,” told Bloomberg that pollsters are still using flawed methodologies because they have an incentive to produce the results partisan media outlets want to hear.
“There are systemic issues with polling post-2012,” Barnes told Bloomberg. “A low response rate, reliance on self-selected polls with inadequate sampling of older, rural, blue-collar voters.”

More at: https://www.infowars.com/lawyer-says-polls-are-wrong-bets-130000-on-republicans-winning-house/

[Schifference]

I predict there will be less campaign ads on Wednesday.

[Cleaner44]

The Dems will win the House, pretty well guaranteed.

By how much?

I expect they'll end up with 230-235 seats (they only need 218).

FOR THE RECORD, the latest (presumably last) RCP average is Dems +7.3. The latest/last 538 House forecast (based on, but distinct from the polling, mind you) has the odds of the Dems taking at the House at 87.4%, with the most likely result being that the Dems end up with 234 seats. The latest/last Cook Political Report (likewise based on but distinct from the polls), has the Dems winning 30-40 seats, which gives about the same result.

Vote hard (and, where possible, LP [or CP]).

Thanks for sharing your prediction.

If you are wrong again like you were 2 years ago, will you start to question your methods of gathering information. I ask because you seem to just buy whatever the liberal media is selling.

[Occam's Banana]

Poll: Who will control the House after tomorrow?

I am unable to vote in this poll, as the correct answer ("a bunch of liberty-hating assholes") is not among the available options.

[acptulsa]

I am unable to vote in this poll, as the correct answer ("a bunch of liberty-hating $#@!s") is not among the available options.

I was thinking I could go "99+% Bipartisan Swamp Creatures", if that were on the poll.

This whole thread feels to me like, 'Want to have some fun? Guess whether that's strychnine or arsenic in the coffee you're drinking!'. Oh, joy.

[CCTelander]

I am unable to vote in this poll, as the correct answer ("a bunch of liberty-hating assholes") is not among the available options.


I regert that I have but one +rep to give for this brilliant post.

[CCTelander]

I was thinking I could go "99+% Bipartisan Swamp Creatures", if that were on the poll.

This whole thread feels to me like, 'Want to have some fun? Guess whether that's strychnine or arsenic in the coffee you're drinking!'. Oh, joy.


ROTFL!

"You must spread some Reputation around..."

[UWDude]

All historical models and predictions are pointless.
It's a post-trump world.
Super majority house. GOP.

[Cleaner44]

I am unable to vote in this poll, as the correct answer ("a bunch of liberty-hating $#@!s") is not among the available options.

Nonsense, all of the choices represent a bunch of liberty-hating $#@!s.

With that said, which specific version will be the result, could still be speculated on.

[enhanced_deficit]

Based on scientific polling data available from all sources so far, I'm prepared to project that Navy Blue team (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?527899-Soros-vs-Adelson-whose-political-funding-is-better-for-cause-of-liberty&) keeps the Senate and Sky Blue team (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?527899-Soros-vs-Adelson-whose-political-funding-is-better-for-cause-of-liberty&) takes the House.
Original Red team had been banished mostly. Now it's race between Soros (anti-Iran war liberal democrat) funded horses vs Adelson (pro-Iran war liberal democrat) funded horses regardless of stripes they display to entertain cheering crowds.

Breaking down the non-scientific projections, unconfirmed rumors suggest that Netanyahu-Jarvanka-Conservatives and Syria-ISIS-Neocon-Liberals would not get completely wiped out during midterm elections and genuine America Firster/non-Globalist Liberty minded folks from both teams would make only marginal gains.

[Occam's Banana]

Nonsense, all of the choices represent a bunch of liberty-hating $#@!s.

:D


With that said, which specific version will be the result, could still be speculated on.

I will gladly leave such speculation to those who don't find this form of proctology to be as unedifying as I do ... ;)

[eleganz]

Thanks for sharing your prediction.

If you are wrong again like you were 2 years ago, will you start to question your methods of gathering information. I ask because you seem to just buy whatever the liberal media is selling.

What he's saying isn't even a prediction, more like quoting the media.

[Zippyjuan]

Early voting has been interesting...

How so? Only how many votes have been cast in early voting has been released- not who they voted for. But based on those figures, could be the biggest non- presidential year turnout in a long time.

[Ender]

Democrats had complete control of both the House and Senate by significant margins under Carter, and likewise until 1995 under Clinton.

(ETA: [Under Bush Jr.] for clarity) Republicans controlled a majority in the Senate and maintained a majority in the House (except for the first couple of years where they had parity) until 2007 when the Dems won Majorities in both houses. Spending was rampant.

You're "misremembering."

Thanks you!

[Anti Federalist]

For sure. I am certainly happy for the tax cut and that is never an option with Democrats. Republicans have their problems, but the gap between the 2 parties has widened over these last 10 years in my opinion.

It's not just that, for me, it's regulatory rollbacks that have really improved my bottom line, it's GOP representation at a state level that continues the NH tradition of keeping as much government as possible out of my life...more than a few reasons to say, at this point, one is better than the other.

I most certainly will take wishy washy GOP over bloodthirsty Bolsheviks and Jacobins that have made it clear they want to exterminate me and my posterity.

[r3volution 3.0]

Seriously how fun is it if you're just going to parrot what literally everyone else is saying?

The polls are typically accurate, so there's not much work to be done in making reasonable estimates.

As for fun, that lies in watching people who insist that the polls are fake get clobbered by reality.

Tomorrow will be entertaining.

[enhanced_deficit]

If this is confirmed as non-fakenews, tomorrow could be a sucky day for team Navy-Blue (Netanyahu-Conservatives aka Jarvanka-Democrats) and a surprise upset for team Sky-Blue (Soros-Democrats):


Dems see late surge in Senate battlegrounds...
(https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/05/trump-close-out-midterm-961507)
COOK: 45 HOUSE SEATS? (https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/democrats-pickup-chances-rise-in-more-u-s-house-races-cook#gs.o3ZDRtM)



https://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif

[Swordsmyth]

If this is confirmed as non-fakenews, tomorrow could be a sucky day for team Navy-Blue (Netanyahu-Conservatives aka Jarvanka-Democrats) and a surprise upset for team Sky-Blue (Soros-Democrats):


Dems see late surge in Senate battlegrounds...
(https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/05/trump-close-out-midterm-961507)
COOK: 45 HOUSE SEATS? (https://www.bloombergquint.com/business/democrats-pickup-chances-rise-in-more-u-s-house-races-cook#gs.o3ZDRtM)



https://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif

LOL

[enhanced_deficit]

LOL

Don't worry, this could be just part of "expectation management" by team MAGA-RogerStone etc.
If Team Sky-Blue wins only 20 seats instead of "projected" 45, Navy-Blue could celeberate results as #winning.

Most of media/maga noise is just marketing.

[r3volution 3.0]

LOL

So you still, though it is now obvious, refuse to recognize that your leftward twins will take the House?

[Cleaner44]

The polls are typically accurate, so there's not much work to be done in making reasonable estimates.

As for fun, that lies in watching people who insist that the polls are fake get clobbered by reality.

Tomorrow will be entertaining.

I agree that polls typically are accurate, but not so much since Trump came along. Obviously Hillary was never beating Trump the way the media pretended.

I suspect the polling now has serious flaws as well. Sometimes the people they choose don't represent an accurate cross section of voters. Sometimes they use the "generic ballot" argument that just doesn't accurately describe the dozens of different Senate races and hundreds of different House races.

Mostly my instinct told me that those polls in 2016 were false and I get the same impression now. Tomorrow will be the fun part where we get to find out once and for all if the polling of the Blue Wave is accurate.

Either way we will still have a giant federal government trampling on our liberties, as we all know. I do hope though that the Marxist left suffers another defeat though because they truly are the biggest enemy of liberty that I can see.

P.S.
Fuck the Neocons!

[Swordsmyth]

So you still, though it is now obvious, refuse to recognize that your leftward twins will take the House?
LOL

[r3volution 3.0]

I agree that polls typically are accurate, but not so much since Trump came along. Obviously Hillary was never beating Trump the way the media pretended.

That's not obvious at all.

That assumes that the pollsters were in a conspiracy to aid Clinton.

Far more likely that their small error (which is what it was, in the end) was just that: an error.


I suspect the polling now has serious flaws as well. Sometimes the people they choose don't represent an accurate cross section of voters. Sometimes they use the "generic ballot" argument that just doesn't accurately describe the dozens of different Senate races and hundreds of different House races.

It's a fair point that the "generic ballot" is a crude measurement.

But, on the other hand, most House races have no polling at all, none.

And so broad measures like the generic ballot are instructive.


Mostly my instinct told me that those polls in 2016 were false and I get the same impression now. Tomorrow will be the fun part where we get to find out once and for all if the polling of the Blue Wave is accurate.

Either way we will still have a giant federal government trampling on our liberties, as we all know. I do hope though that the Marxist left suffers another defeat though because they truly are the biggest enemy of liberty that I can see.

The polls in 2016 were on the money; Trump won by a number of votes well within the margin of error.


Fuck the Neocons!

Hear Hear

..Though it would be best if no one voted.

[timosman]

That's not obvious at all.

That assumes that the pollsters were in a conspiracy to aid Clinton.

Far more likely that their small error (which is what it was, in the end) was just that: an error.



It's a fair point that the "generic ballot" is a crude measurement.

But, on the other hand, most House races have no polling at all, none.

And so broad measures like the generic ballot are instructive.



The polls in 2016 were on the money; Trump won by a number of votes well within the margin of error.



Hear Hear

..Though it would be best if no one voted.

All right Nostradamus, why don't you take a break? You can dazzle us with your brilliance BS tomorrow.

[r3volution 3.0]

All right Nostradamus, why don't you take a break? You can dazzle us with your brilliance BS tomorrow.

I'm going to try my best, tomorrow, to not say "I told you so."

...I may not succeed,

[UWDude]

I'm going to try my best, tomorrow, to not say "I told you so."

...I may not succeed,

Don't worry, the opportunity will simply never come up.

[r3volution 3.0]

Don't worry, the opportunity will simply never come up.

Wanna make a wager?

Dems take the House, I win; unicorns shit money in my driveway, you win.

[timosman]

Wanna make a wager?

Dems take the House, I win; unicorns shit money in my driveway, you win.

Keep your money grandpa. The diapers are going to be expensive if the dems win. :cool:

[eleganz]

The polls are typically accurate, so there's not much work to be done in making reasonable estimates.

As for fun, that lies in watching people who insist that the polls are fake get clobbered by reality.

Tomorrow will be entertaining.

Thats the thing, "generally accurate" can easily be the difference between win or loss depending on how much margin you're over or under projecting turnout.

So you say 2016 polls were "generally accurate" even though they were completely wrong and Clinton got rocked to a margin that was humiliating.

Simply put, its very easy for the liberal pollsters' liberal projections to draw a picture of a "wave" when it may not be anything but.

I think the final result will be less than what they were all expecting.

[r3volution 3.0]

Thats the thing, "generally accurate" can easily be the difference between win or loss depending on how much margin you're over or under projecting turnout.

So you say 2016 polls were "generally accurate" even though they were completely wrong and Clinton got rocked to a margin that was humiliating.

Simply put, its very easy for the liberal pollsters' liberal projections to draw a picture of a "wave" when it may not be anything but.

I think the final result will be less than what they were all expecting.

The polls in 2016, I say again (and this is simply a matter of fact which you can confirm for yourself if you like) were accurate.

The polls tomorrow will also be accurate.

The difference is that there won't be any surprise based on the electoral college.

There's no electoral college in the mid-terms, of course, so it's pretty straightforward.

[Anti Federalist]

I agree that polls typically are accurate, but not so much since Trump came along. Obviously Hillary was never beating Trump the way the media pretended.

I suspect the polling now has serious flaws as well. Sometimes the people they choose don't represent an accurate cross section of voters. Sometimes they use the "generic ballot" argument that just doesn't accurately describe the dozens of different Senate races and hundreds of different House races.

Mostly my instinct told me that those polls in 2016 were false and I get the same impression now. Tomorrow will be the fun part where we get to find out once and for all if the polling of the Blue Wave is accurate.

Either way we will still have a giant federal government trampling on our liberties, as we all know. I do hope though that the Marxist left suffers another defeat though because they truly are the biggest enemy of liberty that I can see.

P.S.
Fuck the Neocons!

I think the single biggest flaw in polling is that people are no longer telling the truth.

In the current environment I don't blame them.

That said, I stick by my prediction:

Dems gain a slim margin in the house, GOP holds onto a slim Senate majority, the dems pick up some of governor's races, gridlock all around and life goes on.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

How so? Only how many votes have been cast in early voting has been released- not who they voted for. But based on those figures, could be the biggest non- presidential year turnout in a long time.
You can't tell how they voted, but you can tell if they're Republicans or Democrats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9q2kTTeWHA
California Democrats don't seem energized. That could change, but if you can't energize Californians, that's not a good sign.

[Swordsmyth]

You can't tell how they voted, but you can tell if they're Republicans or Democrats:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9q2kTTeWHA
California Democrats don't seem energized. That could change, but if you can't energize Californians, that's not a good sign.

Blue Ebb Tide.

[DamianTV]

Same shit, different day. What about different shit, different day? The real solution is NO MORE SHIT, and we can just have different days.

[Cleaner44]

I think the single biggest flaw in polling is that people are no longer telling the truth.

In the current environment I don't blame them.

That said, I stick by my prediction:

Dems gain a slim margin in the house, GOP holds onto a slim Senate majority, the dems pick up some of governor's races, gridlock all around and life goes on.

I agree. I can tell you that I used to respond to polls but no longer do. I refuse to tell pollsters my position, but I most definitely have one. In a world where everyone that isn't a flaming Democrat is now called a Nazi, I just am not interested in telling them anything.

I imagine most Democrats will proudly declare to pollsters which way they plan to vote. I also imagine that many Republicans and Independents aren't so motivated and may even take pleasure in misleading the polls.

Just to note, Nate Silver gives Dems a 88% chance to win the House.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/?ex_cid=midterms-header

This is the same guy that gave Hillary a 71% chance to beat Trump. I am not impressed.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

[Cleaner44]

The polls in 2016, I say again (and this is simply a matter of fact which you can confirm for yourself if you like) were accurate.

The polls tomorrow will also be accurate.

The difference is that there won't be any surprise based on the electoral college.

There's no electoral college in the mid-terms, of course, so it's pretty straightforward.

The electoral college was no surprise, at least to anyone over 22.

The "master of election predictions" Nate Silver certainly factored in the electoral college when he came up with this prediction.

Electoral Votes:

Hillary Clinton 302.2
Donald Trump 235.0


https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

The reality is that Nate was NOT accurate, not by a long shot.

Actual Electoral Votes:

Hillary Clinton 227
Donald Trump 304


All of the polls had Hillary winning and they were wrong. Certainly you aren't contending that all of the major polling companies forgot about the electoral college.

[CaptUSA]

The reality is that Nate was NOT accurate, not by a long shot.


I don't think he properly factored in the hatred of Hillary. I still say that that was the biggest factor in Trump's win. Like all authoritarians, he takes his victory as a sign that the populace supports him - when in reality, they just really, really hated the alternative.

[CCTelander]

I don't think he properly factored in the hatred of Hillary. I still say that that was the biggest factor in Trump's win. Like all authoritarians, he takes his victory as a sign that the populace supports him - when in reality, they just really, really hated the alternative.


^^^^This^^^^

Trump is a full-blown dyed-in-the-wool authoritarian. Even many of his most ardent supporters admit this fact. We USED to oppose authoritarinism around here not support it.

He's better than the other one, the lesser of two evils argument just doesn't cut it. Just because he's willing to take that classic one step backward in preperation for the two steps forward toward greater authoritarianism, an ever expanding police/surveillance state and perpetual war doesn't make him "the best president since Coolidge" or mean he's "moving the ball in the right direction." It just means that he is, or the powers behind him are savvy enough to realize that that ones step backwards is often necessary to advance his/their agenda.

[RJ Liberty]

I don't think he properly factored in the hatred of Hillary. I still say that that was the biggest factor in Trump's win. Like all authoritarians, he takes his victory as a sign that the populace supports him - when in reality, they just really, really hated the alternative.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CaptUSA again."

Dang!

[CaptUSA]

^^^^This^^^^

Trump is a full-blown dyed-in-the-wool authoritarian. Even many of his most ardent supporters admit this fact. We USED to oppose authoritarinism around here not support it.

He's better than the other one, the lesser of two evils argument just doesn't cut it. Just because he's willing to take that classic one step backward in preperation for the two steps forward toward greater authoritarianism, an ever expanding police/surveillance state and perpetual war doesn't make him "the best president since Coolidge" or mean he's "moving the ball in the right direction." It just means that he is, or the powers behind him are savvy enough to realize that that ones step backwards is often necessary to advance his/their agenda.

Yes, all this, but I was really just talking about the polling. It's why Trump's win and his message hasn't really translated into wins for other candidates - at least not yet. If he could have put Hillary on every ballot this midterm, the GOP would have a much better shot. Instead, he thought most people supported his immigration policy so he kept on that message. In reality, they would have taken the devil himself over Hillary, regardless of any messaging.

[Todd]

I think the single biggest flaw in polling is that people are no longer telling the truth.

In the current environment I don't blame them.

That said, I stick by my prediction:

Dems gain a slim margin in the house, GOP holds onto a slim Senate majority, the dems pick up some of governor's races, gridlock all around and life goes on.

I will die laughing if the Democrats get nothing that they expected and they don't get the house. Heads will splode and I can't wait to hear the narrative that "it's fixed" over them reevaluating their bullshit.

[CaptUSA]

I will die laughing if the Democrats get nothing that they expected and they don't get the house. Heads will splode and I can't wait to hear the narrative that "it's fixed" over them reevaluating their bullshit.

That will be fun. What would be really fun is if just for once, every incumbent lost. All at once. A resounding repudiation of government.


Hey, a guy can dream, right???

[Cleaner44]

I don't think he properly factored in the hatred of Hillary. I still say that that was the biggest factor in Trump's win. Like all authoritarians, he takes his victory as a sign that the populace supports him - when in reality, they just really, really hated the alternative.

That is certainly a big part of it. I can also tell you that I have a family member that is a woman in her 80s, a life long Democrat and feminist, and she planned on voting for Hillary no matter what. When it came time to vote, she voted for Gary Johnson because Hillary is so corrupt that she just couldn't bring herself to vote for her. She waited her whole life to elect a woman president and then didn't do it. She is a liberal but she has integrity.

[timosman]

California Democrats don't seem energized. That could change, but if you can't energize Californians, that's not a good sign.

If I were a democrat I would sit this one out to avoid being triggered. :cool:

[CCTelander]

Yes, all this, but I was really just talking about the polling. It's why Trump's win and his message hasn't really translated into wins for other candidates - at least not yet. If he could have put Hillary on every ballot this midterm, the GOP would have a much better shot. Instead, he thought most people supported his immigration policy so he kept on that message. In reality, they would have taken the devil himself over Hillary, regardless of any messaging.


Yeah, I get it. Your mentioning that Trump is an authoritarian just sent me temporarily into "rant mode." I'm all better now. :cool:

[Schifference]

That is certainly a big part of it. I can also tell you that I have a family member that is a woman in her 80s, a life long Democrat and feminist, and she planned on voting for Hillary no matter what. When it came time to vote, she voted for Gary Johnson because Hillary is so corrupt that she just couldn't bring herself to vote for her. She waited her whole life to elect a woman president and then didn't do it. She is a liberal but she has integrity.

She is a dying breed.

[Zippyjuan]

Higher voter turnout may favor the Democrats. They are normally less likely to turn out in mid- term elections. In some states like Texas, they have already received in more mail in ballots than were cast in the entire 2014 mid-term elections. With more states using mail in and absentee balloting, close race results may not be known for a few days.

[Cleaner44]

Higher voter turnout may favor the Democrats. They are normally less likely to turn out in mid- term elections. In some states like Texas, they have already received in more mail in ballots than were cast in the entire 2014 mid-term elections. With more states using mail in and absentee balloting, close race results may not be known for a few days.

Higher voter turnout may favor the Republicans. Who knows?

The real factor is what swing voters think. Republicans will vote Republican. Democrats will vote Democrat. The question is, who will independents vote for?

[acptulsa]

The real factor is what swing voters think. Republicans will vote Republican. Democrats will vote Democrat. The question is, who will independents vote for?

You certainly didn't get that question from the MSM--or the forum trolls. They like to pretend everyone has to be on Team Red or Team Blue.

[misterx]

Higher voter turnout may favor the Republicans. Who knows?

The real factor is what swing voters think. Republicans will vote Republican. Democrats will vote Democrat. The question is, who will independents vote for?

Not always. A lot of people in the south have been registered Democrats for decades and just never changed it, but they vote Republican now.

The problem I see with the forecasts of a blue wave in the house is that they are assuming the Democrats are going to win most of the toss ups when all but two toss ups last I looked were GOP incumbents. If it's a toss up you have to give the edge to the incumbent, but the media doesn't want to do that for obvious reasons.

[TheTexan]

Red wave is gonna sweep the nation :cool:

[misterx]

Red wave is gonna sweep the nation :cool:

You're crazy! It's a green wave.

[donnay]

I just voted, and in my little town there was a thirty minute wait. Lots of people came out and it is raining hard.

[Cleaner44]

Not always. A lot of people in the south have been registered Democrats for decades and just never changed it, but they vote Republican now.

The problem I see with the forecasts of a blue wave in the house is that they are assuming the Democrats are going to win most of the toss ups when all but two toss ups last I looked were GOP incumbents. If it's a toss up you have to give the edge to the incumbent, but the media doesn't want to do that for obvious reasons.

Yes I think the media bias toward the left has resulted in them pushing the narrative of what they want to have happen.

#FakeItTillYouMakeIt

[clint4liberty]

I would love to see Gary Johnson win in New Mexico US Senate race. My humble opinion he will finish a double digit third place. Eric Brakey's defeat is Maine US Senate race will piss me off. In the end, voters make their choices. As for the rest, Democrats pick up 13 seats to reach 206. In the US Senate, Republicans pick up four to reach 55 seats. Democrats pick-up six Governor's mansions, but Republicans retake Alaska for a net gain of 5. I am not making a prediction in other states related ballot measures or statewide races.

[Schifference]

It appears that Florida governor race results are already in.

[eleganz]

I would love to see Gary Johnson win in New Mexico US Senate race. My humble opinion he will finish a double digit third place. Eric Brakey's defeat is Maine US Senate race will piss me off. In the end, voters make their choices. As for the rest, Democrats pick up 13 seats to reach 206. In the US Senate, Republicans pick up four to reach 55 seats. Democrats pick-up six Governor's mansions, but Republicans retake Alaska for a net gain of 5. I am not making a prediction in other states related ballot measures or statewide races.

There was not nearly enough media that could've been potentially generated from a race like that, GJ's team likely ineffective.

Actually they should've cut a deal where the GOP drops out in NM and the LP drops out in Indiana, a win win.

[Swordsmyth]

Despite almost every poll predicting that Democrats will win the House today, a final Gallup survey finds that the majority of Americans believe Republicans will retain control of Congress.
Respondents were asked (https://news.gallup.com/poll/244517/democrats-worried-republicans-election.aspx), “Regardless of how you, yourself, plan to vote, which party do you think will win control of the U.S. House of Representatives in the congressional elections this fall?”
According to the results, 50% of Americans think Republicans will retain control of the House, compared to 44% who think Democrats will win enough seats to gain victory.
Every single prediction Americans have made over the last 10 such midterm election years between 1946 and 2014 has come true.
The poll also found that 61% of Americans think Republicans will retain the Senate compared to 33% who think Democrats will take control.

More at: https://www.infowars.com/final-gallup-poll-majority-of-americans-think-republicans-will-retain-the-house/

[eleganz]

Democrat turnout in Florida not as strong as all the polls projected. Florida will be a huge tell.


Also in Florida...

1059874179179134976

[106459]

The poll also found that 61% of Americans think Republicans will retain the Senate compared to 33% who think Democrats will take control.


Interesting. Probably the exact same percentage of people who identify as the Democratic party, lol. Hope they're disappointed :).

[uncharted]

A big time gambler who won on Brexit and Trump is so confident that the polls are wrong and that Republicans will maintain control of the House that he has traveled to London to bet $130,000 on the outcome.


Ouch.

[RJ Liberty]

I would love to see Gary Johnson win in New Mexico US Senate race. My humble opinion he will finish a double digit third place.

Clint, your prediction was spot on: Gary ended up picking up 15.5%.

[acptulsa]

According to the results, 50% of Americans think Republicans will retain control of the House, compared to 44% who think Democrats will win enough seats to gain victory.
Every single prediction Americans have made over the last 10 such midterm election years between 1946 and 2014 has come true.

Another American tradition down the crapper.

[Cleaner44]

Well it looks like the correct answer was: Democrats win a slight majority.

The good news is that gridlock could reduce the amount of liberty infringing legislation coming out of D.C.

The bad news is that the crimes of the Obama administration will forever be swept under the rug.

Also I know of 0 new candidates that will be helping Paul, Massie & Amash, so that sucks.

[acptulsa]

Well it looks like the correct answer was: Democrats win a slight majority.

The good news is that gridlock could reduce the amount of liberty infringing legislation coming out of D.C.

The bad news is that the crimes of the Obama administration will forever be swept under the rug.

Also I know of 0 new candidates that will be helping Paul, Massie & Amash, so that sucks.

It's worse than that. Brat is out.


Laugh about it, shout about it, when you have to choose
Any way you look at it you lose.

[Zippyjuan]

Trump claiming (no surprise) that they blew away expectations. Actually the results were pretty much as expected.

2020 will likely have a different outcome in the Senate. There were very few Republican seats even up for election- only nine. Next time two thirds of the seats up for election will be held by Republicans.

[acptulsa]

Trump claiming (no surprise) that they blew away expectations. Actually the results were pretty much as expected.

2020 will likely have a different outcome in the Senate. There were very few Republican seats even up for election- only nine. Next time two thirds of the seats up for election will be held by Republicans.

What aspect of recent U.S. political history makes you think that anything other than incumbents keeping their seats is "likely"?

[Zippyjuan]

What aspect of recent U.S. political history makes you think that anything other than incumbents keeping their seats is "likely"?

Let's go with 90% of incumbents keep their jobs. 20 Republicans up for re-election and ten Democrats up for re-election. Which party loses more seats to the other party? The one with the most up for re-election.