View Poll Results: What will be the result of the Midterms (vote twice!!)

Voters
48. You may not vote on this poll
  • GOP holds the House

    7 14.58%
  • Dems win the House by less than 12 seats

    20 41.67%
  • Dems win the House by 12-25 seats

    12 25.00%
  • Dems win the House by 25-38 seats

    7 14.58%
  • Dems win the House by 38+ seats

    1 2.08%
  • GOP gains 1 or more seats in the Senate (52-48 or more)

    29 60.42%
  • GOP holds the same number of seats in the Senate (51-49)

    7 14.58%
  • GOP loses seats but still holds the Senate (50-50 with Pence breaking tie)

    7 14.58%
  • Dems win the Senate (49-51 or more)

    2 4.17%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 58 of 94 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... LastLast
Results 1,141 to 1,160 of 1870
  1. #1141
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by CameronBornAndBred View Post
    Fiercely contested in that his opponent is raising LOTS of money. I'm sure that Cruz's seat is safe, but he is having to put up a harder fight than I'd think he expected. There is a reason that Trump showed up for him; you would not have seen that happen in an easier contest.
    Yeah, but that has more to do with Beto being a heartthrob (to some) and getting lots of free media in the form of appearances on late night shows, a CNN townhall, etc. I'm sure lots of Senatorial candidates are very jealous of all the attention that Beto's receiving for free, but has it really helped him to make his race with Cruz more competitive? I have a theory that Beto's been really running for President for several months now. If he were running for Senate in Texas, he would've moderated certain rhetoric and certain stances, but his campaign basically could've been run in California or New York. And that's why Ds love him. He's running as an unabashed lefty in Texas, which is great for his national cred among Ds but not so great for his chances to win a Senate seat in Texas. In 2018, at least. In 2030, the demographics might make it possible.

  2. #1142
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Jason said we could post on Kavanaugh if some solid polling came out that might indicate influence on the mid-terms, and the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research just released this:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...Vr9?li=BBnb7Kz

    Some tidbits:

    39% said Kav was mostly honest but was hiding something, 31% said he was mostly lying, and 25% said he was totally truthful. As expected, that falls largely along partisan lines. What I found interesting was that independents disapproved of his confirmation, 35% to 17%.

    Two results I found troubling:

    *Only 1 in 3 said that since Kav's confirmation they have a lot of confidence in the Supreme Court.

    *Only 3 in 10 said the FBI did a good job.

    The continuing erosion of the people's belief in their institutions is not a good sign for democracy.

  3. #1143
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    *Only 1 in 3 said that since Kav's confirmation they have a lot of confidence in the Supreme Court.
    Is there a number for those saying that had a lot of confidence before Kav's confirmation?

  4. #1144
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Ok, so this really, really ticks me off. If that's PPB, so be it, send me on vacation. But if I choose not to vote for a few years, that is NO reason to take away my right to vote. (For the record, I always vote and this is BS)

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...se-there-didnt

    And I'll believe this when I see it. This Hill.TV/HarrisX poll says 90% of registered voters are planning to vote in the mid-terms (though they may be surprised when their votes don't count, see above). It is backed up by a Washington Post/ABC News poll from a few days ago.

    https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-amer...-already-voted

  5. #1145
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Atlanta
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Yeah, but that has more to do with Beto being a heartthrob (to some) and getting lots of free media in the form of appearances on late night shows, a CNN townhall, etc. I'm sure lots of Senatorial candidates are very jealous of all the attention that Beto's receiving for free, but has it really helped him to make his race with Cruz more competitive? I have a theory that Beto's been really running for President for several months now. If he were running for Senate in Texas, he would've moderated certain rhetoric and certain stances, but his campaign basically could've been run in California or New York. And that's why Ds love him. He's running as an unabashed lefty in Texas, which is great for his national cred among Ds but not so great for his chances to win a Senate seat in Texas. In 2018, at least. In 2030, the demographics might make it possible.
    Just for the record, I believe Ted was also invited, but declined, so Beto got the hour to himself.

  6. #1146
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Atlanta
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    Ok, so this really, really ticks me off. If that's PPB, so be it, send me on vacation. But if I choose not to vote for a few years, that is NO reason to take away my right to vote. (For the record, I always vote and this is BS)

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...se-there-didnt

    And I'll believe this when I see it. This Hill.TV/HarrisX poll says 90% of registered voters are planning to vote in the mid-terms (though they may be surprised when their votes don't count, see above). It is backed up by a Washington Post/ABC News poll from a few days ago.

    https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-amer...-already-voted
    What percent of the voter-eligible population is actually registered?

  7. #1147
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    If he were running for Senate in Texas, he would've moderated certain rhetoric and certain stances, but his campaign basically could've been run in California or New York. And that's why Ds love him. He's running as an unabashed lefty in Texas, which is great for his national cred among Ds but not so great for his chances to win a Senate seat in Texas.
    I agree he's probably setting himself up for a presidential run (and doing a better job at than Warren - that was a disastrous strategic move IMO). But I am not so sure I agree that his stance is the wrong strategy for Texas. He's still unlikely to win, but according to the polls he's making a closer race than it should be, considering it's in Texas against a famous politician. So I think it's hard to really fault his strategy so far.

  8. #1148
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Quote Originally Posted by BandAlum83 View Post
    What percent of the voter-eligible population is actually registered?
    I don't know, but does it matter? You can't vote if you're not registered, and if you don't vote then who cares what your opinion is. Sorry, I'm still annoyed.

    I think the point was made upthread that the only polls that matter are of registered voters who will actually vote. There's a bit of witchcraft to it anyway, but this is one way to make it more scientific. If science matters anymore.

  9. #1149
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    I agree he's probably setting himself up for a presidential run (and doing a better job at than Warren - that was a disastrous strategic move IMO). But I am not so sure I agree that his stance is the wrong strategy for Texas. He's still unlikely to win, but according to the polls he's making a closer race than it should be, considering it's in Texas against a famous politician. So I think it's hard to really fault his strategy so far.
    The only way we'll ever really know is if we got to peek at the alternate reality in which Beto ran a more moderate campaign. I think he'd be even closer to Cruz, who is quite unlikable as a person.

    I mean, the big picture perspective is that Beto's campaign has been wildly successful. He has huge name recognition now and will be a factor in national politics.

  10. #1150
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!

    Prediction time!

    Ok, I am adding a poll to this thread. It will be a multiple choice poll, but you SHOULD ONLY VOTE TWICE!! Vote once in the House portion and once in the Senate portion of the poll. Let's see which of us gets things the most right. I will close the poll in 10 days, a few days before the election.

    Here are your choices:
    House:
    GOP holds the House
    Dems win the House by less than 12 seats
    Dems win the House by 12-25 seats
    Dems win the House by 25-38 seats
    Dems win the House by 38+ seats

    Senate:
    GOP gains 1 or more seats (52-48 or more)
    GOP holds the same number of seats (51-49)
    GOP loses seats but still holds the Senate (50-50 with Pence breaking tie)
    Dems win the Senate (49-51 or more)

    -Jason "as always, feel free to explain your picks" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  11. #1151
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    The smart folks will wait until we are closer, but rushing in where angles fear to tread:

    Dems win the House by less than 12 seats.
    Repubs pick up at least one Senate seat.

    Because, gridlock.

  12. #1152
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    The smart folks will wait until we are closer, but rushing in where angles fear to tread:

    Dems win the House by less than 12 seats.
    Repubs pick up at least one Senate seat.

    Because, gridlock.
    On board with this.

    Also, very interested in governor's races in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida, among other places.

  13. #1153
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Pleased to see that we have votes in every single poll option at this point. 17 people have voted so far... though one person voted only in the House category and one voted only in the Senate. Still, 15 out of 17 of you understanding how it works is pretty good, I suppose.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Corey View Post
    Also, very interested in governor's races in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida, among other places.
    I toyed with adding a few key Governor races to the poll -- Georgia and Florida are the ones that have attracted the most attention, it seems -- but figured that would make the poll too cumbersome.
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  14. #1154
    Where is the option for the only outcome for which I am certain.

    * Civility and common sense lose.

  15. #1155
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Man, what utter lack of respect for 538 by people voting in this poll. Do you guys realize that 538 has the average D gain in the House to be +39? That there's an 80% chance the D gain in the House will be between +19 and +61? That there's only a 10% chance it will be less than +19?

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...orecast/house/

    Keep in mind. While Nate Silver's personal analysis of the election in 2016 was horrible, which he admits, his model (i.e. 538) gave Trump a 30% chance to win, which made it one of the best-performing models that year. (For example, one prominent election forecaster gave Trump 1%. The NYTimes gave him 10%.) And now Silver's model is saying D+39 in the House on average.

  16. #1156
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Man, what utter lack of respect for 538 by people voting in this poll.
    I vote for the option that will cause the most people to throw the biggest coniption fit possible. I shall be entertained!

  17. #1157
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Keep in mind. While Nate Silver's personal analysis of the election in 2016 was horrible, which he admits, his model (i.e. 538) gave Trump a 30% chance to win, which made it one of the best-performing models that year.
    Trump changed voting. I won't trust another poll for a very long time, if ever, and it is pretty much why I am abstaining from voting in this poll. (But not in the election.)
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  18. #1158
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Troublemaker View Post
    Man, what utter lack of respect for 538 by people voting in this poll. Do you guys realize that 538 has the average D gain in the House to be +39? That there's an 80% chance the D gain in the House will be between +19 and +61? That there's only a 10% chance it will be less than +19?

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...orecast/house/

    Keep in mind. While Nate Silver's personal analysis of the election in 2016 was horrible, which he admits, his model (i.e. 538) gave Trump a 30% chance to win, which made it one of the best-performing models that year. (For example, one prominent election forecaster gave Trump 1%. The NYTimes gave him 10%.) And now Silver's model is saying D+39 in the House on average.
    I never underestimate the Democrat's penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Or, you can say I'm hedging.

    Either way, I think the Dems take the House back. But I am not convinced they will do as well as they think they will.

    By way of further explanation, I recognize that we are all biased by our personal experiences. Where I live -- very red country -- the idea that Republicans are not energized is provably false. They are not staying home, which is what many of the "Blue Wave" articles I have seen assume will happen without any real empirical support beyond supposition (or in some instances, wishful thinking).


    I'm not saying Nate is wrong. I'm saying that I'll believe it when I see it. And soon enough we will know!

  19. #1159
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    I never underestimate the Democrat's penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Or, you can say I'm hedging.

    Either way, I think the Dems take the House back. But I am not convinced they will do as well as they think they will.

    By way of further explanation, I recognize that we are all biased by our personal experiences. Where I live -- very red country -- the idea that Republicans are not energized is provably false. They are not staying home, which is what many of the "Blue Wave" articles I have seen assume will happen without any real empirical support beyond supposition (or in some instances, wishful thinking).

    I'm not saying Nate is wrong. I'm saying that I'll believe it when I see it. And soon enough we will know!
    Yeah, there's some emotional hedging or perhaps outright reverse-jinxing going on with these poll results. Furthermore, I suppose if one was burned by a particularly bad prediction in the 2016 poll, then one might be more cautious this time around.

    A look back at the 2016 poll, in case anyone's interested: https://forums.dukebasketballreport...do=showresults

  20. #1160
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    I never underestimate the Democrat's penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
    Yeah, my sense is that the Democrats have a strong generic advantage that is going to be somewhat wasted by poor specific candidates/races (much like winning the popular vote but not having the math work out the way it divides up between states). Beto is a strong candidate, but may be stuck in the one senate race he can't win – it's like having the second highest score one week in your fantasy football league, but still losing your game. My own local senate race has a Democrat who isn't even running as a Democrat (she literally claims in her radio ads she's an Independent, not a Democrat or Republican), is on commercials mocking the state she's running in, and is running against someone who has roughly the same origin story as the next Marvel superhero movie's main character. And just overall, Democrats seemed overwhelmed and confused by the sheer number of scandals by Trump, literally hundreds of which would be the #1 scandal for Obama, Bush, Reagan, etc. Like referees calling a West Virginia basketball game, they've seem to taken the stance that there have been so many fouls that they can't possibly call most of them.

    (Was that enough cultural analogies?)

Similar Threads

  1. Oscars 2018
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-10-2018, 12:23 AM
  2. 2017-2018 team vs 2018-2019 team
    By proelitedota in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-25-2018, 06:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •