Re: Elections 2018 USA-Poll

[mostly_lurking]

What will happen? Are the polls correct?

[oren]

What do the polls say? Would you post a couple of links to poll sites? For those like me who don't follow politics too closely. (Or maybe it's best to keep them off the poll...)
In addition, I could not properly discern the limits of the barely red option from the blue ripple?

[mostly_lurking]

What do the polls say? Would you post a couple of links to poll sites? For those like me who don't follow politics too closely. (Or maybe it's best to keep them off the poll...)
In addition, I could not properly discern the limits of the barely red option from the blue ripple?

There are many polls. I could put the links but it's pretty easy to find.
Real clear politics
538
Cook Report
Larry Sabato's crystal ball

If you use these only then almost everyone will choose the same option
A bit of deeper looking and intuition (and hope I guess) will help you choose other options.


Concerning the "blue ripple" and "barely red"- yes, it's almost the same besides the 50-50 in the senate which gives the swing vote to the VP.

[oren]

RED (just barely) Dem's win house and senate 50-50
BLUE Ripple- Dem's win control of house but by a hair
So in both options the dems win the house? And in both the senate is effectively  repubs? I clearly misunderstand something... sorry to be a pain.
Edit: maybe the barely Red option is the house exactly 50-50?

[mostly_lurking]

RED (just barely) Dem's win house and senate 50-50
BLUE Ripple- Dem's win control of house but by a hair
So in both options the dems win the house? And in both the senate is effectively  repubs? I clearly misunderstand something... sorry to be a pain.

no pain  

Yes, as far as control it is the same but a 50-50 makes it even harder for the GOP - everyone has to be present plus Pence. I guess Dem's would take that also as a small victory.

[Klondike Kat]

I think that the Dems will win the House by 5 seats or fewer, and the GOP gains at least one seat in the Senate.

[mostly_lurking]

So, the result is kind of in between "blue ripple" and "blue wave"- Blue big ripple 

[mostly_lurking]

I think that the Dems will win the House by 5 seats or fewer, and the GOP gains at least one seat in the Senate.

Pretty good call- + 10'ish , and + 3 -  not too far off.

[SteveMDFP]

Well, there *was* a Blue Wave, seriously under-reported.
.
I've heard that 6 million more people voted for Democratic House candidates than Republican.
Not including counts from parts of California, where votes are still being tabulated.
Republicans only had the House for the past 6 years because of gerrymandering.

With a number of governorships and state legislatures having "flipped," the gerrymandering effect in favor of Republicans may lessen in future elections.

[mostly_lurking]

Well, there *was* a Blue Wave, seriously under-reported.
.

Ok, you can have "small wave" instead of "big ripple" 

Again - this still wasn't as big as people have been saying for the last 2 years. Trump still has 100% negative coverage besides FOX, endless protests and demonstrations against him , he still has about the same 42'ish average rating and the best the dems managed was to win the house by 10-12 seats and also lose more in the senate.  I guess each side feels better claiming victory.

[SteveMDFP]

Well, there *was* a Blue Wave, seriously under-reported.
.

Ok, you can have "small wave" instead of "big ripple" 

Again - this still wasn't as big as people have been saying for the last 2 years. Trump still has 100% negative coverage besides FOX, endless protests and demonstrations against him , he still has about the same 42'ish average rating and the best the dems managed was to win the house by 10-12 seats and also lose more in the senate.  I guess each side feels better claiming victory.

Well yes, true.  On the other hand, the GOP losses happened during the strongest economic period for any election in memory.  The economy is usually the major determinant of a president's and party's popularity.

[Tor Bejnar]

As Floridian Supervisors of Elections count the absentee ballots, etc., the vote spread for the Governor and Senate races have shrunk.  Both are currently (3 pm in Tallahassee) in recount territory (< 0.5% difference).

Governor
DeSantis    REP   4,069,451    49.62%
Gillum        DEM  4,030,936    49.15%
[other individuals received the balance]

Senate
Rick Scott     REP    4,091,417     50.11%
 
Bill Nelson    DEM    4,074,073     49.89%

[Pmt111500]

i'd say democrats take the house.

[sedziobs]

7 out of 11 voters in this poll predicted a flip of the House but not the Senate, but none of them are in here tooting their own horns.

[Tor Bejnar]

Further to the Florida race for U.S. Senator.  Reports in the news media point to the low count of votes in Broward County for the U.S. Senate race (~682,000 - all candidates) compared with the Governor's race (~707,000) and even the Florida Attorney General's race (~696,000).  Undercounted ballots, maybe, that need a hand count?  (Broward Co. is one of the more populous and Democratic-leaning counties among the 67 counties in Florida.)

My from-a-distance analysis, alas, says, "No.  It is a ballot problem."  Remembering how the Palm Beach County ballots in the year 2000 were difficult to read and caused that election for U.S. President to go the way it did, I had a look at a Broward County ballot.  I note that the ballot instructions are in the first column (of the multi-columned ballot) along with the two federal office races (U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives).  The second column has the Governor's race at the top, followed by other state races, etc.  It would be easy for someone to skip the instructions and not notice the two federal office races.  After completing the five-paged ballot (!), a voter might not realize they never saw the federal office races.  In contrast, my Leon County ballot (also a multi-column ballot that is read by an optical scanner, but only 2 pages long, and fewer columns per page) had the instructions in a banner that was above all page 1 columns - not possible to miss the first column of races.

Screen print from the upper left corner of two ballots (reduced in size, too) - Broward Co. and Leon Co.:

[litesong]

Further to the Florida race for U.S. Senator.  Reports in the news media point to the low count of votes in Broward County for the U.S. Senate race (~682,000 - all candidates) compared with the Governor's race (~707,000) and even the Florida Attorney General's race (~696,000).  Undercounted ballots, maybe, that need a hand count?  (Broward Co. is one of the more populous and Democratic-leaning counties among the 67 counties in Florida.)

My from-a-distance analysis, alas, says, "No.  It is a ballot problem."  Remembering how the Palm Beach County ballots in the year 2000 were difficult to read and caused that election for U.S. President to go the way it did, I had a look at a Broward County ballot.  I note that the ballot instructions are in the first column (of the multi-columned ballot) along with the two federal office races (U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives).  The second column has the Governor's race at the top, followed by other state races, etc.  It would be easy for someone to skip the instructions and not notice the two federal office races.  After completing the five-paged ballot (!), a voter might not realize they never saw the federal office races.  In contrast, my Leon County ballot (also a multi-column ballot that is read by an optical scanner, but only 2 pages long, and fewer columns per page) had the instructions in a banner that was above all page 1 columns - not possible to miss the first column of races.

Screen print from the upper left corner of two ballots (reduced in size, too) - Broward Co. and Leon Co.:

Yes, I just saw the same on MSNBC. Its not only the Florida ballot, but sometimes our Washington state ballots have not been easy to see all the choices, some choices which have been "hidden" & in unethical positions. Several times I thought I had voted the whole ballot, only to find one or two voting choices, squirreled away from the main ballot. If such "squirreling" ballots are mainly constructed by one or the other party, major ballot mis-direction is apparent. 

[Pmt111500]

Looks like the voting officials of Scott Peninsula are not familiar with machines and automated systems. Looking at the two different ballots, the misidentification of a vote by  the machine is very much possible. I'd suggest using the same style all throughout the troubled state. It should be common knowledge that a machine can do simple things well. If they want to continue to use machines, the ballot papers should have the same election on the same position on the ballots on every county. Still I'd suggest a paper trail to verify votes, unlike some states of Trumpistan do.

[mostly_lurking]

7 out of 11 voters in this poll predicted a flip of the House but not the Senate, but none of them are in here tooting their own horns.

Probably because it was pretty much expected by everyone. Only thing that did happen was a smaller win in the house than many expected.

[sedziobs]

Well, if a prediction that Dems would take the House by 5 seats is a good call (when the actual result is projected to be +14), then I guess +23 is also a good prediction.  Did anyone predict  more than that?  "Landslide" wasn't defined, so it's hard to say exactly what those 4 were predicting.  Of those who predicted an actual margin, one was D+5 and the other R+3.  So I would say that there was a bigger gain in the house than the expectations in this thread.  As for models, 538's median "deluxe" prediction was 231-204, which looks to be dead on.

[TerryM]

Rather than a "Blue Wave" or the "Blue Tsunami" forecast by a few, we experienced what might be characterized as a  "Golden Shower" where the candidates who spent the most (Corporate) Money were most often rewarded with a 2 year term within which they could prove themselves as valued assets in the eyes of their Corporate Sponsors.


The days of the "Big Business Republican" doing battle with the "Poor, but Honest Democrat" have passed. Seemingly superseded by elections in which well heeled Democratic Candidates owe far more to their "Sponsors" than the relatively down on their heel Republican Opponents.


If my Oligarch spent twice as much getting me elected as my Opponent's Oligarch spent on his unsuccessful campaign, do I now owe my "Sponsor" twice the fealty that my vanquished rival owed to his financial backer?
If, like a certain unsuccessful Texas Candidate, I'd spent enormous amounts of other's cash in an unsuccessful run for office, are my future campaigns still under an obligation to these donors or has my loss at the polls relieved me of these debts?


What promises has Pelosi made to entice Corporate America into donating so heavily?
Terry

[sedziobs]

I discussed this very issue in the 2018 midterms election thread.  If you read through that, you'll see I acknowledge that 538 issues probabilistic forecasts.  And yet, they also have a median deterministic prediction, which is what I said was dead on.  Since no one in this thread was issuing probabilistic forecasts, I thought it was more appropriate to mention their median prediction.

[Neven]

To be continued here.