The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
[US Federal Congressional Elections 2018] Tester Wins, AZ/FL Too Close
enlightenedbum
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
MOD MESSAGE:
Please review the rules for this forum. Politics thread rules here. General rules here.
On political organizing: PA is not a place to logistically organize folks for specific campaigns or causes.
Okay to post: your personal experience phone banking/knocking doors, a link to a candidate's website so people can go there to learn more info, posting about who you are voting for or donating to.
Not okay to post: calls to organize people to volunteer for specific campaigns, discussing within this thread about meeting up to volunteer/protest, posts attempting to recruit volunteers or garner donations. Specific organizing discussions should take place off PA.
Election threads are notoriously hard to moderate. If you are a person breaking or skirting the rules and repeatedly making this thread difficult to moderate, you can be kicked and/or infracted. Follow ze rules. Have fun.
YOUR FRIENDLY GUIDE TO WATCHING ELECTION NIGHT
https://www.danielnichanian.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Elections-tracker-Nov5.pdf
There's a pdf with a ton of races to watch.
When does [insert state here] close?
(Ignore the date, closing times are accurate)
First of all, here are closing times all over the country. Most of Indiana (except Gary) and Eastern Kentucky close first. Kentucky's Sixth District is therefore our first contested race to close. If the Democrat, Amy McGrath, wins there, we're in really good shape. Currently that's a lean GOP seat to 538, giving her a 3/8 chance of taking it.
Major statewide races closing at 7 eastern include: Indiana Senate and Georgia governor. We'll also start seeing returns in Florida, but that race won't be characterized until the panhandle closes at 8 eastern.
Where should I watch?
Here.
Cable news is dumb and you shouldn't watch it. There are some great college basketball games on Tuesday night, maybe watch those instead. If you're a glutton for punishment, MSNBC is probably the least groanworthy, depending on if Brian Williams or Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow is their primary anchor. Online, the Times does a really good job with election returns, I would focus on them or whatever state you want to know stuff about's secretary of state's office. Though some of those kind of suck, frankly. But definitely here, there will be several people who are examining counties and tracking the twitter accounts of people who know even better which counties to look at.
I'm going to watch TV anyway, what should I know?
The major networks are going to work to "characterize" each race as the polls close. This is done based on polling before hand, the general political attitudes of the race in question (a congressional district in Brooklyn can safely be assumed to be Democratic, for example), but mostly on exit polls. EXIT POLLS ARE NOT GOSPEL, though they can give us an indication as to how things are going. There are three major classifications:
1) TOO CLOSE TO CALL - Exit polls indicate the race is close, usually within 5 points either way. The media organizations need to see more actual votes to determine who is going to win. In races we are pretty sure are very close, like Missouri Senate or Georgia Governor, expect to see this classification until a significant majority of the vote is in.
2) TOO EARLY TO CALL - There is not yet enough information to make a call. If they are willing to say "too early to call, candidate X leading" that usually indicates that candidate is leading by 5-9 points in exit polls. I would anticipate this kind of call in say, the Midwestern Senate races.
3) INSTANT CALL - The race is called when the polls closed. This indicates a blowout, probably a double digit win. If you don't see this characterization for say, Tim Kaine, something has gone very wrong for Democrats. Conversely, if you DO see this for Stabenow or Baldwin, that's good news.
Who should I follow on Twitter?
https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw - just in general, you should follow Southpaw.
https://twitter.com/joshtpm - TPM head, they'll probably be tracking shenanigans closely, that's usually their beat. Also a smart analyst.
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn - NYT polling person, head of Upshot, owner of the dreaded arrow of doom
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538 - is Nate Silver
https://twitter.com/Taniel - pays extremely close attention to down ballot stuff, especially referenda, especially those on voting rights.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict - calls races accurately
Where should I talk about it?
In our two threads, try to keep track of which one you're in, though I know we're going to mess that up a lot. The mods have also asked that we keep the liveblogginess of election day down, so it's not just a ton of posts that look like "GILLUM!!!!!!!!!!" or "OH FUCK YOU FLORIDA!!!!"
If you would like to have those reactions, SIG recommends the D&D Discord, which you can find here.
What are expectations like, 48 hours out?
Consensus is that Democrats are likely to take the House. They need 23 pickups. Expectations are somewhere from 30-40. A polling error in the GOP's favor could let them keep the House though. Democrats are likely to win the total Congressional vote by a significant margin (high single digits), but gerrymandering is likely to keep the by district margin close.
Consensus is equally strong that the GOP is going to retain the Senate. A 50/50 Senate (Dems pick up one seat) is maybe the most likely individual outcome. A systemic polling error for Democrats is required for them to win. The most likely path to a majority at this point is a Beto miracle.
Democrats should pick up a number of Governor's mansions. Michigan, New Mexico, and Illinois are probably pickups. There are a bunch of toss ups. We're following Florida and Georgia especially closely.
Basic details:
Election day is Tuesday November 6!
You should vote then (or earlier, if your state allows it, or by mail if you're lucky and live in a relatively smart state).
Make sure your registration is up to date and what not. Here's the federal government's page for voter information.
This thread is primarily focused on the US Congress. So what's going on there?
The United States House of Representatives
Every seat in the House is up. Currently the Republicans hold 236 seats to Democrats 193. A party needs 218 to control the House. A couple of the currently vacant seats are basically Democratic seats like Michigan's 13th district (no Republican is even running) so the number of pickups needed is generally regarded to be 23.
Special elections have been promising but somewhat frustrating for Democrats in the last two yeas. In a series of races where Republicans are usually not seriously tested, Democrats have come just short of winning most of them, and actually won a few. There are something like 120 Republican held seats more Democratic than the one Conor Lamb won in Pennsylvania, and 60-70 Republican held seats more Democratic than the one that Danny O'Connor apparently lost (as I write this on August 8) in Ohio. This seems promising, especially when the GOP isn't able to spend millions on each race. Suburban women have trended Democratic in these races in particular.
The other trend we are seeing is a significant increase in the number of women running for office and winning primaries, especially on the Democratic side. Well over 300 women are running for the House, and in open primaries with a man and a woman running, the woman is winning 69% of the time in the Democratic primary.
Democrats have a lot of energy and have been leading the general congressional ballot all year, usually by a sizable margin. As I write this it is around 8 points. Naturally a lot of this is driven by people not liking the president. Reminder: most presidencies lose seats in midterm elections, though we have had two recent exceptions in 1998 (because impeachment) and 2002 (because 9/11). The less popular the presidency, the harsher the backlash. The only problem is gerrymandering. To win the House, Democrats need to win the national popular vote by a significant margin. The most optimistic estimate is 4 points, the most pessimistic is 11. Either way it's an uphill climb.
The United States Senate
Currently there are 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, and 2 independents who caucus with Democrats (Sanders and King). So to take control of the Senate Democrats only need to flip two seats. That sounds way easier than the House, right? Well, get a load of this map:
Democrats are defending 23 seats (well 22 because of California's jungle primary, there are two Democrats on the general election ballot), both independents are up, with only 9 Republican seats up. Of the seats Democrats are defending, 10 are in states Democrats won. Only 1 GOP seat is in a state Clinton won. So that's rough.
Let's look at some individual races:
States where Trump won but look safe for the Democratic Incumbent:
Michigan: Debbie Stabenow (D) vs. John James (R)
Stabenow is a long time Senator in a state that is traditionally Democratic despite our massive fuckup in 2016. She's popular. James is not a particularly impressive candidate, got a relatively late infusion of money (and a Trump endorsement) to defeat a genuinely terrible super rich candidate in the primary. Stabenow is consistently polling up double digits. Should be safe, especially considering the enthusiasm on the Democratic side.
Ohio: Sherrod Brown (D) vs. Jim Renacci (R)
Brown is the gravel voiced populist who is way more liberal than the red trending Ohio at large. Like probably the most liberal compared to what you'd expect from his state Senator in the country. And he is once again up huge. Average is 15 points right now. Dude knows Ohio.
Pennsylvania Bob Casey (D) vs. Lou Barletta (R)
This could basically be the Ohio race but I like Casey less than Brown. GOP nominated Some Guy and the incumbent Democratic is consistently polling up around 15 points.
Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin (D) vs. Kevin Nicholson or Leah Vukmir (SIG edit this when the Wisconsin primary happens!) (R)
Wisconsin seems to like Baldwin pretty well. She's up 12 or 13 points in polling thus far. Should be pretty safe.
States where Trump won and the Democrat is leading by a noticeable margin, or the state where Democrats did something very stupid and dangerous
Montana: Jon Tester (D) vs. Matt Rosendale (R)
Tester holds a small but consistent lead to retain his seat. Montana is red but not like super crazy red like its next door neighbors. Additionally the GOP nominated a fake rancher from Maryland who @AngelHedgie assures us Montanans are not particularly fond of.
West Virginia: Joe Manchin (D) vs. Patrick Morrisey (R)
Hey it's Joe Manchin, a very frustrating Democrat, who nonetheless kicks ass in his hard right state. Manchin has led every poll in the summer, often in double digits, sometimes by more than Baldwin, despite West Virginia being one of the most Trump friendly states in the country. He probably holds on, which is crazy.
New Jersey: Bob Menendez (D) vs. Bob Hugin (R)
It's New Jersey so this should be a gimme, but Menendez is getting hammered for his corruption trial. He was acquitted, but mostly because corruption is legal now and not because he's not actually corrupt. Naturally Democrats just decided to nominate him again anyway and now this race is way, way closer than it should be. Political gravity probably wins out and he's re-elected, but dumb.
States where Trump won and things are a toss up
North Dakota: Heidi Heitkamp (D) vs. Kevin Cramer (R)
Heitkamp is the second most conservative Democrat and has her work cut out for her to win re-election. Cramer has a lead within the margin of error in the polling average. In a real blue wave it might carry her to victory, but it's hard to say.
Missouri: Claire McCaskill (D) vs. Josh Hawley (R)
America's luckiest (but also very crafty) politician, Claire McCaskill, is up for re-election again. Last time she squeaked by with Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin as her opponent, who she ran adds for during the primary by attacking him as "very conservative." This year she's got the Missouri GOP in a right state, with the governor resigning and there being little enthusiasm for her opponent who could only manage 58% of the vote against a collection of who dats in the primary. McCaskill has a slim lead in general election polling.
Indiana: Joe Donnelly (D) vs. Mike Braun (R)
The other member of the 2012 "super lucky that his opponent made idiotic comments about rape" caucus, Joe Donnelly is in trouble because he's still running in Indiana. Polling is very sparse, but the one we've got has Braun up a point. Usual businessman turned state legislator bio you'd expect from a Republican.
Florida: Bill Nelson (D) vs. Rick Scott (R)
Floridians, for whatever fucking reason, love Lex Luthor Rick Scott. The Medicare fraud enthusiast has consistently high popularity, and is spending a ton of money on the race. Nelson is being kind of sleepy in response. As a result, Scott has opened up a small but consistent polling lead. This one is a significant danger.
Democrats are also defending two seats in Minnesota, which Trump almost won, but both Klobuchar and Smith are well ahead in those races.
Potential Democratic Pickups
Nevada: Dean Heller (R) vs. Jacky Rosen (D)
Heller took the odd stance of being a Trump sycophant in a state that went for Clinton and being up in a midterm election with a president who has literally never been popular. It's a bold strategy, let's see if it's going to work. Rosen is a member of the House who is pretty popular and easily won the Democratic primary. She has a lead in polling and is generally expected to pick up the seat.
The second potential Democratic pickup is where things get dicey. There are three options barring anything really weird happening:
Arizona (open seat, Jeff Flake): Kyrsten Sinema (D) vs. Martha McSally
Sinema is a congresswoman from Phoenix since 2012. If she wins, she'd join Baldwin as the only LGBT Senators in US history (she's bisexual). She's a Blue Dog, so might be more than a little frustrating, but a seat is a seat. Martha McSally is a congresswoman from Tucson who is an Air Force veteran and in fact the first female combat pilot in US history during Desert Storm. Used to criticize Trump a lot but started to love him during her Senate primary for some reason. This race is a toss up, though recent polls have Sinema with a small lead.
Texas(!): Ted Cruz (R) vs. Beto O'Rourke (D)
This is the Democratic white whale. We have been talking about turning Texas purple for as long as I can remember. This may be the best shot we've had. Ted Cruz is, of course Ted Cruz. Almost preternaturally unlikeable, possibly the Zodiac Killer, and oozing asshole. Beto O'Rourke has run one of the better internet friendly campaigns I can remember. He's super proud to have visited every county in Texas (all 250+ of them ) during the campaign, hoping to do much better than Democrats usually do in rural Texas. He's got Cruz scared enough to agree to five debates, though he wants to do them on Friday nights in the fall. In Texas. Cruz is still leading in the polls, but O'Rourke has been gaining all summer. I dunno if this will happen, but it might happen.
Tennessee (open seat, Bob Corker) (!!!!!!): Phil Bredesen (D) vs. Marsha Blackburn (R)
This was not on my radar at all. Bredesen is a former two time Governor of Tennessee, and the last Democrat to win a statewide election in the state for any office. He was a popular governor and remains popular today. Democrats just swept into power in Memphis County. Bredesen has led in basically every poll I've seen in this race. It's weird. Blackburn is one of your conspiratorial members of the House and in normal times would be seen as a ridiculous fringe figure. Sadly we have the House GOP caucus so she's now kinda mainstream. Anyway this would be weird, but in a truly Democratic year, this could happen.
Please review the rules for this forum. Politics thread rules here. General rules here.
On political organizing: PA is not a place to logistically organize folks for specific campaigns or causes.
Okay to post: your personal experience phone banking/knocking doors, a link to a candidate's website so people can go there to learn more info, posting about who you are voting for or donating to.
Not okay to post: calls to organize people to volunteer for specific campaigns, discussing within this thread about meeting up to volunteer/protest, posts attempting to recruit volunteers or garner donations. Specific organizing discussions should take place off PA.
Election threads are notoriously hard to moderate. If you are a person breaking or skirting the rules and repeatedly making this thread difficult to moderate, you can be kicked and/or infracted. Follow ze rules. Have fun.
YOUR FRIENDLY GUIDE TO WATCHING ELECTION NIGHT
https://www.danielnichanian.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Elections-tracker-Nov5.pdf
There's a pdf with a ton of races to watch.
When does [insert state here] close?
(Ignore the date, closing times are accurate)
First of all, here are closing times all over the country. Most of Indiana (except Gary) and Eastern Kentucky close first. Kentucky's Sixth District is therefore our first contested race to close. If the Democrat, Amy McGrath, wins there, we're in really good shape. Currently that's a lean GOP seat to 538, giving her a 3/8 chance of taking it.
Major statewide races closing at 7 eastern include: Indiana Senate and Georgia governor. We'll also start seeing returns in Florida, but that race won't be characterized until the panhandle closes at 8 eastern.
Where should I watch?
Here.
Cable news is dumb and you shouldn't watch it. There are some great college basketball games on Tuesday night, maybe watch those instead. If you're a glutton for punishment, MSNBC is probably the least groanworthy, depending on if Brian Williams or Chris Matthews or Rachel Maddow is their primary anchor. Online, the Times does a really good job with election returns, I would focus on them or whatever state you want to know stuff about's secretary of state's office. Though some of those kind of suck, frankly. But definitely here, there will be several people who are examining counties and tracking the twitter accounts of people who know even better which counties to look at.
I'm going to watch TV anyway, what should I know?
The major networks are going to work to "characterize" each race as the polls close. This is done based on polling before hand, the general political attitudes of the race in question (a congressional district in Brooklyn can safely be assumed to be Democratic, for example), but mostly on exit polls. EXIT POLLS ARE NOT GOSPEL, though they can give us an indication as to how things are going. There are three major classifications:
1) TOO CLOSE TO CALL - Exit polls indicate the race is close, usually within 5 points either way. The media organizations need to see more actual votes to determine who is going to win. In races we are pretty sure are very close, like Missouri Senate or Georgia Governor, expect to see this classification until a significant majority of the vote is in.
2) TOO EARLY TO CALL - There is not yet enough information to make a call. If they are willing to say "too early to call, candidate X leading" that usually indicates that candidate is leading by 5-9 points in exit polls. I would anticipate this kind of call in say, the Midwestern Senate races.
3) INSTANT CALL - The race is called when the polls closed. This indicates a blowout, probably a double digit win. If you don't see this characterization for say, Tim Kaine, something has gone very wrong for Democrats. Conversely, if you DO see this for Stabenow or Baldwin, that's good news.
Who should I follow on Twitter?
https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw - just in general, you should follow Southpaw.
https://twitter.com/joshtpm - TPM head, they'll probably be tracking shenanigans closely, that's usually their beat. Also a smart analyst.
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn - NYT polling person, head of Upshot, owner of the dreaded arrow of doom
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538 - is Nate Silver
https://twitter.com/Taniel - pays extremely close attention to down ballot stuff, especially referenda, especially those on voting rights.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict - calls races accurately
Where should I talk about it?
In our two threads, try to keep track of which one you're in, though I know we're going to mess that up a lot. The mods have also asked that we keep the liveblogginess of election day down, so it's not just a ton of posts that look like "GILLUM!!!!!!!!!!" or "OH FUCK YOU FLORIDA!!!!"
If you would like to have those reactions, SIG recommends the D&D Discord, which you can find here.
What are expectations like, 48 hours out?
Consensus is that Democrats are likely to take the House. They need 23 pickups. Expectations are somewhere from 30-40. A polling error in the GOP's favor could let them keep the House though. Democrats are likely to win the total Congressional vote by a significant margin (high single digits), but gerrymandering is likely to keep the by district margin close.
Consensus is equally strong that the GOP is going to retain the Senate. A 50/50 Senate (Dems pick up one seat) is maybe the most likely individual outcome. A systemic polling error for Democrats is required for them to win. The most likely path to a majority at this point is a Beto miracle.
Democrats should pick up a number of Governor's mansions. Michigan, New Mexico, and Illinois are probably pickups. There are a bunch of toss ups. We're following Florida and Georgia especially closely.
Basic details:
Election day is Tuesday November 6!
You should vote then (or earlier, if your state allows it, or by mail if you're lucky and live in a relatively smart state).
Make sure your registration is up to date and what not. Here's the federal government's page for voter information.
This thread is primarily focused on the US Congress. So what's going on there?
The United States House of Representatives
Every seat in the House is up. Currently the Republicans hold 236 seats to Democrats 193. A party needs 218 to control the House. A couple of the currently vacant seats are basically Democratic seats like Michigan's 13th district (no Republican is even running) so the number of pickups needed is generally regarded to be 23.
Special elections have been promising but somewhat frustrating for Democrats in the last two yeas. In a series of races where Republicans are usually not seriously tested, Democrats have come just short of winning most of them, and actually won a few. There are something like 120 Republican held seats more Democratic than the one Conor Lamb won in Pennsylvania, and 60-70 Republican held seats more Democratic than the one that Danny O'Connor apparently lost (as I write this on August 8) in Ohio. This seems promising, especially when the GOP isn't able to spend millions on each race. Suburban women have trended Democratic in these races in particular.
The other trend we are seeing is a significant increase in the number of women running for office and winning primaries, especially on the Democratic side. Well over 300 women are running for the House, and in open primaries with a man and a woman running, the woman is winning 69% of the time in the Democratic primary.
Democrats have a lot of energy and have been leading the general congressional ballot all year, usually by a sizable margin. As I write this it is around 8 points. Naturally a lot of this is driven by people not liking the president. Reminder: most presidencies lose seats in midterm elections, though we have had two recent exceptions in 1998 (because impeachment) and 2002 (because 9/11). The less popular the presidency, the harsher the backlash. The only problem is gerrymandering. To win the House, Democrats need to win the national popular vote by a significant margin. The most optimistic estimate is 4 points, the most pessimistic is 11. Either way it's an uphill climb.
The United States Senate
Currently there are 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, and 2 independents who caucus with Democrats (Sanders and King). So to take control of the Senate Democrats only need to flip two seats. That sounds way easier than the House, right? Well, get a load of this map:
Democrats are defending 23 seats (well 22 because of California's jungle primary, there are two Democrats on the general election ballot), both independents are up, with only 9 Republican seats up. Of the seats Democrats are defending, 10 are in states Democrats won. Only 1 GOP seat is in a state Clinton won. So that's rough.
Let's look at some individual races:
States where Trump won but look safe for the Democratic Incumbent:
Michigan: Debbie Stabenow (D) vs. John James (R)
Stabenow is a long time Senator in a state that is traditionally Democratic despite our massive fuckup in 2016. She's popular. James is not a particularly impressive candidate, got a relatively late infusion of money (and a Trump endorsement) to defeat a genuinely terrible super rich candidate in the primary. Stabenow is consistently polling up double digits. Should be safe, especially considering the enthusiasm on the Democratic side.
Ohio: Sherrod Brown (D) vs. Jim Renacci (R)
Brown is the gravel voiced populist who is way more liberal than the red trending Ohio at large. Like probably the most liberal compared to what you'd expect from his state Senator in the country. And he is once again up huge. Average is 15 points right now. Dude knows Ohio.
Pennsylvania Bob Casey (D) vs. Lou Barletta (R)
This could basically be the Ohio race but I like Casey less than Brown. GOP nominated Some Guy and the incumbent Democratic is consistently polling up around 15 points.
Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin (D) vs. Kevin Nicholson or Leah Vukmir (SIG edit this when the Wisconsin primary happens!) (R)
Wisconsin seems to like Baldwin pretty well. She's up 12 or 13 points in polling thus far. Should be pretty safe.
States where Trump won and the Democrat is leading by a noticeable margin, or the state where Democrats did something very stupid and dangerous
Montana: Jon Tester (D) vs. Matt Rosendale (R)
Tester holds a small but consistent lead to retain his seat. Montana is red but not like super crazy red like its next door neighbors. Additionally the GOP nominated a fake rancher from Maryland who @AngelHedgie assures us Montanans are not particularly fond of.
West Virginia: Joe Manchin (D) vs. Patrick Morrisey (R)
Hey it's Joe Manchin, a very frustrating Democrat, who nonetheless kicks ass in his hard right state. Manchin has led every poll in the summer, often in double digits, sometimes by more than Baldwin, despite West Virginia being one of the most Trump friendly states in the country. He probably holds on, which is crazy.
New Jersey: Bob Menendez (D) vs. Bob Hugin (R)
It's New Jersey so this should be a gimme, but Menendez is getting hammered for his corruption trial. He was acquitted, but mostly because corruption is legal now and not because he's not actually corrupt. Naturally Democrats just decided to nominate him again anyway and now this race is way, way closer than it should be. Political gravity probably wins out and he's re-elected, but dumb.
States where Trump won and things are a toss up
North Dakota: Heidi Heitkamp (D) vs. Kevin Cramer (R)
Heitkamp is the second most conservative Democrat and has her work cut out for her to win re-election. Cramer has a lead within the margin of error in the polling average. In a real blue wave it might carry her to victory, but it's hard to say.
Missouri: Claire McCaskill (D) vs. Josh Hawley (R)
America's luckiest (but also very crafty) politician, Claire McCaskill, is up for re-election again. Last time she squeaked by with Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin as her opponent, who she ran adds for during the primary by attacking him as "very conservative." This year she's got the Missouri GOP in a right state, with the governor resigning and there being little enthusiasm for her opponent who could only manage 58% of the vote against a collection of who dats in the primary. McCaskill has a slim lead in general election polling.
Indiana: Joe Donnelly (D) vs. Mike Braun (R)
The other member of the 2012 "super lucky that his opponent made idiotic comments about rape" caucus, Joe Donnelly is in trouble because he's still running in Indiana. Polling is very sparse, but the one we've got has Braun up a point. Usual businessman turned state legislator bio you'd expect from a Republican.
Florida: Bill Nelson (D) vs. Rick Scott (R)
Floridians, for whatever fucking reason, love Lex Luthor Rick Scott. The Medicare fraud enthusiast has consistently high popularity, and is spending a ton of money on the race. Nelson is being kind of sleepy in response. As a result, Scott has opened up a small but consistent polling lead. This one is a significant danger.
Democrats are also defending two seats in Minnesota, which Trump almost won, but both Klobuchar and Smith are well ahead in those races.
Potential Democratic Pickups
Nevada: Dean Heller (R) vs. Jacky Rosen (D)
Heller took the odd stance of being a Trump sycophant in a state that went for Clinton and being up in a midterm election with a president who has literally never been popular. It's a bold strategy, let's see if it's going to work. Rosen is a member of the House who is pretty popular and easily won the Democratic primary. She has a lead in polling and is generally expected to pick up the seat.
The second potential Democratic pickup is where things get dicey. There are three options barring anything really weird happening:
Arizona (open seat, Jeff Flake): Kyrsten Sinema (D) vs. Martha McSally
Sinema is a congresswoman from Phoenix since 2012. If she wins, she'd join Baldwin as the only LGBT Senators in US history (she's bisexual). She's a Blue Dog, so might be more than a little frustrating, but a seat is a seat. Martha McSally is a congresswoman from Tucson who is an Air Force veteran and in fact the first female combat pilot in US history during Desert Storm. Used to criticize Trump a lot but started to love him during her Senate primary for some reason. This race is a toss up, though recent polls have Sinema with a small lead.
Texas(!): Ted Cruz (R) vs. Beto O'Rourke (D)
This is the Democratic white whale. We have been talking about turning Texas purple for as long as I can remember. This may be the best shot we've had. Ted Cruz is, of course Ted Cruz. Almost preternaturally unlikeable, possibly the Zodiac Killer, and oozing asshole. Beto O'Rourke has run one of the better internet friendly campaigns I can remember. He's super proud to have visited every county in Texas (all 250+ of them ) during the campaign, hoping to do much better than Democrats usually do in rural Texas. He's got Cruz scared enough to agree to five debates, though he wants to do them on Friday nights in the fall. In Texas. Cruz is still leading in the polls, but O'Rourke has been gaining all summer. I dunno if this will happen, but it might happen.
Tennessee (open seat, Bob Corker) (!!!!!!): Phil Bredesen (D) vs. Marsha Blackburn (R)
This was not on my radar at all. Bredesen is a former two time Governor of Tennessee, and the last Democrat to win a statewide election in the state for any office. He was a popular governor and remains popular today. Democrats just swept into power in Memphis County. Bredesen has led in basically every poll I've seen in this race. It's weird. Blackburn is one of your conspiratorial members of the House and in normal times would be seen as a ridiculous fringe figure. Sadly we have the House GOP caucus so she's now kinda mainstream. Anyway this would be weird, but in a truly Democratic year, this could happen.
The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
So It Goes on
+20
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
I knew the Senate map was bad, but actually looking at it I'm really glad that Trump is such a train wreck. That's a really bad map and nearly any other president would be looking at strengthening their party's hold on the Senate.
edit: yeah, cleaning shiz up.
Thanks for the clarification, Ebum.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I'd like him to win too, but in the meantime it's fun to watch Ted failing miserably as he tries to take on Beto.
I'm pretty sure the mods would say we haven't.
So, plan B. That was to get the recent Republican candidate for governor, Greg Gianforte, installed as the new at large Representative, and position him for 2018. And that was going well...up to Gianforte going all Saturday Night Slammasters on a reporter just before the special election. Yes, Gianforte won, but there's no way that he could run against Tester now, who would be happy to put his mug shot on billboards across the state.
The result is that the GOP was left scrambling to find someone to run that had enough of a statewide profile - which didn't leave much in the way of options. Finally, the party settled on Matt Rosendale, a former Maryland real estate developer who had relocated out to Montana and entered politics here, having served as Insurance Commissioner and in the state legislature. But, not everybody was happy with the choice, and he got a surprisingly strong primary challenge from Russ Fagg, a judge from Yellowstone County. Yellowstone is where Billings, the largest city in the state is, and as a result Fagg's challenge (built on exploiting Rosendale's background as a transplant) got serious legs - to the point where groups like Club for Growth were dumping money on ads against Fagg citing his giving a DV abuser a sweetheart deal during his tenure as judge. The result was an "Ireland wins, but Krum gets the Snitch" scenario in the primary - Rosendale squeaked out a win barely, with Fagg winning Yellowstone decisively. Needless to say, Tester has picked up the "Maryland Matt" branding that Fagg used so effectively.
And so, we're now at this point, and the campaign ads have been...like night and day. Tester's been running a solid, if standard, campaign divided between positive advertising emphasizing his work in the Senate (especially on veterans' issues) and negative advertising focusing on Rosendale's past as a land developer from Maryland (this is a sore point here for a few reasons) and his overly cozy relationship with health insurers as Insurance Commissioner. Meanwhile, Rosendale's ads have boiled down to "I was on stage with Trump, and he said sort of nice things about me?" Most of the negative advertising has come from third parties on the GOP side, and even they feel anemic - I was getting negative ads about Fagg served to me left and right during the primaries on YouTube, but now - I've only seen a handful of short anti-Tester ads. Supposedly the Rosendale camp has had internal polling showing him a few points up - but given 2016, that's not a good sign for the GOP.
In the 1st, (Berkshires to Springfield D+12) Tahirah Amatul-Wadud is challenging Richard Neal. Amatul-Wadud is running as a progressive and is a 29 black Muslim Civil Rights lawyer. Richard Neal is the ranking member of Ways and Means, a 15 term white incumbent liberal. Amatul-Wadid is running as a far left candidate but is very much the underdog. She also strangely voted for Scott Brown which undercuts most of her purity attacks on Neal, which have focused on him voting for defense bills.
In the 3rd, Niki Tsongas is retiring and there's a very crowded race. If I lived there I'd probably lean towards the incredibly impressive Dan Koh, former chief of staff for Marty Walsh. He interned for Teddy, he's 31, Lebanese-Korean, double Harvard, and charismatic. Barbara L’Italien you might remember from FoxNews screwing up and accidentally booking her to hate on immigrants, when she is pro-immigrant. Lori Trahan got the Globe endorsement. Rufus Gifford was Obama's 08 Finance director and Ambassador to Denmark. The 3rd is D+9, 2/3 white and 20% Latino.
The 3rd is also the only one of these races with a token GOP candidate
In the 7th, Mike Capuano is an old white guy with a very liberal voting record, member of the Progressive Caucus and positions to back that. Its a D+34 district that consists of about half of Boston and some of the suburbs. Its about 25% black, 20% Hispanic, 33% white, 10% Asian so its a diverse district. He's being challenged by Ayanna Pressley, City Councilwoman who was the first black woman to be elected to the city council when elected in 09. Ocasio-Cortez's win drew comparisons of progressive upstart taking out the establishment but I don't think that's fair to Pressley who has a lot of experience (and is 44) and isn't coming out of nowhere. More accurate would be the comparison of a white guy in a minority-majority district. Capuano has the backing of John Lewis, Maxine Waters, the Congressional Black Caucus, Deval Patrick, Joe Kennedy and Marty Walsh. Pressley got the Globe and Herald endorsements (for v different reasons I suspect), AG Maura Healey (who has influence in MA), and anti-establishment groups. Ideologically there isn't a lot between them, they're both liberal af, and both are more on the socially/racially liberal side than the white working class progressive side, but Capuano has been a single payer bill sponsor for a decade and Pressley is touting Medicare for All so they're both ticking those boxes too. Capuano is probably favored
In the 8th (my district), you have Stephen Lynch vs a conservo-dem Voehl and Brianna Wu of gamergate fame. Lynch isn't my favorite, especially since he voted against ACA because he didn't think it went far enough to control costs without a public option (which may have just been to mollify unions who didn't love it). He's an old Ironworker union guy who worked his way up. Voehl is more like a West Virginia Dem or Massachusetts Republican and has no qualifications beyond being an AF pilot. Wu has all the depth of a tweet rhetorically and substantially, and while she portrays herself as far left the extent of her political experience is she worked for Trent Lott for a few years. Her qualification argument is she's tech savvy. A good challenger might sway me from Lynch, but the things I like least about him (more working class white dude Dem than liberal Dem, not backing ACA enough) are things his opponents embrace more. The 8th is made up half of Boston, half of the south suburbs and is D+10 and 3/4 white.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Fingers crossed that the "make every seat competitive" strategy holds out for Dems
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/energized-donald-trump-democrats-reach-14-midterms/story?id=57538542
Highlights:
Anecdotally, my district has been a toss-up every election since it was made after the redistricting following the 2010 census. This year it's being rated as lean/safe dem, consistently, and in the (jungle) primary, our rep got over 50% of the vote, which has never happened before.
On the less good news note, I think I can answer one of your questions in the OP.
Point the first: money.
Rick Scott has already spent more money in this Senate race, going into September, than most Senate races cost period. He's already spent $28 million (21 of that HIS OWN MONEY) by early August. In the same timeframe, Nelson had raised ~20 million, but only spent 6. This is both good and bad news. The bad news is that Floridians have been inundated with attack ads for months at this point, and I doubt that's going to let up. The good news is that despite that complete gap in messaging, there isn't a whole lot of a gap that's opened up, and Nelson seems to be conserving strength for a push more just prior to the election. So I wouldn't call this one a lost cause, necessarily, but it's definitely going to be an uphill fight.
Point the second: Puerto Rico.
This is an anecdote from a friend of mine who's from Puerto Rico and has lots of relatives who live/lived there, but it's depressingly believable. Maria hit Puerto Rico. A bunch of them moved to the mainland, primarily Florida. Democrats assumed that, as the Republicans fucked up Maria so much, they would naturally become Democrats. The Florida Republican Party, on the other hand, reached out to them, provided assistance, provided free English language courses to help them acclimate to the mainland, etc. Those same classes have a bend on them which skews social conservatism, which is generally in-line with the feelings of a lot of Puerto Ricans (from a religious standpoint). The Puerto Rican refugees from Hurricane Maria, who are now in Florida, are looking like they may end up a bloc of Republican voters, because the Florida Democratic Party dropped the ball and let the Republican Party be the ones who helped them.
Do what you can and give what you can while you can.
I was worried it was going to be coin flippy due to gerrymandering and enthusiasm among democrats not being that high, so 4/5 is definitely pleasing.
I want to clarify that I think this post is okay even though it's technically asking folks to donate, because it lists several non-partisan causes and gives links. The stuff I don't want to see is "Let's raise $100 for Beto O'Rourke, @me when you donate!" or stuff like that.
Well, yes, it's wobbled in a 10% within a pretty short period of time.
But 50% is a one in two chance of disaster, though, which is what the other projections I'd seen were, so it's still probably a good thing.
His opponent, Mike Braun, is kind of catnip for the Republican base though. "Self-made small business owner" who supports President Trump and pretty much every Republican talking point, he's exciting for the Republican base here. The reality is he's abused his workers and "supports small business" but imports his goods from China. He also has been fined and cited multiple times by the US Labor Department, per politifact:
So Braun is pretty odious to me. My worry is essentially that Donnelly is the in spite of vote for a lot of democrat and democrat-leaning Hoosiers, compared to how energized the base is for Braun.
https://www.headcount.org/verify-voter-registration/
That should point you in the right direction.
I dunno, Donnelly ran unopposed. My gut says probably not, but the flip is the last time someone seen as radically progressive even tried was Obama in 2008 for the presidential run, and he won but then lost in 2012 so maybe?
The biggest issue you get is only a couple of counties really vote democrat, the biggest being Indianapolis. Which is a huge city, but only is strongly democratic in the main part of the city, the suburbs tend to be split or lean republican, depending on where you are.
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/4/17818204/midterm-2018-polls-generic-ballot-democrats
IIRC anything over 9 points makes the House most likely Democratic majority.
I put it in the OP, most optimistic estimate is 4 points, most pessimistic is 11 points.
And what the (Classic) forecast looks like on the Tues after Labor Day
This is the best its looked in a bit. The polls only has it at 69% it should be noted
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Matt Lubchansky is a cartoonist
He's reportedly pretty scared for his seat. Which is a nice thought.
Not only that, a Texas senatorial seat going blue is huge, symbolically. They will dump money to save Cruz, which means that there's less money available for other candidates.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/03/david-hogg-billboard-anti-ted-cruz-tweets-trump/1184762002/
I just don't see it happening. I mean, I see the usual, very vocal folks who would love to see a progressive Dem run, but for the rest of the voters in the state? Ehhhh...
I feel that the only reason Donnelly has his seat is because of Richard "Yes, I am Aware That We're in the Middle of a General Election but, God Meant for Your Rape Baby to Happen" Mourdock. So Donnelly plays the "I'm a kinda conservative, mid-Western Hoosier, but I'll vote for a Dem for Majority Leader in the Senate" card.
Of course, if you don't give the more progressive candidate a shot at some point, you'll never know. Though, I would note that Liz Watson beat out Dan Canon in the IN-09 primary for the Dem side, and Dan was definitely the more progressive/left of those two candidates.
Missouri Senate - tie NBC News/Marist
Florida Senate - tie Gravis
Generic Ballot - D+14 ABC News/WaPo
Generic Ballot - D+11 USA Today/Suffolk
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/a-republican-congressman-helped-a-rival-collect-signatures-to-get-on-the-ballot-some-of-those-signatures-were-fake/2018/09/04/3e1c439c-b049-11e8-9a6a-565d92a3585d_story.html
If you are going to get signatures for an independent candidate to act as a spoiler candidate, you probably shouldn't forge the signatures.
There are two elections going on there, since Thad Cochran resigned: Roger Wicker is going to snooze to reelection over MS House Minority Leader David Baria, but replacing Cochran might just be interesting. See, there are three real candidates: Cindy Hyde-Smith, appointed to replace Cochran and running for the rest of his term; Chris McDaniel, state senator and general jerk who tried to primary Cochran in 2014 and lost by a hair; Mike Espy, former Congressman and Secretary of Agriculture, who resigned from the cabinet on being indicted for corruption but was acquitted. (Hyde-Smith spent twelve years in the state senate, the first ten as a Democrat, which made a lot of people grumble when Bryant appointed her.) The whole affair is officially non-partisan and jungle, with those three and former Gautier councilman Toby Bartee running on the same ballot, with an almost-certain runoff on the 27th.
So both Republican candidates are weakened - Hyde-Smith as a woman (which Republicans don't much like nominating this year), an appointee, and an 8-year member of the Republican Party, and McDaniel as generally abrasive, hostile to the state party establishment, and whose previous run was something of a fiasco. In addition, each has a history of voting in Democratic primaries (Hyde-Smith until 2010, when she switched parties, and McDaniel when he wanted a voice in local elections), which has already brewed plenty of bitter attacks on both sides, plausibly turning off some Republican voters and allowing Espy to preserve his image. Wouldn't make any difference, really, though, would it, since both of them might well make the runoff, and either would consolidate the Republican vote?
Ehhh, that's a bit of an open question. Looking at the most recent three of the five total polls in MS (excluding March to May, but keeping late July to late August), we have one poll with Hyde-Smith over 40, and the other two have her either beating Espy 29-27 or losing 27-28, with all three giving McDaniel 15-18. Now, take all these with a big grain of salt, since nobody knows what the fuck a competitive Mississippi Senate race looks like, but that's all not nothing. Two of those three polls tested the runoff, and Espy led McDaniel by 15 to 20 points in both, though still under 50 (as you would expect). Espy versus Hyde-Smith is another story - one poll gave her a 15-point edge, again under 50, but the other, commissioned by the Espy campaign, claimed he actually led by 3.
So the most likely outcome there is Hyde-Smith/Espy/McDaniel/Bartee on November 6, and Hyde-Smith fairly handily beating Espy on the 27th, but that's definitely not guaranteed. And, of course, it's quite possible that the whole thing will decide control of the Senate three weeks after everyone else has voted.
Speaking as a MS native: there is considerable animosity towards McDaniel even among the right-wing Christian demographic. My mother, who has never voted for a Democrat in her life, sneers whenever he's mentioned, and it's pretty easy to get her started on what a terrible person he is.
All that to say, I don't think McDaniel is ultimately going to be a factor here. He's not just unpopular, he's radioactive.