Reddy Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 I often find myself wanting to post something midterms-related and don't feel it fits either in the Dem thread or the Trump thread sooooo here's a place to talk everything midterm elections. Will there be a wave? Are Dems blowing it? Will they take the House? We can hash it all out in here. Personally, I'm doing my part in IA-01 organizing for Abby Finkenauer, who's running against Republican Rod Blum. This is a pretty important seat. If we lose here, there's likely no wave. ANY taking back of the House goes through IA-01. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Reddy said: I often find myself wanting to post something midterms-related and don't feel it fits either in the Dem thread or the Trump thread sooooo here's a place to talk everything midterm elections. Will there be a wave? Are Dems blowing it? Will they take the House? We can hash it all out in here. Personally, I'm doing my part in IA-01 organizing for Abby Finkenauer, who's running against Republican Rod Blum. This is a pretty important seat. If we lose here, there's likely no wave. ANY taking back of the House goes through IA-01. Thanks for kicking off this discussion because I think it is big enough that it deserves its own thread. I honestly believe that there will be a wave, but I don’t think Democrats will control both the House of Representatives and the Senate. At the very least they will take one over. I don’t think they are blowing it but they face some competitive races that they may not win. I heard about the California primary with multiple candidates in different districts that might hurt them if they don’t even make the ballot due to the number of people running and the whacky primary rules California has. My district faces a tough race between the incumbent, Peter Roskam, and the Democrat, Sean Casten. Roskam refuses to hold town halls and has voted on the tax cuts and Trump’s failed healthcare bill. He sides with Trump on a lot of issues as well, which is really firing up progressives. In Downers Grove, it’s a republican district that may support him, but Casten just needs enough democrats and independents to turn out, and have some moderate republicans vote for him to unseat Roskam. That’s what I’m hoping for at least. Why is the IA-01 race so huge? I don’t know much about it but want to know more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 3, 2018 Author Share Posted June 3, 2018 Thanks for kicking off this discussion because I think it is big enough that it deserves its own thread. I honestly believe that there will be a wave, but I don’t think Democrats will control both the House of Representatives and the Senate. At the very least they will take one over. I don’t think they are blowing it but they face some competitive races that they may not win. I heard about the California primary with multiple candidates in different districts that might hurt them if they don’t even make the ballot due to the number of people running and the whacky primary rules California has. My district faces a tough race between the incumbent, Peter Roskam, and the Democrat, Sean Casten. Roskam refuses to hold town halls and has voted on the tax cuts and Trump’s failed healthcare bill. He sides with Trump on a lot of issues as well, which is really firing up progressives. In Downers Grove, it’s a republican district that may support him, but Casten just needs enough democrats and independents to turn out, and have some moderate republicans vote for him to unseat Roskam. That’s what I’m hoping for at least. Why is the IA-01 race so huge? I don’t know much about it but want to know more. IA-01 is a D +1 district that voted heavily for Obama and then heavily shifted to Trump in '16 and has a Republican rep. The thought is, if we can't win here, there's literally no chance we win in redder districts, so it's a bit of a bellwether. Also, Blum is a pretty weak candidate and Abby's pretty strong - her fundraising has nearly matched his thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 Finkenauer might be able to win IA-1 without a wave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 I'd say the Dems take the house by a small majority. 2-5 seats. They'll stay in the Minority in the Senate with it going from 52-48 to 53-47. For me personally, never donated to a campaign before. Did this time for Lauren Underwood in IL-14. May continue donating this Summer too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 Donnelly is really vulnerable in Indiana. He gets so much heat from both wings as a relative moderate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 3, 2018 Share Posted June 3, 2018 Nothing says the world's greatest democracy like 36% voter turnout for midterms. The objective shouldn't be campaigning, it should convincing people to get off their lazy asses and vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 Election Day should be a national holiday. It’s said every once in awhile. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 3 hours ago, LittleHurt05 said: Nothing says the world's greatest democracy like 36% voter turnout for midterms. The objective shouldn't be campaigning, it should convincing people to get off their lazy asses and vote. I wonder what age group and type of voter is mostly to blame for not showing up for midterm elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 On 6/3/2018 at 5:39 PM, LittleHurt05 said: Nothing says the world's greatest democracy like 36% voter turnout for midterms. The objective shouldn't be campaigning, it should convincing people to get off their lazy asses and vote. Not for the people trying to win their races. Would you rather spend resources on people who never vote or people who always vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 The primaries on Tuesday should assuage anyone's fears that the blue wave is collapsing. Record primary turnout in IA, establishment Dems cruising, and Dem vote share in CA was waaaay up for a primary. R enthusiasm is still low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 According to Chris Wilson at WPI Intelligence, Republican primary turnout was up 43 percent or more over 2014 in states like Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia. The president’s popularity has been rising overall but especially in these critical battleground states. In West Virginia, his approval rating was over 60 percent in 2017. That sounds more like a red wave than a blue one, especially for imperiled senators like Joe Manchin in West Virginia and Claire McCaskill in Missouri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 2014 isn't a good barometer for Ohio with no senate primaries and an incumbent governor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 9 hours ago, Reddy said: Not for the people trying to win their races. Would you rather spend resources on people who never vote or people who always vote? 90% of the people who always vote strictly vote on party, so you don't need to campaign for them anyway. It's either convincing the 10% who do vote that are undecided or getting the non-voters off their asses. If you do that, you are all but guaranteed for their vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 20 minutes ago, LittleHurt05 said: 90% of the people who always vote strictly vote on party, so you don't need to campaign for them anyway. It's either convincing the 10% who do vote that are undecided or getting the non-voters off their asses. If you do that, you are all but guaranteed for their vote. Is it really that high for people to vote straight party ticket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 23 minutes ago, LittleHurt05 said: 90% of the people who always vote strictly vote on party, so you don't need to campaign for them anyway. It's either convincing the 10% who do vote that are undecided or getting the non-voters off their asses. If you do that, you are all but guaranteed for their vote. It should be more than the usual 10% this year...because Trump isn't going to be the only issue in play in the House and Senate races, and the electorate has become more and more polarized, with perhaps as much as 35-40% identifying as centrist/moderate/independent. The fascinating part will be watching which races are successfully nationalized (on the Dem side), which ones are successfully dialed down to mostly local/regional issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 11, 2018 Author Share Posted June 11, 2018 Is it really that high for people to vote straight party ticket? No. If it were true you wouldn't have Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, Joe Donnelly, Steve Bullock, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. I could go on. I could probably list a hundred names of Democrats elected in red states or vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 On 6/10/2018 at 7:33 PM, ptatc said: Is it really that high for people to vote straight party ticket? I don't have confirmed stats to back that up, but I think recent elections show it. In the last 20 years, each presidential election has been relatively close, a few percent difference, way less than some past routs we saw. Bi partisanism is gone and only a small percentage of people affect every election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 12, 2018 Author Share Posted June 12, 2018 I don't have confirmed stats to back that up, but I think recent elections show it. In the last 20 years, each presidential election has been relatively close, a few percent difference, way less than some past routs we saw. Bi partisanism is gone and only a small percentage of people affect every election. Re-read the post I made JUST above yours. Split ballots are still common in most states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, LittleHurt05 said: I don't have confirmed stats to back that up, but I think recent elections show it. In the last 20 years, each presidential election has been relatively close, a few percent difference, way less than some past routs we saw. Bi partisanism is gone and only a small percentage of people affect every election. Is split-ticket voting officially dead? By Amber Phillips November 17, 2016 Going into the 2016 election, Senate Republicans' hopes to keep their tenuous majority were pinned on persuading voters to do something they're less and less inclined to do at the ballot box: Split their ticket by voting for the Democrat for president, Republican for Senate. Turns out, Senate Republicans didn't need split-ticket voters to keep the Senate. Quite the opposite, actually: The 2016 election saw the highest percentage of STRAIGHT-ticket voters in more than a century — literally 100 percent of states holding Senate elections voted for the same party for Senate as for president. And Republicans kept control of the Senate and won the presidency. As a team of nonpartisan political analysts under professor Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia pointed out Thursday, we haven't seen partisan numbers like this since the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, allowing senators to be elected by popular vote (as opposed to being elected by state legislatures). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/is-split-ticket-voting-officially-dead/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5d62fd7ecbbf Edited June 12, 2018 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going into the 2016 election, Senate Republicans' hopes to keep their tenuous majority were pinned on persuading voters to do something they're less and less inclined to do at the ballot box: Split their ticket by voting for the Democrat for president, Republican for Senate. Turns out, Senate Republicans didn't need split-ticket voters to keep the Senate. Quite the opposite, actually: The 2016 election saw the highest percentage of STRAIGHT-ticket voters in more than a century — literally 100 percent of states holding Senate elections voted for the same party for Senate as for president. And Republicans kept control of the Senate and won the presidency. As a team of nonpartisan political analysts under professor Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia pointed out Thursday, we haven't seen partisan numbers like this since the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, allowing senators to be elected by popular vote (as opposed to being elected by state legislatures). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/is-split-ticket-voting-officially-dead/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5d62fd7ecbbf
Brian Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 Hope I'm wrong but I just don't have confidence that Dems will show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 12, 2018 Author Share Posted June 12, 2018 Hope I'm wrong but I just don't have confidence that Dems will show up. 1) All the data thus far shows a significantly higher turnout and enthusiasm among Dems, from specials to primaries. It's been consistent. 2) SHOW UP! And make sure your friends do, too. Talk about it. Be the wave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 12, 2018 Author Share Posted June 12, 2018 Is split-ticket voting officially dead? By Amber Phillips November 17, 2016 Going into the 2016 election, Senate Republicans' hopes to keep their tenuous majority were pinned on persuading voters to do something they're less and less inclined to do at the ballot box: Split their ticket by voting for the Democrat for president, Republican for Senate. Turns out, Senate Republicans didn't need split-ticket voters to keep the Senate. Quite the opposite, actually: The 2016 election saw the highest percentage of STRAIGHT-ticket voters in more than a century — literally 100 percent of states holding Senate elections voted for the same party for Senate as for president. And Republicans kept control of the Senate and won the presidency. As a team of nonpartisan political analysts under professor Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia pointed out Thursday, we haven't seen partisan numbers like this since the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, allowing senators to be elected by popular vote (as opposed to being elected by state legislatures). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/is-split-ticket-voting-officially-dead/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5d62fd7ecbbf I've heard that one election makes a trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going into the 2016 election, Senate Republicans' hopes to keep their tenuous majority were pinned on persuading voters to do something they're less and less inclined to do at the ballot box: Split their ticket by voting for the Democrat for president, Republican for Senate. Turns out, Senate Republicans didn't need split-ticket voters to keep the Senate. Quite the opposite, actually: The 2016 election saw the highest percentage of STRAIGHT-ticket voters in more than a century — literally 100 percent of states holding Senate elections voted for the same party for Senate as for president. And Republicans kept control of the Senate and won the presidency. As a team of nonpartisan political analysts under professor Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia pointed out Thursday, we haven't seen partisan numbers like this since the 17th Amendment was ratified in 1913, allowing senators to be elected by popular vote (as opposed to being elected by state legislatures). https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/17/is-split-ticket-voting-officially-dead/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5d62fd7ecbbf
caulfield12 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2018_generic_congressional_vote-6185.html Generic advantage back up to 7.6% from 3.8% That said, who knows how the spin about North Korea, tariffs/trade and USA vs. Canada/Europe/Mexico/China works out...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 12, 2018 Author Share Posted June 12, 2018 The bottom didn't drop out for D's in 2010 until September. Worth keeping in mind. Most people aren't thinking about the elections yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts