Part of the reason no Democrat can beat Marjorie Taylor Greene in #GA14 is that anti-January 6th rhetoric unfortunately doesn't work in a seat where half of the voters were at the insurrection themselves.
I wish I could recall where I got this from, but I don't remember if this is one of those things I made up with @Thorongil16 on one of our zooms or if I saw it late one night while scrolling my feed.
for what it's worth I actually think that Marjorie Taylor Greene will end up performing above average relative to expectations *after controlling for fundraising* in this cycle. On a related note, I really need to remember to clip fundraising for our House WAR model this year.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The topline of R+3 is reasonable for the new NYT generic ballot poll and should be averaged. But I really wish reporters understood margins of error and stopped overextrapolating on how "independent women are swinging 30 points Republican" when there are ~100 voters in the sample
This poll has very strong, robust methodology. It does the poll a serious and significant disservice to go overanalyzing very small subsamples for swings. It is also completely ridiculous to dismiss the poll or not look at the RV numbers as well (R+1) -- everything is useful.
Do *not* dismiss that poll. R+3 is a very plausible result. But secondly, and more importantly, the poll corrects for a whole ton of 2020 issues, is very transparent about how data is collected, and has sound methodology. Don't dismiss results just because you don't like them.
We haven't seen any public #PASen polls conducted in October yet. It's very, very possible that Oz has closed the gap substantially by now, but we simply have no public data indicating anything one way or another here for now. The dearth of polling is genuinely quite frustrating.
I can absolutely see this race moving back to tossup if we get evidence of it (and we might soon), but until then, we're keeping it at Lean D simply because there's nothing to suggest Oz has climbed out of the low 40s or reversed his horrid favorables...
So, if the generic ballot is D+1, as 538 suggests it is, then PA would ordinarily have a ~R+2 federal lean. But then the question is, do you think the candidate delta between Fetterman/Oz is > 2 points? At the moment, I think you can construct a clear case for "yes".
Just pointing out that a rating of "Likely R" or "Likely D" means that unless things get exceptionally weird, the favored party is very, very likely to win...but that the path exists for an unexpected outcome. This is materially different from a tossup or even Lean R/D.
Nobody in their right mind would say Kristi Noem is anything short of a heavy favorite, but senior SD folks have tried very hard to find anything better for her and can't. The Noem campaign simply doesn't have much better polls than the 45/42 ones that have surfaced.
Ask yourself: when was the last time you saw a campaign spokesperson go on a 9 tweet rant blasting the state's flagship university system for an unreleased poll's outcome? It would have been much easier to just release a good internal and nerf that speculation right there.
We're going to be moving the Ryan/Vance matchup in #OHSen to Leans Republican soon at @SplitTicket_. I want to be clear: we think Vance is a clear and obvious favorite to win here. It's just that we think Lean R is a better reflection of the state of play than Likely R is.
@SplitTicket_ Polls in Ohio are not good. This is not a secret. Everybody knows this. But if this was *any normal state*, we would have had the race at tossup. Ryan continues to pull leads in public polling well into late September, even when DeWine leads by 20+. That's not a Likely R race IMO
@SplitTicket_ The fact that it's Ohio, where polling misses and fundamentals strongly indicate a Republican win, mean that it's at Lean R (and a very strong Lean R, at that). But Vance is likely to underrun Trump by a decent bit if things continue at this rate.
For all the missteps Katie Hobbs' campaign has made, the handwringing here is a *bit* odd. She's polling at a dead heat in a neutral year. This just looks extremely unimpressive compared to Mark Kelly (the strongest Arizona Dem) against Masters (the worst Arizona Republican).
I'm not personally a fan of Katie Hobbs' campaign because I think they've made a series of entirely avoidable missteps, not defined the candidate well, and allowed Lake to define herself more effectively than you'd like, which I think is a mistake against a former TV anchor.
But it's useful to note that for all of her missteps, this race is still roughly where fundamentals indicate, even if that comes from two flawed candidates cancelling out. Maybe Kirkpatrick or someone puts this away by now, but this isn't a Stacey Abrams-level underperformance.
Republicans aren't going to abandon Herschel Walker because they have no other options. They need 2 of GA/NV/PA to flip the Senate, but Oz is still polling at -5 in PA, is stuck in the low 40s, and has horrific favorables. Giving up GA means the path to a majority gets too thin.
His "impressive fundraising day" is $100K less than Warnock's daily average. That's simply smoke and mirrors from the GOP trying to convince everyone that the scandal wasn't That Bad, because it could further diminish enthusiasm among voters for Walker.
It's way too early to check the impact of the scandal on Walker. The Fox Warnock +3 poll was taken before the scandal even had time to register. The Survey USA Warnock +12 poll was taken mostly before the scandal. Wait for a week and check it. Akin didn't tank right away.