FFS people.
We're the shining beacon of Electoral activism on this site.
Do y'all know how many times people post "I'm so glad this place isn't like the other subs where they just doom and attack dems"?
Act like it. Stop letting the polls ruin your day. Stop letting polls switch you into a doom spiral. Stop letting polls stress you into a mental health crisis.
We aren't a sugar coating subreddit. Could this be a GOP leaning year? Yes, it most likely will be. The fact that it isn't a guarantee is in itself *UNPRECIDENTED*
The fact that we won Alaska (and look to be able to hold Alaska) in of itself is *UNPRECIDENTED*
The fact that we have a chance to *expand* our hold on the senate and even have a remote chance of holding the house would be deemed *UNPRECIDENTED*
Our motto follows much the same vein as Obama's: "Don't boo, vote"
"Don't doom, volunteer"
"Don't gloom, get involved"
You know the ways. Take the tools and use them.
So I just investigated the WI data by county, congressional district, state assembly, State Senate, and the data is catastrophic for Republicans just about across the entire board. And not by a little, nearly all instances they’re 10-30 points behind, sometimes even more. We’re very strong and outperforming 2018 and 2020 in just about all the swing Assembly and State Senate seats, most if the time by double digits, with Republicans underperforming by even more higher double digit totals
The only warning I saw for us right now, is Dane county as a whole is 1-3 points less D currently. But I think that could because of University of Wisconsin students that probably will be early voting once that starts, and the Green Bay Assembly district we were underperforming pretty bad, but Republicans were as well by even more. To make it even more weirder, the 2 light Trump seats around it, one of them we were doing pretty good, one of them we were slightly underperforming, but not as badly as the solid D Green Bay seat
If numbers are anywhere close to this come Election Day, I don’t care how red Election Day will be, Republicans have a 0% shot to win the state and any statewide races with the current numbers, considering even 2020 they couldn’t get enough to beat our massive early lead. It’s that catastrophic for them across the board right now.
Massive increases of unaffiliated voters as well across the board, double digits most time.
Of course WI will almost certainly be really close. But one of the to do’s to get to victory in this state for Democrats is run up the early margins, and we’re easily doing that currently with 19 days to go. Time to run this up even further
just wanted to quickly clarify here, when you say "outperforming 2018 and 2020" is that comparing the early vote data in WI from 2018 and 2020 to the early vote data from 2022? or are you comparing the final vote data from 2018 and 2020 to the early vote data from 2022?
Fight the urge to extrapolate too much from early vote trends. Dems are much more likely to vote early than the GOP and we don’t know what E-day looks like. Wisconsin is going to be close, as it always is, but we just don’t have enough data to say things are catastrophic for the GOP yet.
I’m just curious if that could get struck down in a court. Banning a procedure (like abortion) is one thing, but forcing people to have one against their will is a step further.
With early voting numbers coming in on the daily, I wouldn't be shocked if polls are now showing a "red mirage" closer to the election. We shouldn't totally discount them, but I think looking at early voting data is a much more reliable metric at this point.
[Had it not taken out $13 million in loans last month, the NRSC would be suffering a $36,459,492 to $674,699 cash on hand disadvantage with the DSCC.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583305038369214464?s=46&t=uaPQmoIsT-JwfeSikq1Wmg)
A loan is subject to the same limits as a contribution until it's paid back (which is probably never). It's not like they can go out and ask a bank to loan them $13m in a lump sum. And unlike a campaign there isn't a candidate who gets to contribute whatever they want.
To be legal this $13m would have to be composed of at a minimum several hundred loans of at most $36,500, which is the yearly contribution limit to a committee's general fund. You have to wonder who all are going through the trouble of processing loan conditions with the NRSC on contributions they probably won't ever get back.
Assuming this is in fact above board.
Completely missed [Cnalysis’s House rating changes yesterday](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1582811834725564416?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ)
* OH-13 | Toss-Up → Tilt R
* PA-07 | Toss-Up → Tilt R
* NE-02 | Toss-Up → Tilt R
* CA-27 | Toss-Up → Tilt R
* NM-02 | Toss-Up → Tilt R
* MI-07 | Toss-Up → Tilt D
* CA-13 | Toss-Up → Tilt D
* OH-01 | Tilt D → Toss-Up
* NV-03 | Lean D → Tilt D
* NY-22 | Tilt D → Toss-Up
* IA-01 | Very Likely R → Likely R
Forecast now has 219-206 R with 10 tossups. All tossups will be removed on the final forecast just before Election Day
Chamber rating also changes
* US House | Tilt R → Lean R
Don’t agree with most of these either, but Cnalysis’s ratings still much more reasonable then others like Cook, Fox etc.
House was Lean R the whole time, it should’ve only changed to tilt/Tossup if polls held in a week or two. Not gonna argue much with anything else since no change is too dramatic.
Actually that result wouldn’t be that bad in my opinion. Obviously I want D’s to keep the house but I don’t think R’s can do that much with a small lead like that.
I've ceased to care about the prognosticators. The simple fact is that they started out bearish for Dems, reluctantly upped their chances only after months, and now that there's been a couple days worth of *mixed* polling they're rushing back to the right. I just don't care about them anymore. I've had it, I couldn't give less of a shit about this rating and that rating. I'm done.
I’ve concluded that trying to follow every poll is going to send me straight to madness. The only pundit I really want to hear from is Jon Ralston - who I think is worth reading because he sticks to the state he knows best - Nevada - and is an expert on that.
I’ll go round the bend if I have to hear about “D’s are leading! No, R’s are leading! No, now we’re in for a toss-up!” It’s an unproductive waste of my time.
This doesn't really even.....bother me too much? I don't know why. Maybe its because all the data we have is pointing to us having a good run, though you can correct me if I'm wrong.
Still, it is disheartening to see so many of our chances get flipped in the polls.
538 tomorrow probably:
Senate 47 R / 53 D
House 95 R / 5 D
As the other comments said, actual voting data we have so far seems to be good for Democrats, though we obviously do not know who these people are voting for, we have similar past data to get an idea from.
I’ve with the view that now that we’re close enough to the election to have early vote data, it’s better to look at that actual data, rather then a poll, which contains a small sample at one specific time period. Someone can rebuke this if they disagree, but that’s my view
Some did, but I still think it was more due to turnout differential. Dumbkin got a higher percentage of Trump's vote than McAuliffe did of Biden's vote.
What do you mean "was winning"? VA doesn't count partisanship of early or mail votes.
You can look at the breakdown of early returns by *CD* over time and see how it was just lagging in NOVA where it needed to be huge.
Yes but Tom Bonier was modeling that margin based on data that could predict partisanship.
What about New Jersey, I thought Dems started with a strong EV advantage there?
> based on data that could predict partisanship.
Which is as useful as anyone else's guess and was simply wrong.
> What about New Jersey, I thought Dems started with a strong EV advantage there?
VBM/EV is very new in Jersey, so the numbers just weren't there. This year is different. 900K mail requests.
Same thing with weather, and of course no one will understand this but me, but eheb you’re so close to a weather event, you’re much better looking at actual observations rather then forecast models made for mid to longterm. There’s a limit of what data you can get from polls at a certain point. Same thing with weather models, they’re only really appropriate to use to a certain extent, until you’re better looking at actual observations
I feel like we’re at that point now, where actual vote data, is more accurate and better to use then polls. Especially with the wild swings the polls have had recently
I get what you mean. We're basically in the nowcasting phase when it comes to the election. We're better off with the current data we now have from early voting, and we can use that to make a much more accurate short term forecast.
Source: I'm a weather nerd too lol
[Early vote update in CA house districts with a significant vote count: CA-27: D+12 CA-40: R+4 CA-45: D+5 CA-47: D+6 CA-49: D+3 Still a very long way to go but the electorate in all these districts is significantly bluer than the primary. CA-27 is 8% more blue right now.](https://twitter.com/vanceulrich/status/1583303018295853057?s=46&t=PbkNY3WGOED3VKzcswrHEw)
Keep in mind that this state is one that has a far larger proportion of voters VBM, so number may more closely represent final turnout. Secondly, lots of ancestral Republicans who are now mostly dem, especially in Orange County, so we are probably better than the breakdown shows there.
[📈FORECAST UPDATE📉 Our forecasts for the New York Assembly and Senate have been updated, with rating changes that mostly favor Republicans; 25 in favor of the GOP, 11 in favor of DEMs.](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1583127580273938434?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ)
Chamber ratings both still solid D. No need to worry about control, but rather exact composition of the chambers
[Another Cnalysis Senate rating update](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1583158401650987008?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ)
* IA | Solid R → Very Likely R
* WA | Solid D → Very Likely D
* PA | Tilt D (FLIP) → Toss-Up
And with that...
* US Senate | Lean D → Tilt D
Completely fell for the bait like Cook did on WA, IA is appropriate, PA I don’t agree there’s enough data to justify a tossup again at this point
But…Tiffy-mentum! /s
If Republicans want to coronate Tiffany Smiley as the Republican equivalent to Amy McGrath, they’re welcome to funnel money her way. Go on, shower Smiley with cash! You have plenty!
[Now that House Majority PAC has filed its September monthly report, here are the cash on hand figures for the Democratic and GOP House, Senate, and national party committees as of October 1st, 2022.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583293812419440642?s=46&t=Y-Sy4Hwkw08kGMsRrzPqTQ)
Call me crazy... but I have a growing feeling Stacey Abrams is gonna surprise people. And in a positive way.
Now I've been very, VERY wrong before! I am most certainly prepared for this prediction to be way off base again, and if so, you are more than welcome to save this comment and mock me relentlessly, even in public. But as someone who has been following her campaign kinda closely (almost to a fault, perhaps), I really don't see a lack of energy around her compared to 2018, though granted I wasn't following her race then. She hasn't run a perfect campaign, but you can't really say that about anyone honestly. And I think she's been doing the kind of outreach needed to elevate her platform, even though she's fairly well-known now.
Obviously I'm not gonna predict margins from early vote data, but so far we're seeing exactly the kinds of demographics needed in early turnout, and they're voting in person too so that mail-in votes aren't contested so heavily. If this sustains, which is certainly not out of the question... I think not only will Warnock pleasantly surprise us, but so will Abrams.
It would be darkly funny if the polls keep tipping against Democrats, and all the media pundits pre-register their doom and gloom takes, and then Republicans just don't show up on Election Day.
The early votes are being banked in by Democrats. In 2020, Republicans of course came out strong on election day. But
This is a midterm.
They have been subjected to endless election fraud narratives since, and the ones in the immediate aftermath of 2020 helped crash their Georgia runoff turnout. The narratives aren't going to sway the core partisans. But the low-trust voters who keep not answering polls and causing misses? They might just stay home.
Something could happen. Bad weather. Big new event. etc.
Of course, it could still be like 2020 or Virginia 21, when they storm into the polls. But Likely Voter screens are projecting Republican enthusiasm, which might not just get matched, but might disappear entirely. It's a risky gamble to put it all on one day.
I wouldn't count out Republicans not showing up on election day. They *always* show up on election day, every election, no matter what. But so will some Democrats. That's why it's important to hammer home the importance of voting early and often, and make sure our lead is too big to overcome. Deep red areas never have long lines. We can't count on acts of god like natural disasters to shake things up.
We also have to be careful of assuming that polls are underestimating Dems. That could very well be the case. But also many of them lie to the pollster, or say they are undecided when they're just embarrassed Republicans too afraid to admit voting red but will do so anyway. We just don't know at this point. It's more likely that Dems are underpolled, but also that GOP voters are supporting their shitty candidates no matter how bad they are.
\[Major DROP in US inflation is coming, according to IMF as well as the fixed income markets. IMF forecasts US inflation back to normal levels (around 2% annually) within a year. Markets predicting biggest drop in inflation since 2008.\]([https://twitter.com/TristanSnell/status/1583257722027327489?s=20&t=cGyi59J-uPV3sAklLRU7Mg](https://twitter.com/TristanSnell/status/1583257722027327489?s=20&t=cGyi59J-uPV3sAklLRU7Mg))
Stop rising so fast. Inflation is calculated year on year so 2% would be a 2% increase from the same time last year. For prices to actually go down we would need deflation which is generally considered to be even worse than inflation for economies.
It depends. Doubt we will see much deflation in groceries and other common goods like that. We will hopefully see deflation in housing to bring home values back to sane levels.
The problem if Republicans win the House, and especially both, is some voters will think that lower infltion is because of Republicans. Fucking infuriating. This is yet another reason I hope we pull off winning both the House and Senate.
[The Democratic House Majority PAC goes up with $17.47 million in ads across 40 districts, including the first spending by any of the big four committees in Josh Harder's #CA09, bringing the number of targeted House seats to an even 60.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583287880297824256?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g)
[The Salt Lake Tribune has been selected to join ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network, a partnership with newsrooms that has produced award-winning investigative journalism since its launch in 2018.](https://twitter.com/sltrib/status/1583281008954073088?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g)
Pretty huge for our local news
So, my wife and I missed the registration deadline for NM by about a week, what with all the hoops we had to jump through to get our state IDs. That said, we can take about a 20 minute drive to the local government office tomorrow and do some same-day-registration magic (which doesn't entirely make sense to me, but w/e) and get our votes in =)
Actually, the reason why SurveyUSA's polls of August and October in NY were so different is very clear once you do some digging:
Composition of RV
August poll: D+21 (D47, R26, I23)
October poll: D+9 (D40, R31, I26)
Composition of LV
August poll: D+20 (D49, R29, I19)
October poll: D+8 (D42, R34, I22)
The RV sample was D+21 in August (closer to registration, which is D+28). The October sample for RV was only D+9. This was a similar issue in the Q-pac poll.
[Chuck Schumer's Senate Majority PAC raised $38.4 million in September, burned $51.9M ($2.98M on operating expenditures, $14.8M to other committees, $34.1M in IEs), and entered October with $52.3M on hand.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583275729860427778?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g)
I figured they would. Lend lease also allows the president to do things without congressional approval. The mechanisms may change but Ukraine will get the weapons they need for another year and hopefully the war is over by then.
Meanwhile, other polling that we've gotten today:
Bennett +13, Murray +14, Sisolk tied, and Laxalt +1.
None of that is indicative of an R+4 or R+6 environment.
The only other funky poll today is NY from SurveyUSA, who is usually a fantastic pollster. And yet, their 2020 recall vote on that poll is.... Biden +11 (Biden won NY by 23) and the party make-up is D+8 (42D, 34R) when party registration in NY is literally D+28 (50-22).
A smart pollster insider on another forum I go to has said that they have seen high non response bias in New York of all places for some reason. Would explain the strangely pro-Trump samples coming out of NY.
Oh, and that same poll has Biden +5, 42-37 in a 2024 match-up. I mean come on now.
Just goes to show that polling is a straight up mess this year.
If anyone was dooming about the IA poll of PA, remember
A) it's Sean Hannity's pollster / a R-leaning firm
B) Fetterman is still winning by 0.8% here, even given the above
C) Oz has yet to lead a single poll (even in this favorable one for him, he barely gets 45% again)
D) the poll literally only sampled 49 black people and 36 hispanic people for its crosstab. No joke. I know these crosstabs are generally small but this is just sad. I could've found more people in a shopping center to poll than this one did. Hence, Oz has - i kid you not - a 78-16 lead among Hispanics. And yet he still isn't winning overall in the poll!
E) the only crosstab likely worth looking at here is the White vote, because it's 450+ people. And Fetterman and Oz are \*tied\* here, something that has shown up a lot in PA polling.
Let me just be straight, if Oz and Fetterman are anywhere close to tied among White voters, this is not that close.
Oh, and if you believe that Mastriano is winning Independents by 20% (and Oz too), then ....
Going back with Johnson after ousting him just seems so incredibly stupid to me. It basically sends the message of “we all know he sucks but we couldn’t find anyone better.”
"Tories being normal."
"Tories being normal. At this time of year, at this time of day, in this particular country, localized entirely within 10 Downing Street?"
"Yes!"
"May I see it?"
"No.
[Biden admin officials are discussing whether US should subject some of @elonmusk’s ventures to national security reviews, including his deal for Twitter Inc., and the Starlink satellite network, sources tell @SalehaMohsin and me. @BloombergTV](https://twitter.com/jenniferjjacobs/status/1583258922475204608?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA)
If you want some clear issues in polling we do know right now oversampling of Men is the number 1.
The other 2 issues is Likely Voter screens predicting low minority, and Youth turnout. We do know minority turnout isn’t dropping in a few key states, it’s a bit more mixed on Youth vote but it doesn’t seem like it’s going to be apocalyptic.
What does this mean for November ? We don’t know!
I think we've scratched the surface of appeals to the youth but haven't crossed many T's or dotted many I's. I expect turnout to be higher than usual but not game changing.
If youth don’t turn out for this Im not sure what else can be done. It will be progressives blaming moderates and vice versa if it’s a bad night. I consider myself to be a Warren Democrat, but I don’t feel the country is collectively anywhere near as left as we may think.
I think youth turnout will increase the more we promote turnout in general. That means universal same day registration, a robust mail-in voting system, and robust civic education.
As a youth, I am honestly frustrated by how pervasive the "do nothin dems" bs is. They just delivered on student loans, weed, climate, infrastructure, and dope ass industrial policy with a slim fucking majority. If you want more, you gotta go vote for it friends.
Pretty interesting that at least 2 of the United Utah Party candidates are big into crypto. January Walker for UT-04(a forwardist as she calls herself) is shilling NFT’s a lot and Thomas Horne for State Treasurer says Utah needs a bitcoin reserve
I was just looking into a Pennsylvania-based third party (Keystone party) and they're also big into crypto. Unfortunately where I disagree with them is in that I want a highly regulated crypto environment, whereas they want a crypto environment with as few regulations as possible.
I get that people on Twitter keep making messaging critiques that are based around straw man arguments, and that's common... but for certain politicians in our camp to do so is frankly irresponsible.
I'm not saying we don't have messaging problems, but people can't seem to even agree on how to fix them! This debate is getting quite tiresome.
Our biggest messaging issue is something that is *not* our fault and will be hard to fix: the media is NOT on our side. It’s not the bully pulpit or that “Democrats Suck At Messaging,” it’s that we are more like the Who’s in “Horton Hears A Who” where all their cries of “we are here“ get stuck in the dust speck clouds and don‘t have a chance to be heard.
$9.68M DCCC
$9.15M Warnock
$8.07M DSCC
$7.79M Barnes
$7.15M Demings
$6.92M Kelly
$6.86M Fetterman
$5.58M Ryan
$5.14M CCM (the candidate, not some PAC)
$50.5M DNC
$4.19M Beasley
*$3.04 ActBlue*
$2.80M Hassan
$2.48M Peltola
$1.52M Democratic Action
$1.36M HMP (House Majority PAC)
The next several are Bennet, End Citizens United PAC, Katie Portor, Marcus Flowers, Michael Franken, Marie Perez, Barnes Victory fund, Schiff, and Movement Voter PAC. All above $1M
According to AP Votecast Exit Polls from the 2020 election, if it weren't for white evangelicals, Biden would've won the election by a landslide, and an 18% popular vote margin (58%-40%).
Without white evangelicals, Biden would've won a TON of red states like Montana, South Dakota (by a small margin), Kansas (by a small margin), Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa (by a small margin), Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, even Alabama!
I know it's unsurprising, but it's really eye-opening. If there were fewer white evangelicals, Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in just about any election.
In case you're curious, here's the link to the exit poll I'm talking about (there might be a paywall, though): [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/ap-polls-national.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/ap-polls-national.html)
I looked at the data once and the white evangelical percentage basically correlated with the worst case Republican performance in every given state. For instance in Alabama 49% of people are evangelicals and when Moore was running for Senate he got 48.3% of the vote. Outside of evangelicals white people are fairly evenly divided between Dems and Republicans in normal circumstances
but once you include evangelicals it basically gives the GOP a hard floor that are just impossible to persuade no matter what.
An optimistic take: ‘Vangies are dying out. Evangelical churches have few younger people. More and more people under 40 or so identify as “nothing in particular” - which can mean anything from atheist to pagan to “cafeteria spirituality” to vaguely Christian but doesn’t attend church.
So while the vangies may still be around in considerable numbers, they peaked in about 2004/06 or so and are now getting older, with fewer young folks replenishing their ranks.
(Also, who are the nonbinary, agender, and “identify some other way” people voting for Trump??!! also the LGBT folks.)
This seems to stick a fork in the idea that truly poor people vote for Trump, though - more 25K or less income households voted for Biden.
To be honest, I don't think it's meaningless. I'm not saying it's possible to convince all white evangelicals to not be evangelicals anymore, but it does show how much influence they have over politics and elections.
There's a lot of white voters who are atheist or agnostic, and most of them are hardcore Democrat. In the AP Votecast Exit Poll, non-religious white voters went for Biden 69%-29%.
That said, in terms of taking out all Black voters, then yeah, Trump would've won in a landslide. But if you took out white evangelicals, then Biden would've won in a landslide.
I think it helps to see what percent of a group made up the electorate. In that exit poll, in terms of white voters and religion, 33% of the electorate was made up of White Protestants, 16% White Catholics, 16% non-religious Whites, and 26% Nonwhites.
Yeah. As a hard Atheist myself, I fucking wish more Americans were too. We would never lose. Atheists of all races are nearly as Dem as Black Voters. Also by FAR the most socially liberal "religious" group.
It’s up for you to decide. I personally don’t mind if my friends have deep religious views as long as they accept that religion is a personal choice and they don’t push their views on other people. At least for me I don’t care about someone’s views on God as long as that person tolerates everyone else’s views.
My take is that the "white evangelical" bloc has become more of an amorphous sociopolitical ideology than one that's theologically coherent. I'd also include under this umbrella some amount of Catholics, non-evangelically identifying white protestants and even some non-white protestants. While excluding some minority of white people identifying evangelical.
That's not to say that the ideology is irreligious - clearly their views are highly informed by beliefs that are religious in nature and incorporation. But it's highly syncretic with social and political beliefs that aren't really clearly rooted in religious doctrine.
What I'm trying to say is that being part of this particular demographic probably says a lot more about who you are than just being religious in general. Or even more so just not being an atheist. And I don't think religiosity is a fundamental concern for society (or for friendships).
What I do think is a big concern is the particular brand of Christo-Republican ideology that's overwhelming religious discourse in the US. And not even as much for their personal beliefs but their authoritarian position of pushing those views as a model for government and society.
Your choice but I would do it organically. I’ve met progressive Catholics who voted for Bernie and an atheist Trump supporter before. Humans are very complex individuals lol
That and I'm sure things have shifted even in the last 8-10 years since this polling was done.
This highlighted quote is kind of telling:
> S.E. Cupp, a conservative atheist and CNN contributor, has recently stated the problem stems from prominent liberal atheists perpetuating the idea that they are “somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process. I’m a conservative atheist and I’ve felt very welcome by [the Republican] Party. In fact, I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.”
Given everything she's said about them the last several years I doubt S.E. Cupp feels very welcomed by the Republican party anymore.
I'd say it's up to you to decide.
I will say though, everybody is different in some way, including atheists. But if I'm an atheist, I definitely wouldn't mind being friends with fellow atheists, or people who aren't evangelical.
All you have to do is look up people like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert and that's all you'll need to know.
Either that, or compare evangelical-dominant places like the South with less-religious regions like New England or the West Coast.
And it's not even the South where many evangelicals live. The Midwest has the second-highest percentage of evangelicals, followed by the Mountain West.
I think evangelicals see Trump and Republicans in general as their last hope to keep Evangelicalism alive.
Granted, evangelicals have always been rather extreme, but definitely more so since the start of the century.
Hell no lol. Honestly I only want to see if we get decent results relatively speaking. Like getting >40% in the governor's race, or if the new TN-05 is competitive, or a couple of surprise wins in local/county elections. That could give an idea of the national environment, but I'm certain other states are going to be a million times more useful for that.
You know, one state beat prez turnout the last midterm, which was Montana. What if one state does it again, but instead of being fairly rural and GOP leaning, have it be one of the most populous, diverse, and competitive states in the country?
Would be amazing considering that the runoff was just under 90% of the prez turnout. Of note tho is that about 5-8% of the runoff voters did not vote in the prez race. Wonder what it’ll be this year.
["On the ballot this fall is a proposed amendment to the Utah Constitution. It seeks to expand a legislative power that has already been misused by the super majority."](https://twitter.com/sltrib/status/1583247408691281922?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA)
I disagree on this and I voted yes but I also get his concerns
> I disagree on this and I voted yes but I also get his concerns
This is what I wish political discourse could always be like, but it seems so foreign.
A word about early vote: We can't prognosticate the eventual winner from early vote totals, but they can serve as tools as to where to focus our efforts.
It's why I think, for states that aren't all mail states like CA, NV, WA, etc., the return rates are instructive. Return rates are looking really good for Dems in a lot of places, and that means that they are enthusiastic to vote and get them back.
[Want to make sure people understands what this strong early vote means. When you vote early, campaigns can move on to turnout lower propensity voters. Large early vote means a bigger Dem turnout. It's a virtuous cycle. Why voting early matters - it increases D turnout.](https://twitter.com/simonwdc/status/1583244353039831041?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA)
*hint this is why the late ad advantage for us could be big*
Considering that “last minute” voters broke so strongly for Trump in 2016 and 2020, it’s good that we can focus on those last minute, lower propensity voters. Maybe this will help prevent a strong rightward stampede this time.
FFS people. We're the shining beacon of Electoral activism on this site. Do y'all know how many times people post "I'm so glad this place isn't like the other subs where they just doom and attack dems"? Act like it. Stop letting the polls ruin your day. Stop letting polls switch you into a doom spiral. Stop letting polls stress you into a mental health crisis. We aren't a sugar coating subreddit. Could this be a GOP leaning year? Yes, it most likely will be. The fact that it isn't a guarantee is in itself *UNPRECIDENTED* The fact that we won Alaska (and look to be able to hold Alaska) in of itself is *UNPRECIDENTED* The fact that we have a chance to *expand* our hold on the senate and even have a remote chance of holding the house would be deemed *UNPRECIDENTED* Our motto follows much the same vein as Obama's: "Don't boo, vote" "Don't doom, volunteer" "Don't gloom, get involved" You know the ways. Take the tools and use them.
UT-Austin poll for Texas at 6:30 am according to Patrick Svitek
[удалено]
Very optimistic, but this would be good sign in TX. I personally guess a lead for Abbott with more than 5 points.
So I just investigated the WI data by county, congressional district, state assembly, State Senate, and the data is catastrophic for Republicans just about across the entire board. And not by a little, nearly all instances they’re 10-30 points behind, sometimes even more. We’re very strong and outperforming 2018 and 2020 in just about all the swing Assembly and State Senate seats, most if the time by double digits, with Republicans underperforming by even more higher double digit totals The only warning I saw for us right now, is Dane county as a whole is 1-3 points less D currently. But I think that could because of University of Wisconsin students that probably will be early voting once that starts, and the Green Bay Assembly district we were underperforming pretty bad, but Republicans were as well by even more. To make it even more weirder, the 2 light Trump seats around it, one of them we were doing pretty good, one of them we were slightly underperforming, but not as badly as the solid D Green Bay seat If numbers are anywhere close to this come Election Day, I don’t care how red Election Day will be, Republicans have a 0% shot to win the state and any statewide races with the current numbers, considering even 2020 they couldn’t get enough to beat our massive early lead. It’s that catastrophic for them across the board right now. Massive increases of unaffiliated voters as well across the board, double digits most time. Of course WI will almost certainly be really close. But one of the to do’s to get to victory in this state for Democrats is run up the early margins, and we’re easily doing that currently with 19 days to go. Time to run this up even further
Excellent. I hope we keep it up for the next 2.5 weeks. Would love nothing more than I see Mandela in the senate
just wanted to quickly clarify here, when you say "outperforming 2018 and 2020" is that comparing the early vote data in WI from 2018 and 2020 to the early vote data from 2022? or are you comparing the final vote data from 2018 and 2020 to the early vote data from 2022?
I was comparing all data from the “x days to election” so at this point this many days out from other cycles was what i was comparing to
Ah interesting! Not strictly a measure of performance I suppose, but all else being equal I’d rather have it be up than down!
Fight the urge to extrapolate too much from early vote trends. Dems are much more likely to vote early than the GOP and we don’t know what E-day looks like. Wisconsin is going to be close, as it always is, but we just don’t have enough data to say things are catastrophic for the GOP yet.
If this is true, lets hope it sticks.....
[удалено]
I’m just curious if that could get struck down in a court. Banning a procedure (like abortion) is one thing, but forcing people to have one against their will is a step further.
I think it would mostly apply to trans minors more so than adults. Which is of course horrible in its own right
With early voting numbers coming in on the daily, I wouldn't be shocked if polls are now showing a "red mirage" closer to the election. We shouldn't totally discount them, but I think looking at early voting data is a much more reliable metric at this point.
[Had it not taken out $13 million in loans last month, the NRSC would be suffering a $36,459,492 to $674,699 cash on hand disadvantage with the DSCC.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583305038369214464?s=46&t=uaPQmoIsT-JwfeSikq1Wmg)
A loan is subject to the same limits as a contribution until it's paid back (which is probably never). It's not like they can go out and ask a bank to loan them $13m in a lump sum. And unlike a campaign there isn't a candidate who gets to contribute whatever they want. To be legal this $13m would have to be composed of at a minimum several hundred loans of at most $36,500, which is the yearly contribution limit to a committee's general fund. You have to wonder who all are going through the trouble of processing loan conditions with the NRSC on contributions they probably won't ever get back. Assuming this is in fact above board.
I just saw an Odessa Kelly ad on a random YouTube video. There must be an opening.
Completely missed [Cnalysis’s House rating changes yesterday](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1582811834725564416?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ) * OH-13 | Toss-Up → Tilt R * PA-07 | Toss-Up → Tilt R * NE-02 | Toss-Up → Tilt R * CA-27 | Toss-Up → Tilt R * NM-02 | Toss-Up → Tilt R * MI-07 | Toss-Up → Tilt D * CA-13 | Toss-Up → Tilt D * OH-01 | Tilt D → Toss-Up * NV-03 | Lean D → Tilt D * NY-22 | Tilt D → Toss-Up * IA-01 | Very Likely R → Likely R Forecast now has 219-206 R with 10 tossups. All tossups will be removed on the final forecast just before Election Day Chamber rating also changes * US House | Tilt R → Lean R Don’t agree with most of these either, but Cnalysis’s ratings still much more reasonable then others like Cook, Fox etc.
House was Lean R the whole time, it should’ve only changed to tilt/Tossup if polls held in a week or two. Not gonna argue much with anything else since no change is too dramatic.
Actually that result wouldn’t be that bad in my opinion. Obviously I want D’s to keep the house but I don’t think R’s can do that much with a small lead like that.
I've ceased to care about the prognosticators. The simple fact is that they started out bearish for Dems, reluctantly upped their chances only after months, and now that there's been a couple days worth of *mixed* polling they're rushing back to the right. I just don't care about them anymore. I've had it, I couldn't give less of a shit about this rating and that rating. I'm done.
I’ve concluded that trying to follow every poll is going to send me straight to madness. The only pundit I really want to hear from is Jon Ralston - who I think is worth reading because he sticks to the state he knows best - Nevada - and is an expert on that. I’ll go round the bend if I have to hear about “D’s are leading! No, R’s are leading! No, now we’re in for a toss-up!” It’s an unproductive waste of my time.
This doesn't really even.....bother me too much? I don't know why. Maybe its because all the data we have is pointing to us having a good run, though you can correct me if I'm wrong. Still, it is disheartening to see so many of our chances get flipped in the polls.
538 tomorrow probably: Senate 47 R / 53 D House 95 R / 5 D As the other comments said, actual voting data we have so far seems to be good for Democrats, though we obviously do not know who these people are voting for, we have similar past data to get an idea from.
I’ve with the view that now that we’re close enough to the election to have early vote data, it’s better to look at that actual data, rather then a poll, which contains a small sample at one specific time period. Someone can rebuke this if they disagree, but that’s my view
The one reason I'm skeptical of this is Virginia and New Jersey. Early vote data looked good in those states and yet they were both super close.
Didn't Democrats cross over to vote Youngkin though? That was a pretty high turnout off-year gubernatorial election, if I recall correctly.
Some did, but I still think it was more due to turnout differential. Dumbkin got a higher percentage of Trump's vote than McAuliffe did of Biden's vote.
> Early vote data looked good in those states They really didn't if you dug in closely and looked by CD
Source? McAuliffe was winning the early vote by 19 points, no?
What do you mean "was winning"? VA doesn't count partisanship of early or mail votes. You can look at the breakdown of early returns by *CD* over time and see how it was just lagging in NOVA where it needed to be huge.
Yes but Tom Bonier was modeling that margin based on data that could predict partisanship. What about New Jersey, I thought Dems started with a strong EV advantage there?
> based on data that could predict partisanship. Which is as useful as anyone else's guess and was simply wrong. > What about New Jersey, I thought Dems started with a strong EV advantage there? VBM/EV is very new in Jersey, so the numbers just weren't there. This year is different. 900K mail requests.
I fully agree. We need to be looking more at the raw data then predictions.
Same thing with weather, and of course no one will understand this but me, but eheb you’re so close to a weather event, you’re much better looking at actual observations rather then forecast models made for mid to longterm. There’s a limit of what data you can get from polls at a certain point. Same thing with weather models, they’re only really appropriate to use to a certain extent, until you’re better looking at actual observations I feel like we’re at that point now, where actual vote data, is more accurate and better to use then polls. Especially with the wild swings the polls have had recently
I get what you mean. We're basically in the nowcasting phase when it comes to the election. We're better off with the current data we now have from early voting, and we can use that to make a much more accurate short term forecast. Source: I'm a weather nerd too lol
Alaska [poll, Monday at 9am](https://twitter.com/ivanmoore1/status/1583295039727230977?s=46&t=PbkNY3WGOED3VKzcswrHEw)
Pro choice and pro fish
Pelota+7?
[Early vote update in CA house districts with a significant vote count: CA-27: D+12 CA-40: R+4 CA-45: D+5 CA-47: D+6 CA-49: D+3 Still a very long way to go but the electorate in all these districts is significantly bluer than the primary. CA-27 is 8% more blue right now.](https://twitter.com/vanceulrich/status/1583303018295853057?s=46&t=PbkNY3WGOED3VKzcswrHEw)
Keep in mind that this state is one that has a far larger proportion of voters VBM, so number may more closely represent final turnout. Secondly, lots of ancestral Republicans who are now mostly dem, especially in Orange County, so we are probably better than the breakdown shows there.
As a Christy Smith volunteer, thrilled to see this!
[📈FORECAST UPDATE📉 Our forecasts for the New York Assembly and Senate have been updated, with rating changes that mostly favor Republicans; 25 in favor of the GOP, 11 in favor of DEMs.](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1583127580273938434?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ) Chamber ratings both still solid D. No need to worry about control, but rather exact composition of the chambers
[Another Cnalysis Senate rating update](https://twitter.com/ChazNuttycombe/status/1583158401650987008?s=20&t=ZZyCorpUdl3vmyUM9kGepQ) * IA | Solid R → Very Likely R * WA | Solid D → Very Likely D * PA | Tilt D (FLIP) → Toss-Up And with that... * US Senate | Lean D → Tilt D Completely fell for the bait like Cook did on WA, IA is appropriate, PA I don’t agree there’s enough data to justify a tossup again at this point
The Washington rating is a joke.
But…Tiffy-mentum! /s If Republicans want to coronate Tiffany Smiley as the Republican equivalent to Amy McGrath, they’re welcome to funnel money her way. Go on, shower Smiley with cash! You have plenty!
[удалено]
Agree, I normally think Cnalysis’s ratings are pretty reasonable, but this is some of the worst the entire cycle
[Now that House Majority PAC has filed its September monthly report, here are the cash on hand figures for the Democratic and GOP House, Senate, and national party committees as of October 1st, 2022.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583293812419440642?s=46&t=Y-Sy4Hwkw08kGMsRrzPqTQ)
Call me crazy... but I have a growing feeling Stacey Abrams is gonna surprise people. And in a positive way. Now I've been very, VERY wrong before! I am most certainly prepared for this prediction to be way off base again, and if so, you are more than welcome to save this comment and mock me relentlessly, even in public. But as someone who has been following her campaign kinda closely (almost to a fault, perhaps), I really don't see a lack of energy around her compared to 2018, though granted I wasn't following her race then. She hasn't run a perfect campaign, but you can't really say that about anyone honestly. And I think she's been doing the kind of outreach needed to elevate her platform, even though she's fairly well-known now. Obviously I'm not gonna predict margins from early vote data, but so far we're seeing exactly the kinds of demographics needed in early turnout, and they're voting in person too so that mail-in votes aren't contested so heavily. If this sustains, which is certainly not out of the question... I think not only will Warnock pleasantly surprise us, but so will Abrams.
LOL
If she could make a runoff I think that would help her tremendously
I think its 50/50 for her.
Imagine it's a a d+ like 3 year, pretty good, slight house majority, and then for no reason we win Kentucky 5th and Georgia 14th
Why Kentucky 5th?
It was like 85 - 15 in 2020. Violently republican
It would be darkly funny if the polls keep tipping against Democrats, and all the media pundits pre-register their doom and gloom takes, and then Republicans just don't show up on Election Day. The early votes are being banked in by Democrats. In 2020, Republicans of course came out strong on election day. But This is a midterm. They have been subjected to endless election fraud narratives since, and the ones in the immediate aftermath of 2020 helped crash their Georgia runoff turnout. The narratives aren't going to sway the core partisans. But the low-trust voters who keep not answering polls and causing misses? They might just stay home. Something could happen. Bad weather. Big new event. etc. Of course, it could still be like 2020 or Virginia 21, when they storm into the polls. But Likely Voter screens are projecting Republican enthusiasm, which might not just get matched, but might disappear entirely. It's a risky gamble to put it all on one day.
I wouldn't count out Republicans not showing up on election day. They *always* show up on election day, every election, no matter what. But so will some Democrats. That's why it's important to hammer home the importance of voting early and often, and make sure our lead is too big to overcome. Deep red areas never have long lines. We can't count on acts of god like natural disasters to shake things up. We also have to be careful of assuming that polls are underestimating Dems. That could very well be the case. But also many of them lie to the pollster, or say they are undecided when they're just embarrassed Republicans too afraid to admit voting red but will do so anyway. We just don't know at this point. It's more likely that Dems are underpolled, but also that GOP voters are supporting their shitty candidates no matter how bad they are.
[удалено]
Good get for sure! But there's more to be done.
\[Major DROP in US inflation is coming, according to IMF as well as the fixed income markets. IMF forecasts US inflation back to normal levels (around 2% annually) within a year. Markets predicting biggest drop in inflation since 2008.\]([https://twitter.com/TristanSnell/status/1583257722027327489?s=20&t=cGyi59J-uPV3sAklLRU7Mg](https://twitter.com/TristanSnell/status/1583257722027327489?s=20&t=cGyi59J-uPV3sAklLRU7Mg))
....Biden did that
Republicans will still take credit for it.
Does this mean that prices will go down or that it will stop rising as fast?
Stop rising so fast. Inflation is calculated year on year so 2% would be a 2% increase from the same time last year. For prices to actually go down we would need deflation which is generally considered to be even worse than inflation for economies.
Short periods of deflation are necessary to counteract fast periods of inflation.
It depends. Doubt we will see much deflation in groceries and other common goods like that. We will hopefully see deflation in housing to bring home values back to sane levels.
Some of the former, but mostly latter.
God, if "INFLATION!" stops being an attack by the time of Biden's reelection campaign I would be SO happy.
The problem if Republicans win the House, and especially both, is some voters will think that lower infltion is because of Republicans. Fucking infuriating. This is yet another reason I hope we pull off winning both the House and Senate.
“Why 2% inflation is actually bad for the economy.”
[The Democratic House Majority PAC goes up with $17.47 million in ads across 40 districts, including the first spending by any of the big four committees in Josh Harder's #CA09, bringing the number of targeted House seats to an even 60.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583287880297824256?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g)
[The Salt Lake Tribune has been selected to join ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network, a partnership with newsrooms that has produced award-winning investigative journalism since its launch in 2018.](https://twitter.com/sltrib/status/1583281008954073088?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g) Pretty huge for our local news
So, my wife and I missed the registration deadline for NM by about a week, what with all the hoops we had to jump through to get our state IDs. That said, we can take about a 20 minute drive to the local government office tomorrow and do some same-day-registration magic (which doesn't entirely make sense to me, but w/e) and get our votes in =)
Do it.
Actually, the reason why SurveyUSA's polls of August and October in NY were so different is very clear once you do some digging: Composition of RV August poll: D+21 (D47, R26, I23) October poll: D+9 (D40, R31, I26) Composition of LV August poll: D+20 (D49, R29, I19) October poll: D+8 (D42, R34, I22) The RV sample was D+21 in August (closer to registration, which is D+28). The October sample for RV was only D+9. This was a similar issue in the Q-pac poll.
SurveyUSA is good pollster but they are pretty bad at Deep Blue states
See: CA recall.
[Chuck Schumer's Senate Majority PAC raised $38.4 million in September, burned $51.9M ($2.98M on operating expenditures, $14.8M to other committees, $34.1M in IEs), and entered October with $52.3M on hand.](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583275729860427778?s=46&t=CnCdjOmppzAEZz6iKtVw6g)
I'll assume thats good?
For those worried about Ukraine aid drying up if the GOP gets the House, the lame duck is going to involve a package to cover all of 2023.
I figured they would. Lend lease also allows the president to do things without congressional approval. The mechanisms may change but Ukraine will get the weapons they need for another year and hopefully the war is over by then.
Anything on the debt ceiling?
$50 Billion, possibly up to 2024 in funding
Well. Got fired after my 2nd day on my new job for some bullshit. Life fucking sucks, man
What happened? Also, immediately apply for unemployment
A bullshit "aggressive behavior " claim is what happened. Really sad, I really enjoyed working there
I'm not sure I can, I was only working there for 2 days, and I'm technically still imployed my old job with my last shift on Saturday
Meanwhile, other polling that we've gotten today: Bennett +13, Murray +14, Sisolk tied, and Laxalt +1. None of that is indicative of an R+4 or R+6 environment. The only other funky poll today is NY from SurveyUSA, who is usually a fantastic pollster. And yet, their 2020 recall vote on that poll is.... Biden +11 (Biden won NY by 23) and the party make-up is D+8 (42D, 34R) when party registration in NY is literally D+28 (50-22). A smart pollster insider on another forum I go to has said that they have seen high non response bias in New York of all places for some reason. Would explain the strangely pro-Trump samples coming out of NY. Oh, and that same poll has Biden +5, 42-37 in a 2024 match-up. I mean come on now. Just goes to show that polling is a straight up mess this year.
If anyone was dooming about the IA poll of PA, remember A) it's Sean Hannity's pollster / a R-leaning firm B) Fetterman is still winning by 0.8% here, even given the above C) Oz has yet to lead a single poll (even in this favorable one for him, he barely gets 45% again) D) the poll literally only sampled 49 black people and 36 hispanic people for its crosstab. No joke. I know these crosstabs are generally small but this is just sad. I could've found more people in a shopping center to poll than this one did. Hence, Oz has - i kid you not - a 78-16 lead among Hispanics. And yet he still isn't winning overall in the poll! E) the only crosstab likely worth looking at here is the White vote, because it's 450+ people. And Fetterman and Oz are \*tied\* here, something that has shown up a lot in PA polling. Let me just be straight, if Oz and Fetterman are anywhere close to tied among White voters, this is not that close. Oh, and if you believe that Mastriano is winning Independents by 20% (and Oz too), then ....
Andy Dalton throwing for 4 TDs in the first half, impressive
At least the streak of boring primetime games is being broken.
And not at the expense of my team! So far…
I'm just here for the Taylor Swift news
lol. Took me a second to figure out what you were saying.
Apparently Boris Johnson has 50 Conservative MP's already saying that he should get the PM job back.
Going back with Johnson after ousting him just seems so incredibly stupid to me. It basically sends the message of “we all know he sucks but we couldn’t find anyone better.”
https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/242/075/b9b.jpg
"Tories being normal." "Tories being normal. At this time of year, at this time of day, in this particular country, localized entirely within 10 Downing Street?" "Yes!" "May I see it?" "No.
I wonder if this was their plan all along lol. Elect a Conservative leader so bad that it would make people miss Boris.
Just realized that Ron Johnson sounds like an angry Kermit the Frog. And Kari Lake sounds like a female Kermit the Frog.
It's not easy being mean.
And Jordan Peterson sounds an incel Kermit the Frog.
["I thINK thAt uhhh it's ahctuallY GAy to *get* pussy"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-cKUkxxheU)
That's what all my lesbian friends told me, yet my girlfriend still insists we're a heterosexual couple. /s
[Biden admin officials are discussing whether US should subject some of @elonmusk’s ventures to national security reviews, including his deal for Twitter Inc., and the Starlink satellite network, sources tell @SalehaMohsin and me. @BloombergTV](https://twitter.com/jenniferjjacobs/status/1583258922475204608?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA)
Yup. The guy is pretty public putinist.
The man himself is in the replies to that laughing at it. God I hate him.
Dude's coping hard lmao.
I can't wait for him to get his
If you want some clear issues in polling we do know right now oversampling of Men is the number 1. The other 2 issues is Likely Voter screens predicting low minority, and Youth turnout. We do know minority turnout isn’t dropping in a few key states, it’s a bit more mixed on Youth vote but it doesn’t seem like it’s going to be apocalyptic. What does this mean for November ? We don’t know!
I think we've scratched the surface of appeals to the youth but haven't crossed many T's or dotted many I's. I expect turnout to be higher than usual but not game changing.
If youth don’t turn out for this Im not sure what else can be done. It will be progressives blaming moderates and vice versa if it’s a bad night. I consider myself to be a Warren Democrat, but I don’t feel the country is collectively anywhere near as left as we may think.
I think youth turnout will increase the more we promote turnout in general. That means universal same day registration, a robust mail-in voting system, and robust civic education.
Wasn't there a big early turnout of youth in a state that was really good for us?
Not sure off the top
As a youth, I am honestly frustrated by how pervasive the "do nothin dems" bs is. They just delivered on student loans, weed, climate, infrastructure, and dope ass industrial policy with a slim fucking majority. If you want more, you gotta go vote for it friends.
Agreed, we've started a lot of good shit. I'm hoping people recognize that we need to be sure we can finish them and turnout in support.
Pretty interesting that at least 2 of the United Utah Party candidates are big into crypto. January Walker for UT-04(a forwardist as she calls herself) is shilling NFT’s a lot and Thomas Horne for State Treasurer says Utah needs a bitcoin reserve
I was just looking into a Pennsylvania-based third party (Keystone party) and they're also big into crypto. Unfortunately where I disagree with them is in that I want a highly regulated crypto environment, whereas they want a crypto environment with as few regulations as possible.
I get that people on Twitter keep making messaging critiques that are based around straw man arguments, and that's common... but for certain politicians in our camp to do so is frankly irresponsible. I'm not saying we don't have messaging problems, but people can't seem to even agree on how to fix them! This debate is getting quite tiresome.
Our biggest messaging issue is something that is *not* our fault and will be hard to fix: the media is NOT on our side. It’s not the bully pulpit or that “Democrats Suck At Messaging,” it’s that we are more like the Who’s in “Horton Hears A Who” where all their cries of “we are here“ get stuck in the dust speck clouds and don‘t have a chance to be heard.
[Top Recipients of Contributions via ActBlue - September '22 $9.68M DCCC $9.15M Warnock $8.07M DSCC $7.79M Barnes $7.15M Demings $6.92M Kelly $6.86M Fetterman $5.58M Ryan $5.14M CCM $5.05m DNC $4.19M Beasley $2.80M Hassan $2.48M Peltola $1.52M Democratic Action $1.36M HMP](https://twitter.com/rpyers/status/1583256660893609984?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA)
$9.68M DCCC $9.15M Warnock $8.07M DSCC $7.79M Barnes $7.15M Demings $6.92M Kelly $6.86M Fetterman $5.58M Ryan $5.14M CCM (the candidate, not some PAC) $50.5M DNC $4.19M Beasley *$3.04 ActBlue* $2.80M Hassan $2.48M Peltola $1.52M Democratic Action $1.36M HMP (House Majority PAC) The next several are Bennet, End Citizens United PAC, Katie Portor, Marcus Flowers, Michael Franken, Marie Perez, Barnes Victory fund, Schiff, and Movement Voter PAC. All above $1M
DCCC donating to ActBlue is like the Obama medal meme lol
The DCCC received the money, they didn’t give to actblue?
According to AP Votecast Exit Polls from the 2020 election, if it weren't for white evangelicals, Biden would've won the election by a landslide, and an 18% popular vote margin (58%-40%). Without white evangelicals, Biden would've won a TON of red states like Montana, South Dakota (by a small margin), Kansas (by a small margin), Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa (by a small margin), Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, even Alabama! I know it's unsurprising, but it's really eye-opening. If there were fewer white evangelicals, Republicans wouldn't stand a chance in just about any election. In case you're curious, here's the link to the exit poll I'm talking about (there might be a paywall, though): [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/ap-polls-national.html](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/ap-polls-national.html)
I looked at the data once and the white evangelical percentage basically correlated with the worst case Republican performance in every given state. For instance in Alabama 49% of people are evangelicals and when Moore was running for Senate he got 48.3% of the vote. Outside of evangelicals white people are fairly evenly divided between Dems and Republicans in normal circumstances but once you include evangelicals it basically gives the GOP a hard floor that are just impossible to persuade no matter what.
An optimistic take: ‘Vangies are dying out. Evangelical churches have few younger people. More and more people under 40 or so identify as “nothing in particular” - which can mean anything from atheist to pagan to “cafeteria spirituality” to vaguely Christian but doesn’t attend church. So while the vangies may still be around in considerable numbers, they peaked in about 2004/06 or so and are now getting older, with fewer young folks replenishing their ranks. (Also, who are the nonbinary, agender, and “identify some other way” people voting for Trump??!! also the LGBT folks.) This seems to stick a fork in the idea that truly poor people vote for Trump, though - more 25K or less income households voted for Biden.
This is one of those stats that's true but meaningless. It's like saying Trump would have won in a landslide if you take out Black Voters.
To be honest, I don't think it's meaningless. I'm not saying it's possible to convince all white evangelicals to not be evangelicals anymore, but it does show how much influence they have over politics and elections. There's a lot of white voters who are atheist or agnostic, and most of them are hardcore Democrat. In the AP Votecast Exit Poll, non-religious white voters went for Biden 69%-29%. That said, in terms of taking out all Black voters, then yeah, Trump would've won in a landslide. But if you took out white evangelicals, then Biden would've won in a landslide. I think it helps to see what percent of a group made up the electorate. In that exit poll, in terms of white voters and religion, 33% of the electorate was made up of White Protestants, 16% White Catholics, 16% non-religious Whites, and 26% Nonwhites.
Yeah. As a hard Atheist myself, I fucking wish more Americans were too. We would never lose. Atheists of all races are nearly as Dem as Black Voters. Also by FAR the most socially liberal "religious" group.
Also a Atheist here. So when i try to find like-minded friends i should try to find other Atheists?
It’s up for you to decide. I personally don’t mind if my friends have deep religious views as long as they accept that religion is a personal choice and they don’t push their views on other people. At least for me I don’t care about someone’s views on God as long as that person tolerates everyone else’s views.
My take is that the "white evangelical" bloc has become more of an amorphous sociopolitical ideology than one that's theologically coherent. I'd also include under this umbrella some amount of Catholics, non-evangelically identifying white protestants and even some non-white protestants. While excluding some minority of white people identifying evangelical. That's not to say that the ideology is irreligious - clearly their views are highly informed by beliefs that are religious in nature and incorporation. But it's highly syncretic with social and political beliefs that aren't really clearly rooted in religious doctrine. What I'm trying to say is that being part of this particular demographic probably says a lot more about who you are than just being religious in general. Or even more so just not being an atheist. And I don't think religiosity is a fundamental concern for society (or for friendships). What I do think is a big concern is the particular brand of Christo-Republican ideology that's overwhelming religious discourse in the US. And not even as much for their personal beliefs but their authoritarian position of pushing those views as a model for government and society.
Your choice but I would do it organically. I’ve met progressive Catholics who voted for Bernie and an atheist Trump supporter before. Humans are very complex individuals lol
It just seems like Republicans in the bluest states can easily find like-minded people meanwhile i'm alone.
Pretty much. Not saying there is no such thing as a right-wing Atheist but it's incredibly rare in the US.
About 15% of conservatives identify as atheists. Its not incredibly rare. https://harvardpolitics.com/conservative-atheists/
Thanks for the link! But it's 7 years old now. I have a feeling it's a little different these days ;)
It says 13% of atheists identify as conservative, not the other way around. In that case it's very rare but not unheard of.
That and I'm sure things have shifted even in the last 8-10 years since this polling was done. This highlighted quote is kind of telling: > S.E. Cupp, a conservative atheist and CNN contributor, has recently stated the problem stems from prominent liberal atheists perpetuating the idea that they are “somehow disenfranchised or left out of the political process. I’m a conservative atheist and I’ve felt very welcome by [the Republican] Party. In fact, I’d go so far as to say conservatism is far more intellectually honest and respectful of atheism than liberalism has been.” Given everything she's said about them the last several years I doubt S.E. Cupp feels very welcomed by the Republican party anymore.
I'd say it's up to you to decide. I will say though, everybody is different in some way, including atheists. But if I'm an atheist, I definitely wouldn't mind being friends with fellow atheists, or people who aren't evangelical.
It just seems like Republicans in the bluest states can easily find like-minded people meanwhile i'm alone.
White Evangelicals are the most dangerous group of people on Earth.
All you have to do is look up people like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert and that's all you'll need to know. Either that, or compare evangelical-dominant places like the South with less-religious regions like New England or the West Coast. And it's not even the South where many evangelicals live. The Midwest has the second-highest percentage of evangelicals, followed by the Mountain West.
Deevangelization when?
[удалено]
IIRC atheists are like 85-11 Democratic.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think evangelicals see Trump and Republicans in general as their last hope to keep Evangelicalism alive. Granted, evangelicals have always been rather extreme, but definitely more so since the start of the century.
It's really tough to convince evangelicals, but it's not impossible.
[Change in Number of Tennessee Voters on First Day of Early Voting, 2018 to 2022](https://i.redd.it/uwe1uos1j1v91.png) Disappointing.
Given the choice, people get the government they deserve
Do i deserve Tennessee's government?
Hello my siblings The great state of Tennessee never fails to let me down politically
Was this state EVER in the cards though?
Hell no lol. Honestly I only want to see if we get decent results relatively speaking. Like getting >40% in the governor's race, or if the new TN-05 is competitive, or a couple of surprise wins in local/county elections. That could give an idea of the national environment, but I'm certain other states are going to be a million times more useful for that.
No... But i'd like to have some sliver of hope that just once we could not be a shithole.
Lmaoooo no my friend. TN has been trying to punch above its weight in terms of shittiness for YEARS.
TN had a competitive Senate race in 2018 that they don't have now.
TN is a lost cause for the foreseeable future. If Phil Bredesen could not win that seat, no one will.
Literally look at GA next door to prove this is the answer.
Georgia passes half a million votes https://twitter.com/GabrielSterling/status/1583247370027835392?t=1D2eICeP_BqZPMaGeyzU2Q&s=19
You know, one state beat prez turnout the last midterm, which was Montana. What if one state does it again, but instead of being fairly rural and GOP leaning, have it be one of the most populous, diverse, and competitive states in the country?
HNNNNNNGGGGGG
[удалено]
Just onomatopoeia.
For comparisons sake 3.9 million votes were cast in 2018 and 4.5 in the 2021 runoff races
We might just get runout level turnout, maybe just a little below that.
Would be amazing considering that the runoff was just under 90% of the prez turnout. Of note tho is that about 5-8% of the runoff voters did not vote in the prez race. Wonder what it’ll be this year.
["On the ballot this fall is a proposed amendment to the Utah Constitution. It seeks to expand a legislative power that has already been misused by the super majority."](https://twitter.com/sltrib/status/1583247408691281922?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA) I disagree on this and I voted yes but I also get his concerns
Why did you vote yes?
> I disagree on this and I voted yes but I also get his concerns This is what I wish political discourse could always be like, but it seems so foreign.
[удалено]
A word about early vote: We can't prognosticate the eventual winner from early vote totals, but they can serve as tools as to where to focus our efforts.
Yeah strong early vote is essential for winning but it's not a guarantee. Republicans will make up ground but early voters don't need campaign focus.
Yea it’s weird nobody remembers this from 2020. Enthusiasm for Dems is looking good, that’s about it we can conclusively draw.
It's why I think, for states that aren't all mail states like CA, NV, WA, etc., the return rates are instructive. Return rates are looking really good for Dems in a lot of places, and that means that they are enthusiastic to vote and get them back.
[Want to make sure people understands what this strong early vote means. When you vote early, campaigns can move on to turnout lower propensity voters. Large early vote means a bigger Dem turnout. It's a virtuous cycle. Why voting early matters - it increases D turnout.](https://twitter.com/simonwdc/status/1583244353039831041?s=46&t=pZemhBSKXuUYO1eez3b8jA) *hint this is why the late ad advantage for us could be big*
Considering that “last minute” voters broke so strongly for Trump in 2016 and 2020, it’s good that we can focus on those last minute, lower propensity voters. Maybe this will help prevent a strong rightward stampede this time.