Tomorrow is Election Day…
…and I have no hesitation in saying I’m nervous.
I also freely admit I have no idea what will happen, particularly in terms of the House. And it’s not just me; no one knows. Some prognosticators will be right in their predictions and some wrong, but that will probably be due far more to luck more than to knowledge.
But I’m not quite as critical of pollsters as a lot of people are. Elections are getting more and more difficult to predict. Telephone polling, which has been the usual way to do it for the least umpteen years, has become almost impossible to perform correctly because so many people either have blocks on their phones or simply won’t answer unless they know the source of the call and it’s a trusted friend, relative, or business. So how can a pollster get a representative sample of the electorate?
In addition, enthusiasm is such a huge driver of turnout that relying on samples that use a similar turnout model to the most recent election is probably going to be a flawed method. That’s not pollsters’ fault; it’s just inherently difficult and I believe has become more so.
What’s more, the House races are usually going to be harder to predict than a presidential race or even the Senate. That’s because every single seat in the House is up for grabs every two years. That’s 435 races, folks, and although the majority of them are not what you’d call “competitive”—instead, they’re in districts in which the outcome is pretty much a foregone conclusion—enough of them are in doubt that the polling challenge is formidable. Most districts don’t have neat little borders like states do, the population involved is ordinarily smaller, and there are so many districts needing to be surveryed that it would be quite expensive to keep polls up-to-date. Since viewpoints often change close to election time, the information is not usually so current except in a few very hotly covered races.
So we have even people like Nate Silver hedging their bets:
“So in the House we have Democrats with about a 4 in 5 chance of winning,” Silver told ABC’s “This Week.”
However, he noted that “polls aren’t always right.”
“The range of outcomes in the House is really wide,” he explained. “Our range, which covers 80 percent of outcomes goes from, on the low end, about 15 Democratic pickups, all the way to low to mid 50s, 52 or 53.”
“Most of those are under 23, which is how many seats they would need to win to take the House,” he said.”
“But no one should be surprised if they only win 19 seats and no one should be surprised if they win 51 seats,” Silver added. “Those are both extremely possible, based on how accurate polls are in the real world.”
If Nate isn’t careful, he might just talk himself out of a job.
Looking at 2016, a year in which most people claim the pollsters got it very wrong, I noted just a few weeks after that election that the polls were pretty spot on for the national popular vote. In fact, since I wrote that piece, more votes came in that proved the polls to have been even more spot on than was evident at the time of the post: the final results in the popular vote was that Hillary was two percentage points up, and that’s about what most of the pre-election polls had predicted.
But of course, in a presidential election the nationwide popular vote doesn’t matter, except in some people’s minds. What matters is the Electoral College, and that’s done on a state-by-state basis. That’s where the 2016 polls fell down, but only because many of the states that ended up going to Donald Trump, against pollsters’ predictions, did so by very small margins. That means they were extremely hard to have predicted. And they pretty much all went in the same direction—to Trump.
That’s what often happens in an election. There are trends. One trend is that the bulk of the close races will go to one party or another. This may occur this year in Congress, and is actually pretty well nigh impossible to predict.
I’m not extremely optimistic about the house. Part of me hopes the democrats win by an insignificant margin – enough so the republicans can obstruct, and the democrats kill much of their base’s enthusiasm for 2020 by failing to govern.
two dynamics oppose each other in this election. democratic enthusiasm vs electoral republican bias. our federal system favors republicans as 18% of voters control 52 senate seats while 82% control only 48 senate seats. clinton got 3 million more votes then trump but carried only 20 states to trumps thirty. as long as good government democrats put up with this we will be ok. if they stop acting like punching bags and demand majority rule watch out!
Horse Races!
wammo,
The last time the democrats violently disputed us Republicans it because we wanted to free their slaves. How did that work out for the d’s?
No matter how it goes I see conflict ahead. The greater the victory (for either side) the sharper the conflict. Best outcome is a small but clear republican majority in the House with an increased republican majority in the Senate.
Rasmussen, which has been reasonably accurate, has the “generic” congressional race R+1 today. However, the “generic” race isn’t how we elect the House, so nobody really knows. I hope for Geoffrey Britain’s best outcome: small House R majority, increased R majority in the Senate. I think we’ll get the latter, so at least we’ll get continued progress making the federal judiciary less radical.
GB‘s comment is in line with my tentative prediction. I think the Kavanaugh fiasco and the invaders caravan have motivated R voters to turn out. Plus, it’s the economy stupid.
And, yeah, if Nate Silver thinks a Dem gain of 19 House seats and a Dem gain of 51 seats are both possible, he has no idea what’s going to happen. It would be a hoot to have it be 22 seats, just short of a majority. The wailing and gnashing of teeth would be something to behold. On the other hand, riots would not be out of the picture.
Kate,
We’ve already seen a democrat ‘activist’ try to murder a number of GOP reps. If control is that close Antifa- and its supporters like wammo above – will be in a killing rage.
My biggest worry is over the fraud that had not been fixed out ferreted out. This needs to be focused on and fixed before the NEXT election. Laser beam focus
In close races, the left has an instinctive ability to find uncounted ballot boxes in the trunk of a 1989 Buick or divining dangling chads in selective counties for a recount. Odds are any gop candidate who does not win by 3-4 percent will find his/her election overturned within a few days or weeks. Think Norm Coleman.
parker, yes indeed. That’s why we really ought to require paper votes cast AT the polling place ON Election Day, to be counted IMMEDIATELY upon the close of voting AT the polling place — twice, by two separate teams of judges, each team to have 1 Trunk, 1 Jackass, and 1 Independent.
Only ballots submitted by the voter his or her own self.
Nothing brought in from outside the actual polling room.
And no one votes without a voter I.D. No substitutes, no student ID, no Driver’s License, no SS card.
I’d like to see a letter of authorization signed in ichor by the Great Frog its/his/her -self, but alas, he’s planning on being at McMurdo that day, it being spring down there.
Although I still think there has to be some way to let the troops and at least some other Gov Officials vote. At least the Pres and VP. (In this case, anyway.)
GOP holds the House. Massive win in the Senate. James wins MI. Hugin wins NJ. Scott wins FL. McSally wins AZ. GOP wins MO, IN and WV. Deb Fisher beats my Creighton classmate by 30 points. My high school classmate loses the Governor’s race by a similar margin.
News readers on CNN and MSNBC breakdown on air. Justice Brett Kavanaugh has dunked all over the Dems.
The Republic is saved. Cornhead has spoken!
You forgot, cornhead. Rauner retains Illinois. Kavanaugh judges Mike Madigan is a minion of Cthulhu, orders him deported to R’lyeh.
ThousMillions cheer!Julie,
You need to cross the Big Muddy and abandon ILL. There is no there there. We in Iowa need your votes to remain ‘red’. It is time to draw battle lines. Bridges shall be destroyed, roads blockaded, and sooner or latter, but probably sooner, it will be time to hoist the black flag and exercise unintended consequences. I am old but not helpless, or lacking skills.
Roger Simon linked Rasmussen’s recent poll, and I thought this paragraph was interesting, in light of the way that Trump’s voters in 2016 also didn’t advertise too loudly.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/october_2018/is_another_silent_red_wave_coming
“Friday, November 02, 2018
Just as in 2016, Democrats are more outspoken about how they’re going to vote in the upcoming elections than Republicans and unaffiliated voters are.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 60% of Likely Democratic Voters say they are more likely to let others know how they intend to vote this year compared to previous congressional elections. This compares to 49% of Republicans and 40% of voters not affiliated with either major political party. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
In August 2016, 52% of Democrats were more likely to let others know how they intended to vote in the upcoming presidential election, compared to 46% of Republicans and 34% of unaffiliated voters. Some analysts before and after Donald Trump’s upset victory suggested that most pollsters missed his hidden support among voters fearful of criticism who were unwilling to say where they stood.”
Gee, I wonder why people didn’t want to let it be known they intended to (or did, if they decided in the booth) vote for Trump?
parker, there is much in what you say. Still, I can’t abandon the only sensible person I know of in this state, at least not till after the polls close tomorrow.
On the other hand, if Illinois is irretrievably lost, we can still hope to help hold up Iowa. Nice country there, and I’m sure you folks are too sensible to fall to the black spell of Pool, especially right there on the river, in River City, but the ways of Dems are dark indeed. Yes, we’ll hope to see Rauner out of the woods, and then I’ll see about bringing my True Blue heart over there. (Blue happens to be the color of Right-thinking persons everywhere, even if the Dims did snitch it to cover their emptiness.)
Where would I go? Cedar Rapids? Des Moines? Ames? Maybe Council Bluffs. Beautiful along the Other River there, and at a pinch I could always decamp and go live with cornhead across the river. (This on the grounds of a deduction I made, possibly by taking a button and sewing a vest on it, as Perry Mason’s legal opponents used to do.)
By the way, thanks for prompting me to visit the cyberstacks (though I spend altogether too much time there as it is): I learned that there really is a Big Muddy River in Ill. But it’s in the southern part of the state, so I’d have to hike a ways to get there. No, it would be easier to cross the Mississippi at Savanna, say. Or maybe I could go up to Dubuque? I need to be near a totally top-notch Apple guy (or gal) to strip my machines to the bone, give them a complete tear-down and overhaul, and reload the best version of Mac OS X, namely 10.6.8.
Otherwise if you live on a nice farm with some woods and a brook for the cattle, and fields of corn (for food!) and beans, where it rains and snows a lot, that would suit me fine. (I’m a farm girl by upbringing, can you tell?) I promise not to make too much noise, except when I play the piano (mostly classical), but I do hope my pet bull elephant will be welcome. You might think he looks familiar–his brother is the head of the Pachyderm Patrol.
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F7C48N7vnw
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a1zby_UcFo
thanks to gerrymandering and constitutional structural problems dating back to 1788 democrats will need 60% of votes to get control of house. democrats are starting to talk about what they will do if majority of voters are disenfranchised again. they can now see the forrest despite the trees getting in the way.
I agree with everyone who says we just don’t know and have been feeling quite uncertain until today. I feel pretty sure we will see a small Democrat majority in the House – say a gain of under 30. I’d like to be wrong, but I predict that the electorate will send a mixed message to Trump. I think his slightly underwater approval rating is perhaps the best predictor of this result. However what I really want to say is that I see politics as fairly fast moving compared to culture and that the deeper battle is for the culture and that will take many election cycles to resolve. Given that that the POMO, PC, neo- Marxist left thought they were about to seize permanent control it is amazing how much one man has begin to turn that around politically. But on the culture front, Jordan Peterson is by contrast polite, and playing for keeps to help people regain the roots of our country and our civilisation. Watch the latest attempt to take him out and notice how vigilant he has to be and how he takes on the ideology of the left at every turn. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZYQpge1W5s&t=1808s
The left owns the culture and the fight back will be long and difficult. Loss of the House will be a setback, but the consequences for the longer deeper battle are by no means clear. As Neo has pointed out it is also beginning to happen with people like Candice Owens and Blexit. On the face of it we don’t have a chance, but the elites have demonstrated that they are incredibly weak by their incredible and continuing blindness to why Trump was elected. Os Guinness on the Federalist podcast this week lays it out better than anyone I have heard.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/11/02/podcast-americas-division-stems-opposing-views-freedom/ The American republic may be lost in the end, but it is not over yet. Remember Madison designed the likelihood that the House would be lost in by a controversial administration. It gives mobocracy its due, but the rest of the system is designed allow the slower changes to resolve themselves. If we are headed to a French Revolution based socialist utopia the eager beavers will probably have to wait longer. I hope they wait forever.
Wonder which way the “independents” will lean and if they (“they”!) will be the ones to ultimately swing the vote.
Wonder if they’ll be persuaded by the extraordinary insanity of people like Max Boot.
Or if most of them will decide to believe their lying eyes….
(How many of ’em are there, anyway?)
The Dems are not convinced they’ll win the House. I’m basing that on the things I’ve seen about how awful it would be if they won the “House popular vote” but didn’t win the House. Whoever heard of the “House popular vote”?
The Democrats did much of the gerrymandering themselves, concentrating their votes to ensure majorities. Now it works against them. Kind of like the game of Othello.
Pingback:Election Day – Doug Santo
Two years ago, most * of us didn’t vote for Trump – we voted Not-Democrat and the only way to make those Not-Democrat votes count was to vote for Trump. Since then, the Democrats have had a hysterical, incessant two-year tantrum, during which time Republicans have been shot, chased out of public places, and demonized 24/7/365. We’ve watched them try to delegitimize the person we voted for – and the process itself – with the bogus “collusion” witch hunt and with the Kavanaugh incident, they came close to destroying someone who in all probability was innocent, just for political reasons. What part of that would encourage anyone who voted Not-Democrat two years ago to change their mind? And also, what part of that would encourage anyone planning to vote Not-Democrat to tell random strangers who they plan to vote for?
I don’t put any great stock in polling. Midterm turnout is always a big question mark.
We’ll see. I fear for the worst and hope for better.
(* I am projecting. I voted Not-Democrat and wanted my vote to count, and I suspect that many other people who voted for Trump did so for similar reasons. That’s what is especially annoying about the Democrat response. Basically, Trump IS the legacy of Obama’s abuses.)
“…the legacy…”
Absolutely. Obama helped put Trump in the WH—hey, maybe THAT’S the REAL collusion!!)—though heartfelt gratitude should also be shown to Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein…and to Hillary, too.
But it’s not just Obama’s abuses.
He had a whole lotta help, especially from the MSM; which is one of the main reasons (together with its baleful war against Trump these past two years) why the media has lost almost all credibility.
And it’s a real problem (because a healthy society needs a believable media)…but those who’ve turned extremely skeptical of the media are entirely justified.
It’s up to the media to earn back trust. Alas, I’m not holding my breath.
Barry: I don’t think certain media outlets, like CNN, MSNBC, WashPo, or the NYTimes could ever earn my trust back. I really do agree with the assessment of “enemy of the people”. I think the only question is just how over the cliff they are willing to go. If the last two years are any indication, it won’t be long before they are calling for assassinations of Republicans. Their fellow travelers in Hollywood have already tread carelessly close to or crossed that bridge.
Um, in the Kubler-Ross model, which stage of grief is “acceptance”?….
Are we there yet? (Will we ever get “there”?)
To be sure, we’re not really dealing here with stages of grief but of insanity. Raving, acrimonious insanity (which is believed by the faithful to be a superior morality, even patriotism).
So, yes, it would seem that all bets are off.
Chance is a nickname for Providence, and workings of Providence is impossible to gauge by statistics or any other objective method. I do believe in a special Providence which takes care about fools, drunkards and USA. The trend which allowed Trump win 2016 election and which was impossible to predict nicely explained by this special Providence, which makes the man an instrument of this mysterious agent of change. Let us hope it can work its magic once again.