PA-1: This is my home district. Fitzpatrick is definitely favored (I have it somewhere between tilt and lean R), but neither side is acting like he is up by 14 points. I think we can hold him to mid single digits. Fitzpatrick is running targeted mailings to democrats which I think might be quite effective.
Force of habit. Suburban Philadelphia used to be THE backbone of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania. Social moderates who are hardline anti tax. Keep in mind that Montgomery County was the ONLY county in PA that didn't vote for Daddy Casey in 1990. Fitzpatrick appeals to these voters for the same reason Larry Hogan appealed to a lot of suburban Marylanders: he's not a fire breathing social conservative.
I agree with James. Beyond that the message he is pushing hard is that he is the most bipartisan member of the house, and has organizations with data that backs it up. Also pushes his environmental bonafides which play well here, and his police support which plays well just about everywhere. Next time I get a flyer, I'll scan it and post it.
Republicans caught a lucky break in IA-01 and IA-03, because yesterday the Iowa Supreme Court upheld the lower court ruling that knocked Libertarian candidates off the ballot there (and in IA-04 which is not competitive).
Cindy Axne won IA-03 in 2018 and 2020 with less than 50% of the vote, thanks to third-party candidates that collectively received between 3-4 percent. In 2022, with no third-party candidate on the ballot, she again received more than 49% of the vote but lost to Zach Nunn.
Nunn now faces Lanon Baccam in IA-03 with no third parties registered. Mariannette Miller-Meeks faces Christina Bohannan in IA-01, also with no third parties on the ballot. Both are considered lean R races.
Not the one you asked but I'm in NY 17 and... I don't know. I think I saw Maloney's loss coming in 22 but we had headwinds against us in the state that are not here right now. Jones isn't the best candidate but I'd rate it as a very decent shot of flipping, by a narrow margin.
Why on earth would Trump go to NY-04? I could understand it if he were holding 3-5 rallies a day like he did in 2016, but he doesn't do that anymore (probably because he doesn't have the self-control to keep his speeches remotely short). It's a waste of his time.
Sure, but why not hop over to eastern Pennsylvania instead? Like Allentown? That would get you the Philly and/or Scranton media markets, as opposed to the NYC media market which contains exactly one PA county (Pike, which cast 32K votes in 2020 and was 59-40 Trump).
Just a guess, but Trump does have a lot of property in New York. Plus, I'm willing to bet he has quite a few wealthy donors and allies there too. So perhaps the rally is more for his donors or it's more convenient because he can meet up with his wealthy donors that live nearby before and after the rally.
Yeah, I don't think there's any deeper analysis required here. He's a dummy who goes where he'll get applause and be worshipped. I'm not sure the electoral implications even occur to him and he clearly doesn't listen to his advisors (who I don't think are necessarily rocket scientists either).
I'm seeing the same result from NY-22 dated July 7-15. Either they repolled two weeks ago and got the same result, put the wrong dates on somehow, or the survey data is two months old.
Though if the poll is really that old, it's encouraging in a sense in that early to mid-July (after the Trump/Biden debate and before the Biden to Harris switch) is generally regarded as the Democratic nadir for 2024, when, we are told, polls showed the bottom dropping out for Dems in competitive races which helped push Biden to step aside. If a Democrat was leading by seven points then they're almost certainly leading now.
Not sure why Trump is rallying in NY but maybe he guesses a weak result for Dems in another election cycle will make him look good? Harris has been posting weak numbers in safe Democratic states. She won't loose Maryland, California, or New York but it won't look good if she underperformed Biden in safe territory.
A three-fold question for the election experts here: What are the chances that Democrats can win majorities in the House-of-Representative delegations for a majority of states? What would that take in this election cycle? Is it totally beyond the realm of possibility?
I ask, of course, because there is a small but non-negligible chance that a contested election will be decided by the House, where each state casts one vote.
.
One more question: In the event of a narrow election victory by Kamala Harris, how do we prevent a few Disloyal Electors (bought or blackmailed) from throwing the election to Trump? Is this a real risk, or are my fears exaggerated?
I am only going to address the faithless electors portion because I believe there's zero chance of a tied EC(I could write a very boring dissertation about this but won't); imo if Harris wins a fair election, there is zero chance that enough faithless electors will change the outcome
I was not thinking of a tied Electoral College vote, but rather one or more states won by Harris failing to certify their election. Thus creating a situation where neither candidate reaches 270.
Why do you believe there is ZERO chance of two, three or four faithless electors changing the outcome?
Note: In the course of 59 elections, 165 electors have not cast their votes for president or vice president as prescribed by the state they represented. Although 71 were instances where the candidate died, 93 were changed by the elector's personal preference. That’s not an insignificant number!
Its a pretty insignificant number given we are talking tens of thousands of electors (I will leave it up to the reader to calculate exactly how many electors have had their votes counted since 1789.
We did have 10 faithless electors have their votes counted in 2016, so its not impossible, but like I said - in many states they just void the votes and in any others taking a bribe would be a federal and importantly a state crime. And those were all protest voters who knew that they had no impact on the outcome.
So basically you would have Democratic party loyalists who would be willing to take money in order to put Trump in the White House with a huge risk of being imprisoned for doing so. That seems really really unlikely.
If even one person did that, it would also almost surely mean the end of the electoral college.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is a way around that and I think a verified case of an elector being bribed would be enough that every remaining Dem trifecta state would pass it.
But even without that I think that the outrage over a candidate trying to bribe an elector would lead to a real national push for a constitutional amendment.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has no red states' support. You're aware that a whole bunch of Republican legislatures would have to vote for a constitutional amendment, unless we want to risk a Constitutional Convention, right?
Agree to disagree; imo those outcomes are way beyond likely as to the point of statistically impossible(I'm a poker player and I would bet my mortgage that if Harris wins Pennsylvania, she wins the election)
From a pure math standpoint: If Harris wins PA, Trump would need to win four of the five remaining swing states not named Nevada or GA+NC+MI+NV. The only three-state combination involving PA & those five remaining swing states not named Nevada that DOESN'T get Harris to 270 is PA+AZ+WI (266 EVs). All four-state combinations that include PA are winners for Harris.
It looks like Nebraska's special legislative session ended a couple of days ago without going to winner takes all (or apparently passing the property tax relief that was the impetus for the session in the first place). So that really significantly reduces the odds of a non-cheating electoral college tie.
Incidentally, if I'm ever elected to Congress, my first proposed legislation would be to bump up the number of House seats by one so we have an odd number of electors and thus cant have an electoral college tie (at least without faithless electors or cheating).
Well, I would like to see you first propose statehood for DC, as well as for Puerto Rico should the people there want it. Four more senators, certainly a few more House representatives – and definitely more electors. (Making an odd-numbered total, if you wish.)
Right now the GOP has 26 majorities, Dems have 22 and there are two ties (I think MN and NC). The GOP will definitely pick up North Carolina due to gerrymandering.
As you will see, there is no chance to get to 26 majorities themselves. The best we could do is deprive the GOP of having 26 majorities.
Right now the best shot for Dems is likely winning two seats in AZ. Currently the GOP has a 6-3 lead, but won two of those seats by less than 2% in an R+2 year in 2022.
After that you really are looking at slim pickings. Dems lost one Iowa seat by 0.7% and another by 6.8% - they would need both to convert the 0-4 GOP delegation to 2-2.
We lost MT-1 by 3.2% and winning that back would convert that state to a 1-1 tie.
We lost WI-3 by 3.7% and WI-1 by 8.9% and we would need both to get to a 4-4 tie.
Those are the only states where the pivotal seats were within 10% in 2022.
We also need to hold close seats in AK, MN, VA, MI, PA, OR, NV, and ME where the delegation is tied or Dems have a majority based on some narrow wins in 2022.
So basically the odds that Dems can deprive the GOP of that majority of state delegation majorities is the odds of winning MT-1 and AZ-1 and AZ-6 (which in my opinion Dems should be THROWING money at specifically to cut off this method of Trump using election chaos to cheat his way to a win.)
If that chaos happened but Dems won those seats then the presidency would fall to the VP until the deadlock in the house was resolved - the Senate votes like normal - one senator one vote. So Dems would need to have 50 seats (which means as I think everyone knows, we hold all of our seats except WV, and maybe MT if we can pick up FL or TX instead).
But its not clear that the VP gets to break that tie (does Harris get to vote for Walz?)
If the Senate is also deadlocked then the acting president is picked per the laws governing presidential succession in general - the speaker of the House would become acting president until one of the other two deadlocks is broken. In this scenario that would almost surely be Hakeem Jeffries (since Dems almost surely take back the House if they win AZ-1, AZ-6, and MT-1).
The electors are picked by the local parties mostly. They are party loyalists. The chances that any of them could be bribed (which would also almost surely be a federal crime) is slim. And many states are allowed to simply replace disloyal electors. So I dont think this s a real risk.
The biggest risk is still - Trump gets enough votes to win the electoral college without any real shenanigans other than current state level efforts to prevent Democrats from voting.
Our electoral system is insane, and Ive been kind of obsessed with gaming out the different ways that candidates could legally throw a wrench in the works.
Great writeup (with echoes of VEEP). I'm very curious if this scenario coems to pass, what would happen to members of Congress who are in cross-party districts. If we win MT-01 by 500 votes but Trump still carries the district, does the new Dem Congressman vote her conscience in a profile in courage (that would instantly end her career) or vote with the district?
Here are my updated crude 31- and 14-day polling averages. I exclude GOP troll polls (Rasmussen, Trafalgar, etc), any polls released by partisan organizations, and some with really sketchy methods such as ActiVote. For the 14-day state averages, the number of polls is in parentheses.
AZ: 31-day T+1.3, 14-day T+1.2 (4)
GA: 31-day T+0.5, 14-day T+1.6 (5)
MI: 31-day H+1.5, 14-day H+2.4 (5)
NV: 31-day H+1.4, 14-day H+0.6 (3)
NC: 31-day T+0.1, 14-day H+0.9 (6)
PA: 31-day H+0.9, 14-day H+1.0 (4)
WI: 31-day H+3.6, 14-day H+2.5 (6)
US: 31-day H+3.1, 14-day H+2.0
This suggests that Harris remains slightly ahead. The most recent national polls look a little worse for Harris, but that's partly a function of which pollsters have released polls in the last 2 weeks. The state polls don't show the same slippage. In any case, over the next couple weeks we'll see whether the debate moves the poll numbers. The first debate moved them away from Biden, although some of the late movement in that case may have been more a function of the coverage of following events and pressure on Biden to drop out.
Do you have Florida as well? Something seems to be happening in Florida!
There’s a lot of anger at DeSantis, even amongst his own, after he wanted to "develop" state parks. Abortion and Marijuana are on the ballot, which should spike turnout of Democrats and democracy-favoring Independents. And Debbie Murcasel-Powell seems to be within reach of taking down Rick Scott...
I haven't been tracking Florida because if it's flipping the presidential election almost certainly isn't in doubt, but just eyeballing it Trump is up 4.2 over the last 31 days and 3.7 over the last 14. Florida was also one of the few states where polling was too favorable to Dems in 2022. In pretty much all the swing states, it was too favorable to the GOP.
Why the hell hasn’t President Biden prioritized nominating new people to the Board, so the USPS can boot DeJoy? I’ve never seen a good reason or an explanation. That man is an ever-present threat to mail-in voting and democracy!
There are two vacancies on the USPS board of governors and one appointee, Anton Hajjar, serving past his term's expiration.
Both vacant seats have a nomination from Biden. One republican nominee and one democratic nominee — this isn't the craziness it sounds like at first, as the USPS board of governors is legally required to have no more than half+1 seats held by a single party.
The democratic nominee for a seat is Marty Walsh, former mayor of Boston and Secretary of Labor. He was nominated in February of this year... still no confirmation vote scheduled as best as I can tell.
For the republican vacant seat, Biden has renominated the former holder, but I don't know the dates for that.
In an alarming letter, the officials said that over the past year, including the just-concluded primary season, mailed ballots that were postmarked on time were received by local election offices days after the deadline to be counted. They also noted that properly addressed election mail was being returned to them as undeliverable, a problem that could automatically send voters to inactive status through no fault of their own, potentially creating chaos when those voters show up to cast a ballot.
The officials also said that repeated outreach to the Postal Service to resolve the issues had failed and that the widespread nature of the problems made it clear these were “not one-off mistakes or a problem with specific facilities. Instead, it demonstrates a pervasive lack of understanding and enforcement of USPS policies among its employees.”
The letter to U.S. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy came from two groups that represent top election administrators in all 50 states. They told DeJoy, “We have not seen improvement or concerted efforts to remediate our concerns.”
“We implore you to take immediate and tangible corrective action to address the ongoing performance issues with USPS election mail service,” they added. "Failure to do so will risk limiting voter participation and trust in the election process."
Democratic U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris leads Republican Donald Trump 47% to 42% in the race to win the Nov. 5 presidential election, increasing her advantage after a debate against the former president that voters largely think she won, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday.
I heard remarks by Mayor Adams that were broadcast on WINS radio. Among other things, he praised the commissioner for New York City's record low number of shootings last month and various other measures of declines in crime that he claimed make New York "the safest big city in the world." The U.S., yes. The world? I can't imagine it's safer than Tokyo and Singapore. But neither these nor his involvement in the investigations of the 1993 World Trade Center and USS Cole bombings that Adams also mentioned have anything to do with his resignation. A record of achievement doesn't justify corruption.
"A state judge struck down North Dakota's ban on abortion Thursday, saying that the state constitution creates a fundamental right to access abortion before a fetus is viable."
— Swing state polls show an incredibly close race in our 7 Toss-up presidential states right now.
— Final polling did generally overstate Democrats in both the 2016 and 2020 elections in these states, with Wisconsin standing out. Keep that in mind as polling shows Kamala Harris holding up a little bit better in the Badger State than elsewhere.
— If polls are understating Donald Trump again, he of course is in a great position to win given how competitive he already is in the core swing states. But there are good reasons to believe that he is not being overstated this time.
Our best guess is that because Trump’s polling position is better than 2016 and 2020, it’s likelier that he’s at least not being as underestimated as much as he was in previous elections, if he is being underestimated at all.
The exact ordering of the states doesn’t have to exactly mirror 2016 and 2020 (we went over how these key states voted relative to one another in a recent Crystal Ball story). Maybe Wisconsin is bluer than Pennsylvania (or even Michigan) in 2024; maybe North Carolina votes to the left of Georgia, as it generally did prior to 2020. But don’t just assume those things are going to happen because polls suggest that they could or should.
You mean MT-Sen, right? Surely, they're not eating MT-Prez lean-R! I'm very doubtful about those figures on the Jewish vote. So many of us are going to vote for a Nazi-adjacent antisemite?
Reagan wasn't or at least didn't appear to be an antisemite, Carter was really helpful to Israel in the Camp David negotiations but took a really hard line against the 1978 invasion of Lebanon and settlements in the West Bank (properly, in my opinion, at least on the settlements, but that's beside the point), and Nixon's antisemitism wasn't known and didn't affect his policies, and though he was dirty, and murderous abroad, he wasn't the kind of extremist Republican we have today nor in the Goldwater wing of the party. I doubt there are enough Jews who will support a fascist in the U.S., but we'll see.
Democrats cannot afford to sleep or be 1 bit complacent in ANY swing state, especially the big 3 (Blue Wall): Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin. Register NEW voters who turn 18 this year or did so after 2020 cycle and turn them out to close the deal, women voters are very critical to permanently ENDING the Trump Show!! 💙🇺🇲🙏🌊
That's why having 5 out of 7 Democratic governors in the 7 swing states is so very important; each Governor controls a political machine that does the nuts and bolts work such as this(and with the Culinary Union in Nevada, it's covered as well); and the Georgia Democratic party has proven its ground bona fides(I'm very confident at this point in the cycle; as long as our side does the necessary blocking and tackling, we should be fine)
It's also equally important that Democrats hold 5/7 of the Secretary of State positions in these states. The alternative could easily have been election deniers and bad actors that either try to cause havoc during election day and the counting and management of the process. On top of that there's already the various attempts to sabotage voters via misinformation with confusing state websites, voter purges and excessively complex, expensive or tedious voter ID laws. It's an easily overlooked position, but the Secretary of State should not be underestimated with their power.
As SOS, it’s like 6 out of 7. NC SOS has no power or official duty on elections. They are vested in the election board, Members being appointed by the governor, 3 from his party and 2 from the other.
Gap looks like it's entirely the difference between NH-01 and NH-02 congressional primaries. The vote count was roughly tied in NH-02, which had a contested primary in both parties. Republicans got ~15k more votes in the NH-01 primary, where incumbent Pappas won renomination on the dem ticket in a cakewalk.
New Hampshire historically has been a Republican state. Just of a more moderate variety who are relatively independent. It also has a lot of real independents who lean Democratic
I'm talking about traditional conservative Republicans in the Bush mold, not conservative Republicans in general.
Tom DeLay was right wing. However, President Bush was conservative on quite a number of issues while being moderate on others. Comprehensive immigration reform efforts during Bush's time were not right wing. President George HW Bush also raised taxes during his time.
Also, regarding the Sununus, they are not right wingers. Per On the Issues, NH Governor Chris Sununu and his brother, former US Senator John Sununu.
Moderate conservatives, certainly including McCain, are still right-wing! Supporting the destruction of the environment is not a conservative value, if you think about it. The Sununus are opposed to abortion rights, aren't they?
Could you provide some background here on the registration numbers? Is that nationally or just in certain states? Like are the voter registration numbers happening in NC and GA? Could use some more context here.
I'm curious about your condescending attitude on this forum lately and also why you feel the need to speak for the group since you barely contribute anything at all except snarky comments on things you dislike. I did not 'conveniently' leave out anything, I post things as they come in. When more info becomes available I then edit or post that too. I do not honestly care what you specifically care about knowing or not as someone else may find the info interesting.
Where are your facts backing up your anecdotal assertion that "most young people register independent these days"?
The fact that most young people register as independent these days is something that has been discussed numerous times on Daily Kos Elections, the predecessor to this site. I see no reason to repeat what has already been said a dozen times.
And, unlike you, I have a long history of commenting on DKE - almost 13 years now. In that time, I contributed 68 diaries and made roughly 16,300 comments. I mentioned this in the open thread here where we introduced ourselves. Next time, reread that before trying to claim that someone else "barely contributes".
These are misleading at best and intentional disinformation at worst. Why do right leaning accounts constantly post voter registration numbers? 2 reasons.
1) It’s some of the only election data that actually shows their side winning, so they latch onto it and spread it everywhere.
2) They never include the unaffiliated/independent information.
Firstly, here’s what the data said in August 2022 in PA.
Democrats were down 230k voters from 2020 and 19k voters in 2022. Republicans were down 84k voters from 2020 and up 36k in 2022.
Sounds terrible for Democrats, right? That is, until you notice 2 things. 1) Independents are growing in 2022 and down the least of any voter registration type. 2) Republican vote share is higher than Republican voter registration.
Registration is always a lagging indicator, not leading, meaning most of these registrations are changing from people who already voted Republican OR they still vote Democratic, but prefer to not be registered as one. Very few suddenly converted from being a Democrat to a Republican and definitely by not enough to sway any election.
So they don’t actually help the GOP and it’s why, despite their loyal base spreading “PA VOTER REGISTRATION SHOWS GOP GAINS” headlines everywhere, it means very little in terms of actual election victories. It’s only used to make their base voters feel like they’re winning despite their very unpopular political agenda.
Lastly, this is what Michael Pruser had to say after being called out on his spin of the VA predictions. I wonder why he was the only one predicting a Youngkin trifecta in 2023, hmmmm.
Pruser: 2023 Virginia Municipal Election Prediction
Winsome, lose some.
🔴Senate Republicans - 20
🔴House Republicans - 51
I don't see what most of my predictive friends on here see when it comes to Virginia. In fact, of those that I follow and the feed Twitter has sent my way, I've not seen anyone (who has followed the election closely) predict a Youngkin trifecta. What am I missing?
Nothing terribly surprising (favorites did win out), but there is absolutely no question that tonight was an excellent night for the Democratic party.
Even though I hit 3/4 projections and missed VA by a single seat (oh, Juan Pablo), I was 3-4 points right of where each result landed. Suburbs continue to disappear for Republicans and the overarching takeaway is that Pennsylvania seems well out of reach for now.
Other: Maybe I’m missing something here, but how exactly did you get your predictions right in 3/4 races and were only off by 1 seat when you predicted Virginia Republicans to win both the State Senate and State House, which they lost both of?
Pruser: Well, I did say Reeves, McCaffery & Beshear would win.
I also said Republicans would win a trifecta in VA and they did not. Traded a Senate seat for a House seat (bad trade).
Other: Not how math works. Your prediction was 20-20 tied Senate + 51-49 R House. Right now it’s 51-49 D House and 21-19 D Senate, so no, you weren’t off by 1 seat, you were off by 3 and you missed both chambers, which if you count as 1 miss while every other race is 1 correct that’s spin.
Florida Supreme Court Justices are questioning whether the Fair Districts Amendment (FDA) to the state constitution impossibly handcuffs redistricting efforts.
Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz raised the prospect of tossing the amendment, passed by Florida voters in 2010, as the court heard arguments that Florida’s congressional map violates measures prohibiting the diminishment of Black communities voting power.
It's just par for the course here in Florida; it's a BS argument meant to keep blacks from their fair share of seats; I would bet you that 10 posters on this site could come up with a fair district map in less than 1 week; this is nothing but protection of the current gerrymander enforced by a Republican court
PA-1: This is my home district. Fitzpatrick is definitely favored (I have it somewhere between tilt and lean R), but neither side is acting like he is up by 14 points. I think we can hold him to mid single digits. Fitzpatrick is running targeted mailings to democrats which I think might be quite effective.
What will make them effective? What's his tack?
Force of habit. Suburban Philadelphia used to be THE backbone of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania. Social moderates who are hardline anti tax. Keep in mind that Montgomery County was the ONLY county in PA that didn't vote for Daddy Casey in 1990. Fitzpatrick appeals to these voters for the same reason Larry Hogan appealed to a lot of suburban Marylanders: he's not a fire breathing social conservative.
Sometimes our side needs to respect outstanding political instincts; Fitzpatrick has them
Where did I say he didn't?
I didn't say that you did or didn't for that matter..??
I agree with James. Beyond that the message he is pushing hard is that he is the most bipartisan member of the house, and has organizations with data that backs it up. Also pushes his environmental bonafides which play well here, and his police support which plays well just about everywhere. Next time I get a flyer, I'll scan it and post it.
Republicans caught a lucky break in IA-01 and IA-03, because yesterday the Iowa Supreme Court upheld the lower court ruling that knocked Libertarian candidates off the ballot there (and in IA-04 which is not competitive).
https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2024/09/12/iowas-2024-ballot-now-worst-case-scenario-for-libertarians/
Cindy Axne won IA-03 in 2018 and 2020 with less than 50% of the vote, thanks to third-party candidates that collectively received between 3-4 percent. In 2022, with no third-party candidate on the ballot, she again received more than 49% of the vote but lost to Zach Nunn.
Nunn now faces Lanon Baccam in IA-03 with no third parties registered. Mariannette Miller-Meeks faces Christina Bohannan in IA-01, also with no third parties on the ballot. Both are considered lean R races.
Two house races in NY got polled by GQR, a Democratic pollster
NY04. August 30 400 LV
Gillen(D) 50%
DEsposito (R incumbent) 47%
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1834236290474066414
For some reason, Trump is holding a rally here next week on the 18th.
NY 22 Aug 30 2024 400 LV
Mannion (D) 50%
Williams (R incumbent). 43%
https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1834226480118648950
Two best shots in New York.
What about these two Congressional races in New York:
– Mondaire Jones (NY-17)
– Josh Riley (NY-19)
I think Josh Riley will take down Marcus Molinaro. But can Mondaire Jones beat Mike Lawler? Thoughts?
Not the one you asked but I'm in NY 17 and... I don't know. I think I saw Maloney's loss coming in 22 but we had headwinds against us in the state that are not here right now. Jones isn't the best candidate but I'd rate it as a very decent shot of flipping, by a narrow margin.
Why on earth would Trump go to NY-04? I could understand it if he were holding 3-5 rallies a day like he did in 2016, but he doesn't do that anymore (probably because he doesn't have the self-control to keep his speeches remotely short). It's a waste of his time.
Rally after fundraisers in NYC/Hamptons is the most logical reason.
Sure, but why not hop over to eastern Pennsylvania instead? Like Allentown? That would get you the Philly and/or Scranton media markets, as opposed to the NYC media market which contains exactly one PA county (Pike, which cast 32K votes in 2020 and was 59-40 Trump).
Just a guess, but Trump does have a lot of property in New York. Plus, I'm willing to bet he has quite a few wealthy donors and allies there too. So perhaps the rally is more for his donors or it's more convenient because he can meet up with his wealthy donors that live nearby before and after the rally.
Trump isn't exactly a brilliant campaign strategist.
Yeah, I don't think there's any deeper analysis required here. He's a dummy who goes where he'll get applause and be worshipped. I'm not sure the electoral implications even occur to him and he clearly doesn't listen to his advisors (who I don't think are necessarily rocket scientists either).
I'm seeing the same result from NY-22 dated July 7-15. Either they repolled two weeks ago and got the same result, put the wrong dates on somehow, or the survey data is two months old.
https://x.com/jamesd0wns/status/1834218771910643882
Though if the poll is really that old, it's encouraging in a sense in that early to mid-July (after the Trump/Biden debate and before the Biden to Harris switch) is generally regarded as the Democratic nadir for 2024, when, we are told, polls showed the bottom dropping out for Dems in competitive races which helped push Biden to step aside. If a Democrat was leading by seven points then they're almost certainly leading now.
Not sure why Trump is rallying in NY but maybe he guesses a weak result for Dems in another election cycle will make him look good? Harris has been posting weak numbers in safe Democratic states. She won't loose Maryland, California, or New York but it won't look good if she underperformed Biden in safe territory.
It doesn't matter how it will "look." He's the one that cares about superficialities like that.
you absolutely nailed it; just replay how triggered he was over Harris making fun of his 'crowd sizes' and 'bored' rally participants
A three-fold question for the election experts here: What are the chances that Democrats can win majorities in the House-of-Representative delegations for a majority of states? What would that take in this election cycle? Is it totally beyond the realm of possibility?
I ask, of course, because there is a small but non-negligible chance that a contested election will be decided by the House, where each state casts one vote.
.
One more question: In the event of a narrow election victory by Kamala Harris, how do we prevent a few Disloyal Electors (bought or blackmailed) from throwing the election to Trump? Is this a real risk, or are my fears exaggerated?
I am only going to address the faithless electors portion because I believe there's zero chance of a tied EC(I could write a very boring dissertation about this but won't); imo if Harris wins a fair election, there is zero chance that enough faithless electors will change the outcome
I was not thinking of a tied Electoral College vote, but rather one or more states won by Harris failing to certify their election. Thus creating a situation where neither candidate reaches 270.
Why do you believe there is ZERO chance of two, three or four faithless electors changing the outcome?
Note: In the course of 59 elections, 165 electors have not cast their votes for president or vice president as prescribed by the state they represented. Although 71 were instances where the candidate died, 93 were changed by the elector's personal preference. That’s not an insignificant number!
Its a pretty insignificant number given we are talking tens of thousands of electors (I will leave it up to the reader to calculate exactly how many electors have had their votes counted since 1789.
We did have 10 faithless electors have their votes counted in 2016, so its not impossible, but like I said - in many states they just void the votes and in any others taking a bribe would be a federal and importantly a state crime. And those were all protest voters who knew that they had no impact on the outcome.
So basically you would have Democratic party loyalists who would be willing to take money in order to put Trump in the White House with a huge risk of being imprisoned for doing so. That seems really really unlikely.
If even one person did that, it would also almost surely mean the end of the electoral college.
The end of the electoral college? Do you realize that would require a constitutional amendment?
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is a way around that and I think a verified case of an elector being bribed would be enough that every remaining Dem trifecta state would pass it.
But even without that I think that the outrage over a candidate trying to bribe an elector would lead to a real national push for a constitutional amendment.
The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has no red states' support. You're aware that a whole bunch of Republican legislatures would have to vote for a constitutional amendment, unless we want to risk a Constitutional Convention, right?
Basically I agree with everything TomA here posts on the subject
Tied EC is certainly not 0%. You can construct a couple different plausible scenarios.
Trump 2020 + GA, NV, AZ, NE-2
https://www.270towin.com/maps/07NVn
Trump 2020 + PA, MI (I also swapped NC and GA, but that makes no difference)
https://www.270towin.com/maps/JepZz
Probably others. That was just playing around for a minute or two with the map.
I am curious why you think these are exceedingly unlikely?
Agree to disagree; imo those outcomes are way beyond likely as to the point of statistically impossible(I'm a poker player and I would bet my mortgage that if Harris wins Pennsylvania, she wins the election)
From a pure math standpoint: If Harris wins PA, Trump would need to win four of the five remaining swing states not named Nevada or GA+NC+MI+NV. The only three-state combination involving PA & those five remaining swing states not named Nevada that DOESN'T get Harris to 270 is PA+AZ+WI (266 EVs). All four-state combinations that include PA are winners for Harris.
You have expertly made my point; thank you
Yeah.
But ig MI and NV would be harder than other states for Trump. So the scenarios of him winning NV before rust belt, or MI before GA, is less likely.
However, this tie is quite possible:
Trump 2020 + PA + GA, Harris winning all four votes from ME.
The key state being Pennsylvania
It looks like Nebraska's special legislative session ended a couple of days ago without going to winner takes all (or apparently passing the property tax relief that was the impetus for the session in the first place). So that really significantly reduces the odds of a non-cheating electoral college tie.
Incidentally, if I'm ever elected to Congress, my first proposed legislation would be to bump up the number of House seats by one so we have an odd number of electors and thus cant have an electoral college tie (at least without faithless electors or cheating).
Well, I would like to see you first propose statehood for DC, as well as for Puerto Rico should the people there want it. Four more senators, certainly a few more House representatives – and definitely more electors. (Making an odd-numbered total, if you wish.)
Right now the GOP has 26 majorities, Dems have 22 and there are two ties (I think MN and NC). The GOP will definitely pick up North Carolina due to gerrymandering.
As you will see, there is no chance to get to 26 majorities themselves. The best we could do is deprive the GOP of having 26 majorities.
Right now the best shot for Dems is likely winning two seats in AZ. Currently the GOP has a 6-3 lead, but won two of those seats by less than 2% in an R+2 year in 2022.
After that you really are looking at slim pickings. Dems lost one Iowa seat by 0.7% and another by 6.8% - they would need both to convert the 0-4 GOP delegation to 2-2.
We lost MT-1 by 3.2% and winning that back would convert that state to a 1-1 tie.
We lost WI-3 by 3.7% and WI-1 by 8.9% and we would need both to get to a 4-4 tie.
Those are the only states where the pivotal seats were within 10% in 2022.
We also need to hold close seats in AK, MN, VA, MI, PA, OR, NV, and ME where the delegation is tied or Dems have a majority based on some narrow wins in 2022.
So basically the odds that Dems can deprive the GOP of that majority of state delegation majorities is the odds of winning MT-1 and AZ-1 and AZ-6 (which in my opinion Dems should be THROWING money at specifically to cut off this method of Trump using election chaos to cheat his way to a win.)
If that chaos happened but Dems won those seats then the presidency would fall to the VP until the deadlock in the house was resolved - the Senate votes like normal - one senator one vote. So Dems would need to have 50 seats (which means as I think everyone knows, we hold all of our seats except WV, and maybe MT if we can pick up FL or TX instead).
But its not clear that the VP gets to break that tie (does Harris get to vote for Walz?)
If the Senate is also deadlocked then the acting president is picked per the laws governing presidential succession in general - the speaker of the House would become acting president until one of the other two deadlocks is broken. In this scenario that would almost surely be Hakeem Jeffries (since Dems almost surely take back the House if they win AZ-1, AZ-6, and MT-1).
The electors are picked by the local parties mostly. They are party loyalists. The chances that any of them could be bribed (which would also almost surely be a federal crime) is slim. And many states are allowed to simply replace disloyal electors. So I dont think this s a real risk.
The biggest risk is still - Trump gets enough votes to win the electoral college without any real shenanigans other than current state level efforts to prevent Democrats from voting.
Tom, thank you for your thorough and informative reply!
Our electoral system is insane, and Ive been kind of obsessed with gaming out the different ways that candidates could legally throw a wrench in the works.
Great writeup (with echoes of VEEP). I'm very curious if this scenario coems to pass, what would happen to members of Congress who are in cross-party districts. If we win MT-01 by 500 votes but Trump still carries the district, does the new Dem Congressman vote her conscience in a profile in courage (that would instantly end her career) or vote with the district?
Safe R(24) AL AR FL GA ID IN KS KT LA MS MO MT NC ND OH OK SC SD TN TX UT WV WI WY
Lean R(1) IA
Toss-up(3) AK AZ MI
Lean D(3) OR PA VA
Likely D(2) NV(2-2 is the worst case) NH
Safe D(16) CA CT CO DE HI IL ME MD MA NE NJ NM NY RI VT WA
Likely Tied(1) MN
Here are my updated crude 31- and 14-day polling averages. I exclude GOP troll polls (Rasmussen, Trafalgar, etc), any polls released by partisan organizations, and some with really sketchy methods such as ActiVote. For the 14-day state averages, the number of polls is in parentheses.
AZ: 31-day T+1.3, 14-day T+1.2 (4)
GA: 31-day T+0.5, 14-day T+1.6 (5)
MI: 31-day H+1.5, 14-day H+2.4 (5)
NV: 31-day H+1.4, 14-day H+0.6 (3)
NC: 31-day T+0.1, 14-day H+0.9 (6)
PA: 31-day H+0.9, 14-day H+1.0 (4)
WI: 31-day H+3.6, 14-day H+2.5 (6)
US: 31-day H+3.1, 14-day H+2.0
This suggests that Harris remains slightly ahead. The most recent national polls look a little worse for Harris, but that's partly a function of which pollsters have released polls in the last 2 weeks. The state polls don't show the same slippage. In any case, over the next couple weeks we'll see whether the debate moves the poll numbers. The first debate moved them away from Biden, although some of the late movement in that case may have been more a function of the coverage of following events and pressure on Biden to drop out.
Do you have Florida as well? Something seems to be happening in Florida!
There’s a lot of anger at DeSantis, even amongst his own, after he wanted to "develop" state parks. Abortion and Marijuana are on the ballot, which should spike turnout of Democrats and democracy-favoring Independents. And Debbie Murcasel-Powell seems to be within reach of taking down Rick Scott...
I haven't been tracking Florida because if it's flipping the presidential election almost certainly isn't in doubt, but just eyeballing it Trump is up 4.2 over the last 31 days and 3.7 over the last 14. Florida was also one of the few states where polling was too favorable to Dems in 2022. In pretty much all the swing states, it was too favorable to the GOP.
Thank you.
I don’t think they’re sending their best.
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1834236640111235516
This is why our side is winning; thank you for posting
Election Officials Warn Mail System Could Disrupt Voting https://politicalwire.com/2024/09/12/election-officials-warn-mails-system-could-disrupt-voting/
"the U.S. Postal Service that it hasn’t fixed persistent deficiencies"
Great! And somehow, after all this time, Trump's Postmaster General is still in there...
Apparently, there is one Democrat on the board that won’t support getting rid of him.
One or two?
At least one.
Why the hell hasn’t President Biden prioritized nominating new people to the Board, so the USPS can boot DeJoy? I’ve never seen a good reason or an explanation. That man is an ever-present threat to mail-in voting and democracy!
To be fair, he did ultimately nominate enough Democrats to oust him, but for some reason, they have chosen not to.
I thought additional replacement nominations were possible?
I thought they were all filled, but I don't know.
Filled, yes – but I thought some were serving past their time. Perhaps I remember wrong.
There are two vacancies on the USPS board of governors and one appointee, Anton Hajjar, serving past his term's expiration.
Both vacant seats have a nomination from Biden. One republican nominee and one democratic nominee — this isn't the craziness it sounds like at first, as the USPS board of governors is legally required to have no more than half+1 seats held by a single party.
The democratic nominee for a seat is Marty Walsh, former mayor of Boston and Secretary of Labor. He was nominated in February of this year... still no confirmation vote scheduled as best as I can tell.
For the republican vacant seat, Biden has renominated the former holder, but I don't know the dates for that.
Schumer is dropping the ball on this one.
Further on this from an AP story run by Daily Kos, https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/9/12/2269788/-Election-officials-warn-widespread-problems-with-USPS-could-disrupt-voting?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=top_news_slot_7&pm_medium=web:
In an alarming letter, the officials said that over the past year, including the just-concluded primary season, mailed ballots that were postmarked on time were received by local election offices days after the deadline to be counted. They also noted that properly addressed election mail was being returned to them as undeliverable, a problem that could automatically send voters to inactive status through no fault of their own, potentially creating chaos when those voters show up to cast a ballot.
The officials also said that repeated outreach to the Postal Service to resolve the issues had failed and that the widespread nature of the problems made it clear these were “not one-off mistakes or a problem with specific facilities. Instead, it demonstrates a pervasive lack of understanding and enforcement of USPS policies among its employees.”
The letter to U.S. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy came from two groups that represent top election administrators in all 50 states. They told DeJoy, “We have not seen improvement or concerted efforts to remediate our concerns.”
“We implore you to take immediate and tangible corrective action to address the ongoing performance issues with USPS election mail service,” they added. "Failure to do so will risk limiting voter participation and trust in the election process."
Yes, DeJoy needs to be replaced ASAP.
Democratic U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris leads Republican Donald Trump 47% to 42% in the race to win the Nov. 5 presidential election, increasing her advantage after a debate against the former president that voters largely think she won, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-builds-lead-over-trump-voters-see-her-debate-winner-reutersipsos-poll-2024-09-12/
The debate tv ratings included in that article are astronomical
New York Police Commissioner Steps Down https://politicalwire.com/2024/09/12/new-york-police-chief-steps-down/
I heard remarks by Mayor Adams that were broadcast on WINS radio. Among other things, he praised the commissioner for New York City's record low number of shootings last month and various other measures of declines in crime that he claimed make New York "the safest big city in the world." The U.S., yes. The world? I can't imagine it's safer than Tokyo and Singapore. But neither these nor his involvement in the investigations of the 1993 World Trade Center and USS Cole bombings that Adams also mentioned have anything to do with his resignation. A record of achievement doesn't justify corruption.
Apparently, White people account for only 5% of "Stop and Frisk".
Though there's a lot less of it now than during the Giuliani and Bloomberg days, because of legal action.
North Dakota judge strikes down the state's abortion ban https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/north-dakota-abortion-law-ban-ruling-t57254 (Also linked on PoliticalWire)
"A state judge struck down North Dakota's ban on abortion Thursday, saying that the state constitution creates a fundamental right to access abortion before a fetus is viable."
You might find this analysis interesting (everything below the title and link is a quote):
Polling Error in 2016-2020: Look Out for Wisconsin https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/polling-error-in-2016-2020-look-out-for-wisconsin/
— Swing state polls show an incredibly close race in our 7 Toss-up presidential states right now.
— Final polling did generally overstate Democrats in both the 2016 and 2020 elections in these states, with Wisconsin standing out. Keep that in mind as polling shows Kamala Harris holding up a little bit better in the Badger State than elsewhere.
— If polls are understating Donald Trump again, he of course is in a great position to win given how competitive he already is in the core swing states. But there are good reasons to believe that he is not being overstated this time.
Our best guess is that because Trump’s polling position is better than 2016 and 2020, it’s likelier that he’s at least not being as underestimated as much as he was in previous elections, if he is being underestimated at all.
The exact ordering of the states doesn’t have to exactly mirror 2016 and 2020 (we went over how these key states voted relative to one another in a recent Crystal Ball story). Maybe Wisconsin is bluer than Pennsylvania (or even Michigan) in 2024; maybe North Carolina votes to the left of Georgia, as it generally did prior to 2020. But don’t just assume those things are going to happen because polls suggest that they could or should.
Pollster called GABO (C rated) has Shah 48-47 in AZ-1.
Insider Advantage in Michigan. 800 LVs 9/12.
49%-48% Trump.
Normington (D rated) in CA-22
Salas 46% Valadao 44%
Cook has moved Montana Senate into Lean Republican territory.
Pew gives Harris only 65% support from Jewish voters to Trump's 34%. Lowest for Democrat since 1988.
IA, run by Republican Matt Towery, had Whitmer and Dixon tied in 2022. Whitmer won by 11.
I thought that polster's name looked infamous. That was my second favorite poll of that cycle.
I personally know Matt Towery from Georgia politics in the late 80's\early 90's; he was then and is now a Republican hack
Let me guess; your first favorite was WA-Sen?
You bet.
Trafalgar, last weekend of October 2022: Murray 49, Smiley 48
Murray ends up winning by almost 14.5
You mean MT-Sen, right? Surely, they're not eating MT-Prez lean-R! I'm very doubtful about those figures on the Jewish vote. So many of us are going to vote for a Nazi-adjacent antisemite?
It’s certainly possible given the polarization that has taken place since the Gaza war. McGovern, Mondale and Carter got less than that.
It will definitely be a political science case study for academia after the election
Reagan wasn't or at least didn't appear to be an antisemite, Carter was really helpful to Israel in the Camp David negotiations but took a really hard line against the 1978 invasion of Lebanon and settlements in the West Bank (properly, in my opinion, at least on the settlements, but that's beside the point), and Nixon's antisemitism wasn't known and didn't affect his policies, and though he was dirty, and murderous abroad, he wasn't the kind of extremist Republican we have today nor in the Goldwater wing of the party. I doubt there are enough Jews who will support a fascist in the U.S., but we'll see.
Good God! Rating, not eating!
Yes sorry.
It's OK!
Democrats cannot afford to sleep or be 1 bit complacent in ANY swing state, especially the big 3 (Blue Wall): Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin. Register NEW voters who turn 18 this year or did so after 2020 cycle and turn them out to close the deal, women voters are very critical to permanently ENDING the Trump Show!! 💙🇺🇲🙏🌊
That's why having 5 out of 7 Democratic governors in the 7 swing states is so very important; each Governor controls a political machine that does the nuts and bolts work such as this(and with the Culinary Union in Nevada, it's covered as well); and the Georgia Democratic party has proven its ground bona fides(I'm very confident at this point in the cycle; as long as our side does the necessary blocking and tackling, we should be fine)
It's also equally important that Democrats hold 5/7 of the Secretary of State positions in these states. The alternative could easily have been election deniers and bad actors that either try to cause havoc during election day and the counting and management of the process. On top of that there's already the various attempts to sabotage voters via misinformation with confusing state websites, voter purges and excessively complex, expensive or tedious voter ID laws. It's an easily overlooked position, but the Secretary of State should not be underestimated with their power.
Gov, SoS, local and supreme courts, legislatures, county executives, its all important to the end result.
As SOS, it’s like 6 out of 7. NC SOS has no power or official duty on elections. They are vested in the election board, Members being appointed by the governor, 3 from his party and 2 from the other.
does anyone here think for 1 second that Democrats are going to be complacent in ANY important state?
Morning Consult shoes Harris up post-debate 50-45.
https://x.com/IAPolls2022/status/1834292222524621036?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1834292222524621036%7Ctwgr%5Efc7290ece52aa3ad18ed13bc8ef7908d82cde255%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com%2Fembed%2Fcomments%2F%3Fbase%3Ddefaultf%3Dpredictitt_i%3D7456t_u%3Dhttps3A2F2Fwww.predictit.org2Fmarkets2Fdetail2F74562FWho-will-win-the-2024-US-presidential-electiont_e%3DPredictIt207C20Who20will20win20the20202420US20presidential20election3Ft_d%3D202420Presidential20Election20Predictions202620Odds207C20Who20will20be20the20next20president3Ft_t%3DPredictIt207C20Who20will20win20the20202420US20presidential20election3Fs_o%3Ddescversion%3D4ef1b4e67a51bc2b38fed77fda108743
Reuters also has Harris by 5 post debate.
Anyone know why GOP out-voted Democrats by nearly 15K votes in the NH primary? Is that normal?
Gap looks like it's entirely the difference between NH-01 and NH-02 congressional primaries. The vote count was roughly tied in NH-02, which had a contested primary in both parties. Republicans got ~15k more votes in the NH-01 primary, where incumbent Pappas won renomination on the dem ticket in a cakewalk.
No what the numbers usually look like.
That makes sense.
In the 2022 primaries, NH Democrats got roughly 94k votes, NH Republicans 142k votes. That didn't stop Maggie Hassan from getting reelected by nearly double digits.
New Hampshire historically has been a Republican state. Just of a more moderate variety who are relatively independent. It also has a lot of real independents who lean Democratic
Not to mention having a history with the Sununu family dynasty.
The Sununus are not right wing but traditional conservative Republicans in the Bush mold.
Conservative Republicans are right-wing. The distinction is between fascism and merely being on the right.
I'm talking about traditional conservative Republicans in the Bush mold, not conservative Republicans in general.
Tom DeLay was right wing. However, President Bush was conservative on quite a number of issues while being moderate on others. Comprehensive immigration reform efforts during Bush's time were not right wing. President George HW Bush also raised taxes during his time.
Also, regarding the Sununus, they are not right wingers. Per On the Issues, NH Governor Chris Sununu and his brother, former US Senator John Sununu.
Chris Sununu - Moderate conservative
https://ontheissues.org/Chris_Sununu.htm
John Sununu - Libertarian conservative
https://www.ontheissues.org/House/John_Sununu.htm
Regarding John Sununu, he had a similar environmental record as John McCain when being in the Senate.
Moderate conservatives, certainly including McCain, are still right-wing! Supporting the destruction of the environment is not a conservative value, if you think about it. The Sununus are opposed to abortion rights, aren't they?
August voter registration tallies:
+141,796 Republicans
+61,042 Democrats
Ouch.
https://x.com/MichaelPruser/status/1834260730394112112?t=FLnv7Kkj3ZBw0RBW1GgbSA&s=19
If anyone cares about Fox, they have moved North Carolina and Georgia Presidential into toss-up status like the rest of the world.
Could you provide some background here on the registration numbers? Is that nationally or just in certain states? Like are the voter registration numbers happening in NC and GA? Could use some more context here.
You conveniently left out the newly registered independents. Most progressive young people register as independents these days.
And we don't need to know every time any person/organization moves a state to a different category in their predictions.
As a follow-up, I'd like to see the NPA numbers; imo those would be overwhelmingly young democratic voters
I'm curious about your condescending attitude on this forum lately and also why you feel the need to speak for the group since you barely contribute anything at all except snarky comments on things you dislike. I did not 'conveniently' leave out anything, I post things as they come in. When more info becomes available I then edit or post that too. I do not honestly care what you specifically care about knowing or not as someone else may find the info interesting.
Where are your facts backing up your anecdotal assertion that "most young people register independent these days"?
The fact that most young people register as independent these days is something that has been discussed numerous times on Daily Kos Elections, the predecessor to this site. I see no reason to repeat what has already been said a dozen times.
And, unlike you, I have a long history of commenting on DKE - almost 13 years now. In that time, I contributed 68 diaries and made roughly 16,300 comments. I mentioned this in the open thread here where we introduced ourselves. Next time, reread that before trying to claim that someone else "barely contributes".
Many of us are interested in changes in the predicted status of races in different states.
When have partisan voter registration numbers ever been meaningful?
If it were reversed we would be cheering.
Update:
Link edited into op above. California and New Hampshire post in a few weeks.
Also, here is the last four month trends:
Republicans: +544,030
Democrats: -13,805
Other: +530,921
Total National Registration as of Aug. 31.
https://x.com/MichaelPruser/status/1834263705866903763?t=kcMW-g7ru1k1wYwvfows2w&s=19
I appreciate your posting this;but, to be fair it's an incomplete listing
Different states report at different times.
These are misleading at best and intentional disinformation at worst. Why do right leaning accounts constantly post voter registration numbers? 2 reasons.
1) It’s some of the only election data that actually shows their side winning, so they latch onto it and spread it everywhere.
2) They never include the unaffiliated/independent information.
Firstly, here’s what the data said in August 2022 in PA.
https://x.com/WinWithJMC/status/1554144595365208067/photo/1
Democrats were down 230k voters from 2020 and 19k voters in 2022. Republicans were down 84k voters from 2020 and up 36k in 2022.
Sounds terrible for Democrats, right? That is, until you notice 2 things. 1) Independents are growing in 2022 and down the least of any voter registration type. 2) Republican vote share is higher than Republican voter registration.
Registration is always a lagging indicator, not leading, meaning most of these registrations are changing from people who already voted Republican OR they still vote Democratic, but prefer to not be registered as one. Very few suddenly converted from being a Democrat to a Republican and definitely by not enough to sway any election.
So they don’t actually help the GOP and it’s why, despite their loyal base spreading “PA VOTER REGISTRATION SHOWS GOP GAINS” headlines everywhere, it means very little in terms of actual election victories. It’s only used to make their base voters feel like they’re winning despite their very unpopular political agenda.
Lastly, this is what Michael Pruser had to say after being called out on his spin of the VA predictions. I wonder why he was the only one predicting a Youngkin trifecta in 2023, hmmmm.
https://x.com/MichaelPruser/status/1721940842372284543
Pruser: 2023 Virginia Municipal Election Prediction
Winsome, lose some.
🔴Senate Republicans - 20
🔴House Republicans - 51
I don't see what most of my predictive friends on here see when it comes to Virginia. In fact, of those that I follow and the feed Twitter has sent my way, I've not seen anyone (who has followed the election closely) predict a Youngkin trifecta. What am I missing?
https://x.com/MichaelPruser/status/1722129448978296888
Pruser: 2023 Election Night is a wrap.
Nothing terribly surprising (favorites did win out), but there is absolutely no question that tonight was an excellent night for the Democratic party.
Even though I hit 3/4 projections and missed VA by a single seat (oh, Juan Pablo), I was 3-4 points right of where each result landed. Suburbs continue to disappear for Republicans and the overarching takeaway is that Pennsylvania seems well out of reach for now.
Other: Maybe I’m missing something here, but how exactly did you get your predictions right in 3/4 races and were only off by 1 seat when you predicted Virginia Republicans to win both the State Senate and State House, which they lost both of?
Pruser: Well, I did say Reeves, McCaffery & Beshear would win.
I also said Republicans would win a trifecta in VA and they did not. Traded a Senate seat for a House seat (bad trade).
Other: Not how math works. Your prediction was 20-20 tied Senate + 51-49 R House. Right now it’s 51-49 D House and 21-19 D Senate, so no, you weren’t off by 1 seat, you were off by 3 and you missed both chambers, which if you count as 1 miss while every other race is 1 correct that’s spin.
Florida Supreme Court Justices are questioning whether the Fair Districts Amendment (FDA) to the state constitution impossibly handcuffs redistricting efforts.
Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz raised the prospect of tossing the amendment, passed by Florida voters in 2010, as the court heard arguments that Florida’s congressional map violates measures prohibiting the diminishment of Black communities voting power.
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/695606-florida-supreme-court-justices-raise-prospect-of-tossing-fair-districts-amendment/
Awful. I can remember when Republican-appointed judges were rarely willing to make constitutional provisions dead letters.
It's just par for the course here in Florida; it's a BS argument meant to keep blacks from their fair share of seats; I would bet you that 10 posters on this site could come up with a fair district map in less than 1 week; this is nothing but protection of the current gerrymander enforced by a Republican court