US Poll-itics

[Maithanet]

Articles like this one on Black voters in Georgia make me feel good about Biden surpassing Clinton's turnout levels with Black voters.  If national polls are to be believed, really the only group it seems like Biden is struggling with is Latino voters.  Black Americans, Asian Americans, educated whites and noncollege whites all seem to have made meaningful gains compared to 2016.  A poor showing with Latinos could doom Biden in TX and FL (possibly AZ as well, although I'm still very hopeful there), but won't make much difference in GA, NC or the midwest swing states. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

And it looks like Biden’s lead in Pennsylvania is about to go under 5 points again.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/pennsylvania/
 

For the time in a month Silver’s forecast is giving Trump  a 16/100 shot at taking it. 
And 1/14 at winning the presidency.

I think Trump acting like a semi-civil orangutan really did help him.

And this demonstrates as to why it’s ridiculous for anyone to act like Biden even at this stage, should be celebrated as a winner and have any talk about what he should do once he’s in power as if that’s already decided.

And perhaps I’m “bed-wetting”

But I think if 538’s forecast gets to the 70s  like it did in 2016–which is a possibility. I feel like I’m just smelling piss in the bed.

[Maithanet]

2 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

For the time in a month Silver’s forecast is giving Trump  a 16/100 shot at taking it. 

And 1/14 at winning the presidency.

Huh?  Trump's chances of victory in the 538 model have been very steady at between 12% and 14% since Oct 11.  I have seen exactly zero signs of an impending Trump surge, and I am spending an unhealthy amount of time looking. 

Quote

But I think if 538’s forecast gets to the 70s  like it did in 2016–which is a possibility. I feel like I’m just smelling piss in the bed.

If it gets to the 70s, you'll what?  I mean, what can anyone do, other than vote and volunteer your time and hope for the best? 

By all means, remain vigilant about the possibility a Trump victory.  Given his clear intentions to steal the election, we need this to be a blowout. 

[HoodedCrow]

It is scary to have so much chaos from Team Chaos, that is determined to deny voting rights. I hope young people, middle aged people, old people, men, women, non binary, gun owners, non gun owners, and minorities vote them out. 
 

I can’t believe that they are talking about one vote per household. Anyone feel that Serena Joy is on the Supreme Court now?

[Martell Spy]

It's a really bad sign for Trump that Texas is so close. And that is with Biden having trouble motivating Latinos.  I mean, without Texas the GOP would become this weird rump party that can't compete at the Presidential level. What if Democrats run Castro down the road, even as demographics change more over the years in the Sun Belt?

[DMC]

19 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And it looks like Biden’s lead in Pennsylvania is about to go under 5 points again.

Biden's lead in PA just took a hit because of this Insider Advantage poll.  400 likely voters with a 5% margin of error is..not the best poll.  Moreover, make of this what you will, but this is the latest post - on the site - from Insider Advantage's chairman Matt Towery:

Quote

Sean Hannity of Fox News likes to kid me on air about how I’m really not retired from polling and political analysis. That’s because I happily agreed, along with my colleague John McLaughlin, to serve as pollster for Sean’s radio program this election season. Given that John and I were virtually the only pollsters to predict a Trump victory in 2016, we have a pretty good handle on how flawed most network and print news surveys are and where the race might truly stand.

John works for the President Trump, but I do not. So, my comments are my own (you are safe John!).

The polls, just like in 2016, would lead most to believe that President Donald Trump has only a slim shot to be re-elected. I think the great stat genius Nate Silver gave Trump just the slightest of odds to win in ’16 and is right back to that same position again. And just like in 2016, the pollsters and Nate are likely to be off in November.

In the last few weeks I have seen numbers that suggest the violence on the streets and uptick in crime that has afflicted many cities in America, combined with efforts to reduce funding for police, has caused a large shift in suburban voters in states like Florida and Georgia towards the president. The Trump campaign’s brilliant “You have reached 911” ad seized on that shift and is helping accelerate it.

 

[Fez]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

The description Nate Cohn is providing sounds very much like one where Democrats flip the Texas House.  It was gerrymandered in 2010 when the suburbs were safely red, and that is putting a bunch of seats in play that were thought to be "safe".  If Democrats don't get a seat at the table for this round of redistricting, then the lines will be drawn to protect a slim majority with a bunch of R+15 seats.  If the Democrats want any hope of taking state power in Texas before 2032, it needs to be now. 

Taking the Texas House would be huge, but it would also probably be a two-year rental unfortunately. The Texas Legislature and Governor draw congressional district lines (and it goes to the courts if they can't), but Texas law provides for a backup commission to draw the state legislative lines if the state legislature deadlocks. It's a 5-person commission of specific office holders, and Republicans would have a 4-1 majority if Democrats take the state house (right now it's a 5-0 majority).

If Democrats take the state house, Republicans can just refuse to negotiate with them and throw it to the commission to create a new legislative gerrymander. And then after taking back the state house in 2022, they can mid-cycle redistrict the congressional lines to create a new gerrymander there in place for 2024.

Texas Democrats could try playing severe hardball here, but I just don't see any path forwards for them. Their best hope is probably Texas Republicans deciding that any overly ambitious gerrymander would be too unstable due to changing voting patterns and creating only a modest gerrymander.

[Zorral]

Republicans are even more disgusting, depraved and corrupt than you think.  They know it.  They admit it.  But they really don't care.  The money and the power are sooooooooooo good.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/anonymous-republican-donald-trump.html

 

[A Prince of Dorne]

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

Biden's lead in PA just took a hit because of this Insider Advantage poll.  400 likely voters with a 5% margin of error is..not the best poll.  Moreover, make of this what you will, but this is the latest post - on the site - from Insider Advantage's chairman Matt Towery:

 

Yep, that dude is dining out on the 2016 election results. His poll has OVER 50% of the 18-44 age group going for Trump. Not happening. And it has Biden getting fewer than 80% of the Democratic votes. Also not happening. Not to mention it's a mere 400 likely voters, of which 174 are GOP and 13 are Libertarian, with only 33 independents.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, Fez said:

Taking the Texas House would be huge, but it would also probably be a two-year rental unfortunately. The Texas Legislature and Governor draw congressional district lines (and it goes to the courts if they can't), but Texas law provides for a backup commission to draw the state legislative lines if the state legislature deadlocks. It's a 5-person commission of specific office holders, and Republicans would have a 4-1 majority if Democrats take the state house (right now it's a 5-0 majority).

If Democrats take the state house, Republicans can just refuse to negotiate with them and throw it to the commission to create a new legislative gerrymander. And then after taking back the state house in 2022, they can mid-cycle redistrict the congressional lines to create a new gerrymander there in place for 2024.

Texas Democrats could try playing severe hardball here, but I just don't see any path forwards for them. Their best hope is probably Texas Republicans deciding that any overly ambitious gerrymander would be too unstable due to changing voting patterns and creating only a modest gerrymander.

Way to rain on my parade.  Ugh, gerrymandering is the worst.  I think that the lesson Republicans are going to take from 2010 gerrymandering generally and Virginia in particular, is don't get greedy, even if it means letting some of the dead wood die.  If there are 100 seats, it's better to draw 55 of them that are R+15 than it is to draw 65 of them that are R+8.  That's how the Republicans in North Carolina still have both chambers virtually on lockdown. 

[Maltaran]

48 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

I think Trump acting like a semi-civil orangutan really did help him.

 

I feel that Pratchett’s Librarian would be insulted by this comparison 

[Fez]

13 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Way to rain on my parade.  Ugh, gerrymandering is the worst.  I think that the lesson Republicans are going to take from 2010 gerrymandering generally and Virginia in particular, is don't get greedy, even if it means letting some of the dead wood die.  If there are 100 seats, it's better to draw 55 of them that are R+15 than it is to draw 65 of them that are R+8.  That's how the Republicans in North Carolina still have both chambers virtually on lockdown. 

Yeah, it's rough. The other 4 commission members were all re-elected in 2018 too, so none of them are up this year (Lt. Gov, Attorney General, State Comptroller, and Commissioner of the General Land Office). The fifth is the Speaker of the State House. I'm not sure why there's no one from the state senate on the commission; possibly Republicans were more concerned about losing the state senate when they passed the law creating the commission.

Possibly Democrats could sue about the commission; but I'd be surprised if it went anywhere. Maybe if they take the state senate also this year (which is possible, although no one seems to expect it), they could force the issue a bit better. They'd still need Abbott's signature, and won't have the numbers to veto override him. But with both chambers they could make his life very difficult, and maybe he'd be open to signing a relatively fair map. Probably a pipe dream though.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Yeah, I totally trust polls by 'The Center for American Greatness". All this is just to throw uncertainty on the results from PA so legal challenges can be made post election.

The good news is it will soon be swamped out by numerous other high quality polls (and some D leaning polls out as well). Just have some patience.

[DMC]

27 minutes ago, Fez said:

If Democrats take the state house, Republicans can just refuse to negotiate with them and throw it to the commission to create a new legislative gerrymander. And then after taking back the state house in 2022, they can mid-cycle redistrict the congressional lines to create a new gerrymander there in place for 2024.

I'm familiar with the LRB taking over if the legislature/governor can't come to an agreement, but I'm not aware of any provision that the legislature can re-redistrict following the 2022 election.  That would seem...very odd.  Where are you seeing that?

3 minutes ago, Fez said:

Possibly Democrats could sue about the commission; but I'd be surprised if it went anywhere.

Texas redistricting always goes to court.  The Dems will almost certainly lose, sure, but there will be court battles.  As you say, just in general, if they take back the House the Dems' best bet is to leverage that to get the GOP to agree to at least a modestly less gerrymandered map.

[DMC]

Just now, IheartIheartTesla said:

Yeah, I totally trust polls by 'The Center for American Greatness".

They might as well call it the Politburo Poll.

[Fez]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

I'm familiar with the LRB taking over if the legislature/governor can't come to an agreement, but I'm not aware of any provision that the legislature can re-redistrict following the 2022 election.  That would seem...very odd.  Where are you seeing that?

League of United Latin American Citizens vs. Perry.

The Supreme Court held in 2006 that states are free to redistrict as often as they please. This was the case that came up after Texas Republicans did mid-cycle redistricting in 2003 after taking the Teas state house in 2002.

[Which Tyler]

3 hours ago, Mindwalker said:

PS: Apparently T. now claims doctors are getting paid for lying about Covid.

From previous thread, but hey - it got missed amongst the Karens.

 

If there's one thing we know about Trump, it's that anything he ever accuses anyone else of - it's because he's guilty of it himself...

 

  

37 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

I feel that Pratchett’s Librarian would be insulted by this comparison 

Oook.

[DMC]

11 minutes ago, Fez said:

League of United Latin American Citizens vs. Perry.

Gotcha, so no provision in state law.  Highly doubt they'd do that then.

[Fez]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Gotcha, so no provision in state law.  Highly doubt they'd do that then.

Texas is literally the state that did this in 2003; why do you think they wouldn't do it again?

[DMC]

Much different circumstances.  Delay wanted to redraw a map that was made by a three-judge federal panel.  If the LRB ends up drawing the first map, there's little reason to redraw it and go through the whole process of getting bogged down in court battles.  Incumbents aren't gonna be thrilled with that uncertainty.