Updated:
6:00 pm:
The update in the morning, which was about a district by district breakdown, was done by Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball. He was fairly accurate up to 2016, but missed badly in that race. Maybe he is still wrong.
Perhaps one more comment, and I'll close this thread.
Polls depend upon models. If the models are wrong, the poll will be wrong. The question that should be asked is if the model is wrong.
For example, if blacks leave the Democrats, the model is likely wrong. If blue collar workers leave the party, the model is wrong. And so forth.
Are the models wrong? Apparently they were in 2016. Therefore, they could be wrong again.
4:00 pm:
The conventional wisdom that the GOP will lose the Congress because of historical patterns --- is not actually the case.
I was in town today, and saw a political commercial. If there's anything that might turn this election to the Democrats, it is the healthcare issue and liberals' deep pockets. They can run lots of ads like the one I saw, and it might make a difference.
It is particularly evil for them to capitalize on healthcare because Obamacare wasn't supposed to work anyway. It was supposed to fail, and give rise to calls for single payer. As if on cue, that is what the Dems seem to be pressing for this go-round.
It might work. But it is only because they created a system that cannot work. My own premiums are set to go through the roof. People cannot afford this stuff for much longer. But they may have become dependent upon it.
11:00 am:
One of those districts mentioned as a possible Dem pickup was the Seventh District in Houston. I lived in this district for many years so the incumbent is familiar with me. After checking the map of the district, and the voting pattern in previous elections, I really don't see where the opportunity is for the Dems.
If this is an example of their reasoning, I would say that there is reason to believe that they are wrong in their analysis of other races as well.
Of course, something could have changed in the last few years, but I think that is unlikely.
In addition, there is a lot of talk about Tx. Sen. Ted Cruz being vulnerable. This is not likely unless something has changed. The only way the Dems win this one is if the GOP falls asleep.
10.18.18 10 am:
Some articles that expand upon the theme:
Seat by seat analysis of congressional races comment: not sure if this is a nonpartisan analysis of a Democratic one. But if it is a Democratic one, even they are somewhat doubtful at this point.
Speaker Ryan thinks the GOP will hold on. ( Didn't read this one, at this point, I am no fan of Ryan )
Could Trump win 20 percent of the black vote? ( Didn't read this one either, as VDH is a bit loopy to me. There is some talk of this in other quarters, though.)
A worker party led by Trump? Here's the wildcard. If Trump can expand the GOP into areas previously held by Democrats, he can create a new majority.
You have to hand it to the Democrats for being able to hang on to what they don't deserve. The GOP for its part, doesn't deserve to win either, for if they did, they would be more open to a guy like Trump. They sure don't seem to be willing to help much, if any at all.
10.17.18:
Stories like this one seem to suggest that it will be a surprising day on election day for somebody. If the stories are true, then how can the Democrats possibly win? If the stories are false, then the GOP could still win, provided that they hang on to their own people.
Trouble is, you really don't know what people are going to do. It is all a matter of turnout.
I suspect that it's the Dems who will be surprised. For they live in a bubble of their own creation. Since they will not tolerate dissent, they may come to find that their support is weaker than what they believed to be so. Dissent isn't a matter of weakness. It tests your assumptions, if you allow it to. It is a strength, not a weakness.
If I am wrong, maybe that will be a surprise for me. But I wasn't surprised that Trump won. However, I was surprised that Obama won.
We'll see.
No comments:
Post a Comment