Democrats surging in midterm congressional ballot preference?-Rasmusen now shows 3 points-45/42 R

[Politics_Guy25]

This is the smallest GOP lead in Rasmussen in a YEAR and it is MUCH closer than the epic 12-14-16 point leads the GOP had in the summer.

OMG. Could the democrats possibly have a good night come November 2nd?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot

Republican candidates now hold a three-point lead over Democrats on the Generic Congressional Ballot for the week ending Sunday, October 3, 2010. This is the smallest gap between parties in roughly a year.

[Beetwasher]

1. Yup, It's Real Momentum And The Timing Couldn't Be Better

n/t

[Politics_Guy25]

2. This Friday morning will decide the election

If we get a good-to acceptable September jobs report, the GOP is doomed and will not take either chamber. Bank on it.

If the report is bad, conversely, our senate majority comes into question again and the house is gone.

[Beetwasher]

4. Nahhh, You Put Too Much Weight In That One Report

I don't believe that's the case. People already believe the economy sucks, the report isn't going to change their minds on that one way or another.

[DrToast]

6. Totally agree

An individual report doesn't even register on most people's radar. They notice the big picture.

[FBaggins]

19. True. Just as you put too much weight on one or two polls.

The impression of the economy is usually baked in by mid summer. Unless there's a blockbuster news item, you're usually lucky if people include even the Q2 GDP figure in their thinking.

Not that a good number this Friday couldn't help a little... but the election isn't going to turn on it.

[Beetwasher]

21. Still Trying To Deny The Democratic Momentum?

Still insisting Murkowski won't go write in? :rofl:

[FBaggins]

22. Still only looking at the polls you like?

Think there's any chance we can get the SOSs to agree to that standard on election day? :rofl:

[Beetwasher]

23. So You Are Still Denying The Momentum?

Too funny!

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/10/keeps_closin.php#more?ref=fpblg

[FBaggins]

24. Yep... as are all the experts.

" Trading markets on the likelihood of a Republican takeover of the House, which are going to do a more robust job of incorporating different types of information than a one- or two-factor model would, were essentially unchanged on the release of both the Newsweek and the Gallup polls, which is probably the most appropriate response."




Tell me which version of BS you're pushing. Do the latest polls represent a big momentum gain for republicans after a democratic gain (with the electorate swinging back and forth several points every couple days)? Or do you just ignore those polls?

[Beetwasher]

25. I'll Be You Would STILL Insist Murkowski Won't Go Write In Too! ROFL

All of the experts? :rofl:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/10/keeps_closin.php#more?ref=fpblg

[FBaggins]

27. Are you still insisting that AK is now competitive for Democrats?

Or that Crist is going to win the FL senate seat? Or half a dozen other predictions that you now want to pretend never happened?

Entitled to your own opinion... not your own facts. I know that much be heartbreaking for you... but I'm not here to enable your issues.

[Beetwasher]

29. Forced To Make Up Bullshit Now?

Since you would never be able to post any evidence I ever INSISTED on any of those things, here's a little sample of Frodo's brilliant prognostications for viewing amusement:

"She isn't going to run a write in campaign (and if she did it wouldn't come close to impacting the final results). The "sore loser" stigma added on to the existing "daddy gave me the seat" stigma would ruin her and hurt the family name. She's plenty young enough to run for the other Senate seat and/or later for governor.

She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue.

To make it simpler - she isn't going to run just to hand the race over to us. She would only continue if she thought she could win. A write-in campaign doesn't do that for her."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=420790#421663

[FBaggins]

34. So what's this BS now?

So if you said that AK was now a pickup opportunity... and said that it was competitive... that doesn't matter unless you used the magic word "insist"?

Are you claiming that you didn't say that Crist was almost certain to win? Or that you didn't use the word "insist"?

[Beetwasher]

35. "She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

:rofl:

So where's YOUR evidence? Oh, you don't have any to back up your bullshit.

[FBaggins]

43. "YOWZA!!!! Amazing This Seat Is In Play!"

"If Crist wins (likely)"

"we've got a decent chance in LA against Vitter "

"We'll lose some seats in the house, and I believe it's entirely possible we may actually gain some in the Senate. If you look at the Senate picutre race by race, you will see what I mean."

"I think it's more likely we'll probably lose a couple of seats, but it's not outside the realm of possibility that we could have a net gain"

[Beetwasher]

44. "She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

And nothing I've said has been shown to wrong yet. Not like YOUR declaritive statement above which has been absolutely and empahtically been shown to be 100% utter bullshit. :rofl:.

"YOWZA!!!! Amazing This Seat Is In Play!"- I maintain AK IS in play. Did I say we would DEFINITELY win it? Or was that about Delaware? Which is in fact pretty much in the bag.

"If Crist wins (likely)" He still could win.

"we've got a decent chance in LA against Vitter " We've got a shot even still, not a good one, but it's there. Never said any different.

"We'll lose some seats in the house, and I believe it's entirely possible we may actually gain some in the Senate. If you look at the Senate picutre race by race, you will see what I mean."-Yup, I stand by this. There's still a very unlikely chance of a net gain. Nothing wrong with that.

"I think it's more likely we'll probably lose a couple of seats, but it's not outside the realm of possibility that we could have a net gain"- Yup. Again, unlikely, but the probability remains, however unlikely that there could be a net gain.

That's it??? That's what you've got???? :rofl:

Vs.

"She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

[FBaggins]

45. You're living in fantasy land.

And nothing I've said has been shown to wrong yet

"If Crist wins (likely)" He still could win.

But it isn't likely (and more importantly, wasn't when you said it).

"we've got a decent chance in LA against Vitter " We've got a shot even still, not a good one,

"Not a good one" contradicts "a decent one"

That's it??? That's what you've got????

Hardly. Then there're the old "shot their wad in August" when October shows little to no difference. Better in some races and worse in others... but no change in the overall picture.

[Beetwasher]

46. Fantasy? Like This: "She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

:rofl:

And...

THERE'S NO MOMENTUM!!!!!!! (Despite all the evidence to the contrary!)

ABC/WaPo poll: Democrats gain in poll but GOP still leads

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/5/907838/-ABC-WaPo-poll:-Democrats-gain-in-poll-but-GOP-still-leads

[FBaggins]

28. That TPM article was made laughable (as was your prediction)

by polls that were released while the ink was still dry.

And when did asking a question become the same thing as a recognized expert making a prediction?

[Beetwasher]

30. I Know It's Hard For You To Admit Dems Have Momentum, Sucks For You!

:rofl:

Even (R)asmussen shows Dem surge

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/4/907694/-Even-(R)asmussen-shows-Dem-surge

[FBaggins]

32. Yes... rasmussen shows a Dem surge.

Though "surge" is a bit much.

While Gallup shows a massive R surge.

Neither reflects reality... which is that little has changed.

[Beetwasher]

33. There NO MOMENTUM I Tell YOU!!!! NO MOMENTUM!!!!!! WHO ATE MY STRAWBERRIES!!!!!!!!!

Frodo of the "Murkowski Ain't Going Write in no way no how" fame is absolutely CERTAIN there's NO MOMENTUM because Gallup's "likely" voter screen says so!!!

Despite ALL the OTHER evidence to the contrary! :rofl:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/4/907694/-Even-(R)asmussen-shows-Dem-surge

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/10/keeps_closin.php#more?ref=fpblg

[FBaggins]

38. Just like there was in June and in August.

A handful of wishful thinkers looked at a couple polls that were "not as bad as" the then-current norm... and declared that we now had the big mo and everything was changing.

Only to have it all fade away.

You would really have us believe that there have been several massive momentum swings in the last few months? That's just ridiculously ignorant nonsense. When you're old enough to have seen a few cycles you'll temper your wild reactions.

There's a reason why nobody changed their predictions when the Newsweek poll came out... and why nobody is changing their predictions based on the horrific Gallup poll. The reason is that the big picture hasn't changed. Jerry Brown has some momentum (and hopefully Boxer), democrats overall don't. Manchin's opponent has momentum... republicans overall don't.

If one side had momentum, the majority of races showing movement would be going one way... that isn't the case. There are just as many races moving away from our grasp as moving toward it.

Just as I said before... this tightening takes the nightmare scenario almost entirely off the table... but also cuts the chances of a surprisingly good year for us.

[Beetwasher]

39. NO MOMENTUM!!!!!!! FRODO SAYS SO!!!!!!!!

Because right now is exactly like June!!!! It's not like Dems are campaigning or anything. Like in June. :rofl:

[FBaggins]

41. Nope... reality says so.

You should visit some time.

[Beetwasher]

42. "She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

That reality? :rofl:

I'll take real reality, thanks.

ABC/WaPo poll: Democrats gain in poll but GOP still leads
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/5/907838/-ABC-WaPo-poll:-Democrats-gain-in-poll-but-GOP-still-leads

[FBaggins]

47. "A Squandered September For Democrats"

Still waiting for you to come up with someone who actually knows what he's talking about to see this surge.

How could there be a "squandered september for democrats" if we were making such gains?

There is no question that Democrats have their backs to the wall. It's unprecedented to see so many incumbents running behind their challengers. While the Cook Political Report has a general policy of not putting unindicted incumbents in categories worse than our "Toss Up" column, which is akin to the critical ward of a hospital, we are now looking at moving a dozen or so Democratic House incumbents into the Lean Republican column (Sen. Blanche Lincoln is already there).

...snip...

While Democrats start airing blistering attack ads with just several days left before early voting starts in most states, some will be wondering whether it's already too late. For Democrats who haven't taken advantage of September to build leads by defining their GOP opponents, cutting through the clutter of outside-group spending in October might prove next to impossible.

...snip...

There is no reason to believe that this election won't be as massive as the 1994 tsunami. The dynamics are somewhat different but the magnitude certainly looks comparable. Things could change, but it would take a very big change.




http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/po_20101006_3833.php

[Beetwasher]

48. Aww, Poor Frodo, Upset That The Dems Have Momentum And Looking For Any Way To Deny It

n/t

[FBaggins]

49. Nope. Looking for a way to believe that it's true.

And not finding one absent mind-altering substances. Where are you seeing it?

Taken another look at that TPM chart you were so happy with?

[Beetwasher]

50. Sure You Are, Races Are Tightening All Over And Dems Are On The Move And For Some Reason

That appears to bother you.

[FBaggins]

51. Lol... yes... "races are tightening all over"

And half of them are moving in our direction while half are moving the other way.

That's not "momentum"... it sure as heck isn't a "surge".

For Some Reason That appears to bother you.

It wouldn't bother me a bit if there was some reason to believe that it was actually happening. I've been desperately looking for it for months now.

Once again (not that I'm under any delusion that you'll actually try to back up your BS)... what is your explanation for why not a single expert, market, or trading site has moved the overall picture in our favor?

Don't worry... I won't hold my breath.

[Beetwasher]

52. It Obviously Does Bother You Since You Keep Following Me Around Like A Little Puppy

Whenever I make the observation that Dems have momentum. You're my biggest fan! :hug:

You even came back and responded to a comment that was two days old in order to speak with me! I'm so flattered!

You should just ask me out already.

[FBaggins]

54. I'm just hoping that at some point you'll back it up.

Or even answer one of the questions.

But as I said... I'm not holding my breath.

You seem to be under the delusion that repetition ads credibility. That if you make the claim often enough it will become true. If only wishing made it so.

So once again... why are you the only one who can see the emperor's new clothes?"

[Beetwasher]

55. You Seem To Be Under The Delusion That Your Opinion Is Reality

"She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

How'd that "reality" work out for you? :rofl:

Dems got the MOJO!!! And the timing couldn't be better! And poor Frodo is sad.

ABC/WaPo poll: Democrats gain in poll but GOP still leads

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/5/907838/-ABC-WaPo-poll:-Democrats-gain-in-poll-but-GOP-still-leads

[FBaggins]

57. And you're under the delusion that reality becomes opinion if you disagree.

It isn't simply my opinion. It's the opinion of every expert I've been able to find on the subject. I've asked you more than once to provide even one that agrees with you. I can only assume that you can't because they don't exist.

Let's take the most recent call from "Love Nate Silver, One Of The Best Out There":

"G.O.P. Senate Odds Improve for Third Consecutive Week"

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/gop-senate-odds-rise-third-consecutive/#more-1927


Tell me... if we've got the momentum (instead of gains in a handful of specific races offset by declines in a similar number of specific races)... why are the odds still moving against us? If republicans "shot their wad" in August... why does the TPM poll tracking have their average higher than at any point in August (or indeed in this election cycle)?

Oh... and when you look at that polling average... don't forget that TPM has yet to include the Democracy Corps' poll (R+6) or the new CBS poll (R+8).

But hey! Don't worry. I'm sure that if you point out yet again that Murkowski is a bigger idiot than I gave her credit for... nobody will notice how foolish you look.

There's still time for a Democratic surge... but we haven't seen it yet. We've reportedly saved a great deal of cash for the final couple weeks. Let's hope it works.

[Beetwasher]

58. Dems Got The MOJO

And pointing out your ridiculous "reality" about Murkowski just shows how accurate your "predictions" are. Sucks for you that it makes you look inept, but hey, that's not my problem!

[FBaggins]

60. Right... you got problems all your own.

Still no answer to some simple questions, eh? Think anyone missed that?

You were the one who wanted to look at the TPM generic polling average. What happened?

Spin and attempt to distract all you like. The only one you're fooling is yourself.

just shows how accurate your "predictions" are

Lol! A oddsmaker who gets nine out of ten correct is pretty darn accurate. Pointing to the one exception just makes you look silly. Incredibly silly when the game you called is already over and you're still sticking to the prediction that was proven wrong. But hey! Let's move on to predicting a surge "after Columbus Day" (because that's when everyone knows it really really counts). Then we can pick the next generic poll showing a democratic lead (and there certainly will be some) and pretend that it isn't normal variability... but a surge instead.

False hopes lead to depression when people realize they were lied to. The truth is better even when it hurts.

[Beetwasher]

61. Hey, Not My Fault Your Predictions Are Shown To Be Absolute Crap

And that you are certain that they are not your opinion but rather "reality".

[FBaggins]

64. Predictions?

Buddy... you've had trouble even seeing the present situation... how could you possibly make predictions?

I told you that the real race was about a six point gap against us and that the one or two polls that you looked at just represented normal variability (as do the ones showing a double-digit republican lead). I told you that if you could just keep your pants on, the next few polls would confirm this.

There have been half a dozen polls out since then. Tell me... what do they say? What's the current TPM spread? I know you can do it... you can even keep your shoes on. :)

And just to help me better understand reality... can you compare that number to the highest gap in August/Sept? Heck... in the entire race?

[Beetwasher]

65. Prediction: "She either picks up the libertarian line or doesn't continue."

We know for sure that one was a load of crap now, don't we?

[FBaggins]

66. Yep. That's two points for you... no question.

Which leaves you down by fifty or so. Sorry.

Gonna answer the question? Or just pretend the issue doesn't exist?

My kids figured out that didn't work by the time they were two. What's taking you so long?

[Beetwasher]

67. I Have To Answer Your Stupid Questions?

Since when? Yeesh, you'd think I committed the crime of the century for merely pointing out the Dems go their Mojo and are on the move!

[FBaggins]

68. Of course not.

You're welcome to continue looking foolish. I love the free entertainment. It's like a break from depressing news.

Unfortunately for you... they aren't stupid questions. You claimed that you predicted that we would surge after Labor Day and that was the end for the Republicans. That we now had the momentum and everyone but me could see it. You even pointed specifically to TPM as evidence.

I'm just pointing out that you were guilty of wishful thinking combined with the delusion that you had a clue what you were talking about. Now we both know that you didn't. Welcome back to reality.

The bad news is that you were clueless... things aren't getting better (let alone rapidly). The good news is that they aren't getting worse (again, despite what a short-term focus on a couple polls would indicate).

[Beetwasher]

69. Guilty??? LOL! Umm Pointing Out The Dems Are Making Their Move On Got Mojo Is A Problem For You?

Where did I predict a "SURGE" after Labor Day? That never happened.

Here's my prediction:

"Granted, things ain't lookin' to great right now for Dems. But keep in mind, campaigns are only NOW getting into gear. Not very many people are paying attention yet. Things don't really start in earnest until after Labor Day.

I'm not saying things are definitely going to turn around, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

I believe we are seeing the Repubs peaking as we have seen at the end of August for the past few years. This has been the recent pattern. The GOP goes balls out in August, they are aided and abetted by the corporate media and things look bleak for the Dems. But ultimately it all turns out to be a lot of hype and by Nov. people are scratching their heads saying "Whuh happened?"."

[FBaggins]

70. A problem? Of course not.

If it were true. I'd be happy to wake up on 11/3 to find that Beetwasher actually knew what he was talking about. I'd trade that serving of crow for an electoral victory any day.

Where did I predict a "SURGE" after Labor Day? That never happened.


Neither did "momentum" or "shot their wad". What's the difference?

Labor day was a month ago BW... how long does it take you to realize that we're not gaining in more races than we're failing? What measure of "momentum" makes you look less foolish?

[Beetwasher]

71. Whatsa Matter? You Need To Declare Defeat Now, Before The Election Even Happens?

Rushing to judgement a bit there are ya?

[stevenleser]

36. Gallup does not show a Republican surge. They have adjusted their model for turnout based on

enthusiasm. You should read the article they put out on it.

[Beetwasher]

37. Shhh, He's Busy Denying Reality, Don't Burst His Bubble

He likes his little middle earth fantasy world.

NO MOMENTUM!!!! THERE'S NO MOMENTUM I TELL YOU!!!!!!!!!! :rofl:

[FBaggins]

40. Lol... yeah... it doesn't reflect a "surge"...

...it just reflects a Gallup claim that republicans have been way ahead all along.

My point isn't that either poll reflects a surge... but that neither does.

Beetwasher has a habit of looking at individual polls that he likes and reading them in the most favorable light... while entirely ignoring any poll that disagrees with that fantasy.

Gallup will tell you the same thing that Charlie Cook will tell you and that Nate Silver will tell you... and it's the same thing I've been telling BW for weeks now. The landscape is largely unchanged over the last several weeks. Individual races are firming up, but it's happening in both directions. There is no ground-shift of note in either direction.

[rocktivity]

3. .

rocktivity

[DrToast]

5. A surge I can get behind!*

*

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. Will this be spread far & wide, like the "enthusiasm gap"? Somehow...

I doubt it. I hate the M$M. :puke:

[Robbins]

8. RAS

They are slowly begining to adjust for reality In November.Those like myself who keep saying Republicans would win seats but fall
short In taking control of Congress will likely be proven right.

[SheilaT]

9. I keep on hoping that the conventional

wisdom that the Dems will lose seats this midterm will turn out to be totally wrong.

[ClarkUSA]

12. The conventional wisdom is correct. Historically, the party in the WH nearly always loses seats...

... during midterm elections. There is no doubt that Democrats will lose seats in Congress.

However, reports of a massive GOP juggernaut gripping the nation seems to have been a bit premature.

[book_worm]

10. A good night for the Dems will be keeping the house and the senate. We could lose 30 house seats

but still have control of the house--and that would still qualify as a good night for the dems--given the constant refrain that the dems will lose the house and possibly the senate.

[Inuca]

11. I 100% agree n/t

[FBaggins]

13. Yep. 30 House seats and say 4-5 Senate seats would be seen as a victory.

It would suck... but it would suck substantially less than if the current predictions came true.

The biggest problem, of course, would be that expectations would be raised while we would be in a tougher position to fulfill them... making 2012 that much harder for the President (and in a year when we're defending twice as many Senate seats).

BUT... that's a "problem" that I would love to have (all things considered). A good cycle would also reduce redistricting losses. Some people just look at the seats that each party adds/losses in a given state's redistricting... but redrawing the lines also lets you shore up competitive seats that you win narrowly. Keeping those to a minimum will be important.

[DCBob]

14. GOPers peaked too soon..

timing is everything in politics.

[HuckleB]

15. It's almost like the Dems pulled a rope-a-dope on the Tea Goppers.

[Joe Chi Minh]

16. This cannot be publicised enough - to counter their noise-machine.

[tritsofme]

17. Is Rasmussen now the toast of DU?

It can be hard to keep the villains straight sometimes.

Luckily Rasmussen is a constant deluge of a data, so we will soon find out if this is a blip or a trend.

[Imajika]

18. Yes, I was going to ask the same thing...

Today Rasmussen is celebrated because it is a poll result people like.

Next week, well, maybe Rasmussen will be vilified as a tool of the right and a fraud because of a poll people don't like.

The truth seems to be that polling is imperfect, Scott Rasmussen tilts right but does have a reputation to maintain, Rasmussen's polling is held in decent regard by most experts, and no one poll tells the story.

Best thing to do is use the RCP averages.

[phleshdef]

20. Rasmussen is painfully accurate anytime we are within striking distance of an election.

He pulls out his good polling models near an election so that he can maintain credibility all the other times throughout the year that he is manipulating perspectives.

[flamingdem]

26. Good point nt

[FBaggins]

56. How close to an election is "striking distance"? n/t

[HughMoran]

53. It's called "relative changes with their (R) bias accounted for"

It's possible to discern trends in even pollsters who have a bias toward your opponent.

[tritsofme]

59. But it is not possible to see a trend from two data points.

All other things being equal, 1/20 polls that are conducted will be absolute garbage.

Like I said before, until we see the numbers next week, we will not know if this is a blip or a trend.

[Teaser]

62. who cares?

.

[craigmatic]

31. If Rasmussen has them down by 3 it really means they're up by 2.

[Change Happens]

63. Real positive MO!!! Yes, we can!!!!

[craigmatic]

72. I can't wait for 2012 when the full base turns out for Obama.