Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

progressivecitizen

What are surveys and polls telling us?

Recommended Posts

Incompetent fools who would have voted against Trump stayed home in 2016. Those people, along with others who previously supported Obama and who turned on Hillary, are as much to blame for the Trumpian circus as the basket of deplorables. Will these people come out and vote against Republicans this time? In California, record numbers are registering to vote. Anybody read anything about what's going on in the rest of the country? The blues outnumber the reds. Will everyone turn out so we can take the House back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect we will see red areas turning redder and blue turning bluer.  From what I can see, the nation continues to become more polarized, distrustful, insular, partisan, and uncompromising.  The Kavanaugh debacle will fuel both parties to reach new heights of inflammatory rhetoric in an attempt to turn out the base.   When you add it all up, the +'s and the -'s are likely to cancel out leaving the Democrats with normal gains for the out-of-power party in an off-year.  I think chances are slightly better than 50/50 that D's will control the house.  It's just a gut feeling.  

 

Strictly among people I know personally and in-person, I'm getting a sense of fatigue.  It seems like their 'outrage meters' have been pegged for so long, they don't want to think about it anymore.  I see more people avoiding political discussions for fear of stepping on a social landmine.  How does that convert to votes?  Maybe not so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the polls that showed Hillary Clinton would win give many a false sense of security?  "I don't have to worry about voting, because she's a sure thing."  I remind you that Hillary received the majority of votes; she lost due to the electoral college.  However, Hillary was not a popular candidate.  One poll before the election said that 70% believed her to be untrustworthy.  Among liberals and progressives it was Bernie Sanders who made people excited to vote.  And before you blame Bernie for Hillary's loss, the vast majority of his supporters voted for Hillary in the final election.  They just weren't excited about it.  The party elite dismissed Bernie supporters.  They seemed to think that liberals and progressives would fall in line, and they did, reluctantly.  Saying that those who stayed home would have voted for Hillary is not provable. The turnout for 2016 was 55.5% of eligible voters, and that is in line with the three previous presidential elections.  The majority of average people wanted someone different.  There were people who believed that Trump would rebuild America, spend money on infrastructure, and reverse the transition of good paying jobs to low paying jobs.  Many of those people have realized that Trump lied.  I agree with Renegade that these midterms may not be the "blue wave" we hope for.  In fact, the talk of a blue wave may increase Republican turnout. But all one can do is vote.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard that the Senate seems to be out of reach for Dems. What horrible turn of events has occurred in the last couple of months to make people talk this trash? Also, what will Dems be able to do if they take the House? I am assuming they will have the power to stick a crowbar into any and all of Trump's stupidities. Tell me I'm right! And how might the Senate interfere with this if it stays Republican? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It boggles me why anyone would stay home, I live in CA and know Newsome will be governor, Feinstein will remain in the senate, and McNerney will be reelected in the house regardless if I vote because we have a large democrat majority in this state. Why would someone where a win is possibly a few thousand votes difference stay home? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, fourputt said:

It boggles me why anyone would stay home, I live in CA and know Newsome will be governor, Feinstein will remain in the senate, and McNerney will be reelected in the house regardless if I vote because we have a large democrat majority in this state. Why would someone where a win is possibly a few thousand votes difference stay home? 

 

What level of turnout would you consider acceptable?

I guess it depends on your local perspective.

 

  • Typical turnout levels are about 60% for Presidential Elections, and about 40% for Midterms.
  • Something like 27 states already recorded record turnout numbers.
  • 2018 turnout could approach 50%, levels not seen since the 1960’s.
  • Among voters 18-29, turnout is up in 39 of 41 states.
  • Average National turnout is ~48.8%.
  • Expected turnout varies greatly by state, from 36.1% (KY), to 61.5% (Minn).

Other States:

  • NY: 39.9%*  
  • TX: 42.1%  Early voting turnout: 236.4% of 2014 Early voting
  • CA: 42.9%  Early voting turnout:   80.9% of 2014 Early voting
  • GA: 48.8%  Early voting turnout: 194.3% of 2014 Early voting
  • FL: 49.5%   Early voting turnout: 160.4% of 2014 Early voting
  • MA: 49.6% Early voting turnout: 424.2% of 2014 Early voting

*(In the 2016 presidential election, New York was 44th in terms of voter turnout.) 

 

 

While increasing these numbers are good for democracy, what partisans really care about is Democrat turnout vs. Republican turnout.

 

There are some Ruby red states that would probably require Democratic turnout to be greater than 100% (impossible). This is why Dem’s need to attract unaffiliated voters, or non-voters  in order to stand a chance to win the Senate, or Governor's races. This will be true in 2020 as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just my imagination, or are the campaign ads extra nasty this year?   Most ads contain slander and outright lies but, no matter how awful it gets, there's no censoring of political speech.   I'm not so sure that's a good thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Renegade said:

Is it just my imagination, or are the campaign ads extra nasty this year?   Most ads contain slander and outright lies but, no matter how awful it gets, there's no censoring of political speech.   I'm not so sure that's a good thing.  

The Pig has lowered the bar even further, what occupies me sometimes is wondering how this circus will be described 10 or 20 years from now, will the republican party distance itself from Trump once he's gone or will others pick up where he left off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Renegade said:

Is it just my imagination, or are the campaign ads extra nasty this year?   Most ads contain slander and outright lies but, no matter how awful it gets, there's no censoring of political speech.   I'm not so sure that's a good thing.  

 

To protect the electorate from disinformation, political advertisers should be held to a minimum standard of truth, as the ideal.   But it would be almost impossible to enforce it in a non-partisan manner.  The most ruthless would most likely take control of any censorship process, suppressing ads by the other side. 

 

As of now, gullibility in much of the electorate allows the unscrupulous to to shape public opinion on the basis of falsehoods.  The only real solution is for better education of the American people, enabling them to better inform themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What are the surveys and polls telling us?

 

Polls and surveys don't take account of cheating.  Democrats usually need to win by a larger percent than the polls indicate because of Republican election rigging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...