Something was weird there. They have R/D/I 30/32/30, they have Harris tied with indies, Harris +97 among Democrats, Trump +89 among Republicans, and their numbers should work out to a Harris lead of roughly 5 points. Yet they don't. The only possible reason for this is that their "don't know/other" crowd on party ID is extremely pro-Trump.
Probably? The overall is 1611 likely voters, so you're looking at 500ish per category. I just noticed that the crosstabs don't seem to match their toplines.
Depends on what you mean by "bump"? The poll shows a 2-point Harris lead, but this is actually a 6-point swing from the last national Q-Poll that had DJT up 4 in the multi-candidate field.
There always is a chance and Hawley did underperform Trump in 2018. He’s only gotten a worse reputation since then. However, it seems unlikely any Democrat will win statewide in Missouri anytime soon.
Reproductive rights ballot measures in the 2022 midterms didn't really appear to have effects on the rest of the ballot, especially at the scale it would take for a Democrat to win Missouri, and the impact will likely be even less in a presidential year. Either way, Missouri won't decide control of the Senate, and Florida/Texas/Montana are better investments.
On the other hand, isn't there a reproductive rights proposal on the ballot in Missouri? Seems to me that might spur turnout. Maybe some voters who are still loyal to Trump will be inclined to split their tickets to dump Hawley and help the Democrats keep their US Senate majority so they can pass a bill protecting reproductive freedom. I don't foresee Missouri going "blue" in the Electoral College but I could imagine Hawley losing his race.
There's a tiny, tiny chance that Kunce could win if the bottom fell out nationwide for Republicans. One thing IS certain: The Missouri race won't decide who controls the Senate.
The highest priority in the Senate needs to be on getting that 50th Democratic member. For that to happen, all the Democratic incumbents who are currently ahead and their nominated replacements need to win PLUS we need to win one of the following three contests:
1. Montana, where Tester is behind.
2. Florida, where Mucarsel-Powell is behind, or
3. Texas, where Colin Allred is behind.
Kunce could -- in a very, very surprising world -- be our 53rd senator. But we need to give ourselves as many chances as possible to win that 50th seat.
Emerson and RMG aren't the best pollsters, but neither is a GOP troll outfit. RMG shows Tester ahead. POS is a sketchy GOP pollster and that poll was for the Montana GOP, although their recent state polls of the presidential race looked reasonable. I don't know anything about American Pulse, and the poll was for a local TV station.
Would you say that the polling cited by @sacman701 qualifies as evidence (flawed and limited though it may be)?
There's also circumstance: Montana is redder nowadays, and Tester previously won in great Democratic years.
I fully get that Tester has snatched victory out of defeat before. We should be no means write him off.
But we can't bank on it. We need to keep the path open in Florida and Texas. I've been prioritizing Murcasel-Powell over all the others because she needs more money in a very expensive state. And frankly I dislike Skeletor even more than Cruz -- at least Cruz is fun to laugh at.
I do think it is likely that Tester is behind but we have not had a reputable poll as of yet. I think we will need an upset somewhere (besides OH) to keep a 50/50 split.
And I am also rooting for the Democratic challengers in the US Senate races in Florida and Texas. I think both are possible, if things really break our way.
I wouldn't say I'm optimistic about winning, but if the bottom falls out for Trump It wouldn't shock me if this ends up being the wave seat that people look at as emblematic of the depth of the wave. In 2016, Hillary lost the state by 18.6 while Kander lost it by 2.8 and so we've got a relatively recent example of an election where there was massive crossover voting. And while I think Kunce is not as good a candidate as Kander, I also don't think Hawley is as good a candidate as Blunt. MIssouri moved more left than the country from 2016 to 2020 and if Kamala can get the margin to around 12, I think Kunce has a small chance. If she gets it to single digits, I think she's got a real chance.
Kunce lost the Democratic primary for US Senate in the last cycle, beaten by someone with a lot of dough and name recognition (an Anheuser-Busch heiress, right?) who turned out to be a very weak candidate in the general. Given Hawley's richly-deserved high negatives, I remain hopeful this time. Might it make a difference to Republican women, swing voters and independents that Hawley's wife Erin was lead counsel for the bad guys in the horrible mifepristone case this past term?
Imo the stuff on hawley's wife is inside baseball stuff that will have almost no impact (not a voting issue to folks who were going Hawley anyway or vice versa)
Kunce has consistently outraised Hawley in fundraising and is has been chipping at his lead in the polls. While I don’t predict Hawley will lose, 1% chance is stretching it.
I'd argue a 35-40% chance Hawley loses. Right now, that percentage isn't likely to change in the next few weeks. However, compared to other Senate races in red states, Kunce has it better than the other Democratic Senate Candidates.
By contrast, with the WV-SEN race I completely understand how the argument can be made that there's a 1% chance Jim Justice loses. That's because while Democratic Senate Candidate Glenn Elliott is touring all around 55 counties in the state, no real polls have been conducted. Last one showed Elliott well behind in double digits but back on DKE it was argued the pollster didn't have the best credibility.
I see very little difference between WV and Mizzou; extreme long shots both;if forced to handicap it, I'd give Glenn Elliott zero chance and Lucas Kunce maybe 1% chance unless Hawley finds himself in a Live boy\dead girl situation
Polling on Missouri today. In the three statewide races, R are up about ten points. The abortion rights ballot initiative is at 52 and minimum wage is at 57.
I think it's at the very outside of possible. Kunce has the resources and 2016 for Kander was very close despite a blow out at the top of the ticket. But it's never the deciding seat.
No chance. A poll came out showing the abortion rights ballot measure winning and the Republicans sweeping every state-wide election. It's just one poll, but that's the result we should all expect. What makes Kunce moderate, though?
From his website: "Lucas Kunce is a different kind of Democrat. He’s the 13-year Marine veteran, born-and-raised Missourian, and leading antitrust advocate running to replace Josh Hawley in the U.S. Senate. He’s on a mission to take power back for everyday people in our country — starting with working families here in Missouri." Check it out. Detailed bio and discussion of issues of biggest importance to him: https://lucaskunce.com/meet-lucas-kunce/
On the other hand, Kunce has consistently outraised Hawley for months and has been cutting down on Hawley’s lead in the polls. He is indeed a credible Democratic challenger.
Relevant to the FL-13, survey: Something I remember from 2008 was that there was a special election in IN-7 and it appeared to be competitive in some polls. But Carson, the Democrat, ended up winning pretty easily. There was some thought at that time that reason for the polling miss might have actually been Gerrymandering. Voters don't necessarily know what district they're in and the surveys may have captured some of the more R leaning parts of Marion County that were outside the district.
During the NY-03 special a few months ago I received a robocall for Suozzi…even though I live in NY-04. Thankfully that kind of oversight didn’t hurt him, but it shows these things happen even in professionally run campaigns.
IA-02: I know it's not considered competitive, but I am intrigued by independent candidate Jody Puffett, who announced yesterday that she qualified for the ballot.
Although she is running as an independent beholden to neither party, Puffett's background in corporate finance and issue focus (spending cuts, term limits) is more likely to appeal to Rs than Ds.
We'll see if there is any significant protest vote from the right against Ashley Hinson. (Challengers running from the right did surprisingly well in the IA-01 and IA-04 GOP primaries.)
I did some back of the envelope math. Correct me if I'm wrong, but would a 14-point enthusiasm gap translates into, like, eight million votes nationwide or even more. I know the enthusiasm gap won't fully show up as a turnout gap, but it still could translate into huge numbers.
Does anyone have a good idea of how enthusiasm gaps do typically translate? And to what extent is enthusiasm already factored in as polls model turnout composition?
New Swing States poll out today from Bloomberg News/Morning Consult has Harris leading in six of seven states with a tie in one (AZ). Overall, the lead is two point among RVs and one among RVs. The poll was conducted August 23-27 with 4,962 RVs, which included 4,615 LVs. State margins for Harris are (RV/LV):
But if we have to continue the goddamned idiotic tradition of Democrats putting Republicans in positions of Executive power, who would the most innocuous Republicans be, and in what positions? Liz Cheney for Secretary of Commerce? Some Republican veteran anti-Trumper for Secretary of Veterans Affairs? I looked at a list of Cabinet positions, and it's really hard to find ones that couldn't be injurious to entrust to even an anti-authoritarian Republican. Why do Democrats have to continue to gratuitously hurt ourselves by putting a fox in the henhouse? These are not the days of Everett Dirksen, Jacob Javits or even Chuck Hagel. And wanting a Republican in the Cabinet to "have different views" normalizes an abnormal, extremist, authoritarian party that's trying to destroy America and must be defeated at every level. If the Democratic presidential candidate thinks they're not so weird and dangerous but trustworthy enough to put in her Cabinet, why should people vote against them, especially downballot? Terrible, horrible own goal!
I don't. Ray LaHood was transportation secretary for Obama wasn't he? And Jim Leach was an ambassador or something. It doesn't have to be a crazy person.
Yes, Ray LaHood was Transportation Secretary. Jim Leach isn't a Republican anymore, I think, and is pretty liberal. He's from a different age at this point.
By the way, much as I liked President Obama in many ways, he was horrible at trying to get people to vote Democratic downballot, and that hurt the country.
Yes. This includes the PR disaster with the Affordable Care Act in the post-passage of the bill into law in Obama's 1st term and the shaky rollout of the healthcare.gov website in his 2nd term.
ACA is great progress but Obama and Democrats were being complete and utter wimps.
Overseeing TARP should be disqualifying, in my opinion. I know there will be some disagreement about that, but I think that was handled poorly by not at least requiring the banking executives who almost destroyed the world economy by making loads of bad mortgages and then bet against themselves with default credit swaps to resign - or better, also require the banks to give the Federal government 51% of their common stock in exchange for bailouts. Also, was he ever on record about why the banks were bailed out and the people defaulting on mortgages were forced out onto the street?
Something was weird there. They have R/D/I 30/32/30, they have Harris tied with indies, Harris +97 among Democrats, Trump +89 among Republicans, and their numbers should work out to a Harris lead of roughly 5 points. Yet they don't. The only possible reason for this is that their "don't know/other" crowd on party ID is extremely pro-Trump.
Yeah, but are the crosstab samples large enough to be statistically significant?
Probably? The overall is 1611 likely voters, so you're looking at 500ish per category. I just noticed that the crosstabs don't seem to match their toplines.
Depends on what you mean by "bump"? The poll shows a 2-point Harris lead, but this is actually a 6-point swing from the last national Q-Poll that had DJT up 4 in the multi-candidate field.
Any chance Missouri's US Senate seat might flip? Hawley is repulsive and his Democratic challenger Kunce seems like an attractively moderate Democrat.
There always is a chance and Hawley did underperform Trump in 2018. He’s only gotten a worse reputation since then. However, it seems unlikely any Democrat will win statewide in Missouri anytime soon.
You don't think the presence of a reproductive rights proposal on the ballot might be a significant factor?
Reproductive rights ballot measures in the 2022 midterms didn't really appear to have effects on the rest of the ballot, especially at the scale it would take for a Democrat to win Missouri, and the impact will likely be even less in a presidential year. Either way, Missouri won't decide control of the Senate, and Florida/Texas/Montana are better investments.
On the other hand, isn't there a reproductive rights proposal on the ballot in Missouri? Seems to me that might spur turnout. Maybe some voters who are still loyal to Trump will be inclined to split their tickets to dump Hawley and help the Democrats keep their US Senate majority so they can pass a bill protecting reproductive freedom. I don't foresee Missouri going "blue" in the Electoral College but I could imagine Hawley losing his race.
There's a tiny, tiny chance that Kunce could win if the bottom fell out nationwide for Republicans. One thing IS certain: The Missouri race won't decide who controls the Senate.
The highest priority in the Senate needs to be on getting that 50th Democratic member. For that to happen, all the Democratic incumbents who are currently ahead and their nominated replacements need to win PLUS we need to win one of the following three contests:
1. Montana, where Tester is behind.
2. Florida, where Mucarsel-Powell is behind, or
3. Texas, where Colin Allred is behind.
Kunce could -- in a very, very surprising world -- be our 53rd senator. But we need to give ourselves as many chances as possible to win that 50th seat.
Agreed👍
There are no polls in July, but 4 in August:
Emerson: Sheehy 48 Tester 46
American Pulse: Sheehy 51 Tester 45
RMG: Tester 49 Sheehy 44
POS: Sheehy 51 Tester 44
Emerson and RMG aren't the best pollsters, but neither is a GOP troll outfit. RMG shows Tester ahead. POS is a sketchy GOP pollster and that poll was for the Montana GOP, although their recent state polls of the presidential race looked reasonable. I don't know anything about American Pulse, and the poll was for a local TV station.
Would you say that the polling cited by @sacman701 qualifies as evidence (flawed and limited though it may be)?
There's also circumstance: Montana is redder nowadays, and Tester previously won in great Democratic years.
I fully get that Tester has snatched victory out of defeat before. We should be no means write him off.
But we can't bank on it. We need to keep the path open in Florida and Texas. I've been prioritizing Murcasel-Powell over all the others because she needs more money in a very expensive state. And frankly I dislike Skeletor even more than Cruz -- at least Cruz is fun to laugh at.
That's a tough competition. They are both really odious.
I'm not convinced that Tester is actually behind
I do think it is likely that Tester is behind but we have not had a reputable poll as of yet. I think we will need an upset somewhere (besides OH) to keep a 50/50 split.
And I am also rooting for the Democratic challengers in the US Senate races in Florida and Texas. I think both are possible, if things really break our way.
I hardly ever rely on hunches but I just have one on Cruz this time.
I wouldn't say I'm optimistic about winning, but if the bottom falls out for Trump It wouldn't shock me if this ends up being the wave seat that people look at as emblematic of the depth of the wave. In 2016, Hillary lost the state by 18.6 while Kander lost it by 2.8 and so we've got a relatively recent example of an election where there was massive crossover voting. And while I think Kunce is not as good a candidate as Kander, I also don't think Hawley is as good a candidate as Blunt. MIssouri moved more left than the country from 2016 to 2020 and if Kamala can get the margin to around 12, I think Kunce has a small chance. If she gets it to single digits, I think she's got a real chance.
Kunce lost the Democratic primary for US Senate in the last cycle, beaten by someone with a lot of dough and name recognition (an Anheuser-Busch heiress, right?) who turned out to be a very weak candidate in the general. Given Hawley's richly-deserved high negatives, I remain hopeful this time. Might it make a difference to Republican women, swing voters and independents that Hawley's wife Erin was lead counsel for the bad guys in the horrible mifepristone case this past term?
Imo the stuff on hawley's wife is inside baseball stuff that will have almost no impact (not a voting issue to folks who were going Hawley anyway or vice versa)
Probably not. If anything, it would be Senator Hawley's own opinions and record that would be relevant.
You guys are making a good argument for like a 1% chance Hawley loses. So maybe you all are right.
1% chance?
Kunce has consistently outraised Hawley in fundraising and is has been chipping at his lead in the polls. While I don’t predict Hawley will lose, 1% chance is stretching it.
It could be less than 1%, yes.
I'd argue a 35-40% chance Hawley loses. Right now, that percentage isn't likely to change in the next few weeks. However, compared to other Senate races in red states, Kunce has it better than the other Democratic Senate Candidates.
By contrast, with the WV-SEN race I completely understand how the argument can be made that there's a 1% chance Jim Justice loses. That's because while Democratic Senate Candidate Glenn Elliott is touring all around 55 counties in the state, no real polls have been conducted. Last one showed Elliott well behind in double digits but back on DKE it was argued the pollster didn't have the best credibility.
IMO, that's crazy! You're calling this a Lean R race!
I see very little difference between WV and Mizzou; extreme long shots both;if forced to handicap it, I'd give Glenn Elliott zero chance and Lucas Kunce maybe 1% chance unless Hawley finds himself in a Live boy\dead girl situation
I will HAPPILY give you the implied odds of a 35%-40% chance of winning MO. Tell me how much you want to bet...
Polling on Missouri today. In the three statewide races, R are up about ten points. The abortion rights ballot initiative is at 52 and minimum wage is at 57.
https://missouriindependent.com/2024/08/29/poll-shows-missouri-voters-back-trump-hawley-abortion-rights-and-minimum-wage-hike/
11 point margin is better than in 2020 when Biden lost by 16.
I think it's at the very outside of possible. Kunce has the resources and 2016 for Kander was very close despite a blow out at the top of the ticket. But it's never the deciding seat.
No. Unless some bombshell erupts involving Hawley.
It would have to be something personal
to change the trajectory of the race if his behavior on January 6, 2020 wasn't enough. Such as if he had raped children.
I contend that his actions on January6 helped him in rural mizzou(which is the only thing he gives a damn about until he runs for President in '28)
Probably not all his actions, though. Do you suppose they liked him running away from the putschists after egging them on?
No chance. A poll came out showing the abortion rights ballot measure winning and the Republicans sweeping every state-wide election. It's just one poll, but that's the result we should all expect. What makes Kunce moderate, though?
I'm basing that opinion on posts from the Kunce campaign I have seen on FB
What would you expect them to do? Post that he'll lose?
I'm referring to posts that provide his positions on various issues. I consider his positions to be moderate.
Sorry, I get it. I was under the impression that he was running as a progressive. But I couldn't tell you his opinions on issues.
From his website: "Lucas Kunce is a different kind of Democrat. He’s the 13-year Marine veteran, born-and-raised Missourian, and leading antitrust advocate running to replace Josh Hawley in the U.S. Senate. He’s on a mission to take power back for everyday people in our country — starting with working families here in Missouri." Check it out. Detailed bio and discussion of issues of biggest importance to him: https://lucaskunce.com/meet-lucas-kunce/
If the DSCC helps Kunce it might.
On the other hand, Kunce has consistently outraised Hawley for months and has been cutting down on Hawley’s lead in the polls. He is indeed a credible Democratic challenger.
I think probably has the same odds as Dan Osborne in the Nebraska contest
Relevant to the FL-13, survey: Something I remember from 2008 was that there was a special election in IN-7 and it appeared to be competitive in some polls. But Carson, the Democrat, ended up winning pretty easily. There was some thought at that time that reason for the polling miss might have actually been Gerrymandering. Voters don't necessarily know what district they're in and the surveys may have captured some of the more R leaning parts of Marion County that were outside the district.
During the NY-03 special a few months ago I received a robocall for Suozzi…even though I live in NY-04. Thankfully that kind of oversight didn’t hurt him, but it shows these things happen even in professionally run campaigns.
IA-02: I know it's not considered competitive, but I am intrigued by independent candidate Jody Puffett, who announced yesterday that she qualified for the ballot.
Although she is running as an independent beholden to neither party, Puffett's background in corporate finance and issue focus (spending cuts, term limits) is more likely to appeal to Rs than Ds.
We'll see if there is any significant protest vote from the right against Ashley Hinson. (Challengers running from the right did surprisingly well in the IA-01 and IA-04 GOP primaries.)
https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2024/08/29/how-independent-candidate-jody-puffett-could-affect-ia-02-race/
Democratic enthusiasm up big according to Gallup.
https://x.com/johngramlich/status/1829139993828438440
I did some back of the envelope math. Correct me if I'm wrong, but would a 14-point enthusiasm gap translates into, like, eight million votes nationwide or even more. I know the enthusiasm gap won't fully show up as a turnout gap, but it still could translate into huge numbers.
Does anyone have a good idea of how enthusiasm gaps do typically translate? And to what extent is enthusiasm already factored in as polls model turnout composition?
Lots of good details on the Gallup site BTW: https://news.gallup.com/poll/649397/democrats-drive-surge-election-enthusiasm.aspx
#New @Reuters General Election poll
🔵 Harris 45% (+4)
🔴 Trump 41%
🟡 Kennedy 6%
IPSOS #B - 3562 RV - 8/28
https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1829169100872134724?s=61&t=_oLmDamLuLVUMclqY2xEGw
Suffolk has Harris up 5 without Junior
https://x.com/Politics_Polls/status/1829170688726577600
Harris definitely has a sizable bounce currently; and the campaign fundraising is continuing to roll
GDP came in above expectations and the polls continue to show a nice DNC bounce; can't wait for the all CAPS reply from Truth Social
Trump already said on Truth Social that Fox News polls are rigged and worthless.
Quinnipiac poll coming later today
Harris 49, Trump 47
New Swing States poll out today from Bloomberg News/Morning Consult has Harris leading in six of seven states with a tie in one (AZ). Overall, the lead is two point among RVs and one among RVs. The poll was conducted August 23-27 with 4,962 RVs, which included 4,615 LVs. State margins for Harris are (RV/LV):
AZ: tied/tied
GA: +2/+3
MI: +3/+2
NV: +4/+4
NC: +2/tied
PA: +3/+3
WI: +8/+9 (seems out of whack)
Behind a paywall but here is a link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-08-29/election-2024-poll-harris-leads-or-ties-with-trump-in-swing-states?srnd=undefined&leadSource=uverify%20wall
Boy, do I really hate this!
Harris Wants a Republican in Her Cabinet: https://politicalwire.com/2024/08/29/harris-wants-a-republican-in-her-cabinet/
But if we have to continue the goddamned idiotic tradition of Democrats putting Republicans in positions of Executive power, who would the most innocuous Republicans be, and in what positions? Liz Cheney for Secretary of Commerce? Some Republican veteran anti-Trumper for Secretary of Veterans Affairs? I looked at a list of Cabinet positions, and it's really hard to find ones that couldn't be injurious to entrust to even an anti-authoritarian Republican. Why do Democrats have to continue to gratuitously hurt ourselves by putting a fox in the henhouse? These are not the days of Everett Dirksen, Jacob Javits or even Chuck Hagel. And wanting a Republican in the Cabinet to "have different views" normalizes an abnormal, extremist, authoritarian party that's trying to destroy America and must be defeated at every level. If the Democratic presidential candidate thinks they're not so weird and dangerous but trustworthy enough to put in her Cabinet, why should people vote against them, especially downballot? Terrible, horrible own goal!
Yeah, I agree. I think he would be fine.
Kinzinger for VA Secretary would work for me.
He's about the only one I could stomach.. Christine Todd Whitman has to be beyond her shelf life by now
I don't. Ray LaHood was transportation secretary for Obama wasn't he? And Jim Leach was an ambassador or something. It doesn't have to be a crazy person.
Yes, Ray LaHood was Transportation Secretary. Jim Leach isn't a Republican anymore, I think, and is pretty liberal. He's from a different age at this point.
By the way, much as I liked President Obama in many ways, he was horrible at trying to get people to vote Democratic downballot, and that hurt the country.
Yes. This includes the PR disaster with the Affordable Care Act in the post-passage of the bill into law in Obama's 1st term and the shaky rollout of the healthcare.gov website in his 2nd term.
ACA is great progress but Obama and Democrats were being complete and utter wimps.
A lot of that wasn't his fault, but it did hurt the Democrats, and he was in the White House at the time.
Give Susan Collins a good post. Then we take the Senate assuming it’s 49-51 as looks likely.
Yeah, of course, but that's not happening.
Literally any Cabinet position she wants. Secretary of State? AG (not even sure she's an attorney, but who cares)? Done!
Neel Kashkari would be an excellent Treasury Secretary. He's bright, extremely intelligent and would be capable at the job.
On the other hand, I'd prefer Kashkari be the next Fed Chairman.
Overseeing TARP should be disqualifying, in my opinion. I know there will be some disagreement about that, but I think that was handled poorly by not at least requiring the banking executives who almost destroyed the world economy by making loads of bad mortgages and then bet against themselves with default credit swaps to resign - or better, also require the banks to give the Federal government 51% of their common stock in exchange for bailouts. Also, was he ever on record about why the banks were bailed out and the people defaulting on mortgages were forced out onto the street?
It's official: @NelliePou is the new Democratic candidate for Congress in NJ-9, picked tonight to replace the late Bill Pascrell.
RCP has a ton of new polls from yesterday and today; almost all favor Democratic candidates