Noted.
Thank you.
Senate races appear to be tightening up with challengers closing the gap regardless of party. I believe this is normal as people start to pay attention. There is little to no movement on any race.
Latest Senate Math: MT slipping away from Democrats would be the 51st seat.
Contested (lead is >0 but <4, 3 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
OH: Brown(D) up 3+ has not broken 50% in any poll
MI: Slotkin(D) up 3+ has broken 50% in three polls
Competitive (lead is >3i w/50 but <7, 6 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
PA: Casey(D) up 4 has broken 50% in three polls
MT: Sheehy(R) up 5+ has broken 50% in three polls
FL: Scott(R) up 4+ pts has not broken 50% in any poll
NJ: Kim(D) up 6 has not broken 50% in any poll
WI: Baldwin(D) up 3 has broken 50% in three polls
TX: Cruz(R) up 5 has not broken 50% in any poll
Marginal (leading candidate up >6i w/50 but <9, 8 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
MD: Alsobrooks(D) up 7+ has broken 50% in two polls
AZ: Gallego(D) up 7+ has broken 50% in five polls
Note: Bold denotes a possible flip
GOP must hold FL and TX and take any other seat for an outright majority. If Trump wins, they need only hold FL and TX
DEMs must hold all of their seats plus take FL or TX to keep a majority, or all except FL and TX if Harris wins
Note: If the Presidential race is tied, Trump will become President, but if the Senate is in the balance (50/50) Democrats could make Harris or Walz VP in order to hold the Senate.
Updated checking 538 Polls, RCP House Map, The Hill, Rothenberg, 270 to win and Cook power ratings. There are no substantive changes. It remains a horse race with the most likely outcome being not much change.
Dem to GOP (Total gains: GOP+3)
NC-6/Redistricting; NC-13/Redistricting; NC-14/Redistricting
GOP to Dem (Total gains: Dem+3)
LA-6/Redistricting; AL-2/Redistricting; NY-22/D+5 District
Note: In most other contested districts all of the pundit sites rate the remaining races toss ups or give a slight edge to the incumbent party.
Other House seats with the opportunity to flip (by party demographics) vulnerable
Contested (R1 to D1 or Incumbent underwater)
AK01(D)…CA13(R)…CA22(R)…CA27(R)…CA45(R)…CO03(R)
CO08(D)…KS03(D)…ME02(D)…MI03(D)…MI07(D)…MI08(D)
MN02(D)…NC01(D)…NH01(D)…NJ07(R)…NM02(D)…NY04(R)
NY17(R)…NY19(R)…OH13(D)…OR05(R)…PA07(D)…PA08(D)
PA10(R)…TX15(R)…VA07(D)…VA10(D)…WA03(D)…WA08(D)
Total: 12R, 18D; Vulnerable: 6R, 7D
Competitive R2-R4 and D2-D4
AZ01(R)…AZ06(R)…CA03(R)…CA40(R)…CA41(R)…CA47(D)
CT05(D)…FL13(R)…GA02(D)…IA03(R)…IL13(D)…IL17(D)
IN01(D)…MD06(D)…MI10(R)…NE02(R)…NY01(R)…NY18(D)
OH01(D)…OR04(D)…OR06(D)…TX28(D)…TX34(D)…WI01(R)
Total: 11R,13D; Vulnerable: 5R, 2D
Note: Vulnerability is based on party demographics for the district >+2 underwater or recent redistricting changes making the seat more competitive with a party demographic switch.
Note: Some of this is supported by polling now (538), but the polls are mostly candidate commissioned polls.
Note: Taking all of the polling flips, redistricting flips, and most vulnerable seats into account, the result is D+2; If Democrats win all of these the result is D+14; If GOP wins all of them the result is R+12
This “analysis” is a joke.
It is based on polling that cherry picks which polls to include and what time periods to measure based on what will look best for Trump.
But please continue to present it as honest. It will make Nov 6th that much more fun.
1 Like
its got OR as “competitive” but not IA.
there have now been two polls there harris v trump, one partisan and one non-partisan that show trump below 7% lead.
that should be enough for inclusion on the list.
Allan
You are joke, that is the only joke here.
I’ve already proven this is a lie, and you still have not commented on it.
did you find a H2H poll for IA yet? I told you, I use the H2H page, not the multi candidate page. There is only one poll on the list, and its multi candidate
Nah. You didn’t even address my post.
You just went on another one of your “this guy is lying” screeds with nothing to back it up.
We see your game.
RCP cherry picks. I showed evidence of it. You tried to dishonestly change the conversation.
Run along.
1 Like
Yes I did, and your lying again.
I posted the results for NC, AZ and GA where Trump polls were dropped in the same time frame showing that they drop polls Trump is leading too. Your assertion that they only do it to harris polls is proven a lie.
of course you knew that, since you checked those pages and when you saw they did not support your lie, you chose to ignore them
I posted the RCP PA polls and the RCP National polls.
That’s it.
Both posts showed RCP cherry picking.
You are either massively confused or trying to obfuscate.
I am going to be charitable and assume you are massively confused.
Run along.
Do some more “analysis”.
You posted them to show RCP was biased, I posted the NC, AZ and GA stats to show you that was not the case. They drop Trump polls too. You have ignored it, because you are not an honest person. You chrry picked the pages that supported your argument and ignored the ones that don’t, while accusing them of cherry picking, what a typical leftist troll.
and that is all you’re doing… Trolling.
Nah.
Just because every average doesn’t show them cherry picking doesn’t mean they don’t cherry pick.
Sorry if that concept is too complex for you.
I selected some examples of them cherry picking.
You want another? Look at the RCP National Average of Polls from TODAY here…
Atlas Intel (Trump +3) is awfully lonely out there all by itself from back on 9/11-9/12.
Why do you think they wouldn’t include Data For Progress (Harris +4) a more recent poll 9/12-9/13?
Or TIPP (Harris +4) another more recent poll 9/11-9/13?
It’s not RV v LV as they have other RVs in poll.
Any guesses?
How about Yahoo News?
I wonder why they keep including Atlas Intel?
Boggles the mind doesn’t it.
Nothiing in my posts uses national averages, so I really don’t give a rats ass what you think you found.
and you are lying again, thats not “another” one, its the same crap you posted yesterday with the same complaints
You don’t give a rats ass?
Is that code for I surrender?
Run along.
no, its kind of straight up for your lies don’t impress me.
“Oh look, they cherry picked polls on the pages I’m cherry picking to show they cherry pick while I ignore all the other pages” is… dishonest and stupid.
Ok Pythagoras. Back to your analysis. 
You are now just wasting my time.
1 Like
The concept of your opinion not meaning ■■■■■ Nah, easy concept
2 Likes
Posted again because the troll took up enough space
Electoral Template. The race has not moved much post debate and has mostly frozen where it’s at. Basically, a tossup. The debate does not seem to have changed anything. The lead changes from day to day and poll to poll.
Contested states (lead is >0 but <4 and leader (over 3 pts) has broken 50% in fewer than 2 polls)
WI: Harris up <1 has broken 50% in three polls
MI: Harris up <1 has broken 50% in two polls
PA: Tie both have broken 50% in two polls
GA: Trump up 1+ has broken 50% in six polls
AZ: Trump up 1+ has broken 50% in five polls
NC: Trump up <1 has broken 50% in three polls
NV: Harris up 1+ has broken 50% in three polls
ME2: Trump up 1 has not broken 50% in any poll
Note: Trump has broken 50% in MI and WI in one poll
Note: Harris has broken 50% in one poll in AZ and NC
Note: Harris averages in NV and PA include outliers
Competitive (lead is >3 but <7 and leader (over 6) has broken 50% in fewer than 2 polls)
MN: Harris up 5+ has broken 50% in two polls
VA: Harris up 4+ has broken 50% in two polls
FL: Trump up 6 has broken 50% in two polls.
OR: Harris up 5 has not broken 50% in any poll
TX: Trump up 5+ has broken 50% in three polls
Marginal (lead is >6 but <9 and leader (over 8) has broken 50% in fewer than 3 polls)
NH: Harris up 7+ has broken 50% in three polls.
IA: Trump up 7 has broken 50% in the only poll (non RCP)
Note: Neither candidate has enough EV’s to win with PA tied
Note: There are currently 4 states where the lead is <1 (MI, PA, NC and WI) Considering they each win the states where they lead by 1 or more, if Trump wins any two states he wins. If Harris wins any 3 she wins.
Note: The thread use RCP averages, RCP does not seem to use Cygnal polling; however, Cygnal does have a H2H poll in IA showing Trump +7 which would put it on the list
2 Likes
Updated checking 538 Polls, RCP House Map, The Hill, Rothenberg, 270 to win and Cook power ratings. There are no substantive changes. It remains a horse race with the most likely outcome being not much change.
Dem to GOP (Total gains: GOP+3)
NC-6/Redistricting; NC-13/Redistricting; NC-14/Redistricting
GOP to Dem (Total gains: Dem+3)
LA-6/Redistricting; AL-2/Redistricting; NY-22/D+5 District
Note: In most other contested districts all of the pundit sites rate the remaining races toss ups or give a slight edge to the incumbent party.
Other House seats with the opportunity to flip (by party demographics) vulnerable
Contested (R1 to D1 or Incumbent underwater)
AK01(D)…CA13(R)…CA22(R)…CA27(R)…CA45(R)…CO03(R)
CO08(D)…KS03(D)…ME02(D)…MI03(D)…MI07(D)…MI08(D)
MN02(D)…NC01(D)…NH01(D)…NJ07(R)…NM02(D)…NY04(R)
NY17(R)…NY19(R)…OH13(D)…OR05(R)…PA07(D)…PA08(D)
PA10(R)…TX15(R)…VA07(D)…VA10(D)…WA03(D)…WA08(D)
Total: 12R, 18D; Vulnerable: 7R, 7D
Competitive R2-R4 and D2-D4
AZ01(R)…AZ06(R)…CA03(R)…CA40(R)…CA41(R)…CA47(D)
CT05(D)…FL13(R)…GA02(D)…IA03(R)…IL13(D)…IL17(D)
IN01(D)…MD06(D)…MI10(R)…NE02(R)…NY01(R)…NY18(D)
OH01(D)…OR04(D)…OR06(D)…TX28(D)…TX34(D)…WI01(R)
Total: 11R,13D; Vulnerable: 5R, 2D
Note: Vulnerability is based on party demographics for the district >+2 underwater or recent redistricting changes making the seat more competitive with a party demographic switch.
Note: Some of this is supported by polling now (538), but the polls are mostly candidate commissioned polls.
Note: Taking all of the polling flips, redistricting flips, and most vulnerable seats into account, the result is D+3; If Democrats win all of these the result is D+15; If GOP wins all of them the result is R+12
Senate races appear to be tightening up with challengers closing the gap regardless of party. I believe this is normal as people start to pay attention. There is little to no movement on any race.
Latest Senate Math: MT slipping away from Democrats would be the 51st seat.
Contested (lead is >0 but <4, 3 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
OH: Brown(D) up 3+ has not broken 50% in any poll
MI: Slotkin(D) up 3 has broken 50% in two polls
Competitive (lead is >3i w/50 but <7, 6 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
PA: Casey(D) up 3+ has broken 50% in two polls
MT: Sheehy(R) up 5+ has broken 50% in four polls
FL: Scott(R) up 4+ pts has not broken 50% in any poll
NJ: Kim(D) up 6 has not broken 50% in any poll
WI: Baldwin(D) up 3+ has broken 50% in three polls
TX: Cruz(R) up 5 has not broken 50% in any poll
Note: FL includes one older poll without which Scott’s lead is 3.0
Marginal (leading candidate up >6i w/50 but <9, 8 if incumbent w/1 poll over 50)
MD: Alsobrooks(D) up 7+ has broken 50% in two polls
AZ: Gallego(D) up 7+ has broken 50% in eight polls
Note: Bold denotes a possible flip
GOP must hold FL and TX and take any other seat for an outright majority. If Trump wins, they need only hold FL and TX
DEMs must hold all of their seats plus take FL or TX to keep a majority, or all except FL and TX if Harris wins
*Note: If the Presidential race is tied, Trump will become President, but if the Senate is in the balance (50/50) Democrats could make Harris or Walz VP in order to hold the Senate.
