I am a regular reader of fivethirtyeight and am well aware of all of this.

My point is the following: in 2016, most pundits expected a landslide when the facts actually pointed to a close race where trump was the underdog, but well within striking distance. In 2018, we're having the exact same situation again: the generic ballot and the margins of special elections, the turnout in primaries and so on are all pointing towards a good year for the democrats, but the variance within those different indicators is still very high.
A blue wave is possible, yes, but it's just as possible that it falls flat and the dems "only" win the house popular vote by something like 4%, which would allow the GOP to quite comfortably hold it. Just like in 2016, pundits consider the Dems taking the House all but guaranteed while they realistically are just slight favorites to take it as of today.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 9 2018 07:44pm

True. I agree with your points.

The GOP has rebounded quite nicely from last Fall and Winter. The Democrats were up around 7-10 points on generic ballot polls back then. I think the strong economy has a lot to do with the GOP rebound.

All in all I still think the Democrats will take the House, but I don't think it's gonna be by much. I don't see a "blue wave" occurring. It's also a midterm election and Democrats are less reliable voters.

The turnout will probably be higher than a normal midterm, but I predict Democrats will be disappointed given all their expectations. I actually think it's plausible for them to lose seats in the Senate. Rick Scott is currently ahead of Nelson in Florida. It's a terrible Senate map for Democrats across the board.

Think Beto can unseat Cruz?

I live in Texas, and I say no. No matter how unlikeable Cruz iz, Texas is just too red, Cruz will eventually have more money once the PACs roll in, it's a midterm election (less turnout), and he is the incumbent.

That said, I expect his victory to be within single digits (8 points or so), which would be embarrassing on Cruz's part given all the above factors.

O'Rourke has run a good campaign and has outraised Cruz in individual donations by 9.5 million so far. He's been impressive and has inserted himself onto the national scene. He's made a name for himself regardless of whether he wins or loses this race.

Trump-backed candidate for Kansas governor's lead cut to 91 votes

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-kansas/trump-backed-candidate-for-kansas-governors-lead-cut-to-91-votes-idUSKBN1KU2JL





I can't even begin to understand the reasoning behind this. Oh sorry, we just miscounted by 100. LOL

believe it or not, but things like this happen from time to time without any bad intentions or conspiracy.

colyer would probably have significantly better chances in the general election than kobach anyway. kobach is a very polarizing figure who doesnt quite have the political momentum in his back this year; and kansas is still riding hard on the anti-GOP-train, turning it's baseline from a solid red to some shade of pink.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 10 2018 02:49am

I don't believe anyone could miscount by 100 votes. If these primaries happened every day or 3 times a day... maybe. But not this once in a great while count.

there are thousands of precincts across the country. it's not that unlikely for mistakes to happen with that sample size. miscounting by 100 votes usually doesnt matter because the winning margin typically is in the several thousands even in close races, and in the tens of thousands for blowouts.

Were just talking about one state bro. One primary.

yeah, and the vote tallies for the state are the sum of dozens if not hundreds of precincts/polling stations.