Merged 2026 Mid-Term election outcomes: US Congress

[Regnad Kcin]

WHy does any criticism of left wing nuttery offend you
You think ignoring it is going to help win in Novembe.
You had better be prepared to deal with it, you know the GOP is going to bring it up.
That you refuse to read it says something about you.

Therm’s fightin’ words! Whars my musket?

 

[grunion]

Re Wisconsin; I think the Dems dodged a bullet there. Nomnating somebody who attacked Thanksgiving was not a good diea. That kind of crap might play well on college campusus, but out n the real world it is a non starter.

Anyone aware of the 350 year long genocide (yes I used the g-word) against indigenous Americans who doesn’t “attack” Thanksgiving (or at least the foundations of it) is either hypocritical or cruel. That kind of crap might play well in Republican chat groups, but in an educated society it is a non-starter.

 

[Donal]

I saw someone on the tv say that Crowley just pumped massive amounts of money out on ads in the final weeks and that's what turned it around. So that the polling wasn't that wrong it just didn't capture the final days of the campaign. Not sure I buy that but that's the thinking of the pollsters.

At best, polling is a lagging indicator. It has its value, but its not predictive.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Polling is objectively, and possibly intentionally, getting worse.

 

[Solitaire]

I think you will see a number of progressive candidates "distanc themselves" from the DSA. And no wonder aftter that Manifesto.

Out of curiosity. Do you subscribe to the Atlantic Magazine or the New York Post?

 

[Brainster]

Anyone aware of the 350 year long genocide (yes I used the g-word) against indigenous Americans who doesn’t “attack” Thanksgiving (or at least the foundations of it) is either hypocritical or cruel. That kind of crap might play well in Republican chat groups, but in an educated society it is a non-starter.

Apparently nobody's gotten the word to you that Woke 1.0 was crazy and cringey, according to AOC and James Talarico.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Polling is objectively, and possibly intentionally, getting worse.

Evidence?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Methodology.
Most polling is self-selected Internet polling that is not remotely representative.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Methodology.
Most polling is self-selected Internet polling that is not remotely representative.

I just did a quick poll and 100% of respondents (people currently awake at my house) agree with that.

 

[Brainster]

Evidence?

I think the results vs the polling in the Wisconsin Governor's primary as well as the Michigan Senate primary raise some concerns that the pollsters may have bought the usual political argument that the youth vote is going to come out en masse. Here's an outstanding article on the Wisconsin polling. First his credentials:

Last year, a non-profit called State Navigate contracted me to develop a flexible survey weighting program that they could use on any poll of a statewide or state legislative district primary or general election. This program let them adjust the data they got back in their polls to be representative of the population they were trying to sample. I did not ask for money from State Navigate, but instead to have access to the raw data and to be able to analyze it publicly for posts like these. State Navigate has agreed to let me publish the analysis below. I did not share it with them beforehand. (For what it’s worth, State Navigate was the most accurate pollster in both the Virginia and New Jersey governor elections in 2025.)

So he had direct access to the actual poll results, not just the modeled ones by the client. What did he find out?

Most of the miss in polls in Wisconsin is attributable to faulty demographic targets (too many young people). This inflated Hong’s vote margin by about 10 points.

That sounded familiar to me, and sure enough one of the El-Sayed pollsters admitted the same flaw:

Mitchell added that he expected a high turnout among young voters, who he predicted would be energized by El-Sayed’s progressive policies. That may have caused them to overestimate the impact of voters under 44.

Political scientists have a word for those who expect the youth vote to propel them to victory: Losers.

 

[Segnosaur]

gas prices are going to shift that even further in the coming months imo

My concern about that...

Trump will make some big announcement about "we are ending the bombing campaign" in October. Even if there is no real agreement, and any sort of "truce" is temporary, gas prices will drop on speculation right before the election. And even though prices are higher than they were in 2024, Trump supporters have a goldfish-like memory and will only see "gas prices are cheaper now than they were a week ago. All hail Trump!"

 

[dirtywick]

My concern about that...

Trump will make some big announcement about "we are ending the bombing campaign" in October. Even if there is no real agreement, and any sort of "truce" is temporary, gas prices will drop on speculation right before the election. And even though prices are higher than they were in 2024, Trump supporters have a goldfish-like memory and will only see "gas prices are cheaper now than they were a week ago. All hail Trump!"

well, for one he already does that every week, and it does move the oil futures price in the market but the price of actual gas is much more constrained by actual supply and demand. what he won't be able to do in october is draw down on the strategic reserves, because they're already dangerously low today and he has no means to refill it that won't push the price up even higher besides actually opening the strait, which is going to require massive concessions to iran.

New data shows China came into the Iran war with over 3x the strategic oil reserves of the US

New data from the US government released this week shows just how aggressively China added to its oil reserves ahead of the war in Iran.

finance.yahoo.com

the only out i see for him is the chinese have also mostly stopped buying off the markets, and they could start anytime and drive the price up. they could also release some of their massive reserves and drive the price down, too. but what is their game? i don't know, i would assume they are just going to protect their economy. and maybe they want a more rational white house too. or maybe they want to bend trump over a barrel.

 

[Segnosaur]

Polling is objectively, and possibly intentionally, getting worse.

Methodology.
Most polling is self-selected Internet polling that is not remotely representative.

A few things...

Polling has always had a certain element of 'self-selection' (since nobody is "forced" to answer the results of an opinion poll.)

It should also be noted that there are other elements that could contribute to a poll being "inaccurate", especially for midterms... they may not run the polls as often for congressional seats as for presidential elections (meaning more time between the final poll and the actual voting, more time for people to change their minds), they may use smaller sample sizes (decreasing the accuracy). Traditionally low voter turnout will skew results more. Plus, as they typically say "the results are within X% 19 times out of 20", so you would expect at least a few polls to be inaccurate based on statistics alone.

It is possible that the changes in the electorate surrounding "progressives" might require pollsters to adjust their techniques a little. (They have always had to make minor adjustments to the data, for example to account for the greater use of cell phones vs. land lines.). They may have to make further adjustments to deal with more of the "democratic socialist" type voter... louder voice during the campaign but not necessarily more likely to go to the polls.

 

[Segnosaur]

My concern about that...

Trump will make some big announcement about "we are ending the bombing campaign" in October. Even if there is no real agreement, and any sort of "truce" is temporary, gas prices will drop on speculation right before the election. And even though prices are higher than they were in 2024, Trump supporters have a goldfish-like memory and will only see "gas prices are cheaper now than they were a week ago. All hail Trump!"

well, for one he already does that every week, and it does move the oil futures price in the market but the price of actual gas is much more constrained by actual supply and demand.

Yeah, I agree gas is constrained more by supply and demand. But we are talking about MAGAchud here. Even a 1 cent drop in prices will probably be enough to have them dancing in the streets.

what he won't be able to do in october is draw down on the strategic reserves, because they're already dangerously low today and he has no means to refill it...

Trump won't care... he will let the reserves drop to zero the day of the mid-terms to lower prices (because maintaining political power is the only thing he is concerned about), and won't care about whomever is president after him being left with empty strategic reserves.

the only out i see for him is the chinese have also mostly stopped buying off the markets, and they could start anytime and drive the price up. they could also release some of their massive reserves and drive the price down, too. but what is their game? i don't know, i would assume they are just going to protect their economy. and maybe they want a more rational white house too. or maybe they want to bend trump over a barrel.

What china wants is an interesting question.

On one hand, Trump and the MAGAchud are hurting America. And since china is a geopolitical rival to the US, giving Trump and the republicans as much assistance to keep wrecking the US seems like an understandable tactic. If that was the case, helping to lower prices before the midterms makes sense.

But, on the other hand, China is also a major trading partner, and keeping America's economy healthier (by helping Democrats win) would seem to also make sense.

 

[dirtywick]

my uninformed guess is china wants stability

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

A few things...

Polling has always had a certain element of 'self-selection' (since nobody is "forced" to answer the results of an opinion poll.)

It should also be noted that there are other elements that could contribute to a poll being "inaccurate", especially for midterms... they may not run the polls as often for congressional seats as for presidential elections (meaning more time between the final poll and the actual voting, more time for people to change their minds), they may use smaller sample sizes (decreasing the accuracy). Traditionally low voter turnout will skew results more. Plus, as they typically say "the results are within X% 19 times out of 20", so you would expect at least a few polls to be inaccurate based on statistics alone.

It is possible that the changes in the electorate surrounding "progressives" might require pollsters to adjust their techniques a little. (They have always had to make minor adjustments to the data, for example to account for the greater use of cell phones vs. land lines.). They may have to make further adjustments to deal with more of the "democratic socialist" type voter... louder voice during the campaign but not necessarily more likely to go to the polls.

Also most polls are done off "likely" voters. Because of decades of disenfranchisement the pool of "likely" voters skews far to the white than the general population.

 

[shemp]

I don't put a lot of stock in polls, but when I do...

GOP strategists 'tearing their hair out' as Trump insiders feed him bad data​

President Donald Trump's numbers are so bad that a recent report suggests that his staff are trying to shield him by feeding him positive information about Iran. Meanwhile, a new Fox News poll shows just how much of a drag Trump is on Republicans running for office.

The New Republic's Greg Sargent spoke with Democratic strategist Caitlin Legacki on Friday about some of the U.S. Senate races and where they stand as the midterm election nears.

New Fox News polls show damaging numbers for Republican candidates in several states, Legacki said. One of the things that the survey also examined is where Trump stands in states where Senate candidates are struggling to keep their heads above water.

"In Maine, it’s 39 to 60. That’s 21 points underwater. In Texas, it’s 45 to 54, nine points underwater in Texas. In North Carolina, it’s 40 to 59, 19 points underwater in North Carolina. And in Iowa, it’s 42 to 55, which is 13 points underwater. Trump won three of those states, two by double digits. I don’t know what to make of numbers like this," said Sargent.

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Norman Alexander]

I don't put a lot of stock in polls, but when I do...

GOP strategists 'tearing their hair out' as Trump insiders feed him bad data​

I'll believe it when I see it.

To me, it suggests GOP shenanigans in the 2024 election. And polls are media fodder, not reality.

Even with Trump's staggering nosedive in sanity and popularity over the last 18 months, poll swings that severe in so short a time seem highly improbable. Remember: most polls in late 2023 put Harris comfortably ahead, despite the Biden decline debacle. And yet Trump won...

It would make more sense that the polls have moved from "slightly Dem" to "definitely Dem" than see-sawing wildly from "hard GOP" to "hard not GOP".

 

[Gulliver Foyle]

To me, it suggests GOP shenanigans in the 2024 election. And polls are media fodder, not reality.

Even with Trump's staggering nosedive in sanity and popularity over the last 18 months, poll swings that severe in so short a time seem highly improbable. Remember: most polls in late 2023 put Harris comfortably ahead, despite the Biden decline debacle. And yet Trump won...

It would make more sense that the polls have moved from "slightly Dem" to "definitely Dem" than see-sawing wildly from "hard GOP" to "hard not GOP".

Every GQP win since Eisenhower, when it was in reality a different party, has been through some form of cheating or other. And every republitraitor regime has been treasonous.

That's why the US needs a version of the early denazification process, on steroids.

 

[dirtywick]

To me, it suggests GOP shenanigans in the 2024 election. And polls are media fodder, not reality.

Even with Trump's staggering nosedive in sanity and popularity over the last 18 months, poll swings that severe in so short a time seem highly improbable. Remember: most polls in late 2023 put Harris comfortably ahead, despite the Biden decline debacle. And yet Trump won...

It would make more sense that the polls have moved from "slightly Dem" to "definitely Dem" than see-sawing wildly from "hard GOP" to "hard not GOP".

big difference is that this time around trump owns the bad economy