Pennsylvania's 18th congressional district special election

[aleCcowaN]

... in 24 days.

Last poll from Monmouth: Saccone (R) 49% - Lamb (D) 46% - Other 1% - Don't know 4%

I'm not sure how to take this poll. It's among likely voters (good).

One unnerving fact that confirms the national trend which has made possible a Trump presidency and all its concomitant **** is 77% of those likely voters being 50 or older.

Just 7% of them were aged 18 to 34. I couldn't find the district's demographics by age, but it's impossible that such age bracket is made up by less than 11% of the population, especially in Allegheny County.

It's Usaians age 39 or less who are all mouths and no votes, the ones who are enabling this age of ridiculousness. They are the culprits.

 

[shemp]

I agree. Too many in this country can't get off their stupid fat asses and vote. But you better believe they'll bitch about the results.

 

[kookbreaker]

... in 24 days.

Last poll from Monmouth: Saccone (R) 49% - Lamb (D) 46% - Other 1% - Don't know 4%

I'm not sure how to take this poll. It's among likely voters (good).

One unnerving fact that confirms the national trend which has made possible a Trump presidency and all its concomitant **** is 77% of those likely voters being 50 or older.

Just 7% of them were aged 18 to 34. I couldn't find the district's demographics by age, but it's impossible that such age bracket is made up by less than 11% of the population, especially in Allegheny County.

It's Usaians age 39 or less who are all mouths and no votes, the ones who are enabling this age of ridiculousness. They are the culprits.

FWIW The median age of the 18th district is 44.4 years.

https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=42&cd=18

 

[fuelair]

... in 24 days.

Last poll from Monmouth: Saccone (R) 49% - Lamb (D) 46% - Other 1% - Don't know 4%

I'm not sure how to take this poll. It's among likely voters (good).

One unnerving fact that confirms the national trend which has made possible a Trump presidency and all its concomitant **** is 77% of those likely voters being 50 or older.

Just 7% of them were aged 18 to 34. I couldn't find the district's demographics by age, but it's impossible that such age bracket is made up by less than 11% of the population, especially in Allegheny County.

It's Usaians age 39 or less who are all mouths and no votes, the ones who are enabling this age of ridiculousness. They are the culprits.

I doubt it helps, but I am 72 and I almost hope Trump does go after Social Security as all the idiot oldsters who voted for that tool/toad/bottom feeder will vote correctly next time....

 

[aleCcowaN]

FWIW The median age of the 18th district is 44.4 years.

https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=42&cd=18

Thanks, but that includes people 17 or under and foreigners. What matters is the median age of American citizens 18 and older. But from the data in that source, a rough estimation tells that 21-22% of the district's citizens are 18 to 34 and only 53-54% are 50 or older, what contrasts with the 7% and 77% above mentioned

Oh, my! Non-voting youngsters of the 18th and beyond, may your country curse you for your apathy!

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Is that percentage somehow out of the ordinary for that age group?

Because that's an age range where many people are focusing on their higher education, building the foundation for the careers, looking for love, and/or starting a family. Things that many of them probably assign a much higher priority to than concerning themselves with a congressional district special election.

 

[Molinaro]

One unnerving fact that confirms the national trend which has made possible a Trump presidency and all its concomitant **** is 77% of those likely voters being 50 or older.

Just 7% of them were aged 18 to 34. I couldn't find the district's demographics by age, but it's impossible that such age bracket is made up by less than 11% of the population, especially in Allegheny County.

That is just an indication of what age bracket is most likely to hang up on a phone call from a pollster.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Is that percentage somehow out of the ordinary for that age group?

Because that's an age range where many people are focusing on their higher education, building the foundation for the careers, looking for love, and/or starting a family. Things that many of them probably assign a much higher priority to than concerning themselves with a congressional district special election.

In a district with 85% of urban population, how busy can a youngster be to not have an hour to spare some moment on a Tuesday?

[In my country all elections are on Sunday, on ordinary weekends far from holidays weeks]

 

[aleCcowaN]

That is just an indication of what age bracket is most likely to hang up on a phone call from a pollster.

No poll would work if they'd depend on those who woudn't hang up. At least, the unavoidable percentage of people hanging up the phone -me included- will be replaced by more people sampled from the same bracket.

That 7% was looked for that way, based on previous elections, the turnout model the pollsters called "surge model". They discarded the turnout models of a presidential election and an ordinary mid-term election.

So, to be clear, youngster from the PA-18 use to make up for 7% of the turnout in this kind of election. That wasn't polled but used to designed the poll.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I doubt it helps, but I am 72 and I almost hope Trump does go after Social Security as all the idiot oldsters who voted for that tool/toad/bottom feeder will vote correctly next time....

Think it this way: worldwide, people is compelled by law to save money for their old age when they're young just because one million stories of starving old coots won't make they learn the lesson.

Because I understand the problem to be this way: no one is against Social Security but against being taxed to finance Social Security.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

In a district with 85% of urban population, how busy can a youngster be to not have an hour to spare some moment on a Tuesday?

Voting is about more than just checking a box, or at least it should be. You seem to be suggesting that uninformed voting is better than not voting.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Voting is about more than just checking a box, or at least it should be. You seem to be suggesting that uninformed voting is better than not voting.

Yes. Because "informed" is a tricky thing. We see it in this subforum every day. People just believe what they care to believe and then a full orchestra confirmation bias began. That manner of investing valuable time doesn't translate in better votes, at least for about 70 or 80% of the population, or what it's customary called "the majority".

To save time -and overcome the barrier of not understanding- I ask people who I trust and who I know they are capable in their métiers. It's not about voting for me -though many ask and value my opinion to save their time- but about other matters. Why don't people build their reference net? I'm afraid the idiot voters are too much independent to do anything rational.

On the other hand it's better they start to vote without losing any time or, do you suggest that people not voting is, as an average, more idiot than sure voters?

 

[aleCcowaN]

New poll from Gravis (I don't like them much). Let's compare Gravis with Gravis: in January they gave Saccone a 46.4%-33.7% advantage; last February poll decreases Saccone's to 45.5% while Lamb rises to 40%.

Both candidates have much support from the other party, and Lamb has a solid lead among the independent (but PA-18 is deeply Republican).

 

[Foolmewunz]

New poll from Gravis (I don't like them much). Let's compare Gravis with Gravis: in January they gave Saccone a 46.4%-33.7% advantage; last February poll decreases Saccone's to 45.5% while Lamb rises to 40%.

Both candidates have much support from the other party, and Lamb has a solid lead among the independent (but PA-18 is deeply Republican).

This one is like the early special elections in Georgia, Montana, etc... The fact that it's so close should be worrisome to GOP planners. The Republican candidate is not really reprehensible like Roy Moore so it's just overall voter sentiment. As mentioned, Murphy (GOP) ran unopposed in the last two elections and was taking 60/65% in the few prior to that. It's a safe "Republican" seat, but "Republican" in the new sense of the word, e.g. a lot of what we used to refer to as Reagan Democrats. Apparently coal miners will vote Democrat. Out of work coal miners will vote pie in the sky.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Voting is about more than just checking a box, or at least it should be. You seem to be suggesting that uninformed voting is better than not voting.

Uniformed voting IS better than not voting..................



for conservatives.

 

[aleCcowaN]

This one is like the early special elections in Georgia, Montana, etc... The fact that it's so close should be worrisome to GOP planners. The Republican candidate is not really reprehensible like Roy Moore so it's just overall voter sentiment. As mentioned, Murphy (GOP) ran unopposed in the last two elections and was taking 60/65% in the few prior to that. It's a safe "Republican" seat, but "Republican" in the new sense of the word, e.g. a lot of what we used to refer to as Reagan Democrats. Apparently coal miners will vote Democrat. Out of work coal miners will vote pie in the sky.

Monmouth's and Gravis' suggest that Lamb is doing well among the older (surprise) and the educated (no surprise) voters, where the most criticism towards Trump resides.

Anyway, Trump's approval, some national -10, becomes +10 in this district. But as it happened with Moore and Jones, Lamb supporters expect to go to vote and send a nationwide message, while Saccone's are less motivated in spite they appreciate their candidate, which leaves us with another possible "final de bandera blanca" (when a horse race is so tight that you must wait for photographic evidence for the judges to determine the winner) in Alabama style.

 

[uke2se]

Monmouth's and Gravis' suggest that Lamb is doing well among the older (surprise) and the educated (no surprise) voters, where the most criticism towards Trump resides.

Anyway, Trump's approval, some national -10, becomes +10 in this district. But as it happened with Moore and Jones, Lamb supporters expect to go to vote and send a nationwide message, while Saccone's are less motivated in spite they appreciate their candidate, which leaves us with another possible "final de bandera blanca" (when a horse race is so tight that you must wait for photographic evidence for the judges to determine the winner) in Alabama style.

I think the term in English is "photo finish".

 

[aleCcowaN]

I think the term in English is "photo finish".

That's right. Thanks!

 

[shemp]

I'm sure whatever the result, it will be widely (and erroneously) trumpeted as a bellwether for the upcoming fall elections

 

[Foolmewunz]

I'm sure whatever the result, it will be widely (and erroneously) trumpeted as a bellwether for the upcoming fall elections

I dunno about that. Oh, I don't think it's so important as to who gets the by-election (or special election, whatever it is) into the WIN column, but this is the first fair test of the demographic that won Trump the election in '16... the old Reagan Democrats. That there is coal and steel country, and may actually be the tribal homeland of the Lost Tribe of Angry White Voters, which we all derided right up until November of 2016.

Trump took the 18th by almost 20%. This is one of the reasons they've announced he'll be campaigning there (has anyone seen an announcement of an appearance?) so he sparks some interest because thus far having him in the White House has achieved, roughly, having him in the White House. He has no coattails and his core doesn't even turn out.

In a "normal" year Mr/Ms A Republican should be able to beat Mr/Ms A Democrat in that district by fifteen points, minimum. Murphy used to take the district (when he was even opposed) by 25-30.

I think the Dems would love to steal the win, but they'll be real happy with a margin of 5/10 per cent for the GOP. The GOP will shoot off fireworks if they win, but will be very worried if they're not above 15 points. It means that the goofy minority that fell for Trump's snake oil and expected to see those high-paying union-type jobs flooding back into the Three Rivers area are staying home, if not actually switching.

ETA: Signs to watch for.... does Trump actually go there to campaign? He loves him some rallies and it's easy to paper the house in Pittsburgh with devoted Trumpistas, I'm sure. But what he doesn't love is "Losers!". If their internal polls are showing a close race, a scrapper like Bubba would get out there to do his best. Trump's no scrapper for anyone but Trump. If there's a chance Saccone loses, he will want to be in Mar A Lago selling national secrets to the Freedonians, or anyplace but Pennsylvania. He's hosted events in January and February but he seems to be running away from Saccone, as Coraopolis and Ambridge are not in the 18th, at all. They're just outside on the northern reaches of the awkwardly shaped district.