Frightening internal polling (House GOP to lose 30 seats?)

RedState ^ | Jul 30th, 2006 | HoosierTeacher

[rface]

Rush Limbaugh announced on his show that the GOP house internal polling shows a circa 30 seat loss for 2006.

It is hard for me to write much on this subject, as internal polling is secretive and not generaly available to public scrutiny. But there are some thoughts for discussion here.

One, is Rush correct? I don't think Rush makes it up as he goes along. He is human, and can make errors (as can anybody talking solo for 15 hours a week). But I haven't known him to lie outright on a political matter ever. I believe Rush has reported what he has gleaned from a GOP member of congress or a staffer.

Two, is the information correct? Is it a leak, or a misinformation campaign? I guess I don't see much value in leaking incorrect data to Rush exagerating a potential house loss. So I tend to believe the leaker was being accurate.

Three, should Rush have reported this (and should I write about it)? No to the first part. Internal polling is not meant to be leaked or reported. Once millions of Rush listeners have the info, it is already public and so I offer it here for your analysis.

Four, implications? Internal polling isn't the "for public" polling that you get from groups like Zogby, Gallup, Rasmussen, etc. Internal polling is the hard core, scientific, no spin accurate stuff that the candidates and the parties get and is held close to their vests. Only the best of the best work directly for the parties and candidates. My point is that if the information Rush reported is accurate, there are dark times ahead.

Implications go beyond this too. With the recent failure of the GOP by raising the minimum wage and cutting (but enshrining) a major tax, and with no movement on issues like arctic and offshore drilling, the slow pace of federal court appointments, and unreal spending, the GOP is losing the base. Despite our war on terror and a robust economy, Americans see casualty numbers and gas prices.

Having just adjourned for a recess, I see little the house can do other than campaign localy in the near term. If we blow this election we have no one to blame other than ourselves (a moderate to liberal GOP senate and a spend happy house).

"Where have you gone Ronald Reagan, a nation turns it's lonely eyes to you".

[KevinDavis]

If the exit polls was correct, John Kerry would have been President..

[GarySpFc]

Talent will retain his seat in the senate..

[Reagan Man]

Pew Research Center

Why The Generic Ballot Test?

Released: October 1, 2002

Throughout the election season, the Pew Research Center and other major polling organizations report a measure that political insiders sometimes call “the generic ballot.” This measure is the percentage of voters in national surveys who say they intend to vote for either the Republican or the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in their district.* *(If the elections for U.S. Congress were being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party’s candidate or the Democratic Party’s candidate for Congress in your district?)

There is no national election for Congress, of course; rather, 435 individual races determine the composition of the House. So while it might seem that the generic ballot is too broad a measure to forecast the outcome, it has proven to be an accurate predictor of the partisan distribution of the national vote.

The final forecast of the generic House vote and the actual vote totals have paralleled each other very closely for nearly a half-century in U.S. elections. The average prediction error in off-year elections since 1954 has been 1.1%. The lines plotting the actual vote against the final poll-based forecast vote by Gallup and the Pew Research Center track almost perfectly over time.

For the most part, the generic ballot presents an accurate picture of the national political environment in mid-term elections. In 1994, for example, it showed the Republicans with a majority of the popular vote for the first time in 40 years, indicating that the GOP would make major gains. Republicans ended up gaining control of the House and have held the majority ever since. Since then, the two parties have been very close in the generic ballot, and the Republicans have clung to a fairly narrow advantage in the House.

With the House closely divided, the generic ballot is incapable of predicting which party will control the House if, as is currently the case, it finds voters evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. It also is less accurate during presidential elections than in the off-years. Typically, the generic House ballot question is asked after the presidential vote question, which may influence responses to the House item (See “Generic Congressional Measures Less Accurate in Presidential Years,” Sept. 18, 1996).

Yet in mid-term elections the generic is an important barometer of national trends. Going back to 1994, a survey conducted in July by the Pew Research Center showed the Republicans running about even with Democrats among likely voters – a reversal of historic patterns and an early signal that national conditions were favoring the GOP. In 1998, the final pre-election poll showed the Democrats drawing even with Republicans, which presaged the modest gains Democrats made that year. The generic ballot also is valuable for detailing the partisan preferences of major demographic and socioeconomic groups, and showing trends there as well.

So what does this mean for this November’s election? The generic measure has been virtually deadlocked all year. The most recent Pew Research Center survey of registered voters (conducted Sept. 5-10) shows a statistical dead heat with Democrats leading 46%-44%; when the sample is narrowed to likely voters the Republicans lead 47%-46%. In the five weeks remaining in the campaign, the generic ballot will be closely monitored for signs of a national trend, however slight, pushing either party into a clear advantage.

[Swiss]

Didn't exit polls state that Florida went for Gore in 2000?

[Reagan Man]

From the Pew article.

Since then, the two parties have been very close in the generic ballot, and the Republicans have clung to a fairly narrow advantage in the House.

In 2006 that has changed signficantly. Most the generic ballot polls today show the Dems with a double digit lead.

[Redleg Duke]

"We going to seriously miss the RINOs when PELOSI, BARNEY FRANK, and JOHN CONYERS and other radicals and Liberals are running the House."

Yes, but think of how satisfied all of the Conxervative Purists are going to feel, having sent a message to the Republican Party.

[KevinDavis]

Yep....

[Invisible Gorilla]

Oh, you meant in hindsight.

We moved quickly in Iraq to neutralize their biggest weapons of mass destruction: Saddam, Uday, and Qusay. We were concerned about sabotage of the oil fields, WMDs, Iraqi chem weapons suits and nerve agents stockpiled in and around weapons caches we found along the way, etc. We could hardly have committed more troops than we did in Iraq without leaving ourselves vulnerable to some other regional flair up. Remember, under Clinton our military abandoned the policy of maintaining the capacity to fight two major conflicts simultaneously.

Moving slowly and heavily was not without its risks, though playing Monday morning quarterback seems to be.

[KevinDavis]

They will still whine and moan.....

[PhiKapMom]

Thanks! If RNC, NRCC, and NRSC wanted donations by leaking this, it worked as I just donated.

[RightWhale]

The House races are almost local races. In Alaska there is one seat, so that is statewide, and Don Young usually gets the vast majority of the vote. Nobody even looks at national issues in House races. It all depends on whether they like the candidate and if things are going okay economically.

[Uncle Vlad]

It's scary because the Democrats have done nothing but complain about the Republicans, without having a plan of their own.

Hey. it's exactly how Clinton got elected in '92. Remember all the moron Clinton voters running around? "Why are you voting for Bill Clinton?" "He's for change." "What, specifically, do you like about him?" "Well, you'll see."

[Babu]

You obviously don't know the personality and track record of these two public figures very well. First, the RNC wouldn't ask, and second, if they asked, no, neither one would do it.

But if you want to hold mistaken beliefs, I won't stand in your way.

[paul51]

The place needs a good house cleaning. 30 seats won't accomplish much but it's a good start.

[MiHeat]

Lock and load. Dem sweep = civil war with every rat a ....

[Hildy]

Well, since you're SURE you know so much better than me...but of course, won't tell me why...I'll say no more. But I think I know the track records of these two just as well as you...maybe even more.

[mountainfolk]

I was not aware of Tom Davis and his complaints. Your mentioning it does put the problem out there as to why conservatives cannot get everything they want all of the time. The voters in each state are responsible for whom they elect. The Republican party can support the candidate chosen by the voters in the primary election and if that is a RINO, it has to be accepted that as members of the party it is their choice, whether conservatives like it or not. I put the responsibility on the voters in each state to see that they elect a non-RINO if that is what they want. President Bush has to work with those of whatever stripe who are sent to congress by the voters.

[ClaireSolt]

I felst sure that spomeone would post a chart, so we could see facts. alas, no such luck.

[Coop]

So the best you can do is hit and run personal attacks eh?

Sure, Professor. Guess you missed the dozen or so posts I did with factual information. Or perhaps you skipped over 'em because they didn't support this hysterical thread's claim?

[Coop]

No, I'm not. Pay attention.