Shocker: Democrat lead in US House race drops to only two points (the worm is turning Smithers)

Human Events ^ | 8/22/06 | Election Dog

[teddyballgame]

And just as I reported earlier today on the problems with the Gallup poll and other surveys showing a bias for Democrats, the Gallup poll suddenly reports a dramatic drop in the Democrat lead in the US House race to only two points.

In a poll taken over the weekend, the poll of registered voters shows that Democrats now lead only 47%-45% which is down from a nine percentage point lead earlier in August. This is well within the poll's margin of error (+-4%) so the race is essentially even. It is the best showing for Republicans in this poll since just before the 2004 November election when Democrats were ahead by four points among registered voters, but Republicans still won the popular U.S. vote and a 232-203 lead in House seats.

According to the poll, the sudden focus on the war on terror has greatly helped the GOP. The poll states that "President Bush's approval rating has topped 40% for the first time since February...Behind the movements: In the wake of the terror plot that British authorities say they broke up, Bush seems to have gotten a boost. Some of that may have reflected positively on Republican candidates as well.

[StarFan]

Very interesting ping

It is indeed and thanks for the ping. Neil Cavuto interviewed someone today who said the polls these past few months were skewed and the dems may have jumped the gun a bit prematurely in setting up congressional committees, etc. based on false numbers. Oh joy!

[SuziQ]

I love that grpahic! That's one of SirKit's favorite movies!

[SuziQ]

I had the pleasant opportunity to educate the young man who was the cashier at Trader Joe's, a local, sorty hippie grocery store, the other day. He is a bit of a 'crunchy'; long hair, sandals, etc. Anyway for some reason I mentioned we were moving back to MS, and that got us to talking about Katrina. He said that he'd heard something awful the other day, that New Orleans had asked for money to fix the levees for years, and was denied the funds.

I let him know, that what he heard was WRONG, that Louisiana had been getting money for years to fix the levees, and that it was the fault of corruption that the levees didn't get fixed. There has been plenty of money, but the levee board members have made sure that they each got a piece of that Fed. money pie for their own districts, leaving the levees in New Orleans poorly maintained.

I don't know if he believed me or not, but at least I was able to offer some food for thought.

[AntiGuv]

This puts a swift end to that!

MN Supreme Court rules in Gutknecht's favor

As for the 1974 question, Nixon resigned on August 8 of 1974 and the Ford pardon followed on September 8 of 1974, so that timeframe was actually the worse ratings that the GOP has pretty much had ever, probably including even the Hoover collapse.

My personal view is that this Gallup Poll is running counter to the other polls, but there is no question that it more resembles the '96 to '04 timeframe than it does '74, '82, '86, or a reverse '94. If this kind of thing keeps up, the worm will have certainly turned. :)

As for predictions, my ratings are not based on generic poll figures except in the most indirect way, and my latest projection would be a 12 seat loss for the GOP in the House and a 3 seat loss for the GOP in the Senate.

[Torie]

The GOP just got one seat, I thought might go down the dumper. Your 3 seat senate prediction seems about right, and the House prediction would seem right, buth then I saw the Pubbie was even in a poll in CO-7. If that is a real poll (no partisan movement from baseline, maybe a slight GOP plus), it may be that if there is partisan movement, from 2004, we will have to look to the Great Lake states and the Northeast. The normal partisan divides outside that region, seem to be holding, outside of special cases like say in Ashland and environs, (except in Michigan, which has its own thing going).

[AntiGuv]

The problem with assessing the broader significance of the CO-07 poll is that it followed a very acrimonious Dem primary and features a very well-funded GOP nominee (as I've mentioned previously, in both aspects). It did nonetheless tip the seat from Lean Dem to Toss Up in my ratings.

[StoneWall Brigade]

Here in West Virginia, John has been on the attack on old sheets Byrd He's been going after Byrd's tax record.

[OldFriend]

Been watching CSPIN doing their hit on the 'government' for not making the levees safe. Not a word about the levee money that went for the parade, for corruption and assorted other things totally UNRELATED to the levees.

CSPIN has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC.

[AuH2ORepublican]

"As for predictions, my ratings are not based on generic poll figures except in the most indirect way, and my latest projection would be a 12 seat loss for the GOP in the House and a 3 seat loss for the GOP in the Senate."

---

While your predictions are certainly not "based" on generic poll figures, Bush approval ratings or other "national mood" indicators, I do think they have colored your perception of most House and Senate races. Without a heavy anti-GOP undertow, I think most of your predictions would move one spot towards the GOP (e.g., from "Toss-Up" to "Lean GOP," etc.). Let's face it, if Bush's approval ratings had been in the 40s all summer, the seats held by Thelma Drake and Richard Pombo would be considered "Safe GOP" and the seats held by Melissa Bean and Jim Marshall would be would be considered "Toss-Ups" or maybe even "Lean GOP."

[AntiGuv]

Yes, you are correct. Are you actually suggesting that the entire election nationwide should be re-envisioned based on a single poll?

[AuH2ORepublican]

"It did nonetheless tip the seat from Lean Dem to Toss Up in my ratings."

---

I agree that Toss-Up is the right call, and I think it will stay that way until Election Day. I would note that, by the numbers (Kerry carried it 50%-49% in a region where the Bush-Kerry vote fairly describes the partisan balance), it's the second toughest GOP-held open seat to defend (after Nussle's seat in Iowa). If the CO-07 race is a barnburner, it would be unlikely for Musgrave's reelection to be a nailbiter, or for Salazar to be reelected without breaking into a sweat, or for Heather Wilson to be defeated.

[AntiGuv]

I do not consider those four elections to be linked, except in the most tangential way. You might recall that two months ago I was writing that CO-07 would be Toss Up if Lamm won and very well might be so if Perlmutter won. I didn't post that because I predicted some seachange in the national landscape. I posted that because the race had clear indications of becoming more favorable to the GOP than one might expect it would be based on the district demographics in tandem with the national mood. The reasons why are as clear now IMO as they were two months ago: A very acrimonious and divisive Dem primary contrasted with a very well-funded GOP candidate backed by a very unified local party.

So, to me, the fact that CO-07 has trended to where I thought it would impacts CO-04, CO-03, and NM-01 to the degree that the above factors exist in those districts as well (i.e., none).

[AuH2ORepublican]

"Are you actually suggesting that the entire election nationwide should be re-envisioned based on a single poll?"

---

No, I'm saying that it is incorrect to claim that a Democrat tsunami is in the works based on summer polls of national adults. The recent generic congressional ballot is no more trustworthy than those from earlier in the summer, but it is no less trustworthy either. I think the correct baseline when measuring states and districts is electoral performance in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections, maybe with a slight tinge away from the GOP based on the national mood, but nothing that would indicate that Democrats will suddenly becomedominant in districts that voted for Bush and the GOP House candidate in 2000, 2002 and 2004.

[AntiGuv]

No, I'm saying that it is incorrect to claim that a Democrat tsunami is in the works based on summer polls of national adults. The recent generic congressional ballot is no more trustworthy than those from earlier in the summer, but it is no less trustworthy either.

Sure, I have no dispute with that, other than to note that the claims are based on many months worth of both generic and specific polls.

I think the correct baseline when measuring states and districts is electoral performance in the 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections, maybe with a slight tinge away from the GOP based on the national mood, but nothing that would indicate that Democrats will suddenly becomedominant in districts that voted for Bush and the GOP House candidate in 2000, 2002 and 2004.

The Democrats have about twice as much money (proportionally) as they did in those other elections, so that alone is more than a "slight tinge" away from the GOP. In fact, by every factor up and down the line, including the aggregate polls, the Dems are in far better shape than they were in 2000, 2002, and 2004.

But, OK, let's say for the sake of argument that we did re-evaluate the entire nationwide portrait based on one poll. Which poll should we choose? Should we choose the 2% Dem margin (Gallup), the 9% Dem margin (CNN), or the 15% Dem margin (NYT) polled simultaneously? Oh wait, I almost forgot: The credibility of a poll is directly proportional to the desirability of the results.

[AntiGuv]

And, for the record, it's these polls and these polls which are most influential in my evaluation of the midterm cycle. Those are the polls, including these, these, these, and these, that have determined my view of where the election stands.

[PallMal]

All of this feeling their oats is what loses elections for Dhimmicrats,

I'm with you. This is the first time I've ever heard of a Congressional election already decided by the media, and it's only August.

Even in 1994, you didn't hear anything about a "probable Republican takeover" months before the election. That's why I was always suspicious of this whole media to-do about "when the Democrats take the House", blah, blah.

[JulieRNR21]

Thanks for the ping to this important info.

The only poll that matters is on November 7.........BUMP

[AntiGuv]

FWIW, Evans & Novak seem to agree with me that a Toss Up in CO-07 does not revision the whole campaign cycle.

Republican-Held House Seats In Play
Likely Republican Retention	Tossup		Likely Democratic Takeover
	Leans GOP	Leans Dem
AZ-1 (Renzi)	AZ-5 (Hayworth)	CT-4 (Shays)	AZ-8 (Open)
CO-4 (Musgrave)	CO-7 (Open)	IA-1 (Open)	IN-9 (Sodrel)
CT-5 (Johnson)	CT-2 (Simmons)	IN-8 (Hostettler)	KY-4 (Davis)
FL-13 (Open)	FL-22 (Shaw)	NC-11 (Taylor)	TX-22 (Open)
FL-8 (Keller)	IL-6 (Open)	OH-1 (Chabot)
IL-11 (Weller)	IN-2 (Chocola)	PA-6 (Gerlach)
KY-3 (Northup)	MN-6 (Open)	WI-8 (Open)
NH-2 (Bass)	NM-1 (Wilson)
NV-3 (Porter)	NY-24 (Open)
NY-20 (Sweeney)	OH-15 (Pryce)
TX-23 (Bonilla)	OH-18 (Open)
WA-8 (Reichert)	PA-7 (Weldon)
WY-AL (Cubin)	PA-8 (Fitzpatrick)
	PA-10 (Sherwood)
	VA-2 (Drake)

Otherwise I'm posting this because there are some definite departures here from the rest of the collective punditry, and certainly from my own rankings. It gives me a lot to think over for my next revisions!

[slowhand520]

No but it sure will lead to bogus media driven polls that will show the democrats will take the house & senate.

[HostileTerritory]

Do they have any historic credibility? I've read Novak's columns before but this is the first time I've seen his name associated with a detailed survey.