Did he give any reasons for why Rick might lose?

The suppressed turnout from the redistricting combined with the fact that it's low turnout overall and there is a small percentage of Dems that are highly motivated. That is all it takes in these special elections. If Lamb wins though he WILL lose in November

Lamb isnt a bad guy tho compared to other Dems

this is true,

the way PA is redrawn, Lamb would lose in Nov

_if_ he wins this month

The problem is that I think it will help motivate Dems like Alabama did. Fucking Brannon really did a ton of damage with the loss of that seat.

If Strangw would have gotten that nominee the Dems would have lost and lost a ton of momentum.

@Den it hasn't even been redistrict'd yet though

But people aren't voting if they don't even know what district they will be in a few months.

@Den I wouldn't blame Bannon

I'd blame McConnell and the GOPe

hashtagdontblamethevictim

Any GOP Senator from Alabama would have supported Trump 95% of the time. Moore was way too divisive. He barely won his SCOTUS seat which is pathetic in Alabama

Strange would have been fine

I'm still wondering why people think Bannon is responsible for Moore winning in the primaries

Well he backed him. Also a lot of people say that Brannon was leaking stuff about Moore to the media after he won the Primary

But who knows if it's true

People had this perception that Bannon was trying to make Trump's electoral agenda better outside the white house, and that Moore was part of that. After Moore lost and Trump publicly bashed Bannon, it became apparent that wasn't the case.

I think Moore would still have won the primaries without Bannon's endorsement

Yeah I think Bannon really spread the false message that the GOP was trying to undermine Trump. It was untue but if it wasn't for traitors who sunk Obamacare repel like McCain the idea would not have found traction. Plenty of blame to go around

It wasn't just Bannon.

isn't the GOP trying to undermine him though?

yeah, GOP senators and congressmen seem to vote with him frequently enough

but during the 2016 election they pulled all sorts of BS to try to sabotage Trump

Yeah but now that he gave them the Rust Belt it's not advantageous to them. They thought he would lose. Look at the scotes

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

The problem is they have too few numbers in the Senate

here's the thing I noticed,

in the last 4 midterm elections,

(all of them)

the party that was leading in the generic ballot never won by the projected margin

for instance,

in 2014,

Republicans outperformed the generic ballot by 3.3 points,

before that, Republicans underperformed by 2.6 points,

before that, Democrats won but underperformed by 3.6 points,

before that, Democrats over-performed by 2.9 points

this means that in reality,

Democrats could be leading by 9-10 points in the generic ballot and still not take the house,

because they need to win 7-8 points in the popular vote to flip the house,

so when adjusted with that 2.9-3.6 margin of error, being as high as 10 could not mean much, but being higher than 10 could be troubling

It's really not just keeping the house, which is important nonetheless, but winning it with at least 230 seats

We don't want it to be too close

so, to get it straight

2014: Republicans overperofrming by 3.3
2010: Republicans underperforming by 2.6
2006: Democrats underperforming by 3.6
2002: Democrats overpeforming by 2.9

?

correct

keep in mind that in 2002, the GOP actually made gains

although I wouldn't be surprised if polling methodology has changed since then

by the way, what's more important than speculating over polls is taking action

wait

come to think of it, you can speculate over polls all you want, but will that actually change anything?

okay so,

2002: Republicans outperform polls (+2.9)
2006: Democrats underperform polls (-3.6)
2010: Republicans underperform polls (-2.6)
2014: Republicans outperform polls (+3.3)

as long as Democrats aren't leading by 9.4 through 10.4, we should be fine

make no mistake,

the margin of error can swing either way

so even if Democrats are leading only by +3.2, they have a shot

although with 3.2, it's extremely unlikely they can come close to prevailing,

however,

this is the most important factor of all,

**if** by election day,

**if**,

Democrats are leading by 10.5 points,

they **will** flip the house

**100%** chance Democrats flip the house if they are leading the ballot by +10.5

has anyone else here decided to make a fake FB account to see what the masses are discussing when it comes to the midterms?

I've noticed that all the Trump supporter pages are just boomer-tier memes

nothing on the midterms

@Den did you also notice that?

https://i.redditmedia.com/YsavbXhfIiZII3mq9Q3StoN4lFKbuBXze8gzGnJQU7Q.jpg?fit=crop&crop=faces%2Centropy&arh=2&w=640&fm=jpg&s=2e477f3fd7cbfc1efc6e8802a136d054

Ron Paul endorses Nick Freitas for the Virginia Senate Seat

hmm

Lemme look this up

"As a sovereign nation, we have an obligation to secure our borders. Our immigration system must be reformed to allow for safe and sensible legal immigration. We cannot allow for processes that do not take into account the best interests of our citizens. The current system has allowed terrorists and criminals to step in front of honest immigrants seeking to assimilate into our society. Nick supports both strengthening our border security and adopting merit-based immigration policies."

Sounds like a good guy to me, he seems like my kind of libertarian.

He may not have as much reach as Stewart, but I'd keep my eye on him.

because of how much leftists are crowing about "muh blue wave," if they lose any of the races in reliably Blue areas like Virginia, that will make things so much sweeter

"The borders are open and the country is 10% white, but at least I never voted for anyone who supports Israel!"

map with every district that Clinton or Trump won and lost within 10% of the vote

Interesting

Why does my state keep running the same Democrats?

It’s very weird

@Rhodesiaboo it's the same thing for both parties because that's the nature of political office

It takes a hell of a lot of THANKLESS work to run for office

I honestly wish that trump could get a new party created.

But that would never work.

Not in america's system.

which means that the people who have already been politicians for many years tend to be the ones who will go for higher offices

My State has a lot of liberal newspapers

@WildRooHuntingTutorials that'd be a bad idea tbh

They’re trying to dumb us down

I know.

What would help is to improve what we've got

It would never work.

Unfortunately if the republican part branded itself as American Nationalist it would scare normies and mainstreamers away.