Hey dems, do you actually believe the polling?

You nailed it.

The only thing that prevents Republicans suffering a far worse fate in '18 is their inability to pass their even more unpopular hyper-partisan Trump®Care.

Their desperate attempts to do so have actually increased the popularity of the ACA (See http://pollingreport.com/health.htm) - and after Republicans have been hellbent upon refusing to correct its deficiencies and contriving an instability that prevents insurance providers from making commitments.

Sabotaging the ACA will not accrue to the GOP's benefit until they can pass a viable replacement, and that's looking increasingly like failure.

 

Exactly. Only the Republicans could ever make the ACA popular. The Republicans are trying to make the identical mistake the Democrats did in 2010. As you stated, only their inability to pass the AHCA is the only thing I think leading to a very disastrous 2018 midterm. Trump with his 40% approval rating is already one albatross hanging around the GOP congress and the midterms. That they may or may not be able to survive. But two, Trump and the AHCA? In 2018 the Democrats have 25 senators up for re-election vs. 9 for the Republicans. That should in itself equate to a 4 or 5 seat or more gain. But it is possible that the Democrats have a net gain of two. Arizona and Nevada.

Not listening to the public as a whole is a death wish for loss of congressional control. Just glancing through the at risk house seats, those that could switch. As of today the Republicans have around 30 to 10 for the Democrats. Without going deep into each of those seats, that translate into roughly a 15 seat loss for the Republicans. That is without the AHCA. The Democrats need a net gain of 24 seats to recapture the house. Peeving off independents is a sure way to ensure the Democrats get it and much more.

Time will tell.

 

Polling is not delivering the results. I recall Luntz I think it was who said polling was functionally extinct and would be useless within 20 years. We do seem to be heading in that direction.

 

Was the polling wrong in 2016? It was pretty accurate on the national level and definitely well within the margin of error. Seems to me that most of the analysis was wrong. It was a much closer race than most of the analysts were predicting in the midwest.

 

Well, you knows maybe the gerrymandering will save the republican house.

 

I doubt it. Gerrymandering was a huge advantage in the first election 2012, but with each election past that gerrymandering becomes less and less of an advantage. People move, die, come of voting age. The districts drawn using the 2010 census slowly change over time. That gerrymandering advantage I would say is at least half of what it was in 2012.

Now remember the Republicans were able to gain 63 seats in 2010 on distracts drawn in 2000 when the Democrats controlled more of the state legislatures and governors. When in 2000 the Democrats had the huge advantage in gerrymandering. The districts had 10 years to evolve. In 2018, those gerrymandered districts will have had eight years of evolvement and change.

Even gerrymandered districts don't remain static, unchanged for 8 years. I think the Democrats are using gerrymandering for loss of seats. But the Democrats were able to gerrymander Illinois and New York in 2010 while the Republicans did Texas and North Carolina. Those were the four states that got all the attention back in 2010 and 2011 for gerrymandering.

 

Regardless, Dems actually gaining control in 2018 is a very long shot.

Very slim, if at all.

 

If they take the house back, they will start impeachment procedures against the president with no damn hard proof still that Russia colluded in the election. If that happens, thank god they will have the senate to block such foolishness. It's time the dems get the hard leftists out of their party like Maxine Waters,

 

It takes 2/3rds of the senate to vote guilty to convict. That is 67 senators. The house could do whatever it wants and in the end it is irrelevant. This is why the impeachment of Bill Clinton was nothing but a sham. Everyone and their brother knew there were no way anyone was going to get 67 votes in the senate. It amounted to nothing more than a political show trial.

With Bill he went into the impeachment process with a 59% approval rating and came out of it once it was over with a 65% approval. Impeachment actually made Bill more popular. The American public didn't want Bill impeached. No impeachment will work unless that is what the majority of Americans want.

 

This situation is obviously more unique and more chaotic. I believe they should ride out Trump's term unless clear evidence of wrongdoing. An "impeachment" by proxy is basically overthrow and then the US is finished. The Founders warned against using impeachment this way for the very reason.

 

With 67 votes needed in the senate trial for conviction, that isn't about to happen. That is unless there is a whole lot of there, there.

 

Well, I know the dems have lost their damn minds since Trump was elected, I know they are the opposition party and they are supposed to disagree, but not down right hate.

 

Shooting congressmen is not the way to get your message out either, Steve Scalise did NOT deserve that!!

 

The Democrats have failed to realize the candidate they put forth was as much disliked by America as a whole as Trump was. She was flawed with a ton of baggage. She ran a very inept campaign when she campaigned. Hillary seem to take it for granted she was going to win because she was next in line, perhaps took winning for granted. Not realizing there were no super electors as there were super delegates. She couldn't energize her base, they lacked enthusiasm. She was a tired old white woman with a fake smile trying to energize a base in which a much younger and enthusiastic Obama accomplished.

A lot of her base, the Democratic base saw her as in the hip pockets of Wall Street and Washington D.C's lobbyist. Yet she came within a c--t's hair of winning. There is no need to hate, there is the need for self-reflection of what should have been. I think the Democrats need to search within themselves for why they lost, not hate the outside winner. Yet it seems the Democrats aren't capable of looking at the candidate they put forth, to realize they screwed the pooch in doing so.

No, they will continue to hate. Continue to blame everything and everyone but what they themselves did to themselves. Perhaps the Democrats should hate themselves for not putting forth a decent candidate that would have won hands down.

 

Sherrod Brown would've been a good candidate. He's from Ohio and knows the rust belt really well.

 

The GOP would clearly love to dump the unstable political liability that induces legislative paralysis, and would much prefer to collude with their puritanical Pence, but it is in the interests of the Democratic Party to keep the ineffectual Trump, beset by scandal into which his Justice Department's Special Counsel, Republican-run Senate investigative committees, and Republican-run House investigative committees all are delving. Trump guarantees that 2018 will be a discouraging year for the GOP, especially those in the House.

 

Trump wants to do good things for the country and you all just want to obstruct, it's sad and pathetic.

 

He'll be reelected again in 2020 if dems keep this obstruction up. It's time to move on for the good of the country.

 

How are you looking out for your own families by attacking everyone else's? The Nazis were race based Nationalists and strongly authoritarian. They came to power by exploiting fear and ignorance, just exactly like Trump has done, and Trump has made no secret of his liking for authoritarianism.

I've been around for some few Presidential elections, never before have I seen one where one candidate based his campaign nearly entirely on hating certain people who he blamed all our problems on, that is classic Nazi, and that is what Trump has done.

 

Americans disagree. The truth is that, in survey after survey, most have a low opinion of Trump and oppose his agenda on several major issues.

 

I agree and Brown would have carried Ohio I am sure. Add Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to that mix. I would have voted for him against Trump.

 

The party that holds the white house almost always loses seats in the first midterm. There has been only one except since FDR to that rule. Bush in 2002, but he had 9-11 happen and that united the country behind him and his party.

First midterm loses

Obama lost 63 seats in 2010
Bush gained 8 seats in 2002 But lost 33 seats in 2006
Clinton lost 54 seats in 1994
Bush lost 8 seats in 1990
Reagan lost 26 seats in 1982
Carter lost 15 seats in 1978
Nixon lost 12 seats in 1970
LBJ lost 47 seats in 1966
JFK lost 22 seats in 1962
Eisenhower lost 18 seats in 1954
Truman lost 28 seats in 1950
FDR gained 11 seats in 1934.

I think the only question isn't if the Democrats have a good midterm, it is can they gain the 24 net seats in the House to take control? As of today, I think the Democrats chances are excellent. But it is far too early to begin to forecast the results of November 2018. The senate is a different matter, the Democrats have 25 seats up for re-election vs. 9 for the Republicans. 7 of those Republican seats I consider extremely safe, that leaves just Nevada and Arizona that may switch. The Democrats do have two seats also vulnerable, Indiana and Missouri. The rest look fairly safe. I don't expect much change to happen in the senate. All the action next year will be in the House unless something extreme happens.

 

Most seats are safe, reinforced by extensive gerrymandering and knee-jerk hyper-partisanship. Trump's exceptional unpopularity and legislative ineffectiveness will cost the GOP to lose more seats than usual, but if Democrats don't take full advantage of the Republican plight, it'll be their fault.

 

I'm probably one of a very few that think gerrymandering after 8 years won't have the effect it did in 2012 the first year after the redrawing of districts. Remember the four states most complained about when the lines were drawn were two by Republicans, Texas and North Carolina and two by Democrats, Illinois and New York.

People move, folks die and young people come of age to vote. After 8 years that could change some of the districts drastically so the gerrymandered district doesn't have the same slant, bias or lean it once had. We may have seen the evolvement of this in the special elections where in supposedly safe Republican districts, the Democratic candidates came close.

Right now pouring over the House seats, there are roughly 28 Republican seats at risk, that could switch, which doesn't mean they will vs. around 10 for the Democrats. Now isn't November of 2018, things can and will change. With Trump's low approval rating and where those at risk seats are, you're probably looking at a net gain of 15 seats, give or take for the Democrats if the election were held today. That's not the 24 net gain the Democrats need, but there is a long time to go between election day and now for them to add approximately another ten.

Last year independents voted for the Republican congressional candidates 51-47 which help the GOP limit its loses to six seats. Republican congressional candidates received 49% of the total congressional vote to 48% for the Democrats in 2016. What's interesting is that independents when asked which congressional candidate they would vote for today if the 2018 midterms were held today answered 40% Democratic candidate, 32% Republican with a whopping 28% unsure or don't know. That is a huge switch, from a four point deficit in 2016 to a possible eight point plus in 2018. If that holds, you could see a 30-40 seat pick up by the Democrats. If it holds that is. All of this is dynamic and changes constantly. But if I were a Democrat, I would be feeling pretty confident. No wonder the GOP don't want to mess with healthcare even if it is their plan. Maybe they remember 2010 when the Democrats did just that.

 

What Trumps needs to do is encourage McConnell to change the legislative filibuster in the senate, so we can get things done without the help from democrats since they don't want to govern, well they do want to stay on this Russia BS.