The Polls Don't Match the Results

In 1978, the last time inflation was this high, Republicans only won 157 seats.
The incumbent Democrats won 277.

But, if you want to tell yourself comforting stories as you face the likely loss of the House majority, I'm all for it. Biden's so thrilled that he's convinced he doesn't have to change a thing and is probably in the process of deciding that this means the American People are demanding his reelection.

 

I think the primary component involved and why the poles didn't predict the turnout it's because of the repeated over and over statement of the Red Wave. The two ways you win an election is get your base out to vote or convince the other party's base they don't need to vote.

Fear of the Red Wave might have been just what motivated people to get out and vote. And it might have been just what people needed to hear to know that they didn't need to go out and vote.

Next time that's possible probably shouldn't brag about it for months.

 

“The more people you force to vote by mail, the more invalid ballots you will generate,” said Ion Sancho, a former election supervisor in Leon County, Florida.

This was once a perfectly palatable thing to say. In fact, it was a quote cited in the New York Times in 2012, talking about the higher risk of voter fraud with mail-in voting. The Times piece goes on to say that voter fraud with mail-in voting is "vastly more prevalent than the in-person voting fraud."

In fact, according to a report cited in the Wall Street Journal, "Absentee-ballot fraud is a far bigger problem than voter-impersonation fraud--about 50 times more common."

In fact, according to Mark Joseph Stern at Slate, "Voter fraud occurs through absentee ballots. The vast majority of voter fraud prosecutions . . . involve absentee ballots that were illegally cast. And the only voting fraud schemes with the potential to actually swing elections involved mail-in ballots."

Why is mail-in voting so ripe for corruption? One reason has to do with the state of our electoral landscape. "Approximately 24 million--one of every eight--voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters. Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state."

In conjunction with that, the lack of transparency relative to in-person voting is a recipe for more fraud, since with mail-in voting, "the ballot is cast outside the public eye, and thus the opportunities for coercion and voter impersonation are greater. Second, the transmission path for VBM ballots is not as secure as traditional in-person ballots."

Given those facts about mail-in balloting, no, I don't think that Republicans should be advocating for more mail-in balloting. That, that is a recipe for more fraud, logically, and, given Democrats' flair for cheating, more Republican losses.

 

I can't disagree with your arguments. However, I see them as not winning with the average voter. Unless someone can conclusively prove there's been large scale fraud with mail in voting I don't see a majority of voters objecting to it. With that in mind I find the old adage "If you can't beat 'em, you might as well join them." comes into play. If the Republicans embraced it I'm of the opinion that the democrats might start getting nervous about it and object again to the practice.

 

In 2018, the Democrats talked a lot about the blue wave. And that materialized. Why did a blue wave materialize for Democrats in 2018, but not Republicans in 2022?

 

I'm not really keen on how encouraging mail-in balloting helps Republicans. Please elaborate.

Republicans generally vote in person, as compared to Democrats. If a Republican votes by mail, instead of in person, how exactly does that help? I see either no difference, or something goes "wrong" with their ballot in the transmission process or thereafter.

 

Mail in voting takes the stress out of voting on election day. I know of Republicans who chose not to vote this cycle because they really believed their vote wasn't necessary because of the hype of the Red Wave. I think if they chose to go mail in then they probably would have voted.

 

The problem with this logic is it assumes it impossible that one might find the economy to be an important issue and vote Democrat. In actuality there have been many people who believe the economy does better under Democrats

“I’ve been around for a long time and it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans” - Donald Trump (during interview with Wolf Blitzer)

 

But Carter's approval rating was about 50%. Biden's is about 40%. So, not quite parallel, but an interesting point. Thanks.

 

If the Republicans were in charge of the government in both Congress and the White House, yes, I would agree with the logic that voters would want a change and give the Democrats a chance at fixing the economy, but to bring the same people back in charge during which the economy failed is illogical.

 

Republicans the voters anyway aren't as afraid of Democrats Democratic voters are of Republicans.

 

Once again, you're assuming it impossible for one to take that position. I'll put it to you this way, the previous admiration saw an overall job loss of 2.9 million in 4 years, but many people who saw the economy as an important issue still voted for the ruling party because they saw those loses as being driven by external factors other than the administration's policies.

 

We don't have final numbers, but, it appears that the GOP may have taken the popular vote by +6, if so, Dems gerrymandering may have saved them, or, their turnout machine and the long long long voting season that gives their ballot mules time to work may have saved a lot of folks that otherwise would have fallen.

Take Kari Lake:

• She was running against the person who runs elections.
• She told her voters to vote on election day.
• AZ prints the ballots when the voter shows up, and
• Big Surprise, someone "forgot" to replace the ink in the machines in conservative precincts.

Maybe we should be getting all our votes in early like the Dems do.

 

By and large it is urban areas vs rural areas, not state vs state.

Democrats won urban areas, even in incredibly red states like Idaho. Republicans won rural areas, even in incredibly blue states like New York.

The solution I think is to grant cities autonomy from the states. When a given area rises above a certain population density it should become independent from the rest of the state.

This would mean both groups get the policy that's representative of their communities.

 

Not among informed voters who understand that gas prices and inflation are worldwide phenomena in which Congress and the President of the United States have very little (if any) influence.

I think people realize that right now, despite the inflation, most can AFFORD to pay the higher prices. The concern is that they won't if the situation gets worse. But there is very little that a Democratic controlled government CAN do, or that a Republican controlled do-nothing Congress WOULD do.

 

But there are no external factors other than the administration policies in 2022. So the comparison falls apart.

 

Not every country is dealing with inflation, and not every country is dealing with the same amount of inflation. Out of the 44 that are dealing with inflation, studied by Pew Research Center, the US, under Biden, has the 13th highest level of inflation. One of the biggest arguments about what caused inflation is the lockdowns and the unemployment checks that gave more money than people were getting not to work, which were all Democrat policies. So, again, it would be illogical to bring the same people, Democrats, to continue adding more fuel to the dumpster fire, and those voters would thus be uninformed, sadomasochistic, or both.

 

Yet again, you're presenting your notion on the assumption that it is impossible for one to hold that view.

 

The economy might be the number one concern for the public in general. However, Trump was the number one concern for the democrats. Democrats outnumber republicans and that was enough to shift the red wave to a red ripple.

 

When it comes to bucking historical trends in the second election cycle in a row, it's an improbability.

 

Your logic would make sense if the economy was the number one issue among Republicans, but since the economy was the number one issue in general, it doesn't add up, sorry.

 

We need to stop early voting. Period.

 

The polls only count the "likely voters" and not the "unlikely" voters. What happened in both 2016 and now is that the "unlikely" voters came out and voted, mostly for the D in some of the most watched races. It is all about which side gets out the vote and for those voters to vote for them.

A YT channel called "Midas Touch" made this point not too long ago in their analysis. It was unconventional, but it was accurate in this election. I don't watch the channel, but professional pollsters have referred to their work as the reason why.

 

I know a lot of democrats. Their hatred for Trump outweighs logic.

 

I can't say I disagree with that.