2022 US Mid-Term Elections Thread (election date: Tuesday, 8th November)

Brussels Sprout

It's just 11 days until the mid-term elections. By definition the Presidency isn't up for grabs but it's still a vitally important election with important implications for the Biden administration's ability to govern. At the federal level, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for grabs along with 35 seats (out of 100) in the Senate. There are also lots of state level elections and referenda.

Traditionally, the party of a new president tends not to fare well in mid-terms and this time doesn't appear to be shaping up any differently. Democrats had been doing poorly in the polls ever since the US pulled out of Afghanistan in a chaotic fashion in August 2021. There was a respite immediately after the Dobbs Supreme Court decision on abortion this summer but in the past month or so polling has swung back in favour of the Republicans as high gas prices and inflation begin to bite for most Americans

House of Representatives

All 50 states have undergone redistricting in response to the latest census results. Both parties have taken the opportunity to engage in blatant gerrymandering in states under their control. This, along with the traditional rural/urban divide with both major party's support bases, has meant that there are less competitive districts than ever before. In the vast majority of districts the primary elections were where the real election happened and the general election will be a formality.

The Cook political report's current categorisations are:

• Solid Dem/Rep: 161/188 = 349 seats
• Likely Dem/Rep: 16/11 = 27 seats
• Lean Dem/Rep: 14/12 = 26 seats
• Tossup = 33 Seats

By their own definitions they only consider the "lean" and "tossup" categories as currently being competitive, so that's just 59 seats, or a paltry 13.5% of the total.

The Democrats currently have a narrow 8 seat majority and it's predicated that this will be lost, with FiveThirtyEight giving an 82% chance that the Republicans will have control of the House after the election.

Senate

Just over one third (34) of the Senate seats are having their regularly scheduled election for their 6 year term of office. There is also a special election in Oklahoma due to the retirement of 87 year old Jim Inhofe. Since these are all state-wide races gerrymandering does not apply and the competitiveness or lack thereof is instead determined by the demographics of each state.

The Cook political report's current categorizations of these races are

• Solid Dem/Rep: 8/14 = 22 seats
• Likely Dem/Rep: 1/3 = 4 seats
• Lean Dem/Rep: 2/2 = 4 seats
• Tossup = 5 Seats

So that makes 9 competitive races or 26.5% of the total.

The Senate is currently tied at 50 seats each - which has allowed the Democrats to pass legislation via the vice-President's casting vote.

FiveThirtyEight currently have the Democrats as 52% to maintain control after the election. This can party be explained by them having to defend less of their own seats in this cycle. The Republicans have also chosen some "questionable" candidates in some key races, specifically Herschell Walker in Georgia and Dr. Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania.

State level

• 36 states are electing governors
• 46 states have state legislative elections in at least one chamber
• 37 states have ballot initiatives
• 30 states are electing Attorneys General (yes, that really is the plural)

Ordinarily the Attorney General races wouldn't really warrant a mention. However this year there are a number of Republican candidates running on a platform of denying that Joe Biden won the last election and implying that that won't happen again under their watch in 2024. That also applies to some of the candidates in Gubernatorial races.

How do you see things panning out?

Are there any races that you're particularly interested in?

Brussels Sprout

How do you see things panning out?

Unless something shocking happens the Republicans will take the House and will almost certainly impeach Joe Biden, out of sheer spite for Trump's impeachments, before 2024.

Impossible to call the Senate given how close some of those races are. The momentum seems to be with the Republicans and John Federman's debate didn't go great for him during the week. I suspect we might end up where things currently are: 50/50.

Are there any races that you're particularly interested in?

All of the competitive Senate races. I absolutely despise First Past the Post so I'll also be keeping an eye of all of the Alaskan elections since they're using ranked choice voting. There's a ballot initiative in Nevada to introduce Ranked Choice voting there too so I hope that that will pass.

Rjd2

The senate polling over the years has been poor and has underestimated Republican support. The shitshow that was Maine last time and earlier polling in Pennsylvania was Democrat wishcasting and a waste of time.

Regarding that state , its amusing as I do think Lamb and that generic GOP billionaire dude would have got it done if they had won but alas not to be, I'm leaning towards OZ if I had to call it but its very much a 50/50 race.

Georgia looks like it will go to a run off, it's a remarkable achievement that Kemp looks like he will cruise to reelection and may even drag Walker over the line first time round.

Arizona also interesting, the Dems have done a lot of good work on the ground over the years but they seemed to have picked a very mediocre candidate for governor who is in all sorts of bother v Lake. Surprised that the polling is now close regarding the senate, Kelly has a massive warchest and is perfect for that state while his opponent Masters is relying on crumbs for Thiel to keep him in the race. I'd expect Kelly to win on the night though by a smaller percentage then he did in 2020.

Elsewhere Florida curious to see how big of a victory RDS gets, if he is serious about been president he needs a dominant and ideally double digits win. His opponent Crist is a dinosaur and the Democrat Dems are a mess. I do feel for Demmings in that state, she could have been a great VP but asking her to beat Rubio,,,oh dear.

House should go to Republicans , but that's a pretty obvious call.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812638#Comment_119812638

I hadn't realised that Kemp was so far ahead. What's the consensus for why that's happened? They had an extremely close race 4 years ago. Incumbent advantage or did something happen during the campaign?

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119815261#Comment_119815261

Looks like Fivethirtyeight have been wondering the same thing:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-happened-to-stacey-abrams/

Rjd2

Yeah that's a pretty good summary, its not just her own campaign her lack of buzz is hurting it has to be dragging down Warnock also.

Its a small number, but their will be a reasonable number of voters who will vote Kemp/Warnock next month.

Beto up against it in Texas, he probably probably should have sat this one out, as its likely to be a third high profile loss in a row.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119816993#Comment_119816993

Beto's got the same problem that Pete Buttigieg will have (when he no doubts tries to get elected after he moves on from his current job) - being from a state that's just not likely to elect a Democrat to state-wide office anytime soon.

They Democrats may as well try an actual Latino in Texas next time around. O'Rourke will be a busted flush after this.

marno21

2018 was a very good cycle for Dems also. FL Senate, FL Gov, GA Gov, TX Sen were all very close. Kemp and Ron DeSantis have incumbency advantage now too which does help.

On a side note, 2024 Senate cycle really isn't favorable for Dems (Brown in Ohio, Manchin in WV and Tester in Montana are all Dems in now fully red states) so if they don't pick up 1/2 seats this time they will be in a proper minority in 2024. Remember that in 2018, the blue wave year in the House, they still lost net Senate seats (they gained NV and AZ and lost FL, IN, ND and MO - Kavanaugh time). Of course, long term they will struggle in the Senate in general by virtue of the amount of red states vs blue states and the way the Senate numbers stack up.

Obama doing some incredible work on the campaign trail.

Other than Bernie, nobody on the Democrat side holds a candle to him.

I watched his rally in Wisconsin and his messaging was impeccable. Was probably pissing into the wind in Wisconsin given Johnson's lead in the polls but he provided a masterclass for other Democrats to learn from.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119818884#Comment_119818884

Yes. The downside of reaching the highest office in the land at such a young age means that he's in political retirement in an era when he's nearly 20 years younger than the leading candidates in both parties. When you see him campaign like that then it's a shame he can't be used more often.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119819232#Comment_119819232

There's nothing stopping him from running for Congress or state Governor

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119819581#Comment_119819581

Technically, yes of course he could not but since they have a lot less power it's highly unlikely. A bit like how British ex-PMs don't tend to become ministers again.

I'm not sure if a US President has ever run for a lower office after they have left the Presidency. I do know though that William Howard Taft became Chief Court Justice of the Supreme Court after he left the presidency. That would be an interesting career path for Obama. He'd need to get some judicial experience first. Clarence Thomas served only 2 years as a judge before being nominated to the current court. Thing is though, in this day and age his age would probably disqualify him for that role. Nominees would want to be nearer to 50 than 60.

AbusesToilets

John Quincy Adams served in the House of Representatives, and Andrew Johnson was a Senator after their terms as President

pixelburp

Haven't really been paying attention to things midterm related. What's the thinking in terms of expected ideological direction once the GOP take back control? Trumpism all the way down or something else? Roe Vs Wade was obviously the seismic change, while I've seen mutterings of reducing support to Ukraine.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119820900#Comment_119820900

The GOP are still a solid Neocon party. Their will be fringes who make a lot of noise online but when it comes to the serious decision making they will be ignored. The two main parties opinions on Ukraine isn't hugely different for better or worse. Its somewhat similar with the Dems when we had that shitshow of a few progressives having to grovel for forgiveness on Ukraine when they stepped out of line the other week.

Regarding Trump, if they have a good night, he got them over the line with his endorsements and if not its the "rinos" who have let the side down, he can't lose sadly. He will declare for 2024 pretty quickly after the midterms regarding the results. On RDS it's interesting he doesn't seem to bothered with campaigning in Florida as he is understandably confident and seems to be building connections in other states while rocking up delivering speeches etc.

Most notable moment was when he stumped for O Dea in Colorado who Trump has called a Rino in a race the Dems are heavily favored to win.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-decries-desantis-move-campaign-sen-candidate-joe/story?id=91998739

Polling still quite messy for a lot of the key races, some very biased polling from both sides which is making the closest Senate races very tricky to predict sadly.

Brussels Sprout

Latest polls in most of the key swing senate races are absolutely brutal for the Democrats

Nevada: Laxalt (Rep) 51 - 46 Cortez-Masto

Georgia: Walker (Rep) 44 - 47 Warnock (hard to see this one not going to a run-off based on those numbers. Neither candidate has broken 50% in any recent polls)

Ohio: Vance (Rep) : 48 - 44 Ryan

Wisconsin: Johnson (Rep) 51 - 47 Barnes

Pennsylvania: Oz (Rep) 48 - 46 Fetterman

Arizona: Masters (Rep) 45 - 47 Kelly

New Hampshire: Bolduc (Rep): 48 - 47 Hassan

all polls taken from fivethirtyeight and are the recent polls from A or B rated pollsters

Even if Democrats were to win in Arizona, New Hampshire and Georgia they still lose the Senate. That Nevada poll is very bad for them. Fetterman's debate performance could very well have lost that state for them as well.

spacecoyote

It's quite a depressing state of affairs when you look at candidates like Oz and Walker on the Rep side. Really shows how entrenched the voters are when guys like that have a good chance of winning

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119823494#Comment_119823494

Yes. If it was just one or two races seeing this swing you could pin point a bad Democrat candidate. Instead it's all of the races and at the same time, some of the Republican candidates are almost hilariously bad (Walker & Oz). Basically in this current environment, it seems that the Republicans could get anyone at all elected so long as they were running under their banner against a Democrat.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119823319#Comment_119823319

Hassan is hugely uninspiring, I assumed that race was over once the GOP governor Sununu decided not to run as the GOP have picked what seemed like her preferred opponent in a stop the steal loon but it seems Hassan will barely crawl across the line. The Dem moneymen won't be happy whatsoever as the GOP candidate has not much funding so this race should not be this close at all.

Ohio is an odd one I have seen some very right leaning polls have given Vance a similar sort of lead which when you look at how red that state is it's not great at all. Vance should be ok but if the red wave does not occur then he may fall over the line. It does help Vance that the governor DeWine is also on the ballot and hugely popular in that state so that's some insurance for him.

Wisconsin is so weird, Johnson just keeps pulling it out, Mc Connell etc gave up on him in 2016 and he somehow won, it won't be a blowout on Tuesday but somehow he looks like he may win again. From what I seen of his opponent he simply is to progressive for that state which is pretty depressing words to type as he is not exactly a "commie"

Georgia will be a runoff which I think the Dems would settle for right now. Worryingly if I had to put money on one of those 2 winning outright on Tuesday then I think Kemp if he has a strong showing he could drag Walker over the line. Grim.

Arizona is so difficult to call, I still think Kelly will fall over the line but not as sure I was a few weeks ago, I've not checked but would assume Thiel has seriously opened the wallet now for Masters which obviously helps him.

Nevada not really followed that closely, Laxalt like Youngkin seems to be able to get the MAGA base on side while not allientating the more moderate GOP voters, that's a problem for Cortez obviously.

y0ssar1an22

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119823494#Comment_119823494

does it not say more about who they are running against, or the policies they are running against?

spacecoyote

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119830671#Comment_119830671

I really don't think it does. A 2-party system where moderate, cross the aisle politics doesn't work, because both sides are so depressingly entrenched means you can put any idiot in front of your team and they'll pick up the votes.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119830671#Comment_119830671

You could make an argument that Fetterman is now unsuitable due to his impairments after the stroke but Raphael Warnock is a steady candidate - not spectacular in any way but not an obviously flawed person like his opponent.

Basically it comes down to:

1. The mid-terms being a referendum on an unpopular president (currently has a 53% disapproval rating)
2. This happening at a time of soaring inflation, particularly in the (depressingly) crucial "gas" price
3. Those two states were won by tiny margins in 2020

If the Republicans hadn't picked such dreadful candidates the Republicans would likely have these 2 states in the bad already.

Brian?

Looking bad, very bad for the Dems. After how the GOP have behaved for the last 2 years, I cannot believe the American people are this stupid.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119823494#Comment_119823494

The mind boggles at Oz being ahead in Pa. He’s a truly awful candidate and a terrible human being

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119838710#Comment_119838710

I suppose Trump was 33% favoured to win by 538 so there's always a chance?

American politics has become such a crazed ideological pendulum swing each election cycle I'm not remotely surprised voters now think GOP is the way to go.

Much is spoken of the need for PR on UK politics but America desperately needs some kind of third power. Or something to reduce the duopoly.

Carcharodon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119838710#Comment_119838710

I haven’t posted here in years because like politics here it gets toxic but I agree it looks very very bad for Dems, I disagree about Americans being stupid, I use to be very liberal, I always thought I would vote democrats but that has changed big time these past few years.

The Democrats here in California are pathetic, you can see the damage they have created on the ground, the over reaction to covid, small businesses getting wiped out, the nonsense wokeness, and of course the crime, it’s insane, hard to describe how bad it is and the lack of consequences for criminals.

The homeless problem is off the charts, again people don’t realize how bad it is, I drove through a certain part of Oakland a few weeks ago and it looked like a apocalyptic movie, it’s so sad and the money they waste on it is crazy. It’s a drug problem first and foremost, I take drugs so Iam not in a bubble but these people take fentanyl and that **** is crazy, I’ve seen people od on that ****, it’s insane

rant over

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119838787#Comment_119838787

Yes you can't really have a viable third party, on a national level, with FPTP. That is one of the reasons why I am so interested in the Alaskan elections this year and the proposition in Nevada to bring ranked-choice voting there too.

In Alaska, without the new voting system, Sarah Palin would most likely have won the House special election a few months ago and would now be favourite to win the general election. Instead, the fact that a majority of Alaskans disapprove of her has made it extremely difficult for her to win.

So, even if RCV doesn't lead to any new parties emerging anytime soon, it will still favour more moderate candidates at the expense of candidates that simply pander to their party bases.

Unfortunately the vast majority of states still use FPTP along with party primaries to find nominees for districts that happen to be gerrymandered. That's a really bad way to find a consensus candidate for a district

hotmail.com

Democracy is at stake says Biden.

Americans really do live in their own drama bubble.

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119840444#Comment_119840444

One side still hasn’t admitted they lost the last general election. One side is running several candidates for state office that would refuse to certify the election next time if a democrat won.

How is Biden the problem.

hotmail.com

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119840491#Comment_119840491

One thing that unites Americans is drama.

pixelburp

A distinct number of Republican candidates take the view that Trump won the election. Bread and butter issues might drive local politics, but it's reductive and asinine to ignore the reality that one side is playing a conspiratorial narrative like child playing with their fathers shotgun.

Democracy is at stake precisely because to one side, they have decided its norms are opt-in.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119840491#Comment_119840491

That's fair enough, but the Dems have spent about 50 million elevating election deniers because they feel they are easier to beat, so I don't blame Joe Bloggs for not taking the Dems to serious when it comes to "democracy on the ballot" attack line.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119840926#Comment_119840926

Does Joe Bloggs even know about that stuff though?

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119841389#Comment_119841389

I think due to Trump, many would have family, co-workers or whatnot who have flourished their "stop the steal" badges or red hats like religious iconography. It has become a loud point of antagonism. I daresay many would be well familiar with the election denial, it's simply a question as to whether it trumps (pardon the pun) more bread and butter issues.

Rjd2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119841389#Comment_119841389

Who knows, but to be fair it's been something the likes of Tapper of CNN has gone apeshit over and rightfully so.

I don't know if they boosted Lake in Arizona, but if they have oh dear oh dear.

Anyway New York governor race has got some attention recently, as Nate Silver pointed out the GOP would have preferred a much more complacent NY dem voting base so their man could sneak in, that seems unlikely with so much focus on it.

Trump showed last night by going after RDS 3 days before he is up for reelection that he is totally incapable of message discipline. I assume De Santis is fuming privately, he is also sitting on a huge war chest which he hasn't need to use himself, very interesting to see if he has the balls to face Trump now.

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119840926#Comment_119840926

There is a coordinated campaign to install GOP election deniers at every level in the system - this is a fact. Sure the Dems were stupid to fund some candidates during the primary season, but it doesn't change the face the GOP are systematically installing people to help cause confusion over any election that they don't win.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0LA7Ff2hgs

pixelburp

Definitely worth pulling out a pertinent headline from that: 291 GOP Candidates in the midterms Deny or Question the 2020 results. It's just dangerous, and no amount of glib attempts to pitch Biden's commentary about it as melodramatic or alarmist can paper over the attempts by GOP to indulge an anti-democratic base within the party.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/10/06/elections-deniers-midterm-elections-2022/

Brussels Sprout

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589639376186724354

Ignoring the fact that it's just plain weird that the owner of Twitter to be explicitly calling for people to vote for a particular party, shared power means that nothing at all will get done for the next 2 years. As well as that:

A Republican House means:

• Kevin McCarthy selling his soul to the Freedom Caucus in order to be become Speaker
• They'll be impeaching Biden over an, as yet to be decided, crime just to keep Trump happy
• Holding the country hostage over raising the Debt Ceiling
• Blocking aid to Ukraine

A Republican Senate means:

• If a Supreme Court opening comes up they'll find some new excuse not to hold hearings
• Blocking all sorts of lower court judges

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119838710#Comment_119838710

They just have to be more credible than the Democrats, that's all,they don't have to be good or capable.

The Democrats stopped listening and turned inwards. That's all well and good until election time and the people you talk at decide you should have talked with them.

It's a large chunk of their own base they are pushing away.

Who doubts that they'll learn nothing, double down and lose more life long voters in 24.

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119847789#Comment_119847789

In what way are the GOP "more credible" than the Democrats. Their entire platform seems to be to tell the same lie so often it becomes the truth.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119847789#Comment_119847789

The GOP are just as guilty of ideological insularity: more so IMO. Their public persona is now deeply embedded within both Trumpism, and the extreme positions over pronouns, trans/bathrooms and of course, the ever-fresh outrage over abortion.

They're superficially the party of fiscal responsibility, but in reality we're light-years from both "tax and spend" Democrats and the part of Eisenhower. Ignoring the social-politics they seem keen to dismantle worker protections via the "right to work smokescreen", than attempt to arrest spending in the traditional mould. And with the Duopoly the way it's set up, and a voter-base constantly riled up about Outrage X, all you can ever expect to see is a pendulum swing with each election cycle.

Brussels Sprout

Anyone care for some Predictions?

Senate (pick one or the other for each)

1. Pennsylvania
2. Georgia
3. Nevada

House (pick the range)

• Democrats gain seats (or stay the same)
• Republicans gain 1-20 seats
• Republicans gain 20-35 seats
• Republicans gain 35-50 seats
• Republicans gain 51+ seats

I'll go with:

Oz in PA

Warnock (but only after a run-off) in GA

Cortez-Masto in NV

Republicans gain 20-35 house seats.

AbusesToilets

The Democrats failure to push thru Voting Rights reforms predictably coming home to roost. If the last year can't energise their base to get out and vote, nothing will.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119849751#Comment_119849751

Do we know how good/bad the Postal and Early Voting has been going? IIRC that was a bit of a critical slice of Biden's win back in 2020 - and of course the subject of the GOP's histrionics.

Brussels Sprout

I don't think voting rights issues are going to be what cost the Democrats this election. The danger is though that people will get elected this week who will ensure that it really is a decisive issue come 2024. Doug Mastriano getting elected Governor in PA or Carrie Lake getting elected Governor in AZ spring to mind.

pixelburp

Also worth mentioning that it sounds like TRump is gearing-up to announce his candidacy, but presumably will depend on how the results go:

“Not to detract from tomorrow’s very important, even critical election… I’m going to be making a very big announcement on Tuesday, November 15 at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida,”

That or he's trying his hand at running a casino again, lol.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119849778#Comment_119849778

It's an issue when the GOP has successfully decreased the number of competitive districts. NC being the gold standard for that. 50/50 split statewide, 11-3 split for House seats.

It's only going to be worse from here

Brian?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119849751#Comment_119849751

That’s not what’s costing them- inflation, petrol prices and GOP lies about their cause is. The base will vote, the swing voters will go GOP, it’s nothing unusual for the mid terms.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119849789#Comment_119849789

Ah Gerrymandering. Yeah that's a vital issue for sure but the Democrats didn't have the number of Senators to make any laws against it (without getting Republican support - good luck with that). Manchin was never going to vote to break the filibuster and they have literally no leverage over him given that his state was Trump +40 in the last election.

AbusesToilets

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119849808#Comment_119849808

That's a failure of politicking tho. If they could get the BBB bill passed, something pretty apolitical ( or should be) as Voting Rights should not be insurmountable. Particularly after Jan 6.

Genuinely think it was the last best chance to save the Republic.

growleaves

@Brussels Sprout 'Ignoring the fact that it's just plain weird that the owner of Twitter to be explicitly calling for people to vote for a particular party'

Why is it plain weird?

Nobody believes that any of these Big Tech companies are functionally neutral in the first place. There is a very thin pretence that they are 'private companies' operating on a standard profit and loss model.

They are (deniably) involved in every election of the last decade anyway.

Now the fig leaf of supposedly not favouring one side over another is simply dropped altogether.