2018 MidTerm Trends

[gwb-trading]

I did, previous trends weren't mentioned anywhere, you made up your own facts as usual.

As usual you never read the articles or the links from the articles. Nor are you willing to do any basic research on your own -- while you parrot the talking points from your liberal masters continuously, starting each day with posting new threads on the topics they demand.

It should be obvious, even to the most simply minded, that comparing the results of a state seat race to a Presidential race --- and raising a big ruckus that it is somehow a trend while ignoring all the previous races for the same state seat -- is the height of self delusion, which of course is a big problem with liberals.

 

[exGOPer]

As usual you never read the articles or the links from the articles. Nor are you willing to do any basic research on your own -- while you parrot the talking points from your liberal masters continuously, starting each day with posting new threads on the topics they demand.

It should be obvious, even to the most simply minded, that comparing the results of a state seat race to a Presidential race --- and raising a big ruckus that it is somehow a trend while ignoring all the previous races for the same state seat -- is the height of self delusion, which of course is a big problem with liberals.

There is absolutely no mention of any trends in any of the articles you linked or I linked because the data is not easily available for a state house race.

So you use that trick of non-availability of data as a way to dismiss the entire story and whine about how the media and liberals victimized your precious ideology. And the fact that you completely ignored my points about 37 other seats that Dems flipped, the fact that this is the same pattern that happened in 2010, the fact that Dem turnout has doubled and Repub turnout has declined, the fact that Trump's popularity has faded in places he won is all a 'talking point' to you while you whine and whine about your genetically predisposed fixation about being a victim.

And NOBODY said this race was the absolute crux of the trend, it's ONE DATA POINT among many but as usual you ignore that because it hurts your bullshit argument.

 

[exGOPer]

As usual you never read the articles or the links from the articles. Nor are you willing to do any basic research on your own -- while you parrot the talking points from your liberal masters continuously, starting each day with posting new threads on the topics they demand.

It should be obvious, even to the most simply minded, that comparing the results of a state seat race to a Presidential race --- and raising a big ruckus that it is somehow a trend while ignoring all the previous races for the same state seat -- is the height of self delusion, which of course is a big problem with liberals.

Since none of the articles had the numbers as you claimed, I did my own research and it turns you were completely wrong as usual

2014: Dem won by 52 to 47, a margin of 5

2012: Same margin of 5

https://ballotpedia.org/Kentucky_House_of_Representatives_District_49#2014

So what exactly were you whining about? media? liberals? parroting?

You made assertions that had no bearings on the fact, Dems won a seat by a margin of 35+ points in a race that they won by 5 points in the past, that voted Trump by a huge margin and you think that's not worth reporting because it hurts your feelings?

 

[gwb-trading]

Since none of the articles had the numbers as you claimed, I did my own research and it turns you were completely wrong as usual

2014: Dem won by 52 to 47, a margin of 5

2012: Same margin of 5

https://ballotpedia.org/Kentucky_House_of_Representatives_District_49#2014

So what exactly were you whining about? media? liberals? parroting?

You made assertions that had no bearings on the fact, Dems won a seat by a margin of 35+ points in a race that they won by 5 points in the past, that voted Trump by a huge margin and you think that's not worth reporting because it hurts your feelings?

Oh little exGOPer I am so proud of you. For the first time ever you went off and did your own research. But you still managed to flunk the class by not providing adequate support of your assertions over the past 20 years of election cycles, nor understanding the statistical impact of the lower turn-out in the special election. But keep up your effort... someday you will accomplish something at the third grade level.

 

[exGOPer]

Oh little exGOPer I am so proud of you. For the first time ever you went off and did your own research. But you still managed to flunk the class by not providing adequate support of your assertions over the past 20 years of election cycles, nor understanding the statistical impact of the lower turn-out in the special election. But keep up your effort... someday you will accomplish something at the third grade level.

I don't need lectures on research from someone who can't discern a fake peer reviewed paper from a real one.

Here is a complete list of your fabrications and deflections in this thread.

As usual you never read the articles or the links from the articles.
.

There was nothing in the articles as you claimed, so what articles were you referring to?

Actually all the Democratic margins on this seat in previous elections were larger than the current election -- including ones with the same candidate.

An utter lie as proven already, the margin was less than 5 points in the last 3 election cycles.

In terms of predicting election trends -- the results of an election seat should be compared to the previous elections for the same seat.

That's what I did which you were completely wrong about by saying that it didn't represent a break from the trend considering the seat went from +5 D to +35 D

So lets take a look at the Kentucky race... for many years now the state seat in the district was won by a margin of +30 points Democratic or greater.

LOL, you were lying or just making shit up? Where is this 30+ point margin, care to show one link to back that up?

You introduced a new variable into the equation because the facts were uncomfortable and instead of providing data to support your assertions, you blame others for not researching YOUR CLAIMS.

And then when your claims are fact checked, you ignore all that, make condescending remarks to hide your bullshit and lies. You are complaining that I am not researching YOUR claims that you completely made up as shown here.

What else to expect from a conservative right?

 

[exGOPer]

FiveThirtyEight: “According to qualitative assessments by nonpartisan handicappers — Cook Political Report, Sabato’s Crystal Ball and Inside Elections, — only eight GOP-held governorships are completely safe in 2018. That leaves 18 Republican-held governorships in some degree of danger.”

 

[exGOPer]

Barring a major tabulation error, Dave Wasserman projects that Conor Lamb (D) has defeated Rick Saccone (R) in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district.

Absentee ballots are being counted tonight, but it’s not likely that Saccone can make up his deficit in the remaining ballots. Saccone’s best path at this point is through a recount.

That said, the Associated Press is not yet calling the race.

It used to be +20 R, now a Dem is winning it.

This is what you get when you elect a moron.

 

[gwb-trading]

Barring a major tabulation error, Dave Wasserman projects that Conor Lamb (D) has defeated Rick Saccone (R) in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district.

Absentee ballots are being counted tonight, but it’s not likely that Saccone can make up his deficit in the remaining ballots. Saccone’s best path at this point is through a recount.

That said, the Associated Press is not yet calling the race.

It used to be +20 R, now a Dem is winning it.

This is what you get when you elect a moron.

This particular election means something since this 18th District in Pennsylvania has traditional been held by Republicans. This is different than most of the other district flips in recent special elections where seats traditional held by Democrats and won by a Republican in 2016 flipped back to being Democratic (which should be expected).

 

[Tony Stark]

Last poll showed Trump had a 42 % approval rating in PA and an approval rating above 50% in only 12 states.That should continue to help Dems as it did last night.

 

[Cuddles]

This particular election means something since this 18th District in Pennsylvania has traditional been held by Republicans. This is different than most of the other district flips in recent special elections where seats traditional held by Democrats and won by a Republican in 2016 flipped back to being Democratic (which should be expected).

Not to knock the Dems on their victory, but the GOP were disadvantaged since their gerrymandering for said district was deemed unconstitutional