« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Swingometer on the Rasmussen Generic Ballot

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  June 7th, 2010 at 09:20 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Rasmussen has a new generic ballot out, and that means it’s time to see how the Swingometer projects the election to go based on that result.

Since last week the Democrats have lost two points in the poll, but the Republicans held steady, resulting in a R 44-D 35 reading. If we subtract out the independents, third parties, and undecideds to get a two party vote, that turns out to be R 56-D 44 (R+12). In 2008 the two party vote was R 45-D 55 (D+10). Net that’s a R+22 swing from 2008. Plug 22 into the swingometer and we get a 60 seat Republican gain (40 need for majority).

That would be one of the largest changes in the partisan makeup of the House ever, if this poll is to be believed. Even 1994 saw Republicans gain only 54 seats in Bill Clinton’s first midterm. To find a bigger change we have to go back to 1948 when Democrats won 75 seats on Harry Truman’s coattails. The largest midterm I find going back would be Franklin Roosevelt’s second midterm, losing Democrats 72 seats and gaining Republicans 81 in 1938.

2010 will be Barack Obama’s first midterm. Will he really lose 60 seats? If the situation doesn’t change, and Rasmussen is accurate, he probably will. But if nothing ever changed between June and November then we wouldn’t need to take many polls, would we?

Crossposted from Unlikely Voter

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • ktsub
  • earlgrey

    where the polling was off. I know those were just house races, but I have gotten weary of these encouraging polls.

    Doing my part on a local level though with GOP. Just in case someone here accuses me of being nothing more than a debbie downer.

  • acat

    is still the ballot box itself.

    That said, polling is so inexact – perhaps it’s better that we assume we need to work very hard just about everywhere, eh?

    Mew

  • redneck_hippie

    for a second year president. We’re in a great recession that threatens to worsen. I’d say we could be looking at a (somewhat) Rooseveltian 2nd midterm in Obama’s 1st midterm.

    Question is, when will Democrat support crater?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I assume you’re calculating from the current?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    If we don’t work hard we’ll underperform.

  • earlgrey
  • IJB

    When you look at what district ‘flip’ and what districts don’t in the Swingometer, I have reason to think that several of the ones that don’t actually *will* ‘flip’ under an R+9% environment.

    After all, 1) the Swingometer assumes an “even” swing nationally (which may not be the case – certain areas may have a swing to the GOP greater than the average), and 2) the Swingometer will tend to “miss” districts where a D ran unopposed last time or had particularly weak opposition (or a particularly easy time) in 2008.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    The Swingometer is a very simplistic model. It’s fun though and it gives us a starting point for understanding just what these generic ballot numbers mean in terms of a victory or defeat.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …this time around. They probably should have replaced Van Hollen after ’08: he talks big, but right now the Red-to-Blue races are hovering somewhere around five.

  • E Pluribus Unum

    Is smugger a word?

    EPUometer said 80, back last August…….

    Thank you, thank you.

  • acat

    It should be a given.

    Truth is, conservatives don’t look at “politics” the way liberals do – to the right, it’s a thing to do *after*the day job, to libs it *is* the day job.

    This is why we nominated McLame. This is why Romney and Huckabee are contenders. This is why we lost NY-23. Because conservatives only show up – in large numbers – after the “establishment” guys have already laid the ground work, too late to change it.

    Worse, in both the Reagan and the Contract With America eras, conservatives won, took a victory lap, “stopped” the liberals, and then … went home. We turned everything back over to the establishment guys.

    One of my hopes on discovering Red State is that the idea of convincing conservatives that the model has to change, that the hard work has to be a constant, that a “reactionary conservatism” does not really, long term, help.

    I don’t believe it’s a given, so I say it. Hard work. No retreat.

    Mew

  • NeoKong

    5

  • arrowshot

    I have a feeling that a lot worse is to come that will truly reveal the incompetence of this adminstration and the polls will be validated.

  • gemimail

    There is an article on this subject at http://www.marstonchronicles.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=455&Itemid=1297.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    He’s using data from when the south reflexively voted Democrat. That probably understates Republican gains in a more balanced time.

  • fpete13527
  • joayn

    magnificiently said.

  • texasgalt

    but to have a swing like 1938 sets a high bar. There were less than 90 House Republicans then. The Republicans got smacked 1930, 32, 34 and 36.

    This one comes down to turn-out and the level of cheating. Democrats will undoubtedly move heaven and earth in both categories to minimize their losses. They will have the cash and goodies they need to spread around.

    http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/busch/06/1938.html

  • http://www.redstate.com/tnjim TNJim

    Makes me wish we could reco comments here.

    Nicely done.

  • Brian_Roastbeef

    Well said, cat. Well said. That’s the history of conservative revolutions. They are strong in the first couple of years, peter out over the following decade while in power, then get clocked by the liberals because they haven’t kept up the fight…

  • JadedByPolitics

    …

  • zollistar

    So I agree with you, Cat.

    Some of us have to make conservativism, the authentic variety, their life’s work. Some of those who have created this site (take a bow, Erick) are doing that. The rest of us have to work harder at including this aspect into our regular lives, like it or not.

    If we push back long enough and hard enough, we’ll be able to go back to our regular lives full-time. That’s how we’re supposed to live our lives, after all — and what we’re fighting for. The reality, alas, is that there are always going to be people who want to run our lives for us and will work relentlessly to succeed in doing that. So even if we get a respite from this fight, it will be short.

    That’s just the reality of human nature. Ours. Theirs.

  • earlgrey

    We have an enormous opportunity to expose the truth of bad policies.

    Our country will be poorer in future generations and that might inspire people to take a more active interest in how their dollars are being spent.