« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Swingometer Update

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  August 24th, 2010 at 07:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Pelosi Boehner

The Florida primaries are today, but I’m not posting on them today. That way I have time to address – by popular demand* – all the new generic ballot polls, and see where the Swingometer is landing lately.

As always, I’m using the trusty Real Clear Politics archives to find the polls. So let’s go.

There are many polls to look at here. This month we’ve had seven of them. Two of them polled likely voters, and five polled registered voters. I look forward to PPP’s shift to LVs, but we’ll see that next time.

In fact, there are so many polls that I’m not going to give a detailed writeup of each. What I will do is process each individually in one big, honking table, and then average them. It will be a weighted average. Polls of likely voters (Time and Rasmussen Reports) will get a double weighting.

Two party splits
Poll Filter D R Swing
2008 Actual 56 44 –
Gallup 8/22 RV 48 52 R+16
Rasmussen 8/22 LV 45 55 R+22
Time 8/17 LV 46 54 R+20
AP/GfK 8/16 RV 48 52 R+16
Fox 8/11 RV 46 54 R+20
CNN/OR 8/10 RV 48 52 R+16
PPP 8/9 RV 48 52 R+16

So, taking the weighted average, the mean swing is 18.7. It almost feels silly to go to all that trouble of weighting the polls when anyone could have eyeballed that figure anyway, thanks to every single poll giving Republicans a lead within that band of +4 to +10 in the two party splits.

Regardless, we take that 18.7, put it into the Swingometer, and the result is… Republicans gain 52 seats from 2008′s results for a 230 R-205 D House majority, a larger win for John Boehner than either of Nancy Pelosi’s (and in fact exactly equal to her D+31 2006 and D+21 2008 wins combined), and slightly smaller than Newt Gingrich’s R+54 of 1994. (Historical figures per Wikipedia because I’m not basing anything on these numbers).

* Two or three people might not sound like a popular movement, but it is big enough for me.

From Unlikely Voter.

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

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Adjoran

    The national spread may only mean we win our safe and leaning seats by bigger margins, and capture most of the toss-ups, but there are still lots of close races with the Democratic incumbent holding millions in the bank.

    Our ideal result might even be losing the House 218-217 (Pelosi will be thrown under the bus) and a 50-50 Senate. Not enough to repeal Obamacare & other nonsense (but after a sure Presidential veto, it would take 2/3 of both House and Senate to override), but enough to block funding for them.

    That way, with Democratic control of Congress, it would be harder for Obama to sell his “Republican obstructionism” excuse in 2012.

  • bk

    We’ve already seen how much damage the speaker can do on the floor (calendar etc.) and in committee (rules). Other than with nominations, a majority of 1 in the House is in many ways more important than a majority of 1 in the Senate.

  • america1st

    and plenty of time for more people to think about golfing while the economy sinks, the looming tax increases of 2011, the Ramen they are eating because of unemployment, the Ground Zero victory mosque and other raw wounds traceable directly or inferentially to zero and its ilk. The momentum remains conservative and feel, strongly, this prediction, while probably correct on 8/24, will be superseded by even greater swings in the coming days. The current regime is the culmination of the agenda begun by Wilson & FDR. Now that the electorate has begun to experience this rather than look at it in the abstract, distracted by the pixie dust BS, revulsion will increase – particularly as young “home & change” 0biebots see the change in their paychecks (if they have such) and hope they can meet the bills. Reality is a “witch,” ain’t it?

    I really expect to see a more massive re-alignment. Not a veto-proof Senate, yet, but more than enough to throw some brakes on the runaway insanity.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    Honestly, at this point all the matters is getting that gavel out of Pelosi’s hands and returning the chamber to regular order.

    Remember the days when the committees actually developed the bills and amendments were voted on? Yeah, me either.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    My God did it feel good this morning to finally be able to fill in the circle next to Marco Rubio’s name.

  • bk

    He said (paraphrasing), “If you like the direction the country is headed, then vote for either of my opponents since they’ll both vote for more of the same; if you think a different direction needed, then vote for me.”

  • Richard Mullins

    Of course, have Boss Reid lose his job and make it tough on Richard Durbin. I hope it things get tough for Obama so that he goes full tilt left. The Best case scenario is to win the house and senate. It’s getting more likely every day.

  • IJB
  • IJB
  • tominkorea

    Having a 50-50 Senate or not winning the House is not the ideal result. The ideal result for the GOP is the Republican Party winning every seat that it is capable of winning.

    The idea that winning the House or Senate would stop or make it harder for the Democrats to sell Republican obstructionism is categorically false. The Democrats tried to sell that when they had a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and 60% of House Senate. They still have 60% of House seats and still try to sell that.

    Right now, the American people WANT Republican obstructionism. If the Democrats run with that argument, the American people are going to say “ok!” and vote GOP.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    52 seats seems a little low right now. Gehaghty’s analysis yesterday put 41 seats in the category of “GOP should win these” and another 36 in the 50/50 category. Figuring the “GOP should win” losses are balanced by wins in the 28 “DEM should win” category, then we are looking at a 59 seat pickup.

  • Coop

    … is that the Democrats get absolutely slaughtered (politically speaking) in the House, giving Speaker Boehner a solid majority and control of funding. Yet I would prefer to see the Senate remain in Dem control, but at only about 51 seats (giving more GOP representation on the committees).

    That whiny lightweight Marxist already blames the GOP and everybody else for his problems, so I don’t want to give his future, predictable whining some credibility. Clinton was able to recover from 1994′s massacre and go on to win re-election by blaming the “evil” GOP (which controlled both houses of Congress) for everything. This way the Dems will still control two out of three (Senate and White House), so the Obamessiah’s whining should HOPEFULLY be seen for what it truly is.

  • Richard Mullins

    and Obama thinks that every thing is fine. I’m guessing that you want us not to get the house and senate, since you’ve become the Grand Eeyore.

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

    It’s a deliberately simple model that lets me work with 435 races in a way I couldn’t otherwise.

  • mboyle1988

    Key difference between Clinton and Obama: Obama already passed health care, which the public still hates. It won’t get repealed by 2012. With Republicans in control of both houses, we will be able to do enough to revive the economy a bit, we will repeal health care, and then obama will veto it. It will still be an active issue in 2012, and Obama will lose.

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

    I’ll need something to fill the airwaves in the offseason (as brief as it will be before the 2012 stuff heats up), and checking on stuff like that will do nicely.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    Like I said, we haven’t seen actual results yet, but it will be fun to compare it once the dust has settled.

  • http://www.libertyjunkie.com libertyjunkie

    Even if the republicans take back the House and eek out a majority in the Senate, he wont be able to make a case against republicans.

    The reason is simple – he is an arrogant, childish, incoment fool.

    Look what he did with one of the most favorable political climates Dems have ever seen – he wasted it and it only took about 1 year. He was given a chance for generations long Democratic majorities and he blew it.

    He isnt competent enough to use a Republican senate to his advantage. he just doesnt have the political ability.

    Add to that his childish arrogance and what we will see is, as his power is infringed upon, he will become unglued. His out of the mainstream beliefs and actions will get evern more radical. He wont know how to handle majority opposition. Has he ever been opposed in his life? No. He will become defiant and careless, and self destruct even more than he already has.

    My guess is that in 2012 he wont even run, He wouldnt be able to do anything he wants anyway (anything from the leftist agenda) so his ONLY purpose to being in the WH from 2012-2016 would be to veto a healthcare repeal.

    I think he would rather give up on it and not have to “waste his time” for another four years. When has he ever dedicated himself to 8 years of a job anyway? My guess is that he is so disloyal, that he isnt even loyal to his leftist causes. He is in the history books, he is world famous – and that is enough for him.

  • eastbaylarry

    The real ‘worst case’ would be an unrepairable ‘October Surprise’.

    Be prepared to vote Conservative in the primary and Republican in the general, but keep the powder dry.

  • http://www.twitter.com/RS_yoyo yoyo

    Apply polling data retroactively in the same manner you do here and apply that data to the races prior?

    Since you built your model to apply in the future, you shouldn’t have to worry with you model being biased based on a known outcome. You should have a fairly accurate dataset that can be used to see if a pattern in your deltas emerge, thus giving you a +/- figure that is … modestly trustworthy.

    If nothing else, it may be a danged-good indicator of voter mood and turn-out predictor….

    Something to thunk-on.

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

    I just haven’t had time yet. :)

  • http://www.twitter.com/RS_yoyo yoyo
  • penguin2

    will commence. It isn’t just about legislation, which will continue to be a challenge, and not much can be undone with the veto situation, though funding can be withheld. Investigations and follow the money and the votes – critical.

  • nvrepub

    nt

  • Richard Mullins

    and right now, we’re doing a good job watching out for that October surprise. The primaries have been over since March here in Texas and it’s time to vote Republican period. Perry v White is getting nasty here but I convinced that Rick Perry will win. BTW, more conservative candidates lost in TX-08 and TX-14 primaries, so those people are stuck with a little less conservative Republicans.

  • ritaok

    Is this all there is? What happens to the new young bloods, you know, the only three with brains in our whole outfit? Ryan, and definitely Coburn, and that other young gun – what happens to them? They get the brush off from the cocktail RINO establishment types. No wonder young adults take a walk from “the system” and are no shows at your precinct. This seniority loyalty system for the Speaker is based on turn-taking, and rewards the exhausted and senile. It has to go.

  • http://www.amazon.com/Wade-Arnold/e/B002RHGZAS/ref=ep_sprkl_at_B002RHGZAS?pf_rd_p=479564851&pf_r Wade

    Until Obama is gone, can the new Republican powers-that-be NOT wuss out and let the new Democrat minority walk all over them? Pelosi locked them out of everything, and its perfectly honorable to make the Dems PROVE they can play like a team before letting them have equal committee assignments, etc.

    I think a 2 year probationary period is in order, where Dems are subject to the EXACT same rules as Republicans were. Then, if they prove they can act like adults and obey the Constitution, they can start to get treated like adults.

  • RealQuiet

    Seniors and independents weren’t nearly as toxic toward Dems as they are today. The Dem voter base was ticked at Clinton not passing Hillarycare. The GOP base is arguably as fired up as they were in 1994 if not more today. Right now I see a 60-90 seat gain in the House. Realistically though, 60-70 seats. However, there are some supposively “safe, likely” Democratic seats that could fall in November that aren’t on the radar. Hence, that is why I have an outside shot at an 80-90 seat gain.