Post

And the senate?

Doesn't Cook historically shift ratings closer to the election? They are hesitant about making too many shifts in response to polling too far out from actual voting.

How’s he going to do that in a landslide?

The clerk does it. Not sure where I saw it, maybe Dave Troy, said watch for Johnson to install a loyalist in that position.

Your lips to God’s ear, sir.

We are Charlie Cook ✊

Charlie has been bearish on Dems chances in the past when I was hoping for better, and he was right. Dude has closely followed more elections in his career than nearly anyone alive. And I am sure there are Charlie Cooks in the various states that he knows and talks to.

fact check: also true!

It's honestly crazy because if you know literally nothing other than "it's a midterm" and the size of the Republican margin, postwar results say 18/20 times the out party gains enough seats to get to a majority

Maybe it’s the “WITH AMY WALTERS(tm)” who is the problem there ….

Oh, I see. That makes sense.

Those are the prior election tossups for analysis purposes. This year Cook has 21 tossups.

You're setting us up for a major crash on the 4th, right? HRC redux.

I wonder what the comparable percentage is for races Cook calls toss-ups in their final ratings.

Sounds a lot like the two hotdog carts on the beach. They're all OK if they all say the same thing.

Although it would make sense that the out party wins toss ups, right? Especially in a mid term year.

No, sorry, this is just midterms. I do have the president data and will be posting that at FiftyPlusOne soon!

Agreed

I mean Dave Wasserman comes off as a Republican sympathizer

I read this and yet somehow in my mind it comes out in David Plouffe’s voice.

Well, working on it secure.actblue.com/donate/socia...

In this house it’s Spain and post its on what goes

Ignore polls and fight like we're losing! Contest everywhere, help register voters, check your own registration and VOTE like everything depends on it - because it does!