Mid-term election Predictions


Recommended Posts

I hereby predict that the Dems will lose seats in the House.  But it will be so close a call that the "Majority Party" is up for grabs.

I predict that GOP will gain enough seats in the senate to technically have the Majority.  But there will still be enough swing votes (Murkowski, Romney, Cheney, Collins,etc.) that any left leaning bill will still be up for grabs.  But not a single right leaning bill will pass.

Best case scenario for GOP is continual deadlock for the next two years.

And some time soon after the election, Democrats will finally make a decision on whether they hate Kamala more or are afraid of the harm biden will do to the party. They may go woke and decide it's worth the political points to have the first black woman in the oval office (if they can define woman, or if they decide she's light enough to accuse her of wearing blackface).

So far it looks like they're just going to let it ride.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good prediction.  I figure the Dem House losses be bigger than you're predicting.  History:

A Very Early Look At The Battle For The House In 2018 | FiveThirtyEight

Biden is currently sitting around 42% approval, which would indicate a range of 10 and 50 seats lost (at least to the extent you can use the past to predict the future).  Based on the number of folks on the left in my various circles who don't like (or openly despise) Biden, I'm guessing more seats, not fewer, will be lost.

The mitigating factor in this election, is GOP division over Trump.  A party has only so much emotional oomph behind it for a national election, and quite a bit of that oomph is directed at infighting between the Trump folks and antiTrump folks.

 

I agree that it will be fascinating to see who the Dems pick for president.  You don't have to have a political bone in your body to see the validity of not running Biden for a 2nd term, due to his age-related decreasing facilities.  But then if he can act as a barely-present rubber stamp for whatever the folks in charge wanna do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Good prediction.  I figure the Dem House losses be bigger than you're predicting.  History:

A Very Early Look At The Battle For The House In 2018 | FiveThirtyEight

Interesting. Let me think through this.

Insert:  Gerrymandering.  The latest maps feature the following:

  • 181 Blue Seats.
  • 182 Red Seats
  • 34 highly competetive seats.
  • 41 possibly competetive if things are bad enough.  I wonder, for instance, what year that dot was at the bottom left of your graph? That guy did better than Obama did in 2010.  These are "lightly colored"  (i.e. light blue, light red).

So your chart could be accurate assuming a few fairly reasonable conditions.

  • The House makeup speaks to the demand for the party of the President who was elected.  Yes.  This means that most (possibly all) of the toss up states are already the party of the President.  It's possible.
  • With very low Presidential poll numbers, we see some of the "lightly colored" districts turn to their minority side. Maybe.  Maybe not.  I'm seeing the country get so polarized that I don't know if there really are "lightly colored" states anymore.  What we might have is that these states will have a lower voter turnout from the majority party.  This would allow the minority party to win an election.

If both of these effects are in play, we could see numbers as high as you're predicting.  I'm still thinking the numbers are going to be on the lower end of your range (I'd say 10 to 15 seats).  We'll see.

I don't know how helpful a chart like this is when the range is so huge.  For illustration purposes: I think the Republicans will have somewhere between 100 to 400 seats after the election.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I'm seeing, if some of the hot political topics going on right now (like Critical Race Theory and elementary school-level sex education) manage to stay hot topics until the midterms, we could indeed see a massive turnout as people who are up in arms over the matters take it out on the other side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I predict that:

1. Elected officials (both parties) will become more corrupt and put their own agendas above the needs, freedoms and liberties of the citizens they represent.  They will do this saying that they are following their conscience. 

2. That it will become more obvious that elections are being ridged. 

3. That our national debt will increase at even greater rates - increasing economic woes. 

4. That our international affairs will become more chaotic. 

5. More and worse supply chain problems

6. Elected officials will become richer and those they represent will become poorer. 

7. Democrats will blame Republicans for everything that goes wrong and Republicans will blame Democrats for everything that goes wrong.  And lots of things will go wrong.  I am not sure but I think it possible that there will develop violence between the political party members.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2022 at 3:46 PM, Traveler said:

I predict that:

1. Elected officials (both parties) will become more corrupt and put their own agendas above the needs, freedoms and liberties of the citizens they represent.  They will do this saying that they are following their conscience. 

2. That it will become more obvious that elections are being ridged. 

3. That our national debt will increase at even greater rates - increasing economic woes. 

4. That our international affairs will become more chaotic. 

5. More and worse supply chain problems

6. Elected officials will become richer and those they represent will become poorer. 

7. Democrats will blame Republicans for everything that goes wrong and Republicans will blame Democrats for everything that goes wrong.  And lots of things will go wrong.  I am not sure but I think it possible that there will develop violence between the political party members.

 

The Traveler

Sounds like you've watched this episode before :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2022 at 10:08 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

If the things that are alleged to have happened in 2020 really happened, then why do we have any reason to believe the Democratic Party will ever lose its House and Senate majorities ever again?

It's pretty much a fact that voter fraud always happens "to some degree".  But the question becomes "Was it enough to effect the results of the election?"

The answer is not as easy as one would think.  There needs to be "plausible deniability" for it to hold up.  The primary rubric by which that is usually weighed is either numbers of individuals or percent of individuals.

The first layer is "how big is the number?"  And if it is a big enough number, they look into it further.  But if it isn't that big, then they just go "Oh, well.  It wasn't enough to effect the results".  That is true in most cases.  But the second question rarely gets asked. "How close was the election?"  If the race is so close that even 1/10 of 1% could sway the election, it doesn't take many votes to do so.  And you get away with it.  Plain and simple.

So, if the race is so skewed that it would take 5% or more to swing the election, that is a difficult level of voter fraud to cover up with plausible deniability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you folks can help me understand something.  In many accusations of voter fraud, I hear the term "ballot harvesting".   What is it, and why is it fraudulent?

If it's just things like visiting people's houses with ballots, or offering rides, even offering food or incentives to vote - I wouldn't consider any of those things fraudulent.  It would appear dems rock at it and republicans suck at it, which would explain why I only hear the right complaining about it.   I don't care if someone sets up shop in a nursing home to help people get their vote in for Biden.  If the right is too stupid to do similar things, then too bad for the right.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Maybe you folks can help me understand something.  In many accusations of voter fraud, I hear the term "ballot harvesting".   What is it, and why is it fraudulent?

If it's just things like visiting people's houses with ballots, or offering rides, even offering food or incentives to vote - I wouldn't consider any of those things fraudulent.  It would appear dems rock at it and republicans suck at it, which would explain why I only hear the right complaining about it.   I don't care if someone sets up shop in a nursing home to help people get their vote in for Biden.  If the right is too stupid to do similar things, then too bad for the right.  

Here is what it is and why it is bad:  Conservative side.

https://lawyersdemocracyfund.org/other-issues/ballot-harvesting/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/beware-the-fall-ballot-harvest-11592607662

https://www.pressregister.com/opinion-mail-voting-plus-ballot-harvesting-bad-combination-1

Here is the liberal side:

https://theconversation.com/is-ballot-collection-or-ballot-harvesting-good-for-democracy-we-asked-5-experts-156549

https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/may/29/what-ballot-harvesting-and-why-trump-tweeting-abou/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/26/what-is-ballot-harvesting-why-is-trump-so-against-it/

 

Here's my observation from reading these sites.  While the conservative articles say the same "principles" they do so in an independent fashion.  They use their own words, their own arguments, and their own phrasing.

The liberal sites also say the same principles.  But I found it annoying how much they use the same word-for-word phrases and arguments.

And why on earth this issue can be construed as "anti-minority" is only in the mind of the racist who believes that if you're a minority, then you simply don't have the ability to find the proper drop-off locations for your own ballot that apparently, you don't know how to fill out -- because you're a minority. 

That's seriously what you think of minorities?  Gee, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK.  New information.  Apparently, the slew of Dema "retiring" from Congress aren't doing so because they fear they will lose to a Republican.  They are making room for more progressive (read: further left) candidates that are already "chosen" to win.

It doesn't really make sense to put further left candidates up for election in a district/state that is highly competitive.  So, I see two outcomes:

1)  They intend to cheat and get away with it.

2) They'll make Stacy Abrams' reaction look like child's play.  And certain Government officials will be sure to turn certain keys to have that alter the course of the election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2022 at 5:11 PM, SpiritDragon said:

Sounds like you've watched this episode before :)

History does seem to be repetitive - including the history of the Book of Mormon.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2022 at 8:31 PM, mirkwood said:

Dems get smoked overall.

I wonder if the Dems have transformed America (laws and government bureaucrats) more than you realize.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/27/2022 at 11:14 AM, Carborendum said:

Here is what it is and why it is bad:  Conservative side.

https://lawyersdemocracyfund.org/other-issues/ballot-harvesting/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/beware-the-fall-ballot-harvest-11592607662

https://www.pressregister.com/opinion-mail-voting-plus-ballot-harvesting-bad-combination-1

Here is the liberal side:

https://theconversation.com/is-ballot-collection-or-ballot-harvesting-good-for-democracy-we-asked-5-experts-156549

https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/may/29/what-ballot-harvesting-and-why-trump-tweeting-abou/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/26/what-is-ballot-harvesting-why-is-trump-so-against-it/

 

Here's my observation from reading these sites.  While the conservative articles say the same "principles" they do so in an independent fashion.  They use their own words, their own arguments, and their own phrasing.

The liberal sites also say the same principles.  But I found it annoying how much they use the same word-for-word phrases and arguments.

And why on earth this issue can be construed as "anti-minority" is only in the mind of the racist who believes that if you're a minority, then you simply don't have the ability to find the proper drop-off locations for your own ballot that apparently, you don't know how to fill out -- because you're a minority. 

That's seriously what you think of minorities?  Gee, thanks.

Just as a note - I believe ballot harvesting is a ploy by the drug cartels to take control of elections.  We know that drug cartels desire to control governments through elected officials.  We know this by the example of Mexico.  We also know that drug cartels are more in control of those who are illegal crossing our southern border that our border control.  We know that the drug cartels receive money and favors from illegals.  By the same means that illegals are controlled in their border crossing by the drug cartels, ballot harvesting can be controlled by the drug cartels - in fact any votes cast by illegals would be as easy for drug cartels to control (even easier) than their crossing the border.   

It is my belief that current politicians controlled by drug cartels can be identified by their stand concerning illegal immigrant status and backing of illegal crossing of the border. 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Carborendum said:

OK.  New information.  Apparently, the slew of Dema "retiring" from Congress aren't doing so because they fear they will lose to a Republican.  They are making room for more progressive (read: further left) candidates that are already "chosen" to win.

It doesn't really make sense to put further left candidates up for election in a district/state that is highly competitive.  So, I see two outcomes:

1)  They intend to cheat and get away with it.

2) They'll make Stacy Abrams' reaction look like child's play.  And certain Government officials will be sure to turn certain keys to have that alter the course of the election.

There is another possibility.  Then intend to make what some would call a certain type of cheating - legal.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Traveler said:

There is another possibility.  Then intend to make what some would call a certain type of cheating - legal.

 

The Traveler

There’s another possibility too. Maybe more people honestly think democrats are a better option than republicans this cycle. No grand conspiracy, no massive fraud. Simply put, the republicans just lost. It’s life, especially in politics. Your side will lose, and no, there was no widespread fraud. Strike three happened and the umpire isn’t giving you a fourth. 
 

People talking about fraud remind me a bit of owners of a failed restaurant blaming everything but themselves for the failure of the restaurant. Well, maybe the food just wasn’t good? 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

There’s another possibility too. Maybe more people honestly think democrats are a better option than republicans this cycle. No grand conspiracy, no massive fraud. Simply put, the republicans just lost. It’s life, especially in politics. Your side will lose, and no, there was no widespread fraud. Strike three happened and the umpire isn’t giving you a fourth. 
 

People talking about fraud remind me a bit of owners of a failed restaurant blaming everything but themselves for the failure of the restaurant. Well, maybe the food just wasn’t good? 

So no possibility of elections being tampered with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

I wonder if the Dems have transformed America (laws and government bureaucrats) more than you realize.

 

The Traveler

I have no idea what you are trying to get across to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

So no possibility of elections being tampered with?

I’m in the Ben Shapiro camp on this one. Was there some fraud? You bet. Enough to change the results? Nope. The bitter pill is that Biden simply won because more people wanted him to be president than they wanted Donald Trump.
 

I think the real hardcore Trumpers (no, no one here is one of them) are in total denial. Like a person who has been divorced five times but still can’t fathom that maybe-just maybe-they might be to blame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LDSGator said:

I’m in the Ben Shapiro camp on this one. Was there some fraud? You bet. Enough to change the results? Nope.

Do you also agree with Ben when he acknowledges that fraud wasn't ultimately necessary because the left wing media & social media outlets were successfully able to censor enough content and control the narrative sufficiently to produce an equivalent result by keeping the American people uninformed/misinformed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LDSGator said:

I’m in the Ben Shapiro camp on this one. Was there some fraud? You bet. Enough to change the results? Nope. The bitter pill is that Biden simply won because more people wanted him to be president than they wanted Donald Trump.
 

I think the real hardcore Trumpers (no, no one here is one of them) are in total denial. Like a person who has been divorced five times but still can’t fathom that maybe-just maybe-they might be to blame. 

I have always been of the mind that when a checkbook balance is off even by one cent - the only conclusion that you can make is that there is an error and if there is an error you really do not know how far off it actually is.  Seldom is anything one cent so you can be quite sure that the error is not one cent.  The same applies to election fraud.  If the count is off it is pure speculation by how much.   The intent of fraud is to hide what really happened.  It is also an indicator that it is much bigger than realized when there is no one prosecuted or even any attempt to prosecute. 

 

The Traveler 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, person0 said:

Do you also agree with Ben when he acknowledges that fraud wasn't ultimately necessary because the left wing media & social media outlets were successfully able to censor enough content and control the narrative sufficiently to produce an equivalent result by keeping the American people uninformed/misinformed?

Yes….and no. 

No one should argue that Twitter/Facebook aren’t left leaning, but I think both sides (especially the hardcore) are misinformed. Only because political junkies (not pejorative, I’m one of them) tend to only get their news from sources they already agree with. So most news sites “spin” the news to align with what their viewers already suspect about the world. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 11:45 AM, Traveler said:

Just as a note - I believe ballot harvesting is a ploy by the drug cartels to take control of elections.  We know that drug cartels desire to control governments through elected officials.  We know this by the example of Mexico.  We also know that drug cartels are more in control of those who are illegal crossing our southern border that our border control.  We know that the drug cartels receive money and favors from illegals.  By the same means that illegals are controlled in their border crossing by the drug cartels, ballot harvesting can be controlled by the drug cartels - in fact any votes cast by illegals would be as easy for drug cartels to control (even easier) than their crossing the border.   

It is my belief that current politicians controlled by drug cartels can be identified by their stand concerning illegal immigrant status and backing of illegal crossing of the border. 

That's entirely possible.  And it would certainly explain an awful lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share