'18
Rs defend 65 seats @ Trump+10/bluer
Ds defend 30 @ Clinton+10/redder
'26
Rs defend 30 seats @ Trump+10/bluer
Ds defend 62 @ Harris+10/redder
BUT
'18
Ds need 24 (37% of R defensive seats)
'26
Ds need 3 (10% of R defensive seats)
'18
Rs defend 65 seats @ Trump+10/bluer
Ds defend 30 @ Clinton+10/redder
'26
Rs defend 30 seats @ Trump+10/bluer
Ds defend 62 @ Harris+10/redder
BUT
'18
Ds need 24 (37% of R defensive seats)
'26
Ds need 3 (10% of R defensive seats)
What do you notice?
What do you notice?
(Notice Crawford and Harris both did relatively well in suburban WOW)
(Notice Crawford and Harris both did relatively well in suburban WOW)
If anything higher salience/turnout specials like FL-01/06 have been better for Democrats than the average (average swing is +11%D so far in 2025)
If anything higher salience/turnout specials like FL-01/06 have been better for Democrats than the average (average swing is +11%D so far in 2025)
-very lib electorate
-real support lower than polls
-thermostatic backlash
-voters do love 2 vote “no”
-very lib electorate
-real support lower than polls
-thermostatic backlash
-voters do love 2 vote “no”
- universal name ID/salience
- infuriates liberal base, but not equally adored by conservative base
- backlash with marginal Republican voters
- universal name ID/salience
- infuriates liberal base, but not equally adored by conservative base
- backlash with marginal Republican voters
Unique/noisy data bc it’s all adults (not just voters) and RDD (all phone, traditional), but these points in some ways make the very bad econ ratings more interesting
Unique/noisy data bc it’s all adults (not just voters) and RDD (all phone, traditional), but these points in some ways make the very bad econ ratings more interesting