Generic Congressional ballots at Rasmussen, Gallup show wide GOP advantage
posted at 9:30 am on October 12, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
With three weeks to go before the midterms, both Rasmussen and Gallup have their final peek at the composition of the likely voters that will decide who goes to the 112th Congress, and … nothing much has changed over the last few weeks. In fact, at Gallup nothing has changed since it started tracking likely voters in this cycle, with both of its two models showing the same wide Republican advantages as before. This rebuts the meme that Democrats have rallied the forces and generated new enthusiasm for their candidates, and the models show why:
Republicans maintain a substantial advantage over Democrats among likely voters in Gallup’s generic ballot for Congress — in both lower- and higher-turnout scenarios — fueled in part by the GOP’s strong showing among independents.
Gallup’s latest election update shows that if all registered voters were to turn out, 44% of voters would favor the Democratic candidate in their district and 47% would favor the Republican candidate. The race has been close since the beginning of September, suggesting there has been little structural change in Americans’ broad voting intentions in recent weeks.
Among voters Gallup estimates to be most likely to vote at this point under either a higher- or lower-turnout scenario, Republicans maintain substantial double-digit advantages. In Gallup’s higher-turnout scenario, Republicans lead 53% to 41%. In Gallup’s lower-turnout scenario, Republicans lead 56% to 39%. These likely voter estimates are based on respondents’ answers to seven turnout questions, with the results used to assign a “likelihood to vote” score to each registered voter and, in turn, to create hypothetical models of the electorate based on various turnout scenarios.
In addition to turnout, independents’ voting intentions are a critical determinant of the midterm election outcome — particularly relevant, given that more than 90% of Democrats and 90% of Republicans say they will vote for their party’s candidate in the elections. At this point, independents tilt strongly toward the Republican candidate in their district, helping shift the race in the GOP’s direction.
The issue in this election is not that Democrats aren’t voting for Democrats. It’s that independents have fled Democrats in large numbers and are motivated to come to the polls this year. Independents give the GOP a ten-point gap in the broader registered-voter sample, but that turns into a gap of more than 20 points in either turnout model for likely voters — 54/33 in the higher-turnout model, and 57/32 in the lower-turnout model, the one that uses the normal 40% overall midterm turnout.
At Rasmussen, the numbers have changed a bit over the last three weeks, but in favor of the Republicans:
With just three weeks to go until Election Day, Republicans hold an eight-point lead on the Generic Congressional Ballot.
Polling for the week ending Sunday, October 10, shows that 47% of Likely Voters would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate, while 39% prefer the Democrat.
The Republican advantage comes from a number of factors. One is the fact that midterm elections typically feature an older electorate with a smaller share of minority voters. Additionally, in 2010, there is clearly an enthusiasm gap favoring the GOP.
Due to these and other factors, the data projects that 35% of voters this year will be Republicans, while 33% will be Democrats. In the previous midterm election of 2006, the Democrats had a two-percentage point advantage. Unaffiliated voters strongly favored Democrats in 2006 and strongly favor Republicans this year.
Note that the composition of likely voters will not differ widely from the overall composition of the electorate. Democrats have an advantage between 1-3 points in party affiliation in the general population, but that reverses to a two-point GOP advantage among those likely to vote in these midterms. If that 3-5 point swing was the only difference in the electorate, Democrats wouldn’t face a wave of the magnitude we’re seeing. The difference is that their radical agenda and profligate spending has thoroughly discredited them not with their base but with everybody else.
Given these numbers, an appeal for more Democrats to come to the polls may help make a couple of races a little more close, but it won’t help stem the tide. In fact, as Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership become more strident and polarizing in their appeal to the base, they may wind up seeing that backfire as they alienate even more of the independents over the next three weeks.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.
Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2