James E. Campbell has a very worthwhile post at Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball on projections for the midterm elections based on a “seats in trouble” analysis. Here’s the summary:
— This article updates and applies the seats-in-trouble congressional election forecasting equations to the 2022 midterm elections.
— The goal is to use micro level (congressional district and state) competitiveness assessments in combination with their electoral history to statistically generate an accurate prediction of the election’s national outcome.
— The seats-in-trouble forecasts for the 2022 midterms are losses for the Democrats of 42 seats in the House of Representatives and 1 seat in the Senate.
That’s not good news for the Democrats but it isn’t apocalyptic, either.
I believe the new wing of the R party – younger populists – have stirred the enthusiasm of those who have had enough of self-serving, tainted politicians, giving them a good chance of defeating both R and D incumbents. However, the one big fly in the ointment of that prediction/wish is how safe and secure the midterm votes will be.
IMO the last election mirrored that of a 3rd world country – riddled with fraud, last minute legislative manipulations, injection of oversized funding to one candidate, erratic irregularities, and compromised, unsafe voting machines. Nonetheless, there has been a plethora of vociferous pushback from political power brokers, enjoined by a biased judiciary, denying any election wrongdoing, essentially chiding the large percentage of citizen voters who see the 2020 election as a farce, one producing an illegitimate president. This sense of election foul play has only expanded in the months following the certification of Biden’s “win.â€
How such a jaundiced opinion of our election process will effect the midterms remains to be seen. Will it dampen people’s enthusiasm to vote, as they feel it’s a futile exercise? Or, will a coordinated energized commitment, to rid Congress of those not representing the key interests of Main Street, be able to overwhelm even a fraudulent rigged system still in place, giving the populist movement an advantage to have their turn at governance?
Jan: IMO the last election mirrored that of a 3rd world country – riddled with fraud
There is no evidence of significant fraud in the U.S. election process. Multiple audits and recounts, as well as independent investigations, confirmed the results of the 2020 election.
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2022/election_integrity_most_voters_still_suspect_cheating
55% of likely voters, as of a few months ago, believe there was cheating in the 2020 election. The “big lie,†is what Biden and his allies want people to believe. However, many of the irregularities noted in the thousands of affidavits submitted, Dominion machine vulnerabilities discovered by cyber analysis, threatening election clerks and/or firing them when they dispute the accuracy of ballot counts, point to a massive cover-up. The reason the numbers of those who believe the election was illegitimately processed is increasing is because more evidence, via podcasts, independent cyber expert investigations, and unbiased sub stacks, are surfacing and changing the spoon-fed narrative, of a “fair†election, to a more believable one described as a swiss cheese of corruption.
Jan: 55% of likely voters, as of a few months ago, believe there was cheating in the 2020 election.
Yes, we understand that many people believe there was fraud. But argumentum ad populum is not evidence of the underlying claim.
Jan: However, many of the irregularities noted in the thousands of affidavits submitted
The courts looked at hundreds of affidavits, and the vast majority were hearsay at best. You ignored that audits, recounts, and investigations showed no significant fraud.
Perhaps you might point to a particular bit of evidence that you find convincing rather than just waving in the general direction.
Zach, “evidence,†as you call it, is subject to manipulation, interpretation by those in power, and those afraid of opposing those in power with evidence openly refuting the establishment’s standardized narrative.
Following the election the elites and establishment were quick to proclaim what a “perfect†election 2020 was. Citizen observations, written statements citing a different conclusion were mocked, rejected, or not even read. Law suits hurriedly filed, opposing the legitimacy of the election, were summarily dismissed on process, not because any evidence was seriously reviewed, considered or debated. Outside expert’s findings, analyzing the safety/security aspects of the machines used to count the votes, predominantly Dominion machines, were literally ignored, even when illegal irregularities such as internet access or the machine’s ability to alter votes were discovered (Co & Philadelphia are examples). Even more egregious was how an incurious press turned a deaf ear and blind eye to even the mere possibility of election foul play. A few times, when election corruption could not be sufficiently finessed, repressed, or covered up, those clerks finding these discrepancies were forced to resign. Enough of these scenarios have emerged and been detailed in media rapidly replacing our old, corrupted legacy media – independent blogs, alternative news streaming, and an explosion of substack essays where free speech and opinions are not blunted and/or censored – to be having an impact in changing the discourse of how the growing majority now view the past election.
One free thinker, long time democrat, turned articulate blogger is Sasha Stone. She is to the point and spot on with how she sees the dysfunctional democrat party now functioning. Below is her contrast and comparison of the “elite†vs “MAGA.â€
https://sashastone.substack.com/p/the-ultra-elite-vs-the-ultra-maga
Her refreshing political opinions, not cluttered by extraordinary party affiliation bias, join those of Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald.
Z: Perhaps you might point to a particular bit of evidence that you find convincing rather than just waving in the general direction.
Jan: “evidence,†as you call it, is subject to manipulation, interpretation by those in power, and those afraid of opposing those in power with evidence openly refuting the establishment’s standardized narrative.
So, no. You can’t.
It’s useless pointing out evidence to the blind.
Jan: It’s useless pointing out evidence to the blind.
There are far more readers of this blog than commenters. You might post for their benefit. Or, a reasonable reader might just assume you don’t have actual evidence.