For the Republicans the situation remains difficult, but the Dems must also be careful. Meanwhile, doubts about the polls are growing
La rubrica - Outside the Beltway: cronache e analisi di politica Usa
The midterm elections are approaching. And, for the Republican Party, the situation appears to be anything but rosy. According to the polling average ofReal Clear Politics Relative to general voting intentions for Congress, Democrats would be ahead by almost nine percentage points. In particular, according to Decision Desk HqAsinello currently has a 72% chance of winning the majority in the Chamber and a 54% chance of doing the same in the Senate. All this, while, according to a very recent Ipsos poll, the overall approval rating for Donald Trump dropped to 32%. In this case, among Republican voters, approval of his actions went from 82% to 73% in a week. In short, the situation, at the moment, favors the Democratic Party. Furthermore, it is no mystery that the high cost of fuel triggered by the war against Iran is weighing on the Republicans. This is a knot that the US president is unlikely to be able to resolve by November 3, when the mid-term elections will be held. However, we must be careful and not take anything for granted. If the difficulties of Trump and his party are objective, signs are also emerging that outline a picture marked by greater uncertainty. This was explained last week by the well-known pollster, Nate Silver, who highlighted some noteworthy elements.
First of all, he highlighted how the wave in favor of the Dems is paradoxically occurring above all in traditionally Republican states. According to Silver, this can be explained in three ways. First, it is possible that some constituencies that once supported Trump are starting to turn their backs on him. Which would be linked to the low approval rating that, as we have seen, is currently afflicting the US president. Second, Silver argues that some historically Republican states, such as Kansas and Iowa, are suffering the most damage due to the high cost of fuel. Finally, the negative economic situation risks putting incumbent candidates seeking reconfirmation into crisis. Clearly, overall, this is a merciless analysis, which cannot fail to worry the Republican Party. On the other hand, however, Silver highlights a further element. And that is that, in the traditionally Democratic states, Asinello does not seem to be registering a clear advantage. Indeed, Senate races such as in Minnesota, New Hampshire and Michigan pit the candidates essentially head-to-head. The risk for the Dems, according to Silver, is that the latter are currently given an advantage in electoral groups with respect to which, in the past, they have very often been overestimated.
Finally, hovering over all this is the unknown of the actual value of the polls. “The problem is that it has never been so cheap and easy to do polls the wrong way nor so expensive and complicated to do them the right way,” said Democratic pollster Zac McCrary significantly. “There is only one source of truth capable of distinguishing real signals from background noise in polls: campaign spending. It’s one thing if a campaign committee releases a poll that shows a head-to-head competition. But if outside groups aren’t spending money in that district, it means their data doesn’t show an open competition,” added Republican area pollster Patrick Ruffini. “This does not mean that all polls are unreliable and that reliable information does not exist, but the professionals I spoke to told me that many of the best ones are not often accessible to the public,” said journalist Ben Jacobs. In short, there remains great confusion under the sky.
