(CNN) Of late, House Republicans have experienced something of an uptick in expectations – as the party’s base has stirred to life amid the battle over the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and President Donald Trump’s relentless focus on a caravan of people moving toward the nation’s southern border in hopes of gaining entry.
“This will be the election of the caravan, Kavanaugh, law and order, tax cuts, and common sense,” Trump said on the campaign trail in recent days.
There’s no question that there has been some marginal narrowing of things like the generic ballot test in recent national polls, movement that suggests that the most catastrophic outcome for House Republicans – seat losses upward of 40 – are less likely today than, say, a month ago.
In that vein, some Republicans seized on new data from a poll of 69 battleground House districts by The Washington Post and the Schar School that shows 50% of voters backing the Democratic candidate in their district and 47% supporting the GOP candidate.
That 3-point gap seems like really good news for a party that has faced, at times, double-digit deficits in the generic ballot. Right? Wrong – on a couple of fronts.
-
This is not a generic ballot question
The generic ballot tests goes like this: “If the election were today, would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate running in your district?” This is not that. The Post story on the poll notes: “Surveys identified the major-party candidates by name in each district.” So, in each of these 69 battleground seats, the respondents were given the actual names of the two major party candidates on the ballot and asked to choose which candidate they would prefer. Then those numbers were aggregated into the total percentage choosing the named Democratic candidate in their districts and the total percentage choosing the Republican one. -
These districts are not 50-50 partisan splits
Lost, I think, amid the focus on the 50%-47% number is the fact that of these 69 districts, 63 of them are currently controlled by Republicans. Forty-eight of them were carried by Trump in 2016. And in that election, the Republican candidates took 56% of the vote in these 69 seats as compared to just 41% for the Democrats. This is not neutral ground – or anything close to it. These are seats that, in the main, Republicans, in anything close to a status quo national political environment, would have very little worry about winning. That these districts are even marginally competitive speaks to the tilt of the playing field; that the Democratic candidates have a lead – albeit a narrow one – shows just how difficult this environment still is for Republicans.
One other point worth considering here: The 3-point Democratic edge is statistically unchanged from the 50%-46% advantage in these 69 districts that the Post-Schar poll found in the beginning of this month. Also unchanged is the fact that women are the reason for Democrats’ lead; women went for the Democratic candidate by 15 points in the earlier poll and favor the Democratic candidates by 13 points – 55% to 42% – in this latest survey.
What the Post-Schar polling finds then is not good news for Republicans but good news for Democrats. In the battle for the House, the terrain of which should overwhelmingly favor Republicans, Democrats are running even or even slightly ahead. And that fact hasn’t changed throughout a month that, broadly speaking, has been a good one for Republican efforts to gin up excitement and intensity in their base.
The Point: Numbers don’t always tell the story that a cursory glance suggests they do. Or the story you want them to.
Ccoming down to a kind of pseudo reality- or ?
Related Blogs
FOXTROT ALPHA
From the network
AV Club
Deadspin
Gizmodo
Jalopnik
Jezebel
Kotaku
Lifehacker
Splinter
The Takeout
The Root
The Onion
Clickhole
Ford Says American Steel Is Now the Most Expensive in the World Thanks to Trump
Michael Ballaban
Today 10:10am
Filed to:TMS
Expensive trade wars, who the shorts REALLY want to win, and burning BMWs. This is the Morning Shift for October 23, 2018.
1st Gear: Trade Wars Are Good, And Easy To Win
President Donald Trump started a trade war with China and seemingly the rest of the world, and he began the war by hiking up tariffs on steel and aluminum. While the intended purpose was to “bring steel back” or somesuch, the market forces at work are vastly greater than any mere tariffs that can be thrown at such a globalized commodity.
ADVERTISEMENT
The end result? Steel is just way more expensive now, Ford says, according to Bloomberg:
Ford Motor Co. said Donald Trump’s tariffs have made steel more expensive in the U.S. than any other market, escalating the company’s criticism of the president’s trade war.
“U.S. steel costs are more than anywhere else in the world,” Joe Hinrichs, Ford’s president of global operations, said Monday at an event marking the start of Ranger pickup production at a factory west of Detroit. He added that Ford is talking to the administration about the tariffs: “We tell them that we need to have competitive costs in our market in order to compete around the world.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Bloomberg goes on to note that last month Ford CEO Jim Hackett said that the trade wars have already eaten a billion dollars off of the company’s profit, and that’s with most of its metals already sourced from the U.S.
This is what winning feels like.
2nd Gear: The Ford Ranger Won’t Steal Too Many F-150 Sales, Ford Thinks
This is mostly unrelated to the previous gear, but while we’re here talking about Ford, let’s be here, in the moment, to talk about Ford.
ADVERTISEMENT
Ford doesn’t think the new 2019 Ford Ranger will eat too much into its goose that lays golden eggs, the Ford F-150.
Also, it came from the same person, Joe Hinrichs, the aforementioned head of Ford’s global operations, speaking at the same event, but this time to a different publication. From Automotive News:
Ford Motor Co. doesn’t believe the midsize Ranger will steal much business from its profit-generating full-size F-series trucks when the smaller pickup returns to North American showrooms early next year.
“There always will be some substitution, but this is more of a lifestyle vehicle for people who want to use it for different purposes,” Joe Hinrichs, Ford’s president of global operations, said Monday at an event celebrating the Ranger’s expected start of production here next week. “The F-150’s gotten bigger over time and more expensive. We believe there’s room now to slot the Ranger in very nicely in the showroom.”
ADVERTISEMENT
While the new Ranger won’t exactly be cheap, starting at around $26,000, its big sibling, the F-150, has gotten so monumentally huge and expensive that Ford doesn’t think they’ll eat into each other too much.
Okay, okay, so “monumentally huge and expensive” means it’s got a base price of around $28,000, just $2,000 more than a Ranger, but Hinrichs is right. They’re different trucks for different people. I’m sure Ford will be fine.
3rd Gear: Dyson Wants to Build Cars in Singapore (?)
Dyson, the company that makes the vacuums and the weirdly over-powered bathroom hand dryer things that just spray water everywhere, also has a multi-billion dollar electric car program, in case you forgot. They want to build three electric cars entirely from scratch, and they’ve already made the crucial step of being very British and getting an old World War II airfield as a test track.
ADVERTISEMENT
Dyson hadn’t yet said where it was going to build cars, if it ever does. But CEO James Dyson is a prominent Brexiteer, so in keeping with that Patriotic™ theme, you’d expect it to be built by striking coal workers in Yorkshire or something.
But no.
The cars are going to be built in Singapore, the Guardian says:
The British manufacturer chose Singapore because of its proximity to “high-growth markets” in Asia, the chief executive, Jim Rowan, said in a memo to staff on Tuesday. The plant will be completed in 2020, with the car to be launched in 2021.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Guardian goes on to say that Dyson already has a plant there, so it makes some semblance of sense for the company.
4th Gear: A Private Equity Firm Buys Magnetti Marelli
Magnetti Marelli is a parts supplier owned by Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. Or rather, it was owned by FCA, because now it is own by private equity firm KKR, through Calsonic, Reuters reports:
Japan’s Calsonic Kansei, owned by U.S. private equity firm KKR, has agreed to buy Fiat Chrysler’s Magneti Marelli for 6.2 billion euros ($7.1 billion) to form the seventh-largest independent car parts supplier.
ADVERTISEMENT
Congrats to all the rich people involved.
All the workers… eh.
5th Gear: BMW Recalls Diesels Due To Risk Of Fiery Death
If you own one of these cars, please get it fixed. Fiery death ain’t nothin’ to play around with.
ADVERTISEMENT
Reverse: Surely This Can Never Happen Again (It Will Happen Again)
On this day 89 years ago, the stock market completely tanked, kicking off the Great Depression. Obviously we’ve all learned our lesson since then.
Neutral: What Should Cars Be Made Out Of?
Clearly, steel is out of the question. It’s too expensive. I propose we make them out of wood. Wood can be a sustainable resource if harvested properly, and Morgans are good cars. The logic of this argument cannot be defeated.
6TH GEAR: ICYMI
Why Soldiers Carry Heavier Loads