The pollsters' pollster says there will be no blue wave (house seat, voters)

[PilgrimsProgress]

Just heard this guy interviewed on the radio today about his current book, More Great News for America, a sequel to Great News for America. Gerard Lameiro, PhD, uses a different form of research he calls modeling. He explained other pollsters use techniques which are outdated. I only caught the last part of his interview though. He predicted Trump's win before anyone else and after the election he heard from his fellow pollsters, his competition, who said, "You were right, we were wrong." Makes me wonder if Trump's people were working with him or using his techniques.

He said there would be no blue wave. We shall see! This is his website
Gerard Lameiro PhD

[don1945]

Boy, someone better tell that to the people of NJ, VA, AL, and PA. Maybe they can cast their ballots again for the red team.

[prospectheightsresident]

While still too far out to say whether there will be a wave or not for the Dems, if the election were held today I'd agree with the pollster. To win the seats necessary to take back the house, the Dems need to win over competitive to conservative districts. While they were able to do so in PA last week with a pro-Trump, pro-tariffs, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment Democrat, the Democrat base in a lot of the other districts they'd need to take back the House is far more leftist, which would spell trouble in many a general election campaign.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident

While still too far out to say whether there will be a wave or not for the Dems, if the election were held today I'd agree with the pollster. To win the seats necessary to take back the house, the Dems need to win over competitive to conservative districts. While they were able to do so in PA last week with a pro-Trump, pro-tariffs, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment Democrat, the Democrat base in a lot of the other districts they'd need to take back the House is far more leftist, which would spell trouble in many a general election campaign.

1. People on the left are the ones who tend to support tarriffs , Republicans support free trade to an extent that they don't think you should use tarriffs

2. Lamb said he was personally pro life, but supported the right to choose from a legal stand point, that is in line with the views of every single Democrat I have ever met .

3. Lamb supported President Obama and the democartic partys current stance on background checks

In short, you have a cartoonish belief of what a Democrat is , and because of it, you do not have an informed opinion.

[mrpeatie]

Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident

While still too far out to say whether there will be a wave or not for the Dems, if the election were held today I'd agree with the pollster. To win the seats necessary to take back the house, the Dems need to win over competitive to conservative districts. While they were able to do so in PA last week with a pro-Trump, pro-tariffs, pro-life, pro-2nd Amendment Democrat, the Democrat base in a lot of the other districts they'd need to take back the House is far more leftist, which would spell trouble in many a general election campaign.

Find me the idiot voter who thought Lamb was pro-Trump? Especially after Trump personally travelled to the district to campaign with the R candidate...


The house will be won and lost in suburban districts. At the current moment those tend to be moving towards Ds. Lamb won by running up big totals in Allegheny suburbs not by mysteriously flipping the rural areas. And that Ga house seat in the Atlanta suburbs that Ds lost earlier had swung towards Ds in double digits. Whether or not they win enough seats comes down to election day but if they get enough candidates who are passable the district constituencies and spike adequate anti-Trump voters they will have big gains.


FWIW- every frickin pollster out there does modeling. You can say some do it better or worse than others but that is a basic part of what they do- collect raw data, break responses down into key demographic groups, produce a model of who will vote and weigh the demographic results to fit the overall proportion. Its why the likely voter results are so much more scrutinized than eligible voters.

[prospectheightsresident]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

1. People on the left are the ones who tend to support tarriffs , Republicans support free trade to an extent that they don't think you should use tarriffs

2. Lamb said he was personally pro life, but supported the right to choose from a legal stand point, that is in line with the views of every single Democrat I have ever met .

3. Lamb supported President Obama and the democartic partys current stance on background checks

In short, you have a cartoonish belief of what a Democrat is , and because of it, you do not have an informed opinion.

1) Traditionally, yes. But many Democrat nominees have been the corporate/globalist type as of late, which has allowed President Trump to initiate sort of a role reversal.

2) I know many a Democrat who refuses to answer whether they are "personally" pro-life as they deem it irrelevant and, well, aren't personally pro-life. Still, me and others feel there is a difference: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/16/o...etType=opinion

3) While the NRA and others oppose "universal background checks" without addressing the actual problem, Lamb's overall 2nd Amendment stance remains far outside of the Dem mainstream position; he does not support new restrictions on guns. Thus, I merely reiterate my point. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ports-gun-rig/ ; https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/13/polit...ues/index.html

In short, failing to discuss and seeking to parse out points that you disagree with, your absolutist views/statement on what posters think are shortsighted and easily rebutted.

[kimchee]

There's one thing I'll give the Republicans credit for.... They are good at coming up with lame excuses for losing special elections....

Oh, the losing Republican candidate(s) didn't campaign hard enough, didn't go all in with Trump, is tainted, is weak, has a p-rn stache, etc....

Let's not forget what Conor Lamb campaigned for, shall we?

1. For universal healthcare
2. Against Trump's tax cut
3. For expanded background checks
4. For stronger unions
5. Against cuts to Social Security
6. For women's right to choose (even if he may disagree)
7. For medical marijuana

That sounds like a Democrat in my book.

[merv1225]

Originally Posted by PilgrimsProgress

Just heard this guy interviewed on the radio today about his current book, More Great News for America, a sequel to Great News for America. Gerard Lameiro, PhD, uses a different form of research he calls modeling. He explained other pollsters use techniques which are outdated. I only caught the last part of his interview though. He predicted Trump's win before anyone else and after the election he heard from his fellow pollsters, his competition, who said, "You were right, we were wrong." Makes me wonder if Trump's people were working with him or using his techniques.

He said there would be no blue wave. We shall see! This is his website
Gerard Lameiro PhD

I wonder how he did in 2012. I suspect he followed Dick Morris' "model" and predicted a Romney landslide.


One of his current predictions: predicts the "end (the complete shutdown!) of the Democratic Party in the near future".

He also predicts the coming of an era of conservative enlightenment that includes four big religious and cultural trends in America:

• Return to faith in God
• Renaissance of reason
• Restoration of education
• Rebirth of morality, freedom, peace and prosperity

[dashrendar4454]

Of course there won’t be a blue wave. Democrats will win some seats here and there but a blue wave is not likely

[YanMarcs]

there will be no blue wave, the Democrats have regained some state governments, and conquered the house, as traditionally happens during election cycles