The Senate, where the GOP holds 53 seats, remains a toss-up, the conservative outlet says

For the first time this year, Fox News is projecting that Democrats will win control of the House of Representatives in November’s midterm elections.

In its latest power rankings Tuesday, the conservative outlet forecast that Democrats are favored to capture 219 seats — one more than the 218 needed for a majority. Republicans were favored in 198 races, while 18 contests remained toss-ups.

“The House is likely out of reach for the GOP this year,” according to the Fox News analysis. “The Democratic Party has enjoyed a lead in the House all year. Now, as another 20 races shift leftward, this forecast sees the Democrats taking control.”

all 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 190 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)
  • [–] 75 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [–] 17 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    Yeah I don't believe anything else Fox News says, why would I believe them about this? They may just be trying to motivate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Yes, motivation.. which is actually hatred & greed in this case. These "people" would never admit to failure unless it benefits them, it's a tactic besharted forth to get the fence sitting MAGATs to vote against their better interests so they can "own the Dems".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 105 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    Probably trying to rile up their viewers so they'll go out and vote.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    More likely to have the opposite effect. Historically speaking, good poll numbers help a candidate and bad poll numbers hurt them. That's why low quality partisan polls are always boosting their own side's numbers and not the other guy. Republicans are already far less enthusiastic about voting in the mid terms this year. Telling them their side can't win is only going to discourage them that much more.

    Fox News is a shit hole run by lying sociopaths, but they do take their political polling seriously. It's one of the few areas where they have any credibility at all. I wouldn't be surprised if they've been intentionally vague and overly cautious with their analysis of the data so that they can hide some of that potential blue wave in the big pile of toss up races. But you can only fudge things so much without looking incompetent, especially if they have to resort to more obvious methods of tipping the scales.

    Honestly, the actual poll is barely even news at this point. A year and a half ago the conventional wisdom was that the Senate as safely red while the House was going to be tough fight. But for months now the House has been looking like a lost cause for the Republicans, and, especially in the last few weeks, the Senate is looking like an uphill battle for them too. What's newsworthy here is that Fox is actually reporting it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    See, this is what confuses me about these discussions. You're saying that it discourages people from voting if they're told their party can't win, and yet lots of comments on this post are reacting as if telling people their party is doing good is telling them not to bother voting. I guess we shouldn't have polls at all, since telling people their oarty has a good chance of winning and telling them their party has a bad chance of winning are both seen as telling them not to vote

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    At the extremes that's going to be true. Elections where one candidate is viewed as being unbeatable tend to have lower turnout, while turnout is highest when races are highly competitive. Keep in mind though that there's sort of a chicken and egg situation there. High levels of enthusiasm and therefore turnout also tend to make races more competitive, while safe seats are often the result of gerrymandering and other forms of political dysfunction that suppress voter turnout and political engagement in general.

    But regardless of whether a race is competitive or virtually uncontested, you typically want to be the one that's in the lead. People are more likely to support politicians they view as popular, for much the same reason that they are more likely to pay money for movies and books that can claim to be #1 somehow. The bandwagon effect can be a powerful thing.

    And voter turnout is heavily dependent on enthusiasm, and it's a lot easier to be enthusiastic when your side doesn't look like it's losing. And that's just the voting, there's also donations, volunteers, media coverage, etc. all of which can be significantly affected by how people perceive the race to be going.

    The idea that good poll numbers are somehow bad for that candidate's voter turnout is largely a product of the 2016 election. Right up to election day the polls almost all said Hillary would win. And then Trump won. There's a number of reasons for that, but one of the ones that gets mentioned a lot is that Democrats stayed home because the polls all said they wouldn't need to vote.

    The context is very important though. Hillary was deeply unpopular even before the DNC helped her snatch the nomination away from Bernie Sanders. A lot of people would have preferred that Trump lose, but really, really didn't want to vote for Hillary. Those people might have been more likely to hold their nose and vote for her if they weren't under the impression that she was practically guaranteed to win.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    I mean, who is watching FOX religiously and not voting, at this point? It's the channel of, by, and for conservative GOTV ops.

    I think a better question might be "Who is still watching this channel?" And you're talking about 2M viewers during the Prime Time peak.

    That's a rounding error, nationally. And out of a pool that's already heavily engaged.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Fox News still has incredible reach and screens tuned to it all over the place like gyms and barber shops even in my very liberal town. They are experts at the pretense of impartiality and a lot of people fall for it especially the non politically active which is sadly still quite a huge cohort of Americans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    That will engage their population to vote and put the 'left' at ease, maybe not to vote.

    What they say doesn't matter, the only thing that matters is for us to vote.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Democrats trailing in the polls = give up chance of flipping seat and don’t vote

    Democrats doing well in polls = don’t bother to vote it’s in the bag

    Are the only good poll numbers nail biting 50/50?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 weeks ago* (1 child)

    The attempt of voter mobilisation I assume?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 32 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Pretend this is psyop propaganda designed to lull you into a false sense of safety-

    AND VOTE ANYWAY.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    It worked the last 2 elections. It will work again. I would also expect by the end of this election cycle we will hear once again how there are numerous groups forming on social media who helped form "protest" and "single issue" voters.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    Any word on who the two conservative Democrats who vote with the Republicans to ensure that they can't do anything meaningful, or at least symbolic, with the majority will be?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago*

    Fetterman is an easy first pick.

    I've got my eye on John Hickenlooper and Mark Warner, as they have both been eager to piss in their party's punch bowl before.

    Gillibrand is another to look out for, as she's been deep into crypto and AI. If Charles Booker can pull out an upset in Kentucky, he's going to be a friend of fossil fuels and the military. Then there's the old stand by - Schumer, Durbin, and Schiff - who have been forcing the country to eat shit for decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago

    I don't believe anything Fox news reports. People still need to vote.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    To make us complacent so we won't vote.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    If this actually happens and Republicans lose the House by a handful of seats, please don’t call it a “blue wave”…

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child)

    I don’t believe it.

    These same stories come out every election cycle, especially from right-wing news sources. “The left are going to take the senate” “The dems are going to have a landslide victory”

    It’s propaganda with two goals:

    • to fire up their base and encourage them to vote against the enemy that is somehow lesser, but also a threat.
    • To create placidity in Democrat voters. If it’s in the bag, then I don’t have to skip out on a day of minimum wage work to cast my vote. The landslide will sort it out.
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago

    Hit the nail on the head. Same reason I keep seeing polls about how all these places are going to vote blue. Their trying everything they can to keep blue voters at home and or invalidate their mail in votes, don't be fooled go out and vote!!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

    Yes, I'm still voting regardless. I don't believe anything until I see it. And we gotta do it again two years from now.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    Maybe it's because I'm autistic and think differently, I'm legitimately confused when people take news that they have a good chance of winning as telling them not to vote. If anything, shouldn't it be taken as encouraging you to vote? The opposite is also taken as discouraging people from voting. Are people just that defeatist? You have no chance of winning, you don't bother voting, you have a good chance of winning, you don't bother voting

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

    The goal is to lull people into a false sense of security. Voting isn't necessarily easy for every person legally entitled to vote. You're supposed to get time off of work, sure, but the actual reality of that especially for shift-laborers, or parents with young children who can't stand in line for an hour with them, or people who live in remote locations with few voting places can be quite different.

    If they keep hearing that their side is likely to win and it's going to be a pain in the ass for them to actually vote anyway, then they're more likely to skip the hassle thinking they have the victory in the bag.

    Additionally, hearing "the opposition is probably going to win" does a lot to mobilize the maga side to get off their asses and vote, even if trumpster's approval rating has dropped to pretty much just dedicated magats.

    I'm convinced that 99.95% of the time, polls exist and are publicized primarily to impact the outcome and NOT to provide clear or unbiased information.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    But don't people understand that the victory being promised is contigent on them voting? I was motivated to vote liberal precisely because I was told they could win, otherwise I would have voted NDP feeling like it was in vain because conservatives were surely going to win

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    Once they take the house and the senate, they can stop all that negative legislation that's been passing, like...

    uhhh...

    ummmm...

    ...don't get me wrong... everyone should absolutely still vote, but even a massive victory is going to fix fuck all, and we should all be prepared for that.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    Winning the house and senate would curb the Trump admin considerably. The admin will be playing defense rather than offense and democrats can issue subpoenas. Are we surely going to stop contributing to the Palestinian genocide? Probably not, but there's a chance the progressive wing could withhold support for key votes and demand concessions — in much the same way the ultra conservative wing of the Republican Party prevented them from passing some of their agenda.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    I just doubt the democrats have the political will to make any real moves other than some symbolic blocks. I think the Dems run a cleaner show but they are functionally very similar to the Republicans. What does their platform even stand for these days?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • At the very least it could result in a pulling out of Iran and blocking any further attempts to fund Trump's nonsense. Hell if they need to it'd make holding up funding a lot easier since a lot of agencies work on rather short term budgets, sure ICE may have enough budget for ages but what about say the ATF, Secret Service, or military?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    I hate that politics is like fucking sports. Just dumb stats and predictions to fill airspace. And the best part is people who think they’re too smart for sports eat it up.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago

    Their broadcast license should be taken away for these NaStY poll numbers! We have the best numbers. Nobody has better numbers then we do - signed, the administration

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Vote vote vote vote vote!

    But only once! Don't worry, Republicans are the only ones that attempt to do it multiple times.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • I hope gas goes up to ten dollars a gallon and Peter Theil somehow has a change of heart and becomes like Jesus and donates all his money to ending world hunger and making sure that tech companies behave ethically and transparently

    I also hope they make another video game like deadly creatures where you can play a tarantula who acts like a cowboy sorta

    Also dear God please make sure that Republicans fuck up all their shit like they already be doin' so intensely right now.

    Amen.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    I don't care who predicts what, we still have to get our asses out to vote. "The Blue Wave" ain't real until we make it real.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago

    The writing's on the wall and Donald's starting to lay the groundwork for an "emergency." He just sued California alleging non-citizen voting. His DHS claimed 16,000 non-citizen votors in Nevada, trimmed the list to 185, and then when Nevada checked all 185 on the list, it went to 0.

  • source
  • Unless they predict the current administration and several justices getting hanged, I don’t fucking care.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    The house had been at like 99% odds for months now. The senate is at 74% now.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

    I'm all for Dem wins. My prediction is they won't be able to do much, and get blamed for too much time on hearings, maga will ignore subpoenas and otherwise drag it all out. Dems get blamed for not fixing all the damage, since people ignore that they don't have the presidency, or enough majority in senate. Some people imply by comments in various places, that they think they can vote for president this election. If that's the lack of civic comprehension the voting public has, it's no wonder they flippantly swing back and forth and keep regressing with maga.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    As usual. "fix everything in 24 months or we throw the bums back in".

    Democrats actually have to do things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago

    Yep. And the Murc's Law Media gives a great big democracy-crushing assist with their bOtHsIdeS bullshit.

    Republicans run the place, leave everything broken, in the ditch, and covered it all the poo they flung.

    Democrats get back in, have a lot of backstabbers and feet-draggers, but don't have much of an edge anyway, and if they don't fix everything in mere months, the "liberal media" starts the drumbeat of how voters are having vibes about the economy being bad or whatever....

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    Thank you for this contribution. I can assure you that it has been filed for future reference.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    People are so easy to fool. If this really turns out in a win for the GOP, man that’s the saddest fucking thing.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    Without the Senate majority no impeachment will go through.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    No shit, everyone knows this. It's the senate that we should be worried about.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Karl Rove is livid right now!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    I'll believe it when I see it.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    “We need to let bygones be bygones and not dwell on the past. We need to move forward and work on unity…”

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago

    Polls like this will just galvanize the magats and lull the left into staying home and letting someone else vote.

    I'm already calling it for another republican majority. How this is even close is beyond my comprehension, but America.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Don’t do that, don’t give me hope…

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    We need an army of kamikaze progressives willing to run for everything from dog catcher to Senate/Governor. Wave after wave of people willing to be one term politicians, dedicated to policy.

    Policy, policy, policy.

    No more cults of personality. That’s how they peel off popular support.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    I just hope it isn't donorcrats who are helming the Democratic ship. They have a tendency of going around in circles.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    Yeah... but nope. It's the USA, even with control of both chambers (not gonna happen btw), dems won't do shit. Nothing happened when trump tried to take the capitol, nothing about Musk nazi salute, nothing when they decided to laugh in your faces about the Epstein files, nothing about war in Iran, almost nothing about ICE, etc. And nothing will happen when the GOP takes the next election, legally or not. It's too little too late, democracy has left the USA a long time ago.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    We’d better be damn ready to fight to keep it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Fox News has an obvious and pronounced conservative slant, but it is still mostly based in reality, except for programmes like the Sean Hannity show (if that is still going) and whatever crap their commentators say. Fox News is still going to call a duck a duck, or at least a waterfowl, and this sometimes garners criticism from the truth-challenged.

    Newsmax and OANN are the actual loonies.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    And then the Senate will be failure theater as always

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    Does your state allow early voting? Have you voted yet?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    Hmmm a 20 seat lead MIGHT make a difference... Depends how many dinos like Collins get a seat but will vote with Republicans everytime.

  • source