United States Congressional & Gubernatorial 2022 elections

AZ made a strong move toward D, now ~60%.
NV was leaning R but is now 50-50.
NH & PA both strengthened its D-lean to D-likely ~70%.
GA strengthened its D-lean to ~60%.
NC, OH, & WI still leaning strongly R but less so now.

Current prediction:
R: 50 (pick up NV)
D+I: 50 = 48+2 (pick up PA)

Best case scenario for Rs:
R: 52 (pick up AZ, GA, NV)
D+I: 48 = 46+2

Best case scenario for Ds:
R: 49
D+I: 51 = 49+2 (pick up PA, hold NV)

I would reclassify your “best” as “realistic good” for each party, JMO of course. For simplicity, I think of each having a 1sd, 2sd, and 3sd chance of picking up 3, 4, and 5 seats:
Dem pickup order: PA, NC, OH, WI, FL/IA
GOP pickup order: GA, NV, AZ, NH, CO

As polling continues to look strong for Fetterman, I’m moving the midpoint from a wash (with any gains offset by losses) to a PA flip being the midpoint.

1 Like

potato tomato let’s call the election off

I agree with the states you’ve chose, just not the order. Here’s what I would come up with according to Predictit:
DEM % chances of flipping the bird to the Rs: PA 70, WI 34, NC 25, OH 19, FL 8, IA 7
REP % chances of kicking some D ass: NV 56, AZ 45, GA 43, NH 34, CO 17


This is about to go in the innumeracy thread . . .

I was never very good at meth…or speeling.

The GOP nominee for Attorney General in MI is a big lie proponent. He allegedly was involved in a data breach of voting equipment in an attempt to “investigate” the big lie.

The attorney general is now looking for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate tampering with voting equipment, as it would be improper for him to investigate his opponent due to conflict of interest

This confuses me. I see why it would be considered tampering with voting equipment and should be illegal, but would it somehow be OK without the possible (or certain) conflict of interest?

I don’t understand your confusion, so I’m trying to parse your question in pieces

Yes, tampering with voting equipment is illegal in MI

No, it wouldn’t be OK to tamper. It’s a question of a sitting district attorney launching an investigation into their political opponent. If there’s a criminal allegation, best to have someone independent conduct the investigation, as investigating your opponent is full of conflict of interest.

1 Like

Just want to repeat my predictions and point out that the dishonest association between being charged under the Espionage Act and Trump being an actual spy will likely be exploited heavily to meddle in the midterms. The best part is that since the documents are classified and we won’t know what’s in them, there will be no counter to the accusation. It’s a pretty brilliant strategy. Remember, the Democrats are politically savvy.

and only got there bc one guy refused to give back documents he was practically begged to give back.

1 Like

Trump is the best thing to ever happen to Democrats. Still, if he’s not actually a spy selling state secrets (an extraordinary accusation by the way), then yes the narrative that he is, which is almost certainly not provable prior to the midterms, is a politically savvy narrative. It certainly has some shades of the Russia collusion narrative around the 2018 midterms. In both cases there are very serious allegations being foisted that were not and likely will not be resolved prior to the election and are in the interim difficult to rebut given their seriousness, lack of evidence, and inherent difficulty in proving a negative.

1 Like

I’m missing something: where is the accusation that he is a spy selling state secrets?


Define “meddle” please.

Something like FBI announcing he’s under investigation again 11 days before the election

Has he been charged? I was under the impression that so far, the act is the justification for the warrant but Trump has yet to be charged and some think that they may stop at just recovering the documents.

Who is making this association? So far you are the only one I’ve seen mentioning it.

1 Like

I think you’re just playing dumb, but it’s being heavily implied or outright accused all over the internet through the usual narrative laundering channels. In case you’re unfamiliar with this idea, it starts with official media channels reporting the dots to connect and sometimes heavily implying the conclusion they want you to make, then the explicit narrative tends to form on social media (this avoids defamation suits). Examples:

It looks like this subject was primed for the liberal lawfare crowd in 2020 by Brookings. “…the alarming but plausible things Donald Trump might do to maintain the spotlight and raise revenue after he leaves the presidency. There are many horrors—but at the top of the list is the possibility that Trump could sell national secrets to foreign governments and interests.”

Here’s a Philadelphia Inquirer article from earlier this year doing the same thing:

Then of course the raid happens and we get the more recent reminders to connect the dots. First the surely true anonymously sourced nuclear weapons article from WaPo, “Experts in classified information said the unusual search underscores deep concern among government officials about the types of information they thought could be located at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club and potentially in danger of falling into the wrong hands.”

Then other run with it. Documents as possible kompromat for Putin:

Mention of Espionage Statutes involving “intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation:”

Then it moves onto social media like reddit or twitter, or even forums like here where a poster brought up the execution of the Rosenbergs in the 1950s for Espionage Act violations, with the very obvious implication:

Here is a twitter thread specifically alleging selling nuclear secrets to the Saudis:

This reddit thread is full of the same type of accusations, including the exact same Rosenberg connection as appears on this forum in the FBI Raid on Mar-a-Lago thread


So yes, you were just missing something. Not sure why someone would “heart” your post for missing this lol

1 Like

Taking these one at a time:

So… completely idle speculation that contains zero accusations that is wholly irrelevant to the actual FBI raid.

You asked, I answered quite thoroughly. Now you’ve seen actual examples of others mentioning it, so you’re more informed.

1 Like

So your point is that the justice department should have ignored Trump taking the classified documents? Or not have cited the Espionage Act in the search warrant?

And it appears Trump fell right into their trap by ignoring the subpoena.

On the AO, we had a :tfh: emotion for this stuff.

1 Like