It's definitely a long shot, and I expect the environment to move a little right of where it is now by November, but this is not a set of polls that inspires high confidence in Graham

@Plant from a Politico article today: The GOP’s top Senate super PAC — Senate Leadership Fund — plans to spend $5 million boosting recently appointed GOP Sen. Darline Graham, according to a person familiar with the decision.

their internal polling must be pretty bad as well

@Plant these polls all seem pretty fake

@SemioticRivalry the publicly released polls?

I heard on YouTube someone say they have sources that say it's a close race according to internal data

Also Republicans say darline isn't visible and annie has had alot more ads up

@Jack1 i don't really see any reason to trust private polling more than public polling

@Jack1 I don’t know about the polling and it’s purely anecdotal but where I am (a purple area in SC) I have yet to see a single sign for Graham. It’s only Andrews.

@SemioticRivalry just looking at it from a fundamentals perspective, Lindsey Graham won the seat by 10.3% as an incumbent in a D+3 House popular vote year. the generic average is currently at D+8. take off 5%, take off another percent or two for losing the incumbency advantage, and you get into territory where candidate effects and/or national polling error can flip the seat. the polling is weak evidence in support of this

i think you're probably going to come out on top here but i expect this to be fairly close and i'd price andrews' odds closer to 30% than 15%

@SemioticRivalry maybe our difference here is that in my model of this election, there's a substantial chance of a polling miss in favor of Republicans and like a D+12 national environment. if you max out the environment at like D+9 it's very unlikely candidate effects alone carry Andrews over the finish line