Mid-term prediction

[Aspenglow]

@Johnny_Ace

I deleted your spoilered stuff, but I’m going to comment on some of it anyway.

I understand why you didn’t quote my spoilered stuff, but I do wish you had read it more closely.

@Johnny_Ace

I think you’re way too optimistic in your reasoning. Remember, we’re talking about roughly 35% approval ratings, which is pretty much Trump’s floor, no matter what stupid shit he pulls. And that’s almost completely made up of Republicans and people who are either blind or completely un- or mis-informed.

Now that 35% aren’t evenly distributed, and they’re generally among the most active voters. They obviously tend to live in the red districts, which means their election results are unlikely to be any different than the last ones, regardless of who the Dems find to run.

I gave quite a number of reasons why the election results in those super-red districts are likely to be very different that the last ones. Disparity in voter enthusiasm; generic ballot favored to Dems; people’s fears about this president, and others. I hope you will re-review my points.

@Johnny_Ace

Jones is a special case; Moore is such a sleazeball that Alabamans had little choice but to vote against him or look like complete idiots. As it turned out, it was still close enough that Moore could fight it. How many other congressional races are going to attract that kind of national attention, let alone have such an obvious villain?

I made a point to include mention of the results in many other special elections held since Trump’s election and did not hang my hat on Doug Jones’ win in Alabama. You seem to have missed that point entirely.

Jon Ossoff lost his race in Georgia, but he closed a 20+ point gap to lose by a mere half a percentage point.

In November in Virginia, Ralph Northam won the Governor’s race by nearly 10 points after the pundits all opined that Gillespie would be the winner. More importantly, Dems flipped 16 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates. They didn’t quite take over because they couldn’t overcome the gerrymandering in that state. But it’s worth noting that more than 200,000 Democrats voted in that election than Republicans.

Also in November inn Washington State, Dems flipped control of their state government with one state Senate win. Dems now control both houses of their state government for the first time since 2012.

Allison Ikley-Freeman, a lesbian and a Democrat, won her race in November for State Senator in Oklahoma. In. Oklahoma.

And no, the results in Alabama were not even remotely close enough for Moore to fight them. In fact, exactly the opposite. There must be an 0.5% or less difference in the vote tally for an automatic recount. Wasn’t even close. Jones won by more than 22,0000 votes. (Interestingly, that’s roughly the same number of Republicans who stood in long lines to vote for “Other,” when the sole issue on the ballot was the Moore/Jones election. Thank you, Richard Shelby!)

A wave is coming, and absent some huge, unforeseeable event, it’s going to go for Dems. Primaries start in Texas in March, and then it’s game on.

dtilque, I did go with more than D+25. I said in the very line you quoted that 80+ would not surprise me.

[Bijou_Drains]

Here in NC the GOP has 10 seats of 13 in Congress. They packed lots of Dems into those 3 seats. Most of the R seats are in the range of 58-67 so it won’t be easy to flip many of those 10.

North Carolina Election Results 2016

[Hari_Seldon]

Based on Celidon’s post, I am going with D+52. Anyone who won by 5% or less will be swept away in the tide. Very cautiously, I will predict D+1 in the Senate, leading to an exact tie.

[Bijou_Drains]

To add info on NC, the closest race the GOP won out of the 10 races was by 12 points. Several of the other races they won by 30. It is possible the Dem candidates are better this time around.

[Lance_Turbo]

Here’s a quick and dirty model based on national house vote and Cook PVI.

Nat. House Vote - Lower - Upper
Even - 197 - 205
D+1 - 205 - 215
D+2 - 215 - 223
D+3 - 223 - 235
D+4 - 235 - 245
D+5 - 245 - 254
D+6 - 254 - 264
D+7 - 264 - 277
D+8 - 277 - 297
D+9 - 297 - 307
D+10 - 307 - 323

The generic congressional ballot right now is about D+10, but I think that is an absolute worst case scenario for team R, and that there are lots of opportunities for R victories and D screw ups in the mean time to move that needle four to six points in a favorable Republican direction. Thus my prediction is D+55 seats.

However, if the political winds are blowing in November similarly to how they are blowing now D+100 is a possibility.

In the D+100 scenario the closest races will be in districts like:
California 4th
Kansas 2nd
Michigan 4th
North Carolina 5th
Oklahoma 5th
Pennsylvania 11th
South Carolina 1st
Texas 21st
Texas 22nd
Texas 31st

[Johnny_Ace]

@Aspenglow

I understand why you didn’t quote my spoilered stuff, but I do wish you had read it more closely.

Oh, I read and understood it. I just don’t agree with it.

I gave quite a number of reasons why the election results in those super-red districts are likely to be very different that the last ones. Disparity in voter enthusiasm; generic ballot favored to Dems; people’s fears about this president, and others. I hope you will re-review my points.

Are they really going to be that different? People may claim that this election will be a referendum on Trump (and that may be a good rationale for getting the Dem vote out), but how many Dems are there in the deep-red districts? I doubt that Pubbies are just going to roll over to the blue wave. I think they’ll be equally as active in midterms as they always have been, which is bad news for predicted upsets in those places. You can also bet that they’ll be flogging the hell out of the new tax cuts, without mentioning a single one of the cons that have been described by economists.

I made a point to include mention of the results in many other special elections held since Trump’s election and did not hang my hat on Doug Jones’ win in Alabama. You seem to have missed that point entirely.

Jon Ossoff lost his race in Georgia, but he closed a 20+ point gap to lose by a mere half a percentage point.

Jones was Senate anyway, and the midterms there look bleak for Dems. As for Ossoff, nationwide Dems poured money that he wouldn’t otherwise have had into the race. That’s not going to happen in a lot of races come November.

In November in Virginia, Ralph Northam won the Governor’s race by nearly 10 points after the pundits all opined that Gillespie would be the winner. More importantly, Dems flipped 16 seats in the Virginia House of Delegates. They didn’t quite take over because they couldn’t overcome the gerrymandering in that state. But it’s worth noting that more than 200,000 Democrats voted in that election than Republicans.

Also in November inn Washington State, Dems flipped control of their state government with one state Senate win. Dems now control both houses of their state government for the first time since 2012.

These are more encouraging because they weren’t nearly as superfunded as Ossoff’s race was.

Allison Ikley-Freeman, a lesbian and a Democrat, won her race in November for State Senator in Oklahoma. In. Oklahoma.

I’m tickled pink about that last, actually. But I don’t even begin to think it’s turning into a national trend.

And no, the results in Alabama were not even remotely close enough for Moore to fight them. In fact, exactly the opposite. There must be an 0.5% or less difference in the vote tally for an automatic recount. Wasn’t even close. Jones won by more than 22,0000 votes. (Interestingly, that’s roughly the same number of Republicans who stood in long lines to vote for “Other,” when the sole issue on the ballot was the Moore/Jones election. Thank you, Richard Shelby!)

I’d say 1.7% is significantly close enough to half a percent, but that’s a quibble. And Moore fought it anyway. Color me pleased as punch that he did, though; he pretty much just guaranteed his own retirement from politics, whether he likes it or not.

A wave is coming, and absent some huge, unforeseeable event, it’s going to go for Dems. Primaries start in Texas in March, and then it’s game on.

dtilque, I did go with more than D+25. I said in the very line you quoted that 80+ would not surprise me.

We’ll see. 270towin has 83 races listed as competitive, and less than a quarter of them are shown as likely or safe Democrat with 20 more a complete tossup. That’s after all the positive polling for Dems in the generic ballot and their successes in the special elections.

[DSeid]

I’ll go D +44.

Note that I’m cheating, cribbing off of Enten’s 538 entry. They have a nice graphic there that addresses the lean by district. If the generic is D up by 12% (which it was at the time they wrote it, now back down to D up 10.3%) and

@538

… There are 58 Republicans in seats with a partisan lean of +12 points Republican or less. …

Now up 12% or more on the generic ballot in November is not unreasonable and that would mean that at least that many currently GOP held seats are in play and in a year with a less than typically enthused GOP base, a more than typically enthused Democratic one, and many swing voters not thrilled with the GOP Congress … winning 75% of those realistically in play does not seem outrageous.

Of course the generic ballot can shift by then, and per that report it often does.

@538 more

… But most large shifts on the generic ballot from this point onward have occurred against the party that holds the White House. …

If it does shift large and against the GOP, say to 18, then there would be 103 seats currently GOP held in play. If that does happen (and I do not bet on that) then D+75 is a fairly realistic expectation.

[Johnny_Ace]

As an aside (and forgive my French), how the fuck was Washington state ever Republican-controlled?

(And just to make clear here, if you’re not a longtime reader, I would like nothing better than to see the pro-Dem outcome occur. But I look at the numbers and I just don’t see it.)

[OttoDaFe]

@Johnny_Ace

As an aside (and forgive my French), how the fuck was Washington state ever Republican-controlled?

(And just to make clear here, if you’re not a longtime reader, I would like nothing better than to see the pro-Dem outcome occur. But I look at the numbers and I just don’t see it.)

The SoW didn’t turn hippie-dippy until the '60s. Before that it was reliably Republican (as “Republican” was defined then, not as it’s defined now).

Another factor was the rapid growth of Seattle, which by itself is enough to tilt the state blue. Outside Seattle — and especially east of the Cascades — there are a lot of reddish-purple to bright-red counties.

[Steve_MB]

I predict somewhere around D+50, based largely on the fragility of Republican gerrymandering (as noted in the spoilered section of the OP) in the face of changing turnout-model circumstances (as noted in too may posts to list).

[Buck_Godot]

If we assume a Dem +10%-15% change over what they were in 2016, that gives us a Dem +18-41.
So lets call it D+21 since no one has seemed to take that number.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

I’ll go with D+42*.

*It is, after all, the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

[Johnny_Ace]

Something encouraging happened today. I got a fundraising letter from Cathy Meyers, presumably the Democratic candidate who will run against Paul Ryan in November. The four-page letter spent only about a paragraph directly slamming Trumpus and about a full page hitting Ryan; the rest was introductory, her background, qualifications, a few policies, that Dems can take Ryan in November, rah rah stuff, etc. And, of course, asking for a donation to the campaign. In short, it was well-written and didn’t go off the rails to hit Trump.

Apparently Dems are really taking this race seriously, and are being innovative about campaigning. For, you see, the punchline here is that I live in California.

[Gyrate]

One wonders if there are any gains to be had in North Carolina once the districts are redrawn.

@Johnny Ace

Apparently Dems are really taking this race seriously, and are being innovative about campaigning. For, you see, the punchline here is that I live in California.

I can’t tell whether you’re being serious or sarcastic here, but given that out-of-state funding has been a great help to Democrats in recent races it’s not unreasonable to cast one’s nets so widely.

[RickJay]

It doesn’t matter how fired up Democrats are if you have a lot of seats where there simply aren’t enough Democrats. It’s also worth nothing the Republicans will be very fired up, too. The tax scam is enormously valuable to Republican paymasters; they have literally never had a more vested interest in getting their supplicants elected, and they’re going to break new donation records making sure the tax bill remains in place.

538 has noted that the approximate House loss for a President’s party when as unpopular as Trump would be about 40 seats. That is, I think, a pretty good guess. However, 538 figures the margin of error at 33 seats - meaning the Republicans would retain the House, or they could be wrecked. 100 seats though just doesn’t work; there aren’t that many vulnerable seats.

[dtilque]

@RickJay

It doesn’t matter how fired up Democrats are if you have a lot of seats where there simply aren’t enough Democrats.

In most districts, voters dedicated to one party don’t make up a majority. There’s always going to be a fair number of unaffilitated voters. They normally vote at roughly 50-50, so their votes cancel out. My contention is that they’re going to break much more D because of Trump.

[Johnny_Ace]

@Gyrate

One wonders if there are any gains to be had in North Carolina once the districts are redrawn.

I can’t tell whether you’re being serious or sarcastic here, but given that out-of-state funding has been a great help to Democrats in recent races it’s not unreasonable to cast one’s nets so widely.

Dead serious. Also, according to the letter, Ryan is more vulnerable than is generally assumed, referencing Meyers’ own internal popularity polling as a dead heat (obviously unreliable at this point, but interesting).

And the hits just keep on coming:

Rep. Darrell Issa will not seek re-election

Hot damn, there just might be a chance after all.

[RickJay]

My contention is that they’re mostly going to break towards “not voting.”

As it stands, if you held an election today, the Democrats would probably take the House. Probably. It’s foolish to think it’s in the bag, though, and no, they won’t be +100.

More than half the GOP seats won in 2016 were won by 10 points or more.

[Aspenglow]

@Johnny_Ace

Dead serious. Also, according to the letter, Ryan is more vulnerable than is generally assumed, referencing Meyers’ own internal popularity polling as a dead heat (obviously unreliable at this point, but interesting).

And the hits just keep on coming:

Rep. Darrell Issa will not seek re-election

Hot damn, there just might be a chance after all.

My favorite news today so far, by a mile. What a crook. That’ll be a Dem seat now, for sure.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

@Johnny_Ace

Something encouraging happened today. I got a fundraising letter from Cathy Meyers, presumably the Democratic candidate who will run against Paul Ryan in November. The four-page letter spent only about a paragraph directly slamming Trumpus and about a full page hitting Ryan; the rest was introductory, her background, qualifications, a few policies, that Dems can take Ryan in November, rah rah stuff, etc. And, of course, asking for a donation to the campaign. In short, it was well-written and didn’t go off the rails to hit Trump.

Apparently Dems are really taking this race seriously, and are being innovative about campaigning. For, you see, the punchline here is that I live in California.

I’m not sure she’s the front-runner. According to Ballotpedia, an ironworker named Randy Bryce has raised over a million and a half dollars in that race. She’s barely raised $80,000.

Anyone know anything more about who is the favorite at this point to take on Ryan?