Posted on 01/18/2018 7:29:24 AM PST by Kaslin
It's normal for the party out of power to gain ground in a midterm election. The big question in 2018 is whether the Democrats will gain enough ground to win a majority in the House of Representatives.
While the political winds currently favor the Democrats, 390 of the 435 House races are pretty well locked in for one party or the other. Only 45 out of 435 races are even somewhat competitive. Still, a race-by-race analysis on ScottRasmussen.com suggests that a normal midterm gain would get the Democrats very close to their goal.
The starting point is 187 races that are rated as either Strong or Likely Democratic and nine more tilting or leaning in that direction. With decent midterm turnout, the Democrats would win all of these races bringing their total to 196.
With a good midterm turnout, the Democrats could also win just about all of the toss-ups or races currently just tilting in the GOP direction. These are races like the open seat contest in Washington's 8th Congressional District. Republican incumbent Dave Reichert opted out of a re-election battle in a District where Hillary Clinton attracted more votes than Donald Trump. Barack Obama also carried the District in both 2008 and 2012.
While nothing is certain in politics, Washington-8 is the type of race Democrats should expect to win with a good midterm performance. At ScottRasmussen.com, we place 17 races in this category. Winning all them would get the Democrats to 213 seats, still five votes short of a majority. To get over the top, the current minority party will need an electoral wave that washes out some seats that would remain in GOP hands during a normal election cycle.
At ScottRasmussen.com, we've identified 19 races that currently lean Republican but could be at risk in a wave election. That means the best way to tell if a wave is coming is to follow these 19 races. If the Democrats do well in these campaigns, they will have a very good chance of winning a Congressional majority. On the other hand, if the GOP can solidify its position in these races, there will be no wave and the Republicans will preserve a narrow majority.
The 19 wave watch districts are California-45 (Mimi Walters), Georgia-6 (Karen Handel), Illinois-6 (Peter Roskam), Illinois-12 (Michael Bost), Iowa-1 (Rodney Blum), Iowa-3 (David Young), Kansas-2 (Open), Kansas-3 (Open), Kentucky-6 (Garland Barr), Maine-2 (Bruce Poliquin), Minnesota-3 (Erik Paulsen), Michigan-8 (Mike Bishop), New Jersey-7 (Leonard Lance), New Jersey-11, (Rodney Frelinghuysen), Pennsylvania-7 (Patrick Meehan), Pennsylvania-8 (Brian Fitzpatrick), Pennsylvania-15 (Open) and Utah-4 (Mia Love).
Geographically, many of these districts should be friendly to Democratic challengers. Hillary Clinton won seven of the 19 districts and came very close in five more. Additionally, 10 of the 19 are from states Clinton won in her presidential bid. Four others are from Pennsylvania, a state that the president carried by less than a percentage point in 2016.
Obviously, it's very early in the campaign season and a lot can change by November. But the Democratic path to a Congressional majority must almost certainly pass through these 19 Congressional Districts.
Bruce Poliquin won CD-2 in Maine by about 10% in 2016.
The Democrats ran (for a second time) Emily Cain, a moonbat’s moonbat. If they run her or a similar candidate, Mr. Poliquin should be re-elected.
Donald needs to announce an excellent message this year.
after a few House members are indicted ole Scott may have to change his mind
I live in Minnesota 3. It’s the southern, southwestern and western suburbs of Minneapolis. It’s not as GOP as it was about 20 years ago but Paulson should win again. The Dems had a very viable well-funded candidate in 2016 and she lost by about 10 points.
The race I consider interesting is Minnesota 1, the southern tier of counties along the Minnesota-Iowa border. The district has a GOP lean to it although for the last dozen years it’s been held by a Dem who votes liberal but talks conservative when he’s back in the district. The guy (Tim Walz) is running for Governor. It’s an open seat and the guy the GOP is running has a lot of name ID from a previous run for Congress. His dad also represented parts of the area back in the late 70’s and early 80’s.
If the GOP can pick up that seat, I think the wave might not be as bad.
Voters need to look at their new take-home wages and their 401k balance increases as they go to the voting booth!
Any article dealing with pollsters and politics MUST include a table detailing the accuracy of that polling organization over the last decade - that is roughly 3 presidential and 3 mid term elections. I think all of that information is already available on the web.
Why should polling organizations, who generate money through advertising, be exempt from “truth in advertising” laws?
Who knows that might reduce the number push polls coming out a year, or more, before an election and reduce the rancor that accompanies most political polls?
Bottom line - who will buy something from a company with a history of bad products and failures?
Posts like this condition Republicans to discouragement and defeat. After all, we can’t fight the inevitable, and the polls rule.
Interesting to talk of Truth in advertising with these polls.
Isn’t there normally a disclaimer on polls, that the margin of error is plus or minus 3 points, or some number of points?
That Hillary would win....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.