As of Sunday morning, the New York Times elections site—which is possibly the best one available—shows 21 U.S. House seats still uncalled, although one of them is a Democrat-vs.-Democrat race in California, so that seat is automatically a Democratic hold. Among the 20 other races, Democrats would need to win 14 to hold the majority, while Republicans only need seven. Here I’m going to analyze how those 20 seats break down, from east to west.
Maine 2—Democrat Jared Golden leads Republican Bruce Poliquin by 3% before ranked-choice voting kicks in. Golden’s in good shape. LIKELY D.
New York 22—Republican Brandon Williams leads by about 2% in a Republican-leaning district. LIKELY R.
Colorado 3—Republican Lauren Boebert holds a narrow lead, but most signs indicate that she will squeak this one out. LEANS R.
Colorado 8—It is a bit surprising that this race has not been called for Democrat Yadira Caraveo, whose Republican opponent, Barbara Kirkmeyer, conceded days ago. The margin is only 0.7% right now, but one tends to think that the person who conceded had a good reason to do it. LIKELY D.
Arizona 1—Democrat Jevin Hodge leads incumbent Republican David Schweikert by 0.8%, but there are a lot of votes (14%) still to be counted. It is a close district, so it is hard to say who will prevail here. My guess is that Schweikert ekes it out. LEANS R.
Arizona 6—Republican Juan Ciscomani leads Democrat Kirsten Engel by 0.4% with 13% of the vote still out. I expect Ciscomani hangs on. LEANS R.
Oregon 5—With Republican Lori Chavez-De Remer leading Democrat Jamie McLeod-Skinner by 2. It’s clear that a bitter Democratic primary, in which McLeod-Skinner ousted incumbent Kurt Schrader, left a mark. My guess is that the Republican holds on. Democrats should take a lesson from what happens when you primary a centrist Democrat in a centrist district. LEANS R.
Oregon 6—Democrat Andrea Salinas leads Republican Mike Erickson by 2%. It’s a slightly blue-leaning district, so I expect Salinas wins. LIKELY D.
California 3—Republican incumbent Kevin Kiley leads Democratic challenger Kermit Jones by about 6%. Late counts in California typically favor Democrats, but Jones probably has too far to go to get there. LEANS R.
California 6—I don’t know why this one hasn’t been called yet. Incumbent Democrat Ami Bera has a 12% lead over Republican Tamika Hamilton, in a Democratic-leaning district. LIKELY D.
California 9—Another race that probably should have been called by now. Democratic incumbent Josh Harder leads by 12% over Republican Tom Patti. LIKELY D.
California 13—Republican John Duarte has a 0.2% lead over Democrat Adam Gray in this open seat. The late count, I expect, will likely favor Gray. LEANS D.
California 21—Incumbent Democrat Jim Costa leads Republican Michael Maher by 10%. LIKELY D.
California 22—Republican incumbent David Valadao has a 6% lead over Democrat Rudy Salas. This is a heavily Democratic district, but Valadao’s personal brand has helped him overcome his district’s partisan lean many times. The margin will tighten, but I expect Valadao will hold on. LEANS R.
California 27—Republican incumbent Mike Garcia holds a 10% lead over Democrat Christy Smith in this Democratic-leaning district. The margin will tighten, but it’s hard to imagine Garcia losing a 10-point lead. It’s beginning to look like the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was right to pull the plug on this race. LEANS R.
California 41—Longtime Republican incumbent Ken Calvert leads Democrat Will Rollins by about a point and a half. This one could be pretty tight up to the end. It’s one of California’s more Republican districts, but that’s not saying much. With the late count usually favoring Democrats, I think Rollins pulls it out. LEANS D.
California 45—Incumbent Republican Michelle Steel leads Democrat Jay Chen by 8%. She probably holds on. LEANS R.
California 47—Incumbent Democrat Katie Porter’s district got a lot more Republican this cycle, but she leads her GOP opponent, Scott Baugh, by 2%, and I expect she holds on. LEANS D.
California 49—Incumbent Democrat Mike Levin leads Republican Bryan Maryott by 4% and should win. LIKELY D.
Alaska At-Large—Democratic incumbent Mary Peltola is in great shape, with 47% of the vote before ranked choice takes effect, and some number of Republicans certain to have named her as their second choice. LIKELY D.
In all, of the 20 uncalled races, I expect Democrats to win 11 and Republicans to win nine. That would give Republicans a scant 220-215 majority with a net gain of seven seats. As compared to the average loss for a president’s party in a midterm election (34-35 seats), this is clearly a major underperformance by the Republican Party, and it puts Democrats in a strong position to retake the House in 2024 if President Biden does well in his reelection campaign.
That said, if just three of those expected Republican seats end up going Democratic (and at least two of them are pretty dicey calls at this point), then Democrats would hold the House—a remarkable result if it happens.
I learned in 2010 never to bet against Nevada political guru Jon Ralston when it came to picking winners in Nevada. Ralston’s calculations show that embattled Democratic Senator Catherine Cortez Masto is likely to hold off a challenge by Republican Adam Laxalt. As such, I am changing my rating in that race from Leans R (flip) to Leans D.
The ratings change, if my projections are correct, would indicate Democrats will hold the Senate by taking a 50-49 advantage into any runoff that might happen in Georgia. A 50-50 tie would keep Democrats in charge due to the tie breaking vote of Vice President Kamala Harris.
I still project a 23-seat pickup in the House by the GOP, for a 236-199 advantage.
Heading into the final two days before the 2022 midterm elections, it is clear to me that the Republican Party has the momentum and this will essentially be a normal midterm, with one caveat: It appears that Democratic turnout will be higher than could normally be expected in a midterm with a Democratic president, which will blunt Republican gains somewhat and possibly enable them to preserve their tenuous 50-50 hold on the U.S. Senate.
But even though Republicans appear unlikely to get the 34 or 35 seats the “out” party could expect to pick up in an average midterm election, I still expect almost every U.S. House seat Joe Biden won by less than 8% in 2020 to flip to the GOP. As such, I expect Republicans to pick up 23 U.S. House seats and take the majority by a 236-199 margin.
I didn’t just pick this number out of a hat, and when I made my first projections in the spring, it was higher. At that time, I expected Republicans to flip virtually every district Biden won by less than 12%, which I based on Democratic underperformance, relative to 2017, in the governors’ races in Virginia and New Jersey last year.
After the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, I noted that Democratic over performance in special elections from that point was significant enough that I changed my projection to Democrats losing virtually every Biden +3 seat. But with momentum clearly turning back to the Republicans in the last month or two, I expect to end up somewhere in the middle between those two extremes. With a couple of exceptions, I am projecting Republicans to win any Biden House seat of +8 or less. I expect with close to 100% certainty that Republicans will control a majority of the House in January 2023.
The Senate, I feel less confident about. On one hand, Republicans have hurt themselves badly by picking a number of really bad candidates. On the other hand, the only five Senate races that appear to be in doubt at this point are four seats currently held by Democrats and only one seat currently held by a Republican. Democrats would need to win four of those five seats just to stay at 50-50. In a year in which I expect Republicans to gain, it is hard to imagine that Republicans would win only one of these five super-competitive seats. Had the GOP chosen better candidates in Pennsylvania, Georgia and New Hampshire, I’d be projecting the GOP to pick up at least two seats and most likely three. And those dynamics might still hold, possibly propelling two or three of those really awful Republican candidates into the Senate. Right now, I’m calling it 50-49 GOP with Georgia going to a runoff, but it’s far likelier that it might be 51 or 52 seats for the Republicans than it is that Democrats will do any better than 50-50. In short, the dynamics tell me to expect the Republicans to get 51 Senate seats, but it’s just hard for me to see where they get that 51st seat.
On average, my projections since 2006 have been within seven seats in the House and 1.375 seats in the Senate. Based on my historical error rate, one could expect a Republican House majority of anywhere from 229-206 to 243-192, and a Senate that contains anything from a 52-48 Democratic edge to a 52-48 Republican edge.
I also make projections at the state level, and those are all available in the attached chart.
I deactivated my website briefly starting in July and am now starting back up again with the 2022 midterms looming a month out. The landscape has changed tremendously since my June projections of Republican gains of 32 House seats and four Senate seats. The Dobbs decision by the Supreme Court appears to have resulted in registration gains for Democrats, particularly among women, and in special House elections since then, Democrats have overperformed across the board. Using the special elections since the Dobbs decision as a baseline, I am adjusting my forecast to indicate that Republicans will net six House seats and that neither party will make a net gain in the Senate. If correct, my projections would indicate Republicans flipping the House by a razor-thin 219-216 margin, and the Senate holding at 50-50.
At this time, I expect Democrats to flip the Senate seat in Pennsylvania, and I characterize Democrat John Fetterman’s race against Republican Mehmet Oz as “Leans Democratic.”
On the flip side, I think Nevada is going to be problematic for Democrats this cycle, and I expect Republican Adam Laxalt to upend incumbent Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto. I am characterizing Nevada as “Leans Republican.” I have long been noting signs of Democratic weakness in Nevada this year and have always considered this the likeliest Democratic loss this cycle. I see nothing to contradict my analysis at this point.
I don’t expect any other races to flip. I expect Senator Raphael Warnock (D-Georgia) to defeat Republican Herschel Walker, and I rate that race as Leans Democratic. And despite running by far the best campaign in the country, it is hard for me to see Democrat Tim Ryan overcoming Ohio’s red lean to beat Republican J.D. Vance. I rate Ohio as Leans Republican.
Democrat Cheri Beasley is doing about as well as can be expected against Republican Ted Budd in North Carolina, and while I don’t rule out an upset, the Tar Heel State is clearly “Leans R.”
Democratic challenger Mandela Barnes is running a lousy campaign in Wisconsin and I recently moved that race to “Likely R,” with Republican Senator Ron Johnson poised to win a third term.
And in Florida, I don’t expect Republican Senator Marco Rubio to have much trouble defeating Democrat Val Demings. Florida is “Likely R.”
Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan appears to be well ahead of Republican Don Bolduc in New Hampshire, which I rate as “Likely D.”
In the only other state where Democrats worried about a threat, Senator Michael Bennet (D-Colorado) looks to be in control, and Colorado is also “Likely D.”
All remaining Senate races this cycle are characterized as safe seats for the party currently holding them. The end result, if all projections hold, would be a 50-50 Senate for the second straight cycle, with Vice President KamalaHarris giving the tiebreaking vote to Democrats.
Today I saw a tweet from a self-identified Millennial who lamented that her generation had spent their adolescence doing all the things they were supposed to do to prepare for a world that was not waiting for them when they graduated.
I had to restrain myself from responding unsympathetically. In fact, I didn’t respond at all. But I thought about responding, and what immediately came to mind was that the kids who turned 18 years old in 1861, 1929, 1941 and 1965 got thrown some unexpected curveballs too.
I grew up in Northwest Indiana, an industrialized collection of suburban communities near Chicago. “The Region,” as the locals call it, relied heavily for several generations upon the steel mills established in the early 20th century along the south shore of Lake Michigan. Up until the 1980s, it was commonplace for “Region” kids to get their high school diploma one day and get a job at one of the mills the next day. The mill jobs were plentiful and paid well, and the hard-won benefits secured by the United Steelworkers union made it possible to retire with a good pension by age 50. But by the 1980s, the domestic steel industry had gone into decline, and the kids who came up with me had to make other plans. Many of them have not done as well as their parents’ and grandparents’ generations, but they’ve adapted and done what they had to do. This is nothing new.
I guess that’s the thing that irritates me the most about today’s younger generations. They seem to think nobody else has ever faced the need to adapt to an unexpected situation. In the preceding paragraphs, I named five groups of people who also faced unexpected challenges when they came of age. I’ve left out many more. Millions upon millions of people throughout human history have made careful plans, played by the rules, did all they were supposed to do, and then saw all of their efforts go up in smoke. It’s not a new or unprecedented phenomenon.
What previous generations seemed to understand that the current younger generations seem not to get is that there are no guarantees in life, and when things don’t go the way you expected, you have to adapt. You can’t just complain and ask older people to bail you out (as we are seeing with the incessant push for forgiveness of all student loan debt).
“But Boomers left us this mess!” Yes, and the adults of the 1920s left their kids a Great Depression, and adults in the 1930s left their kids a world at war for the second time in 25 years. Millions of them did everything they were supposed to do, too, and they got smacked in the face by a world that wasn’t the one they had prepared for.
What seems to separate today’s young people from the ones back then is that their parents didn’t prepare them for the eventuality that things might not go according to plan. They weren’t raised to adapt, or to roll with the punches that life brings, in one form or another, to every generation and every person.
So it’s hard for me to be sympathetic to the complaints of younger people today. I oppose blanket student loan forgiveness, for example. I think it’s a bad idea, and a political loser as well, since most Americans don’t have student debt and will see forgiveness as a giveaway to a privileged minority. I do think we should revisit the law prohibiting bankruptcy relief for student loans, and also make provision for people who truly can’t pay. I would even support a reduction in interest rates on federally backed loans.
But I don’t like the idea that if you can’t buy all the things you want, or take all the vacations you’d like to take, you should just get to walk away from your obligations. I also don’t like the idea that people who don’t make the wisest choices (majoring in a field with poor job prospects, for example) should be absolved or saved from the consequences. And if you want loan relief, a number of forgiveness programs already exist. You might have to do something you don’t especially want to do–say, spend a few years teaching school in an impoverished area, for example–but people have always had to do things they don’t especially want to do in order to get the things they want in life. This, also, is nothing new.
I’m a Gen-Xer. We and previous generations were all taught something that succeeding generations seem not to have been told: Life isn’t fair. Sorry, but it just isn’t. If you’re a young person and you were sheltered from that reality by your parents, I’m sorry, but now, it’s time for you to learn that eternal truth and adapt. And maybe you’ll be able to tell your kids what your parents never told you.
Recent Comments