At this point in the election cycle, any result between a Republican sweep of the presidency and both houses of Congress, and the Democrats doing the same thing are all well within the realm of possibility. I’ve discussed a lot about the Presidency and Senate, but not so much the House.
The first step for Republicans if they want to win back the House is holding their own. It is highly likely that the Democrat presidential candidate won’t win the national popular vote by more than 8.6%. The significance of that number is that it was the Democrat’s margin on the generic House ballot in 2018. Broadly speaking, if a seat stayed Republican in a D+8.6 year, why should it go Democrat two years later in a near-neutral year, or even a D+4 or 5 year. Republicans may not need to fret about losing too many of their own seats. The Democrat counter-argument is that because they flipped the 40 seats they did in 2018, they can focus more resources on the “spots they missed” last year. Of course, they need to dispense resources to protect their own incumbents, weakening this argument, but it definitely still caries some clout.
There is 1 Republican-held district rated as Lean Democrat, 4 are Toss-Up, and 16 Lean Republican. If Republicans want to take back the House, they can’t afford to lose more than 5 of their own seats. All but 4 of these districts contain a good deal of suburbs or an urban area, and 4 of those are open seats. Therefore, the question becomes: Will the suburbs continue their leftward trend, or was their showing in 2018 the upper limit of how well Democrats can hope to do there? This question will be key to elections on every level of government this cycle, but especially the House. It is something to keep an eye on.
A common GOP talking point is that 31 Democrats holding districts that Trump won in 2016. They only need to flip 19 seats, or about 56% of that. It seems plausible, given the decrease of split-ticket voting, if Trump wins re-election. The Democrats counter by saying that a lot of these districts are trending left, and won’t be voting Trump in 2020. Taking a quick glance at their past and how their state is rated for 2020, it looks like 18-25 of these districts will still be voting for Trump, and there are a handful of right-trending districts that Trump could flip from Clinton. Let’s say 23 Democrats are trying to win re-election in districts Trump will win in 2020. If the GOP can win 78% of them, they flip back the House. Doable if they can convince most of the voters on their side to cast a split-ticket vote. Let’s break this down further by providing Republicans a roadmap for House control.
These Trump district Democrats fall into 3 categories. Republicans should aim to flip 6 seats in the first category, and 5 in each of the others.
- Midwesterners/Northeasterners that win with a coalition that includes their district’s Obama-Trump voters. (IA-1, IA-2, IL-17, ME-2, MN-7, NJ-3, NY-19, PA-8, WI-3) In this category, convincing Trump voters that electing a Democrat to Congress will get in the way of his effort to improve economic conditions for them will be key.
- Those that won in a fluke in 2018 against a weak Republican opponent. (MI-8, NM-2, NY-11, NY-22, OK-5, SC-1, VA-7, UT-4) Here, Republicans need to just put up solid, competent contenders that can undermine any crossover appeal these incumbents may have built.
- Those that won in blue-trending or swing districts that Trump just happened to win. (AZ-1, GA-6, IA-3, IL-14, MI-11, MN-2, NH-1, NJ-2, NJ-5, NJ-11, NV-3, NY-18, PA-17, VA-2) Making it about Trump isn’t the best idea here, and neither is name-calling or other nasty antics that the GOP has deployed in GA-6 and IL-14. Instead, Republicans should put up people who represent the district well, who are neighborly and friendly, and maybe even not afraid to condemn Trump every once in a while.
Additionally, there are two other categories of Clinton-district Democrats who are vulnerable.
- Swing district or right-trending districts. (CA-10, CT-5, FL-13, NH-2, NV-4, OH-13, PA-7, WA-8) Republicans should aim to flip 2 of these seats. Trump’s performance in these districts will be key to how well Republicans can do here.
- Districts with strong GOP challengers. (CA-21, CA-39, CA-45, CA-48, IL-6, NJ-7, KS-3, TX-7) Republicans should aim to flip 3 of these districts. Republicans already have strong and/or promising candidates here. However, no one these days is immune to a House race becoming about national issues instead of local issues, resulting in polarized voting. Here, they need to keep voters focused on the local issues that affect them the most. If things get dicey, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to start talking like a Democrat and adopting one or two center-left policy positions, such as supporting Medicare coverage for pre-existing conditions or immigration reform that doesn’t involve a wall or family separations.
If Republicans win 48% of the districts I mentioned above, the House is theirs (assuming they lose 4 of their own seats).
The purpose of this roadmap is to show how well Republicans SHOULD be doing in each category. If they’re underperforming in one category, they need to do better than their goal in another. If the GOP falters and only flips one seat in Category 2, they need to make up for it by flipping all the Trump seats in Category 2, or one each from 2 and 3. I will periodically revisit this roadmap and keep you updated on how things are looking House side.
Ultimately, I think the House remains in play. But in a lot of districts the Republicans need to flip, it’s the Democrat’s race to lose.
Republican Retirements
7 Republicans in the past 2 weeks have announced they’re not seeking re-election. While there is a discussion to be had in regards to exactly how bad this is for the GOP, it’s hard to make the case this is a good sign for the party. Some possible reasons these Republicans are retiring:
- They don’t like being in the minority.
- They’re facing competitive re-elections, often for the first time.
- They’re not enjoying the Congressional lifestyle.
- The current environment in D.C. is toxic.
- They’re just getting too old.
A lot of retirements are coming from safe Republican districts, and a lot of the reasons aren’t suggestive of impending doom for the party. While maybe more Republicans will retire and it will just become a downward spiral like last year, it could also just be a bad stretch that won’t matter much in the home stretch of the campaign. If a bunch of more GOP retirements happen by Christmas, that’s when the party should activate panic mode.