The GOP’s House Majority Is Safe … Right?

[BootinUp]

I think Hillary can do better than 8% over Trump, which is more than they seem to think.

-----------------------------------
Jun 20, 2016 at 7:00 AM

By David Wasserman - FiveThirtyEight.com

Right now, most bettors foresee nine words that are the stuff of Republicans’ 2017 nightmares: “President Hillary Clinton and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.” But at least the House is safe for the GOP. It is, right?

House Democrats probably need a Donald Trump loss of historic proportions to have any chance at a three-part sweep. But not even a Clinton rout would guarantee that scenario thanks to structural factors and because voters skeptical of both nominees could well anticipate such an outcome and respond to a Republican message of “checks and balances” — a tactic that’s worked before.

Republicans hold their largest House majority — 247 seats to 188 for Democrats — since the 1928 election, in part because they have some tremendous built-in geographical advantages, both natural and engineered, that their counterparts in the Senate don’t share.

First, Democratic voters have never been more concentrated in big urban areas than they are now. In 2012, President Obama won by 126 electoral votes while carrying just 22 percent of America’s counties — even fewer than losing Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis’s 26 percent in 1988. That means Democrats are wasting more votes than ever in safe congressional districts they already hold. For example, an additional straight Democratic ballot cast in Chicago or Madison might help defeat GOP Sens. Mark Kirk in Illinois or Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, but it’ll do zip to put a dent in Speaker Paul Ryan’s House majority, because Democrats already hold all the House seats anchored by those cities.

Continued:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-house-majority-is-safe-right/?ex_cid=538fb

[MyNameGoesHere]

1. Midterms we will regain majority.

[FBaggins]

2. With Trump, all bets are off

They have a near-insurmountable lead (for the reasons cited) - and I would guess that we pick up 10-15 seats all else being equal - but Trump could easily say/do something that creates a tidal wave. We absolutely should be prepared to take advantage of a wave (e.g., running legit candidates in moderately strong R districts, etc.)

[Maru Kitteh]

7. Exactly this.

Trump changes everything. We should work hard to ensure we maximize this opportunity.

[Agnosticsherbet]

3. Democrats need to win big in State races in 2020 to un-mander the gerrymander.

I think we will take Hosue seats, but it a truly historic win to retake the House.

[MineralMan]

4. I don't know. It could be.

However, it's entirely possible that Trump will flame out and destroy Republican turnout. If that happens, the House just might flip. It's also possible that enough enthusiasm for Clinton will boost turnout by Democrats, which could have the same effect.

In Minnesota, for example, there are two seats that could possibly flip. They'll be close, but either a lower turnout by Republicans or a higher turnout by Democrats could flip them. I imagine there are other Republican seats where the margin is close. Those could flip as well.

All the more reason to GOTV like crazy for the November election.

[Night Watchman]

5. If Trump is the Nominee.....

no Republicans are safe!

[beachbum bob]

6. trump is toxic and house gop know it

a change of 30 seats are possible if you look at republicans that won their seat by 9% or less...those are in jeopardy with a clinton landslide

[zipplewrath]

8. Look to Florida

The GOP lost a major gerrymandering case here and the districts have been redrawn. My GOP critter isn't even running in our district this time because he's certain to lose. Florida is a big state, and there could be some major shifts. If we had a competent party apparatus down here it could really shake things up. Instead, my only hope is that the national party gets involved. Unfortunately that means DWS and I don't see a lot of evidence she is up to the job.

[Cha]

9. K&R!

[uponit7771]

10. This explains why we don't have a representative government any longer; Pubs have less people votin

... voting for them and they hold majorities because of gerrymandering.

Its horrid

[justiceischeap]

11. I believe this is exactly what the GOP is currently worried about

with Trump as their candidate. I think they had already gotten used to the idea of losing the White House--it's no big deal, really, because they can continue to obstruct any and everything.

What has become increasingly clear of late, though, is people that have firmly attached their wagons to Trump aren't polling well either. I think they have a real fear of losing their majority and so they're distancing themselves (or trying to at least) from Trump.