For some time Larry Sabato’s respected Crystal Ball has been predicting a Republican takeover of the Senate in November. Now it appears that the House is within reach for a Republican takeover, too:
To our knowledge, the Crystal Ball is the only predictive organization that uses two different methods for its prognostications. We carefully examine the 435 districts individually, and make an estimate of the outcome for each seat (using polling, past election results, elite opinion in the district, and so on). Last week we published our current estimate of GOP gains from this method: +27 seats.
This week we employ the other method, statistical regression analysis that uses variables such as the president’s Gallup Poll rating and the basic facts of the election. The author is Prof. Alan Abramowitz of Emory University, a frequent contributor to the Crystal Ball and one of the nation’s most distinguished political scientists. Prof. Abramowitz’s model for the 2010 House midterm election has been perhaps the most accurate of all political science models in projecting past midterm elections. As Prof. Abramowitz explains, the key variables in the 2010 election are the simple realities that (1) it is the midterm election of a Democratic presidential administration and (2) the Democrats are defending so many marginal seats—more than fifty that they added in 2006 and 2008, two exceptionally pro-Democratic elections.
His model has a result that will startle many of our readers: Republicans will pick up 37 House seats in November. That is remarkably close to the 40 seats the GOP needs to take outright control of the House.
To be honest I find this prediction astonishing. I would have thought that the districting method and the number of safe seats it ensures would have precluded such a large swing.
But the rationale is pretty compelling, too. Flight from a very unpopular Republican president gave Democrats control of the House but that doesn’t ensure a permanent majority there.
However, that analysis brings to mind another question: will passing President Obama’s healthcare proposal hurt Democrats in November, help Democrats in November, or make no difference?
I don’t honestly know the answer to that question. I think it may make no difference. Those for whom the Democratic version of healthcare reform is the most critical issue tend to live in highly Democratic districts, safe districts. And I think that as long as the unemployment rate remains high November is going to be very, very difficult for Democrats in swing districts.
What think you?
Dave, if you look at Cook’s Report, you’ll only find one or two seats considered competitive in Illinois. (The seat Mark Kirk vacated to run for U.S. Senate and the seat Oberweis gave to the Democrats) I think we’re blessed to live in a state where they really know how to draw maps well. I hear that other states like Iowa are rank amateurs, so we may not have an accurate sense of how competitive some districts might be. IOW, I wouldn’t be surprised that 10% of the seats in Congress are truly competitive, which is enough to swing control.
All that said, I prefer the first approach of seat-by-seat analysis to the statistical method. I’ll say 27 seat gain.
It’s the economy stupid. (Not you Dave) Most people are clueless about what is in the HCR bill. It doesnt matter, other than another talking point. If unemployment is high, that trumps everything.
Steve
Remember that four short years ago, Republicans held 232 seats in the House, and the district lines were the same then as they are today. Over the past two election cycles, Democrats managed to pick up most of the seats that could go either way, plus several conservative districts that had been represented by particularly bad Republicans. Now they have to defend 50-60 seats with moderate-to-conservative electorates in a year when the political climate is as strongly anti-Democrat as the last two cycles were anti-Republican.
Dave,
I think it will be a net loss to the Democrats. It will help the Democrats with progressives, but it’s going to hurt them with everyone else. The economy is going to be what hurts the Democrats.
Keep in mind that redistricting in most states took place almost a decade ago, so it’s possible that “safe” districts are no longer as safe.