Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 20, 2014, 09:22:40 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2010 Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  How many seats will the Democrats lose (net) in the House?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print
Poll
Question: Hows many seats will the Democrats lose (net) in the House?
None   -4 (3.5%)
1-4   -2 (1.8%)
5-9   -7 (6.1%)
10-17   -21 (18.4%)
18-22   -23 (20.2%)
23-44   -32 (28.1%)
45 or more   -25 (21.9%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 112

Author Topic: How many seats will the Democrats lose (net) in the House?  (Read 22981 times)
Passing Through a Screen Door
BRTD
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 72033
Sweden


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: November 29, 2009, 01:03:26 pm »
Ignore

I'll say about 10-15. The GOP is still anathema in many parts of the country, any gains will have to come almost exclusively from the south.
Logged

Victory over Inks dedicated in memory.


01/05/2004-01/10/2014
Warner for Senate '14
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30545
United States


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2009, 01:10:58 pm »
Ignore

I'd say 20-25.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2009, 02:18:43 pm »
Ignore

I'll say about 10-15. The GOP is still anathema in many parts of the country, any gains will have to come almost exclusively from the south.

Actually, they have real room for growth in the industrial Midwest and the Mountain West. The industrial Midwest is in decline, and they have mostly Democrats in office at the moment. In the Mountain West, there is lots of anger about growing federal power and government spending. The leadership of the GOP understands they need to run moderates, the base just has to start listening. Will they? I don't know.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Sibboleth
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 56350
Saint Helena


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 29, 2009, 02:54:18 pm »
Ignore

Twenty million billion.

---

It's too early to say, obviously. The only things that are clear is that the pattern of Democratic gains which started (more or less) wi' the Chandler by-election is going to end, and the swing will be higher than average in most of the South. We'll have a better idea by the summer (that's the point at which it became clear in 2006, for those who had eyes to see, that the House was going to fall). Until then, all we're doing is throwing random numbers around, and often those that look pleasing to us. Confirmation bias is the devil of election prediction, and we are all vulnerable to it.
Logged

"I have become entangled in my own data, and my conclusion stands in direct contradiction to the initial idea from which I started. Proceeding from unlimited freedom, I end with unlimited despotism. I will add, however, that there can be no solution of the social formula except mine."
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: November 29, 2009, 03:03:17 pm »
Ignore

I'd say 20-25.

That is around where I am predicting, like 22-27 though.
Logged

dwkulcsar
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 74
United States


P
View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 29, 2009, 03:24:06 pm »
Ignore

I'd say 10-17, and Alan Grayson (FL-8) is not going to be one of them. Grayson's detractors are in the upper part of his district, who did not vote for him anyways. He will win the Orlando and Orange County part of his district. Grayson has alot of cash and will not have a problem spending it to keep himself in office.

The GOP has put forth some very weak possible contenders, the only one that may be worth it is State Rep. Kurt Kelly, but he is from Ocala, and may not sell as well as Grayson can where the population is which is Orlando-Lake County.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13418


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 29, 2009, 03:48:38 pm »
Ignore

I'll say about 10-15. The GOP is still anathema in many parts of the country, any gains will have to come almost exclusively from the south.

Actually, they have real room for growth in the industrial Midwest and the Mountain West. The industrial Midwest is in decline, and they have mostly Democrats in office at the moment. In the Mountain West, there is lots of anger about growing federal power and government spending. The leadership of the GOP understands they need to run moderates, the base just has to start listening. Will they? I don't know.

How many seats is the Mountain west really? They will probably lose that Idaho seat and that New Mexico seat as well as CO-4. But for it to be a real wave election and for the Republicans to take over congress they would need to win AZ-5, NV-3, CA-11. At this moment I don't see them winning either of them. But if health care doesn't pass, or the economy worsens, all bets are off. The democrats may have lost a lot of support in exurban/rural west but the good news for them is that not a lot of people live there.
Logged
Wiz from Wis in Mass
Wiz in Wis
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1188


Political Matrix
E: -4.00, S: -5.57

View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 30, 2009, 02:21:21 pm »
Ignore

At this point, not enough to win either chamber, or even really come close in the House. A good number of the 2006/2008 pickups were seats that leaned D, like IA-1, the CT seats, the PA seats, The NY seats, NOVA, Denver Burbs, NM-1, FL22. I don't think they lose that many. Given that 2010 will force a number of states to redistrict that are pretty much gerrymandered to give the GOP a leg up, I doubt that regaining control of the House is in the cards barring some collapse the likes of which have not been postulated (15% + unemployment, huge clusterflock in Afghnistan, Giant Democratic child mollesting scandal and coverup).
Logged
Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9331
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: December 04, 2009, 02:11:00 am »
Ignore

they will gain about 23
Logged

people suck
nkpatel1279
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1718
United States


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: December 04, 2009, 10:27:46 am »
Ignore

Democrats will pick up DE-AL,IL-10,LA-2 and PA-6.
Democrats will have a tough time holding onto.
1)AL-2
2)AL-5
3)FL-8
4)ID-1
5)LA-3
6)MD-1
7)MI-7
8)NJ-3
9)NM-2
10)OH-1
11)OH-15
12)VA-2
13)VA-5

Democrats loose about 10 seats.
Logged
OC
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9763
United States


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2009, 04:49:21 pm »
Ignore

Wave election net lose about 26 or 33 seats, but for now 10-17
Logged
timmer123
Full Member
***
Posts: 140


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: December 12, 2009, 11:57:21 pm »
Ignore

Only time will tell on this.  We talk about 1994 a lot, but remember that nobody saw the 52 seat loss the Dems incurred coming.  They were completely blindsided.

It's gonna depend on the economic situation of the country, and other variables.  15 seat minimum pick up.. but wouldn't be surprised to see upwards of 30.
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4963


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: December 13, 2009, 12:25:15 am »
Ignore

Only time will tell on this.  We talk about 1994 a lot, but remember that nobody saw the 52 seat loss the Dems incurred coming.  They were completely blindsided.

It's gonna depend on the economic situation of the country, and other variables.  15 seat minimum pick up.. but wouldn't be surprised to see upwards of 30.

The difference this time is that Democrats expect to get their asses kicked next year. 
Logged
OC
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9763
United States


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: December 14, 2009, 12:15:12 pm »
Ignore

I think the fewest number of seats the Dems will have is 225.  I don't see the republicans gaining more than 210.  The ousted Dems will be Dems who don't vote for Obama's budget anyway.  They are there for the numbers.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15883


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: December 14, 2009, 02:46:53 pm »
Ignore

If the election were held today, they would lose 65 to 70 seats. The GOP would win the highest percentage of the Congressional vote since the 1920s.
Logged

Rowan
RowanBrandon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6714


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2009, 03:09:46 pm »
Ignore

Democrats will pick up DE-AL,IL-10,LA-2 and PA-6.
Democrats will have a tough time holding onto.
1)AL-2
2)AL-5
3)FL-8
4)ID-1
5)LA-3
6)MD-1
7)MI-7
8)NJ-3
9)NM-2
10)OH-1
11)OH-15
12)VA-2
13)VA-5

Democrats loose about 10 seats.

Only 10?? You're insane.
Logged
Drafting it up in Tulsa, America
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21152
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2009, 08:10:34 pm »
Ignore

I'm thinking somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 seats, give or take 5.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32032
United States


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: December 25, 2009, 09:30:27 pm »
Ignore

Could be a lot higher: Democrats have won a bunch of seats in 2006 and 2008 that they really just have no business holding based on the PVI.

I think that this is really the key.

There are several factors. 

First, the only time, post war that the president's party gained seats in an off year election was when the president had high poll numbers and it was the first year after a redistricting (2002).  The most minor losses occurred when the president had higher numbers.  My guess would be that even if Obama were at 50% to 55%, you'd see a 10-15 seat loss. 

Second, there are a number of naturally GOP seats, that might include another 5-15 seats.

Two other factor will be if Obama is below 50% and if there is a strong anti-incumbency feeling by the election. 

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.
Logged

J. J.

"Actually, .. now that you mention it...." 
- Londo Molari

"Every government are parliaments of whores.
The trouble is, in a democracy the whores are us." - P. J. O'Rourke

"Wa sala, wa lala."

(Zulu for, "You snooze, you lose.")
Bo
Rochambeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14388
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

View Profile
« Reply #43 on: December 25, 2009, 09:45:27 pm »
Ignore

I'd say 18 to 22. They will probably pick up around 5 and lose around 25, thus for a net loss of about 20.
Logged

Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22009
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: December 26, 2009, 02:06:18 pm »
Ignore

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.

Just as the Bradley Effect costing Obama the election was not out of the question.
Logged
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #45 on: December 26, 2009, 02:10:53 pm »
Ignore

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.

Just as the Bradley Effect costing Obama the election was not out of the question.

Well it wasn't. If you're attempting sarcasm, I'm failing to detect it Tongue

My general feeling is we're in a period (probably since 2006) where the controlling party, whichever one it is, will suffer huge losses after huge but short-lived gains in power.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Franzl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 22009
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: December 26, 2009, 02:22:43 pm »
Ignore

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.

Just as the Bradley Effect costing Obama the election was not out of the question.

Well it wasn't. If you're attempting sarcasm, I'm failing to detect it Tongue

My general feeling is we're in a period (probably since 2006) where the controlling party, whichever one it is, will suffer huge losses after huge but short-lived gains in power.

I'm just mocking J.J.'s analysis, that's it.
Logged
Vepres
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8103
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.26, S: -7.39

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: December 26, 2009, 03:55:44 pm »
Ignore

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.

Just as the Bradley Effect costing Obama the election was not out of the question.

Well it wasn't. If you're attempting sarcasm, I'm failing to detect it Tongue

My general feeling is we're in a period (probably since 2006) where the controlling party, whichever one it is, will suffer huge losses after huge but short-lived gains in power.

I'm just mocking J.J.'s analysis, that's it.


Ah, ok.
Logged

LOL, Failure

Alright, if Republicans gain less than 75 seats, I'll prominently display my failure in my signature.
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4963


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: December 27, 2009, 02:59:27 am »
Ignore

Naturally, I'd say 25-35 seats could be expected, though not significant.  I'd say anything above 35, and you are entering re-alignment range.  The GOP doing better than 1994 is not out of the question.

Just as the Bradley Effect costing Obama the election was not out of the question.

Well it wasn't. If you're attempting sarcasm, I'm failing to detect it Tongue

My general feeling is we're in a period (probably since 2006) where the controlling party, whichever one it is, will suffer huge losses after huge but short-lived gains in power.

So you would expect that Republicans lose big again in 2012?  Especially considering that Democrats likely wont work with Republicans the way they did on a good number of issues in 1995 and 1996, which made Republicans look somewhat competent.  This time, you will likely see Democrats blocking almost every Republican initiative. 
« Last Edit: December 27, 2009, 03:15:33 am by Mr.Phips »Logged
Sewer
SpaceCommunistMutant
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7535
View Profile
« Reply #49 on: December 27, 2009, 03:45:50 am »
Ignore

This time, you will likely see Democrats blocking almost every Republican initiative. 

lol
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines