Will Democrats gain 25 seats gross in the House?

[MD]

Maybe they net 12-15. Tops.

This is my prediction.

6 months ago, I honestly thought along these lines.  Now, I am backing it off to 8 to 10, at most and it could be a little less.   The new maps pretty much resulted in a wash.  Cook has an excellent tally on that.  TX and FL were 2 states the GOP thought they would make huge gains with new maps but due to some issues around mandatory minority created districts, that didn't happen.  IL and NC pretty much cancel each other out.  The R's gain because of less seats in some places (MA, PA) but the new maps themselves don't make much of a difference.   In the past few months the R's have caught some breaks.  CA 31 wasw gift wrapped.  Boren retired.  The seats in PA look safe fror them. 

[MD]

Sorry about the last post.  The screen started to jump when I typed my second paragraph.  Anyway, I do think 8 to 10 is now the max.  It could be less.  If not, I look for the D's to make gains in NY and OH big time. 

[Jbrase]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

[MD]

If Obama had been fortunate and had the opportunity to run against Santorum or Newt, then the House would have been in play.  The POTUS election has all the makings of being a very close contest.  I would give Obama an advantage today based on the swing states but a win is not 100% certain. 

[greenforest32]

Is Nate Silver going to make 2012 projections for the House races?

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/23/do-democrats-have-a-shot-at-the-house/

NYT has ratings now: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/ratings/house

[Mr.Phips]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

If Democrats have a net loss in both the House and Senate, it will have been the first time in history that a President was reelected while his party lost seats in both Houses. 

[Speaker Dereich]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

If Democrats have a net loss in both the House and Senate, it will have been the first time in history that a President was reelected while his party lost seats in both Houses. 

Not so. Republicans gained seats in both houses in 1916 while Woodrow Wilson won reelection.

[Mr. Morden]

How do you even count the gross gains in a year where you have redistricting?  If, for example, you have a state that's gaining more districts, then does a newly created district that's won by a Democrat count as a seat that they've gained?  Even in states where the number of seats stays the same, there won't be perfect continuity between the old districts and the new districts.  So what counts as a gain?

[Mr.Phips]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

If Democrats have a net loss in both the House and Senate, it will have been the first time in history that a President was reelected while his party lost seats in both Houses. 

Not so. Republicans gained seats in both houses in 1916 while Woodrow Wilson won reelection.

96 years is still an awful long time. 

[zorkpolitics]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

If Democrats have a net loss in both the House and Senate, it will have been the first time in history that a President was reelected while his party lost seats in both Houses.  

Of course if Romney wins and the GOP gains seats in the Senate but loses seats in the House then it will just be another typical election.

[Mr.Phips]

Depending on how bad Romney fails, the Dems could even face net loss from being boned in redistricting in several states. I think it'll be like D+3 or 4 myself but I do no see any scenario short of Obama winning in a decent landslide where they pick up a large amount of House seats.

If Democrats have a net loss in both the House and Senate, it will have been the first time in history that a President was reelected while his party lost seats in both Houses.  

Of course if Romney wins and the GOP gains seats in the Senate but loses seats in the House then it will just be another typical election.

That's what happened in 1992.