Republicans aren't going to win anything that's D+ in PVI, they won only one seat like that last year, CA-31 and that race didn't even include a Democrat. R+ seats are the only place they have a chance in and even some of those are difficult.
I was going to point out loBiondo, yeah, but...this post is funny enough I don't have to.
Why not? Why are Republicans incapable of winning D+1 or 2 or 3 when they have a better candidate with a better campaign or a better environment than the Democrats do? Just like Democrats are capable of winning R+1 or 2 or 3 when they run a better campaign and a better candidate or have a better environment than the Republicans do. Those numbers aren't etched in stone either, seats shift over time, sometimes even from the Democrats to the Republican Party.
I think part of the reason is that its seems that there are more competitive R PVI districts than those with D PVI's.
For example, if you look at states like NC or OH, Republicans could never win the districts with Democratic PVI's (like Butterfield's or Kaptur's). The most competitive districts in those states would be Republican leaning (like Johnson's or McIntyre's).
