2016 House Ratings: Nowhere But Up From Here

[publicunofficial]

I know it's kinda gross to do this while the votes are still being counted in some races, but I wanted to beat everybody to the punch .


My criteria is simple.

1) The ratings are made without assuming anything about higher up races. For this first edition of my ratings, the 2016 presidential race might as well be Generic D vs. Generic R. Obviously the Presidential race will affect House races down the line (Hillary would make it hard for R's in New York, Rubio would make it difficult for D's in Florida, ect.) but for now I'm ignoring it. This goes for Senate and Governor races too.

2) Unless I have good reason to think otherwise, this first set of ratings is ignoring potential retirements. Mike Fitzpatrick is the only confirmed retirement so far, everything else would just be speculation on my part.

3) I have no idea who will be recruited to run in any race. As such, I won't do things like rate VA-02  as a Toss-Up because "Mark Herring could run". I will however note potential candidates that would be competitive. This goes both ways, and I won't rate races Safe D or Safe R purely because I think the opposition party will fail to find a good candidate. The Ohio Democrats will probably disappoint me in OH-14, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

4) For the uncalled races, I assume the following people will be declared the winner:
-AZ-02 for Barber
-CA-07 for Ose
-CA-16 for Tacherra
-CA-26 for Brownley
-LA-05 for Abraham
-LA-06 for Graves
-NY-25 for Slaughter

However, my ratings won't change if I prove to be wrong or not. For example, I think CA-07 will be a Toss-Up next year no matter if Ami Bera or Doug Ose is the winner.

So without further ado, here's my 2016 House ratings.




Likely D:
AZ-09 (Sinema)
CA-03 (Garamendi)
CA-09 (McNerney)
CA-26 (Brownley)
CA-36 (Ruiz)
IA-02 (Loebsack)
IL-11 (Foster)
MD-06 (Delaney)
MN-07 (Peterson)
NH-02 (Kuster)

Lean D:
AZ-01 (Kirkpatrick)
CA-16 (Tacherra)
CA-31 (Aguilar)
CA-52 (Peters)
MN-08 (Nolan)
NV-04 (Hardy)
NY-18 (Maloney)
NY-25 (Slaughter)

Toss-Up:
AZ-02 (Barber)
CA-07 (Ose)
FL-02 (Graham)
FL-26 (Curbelo)
IA-01 (Blum)
IL-10 (Dold)
ME-02 (Poliquin)
NE-02 (Ashford)
NH-01 (Guinta)
TX-23 (Hurd)

Lean R:
CA-10 (Denham)
CA-21 (Valadao)
CA-25 (Knight)
CO-06 (Coffman)
FL-13 (Jolly)
IA-03 (Young)
IL-12 (Enyart)
MI-01 (Benishek)
NJ-03 (MacArthur)
NY-01 (Zeldin)
NY-19 (Gibson)
NY-21 (Stefanik)
NY-23 (Reed)
NY-24 (Katko)
PA-08 (OPEN)
UT-04 (Love)
VA-10 (Comstock)

Likely R:
AK-AL (Young)
GA-12 (Allen)
IL-13 (Davis)
IN-02 (Walorski)
MI-11 (Trott)
NJ-02 (LoBiondo)
NV-03 (Heck)
NY-11 (Grimm)
OH-14 (Joyce)
VA-02 (Rigell)
WA-08 (Reichert)
WV-02 (Mooney)
WV-03 (Jenkins)


I'm working on brief paragraphs to explain my reason for each rating, and I'll probably post it within a few days. In the mean time, feel free to discuss my ratings or post your own.

[smoltchanov]

So, essentially, in neutral year - relatively small (within 10-15) gains for Democrats and return to pre-2014 situation?

[publicunofficial]

So, essentially, in neutral year - relatively small (within 10-15) gains for Democrats and return to pre-2014 situation?

In essence yes. There's only a few seats that Republicans have left to take from Democrats, and most of those seats are going to be harder to take in 2016 than they were in 2014 barring the unlikely event of another Republican wave.

That being said, retirements and recruitment will bring certain seats into play on both sides. I'm not ready to proclaim Democrats take 10 seats, but a modest gain seems like the most likely event.

[smoltchanov]

So, essentially, in neutral year - relatively small (within 10-15) gains for Democrats and return to pre-2014 situation?

In essence yes. There's only a few seats that Republicans have left to take from Democrats, and most of those seats are going to be harder to take in 2016 than they were in 2014 barring the unlikely event of another Republican wave.

That being said, retirements and recruitment will bring certain seats into play on both sides. I'm not ready to proclaim Democrats take 10 seats, but a modest gain seems like the most likely event.

And then - try to win as many governorships in 2018 as possible to make redistricting more favorable to Democrats and get a chance for getting House back in 2022?

[SWE]

Likely R
Don Young (AK-AL)
Jim Allen (GA-08)
Rodney Davis (IL-13)
Jackie Walorski (IN-02)
Steve King (IA-04)
Dave Trott (MI-11)
Joe Heck (NV-02)
Frank LoBiondio (NJ-02)
Chris Gibson (NY-19)
David Joyce (OH-14)
Mia Love (UT-04)
Scott Rigell (VA-02)
Dave Reichert (WA-08)
Alex Mooney (WV-02)
Eva Jenkins (WV-03)

Lean R
French Hill (AR-02)
Jeff Denham (CA-10)
David Valadao (CA-21)
Steve Knight (CA-25)
David Jolly (FL-13)
Mike Bost (IL-12)
Dan Benishek (MI-11)
Scott MacArthur (NJ-03)
Lee Zeldin (NY-01)
Michael Grimm (NY-11)
Elise Stefanik (NY-21)
Tom Reed (NY-23)
PA-08 (OPEN)
Barbara Comstock (VA-10)

Tossup/Tilt R
Mike Coffman (CO-06)
Bob Dold (IL-10)
David Young (IA-03)
John Katko (NY-24)

Pure Tossup
Martha McSally (AZ-02)
Gwen Graham (FL-02)
Carlos Curbelo (FL-26)
Bruce Poliquin (ME-02)
Dan Ashford (NE-02)
Frank Guinta (NH-01)
Will Hurd (TX-23)
Don Blum (IA-01)

Tossup/Tilt D
Ami Bera (CA-07)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Scott Peters (CA-52)
Charles Hardy (NV-04)

Lean D
Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-01)
Julia Brownley (CA-26)
Rick Nolan (MN-08)
Ann Kuster (NH-01)
Sean Maloney (NY-18)

Likely D
Kirsten Sinema (AZ-09)
John Garmendi (CA-03)
Jerry McNerney (CA-09)
Raul Ruiz (CA-26)
Pete Aguilar (CA-31)
David Lobesack (IA-02)
Bill Foster (IL-11)
John Delaney (MD-06)
Colin Peterson (MN-08)
Louise Slaughter (NY-25)

[Miles]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It looks like Costa is going to win.

For MN-07, Peterson is a team player and I've heard he wants to hand off this seat in a Presidential year.

[Clermont County GOPer]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

He is, but only in Presidential years.

[SWE]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

lol

[free my dawg]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

Because winning by 3 in 2012 makes you a good candidate.

Right.

Anyways, I'll reserve my judgment until they actually serve in and vote on a few bills.

[The_Doctor]

Very back of the envelope calculations.

The Republicans took 233 in 2012.  Let's see what the GOP's 2016 floor is likely to be.

+ GA 12
+ NC 07
+ WV 03

- MI 01
- FL 02
- CA 31
- NV 04

So it would be 232 likely as a base point (-12).

Starting from there, it sounds like the GOP would have a huge leg up on 2016, even if Clinton won by similar margins to Obama. Probably, if you split the rest of the tossup, something like GOP 239 in the event of a Clinton win.

[Free Bird]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

[Vosem]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

Yeah, seeing whether new, clearly-competent incumbents in unfavorable districts will be able to establish themselves will be very interesting -- people like Dold, Graham, and Poliquin. It's definitely doable -- Kirkpatrick and Peterson and Valadao prove it -- but that does not necessarily mean it will be done.

[publicunofficial]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

Yeah, seeing whether new, clearly-competent incumbents in unfavorable districts will be able to establish themselves will be very interesting -- people like Dold, Graham, and Poliquin. It's definitely doable -- Kirkpatrick and Peterson and Valadao prove it -- but that does not necessarily mean it will be done.

I don't think Valadao's proven anything, tbh.

[Senate Minority Leader Lord Voldemort]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

Yeah, seeing whether new, clearly-competent incumbents in unfavorable districts will be able to establish themselves will be very interesting -- people like Dold, Graham, and Poliquin. It's definitely doable -- Kirkpatrick and Peterson and Valadao prove it -- but that does not necessarily mean it will be done.

I don't think Valadao's proven anything, tbh.

Valadao's CADems top target in 2016 (not like they really have anyone else to target lol).

I'd say it's a coin flip whether he wins reelection in 2016. The district has a massive Hispanic population, but Valadao is the Republicans' number one proponent of immigration reform. For Dems, it'll be tying Valadao to the radicals in his party.

[IceSpear]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

Yeah, seeing whether new, clearly-competent incumbents in unfavorable districts will be able to establish themselves will be very interesting -- people like Dold, Graham, and Poliquin. It's definitely doable -- Kirkpatrick and Peterson and Valadao prove it -- but that does not necessarily mean it will be done.

I don't think Valadao's proven anything, tbh.

Valadao's CADems top target in 2016 (not like they really have anyone else to target lol).

I'd say it's a coin flip whether he wins reelection in 2016. The district has a massive Hispanic population, but Valadao is the Republicans' number one proponent of immigration reform. For Dems, it'll be tying Valadao to the radicals in his party.

Denham and Knight would be potential targets as well.

[publicunofficial]

As a part time native, I can say Poliquin in 16 is going to be based on how he actually does and not party. If Collins and Snowe can be continuously re elected, even in Dem wave years, just by doing a respectable job by the whole state, then Poliquin can definitely win in just the more conservative district.

Yeah, seeing whether new, clearly-competent incumbents in unfavorable districts will be able to establish themselves will be very interesting -- people like Dold, Graham, and Poliquin. It's definitely doable -- Kirkpatrick and Peterson and Valadao prove it -- but that does not necessarily mean it will be done.

I don't think Valadao's proven anything, tbh.

Valadao's CADems top target in 2016 (not like they really have anyone else to target lol).

I'd say it's a coin flip whether he wins reelection in 2016. The district has a massive Hispanic population, but Valadao is the Republicans' number one proponent of immigration reform. For Dems, it'll be tying Valadao to the radicals in his party.

Denham and Knight would be potential targets as well.

Knight's a really bad for his district (He's a major SoCon with a history of supporting quasi-racist legislation), and I expect the Democratic presidential nominee to win the district in 2016 (Obama barely lost it in 2012, and it's a heavily  Hispanic trending district). I was expecting (like most people) Tony Strickland to win over Knight, and he would've been a much tougher opponent in this seat.

Of course, Strickland could run again the primary, probably creating another R-on-R race.

[Mr. Illini]

I'd say IL-13 is more likely to flip in 2016 than IL-12. Turnout is king in 13 with students and minorities, while 12 has fallen to the epidemic of the disappearance of the southern white Democrat.

[Clermont County GOPer]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

Because winning by 3 in 2012 makes you a good candidate.

Right.

Anyways, I'll reserve my judgment until they actually serve in and vote on a few bills.

For a democrat to win They'd have to carry Chautauqua county, which wouldn't vote for an Ithaca liberal, which the democratic primary is rigged to nominate

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

Because winning by 3 in 2012 makes you a good candidate.

Right.

Anyways, I'll reserve my judgment until they actually serve in and vote on a few bills.

For a democrat to win They'd have to carry Chautauqua county, which wouldn't vote for an Ithaca liberal, which the democratic primary is rigged to nominate

If Tompkins had high enough turnout, the Democrat wouldn't need to win any other county.

[SWE]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

Because winning by 3 in 2012 makes you a good candidate.

Right.

Anyways, I'll reserve my judgment until they actually serve in and vote on a few bills.

For a democrat to win They'd have to carry Chautauqua county, which wouldn't vote for an Ithaca liberal, which the democratic primary is rigged to nominate

lol

[free my dawg]

Tom Reed in NY-23 is NOT vulnerable

Because winning by 3 in 2012 makes you a good candidate.

Right.

Anyways, I'll reserve my judgment until they actually serve in and vote on a few bills.

For a democrat to win They'd have to carry Chautauqua county, which wouldn't vote for an Ithaca liberal, which the democratic primary is rigged to nominate

Nah. Just getting out the vote in Thompkins and winning Seneca would be good enough. Treading water in that county helps

[free my dawg]

(click for larger) - RW means Retirement Watch, HO means the incumbent might run for higher office, RE means redistricting might move this seat, and PW means Primary Watch

Likely R:
AK-AL
AR-02
CA-25
CO-3
FL-7 (RW)
FL-10 (especially if the redraw holds)
GA-12
IA-4
IL-13
MT-AL (HO)
MI-3 (PW)
MI-6
MI-8
MI-11
NC-2 (PW)
NJ-2 (RW)
NJ-5
NV-3
NY-11
NY-21
OH-14
PA-6
UT-4
VA-2
VA-4 (RE)
WA-8 (HO)
WI-6
WV-2

Leans R:
CA-10
CO-6 (HO - unlikely)
FL-13
IL-12
ME-2
MI-7
NJ-3
NY-1
NY-23
VA-10

Tilts R:
AZ-2
IL-10
NE-2
TX-23

Toss-Up:
CO-6
FL-18
FL-26
MI-1
NH-1
NY-19
NY-24
PA-8
TX-23 (Gallego is in)

Tilts D:
FL-2
IA-1

Leans D:
AZ-1 (HO/Redis)
CA-7
CA-52
MN-8
NV-4 (Kihuen is in)

Likely D:
AZ-9 (HO)
CA-24 (RW)
CA-26
CA-36
MD-6 (HO)
MN-1
MN-7
NH-2 (HO)
NY-21 (RW)

[JerryArkansas]

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

^ The one thing that immediately stands out to me in both of your maps is TX-23. I'd be pleasantly surprised if it remains in the GOP column. I think Gallego starts off with the advantage in that one. Blue Dogs aren't dead everywhere - the upper South may be mostly gone, but I think SW TX is still very easy to claim.