When will Democrats win back the House?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

I don't know where the idea that only conservative Democrats can win came from. Check out the ideology of the only Democratic Senator from Idaho in the last 60 years.

[smoltchanov]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

They did exactly that in 2006-2008 cycles. And it worked then. And i am 101% for it. But, frankly, not sure that it will work in times of extremely high ideological polarization. I tried to pinpoint a disitricts, which could elect at least Gene Taylor/Barrow/McIntyre Democrat now (and they are far from being most conservative among Democrats in 20th century) - and came with none. The same (only slightly better, may be 2-4 districts) for moderate Republicans (and, again, i don't speak about Javits/Reid types, but about Shays/ Boehlert one)

[smoltchanov]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

I don't know where the idea that only conservative Democrats can win came from. Check out the ideology of the only Democratic Senator from Idaho in the last 60 years.

Taylor? Or Church? And you really think Idaho would elect any of them NOW?

[RINO Tom]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

I don't know where the idea that only conservative Democrats can win came from. Check out the ideology of the only Democratic Senator from Idaho in the last 60 years.

It's not really that they have to actually be conservative to win (I mean, no one would call Robert Byrd or Heuy Long conservative, would they?), but appearing socially conservative, IMO, gives a candidate more "folksy" credentials.  Can you think of a type of politician who's more inherently populist-sounding than a socially conservative, fiscally liberal Democrat from a rural district?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

I don't know where the idea that only conservative Democrats can win came from. Check out the ideology of the only Democratic Senator from Idaho in the last 60 years.

Taylor? Or Church? And you really think Idaho would elect any of them NOW?

Church is the only one from the last 60 years, but good to see that the 2nd last Democratic Senator from Idaho was certainly no conservadem either. Idaho doesn't seem to be electing any Democrats of any ideology, so you might as well run someone who stands for something.

[smoltchanov]

When Democrats re-implement a 50-state strategy and having socially conservative and moderate office holders in the South and Plains is a priority for them.

I don't know where the idea that only conservative Democrats can win came from. Check out the ideology of the only Democratic Senator from Idaho in the last 60 years.

Taylor? Or Church? And you really think Idaho would elect any of them NOW?

Church is the only one from the last 60 years, but good to see that the 2nd last Democratic Senator from Idaho was certainly no conservadem either. Idaho doesn't seem to be electing any Democrats of any ideology, so you might as well run someone who stands for something.

Well, it elected Minnick in 2008. And almost elected (49.35%) Jana Jones for Superintendent of Public Instruction last year . So, it's possible, though, admittedly, rare and difficult. And i don't support an idea to "run someone who stands for something", i like to win. Usually only conservative Democrats, like Minnick, now have any (small, but still...) chances to win in Idaho. So, we will surely disagree here

[JerryArkansas]

For the democrat's to win back the house, they have to do a few things.

I'll illustrate them using this map.

• First, win all of the seats which they now have.  that is about 180 seats, assuming that Nevada 4 is an automatic Pickup. 
• Next, they have to defend all of the tossup seats that they have right now, that is 9, so they are at 189, or +1
• Next, take all of the Republican tossup seat, which adds 12 to the total, getting them to 201
• Next, the seats which are more safe, they need all of them as well.  There is 8, so were at 209
• They also have to win all of the seats which are leaning towards the Republicans, and that only gets them to 217.  They have to win every seat that is not likely or safe, and still get one or two of them to be able to get to the magic number. 

So, they won't get the house for at least 5 years, and that is hoping that the 2018 midterms are great for them.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems arent winning back House; they will get between 194-202 seats.

[smoltchanov]

Dems arent winning back House; they will get between 194-202 seats.

Reasonable guess. Then 2018 midterms will come, and, most likely, will reduce Democratic representation to about 190. Then 2020 will help Demcrats to get over 200 again, but not majority. And so on...

[Torie]

For the democrat's to win back the house, they have to do a few things.

I'll illustrate them using this map.

• First, win all of the seats which they now have.  that is about 180 seats, assuming that Nevada 4 is an automatic Pickup. 
• Next, they have to defend all of the tossup seats that they have right now, that is 9, so they are at 189, or +1
• Next, take all of the Republican tossup seat, which adds 12 to the total, getting them to 201
• Next, the seats which are more safe, they need all of them as well.  There is 8, so were at 209
• They also have to win all of the seats which are leaning towards the Republicans, and that only gets them to 217.  They have to win every seat that is not likely or safe, and still get one or two of them to be able to get to the magic number. 

So, they won't get the house for at least 5 years, and that is hoping that the 2018 midterms are great for them.

Very well done research job and map Jerry. Thanks.

[windjammer]

Wooow, impressive job.

[The Mikado]

Thanks for the map, Jerry. Your 209 number for the Dems sweeping the "Leans R" seats lines up with my 206-210 estimate for a Democratic commanding victory in 2016 (something I doubt in itself, but may happen if the Republicans utterly screw up next year). They'd need to take those Likely R seats to get closer than that, and I don't really see that happening.

200 Dems after the next election is a good night, 208 Democrats is a spectacular night, I don't see it going much higher than that.