Trump's lewd comments - is the House in play?

[Progressive]

What if GOP voters in places like Utah, for instance, stay home? Is the House in play?

[progressive85]

The House is so badly gerrymandered.  It would definitely be if these maps weren't so completely rigged.  Even so, the Republicans are playing with fire.

It depends who comes out.  If a lot of young women and really any woman that's so disgusted by Trump's remarks go to the polls on Election Day and vote Democratic tickets, Hillary's going to have more coattails than anyone thought, let's say a month ago.

[Gass3268]

The House is so badly gerrymandered.  It would definitely be if these maps weren't so completely rigged.  Even so, the Republicans are playing with fire.

It depends who comes out.  If a lot of young women and really any woman that's so disgusted by Trump's remarks go to the polls on Election Day and vote Democratic tickets, Hillary's going to have more coattails than anyone thought, let's say a month ago.

If a decent % of Republicans stay home and don't vote the gerrymander won't matter.

[Mr. Illini]

The House is not "in play," but Dems will make serious gains

[Ebsy]

I'm thinking we will see large shifts in certain districts, especially those that are heavily suburban and heavily Latinos.

[Incipimus iterum]

The Democrats might make a few gains but not enough to regain control of the House of Representatives.

[windjammer]

It already was before the comments

[Figueira]

It's possible. It's also possible the Democrats will make very few House gains.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

No, but with any luck it will put Doug Owens back in contention.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

[windjammer]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

The senate wasn't "barely" in play, before the comments democrats were the favorites picking this chamber already.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

The senate wasn't "barely" in play, before the comments democrats were the favorites picking this chamber already.

Both 538 and the Upshot gave basically 50/50 odds. And the polls' movement toward Hillary doesn't seem to have translated in Senate races so far.

[windjammer]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

The senate wasn't "barely" in play, before the comments democrats were the favorites picking this chamber already.

Both 538 and the Upshot gave basically 50/50 odds. And the polls' movement toward Hillary doesn't seem to have translated in Senate races so fa

50/50 odds doesn't mean "barely" at play

[Tartarus Sauce]

While I would usually say no, I actually think people are being quite subdued in their assessments of the Democrats chances in both chambers. This is looking like it's going to transform into the GOP nightmare scenario. With the Republicans now rapidly fleeing away from Trump and his inevitable loss becoming more apparent by the day, Donnie is almost sure to have a meltdown and begin blaming establishment Republicans.

By the same token that party leaders breaking away from Trump provides convenient signaling to establishment faithful to vote their conscience on the top of the ballot while checking straight ticket down the line, Trump beseeching his supporters to dump incumbent party operatives for betraying him could provide just as potent a force. This was precisely the reason Republican officials have been gritting their teeth and reluctantly endorsing Trump despite all of his controversies and his rather obvious liabilities: they couldn't afford to fragment their electorate by alienating the sizable Trump coalition and not suffer down-ballot consequences for it. Well now that looks to be exactly what's going to happen.

There are dozens of GOP candidates residing in congressional districts which are designed to their advantage that are not nearly as entrenched as the urban Democratic districts, but not as vulnerable as the swing districts either. Consolidating Democratic voters into a few impregnable blocs which are ceded as impossible to compete in for the payoff of a multitude of less entrenched but still advantaged districts has allowed Republicans to hold such large margins in the House. That strategy has worked wonders for them specifically because they've maintained a high degree of voter discipline in supporting Republican nominees for congressional offices.

A house divided, however, cannot stand, and some of these moderately bolstered Republican districts could end up being undermined by internal fissures within the local GOP electorates. Even without factoring in the potential for reduced turnout ---which could very well be a reality not just due to the divisiveness of this election but also due to the paltry GOTV machine--- things could potentially take an ugly turn if the party faithful show up to vote for Republican candidates for congressional offices and doing a write-in at the top of the ticket while the Trump supporters vote for Trump and decide that their local representatives can go suck a big fat one. Not only does this endanger districts Republicans didn't envision being surrenderable to Democrats, but it virtually guarantees a wipeout in all the competitive districts, where embattled Republicans were already imperiled with the prospect of being swept out by the undertow generated by the radioactive walking disaster at the top of the ticket.

TL;DR: internecine conflicts between the Trump coalition and other Republicans could unravel GOP partisan unity for congressional candidates on top of potential down-ballot drag from the top of the ticket and reduced turnout could all combine for a massive down-ballot loss across the board for Republicans.

[Figueira]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

The senate wasn't "barely" in play, before the comments democrats were the favorites picking this chamber already.

Both 538 and the Upshot gave basically 50/50 odds. And the polls' movement toward Hillary doesn't seem to have translated in Senate races so fa

50/50 odds doesn't mean "barely" at play

True. "Barely in play" would be "Democrats might win IL and WI, and have an outside shot at NH, PA, and IN."

[Antonio the Sixth]

It already was before the comments

Nah. If the Senate is barely in play, then the House certainly isn't.

The senate wasn't "barely" in play, before the comments democrats were the favorites picking this chamber already.

Both 538 and the Upshot gave basically 50/50 odds. And the polls' movement toward Hillary doesn't seem to have translated in Senate races so fa

50/50 odds doesn't mean "barely" at play

True. "Barely in play" would be "Democrats might win IL and WI, and have an outside shot at NH, PA, and IN."

You're right, but still. I'd like to see some polls before we start talking about impending doom for Congressional Republicans (though Tartarus Sauce raises some very good point). For all we know, this could have zero impact.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Sean Trende of RCP (a right-leaning but generally sharp and objective guy) thinks it might be: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/08/the_house_may_be_in_play_132008.html

[Lachi]

I think it COULD come into play if trump implodes at the debate.

I think it'll probably be 202-234 at this point, but If trump continues to go down, his negative coattails will literally bring the house down with him

[Antonio the Sixth]

his negative coattails will literally bring the house down with him

So you think his unpopularity will be so strong that it will create an earthquake beneath the Capitol?

[politicallefty]

I may be off by a week or two, but I said this back in August:

As for the House this year, it's really too early to say. I agree with most people that say that it would take a wave (i.e. anywhere from a solid Clinton win to a landslide) for Democrats to win back the House. That cake isn't even done mixing, let alone ready to bake. I don't think we'll know the true House landscape until after the first debate. Waves really tend to materialize in October. I think there will be races not on the radar that will be if we're at this point in late September (which basically has to happen if a Democratic takeover is to actually happen). Split-ticket is sure to increase this year, but if Trump is losing suburban Republican-held seats by 15 or even 20-points or more, very few will survive. No gerrymander will protect against a 40-point or even a 2-1 Hillary win in the Philly suburbs (which is the current polling). I think it's general political conventional wisdom with gerrymanders that the bigger they are, the harder they can fall. I think it will take a sizable win for the House to fall, but it is a significant possibility that cannot be ignored.

To answer the questions, let's wait a couple days and see what's what. I think it's very possible that it is though. The way Republicans are running from Trump leads me to believe that there is some very nasty internal polling. I know the Washington Establishment has never been particularly enamoured by Trump, but I think it's virtually unprecedented to abandon the top of the ticket as many Republicans are doing now.

It's also worth noting that Stu Rothenberg retweeted Sean Trende saying the House is in play.

[Lachi]

his negative coattails will literally bring the house down with him

So you think his unpopularity will be so strong that it will create an earthquake beneath the Capitol?

Not in that sense. I mean in the sense that the GOP could lose the house because if a Trump implosion, it has nothing to do with natural disasters .

[Shadows]

I dunno why are people so optimistic, you need a big win & a strong top of the ticket candidate.

Forget Sanders, even Biden would have done really well here. If we had that kind of a candidate, the House would be in play. You can't make that many numbers in the House with one of most dishonest corrupt & fraudulent candidate for President even against Trump!

[KingSweden]

If Sean Trende is worried, I'd listen. Still think at most F gains are 20-25 rather than 8-12

[The Mikado]

House isn't going to fall, but a Dem net gain of 15-20 is on the table, and that'd change a lot of things in the House.

[Boston Bread]

Trump's comments won't hurt congress candidates significantly. But the fallout between the Trump-Establishment war could hurt them if Trump supporters heed his words and punish Republicans who fail to support him.