Dems in Trump CD's; Reps in Clinton CD's

[smoltchanov]

Bullock will not be president. He will run for Senate in 2020.

The Dems who still won in very working class areas after 2012 (Bullock, Justice, Petersen, Bel Edwards) are generally socially conservative to a degree that will make much of the Dem base uncomfortable.

Nah, neither Bullock nor Justice are socially conservative - far from it, actually. They won because of their economic platform. Bullock in particular had the incumbency advantage and is relatively popular in the state - he would have lost to Gianforte had this been an open-seat race, though (unlike Justice, who is basically a Democratic version of Trump).

If Justice is a Democratic version of Trump, and he is NOT socially conservative that means that Trump is not a socially conservative too. Yes??? Then - why liberals are so frightened?

[smoltchanov]

Justice is fairly liberal (he even supported Obama), but he ran on a populist platform, which plays well in a state like West Virginia.

Well, no doubts about second part of this statement, but some - about first. Social liberals are not especially popular in West Virginia (while populists - are)

[smoltchanov]

Any chance Trump won Peter Defazio's district, Oregon-4?

I would love for Republicans to take out DeFazio but I don't think its gonna happen. He is a pretty entrenched incumbent since he has been in Congress for a long time.

Wait until he retires. Before that - no chances (IMHO, as usual)

[smoltchanov]

It already is really Democrat heavy. To win the House, Democrats likely need 45+ seats out of California, and a President Trump should help them there. California, like Massachusetts, is a good example of Democrats spreading themselves out, or "de-packing", unlike their tendency to self pack in major cities in other states.

In the long run, Democrats should have a natural advantage in the House, as I could see them almost monopolizing the California delegation (all but maybe 3-4 seats), gaining lots of ground in Texas (Republicans seem to be on the receiving end of a serious self-packing problem there in the long run; just look at how lopsided the Republican margins in the rurals are compared to how even the Democrats seem to be spread across the metros), and retaining the edge in liberal havens like New England, growing areas of the New South (where New VRA districts are likely to be created at some point in NC and GA), and in the metro areas of other states which guarantees them a few random seats (StL, KC, Memphis, etc). On the other hand, unless Democrats figure out their WWC problem, they could be in for a world of hurt in the Senate in the long run, unless they hold the Hillary states and their gains in the New South come quicker than anticipated.

+1. Very good analysis