Very early House 2018 rating

[Xing]

I know it's extremely early, and we don't know what kind of year 2018 will be yet, but what the heck (RIP), let's give the House a tentative rating. I'll say Likely R. Odds are a neutral to good year for Democrats won't be enough for them, but if Trump has extremely bad approval ratings, and Democrats can get good recruits in Republican-leaning districts as well as swing districts, it's not completely out of the question that they could take back the house. That is an enormous 'if'.

[windjammer]

Likely rep

[Gass3268]

Lean R

Map/Geography favors Republicans, but I imagine Trump will not be sitting pretty in 2 years.

[jamestroll]

Using the same principle that I used in my Senate projections, I will not count out any incumbent right now. Lean R. But that can change quickly.

I would like to note a few things.

1) Less than two months ago, I was being told that the Democrats have an electoral college lock and the GOP has a lock on midterms forever. Until the end of time pretty much. This was all based on results from 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014. In hindsight, that was a a stupid statement.

2) Many of the arguments I am hearing against the Democrats taking the House in 2018 exactly mirror the arguments against it in 2006. Literally word for word.

3) Yes, gerrymandering is an issue. But by 2018, it would have been nearly eight years since the lines were redrawn. Voting patterns have shifted, people have moved, people have died, people have become voting age.

4) Gerrymandering can also blow up. In 2006, the gop gerrymander spread out Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, with along with the anti GOP mood that year, allowed the Democrats to pick up multiple seats in Pennsylvania. If Trump is bad enough, the same thing can happen in multiple states in 2018.
also.

5) If Trump is unpopular and there is a anti Republican climate, it would be possible to unite old and new coalitions. For instance, the last Democratic wave midterm, Democrats were able to do well in the upper south. Sure, it may have been a last hurrah, but it helped in that election.

6) With all that being said, midterms do not always go against the White House party. But I think the most neutral early prediction would be GOP +5 Senate and DEM +10 House. 

[GlobeSoc]

Lean R

Map/Geography favors Republicans, but I imagine Trump will not be sitting pretty in 2 years.

[Figueira]

Likely R, but closer to Lean than Safe. It would be interesting if we ended up with a D House and an R Senate.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Using the same principle that I used in my Senate projections, I will not count out any incumbent right now. Lean R. But that can change quickly.

I would like to note a few things.

1) Less than two months ago, I was being told that the Democrats have an electoral college lock and the GOP has a lock on midterms forever. Until the end of time pretty much. This was all based on results from 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014. In hindsight, that was a a stupid statement.

2) Many of the arguments I am hearing against the Democrats taking the House in 2018 exactly mirror the arguments against it in 2006. Literally word for word.

3) Yes, gerrymandering is an issue. But by 2018, it would have been nearly eight years since the lines were redrawn. Voting patterns have shifted, people have moved, people have died, people have become voting age.

4) Gerrymandering can also blow up. In 2006, the gop gerrymander spread out Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, with along with the anti GOP mood that year, allowed the Democrats to pick up multiple seats in Pennsylvania. If Trump is bad enough, the same thing can happen in multiple states in 2018.
also.

5) If Trump is unpopular and there is a anti Republican climate, it would be possible to unite old and new coalitions. For instance, the last Democratic wave midterm, Democrats were able to do well in the upper south. Sure, it may have been a last hurrah, but it helped in that election.

6) With all that being said, midterms do not always go against the White House party. But I think the most neutral early prediction would be GOP +5 Senate and DEM +10 House. 

     Good post. We need to avoid falling into the rut of assuming that future elections will closely mirror past elections. Looking back further than a couple of cycles blows this notion out of the water.

[Virginiá]

Using the same principle that I used in my Senate projections, I will not count out any incumbent right now. Lean R. But that can change quickly.

I would like to note a few things.

1) Less than two months ago, I was being told that the Democrats have an electoral college lock and the GOP has a lock on midterms forever. Until the end of time pretty much. This was all based on results from 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014. In hindsight, that was a a stupid statement.

2) Many of the arguments I am hearing against the Democrats taking the House in 2018 exactly mirror the arguments against it in 2006. Literally word for word.

3) Yes, gerrymandering is an issue. But by 2018, it would have been nearly eight years since the lines were redrawn. Voting patterns have shifted, people have moved, people have died, people have become voting age.

4) Gerrymandering can also blow up. In 2006, the gop gerrymander spread out Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, with along with the anti GOP mood that year, allowed the Democrats to pick up multiple seats in Pennsylvania. If Trump is bad enough, the same thing can happen in multiple states in 2018.
also.

5) If Trump is unpopular and there is a anti Republican climate, it would be possible to unite old and new coalitions. For instance, the last Democratic wave midterm, Democrats were able to do well in the upper south. Sure, it may have been a last hurrah, but it helped in that election.

6) With all that being said, midterms do not always go against the White House party. But I think the most neutral early prediction would be GOP +5 Senate and DEM +10 House.  

Good points Jimmie.

I don't think we have enough information yet, but in a gun-to-head scenario, I'd say Leans R. If we had some Republican like Romney or Kasich taking over, I'd say Likely R, but that just isn't the case.

[morgieb]

Likely R, but closer to Lean than Safe. It'll be hard to overturn such a map for the Democrats (I think the gerrymanders for this cycle are harder than 2001-2010), but Trump may well be unpopular enough for it to happen, and there are enough Clinton-voting districts that might be flippable in a wave. Jimmie has some good points.

[Devils30]

If the southern CA districts vote for House like they did for President, the GOP has a harder challenge than expected.

[jamestroll]

Likely R, but closer to Lean than Safe. It'll be hard to overturn such a map for the Democrats (I think the gerrymanders for this cycle are harder than 2001-2010), but Trump may well be unpopular enough for it to happen, and there are enough Clinton-voting districts that might be flippable in a wave. Jimmie has some good points.

Thank you!

Like I said, it has been two additional years since lines were drawn (2018 vs 2006), and in an anti-gop year, Democrats may be able to exploit old and new coalitions. We have a bunch of normally GOP districts that voted for Clinton, and many districts that had Democrats in office as recently as 2010/2012.

It is lean R at this point, as I am not counting out incumbents at this early stage.

I do find it interesting on how Democrats on this site are realistic to pessimistic about 2018 Elections but many Republicans are overly optimistic and predicting heavy Republican gains. That must be because of the unexpected Trump victory though.

[The Other Castro]

2018/2020 could be similar to the 2006/2008 patterns, if Trump is unpopular. Dems might not be able to pick up 24 seats in 2018 alone, but 24 seats over 2 House cycles is doable.

[publicunofficial]

With no DCCC recruits announced outside of Doug Applegate? Likely R. Talk to me again in a year or so.

[ElectionsGuy]

Likely R for now. They have a better chance at the house than the senate.

[progressive85]

It's interesting -- 2022 may actually be the year when Democrats gain the most seats, due to newly created districts that aren't gerrymandered.  So Democrats could see a 1996, 1998, 2000 thing-- three consecutive cycles of small, incremental gains.

[Sir Mohamed]

Likely R at this point.

Maybe around five seat loss if the Trumpster’s approval rating is not significant below 50%. If it’s in the low 40s, maybe ten seats at best. It would be toss-up if President Drumpf has an approval rating of 35% or below. But as of now, I think that Dems have better shot at the house than senate in 2018 (only if the Trumpster is underwater big league).

[Orser67]

Lean R, Republicans have incumbency and map advantages. But in three of the last four midterm elections in which the president's party held the House (2010, 2006, 1994, with 2002 the lone exception), the opposing party won control of the House.