Is this the most plausible route to 218?

[mencken]

CA-49
TX-23
CA-10
VA-10
CA-25
CO-6
FL-27
KS-3
FL-26
TX-7
NJ-7
CA-21
CA-39
CA-48
AZ-2
PA-6
MN-3
NE-2
MN-2
IA-1
PA-8
PA-16
UT-4
MI-11

All districts where both Trump and the Republican nominee had (relatively) weak performances.

[Nyvin]

Why PA-16 but not PA-7?

Shouldn't WA-8 be on the list too?

[Heisenberg]

Mencken, I would take out IA-01 and add PA-07 (how is it missing when 06 and 08 are on the list). I don't think PA-16 is as vulnerable. There was talks about it being in play since it was an open seat but it is further out than PA-06, 07, and 08. Smucker should be a pretty good incumbent. There's a good chance Meehan runs statewide, which leaves the seat vulnerable to pickup.

[Nyvin]

In alphabetical order:

AZ-2, CA-10, CA-21, CA-25, CA-39, CA-45, CA-48, CA-49, CO-6, FL-26, FL-27, GA-6, IL-6, KS-3, MN-2, MN-3, NE-2, NJ-7, NY-24, PA-6, PA-7, PA-8, TX-23, VA-10, WA-8. Then there's like 20 other decent targets that will largely depend on recruiting.

This is a solid list.

[LabourJersey]

While I might be biased, I think the route to 218 in two years involves targeting NJ heavily. On the ground I think that NJ's 2nd, 3rd and 7th district are less safe than they appear to be, since the Trump voters in these districts are likely the ones the GOP would lose first in a midterm (namely, upper middle class white voters who voted for Trump b/c "he is better than Hillary").

Lance is not very strong and isn't exactly beloved, nor is MacArthur. Plus I think Gottheimer will have to put up a fight in the 5th district, but he can raise the money/get out his voters. I think LoBiondo in the 2nd district would be the most entrenched Republican, but his district includes Atlantic City, which is a natural epicenter for anti-Trump sentiment.

[Figueira]

I didn't realize that John Culberson in TX-07 was vulnerable.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

[Nyvin]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

In the long term I think IA-3 might become the most democratic district in the state if Dallas and Polk Counties (Ankeny in particular) keep growing.

[Kingpoleon]

Besides FL-27, probably. Replace it with MT-AL or AK-AL.

[PAK Man]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

Yes, but 2012 was well before the Dems had SJW baggage and treated working-class whites like racist, uneducated scum. Obama actively courted their votes and showed concern for their needs.

I'm not denying that IA-01 has the fundamentals of a blue district, but the Democrats have to go back to what they were in 2012 if they want to win it.

Trump even won IA-02, which is way more liberal than IA-01. That's the extent of Dems' collapse among working-class whites who voted Obama twice, and you can't just assume that they're all just going to magically come back.

And if Iowa Dems uniquely hate Clinton so much, why did she win the Iowa caucus?

[PAK Man]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

Yes, but 2012 was well before the Dems had SJW baggage and treated working-class whites like racist, uneducated scum. Obama actively courted their votes and showed concern for their needs.

I'm not denying that IA-01 has the fundamentals of a blue district, but the Democrats have to go back to what they were in 2012 if they want to win it.

Trump even won IA-02, which is way more liberal than IA-01. That's the extent of Dems' collapse among working-class whites who voted Obama twice, and you can't just assume that they're all just going to magically come back.

And if Iowa Dems uniquely hate Clinton so much, why did she win the Iowa caucus?

By the skin of her teeth, she won by. Also, caucuses are a bad measure of support.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

Yes, but 2012 was well before the Dems had SJW baggage and treated working-class whites like racist, uneducated scum. Obama actively courted their votes and showed concern for their needs.

I'm not denying that IA-01 has the fundamentals of a blue district, but the Democrats have to go back to what they were in 2012 if they want to win it.

Trump even won IA-02, which is way more liberal than IA-01. That's the extent of Dems' collapse among working-class whites who voted Obama twice, and you can't just assume that they're all just going to magically come back.

And if Iowa Dems uniquely hate Clinton so much, why did she win the Iowa caucus?

I love this revisionist history of the dems being "anti-white" someone should tell Clinton an Kaine that

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

Yes, but 2012 was well before the Dems had SJW baggage and treated working-class whites like racist, uneducated scum. Obama actively courted their votes and showed concern for their needs.

I'm not denying that IA-01 has the fundamentals of a blue district, but the Democrats have to go back to what they were in 2012 if they want to win it.

Trump even won IA-02, which is way more liberal than IA-01. That's the extent of Dems' collapse among working-class whites who voted Obama twice, and you can't just assume that they're all just going to magically come back.

And if Iowa Dems uniquely hate Clinton so much, why did she win the Iowa caucus?

I love this revisionist history of the dems being "anti-white" someone should tell Clinton an Kaine that

If you read my post more carefully, maybe you'll notice that I was only referencing working-class whites.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Forget Iowa 1 and 3 as long as Hollywood and SJWs remain the face of the Democratic Party.

Despite the fact Obama EASILY won IA-01 and narrowly won IA-03? The third district will always be slightly challenging since David Young, while a complete bore, has Grassley connections, so he'll probably be safe for as long as he's there.

Don't let the 2016 results fool you; IA-01 is quite Democratic. Iowans HATED Clinton (even Democratic voters, who all, for some reason, voted for Gary Johnson instead of her) which explains why she did poorly there, especially compared to Obama. The House races fumbled in 2014 because Pat Murphy never had a competitive race before and assumed the seat would go blue (keep in mind this was a very narrow loss) and Vernon suffered the same fate in 2016 - everybody assumed she'd win because of the district's partisan lean and didn't even bother really competing here until it was too late.

Yes, but 2012 was well before the Dems had SJW baggage and treated working-class whites like racist, uneducated scum. Obama actively courted their votes and showed concern for their needs.

I'm not denying that IA-01 has the fundamentals of a blue district, but the Democrats have to go back to what they were in 2012 if they want to win it.

Trump even won IA-02, which is way more liberal than IA-01. That's the extent of Dems' collapse among working-class whites who voted Obama twice, and you can't just assume that they're all just going to magically come back.

And if Iowa Dems uniquely hate Clinton so much, why did she win the Iowa caucus?

I love this revisionist history of the dems being "anti-white" someone should tell Clinton an Kaine that

If you read my post more carefully, maybe you'll notice that I was only referencing working-class whites.

Can you please point to were the dem party call wwc "scum"?