What I’ve done is looked through all 435 elections for the House of Representatives and identified all the races the Republicans won by less than 30,000 votes. I hope I missed one or two, but I came up with only 34 districts that fit my criteria of potentially winnable Republican-held seats. This is a very rough way of mapping out the vulnerable seats. Some seats might become competitive if the incumbent dies or decides to retire or is consumed in scandal or loses a primary to a total wingnut. Some candidates were quite vulnerable last time but might not be vulnerable next time, and vice-versa. In some cases, we had bad candidates and a better candidate can make a big difference. But, as a general matter, if a candidate won in November with more than a 30,000 vote cushion, beating them is largely out of our control. In most districts, in a two-way race, a 30,000 vote cushion translates to about 57% of the vote. We can’t wipe out a lead like that just by doing a focused registration drive and Get Out the Vote effort.
In order to take back control of the House of Representatives, the Democrats need to make a net gain of 17 seats in the next election. That means that if we don’t lose any seats we currently control, we’d basically have to win at least half of the districts I am listing below. You can see how hard this is going to be to pull off.
California (10th District)- Jeff Denham won by about 13,000 votes.
California (25th District)- Buck McKeon won by about 24,000 votes.
California (31st District)- Gary Miller won by about 15,000 votes.
Colorado (6th District)- Mike Coffman won by about 11,000 votes.
Florida (2nd District)- Steve Southerland won by about 18,000 votes.
Florida (10th District)- Dan Webster won by about 11,000 votes.
Florida (16th District)- Vern Buchanan won by about 25,000 votes.
Illinois (13th District)- Rodney Davis won by about 1,300 votes.
Indiana (2nd District)- Jackie Walorski won by about 4,000 votes.
Indiana (8th District)- Larry Bucshon won by about 29,000 votes.
Indiana (9th District)- Todd Young won by about 25,000 votes.
Kentucky (6th District)- Andy Barr won by about 12,000 votes.
Michigan (1st District)- Dan Benishek won by about 2,300 votes.
Michigan (3rd District)- Justin Amash won by about 28,000 votes.
Michigan (11th District)- Kerry Bentivolio won by about 23,000 votes.
Minnesota (2nd District)- John Kline won by about 29,000 votes.
Minnesota (6th District)- Michele Bachmann won by about 6,000 votes.
Nebraska (2nd District)- Lee Terry won by about 6,000 votes.
Nevada (3rd District)- Joe Heck won by about 21,000 votes.
New Jersey (3rd District)- Jon Runyan won by about 27,000 votes.
New York (11th District)- Michael Grimm won by about 10,000 votes.
New York (16th District)- Chris Gibson won by about 18,000 votes.
New York (23rd District)- Tom Reed won by about 10,000 votes.
New York (27th District)- Chris Collins won by about 4,300 votes.
North Carolina (8th District)- Richard Hudson won by about 24,000 votes.
North Carolina (9th District)- Robert Pittenger won by about 23,000 votes.
Ohio (6th District)- Bill Johnson won by about 20,000 votes.
Ohio (16th District)- Jim Renacci won by about 16,000 votes.
Pennsylvania (12th District)- Keith Rothfus won by about 12,000 votes.
South Carolina (5th District)- Mick Mulvaney won by about 21,000 votes.
South Carolina (7th District)- Tom Rice won by about 26,000 votes.
Tennessee (4th District)- Steve DesJarlais won by about 27,000 votes.
Texas (14th District)- Randy Weber won by about 21,000 votes.
Virginia (2nd District)- Scott Rigell won by about 23,000 votes.
Any district that was won by 10,000 or less votes should be considered highly competitive. Under 5,000 should be considered a toss-up. You can see that there are only seven presently highly-competitive seats and only four toss-ups. That is a horrible place to begin our campaign to retake the House. Only half of these districts were won by less than 20,000 votes. Only 22 of them are in states that Obama carried, and almost none of them are districts that Obama carried.
The only way we can win back the House is to get on the ground in most of these districts and start organizing. So, let’s start a conversation about that.
South Carolina 05 is definitely doable. That is John Spratt’s old district. Check out the Obama vote in the districts as well. There are some counties that went for Obama.
SC-07 is more of a stretch. And it’s a newly added district. Timber, farming, and tourism, with a steel mill and a paper mill thrown in.
NC-08 is Larry Kissell’s old district. Should be able to compete there. A little bit of suburban Charlotte in this.
NC-09 is Sue Myrick’s old district. I’m surprised that it was that close. Issues with the candidate? A little bit of suburban Charlotte in this.
There are a lot of similarities in these districts economically and culturally. They historically were rural and textile areas with no major cities to speak of. Baptist, Methodist, and Pentecostals.
I’ll be honest and say that I don’t currently expect to win more than four of these districts, and I don’t expect to win any in the Carolinas.
How much more safe has Gerlach been made? What are the changes from ’08 to now, in terms of geography of district?
I can look up the exact numbers for you tomorrow. But the three Philly suburb districts not held by Schwartz are out of reach.
How so? What happened to a lot of the suburbs before that we held with Murphy & Sestak(and Gerlach’s was always a nailbiter until ’10)?
They gerrymandered all three districts to make them significantly more Republican. The Delaware Co. seat lost Chester. The Bucks Co. seat lost parts of Philly. The Chester Co. seat lost parts of MontCo. that were replaced by Berks and Lebanon Co.
North Carolina is a big OFA state. I realize that if OFA was going to make a difference in these Congressional races it should have put Democrats over the top in the election we just finished. But the organization is there, it’s a shame to leave it untapped, and NC is as good a state as any to experiment with how organizing can make a diffference in the off-cycle years.
Damn straight. And it’s more than a shame; it’s political malpractice especially since the Democratic establishment has blown organizing so badly.
With a “business as usual” attitude, we definitely will win none of them and probably lose McIntyre. Of those likely to return the effort to go out and change some of the fundamentals, the most likely reversal would be SC-05. IMO the least likely would be NC-09.
If the Democratic leadership seriously thinks that it cannot take back the House, it will sit on its hands and that will make the situation even worse. I’ve seen the failure to argue fundamentals cause the drift of the Overton window dramatically to the right over the past decade. Nationwide. It is political malpractice to be a victim to the PVI. Elections have consequences that can help or hurt people. But for a lot of the party establishment running the DCCC it’s just a game.
But for a lot of the party establishment running the DCCC it’s just a game.
This has been the biggest black mark against Pelosi’s House leadership. She’s the one that appoints the DCCC head. And look at the hacks that she appoints. And yes, DWS is a hack(among the others).
Steve Israel was the most recent DCCC head. DWS is DNC, Howard Dean’s old job.
Thanks for your research.
Isn’t it theoretically easier to cause upsets in midterm elections, because a lot fewer people vote? Isn’t that what the Tea Party did in 2010? In other words, even keeping the same proportions, 57% of the vote in a competitive race would translate to a lot fewer votes to overcome in a midterm election. — I’m not trying to be Pollyanna here, just realistic about strategic possibilities.
And isn’t it just as relevant to know which contests DEMOCRATS won by 30,000 or less? Because they will have to be defended just to keep the seats we have.
Honestly, you don’t even want to look at the numbers for vulnerable Democratic seats. You’ll piss yourself.
So how did this happen? Democrats have more votes and gerrymandering was shown to be have minimal effects. Is it simply no “Wyoming” rule?
gerrymandering had MASSIVE effects. Look at Ohio compared to Illinois. Look at Michigan and Pennsylvania and Virginia and compare them to Minnesota.
I was using Sam Wang’s outdated calculations suggesting about R+6.5 from gerrymandering found here: http://election.princeton.edu/2012/10/04/quantifying-the-effect-of-redistricting/
But neglected to see that he reversed himself on this topic here:
http://election.princeton.edu/2012/11/09/the-new-house-with-less-democracy/
Booman’s right. Gerrymandering is the main problem with the House.
This is the same BooMan who was sure that only Obama’s poor performance in the first debate kept the Dems from flipping the House this time round?
Yes, it was very difficult to research the newly drawn districts, especially considering the paucity of good polling. My estimate was that the Dems would pick up between 17-22 seats, rather than the eight we actually picked up. That was too high on two counts. Good research would have put an optimistic figure no higher than fifteen. If Obama’s momentum had not been broken and he had carried about 53 to 54 percent instead of 51, I think we would have been in that 17-22 range. But I didn’t have good data and I let the good data I had give me overconfidence for the House races where I did not have good data.
I was as big a debate bed wetter as anyone, but I’m starting to believe the folks who say Obama was Romney was already moving up before the first debate (as Republicans came home).
There’s something grammatically incorrect in that sentence. Maybe a missing preposition? I don’t understand what you were trying to say with this part:
I originally wrote “Obama was moving down” but then realized I wasn’t sure of that, but am sure that Romney was moving up, prior to the first debate.
OK. I think you meant (bold added)
… the folks who say Obama was moving down while Romney was already moving up before the first debate
it looks like you may have accidentally deleted a line or two. Could you please reconstruct your comment?
True. See above.
In a non-presidential election, it’s going to be tough. In 2010, a bunch of idiot Dems ran from President Obama and the ACA. That was idiocy. We should have demanded a return to the Clinton tax rates for those earning over $200k ($250k for spouses) and stuck together, hammering home the theme of Republicans protecting the rich. We broke ranks and ran and, as a result, got slaughtered.
If we have any chance in 2014, we’ve got to stick together and on message. Those who run away from the President should get zero party assistance.
It’s difficult to create a wave election when you’ve got the party primarily in power. But we’ve got to try and there’s a chance. Barring something unforeseen, we’d have to run on the obstructionism of the Republicans in a big way.
Absolutely. In SD, Steph H-S ran away from Obamacare. She missed a wonderful opportunity. Of course, many in SD do not like it today. I ran into many who said that they would not vote for me for State Senate due to Obamacare. I tried to explain that the State Senate had little impact but….
Steph H-S validated the attacks on Obamacare by not engaging and explaining. The fact is that most folks have little understanding of what the Affordable Care Act does. And Demomcrats like Steph H-S failed all along during the debate to do anything but run away from it.
Blue Dogs validated the “Obama is a dangerous socialist” meme. And now we are paying the political price in a lot of states.
Agree absolutely. Obamacare can be a positive or negative. By evading the issue, Blue-dogs made it a negative. Now we need to overcome that.
I was particularly amazed that during the election OFA decided to finally explain some of the benefits of Obamacare. Like 3 years too late. And now that the election is over, the effort to sell the program has ended as well. The enemies of the program are just beginning, and the OFA side needs to sell, sell, sell, 24/7/365 to win 2014. Obamacare can either win the election in 2014, or lose it again.
Yes, absolutely. I’ve been disappointed the WH has made so little attempt to explain and sell Obamacare. I realize it’s complicated and the process is slow, but it needs MORE communication because it’s complicated, not less.
I wish they had an Obamacare News of the Day website, or fact of the day, or a sample “Exchange” site where you could enter your info and what you’re eligible for.
VA is and has been gerrymandered to hell since before the last census. Bobby Scott won by 80+%. The other two won with 60-65+%. Meanwhile, the Republicans have enough to where they’re out of reach: 55-57% in practically every other district.
Current score:
3 abortions
6 adulterous relationships while a physician
If the guy is not taken out, it is an opportunity missed.
TN-04 will stay competitive if…
Still, it will take the state party getting their stuff together and the national party getting involved early so Eric can get the message out about DesJarlais. The majority of voters in the district still hadn’t heard about the affair, abortions, etc, when they hit the polls.
People need to get moving on this now. While the issues and stuff is fresh. If it gets stale, he will use the old “2012 vindicated my multiple abortions” thing.
Booman, where did you find your numbers? I can’t find easily available results anywhere. I’d like to do my own analysis of vulnerable.
Google is showing me two different kinds of results for IL-13. One set says that Rodney Davis holds the seat in Central Illinois. Another set says it’s Judy Biggert in South Suburban Chicago. Assuming it’s Biggert, she ran a tough nasty campaign. I don’t remember her opponent’s name although I must have seen his ads literally hundreds of times. Maybe he focused on her not himself. That area has some very rich areas. I’m surprised a Democrat came so close. Biggert will be very hard to defeat in 2014. The best chance of a pickup would be her death or a huge financial scandal.
Biggert was in the old IL-13 but now represents IL-11.
The new IL-13 is Rodney Davis (R) who beat David Gill by just about 300 votes.
This is my district and the result was heartbreaking. Not sure why I used the past tense, because it’s still heartbreaking.
Rodney Davis beat David Gill because the republicans poured literally millions of dollars of outside money into our district and went on TV with ads that were full of lies.
I completely believe that citizens united bought this race for the republicans.
Lets kick his ass in 2014. Durbin will be on the ballot and lord knows if OFA is gonna double down for anyone its Durbin (not that he’ll need the help if he stays in the Senate.) We’re gonna have to compete in a lot of districts like that across the country.
Kicking his ass in 2014? I’m completely on board with that! I’ve been afraid to look into whether Gill plans to run again in 2014 because it will be too depressing right now if the answer is no.
Losing fair and square is one thing; losing because people lie and cheat and get away with it, that’s something else altogether.
And how much did the DCCC spend on Gill? Probably next to nothing.
I do know that the DCCC opened an office here because of Gill, who was on their red-to-blue list. So I know they fought for him, but I have no idea how much the DCCC spent on this race, or how many people they had working here.
Sorry, Davis won by 1300, not 300.
Everything everyone said below plus Judy Biggert got crushed by Bill Foster. She’s finally gone.
Yes, I remember Foster winning. Thought he was in the 11th. I remember his ads, too. At the end, everyone in the Cafeteria, Democrat, Republican, TeaBagger, said the same thing, “X more days and we won’t have to watch this crap any more.” Biggert’s ads ran like three times each commercial break, every commercial break. I hope the Koch’s lost LOTS of money.
Right IL-11. Her ads were on par with the crap the Romney campaign was putting out, fact free and actively misleading.
Multi-millionaire Renacci is a perfect target for the class/economic argument which should be presented clearly in the next 2 years over and over again. His top donors in his $2,922,69 campaign coffers were from corporations like Murray Energy and First Energy and i.25 million from large individual donors. He somehow doubled his income during the last two years (his first years in office) from $23 million to $43 million. As a 1%er, he doesn’t represent his district in NE Ohio.
BTW, I suspect that successful Rovian electronic ballot “corrections” occurred in House races dovetailing with the effect of unfair gerrymandered districts.
In addition, we must all help defeated progressive candidates remain in the limelight. People like Betty Sutton, Rob Zerban can give good commentary of the actions of the republicans in Congress and will be speaking with regional perspectives that could persuade people to pay attention before the 2014 campaigns.
Shimkus in IL-18 could be vulnerable. Do not be confused by the 2012 election results where he won by a ton. He was opposed by a fake Dem, a well-known forced-birth anti-choice lunatic in S IL. Shimkus could be beaten by the right candidate.