I’m not one who’s provided a race-by-race breakdown to predict the House elections. But I finally decided to come up with my own rudimentary model, with Charlie Cook’s ratings as a guide.
My model relies on Cook’s late September ratings in 2008 and 2006, both wave elections, and compares them to the most recent Cook ratings now. Relying on late September ensures an apples-to-apples comparison.
The hardest races to forecast are the disfavored party’s tossups and “lean” races in an anti-majority party wave. Those are the races that decide whether the House flips.
What I found is interesting, and discouraging for us.
Cook’s 2006 ratings in late September had 18 GOP-held tossups and 16 GOP-held “lean R” seats. Of those, 10 from each category flipped. Also flipping were 6 of 19 “likely R” GOP-held seats, as well as 2 GOP-held open seats Cook already had flipping in late September. And 2 “safe” seats from Cook’s late September ratings flipped, those being Boyda over Ryun in Kansas and Altmire over Hart in PA-04. NO Dem-held seats flipped, and indeed in late September Cook had all Dem-held seats as lean, likely, or safe, with NO tossups.
Cook’s 2008 ratings in late September had 19 GOP-held tossups and 14 GOP-held “lean R” seats. Of those, 13 tossups and 6 leans flipped. None of 20 “likely R” seats flipped this time, nor did any safe seats. Meanwhile, Dems had more vulnerable seats this time in Cook’s late September ratings, and 2 of 10 Dem-held tossups flipped as did the lean D seat of Tim Mahoney due to his late-breaking sex scandal, and in a runoff the safe D seat of Bill Jefferson due to his being a crook. Also flipping but excluded from my consideration was Don Cazayoux’s seat, which I exclude because he won it as a Dem pick-up in a special election earlier in the year before losing it in November, and that makes it awkward to include in any count discussing 2008 gains or losses. I note, too, that
Here’s the interesting thing per Cook’s late September ratings: the total number of seats the Rs lost from Cook’s tossup and lean R columns almost perfectly matched the number of R-held seats in Cook’s tossup column. In 2006, Cook listed 18 GOP-held tossups, and the GOP lost 20 seats total from the tossup and lean R columns. In 2008, Cook listed 19 GOP-held tossups, and the GOP lost exactly the same number total from the tossup and lean R columns.
The difference in 2008 was that no likely R seats flipped, compared to 6 in 2006. The reason for this is obvious: the likely R seats in 2006 were much lower-hanging fruit than the 2008 likely R seats, since the remaining Republcan-held seats were much more conservative and safer after the Dems already had made big gains one cycle earlier.
Applying the same princples to 2008, Cook in late September had 43 Dem-held seats as tossups, and 31 as lean D. If the election follows the same pattern as the previous 2 waves, we should lose 43 seats total from those 2 categories. We also should lose all the Dem-held seats that Cook counts as lean R or likely R, and that’s 10 more. That’s a gross gain of 53 for the bad guys. But there are 4 GOP-held seats we should pick up by everyone’s predictions, seats that Cook lists as lean D or tossups, and that knocks down the net GOP gain to 49.
That would give the Republicans a 228-207 majority. And sadly it’s a very reasonable prediction that lines up perfectly with ALL the published predictions out there.
Here’s where I think we either can have some confidence or where we’re deluding ourselves, election day determining which it is: when I look at Cook’s “lean D” seats, it’s just really hard to see hardly any of them flipping. My “feeling” is that we hold almost all of them. And even on our tossups, I did a quick count and found 25 I’ll say are gone. That adds up to total losses of 15 fewer than my rudimentary model would predict, and of course it means we hold the House with 222 seats for the good guys.
The optimistic seat-by-seat breakdown is essentially what conspiracy and StephenCLE and others are engaging in with their own breakdowns posted in occasional diaries here.
And I can see exactly how they get there.
But sadly history shows that a lot more tossups and leans flip in a wave, and that’s where we might find out we’re deluding ourselves.
I just hope our candidates and party committees continue hammering the opposing candidates and getting voters to reject enough of them to keep us at 218 on election night. But I just don’t feel good about it.
If you make the following assumptions:
1. All seats that are considered safe will break completely for that party.
*2. All seats that are considered “Likely” will break 80-20 for the favored party.
*3. All seats that are considered “Leans” will break 65-35 for the favored party.
4. All toss-ups will be split 50/50
*What this means is that if 50 Democratic and Republican held seats are considered Leans Democratic, then the Democrats would take 30 seats and the Republicans would take 20 seats (or vice-versa).
So I took Cook, Rothenberg, Swing State Project, and CQ and with those assumptions in mind, I got the following projections (I didn’t distinguish between tilting races for Rothenberg, the difference it made was not large enough to worry about it).
Cook: 215-220 (R+5)
Rothenberg: 221-214 (D+4)
SSP: 216-219 (R+3)
CQ: 221-214 (D+4)
This averages to… 218-217 (D+1)
The real difference between SSP/Cook and Rothenberg/CQ is that Rothenberg and CQ see more safe seats for the Democrats (all four seem to be in rough agreement with where the Republicans are).
He has on November the 2nd. The caveat is that Charlie is on record saying he is judging things differently this year – macro rather than micro. This is the explanation for why he was late to predict a Dem takeover in 2006 and early to predict a GOP takeover this cycle.
but given 1) the huge outside spending to support Republicans/attack Democrats, 2) the generally poor quality of the DCCC ads (in my opinion), 3) the way Congress bungled the Bush tax cuts and failed to accomplish anything significant since the summer, and 4) the crappy state of the economy, my “feeling” is we lose between 40 and 50 seats. Six weeks ago I figured we would lose around 30. It just looks ugly to me out there.
If I remember right, both years had events that broke for the “wave party” near election day. And that does not always happen.
Sometimes such events are surprises — so there’s no way to know which way they will break.
One possible surprise in our direction is turnout. Assuming Rs have “maxed out” in current polls, additional turnout can only help us.
So I think it’s equally likely that the “loss” will be closer to 30 seats.
Nevertheless, I think we have a bracket of possible losses, somewhere between 25-55 seats.
Losses above and below that range are highly unlikely.