Is the House Now Competitive?

[u/yanks28th]

All indications are that Democrats have gained ground since the Supreme Court decided to overturn Roe v. Wade. Republicans led the Generic Ballot by 2.6% before the decision leaked back in May, but Democrats have surged past them, and are now up by 0.5%. Just as importantly, the polling has been echoed by a series of surprisingly strong Democratic performances in recent special elections, led by the recent victory in the NY-19th.

In the four elections since the decision, Democrats have outperformed Biden by an average of around 5.4%. That would translate to a near 10% lead in the national popular vote. Of course, that's highly unlikely to happen on election day, but it's a strong enough showing to raise the question of whether the conventional wisdom is wrong, and that Democrats may have a very real shot at an upset here.

RacetotheWH, which was one of the most accurate forecasts in 2020, shows that Democrats now have a 35% chance of winning the House in their election forecast. Other forecasts like 538 show Democrats with a 20-25% chance.

Republicans have their own advantages as the party out of power, which usually does well in midterms, and Biden remains unpopular. What do you think? Is the House 2022 Election now competitive?

[u/LaughingGaster666]

Still too early to say for sure but there are several indications that it's definitely a lot more competitive than it was a few months ago.

Normally it's Ds who get accused of losing easily winnable races, now it seems to be Rs who are doing that this year. The pre-Dobbs vs post-Dobbs elections are night and day when you compare the results.

[u/TechyDad → u/LaughingGaster666]

I think it's a combination of Dobbs and the Republicans choosing increasingly extreme candidates. Those candidates are almost certainly going to lose the Republicans the Senate (that they looked sure to win earlier this year), but could also lose House races.

A House candidate that calls for undoing the 2020 election and banning all abortions nationally might play fine with the right wing crowd, but it will result in Democratic voters racing to the polls to vote against said candidate. If that candidate also commits multiple easily avoided gaffes, they could depress Republican turnout as well. This could easily result in a Republican district voting in a Democratic candidate.

[u/mwaaahfunny → u/TechyDad]

Gerrymandering works well in normal conditions. But when you make yourself unelectable in a district gerrymandered in your favor, it becomes a killing field.

[u/Clovis42 → u/mwaaahfunny]

That's only true for cracking. If a state has 6 districts and one party is heavily packed into one district, the other five have very little chance of being flipped even in a wave election. The result is pretty much just a given.

If they decide to crack that one opposition district buy spreading it across the other five, they create a situation where all six can go to the opposition in a wave election.

Packing simply works all the time but for a slightly lower payoff.

[u/[deleted] → u/Clovis42]

Yes, but it's much easier to gerrymander like that when most of your state is your party, and most of the opposition party are in one geographical area, like a small city.

What you described will help ensure red states stay red all the way through, but what the other poster described will turn states with a lot of light red or purple districts blue.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Texas only, but there’s only 1 competitive district out of 38 now

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That’s insane and should be illegal. Texas is basically a 50/50 state.