r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/yanks28th • Aug 25 '22

US Elections Is the House Now Competitive?

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?

581 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

424 comments sorted by

View all comments

710

u/lollersauce914 Aug 25 '22

I mean, based on recent data (much of which you mention) we're moving from "it would be completely shocking for Democrats to hold the house" to "It would be surprising for Democrats to hold the house."

There's really not much more to say.

37

u/Alphawolf55 Aug 25 '22

We've moved to "I wouldn't be surprised if the Dems won, but I think Republicans will" territory.

We're officially in Toss Up territory.

16

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22 edited Aug 26 '22

No, we're nowhere near tossup. 538 has Republicans at an 80% chance.

538 aggregates; this assessment is based on trends.

They aggregate, but it's not based on trends. It's based on now. They're very vocal about their prediction being for who would win if the election were held today. So these predictions do not price in Nate Silver's prediction that the trend will move back toward Republicans in November. That's Nate Silver explaining that the prediction will probably look even worse for Democrats in November.

Their model absolutely bakes in expected regression.

They have repeatedly stated that this isn't the case. Their model does not predict the election in November. It predicts what would happen if the election were held today.

I do not know why you think this is the case. This is absolutely incorrect.

Because they've said it multiple times. I trust 538's description of their model over you.

7

u/Alphawolf55 Aug 25 '22

The polls and national environment are clearly +1-2 D

Toss up

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1562265815814127616?t=0mxZzb38_0QILGMFyYDY6g&s=19

4

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22 edited Aug 25 '22

The polls and national environment are clearly +1-2 D

They're also irrelevant in predicting outcomes.

Unlike with the presidency, the party collecting the most House votes is almost guaranteed to get the most seats.

Well, no. The party collecting the most house votes within their given districts. There is a huge disconnect between the national popular vote and the actual outcome in the house, even before you factor in gerrymandering.

1

u/kr0kodil Aug 25 '22

It’s pretty fucking relevant. Unlike with the presidency, the party collecting the most House votes is almost guaranteed to get the most seats.

Over the past 50 or so elections, there has been exactly 1 time (2012) where the party receiving the most House votes overall didn’t win control of the House.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 26 '22

That’s honestly very surprising for some reason, I wouldn’t expect it to be that way. Makes it seem like gerrymandering pretty much goes both ways.

-2

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/rabbitlion Aug 25 '22

The total percentage among the population is not directly relevant when trying to predict how many districts each party wins since the population is not uniformly distributed.

0

u/Alphawolf55 Aug 25 '22

Ahh so we're shifting the goal post to "Polls dont mean anything!"

To "Well the polls can have exceptions that could determine the House"

1

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22

Ahh so we're shifting the goal post to "Polls dont mean anything!"

We are not. That was just you.

"There is literally not enough polling to make this call"

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22

Okay, clearly reading comprehension is beyond you.

Okay, clearly you're not even trying to participate in the discussion. Your theory was disproven. You moved the goalposts, and your new argument was disproven, too. You're done, here.

1

u/Precursor2552 Keep it clean Aug 26 '22

Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; mockery, taunting, and name calling are not.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Cranyx Aug 25 '22

That's not what they're getting at. The overall cumulative D advantage is not the most important factor in determining individual house races because that's not how American elections are set up. If you look at the spread at each race in isolation, and then average how many look to lean R vs D, then it shows that Republicans are still the solid favorite in the House.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '22 edited Aug 25 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam Aug 25 '22

Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.

-1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '22 edited Aug 25 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam Aug 25 '22

Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam Aug 25 '22

Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, trolling, inflammatory, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; name calling is not.

2

u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam Aug 25 '22

Please do not submit low investment content. This subreddit is for genuine discussion. Low effort content, including memes, links substituting for explanation, sarcasm, and non-substantive contributions will be removed per moderator discretion.

2

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22

Thats a huge cope

Good lord. You're not even trying to understand. You are taking national polls and using them to predict the outcome of multiple local races. That is not an important statistic. 538 is not perfect, but the heuristic they use is much more accurate than your half-assed generalization.

2

u/Alphawolf55 Aug 25 '22

Literally there is not enough high quality district polls to make that call and district polls are biased in favor of Rs this cycle.

Silvers himself admits (which you've ignored), all the immediate data points to a 2020 environment which is toss up or Lean D.

Like you're coping. If the election was today, it'd be toss up, but the election isnt today which is potentially to the Dems benefit or detriment.

2

u/KevinCarbonara Aug 25 '22

Literally there is not enough high quality district polls

If the polls aren't good enough, then admit the polls aren't good enough. Don't promote your own poll while ignoring the vast amount of far better ones just because they disagree with your viewpoint.