2022 Generic Ballot / Recruitment / Fundraising / Ratings Megathread

[Devils30]

Also it's kind of crazy that there could actually be four Republican House members from New England. They haven't had that many since before the 2006 midterms.

A lot of this list will be one termers and completely cooked with a Trump 2024 nomination. A lot of this list flips in an R+4 year but not an R+1, will be interesting.

I disagree completely with CA-49, Levin was up 6 and it voted no on the recall I believe.

[2016]

I saw this morning typical Atlas Democrats bragging about the NBC NEWS Poll showing D's ahead 48-47.

However the underlying things have not being discussed. 47 % want change from Pres Bidens Leadership, only 28 % of Independents approving of Biden.

Those two Numbers are a rip for a complete disaster for Democrats on Tuesday. Their District Candidates and Statewide Candidates have to run well ahead of Biden as Bill McInturf alluded to.

[kwabbit]

Also it's kind of crazy that there could actually be four Republican House members from New England. They haven't had that many since before the 2006 midterms.

A lot of this list will be one termers and completely cooked with a Trump 2024 nomination. A lot of this list flips in an R+4 year but not an R+1, will be interesting.

I disagree completely with CA-49, Levin was up 6 and it voted no on the recall I believe.

The New England Republicans could stick around, but >50% would be DOA in 2024.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting that Wasserman seems to think that an R wave would hit the northeast particularly hard when it seems like a lot of conventional wisdom is the opposite.

Also imo that's *wayyy* too many tossups. It's hard to find a world where AZ-01 and NY-04 are tossup simultaneously.

[wbrocks67]

The ME-02 result is... odd? Considering even if Golden doesn't win outright, he's likely to win b/c of the Independent vote going for him in the 2nd round.

Cartwright losing also kind of goes against all the stuff we've seen from that district polling wise.

Quite a bit of curious choices on there.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The ME-02 result is... odd? Considering even if Golden doesn't win outright, he's likely to win b/c of the Independent vote going for him in the 2nd round.

Cartwright losing also kind of goes against all the stuff we've seen from that district polling wise.

Quite a bit of curious choices on there.

They are both running in Trump districts in a year that will prolly be worse than 2020 for Dems. Yes they have both made an effort to distance themselves, but with the way things are looking, Golden may need like a 12 point overperformance of partisanship which is quite tricky though not impossible.

[wbrocks67]

The ME-02 result is... odd? Considering even if Golden doesn't win outright, he's likely to win b/c of the Independent vote going for him in the 2nd round.

Cartwright losing also kind of goes against all the stuff we've seen from that district polling wise.

Quite a bit of curious choices on there.

They are both running in Trump districts in a year that will prolly be worse than 2020 for Dems. Yes they have both made an effort to distance themselves, but with the way things are looking, Golden may need like a 12 point overperformance of partisanship which is quite tricky though not impossible.

I mean I'm literally just going off of public polling, all of which has had Cartwright and Golden ahead.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Levin and Harder losing both seem like reaches to me. I've not really seen any convincing evidence so far that either of them are in danger of losing, but it could happen, I guess.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The ME-02 result is... odd? Considering even if Golden doesn't win outright, he's likely to win b/c of the Independent vote going for him in the 2nd round.

Cartwright losing also kind of goes against all the stuff we've seen from that district polling wise.

Quite a bit of curious choices on there.

They are both running in Trump districts in a year that will prolly be worse than 2020 for Dems. Yes they have both made an effort to distance themselves, but with the way things are looking, Golden may need like a 12 point overperformance of partisanship which is quite tricky though not impossible.

I mean I'm literally just going off of public polling, all of which has had Cartwright and Golden ahead.

That's fair, but district level polling tends to be very iffy. It can def be taken into consideration but shouldn't be used as the sole basis in a prediction, especially if the pollr esults just don't seem to logically make sense. We def got a few of those polls in 2020.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Levin and Harder losing both seem like reaches to me. I've not really heard any convincing evidence so far that either of them are in danger of losing, but it happen, I guess.

Levin could lose but I disagree with this call by Wasserman, especially given a lot of the other seats he lists as D wins.

CA-13 seems like fair game though. Biden did win the district by 10.8% in 2020 but did underperform Clinton and rural/small town Hispanics seem to be one of the areas where Dems are facing big problems.

[AncestralDemocrat.]

https://twitter.com/HWLavelleMaps/status/1589434701097603072?t=JPQZnAZHq57SDFU68...

[Vosem]

Wasserman's thoughts on how the Tossup races break:
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1589426102141079554?cxt=HHwWhMDS7cyn444sAA...

I wouldn't be surprised if he does one final ratings update tomorrow morning.

Fascinating; he's at 234-201, to RRH's final call of 245-190. Here are the races they're predicting break differently:

Wasserman blue, RRH red:
IN-1 (Mrvan)
MI-8 (Kildee) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NV-1 (Titus)
NV-4 (Horsford) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-3 (Suozzi)
NY-18 (Ryan) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-19 (Ryan)
OH-1 (Chabot)
PA-17 (Lamb)
TX-28 (Cuellar) (Wasserman at Leans D)
TX-34 (Flores)
VA-7 (Spanberger)

Wasserman red, RRH blue:
CA-49 (Levin)

There is probably one seat I've missed them disagreeing on, because the numbers need one more "Wasserman blue, RRH red" seat to add up, but for the life of me I can't find it. I guess, uh, pretend Wasserman didn't call Levin losing -- by far his weirdest call, points at a much redder year than everything else he said -- and then this all works, and there are 11 "especially controversial" seats to look at, where both sides seem confident.

EDIT: NVM, found it, was confused by Wasserman terming NY-19, which Ryan is leaving, to be "Ryan's seat", while RRH was terming NY-18, which he is coming to, as Ryan's seat. There are 12 seats that Wasserman has called blue but RRH has called red, and 1 seat that is the reverse; for some reason CA-49.

[Tekken_Guy]

The west coast results look a bit discordant…especially Mike Levin losing while Salinas wins in OR-06; very weird given what Oregon is looking like atm.

It also does not take into account the apocalyptic rain on Tuesday in SoCal. Not a single soul will dare leave their house or workplace to vote lest they drown in the half inch of precipitation.

The rain is not going to have any effect on any races unless they’re Mike Garcia 2020 close.

[kwabbit]

The west coast results look a bit discordant…especially Mike Levin losing while Salinas wins in OR-06; very weird given what Oregon is looking like atm.

It also does not take into account the apocalyptic rain on Tuesday in SoCal. Not a single soul will dare leave their house or workplace to vote lest they drown in the half inch of precipitation.

The rain is not going to have any effect on any races unless they’re Mike Garcia 2020 close.

The rain WILL DOOM the GOP, ending Young Kim's homophobic tenure in the US House. The general rule of thumb, according to Vance Ulrich, is that 1 inch of rain in SoCal = 6ft in the Northeast. SoCal E-day turnout will be lucky to hit 5% of RV. Young Kim is gone, Michelle Steele is gone, Ken Calvert is gone, Darrell Issa is gone, Mike Garcia is gone. It's over.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Democrats have a better chance of holding the House than Mastriano does of winning.

[Devils30]

The ME-02 result is... odd? Considering even if Golden doesn't win outright, he's likely to win b/c of the Independent vote going for him in the 2nd round.

Cartwright losing also kind of goes against all the stuff we've seen from that district polling wise.

Quite a bit of curious choices on there.

They are both running in Trump districts in a year that will prolly be worse than 2020 for Dems. Yes they have both made an effort to distance themselves, but with the way things are looking, Golden may need like a 12 point overperformance of partisanship which is quite tricky though not impossible.

I mean I'm literally just going off of public polling, all of which has had Cartwright and Golden ahead.

We need to chill, they all know as much as we do. It's a guessing a game. That said, there are a lot of Biden +11 type seats I think the Rs will be disappointed about on election night.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The west coast results look a bit discordant…especially Mike Levin losing while Salinas wins in OR-06; very weird given what Oregon is looking like atm.

It also does not take into account the apocalyptic rain on Tuesday in SoCal. Not a single soul will dare leave their house or workplace to vote lest they drown in the half inch of precipitation.

The rain is not going to have any effect on any races unless they’re Mike Garcia 2020 close.

But I was told:

[South Dakota Democrat]

The west coast results look a bit discordant…especially Mike Levin losing while Salinas wins in OR-06; very weird given what Oregon is looking like atm.

It also does not take into account the apocalyptic rain on Tuesday in SoCal. Not a single soul will dare leave their house or workplace to vote lest they drown in the half inch of precipitation.

The rain is not going to have any effect on any races unless they’re Mike Garcia 2020 close.

But I was told:

Reminds me of the "Rainy Day Women" episode on the O.C.

[Devils30]

Trends happen, candidates matter but I have a real hard time squaring up these House races. If Dems really win PA-8, NM-2, KS-3 (big) and NY-19,22, are they really at any risk whatsoever in CT-5, RI-2, NY-17? These polls consistently have Dems holding their own in swing seats and if a lot actually hang on, are the Biden double digit seats really competitive?

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

I saw this morning typical Atlas Democrats bragging about the NBC NEWS Poll showing D's ahead 48-47.

However the underlying things have not being discussed. 47 % want change from Pres Bidens Leadership, only 28 % of Independents approving of Biden.

Those two Numbers are a rip for a complete disaster for Democrats on Tuesday. Their District Candidates and Statewide Candidates have to run well ahead of Biden as Bill McInturf alluded to.

I mean these numbers aren’t too crazy when you look at the 2020 results. Trump got 47% of the vote in the highest turnout election since the turn of the 20th century and the 2nd most amount of votes do any presidential candidate ever. Republicans have all the Trump 2020 voters supporting them.

Democrats are faltering with 3-4% of the majority that voted for Biden. It’s the same 3-4% that screwed around and let Trump slip through in the first place back in 2016 but got their sh1t together 4 years later when they realized he could actually win again.

The midterms are lost and have been lost since November 2020. 2024 is another story. With Trump likely running again, Democrats should have an easier time convincing that last 3-4% to come back and block another Trump term.

[Tekken_Guy]

I saw this morning typical Atlas Democrats bragging about the NBC NEWS Poll showing D's ahead 48-47.

However the underlying things have not being discussed. 47 % want change from Pres Bidens Leadership, only 28 % of Independents approving of Biden.

Those two Numbers are a rip for a complete disaster for Democrats on Tuesday. Their District Candidates and Statewide Candidates have to run well ahead of Biden as Bill McInturf alluded to.

I mean these numbers aren’t too crazy when you look at the 2020 results. Trump got 47% of the vote in the highest turnout election since the turn of the 20th century and the 2nd most amount of votes do any presidential candidate ever. Republicans have all the Trump 2020 voters supporting them.

Democrats are faltering with 3-4% of the majority that voted for Biden. It’s the same 3-4% that screwed around and let Trump slip through in the first place back in 2016 but got their sh1t together 4 years later when they realized he could actually win again.

The midterms are lost and have been lost since November 2020. 2024 is another story. With Trump likely running again, Democrats should have an easier time convincing that last 3-4% to come back and block another Trump term.

Isn't there a decent chance DeSantis ends up with the nomination instead? With him atop the ticket it'll be a lot harder to get those "stop Trump" voters back IMO.

[Vosem]

Wasserman's thoughts on how the Tossup races break:
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1589426102141079554?cxt=HHwWhMDS7cyn444sAA...

I wouldn't be surprised if he does one final ratings update tomorrow morning.

Fascinating; he's at 234-201, to RRH's final call of 245-190. Here are the races they're predicting break differently:

Wasserman blue, RRH red:
IN-1 (Mrvan)
MI-8 (Kildee) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NV-1 (Titus)
NV-4 (Horsford) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-3 (Suozzi)
NY-18 (Ryan) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-19 (Ryan)
OH-1 (Chabot)
PA-17 (Lamb)
TX-28 (Cuellar) (Wasserman at Leans D)
TX-34 (Flores)
VA-7 (Spanberger)

Wasserman red, RRH blue:
CA-49 (Levin)

There is probably one seat I've missed them disagreeing on, because the numbers need one more "Wasserman blue, RRH red" seat to add up, but for the life of me I can't find it. I guess, uh, pretend Wasserman didn't call Levin losing -- by far his weirdest call, points at a much redder year than everything else he said -- and then this all works, and there are 11 "especially controversial" seats to look at, where both sides seem confident.

EDIT: NVM, found it, was confused by Wasserman terming NY-19, which Ryan is leaving, to be "Ryan's seat", while RRH was terming NY-18, which he is coming to, as Ryan's seat. There are 12 seats that Wasserman has called blue but RRH has called red, and 1 seat that is the reverse; for some reason CA-49.

CNAnalysis's final call for the House is 230-205, so a little more pessimistic on GOP odds than Wasserman: https://projects.cnalysis.com/21-22/house

He has CA-49 going blue (...obviously), and of the races where Wasserman and RRH disagree, he has 10/12 going Democratic (all but NY-19 and OH-1, which he's calling for the GOP). This leaves 5 races he's calling for the Democrats which both RRH and Wasserman have going Republican:
CA-13 (Harder)
IL-17 (Bustos)
ME-2 (Golden)
MI-7 (Slotkin)
MN-2 (Craig)
WA-8 (Schrier)

...you'll notice 6. There is one race CN has going Republican which Wasserman and RRH both have as blue:
OH-13 (Gibbs)

~~

So, we have the following breakdown:
RRH red, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis blue:
IN-1 (Mrvan)
MI-8 (Kildee)
NV-1 (Titus)
NV-4 (Horsford)
NY-3 (Suozzi)
NY-18 (Ryan)
PA-17 (Lamb)
TX-28 (Cuellar)
TX-34 (Flores) (R --> D possibility)
VA-7 (Spanberger)

RRH red, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis red:
NY-19 (Tenney) (R --> D possibility)
OH-1 (Chabot) (R --> D possibility)

RRH red, Wasserman red, CNAnalysis blue:
CA-13 (Harder)
IL-17 (Bustos)
ME-2 (Golden)
MI-7 (Slotkin)
MN-2 (Craig)
WA-8 (Schrier)

RRH blue, Wasserman red, CNAnalysis blue:
CA-49 (Levin)

RRH blue, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis red:
OH-13 (Gibbs) (R --> D possibility)

Seats that all of these analyses agree are flipping R to D: IL-13, MI-3

Seats that all of these analyses agree are flipping D to R: AZ-2, AZ-6, CT-5 (!!), FL-4, FL-7, FL-13, GA-6, IA-3, MI-10, NV-3 (!), NH-1 (!!), NJ-7, OR-5 (!!!), PA-7, PA-8 (!), RI-2 (!!!!), TN-5, TX-15, VA-2, WI-3

That is a strange and motley crew of seats everyone agrees are going Republican. (There also might need to be a category of 'seats that everyone notably thinks will be held by Democrats, even though they are obviously on-paper good targets' -- AK-AL, OH-9 and KS-3 fit in this category.)

I count 227 seats that all of these projections agree are voting Republican, though more than a couple of them are actually very weird calls.

[Devils30]

Wasserman's thoughts on how the Tossup races break:
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1589426102141079554?cxt=HHwWhMDS7cyn444sAA...

I wouldn't be surprised if he does one final ratings update tomorrow morning.

Fascinating; he's at 234-201, to RRH's final call of 245-190. Here are the races they're predicting break differently:

Wasserman blue, RRH red:
IN-1 (Mrvan)
MI-8 (Kildee) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NV-1 (Titus)
NV-4 (Horsford) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-3 (Suozzi)
NY-18 (Ryan) (Wasserman at Leans D)
NY-19 (Ryan)
OH-1 (Chabot)
PA-17 (Lamb)
TX-28 (Cuellar) (Wasserman at Leans D)
TX-34 (Flores)
VA-7 (Spanberger)

Wasserman red, RRH blue:
CA-49 (Levin)

There is probably one seat I've missed them disagreeing on, because the numbers need one more "Wasserman blue, RRH red" seat to add up, but for the life of me I can't find it. I guess, uh, pretend Wasserman didn't call Levin losing -- by far his weirdest call, points at a much redder year than everything else he said -- and then this all works, and there are 11 "especially controversial" seats to look at, where both sides seem confident.

EDIT: NVM, found it, was confused by Wasserman terming NY-19, which Ryan is leaving, to be "Ryan's seat", while RRH was terming NY-18, which he is coming to, as Ryan's seat. There are 12 seats that Wasserman has called blue but RRH has called red, and 1 seat that is the reverse; for some reason CA-49.

CNAnalysis's final call for the House is 230-205, so a little more pessimistic on GOP odds than Wasserman: https://projects.cnalysis.com/21-22/house

He has CA-49 going blue (...obviously), and of the races where Wasserman and RRH disagree, he has 10/12 going Democratic (all but NY-19 and OH-1, which he's calling for the GOP). This leaves 5 races he's calling for the Democrats which both RRH and Wasserman have going Republican:
CA-13 (Harder)
IL-17 (Bustos)
ME-2 (Golden)
MI-7 (Slotkin)
MN-2 (Craig)
WA-8 (Schrier)

...you'll notice 6. There is one race CN has going Republican which Wasserman and RRH both have as blue:
OH-13 (Gibbs)

~~

So, we have the following breakdown:
RRH red, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis blue:
IN-1 (Mrvan)
MI-8 (Kildee)
NV-1 (Titus)
NV-4 (Horsford)
NY-3 (Suozzi)
NY-18 (Ryan)
PA-17 (Lamb)
TX-28 (Cuellar)
TX-34 (Flores) (R --> D possibility)
VA-7 (Spanberger)

RRH red, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis red:
NY-19 (Tenney) (R --> D possibility)
OH-1 (Chabot) (R --> D possibility)

RRH red, Wasserman red, CNAnalysis blue:
CA-13 (Harder)
IL-17 (Bustos)
ME-2 (Golden)
MI-7 (Slotkin)
MN-2 (Craig)
WA-8 (Schrier)

RRH blue, Wasserman red, CNAnalysis blue:
CA-49 (Levin)

RRH blue, Wasserman blue, CNAnalysis red:
OH-13 (Gibbs) (R --> D possibility)

Seats that all of these analyses agree are flipping R to D: IL-13, MI-3

Seats that all of these analyses agree are flipping D to R: AZ-2, AZ-6, CT-5 (!!), FL-4, FL-7, FL-13, GA-6, IA-3, MI-10, NV-3 (!), NH-1 (!!), NJ-7, OR-5 (!!!), PA-7, PA-8 (!), RI-2 (!!!!), TN-5, TX-15, VA-2, WI-3

That is a strange and motley crew of seats everyone agrees are going Republican. (There also might need to be a category of 'seats that everyone notably thinks will be held by Democrats, even though they are obviously on-paper good targets' -- AK-AL, OH-9 and KS-3 fit in this category.)

I count 227 seats that all of these projections agree are voting Republican, though more than a couple of them are actually very weird calls.

I just find it weird the Senate with all these Biden +1 or less seats is a complete tossup, yet everyone is giving the GOP a ton of Biden +7-12 House seats with very little evidence. It would be one thing if we had multiple high quality polls in CT-5, RI-2, OR-5 but we have none. Meanwhile we have them in PA-8, NM-2, NY-19, NY-22, CA-49, MN-2, NH-1 and none are really bad for Dems.

Given polarization, it's just difficult seeing the GOP not winning the Senate but then winning 25 house seats as these analysts suggest. I feel like a 51-49 GOP Senate could come alongside a disappointing 12 house seat gain for them instead of a major wave. If they are gaining 25+ it very well may be a 53-47 Senate and Ds getting a 51-49 Senate may mean the GOP is sweating out the House for a week.

[Vosem]

I just find it weird the Senate with all these Biden +1 or less seats is a complete tossup, yet everyone is giving the GOP a ton of Biden +7-12 House seats with very little evidence. It would be one thing if we had multiple high quality polls in CT-5, RI-2, OR-5 but we have none. Meanwhile we have them in PA-8, NM-2, NY-19, NY-22, CA-49, MN-2, NH-1 and none are really bad for Dems.

Given polarization, it's just difficult seeing the GOP not winning the Senate but then winning 25 house seats as these analysts suggest. I feel like a 51-49 GOP Senate could come alongside a disappointing 12 house seat gain for them instead of a major wave. If they are gaining 25+ it very well may be a 53-47 Senate and Ds getting a 51-49 Senate may mean the GOP is sweating out the House for a week.

I agree, but moreover I think more than half of the seats that there's lots of disagreement about in these analyses are likelier flips than CT-5 or NH-1, both of which have every poll giving a victory to the Democrat?

(Although, in fairness to these pundits, RRH has a 53-47 Senate, and CNAnalysis has 51-48, with the only GA prediction being 'runoff', which I think in both cases are pretty consistent with their general picture. I don't think Wasserman has Senate predictions out yet.

These guys all agree that Republicans hold all of their Senate seats, including PA and WI, and then gain NV. Nobody is outright predicting a Warnock win in GA. AZ has a divide, with RRH predicting Masters and CNAnalysis predicting Kelly.)

[Roll Roons]

https://twitter.com/kkondik/status/1589596646383706112?cxt=HHwWgIDTvcrusI8sAAAA

Bear in mind that they currently have Republicans favored to flip 13 D-held seats while Democrats are favored to flip two R-held seats and 20 seats are tossups.