Official 2022 Congressional Election Results Thread

[Progressive Pessimist]

I'm back! And holy molasses, I never thought that I would ever be capable of underestimating American voters! What a night! This actually might have been the most satisfying election night that I've observed since 2012, especially since I was resigned to envisioning the worst possible, seemingly preordained outcome.

 I know we still have some ways to go, and there were some very upsetting close losses still (Kansas Attorney General, MI-10, just about every New York House race, Wisconsin Senate) but I always said that I would live and die by the Senate as my ultimate priority for what I cared most about, and I have my fingers and everything else crossed that we might actually end up with 51 seats. The fact that the House is (or maybe was) in contention at all is gravy, but some very unexpectedly delicious gravy. It was so entertaining to watch McCarthy's speech last night where he almost literally was polishing a turd.

Florida though...

[Progressive Pessimist]

No hot takes from me on this race: Beasley lost because she was a Democrat running in North Carolina, a stubbornly Tilt/Lean R state.

Yeah, I'm glad I didn't get my hopes up for either it or Ohio. But even then, Beasley and Ryan put up relatively good fights. Honestly, Demings seemed to also but it mattered even less in her mutant hovel of a state. Democrats should still work to try and flip North Carolina though. Take resources that would go into Florida and use them there and in Alaska and Texas instead. The fact that Wiley Nickel managed to win gives me at least some optimism for the state in better years for the party.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Anyone think that since 218-217 is really impossible to get anything passed in - that it’s better for Dems politically if the GOP wins the majority (at that number specifically I mean)

I've said this earlier in the thread: while I'd love to see the Democrats retain both houses, a D Senate and a bare R majority in the House is probably the best case for D prospects in 2024:

1. It allows D's to continue confirming Biden's appointments.

2. It removes any pressure on the D's to try and pass a very progressive agenda around Manchin & Sinema.

3. The R caucus will be an ungovernable clown show that regularly embarrasses itself, and can be blamed for failure to get anything done.

One advantage for the D's if they do hang on is they can keep the J6 committee going, but not having it is a minor loss.  At this point I think the committee has accomplished most of what it can do in terms of persuading the public; the DOJ will handle the criminal investigations.

Honestly, the committee might have played a bigger tole in these midterms with how near-universally election denialism has been rejected across swing states. They kept January 6 on the minds of voters to some extent, no matter how much others tried to make us forget or downplay it. It did its part in helping to save the country for right now.

[Progressive Pessimist]

217D-216R-2 Tossups:

https://twitter.com/galenmetzger1/status/1591198903910961155

I don't know if I like that the potential House majority goes through Christy Smith winning.

But if she does win seat 218 for us, would that be the biggest redemption arc for a politician since Jon Ossoff?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Vindication for Xing!

I'm sorry I ever doubted you, or anyone else who tried to guarantee me that titanium tilt D Nevada would return...well, save for the gubernatorial election.

I would like to note that Ralston had that focus group a few months back where this was basically called. He detailed that the group of Democrats despised Laxalt and cited abortion as a concern but were willing to give Lombardo a chance. That really might explain Nevada entirely this year.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I was always going to be okay with Sisolak losing as long as everything else in Nevada worked out how it looks like it will.

Congratulations on your one gubernatorial (and statewide overall) flip, GOP!

[Progressive Pessimist]

Joe Lombardo repudiated election denialism. If he wins and Lake loses, that should send a loud and clear message to the GQP.

As I noted a page or two back, Ralston observed that Lombardo was getting crossover support from Democrats. He probably wouldn't have won without it.

And in spite of Nevada polling being worse than ever, one thing that it did consistently show was that Lombardo was outrunning Laxalt.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I was always going to be okay with Sisolak losing as long as everything else in Nevada worked out how it looks like it will.

Congratulations on your one gubernatorial (and statewide overall) flip, GOP!

I believe that the Republican LG candidate in NV also won.

Oh well, NV Dems still have control of both houses of the legislature and CCM winning is more important. Sisolak wasn't great anyways.

I forgot about that.

https://twitter.com/lxeagle17/status/1591225924649119744?s=20&t=bcZx65gHqklm...

Defy him at your own ******* risk

He did finally get one thing wrong: Becker defeating Lee.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Hobbs not mobs!

Drain the Lake!

[Progressive Pessimist]

I of course want the House but I can absolutely live with Hobbs winning AZ-GOV and Dems winning the Senate.

You'll be more vindicated than anyone if Hobbs wins, and you'll deserve it. That debate that didn't happen clearly didn't matter.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/lxeagle17/status/1591915427977904128

Weirdly, it seems like this year the safe Democratic states are the ones who let us down the most while swing states delivered in ways that were almost unimaginable. Maybe it was their Democratic politicians and voters getting complacent over the perceived lack of risks towards abortion and democracy in their states.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yeah, it always seemed weird to me that Newsom didn't even try. I get he was always going to win, but he could've at least attempted to campaign for downballot reasons. I know he did campaign with a few and send some of the competitive CDs money, but he could've done a lot, lot more.

Newsom has never been politically apt, and the Democrats should nominate someone like Shapiro or Polis if they're so hell-bent on picking a governor for their next nominee. A safe blue state Democrat like Newsom has never had to work a day in his life to win an election, and campaigning does not come naturally to him.

It is starting to appear that fear of Larry Elder probably propelled his significant recall win more than any affirmative attribute of his.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I put all the results we know about into https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-flip-senate-house/ including OR-5 and AK and it gives me GOP 92% of House control with most projections having at least 225 seats. A very slight overestimation due to an unexpected R trend in NY-19 and VA-2.

It's so ironic how the special elections turned out to be right in regards to a neutral year and clearly showing a sign that this was not going to be a 2010/14 style midterm of doom, but NY-19 was probably the second most prominent of these specials besides AK and it flipped back.

It’s very ironic, and it wasn’t just NY-19. NY-22 was a good result for R’s along with NE-1 and MN-1. All of those results were nothing like the specials. In fact, I remember democrats explicitly saying that Molinaro was DOA.

Regrettably, I was one of those. I think the state party might have gotten cocky in that regard too. They probably assumed that college town turnout that would swamp the rest of the district would be a given in November since it's what delivered in the special. Evidently, that was false.

Though for the other special elections I think it was assumed that they'd be much more in line with typical November election results.

Republicans trying to downplay the special elections liked to insist that Democrats were the party with special election success now, and while that may actually be true now, it doesn't necessarily mean that November elections everywhere feature Republicans turning out in an overwhelming fashion. That kind of varied state to state this year.

As with 2020, a lot of things are true are at once, and our political realities are much more complicated than a mere prediction can suggest.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/_alex_joshua/status/1592239566156894208?t=8xbLQluqAGUe679PUJ...

Just wanted to post it somewhere

It'd be amusing if *he* jumped to the Dems.

Ironically half the ads I saw against Maloney involved how he voted for "Pelosi's out of control spending." Granted, I forget if those were by outside groups or his own campaign.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Should be enough for Garcia to hold, right? Wasserman seems to think so:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1592305116199424001

I'm very confident that Garcia comes out on top, but it would be absolutely hilarious if Smith ended up winning in a squeaker after everyone has written her obituary.

I would welcome that. Smith obviously deserves to be treated like the joke of a candidate that she is, but I've also simultaneously found myself rooting for her to win and prove everyone wrong. I don't think that will happen either, but it would be glorious if it did.

No more chances for her after this though.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Considering how much I feared the worse for a better part of this year in the lead-up to the midterms, which felt like I was a death row inmate being led to my execution, I can very easily live with a bare majority for the GOP in the House. The only reason part of me was hoping for a narrow Democratic majority after last Tuesday would have just been to twist the knife in McCarthy and the GOP's wounds or to see embarrassments like Lauren Boebert lose. Otherwise a narrower majority for the Democratic Party honestly might not be worth it, and the GOP may very well find that out as they try to survive their own circular firing squad and factional disputes. They can be blamed now if anything goes wrong and give a unified Democratic Party something to run against in 2024.

Maybe it's a beggars can't be choosers situation, but nearly everything went the way I had hoped or better in my wildest, though still grounded, fantasies, so I feel like I'm being ungrateful to be disappointed with how some of the House elections went. It is absolutely fair to be frustrated by specific races where Democrats fell short or met setbacks, but on a macro level, looking at the overall results this was an utterly humiliating result for the GOP, and they know it, no matter how much they try to polish the turd/poisoned chalice of their inevitably dysfunctional majority.

[Progressive Pessimist]

It's a shame Boebert hung on. Most of the worst candidates in the country lost this year, thankfully, but that was only ever going to go so far when there were so many on average.

Maybe she'll lose next time?

[Progressive Pessimist]

I think an important lesson from these midterms is that relying on how a district voted based on the last presidential election (especially one with circumstances and turnout as unique as 2020) probably isn't the best way to postulate how a district, especially a redrawn one, may vote in a midterm. The turnout dynamics can be so vastly different that focusing on the candidates and their campaigns themselves, the national environment, and also I think it's become clear now especially given the New York races, how state parties factor in all are probably better indicators.

The conventional wisdom of Democratic incumbents and open seats going GOP because they're in Trump districts, and vice-versa falling flat on its face this cycle ought to show what an apples-and-oranges comparison we might have here.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/GartonArthur/status/1594091538103111683

This being a neutral year is definitely the safest way to classify it. We saw many variables from state to state that led to some having concentrated blue waves, some having red waves, and some in between or having fairly typical results for that state. That still probably isn't what Republicans wanted though and clearly something Democrats like myself were content to settle for.

[Progressive Pessimist]

https://twitter.com/GartonArthur/status/1594091538103111683

This being a neutral year is definitely the safest way to classify it. We saw many variables from state to state that led to some having concentrated blue waves, some having red waves, and some in between or having fairly typical results for that state. That still probably isn't what Republicans wanted though and clearly something Democrats like myself were content to settle for.

This was not a neutral year at least as far as the total House vote goes.  Adjusting for uncontested races does not make that big of a difference, 1% tops, so this is going to end up around R+3.

It depends how you look at it. If you look at it in that technical way, obviously it's an R+3 year or so. But if you look at the results themselves the GOP had more "wasted votes" this time around, whereas that used to be a Democratic problem. An R+3 year should have meant huge gains in every state where just about every tossup went to them, but instead it seemed to vary from state to state with different circumstances yielding different results. Factor in the gubernatorial, Senate, and state legislative results too and it's even harder to call this a truly Republican year.

[Progressive Pessimist]

CA-22 is really frustrating especially considering both sides put a ton of money into that race, but Democrats really tried in it (compared with 27, 41, 45, etc.)

The irony here too is that Steel's lead in CA-45 is now <5% and yet Dems didn't even put any effort in there either. Could've been doable.

That's kind of true of a lot of House races in hindsight. It looks foolish now, but before the elections actually happened and what kind of environment we actually had became evident, I can't really blame Democrats for prioritizing defense over offense this year.

By the way, congrats everybody! We made it to 538 pages!

[Progressive Pessimist]

In 2020, the Democrats won 222 House seats and won the GCB by 3.1%.

In 2022, the Republicans won 222 House seats and won the GCB by 3.1%.

It does look like the national House map is finally fair, despite lots of gerrymandering occurring on both sides.

For now...North Carolina and Ohio are certain to redraw their maps in a way that will probably benefit Republicans.

However, Democrats can do the same in Maryland and New York.

This is the game now in order to create some sort of balance in the House. Both parties seem to have lowered their ceilings but raised their floors.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Referring to those New Jersey House results, not to be too centered on my own hometown again, but it's interesting to me that it voted almost exactly in line for Pallotta as it did for my council and mayoral races...I hate my lean R town...

One thing I’ll say is that the talking point that has aged perhaps more poorly than any other is the one that Democrats were better off losing in 2020.

Absolutely. Even though the Democratic Party possibly would have had its greatest midterm ever if the same things occurred during a Trump six year itch featuring record gas prices, inflation, the Dobbs decision, the same bad candidates, etc. the country still wouldn't have been as well off.

For awhile I was resigned to thinking that Democrats always came to power at the worst times and that the party was in a lose-lose situation post-2016 no matter what, but after these midterms we actually got it does seem like our horrible timeline is kind of balancing out more into positive territory now, finally!

As we suspected, the red wave in New York was less about crime or persuasion and simply just more about crappy Dem turnout.

https://twitter.com/therealjsolo/status/1596474620861120512

The most hated (ex) New Yorker possibly in existence being the republican party's presidential nominee in '24 should do wonders for turnout and help democrats win all those House seats back.

We'll see. There unfortunately is the possibility of Lawler, Molinaro, etc. being moderate enough to have crossover support and keep their seats (if the New York map doesn't get redrawn) in spite of most environmental factors a la Fitzpatrick. Okay, maybe not that severe, they probably would lose in a blue wave unlike him.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Adjusting for uncontested seats, gonna be a pretty darn fair map nationally. Enjoy it while it lasts because Ohio/North Carolina redraws are incoming

New York better make up for that. 

Maryland too. Sure, they only have one Republican seat, but Andy Harris is awful and the initial map before being overturned already featured him drawn into a district where he could lose in a Democratic enough year. Hell, his performance this year in a much more favorable district wasn't even all that spectacular given how parts of the eastern shore seem to be trending. That one seat if and when it flips would still be a pretty valuable pickup.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Something I didn't expect... McKee actually outperformed Raimondo's 2018 performance in RI in a much redder year.

Given what polling suggested about Rhode Island between the Governor's race and RI-2, when I saw Magaziner and McKee win by as much as they did as soon as they did on election night, that was one of several signs that there was no red wave.