What do you think about the Fairvote projections?

[King Lear]

Theirs a very interesting site called Fairvote http://www.Fairvote.org/, that projects that in an even house vote Republicans are projected to gain 2 house seats, and even if Democrats win the house vote by several points they’ll still probably come up short due to Gerrymandering and the heavy concentration of Democratic voters in Safe Urban districts. What do you think of their analysis?

[Bidenworth2020]

interesting site. Nate says that dems can not win the house with anything less than a 5 point PV win.

[King Lear]

interesting site. Nate says that dems can not win the house with anything less than a 5 point PV win.

He’s probably right about that, which means the real question is can Democrats have even a 5 point House Vote win after a whole year of Republicans barraging them with 100s of millions of dollars in ads attacking them on everything from Abortion and guns to not supporting tax cuts for rich white people and not wanting to take away welfare from “those undeserving Blacks and Mexicans” along with accusations of supporting “those scary brown Muslims”. By the way, I’m already hearing adds on the radio in my district of CA-45 saying “please thank Mimi Walters for Tax Reform” and when I turn the TV on I’ve seen adds saying “Republicans in Congress just gave everyone Tax cuts for Christmas” set to Christmas music and ending with an image of Santa Claus flying his slay around the Capital building (personally I find it disgraceful that Republicans are trying to turn Christmas into a partisan holiday, it’s spose to be a time where everyone can put aside their differences and help one another even if you don’t believe the religious aspect of it), so taking this into consideration if they can withstand all that crap and still have a 5 point PV win they probably will flip the house.

[Pericles]

Gerrymandering is a serious obstacle. If Democrats win by less than 8 points they will probably fall short and may need to win by 10 points. However I believe they can make it. They're currently leading by 13 points, which would give them a majority. Remember Clinton outspent Trump on ads with attack ads but still lost, and Republicans stunts failed in Virginia. Democrats have a great shot and I think they will make it, though in the end we'll see whose right.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Democrats would be kind of screwed if they weren't leading the generic ballot by more then 5 points, which they are.

[Pericles]

I think Democrats need 8%(maybe more) to win. If they get their 2006 showing or exceed it they'll probably be winning but if they do worse than in 2006 they'll fall short. However given they have a 13.3 point lead right now they have a great shot. History shows that if Trump has his current approval rating of 37%(it could go down or up) there will be a 10-11% swing against Republicans in 2018. Given Republicans won by 1.1% in 2016 that would mean they end up losing by 9-10%, though it could be slightly more or likely less. At this point the House is tilt-lean D.

[Oryxslayer]

Under a universal swing, Dems would take the house with a lwad of 4 - the median House seat is R+3. However, incumbency is a factor, so des probably need D+7 to take control.

On the flip side, if it was Rs in the minority, they would probably need a R+1/2 generic ballot to override incumbency. So it is not a true gerrymander lockout, but rather incumbency that raises tge bar for House control.

[UncleSam]

Generic ballot polling will regress a bit towards the mean next year as Likely Voter screens start getting employed and the tax bill hits in February. We should have a much better idea come April whether D leads in the double digits will last through next year or not - if Dems start seeing leads in the 6-8 point range instead of 10-12 range, I think they come up short in the final house vote, though only by a little. If Dems can retain their momentum they should flip the house, albeit probably narrowly.

[Young Conservative]

Democrats need to appeal to non-city residents if they want to win the house. Natural packed concentration of liberal voters is their problem, not gerrymanderin.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Generic ballot polling will regress a bit towards the mean next year as Likely Voter screens start getting employed and the tax bill hits in February. We should have a much better idea come April whether D leads in the double digits will last through next year or not - if Dems start seeing leads in the 6-8 point range instead of 10-12 range, I think they come up short in the final house vote, though only by a little. If Dems can retain their momentum they should flip the house, albeit probably narrowly.

The likely voter screens may have the opposite effect to the one you suggest.  Based on 2017 results, Democratic voters are currently more motivated and likely to vote then Republicans.  If the pollsters adjust their screens accordingly (as a couple did during the Alabama Senate election), the generic ballot is likely to move even further D-ward.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Democrats need to appeal to non-city residents if they want to win the house. Natural packed concentration of liberal voters is their problem, not gerrymanderin.

Looking at the 2016 results and considering Trump's approval appears to be holding up better in rural areas that voted for him than in suburban ones, the GOP may soon start to experience the same problems with vote-packing in rural areas that Dems currently do with urban areas.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I subscribe to Sabato's view that Dems need to win by 4 to take the house.
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/partisan-gerrymandering-and-the-outlook-for-the-2018-u-s-house-elections/