2018 Congressional Recruitment/Fundraising/Ratings Megathread v2

[UlmerFudd]

The overconfidence from Republicans is striking. Peterson will easily be re-elected in 2018, by 8-10 points. He'll probably retire in 2020 though.

I would say that overconfidence is a problem on both sides. I highly doubt that any Democratic incumbents in the House will lose this year, similar to how no Republican incumbents lost in 2010, and Peterson, in particular, will probably be boosted by Klobuchar's performance in the Senatorial race there. But I also think that some of the projections which have been made by people here, in regards to the status of certain races or to the extent of Democratic gains in Congress, are overblown. The effects of gerrymandering, both in the political and in the "natural" (that is, geographic) sense should always be taken into account. Patterns of polarization must also be considered. The 2018 midterms will be decided by which way independents go, and by how energized the respective party bases are.

My belief is that the Republicans will retain the Senate, if only narrowly, and that they will gain at least one of the Senate seats. I think the House will yield a narrow Democratic majority. Those are more reasonable projections than the people who think that Democrats will gain 70+ seats and dominate every race.

Didn't Djou and Cao lose?

[KingSweden]

The overconfidence from Republicans is striking. Peterson will easily be re-elected in 2018, by 8-10 points. He'll probably retire in 2020 though.

I would say that overconfidence is a problem on both sides. I highly doubt that any Democratic incumbents in the House will lose this year, similar to how no Republican incumbents lost in 2010, and Peterson, in particular, will probably be boosted by Klobuchar's performance in the Senatorial race there. But I also think that some of the projections which have been made by people here, in regards to the status of certain races or to the extent of Democratic gains in Congress, are overblown. The effects of gerrymandering, both in the political and in the "natural" (that is, geographic) sense should always be taken into account. Patterns of polarization must also be considered. The 2018 midterms will be decided by which way independents go, and by how energized the respective party bases are.

My belief is that the Republicans will retain the Senate, if only narrowly, and that they will gain at least one of the Senate seats. I think the House will yield a narrow Democratic majority. Those are more reasonable projections than the people who think that Democrats will gain 70+ seats and dominate every race.

Didn't Djou and Cao lose?

They did, though those (especially in Djou’s case) were unusual circumstances. Lee Terry and Steve Southerland are better examples IMO

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The problem with Steve Southerland and Lee Terry was that they were weak incumbents. Colin Peterson cannot conceivably be seen as such.

[Calthrina950]

The overconfidence from Republicans is striking. Peterson will easily be re-elected in 2018, by 8-10 points. He'll probably retire in 2020 though.

I would say that overconfidence is a problem on both sides. I highly doubt that any Democratic incumbents in the House will lose this year, similar to how no Republican incumbents lost in 2010, and Peterson, in particular, will probably be boosted by Klobuchar's performance in the Senatorial race there. But I also think that some of the projections which have been made by people here, in regards to the status of certain races or to the extent of Democratic gains in Congress, are overblown. The effects of gerrymandering, both in the political and in the "natural" (that is, geographic) sense should always be taken into account. Patterns of polarization must also be considered. The 2018 midterms will be decided by which way independents go, and by how energized the respective party bases are.

My belief is that the Republicans will retain the Senate, if only narrowly, and that they will gain at least one of the Senate seats. I think the House will yield a narrow Democratic majority. Those are more reasonable projections than the people who think that Democrats will gain 70+ seats and dominate every race.

Didn't Djou and Cao lose?

My mistake. But my point still holds for the most part. I'm not excluding the possibility that one or two incumbents may lose, but I don't think any will.

[Brittain33]

Oh dear, that canard that Collin Petersen who survived 1994, 2010, and 2014 is suddenly on a knife’s edge for re-election during a midterm of the most unpopular Republican president of the last 40 years. Sure, Sean.

Perhaps you missed where he barely beat an unknown opponent as Trump won his district in a landslide (and is still likely very popular there)?

The only reason I am skeptical is that he is facing the same opponent this time.

Ok. Can you give me any examples of a Congressman who barely survived a Presidential year won by a President of the opposite party and then lost in the mid-term election, without there being a big redistricting factor? There may be some, but it would surprise me.

Lee Terry? Steve Southerland? Do you guys have complete amnesia?

You’re right, those are two good examples.

[KingSweden]

Good article from Amy Walter:

https://cookpolitical.com/analysis/national/national-politics/has-blue-wave-already-crested

[mencken]

The problem with Steve Southerland and Lee Terry was that they were weak incumbents. Colin Peterson cannot conceivably be seen as such.

They were also Republican incumbents representing R+4 districts, as opposed to a previously D+6 district that stampeded all the way to D+12 in the last election.

I do not see how it is "overly optimistic" to think that Peterson will probably win reelection by a narrow margin, but would be in trouble if he had a serious opponent. Would that have been a mischaracterization of Democrats' opinion of Valadao circa 2014?

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Changed a number of ratings, mostly in the direction of Republicans.

[Brittain33]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

[_]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

Oh boy here we go

[Strudelcutie4427]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

Oh boy here we go

Democrats are gonna learn fast not to line up behind that little twerp. He’s going after them now

[YE]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

[GlobeSoc]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

[Politician]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

[ON Progressive]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

The amazing thing is that it might actually help Peterson.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Collin Peterson is 1 of 4 House Democrats to receive money from the NRA in 2016.

[Lamda]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

I am a Democrat and a proud gun owner,Hogg can suck it.

[mencken]

Remember when anyone who ever said anything bad about David Hogg ever was a terrible person?

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

David Hogg from Parkland has discovered Collin Peterson and is going after him on Twitter.

The amazing thing is that it might actually help Peterson.

[Calthrina950]

Remember when anyone who ever said anything bad about David Hogg ever was a terrible person?

Opinions have certainly changed on this board. David Hogg, as I noted before, is very arrogant and overconfident, and has done more to harm his cause then he has to advance it.

[Brittain33]

Remember when anyone who ever said anything bad about David Hogg ever was a terrible person?

Well, that’s still true. Pretty much anyone going after Hogg has been a terrible person. I think Hogg is wrong on this, but he may not have the same priorities as me.

[Calthrina950]

Remember when anyone who ever said anything bad about David Hogg ever was a terrible person?

Well, that’s still true. Pretty much anyone going after Hogg has been a terrible person. I think Hogg is wrong on this, but he may not have the same priorities as me.

My views of Hogg are based upon an evaluation of the statements which he has made, and how he has conducted himself in public. While I would never wish harm upon anyone, and consider the conspiracy theories bandied about by those on the right to be extreme and cruel, I have never thought Hogg to be the best role-model for his movement either. But then again, considering who is our President, one has to take things into context.

[Person Man]

Remember when anyone who ever said anything bad about David Hogg ever was a terrible person?

Well, that’s still true. Pretty much anyone going after Hogg has been a terrible person. I think Hogg is wrong on this, but he may not have the same priorities as me.

My views of Hogg are based upon an evaluation of the statements which he has made, and how he has conducted himself in public. While I would never wish harm upon anyone, and consider the conspiracy theories bandied about by those on the right to be extreme and cruel, I have never thought Hogg to be the best role-model for his movement either. But then again, considering who is our President, one has to take things into context.

If we keep voting for Trump and his bureaucrats in Congress and the state level, if course people are going to try to emulate them.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Good article by Josh Kraushaar of National Journal arguing that fundamentals matter more than the recent tightening of the generic ballot: https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/668463?unlock=TCWQH9ME1WELGENA.  Bottom line:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[KingSweden]

Good article by Josh Kraushaar of National Journal arguing that fundamentals matter more than the recent tightening of the generic ballot: https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/668463?unlock=TCWQH9ME1WELGENA.  Bottom line:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Remarkably bullish from Hotline Josh, who is usually sour on Dem chances