But the Dems will still be the majority even with a 20 seat loss, right?
Yes...
Yes. Current make up is 255 to 178, a 77 seat difference. A 20 seat switch would make it 235 to 198, and even Republicans picking up 2 seats would still put them 35 seats down.
However, if the polling continues at it’s current pace, you could see a soft chance at a 30 seat flip. That would put the Republicans in good position for a house take over with a successful Presidential candidate in 2012.
But even with the Democrats collapsing right now, it seems unlikely that the Republicans can recapture the House in 2010.
The magic number is right around 40.
20 seat flip is not good enough. We need at least 45 and preferably 70.
Yes. The current margin is 256 to 179, for a margin of 77 seats. If Republicans won 39 seats, they would have a bare majority. In practice, a margin of 10 to 20 seats is needed for secure control, meaning that winning or switching 45 to 50 seats must be the goal.
The NRCC already has a target list of 70 seats, and another 10 or so are expected to be added. Many of the target districts voted for Bush and McCain but went Democrat when Rahm Emmanuel recruited and won with relatively conservative House candidates.
In 2010, these “Blue Dogs” will have to defend numerous liberal votes, high deficits, unemployment in excess of 10%, and association with the increasingly unpopular Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Historically, the party out of power tends to gain House seats in the mid term elections.
At this point, the smart money would bet on large Republican gains in the House but not enough to take control.
The Republicans are not prepared to assume the majority. If they were to win a majority in 2010, the preponderance of the evidence is that they would immediately f**k up.
To turn this Democrat debacle into long-lasting success, we need a Gingrich and we don't have one right now.
But the Dems will still be the majority even with a 20 seat loss, right?
+++++++++++
“noting a new Gallup poll showing Congress’ job disapproval at 70 percent among independents”
“But the Dems will still be the majority even with a 20 seat loss, right?”
Yup GOP would still be under 200 and Dems at 235 ... but why would it be this GOOD for the Dems in 2010, if after a *campaign* of Repubs cutting through the media clutter, we make people realize what they’ve bought into?
The only scenario that makes nov 2010 better than aug 2009 for the Dems polling-wise would be if the economy is gangbusters. possible, but not likely due to how the dems are managing it.
I think a shift of 6-8 pts to the GOP and a 25-40 seat gain is more in the ballpark of what you might expect. 1994 was almost 50 seats IIRC. 2010 will be another 1994 IMHO.