Smart money is on Republicans keeping control of House, betting site odds say

KARE11 ^ | 10/28/2018 | William Cummings

[a little elbow grease]

Nate Silver still has his head up his *ss, though.

lol

[rb22982]

With the map this year (lots of vacant R seats, redistricting helping Ds in PA and elsewhere, etc on the House side, and a lot of Dem senate seats in R/Purple states Trump won), it’s possible.

[thirst4truth]

I already moved to the hills when Obama won.

We moved when Clinton won! Moved from Seattle to southern Oregon, 24 years ago. Just got back from a funeral and visit in Seattle went up to Friday Harbor, via Anacortes. Drove all the way and I think I had my first panic attack of my life, on the west coasts Interstate 5, seriously don't know if I can do it again.

[fortheDeclaration]

No, those are still GOP districts and it would take a real wave to flip that many seats. Since the Democrats are going to lose Senate seats, there is no wave and they will fall short. Also, the Democrats are now complaining about gerrymandering helping the GOP, not them. The only way you flip 23 seats is in a wave election cycle, and that is not going to happen. Also, we are likely to flip some of their seats as well.

[rb22982]

Again, that is incorrect. Many of those district went for HRC in 2016, sometimes by large amounts. And we were gerrymandered out of 3 seats in PA and possibly a handful in a few other states. The house could easily be +15R to +10Ds with where things sit now and 2% turnout delta could easily make or break it.

[fortheDeclaration]

Most of those districts had GOP congressmen but are now open seats, that is why they are considered 'tossup's'

And the Democrats are complaining about the Gerrymandering losing them seats.

There are also a number of Democrat seats that the GOP may flip to make up for those 3 seats. The fact is that the Democrats need to pick up 23 GOP held seats, which would take a wave election like they had in 2006. It isn't going to happen when they are losing Senate seats.

[rb22982]

Again, no. The gerry-mandering Democrats complain about is what we did after 2010 when we took over the vast majority of state houses/governors. There is no gerry-mandering in the entire country this election that is net incrementally favorable to Rs and there are a lot to Ds, including 3 basically freebies in PA. Yes, those seats are now open but they also voted for HRC, making them very competitive races. There are only a small handful of D seats up that are competitive (MN has a couple) but 35+R seats.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying the Dems will take the house, but there are many scenarios where Democrats don't pick up AZ or NV (lose by 1-4%), we pick up MO and ND (+2) and we lose the house by 5 seats.