Larry Sabato Projects a 6-8 Seat Gain for Democrats in the House

[Awsi Dooger]

We need +15 and even the lowest estimates have generally been +8-10, so this surprised me. It's a new posting on his website for Thursday. Sabato and co-writer David Wasserman argue Democrats "have thus far failed to establish a truly national narrative to frame the battles in each of their targeted districts within a single, compelling context."

They list the so-called Four Ts of the Battle for the House: Terrain, Top of the Ticket Influences, Treasuries of Campaigns and Traits of Candidates. Scroll low on this link for the "Dirty Thirty Competitive House Races."

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=DNW2006062901

"Just how perilously close are Republicans to losing their congressional majority in 2006? The way several independent observers and Democrats are talking and acting these days, you might guess the GOP's demise was all but a done deal.

Only last month, veteran bipartisan polling team Thom Riehle and Lance Tarrance concluded that Republicans were "on the road to losing their majority status" after finding that by a margin of 44 percent to 32 percent, registered voters nationwide preferred the generic Democratic candidate for Congress in their district to the generic Republican. In Texas Hold'em poker terms, Riehle and Tarrance argued then that "Republicans need some great flop cards, a lucky turn card and a killer river card if they have any hopes of avoiding an all-in disaster in November."

<snip>

"But a little more than four months out from the election, the Crystal Ball is not yet ready to view the GOP majority as a flimsy house of cards, nor in our estimation should Murtha fast-forward to helping Pelosi hand out committee gavels to the ranking members of his caucus. The Republican margin in the House of Representatives may be more tenuous this year than it has been in any election cycle since its inception in 1994, but a larger wave than currently exists must build in order to completely erode the GOP's 15-seat edge, and by no means has the party in power already been swept out to sea."

<snip>

"Looking at each of these four factors carefully will tell us much about whether Democratic chances of sweeping the House sweepstakes keep moving closer to 50 percent over the next few months. At least for now, the race-by-race rather than national dynamic of competitive congressional races points to a "micro-wave" rather than a "macro-wave" for Democrats, and the current heat level places the Crystal Ball's best House estimate in the area of a 6-8 seat Democratic gain."

[snowbear]

1. Sabato and Wasserman have been drinking too much green tea..

Even Tweety on MSNBC and Wolf on CNN gave a 10 time better projection today for Democrats than "Sabato's Cystral Ball"

O'well.. we'll see "a poll a week" until November rolls around..

[Awsi Dooger]

2. I wish I knew the individual races better

And could pinpoint where he's wrong.

I've done work on the voting history of those districts but I don't know enough about the candidates or local issues

[TayTay]

3. And the way-back machine pulls in 1994 and says:

POLL SHOWS CONGRESSIONAL INCUMBENTS HAVE VERY LITTLE TO FEEL CONFIDENT ABOUT
Buffalo News, CITY, Sec. NEWS, p A3 07-04-1994
By RICHARD MORIN and DAVID S. BRODER - Washington Post

WASHINGTON

Four months before its members face the voters, the 103rd Congress is seen as a do-nothing assemblage of quarrelsome partisans more attuned to the special interests than to its constituents, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Six out of 10 of the 1,531 randomly selected persons polled disapprove of the way Congress is doing its job, but an equal proportion give thumbs up to the work of their own representatives.

The poll, done June 23 to 26, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent.

Any comfort incumbents may draw from their status has to be balanced by the fact that only 35 percent say they are inclined to re-elect their representative, while 54 percent want to look for someone else. Those figures are nearly identical to the 1992 numbers that presaged the biggest turnover in the makeup of the House in almost five decades.

In 19 surveys over the last five years, spanning three Congresses and two presidents, the average scores for Congress have been 33 percent approval and 62 percent disapproval. The latest poll -- showing 34 percent approval and 61 percent disapproval -- is right in line with that.

The disapproval number is down five percentage points from the level when the 103rd Congress began in January 1993, but it is 26 points higher than it was 20 years ago, when Congress was confronting President Richard M. Nixon in the impeachment proceedings that led to his resignation. Unlike many other political attitudes, this one does not split on partisan lines. Six out of 10 Democrats and an equal percentage of Republicans say they disapprove of the job Congress is doing.

[formernaderite]

8. the most important line from the piece you posted

this is the most important line:

"Six out of 10 of the 1,531 randomly selected persons polled disapprove of the way Congress is doing its job, but an equal proportion give thumbs up to the work of their own representatives."
people may hate the congress as it stands, but they don't seem to blame their OWN representative. So many of these districts on both the republican and democratic side have been neatly carved out to ensure that the district is overwhelmingly representing one party or the other. Unfortunately I don't see a huge shift in the congress...but I would love to see us take back the Senate...is that at least doable?

[DemPopulist]

12. Uh

You do realize that article is from 1994, right? When the Republicans picked up 54 seats? :shrug:

[gasperc]

9. great find

[gasperc]

10. although the GOP DID pick up seats in '92

so all though they messed up on many other races they did pick up a bunch of seats in 1992, which at the time was described as a paradox but not really since the anti-incumbent was already forming and crested in 1994.

You can't really say that happened in 2004, so 2006 could be a pre-wave allowing the GOP to cling to power(sadly) but implement yet more diasterous policies and possibly contend with very bad economic conditions along with high interest and fuel prices which will culminate in a macro-wave in 2008. So, I'm not saying this as a strategy but we are simply obligated to do ALL we can to win as many seats as possible. Let's face it, if we do win a majority with just 15 seats then a one or two seat majority will be difficult to govern with. The one big advantage will be subpeona power and the chairmenships but rest assured the GOP will work tirelessly to keep us wobbling

[DemPopulist]

13. The GOP didn't pick up "a bunch of seats" in '92

They picked up about ten seats in the House - essentially gaining back what they lost in the '90 midterms - and lost a seat or two in the Senate. Not really a foreshadowing of the '94 landslide.

You don't need a pre-wave to have a wave. Sometimes the biggest waves are in opposition to a victory in the prior election, like in 1966 when the Republicans gained around 50 seats after losing a lot in the Goldwater debacle.

[City Lights]

4. I'm pleasantly shocked to see someone giving JD Hayworthless a run

for his money. :applause: I used to live in his district and never expected him to be in a competitive race.

I'm now in IL's 8th (IL's wealthiest and most Republican district) and hope Bean can win another term.

[rockymountaindem]

5. Personally, I'd say that 's about right

I think we can make gains, but all this talk of winning one or both houses is just going to lead to a bunch of diasppointed Democrats come November. I hope I'm wrong, though.

[Awsi Dooger]

11. The betting odds on House control are 50/50

That's on TradeSports.com and offshore venues. It basically hasn't changed for months.

So Larry Sabato's projection of only 6-8 seats transfer is way out of line with that.

For reference purposes, the betting line of the Senate is more than 80% favorite the GOP will retain control. Actually, that's very low. When I look at the odds of the individual races, the math comes out much higher than 80% that we will not take over the senate. Especally since there has been a big move in DeWine's favor in Ohio. The favoritism in that race moved 6 or 7% toward DeWine in the past few days. He's now a small favorite to retain the seat.

[kentuck]

6. If the Democrats "only" win 6-8 seats, it will be the fault of the...

..."leftists" in the Party. If they had been less vocal, voters would have trusted the Democrats more, and more Independents would have voted for the Democrats. Democrats will have to be a "moderate" Party to ever achieve majority status again. Can't you hear it now?? :sarcasm:

[peaches2003]

7. Listen to Larry

I always find Larry Sabato's views to be worth listening to. His University of Virginia Center for Politics does not give either side what they want to hear, but is close to political reality.