For Democrats, 8 is the loneliest number this November
The best survey of the November House elections I’ve found shows that Republicans are expected to emerge from the contest with a narrow majority of seats at 225-210.
If this prediction holds true, it means that out of the roughly 70 vulnerable seats now held by Democrats, they need to find a way to eke out another eight victories.
That’s a tiny number out of the 435 contests nationwide, and it gives a clear sense that despite all the rhetoric to the contrary Democrats are still in the hunt for a (razor-thin) majority.
But in this political climate, it won’t be easy. You can bet that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s team is scouring the country, looking for any chance at a save.
One thing is more certain day-by-day: to hold their majority, Democrats need to sharply limit their losses here in New York state and the North Country.
A top priority has to be propping up Mike Arcuri (D-Utica) in his NY-24 contest with Republican businessman Richard Hanna.
That same survey of the race (click link above) says Hanna now has a narrow advantage.
Tags: election10
.png)
I like your use of adjectives. A “narrow” margin is 219-217.
A landslide is 225-210, where the Dems lose 48 seats. Wow! and Historic! are better descriptive words for this.
Democrats currently have a 253-178 majority.
If Republicans capture a 225-210 majority, as this forecast suggest, it will be a far more narrow margin.
This isn’t only semantics.
With a 225-210 GOP margin (or, conversely, a razor-thin Democratic margin) the parties will have a much more difficult time assembling majorities to pass legislation.
The GOP will struggle to marshal more liberal House members — especially if they win elections in more Democratic-leaning districts in November.
If they maintain the majority, Democrats will struggle similarly to marshal more conservative members of their caucus.
This wasn’t a problem for Dems in the current House.
Democrats held such a large majority that they were able to pass sweeping legislation, while allowing their “blue dog” members to defect on key votes.
(An example would be Mike Arcuri’s vote against health care.)
–Brian, NCPR
I always thought having narrow margins was a good thing as ot prevented either side from going whole hog with the truly stupid and outlandish elements of their platforms.
Bret,
Narrow margins don’t matter in the House. Majority rules, no filibuster. It’s closer to a parliamentary system.
Verplanck,
I disagree, and must point you to Brian Mann’s absolutely correct earlier comment about a larger majority allowing for leeway in assembling the votes to pass a bill. Fortunately, members of Congress are not bound to vote with their party 100% of the time, and thankfully many do think for themselves. That’s why Bret claimed that smaller majorities lead to more compromises and more moderate legislation.