Congressional Prognosticators Are Unaware of The Scope Of The 2020 Anti-Trump Wave That Is Forming

The new Economist/YouGov poll, released yesterday, has more bad news for the GOP. Favorability for congressional Democrats (37%) is 8 points higher than favorability for congressional Republicans (29%). Since only 34% of voters see Trump as honest and trustworthy, he's not going to be able to offer Republicans much help heading into the midterms, except with his hardcore followers-- the 34%. And they need some help. The generic congressional vote now, looks hideous for the GOP. Asked who they would vote for, the Republicans were underwater in every region, as well as nationally:

Northeast

• Democrat- 58%
• Repblican- 30%

Midwest

• Democrat- 45%
• Repblican- 40%

South

• Democrat- 44%
• Repblican- 40%

West

• Democrat- 47%
• Repblican- 38%

Nationally

• Democrat- 47%
• Republican- 38%

Yesterday, writing about the same 2020 congressional cycle, the brain scientists at the Cook Report, as conservative and wrong as always, claimed that "Overall, Democrats are favorites to retain the majority, more likely a reduced than expanded one. If the 23 seats currently in the Toss Up column were to split evenly between the parties, Republicans would gain a net of five seats, less than a third of what they need. The Democrats-- even with a wrecked and even more useless than usual DCCC-- are on track to pick up closer to 50 seats than lose 5. Their predictions have consistently proven worthless for the last decade and a half... so why does anyone care what they say?

Why split them? That's just arbitrarily stupid, It would literally make more sense to say the Democrats will win all of them-- or 90% of them. Look, for example, at the once iconic Republican county in California that swung elections to Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon-- red, red Orange County. It used to be for Republican politics what Bavaria was for the Nazi Party. No more-- in fact there is not one Republican congressman left in any corner of the county-- 100% Democrat. But the NRCC us targeting the 4 Democratic freshmen. Split them 2 to 2? Insane, when the Democrats are likely to retain all 4, even incompetent and worthless Gil Cisneros, who may be far less lucky when Trump isn't on the ballot in 2022. As of yesterday, there were more registered Democrats in Orange County than there are Republicans. By election day, there are likely to be thousands more Democrats than Republicans, since the Democrats are out-registering the GOP by around 100 voters per day.

Rachel Bitecofer is a better analyst and prognosticator than Cook. Her latest is about how increased suburban turnout is what gave the Democrats their big midterm wins in 2018. "The main driver of the suburban revolt away from the GOP," she wrote, "is college education. Although Trumpism has been an effective rallying cry for the GOP base, it has galvanized a previously complacent part of the electorate; white, college educated millennial women as well as all voters under age 40, who represent a far more diverse and liberal voter universe than their older counterparts. As such, any district with high levels of college educated voters was extremely vulnerable for Republicans in 2018, even those that had long been in the hands of the Republican Party such as the six Orange County districts in Southern California which my model was quite clear would uniformly flip to the Democrats. It's important to clarify one point, profoundly misunderstood, 2018 is a story of turnout and turnout was powered by one thing, and one thing only: Donald J. Trump. Contrary to conventional wisdom, Democrats did not flip these Republican districts via the support of moderate Republicans due to their focus on health care. Instead, I’ll show in a forthcoming analysis of the voter file that Democrats’ sharp reversal in their abysmal midterm electoral fortunes was powered by large turnout surges of partisan Democrats and Independents. This turnout surge had profound impacts on the demographic and partisan compositions of the electorates in the competitive districts, leading 40 of them to flip on Election Day."

For better or for worse, American elections are low turnout affairs and it is increasingly clear that in the polarized era, as voters have become more entrenched in their respective parties, elections are increasingly decided by which party (and their Independent leaners) has a turnout-boosting enthusiasm advantage. Analyzed this way, contests are assessed by their turnout surge (or decline) potential. Using this metric, despite Democrats’ impressive 2018 performance, they left a half dozen seats uncontested in the 2018 cycle that may well have flipped if they had been identified as competitive by the Democrat’s campaign apparatus.

The table below identifies these districts, as well as several others Democrats did contest but came up short in for the 2018 cycle. Nine of these districts are in Texas, which increasing looks like it should be Ground 0 of the Democrats’ 2020 efforts. However, actually flipping these districts would require a massive investment in an area Democrats have continually under-invested in: Latino turnout. Democrats’ success in increasing the size of their House majority will largely depend on whether they come to recognize the need to maximize turnout among Democratic-friendly constituencies such as college-educated women, Latinos, African Americans, and Millennials and in their ability to understand that it is fear of Trump, not policy, that will best motivate these voters to the polls, no matter what the voters themselves may think. Given the rampant misdiagnosis of how Democrats came upon their House majority in the 1st place (the turnout surge was about health care, not Trump and they won by wooing Republicans) I am certainly not arguing that Democrats will win these seats, only that demographically, they would be able to if they ran the right strategy. Between NY 24 and 27 Democrats and their allies spent $40 million dollars and came up short on both races. Reinvesting money like that in Texas has potential to yield them far greater seat gains.

I’ll add, the four open seats all but certain to flip as is AZ 6 now that the party has come to realize how competitive it is. I also assume that the party will invest more heavily in NE-2 in 2020, regardless of whether they care for the nominee. That would give Democrats a bare minimum of an additional 6 seats from the cycle.

Here are the 18 most competitive seats currently held by the Republican Party [including the percentage of residents with college eductions]. 

• AZ-06- David Schweikert-- 51.1%
• GA-07- (open) 47.8%
• IN-05- (open)-- 50.9%
• MO-02- Ann Wagner-- 55.4%
• NC-02- George Holding-- 43.8%
• NE-02- Don Bacon-- 46.1%
• NY-01- Lee Zeldin-- 44.4%
• NY-24- John Katco-- 41.9%
• NY-27- Chris Collins-- 42.3%
• TX-02- Dan Crenshaw-- 47.1%
• TX-03- Van Taylor-- 60.5%
• TX-10- Michael McCaul-- 44.3%
• TX-21- Chip Roy-- 51.8%
• TX-22- (open)-- 51.3%
• TX-23- (open)-- 24.1%
• TX-24- (open)-- 51.0%
• TX-25- Roger Williams-- 43.1%
• TX-31- John Carter-- 42.8%

I asked the most likely Democratic candidates in some of these districts why they think they are going to turn their district blue this cycle. The first to get back with me was Mike Siegel, the Texan who nearly defeated Michael McCaul in 2018 and is poised to do just that in 2020. "In a single election cycle, we narrowed the gap in TX-10 from 19% to 4%. Through a strong field campaign, a massive volunteer effort, and enthusiasm up and down the ballot my campaign mobilized over 1,000 Texans to knock doors and get out the vote. And this was only the beginning. McCaul is deeply unpopular, because of his attacks on healthcare, his complicity in family separation and other human rights abuses, and his complete absence from the District. For eight terms, McCaul did nothing to show that he cared; he relied on personal wealth and gerrymandering to maintain his position. Now, we have the foundation for a strong progressive shift, led by youth and labor, social justice organizations and grassroots activists, that will flip TX-10 and propel Democratic candidates up and down the ballot, from local races to Senate and President. McCaul's days in Congress are numbered."

Marqus Cole is the progressive Democrat running for the open seat in the suburbs north of Atlanta that is looking like it's gone from red to purple and will elect a Democrat for the first time in living memory. "Anyone who looks closely at the GA-07 can see the writing on the wall," said Cole this morning. "That is why Woodall retired instead of facing the music. The lukewarm centrist candidate ran and lost in this Atlanta suburb by 500 votes; meanwhile Lucy McBath ran as a gun control activist next door and won and here Stacey Abrams ran as a strong unabashed, unapologetic Democrat and carried the district by 1,700 votes on a progressive platform.  This is one of the most diverse communities in the South and it is only growing as incomes go up, demographics change and the Trump Administration gets more extreme. A progressive, millennial and minority candidate who can speak to criminal justice reform, access to healthcare and small business interests is pitch perfect to carry the seat. That is why the Republican party is doing everything it can to try and buy the seat early with candidates pouring in $50,000; $250,00 and $600,000 of their own dollars early." It's worth investing in seats like GA-07 and TX-10 and helping progressives like Marqus Cole and Mike Siegel replace Republicans in Congress. Please click on the Blue America 2020 congressional thermometer on the right and consider contributing what you can.