A bit early for that, surely:
Democratic hopes of recapturing the House are dimming as a series of race-by-race setbacks and economic uncertainty suggest that the 25 seats they need to net might be out of reach.
The Hill projects that Democrats will net somewhere between 10 and 15 seats, assuming the presidential election remains a close contest.
Although I don’t know where they’re getting 10 to 15 seats, given that their latest available projection (from May) shows the Democrats and Republicans standing pat (seven Democratic seats expected to flip, and seven Republican ones). Then again, there may be a new projection that’s not available, given that the Hill’s May list is still showing CA-31 as being a Toss-up. It’s actually Safe Republican, given that California’s bizarre new jungle primary system split the Democratic vote sufficiently that the two Republican candidates ‘won’ the primary. I’d email to check, except that there’s no immediately obvious way to do that.
Anyway: interesting, no? – And it’s fitting in with my informal, subjective feelings about the race. The Democrats have simply not been acting like a political party that will win the House of Representatives back.
Moe Lane
PS: We will lose seats. Expect it.
Even if we lose a net of 1 seat the media will view it as a rebuke of repubs/tea party and that Romney has no mandate. Therefore, they will claim he will have to govern from the “center” in a “bipartisan” manner.
Now, can we get the Senate – that’s the billion dollar question. Even if Romney is elected, and the House stays Republican, it’s totally moot unless we also get the Senate since otherwise, Harry Reid won’t allow any budgets to come to the floor and we won’t make any progress to resolve the debt crisis.
We’ve already lost Maine and will most likely lose MA. So, can we gain a net of 4 to do this?