2018 HOR Midterms, all 435 races, part I

So, first a word of praise for the guys (and gals) at THE GREEN PAPERS: they do really excellent work at simply collecting information about what's up with coming elections.

Based on their information, I have put together a very large EXCEL table of all 435 HOR races that are planned for 2018. That is a link to google docs and I will be updating the table every couple of days.

There are lots of advantages to doing it this way, at least until the primaries are over with. I think that people of all ideological stripes will be thankful for this thread and please, feel free to click on and use the information.

Ok, so what is in the table and what is not at current? Here we go:



Just for kickers, so no one thinks I am being partisan, the decision to screenshot Colorado had nothing to do with politics, but rather, with my 10 year hold daughter, who loves this sweet treat:



LOL....she told me to screenshot Colorado. LOL

-Each state is hyperlinked to the Green Papers page that deals specifically with all 2018 races and is tagged to start with the HOR races.

-Each candidate who has his/her own campaign website is also hyperlinked.

-Each seat is color coded according to the party of the current seat-holder.

-The year in which that Representative was first elected to that seat is listed in the third column.

-The type of election (Incumbent or Open) is listed in the fourth column.

-Afterwards, for Ds, Rs, Is, Ls and unaffiliateds, the NUMBER of candidates already declared for the primaries is recorded. The state link will also show whether they have already made an FEC financial filing, or not. This number has nothing to do with quality/electability of candidates nor is it a predictor of who will win. It simply shows where the candidate interest/action is as of this point in time.

-The final, comments column is helpful to see incumbent races where one of the two major parties has not fielded a candidate yet for the primaries. More on this later in the. In that case, the number "0" is also bolded, to help catch your attention. In the case of OPEN elections, usually is so that the current seat-holder is giving up that seat in order to campaign for higher office.

Here is a second screenshot, of the OPEN races at this time:



That is a fine example of good record-keeping, without partisanship. Currently, in GA-06, a hotly contested race that Karen Handel (R) just won, the race is offically listed as OPEN only because Karen Handel has not filed yet nor declared her intent to run in 2018. Pretty much everyone is expecting that she will, but currently, officially, the race is open.

After the first tab, if you tab out, there are four other tabs you can see:



It's the same information, just sorted differently, by type of election, opposed or not and by year of election (meaning, the first year in which the current rep was elected, which gives us a good estimate of how long her or she has served).

With all of this stuff in mind, some cold, hard facts as of August 7th, 2017:



-Currently, 1,332 individuals have declared themselves as candidates for the US House of Representatives in 434 out of 435 races (UT-03 is currently vacant) and almost twice as many Democrats (63.01% of all candidates) have filed as have Republicans (33.03% of all candidates). Of all others, 63 candidates of other parties have filed (4.73% of all candidates). Once again, and I reiterate, numeric superiority at this point in time has absolutely nothing to do with quality. It's simply a number that shows interest. But in 2010 and in 2014, the tables were turned: far more GOP competitors were turning out to challenge sitting Democratic Congressmen. So, this is normal. What is abnormal is that it is happening so early. THAT is new.

-Over one state, Kansas, I can report absolutely nothing. For all four seats, no candidates (for either party) have declared at all. This may just mean that KS doesn't allow early filings or the incuments are taking their time getting around to filing. Those seats have been very reliable GOP seats for a long time and I see no major indication that things are going to change, in spite of the closeness of the KS-04 race from about 2 months ago. Again, it's just good book-keeping at this point to note this fact.

-In terms of open seats vs. Incumbent races, roughly 20 seats are open and only in the cases of MT-AL and GA-06 is it likely that the new winners simply have not filed yet, so we are guaranteed to see at least 18 new faces in congress based alone on the fact that the races are OPEN.

-When it comes to incumbent races, 80%+ of incumbents tend to win their re-elections. That is a statistical reality. Consider: in the big wave of 2010, where the GOP took 63 seats, that's 14.5% of the HOR, the other 85.5% remained in incumbent party hands.

-For me the far more important rubrik is the "unopposed" rubrik, which has major implications, especially in states that do Jungle Primaries. Example: in CA, 20 out of 53 seats are currently completely unopposed. If this statistic holds, then after the jungle primary is over with, then those 20 seats are already decided before election day. In 19 of those 20 CDs, the Republican party has not yet fielded a candidate for the Jungle Primary. In CA-08, it's the opposite, where the Democratic Party has not yet fielded a candidate. Remember, in a Jungle Primary, the names of everyone from all parties is on one ballot and the top-two vote getters get to go on to the General election. So, if a major Party doesn't field someone for a seat in the primary, then that party has already ceded the seat for the General. Remember, I am defining "unopposed" only referring to the two major parties. In a number of CA seats I classify as "unopposed", there is a third party candidate, for instance, CA-05, where a candidate from the "Free Soil Party of 1848" has filed....

-On the other side of the coin, and staying with the Jungle Primary states (for instance, CA, LA and GA), if too many from one party are running and only one from the other party, then that one lone candidate actually has a better chance of getting into the top-two: in CA-10, for instance, Jeff Denham's (R) seat, 7 Ds have filed against him, plus 1 I. So, he may only need 25% of the overall jungle-primary vote in order to get into the top two. So, the rush of one party to "pile-on" an incumbent of the opposing party may not necessarily be wise.

Nor is it wise against a seasoned veteran. In TX-32 (Texas doesn't have the jungle primary, but it does the so-called Texas 2-Step), with Pete Sessions (R), who was first elected to Congress in 1996, Bill Clinton's re-election year, as incumbent, 10 Democrats are in the running against him. Now, that may show massive energy and drive and enthusiasm, which I find good for our political spectrum, but it can just as easily mean that the 10 eat each other alive, burn through all of their funding and at the end of the day, Sessions trots off easily to re-election. Remember, being elected in 1996 means that he has already won 11 election cycles and is a seasoned veteran. At the same time, Pete Sessions, who will turn 73 next year, may just as well consider retirement and maybe Texas insiders already have wind of this kind of information. I am not saying that he is planning to retire, but I am saying that it is highly unusual to see THIS many contenders against an incumbent, and above all else, so early in the race. There is no real reverse-equivalent of this on the other side. The highest number of R contenders for a House seat is 5, in NV-03, where Democrat Jackie Rosen is running for the Senate, so the Rs have 5 in the primary and the Ds have 4.

The point I am making is that things do not always look as they appear, that discernment is necessary in seeing how things are shaping up.

In 2010 and 2014, the generic polling showed the GOP ahead. Right now, it shows the DEMS ahead, but I am wary of including generic polling in pretty much anything.

I also did not include the Cook PVI ratings for these CDs, either. Right now, I just want to get the information out there.

The final tab is a very telling tab. It tells us how many representatives are there from which "class", for instance, the class of 2004, or 1996. Here is the end-summary of those stats:



So, roughly 2/3 of the current HOR was seated as of the beginning of the 21st century. The legislative body is younger than many may realize.

But the class-to-class stats are even more enlightening. For instance, in 2010, as already mentioned, the GOP won 63 seats. Of those 63, 56 are still in Congress. That is a very large retention rate. In 2006, the DEMS won 31 seats. Of those 31 seats, 21 Representatives are still in Congress, a high retention rate, but not as high as 2010. And the stats go on and on and on.

I will be updating this table very frequently - without partisan tilt at all.

When the primaries are over with, then the Excel table will be adjusted for the top two candidates and polling information et al will be included. That will be, of course, Part II .

And as a final note, lots of things can change: a slew of incumbents could announce retirements in 2018, scandals (Weiner or Foley, take your pick) or family tragedies (Mel Carnahan, Senate, 2000) can happen, all sorts of stuff can happen. And in every election cycle I have watched there have been one or two surprises every election: one or two seats that were under the radar switched hands. All of these things can happen, which can make election night a little more exciting.

I hope that the PF community finds this info helpful.

-Stat

 

This paragraph from the OP:

Should read:

"Currently, 1,332 individuals have declared themselves as candidates for the US House of Representatives in 434 out of 435 races (UT-03 is currently vacant) and almost twice as many Democrats (63.06% of all candidates) have filed as have Republicans (33.04% of all candidates). Of all others, 52 candidates of other parties have filed (3.90% of all candidates). Once again, and I reiterate, numeric superiority at this point in time has absolutely nothing to do with quality. It's simply a number that shows interest. But in 2010 and in 2014, the tables were turned: far more GOP competitors were turning out to challenge sitting Democratic Congressmen. So, this is normal. What is abnormal is that it is happening so early. THAT is new."

Sorry, was distracted while doing the math by hand. LOL

 

Here comes the "blue wave"

Have another nothing burger on me.​

 

So, from August 7th to August 8th, 5 more HOR candidates have declared: 3 Ds, 1R and 1L



2 were added immediately after the OP went online yesterday (FL-29, IL-09), 3 were added this morning (IL-10, MA-06, NJ-11).

Source

We have gone from 1,332 declared candidates to 1,337

 

On August 7th, there were 1,332 declared HOR candidates, yesterday that number rose to 1,337 and as of today, August 9th, 2017, there are 1,345 declared candidates:



8 were added (FL-18, IL-05, IL-14, NC-04, OH-15, TN-02, TX-10, WA-0

Source

-Stat

 

On August 7th, there were 1,332 declared HOR candidates. As of August 10th, 2017, end of day, there are now 1,352 declared candidates:



There were changes in FL-01, FL-02, FL-07, FL-10, FL-11, FL-12, IN-04 and MA-03. So, there is lots and lots going on under the radar screen, as far as election 2018 is concerned.

Source

 

On August 7th, there were 1,332 declared HOR candidates. As of August 11th, 2017. there are now 1,356 declared candidates:




There were changes in IL-05, IN-04 (Rokita is not running for Sen, an R jumped in following his announcement), IN-08, IA-02, TN-06

Source.

 

Without getting into all the details, I think we can fairly safely say the GOP will still have the House - though if Trump's approval never bounces and continues to slide that could definitely change. But the problem is that, even if Trump is unpopular, the rural counties remain GOP - Democrats just aren't competitive in rural areas. However, if Trump continues to slide, I'll be the one to say it: you can expect a blue wave.

I'm given very little comfort by the fact that pollsters are more sloppy at this time and their methodology pretty clearly suggests their results are not representative of the actual electorate. But that accounts for a few points, not for the double digit gap Trump has.

 

Just to be absolutely clear: this thread is not about predictions at all. It is merely Part I - getting the nuts and bolts information out there, which, BTW, represents hours and hours of work on my part.

As far as predictions go, an hour is like a week in politics and all politics is local. Each race is individual and we are sure to see some surprises. There is an obvious numerical structural deficit for the Democrats in the Senate for 2018, but that same deficit is about to his the Republicans in 2020, a year in which far more than the "base" will turn out.

On the D side, the Ds see a real path to a House Majority and indeed, mathematically, it is very possible. They need less than 30 seats to do it and most waves in the last 24 years have brought at least 60 seats over to the winning side. Of course, this is nothing like the massive 100 or 200 seat swings we saw in the 20s to the 50s, but still, for the purpose of securing a majority, would do the trick. Again, each race is individual. KY-03 in the early 2000s is a good example. MO-SEN-2012 is another good one, or IN-SEN-2012.

As far as pollsters and polling go, you and I could have a very adult, very productive conversation about that and perhaps in the next days, I will make a thread just about it. But the work that goes into analyzing all of the end polling from 2016 is really, really time-consuming and I run my own business and work quite a bit...

Thanks for stopping by.

 

I'll certainly watch the thread.

 

I have every reason to suspect that there will be a record number of declared candidates for 2018 and that even seats that would normally be "safe" will be contested.

The Dems are focused primarily on any seat with an R incumbent margin at or below 7 which makes sense if they want to take back the House.

However the increase in declared candidates has nothing to do with the Dems intentions and more to do with overall dissatisfaction with Congress amongst the electorate at large. Some of these candidates are doing it out of frustration because they want the opportunity to express opinions that are being ignored by the parties themselves. In essence they are taking the concept of the government of the people quite literally and putting themselves forward as alternatives to the status quo.

2018 could very well be a "wave" election unlike any before if this dissatisfaction produces new faces capable of striking a chord amongst their local communities. Yes, all politics are local and there are undercurrents that are happening that are, in my opinion, good for the democratic process because they will result in a more engaged electorate.

Yes, I know this is not a prediction thread but it is worth noting that the Republicans do better with lower voter turnouts which is why they normally do so well in midterm elections. If the dissatisfaction translates into voter turnout 2018 could set a midterm record and that is not going to be a positive for the GOP.

 

First and foremost most people will check their bank balances/work situation and vote accordingly.

 

Nice workbook.

Election night is always a night of high entertainment for me as I watch the coverage on tv into the wee hours.

I think the next HOR (House Of Reps) in 2018 will be DEM controlled. And I hope the next Senate will remain GOP controlled. The Senate is more significant due to SCOTUS nominations and treaty ratifications.

The GOP has already proved in Trumps first 100 daze that they are unfit to govern.

 

Excellent work Stats.....thanks for the time and effort.

 

Indeed, I think this is a big factor for many people in every election. Didn't stop either D or or R-wave in the past.
But I think your point is very valid.

 

Look at today, the economy is doing well, stocks up , joblessness down, consumer confidence up, food stamp use down, illegal immigration is way down and no positive press. Reasonable people regardless of party vote for their own personal situation, and rightfully so.

 

Oh, I concur with you on that point. But, that being said, each race is individual and tons of things can happen up to election day.

 

Edit: nvm, I don't want to burst your bubble OP.

 

I do not understand your posting. What do you mean by "nvm"?

 

On August 7th, there were 1,332 declared HOR candidates. As of August 11th, 2017. there are now 1,363 declared candidates:




On the HOR level, there were changes in AZ-02, GA-07, IN-06 (no longer an unopposed race), ME-02, NJ-11, PA-11, TN-02, VA-06, WI-06. These are not all additions: sometimes, a candidate drops out. Also, The Green Papers corrected a clerical error in WI-06.

But just in one week's time, 30 additional candidates have declared. It is going to be a very busy primary season, I suspect.

Source.

 

As of August 14th, 2017. there were 1,363 declared candidates (I dated the one sentence in the posting before this one incorrectly, **** happens, nööö). As of August 17th, 2019, there are not 1,399 declared candidates for the HOR. That's an addition of 36 new candidates in 3 days time:



There were changes in CA-07, GA-07, GA-10 ID-01, KS-01, KS-02, KS-03, KS-04, MN-01, NM-02, ND-AL, SC-07, TN-02, TX-31, UT-03. If you read the OP, it noted that at that time, there was absolutely nothing to report out of Kansas. All of a sudden, there was a lot of data for all 4 HOR seats at once.

Source:

Green Papers 2017-08-015
Green Papers 2017-08-016
Green Papers 2017-08-017

 

As of last Thursday, August 17th, there were 1,300 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, August 21st, there are now 1,412:



Over Friday and the weekend, changes occured in CA-10, CA-24, CA-43, GA-03, IL-13, IL-18, KY-06, ME-02, MI-12, NJ-05, TN-01, TX-03, TX-14, TX-21, TX-23 and TX-32

The source is HERE, and you should read the blog entries for both Monday, August 21st and Friday, August 18th.

In TX-32, 11 Democrats are vying to go up against Republican incumbent (since 1996) Pete Sessions.
In CA-43, 4 Republicans are now vying to go up against Democratic incumbent (since 1990) Maxine Waters.

In Texas, it's the so called Texas-2-Step, with Primaries and Conventions, but the primaries are closed. So 11 candidates in the D-field means that a lot of money will be shot even before the General election season starts, which I consider to be to Pete Session's advantage. I am still wondering if Sessions is considering retiring and perhaps people in TX inner-circles know stuff we don't know.

Conversely, in CA, those are jungle primaries, so all 5 candidates (both D and R) will be on one ballot and the top two go on to the General election. With 4 republican contenders in a strongly Democratic district, with the Rs splitting the vote among them, Maxine Waters is guaranteed to sail on to the GE. In 2016, she won re-election with 76% of the SPV and in both 2014 and 2012, with 71% each time, respectively. So, it's an uphill battle here for any Republican, but with so many vying to go up against her, I wonder if she may also be considering retiring. Time will tell.

Both incumbents, Waters and Sessions, tend to be lightning-rods for "the other side", so some excitement in their races is to be expected.

-Stat

 

As of Monday, August 21, 2017, there were 1,412 declared candidates for the HOR. As of today, there are now 1,416:




There were changes in CA-23, CA-31, CO-04, CO-07, MD-07, NC-04 and TX-23


Source

 

As of Wednesday, August 23rd, 2017, there were 1,416 declared candidate for the HOR. As of today, August 25th, 2017, there are now 1,430:



There were changes in AL-05, AZ-03, CO-02, FL-01, FL-22. IL-17, IN-06, KS-02, ME-02, MS-04, OR-02, TX-03, TX-07

Source (changes from 08/25 and 08/24)

When this thread began on August 7th, 2017, there were 1,332 declared candidated for the US-HOR, so 98 newly declared candidates have come on board in the last (almost) 3 weeks.

 

As of Friday, August 25th, 2017, there are were 1,430 declared candidates for the US-HOR.

As of today, Thursday, August 31, 2017, there are now 1,449 declared candidates:



There were changes in AR-01, AZ-08, CA-10, CA-26, CA-39, CA-52, FL-07, FL-11, FL-27, IL-16, NY-06, NY-21, NC-06, OH-12, OH, 15, OH-12, OR-02, PA-11, SC-07, TX-16,TX-22, VA-02,
,
Source (Changes from August 28th through August 31st)