2018 HOR Midterms, all 435 races, part I

I would say the most likely consequence of the "Trump Effect" will be to end up putting more (previously thought) Safe (R) seats in play for the Dems.

 

As of Friday, October 27th, there were 1,726 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, Friday, November 3rd, 2017, there are now 1,741:



Note: as of September 29th, 2017, for each CD, the party in control of that CD is now marked by color (the now widely accepted red vs blue) and the current number of candidates for that CD are listed in parentheses to the right of the CD itself.

There were changes in the following 27 CDs: AZ-09 (10), AR-04 (5), CA-25 (, CA-27 (3, now unopposed), CA-51 (2, still unopposed), CA-52 (7), CA-53 (3), CO-06 ( 8 ), FL-16 ( 8 ), FL-27 (16), HI-01 (3), ID-01 ( 8 ), IL-12 (7), IA-04 (7), IN-05 (5), MD-06 (13), MA-02 (5), MI-07 (3), MT-01 (7, technically still an open seat), NH-01 (9), NY-11 (10), OH-12 (6), TN-02 (9), TX-04 (3), TX-05 (1, currently unopposed, now an open seat, Hensarling is not running for re-election), TX-21 ( 8, now an open seat, Lamar Smith is retiring), VA-01 (6), VA-07 (9)

Source (see postings going back to October 30th)

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

On Friday, November 3rd, 2017, there were 1,741 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of Monday morning, November 20th, 2017, there are now 1,801:



I was so swamped with work, I just didn't have the time to keep up on this, and so I simply swept through all 435 seats and recorded all changes, just to be sure. There were over 70 changes in 32 states:

AR-01 (5), CA-06 (1), CA-09 (2, no longer unopposed), CA-10 (11), CA-14 (2, no longer unopposed), CA-36 (5), CA-42 (5), FL-01 (5), FL-02 (3, still unopposed), FL-16 (7), HI-02 (3, still unopposed), ID-01 (9), IL-07 (5), IL-17 (4), IL-18 (3), IN-04 (10), IN-05 (3), IN-07 (4), IN-09 (7), KS-03 (6), KY-04 (4), LA-03 (4), MD-03 (3), MA-03 (13), MI-04 (4), MN-03 (6), NV-02 (4), NV-03 (12), NH-01 (11), NH-02 (5), NJ-02 (2,now an open seat, currently, unopposed*), NJ-11 ( 8 ) NM-01 (11), NM-02 (11), NY-03 (5), NY-18 (2, still unopposed), NY-24 (5), NC-02 (10), NC-10 (5), OH-11 (2, currently unopposed**), OK-02 (5, no longer unopposed), OR-01 (2, still unopposed), OR-02 (11), OR-03 (4), OR-04 (4), OR-05 (3), PA-18 (11), SC-02 (3), TX-02 (12, now an open seat*), TX-05 (3, no longer unopposed), TX-07 (7), TX-10 (4), TX-11 (5), TX-12 (3), TX-16 ( 8, no longer unopposed), TX-18 (5), TX-20 (1, once again unopposed), TX-21 (12), TX-25 (4), TX-29 (6, now an open seat*), TX-30 (4), UT-03 (1, currently unopposed***), VA-06 (5, now an open seat*), VA-09 (4), WA-03 (5), WA-05 (4), WA-08 (12), WA-10 (3, still unopposed), WV-03 (9), WI-01 (6), WI-03 (4),

States with no changes: AL, AK, AZ, CO, CT, DE, GA, IA, ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, ND, RI, SD, TN, WY

There were probably a couple of other changes, for instance, a D dropped out of a race, another D entered the same race and so, mathematically, nothing changed.

*incumbent has announced retirement
** = lateral numerical shift (OH-11)
*** in the case of UT-03, the numbers dropped from 8 to 1 because the special election happened and now candidates will probably begin to declare for 2018.

When I started this thread on August 7th, 2017, 3.5 months ago, there were 1,332 declared candidates. There are now 1,801, a growth rate of 35.21%.

This is simply a HUGE field looking into 2018 and more importantly, according to FEC reports, more money is flowing than usual.

Starting AFTER Thanksgiving, I will open up two new threads related to this one but worthy as standalone threads, focusing on the unopposed vs open seats and also reporting on where the money is flowing.


Source (see postings going back to November 6th)

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

Those are the current numbers.

-Stat

 

On Monday, November 20th, 2017, there were 1,801 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of Sunday morning, December 24th, 2017, there are now 1,968:



That's an increase of 167 declared candidates in one months's time (9.27% growth rate) and since this thread was created on August 7th, 2017, an increase of 636 candidates since that date (growth rate 47.74%).

As was the case on November 20th, more than one month ago, I have been so swamped with work, I had no time to track this material, so I simply went through all 435 House races to see where there have been changes.

States with no changes at all: AL, AK, CT, DE, MS, MT, NE, NH, ND, OK, RI, SD, WV, WY

There were changes in circa 150 CDs out of 36 states: AZ-02 (11), AZ-05 (3), AZ-08 (9), AR-01 (4), CA-04 (6), CA-05 (3), CA-10 (10), CA-11 (2, still unopposed), CA-18 (2, still unopposed), CA-23 (5), CA-25 (9), CA-26 (5), CA-27 (2), CA-36 (6), CA-42 (6), CA-43 (7), CA-47 (2, no longer unopposed), CA-48 (13), CA-49 (5), CA-50 (7), CA-52 ( 8 ), CO-01 (5), CO-02 (5), FL-10 (4), FL-11 (6), FL-15 (10), FL-22 (4), FL-23 (6), FL-24 (3), FL-26 (6), FL-27 (15), GA-08 (6), GA-14 (2, no longer unopposed), HI-01 (5), ID-02 (3, no longer unopposed), IL-01 (3), IL-02 (5), IL-04 (9, now an open seat), IL-05 (5, no longer unopposed), IL-06 ( 8 ), IL-07 (5), IL-08 (3), IL-09 (5), IL-10 (4), IL-11 (3), IL-12 (6), IL-13 (6), IL-14 ( 8 ), IL-15 (3), IL-16 (7), IL-17 (3), IL-18 (5), IN-06 (6), IA-04 (7), KS-03 (5), KY-02 (3), KY-03 (1, once again unopposed), KY-05 (3), KY-06 (5), LA-03 (4), LA-06 (3, no longer unopposed), ME-02 (11), MD-01 ( 8 ), MD-03 (2, once again unopposed), MD-04 (5), MD-05 (3), MD-08 (2, still unopposed), MA-01 (2, still unopposed), MA-03 (16), MI-09 (4), MI-11 (11), MI-13 (5, unopposed, Conyers has resigned, seat currently vacant), MN-08 (4), MO-02 (7), MO-06 (4), NV-03 (13), NV-04 (4, Kihuen is resigning, open seat), NJ-01 (2, still unopposed), NJ-02 (3, still unopposed), NJ-07 (11), NJ-11 (6), NJ-12 (2, still unopposed), NM-01 (10), NM-02 (14), NY-02 (4), NY-11 (9), NY-22 (2, still unopposed), NY-23 (11), NC-02 (9), NC-08 (2, no longer unopposed), NC-13 (4), OH-03 (2, no longer unopposed), OH-08 (3, no longer unopposed), OH-11 (3, still unopposed), OH-12 (12), OH-14 (5), OH-15 (5), OH-16 (, OR-02 (10), PA-01 (3, still unopposed), PA-05 (3), PA-10 (4), PA-11 (9), PA-12 (6), PA-15 (10), PA-16 (6), SC-04 (3, no longer unopposed), TN-07 (5), TX-01 (6), TX-02 (16), TX-03 (11), TX-04 (5), TX-05 (10), TX-06 (17), TX-07 ( 8 ), TX-08 (4), TX-09 (2, still unopposed), TX-11 (6), TX-13 (3), TX-14 (6), TX-15 (4), TX-16 (10), TX-17 (5), TX-18 (6), TX-19 (5), TX-20 (4, still unopposed), TX-21 (26), TX-22 (12), TX-23 ( 8 ),TX-24 (9), TX-25 (7),TX-26 (5), TX-27 (11), TX-28 (2, still unopposed), TX-29 (15), TX-30 (5), TX-31 (7), TX-32 (10), TX-33 (4), TX-34 (2, no longer unopposed), TX-35 (5), TX-36 (3), UT-04 (4), VA-04 (2, no longer unopposed), VA-06 (6), VA-07 (10), WA-08 (11), WI-03 (5), WI-05 (5), WI-07 (3, no longer unopposed).

Although this is a huge number of Democratic candidates for the HOR, the actual margin D-vs-R went down somewhat, due in part to a slight uptick in GOP candidates but even more due to an explosion of Libertarian candidates, mostly out of Texas. We jumped from 20 L candidates at the end of November to 72 as of this current time. In fact, there were changes to record in 35 out of 36 CDs in the Lone Star State and in all of them, L candidates were involved. Why, one could almost imagine that Libertarians suddenly woke up in December, yawned, looked at their calendars and said "gee, let's enter the race". Although that was just meant in jest, it likely indicates a coordinated effort to increase Libertarian influence in TX.

Due to allegations of sexual impropriety flying practically all over the place, there have been a number of resignations and retirement announcements, making for a large new swath of open seats. You can see in the EXCEL table exactly which of those seats are now open. Also, a number of seats that were hitherto unopposed (see: definition in the OP) are no longer unopposed, not a surprise at this late stage in the game.

We are seeing high level marquee races developing in FL, CO, CA, NY, NJ TX, VA, NC, WA, MI, PA and WI, to name 11 key players for a good start.

The Democratic Party is now targeting at least 80 House Seats it finds to be competitive. To this date I have not read any kind of similar statistic coming out of the Republican Party but even in the worst of years for a party, seats tend to switch sides on both sides, which means that the GOP will have some targets of their own. NV-04 comes as a possible target to mind. One state where we are seeing relatively little motion is, of all places, OH. I am developing a theory about my home state, namely, that OH is so election-weary that Ohioans just want to be out of the spotlight for a while.

This is a good part of the reason why the Democratic Party is now targeting at least 80 seats:



This is the largest generic lead for the Democratic Party ever, since polling starting covering the generic ballot. More on this subject soon. The generic lead is leaner in the HuffPo aggregator because they go back farther in time.

Since primaries are practically around the corner, the next phase of these stats is to follow the money and see exactly who has the financial warchest to march through primaries and a GE. And of course, to keep a watchful eye on the generic polling. Please notice the Gallup has NOT polled for the generic. After the scandals of 2010 and 2012, it's no wonder that Gallup has turned it's tail and run away.

Also - and this is just a cursory glance, but when I look at the EXCEL table I see an overwhelming majority of female names and also an explosion of names that sound like names from various minority populations. I say that with a grain of salt, because a name name be anything: I know a Joe Green who is black and well, Nikki Haley, which sounds like a white, maybe Irish name, is actually Indian, as in, from the continent of India.


Source (see postings going back to November 21st)

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

Those are the current numbers.

-Stat

 

Based on the input from yesterday, some more cold, hard stats for you all to chew on over your Christmas Roastbeef.....

the number of currently unopposed seats in the US-HOR = 107 and the partisan breakdown of them is incredibly lopsided:

14 unchallenged seats currently held by Republicans and 93 unchallenged seats currently held by Democrats. This is an astonishing change over the past 2 decades, where the number of unchallenged seats held by Republicans was always a larger total than those held by the Democrats. This means that if absolutely nothing more changes about these seats (there will be yet changes to come, to be sure), then the Rs are automatically guaranteed 14 seats and the Ds are automatically guaranteed 93 seats, simply by default. I define an unchallenged seat as as one where one of the two major parties has no announced candidates. An unchallenged seat may have some third party (Libertarian, Green, etc) candidates, but it still technically unchallenged since the statistical probability of these smaller splinter parties winning a HOR-seat is practically null. this means that at current, 24.6% of the US-HOR is not even competitive. Of the unchallenged races, 3 are OPEN seats, 104 are incumbent seats.

At this time there are 40 OPEN races (9.2%) and 405 Incumbent races (91.8%). Of the OPEN races, 5 of them are also currently unchallenged (3 D seats, 2 R seats) and if that statistic remains so, then only 35 of the 40 OPEN races will be competitive. However, at least three of them are OPEN only because the current GOP incubent who just won in a special election in 2017 (KS-04, MT-AL, GA-06) hasn't bothered to announce quite yet. That being said, considering the rate of retirements going into 2018, this number is likely to actually rise some before the primaries begin.

Traditionally, in the past, about 85-90% of HOR-incumbents have retained their seats. 405 * .88 = 357
435 -357 = 78 seats very likely in play. This simple math tracks very well with the DNC announcing that it is targeting 80 GOP seats.

One thing is for sure: if the current stats hold, then 104 names are guaranteed to NOT change in the next legislative period and 40 names are absolutely guaranteed to change.

-Stat

 

Successful gerrymandering and the obstinacy of incumbency are factors that will cap the Democratic resurgence in DC in '18, but winning gubernatorial races is essential in controlling the next congressional redistricting after the 2020 census, and if Trump can cling to office until then, he will be an invaluable Democratic asset.

Trump's endorsement of any GOP candidate is an honor and distinction they will share with Roy Moore - as voters are sure to be reminded.

Threatening that Democratic advantage are The Trump Justice Department's Republican Special Counsel, the Republican-run Senate committees and the Republican-run House committees investigating the 2016 election's foreign intrigue and improprieties - as well as several alleged victims of the Moore-supporting, self-professed "pµ$$¥-grabber"'s predations who are demanding justice.

If Trumpery persists in pushing a big, intrusive government hellbent upon seizing control of wombs, reallocating wealth to the wealthiest, commandeering local resources to abet jack-booted thugs in rounding up and deporting undocumented neighbors, and enshrining religious discrimination as a mainstay of immigration policy, better-educated Americans will be motivated to register their repugnance at the polls, but the Democratic Party must still address the discontent of the White, blue collar workers who were sufficiently desperate to fall for the chimerical gewgaws of Trumpery.

 

On Sunday morning, December 24th, 2017, there were 1,968 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, Wednesday, December 27th, 2017, there are now 1,975:



There were changes in: AZ-08 (17), TX-21 (26).

Actually, from the Green Papers blog entry, there were considerably more changes, only, it appears that all of them but these two were already entered on December 24th individual state tables but not yet officially blogged. 8 More Republicans jumped into the AZ-08 race, which is now one of the hottest in the nation, and 1 Republican dropped out of the TX-21 race, also one of the hottest in the nation, making for a net gain of 7 newly declared candidates.

Surely there will be some changes before the new year and then we slowly move over to phase 2 - which is to see who is really raking in cash to fight a competitive primary, and who is not. Also to see if there is even one CD out there where a third party candidate has even the remotest of chances at winning a HOR-race.

My instinct tells me that there will be some more retirements and/or resignations and that some of the hitherto unchallenged races will finally find at least one challenger from the opposing party.

As of February I will then organize the table according to chronological order of the primary calendar.

I just want to again remind that intensity of candidates for a primary does not necessarily mean that that seat will be competitive in the fall, but more often than not, that is the case. With the unparalleled unpopularity and disapproval of a sitting US-president this early in his administration, coupled with the GOP tanking in generic polling numbers all over the place, we are literally heading into uncharted territory when it comes to the 2018 mid-terms for the US-House.

And conversely, a race in a quiet little CD that has has no party action in years could suddenly end up being very competitive and in every mid-term there have always been at least one surprise, i.e., a CD somewhere out there that wasn't even on the radar screen, the flipped, etc.

Source (posted December 26th)

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

Those are the current numbers.

-Stat

 

On Wednesday, December 27th, 2017, there were 1,975: declared candidated for the US-HOR. Today, Saturday, December 30th, 2017, there are now 1,972:




There were changes in: AZ-08 (10), FL-06 (6), GA-02 (4), IL-01 (2, no longer unopposed), NY-27 (5), PA-01 (4, still unopposed), TN-09 (3, still unopposed)

Source (posted December 29th)

The huge shift was in AZ-08, which went from 9 candidates on December 24th to 17 on December 27th, to 10 yesterday. That didn't look right, so I shot-off an email to the Green papers people and they confimed that it was simply a copy/paste blogging error, that 8 of the 17 candidates I saw on December 27th were a false paste-in from a Texas district. Of course, when I do through this stuff, I don't memorize the names of people as I am going along and so by the time I got to Texas, I was no longer concentrating on the names from AZ-08. Either way, we end the year just slightly shy of 2,000 declared candidates. That is a BEVY of candidates.

As I have been hinting at, at the New Year, I will move over to phase 2 of this and will be following the money. I will also be reorganizing the excel table according to the primary calendar for 2018.

Some things I can predict with great certainty:

1.) Not all of these names are serious candidates; some of them will raise no money at all and will simply fall off the radar screen. This happens in every HOR election cycle, regardless whether presidential cycle or mid-term cycle. I suspect that this will happen the most among 3rd party candidates and a huge overflow of candidates from the opposing party in what is being perceived as potentially competitive seats.

2.) There will be surprises, all the way up to election day, 2018: deaths, resignations, withdrawals from a race, scandals, you name it. Somewhere among these 435 HOR seats there will be some craziness and it can happen in either or both major parties. And there will be a couple of surprise seat flips on election night that absolutely no one saw coming.

3.) The Jungle primary states, esp California and Louisiana, are likely to play an extraordinary role in 2018. Reason: in Jungle primary states, it is possible to shut the opposition party out of a number of seats long before the general election, due to the top-2 nature of the Jungle primary. Since the DNC has targeted a very large number of seats currently held by the GOP, if it shuts the GOP out of 7-8 seats total in the Jungle primaries in say, California and Washington State, then effectively, the Democratic party will have automatically flipped some seats long before election day. I am not saying that this is going to happen. I am saying that it is possible. Likewise, in Lousiana, which uses the GE as it's primary day (very, very weird), theoretically, in the case of an excruciatingly close HOR race to get to 218 seats and therefore the majority, it could all hang from an overtime game in that state in 1 or 2 seats. The only problem with that is that the GOP already has 5 of 6 HOR seats in LA and due to the GOP's extreme gerrymandering of the state, the prospect of a D losing LA-02, much less a GOP top-2 shut-out in the primary, is practically nil. If a D is losing in, of all places, LA-02, then would be indicative of a massive GOP wave. What we are seeing in polling, however, is exactly the opposite. And as with California, I am not saying that this will happen.I am saying that it can happen.

4.) More money than ever before will be spent in polling for a larger number of HOR seats than ever before. This is, imo, a double-edged sword as polling in a number of congressional districts has been proven to be very unreliable, but in others, it has been spot-on. Again, I stick with my years-old premise that any one poll can be very wrong, but the aggregate from a rich gene-pool of polling for any particular race is very likely to be on target.


5.) Due in large part to the gross hyperbole and endless trolling coming from our current president (frankly, I cannot believe I have to write something like this, it's really a little bit depressing), this will be the nastiest, ugliest, most over-the-top midterm cycle since post-Civil War, and maybe, since ever. And worse yet, the acrimony is liikely to remain after the mid-terms are etched into stone. See: Roy Moore, Alabama.


Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

Those are the current numbers. Happy New Year.

-Stat

 

He's surrounded by ********s.

 

Isn't it strange how PF censors "Russians" when you type it, but not me?

 

On Saturday, December 30th, 2017, there were 1,972 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of today, Saturday, January 13th, 2018, there are now 2,017:



There were changes in the following 90 CDs: AL-02 (6), AL-04 (5), AK-AL (4), AZ-02 (10), AZ-04 (3) AZ-05 (4), AZ-07 (2, still unopposed), AZ-08 (10), AZ-09 (17), AR-03 (4), CA-05 (3, still unopposed), CA-06 (2, still unopposed), CA-22 ( 8 ), CA-23 (4), , CA-40 (2, still unopposed), CA-48 (14), CA-49 (4, now unopposed, Rep. Issa is retiring or may run for another CD other than CA-49), CA-52 (9), CO-01 ( 8 ), CO-03 (4), CO-04 (6), CO-05 (7), CT-04 (2, no longer unopposed), FL-02 (6), FL-03 (5), FL-05 (2, still unopposed), FL-06 (5), FL-07 ( 8 ), FL-12 (7), FL-27 ( 18, GA-05 (2), GA-06 (5, still unopposed, meaning that Karen Handel has still not filed for her candidacy), GA-09 (3), GA-10 ( 8 ), GA-13 (3, no longer unopposed), ID-01 (10), IL-03 (4), IL-04 ( 8 ), IN-04 (12), IN-05 (4), IN-08 (4), KS-02 (9), KY-01 (3), KY-02 (4), KY-04 (7), KY-06 (6), MD-01 (9), MD-02 (4), MD-06 (12), MA-03 (13), MA-09 (3), MI-03 (7), MI-09 (5), MI-11 (12), MN-05 (6, no longer unopposed), MO-03 (3, no longer unopposed), MT-AL (6, Gianforte has not yet filed for his candidacy), NV-04 (5), NH-01 (12), NH-02 (6), NJ-02 (4, still unopposed, but for the Democrats), NJ-03 (3), NM-02 (15), NY-02 (3), NY-12 (3, still unopposed), NY-18 (3, no longer unopposed), NY-21 (14), NY-23 (10), NC-08 (5), OH-01 (5), OH-02 (7), OH-12 (13), OH-13 (3), OR-1 (3, still unopposed), OR-02 (11), PA-01 (6, still unopposed), PA-03 (4), PA-06 (5), PA-08 (9), PA-09 (6), PA-11 (9), PA-15 (13), PA-16 (7), RI-02 (2, no longer unopposed), SC-04 (5), TX-20 (5), UT-03 (2, no longer unopposed, but not yet an incumbent election), VA-02 ( 8 ) VA-06 (9), WV-03 (11), WI-05 (5).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS

There is a lot to be said about all of this, but I have little time today. However, if you check the excel link, you will see that I have added a table according to gender. The numbers don't quite match up yet, I need to clean up the table (off by 5 among all Democrats, off by 12 among Republicans, off by 6 among "other" - I'll get it cleaned up in the next days), but you can see that there are a lot of female candidates out there:



A little over 30% of all D-candidates are women.
Among the R-candidates, it's around 11.9%, and at 12.9% for "other" candidates.
As soon as the numbers match up perfectly, I will do a more specific analysis, but a little more than 76% of all female candidates are from the Democratic Party at current.
One state in the Union is currently fielding no females candidates for the HOR at all: Louisana.

More serious stuff tomorrow, but one fun little tidbit: In WA-09, it's Smith-vs-Smith.
In a race unopposed by the GOP, Democratic incumbent David Adam Smith is being challenged by fellow Democratic candidate Sarah Smith.

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

Those are the current numbers.

-Stat

 

On January 13th, 2018, there were 2,017 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, Sunday, January 21st, 2018, there are now 2,056:



There were changes in 37 CDs: AZ-03 (5), CA-08 (5), CA-15 (3), CA-34 (4), CA-45 (10), CA-48 (15), CA-49 (9), FL-04 (4), FL-06 ( 8 ), FL-07 (7), IL-17 (2), MD-03 (3), MA-03 (15), MI-10 (2, no longer unopposed) MN-02 (4), MS-03 (4), NH-02 (7), NJ-02 (6, no longer unopposed), NJ-04 (5), NV-04 (5, no numeric change, personnel change), NM-02 (13), NY-01 (9), NY-02 (5), NY-25 (3, no longer unopposed), NY-27 (7), OH-03 (3), OH-12 (16), OK-05 (5), OR-05 (4), PA-07 ( 8 ), PA-09 (7), TN-04 (5), TX-10 (11), UT-03 (3, incumbent John Curtis has now announced), VT-AL (4), VA-06 (12), WA-08 (11 - no numeric change, personnel change).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS (log entries going back to and including Tuesday, January 16th, 2018 ---

Let's talk about shutouts and intensity. Currently, in the following CDs, the Democratic Party is fielding ZERO candidates:



So, in 14 CDs, the Democratic Party, if this statistic holds, is shutout of a potential victory simply because it is fielding no candidates. All 14 of those CDs are CDs are GOP CDs.

Currently, in the following CDS, the Republican Party is fielding ZERO candidates:




So, in 63 CDs, the Republican Party, if this statistic holds, is shutout of a potential victory simply because it is fielding no candidates. 59 of those CDs have a Democratic incumbent, 3 of them have a Republican incumbent and one is currently vacant. But be careful, all three of the Republicans CDs are CDs where a Republican won in a special election in 2017 and those incumbents have simply not yet declared, so the probability is very good that this list will shrink by at least 3. That is the logical assumption.

That makes for 77 CDs that are currently unopposed. Actually, that's a little under the normal statistic for unopposed CDs, but this time around, the advantage is heavily for the Democratic Party, the ratio being circa 4.5 : 1.

Now, let's look at intensity. Here are the CDs where the GOP is fielding 5 or more candidates:



That's 29 CDs. In 5 CDs, the GOP is fielding 9 or more candidates, 7 of them CDs with a Democratic Representative and 22 of them CDs with a Republican Representative and most all of them are retiring. The top two CDS represent a CD that the GOP really wants to retain and one it would really like to pick up.


Let's look at the Democratic Party, with the same parameters (5 or more candidates per CD):





That makes for 72 CDs where the Democratic Party is fielding 5 candidates or more, and (identical to the GOP), in 5 of them, the Democratic Party is fielding 9 candidates or more pro CD. Of those 72, 11 of them CDs with a Democratic Representative and 61 of them in currently Republican controlled CDs. Exactly as with the GOP, the top two CDs represent one that it really wants to retain and one that it wants to pick-up.

The Democratic Party is currently fielding 5 or more candidates in considerably more CDs than the Republican party. Now, as I clearly indicated in the OP, intensity can be but it not always necessarily an advantage. For instance, in TX-21, if all 18 GOP candidates spend a lot of money and rip the flesh off of each others' bones, then the Democratic nominee, once he or she is selected, could actually have a chance to pick-up a seat that Lamar Smith has held for 32 years. Likewise for the Democrats in VA-10, where 11 of them want Barbara Comstock's (R). A similar dynamic could play out here.

That being said, in the states with a jungle primary system (for instance, California, Washington State, Georgia and Louisiana), an overflow of candidates from one side could actually ensure that that party comes into the two-two, thereby shutting out the other Party from that seat long before the General election (excepting Louisiana, which does it differently). This is why the Democratic Party is eyeing a number of GOP held seats in California and Washington State. Already the GOP is very concerned that it may already get shut out of higher offices in California due to the jungle primary.

Another metric for this is to look at CDs that have an incumbent from one party, but which was "won" by the presidential candidate of the other party back in 2016. There are a certain number of GOP CDs that Clinton won in 2016 and also a smaller number of Democratic CDs that Trump won in 2016 and statisticians are very much eyeing these CDs to see how they perform in 2018. Not surprisingly, in some of the CDs that Clinton won in 2016, the current Republican incumbent is retiring.

Here an (incomplete) list of CDs that, at least on paper, look to be very, very competitive and could flip to the other side:

AZ-02, AZ-08, AZ-09, CA-01, CA-04, CA-10, CA-22, CA-23, CA-25, CA-48, CA-49, CA-50, CO-05, CO-06, FL-02, FL-03, FL-06, FL-11, FL-12, FL-15, FL-23, FL-26, FL-27, GA-06, GA-11, IL-06, IL-14, IN-04, IN-09, IA-03, IA-04, KY-04 (maybe), KY-06 (more likely), ME-02, MD-01 (coming onto the radar screen), MI-03, MI-06, MI-07, MI-08, MI-11, MI-13, MN-03, MN-06, MN-07, MO-02, NV-02, NV-04, NH-01, NH-02, NJ-02, NJ-07, NY-01, NY-02, NY-11, NY-19, NY-21, NY-23, NY-27, NC-02, OH-01, OH-02, OH-12, OK-05 (yes, Oklahoma), OR-02, OR-05, PA-07, PA-11, PA-15, PA-18, TX-06, TX-07, TX-10, TX-21, TX-22, TX-23, TX-32, UT-04, VA-01, VA-02, (VA-06), VA-07, VA-10, WA-08, WI-01, WI-05, WI-06.

This list of 86 CDs is in no way conclusive. Surprises are bound to happen. 8 of them are Democratic CDs, the other 78 are GOP CDs. Not all of them are going to flip, but they are all likely to either be extremely competitive or considerably more competitive than in the past.

A couple of states may also come on board, like TN, where Bredeson (D) is now running for higher office. A person of high name value at the top of the ticket tends to attract more voters.

What should start to happen soon is what I call the "winnowing": those candidates who have not really accumulated any financial warchest and may even be asked by their party to drop out. This happens in every cycle that I have experienced.


Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

Yesterday, on January 21st, 2018, there were 2,056 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, Monday, January 22nd, 2018, there are now 2,070:



That's an increase of 738 candidates since I began this thread on August 7th, 2017, more than 5 months ago, and represents a growth rate of 55.4%.

There were changes in the following 14 CDs: CA-04 (7), CA-05 (5), CA-22 (9), FL-06 (9), FL-08 (3), FL-13 (2, no longer unopposed), FL-14 (7), FL-26 (7), MD-07 ( 8 ), NV-04 (5, numerically unchanged, personnel change), OH-10 (3, corrected from last week), TN-09 (4, no longer unopposed), WV-03 (11, numerically unchanged, personnel changed), WI-07 (4).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS - blog entry for January 22nd, 2018

A little more than one week ago, I introduced the statistics male vs. female, but the numbers didn't completely jive, there was cleanup work necessary on the new excel table. Now the numbers DO jive, currently also at 2,070:



With 437 women currently in the running, without exact stats from the past to compare with, I cannot say this with absolute certainty, but it sure looks as if this is a record number of women running for the HOR, likely the highest number ever. An exact breakdown = D women (30.29% of D candidates), R women (12.55% of R candidates) and I women (11.11% of Independent candidates - a mixture of Libertarian, Green and unaffiliated). It is being reported (from multiple sources) that almost 100 of those women are women of color, a statistic I do not intend to follow here (race, ethnicity), so I cannot back that claim up.

Another nice addition to the excel tables:



The State Totals tables is based of course on HOR-2018 A and simply lists the totals for each state, the sum also being represented as a % of the grand total.

The 13 top states (all with 50 candidates or more in the running):

1.) Texas: 272
2.) California: 230
3.) Florida: 142
4.) New York: 106
--------------------------
5.) Pennsylvania: 99
6.) Illinois: 89
7.) Ohio: 71
8.) Virginia: 66
9.) Georgia: 63
10.) Arizona 61
11.) Michigan: 59
12.) North Carolina: 52
13.) Indiana: 50

So, 1,360 of all candidates (65.7% - 2/3 of all candidates) come from 1/4 of all states. Alone, 750 candidates (36.2%) come from the top 4 states, all of which are fielding 100 candidates or more. And Pennsylvania is just under the 100 mark. It is interesting to see that Texas, a reliably Conservative state, is seeing so much actitivity right now. Even in Texas, there are currently more Democratic candidates (110) than Republican candidates (103) vying for office.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And while we are at it, let's not forget that just under 200 of all of these candidates are Independents of some stripe, all of them tilting at windmills in a society geared almost exclusively to an overly dominant 2-party system. I am not saying that that is bad or good. I am simply saying "it is what it is".

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

One note is that the jungle primary can also cut against the favored party. Democrats in California are particularly concerned about the notion that the abundance of democratic candidates could split the vote so much that they are themselves precluded from being included in the final top-two ballot. It occurred in 2012 when when two Republicans finished ahead of then-Redlands Mayor Pete Aguilar in an Inland Empire congressional district in which Democrats held a voter registration edge.

Surveying the competitive House districts this year, Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.) said, “‘We don’t want to get Aguilar-ed.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/19/california-democrats-fear-nightmare-midterms-2018-346948

 

Indeed. I mentioned this very possible paradox in the OP, back in August. However, many of those Democrats will be ill-funded and likely go: nowhere.

So, as stated in the OP, this thread really is about intensity and interest in higher office and in no way a predictor of who will win.

Interestingly enough, the GOP is also very scared that it will be shut out of the GE in the higher office elections in CA, also precisely because of the jungle primary, so I guess it all depends on how you look at it.

And I think it brings home the point that, at the end of the day, all politics is local. What may work in one CD may not work in the other CD at all.

 

On January 22nd, 2018, there were 2,070 declared candidates for the US-HOR. Today, Wednesday, January 24th, there are now 2,086:




There were changes in the following 15
CDs: AL-03 (3), AK-AL (5), AZ-08 (11), CA-39 (15), CA-49 (10), GA-12 (5), IN-05 (6), IN-06 (7), KY-03 (2, no longer unopposed), KY-05 (3, no longer unopposed), MS-03 (5, still unopposed), MO-03 (4), NY-24 (6), OH-06 (2, no longer unopposed), TN-06 (4, still unopposed).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS - blog entry for January 23-24, 2018

Here the stats according to gender:



6 more women and 10 more men entered the fray in the last two days. However, there was a simple computational error in the excel spreadsheet that I just caught and so the total number of women has jumped to 465 (the column for "other" women was not in the calculations, sorry for the error).

As you can see from above, 4 seats that were formerly unopposed now have at least one candidate from the other major party and are no longer unopposed. That brings the count of unopposed seats to 101 (23.45% of the HOR seats available). Of those 101 seats, 12 (9 INC, 3 OPEN) are GOP seats with no Democratic contender (11.9%), the remaining 89 (86 INC, 3 OPEN) are Democratic seats with no GOP contender (88.1%). If this trend continues, then these seats are of course guaranteed to not switch hands. When it comes to an open seat, the chances that the other side will at least try to field a contender do increase. Now, I don't have exact stats at hand, but I do remember that in 2014, there were more unopposed seats, most all of them on the GOP side. Right now, we are seeing reverse colors in terms of this rubrik.

Coming soon: Individual state analyses, in Primary-chronological order.

One more note: with the State Supreme Court decision to nullify the GOP CD map and with the decision that districts much be redrawn, assuming that the decision holds, this also means that there is the possibility that some declared candidates will suddenly find that the no longer live in the district they would like to represent. This is a development that few are speaking about, but logic dictates that in the most gerrymandered CDS of all, this really could happen, especially to an incumbent.

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

On Wednesday, January 24th, 2018, there were 2,086 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of today, Saturday, January 27th, 2018, there are now 2,097:



There were changes in 15 CDs: AZ-08** (15), CA-39 (15), CO-05 (, CT-03 (3, no longer unopposed), IN-04 (12, no numeric change, personnel change), IN-06 ( 8 ), NV-04 (6), NY-24 (6, no numeric change, rather, personnel change), NY-25 (2), OH-12** (17), OR-01 (4, still unopposed), PA-07 (7, now an open seat, Meehan is retiring*), PA-08 (6), TN-09 (4, no numeric change, candidate moved from Independent to write-in), VA-11 (4).

The Green Papers also listed a change in CA-49, but that was a duplicate posting from earlier in the week.

*Pat Meehan's (R-PA-07) exit from the 2018 mid-terms is important for a number of reasons: first, he headed the ethics committee investigating sexual abuse in the HOR and then he himself has become embroiled in a case where he is being accused of such and has essentially admitted it. Second, this is a swing-district, so I expect that a horde of Republicans will want to jump into the race, only, they will now have less time to organize and third, with the redistricting decision from a PA state SC judge declaring the gerrymandered map of PA to be unconstitutional, this CD (07) is a particularly egregious example of gerrymandering taken to the next level and if/when the map is redrawn, the chances are very high that the CD will be more Democratic Party friendly. So, until the SCOTUS decision comes out and the new map is drawn, all bets should logically be off about a number of Pennsylvania US-HOR races.

**Just a reminder: in the case of AZ-08 and OH-12, there are TWO candidate lists, one for a special election primary, one for the normal primary. Since the special election primary usually comes BEFORE the normal primary, I am calculating the special election list. Most of the names are also duplicated on the normal primary list, anyway.

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS - blog entry for January 23-24, 2018

Here is the breakdown according to gender:



Let's look at the open seats. With Meehan's retirement, there are now 43 open seats, or just under 10% of the HOR. 16 of them are currently D-held, 27 are currently R-held. 6 of those open seats (2 D, 4 R) are unopposed which means that if the other team doesn't field a candidate, those 6 open seats will be automatic shutouts in spit of the fact that they are open:




However, that statistic, without context, is deceptive. Of the 4 R-controlled seats that are currently OPEN, 2 of them have no REPUBLICAN currently running: SC-05 and GA-06, both seats that had special elections in 2017. In other words, the R-incumbent has STILL not declared candidacy, even now, at the end of January, 2018. That is beginning to look a little unusual, to say the least. Were this statistic to hold, then the GOP would be forfeiting two traditionally solid-R seats for no aparent reason, which would be silly. As far as Karen Handel is concerned (GA-06), I mentioned her lack of candidacy as a simple clerical matter all the way back in the OP on August 7th, 2017. Either she is really, really taking her time to declare or something is up. Both of these Republicans (Handel, Norman) won those 2017 special elections by slender margins (+3.6, +3.2, respectively) in districts that were traditionally GOP-blowout districts.

However, let's assume that both of those incumbents will declare, thus turning those currently OPEN seats into incumbent races, afters, which would leave us with 4 of 41 OPEN seats that are also unopposed (OK-01, TN-06 for the Republicans, CO-02 and CO-07 for the Democrats), which in turn means that we are likely actually looking at 37 House seats that are OPEN and competitive. These seats will be crucial to watch, for some of them are in swingy-districts (like NV-04, FL-27), but some of them are in districts usually considered to be rock-solid (ID-01, PA-15, MA-03). If we see a Democratic candidate polling extremely well in, say, ID-01, then that would be yet one more piece of data that supports the idea that a Democratic wave is coming. However, if a Republican starts polling well in MA-03 or IL-02, then those data-points would support the idea that a wave is not forming at all. Why are OPEN seats so important to look at somewhat like canaries in the coal mine? Well, because the name recognition of an incumbent is no longer on the ballot and so the cards get to be mixed anew, especially in districts with longstanding incumbents (TX-21 -31 years, VA-06 - 26 years), where the possibility is strong that incumbent fatigue has also set-in, regardless of party.

It can also be that I missed a couple of Republicans who are retiring I thought the number of R retirements was 31 or so, so I will be combing through this statistic again and reporting any changes.

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

On Saturday, January 27th, 2018, there were 2,097 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of today, Monday, January 29th, 2018, there are now 2,105:



There were changes in the following 23 CDs: AL-04 (6), AL-05 (5), AZ-01 (5,no numeric change, but rather, personnel change), AZ-02 (11), CA-22 (10), CA-39 (15, was already reported on Saturday, but not yet logged at the CD page), CA-51 (3, no longer unopposed), IL-04 (7), IL-07 (4), IL-12 (5), KS-03 (6), KY-01 (3, no numeric change, but rather, personnel change), MD-06 (13), MA-03 (14, was a Green Papers clerical error between MA-03 and MD-03, one candidate was erroneously listed for both CDs - deleted from this CD), MA-05 (2, no longer unopposed), MN-05 (7), NM-01 (11), NY-18 (4), OH-08 (5), OK-05 (6), PA-07 (7, no numeric change, but rather, personnel change), WV-02 (3), WV-03 (10).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS - blog entry for January 29, 2018.

That reflects changes in 23 CDs but an uptick of only 8 candidates, because people are also starting to drop out of the race as well. Honestly, I did not think this list would even hit 2,000 and then I though to myself that it will surely crest at 2,100... wait and see. In the case of WV, the filing deadline has now passed, so the candidate numbers from that state should not change.

Here the numbers by gender:



Women are almost 23% of all candidates.

Just a reminder: at the excel document, there is a table for the state totals as well, and it is sortable.

I screenshotted the party strength, in descending order. Here the Democratic Party, circa top 30 states states:



And sorted according to Republican Party strength, also descending:



And according to officially declared "Independent" candidates, descending:



"Independents" are only on the ballot in 26 states.

And also sorted according to Libertarian candidates, descending:



Libertarians are on the ballot in only 19 states, but there are a ton of them running in Texas. Surprisingly, a good number of Libertarians are also on the ballot in Maryland.

And sorted according to "unaffiliated" candidates (under which are also Green Party candidates and candidates from parties you may never have heard of...):



We see that unaffiated candidates are disproportionately high in CA and in FL.

And finally, the grand totals for all 50 states, in descending order (2 screenshots):




We see that in the sleepy small states (population-wise) of WY, ND, DE, RI and VT, not much is going on.
But more than 1/3 of all declared candidates are in the top five states of TX, CA, FL, NY and PA.

So, a lot is going on and a lot more is about to happen. It's a dream year for people who love electoral statistics, to say the least.

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

While looking over this spreadsheet (sorted based on strength of Republican candidacy), I noticed that Democrats outnumber Republicans in nearly every single state. The only states where I see more GOP candidates as compared to DEM candidates are Arizona (+9), Tennessee (+6), Oklahoma (+5), Kansas (+2), New Hampshire (+1), Mississippi (+4), Idaho(+3), Louisiana (+1), South Dakota (+2) and Wyoming (+1). Even in some very, very red states likes Alabama, Indiana, and Texas - democrats are fielding more candidates thus far. And you will notice that the margins in the States where Republicans are fielding more candidates are all in the single digits. By contrast, Democrats enjoy a double digit lead over Republicans in THIRTEEN states.


I think this bit of information just adds another data point to reason some are predicting a blue wave in 2018.

 

Possible.

But as I noted in the OP, the only Thing that those numbers are guaranteed to measure is: intensity.

That being said, in years where Republican waves happened, we saw this Kind of intensity, just in reverse Colors.

Sorry for the excess capitalization, I am testing out the Windows-Browser for Win10 instead of using Chrome and the program is doing weird Things when I type on this Forum. Strange.

 

Some see their prospects for re-election bleak, some are just sick of trumpery, and for many, the two are inextricably intertwined.

Many will claim that they suddenly want to spend more time with their families.

 

Thanks for the info.

 

On Monday, January 29th, 2018, there were 2,105 declared candidates for the US-HOR. As of today, Saturday February 3rd, 2018, there are now 2,139:



There were changes in the following 51 CDs: AL-01 (2, no longer unopposed), AL-03 (6), AZ-04 (5), AZ-05 (5), AZ-09 (10), CA-10 (11), CA-27 (3, no longer unopposed), CA-28 (6), CA-39 (16), CA-46 (2, no longer unopposed), CO-05 (9), FL-05 (3, still unopposed), FL-06 (9), FL-21 (3), GA-14 (3) IL-04 (5), IN-05 ( 8 ), KS-03 (7), KY-01 (2), KY-02 (5), KY-03 (4), KY-04 (6), KY-05 (4), KY-06, MA-03 (13), MA-07 (2, still unopposed), NJ-02 (7), NJ-11 (6, now an open seat, Freylinghusen is retiring) NY-18 (5), NY-19 ( 8 ), NY-27 ( 8 ), NC-08 (4), NC-10 (4), NC-11 (4), ND-AL (3), OH-06 (3), OH-11 (4), OH-12 ( 18 ) , OH-16 (9), PA-01 (6, now an open seat, Brady is retiring, still unopposed, no numeric change, just personnel change), PA-07 (9), PA-13 (3), PA-18 (10), SC-04 (7, now an open seat, Gowdy is retiring), SC-07 (6), SD-AL ( 8 ), TN-05 (2, no longer unopposed), VA-04 (3), VA-05 (7), WV-03 (11, addition of Republican Rick Snuffer is *pending* as the official filing deadline has passed), WI-07 (4).

Source: THE GREEN PAPERS - blog entries for February 2, 2018 back to January 30, 2018.

Some seats move from unopposed to competitive in term of both teams not fielding at least one candidate:

AL-01, CA-27, CA-46, TN-05

There were 3 retirements, all 3 worth noting:

NJ-11 (Freylinghusen-R)
PA-01 (Brady-D)
SC-04 (Gowdy-R)

NJ-11 and PA-01 were not big surprises. Both announced retirees had served for a long time: Freylinghusen came in on the 1994 wave and Brady was elected in 1988, going against the George H.W.Bush wave of that presidential election year. But Trey Gowdy's sudden retirement (he came in on the 2010 GOP-wave and will therefore have only served 8 years) IS a surprise, compounded by the fact that he served on 2 full committees and 4 subcommittees, 2 of which he chaired, literally, "plum" assignments. Not only that, Gowdy hails from a very safe R-District, so his resignation after having been in the national spotlight during the Obama years and now more than once during Trump's first year, is making people wonder exactly why he is retiring.

Brady (PA-01) was no angel and resistance to him was already forming among Democrats. For the last 4.5 months, there have been 5 or 6 D candidates for PA-01, a CD where the GOP has yet to field a candidate, and some of those names are up-and-coming Democrats in Pennsylvania politics.

Freylinghusen came from a more swingy district in a very blue state (NJ) and his seat has been listed as one of the most endangered R-seats ever since the 2016 presidential election.

As I indicated on a posting above, I have missed a couple of open seats and so I will be combing through everything once again and will be doing a special posting only on the retirements/resignments in the next days.

Don't forget: the link to the EXCEL document containing all of the numbers plus various links is at the OP, but for ease of reference, HERE as well.

-Stat

 

This thread ends now. No more input will be given.

 

And by the way, the blue wave came, nööööö

D +8.56% nationally in the House of Representatives, a net +40 seat pick up (D +43, R +3) and perhaps it will become D +41 net after the 2019 special election in NC-09, since the results from November 2018 were thrown out by a REPUBLICAN controlled board of elections due to massive ELECTORAL FRAUD committed by the REPUBLICAN NC-09 team, for which a number of people are going to land in jail for a long time, nööööö.....

So, your nothing burger turned into a nice, big, juicy burger!