Democrats are favored to gain control of the House of Representatives in this year’s midterm elections, according to the FiveThirtyEight forecast model. But — a very FiveThirtyEight-ish sentence follows — the range of possible outcomes is wide and Democrats’ prospects are far from certain. Relatively small shifts could allow Republicans to keep control of the House, or could turn a blue wave into a tsunami.

What’s behind all of this? Our methodology post goes into a lot more detail about how our forecasts are calculated. But that explanation is rather abstract, so in this article, I’m going to focus on how these factors are playing out given what we know about the political environment this year.

Theme No. 1: A broad consensus of indicators point toward Democrats performing well

In contrast to our presidential forecasts, which are heavily dependent on polling, our House model uses a broad mix of polling and non-polling indicators, including factors such as fundraising totals and historical trends in midterms. Those indicators look both pretty good for Democrats and remarkably consistent with one another:

The Lite version of our forecast, which focuses as much as possible on district-level and generic ballot polls , projects Democrats to win the popular vote for the House by 7 or 8 percentage points.

, projects Democrats to win the popular vote for the House by 7 or 8 percentage points. The Classic version of the model, which incorporates a lot of non-polling metrics such as fundraising and past voting in each district , also shows Democrats winning the popular vote by 7 or 8 points.

, shows Democrats winning the popular vote by 7 or 8 points. The generic ballot , which influences all three versions of our forecast, has generally shown Democrats with a lead of … 7 to 8 percentage points.

, which influences all three versions of our forecast, has generally shown Democrats with a lead of … 7 to 8 percentage points. And finally, our model calculates a starting assumption about the race based on historical trends in midterms since 1946 and presidential approval ratings. It also implies that Democrats “should” win the House popular vote by about 8 percentage points — just what the other metrics show.

So you’d expect Democrats to do pretty well based on the historical propensity of opposition parties to gain ground in midterm elections, especially under unpopular presidents. And Democrats are doing roughly as well as you’d expect them to according to most indicators of the national environment.

There are a couple of exceptions — indicators that are a little out of the consensus — but both of them fall on the better-for-Democrats side of the consensus. First, Democrats have done really impressively in fundraising. Their candidates have raised more in individual contributions than Republicans in 71 of the 101 districts rated as competitive by the Cook Political Report, despite the fact that about two-thirds of these districts feature Republican incumbents. That’s unusual. Most challengers significantly trail in fundraising at this point in the cycle. Meanwhile, the results of special elections have been very good for Democrats. Our model doesn’t actually use special election results in its forecasts, but they’re part of a coherent alternative narrative in which there’s upside for Democrats relative to what our forecast shows. Donating money and voting in special elections are tangible indicators of voter engagement, and it’s possible that they point toward a Democratic enthusiasm advantage that could become clearer later on in the cycle.





FiveThirtyEight House forecast update for August 16, 2018

Theme No. 2: However, there’s some feast-or-famine risk for Democrats

It’s much to Democrats’ credit that there are so many districts in play in all corners of the country. (Based on our accounting, Democrats have fielded a nominee in all but three of the 435 congressional districts nationwide.) But if you had to pinpoint the exact districts that Democrats should hope to win to gain 23 seats and take the House majority, you’d have a pretty hard time. We have only 215 seats rated as favoring Democrats — “lean Democrat” or stronger — which is fewer than the 218 they need to take the House.

Nonetheless, Democrats are favored to win the majority if current conditions hold because they’ll have a bunch of opportunities, even as underdogs, to win those extra seats: 14 toss-up races, 19 “lean Republican” races and 53 “likely Republican” contests. Those are a lot of lottery tickets to punch, even if Democrats aren’t necessarily favored in any individual race.

But Democrats would have a problem if there’s a shift in the national climate toward Republicans, or even if there’s a relatively modest systematic polling error in the GOP’s favor on Election Day. All of the sudden, they’d lose most of the toss-up races along with some of the “lean Democrat” races — and the “lean Republican” and “likely Republican” seats would become an uphill climb at best.

The flip side to this is that if the political environment gets better for Democrats, their seat gains could pile up at an accelerating rate. There are a plethora of districts that are 10 to 20 points more Republican than the country as a whole, a lot of which were gerrymandered to be “safe” for Republican candidates — but where the gerrymanders could fail in the event of a large enough wave.

Theme No. 3: Incumbents — especially Republican incumbents — are really vulnerable

The first line of defense for a party hoping to maintain its majority is incumbency. Even if the national political climate is unfavorable, its incumbents may be popular enough in their districts to withstand the wave.

The issue for Republicans is that the incumbency advantage has been weakening over time — and it appears to be especially flimsy this year. In the 1990s, incumbents overperformed the partisan baseline of their districts by somewhere on the order of 20 percentage points. (So, for example, a district that might favor Republicans by 2 points in an open-seat race would go to the GOP by 22 points if there were a Republican incumbent running.) In more recent elections, as Congress has become less and less popular, the incumbency advantage has eroded to more like 10 to 12 percentage points. And between Republicans’ anemic fundraising, GOP incumbents’ voting records — which are highly aligned with President Trump’s positions, even in purple districts — and reasonably good district-by-district polling for Democratic challengers, our model is projecting only about a 6-point advantage for GOP incumbents this year. Plus, a lot of Republican incumbents have retired.

Our forecast also shows a relatively narrow advantage for Democratic incumbents. But Democratic incumbents have little exposure in the House: Any Democratic representative who was strong enough to survive the GOP waves in both 2010 and 2014 probably won’t have any problems this year. (It’s a entirely different story in the Senate, where there are lots of vulnerable Democratic incumbents who were last re-elected in the strong Democratic year of 2012.)

Theme No. 4: Potential Democratic gains are broad-based, across all regions of the country

One factor helping Trump in 2016 was that he really needed to beat his polls in only one part of the country, the Midwest, to defeat Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College. (Outside of the Midwest, the polls were reasonably accurate and even underestimated Clinton in some states.) By contrast, Republicans are facing a multi-front assault in the House this year:

In the Northeast, they have a lot of exposure in New York and New Jersey, which were once bastions of moderate Republicanism but which have become increasingly inhospitable to this brand of politics — and in Pennsylvania, where court-ordered redistricting resulted in a bad map for Republicans and where a lot of GOP incumbents have retired.

In the South, they face pressure because of demographic change in states such as Georgia and Virginia — and increasingly in Texas.

In the Midwest, there’s the risk of reversion to the mean with Trump off the ballot, especially as the GOP coalition in these states has come to rely on voters without a college degree who don’t always participate in midterm elections.

And in the West, there are 14 Republican-controlled seats in California and another four in Washington that look increasingly out of place as the Pacific Coast becomes a somewhat literal “blue wall.”

As it happens, projected Democratic gains are almost evenly distributed between the four Census Bureau regions: The Classic version of our model projects them to gain nine seats in the Midwest, nine in the South, nine in the Northeast and eight in the West. Note that Democrats could completely flop in any one of these regions and yet still (just barely) win enough seats to take the House.

Our forecast shows Democrats gaining House seats all over the country Democratic-Held Seats Census Region Total Seats Current FORECASTED* net gain Northeast 78 51 60 +9 Midwest 94 33 42 +9 South 161 48 57 +9 West 102 63 71 +8 * Forecasts are derived from the Classic version of FiveThirtyEight’s House model as of Aug. 16.

Theme No. 5: Democrats need to win the popular vote by a fairly wide margin

The Classic version of our model gives Democrats a near certainty (about a 98 percent chance) of winning more votes than the GOP in the race for the House — but “only” a 3 in 4 chance of winning the majority of seats. This discrepancy between votes and seats reflects a combination of gerrymandering, voter self-sorting and incumbency, all of which favor Republicans to some degree. Thus, in the Classic version of our forecast, Democrats would need to win the popular vote by about 5 percentage points in order to become favorites to win the majority of seats in the House. And in the Lite and Deluxe versions, the break-even point is closer to a 6-point popular-vote win.

Nonetheless, these margins aren’t as bad for Democrats as they might be. At earlier points in the cycle, Democrats had appeared to need more like a 7- to 8-point advantage in the national popular vote to be favored to claim the majority of seats. Since then, the Republican edge has been eroded by retirements, by Pennsylvania’s redistricting and by the relatively weak GOP incumbency advantage (see Theme No. 3). All of this might seem like splitting hairs, but because so many indicators (see Theme No. 1) point toward Democrats winning the popular vote by a margin of something like 7 or 8 percentage points, these subtle differences are important.

I’ll be on vacation next week — excuse me, I’ll be investigating ground-level conditions in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District — but we’re going to be returning to these themes again and again between now and Nov. 6, so let’s call it a day. As a bonus, though, here’s a table put together by my colleague Julia Wolfe showing what our Classic forecast thinks of the race in every district in the country.

The odds for all 435 house races According to the Classic version of FiveThirtyEight’s House model, as of 6 p.m. on Aug. 16, 2018 probabilities that…… district Incumbent A Democrat Wins A Republican Wins AK-1 Don Young 24.31% 75.69% AL-1 Bradley Byrne 0.05 99.95 AL-2 Martha Roby 2.39 97.61 AL-3 Mike Rogers 0.18 99.82 AL-4 Robert B. Aderholt 0.00 >99% AL-5 Mo Brooks 0.18 99.82 AL-6 Gary Palmer 0.02 99.98 AL-7 Terri A. Sewell 100.00 0.00 AR-1 Rick Crawford 0.16 99.83 AR-2 French Hill 22.65 77.34 AR-3 Steve Womack 0.08 99.92 AR-4 Bruce Westerman 0.13 99.87 AZ-1 Tom O’Halleran 94.16 5.83 AZ-2 Open seat 90.01 9.99 AZ-3 Raul Grijalva 99.97 0.03 AZ-4 Paul A. Gosar 0.06 99.94 AZ-5 Andy Biggs 0.20 99.80 AZ-6 David Schweikert 13.39 86.61 AZ-7 Ruben Gallego 99.98 0.00 AZ-8 Debbie Lesko 21.54 78.46 AZ-9 Open seat 98.82 1.18 CA-1 Doug LaMalfa 13.94 86.06 CA-2 Jared Huffman >99% 0.00 CA-3 John Garamendi 99.87 0.13 CA-4 Tom McClintock 12.50 87.50 CA-5 Mike Thompson 99.95 0.00 CA-6 Doris O. Matsui 100.00 0.00 CA-7 Ami Bera 98.13 1.87 CA-8 Paul Cook 0.00 100.00 CA-9 Jerry McNerney 99.86 0.14 CA-10 Jeff Denham 70.77 29.23 CA-11 Mark DeSaulnier >99% 0.00 CA-12 Nancy Pelosi >99% 0.00 CA-13 Barbara Lee 99.99 0.00 CA-14 Jackie Speier >99% 0.00 CA-15 Eric Swalwell >99% 0.00 CA-16 Jim Costa 99.77 0.23 CA-17 Ro Khanna >99% 0.00 CA-18 Anna G. Eshoo >99% 0.00 CA-19 Zoe Lofgren >99% 0.00 CA-20 Jimmy Panetta 99.88 0.00 CA-21 David Valadao 64.34 35.66 CA-22 Devin Nunes 2.23 97.77 CA-23 Kevin McCarthy 0.11 99.89 CA-24 Salud Carbajal 97.27 2.73 CA-25 Steve Knight 77.44 22.56 CA-26 Julia Brownley 99.82 0.18 CA-27 Judy Chu 100.00 0.00 CA-28 Adam Schiff >99% 0.00 CA-29 Tony Cárdenas >99% 0.00 CA-30 Brad Sherman >99% 0.00 CA-31 Pete Aguilar 99.82 0.18 CA-32 Grace Napolitano >99% 0.00 CA-33 Ted Lieu >99% 0.00 CA-34 Jimmy Gomez 99.98 0.00 CA-35 Norma Torres >99% 0.00 CA-36 Raul Ruiz 99.68 0.32 CA-37 Karen Bass >99% 0.00 CA-38 Linda Sánchez >99% 0.00 CA-39 Open seat 34.57 65.43 CA-40 Lucille Roybal-Allard 99.89 0.00 CA-41 Mark Takano 99.99 0.01 CA-42 Ken Calvert 2.25 97.75 CA-43 Maxine Waters >99% 0.00 CA-44 Nanette Diaz Barragán 100.00 0.00 CA-45 Mimi Walters 58.04 41.96 CA-46 J. Luis Correa >99% 0.00 CA-47 Alan Lowenthal 99.97 0.03 CA-48 Dana Rohrabacher 66.27 33.73 CA-49 Open seat 74.91 25.09 CA-50 Duncan D. Hunter 8.17 91.83 CA-51 Juan Vargas >99% 0.00 CA-52 Scott Peters 99.80 0.20 CA-53 Susan Davis 99.97 0.03 CO-1 Diana DeGette >99% 0.00 CO-2 Open seat 99.78 0.22 CO-3 Scott Tipton 40.54 59.46 CO-4 Ken Buck 3.63 96.37 CO-5 Doug Lamborn 2.79 97.21 CO-6 Mike Coffman 64.57 35.43 CO-7 Ed Perlmutter 99.69 0.31 CT-1 John B. Larson 99.97 0.02 CT-2 Joe Courtney 99.93 0.07 CT-3 Rosa L. DeLauro 99.98 0.02 CT-4 Jim Himes 99.84 0.16 CT-5 Open seat 96.33 3.66 DE-1 Lisa Blunt Rochester 98.77 1.23 FL-1 Matt Gaetz 0.01 99.99 FL-2 Neal Dunn 0.02 99.98 FL-3 Ted Yoho 1.18 98.82 FL-4 John Rutherford 0.03 99.97 FL-5 Al Lawson 99.99 0.01 FL-6 Open seat 28.17 71.83 FL-7 Stephanie Murphy 97.43 2.57 FL-8 Bill Posey 1.95 98.05 FL-9 Darren Soto 99.86 0.14 FL-10 Val Demings 100.00 0.00 FL-11 Daniel Webster 0.07 99.93 FL-12 Gus M. Bilirakis 1.56 98.43 FL-13 Charlie Crist 99.60 0.40 FL-14 Kathy Castor 100.00 0.00 FL-15 Open seat 27.57 72.43 FL-16 Vern Buchanan 11.59 88.41 FL-17 Open seat 0.37 99.63 FL-18 Brian Mast 7.58 92.42 FL-19 Francis Rooney 0.64 99.36 FL-20 Alcee L. Hastings 100.00 0.00 FL-21 Lois Frankel 100.00 0.00 FL-22 Ted Deutch 99.88 0.12 FL-23 Debbie Wasserman Schultz 99.69 0.31 FL-24 Frederica Wilson 100.00 0.00 FL-25 Mario Diaz-Balart 28.18 71.82 FL-26 Carlos Curbelo 37.89 62.11 FL-27 Open seat 97.11 2.89 GA-1 Buddy Carter 0.21 99.79 GA-2 Sanford D. Bishop Jr. 99.89 0.11 GA-3 A. Drew Ferguson 0.01 99.99 GA-4 Hank Johnson >99% 0.00 GA-5 John Lewis 100.00 0.00 GA-6 Karen C. Handel 4.62 95.38 GA-7 Rob Woodall 29.40 70.60 GA-8 Austin Scott 0.00 100.00 GA-9 Doug Collins 0.00 >99% GA-10 Jody Hice 0.01 99.99 GA-11 Barry Loudermilk 0.06 99.94 GA-12 Rick Allen 1.76 98.24 GA-13 David Scott >99% 0.00 GA-14 Tom Graves 0.00 >99% HI-1 Open seat >99% 0.00 HI-2 Tulsi Gabbard >99% 0.00 IA-1 Rod Blum 72.87 27.13 IA-2 David Loebsack 96.99 3.01 IA-3 David Young 66.97 33.03 IA-4 Steve King 17.55 82.44 ID-1 Open seat 0.04 99.96 ID-2 Mike Simpson 0.31 99.69 IL-1 Bobby L. Rush >99% 0.00 IL-2 Robin Kelly >99% 0.00 IL-3 Daniel Lipinski 99.98 0.02 IL-4 Open seat >99% 0.00 IL-5 Mike Quigley >99% 0.00 IL-6 Peter J. Roskam 25.34 74.66 IL-7 Danny K. Davis >99% 0.00 IL-8 Raja Krishnamoorthi 99.89 0.11 IL-9 Jan Schakowsky >99% 0.00 IL-10 Bradley Schneider 99.91 0.09 IL-11 Bill Foster 99.94 0.06 IL-12 Mike Bost 38.37 61.63 IL-13 Rodney Davis 32.50 67.50 IL-14 Randy Hultgren 35.98 64.02 IL-15 John Shimkus 0.03 99.97 IL-16 Adam Kinzinger 2.23 97.77 IL-17 Cheri Bustos 99.86 0.14 IL-18 Darin LaHood 0.02 99.98 IN-1 Peter Visclosky 99.98 0.02 IN-2 Jackie Walorski 7.46 92.54 IN-3 Jim Banks 0.26 99.74 IN-4 Open seat 0.72 99.28 IN-5 Susan W. Brooks 0.93 99.07 IN-6 Open seat 0.11 99.89 IN-7 André Carson 99.99 0.01 IN-8 Larry Bucshon 0.77 99.23 IN-9 Trey Hollingsworth 23.53 76.47 KS-1 Roger Marshall 0.00 >99% KS-2 Open seat 39.00 60.99 KS-3 Kevin Yoder 21.21 78.78 KS-4 Ron Estes 12.73 87.27 KY-1 James Comer 0.01 99.99 KY-2 Brett S. Guthrie 0.12 99.88 KY-3 John A. Yarmuth 99.35 0.64 KY-4 Thomas Massie 0.06 99.94 KY-5 Harold Rogers 0.00 >99% KY-6 Andy Barr 47.30 52.70 LA-1 Steve Scalise 0.00 >99% LA-2 Cedric Richmond 100.00 0.00 LA-3 Clay Higgins 0.09 99.91 LA-4 Mike Johnson 0.20 99.80 LA-5 Ralph Abraham 0.07 99.93 LA-6 Garrett Graves 0.00 >99% MA-1 Richard E. Neal 100.00 0.00 MA-2 James McGovern 99.98 0.02 MA-3 Open seat 99.90 0.10 MA-4 Joseph P. Kennedy III 100.00 0.00 MA-5 Katherine Clark >99% 0.00 MA-6 Seth Moulton 99.97 0.03 MA-7 Michael E. Capuano 100.00 0.00 MA-8 Stephen F. Lynch 100.00 0.00 MA-9 William Keating 98.78 1.22 MD-1 Andy Harris 1.10 98.90 MD-2 C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger 99.98 0.02 MD-3 John P. Sarbanes 99.99 0.01 MD-4 Anthony Brown >99% 0.00 MD-5 Steny H. Hoyer 99.99 0.01 MD-6 Open seat 98.83 1.17 MD-7 Elijah Cummings >99% 0.00 MD-8 Jamie Raskin >99% 0.00 ME-1 Chellie Pingree 99.44 0.56 ME-2 Bruce Poliquin 40.79 59.21 MI-1 Jack Bergman 18.99 81.01 MI-2 Bill Huizenga 5.88 94.12 MI-3 Justin Amash 1.92 98.08 MI-4 John Moolenaar 0.44 99.56 MI-5 Daniel Kildee 99.79 0.21 MI-6 Fred Upton 14.96 85.04 MI-7 Tim Walberg 38.06 61.94 MI-8 Mike Bishop 42.62 57.38 MI-9 Open seat 98.89 1.11 MI-10 Paul Mitchell 0.24 99.76 MI-11 Open seat 65.19 34.81 MI-12 Debbie Dingell 99.99 0.01 MI-13 Open seat 100.00 0.00 MI-14 Brenda Lawrence >99% 0.00 MN-1 Open seat 45.34 54.66 MN-2 Jason Lewis 76.13 23.87 MN-3 Erik Paulsen 65.79 34.21 MN-4 Betty McCollum 99.98 0.02 MN-5 Open seat >99% 0.00 MN-6 Tom Emmer 0.19 99.81 MN-7 Collin C. Peterson 85.48 14.52 MN-8 Open seat 35.44 64.56 MO-1 William “Lacy” Clay Jr. >99% 0.00 MO-2 Ann Wagner 10.17 89.83 MO-3 Blaine Luetkemeyer 0.02 99.98 MO-4 Vicky Hartzler 0.08 99.92 MO-5 Emanuel Cleaver 99.78 0.22 MO-6 Sam Graves 0.06 99.94 MO-7 Billy Long 0.01 99.99 MO-8 Jason Smith 0.01 99.99 MS-1 Trent Kelly 0.07 99.93 MS-2 Bennie G. Thompson 99.53 0.00 MS-3 Open seat 0.27 99.73 MS-4 Steven Palazzo 0.45 99.55 MT-1 Greg Gianforte 12.18 87.81 NC-1 G.K. Butterfield >99% 0.00 NC-2 George Holding 10.74 89.25 NC-3 Walter B. Jones 0.00 100.00 NC-4 David Price >99% 0.00 NC-5 Virginia Foxx 5.19 94.81 NC-6 Mark Walker 21.51 78.49 NC-7 David Rouzer 7.18 92.82 NC-8 Richard Hudson 14.12 85.88 NC-9 Open seat 50.35 49.64 NC-10 Patrick T. McHenry 0.30 99.70 NC-11 Mark Meadows 0.34 99.66 NC-12 Alma Adams >99% 0.00 NC-13 Ted Budd 37.21 62.79 ND-1 Open seat 1.34 98.66 NE-1 Jeff Fortenberry 0.15 99.85 NE-2 Don Bacon 58.20 41.80 NE-3 Adrian Smith 0.00 >99% NH-1 Open seat 75.26 24.74 NH-2 Ann Kuster 98.55 1.45 NJ-1 Donald Norcross 99.98 0.02 NJ-2 Open seat 87.08 12.92 NJ-3 Tom MacArthur 43.91 56.09 NJ-4 Chris Smith 6.66 93.34 NJ-5 Josh Gottheimer 99.02 0.98 NJ-6 Frank Pallone Jr. 99.98 0.02 NJ-7 Leonard Lance 63.22 36.78 NJ-8 Albio Sires >99% 0.00 NJ-9 Bill Pascrell Jr. >99% 0.00 NJ-10 Donald Payne Jr. >99% 0.00 NJ-11 Open seat 72.34 27.66 NJ-12 Bonnie Watson Coleman >99% 0.00 NM-1 Open seat 97.92 2.07 NM-2 Open seat 24.28 75.72 NM-3 Ben R. Lujan 99.98 0.01 NV-1 Dina Titus 99.98 0.02 NV-2 Mark Amodei 1.31 98.69 NV-3 Open seat 66.86 33.14 NV-4 Open seat 78.55 21.45 NY-1 Lee Zeldin 10.95 89.05 NY-2 Pete King 18.79 81.21 NY-3 Thomas Suozzi 99.14 0.86 NY-4 Kathleen Rice 99.87 0.13 NY-5 Gregory W. Meeks 100.00 0.00 NY-6 Grace Meng 99.97 0.00 NY-7 Nydia M. Velázquez 99.99 0.00 NY-8 Hakeem Jeffries 100.00 0.00 NY-9 Yvette D. Clarke >99% 0.00 NY-10 Jerrold Nadler >99% 0.00 NY-11 Daniel Donovan 24.32 75.68 NY-12 Carolyn Maloney >99% 0.00 NY-13 Adriano Espaillat >99% 0.00 NY-14 Joseph Crowley >99% 0.00 NY-15 José E. Serrano >99% 0.00 NY-16 Eliot Engel 99.98 0.00 NY-17 Nita Lowey 99.95 0.00 NY-18 Sean Patrick Maloney 98.26 1.74 NY-19 John Faso 52.13 47.87 NY-20 Paul D. Tonko 99.98 0.02 NY-21 Elise Stefanik 7.38 92.62 NY-22 Claudia Tenney 71.17 28.83 NY-23 Tom Reed 4.86 95.14 NY-24 John Katko 36.66 63.34 NY-25 Open seat 99.72 0.28 NY-26 Brian Higgins >99% 0.00 NY-27 Open seat 24.50 75.49 OH-1 Steve Chabot 58.23 41.77 OH-2 Brad Wenstrup 5.50 94.50 OH-3 Joyce Beatty >99% 0.00 OH-4 Jim Jordan 4.48 95.52 OH-5 Robert E. Latta 0.31 99.68 OH-6 Bill Johnson 0.04 99.96 OH-7 Bob Gibbs 11.38 88.62 OH-8 Warren Davidson 0.06 99.94 OH-9 Marcy Kaptur 99.97 0.02 OH-10 Michael Turner 6.42 93.58 OH-11 Marcia L. Fudge >99% 0.00 OH-12 Troy Balderson 48.95 51.05 OH-13 Tim Ryan 99.95 0.05 OH-14 David Joyce 18.93 81.07 OH-15 Steve Stivers 2.63 97.37 OH-16 Open seat 4.99 95.01 OK-1 Open seat 0.75 99.25 OK-2 Markwayne Mullin 0.01 99.99 OK-3 Frank Lucas 0.00 >99% OK-4 Tom Cole 0.02 99.98 OK-5 Steve Russell 23.67 76.33 OR-1 Suzanne Bonamici 99.96 0.04 OR-2 Greg Walden 0.26 99.73 OR-3 Earl Blumenauer 100.00 0.00 OR-4 Peter DeFazio 99.17 0.83 OR-5 Kurt Schrader 99.61 0.39 PA-1 Brian Fitzpatrick 21.52 78.48 PA-2 Brendan Boyle >99% 0.00 PA-3 Dwight Evans >99% 0.00 PA-4 Open seat 99.63 0.37 PA-5 Open seat 99.98 0.02 PA-6 Open seat 97.60 2.40 PA-7 Open seat 86.77 13.22 PA-8 Matt Cartwright 93.52 6.48 PA-9 Open seat 0.90 99.10 PA-10 Scott Perry 14.85 85.15 PA-11 Lloyd Smucker 27.28 72.72 PA-12 Tom Marino 0.18 99.82 PA-13 Open seat 0.01 99.99 PA-14 Open seat 1.23 98.77 PA-15 Glenn W. Thompson 0.08 99.92 PA-16 Mike Kelly 4.76 95.24 PA-17 Conor Lamb 92.96 7.04 PA-18 Mike Doyle 100.00 0.00 RI-1 David Cicilline 99.98 0.02 RI-2 Jim Langevin 99.97 0.03 SC-1 Open seat 15.00 85.00 SC-2 Joe Wilson 0.85 99.15 SC-3 Jeff Duncan 0.15 99.85 SC-4 Open seat 0.05 99.95 SC-5 Ralph Norman 12.36 87.64 SC-6 James E. Clyburn >99% 0.00 SC-7 Tom Rice 1.06 98.94 SD-1 Open seat 1.44 98.56 TN-1 Phil Roe 0.00 >99% TN-2 Open seat 0.03 99.97 TN-3 Chuck Fleischmann 0.13 99.87 TN-4 Scott DesJarlais 0.76 99.24 TN-5 Jim Cooper 99.97 0.03 TN-6 Open seat 0.00 >99% TN-7 Open seat 0.03 99.97 TN-8 David Kustoff 0.02 99.98 TN-9 Steve Cohen >99% 0.00 TX-1 Louie Gohmert 0.00 >99% TX-2 Open seat 7.84 92.16 TX-3 Open seat 0.77 99.22 TX-4 John Ratcliffe 0.00 >99% TX-5 Open seat 0.08 99.92 TX-6 Open seat 6.64 93.36 TX-7 John Culberson 49.32 50.68 TX-8 Kevin Brady 0.00 >99% TX-9 Al Green 100.00 0.00 TX-10 Michael T. McCaul 2.62 97.38 TX-11 K. Michael Conaway 0.00 >99% TX-12 Kay Granger 0.01 99.99 TX-13 Mac Thornberry 0.00 >99% TX-14 Randy Weber 1.75 98.25 TX-15 Vicente Gonzalez 99.90 0.10 TX-16 Open seat 99.98 0.02 TX-17 Bill Flores 0.52 99.48 TX-18 Sheila Jackson Lee >99% 0.00 TX-19 Jodey Arrington 0.00 >99% TX-20 Joaquin Castro 99.94 0.00 TX-21 Open seat 17.81 82.17 TX-22 Pete Olson 14.17 85.83 TX-23 Will Hurd 72.36 27.64 TX-24 Kenny Marchant 4.37 95.62 TX-25 Roger Williams 7.09 92.91 TX-26 Michael Burgess 0.12 99.88 TX-27 Michael Cloud 0.48 99.52 TX-28 Henry Cuellar 99.95 0.00 TX-29 Open seat 99.99 0.01 TX-30 Eddie Bernice Johnson 99.99 0.00 TX-31 John Carter 20.11 79.88 TX-32 Pete Sessions 11.74 88.25 TX-33 Marc Veasey 99.99 0.01 TX-34 Filemon Vela 99.95 0.05 TX-35 Lloyd Doggett 99.99 0.01 TX-36 Brian Babin 0.02 99.98 UT-1 Rob Bishop 0.03 99.97 UT-2 Chris Stewart 2.53 97.43 UT-3 John R. Curtis 0.03 99.97 UT-4 Mia Love 19.01 80.99 VA-1 Robert J. Wittman 1.50 98.50 VA-2 Scott Taylor 8.14 91.86 VA-3 Robert C. Scott 100.00 0.00 VA-4 A. Donald McEachin 99.86 0.14 VA-5 Open seat 48.78 51.22 VA-6 Open seat 0.34 99.66 VA-7 Dave Brat 32.08 67.92 VA-8 Don Beyer >99% 0.00 VA-9 Morgan Griffith 0.16 99.84 VA-10 Barbara Comstock 74.71 25.29 VA-11 Gerald E. Connolly 99.99 0.01 VT-1 Peter Welch 99.98 0.02 WA-1 Suzan DelBene 99.87 0.13 WA-2 Rick Larsen 99.88 0.00 WA-3 Jaime Herrera Beutler 10.00 90.00 WA-4 Dan Newhouse 0.80 99.20 WA-5 Cathy McMorris Rodgers 28.14 71.86 WA-6 Derek Kilmer 99.93 0.07 WA-7 Pramila Jayapal >99% 0.00 WA-8 Open seat 44.36 55.64 WA-9 Adam Smith 100.00 0.00 WA-10 Denny Heck 99.90 0.10 WI-1 Open seat 20.76 79.24 WI-2 Mark Pocan 100.00 0.00 WI-3 Ron Kind 99.27 0.73 WI-4 Gwen Moore >99% 0.00 WI-5 F. James Sensenbrenner 2.01 97.99 WI-6 Glenn Grothman 29.23 70.77 WI-7 Sean P. Duffy 0.89 99.11 WI-8 Mike Gallagher 0.76 99.24 WV-1 David McKinley 0.30 99.70 WV-2 Alex Mooney 3.65 96.35 WV-3 Open seat 6.03 93.97 WY-1 Liz Cheney 0.02 99.98 Odds may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding and third-party candidates.

CORRECTION (Aug. 17, 2018, 5:45 p.m.): The first name of Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin was misspelled in an earlier version of the table in this article.