Should we still get rid of the filibuster if we win the Senate but lose the House?

[Polybius]

It's looking like a real possibility (in fact I would say high probability) that we gain about two or three seats in the Senate, but lose the House. So, if that scenario plays out, would it be a total waste to eliminate the filibuster in January?


I mean, what would the point, since we wouldn't have the House? There's already no filibuster on federal judges and Justices.

[Demsrule86]

1. I am not ceding the house. But no, there would be no point...you could do it for legislation if

you had GOP type on board but that is unlikely. We need to keep the House.

[Polybius]

4. We have to be up by 4-5 points just to break even in the House

Redistricting was very bad, with gerrymandering all over the place in Red states. Hell, even in NY we lost about three Democratic seats due to a judge striking it down because of our 2015 ban on gerrymandering.

It's possible, but it's not looking good.

[BootinUp]

7. I don't have a link or a exact memory

but I read, possibly at 538, that we need more like +7 in actual national vote margin to keep the house.

[Polybius]

9. Damn, that's even more grim

And not even in just one poll, but an average list of polls.

[BootinUp]

10. I'll probably head over there 538 or maybe one of

the other race predictors in a while and verify my memory. Could be mistaken.

[ColinC]

11. Polls have been dramatically off the last several cycles.

And have become far less of an indicator now than they have in the past. A stronger indicator is enthusiasm and voter contact metrics. Two things that cannot very accurately be measured by polling.

[Polybius]

13. Yeah but when they were off in 2016 and 2020, they underestimated MAGA's

We'll soon find out if they were off or not this year.

[ColinC]

16. Indeed. We really simply won't know entirely where things are headed

...until election night.

[Polybius]

18. The Senate seems much easier to predict

I think it's a given that we pick up PA. We probably hold onto everything, but Nevada isn't a certainty. GA we're only going to win because of Walker. Ron Johnson loses I think. Rubio easily holds on.

[ColinC]

19. There is definitely a strong maybe for all those predictions.

Just a few more months to go!

[honest.abe]

2. Yes.

The filibuster is wrong no matter who benefits.

The majority rules even if by a single vote.

Imho.

[nevergiveup]

3. We are going to pick up at least 5 house seats and at least 3 senate seats

so we will be eliminating the filibuster in January. I do confess that my numbers may be low.

[Polybius]

5. I think we net two Senate seats, but three is certainly possible

Due to extreme gerrymandering this year though, we have to be up about 4 points on all the polls to even break even in the House. I don't see it happening at all.

[Fiendish Thingy]

6. That's quite optimistic

Current estimates, incorporating the shift of momentum towards Dems since Dobbs , are that Dems lose approx. 15 seats in the house. Previous estimates were 25-30 seats.

For Dems to gain five seats, 20 races would have to flip.

[Zambero]

8. Are there 20 or more close races currently trending red?

I'd venture to say there are. Momentum seems to be going our way as Republican over-reach and persistent Trumpism turns off more and more voters.

[Elessar Zappa]

15. I'd give it 50/50 on the House.

Momentum is on our side right now and, with the correct messaging, I believe Dems can pull off a miracle.

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. Keeping the senate is 50/50 right now; it's 80/20 the GOP takes the house

But it’s early August, and a lot can happen in the next 90 days.

Since Dobbs, the forecast has gone from GOP taking 25-30 seats in the house to only 15.

[KPN]

12. We aren't going to lose the House. Moot question.

[Polybius]

14. Bookmarking this

I want to tell you that you were right if we keep it.