Using the New York Times election map, I created a list of House seats where the winner received less than 60% of the vote and the loser received more than 40%. I began my task with the idea that since Democratic votes are concentrated in urban areas with ridiculous margins of victory, I would find more "safe" Democratic seats than Republicans. The numbers, however, did not back up my hypothesis. Turns out both parties start with just about the same number of seats where the winner took more than 60% or the challenger (if there was one) couldn't even muster 40%, 150 seats for the Democrats and 153 for the Republicans. That leaves 51 Democrats and 80 Republicans who won seats with margins within the 60/40 range. The list of winners and margins broken down regionally, with a few thoughts, below the orange Infinity and Beyond!
I broke down the country into six regions: New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Interior West, and Pacific. Any state west of the Mississippi that touches neither the Mississippi River or the Pacific Ocean is in the Interior West category, so Texas is in this category instead of the South.
New England:
ME 2 Michaud (D) 58.1/41.9
NH 1 Shea-Porter (D) 49.7/46.0, NH 2 Kuster (D) 50.2/45.1
MA 6 Tierney (D) 48.3/47.3
RI 1 Cicilline (D) 52.4/41.5
CT 4 Himes (D) 59.8/40.2, CT 5 Esty (D) 51.5/48.5
None from VT
7 Democrats (out of 21 total Democrats), 0 Republicans (out of 0)
We can only play defense here, since no Republicans from New England currently serve in the House. In fact, Romney only won five counties in the whole region and three of those were in New Hampshire. The New Hampshire seats have been battlegrounds for a few cycles now and rural CT 5 had another of those Romney counties. Michaud's ME 2 had the fifth.
Mid-Atlantic:
NY 1 Bishop (D) 52.2/47.8, NY 2 King (R) 58.7/41.3, NY 3 Israel (D) 57.5/41.7, NY 11 Grimm (R) 52.8/46.2, NY 18 (D) Maloney 51.7/48.3, NY 19 Gibson (R) 53.5/46.5, NY 21 (D) Owens 50.3/48.1, NY 23 (R) Reed 51.9/48.1, NY 24 (D) Maffei 48.4/43.8, NY 25 (D) Slaughter 57.2/42.8, NY 27 (R) Collins 50.7/49.3
PA 3 (R) Kelly 54.7/41.1, PA 6 Gerlach (R) 57.0/43.0, PA 7 (R) Meehan 59.5/40.5, PA 8 (R) Fitzpatrick 56.6/43.4, PA 11 Barletta 58.5/41.5, PA 15 Dent (R) 56.7/43.3
NJ 2 (R) LoBiondo 58.0/40.0, NJ 3 (R) Runyan 53.8/44.8, NJ 5 (R) Garrett 55.5/42.4, NJ 7 (R) Lance 57.4/39.9, NJ 11 (R) Freilinghuysen 58.9/40.0
None from MD, DE
6 Democrats (out of 40), 16 Republicans (out of 26)
Note that over half the Republicans from this region made the list, from some of the most Republican areas, while the relatively few Democrats are in relatively conservative areas. We have been on offense for a long time in the Northeast and we are winning.
Midwest:
MI 1 (R) Berishek 48.2/47.5, MI 3 (R) Amash 52.7/44.1, MI 6 (R) Upton 54.5/42.7, MI 7 Walberg 53.3/43.0, MI 11 (R) Bentivolio 50.8/44.4
OH 2 (R) Wenstrup 59.1/40.9, OH 6 (R) Johnson 53.4/46.6, OH 7 (R) Gibbs 56.7/43.3, OH 16 (R) Renacci 52.2/47.8
IN 2 (R) Walorski 49.0/47.6, IN 8 (R) Bucshon 53.4/43.1, IN 9 (R) Young 56.3/43.7
IL 6 (R) Roskam 59.2/40.8, IL 8 (D) Duckworth 54.7/45.3, IL 10 (D) Schneider 50.5/49.5, IL 11 (D) Foster 58.1/41.9, IL 12 (D) Enyart 51.5/42.9, IL 13 (R)Davis 46.6/46.2, IL 14 (R) Hultgren 58.8/41.2, IL 17 (D) Bastros 53.3/46.7
IA 1 (D) Braley 56.9/41.7, IA 2 (D) Loebsack 55.4/42.5, IA 3 (R) Latham 52.3/43.6, IA 4 (R) King 53.2/44.6
WI 1 (R) Ryan 54.9/43.4, WI 7 (R) Duffy 56.1/43.9, WI 8 (R) Ribble 55.9/44.1
MN 1 (D) Walz 57.6/42.4, MN 2 (R) Kline 54.1/45.9, MN 3 (R) Paulsen 58.2/41.8, MN 6 (R) Bachmann 50.6/49.4, MN 8 (D) Nolan 54.5/45.5
None from MO
9 Democrats (out of 35), 23 Republicans (out of 50)
Again, the Republicans have a higher proportion of their members on the list. Most of the Democrats are from IL where we control the statehouse and pulled our own gerrymander tricks. The winning percentages for Republicans are the lowest in this region. Most of these are blue states in presidential races, this should be home turf. Any serious gains we hope to make in the House will have to start in the Midwest.
South:
WV 3 (D) Rahall 53.9/46.1
VA 1 (R) Wittman 56.1/41.0, VA 2 (R) Rigell 53.8/46.2, VA 4 (R) Forbes 57.1/42.9, VA 5 (R) Hurt 55.3/43.2, VA 7 (R) Cantor 58.6/41.4
NC 2 (R) Ellmers 55.9/41.4, NC 5 (R) Foxx 57.5/42.5, NC 7 (D) McIntyre 50.1/49.9, NC 8 (R) Hudsen 54.1/45.9, NC 9 (R) Pittenger 51.8/45.7, NC 10 (R) McHenry 57.0/43.0, NC 11 (R) Meadows 57.4/42.6
SC 5 (R) Mulvaney 55.6/44.4, SC 7 (R) Rice 54.9/45.1
GA 12 (D) Barrow 53.7/46.3
KY 6 (R) Barr 50.6/46.7
TN 4 (R) DeJarlais 55.8/44.2
FL 2 (R) Southerland 52.7/47.3, FL 6 (R) DeSantis 57.2/42.8, FL 7 (R) Mica 58.7/41.3, FL 10 (R) Webster 51.8/48.2, FL 13 (R) Young 57.6/42.2, FL 16 (R) Buchanan 53.6/46.4, FL 17 (R) Rooney 58.6/41.4, FL 18 (D) Murphy 50.3/49.7, FL 22 (D) Frankel 54.6/45.4, FL 26 (D) Garcia 53.6/43.0
None from LA, AR, MS, AL
6 Democrats (out of 30), 22 Republicans (out of 82)
The whole western part of the region is pretty red and the polarization there locks in just about all of the representatives outside of the purple Atlantic coast. There are still relatively more Republicans than Democrats on the list from this region, (roughly 25% of their seats vs 20% of ours). But the winning percentages are closer to 60 than 50 in many of their races, while our seats on this list are particularly vulnerable. So while at first glance the South seems like fertile pickup territory, I think we are pretty much playing defense here. In the best case scenario, I think we can pick up a couple of seats and set ourselves up for a push here in the next presidential cycle.
Interior West:
TX 14 (R) Weber 53.5/44.6, TX (D) Gallego 50.3/45.5
NE 2 (R) Terry 51.2/48.8
SD AL (R) Noem 57.5/42.5
ND AL (R) Cramer 55.0/41.8
MT AL (R) Daines 53.2/42.9
CO 3 (R) Tipton 53.5/41.1, CO 6 (R) Coffman 48.7/45.1, CO 7 (D) Perlmutter 53.3/41.2
NM 1 (D) Grisham 59.1/40.9, NM 2 (R) Pearce 59.1/40.9
AZ 1 (D) Kirkpatrick 48.6/45.4, AZ 2 (D) Barber 50.1/49.9, AZ 9 (D) Sinema 48.3/45.2
UT 4 (D) Matheson 49.3/48.1
NV 3 (R) Heck 50.4/42.8, NV 4 (D) Horsford 50.1/42.2
None from WY and ID
8 Democrats (out of 23), 9 Republicans (out of 58)
Texas, the most horribly gerrymandered state in the union, only has TWO freaking seats that fall within the 60/40 parameter out of 36 total. A lot of close races in this region, we have to play some serious defense in all of these seats except probably NM 1. There are several Republicans with low percentages too, though. Note that this is the first region where a higher proportion of our seats make the list.
Pacific:
WA 1 (D) DelBene 53.6/46.4, WA 6 (D) Kilmer 59.0/41.0, WA 8 (R) Reichart 59.9/40.1, WA 10 (D) Heck 58.2/41.8
OR 5 (D) Schrader 54.1/42.6
CA 1 (R) LaMalfa 58.1/41.9, CA 3 (D) Garamendi 53.9/46.1, CA 7 (D) Bera 50.8/49.2, CA 8 (R) Cook 57.6/42.4, CA 9 (D) 54.7/45.3, CA 10 (R) Denham 53.5/46.5, CA 16 (D) Costa 55.1/44.9, CA 21 (R) Valadao 58.9/41.1, CA 24 (D) Capps 54.8/45.2, CA 25 (R) McKeon 55.6/44.4, CA 26 (D) Bownley 52.0/48.0, CA 31 (R) Miller 55.2/44.8, CA 33 (D) Waxman, 53.2/46.8, CA 36 (D) Ruiz 51.9/48.1, CA 39 (R) Royce 58.8/41.2, CA 41 (D) Takano 57.6/42.4, CA 45 (R) Campbell 59.1/40.9, CA 49 (R) Issa 58.8/41.2, CA 52 (D) Peters 50.5/49.5
HI 1 (D) Hanabusa 54.6/45.4
None from AK
16 Democrats (out of 50), 10 Republicans (out of 21)
While almost half of the current House Republicans from this region make the list, more Democrats are defending tighter margins. I'm intrigued by California's new redistricting runoff processes and hope they point the way to better ways to conduct elections. Perhaps as a direct result of this, a larger number of winners in CA had narrower victories than in other parts of the country. We are pretty much in a purely defensive position in this region where we already dominate the map with only one Republican winning with less than 54% of the vote.
So in my little exercise, 80 House Republicans and 51 Democrats fell within the 60/40 band, a balance that works in our favor. However, 60% is a pretty high percentage, I use it only to show the realm of possible in some kind of wave election. When you eliminate the members who won at least 56%, then 54% the numbers narrow and the real vulnerabilities arise for House Republicans:
<60 <56 <54
R D R D R D
New England 0 7 0 5 0 5
Mid Atlantic 16 6 7 4 5 4
Midwest 23 9 16 6 12 3
South 22 6 13 6 6 5
Interior West 9 8 7 7 6 7
Pacific 10 16 3 13 1 7
With the more stringent threshold, the numbers do not look as good. There are 31 Democrats winning with under 54% and 29 Republicans. Those Pennsylvania and New Jersey reps melt away, as do a lot of those Southern members. They may have thinned out their strength through gerrymandering and Democratic vote sinks, they still managed to pull out comfortable victories. Meanwhile, most of the Democrats in those regions won with fairly low percentages. I think it would do us well to contest those seats, but the fruits may not bear until a later cycle. The Plains and Southwest have a number of potentially close races in seats held by both sides. Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic, but if nothing crazy happens between now and 2014 I think most of those New England and Pacific Democrats will be fine. Its the Midwest where the partisan balance is the most out of whack and where the best chances for real gains in the upcoming election lie.
So the only way I think we can have any hope of winning back the House will be to continue the consolidation of the Northeast, control the damage in the South, defend the west coast, and focus on the Midwest, Great Plains, and southwest for more substantial gains. It'll be a long shot, but I think if the political discussion continues to focus on Republican obstructionism we can at least avoid the usual midterm backslide and set ourselves up for a decent chance to taking the House in 2016.
Here's a list of the districts won with less than 54%:
Democrats Republicans
NH1 NH2 MA6 RI1 CT5
NY1 NY18 NY21 NY24 NY11 NY19 NY23 NY27 NJ3
IL10 IL12 IL17 MI1 MI3 MI7 MI11 OH6 OH16 IN2 IN8 IL13 IA3 IA4 MN6
WV3 NC7 GA12 FL18 FL26 VA2 NC9 KY6 FL2 FL10 FL16
TX23 C07 AZ1 AZ2 AZ9 UT4 NV4 CA10