Jordan Raddick

The 2020 House Elections: How did I do?

On Wednesday, I took a look at back at my predictions for the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, and Saturday it was the Senate’s turn. Today: how did I do at predicting elections for the House of Representatives?

As happens every even-numbered year, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives were up for a vote. I predicted the outcomes of them all on a map, and discussed detailed predictions in part 2 and part 3). How did I do in predicting the results of those elections?

What We Still Don’t Know

The answer is, “we don’t know for sure yet,” because there are four results still unknown.

The weird one

The exciting ones

And there are also three house races where both winner is still unknown, and might be from either major party:

Iowa’s second district race is headed to a recount, but recounts almost never change election results, so the most likely outcome is a ridiculously narrow win by Miller-Meeks. What is especially remarkable about this race is that neither I nor anyone else had this on our radar as a close race; Hart was expected to win easily. But so it always goes on election night – there is always at least one race that defies expectations. That’s the nature of trying to predict 435 different things; enough opportunities for outcomes to occur virtually guarantees that there will be a rare outcome somewhere, somehow.

So there are those four uncertainties, but that still leaves 431 certainties. How did I do in my predictions?

Hits and Misses

My top line result for the House of Representatives was that the party count would be a good result for the Democratic Party: 237 seats going Democratic and 198 Republican, for a net swing of five seats Democratic.

In reality, the Democratic majority remains, but the House elections feel very much like a win for the Republicans. Not including the three seats yet to be decided, the count is 230 Democratic, 202 Republican. Republicans have a narrow lead in all three undecided races, meaning the result most likely result is a swing of seven seats in favor of the Republicans.

I have some ideas about why the 2020 House and Senate elections were so good to the Republicans, but that’s a topic for a different post. What matters here is: how right or wrong were my predictions? And for evaluating my predictions, the important question is not the swing, but rather the individual election results.

Here is my the map of the outcome of my predictions. Colors indicate the party of the winning candidate, using the traditional yet arbitrary red for Republican and blue for Democratic. Districts whose calls I missed are shown with their winner’s name in BIG BOLD ALL-CAPS.

Checking my predictions for the 2020 U.S. House of Representatives elections. Click for a larger version.

The map shows that my predictions were correct for 417 of the 432 decided House seats. That’s a 96.5 percent success rate, although it’s less impressive than it sounds when you realize how gerrymandering has made most House elections completely uncompetitive. It’s also less impressive when you realize the systematic offset: I mistakenly predicted one Republican win in a seat that went Democratic, and FOURTEEN Democratic wins in seats that went Republican. If Garcia holds on in California-25 and Miller-Meeks in Iowa-2, the latter number goes up to SIXTEEN.

Here are the districts where I got it wrong. Click the district names to see the district’s Wikipedia page, which includes a map; click on RESULTS see the results from the most official source I could find (and many thanks to the websites of the Secretaries of State of California and Utah for making their official state counts so easy to find and link to):

Margins of victory

DistrictMargin
NJ-71.2%
TX-241.3%
UT-4-1.0%
CA-39-1.2%
CA-48-1.2%
MN-13.0%
TX-73.3%
NE-24.3%
AZ-64.4%
MI-36.0%
MO-26.4%
TX-216.5%
NC-86.6%
FL-26-3.4%
TX-226.9%
OH-17.2%
NY-22-3.8%
TX-23-4.0%
IL-138.8%
AK9.0%
GA-69.2%
AR-210.8%
MT12.8%
MN-713.5%
MI-615.7%
NY-11-15.8%
Elections I predicted would be close,
and their actual margins

As I had discussed when I evaluated my Senate picks on Saturday, I predicted not only the winner of each contest, but also which would be close (within 5% vote share) and very close (within 1% vote share). How did I do?

I predicted that 26 races would be close – decided by a vote share of more than 1 percent but less than 5 percent. I looked up the actual vote share margin of those 26 races, defined as the percent vote share for the winning candidate minus that for the losing candidate. The table to the left (or above if you’re on a small screen) shows the results of those 26 races.

Because of votes for third-party candidates, the vote shares do not always add up to 100 percent; but that doesn’t matter because I only considered the difference. For a few of the close races I predicted, I missed not only the margin but also the winner. Those races are described in more detail in the Hits and Misses section above, and I somewhat arbitrarily decided to double the penalty for missing the margin. Of my 26 predicted close races…

NINE were actually close, decided by between 1 and 5 percent once I applied the double-penalty for picking the wrong winner. The one that I missed most hilariously was New York-11, described above, where I predicted a close win for Max Rose but Nicole Mallonakis won by a shocking 15.8 percent.

What about the races that I predicted would be very close, within one percent vote share or less? The table to the left (or below if you’re on a small screen) show the results.

DistrictMargin
CA-25-0.2
CA-211
OK-54.2
VA-55.2
GA-7-2.8
NJ-25.7
PA-106.6
IN-5-4.1
CO-3-6.2
NY-2414.1
NY-2-13.8
Elections I predited would be
very close, and their
actual margins

Of the 11 races that I predicted would be very close, two actually were very close – the two in California that are so close we don’t yet know who won. One more (OK-5) was within 5 percent. The other eight were decided by even more than 5 percent. Most hilariously wrong were the elections in NY-2 and NY-24, where I picked the wrong candidate, and the other candidate won by 13.8 percentage points.

Correctly calling of 26 close and 2 of 11 very close races is not great, but even that doesn’t tell the full story, because there were races that I did not expect to be close that turned out to be close. The most obvious example of a miss to that side was Iowa-1, where I picked incumbent Abby Finkenauer to win easily, but actually she lost by 3.6 percentage points. In addition to her and Donna Shalala in Florida-27 (who lost by 2.8 percentage points), there were an additional 17 where my predicted candidate won, but by less than 5 percentage points. Those unexpectedly close races are shown in the table below.

What do all 19 of these districts have in common? They were all occupied by Democratic representatives. Two of them have changed parties and are now represented by Republicans. The other 17, like the House as a whole, remain Democratic, but by a much smaller margin than expected.

District Margin
IA-2-0.0
IL-141.4
IA-31.4
VA-71.8
PA-172.0
WI-32.0
MN-22.2
MI-112.4
TX-152.9
NV-33.0
AZ-13.2
MI-83.6
PA-83.6
WA-83.6
PA-73.8
IL-174.0
NV-44.9
FL-27-2.8
IA-1-3.6
Races that were unexpectedly close,
with their actual margins

That was supposed to be the end of this post – an evaluation of how I did in predicting the 2020 House elections. Not great, but not bad for a first attempt. I’ll take it.

But this is not the end of this post, because in fact, doing this comparison has made me realize something that I hadn’t realized before, and I haven’t heard anyone else observe either: the Republicans came very close to winning the House. Once all the seats are decided, it looks like the balance of power will be Democratic 220, Republican 205. If eight elections had gone the other way, the balance would be Republican 213, Democratic 212.

How many additional Republican votes would it have required to swing the eight closest elections in their favor? Those are the districts in the second through ninth row of the table to. the right (or above if you’re on a small screen), from Illinois-14 to Texas-15. I’m calculating that number now, and I’ll let you know on Wednesday.

And if there is one ironclad rule in American elections, it’s that the President’s party suffers significant losses in Congress in the first midterm election. Which means that there is a good chance that the Republicans will control both houses of Congress in 2022. What impact would that have on our system?

Hang on folks, because I think I found a game-breaking glitch in democracy.

More on Wednesday.

Exit mobile version