Talk:2014 United States House of Representatives elections

??

District	Incumbent	Cook	Rothenberg	Roll Call	Crystal Ball
AZ-1	Kirkpatrick (D)	Tossup
AZ-2	Barber (D)	Tossup
AZ-9	Sinema (D)	Lean D
CA-3	Garamendi (D)	Likely D
CA-7	Bera (D)	Lean D
CA-9	McNerney (D)	Likely D
CA-10	Denham (R)	Likely R
CA-16	Costa (D)	Likely D
CA-21	Valadao	Likely R
CA-24	Capps (D)	Likely D
CA-26	Brownley (D)	Likely D
CA-31	Miller (R)	Tossup
CA-36	Ruiz (D)	Tossup
CA-41	Takano (D)	Likely D
CA-52	Peters (D)	Lean D
CO-6	Coffman (R)	Lean R
CT-5	Esty (D)	Likely D
FL-10	Webster (R)	Likely R
FL-13	Young (R)	Likely R
FL-18	Murphy (D)	Tossup
FL-22	Frankel (D)	Likely D
FL-26	Garcia (D)	Tossup
GA-12	Barrow (D)	Lean D
IL-10	Schneider (D)	Lean D
IL-12	Enyart (D)	Likely D
IL-13	Davis (R)	Lean R
IN-2	Walorski (R)	Lean R
KY-6	Barr (R)	Likely R
MI-1	Benishek (R)	Likely R
MI-7	Walberg (R)	Likely R
MI-11	Bentivolio (R)	Lean R
MN-6	Bachmann (R)	Likely R
MN-7	Peterson (D)	Likely D
MN-8	Nolan (D)	Likely D
NE-2	Terry (R)	Likely R
NV-3	Heck (R)	Likely R
NV-4	Horsford (D)	Likely D
NH-1	Shea-Porter (D)	Tossup
NH-2	Kuster (D)	Likely D
NY-1	Bishop (D)	Lean D
NY-2	King (R)	Likely R
NY-11	Grimm (R)	Likely R
NY-18	Maloney (D)	Lean D
NY-19	Gibson (R)	Likely R
NY-21	Owens (D)	Likely D
NY-23	Reed (R)	Likely R
NY-24	Maffei (D)	Likely D
NC-7	McIntyre (D)	Lean D
OH-14	Joyce (R)	Likely R
PA-7	Meehan (R)	Likely R
PA-8	Fitzpatrick (R)	Likely R
PA-12	Rothfus (R)	Likely R
TX-23	Gallego (D)	Lean D
UT-4	Matheson (D)	Lean D
WA-1	DelBene (D)	Likely D
WV-2	(Capito) (R)	Lean R
WV-3	Rahall (D)	Likely D
WI-7	Duffy (R)	Likely R

Include FairVote's Analysis?

The table and map should include FairVote's Monopoly Politics predictions. In 2012, they predicted 333 districts and were right in all 333 of them. They recently released their predictions for 2014 along with a substantial body of analysis here: http://www.fairvote.org/monopoly-politics-2014-and-the-fair-voting-solution. You can download their spreadsheet of predictions (which allows you to adjust for the national average and incumbency advantage) here: http://www.fairvote.org/assets/Monopoly-Politics-2014FinalRelease.xlsx

I'm taking a stab at making this edit, as I feel like the article is incomplete without it, but it's quite a complex edit, so I would appreciate a second pair of eyes looking over it. Banyan (talk) 16:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

It looks like back in January someone (just an IP address, no username) undid this change with the following note: "Since FairVote is not a professional predicting service (they have other goals and predicting elections is a sideshow) and their ratings were not being kept updated, they were removed" This is a bit baffling to me, especially since FairVote was in many ways the first one to this game (the Cook partisan voting index is based on FairVote's work). FairVote does update their ratings regularly. FairVote doesn't just do predictions, but it is one of their central projects, and they are often cited in that capacity. I'm trying to manually undo these unfortunate changes. I hope that if someone wants to drastically change this page again, they will come to the talk page first to justify the change. Banyan (talk) 14:16, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, there was no justification for unilaterally taking out FV without going to the talk page. Orser67 (talk) 15:14, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

"Incumbent running"?

I'm noticing that many of the candidates listed as running have in fact said nothing of the sort. As Tim Griffin proves, anyone can retire at any time. We should be clear on who is actually running and who is undeclared. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Looking for someone to nominate this article for GA status

Does anyone else think this article is up to GA status?--Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Steve Stockman - Map needs updating

The map of retiring incumbents needs updating now that it has become clear that Steve Stockman will seek election to the Senate Guyb123321 (talk) 21:30, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Indiana 5th District links

The candidates table for the Indiana Congressional districts contained several links to pages about individuals who are quite obviously not in the race, including an Irish politician, an English soccer player, and a dead Confederate leader. Based on rudimentary research, it appears the links themselves are the problem (whether this is because the pages on the candidates in this election do not yet exist or have similar titles to other articles I don't know). I have removed the links for now to avoid confusion. Nathaniel Greene (talk) 00:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Undeclared/unknown

Someone put in "undeclared/unknown" into the table for all incumbents who aren't retiring. Many of these candidates have declared they are seeking re-election, but with 435 representatives, it's a huge undertaking to track each candidate's announcement that they are seeking re-election. I propose removing the "undeclared/unknown" which is both inaccurate, and, in my opinion, unattractive. Orser67 (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Links

>> Republican Presidential Hopefuls in Vegas to Woo Donor AdelsonLihaas (talk) 19:21, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Was there more gerrymandering?

There has been a number of reports that the polls are so lopsided:

• http://m.thenation.com/article/188801-republicans-only-got-52-percent-vote-house-races
• http://billmoyers.com/2014/11/05/gerrymandering-rigged-2014-elections-republican-advantage/
• http://www.republicreport.org/2014/gerrymandering-rigged-the-2014-elections-for-republican-advantage/

Popular vote?

Any figures for the national popular vote for the two Parties and others/independents? best, Sunil060902 (talk) 21:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjYj9mXElO_QdHVsbnNNdXRoaUE5QThHclNWaTgzb2c&usp=drive_web#gid=0--71.105.126.167 (talk) 04:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

There is also my tabulation of the Congressional results including the total votes for the 3 'major' minor parties: and the state by state results. A poster there also tabulated the regional totals. As I tabulated the results myself I have no site as backup to show prove the totals though I could scan my 'working papers' if that helps. http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=201724.1700 scroll down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Tondowsky (talk • contribs) 23:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The problem with both of those is that it's USERGENERATED data which is considered Original research which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Thus a "reliable source" reference for these figures is needed. So TheGreenPapers.com ref will be satisfactory in the meantime. Eventually the "official popular votes totals" from the House Clerk will be made available from here, and then we'll switch to the figures from that reference. --IJBall (talk) 05:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Historic election

The article says the Democrats lost 74 seats during the Truman era, and thus the Republicans shattered that record. However, if you look at Wikipedia's pages for the 1950 and 1946 elections it says that Truman's party lost 28 and 54 seats for a total of 82. However, The American Presidency Project of UC Santa Barbara claims that Truman's party only lost 45 seats in the 1946 election. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.169.90.79 (talk) 03:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Turnout figure

I´d like to ask for edit the turnout figure. It can be placed on the right panel, as usual it is written in another elections. Thanks.

A Map Showing % Party Rep by State

For the 20th Century and up until 2008, the Wikpedia article on Congress elections include relative Party representatives by state. I think both district and state based maps have a role to play. District maps are more precise, but they are distorted by the demographics of the Republicans being stronger in rural unpopulated areas, and the Dems being reduced to a few pockets of blue. This is also true for Presidential maps, in which Republicans appear much stronger in district as opposed to state maps. I think both are useful, but that the addition of State-based maps gives a better sense of how many congress people each Party has per state. When you have the district maps, even in a state like NY, you see a sea of Red, and then a few pockets of blue downstate, when in fact the Democrats control NY's congressional representation. Its true that since 2008, the Republicans have won sweeping elections in 2010 and 2014, and so Congress really is very red, but the district maps overplay this even more.

Ideally someone proficient in mapmaking could add state-based maps to the 2010, 2012 and 2014 Congress articles.

This is a model of the type of state maps I'm talking about

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:109_us_house_membership.png

--Gary123 (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United States House of Representatives elections, 2014. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021004711/https://doe.dos.state.fl.us/elections/resultsarchive/Index.asp?ElectionDate=11%2F6%2F2012&DATAMODE= to https://doe.dos.state.fl.us/elections/resultsarchive/Index.asp?ElectionDate=11%2F6%2F2012&DATAMODE=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150127130653/http://enr.ncsbe.gov/ElectionResults/?election_dt=11%2F04%2F2014 to http://enr.ncsbe.gov/ElectionResults/?election_dt=11%2F04%2F2014

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:28, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Error in the map

I'm writing this post to bring attention to the error in the map for Congressional Districts. The map indicates that the Republicans gained the 2nd Congressional District in New Hampshire, but this is an error, as the Democrats held this seat. Could someone please fix this on the map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.238.210.7 (talk) 04:11, 3 January 2018 (UTC)