It is not a wave election

Michael Barone:

...

My predictions would produce an almost evenly divided House: 219 Democrats, a net gain of 16, and 216 Republicans. Such a result would raise the question of whether Mississippi Democrat Gene Taylor, who declined to vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker in this Congress, would do so again, and whether another Democrat might do so—which could produce a Republican majority for speaker. My predictions also suggest, correctly, that I do not see this, at least yet, as a "wave" election. In a "wave" election, the winning party—Democrats in 1974, Republicans in 1994—win about half the districts they seriously contest, while the losing party wins about 10 percent of those they seriously contest (since the Republicans seem to be seriously contesting only five seats, this would give them at best one offsetting gain). If you count all these 45 Republican seats as seriously contested, this would mean that Democrats would gain only 36 percent of them. A "wave" result, which some are forecasting, would give Democrats a net gain of 22 or 23 seats, enough for a 225-210 or 226-209 majority.

One reason I do not see this election as a "wave" is that I think Republicans have a superior turnout program. The samples in most recent polls show a Democratic advantage in party identification—quite different from the 2004 exit poll that showed party identification at 37 percent Republican and 37 percent Democratic. I think there probably has been some shift in party ID since November 2004, but I doubt that it's as great as those polls suggest. In any case, polls are not good at predicting turnout. Some but not all polls show Democrats to be more "interested" or "certain to vote" or "motivated." But responses to those questions have not done a good job at projecting turnout in the past, including November 2004. To get a really good idea of turnout, I think we have to wait for elections—or, rather, for the vote to be counted.

...

I think Barone is probably the best at observing election trends and polling. I think he would concede that the election is still close enough that his predictions could be off by a few candidates either way. In other words, voters can still make a difference in several of these races.

The Republican's best hope is in turning out their base. That used to be the Democrats best hope, but this year, the Democrats have put their hope in suppressing Republican turnout. It would be nicer if both parties were putting their hope in the embrace of their issues. However, Democrats are afraid to take a stand and show their hand, and Republicans have been put on the defensive because of the misconduct of fewer than half a dozen of their members.

It is ironic that if Democrats were to say what they are far, they fear they would lose votes.