continues. host: glad to be joined by david

wasserman, cook political report editor. let's start the news of the foxhole that came out yesterday finding that 41% of respondents to this poll said they would vote for a republican on the generic ballot. 41 sensing they would vote for a democrat in election 2022. do you want to put -- 41% saying they would vote for a democrat in the election in 2022. guest: we typically see democrats do a little better on this generic ballot holes than they end up doing at the ballot box but we have seen some narrowing in the past few months. this is a complicated election cycle because ordinarily you would look at a president with 39% approval and high inflation would say they are headed for historic losses.

democrats have gotten a boost in the last couple of months. the enthusiasm gap has closed significantly as a result of dobbs. the longer exists when you look at special elections we have seen in races in nebraska and minnesota last week, or democrats actually did better than the 2020 presidential margin in those red seats. we have seen gas prices come down and that put a percent drop has taken a little bit of a bite out of the republicans' message of the biden inflation. we are in the midst of primary season and a lot of the republican polls have produced some nominees who may be a little too far right for swing districts. whereas a coldness ago we might have said that republicans were on track for a 20 percent to 35 seat -- 20 to 35 seat gain.

host: the house right now, democrats held at 221 to 214 c advantage. how many seats -- seat advantage. how many seats do you see it switching hands? guest: pc 34 races as tossup's in our nomenclature and another 26 races as either leaning democrat or republican, competitive but one party had an advantage. if you were to split the tossup's down the middle, republicans would gain 17 seats, right in the middle of our range. host: and well more than they need. guest: well more than they need but redistricting makes the cycle more complicated. if democrats hadn't suffered a crushing string of legal defeats toward the tail end of the 2022

redistricting process, including in florida, new york, and ohio, we might actually be talking about democrats having a good chance to retain the health majority. bernie is, if democrats hadn't won legal victories overturning republican gerrymander's in the past five years in pennsylvania, north carolina, florida, and virginia, they probably wouldn't be holding a house majority narrowly today. host: did the primary season do more to put seats in play that democrats might be able to grab or did it do more to put seats in play that republicans might be able to pick up? guest: primary season has altered the outlook in more than a handful of seeds, but in some seeds it has had a big impact. in michigan's third district, or one of the 10 pro-impeachment republicans, peter mayer, narrowly lost his primary in

grand rapids to a trump-endorsed former head later -- hud later had redistricting. that part is trending towards democrats. under the own lines, it was a seat trump won by three points and now it is a seed that widened would have one by eight point and republicans have a nominee who is a hard-core mag a candidate. democrats have a strong candidate. we assume more broadly republican -- we see more broadly republican primaries in swing districts, there been some nominees with positions on abortion that are a little out of the mainstream. vega won virginia's for seventh district republican primary to face the democrat candidate, a gift to her because vega has been endorsed by the house

freedom caucus and has expressed skepticism toward acceptance of abortion and they will pursue that against her and other candidates who fit that mold. host: for the rear viewer who has not seen one of david wasserman's 49 appearances, is what he can do. chapter and verse on any district in this country. let me invite viewers to join in the conversation. if there is ray she want to talk about, go ahead. republican's (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. he will be with us until the house gavels in. they will be coming in early to work on the inflation reduction act.

start calling in. other trends you saw for primary season, and i know primary season is not over yet. guest: on the republican side, we are seeing two effects. we are seeing a defamation of the trunk skeptic winning of house republicans. there were 10 who voted for impeachment, so far we have seen three lose primaries and we will see a fourth lose their primary when liz cheney is on the ballot next week in wyoming. then we have four of the 10 who opted not to seek reelection, leaving two remaining, one in washington state who just had a win over a trump-endorsed candidate who different put together a series campaign. and then the central valley of california who is up against a tough democratic challenge in a

district that got more blue and the remap. we could see one out of 10 pro-impeachment republicans survive. we are seeing a number of more moderate republicans doing well in swing districts, people like tom kane junior in new jersey or zach non-in iowa's third district, -- zach nunn and i was there district. in these seats we will see more traditional or moderate republicans emerge. and a lot of the safe republican seats in primaries, you are seeing the party be remade into trump's image. on the democratic side, we have seen a snapback from the progressive turn of 2018 and 2020, when you saw squad members in. we have seen on omar in the house almost lose primary for

reelection in minnesota actually won shortly -- narrowly. you are also seeing groups play a lot in democratic primaries against progressives who are perceived as specific that it toward health and the rights. as helped to blunt the movement of democrats and toward the left. host: charles is up in colorado, independent. caller: this isn't regarding any one race, but correct me if i'm wrong. i think all of this redistricting and gerrymandering is just hurting democracy, because if they are not balanced districts, you are not going to get fair elections. i just don't see where it has

anything to do with democracy. a good example is a trump district is 80% trump, all trump has to do is call that person a rhino and he is out of office -- a rino and he is out of office. i am just very disheartened. guest: logically, if we were living in a sane society, redistricting would be handled by a group of nonpartisan bureaucrats in every state capital or by a census commission. that is not the system we have. and as a result we have a great deal of asymmetry in the way that drawing boundaries is handled from state to state. and that is hurting democrats, because in a lot of lou estates like california, new jersey, washington, junior, colorado,

voters have passed reforms that have taken the power to draw lines out of the hands of politicians and put them into bipartisan or nonpartisan commissions. the result is even though the maps might lean a little towards democrats, they are not the same type of jerry manders we are seeing in red states that have hyperinflated the republicans' share of seats in place like texas and tennessee, florida, and ohio. publicans at this time were able to do an end around of commissions in ohio and utah by either neutering reforms passed by voters or waiting or stalling until deadline and passing a map at the last minute when it was too late for a lawsuit to overturn the map in ohio. in florida you saw government --

governor ron desantis overpower his own legislature in a map that will expand republicans' advantage there. redistricting does have the power to predetermine outcomes in a way that voters don't understand and has shifted competition from general election to primaries and made them ideological cage matches the caller alerted to -- alluded to. a great deal of the polarization is attributable to the rural divide that has become more stark that has nothing to do with redistricting. democratic voters are clustering in suburbs in college towns. republicans have gained strength in small towns, rule areas -- rural areas and in cities and has given republicans an

advantage where they can win a greater share of territory with a smaller number of votes. host: david wasserman so steeped in redistricting is that his twitter handle is at redistrict. this is john, south bend, indiana, republican. good morning. caller: i wanted to ask about the special election in minnesota to replace jim hagedorn. do you think it would wrong to read into this too much as see it as a bellwether for the fall should republicans be tempering their expectations because this is a safe red seat that came within several single digits out would it be wrong to do that because of low turn out in that election. guest: we are in the midst of a string of house special elections that will give us clues is to if this post dobbs

bump for democrats is durable into the fall. so far it looks good for democrats in that regard. four days after the supreme court district, in nebraska we saw the candidate come within six points of winning a special and a district that had voted for trunk -- trump by 11 points and we saw that repeat in southern minnesota, another fairy will -- fairly rule all district but -- rural district and trump carried it by 10 points in 20 but the democrat came within four points of flipping that to democrats. publicans point out that this is a place that has some history of voting for democrats down ballot , represented not long ago by governor tim walz, a democrat, came within three points of

beating the mayor in 2020. the republicans nominated an appealing candidate. this is not a race that i would have expected to be particularly close before the dobbs ruling, but the democrat was the former ceo of hormel foods and ran on cutting the cost of food and his experience in dealing with inflation and consumer goods and it was a good message for democrats there. we will be watching the upcoming race in new york's 19th congressional district on august 23, a closer district and a seat biden carried by two points in 2020. if it democrats managed to turn the tide and win that race, and that would be an even better sign for their rebound. host: you mentioned nebraska. let's head to anthony in omaha,

democrats. caller: i live in nebraska's second congressional district, the newest ranking from over in cook. they moved it a likely republican victory and justice week, an internal poll had bacon up 15 which caused a firestorm. i wanted to know whether you had that information or whether that changes your mind. guest: i get asked more about this district then just about any other. bacon is a pragmatic republican incumbent, retired brigadier general who has advocated in one of 13 republicans to vote for the bipartisan infrastructure package and has won his last two

elections narrowly from a very progressive democrat. this time around, democrats nominated tony vargas, who is a former public school teacher who moved to nebraska from new york city. he does have a more moderate packaging. i met with him a couple months ago and was skeptical of his chances, but we have seen polling conducted for both parties that indicates it is a real race and may be assigned that the last few times democrats simply nominated a week candidate rather than don bacon demonstrating a lot of strength. this is an urban district turning toward democrats. biden won it in 2020 and they believe the abortion issue, the fact that they can fill out a right to life questionnaire which indicated opposed

exceptions for rape and incensed could be the silver bullet to finally put this district in their column. i think it is going to be a very competitive race. host: for visual learners, we can show the race ratings chart you can find at cookpolitical.com, these two great boxes are the most competitive races according to david wasserman and his colleagues are 26 seats, eight were publican seats in the tossup category. how much of this is science, art in making these race ratings from tossup to means one way or another to likely and safe? guest: it is a mix of art and science and we make as many qualitative assessments of strengths and weaknesses as well as quantitative. if you are only looking at these races in quantitative terms, you are missing half of the picture.

if you're only following the gossip in the district, you are also missing half of the picture. my approach for the last 15 years has been to blend those two disciplines. as much time i -- as i spend in spreadsheets with redistricting, i am meeting with the candidates. i've met between 800 and 900 congressional candidates in the last 15 years. the cycle alone we have been interviewing most of the competitive candidates on both sides of the aisle, sizing up with her their biographies fit the districts well and what the lines of attack might be with their opponents. candidates still do matter. that's why we don't assign a particular percentage odds but have more broad categories for these races that attempt to characterize where they stand in relation to each other.

there will be a few surprises on election night. i fully expect that some races will go the other way, but if that didn't happen, then politics wouldn't keep us on our toes. host: 800 and 900 interviews, who is the most memorable? guest: i really got to look through my notes. i have had my share of really strong candidates and also -- i will never forget a candidate from mississippi who went i asked the reason why he was running for congress told me that he was sick and tired of the bipartisanship plaguing washington. it was a wealthy, so funding executive. he had an a dude attempted to step in and correct him and said that mr. so-and-so is sick of the partisanship and not the

bipartisanship. he turned and said which one is it? what am i supposed to say? it is those times that give you an indication of the level of experience. host: good morning. caller: there is a matter of art and science and selecting as you mentioned and there are factors that cause candidates to lose and i'm interested in during the correlation between the folks that vote against -- voting to impeach lose their district. i am interested in how many trump-endorsed candidates have lost. i don't know what the correlation is saying they are losing because of voting to impeach. i would like to hear how many you think have lost that are trump endorsed.

and finally the walker in warnock race in georgia, i would like to hear your opinion on that. guest: all great questions. donald trump had lost his for share of primaries of endorsed candidates. in-house races in georgia, we saw into runoffs, donald trump indoor sees lost to other republicans, but in those cases, everyone running in those primaries was ardently pro-trump and maga oriented peer in may been the case of one being more -- oriented. it may have been case of one being better funded or a former democrat so it was tough to sell to an electorate over publicans. trump had endorsed katie arrington -- over republicans. trump had endorsed katie arrington over nancy mays who had voted to certify the 2020

election. i think the more meaningful primaries for determining the future of the republican conference aren't the ones that involve the pro-impeachment members, because we pretty much know they fell on their sward by voting for impeachment. they involve the members like mace who crossed trump in some other way, either by voting for an infrastructure bill of the january 6 commission or simply voting to certify the results in arizona and pennsylvania last january. we have seen a mixed record for these members. some have hung on, nancy mays, chris smith, members from texas, but we have seen some lose. rodney davis and illinois's 15th district or david mckinley in west virginia's second district. we are going to see the party move anymore -- in a more trump

direction. host: let me go back to liz cheney. i want two back and play a video from democratic congressman dean phillips of minnesota encouraging democrats to temporarily switch and vote republican in the primary in wyoming for liz cheney. [video clip] >> i am dean phillips, a democratic member from minnesota you might be surprised i would be supporting liz cheney for wyoming u.s. house here but principal aust always come before politics and -- principal must always come before politics and no one has shown more integrity encourage then she. patriots will put it on the line to protect our country and liz cheney has done that. it is far more important than any policy changes. so i encourage you to please switch parties and vote for liz cheney.

we would send a message to donald trump and protect our democracy. host: how unusual is something like that? guest: we are in an unprecedented time where we had republican members vote to impeach a president of their own party for his behavior. so we are seeing some democrats express support for liz cheney. we are also seeing dick cheney cut and add where he calls trump a coward and that seems to be the closing message in the waning days of this campaign. there aren't enough democrats in wyoming to make a meaningful dance in the rebuttal can primary. wyoming is a state that voted for trump 70% of the vote in 2020. a couple months ago, the only elaborate hail mary pass to reelection for cheney involved

accommodation of democrats reregistering to participate in a primary and a third pro-trump candidate taking votes away from harriet hagman who is the trump-endorsed see. as soon -- trump endorsee. polls show hagman ahead by 30 or more points. host: who is she? guest: she is an attorney in the cheney camp has criticized for diverting water -- hoping well-heeled industries divert water from wyoming in the past, but she is the consensus tick of the pro-trump forces in the state and rather than attacking pigman, cheney has been more focused on defending her work on the january 6 commission and attacking donald trump. her real goal here is to affect

how she will be remembered by his street more than it is to try and win the election. another irony -- in 2020, liz cheney could have chosen to run for an open senate seat and probably could have waltzed into that seat, but she told me at the time that she believed that the battle between freedom and socialism would be fought in the house and wanted to climb the house readership ranks and now is on the verge of being out of a house. host: in georgia, this is niles, independent. caller: a caller took my question so i will ask another. michigan seven will be one of the more barnburner races. you have elissa slotkin who in 2018 was apprised democratic recruit going up against tom

barrack, a state senator. that race is going to be one of the closest races in the country. but given the fact that michigan governor gretchen whitmer is by all accounts favored to win reelection, i am curious to know what your thoughts are on that race and if governor whitmer could have any down ballot effect on members like slotkin and tillby. guest: michigan is a fascinating state, a cycle, in part because it had a new redistricting commission, bipartisan, who redrew a lot of competitive districts. if a lot of those were like michigan, we would see more. the seventh district held by alyssa slotkin, this is a race

that is on the tossup list. she is facing state senator tom barrett. slotkin has run flawless campaigns the last two cycles and is one of the democrats who got elected in the blue wave of 2018. she has run as a pragmatist with national security experience and run on populist message of stopping corruption in -- stopping corruption in washington working across the aisle. republicans have a financial advantage of the super pac level. kevin mccarthy has raised over $200 million for house republicans at the committee level this cycle, but the place where democrats have an advantage is at the candidate level, where they are frontline incumbents who have about $3.5

million on hand on average, whereas republican challengers are coming out of primaries a little bruised and broken and have had to replenish their warchest. so the next month or so, we are likely to see airwaves unanswered against republican tom barrett. she is going to make the case that he voted the legislature against tax plans that would have gm to the district, so in democrats use this basically the cap all of these republicans -- kneecap all of these republicans had set a mousetrap where they cannot escape their high negative when it is finally their turn to go up with ads in october? host: not to get too deep into the strategy, but isn't this the place where the national republican congressional committee is supposed to come in and fill that gap if there is a place like this were something

is done unanswered? there is a national party here spending money on these ads, right? guest: that's true. that is why republicans have gone in some districts where they don't think candidates can afford to be up yet, but keep in mind, committees and super pac's pay higher rates for as the candidates. candidates are guaranteed the lowest unit rate of advertising. that can impact the calculus here. typically, messaging is more effective when it comes from the candidate. host: steve in rockville center, new york, republican. good morning. steve, you with us? sounds like you are there, but just not on your phone. this is donna in york, maine, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm so glad to be able to talk to an expert who is this passionate on this really important subject.

i think i am a novice about it because i'm wondering who wields the power for redistricting? visit the legislature? -- is it the legislature? is it a commission? i think i heard you say that they overruled or vetoed the decision by a commission in florida. the second part of my question is, it seems to me that it matters a lot, but maybe it matters less than i think. thanks a million. waiting for your answer. guest: redistricting is hugely important to determining house races, especially in an era where we have far less split ticket voting than we used to. there used to be a competitive range of districts that was quite wide, where it was routine for democrats to win seats in the south or rural areas that the republicans won by 20

points. and we saw a number of republicans win suburban seats that were barack obama and bill clinton had carried in the past. now, when local news has faded and there are fewer opportunities for candidates to differentiate themselves from their parties, and electorates are demanding purity, we see fewer conservative democrats and moderate to liberal republicans. as a result, it is parliamentary. it is straight ticket. that means decisions about how to draw boundaries, even within a few miles, can predetermine which party has the advantage i n a decade. who gets to draw the lines? it depends on the states. in sum, there are commissions who are allowed to draw lines but not all are created equally. for example, in virginia and

washington state, and new york state, commissions that were empowered with equal members of democrats and republicans, they simply reached a stalemate and courtside to intervene. but in other states, the process is relatively nonpolitical. for example, california is prohibited from taking into account a partisanship or where incumbents live in their process. colorado and arizona have provisions encouraging the construction of competitive districts. and then in the majority of states, it is really up to partisan state legislators. that is where there is really a lot of opportunity to manipulate boundaries in favor of one side or the other. democrats were most successful the cycle in illinois, new mexico, and oregon in gerrymandering the boundaries, and nevada republicans