After a number of requests in previous diaries here it is. The same style diary, the same methodology and the same layout so as to allow you dear reader to compare us to them!
So below the fold to see how the Repubs are doing in House candidate recruiting for 2008!
A hint – They are doing really crap.
249 House races have confirmed Republican candidates – yep only 249!!! So as not to give any Repub trolls any hints this diary is very light on for analysis.
However it goes without saying that from these numbers the Repubs are really struggling to find candidates for House races in 2008. Wonder why? Just look at the number of unfilled races in California and New York.
Before we crack open the bubbly however a few cautionary notes.
– It is harder to find Repub candidates because they don’t have a central fundraising hub like ActBlue.
– I didn’t trawl through Repub blogs as much as I would through ours (try it yourself and you will see why!)
– Very few State Repub Party sites had up to date lists of candidates. More Dem State Party sites did.
– The Repubs don’t have a Swing State Project or 2008 Race Tracker wiki so again it is harder to find their candidates.
– Expect a lot more of their 2006 candidates to step up as sacrificial lambs later in the cycle.
– I am sure I have missed some candidates but not many as I FEC searched all 2006 candidates as well as checking out their websites for updates.
*** Despite all that hedging we are soooo far in front of them!!!***
So here is where we are at (Democratic Districts):
Districts with confirmed candidates – 47
Districts with unconfirmed candidates – 1
Districts with rumoured candidates – 18
Districts without any candidates – 167!
1) The Democratic held districts with confirmed Republican challengers are as follows:
AL-05,
AZ-07,
CA-05,
CA-09,
CA-10,
CA-11,
CA-23,
CA-37,
CA-47,
CT-02,
CT-05,
FL-02,
FL-11,
FL-16,
FL-22,
FL-23,
GA-08,
GA-13,
IL-08,
IN-01,
IN-02,
IN-08,
IN-09,
KS-02,
KS-03,
KY-03,
ME-01,
MD-04,
MD-08,
MA-04,
MA-05,
MA-06,
MI-05,
MN-01,
NH-01,
NY-19,
NY-20,
NC-11,
OH-10,
OH-18,
PA-04,
PA-07,
TX-22,
TX-23,
TX-29,
VA-08,
WV-03,
2) The following Democratic districts have candidates that are expected to run but are yet to confirm:
NC-07,
3) The following Democratic districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!
AZ-05,
AZ-08,
CA-06,
CA-12,
CA-20,
CO-02,
GA-12,
MI-01,
MN-08,
NH-02,
NY-24,
ND-AL,
PA-08,
PA-10,
PA-11,
RI-01,
WA-09,
WI-08,
4) And last but not least the following districts have not a single rumoured GOP candidate:
AL-07,
AZ-04,
AR-01,
AR-02,
AR-04,
CA-01,
CA-07,
CA-08,
CA-13,
CA-14,
CA-15,
CA-16,
CA-17,
CA-18,
CA-27,
CA-28,
CA-29,
CA-30,
CA-31,
CA-32,
CA-33,
CA-34,
CA-35,
CA-36,
CA-38,
CA-39,
CA-43,
CA-51,
CA-53,
CO-01,
CO-03,
CO-07,
CT-01,
CT-03,
FL-03,
FL-17,
FL-19,
FL-20,
GA-02,
GA-04,
GA-05,
HI-01,
HI-02,
IL-01,
IL-02,
IL-03,
IL-04,
IL-05,
IL-07,
IL-09,
IL-12,
IL-17,
IN-07,
IA-01,
IA-05,
IA-03,
KY-06,
LA-02,
LA-03,
ME-02,
MD-02,
MD-03,
MD-05,
MD-07,
MA-01,
MA-02,
MA-03,
MA-07,
MA-08,
MA-09,
MA-10,
MI-12,
MI-13,
MI-14,
MI-15,
MN-04,
MN-05,
MN-07,
MS-02,
MS-04,
MO-01,
MO-03,
MO-04,
MO-05,
NV-01,
NJ-01,
NJ-06,
NJ-08,
NJ-09,
NJ-10,
NJ-12,
NJ-13,
NM-03,
NY-01,
NY-02,
NY-04,
NY-05,
NY-06,
NY-07,
NY-08,
NY-09,
NY-10,
NY-11,
NY-12,
NY-14,
NY-15,
NY-16,
NY-17,
NY-18,
NY-21,
NY-22,
NY-27,
NY-28,
NC-01,
NC-02,
NC-04,
NC-12,
NC-13,
OH-06,
OH-09,
OH-11,
OH-13,
OH-17,
OK-02,
OR-01,
OR-03,
OR-04,
OR-05,
PA-01,
PA-02,
PA-12,
PA-13,
PA-14,
PA-17,
RI-02,
SC-05,
SC-06,
SD-AL,
TN-04,
TN-05,
TN-06,
TN-07,
TN-09,
TX-09,
TX-15,
TX-16,
TX-17,
TX-18,
TX-20,
TX-25,
TX-27,
TX-28,
TX-30,
UT-02,
VT-AL,
VA-03,
VA-09,
WA-01,
WA-02,
WA-03,
WA-06,
WA-07,
WV-01,
WI-02,
WI-03,
WI-04,
WI-07,
And don’t forget 2 races will probably become uncontested when the special elections are done in CA-37 and MA-05.
Woo hoo to the Democratic Party we are implementing the 50 State Strategy in spades whilst the GOP are playing rats jumping off a sinking ship.
Loading ...
Whaddya reckon – How well are we doing?
While Jim Noland is around 79 or so, I expect him to make his fifth straight run against Ike Skelton.
The amusing thing about Noland is that he’s winning contested primaries and not spending more than $2K while doing so.
I think a good number of Missouri’s frequent candidates better resumes than other frequent candidates. Noland was a State Senator in the 70s. George Weber (D-MO-2) was a state rep for a term in the 1960s.
The best bet for MO-4. 4 guys file, one spends $50K or more, and Jim Noland spends $600 and wins by 10 points.
the lack of an opponent for welch was adressed last month in the burlington free press. in which, the republicans said they have two candidates who are looking at the race, but refused to name names. in other words, they have two sacrificial lambs, and are trying their best to get lite gov dubie to run. it’s unlikely he’d win, but with douglas running for gov, he’s their strongest.
this may not seem like much, considering the lean of the state, but in 1990, establishment candidate peter smith (R-VT) was defeated by then former mayor bernie sanders (I-VT) in a surprising upset. peter welch is about as much an establishment candidate as peter smith.
compounding all of this is the talk of an impeach bush third party candidate running, which could make an impact. while i agree with the impeachment, i don’t think it’s going to happen. furthermore, if say, the impeachment candidate gets elected, bush is impeached during the few days between the inaugeration of congress and the inaugeration of the president, what’s the impeachment going to do for the next 2 years?