Now that we have complete presidential results by CD for the entire nation, we can take a look at how members of Congress fared compared to the top of the ticket in each district. The vast majority of Congressmen and women typically perform better than their party’s presidential candidates. The reasons for this are plain: Most members don’t face serious challenges, and individual Congresscritters can tailor their politics to suit their CDs far better than any presidential office-seeker, who (in theory, at least) has to appeal nation-wide.
Some Congressmembers, however, invariably run behind the ticket. First up are the laggard Republicans:
| State | CD | Member | Party | GOPer Margin | McCain Margin | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WY | AL | Lummis | (R) | 10 | 32 | -22 |
| LA | 4 | Fleming | (R) | 0 | 19 | -19 |
| KY | 2 | Guthrie | (R) | 5 | 23 | -18 |
| AK | AL | Young | (R) | 5 | 21 | -16 |
| LA | 1 | Scalise | (R) | 31 | 47 | -16 |
| NC | 10 | McHenry | (R) | 15 | 27 | -12 |
| OH | 2 | Schmidt | (R) | 7 | 19 | -12 |
| SC | 1 | Brown | (R) | 4 | 15 | -11 |
| CA | 4 | McClintock | (R) | 0 | 10 | -10 |
| TX | 22 | Olson | (R) | 7 | 17 | -10 |
| KS | 2 | Jenkins | (R) | 4 | 12 | -8 |
| LA | 6 | Cassidy | (R) | 8 | 16 | -8 |
| MO | 9 | Luetkemeyer | (R) | 3 | 11 | -8 |
| NC | 5 | Foxx | (R) | 17 | 23 | -6 |
| AL | 3 | Rogers | (R) | 8 | 13 | -5 |
| MN | 6 | Bachmann | (R) | 3 | 8 | -5 |
| AL | 4 | Aderholt | (R) | 50 | 53 | -3 |
| AZ | 3 | Shadegg | (R) | 12 | 15 | -3 |
| TX | 7 | Culberson | (R) | 14 | 17 | -3 |
| GA | 10 | Broun | (R) | 21 | 23 | -2 |
| AZ | 2 | Franks | (R) | 22 | 23 | -1 |
| SC | 2 | Wilson | (R) | 8 | 9 | -1 |
| UT | 3 | Chaffetz | (R) | 37 | 38 | -1 |
Most of the folks on this list are freshmen who are almost all certain to do much better in 2010. A handful of others are in extremely red districts to begin with, making any difference between their performance and McCain’s mostly a matter of minor noise.
Some, however, stand out for reasons all their own, and their underperformance signals a weakness which could potentially be exploited (again). They include the ethically plagued Don Young, the hapless Patrick McHenry, the well-hated Jean Schmidt, the befuddled Henry Brown, the batshit Virginia Foxx, the caught-napping Mike Rogers, and the loose-lipped Michele Bachmann. While all sit in red districts of varying difficulty, each could be vulnerable (particularly Brown and Rogers, I feel).
Now for the Democratic list:
| State | CD | Member | Party | Dem Margin | Obama Margin | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | 4 | Himes | (D) | 4 | 20 | -16 |
| MI | 13 | Kilpatrick | (D) | 55 | 70 | -15 |
| IN | 7 | Carson | (D) | 30 | 43 | -13 |
| ME | 1 | Pingree | (D) | 10 | 23 | -13 |
| PA | 11 | Kanjorski | (D) | 3 | 15 | -12 |
| CA | 8 | Pelosi | (D) | 62 | 73 | -11 |
| NM | 1 | Heinrich | (D) | 11 | 20 | -9 |
| OH | 15 | Kilroy | (D) | 1 | 9 | -8 |
| NV | 3 | Titus | (D) | 5 | 12 | -7 |
| CA | 6 | Woolsey | (D) | 48 | 54 | -6 |
| IL | 7 | Davis | (D) | 70 | 76 | -6 |
| NY | 15 | Rangel | (D) | 81 | 87 | -6 |
| OH | 1 | Driehaus | (D) | 5 | 11 | -6 |
| GA | 13 | Scott | (D) | 38 | 43 | -5 |
| MI | 7 | Schauer | (D) | 2 | 6 | -4 |
| MI | 9 | Peters | (D) | 9 | 13 | -4 |
| IA | 2 | Loebsack | (D) | 19 | 22 | -3 |
| IL | 4 | Gutierrez | (D) | 69 | 72 | -3 |
| VA | 11 | Connolly | (D) | 12 | 15 | -3 |
| CA | 9 | Lee | (D) | 76 | 78 | -2 |
| CO | 1 | DeGette | (D) | 48 | 50 | -2 |
| FL | 8 | Grayson | (D) | 4 | 6 | -2 |
| FL | 23 | Hastings | (D) | 64 | 66 | -2 |
| IL | 1 | Rush | (D) | 72 | 74 | -2 |
| OH | 10 | Kucinich | (D) | 18 | 20 | -2 |
| PA | 2 | Fattah | (D) | 78 | 80 | -2 |
| WA | 7 | McDermott | (D) | 67 | 69 | -2 |
| CA | 35 | Waters | (D) | 69 | 70 | -1 |
| CO | 2 | Polis | (D) | 29 | 30 | -1 |
| IL | 2 | Jackson | (D) | 79 | 80 | -1 |
| MN | 5 | Ellison | (D) | 49 | 50 | -1 |
| NJ | 3 | Adler | (D) | 4 | 5 | -1 |
| OH | 11 | Fudge | (D) | 70 | 71 | -1 |
| VA | 8 | Moran | (D) | 38 | 39 | -1 |
| WI | 8 | Kagen | (D) | 8 | 9 | -1 |
Once again, the vast majority here are freshmen. There are also quite a few more folks in absurdly blue districts (much bluer than the most Republican districts are red). A few stand out as potentially more than just noise, though. Nancy Pelosi puts in a token appearance here – obviously you’re going to take a few dings if you’re the party leader, but not quite enough for us to be welcoming Congresswoman Sheehan as our new overlord.
Anyhow, I wouldn’t be surprised if Artur Davis’s long-manifest desire to run for higher office hurt him with the folks at home. (UPDATE: It was Danny Davis in IL-07, not Artur Davis in AL-07.) Meanwhile, Lynn Woolsey’s outspoken, er, leadership of the Progressive Caucus might be chafing at her favorability ratings. Charlie Rangel, of course, endured tons of bad press thanks to his tax problems. And David Scott had to face down all kinds of bullshit from Deborah “The Defrauder” Honeycutt. None of these seats, of course, could ever turn red (is Anh Cao laughing at me as I say this?) – it’s just that their current inhabitants had (and in some cases still have) varying “issues” in front of them.
As for more serious situations, it’s no surprise to see Paul Kanjorski on this list. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick also has a featured spot, thanks undoubtedly to the serious primary challenge she got last year and her bellicose defense of her disgraced son Kwame (the ex-mayor of Detroit). I wouldn’t be surprised if she got primaried again. Otherwise, I don’t see too many vulnerable Dem veterans on this list – but Kanjorski and Kilpatrick seriously need to consider retirement.
UPDATE: Himes’s margin of victory was actually four points, not one – I had failed to include the votes he got on the Working Families Party line.
I’m fairly certain he’s not on the list. Presumably the IL-7 Davis refers to Danny Davis. Artur Davis was unopposed both this year and in 2006.
Should that really be included since Fleming was elected in a much lower-turnout vote when McCain and Obama weren’t on the ballot?
And I love seeing that 0 by McClintock. Can’t wait until we get to contest that seat again.
She’s a lot stronger than you’d think. She would have been unseated in August but she did a very savvy thing and paid Martha Scott to run against her. With the anti-Kilpatrick vote split between Mary Waters and Scott Kilpatrick won.
It would be nice if she’d fade quietly away, but she’s here to stay. Her biggest challenge will be in 2012, when we’re re-districting. Detroit won’t have enough people to be the core of two districts the way it is now, so Conyers and Kilpatrick will almost certainly be put into a single district and be forced to run against each-other.
Besides being freshmen, I wonder how much of Peters and Schauer’s underperformance is because John McCain pulled out of Michigan early. Or, rather, not that they necessarily underperformed, but Obama overperformed for what should be expected in Michigan. I think that Obama’s win in Michigan– especially in rural areas like MI-07– was a lot bigger than it would have been if there had been an active McCain operation up to Election Day.
But like you said, if they can hold them in 2010, as incumbents the margin will be bigger.
I’d use a lot of terms to describe Patrick McHenry but “hapless” would not be one of them. The man is one of the most dangerous figures in the Republican Party and , heaven help us, barring a long stretch of Democratic dominance a la 1932-94 he is likely to become Speaker one day.
McHenry is an ideologue. He deliberately and loudly votes against his district to show he’s with the leadership (credit unions vote). He is overly ambitious. He’s a twerp with no connection to the real world. And it is working. Perhaps not so much as at the start but he is moving up the ladder. Cough cough.
I’d have to imagine that McCain’s big “fuck you” to the state was part of the reason why some Democrats underperformed Obama (though you are absolutely correct about Kirkpatrick)
In 2004 a similar list contained 31 Republicans who ran behind Bush and 12 Democrats who ran behind Kerry.
Three Republicans were on this list in both 2004 and 2008: Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, and Culberson of TX-7. In addition, three congressional districts make it in both years for the Republicans (TX-22, MN-6, UT-3). Charles Taylor, Marilyn Musgrave, Hostetler, and Sodrel are off the list because they lost and the seats are held by Democrats. Mark Kennedy and Tom Tancredo lost running for higher office.
Moran, Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Ellison and Cheeks-Kilpatrick appear on both the 2004 and 2008 lists. Ellison’s margin is far smaller than in 2004. Pelosi has been singled out for national level abuse by Republicans. In 2008 the independent Sheehan ran ahead of the Republican in her district.
Was no surprise to see Carson on there, either. But unless hes just really, really disliked back home I cant see him being knocked off. How unreal is it, though, that the late congresswoman almost lost her seat in a district that only 2 years later went for Obama by 43. And she wasnt even corrupt at all.