If Democrats are to regain the majority in the House in 2012, these are the seats they must target:
Republican-held seats:
AK-AL: Don Young
AZ-1: Paul Gosar
AZ-3: Ben Quayle
AZ-5: David Schwiekert
AR-1: Rick Crawford
AR-2: Tim Griffin
CA-3: Dan Lungren
CA-4: Tom McClintock
CA-44: Ken Calvert
CA-45: Mary Bono Mack
CA-48: John Campbell
CA-50: Brian Bilbray
CO-4: Cory Gardner
FL-12: Dennis Ross
FL-13: Vern Buchanan
FL-22: Allen West
FL-24: Sandy Adams
FL-25: David Rivera
IL-8: Joe Walsh
IL-10: Bob Dold
IL-11: Adam Kinzinger
IL-13: Judy Biggert
IL-14: Randy Hultgren
IL-17: Bobby Schilling
IN-8: Larry Bucshon
IA-4: Tom Latham
MI-7: Tim Walberg
MN-8: Chip Craavack
NE-2: Lee Terry
NV-2: Dean Heller
NV-3: Joe Heck
NH-1: Frank Guinta
NH-2: Charlie Bass
NJ-2: Frank LoBiondo
NJ-3: Jon Runyan
NJ-4: Chris Smith
NJ-5: Scott Garrett
NJ-7: Leonard Lance
NM-2: Steve Pearce
NY-3: Peter King
NY-13: Mike Grimm
NY-19: Nan Hayworth
NY-25: Ann Marie Buerkle
NY-29: Thomas Reed
NC-2: Renee Ellmers
OH-1: Steve Chabot
OH-2: Jean Schmidt
OH-3: Mike Turner
OH-6: Bill Johnson
OH-12: Pat Tiberi
OH-14: Steve LaTourette
OH-15: Steve Stivers
PA-7: Pat Meehan
PA-8: Mike Fitzpatrick
PA-11: Lou Barletta
PA-15: Charlie Dent
TX-23: Francisco Canceso
TX-27: R. Blake Farenthold
WI-7: Sean Duffy
WI-8: Reid Ribble
Loading ...
Some explanation would be helpful.
in my opinion. He won’t stay in the new IA-04 to fight it out with Steve King in the GOP primary, even if Story County (Ames) is drawn into IA-04, which I doubt will happen. Story County probably will be in the new IA-03, centered in Polk County, and Latham will fight for that seat. I believe his chances of winning are better if Dallas County is included in the district, but a lot depends on who the Democratic candidate will be. Leonard Boswell isn’t making any noises about retiring, but Christie Vilsack (former first lady) may run anyway.
Latham keeps his head down, brings some money to his district and avoids making the news. It’s not going to be easy for anyone to run against him.
If Iowa is a contested state in the presidential campaign, I think that’s probably bad for Latham–Polk County would be a priority for the Obama campaign GOTV.
First, a lot of these weren’t doable in 2008 and won’t be doable in 2012. Seriously, we’re not going to win AK-AL even if Don Young gets caught in bed with a dead girl AND a live boy. If Berkowitz couldn’t do it with the political wind at his back and all polling showing him romping, nobody will. Same goes for CA-04, despite Charlie Brown being an excellent candidate and McClintock being a downstate carpetbagger. And so on.
Secondly, there’s redistricting. With the GOP controlling trifectas (or at least duopolies) in most of the key states losing seats, a lot of these districts won’t look anything like they did this decade. NV-03 and IA-04 spring readily to mind. Dina Titus is likely to have a Dem-leaning district all her own in 2012, while NV-03 will become fairly solid R.
And there are the incumbents on this list that represent safe R districts that we would probably have no hope of cracking even if we did have D trifectas everywhere. OH-03? NY-03? NJ-04? Pure fantasy. Those incumbents are popular and haven’t faced serious opposition in almost their entire careers, and their districts are likely to become more Republican, not less.
Then there are the Blue Dog districts that we only held in a fluke in the first place. NY-13 springs readily to mind – McMahon was supposed to win in 2010, and wouldn’t have won in 2008 absent a total Staten Island GOP fail. CO-04 was only ours because of Musgrave – CO-03 is much more doable in a neutral/D year, yet absent from your list.
And finally, the D-leaning/swing districts that you omitted. Why is Arkansas, where the Dem bottom just fell out for good, a better prospect than MI-01?
I could go on, but I think I’ve overstated my point already.
will look like politically in two years. A good chunk of them might not exist in anything resembling their current form.
That makes planning difficult, but it’s reality.
Its not far about what the DCCC is thinking. They put a similar list out. No one on this list or the DCCC’s list are surprised to be on it. Freshman or those in marginal seats are easy picks.
Naturally with Freshman not even sworn in handicapping 2012 is hard to do. Lets check back in a year and we might get a clearer picture. Here are the three unknows.
1. Redistricting. Some of these folks might not have a place to run in 2012 or may find themselves in save seats.
2. Fundraising–Its a benchmark and it signal to others “stay out of this race because I will spend you under the table”.
3. What type of congressman will the freshman on your list be? Will they connect with people in the district?Will they focus a lot of attention on meeting people at home?Will they make a good impression? Will they be polarizing? You have Cory Gardner on your list. Ms. Mulgrave was a prime example of someone who did not click with her seat. A prime question to ask about all these congressman is whether they will click with folks back home.
The only reson why he’s stayed in this long is to help pay for the costs of defending himself from ethics charges. Now that they’re dropped and with fellow pork-wrangler Murkowski staying on, he can retire in comfort.
The Republicans have an 8-3 majority there right now, which is hugely unbalanced for one of the most purple states in the country. There is a good chance that VA-02 could flip back, possibly VA-05 in a Periello v. Hurt rematch. Then there are a couple more seats that are not likely to turn blue, but are possibly competitive, like VA-01, VA-10, VA-04 (although my guess is that Petersburg will be dumped into VA-03 in redistricting which will make it a lot less blue), or even VA-07 (Cantor was the only R incumbent in VA not to crack 60% this year).
If the Democratic base gets energized a net gain of 30 seats isn’t out of the question. Which seats, however, will depend on how each state is redistricted and it seems premature to list specific seats. Texas may be good for up to 4 for the Dems depending on how much or little the GOP gets away with.
process to finish, and then wait for the 2012 election season to start, so that we can have a good measure of the political climate for that year.
However, there are definitely a few seats Dems should be targeting.
NH-01/02 – The White House is personally encouraging Annie Kuster and Carol Shea-Porter to give it another run in 2012. I can’t see either district changing too much.
MN-08 – Chip Cravaack is not long for this district, which is anchored in Duluth.
NV-04 – I’m sure Joe Heck will be protected at the cost of NV-04 having a Democratic lean. Hopefully they’ll draw the district to include Dina Titus.
MD-01 – 7-1 gerrymander, dawg.
I think California and Illinois will provide us with quite a few seats, given the incumbent protection nature of both maps which could easily become undone, in the Democrats’ favor. I also think Texas is a good opportunity (surprisingly), with two new Hispanic-majority districts and possibly winning back TX-27.
A 30 seat pick-up is completely doable if the economy improves and Obama’s campaign is doing well. With any luck we can win back the House, hold the Senate, and get rid of the filibuster so we can have two functional Democratic years.
It will be some seats where the democratic incumbents can need help after be more endangered cause of the redistricting process, and surely we will have some open seat. Of course the democrats need to fight this seats. I would include the likely merge of the current IA-03 and IA-04 in the defensive strategy.
This would be my list of seats for attack since now (of course since a point open to the things what the redistricting can change):
0 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN DISAPPEAR
OH-?? ? (disappear)
NJ-03? J Runyan (disappear)
LA-?? ? (disappear)
NY-25 A Buerkle (disappear)
NY-13 M Grimm (disappear)
IL-19 J Shimkus (R) (disappear)
This, taking IL-19 J Shimkus (R) like a generic republican seat what can disappear in Illinois (all are in risk). I think the work and the effort for defeat A Buerkle, J Runyan and M Grimm must be done in this front. This would not give democratic gains, but here would not have democratic loses.
1 NEW SEATS WITH D+/EVEN RATING (obviously open)
01 FL-27 (new) Take it as a generic name. I think one of the two new seats after the redistricting in Florida can be democratic, and maybe the new seat help making R+ the current FL-22, then the new seat would be in the area of Miami.
02 WA-10 (new) The new seat in Washington can be D+ too. Time of find someone for the seat still before the design of the seat.
03 NV-04 (new) The same than for WA-10.
2 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN BE D+/EVEN AFTER IMPORTANT CHANGES IN THE REDISTRICTING
04 MD-01 A Harris (R)
05 MD-06 R Bartlett (R)
06 AR-02 T Giffin (R)
07 IL-15 T Johnson (R)
08 IL-18 A Schock (R)
09 IL-16 D Manzullo (R)
10 IL-08 J Walsh (R)
11 IL-11 A Kinzinger (R)
12 IL-13 J Biggert (R)
13 IL-14 R Hultgren (R)
14 IL-06 P Roskam (R)
15 CO-03 S Tipton (R)
16 IL-17 R Schilling (R)
17 IL-10 R Dold (R)
3 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN CONTINUE AS D+/EVEN WITH LOW CHANGES IN THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS
18 NH-02 C Bass
19 NH-01 F Guinta
4 REPUBLICAN LIKELY R+ SEATS WITH WEAK INCUMBENTS
I think the republicans can be able to give R+ seats to the rest of their current incumbents. The redistricting process will give a decent number of R+low seats. Group to watch. Better wait until the redistricting.
It will be some seats where the democratic incumbents can need help after be more endangered cause of the redistricting process, and surely we will have some open seat. Of course the democrats need to fight this seats. I would include the likely merge of the current IA-03 and IA-04 in the defensive strategy.
This would be my list of seats for attack since now (of course since a point open to the things what the redistricting can change):
0 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN DISAPPEAR
OH-?? ? (disappear)
NJ-03? J Runyan (disappear)
LA-?? ? (disappear)
NY-25 A Buerkle (disappear)
NY-13 M Grimm (disappear)
IL-19 J Shimkus (R) (disappear)
This, taking IL-19 J Shimkus (R) like a generic republican seat what can disappear in Illinois (all are in risk). I think the work and the effort for defeat A Buerkle, J Runyan and M Grimm must be done in this front. This would not give democratic gains, but here would not have democratic loses.
1 NEW SEATS WITH D+/EVEN RATING (obviously open)
01 FL-27 (new) Take it as a generic name. I think one of the two new seats after the redistricting in Florida can be democratic, and maybe the new seat help making R+ the current FL-22, then the new seat would be in the area of Miami.
02 WA-10 (new) The new seat in Washington can be D+ too. Time of find someone for the seat still before the design of the seat.
03 NV-04 (new) The same than for WA-10.
2 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN BE D+/EVEN AFTER IMPORTANT CHANGES IN THE REDISTRICTING
04 MD-01 A Harris (R)
05 MD-06 R Bartlett (R)
06 AR-02 T Giffin (R)
07 IL-15 T Johnson (R)
08 IL-18 A Schock (R)
09 IL-16 D Manzullo (R)
10 IL-08 J Walsh (R)
11 IL-11 A Kinzinger (R)
12 IL-13 J Biggert (R)
13 IL-14 R Hultgren (R)
14 IL-06 P Roskam (R)
15 CO-03 S Tipton (R)
16 IL-17 R Schilling (R)
17 IL-10 R Dold (R)
3 REPUBLICAN SEATS WHAT CAN CONTINUE AS D+/EVEN WITH LOW CHANGES IN THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS
18 NH-02 C Bass
19 NH-01 F Guinta
4 REPUBLICAN LIKELY R+ SEATS WITH WEAK INCUMBENTS
I think the republicans can be able to give R+ seats to the rest of their current incumbents. The redistricting process will give a decent number of R+low seats. Group to watch. Better wait until the redistricting.