Author: DavidNYC

Not so fast, said the DCCC to the doomsayers:

At least 2 members who have been targets of an orchestrated GOP effort to goad them into retiring have told DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen they will run again over the past day. Spokespeople for Reps. Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Tim Holden (D-PA) say the incumbents will seek another term. …

Meanwhile, other potentially vulnerable incumbents have also assured the DCCC they are staying put. Reps. Ben Chandler (D-KY), Jim Matheson (D-UT) and Chet Edwards (D-TX) all told Dem leaders they would seek additional terms. A spokesperson for Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-TN) later said he will run for re-election as well.

Reid Wilson, who has done yeoman work tracking down retirement rumors, also reports that his sources say they expect Rick Boucher (VA-09) to run again. The GOP’s gung-ho attempts to goad various red-seat Dems into retirement may be having the opposite effect, if it’s pushing Dems to circle the wagons (and getting some competitive juices flowing again). In any event, this is some good pushback by Chris Van Hollen and the D-Trip.

Of course, there are still plenty of other names to be concerned about – our open seat watch still has several Democratic names on it, and several more have been the subject of recent rumors. I’m hoping, though, that some wobbly members of our caucus will take some cues from an old warhorse like Skelton and say to themselves, “If he can do it once more, then so can I.”

UPDATE: Maybe my theory is right:

Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) even publicly announced he’s definitely running again, and bashed Republicans for spreading rumors that he was thinking of stepping down.

“I don’t know why anyone would give credibility to these Republican rumors. I’m running for re-election and anyone who knows me knows that what I’m doing now is what I’ve always done,” Peterson said in a statement. “My paperwork is on file and in February I’ll make an official announcement.”

UPDATE No. 2: I’ve changed the title, in light of the extra information in the Politico piece, which notes that Earl Pomeroy has also told the DCCC he’s running again. (So has Paul Kanjorski, but Obama won his district handily.) Marion Berry is also expected to run again, according to the piece. So that’s seven red-seat yeses and two probablies (Boucher and Berry). Not bad for a day’s work.

In the last few weeks, Rasmussen Reports – already among the most prolific pollsters – has released a torrent of new senate and gubernatorial polls. While political junkies might instinctively be grateful for all the data, partisans have to be concerned about Rasmussen’s ability to drive the over-arching narrative. This is all the more so given widespread concerns about Rasmussen’s methodology – concerns which have given rise to at least two new detailed analyses on Pollster.com this month, one by Mark Blumenthal and the second by Alan Abramowitz.

I personally think Rasmussen Reports has an axe to grind – their made-up way of reporting presidential favorables and their questionable non-electoral polls make me mistrustful. At the same time, we don’t want to stick our heads in the sand, and 538.com’s pollster ratings do indicate that Rasmussen seems to be interested in getting things right, at least as far as the horserace is concerned. So we’ve decided to package up the most recent Raz surveys and let ’em all at you in one blast.

CT-Sen (12/7, likely voters, 9/10 in parens):

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 35 (39)

Rob Simmons (R): 48 (49)

Other: 7 (5)

Undecided: 11 (6)

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 39 (42)

Peter Schiff (R): 40 (40)

Other: 8 (7)

Undecided: 14 (10)

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 38

Linda McMahon (R): 43

Other: 8

Undecided: 9

(MoE: ±4.5%)

CO-Sen (12/8, likely voters, 9/15 in parens):

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 37 (36)

Jane Norton (R): 46 (45)

Other: 8 (7)

Undecided: 8 (12)

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 41

Tom Wiens (R): 42

Other: 7

Undecided: 10

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 38

Ken Buck (R): 42

Other: 8

Undecided: 12

Andrew Romanoff (D): 34 (34)

Jane Norton (R): 45 (42)

Other: 7 (8)

Undecided: 15 (15)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 40

Tom Wiens (R): 41

Other: 5

Undecided: 14

Andrew Romanoff (D): 39

Ken Buck (R): 41

Other: 6

Undecided: 14

(MoE: ±4.5%)

IL-Sen (12/9, likely voters, 10/14 in parens):

Alexi Giannoulias (D): 42 (41)

Mark Kirk (R): 39 (41)

Other: 3 (4)

Undecided: 14 (13)

Cheryle Jackson (D): 39 (39)

Mark Kirk (R): 42 (43)

Other: 4 (4)

Undecided: 15 (13)

David Hoffman (D): 38 (33)

Mark Kirk (R): 42 (43)

Other: 3 (8)

Undecided: 17 (16)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

NV-Sen (12/9, likely voters, 9/14 in parens):

Harry Reid (D-inc): 43 (40)

Sue Lowden (R): 49 (50)

Other: 6 (4)

Undecided: 3 (5)

Harry Reid (D-inc): 43 (43)

Danny Tarkanian (R): 49 (50)

Other: 6 (4)

Undecided: 2 (3)

Harry Reid (D-inc): 43

Sharron Angle (R): 47

Other: 7

Undecided: 3

(MoE: ±4.5%)

OH-Sen (12/7, likely voters, 9/23 in parens):

Lee Fisher (D): 36 (40)

Rob Portman (R): 38 (41)

Other: 8 (6)

Undecided: 18 (14)

Jennifer Brunner (D): 33 (38)

Rob Portman (R): 40 (40)

Other: 7 (5)

Undecided: 20 (18)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

OH-Gov (12/7, likely voters,  9/23 in parens):

Ted Strickland (D-inc): 39 (45)

Jon Kasich (R): 48 (46)

Other: 3 (3)

Undecided: 11 (7)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

SC-Gov (12/2, likely voters, no trendlines):

Jim Rex (D): 33

Gresham Barrett (R): 39

Other: 7

Undecided: 21

Jim Rex (D): 36

Andre Bauer (R): 35

Other: 13

Undecided: 16

Jim Rex (D): 32

Henry McMaster (R): 39

Other: 10

Undecided: 19

Vincent Sheheen (D): 23

Gresham Barrett (R): 45

Other: 11

Undecided: 20

Vincent Sheheen (D): 29

Andre Bauer (R): 39

Other: 13

Undecided: 19

Vincent Sheheen (D): 26

Henry McMaster (R): 43

Other: 10

Undecided: 21

(MoE: ±4.5%)

For the final word, I’ll turn things over to Jon Stewart. The ever-brights at Fox & Friends had some difficulty in retransmitting a misleadingly-worded (and dodgy) Rasmussen survey on global warming, leading Stewart to opine (at 1:50) that this poll had a margin of error of “monkey-fuck ridiculous”:

Rasmussen Reports, you decide.

Houston’s mayoral runoff is today, between City Controller Annise Parker and former City Attorney Gene Locke. Polls close at 7pm local time, 8pm Eastern. The Houston Chronicle will carry results here. If you’d like to make predictions, go right ahead!

UPDATE: Parker wins, 53-47.

Exciting news, folks: Thanks to the hard work of Dave and Jeffmd, Dave’s Redistricting App now has political data for the state of New York. Just like with Maryland, when you create your new New York maps, you’ll be able to see the Obama-McCain percentage for each district.

With this new feature launched, SSP plans to hold a redistricting contest in the near future. Dave has asked, though, that everyone kick the tires a bit before we officially begin the contest. So head on over to the app and test out the new NY data – and then stay tuned for a more detailed announcement from us soon!

Nevada’s Republican Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki caught a huge break today:

Charges against Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki and his chief of staff tied to his alleged mismanagement of a college savings program were dismissed this morning in Clark County District Court.

Judge Valerie Adair issued a written ruling on arguments she heard Nov. 24 from attorneys for Krolicki and his chief of staff, Kathryn Besser, dismissing counts that stemmed from what prosecutors called mismanagement of a multi-billion dollar college savings program while Krolicki served as state treasurer. …

Adair’s ruling indicated she found the grand jury indictment to be overly vague – a point that defense attorneys had argued in their hearing on the matter two weeks ago.

In the ruling, Adair wrote, “Defendants contend that the indictment does not provide sufficient notice of the charges against them. The court agrees.”

At this point, the prosecution can either appeal or simply seek a new indictment – or do neither. The case is being handled by the state Attorney General’s office, and there’s been some unseemly political intrigue in that regard as well:

State Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto came under fire after it was learned last month that her husband had planned a fundraiser for one of Krolicki’s Democratic opponents for the lieutenant governor’s seat. At the last court date, her office offered to remove itself from the prosecution, which the defense declined.

Masto, first elected in 2006, is a Democrat herself, unsurprisingly. Her husband Paul had been helping out businessman Robert Randazzo. In any event, the big electoral news seems to be this:

A spokesman for Nevada Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki (R) says Krolicki has no plans to run for Senate even though a judge dismissed felony charges against him Monday.

Krolicki opened an exploratory committee to challenge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) shortly after the 2008 election, but soon after he was charged with misappropriating millions of dollars in state money stemming from his time as state treasurer.

He was cleared of those charges Monday, but spokesman McKay Daniels said Krolicki won’t be entering the Senate race. Krolicki annnounced in August that he would instead seek reelection, and he’s sticking with that.

Then again, it’s not like things could get much worse for Harry Reid.

Mason-Dixon for the Las Vegas Review-Journal (11/30-12/2, likely voters, no trendlines):

Dina Titus (D-inc): 40

Joe Heck (R): 40

Undecided: 20

Dina Titus (D-inc): 48

Rob Lauer (R): 32

Undecided: 20

(MoE: ±6%)

This is one of the first media polls we’ve seen of a 2010 House race, and things don’t look so hot: Rep. Dina Titus is tied against former state Sen. Joe Heck. Heck, you may recall, dropped down from the gubernatorial race to sub in for highly touted rich guy banker John Guedry. (Guedry claimed he bailed on the race for allegedly personal reasons – not long after it came out that his bank received $400 million in TARP funds while cutting him a fat bonus check.) Titus herself was a replacement candidate, joining the race last year after prosecutor Robert Daskas dropped out.

Heck doesn’t have the primary field to himself, though. Real estate “investor” (is that like developer?) Rob Lauer looks to be running to Heck’s right and has said he’ll put $100,000 of his own money into the race. Heck’s biggest sin appears to be his initial refusal to sign an anti-tax pledge (he later changed his mind); with the Republican base exceedingly intolerant of any apostasy these days, this may wind up hurting him. It’s still very early (the primary is June 8th), but we’ll see if Lauer can gain any traction among the teabagger set.

In the meantime, Titus has plenty to be concerned about. One bit of good news is that she leads among independents, 46-37. But the real story is among self-identified Democrats, where she only has a 68-9 margin. Heck, on the other hand, gets the support of Republicans at an 80-2 rate. The fact that 23% of the members of Titus’s own party aren’t sure that they want to support her speaks to broader concerns about the energy and excitement (or lack thereof) within the Democratic base. She’ll need to consolidate those voters in order to secure a second term.

Mase-Dix also asked if voters approved of Titus’s vote in favor of the healthcare reform bill. By a 41-47 margin, they said no. The fact that indies were opposed 38-50 yet she still leads them in the horserace is also a good sign – this vote isn’t a dealbreaker. Dems also approve of healthcare reform by wide margins. The difficulty is that Republicans disapprove of it by even wider margins. Will touting healthcare reform therefore motivate the other side more than your own? It’s a tough situation.

Furthermore, as Tim Sahd points out, the Las Vegas area has been especially hard-hit by the recession and the housing bust. This isn’t helping Titus either. Obviously this is just one poll, and we’re a long way off from election day. Still, she’s in the bottom half of Frontline Dems when it comes to fundraising, and like a lot of members of Team Blue, she has a lot of hard work ahead of her.

Alright, here’s sort of a group trivia question: Which open seat House races (including special elections) have the Democrats lost since 1994? I’m sure that together, we can name them all.

UPDATE: I think this chart covers it. Let me know if I’ve missed any.

The Michigan and Pennsylvania races in 2002, the Texas races in 2004 and the LA-05 race in 1996 were all due to redistricting. Obviously the Texas races pose a bit of a definitional problem, since most of the affected Dem incumbents ran in different districts (or at least, renumbered districts). But I’ve left TX-10, 11 & 24 on the list because there were indeed no incumbents who ran in those races. TX-02 is a little trickier, because Jim Turned retired outright, but incumbent Nick Lampson ran in the 2nd CD (albeit a very different-looking 2nd CD). But I think it merits inclusion.

And here’s an interesting tidbit: Not counting losses attributable to redistricting, Dems have lost 27 open seats and 12 incumbents since 1994, for a total of 39 over a 15-year period. To take back the House, the GOP needs to win two more than that total – 41.

Here’s another fun map link: the 50 largest metro areas, carved out of their respective states and resized (along with the diced-up states) by population. No surprise that NYC, L.A., and Chicago are the three biggest, and even without their major metro areas, Texas and California are the two biggest states. The third-largest state, though, is interesting. Click and have a look.

Also, check out this bit of awesomeness from the WaPo:

Correction

Thursday, December 3, 2009

A Nov. 26 article in the District edition of Local Living incorrectly said a Public Enemy song declared 9/11 a joke. The song refers to 911, the emergency phone number.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (11/30-12/02, likely voters, 9/8-10 in parens):

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 42 (44)

Gilbert Baker (R): 41 (37)

Undecided: 17 (19)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 44 (45)

Curtis Coleman (R): 39 (37)

Undecided: 17 (18)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 45 (46)

Tom Cox (R): 31 (29)

Undecided: 24 (25)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 46 (47)

Kim Hendren (R): 30 (28)

Undecided: 24 (25)

(MoE: ±4%)

Rasmussen (12/1, likely voters, 9/28 in parens):

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 39 (39)

Gilbert Baker (R): 46 (47)

Undecided: 9 (8)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 40 (41)

Curtis Coleman (R): 44 (43)

Undecided: 9 (11)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 40 (40)

Tom Cox (R): 43 (43)

Undecided: 10 (11)

Blanche Lincoln (D-inc): 39 (41)

Kim Hendren (R): 46 (44)

Undecided: 9 (10)

(MoE: ±4.4%)

These are Moe Szyslak numbers – plug-fugly. In fact, Tom Jensen says things are actually worse than they appear: In PPP’s recent poll of AR-02, undecided voters in that district gave Lincoln wretched 11-58 favorables (yeah, you read that right). It’s starting to make me wonder how Lincoln can survive, especially if Baker winds up being the GOP nominee – and it makes these other numbers from R2K all the more interesting:

Bill Halter (D): 34

Gilbert Baker (R): 42

Undecided: 24

Bill Halter (D): 35

Curtis Coleman (R): 40

Undecided: 25

Bill Halter (D): 36

Tom Cox (R): 32

Undecided: 32

Bill Halter (D): 36

Kim Hendren (R): 31

Undecided: 33

(MoE: ±4%)

Lt. Gov. Bill Halter is mooting a primary challenge to Lincoln, and as you can see, all of the Republican candidates fare identically against him as they do against the incumbent. The big difference, though, is that Lincoln’s overall favorables are underwater at 41-50, while Halter is in positive territory at 36-25 – and two-fifths of the state doesn’t even know him yet. On account of that, I have to believe Halter would do better than Lincoln once he’s better-known. But the first question is, can he win a primary?

Blance Lincoln (D-inc): 42

Bill Halter (D): 26

Undecided: 32

(MoE: ±5%)

Forty-two percent is not where an incumbent wants to be in a potential primary matchup, especially against a guy who’s unknown to a third of Democrats. Lincoln’s numbers among members of her own party are fairly decent, 62-32. But among Dems, Halter clocks in at a nifty 55-11, and he clearly has room to grow

I’d also like to point out that Halter is hardly some unelectable left-wing gadfly. To the contrary: He won statewide office in 2006 with a higher share of the vote than even super-popular Gov. Mike Beebe. And while I certainly wouldn’t expect Halter to be a progressive standard-bearer, there’s little question he’d be better on healthcare than Lincoln, given that’s how he’s hoping to get traction against her.

In the end, I don’t see how we wouldn’t be better off with Halter, whose negatives almost surely wouldn’t wind up as awful as Lincoln’s, and who can’t be tied to DC in quite the same way. It wouldn’t be an easy fight – waging war against an incumbent seldom is. But I’d like to see him try.

(Note: According to the SSP calendar, Arkansas’s filing deadline is March 8th and the primary is May 18th.)

RaceTracker Wiki: AR-Sen

Two separate sources have informed the Swing State Project that former state Sen. Cal Cunningham has reconsidered his earlier decision and will enter the Democratic primary for the 2010 North Carolina senate race. This is reminiscent of the situation two years ago, when state Sen. Kay Hagan got into the race against Elizabeth Dole after initially saying she would not run. We hope to hear more from Cunningham soon.

Also, our condolences to Secretary of State Elaine Marshall, whose husband passed away this past weekend.

UPDATE: Another source writes in to tell us that Cunningham will be delaying his announcement out of respect for Marshall.