Author: abgin

Taking the last non-Rasmussen polls (four as maximum) and calculating the average between the key numbers of the polls we have the next rank:

(Begining from the number of democratic senate seats and the number of democratic governors what need not run for reelection this year, the first number mean the number of democratic senate seats and governors what dems would have winning until every race of the list.)

(When I tell not the number of polls is because they are four or more)

(I bold emphasize the race with a negative poll what include an outsider key value what make down the average).

RANK OF SENATE AND GUBERNATORIAL RACES BY LAST NO-RASMUSSEN POLLS AVERAGE

41 senate seats in the democratic caucus need not run this year.

07 democratic governors need not run this year.

And taking L Chafee and C Crist as friendly candidates:

42S +??.??% VT-Sen 0 polls

43S +??.??% MD-Sen 0 polls

44S +??.??% HI-Sen 0 polls

08G +38.50% AR-Gov 2 polls

09G +37.75% NY-Gov

45S +36.67% NY-Sen 3 polls

10G +23.50% NH-Gov

46S +22.75% OR-Sen

47S +21.00% NY-Sen(s)

11G +20.00% RI-Gov 2 polls

48S +19.25% CT-Sen

49S +15.67% WI-Sen 3 polls

12G +10.67% HI-Gov 3 polls

13G +09.00% AZ-Gov

14G +07.67% CT-Gov 3 polls

15G +07.50% MA-Gov

16G +07.00% MD-Gov

17G +06.25% CA-Gov

50S +06.25% WA-Sen

51S +06.00% FL-Sen

18G +05.25% OH-Gov

19G +04.00% NM-Gov 2 polls

52S +04.00% CA-Sen

53S +03.00% OH-Sen

20G +02.00% MN-Gov

21G +02.50% OR-Gov 2 polls

22G +02.00% VT-Gov 1 poll

23G +01.75% CO-Gov

54S +01.50% CO-Sen

55S +01.25% PA-Sen

56S +01.00% MO-Sen

57S +00.75% NV-Sen

24G =??.??% ME-Gov 0 polls

25G – 00.50% IL-Gov

**** – 00.75% NJ-Gov

58S – 01.50% IL-Sen

26G – 01.50% GA-Gov

59S – 04.25% KY-Sen

60S – 04.75% NC-Sen

**** – 05.75% MA-Sen

27G – 06.00% TX-Gov

28G – 06.25% WI-Gov

29G – 06.50% FL-Gov

61S – 09.25% NH-Sen

30G – 10.00% SC-Gov 1 polls

31G – 11.00% NV-Gov

62S – 11.00% IN-Sen 2 polls

32G – 11.75% IA-Gov

33G – 12.67% AL-Gov 3 polls

34G – 13.00% PA-Gov

35G – 13.00% SD-Gov 1 poll

63S – 14.25% LA-Sen

**** – 14.25% VA-Gov

64S – 15.00% DE-Sen 2 polls

36G – 15.25% MI-Gov

65S – 15.25% AR-Sen

66S – 16.00% IA-Sen

37G – 16.25% OK-Gov

…

I take as the negative outsider polls, the polls what have a difference of -9.50 or more with the average (higher with the other polls for the race).

This is a rank of outsider values:

(The first number is the difference between the outsider value and the average for the race).

– 12.50% NH-Gov by PPP

– 11.00% PA-Gov by Muhlenberg College

– 10.75% MN-Gov by Survey USA

– 10.00% NM-Gov by Survey USA

– 10.00% IA-Sen by PPP

– 09.75% OR-Sen by Survey USA

– 09.75% WI-Gov by St Norbert College

– 09.50% IL-Gov by PPP

– 09.50% OR-Gov by Survey USA

The two colleges seems local pollsters attacking the democratic prospect in PA and WI. I worry about WI-Gov race because I think should be better than this and no-one is polling the race. Without the outsider poll, the average for WI-Gov race would be – 02.25%.

Survey USA seems begin a campaign for include outsider values for the races with lower number of polls (the poll for WA-Sen was too an outsider value but is not included because they are more recent polls for the race). ME-Gov with 0 polls and VT-Gov with 1 poll are good candidates for the next Survey USA poll in this strategy.

Just Survey USA polls create the alone positive outsider values at this level (+9.50 or more) because the average between the key value of two polls is in the middle of both values and if one is included as outsider, both values get as outsiders. A third poll would show what is the real outsider value.

And PPP has too some unpleasant polls. The dems from NH (the value for NH-Sen is not an outsider but is very bad too), IA and IL (Obama’s home state) are not favored by PPP what gives to they negative outsider key values in the polls. The new PPP poll of IL-Sen and IL-Gov races included after the updates, improves the previous numbers but still makes down the average of both races to negative numbers.

Of course all the races with positive average are races for fight and try win. And someone of the races with negative average can be too for fight but the democratic candidates need emerge. In the poll of the diary are included the 20 first races with negative average in the moment of write the diary (before the updates).

I will update the diary with the results of the new polls while the diary continues in the frontpage of SSP. I include too the reference of the NJ-Gov, MA-Sen and VA-Gov races with the average of the last four polls just before the elections of 2009 and 2010.

I wish the SSP readers see the results of my work rating all the more important races this year.

The chart has a mathematical basis. I make this chart only with numerical rules what are the same for all the types of races (senate, gubernatorial, US House or statewide offices) and are the same for democrats and for republicans. The chart is totally symmetric, the rules are symmetric for both sides. That mean the chart is not biased by democratic or republican leanings. This is a goal for me.

For the numerical rules I take in consideration:

– The political level or strength of the people running for every office. Basically I take in consideration the political career of every one. Every level is traslated to numeric values.

– The political leaning of every district or state. Following the rates of the Cook Partisan Voting Index, and the same, every level is traslated to numeric values.

– The last four (as maximum) no-Rasmussen polls. The expected value of these polls is included too. Rasmussen polls are out for this rating chart because distort the numbers and the results.

– The possible incumbent unpopularity traslated to numeric values.

– The fundraising level of the candidates for every race updated to the last quarter data. I still need work few more this chapter because is so difficult have all the data. The effect of this area is less important, some times, for races in the limits of the groups can make change the rating.

– The rating for the Lieutenant Governor races what go in the same ticket than the Governor is linked to the rate for the gubernatorial race.

Well, this is my chart for rating 2010 races:

For read the chart:

– The chart takes the form of a mathematical matrix.

– They are five groups of offices (by row): Senate, Governor, US House, Lieutenant Governors what run with the governor, Statewide Offices including Lieutenant Governors what run separately.

– They are seven rating groups (by column): Safe Democratic, Likely Democratic, Leans Democratic, Toss-Up, Leans Republican, Likely republican, Safe Republican (like always).

– The color code talks about the party of the current or the last incumbent before the elections. Blue for offices with democratic offices, red for offices with republican officer and gray for new offices and independents (like C Crist now). The races what change of party in the cycle cause of special elections or incumbents switching party and still have another election in November are in two colors. Red-Blue mean the office change from republicans to democrats (like NY-23 or PA-Sen) and Blue-Red mean the office change from democrats to republicans (like HI-01 or AL-05). The same for combinations with gray.

– In every sub matrix (as example the US House race what are Toss-Up) they are four columns. Two are in blue and two are in red. The first (blue) is for the races with democratic incumbent running for reelection. The second (blue) is for the races open by democratic incumbents what run not or are defeated in the primaries. The third (red) is for the races open by republican incumbents what run not or are defeated in the primaries. And the fourth (red) is for the races with republican incumbent running for reelection. As exception, I include not the Safe Democratic races with democratic incumbent what switch not party and is running for reelection and I include not the Safe Republican races with republican incumbent what switch not party and is running for reelection.

– For the statewide races I use some generic names:

ND-LG = Race for Lieutenant Governor of North Dakota.

ND-AG = Race for North Dakota Attorney General.

ND-SS = Race for North Dakota Secretary of State.

ND-ST = Race for North Dakota State Treasurer.

ND-SA = Race for North Dakota State Auditor.

For others follow this example:

NM-PLC = Race for New Mexico Public Lands Commissioner.

– For RI-Gov and FL-Sen races we have running highest level independents (L Chafee and C Crist, both former republicans). In the chart, the rate for RI-Gov race is not exactly Safe Democratic, the rate is Safe no-Republican. The rate for FL-Sen is Toss-Up for no-republican taking C Crist as a more democratic leaning candidate and Likely no-Democratic taking C Crist as more republican leaning candidate.

I include MA-Sen, VA-Gov, NJ-Gov, NJ-LG and VA-AG as Safe Republican for remember too these changes in the end of the cycle.

ANALYZING

For analyze the results of this chart is necessary take in consideration what all the rating is based in the current numbers for every race. This rating chart is more a picture of the current situation of every race than a prediction for the elections.

The chart is dynamic and goes changing (little changes habitually). As example, the last change for HI-01 after the special election.

The picture will move with the time cause of the work of both parties and all candidates. In the previous days to the elections I think the chart will give a picture what can be near to the final results.

The same numerical rules affect to all races, that mean all Toss-up are Toss-Up under the same conditions, and all Likely Democratic races are LiD under the same conditions. In this chart of rating is not possible change the rating for one race individually. I only can change the numerical rules what affects to all races, and the work in the races (new polls, fundraising events, new candidates running…) make some races can improve in the rating chart.

I like not see tons of Toss-Up in the rating charts, for that the numerical rules find a less number of Toss-Up but find at same time a symmetric balance. All the LeD races are Leans Democratic under symmetric conditions than the conditions for the Leans Republican races.

The chart shows not republican big waves in this moment. The chart shows some lose for democrats but the majorities in the Senate and the House are not in risk with current numbers. They are not numeric evidence of waves.

If republicans win the 50% of the Toss-Up races in this chart (and I think they will winn less) and all the worse rated races that would be the net results since now, for the end of the cycle:

Senate: Democratic Party would lose 3-4 senate seats in November.

Gubernatorial: Democratic Party would lose 0-1 governor offices in November.

US House: Democratic Party would lose 21 house seats in November.

LG linked to governors: Democratic Party would lose 1 LG linked to governor in November.

Statewide Offices: Democratic Party would lose 6-7 statewide offices in November.

Many Toss-Up races in this chart are winnable races. Maybe all. Some races what here appear as Toss-Up need polls because a poll can show democratic side favored, like in IL-08 or LA-02. The numbers show not still the failure of the republican candidate in IL-08 race.

The chart at same time shows what both big parties are forgetting a bit the statewide races. Some risks for work still, and some good chances in this group of races for state senators, mayors, and more decent level candidates.

I think some of the Leans Republican races in this rating chart are races for fight.

After look to very much races, I will try to explain my point about 2010 elections at House level in this diary.

In few words I think they are not data what make me think democrats would lose more than 15 house seats.

Looking to the political level of incumbents and challengers, the rating of the districts, and the fundraising numbers of candidates I will make a rank of house seats, giving too the numbers of the last poll for the race if they are. This is not a rank of vulnerability, this is a rank by political level difference between the current candidates for every district looking to the political level of candidates and looking to the district too.

The rank is based in a little system of score what I create for try see better the difficult races for booth parties. Two examples of the score:

DE-AL currently a republican seat has 4.5 points of difference for the challenger party (Democratic Party). They are 3.0 points for dems by difference between political level of the candidates of booth partys, 0.5 points for dems by lead fundraising and 1.0 points for dems by the district democratic leaning.

TX-17 currently a democratic seat has 0.5 points of difference for the challenger party (Republican Party). They are 1.0 point for dems by difference between political level of the candidates of booth partys, 0.5 points for dems by lead fundraising and 2.0 points for republicans by the district republican leaning.

RANK BY POLITICAL LEVEL OF CANDIDATES FOR EVERY DISTRICT

Sure the system of score can improve still but I think give us a rank so logical.

Possitive difference for the challenger party (high weakness of the incumbent party)

4.5 points DE-AL D+07 Rep seat Last poll -10% R Research 2000 (D)

4.0 points TN-06 R+13 Dem seat

3.0 points KS-03 R+03 Dem seat

2.5 points IL-10 D+06 Rep seat

1.5 points IN-08 R+08 Dem seat

1.5 points ID-01 R+18 Dem seat

1.0 point  LA-03 R+12 Dem seat

1.0 point  NY-29 R+05 Dem seat

1.0 point  LA-02 D+25 Rep seat

0.5 points NM-02 R+06 Dem seat Last poll -02% D PPP

0.5 points IN-09 R+06 Dem seat Last poll -08% D Survey USA (R)

0.5 points ND-AL R+10 Dem seat Last poll -06% D Rasmussen Reports (R)

0.5 points SD-AL R+09 Dem seat Last poll +07% D Rasmussen Reports (R)

0.5 points TX-17 R+20 Dem seat

Tied

0.0 points AR-02 R+05 Dem seat

0.0 points NH-02 D+03 Dem seat Last poll -07% D University of NH

0.0 points PA-07 D+03 Dem seat

0.0 points MI-07 R+02 Dem seat Last poll -10% D National Research (R)

0.0 points NY-23 R+01 Dem seat Last poll +02% D 2009 special election results

0.0 points MS-01 R+14 Dem seat

0.0 points MO-04 R+14 Dem seat

0.0 points MD-01 R+13 Dem seat Last poll -13% D Tarrance Group (R)

Possitive difference for the incumbent party

0.5 points AR-01 R+08 Dem seat

0.5 points TN-08 R+06 Dem seat

0.5 points FL-25 R+05 Rep seat

0.5 points OH-18 R+07 Dem seat

0.5 points SC-05 R+07 Dem seat Last poll +07% D PPP

1.0 point  PA-11 D+04 Dem seat

1.0 point  OH-01 D+01 Dem seat Last poll -17% D SurveyUSA (R)

1.0 point  PA-08 D+02 Dem seat

1.0 point  MA-10 D+05 Dem seat Last poll -03% D McLaughlin & Associates (R)

1.0 point  VA-05 R+05 Dem seat Last poll =00% D PPP

1.0 point  AZ-05 R+05 Dem seat Last poll =00% D American Viewpoint (R)

1.0 point  AZ-08 R+04 Dem seat

1.0 point  IL-14 R+01 Dem seat

1.0 point  NY-24 R+02 Dem seat

1.0 point  PA-06 D+04 Rep seat

1.0 point  WA-08 D+03 Rep seat

1.0 point  NC-08 R+02 Dem seat Last poll +14% D PPP

1.0 point  CA-11 R+01 Dem seat

1.5 points NE-02 R+06 Rep seat

1.5 points MN-06 R+07 Rep seat Last poll +16% R PPP

1.5 points SC-02 R+09 Rep seat Last poll -01% R PPP

1.5 points AL-03 R+09 Rep seat

1.5 points CA-44 R+06 Rep seat Last poll +14% R Tulchin Research (D)

1.5 points NH-01 EVEN Dem seat Last poll -10% D University of NH

1.5 points NY-01 EVEN Dem seat Last poll +02% D Survey USA (R)

1.5 points CA-03 R+06 Rep seat

1.5 points KY-06 R+09 Dem seat

1.5 points CO-04 R+06 Dem seat

1.5 points AL-02 R+16 Dem seat Last poll +24% D Anzalone-Liszt Research (D)

1.5 points MS-04 R+20 Dem seat

…

2.5 points FL-12 R+06 Rep seat Last poll -04% R Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D)

…

In the first two groups I bold emphasize the results of polls what favore incumbent party. In the third group I bold emphasize the results of polls what favore challenger party.

These groups of house races include all negative polls for incumbent party.

The first and second groups include difficult races for the incumbent party, with majoritary bad polls for the incumbent party, but not all. Between the first places, they are three republican seats where democrats are favored this year.

The number of seats in this two groups give a difference of +15 seats for republicans. But not all polls are negative for the incumbents in these groups, and not all the seats in these groups will change of party in 2010 elections.

The third group lean clearly toward the incumbent parties and is a group much more balanced with seats of booth parties. They are some unfavorable polls for booth parties, 3 for democrats and 2 for republicans. I think this group of races will give to republicans low number of net gains if the numbers change not to worse.

The polls will be surely the best information for every district, but this rank show us a so low number of districts without poll in the risk zone. This is important now for try stablish limits to loses and for see where is needed more work.

For all that, and looking specially to the polls, I think we have not evidence still of democrats will lose more than 15 seats.

About the seats where GOP is the incumbent party, like I tell before, they are three seats where democrats are favored (all in the first group of races), and they are some others what democrats can make vulnerable. Some days before, in my comments, I give a list of seven seats, but today will be six because I think the chance of win AZ-03 low without P Gordon. This is the list:

1.0 FL-25 (with J Garcia in)

1.0 PA-06

1.0 WA-08

1.5 SC-02

2.0 PA-15 (if J Callahan improves fundraising)

2.5 FL-12 (if L Edwards improves fundraising)

I think FL-25 (the effect of J Garcia running is not included in the rank still) and FL-12 are seats what give so good chance for fight strong. With the lead in  fundraise for democratic side, FL-12 district would low until 0.5 points for the incumbent party (republican party). In very few districts democrats can improve more with lower effort. For PA-15 I think J Callaham needs too take the lead fundraising, and with that, PA-15 race would be in the same level than PA-06 or WA-08 (1.0 points for the incumbent party).

They are more districts in lower level of risk for republicans. I would not forget this district and the other districts with 1.5 points where so unpopular republicans can fail.

PD: Just today one good level republican announce a bid for MI-03 and that makes I update my comments about this race. With higher level republicans, lower chance for democrats in republican open seats.

First days I was try to down the maps, but I have much trouble until the last change in the application what help me very much.

The philosophy for my model is so easy. If you need more democratic votes for make more democratic the districts, you must go where they are, you must go to New York City. That gives us a linear model what seems a rainbow for the redistricting.

My model try to find the limits, and I can draw a map with very much 59% Obama districts (D+7) but not all, I need down for some districts to 58% Obama (D+6). The first limit what stop me making more democratic New York districts is the limit of box in the Westchester County for can access with more districts to the area of New York City. The second limit would be the VRA conditions.

For make more compact the districts, but without lose the linear model, you only need down more districts to 58% Obama.

IMAGES:

DETAILS:

Only E Massa change his district number. He pass from 29th to 26th. All other democratis incumbents keep his number district.

P King and C Lee, the republican incumbents lose their districts.

Sometimes the areas where lives the incumbents are excessively big. I try to include all the areas in their districts, but for the 2nd, 8th, 14th and 15th districts I need to take some parts for other districts. Knowing exactly where live the incumbents would not be difficult to leave they in their districts.

I don’t include McCain results because i can not see the end of the line of results. The line get cut without pass to a second line.

District 01:

– Incumbent: T Bishop

– Dark blue in Long Island.

– Population: 706,022 with deviation of +5,689

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 69%; Bl 11%; Hi 16%; As 2%.

District 02:

– Incumbent: S Israel

– Dark green in Long Island, from Nassau until Suffolk.

– Population: 706,389 with deviation of +6,056

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 68%; Bl 14%; Hi 12%; As 4%.

District 03:

– Incumbent: vacant

– Purple in western New York, linear district from Chautauqua until Manhattan.

– Population: 698,741 with deviation of -1,592

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 62%; Bl 7%; Hi 27%; As 2%.

District 04:

– Incumbent: C McCarthy and maybe P King (R)

– Red in Long Island, linear district from Queens until Suffolk.

– Population: 707,202 with deviation of +6,887

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 54%; Bl 15%; Hi 15%; As 9%.

District 05:

– Incumbent: G Ackerman

– Dark yellow in Long Island, from Queens until Nassau.

– Population: 704,967 with deviation of +4,634

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 52%; Bl 7%; Hi 14%; As 24%.

District 06:

– Incumbent: G Meeks

– Dark greenish blue in Long Island, from Brooklin until Nassau.

– Population: 694,093 with deviation of -6,240

– 2008 elections: 79% Obama D+27.

– Racially: Wh 32%; Bl 50%; Hi 10%; As 5%. VRA district

District 07:

– Incumbent: J Crowley

– Gray in New York City, from Brooklin until Queens.

– Population: 696,707 with deviation of -3,626

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 51; Bl 3%; Hi 24%; As 18%.

District 08:

– Incumbent: J Nadler

– Light purplish blue in western New York, linear district from Erie until Manhattan (Upper West Side).

– Population: 706,893 with deviation of +6,350

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 69%; Bl 11%; Hi 16%; As 2%.

District 09:

– Incumbent: A Weiner

– Light tuquoise in Long Island, from Queens until Suffolk.

– Population: 694,038 with deviation of -6,295

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 61%; Bl 10%; Hi 18%; As 8%.

District 10:

– Incumbent: E Towns

– Dark pink in New York City, Brooklin.

– Population: 693,891 with deviation of -6,442

– 2008 elections: 82% Obama D+30.

– Racially: Wh 26%; Bl 50%; Hi 13%; As 8%. VRA district

District 11:

– Incumbent: Y Clarke

– Light green in New York City, Brooklin.

– Population: 693,935 with deviation of -6,398

– 2008 elections: 85% Obama D+33.

– Racially: Wh 31%; Bl 50%; Hi 11%; As 4%. VRA district

District 12:

– Incumbent: N Velázquez

– Blue in New York City, from Brooklin until Queens.

– Population: 695,534 with deviation of -4,799

– 2008 elections: 84% Obama D+32.

– Racially: Wh 29%; Bl 11%; Hi 48%; As 8%. VRA district

District 13:

– Incumbent: M McMahon

– Salmon in New York City, from Staten Island until Manhattan by water link.

– Population: 706,942 with deviation of +6,609

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 65%; Bl 8%; Hi 13%; As 11%.

District 14:

– Incumbent: C Maloney

– Dark brownish green in New York City and Long Island, from Manhattan until north Suffolk.

– Population: 706,712 with deviation of +6,379

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 81%; Bl 3%; Hi 7%; As 6%.

District 15:

– Incumbent: C Rangel

– Orange in New York City, from Manhattan until Queens.

– Population: 695,108 with deviation of -5,225

– 2008 elections: 86% Obama D+34.

– Racially: Wh 44%; Bl 14%; Hi 27%; As 12%. VRA district

District 16:

– Incumbent: J Serrano

– Green in New York City, Bronx.

– Population: 693,589 with deviation of -6,744

– 2008 elections: 95% Obama D+43.

– Racially: Wh 3%; Bl 32%; Hi 61%; As 1%. VRA district

District 17:

– Incumbent: E Engel

– Dark purplish blue in the south of western New York, linear district neighboring Pennsylvania, from Chautauqua until Manhattan (Upper West Side).

– Population: 706,897 with deviation of +6,564

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 80%; Bl 5%; Hi 10%; As 3%.

District 18:

– Incumbent: N Lowey

– Light Yellow in northern New York, from Dutchess until Queens.

– Population: 695,784 with deviation of -4,549

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 68%; Bl 6%; Hi 16%; As 6%.

District 19:

– Incumbent: J Hall

– Green in northern New York, from Saratoga and Washington until Putnam.

– Population: 693,403 with deviation of -6,930

– 2008 elections: 58% Obama D+6.

– Racially: Wh 68%; Bl 14%; Hi 12%; As 4%.

District 20:

– Incumbent: S Murphy

– Light pink in northern New York, from Jefferson until the Bronx.

– Population: 703,781 with deviation of +3,448

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 70%; Bl 19%; Hi 7%; As 2%.

District 21:

– Incumbent: P Tonko

– Dark red in northern New York, linear district from Oswego until the Bronx.

– Population: 706,364 with deviation of +6,031

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 67%; Bl 14%; Hi 13%; As 3%.

District 22:

– Incumbent: M Hinckey

– Brown in western New York, linear district from Erie until the Bronx.

– Population: 706,466 with deviation of +6,133

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 65%; Bl 9%; Hi 20%; As 3%.

District 23:

– Incumbent: W Owens

– Ligth turquoise in northern New York, from Syracuse until Albany.

– Population: 693,837 with deviation of -6,496

– 2008 elections: 58% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 90%; Bl 5%; Hi 2%; As 1%.

District 24:

– Incumbent: M Arcuri

– Dark purple in western New York, linear district from Ontario until Manhattan.

– Population: 695,810 with deviation of -4,523

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 72%; Bl 16%; Hi 8%; As 2%.

District 25:

– Incumbent: D Maffei

– Pink in western New York, from Buffalo until Onondaga.

– Population: 693,428 with deviation of -6,905

– 2008 elections: 58% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 87%; Bl 8%; Hi 2%; As 2%.

District 26:

– Incumbent: E Massa

– Dark gray in western New York, from Steuben until Rockland.

– Population: 700,655 with deviation of +322

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 80%; Bl 7%; Hi 7%; As 3%.

District 27:

– Incumbent: B Higgins and C Lee (R)

– Green in western New York, from Erie until Monroe.

– Population: 693,889 with deviation of -6,444

– 2008 elections: 58% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 78%; Bl 14%; Hi 4%; As 1%.

District 28:

– Incumbent: L Slaughter

– Light purple in western New York, Monroe.

– Population: 693,567 with deviation of -6,766

– 2008 elections: 59% Obama D+7.

– Racially: Wh 77%; Bl 13%; Hi 5%; As 2%.

They are four districts in 58% Obama. You can increase three of they until 59% Obama, but the fourth down until 55-56% Obama (D+3 or D+4) because can not access to the New York City area.

Well, sure republicans will hate this model, and maybe democrats smile. New York gives the chance of a good redistricting for democrats.

First thank to Dave by his very good application for redistricting and thanks to the people what help me for save and up here the maps. This is my first diary here.

Well, im not expert in laws for redistricting but i hope to respect all. I try let all incumbents their own district, let all democrats safe, and make so compact districts respecting the county borders.

These are the results:

CD1: (Blue) Frank Kratovil (D)

– D+8 Obama 61% McCain 37%

– Include all of Kent, Queen Anne’s, Caroline and Talbot counties.

– Include part of Baltimore county and part of Baltimore city.

– White 57% Black 36%

– Deviation of population: -1673

CD2: (Green) Dutch Ruppersberger (D)

– D+8 Obama 61% McCain 37%

– Include all of Carroll county.

– Include part of Baltimore, Howard and Prince George’s counties.

– White 50% Black 29% Hisp 14%

– Deviation of population: -3402

CD3: (Purple) John Sarbanes (D)

– D+11 Obama 64% McCain 34%

– Include part of Baltimore, Howard and Anne Arundel counties.

– White 56% Black 30%

– Deviation of population: -2964

CD4: (Red) Donna Edwards (D)

– D+10 Obama 63% McCain 36%

– Include part of Prince George’s and Anne Arundel counties.

– White 54% Black 38%

– Deviation of population: -557

CD5: (Yellow) Steny Hoyer (D)

– D+10 Obama 63% McCain 36%

– Include all of Charles, Calvert, St-Mary’s, Dorchester, Wicomico, Somerset and Worcester counties.

– Include part Prince George’s county.

– White 56% Black 36%

– Deviation of population: -3580

CD6: (Greenish blue) Roscoe Bartlett (R)

– D+10 Obama 63% McCain 36%

– Include part of Frederick and Montgomery counties.

– White 58% Black 16% Hisp 13% Asian 11%

– Deviation of population: +8208

CD7: (Gray) Elijah Cummings (D)

– D+8 Obama 61% McCain 37%

– Include all of Cecil and Hartford counties.

– Include part of Baltimore county and part of Baltimore city.

– White 60% Black 34%

– Deviation of population: -3148

CD8: (Lilac) Chris Van Hollen (D)

– D+8 Obama 61% McCain 37%

– Include all of Garrett, Allegany and Washington counties.

– Include part of Frederick and Montgomery counties.

– White 70% Black 10% Hisp 10% Asian 8%

– Deviation of population: +7113

These results are using new population estimations. CD6 and CD8 have few more population because i try to respect county borders.

Im not sure if E Cummings get inside his new 7th district but i think he have a good part of Baltimore in the new district.

In images:

UPDATE FOR INCLUDE BLACK MAJORITIES IN CD4 AND CD7:

Giving black majorities of 50% to 4th and 7th district these are the results:

CD1: (Blue) Frank Kratovil (D)

– D+6 Obama 59% McCain 39%

– Include all of Kent, Queen Anne’s, Caroline and Talbot counties.

– Include part of Baltimore, Anne Arundel and Prince George’s counties and part of Baltimore city.

– White 65% Black 26%

– Deviation of population: +6012

CD2: (Green) Dutch Ruppersberger (D)

– D+7 Obama 60% McCain 39%

– Include part of Harford, Baltimore, Carrol, Howard, Montgomery and Prince George’s counties.

– White 50% Black 26% Hisp 15%

– Deviation of population: -4800

CD3: (Purple) John Sarbanes (D)

– D+7 Obama 60% McCain 39%

– Include part of Harford, Baltimore, Howard counties and part of Baltimore city.

– White 64% Black 25% Asian 6%

– Deviation of population: -2980

CD4: (Red) Donna Edwards (D)

– D+17 Obama 70% McCain 29%

– Include part of Prince George’s and Anne Arundel counties.

– Black 50% White 42%

– Deviation of population: +3968

CD5: (Yellow) Steny Hoyer (D)

– D+6 Obama 59% McCain 40%

– Include all of Charles, Calvert, St-Mary’s, Dorchester, Wicomico, Somerset and Worcester counties.

– Include part Prince George’s and Anne Arundel counties.

– White 63% Black 30%

– Deviation of population: +3283

CD6: (Greenish blue) Roscoe Bartlett (R)

– D+7 Obama 60% McCain 39%

– Include part of Carroll, Frederick and Montgomery counties.

– White 61% Black 14% Hisp 13% Asian 10%

– Deviation of population: -1859

CD7: (Gray) Elijah Cummings (D)

– D+16 Obama 69% McCain 30%

– Include all of Cecil county.

– Include part of Harford and Baltimore counties and part of Baltimore city.

– Black 50% White 44%

– Deviation of population: +1739

CD8: (Lilac) Chris Van Hollen (D)

– D+7 Obama 60% McCain 38%

– Include all of Garrett, Allegany and Washington counties.

– Include part of Frederick and Montgomery counties.

– White 73% Black 9% Hisp 8% Asian 8%

– Deviation of population: -5366

These results are using new population estimations.

In images: