Author: democraticavenger

A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, Jerome Armstrong called for a goal of Democrats putting up 80 House Challengers a cycle:
http://www.mydd.com/…
With the Democratic take over the House and a net gain of 30 seats, the number of seats available to challenge has shrunk, however. I believe we can still try to get to 80 Districts that can and should be challenged. What is more is that this is symbolic because it places more than a third of the House Republicans in jeopardy and limits there purely safe members to a grow not large enough to sustain a veto.
  More House seats is important if we wish to see the type of agenda we all want passed, We need both more seats and the political momentum that comes with the perceived mandate. Fortunately we are already blessed with roughly 60 very qualified House Candidates.
Over the Jump, I break down the Four Categories of Republican House Members and their relative number and list the challengers in each category. I will also then break down what the conventional wisdom is currently saying about House Races and where it is important we get out in front of conventional wisdom.

Base Republican Districts, 60+ for the President 110 Republicans Seats  [12 Dems hold seats this Republican]
  Dems currently challenging [10-15]
]
This is by far the largest cohort of Republican Members of Congress Representing 110 of 200 Republicans in Congress.  Of the Seats Democrats gained in 2006 only Three came from District this Republican and in each case it was Republican either incompetence or malfeasance, [The Hostletter, Sherwood and Delay seats] That allowed Democrats to win.  Democrats do currently hold 12 seats this Republican but these are often personally popular incumbents and holdovers. While any seat this Republican held is a bonus it is simply not the future of the Democratic Party 
  This does not mean we have no challengers at this level, indeed, to get to 80 we need to challenge seats this Republican. We are currently looking at  roughly 10 or so competitive races to challenge Republicans almost because the seat is open or bizarre Republican Behavior, though in some case it is just week Republican Performance. These are the 10 Districts so far were the likely Democratic Nominee has at least some chance at victory. Just threatening here is important so as to prevent the 60+ cut off from seeming defenseless but these races have to be watched very carefully because the Democrats we elect from such districts are not likely to be very progressive. 

Open Seats in this Category
WY AL MS 3 AL 2 CO 6 CA 52

Candidates Starting with Open Seats

  Here are the Ten most likely deep red switch with the name and website of our most likely challenger.

CA 4
Charlie Brown: http://www.charliebr…

CA 41
Tim Price: http://www.timprince…

CA 42
Ron Shepston: http://www.ronshepst…

CA 52
Ron Lumpkin: http://lumpkinforcon…

AK AL
Ethan Berkowtiz: http://ethanberkowit…

OH 2
Vic Wulsin: http://www.wulsinfor…

  IN 3
Michael Montagano: http://www.montagano…

  ID 1
Larry Grant: http://www.grantforc…

KY 2
David Boswell: http://www.kysenated…

MD 1
Frank Kratovil: http://frankkratovil…

Lean Republican Seats, Bush 56-59  43 Seats [15 Dems]
Dems Challenging[ 15-20]
These Seats have significant built in Republican advantages, however as one can see Democrats hold  more than a fourth of such seats. This mean Democrats can win here, but again, the Democrats elected from such District trend to the right. Democrats gained only six of these in 2006. This means that more than 2/3 of the newly elected Democrats come from more Democratic Districts.  We need to compete here, but again primarily to keep them off balance.  We have 16 challengers so far, with open seats first listed below.

  Open Seats in This Catergory
IL 18 NM 2 OH 7

Candidates Starting with Open Seats
IL 18
Dick Versace: http://www.dickversa…

NM 2
Bill McCamley http://www.billmccam…

OH 7
  Dave Woolever http://www.daveforoh…

AZ 3
Bob Lord: http://www.lord2008….

CA 44
Bill Hedrick: http://www.hedrickfo…

CO 4
Betsy Markey: http://betsymarkey.c…

FL 9
John Dicks: http://www.johndicks…

FL 13
Christine Jennings: http://www.christine…

MT AL
Bill Kennedy: http://www.kennedy20…

MO 6
Kay Barnes http://www.kay4congr…

MN 6
Elewyn Tinkelberg: http://www.tinklenbe…

NJ 4
Josh Zeitz: Website coming 

NJ 5
Dennis Shulman:  http://www.shulmanfo…

NY 29
Erica Massa: http://www.massaforc…

VA 5
Tom Perriello: http://www.perriello…

WV 2
John Unger: http://www.ungerforc…

Marginal Bush 54-55 21 Republican held Seats  [13 Dem Held Seats]
Dems Currently Challenging [12-16]

This is actually a relatively small group, as the number of districts of this make up is small. In all  21 Republican call this home.  Republican lost 7 seats of these seats in 06. These Seats can be just as useful as seats with lower GOP Density.

Open Seats in this Category
AZ 1, OH 16 IL 14

Challengers listed with open seats first

  AZ 1

Ann Kirkpatrick http://www.kirkpatri…

OH 16
John Boccieri: http://johnforcongre…

IL 14
Bill Foster: http://foster08.com/…

CA 26
Russ Warner http://www.warnerfor…

FL 8
Charlie Stuart: http://www.charliest…

FL 24
Suzanne Kosmas: http://kosmasforcong…

Il 16
Robert Abboud: http://www.robertabb…

MI 7
Mark Shauer: http://www.markschau…

New York 13
Two Candidates

New York 26
Jon Powers:  http://www.powersfor…

Pennsylvania 18
Many Candidates

Minnesota 2
Steve Sarvi:  http://www.stevesarv…

North Carolina 8
Larry Kissell: http://www.larrykiss…

Virginia 10
Judy Feder: http://judyfeder.com…

Swing Bush 53 and under 28 seats Kerry Won Bush Seats 8, all Kerry Plus 54+ seats held by Dems.
  [ Bush won, but 53 or under for Dems  19]
Dems  Currently Challenging[20-28] 

There are only 28 such seats still in Republicans hands, as this where Republican took a near merciless beating, and in fact of the 28 seats they did hold only X held with more than 55%.  These 28 seats represent golden chances for Democrats to win in 2008. In 2006 Democrats gained 14 or nearly half their overall gains from this type of district and the going is just getting good.  The candidates and open seats listed bellow.

Open Seats in Category.
NM 1 OH 15 NJ 3 IL 11 MN 3

Candidates starting with Open Seats

New Mexico 1
Martin Heinrich: http://martinheinric…

Ohio 15
Mary Jo Kilroy: http://www.kilroyfor…

New Jersey 3
John Adler: http://www.adlerforc…

Illinois 11
Debbie Halvorson: http://www.debbiehal…

Minnesota 3
Terri Bonoff: http://www.terribono…

Connecticut 4
Jim Himes: http://www.himesforc…

New York 25
Dan Maffei: http://www.maffeifor…

Illinois 6
Jill Morgenthaler: http://www.jillmorge…

Illinois 10
Dan Seals: http://www.dansealsf…

Jay Footlik: http://jayfootlik.co…

Washington 8
Darcy Burner: http://www.darcyburn…

Michigan 9
Gary Peters: http://www.petersfor…

Ohio 1
Steve Dreihaus: http://www.driehaus2…

Ohio 14
  Bill O’Neil: http://oneill08.com/

Pennsylvania 3
Many Candidates

Nevada 3
Robert Daskas

New Jersey 7
Linda Stender: http://www.lindasten…

Pennsylvania 15
Sam Bennett: http://www.bennett20…

Races in Flux
VA 11, FL 10 

Conclusion
  Currently as one who can do the math can see, Democrats are running strong challenges in 57 of the 80 seats where Democrats are looking to challenge. There are also some 60 or so other challengers who vary in strength, who could become strong with the proper encouragement. That and the rumor of strong challengers alone should get us up to 65-70 challengers, the last ten will ultimately be up to us to find, as well as making sure the bottom 40 are given enough support to feel as if they are in the game, because Conventional Wisdom would say they are not. We need to understand and then attack this conventional wisdom. 

  Challenging Conventional Wisdom

The Cook and CQ political report will stand in for what amounts to the conventional wisdom. I will include their official predictions at the end of the list.  In total, they list
46 Republican Seats list as potentially Republican Vulnerabilities. However, I believe that we are closer already to 80 then they are to 46.  Already, Democrats have two challenger who have raised 200K,  Russ Warner http://www.warnerfor…
and Judy Feder http://judyfeder.com…. Who are not considered viable challengers and Tom Davis is not considered at all vulnerable, which will obviously change. However.  The key level of increased vulnerability however currently comes from under or unchallenged marginals. Of the 49 seats that fall into the marginal and swing categories, Democrats based on the list above are challenging in only 31 of 49 seats or currently leaving 18 races either under targeted, or unchallenged.  Now obviously the Tom Davis seat appears to be fixed. But that still leaves seventeen under targeted marginal seats.  If we are to successfully get to 80 challengers, it is these seats we need to look into.  Before, I press on with where we are not running strong enough candidates, it is important to give notice to the five strong challengers who have emerged, but are not yet on the conventional watch lists. The success of their campaigns will be give to giving nightmares to Republicans in the House.

CA 26
Russ Warner

MN 2
Steve Sarvi
http://www.stevesarv…

VA 5
Tom Perrillo
http://www.perriello…

VA 10
Judy Feder 
http://judyfeder.com…

IL 16
Robert Abboud
http://www.robertabb…

The 17 undertargeted marginal seats
We are looking at currently 17 undertargeted races, seven of which come the listed above marginal category and 10 of which come from the Swing district category.  The first one which goes in its own sort of box is FL 10, where Congressman Young appears somewhat likely to retire netting us a near certain high quality candidate and no problems. If not we still need to challenge hard here.  But for the moment we can dispense with it. That leaves us now 16. Which we divide up into their two respective categories

Seven under-loved madrigals.
  In these races we are currently looking at three challengers needing strengthening and four totally unopposed races. First the candidates,
In IL 13  Scott Harper http://www.scottharp… the Democratic candidate to challenge Judy Biggert. This is a done deal as Illinois filling deadline has closed.  Mr. Harper seems like a decent enough candidate but I will need to see more fundraising before I can be confident he can take this race all the way.
Wisconsin 1, has three sort of all relative decent candidates, however lurking is the perennial candidate who always gets the nomination but never does any real work. We need him to be defeated this time, and then coalesce around the nominee in a big way. Finally is CA 50, which I admit just might be me.  I am just not thrilled with Nick Leibham, http://www.nickleibh…. He has raised some money and I might just be wrong, but I just doubt very highly he can actually given Brian Bilbray a race
This leaves Four Seats
FL 18,  OH 3 and MI 4,8 currently challenger less. Leaving these races completely open is wrong as not only are they possible pickups but all of them are in key Presidential states.

9 under loved swing districts
  In these six districts we are looking at nine districts were Democrats have not yet gotten a prime recruit. In only one of these districts does a Democratic Challenger have?
A website at that is Jerry Northington in DE AL http://www.northingt…. He might be a good enough guy, but seems to lack the voltage for what is a statewide race.  Other that the remaining 8 districts,
IA 4 NY 3,23, PA 6, MI 6,11 OH 12, all seem to lack challengers or have very poorly defined challengers.  It is imperative that we nail down challengers of a certain quality for these races.

Conclusion
  If Democrats can add real races in these 17 districts to the challengers already in position in the 57 other districts. We will be just six races short of 80 challengers, and we looking over some of the other challengers already filled, it is possible we are already there.  This is in short a map to 80 challengers and a huge gain in the House. We just need to be diligent about following, particularly once we have our Presidential Nominee.

The Conventional Wisdom House Race lists.

COOK  [40]

Toss up
AZ 1
Il 11
MN 3
NM 1
OH 15
OH 16

Lean
AK AL
CA 4
CO 4
CT 4
IL 10
MI 7
NV 3
NJ 7
NY 25
NY 29
NC 8
OH 1
PA 6
WA 8
WY AL

Likely
CA 50
FL 8
FL 13
FL 24
IL 6
IL 14
IL 18
MI 9
MN 6
MO 6
NJ 3
NM 2
NY 13
OH 2
OH 14
PA 3
PA 15
PA 18
VA 2

CQ [44]

Toss up
AZ 1
CA 4
IL 11
MN 3
NC 8
OH 15

Lean Republican
AK AL
CO 4
CT 4
FL 13
Il 10
Il 14
MI 7
MI 9
MO 6
NV 3
NJ 7
NM 1
NY 25
NY 29
OH 1
OH 2
OH 16
PA 3
PA 6
WA 8
WV 2
WY AL

Likely Republican
AZ 3
FL 8
FL 15
FL 24
ID 1
Il 6
Il 18
MN 6
MT AL
NV 2
NJ 3
NY 26
OH 14
PA 15
PA 18
VA 2

20 key House recruiting priorities.

On the whole Democrats are doing exceptionally well when it comes to House Challenger recruitment. By my count there are already 45 districts in which well-established challengers could potentially win.   Additionally Democrats have another five districts in which challengers are pretty close to declaring and if such challengers declared would also make these very competitive. This amounts to already 50 potential wins.  While this is very good news, I believe there are at  twenty more districts in which a Democrat could win if a proper challenger would emerge. With any luck we should be looking at 70 Republicans or more than 1/3 of the Republican House Caucus on the Run.  The twenty districts in need of a challenger are on the flip with brief explanations of each. It is also extremely important to remember challenger does not have to mean extremely well funded, well connected party insider or self-funder.  In 2006 we won with many first time , regular people who worked very hard. We need just as many Tim Walz’s, as Nick Lampson's

1.    PA 6
        This is the most surprising of  the districts to currently be without a challenger  in Jim Gerlach entire career in Congress he has never gotten above 52% of the vote. His district is only 1 of 8 remaining districts that voted for Kerry and in sending a Republican to Congress. I have heard in and out many names floated but as of yet have not heard of a declared challenger. I imagine that should not last long but still until it is rectified it is clearly the biggest problem district out there.

2.    IL 6
This district was  waiting on Tammy Duckworth decision of whether to run against Peter Roskam or not, now that the decision has been made. Democrats are in need of a new candidate.  Peter Roskam only got 51% in a district that only gave George Bush  53%. This could well be Obama territory and not having a House Challenger would be shame.
    
3.    DE AL
This district has been held extremely well held by Republican Michael Castle for a relatively long time and will be an extremely difficult get and yet it is the most Democratic district of any held by  a Republican. So far no credible challenger has emerged but if one does Mike Castle can be beat.

4.    IL 18
This newly minted open seat should be of considerable value, while it is a generally tough district giving Bush 58 percent of the vote.  Its Republican Members of Congress have been more moderate than most. We need  a strong candidate in  this race as we should in all under 60 Bush open seats.

5. MN 3
 Jim Ramstad is defiantly a slippery customer who has a tendency to vote correctly on a number of occasions, and yet his district in Minnesota, like  the one now held by Congressman Tim Walz, barely gave the Republican any margin with which to work. Another earnest Minnesotan can and should make this race a real fight.  At the very least a challenge will make Jim Ramstad do the right thing more often.

6.    MI 11
This district seems to be one of utmost importance, it was one of the five
seriously under targeted in 2006.  The criteria are those races in which an incumbent is held to less than 55% while spending less than $ 500,000. The other four all seem to have challengers in place.  This district simply can not be left to go unchallenged.  It also gave George Bush only 53% of the vote. Simply put. We can beat Thaddeus McCotter.
7.    FL 10
 Bill Young  is the type of incumbent who needs pushing into retirement, his district only voted for the President 2004 by an exceptionally small margin and yet he has been re-elected by very large margins over and over. He is however quite old and a strong and declared challenger could make him think twice about running for re-election. Plus given his age, he could lose even if he does run for re-election
8.    NJ 3
    Jim Saxton sometimes talks like a moderate but is many ways a conservative, he was held to under 60% against a very under-funded  challenger in 2006 and represents another just Bush  win with roughly 51%, in 04 but which Gore won by near double-digits.  I heard rumors of state-senator John Adler getting into the race but until I hear more than rumors, we need a candidate.
9.    NY 3
There are only  six New York State Republican House members left and already four have challengers, and three have very serious challengers. There are still sadly two who lack the kind of challenger they need. Peter King’s race is one of them. A very similar district to NJ 3 in that it went slightly for Bush in 04, but near double digits for Gore in 2000. All the other Long-Island district have fallen. A well place challenger should make this one fall as well.
10.    OH 12
The pattern should begin to be emerging, this is a district in which George Bush won by the slightest of margins with an incumbent who receive less than 60% in 2006. It was one of the better funded challenges though our candidate faced other obstancles. Given the still somewhat toxic environment for Republicans in Ohio, along with a Presidential year, Pat Tieberi is clearly vulnerable to the right kind of challenger.
11.    NY 13
    One of only Six Republican from New York, and one of only two without a challenger, this district showed a bigger Bush swing than NY 3, but also went for Gore by a similar amount. Vito Fossella represents Staten Island and Brooklyn. Steve Harrison on an extremely small budget held Vito to only 57% and therefore the right challenger should be able to win. New York could at the end of 2008 have no Republican left in the delegation and hopefully  with CT we can have a Republican free North East from New York to Maine.
12.    VA 2
    It is not the nature of the district but Thelma Drake’s mediocre performance that have landed her on the hot heat, after winning the seat initially in 2004 with only 55% of 3  points behind Bush’s take her 2006 performance of only 51% makes her in serious jeporardy  were a serious challenger to emerge. We need one, if only to help our 2008 VA Senate candidate.
13.    NJ 2
This is another barely won for Bush 2004, Gore much bigger Winner 2000, moderately Republican held districts, the reason it falls lower on the scale than NJ 2 is the Republican Frank LoBiondo holds up better than does Jim Saxton, and is also more politically strewed. Still a strong challenge here and it is a winnable race.
14.    Il 11
It is actually amazing to be that Jerry Weller is not considered more vulnerable given the fun he has with ethics and yet, his 55% win over very capable John Pavich indicated taking him out in a district that gave George Bush 53% will be difficult, but Illinois could be Obama country and the right challenger could have Weller’s number.
15.  OH 3
Mike Turner sits on the type of district that swung well in  2006. It gave George Bush 54% of the vote in Dayton Ohio. It is not an easy sell and yet Mike Turner is not a long time member having only been recently elected in 2002.  He also was held to under 60% against a very late declaring challenger after a debacle with our first candidate. It is the type of district that could swing and therefore should be challeneged.
16.   IL 13
Judy Biggert sits on a moderately Republican districts in generally suburban Illinois The district gave George Bush about 53% of the vote, she has not often been challenged though she did  dip below 60 in the most recent election despite nominally funded opposition.  Seats in Illinois that fit this profile must have viable challengers as a Democratic winning 60% of the vote there in the Presidential is a real possibility[if you doubt, the Dem and Green got 60% against the last Republican to hold statewide office, so 60% is clearly possible]
17.  MI 8
Mike Rogers faced down with 55% a pretty good challenger in 2006 election, and yet the 54% that Bush got in the District in 2004 means it could flip.  It  was these Suburban leaner districts that made for the last 10 of the Democrats House wins, this district and PA 4 seems to have a possible similarities, the point is that there is simply no reason to give up here.
18.  MI 6
Fred Upton usually wins big  but the district is relatively moderate, giving George Bush 53%, it isn’t a high priority but a challenger could win here.  If I had to guess I would say Both Stabenow and Granholm one this district. We need to compete here.
19. FL 18
One of the very few district in which the George Bush percentage dropped versus 2000, FL 18 is the most Democratic of the three Miami area Cuban district,  This district only gave George Bush 54% of the vote and while its Incumbent is well entrenched the right kind of challenger could move this district on the path to becoming Democratic.
20. MI 4
This district is mostly listed for the round number as Bush’s 55 here, along with 61% by Dave Camp in 2006, does not give me much grounds for getting too excited and yet, 55% is not so larger as to give up hope. Dave Camp could be defeated if  a very high quality challenger were to emerge.

This is the biggest story coming out of the most recent fundraising numbers on the House Side.  While Tom Cole and NRCC huff and puff about how they plan to blow our house down. We have got the finest brick house in the land. Ignoring, for a second, the fact  that the DCCC and DSCC are both taking their counterparts to school or that the Democratic Presidential are out raising their Republican counterparts by huge sums with even more in the bank, you can not possibly win races any races without candidates.  It is on the count of funded  challengers where Democrats in the House are destroying their Republican opponents. As of June 30th the Democrats have twenty-four Republican held districts with candidates with $100,000 or more cash on hand. This compares to only nine such districts for Republicans. For a deeper analysis of this nearly 3-1 advantage follow the jump.

Eight of nine  districts are held by seats Republicans lost in 2006.  They have  one well funded challengers to long term Democrats and that is the GA 8 seat which was redraw and produced and squeaker in 06.  When dissecting even further you see that of the 9 challenger race they do have, three are re-runs. For those doing math, that means six new challenger districts with new challengers.  The Democrats have twenty four such districts with 100,000 cash on hand.  It is true we have nine re-runs within the amount of cash that says they are ready to compete, but eight of whom finished within six points of their Republican incumbents last cycle. Even when removing reruns and focusing only on new candidates, it is clear that the fifteen new Democrats still far outpaces the only six new Republicans. While it is still quite early, the prospects for Democratic gains have to far out-way the chance of Republicans to regain.  To close out here is the list of Democrats followed by the list of Republicans.

Democratic Challengers with 100,000
AZ 3  Bob Lord
CA 4Charlie Brown
CA 26 Russ Warner  Hoyt Hillsman
CO 4 Angie Pacione
CT 4 Jim Himes
FL 8 Mike Smith
FL 9 Bill Mitchell
IA 4Selden Spencer
IL 10 Footlik Seals
IL 14 Bill Foster
IN 3 Michael Montagano
MI 7David Nacht
MO 6 Kay Barnes
NC 8 Larry Kissell
NM 1Martin Heinrich
NM 2Bill McCamley
NY 25 Dan Maffei
NY 26 Jon Powers
NY 29 Eric Massa, David Nachbar
OH 1 Steve Dreihaus
OH 2, Vic Wulsin, Steve Black
OH 16 John Boccieri
TX 10 Larry Joe Doherty  Dan Grant
WA 8 Darcy Burner

Republicans with $ 100,000
CA 11 Dean Andal
CT  5  David Cappiello
Fl 16[3]
GA 8 Richard Goddard
KS [2] [Jim Ryun re-run]
NH 1 Jeb Bradley
NY 19 Andrew Saul
NY 20 [2]
TX 22 Shelly Sekula Gibbs

The Netroots community has been drifting.  In many ways the unity of purpose and mission that comes from an election cycle has been lost in the ruckus surrounding both the Presidential Primaries and the duels over contrasting strategies on how to best end the War in Iraq.  However there is clearly no better way to force the President to change course than to override his veto.  Already the Republican Minority Leader John Boehner is discussing the possibility of re-evaluating the issue come September. He should not be allowed to wait.  But how can we tie Republican hands..  We can force them by electing Jim Marlow to Congress on June 19th or in the subsequent runoff election.

The vote to override the President failed by roughly 70 House votes.  The Republicans in Congress, so far with rare exception, have looked at Iraq in primarily political terms.  Stick with the President, paint the Democrats as abandoning the War on Terror, and other such calculations. They tend not to see the 2006 Election as a repudiation of the War in Iraq, but as primarily about corruption or spending or other transient or fixable things. Although Iraq may have been the dagger in the Northeast, this was a region Republican members of Congress had been considering abandoning for some time. “Safe” Republicans need to know they are vulnerable too.  To gain the 70 House votes we need to override this President, we need to pick up 60 Republican votes. However there are only 49 Republicans who represent districts in which George Bush  got 55% of the vote or less in 2004.  Right now roughly 2/3 of the Republican Caucus is sitting pretty, thinking my seat could never belong to a Democrat.  Therefore why risk alienating my President and, judging from Thursday’s debate, the next Nominee, by admitting that the Democrats are right about Iraq.  This is where Georgia 10 comes in. More Republican members of Congress, particularly Southern members of Congress need to feel Iraq could be the issue that costs them their seat. Of the 49 swing districts held by Republicans, only 6 are in the South.  If business as usual prevails in GA 10, i.e. a safe Republican seat just returns to the Republican Party, then no national polling, or debate or rally or phone call will come close to forcing Republican Members of Congress  to accept the Political reality of Iraq, let alone the policy reality. However, were this seat, in the one state in 06 to trend slightly GOP.,  lost to the Democrats  or even if Jim Marlow were to come close, the political foundation for folks such as Mitch McConnell or any of the other Southern Republicans Leadership would crumble.  Now there’s no doubt that we could lose this race in catastrophic fashion and the Democrats could lose three more Georgia House Seats, and still merrily expand our  House and Senate Majorities and capture the White House. But in the meantime nothing will create the divide between the White House and Republicans in Congress needed to End the War, like a loss in Georgia Ten. Let’s get it done.
On the Web
http://marlowforgeor…
http://brandeis.face…

With the Presidential race gearing up at a its fastest pace ever, it is extremely important to remember that 2008 is still a chance to strength our majority in the House and as importantly, punish the Republicans who stood with Bush every step of the way until it was politically inconvenient. So this is Month Three.

Top 50

1. MI 7
  Republican Tim Walberg
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reason for Weakness
  Tim Walberg is the most vulnerable Republican member of Congress because running against an opponent in a general election who spent only $ 55,000.  He got just 51% in a 54% Bush District. His defeat of a Congressman Schwarz who was widely liked will cause him problems.  If the Democrats can find a centrist in the Schwarz model we should be able to defeat this Freshman.

Change: No Change
Tim Walberg continues to vote like a right-winger on everything and his district just isn’t built for that rightwing a record.  Joe Schwarz remains the wild card.

2. PA 15
  Republican Charlie Dent
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Charlie Dent has only been re-elected once in now one of only eight Republicans to hold a seat that John Kerry won.  He also was one of only two incumbents in Kerry won districts not to have a well-financed challenger. The fact that he was only able to get 53% under these circumstance means that he is a very good target for defeat. 

Change: No Change
Charlie Dent’s vote for the troop surge solidified his vulnerability in my mind.  There also appear to many possible Democratic Challengers. Finding a challenger quickly will be important

3. 
NV 3 
  Republican Jon Porter
  06 Winning Percentage 48%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  As a Member of Congress you never want to be getting less than 50% and that is exactly the position that Jon Porter find himself as he confronts life in the minority.  The Democrat was able to get 47% with 5% going elsewhere. If the Democrats can recruit a slightly more experience candidate and Ms. Hafen now counts. This race will be extremely close.

Change Up
Reason: Keller move on Iraq will make him less vulnerable; also Nevada’s first Democratic Caucus should give Democrats a great chance to get organized to beat Porter.  Democratic Nominee for Gov in 06 Diana Titus is one potential challenger.

4. WA 8
  Republican Dave Reichert 
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage 48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A two term Congressman from one of eight Kerry won Republican held seats is by definition vulnerable, also a minority member. That he was able to get only 51% in both cycles adds to that vulnerability. This race will be very tight again. The Presidential should be helpful.
Change Up
Reason. His Iraq vote is particularly damaging in this district.  Washington State simply despises the War.

5.  FL 8
  Republican Ric Keller
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage 55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  You never want to run below the President of Your own Party in your district and this is exactly what happened to Ric Keller. This is particularly bad in a state where Republican loses were less than in other states. His 53% against a good but not great opponent in a peripherally targeted race was trouble enough, but he is now breaking a term limits and already has a republican primary challenger.

Change Down
Reason: His Iraq flip flop will probably benefit him slightly. More importantly he seems to be engaging hard to keep his seat and that makes you inherently

6.
CA 4
  Republican John Doolittle
  06 Winning Percentage 49%
  04 Bush Percentage 61%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A congressperson never wants to get less than 50%, when that is combined with such a massive running behind of party ID It shows a member with a serious problem. The large amount spent on the legal defense fund might be why.  If Charlie Brown gives it another shot this could be a race.  We sure should make sure it is.
Change Up
Reason: Charlie Brown is in, corruption remains; this race will be a barn burner to the finish.

7. NJ 7

  Republican Mike Ferguson
  06 Winning Percentage  49%
  04 Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another Republican under 50% spells danger for him. He also is still a relative junior member just reaching the minority for the first time.  Linda Stender should be encouraged to make the challenge again and regardless this can be a very close race.  Ferguson’s positions on social issues are also out of step for the district.
Change Up
Reason Iraq will focus more importantly in this district as Ferguson voted to defend the Surge.

8.
6. AZ 1
  Republican Rick Renzi
  06 Winning Percentage 51%
  04 Bush Percentage 54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Hints of corruption, a weak re-election performance including running behind the President of your own party and being a relatively junior member now in the minority these are the challenges now faced by Rick Renzi.  This is a member who is beatable.
  Change Down
Reason: The other districts all seem to have at least possible challengers AZ 1 lacks that currently and Iraq will not cause as much of an issue here. Renzi corruption still makes him vulnerable but he is more likely to escape.

9.
NC 8
  Republican Robin Hayes
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage 54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Winning by less than 500 vote against the same opponent who was generally under-funded last time is all one needs to make the top ten list of vulnerable members, I think Larry Kissell should be the first person on the New Blue Majority List.
Change None
Reason: The race is the same, everyone else has a district fit issue  while this a straight even issue.

10.
MI 9
  Republican Joe Knollenberg
  06 Winning Percentage 52%
  04 Bush Percentage 51%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was probably the worst under-target in the nation besides PA 15 with less reasons for it. The good news however is that Joe Knollenberg now a minority member spent a huge amount of money his campaign money just to hold on.  He is also relatively old so a retirement would not be surprising. Either way this seat should be a top priority.  Nancy Skinner was a very good candidate that not only the DCCC but us in the Netroots missed as well. If  she runs again I think supporting  her would be justified.
Change Up
Reason. Joe Knollenberg is thought of as possibly retiring either way, he is a relic, in a Presidential, change has a real chance to sweep out Knollenberg. DCCC also seems to be very interested.

11.  CO 4
  Republican Marilyn Musgrave
  06 Winning Percentage 46%
  04 Bush Percentage 58%
  Reasons for Weakness
  46% is a terrible number for an Incumbent.  It means serious problems particularly when your last election performance before was already 7% the President behind that of the President of your own party.
Change Down
Reason:  Colorado seems to have just too much going on,  No candidates are emerging and this district is just going to be very tough. Musgrave is still outside the mainstream, though being in the minority actually gives her a smaller chance to say the kind of things that got her in trouble in the first palce.

12.  PA 18
  Republican Tim Murphy
  06 Winning Percentage 58%
  04  Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness 
  Scandal appears to be rearing itself into this district in a way that helps us.  This combined with a district remarkably similar to PA 4th where Melissa Hart was recently beaten. If not for the scandal this district would rank lower but for now it is a prime target
Change Up
Reason:  Hastert appears to be re-emerging as less talk of retirement appears edging this district up.

13. OH 16
  Republican Ralph Regula
  06 Winning Percentage 59%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  When a nothing challenger holds you under 60% that is a problem. When you are already in your Eighties that is also a problem. When you are about to drop a tremendous amount in power that spells trouble. The Democrats already have a challenger and more will probably emerge.
Change Up
Reason: Retirement seems like a real possibility and a challenger has already appeared. Ohio seems to be trending Blue also.

14.  IL 6
  Republican Peter Roskam
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04 Bush Percentage  53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was the DCCC’s greatest folly, by choosing a non-local candidate. It allowed the Republicans to frame the race in a way favorable to them and ultimately win it.  That said the race was extremely close. A freshman Republican minority member has to beatable.  Finding a local candidate will be essential.
Change  Up
Reason: Hastert moving down combined with Roskam deep conservative record makes this race the best in Illinois

15.  IL 14
  Republican Dennis Hastert
  06 Winning Percentage 60%
  04 Bush Percentage 55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  How the mighty have fallen. It is quite likely this seat will open up in 08 and if not Dennis Hastert is damaged goods, a bygone relic of an era that is gone. Illinois is also a state trending clearly our way.  This is a great chance.
Change: Down
Reason: Hastert looks more and more likely to run and this seat could drop far and fast if he runs for re-election

16.
PA 6
  Republican Jim Gelach
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  51%,  three straight elections. It seems as  if  Jim Gerlach  is a survivor which makes him difficult to defeat and yet he clearly has to deal with transition from majority to minority.  A good Democratic Candidate will make this a  race again and quickly.
Change None
Reason Gerlach is vulnerable for the very same reasons he always has been and that stays the same this month.

17.  NM 1
  Republican Heather Wilson
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another absolute squeaker and another chance to take a Republican held seat. Heather Wilson is as slick as they come, though people do seem to think that Patricia Madrid made a late debate error. Regardless, she is vulnerable but difficult to beat.
Change Up
Reason: She took the wrong position on Iraq with the resolution and that is going to be  a problem.

18.
Republican Barbara Cubin
  06 Winning Percentage  48%
  04 Bush Percentage  69%
  Reasons for Weakness
  No one likes Barbara Cubin and her extremely weak showing shows, and yet trying to overcome the Republican tilt of Wyoming is extremely difficult, particularly in a Presidential Year. It would not be surprising to see a better Republican challenge her in the primary. 
Change  Up
Walsh is dropping like a stone and this district benefits
19.
OH 15
  Republican Deborah Pyrce
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  If you basically run  in a tie with your opponent in a Congressional Race, you are vulnerable. However Deb Pryce is a seasoned campaigner and I am readily able to change roles, as her shift out of Republican Leadership shows.  This is a tough one but completely winnable.
Change Up
Reason:  Moves up as a Result of Walsh

20.
CT 4
  Republican Chris Shays
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04  Bush Percentage 46%
  Reasons for Weakness
  In many ways Chris Shays is like many of the other close races except that he has more long term incumbency and will be expect a challenge. I am from CT so I know of recruiting difficulties.  It is a winnable race but one that requires a complete commitment to it.  Still  only eight Kerry won districts have Republican Incumbents this is one of them.
Change  Up
Reason: His Iraq vote was bad for him, he moves up mostly because of Walsh but has a chance to move up more because of his Iraq vote.

21. .NY 13
  Republican Vito Fosella 
  06 Winning Percentage 57%
  04 Bush Percentage 55%
Reasons for Weakness
This race moved into the rankings from spot 26 because the DCCC targeted it for ethics violations. New York’s Democratic Lean in the last election makes it seem entirely possible that this race will finally get hot. 
Change up
  The other moved down and Vito’s corruption move him up also.

22. NY 25
  Republican Jim Walsh
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  After not having a real challenger in a long time Jim Walsh was faced with the scare of his life. Democrat Dan Maffei was also not as well funded as he could have been.  As  one of the eight Republican in Kerry won districts. Jim Walsh can expect a real challenge though unlike other members he will be ready for it.
Change Down
Reason: Flipping on Iraq clearly helps him in his district and make him slightly less vulnerable.

23.
.  IL 10
  Republican Mark Kirk
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04  Bush Percentage 47%
  Reasons for Weakness
  The seventh  Kerry won district on the lists. Mark Kirk is much like Chris Shays was  after 2004. A scare yes, but he  still  had some breathing room. Picking him off will be very difficult, though Dan Seals giving it another try would be serious. 

Change Down
Reason: Mark Kirk leaving of the administration on Iraq is very bad for them but it is very good for his re-election prospects.

24. PA 3
  Republican Phil English
  06 Winning Percentage 54%
  04  Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was another under-target in PA , an area which trended toward the party in a serious way. There have also been rumor’s abounding about Phil English. Finding a good challenger will be difficult but he is clearly vulnerable because of his underperformance.
Change Down
Reason: Though he didn’t move, he seems less vulnerable because of his Iraq switch.

25.
GA 10
Republican Open
04 Bush Percentage 65%
Reason
Open seats are always likely to flip more than others, the picture on this seat will get more clear soon. But it needs to be included in the top 25 for now. .

Entered Top  25
GA 10

Left Top 25
MI 11

26.
Republican Scott Garrett
  06 Winning Percentage  55%
  04  Bush Percentage  57%

27. Republican Tom Davis
  06 Winning Percentage 55% 
  04  Bush Percentage 50%

28. OH 1
  Republican Steve Chabot
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage  51%

29.  IA 4
  Republican Tom Latham
  06 Winning Percentage  57%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

30. NY 3
  Republican Peter King
  06 Winning Percentage  56%
  04  Bush Percentage 53

31. IL 11
  Republican Jerry Weller
  06 Winning Percentage 55%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

32. .  NY 29
  Republican Randy Kuhl
  06 Winning Percentage  52%
  04  Bush Percentage 56%

33. OH 2
  Republican Jean Schmidt
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04  Bush Percentage 64%

34.
FL 1O
  Republican Bill Young
  06 Winning Percentage  66% 
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

35.  DE AL
  Republican Mike Castle
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  46%

36. CA 26
  Republican David Drier
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  55%

37. OH 3
  Republican Mike Turner
  06 Winning Percentage 59% 
  04  Bush Percentage  54%

38. FL 24
  Republican Tom Feeney
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%

39.  NJ 3
  Republican Jim Saxton
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

40. MN 6
  Republican Michelle Bachmann
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage 57%

41. VA 2
Republican Thelma Drake
06  Winning Percentage 52%
04 Bush Winning Percentage  58%

42.  OH 12
  Republican Pat Tiberi
  06 Winning Percentage 58% 
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

43. NJ 2
  Republican Frank LoBiondo
  06 Winning Percentage  62%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

44. 
NY 23
  Republican John McHugh
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 51%

45. OH 14
  Republican Steve LaTourette
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

46. CO 6
Republican Tom Tancredo
06 Winning Percentage 59%
04 Bush Percentage 60%

Reason Likely to be open

  47. WI 1
  Republican Paul Ryan
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 54%

48. ID 1
  Republican Bill Salli
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage 69%

49 . 
MN 3
  Republican Jim Ramstad 
  06 Winning Percentage  65%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

50.  MI 4
  Republican Dave Camp
  06 Winning Percentage  60%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%

No changes in Top 50

I often wonder what value I provide the world by giving it  lists of  vulnerable Republicans. This is my best an attempt at answer. The Stem Cell Research Bill was Thirty Seven votes short of being veto-proof in the house. There are actually 37  Republicans who voted against it  .  So if Stem Cell Research is your big issue , these are I believe the  members  you want to hit the most for it.  I might be wrong or right. It is merely my best guess.  The point is this is how you move issues, as well just partisanship.[I am a partisan so if you want to beat the 16 Democratic opponents of Stem Cell ask someone else. ]  It is useful to know when someone votes against their district if you are trying to mount an issue campaign against them.  So without further ado, the Republicans who voted against their district on Stem Cell Research.

Bachmann
Bilirakis
Buchanan
Camp
Chabot
L Diaz-Balart
M. Diaz-Balart
Drake
English
Feeney
Ferguson
Gallegly
Garrett
Hayes
Keller
King [NY]
Kline
Knollenberg
Kuhl
Lahood
Latham
LoBiondo
McCotter
McHugh
Tim Murphy
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ryan
Saxton
Smith[NJ]
Tiberi
Walberg
Walsh
Weller
Wolf

So this is the second month of tracking the Top 50 House Pick Up Chances in the country. What is the most amazing about a project like this is the amount of new information there already is to switch decisions  about races. We have about  7 votes in the House that could be used  against certain Republicans in the House . We also have a new DCCC list of where they are looking to go in terms of targeting. In addition to the information from last month  I will include change as well reason for change

The Top 50 races

1. MI 7
  Republican Tim Walberg
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reason for Weakness
  Tim Walberg is the most vulnerable Republican member of Congress because running against an opponent in a general election who spent only $ 55,000,.  He got just 51% in a 54% Bush District. His defeat of a Congressman Schwarz who was widely liked  will cause him problems.  If the Democrats can find a centrist in the Schwarz model we should be able to defeat this Freshman.

Change No Change
Reason: Tim Walberg has already cast his lot like the Right Wing Republican we expected including a no vote on the Minimum Wage,  the only issue is that lots of Republicans now seem to be circling  as well.

2. PA 15
  Republican Charlie Dent
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Charlie Dent has only been re-elected once in now one of only eight Republicans to hold a seat that John Kerry won .  He also was one of only two incumbents in Kerry won districts not to have a well-financed challenger. The fact that he was only able to get 53% under these circumstance means that he is a very good target for defeat. 

Change  No change
Reason Charlie Dent remains vulnerable and  the DCCC now list him a such. This race will remain very hot
3.. FL 8
  Republican Ric Keller
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  You never want to run below the President of Your own Party in your district and this is exactly what happened to Ric Keller. This is particularly bad in a state where Republican loses were less than in other states. His 53% against a good but not great opponent in a peripherally targeted race was trouble enough, but he is now breaking a term limits and already has a republican primary challenger.

Change Up
Reason: On reflection Ric Keller seems even more vulnerable, and his rushing out to oppose Iraq would make sense for someone more vulnerable.

4.  NV 3 
  Republican Jon Porter
  06 Winning Percentage 48%
  04 Bush Percentage 50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  As a Member of Congress you never want to be getting less than 50% and that is exactly the position that Jon Porter find himself as he confronts life in the minority.  The Democrat was able to get 47%  with 5% going else where. If the Democrats can recruit a slightly more experience candidate and Ms. Hafen now counts. This race will be extremely close.
Change Down
Reason: Keller had to move up and therefore Porter had to move down  He remains  very vulnerable and is DCCC rated as such

5. WA 8
  Republican Dave Reichert 
  06 Winning Percentage  ?
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A two term Congressman from one of eight Kerry won Republican held seats is by definition vulnerable, also a minority member. That he was able to get only 51% in both cycles adds to that vulnerability. This race will be very tight again. The Presidential should be helpful.
Change None
Reason. Reichert remains a Republican in a Democrat district who by an extremely small percentage and who just seems vulnerable 

6. AZ 1
  Republican Rick Renzi
  06 Winning Percentage 51%
  04 Bush Percentage 54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Hints of corruption, a weak re-election performance including running behind the President of your own party and being a relatively junior member now in the minority these are the challenges now faced by Rick Renzi.  This is a member who is beatable.

Change Up
Reason: The DCCC lists it as vulnerable because of ethics issues that alone should make him more vulnerable.

7. CA 4
  Republican John Doolittle
  06 Winning Percentage 49%
  04 Bush Percentage 61%
  Reasons for Weakness
  A congressperson never wants to get  less than 50%, when that is combined with such a massive running behind of party ID It shows a member with a serious problem. The large amount spent on the legal defense fund might be why.  If Charlie Brown gives it another shot this could be a race.  We sure should make sure it is.
Change Up
Reason: The increased likelihood of Charlie Brown’s running again  makes Doolittle vulnerable as does the DCCC ranking  the district in its  ethically challenged catergory.

8. NJ 7
  Republican Mike Ferguson
  06 Winning Percentage  49%
  04 Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another Republican under 50% spells danger  for him. He also  is still a relative junior member just reaching the minority  for the first time.  Linda Stender should be encouraged to make the challenge again and regardless this can be a very close race.  Ferguson’s position on social issues are also out of step for the district.
Change Up
Reason: The Democratic Convention in Denver will make beating Marilyn Musgrave more difficult he drop allows this district to move up.

9.NC 8
  Republican Robin Hayes
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Winning by less than 500 vote against the same opponent who was generally under-funded last time is all one needs to make the top ten list of vulnerable members, I think Larry Kissell should be the first person on the New Blue Majority List.
Change Up
Reason: Same as above

10. CO 4
  Republican Marilyn Musgrave
  06 Winning Percentage 46%
  04 Bush Percentage 58%
  Reasons for Weakness
  46% is a terrible number for an Incumbent.  It means serious problems particularly when your last election performance before was already 7% the President behind that of the President of your own party.
Change Down
Reason: In a traditionally Republican part of a trending Democratic State, CO 4 is likely to re-act slightly against the Democratic Tide. This just make beating Musgrave more difficult and it is more important to win Colorado in the Presidential than beating Marilyn Musgrave.

11. MI 9
  Republican Joe Knollenberg
  06 Winning Percentage 52%
  04 Bush Percentage 51%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was probably the worst under-target in the nation besides PA 15 with less reasons  for it. The good news however is that Joe Knollenberg now a minority member spent a huge amount of money his campaign money just to hold on.  He is also relatively old so a retirement would not be surprising. Either way this seat should be a top priority.  Nancy Skinner was a very good candidate that not only the DCCC but us in the Netroots missed as well. If  she runs again I think supporting  her would be justified.
Change None
Reason, If anything this spot holds the best because it is now a DCCC target.

12.  IL 14
  Republican Dennis Hastert
  06 Winning Percentage 60%
  04 Bush Percentage 55%
  Reasons for Weakness
  How the mighty have fallen. It is quite likely this seat will  open up in 08 and if not Dennis Hastert is damaged goods, a bygone relic  of an era that is gone. Illinois is  also a state trending clearly our way.  This is a great  chance.
Change None
Reason: Looking at Dennis Hastert’s sad face it is hard to believe he will run again and open seats are generally easier to get.
13.  PA 18
  Republican Tim Murphy
  06 Winning Percentage 58%
  04  Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness 
  Scandal appears to be rearing itself into this district in a way that helps us.  This combined with a district remarkably similar to PA 4th where Melissa Hart was  recently beaten. If not for the scandal this district would rank lower but for now it is a prime target
Change Up
Reason: The scandal is now being addressed by the DCCC edging this seat up a spot.

14.  OH 16
  Republican Ralph Regula
  06 Winning Percentage 59%
  04 Bush Percentage  54%
  Reasons for Weakness
  When a nothing challenger holds you under 60% that is a problem. When you are already in your Eighties that is also a problem. When you are about to drop a tremendous amount in power that spells trouble. The Democrats already have a challenger and more will probably emerge.
Change down
Reason The Murphy Scandal  moves Regula down a spot no real change.
  15 .  IL 6
  Republican Peter Roskam
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04 Bush Percentage  53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was the DCCC’s greatest folly, by choosing a non-local candidate. It allowed the Republicans to frame the race in a way favorable to them and ultimately win it.  That said the race was extremely close. A freshman Republican minority member has to beatable.  Finding a local candidate will be essential.
Change None
Reason: Roskam has voted like a right winger when his district is far more reasonable. He has to be considered a prime target

16. PA 6
  Republican Jim Gelach
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  51%,  three straight elections. It seems as  if  Jim Gerlach  is a survivor which makes him difficult to defeat and yet he clearly has to deal with transition from majority to minority.  A good Democratic Candidate will make this a  race again and quickly.
Change None
Reason Gerlach is vulnerable for the very same reasons he always has been.

  17. NY 25
  Republican Jim Walsh
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  After not having a real challenger in a long time Jim Walsh was faced with the scare of his life. Democrat Dan Maffei was also not as well funded as he could have been.  As  one of the eight Republican in Kerry won districts. Jim Walsh can expect a real challenge though unlike other members he will be ready for it.
Change None
Reason  Same basic reasons, he has been voting with Democrats on everything but stem cell research.

18. NM 1
  Republican Heather Wilson
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage  48%
  Reasons for Weakness
  Another absolute squeaker and another chance to take a Republican held seat. Heather Wilson is as slick as they come, though people do seem to think that Patricia Madrid made a late debate error. Regardless, she is vulnerable but difficult to beat.
Change None
Reason She is just a vulnerable as ever but is still as skilled as ever. She is also voting along with Democrats and making noise on Iraq.

19. WY AL
  Republican Barbara Cubin
  06 Winning Percentage  48%
  04 Bush Percentage  69%
  Reasons for Weakness
  No one likes Barbara Cubin and her extremely weak showing shows, and yet trying to overcome the Republican tilt of Wyoming is extremely difficult, particularly in a Presidential Year. It would not be surprising to see a better Republican challenge her in the primary. 
Change None
Reason Cubin keeps voting like a right winger and her value in the minority still drops. Although the Republican inability to really oppose Democrats so far in the House makes a primary less likely no one wants to run to be powerless.

20.  OH 15
  Republican Deborah Pyrce
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%
  Reasons for Weakness
  If you basically run  in a tie with your opponent in a Congressional Race, you are vulnerable. However Deb Pryce is a seasoned campaigner and I am readily able to change roles, as her shift out of Republican Leadership shows.  This is a tough one but  completely winnable.
Change None
Reason: The DCCC keeps her on the target list and her district might be more Democratic in a Presidential but 06 was a great year for Ohio Democrats.  She is already leaving leadership aside and voting with Democrats a ton.

21.  CT 4
  Republican Chris Shays
  06 Winning Percentage  51%
  04  Bush Percentage 46%
  Reasons for Weakness
  In many ways Chris Shays is like many of the other close races except that he has more long term incumbency and will be expect a challenge. I am from CT so I know of recruiting difficulties.  It is a winnable race but one that requires a complete commitment to it.  Still  only eight Kerry won districts have Republican Incumbents this is one of them.
Change None
Reason: Shays voted against Medicare change but otherwise is voting with most of the Democratic agenda. The DCCC still seems interested.

22.  IL 10
  Republican Mark Kirk
  06 Winning Percentage  53%
  04  Bush Percentage 47%
  Reasons for Weakness
  The seventh  Kerry won district on the lists. Mark Kirk is much like Chris Shays was  after 2004. A scare yes, but he  still  had some breathing room. Picking him off will be very difficult, though Dan Seals giving it another try would be serious. 

Change None 
Reason: Mark Kirk is clearly leaving his leadership days behind  and voting with Democrats . This makes it easier for him to paint himself as moderate but it is also clearly as the DCCC said

23.  NY 13
  Republican Vito Fosella 
  06 Winning Percentage  57%
  04  Bush Percentage  55%
Reasons for Weakness
This race moved into the rankings from spot 26 because the DCCC targeted it for ethics  violations. New York’s Democratic Lean in the last election makes it seem entirely possible that this race will finally get hot. 

24.  PA 3
  Republican Phil English
  06 Winning Percentage 54%
  04  Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was another under-target in PA , an area which trended toward the party in a serious way. There have also been rumor’s abounding about Phil English. Finding a good challenger will be difficult but he is clearly vulnerable because of his underperformance.
Change Down
Reasons: Vito’s  weakness is just slightly greater.

25. MI 11
  Republican Thaddeus McCotter
  06 Winning Percentage 54% 
  04 Bush Percentage 53%
  Reasons for Weakness
  This was another Michigan under-target particularly in relationship to funding.  That means the Vulnerable exists and is real. It is going to be a very tough nut to crack, but it fits the profile of many of the Democrat upset victories that happened across the country this year.
Change Down
Reason: Just moved down a spot.

Dropped out of Top 25
Steve Chabot

Entered
Vito Fossella

26.  OH 1
  Republican Steve Chabot
  06 Winning Percentage 53%
  04 Bush Percentage  51%

27.  NJ 5
  Republican Scott Garrett
  06 Winning Percentage  55%
  04  Bush Percentage  57%

28. IL 11
  Republican Jerry Weller
  06 Winning Percentage 55%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

29.  IA 4
  Republican Tom Latham
  06 Winning Percentage  57%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

30. NY 3
  Republican Peter King
  06 Winning Percentage  56%
  04  Bush Percentage 53%

31.  OH 2
  Republican Jean Schmidt
  06 Winning Percentage 51% 
  04  Bush Percentage 64%

32.  VA 11
  Republican Tom Davis
  06 Winning Percentage 55% 
  04  Bush Percentage 50%

33.  NY 29
  Republican Randy Kuhl
  06 Winning Percentage  52%
  04  Bush Percentage 56%

34.  FL 1O
  Republican Bill Young
  06 Winning Percentage  66% 
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

35.  CA 26
  Republican David Drier
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  55%

36.  OH 3
  Republican Mike Turner
  06 Winning Percentage 59% 
  04  Bush Percentage  54%

37.  FL 24
  Republican Tom Feeney
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04 Bush Percentage  55%

38. DE AL
  Republican Mike Castle
  06 Winning Percentage 57% 
  04  Bush Percentage  46%

39.  NJ 3
  Republican Jim Saxton
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

40. MN 6
  Republican Michelle Bachmann
  06 Winning Percentage  50%
  04  Bush Percentage 57%

41. VA 2
Republican Thelma Drake
06 Winning Percentage 52%
04 Bush Winning Percentage  58%

  42.  OH 12
  Republican Pat Tiberi
  06 Winning Percentage 58% 
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

43.
NY 23
  Republican John McHugh
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 51%

44.  OH 14
  Republican Steve LaTourette
  06 Winning Percentage  58%
  04  Bush Percentage  53%

45.  NJ 2
  Republican Frank LoBiondo
  06 Winning Percentage  62%
  04  Bush Percentage  50%

46. CO 6
Republican Tom Tancredo
06 Winning  Percentage 59%
04 Bush Percentage 60%

Reason Likely to be open

  47. WI 1
  Republican Paul Ryan
  06 Winning Percentage  63%
  04  Bush Percentage 54%

48.
MN 3
  Republican Jim Ramstad 
  06 Winning Percentage  65%
  04  Bush Percentage  51%

49 .  ID 1
  Republican Bill Salli
  06 Winning Percentage 50%
  04 Bush Percentage 69%

50.  MI 4
  Republican Dave Camp
  06 Winning Percentage  60%
  04  Bush Percentage  55%

Dropped out of Top 50
Ilena Ros-Lethinen
Fred Upton

Enter Top 50
Thelma Drake
Tom Tancredo

So the Minimum Wage increase got 82 Republican House votes, which on face is encouraging but in my mind it begs an important question. Why did it take nine years and Democratic Control of the House to actually get a Minimum Wage increase passed?

Excluding the two Freshman. 80 Republican Members of Congress voted for the Minimum Wage Increase. Now clearly on  some issues small minorities within a party often don’t break with their parties leadership on issues because of the danger . But this was by no means a small minority.  80 Republicans represented more than a third of the entire Caucus at the time.  This group could have easily forced the House Leadership to pass a Minimum wage increase that the Senate could have passed without linking  it to the Estate tax. I know there are many not in these parts but some in the party who would  think that now we are in the Majority we should be less aggressive in defeating Republicans who could be useful to us, better to focus on defending the seats we have.  Just remember that it is these 80 Republicans who kept the poorest workers in this country from getting a raise, not because they don’t believe in the Minimum Wage but because they didn’t have the courage to stand up to Tom Delay and Company.  It will take a lot more acts of actual political courage for me to believe any of these Members of Congress has truly changed.  So to the Shays’, Wilsons’ and Gelachs’ of the world, speaking for no one but myself, I am still coming to send you into the private sector.

The “80”  Should haves.
Aderholt
Alexander
Bachus
Biggert
Bonner
Bono
Bozeman
Brown Waite
Capito
Castle
Crenshaw
Davis  KY
Jo Ann Davis
L Diaz-Balart
M Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English
Everett
Ferguson
Forbes
Fossella
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gillmor
  Goode
Goodlatte
Hayes
Hulshof
Jindal
Johnson IL
Jones  NC
Keller
King NY
Kirk
Kuhl
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
LoBiondo
Marchant
McCotter
McHugh
Miller MI
Moran KS
Tim Murphy
Peterson PA
Petri
Platts
Poe
Pryce OH
Ramstad
Regula
Reichert
Renzi
Rogers AL
Rogers KY
Ros-Lehtinen
Saxton
Schmidt
Shays
Shimkus
Simpson
Smith NJ
Smith TX
Stearns
Turner 
Upton
Walden OR
Walsh NY
Wamp
Weller
Whitfield
Wilson
Wolf
Young AK
Young FL

So back on December 19th I brought the blogosphre  the 50 Republican House seats  I thought would most likely flip to the Democrats in the next election. I also promised to update this list once a month.  One of the major reason I am able to keep track of  the candidates and races  is because of the tremendous work of Ron Gunzburger’s  at www.politics1.com. I wrote this diary both to look at his work and also to announce that is website is now cleared and already doing a good job covering the 2008 Presidential race as well as the beginning of coverage of the 2008 congressional races.  This coverage will be invaluable in my being able to bring update coverage of taking even more Republican seats.  So this is a thanks and encouragement for everyone else here to visit politics1.com
 

(I don’t agree with every name on this list, but this is a strong diary and good food for thought. – promoted by DavidNYC)

Now it is entirely possible that there are more than Ten  Democratic Challengers who ran this time who  would make ideal candidates against the same opponent in 2008.  It is important to remember that out of 30 Democratic pick ups, just four came in re-matches, and in challenger rematches the two most closely watched, PA 6 and CT 4 were rare loses in an otherwise near East coast sweep.  It is important to remember that simply being the nominee last time should not mean the nomination should be yours for the asking the next time. That said the sheer number of close calls means that some of these candidates deserve another look. It is that sprit I present the Ten who should run again, as well five honorable mentions candidates who should be viewed seriously if not automatically favorably if they declare.

1.  Larrry Kissell NC 8
  The fact that Larry Kissell has already committed to another run makes this choice relatively simple. Still when use lose by  around 4,00 votes against a long term incumbent with that large a spending gap something is happening.  Kissell was supposed to be a third tier nobody and now he is a clear netroots hero.  Congressman Robin Hayes will also find life more difficult with no one there who can tell him exactly how to vote.  The district is winnable by the numbers also. Larry Kissell for congress.

2.  Nancy Skinner MI 9
  This is probably the greatest under-target in the nation and for that very reason Nancy Skinner should be given another shot in this district should she want it.  One huge accomplishment of hers was to run through the considerable about of money Congressman Knollenberg had stored up over years and years. She ran a very good race and needs another chance.  It also be noted this race was missed almost completely by the mainstream blog’s that could have pushed it higher up. We might have missed a win here, as surely as the DCCC did.

3.  Charlie Brown CA 4
This is a somewhat no brainier as the cloud of doubt of Congressman Doolittle continues to grow. Charlie Brown was able  to run an extremely competitive race and He makes a great contrast to John Doolittle. I am excited for round 2

4.  Linda Stender NJ 7
  This was a very close race that and I believe Linda Stender to be the best possible candidate.  Mike Ferguson is the type of member who gets weaker in the minority.  Linda Stender could very well knock him off.

5.  Darcy Burner WA 8
  This race is extremely similar to the race just above. Relatively junior members just hold on and with a change in climate after the midterm, Congressman Reichert doesn’t have all his friends to get his back.  He seems more suitable for the transition than Mike Ferguson, but the district is more democratic. Darcy Burner proved herself as a candidate this cycle.

6.  Dan Seals IL 10
  This was a slight under target and the 53% for Mark Kirk shows that might well have been a mistake. Dan Seals ran a very good campaign with a positive results and there are already rumblings that Mark Kirk is going to try and move up or out.  Dan Seals should go right back to putting pressure on Congressman Kirk

7.  Tessa Hafen NV 3
  Probably one of the more heart-breaking loses in the country as Jon Porter won with only 47% of the Vote. Tessa Hafen got 46% if she  can just find a way to consolidate the Anti-Porter vote. I think she could very well. She certainly earned the right by taking a race others has given up on.

8.  Gary Truaner WY AL
  Barbara Cubin is one of the worst members of Congress by fire.  She ran under 50% last time and is generally not liked. This will potentially make her vulnerable to a Republican primary challenger who would then be more likely to win the general. Gary Truaner did run a great campaign but  Wyoming is just an  extremely difficult place to pull off.

9.  Larry Grant ID 1
  This is probably the greatest shame because it is hard to beat  a Republican incumbent in Idaho. No matter who it is. That Bill Sali won means he is going to be extremely difficult to beat now that he is a Congressman. Still Larry Grant’s tough fight in the state would be a great value too it.

10. Charles Dertinger PA 15
This is probably my most difficult call. Charlie Dent needs a really good challenger. Charles Dertinger did everything right, except he raised no money. He could very well be the next cycle’s Paul Hodes but he also might simply be someone who can’t raise money at all.  He would benefit from a primary challenger who will force him to raise some money, but he should probably be given another shot. No matter what happens this district needs to have a giant bulls-eye on it.

Honorable Mentions
Erica Massa NY 29, Dan Maffei NY 25 John Pavich IL 11  NC 5 Roger Sharpe  Mary Jo Kilroy OH 15