In recent days, several folks have asked for a clearer description of the kind of discourse that’s acceptable at the Swing State Project, and what’s off-limits. Before I get into that, let me explain my personal feelings on the matter. In my not at all humble opinion, I think SSP is one of the best political sites on the Internet, and has been for a long time. A big part of the reason is the comments section – it’s intelligent, civil, thoughtful, and almost entirely free of fights and flamewars. There are good reasons why it is that way, and there are good reasons why it ought to stay that way.

So why are the comments here so great? Well, for one, just based on the general topic of this blog, we attract a lot of very knowledgeable people. But there are plenty of sites out there with super-smart userbases but comment boards that are a total morass. What makes SSP different is focus. We stay relentlessly focused on one subject and one subject only: political horserace analysis. The discussion is always on-point, and you are bound to learn something from reading the comments to every post. What’s more, I think that precisely because it’s not a free-for-all, people are inclined to be more thoughtful in what they say. And it’s a virtuous circle – good comments foster a good site which attracts more good people to visit.

The other thing that makes SSP so excellent – and this something that is both somewhat subconscious and also the thing that people sometimes have the greatest struggles with – is that we strive to be bloodless. What do I mean by that? I think the best analyses tend to avoid a discussion of personal feelings and emotions. We’re trying to describe the political world as it exists – not as what we wish or hope or fear. When we set aside our own emotions, I think we are at are most accurate and astute. On the flipside, when things become heated and emotional, that is when the conversation is most likely to derail.

Now, I am not at all suggesting we never express a personal preference – that would be ridiculous. But it’s important not to let those personal preferences get in the way of clear-eyed analysis. If you like Candidate A more than Candidate B, it’s crucial to be able to step back and acknowledge that Candidate B has a better shot of winning the primary, if that is in fact the case. The same is true for legislation. We don’t debate legislation on the merits here – there are plenty of other sites for that. But to the extent legislation affects the horserace, we need to be able to stand aside from our own feelings and let the cold hard facts take center stage.

I want to be clear: As far as “bloodlessness” goes, I’m not trying to lay out hard-and-fast rules here. Yes, we do have some rules: stick to the horserace; no insults or ad hominems; support your arguments with facts and links. Those are pretty straightforward. The intersection of analysis and emotion is a lot trickier, and we aren’t robots. And we’re also a partisan site, which means it’s generally going to be okay to bash Republicans (though even there, lines can be crossed). It’s usually on our own side of the fence that we run into trouble – primaries or intramural legislative battles.

Just noticed this story in Politico (apologies if this was already diaried somewhere here):

The DCCC raised $3.65 million for the month, and ended November with $15.35 million cash-on-hand. It still holds $2.66 million in debt from last election cycle.

The NRCC only raised $2.34 million in November, and spent $2.16 million, hardly adding to their overall cash total. The committee now has $4.35 million in its account, while still owing $2 million in debt.

I am feeling rather pessimistic about next year’s House races, but if the NRCC can’t build up a decent war chest now, with unemployment high and support for health care reform sinking, I don’t see them putting together a huge wave. They’re talking about targeting dozens of seats, but they’re a long way from having the money to do that.

On the other hand, they do seem to have a more enthusiastic base.  

Here is my entry for Round 1 of the Great Swing State Project Redistricting Contest – New York Edition.

Because New York’s population has not been keeping up with the national average, it is expected to lose a seat. In my map, that seat in Peter King’s NY-03. NY-03 on Long Island is eliminated and “moved” all the way to the other side of the State, where it reappears as the successor of Eric Massa’s NY-29. NY-01, NY-02, NY-04, NY-05, NY-06, and NY-18 all devour a piece of NY-03, though NY-06 and NY-04 get the toughest pieces of meat. But other than NY-29 being renumbered NY-03, all the district numbers correspond to their existing incumbents.

There are only 11 districts which voted less than 60% for Obama (NY-01, NY-20, NY-21, NY-22, NY-23, NY-24, NY-25, NY-26, NY-27, NY-28, NY-03), only 5 districts which voted less than 57% for Obama (NY-23, NY-24, NY-26, NY-27, NY-03), only 2 districts which voted less than 53% for Obama (NY-24, NY-26), and only one district that McCain actually won (NY-26).

All incumbents should live in their districts (or else live close enough that only a few precincts would need to be traded in order for them to live in their district), with the exception of Jerold Nadler (NY-08). He already lives at the far northern edge of his district, and it gets sucked further into Brooklyn. Oh yeah, and I suppose Peter King is also an exception – he does not live in his district any more because he does not have a district any more.

All other contest rules are obeyed (No touch point contiguity, VRA districts fully respected, etc).

---

Upstate

Upstate, my goal was to strengthen Democratic incumbents to the degree possible without significantly endangering other Democratic incumbents. For example, I wanted to make NY-23, more Democratic not at the expense of turning NY-21 into a seat that is potentially competitive. I also wanted to reduce the appearance of gerrymandering in this part of the State, partly because gerrymandering is the most conspicuous in upstate New York. Because upstate has a disproportionate ratio of land mass to population, people just looking at a map of Congressional districts will naturally focus on upstate when determining how gerrymandered New York looks. I also wanted to keep at least the core of all the existing districts, which is challenging because much of the population loss has been in upstate New York. Because I did not eliminate a district upstate, all the upstate districts feel a substantial force sucking them towards NYC.

---

NY-27

Incumbent: Brian Higgins (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	88%	5%	1%	4%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	54%	44%
New District	55%	43%
Change	+1%	-1%

Given the fact that Erie County is large enough that it has to be split no matter what we do, and given my desire to strengthen Eric Massa’s NY-29 (renumbered to NY-03), I opted to largely keep NY-27 as it is. The only changes are that it gives up some of Buffalo’s eastern suburbs (most significantly Cheektowaga) to NY-03, and picks up Niagara Falls and Tonawanda to the north. As a result, NY-27 becomes marginally more Democratic and safer for Higgins. Obama did not improve by much here over Kerry, and Buffalo may be trending slightly Republican, but Higgins should continue to be favored here.

---

NY-03

Incumbent: Eric Massa (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	82%	14%	2%	1%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	48%	51%
New District	55%	44%
Change	+7%	-7%

Eric Massa’s district (old NY-29, renamed NY-03) is difficult to deal with. Massa lives in Corning in Steuben County, which is very inconvenient because the counties in that area are some of the most heavily Republican in New York State. Because I wanted to clean up Rochester and because the districts in Western New York have to be pushed generally to the East, sending the district north did not really work. I tried making an Ithaca-Binghampton based district for Massa, but that does not really work either because without Ithaca, it is difficult to avoid weakening NY-24. Also, if you make an Ithaca-Binghampton/Elmira/Corning district for Massa, then you have to waste Democratic votes in the Buffalo area unless you keep a modified Rochester-Buffalo version of NY-28 (which in turn means that Rochester is still split asunder). All this should make the point that western New York is a very delicate balancing act, and there is not really any great obvious way to draw the districts. Reorganizing things so that Massa’s district goes to Buffalo seems to be the least worst option.

In any case, Massa’s district swings Democratic by a net of 14 points. About half the population is in Erie County, so he could potentially face a primary challenge, but assuming Massa prevails in any primary and that people in Buffalo get to like him, he should have an excellent chance to hold on to this district for a long time to come.

---

NY-26

Incumbent: Chris Lee (R)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	94%	2%	1%	2%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	46%	52%
New District	43%	56%
Change	-3%	+3%

Now we come to the token Republican district in New York State. Chris Lee should be quite safe in NY-26, representing a district that stretches all the way from the Buffalo Suburbs to the Rochestere suburbs and even to outlying areas around Binghamton. But mostly, this district is rural. It would be possible to make it more heavily Republican and to help make neighboring districts (particularly NY-03) slightly more Democratic in several places, but not without splitting many more counties and making upstate New York look much more gerrymandered.

---

NY-28

Incumbent: Louise Slaughter (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	77%	13%	3%	5%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	69%	30%
New District	59%	39%
Change	-10%	+9%

Rochester is put back together, into one fairly safe Democratic district. Though this NY-28 is substantially less Democratic than the previous Rochester to Buffalo serpent, it is still Democratic enough for Louise Slaughter or whichever Democrat succeeds her to win easily.

---

NY-25

Incumbent: Dan Maffei (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	88%	6%	2%	2%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	56%	43%
New District	57%	42%
Change	+1%	-1%

NY-25 remains firmly anchored in the Syracuse area. Onadonga County continues to dominate the district. But instead of heading west to the Rochester suburbs, NY-25 now heads south to the outskirts of Binghamton. If there is further population loss after another 10 years, NY-25 could become a true Syracuse-Binghamton district tracing I-81. Maffei should be slightly safer in this marginally more Democratic district.

---

NY-24

Incumbent: Mike Arcuri (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	91%	3%	2%	2%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	51%	48%
New District	52%	46%
Change	+1%	-2%

NY-24 becomes swings a net of 3 points Democratic, but realistically remains a swing district. NY-24 is composed of two major pieces. To the east of Syracuse is the area surrounding Utica (Oneida, Herkimer, and Otsego Counties). To the west of Syracuse is the finger lakes region (Tompkins, Auburn, and Seneca Counties, with the city of Geneva thrown in). The old version of NY-24 connected these two pieces by running to the south of Syracuse, while the new NY-24 connects the pieces by running to the north of Syracuse, through Oswego County.

NY-24 could still run to the South through Cortland and Chenango Counties, but then NY-25 would have to take Oswego County, and would have to split the bothe Cayuga and Oneida counties with NY-24. That would make NY-25 1 point less Democratic and NY-24 1 point more Democratic than my version, but it also looks much more gerrymandered.

In any case, Arcuri can’t really complain, because his district adds Ithaca and becomes more Democratic, even if only a little bit more Democratic. This is not necessarily a safe Democratic seat for perpetuity, but Mike Arcuri has a good chance of holding it.

---

NY-23

Incumbent: Bill Owens (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	93%	2%	1%	2%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	52%	46%
New District	53%	46%
Change	+1%	0%

NY-23 becomes a much more compact and ever so slightly more Democratic district firmly based in New York’s North Country. The district consists of all of Jefferson, Lewis, St. Lawrence, Hamilton, Franklin, Clinton, and Essex counties, along with nearly all of Warren and Saratoga Counties, taken from the old NY-20.

It is very tempting to give NY-23 some Democratic precincts in the Albany/Schenectady area. That could be done, but at the cost of a more gerrymandered looking map and possibly at the cost of pushing NY-21 towards competitiveness, which I wanted to avoid. One potential problem is that Doug Hoffman is drawn into the district. But if Owens can win in 2010, he ought to be able to win this new district in 2012 as well.

---

NY-21

Incumbent: Paul Tonko (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	86%	7%	2%	3%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	58%	40%
New District	57%	41%
Change	-1%	+1%

NY-21 stays almost entirely the same. The only difference is that it now takes in all of Fulton County, and slightly more of Rensselaer County. The upshot is that it swings a net of 2 points Republican, but remains a reasonably strong Democratic leaning district. Tonko is no less safe than he is now.

---

NY-20

Incumbent: Scott Murphy (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	80%	8%	3%	7%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	51%	48%
New District	58%	41%
Change	+7%	-7%

NY-20 is one of the chief beneficiaries of the magnetic force pulling upstate districts towards New York City. A former swing district becomes much more solidly Democratic. Though a substantial portion of the district (Washington, Columbia, Greene, and parts of Rensselaer and Dutchess Counties) remains, the population center drifts down further towards the NYC suburbs, with the addition of Poughkeepsie and other towns along the East bank of the Hudson all the way to the edge of Yonkers. Murphy’s home in Glens Falls is included – barely – in the far north of the district (yes, that looks like touch point contiguity, but it’s not if you zoom in). It is quite possible that Scott Murphy could face a primary challenge from the southern end of the district. But regardless of which particular person NY-20 sends to Washington or whether that person lives in the north or the south of the district, that person would very likely be a Democrat.

---

NY-22

Incumbent: Maurice Hinchey (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	79%	7%	2%	10%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	59%	39%
New District	57%	42%
Change	-2%	+1%

NY-22 loses both Ithaca and Poughkeepsie, but becomes only marginally more Republican. It expands a little bit down the western bank of the Hudson, through Orange and into Rockland County, but (with the exception of the losses previously mentioned) this district remains substantially the same. Hinchey will be just fine.

---

NY-19

Incumbent: John Hall (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	62%	20%	3%	12%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	51%	48%
New District	60%	39%
Change	+9%	-9%

Like NY-20, NY-19 becomes much more Democratic as it is sucked into Westchester County. As with NY-20, the incumbent (John Hall) lives in the very north of the district, in Dover Plains. NY-19 is now entirely to the east of the Hudson river, and it includes White Plains, Scarsdale, and Mount Vernon, as well as part of Yonkers and a bit of the North Bronx. Fully 63% of the district will be new to Hall, so he could theoretically face a primary from someone who lives in southern Westchester county, but Hall should be reasonably well suited for the new NY-19.

---

NY-17

Incumbent: Elliot Engel (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	57%	13%	4%	23%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	72%	28%
New District	61%	38%
Change	-11%	+10%

NY-17 becomes substantially more Republican, but not so much as to put Elliot Engel in any real jeapordy. Mount Vernon and part of the Bronx are traded for part of Orange County and an expanded piece of Rockland County. This district would be reasonably safe for most Democrats, and should be even more safe for Engel.

---

NY-18

Incumbent: Nita Lowey (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	59%	16%	4%	19%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	62%	38%
New District	62%	37%
Change	%	-1%

Finally we come to NY-18, which is now a hybrid Westchester, Long Island, and Bronx district. But mostly, it is a Long Island Sound district. despite helping to dilute competitive and Republican leaning territory on Long Island, this new NY-18 is actually very slightly more Democratic than the previous version. From Nita Lowey’s home in Harrison (in Westchester County), the 18th travels down Interstate 95 and into the Bronx, where (after picking up some choice Democratic precincts), it crosses into Queens via the Throgs Neck and Bronx-Whiteside bridges. Via the Cross Island Parkway, NY-18 crosses into Nassau County, where it picks up suburbs around Glen Cove while skirting along the coast. It continues to skirt along the Long Island Sound into Suffolk County, where it picks up McCain voting Smithtown, keeping those voters out of NY-01 and NY-02. This district substantially different from the current NY-18, but Lowey should be fine – she previously represented part of the Bronx, and should feel quite at home in northern Long Island as well.

---

Long Island

On Long Island, my goal was not just to safely eliminate GOP leaning NY-03, but to do so while simultaneously avoiding the creation of anything that Republicans would have a chance of winning in anything other than a very strong GOP wave year. Through creative line drawing, the least Democratic district on Long Island is now NY-01 (57% Obama), while all the other districts voted at least 60% for Obama. It would certainly be possible to draw more compact districts on Long Island, but I doubt it would be possible to draw districts that are much more compact but are all equally Democratic. I tried to maximize Democratic strength without touching anything beyond Queens, and I think I achieved that about as well as can be done.

---

NY-01

Incumbent: Tim Bishop (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	75%	10%	2%	10%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	52%	48%
New District	57%	43%
Change	+5%	-5%

NY-01 swings 10 points Democratic, thanks to some help from Lowey in NY-18 (taking Smithtown) and Steve Israel in NY-02 (taking part of Brookhaven). To make up the population lost to those districts, NY-01 heads west along the barrier islands on the south of Long Island to pick up Democratic voters in Long Beach and the Rockaways. The result is a Democratic district rather than a swing district, though NY-01 could still be competitive under some conceivable circumstances.

---

NY-02

Incumbent: Steve Israel (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	79%	5%	2%	13%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	56%	43%
New District	59%	40%
Change	+3%	-3%

That NY-02 helps NY-01 to become more Democratic does not necessarily mean that NY-02 has to become less Democratic. In fact, this version of NY-02 becomes a net of 6% more Democratic as well. It does so by ceding some of the more GOP friendly parts of Brookhaven to NY-05, and extending just a bit further into Nassau County to pick up strongly Democratic precincts around Hempstead. Steve Israel should have no trouble winning this district, even if Pete King were to attempt to run in it.

---

NY-04

Incumbent: Carolyn McCarthy (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	58%	19%	6%	13%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	58%	41%
New District	61%	39%
Change	+3%	-2%

Remember, there’s no NY-03 on Long Island any more (it’s now Massa’s district), so we skip straight to NY-04. Like NY-01 and NY-02 before it, NY-04 becomes more Democratic. It does this even while taking a pretty big bite out of King’s old district. It does this by giving up the biggest McCain voting parts of the current NY-04 (around Garden City) to NY-09, while moving into Queens, picking up areas on the periphery of the current NY-06. I also sent a finger north for the purpose of picking up McCarthy’s home in Mineola, though I am not sure if I included the right precincts or not. Pete King should live in NY-06 now, but it would probably make the most sense for him to try running in this district, if he bothered to run at all. This would set up a McCarthy-King matchup which just happens to be rigged very much in McCarthy’s favor. With King out of the picture, there would be no Republican US Representatives left on Long Island.

---

NY-05

Incumbent: Gary Ackerman (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	53%	4%	22%	17%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	63%	36%
New District	61%	38%
Change	-2%	+2%

NY-05 becomes only modestly more Republican. It stretches all the way from Huntington in Suffolk County to Astoria in western Queens. If NY-05 were sent up to the Bronx instead of Astoria, it could actually be even more Democratic (and NY-07 could become a more purely Queens based district), but I decided against that on the grounds that there was really very little need to alter the basic arrangement of Crowley’s district. Ackerman should be just fine in this district, and in the unlikely event that King tries to run in NY-05, Ackerman should be able to easily beat him.

---

NY-06

Incumbent: Gregory Meeks (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	41%	50%	1%	5%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	89%	11%
New District	69%	31%
Change	-20%	+20%

NY-06 is really more of an NYC district, but I am including it under the Long Island heading because of the important role it plays in the demolition of Pete King’s district. NY-06 swings massively towards the GOP by a net of 40%, but is still an extremely safe Democratic district. In the east, NY-06 starts in the middle of Brooklyn, taking a nice big bite of African American voters from the heart of the current NY-10 and NY-11. The reason for sending NY-06 into Brooklyn is to pick up as many black voters there as possible while also keeping NY-10 and NY-11 as VRA districts, for the purpose of leaving a larger number of African American Democratic voters free in Queens to help make NY-01, NY-04, NY-09 more Democratic.

Through a thin 1 precinct wide corridor, NY-06 enters Jamaica Bay, and comes out on the other side at JFK International Airport. From there, it picks up just enough African Americans to make the district black majority (but no more than are strictly necessary), reenters Jamaica Bay, and comes out at Inwood. It then picks up a few of the more Republican precincts in the Rockaways. It may or may not pick up Meeks’ home. If it does not include his home and it is necessary to include his home, it should be just a matter of switching a few precincts between NY-01 and NY-06 to fix the issue.

In Nassau County, the NY-06 heads steadily East along the South Shore of Long Island, picking up the most Republican precincts it can find along the way, often traveling through a nice narrow 1 precinct corridor. Naturally the most heavily Republican parts of Pete King’s old district (around Massapequa) are included in NY-06.

NY-06 continues east into Suffolk county, where it continues to pick up all of the most Republican precincts that it can find, most of which used to be in NY-03. The result is a black majority VRA district which just so happens to contain Pete King’s home and all of the strongest GOP parts of his old district. I don’t know how this could possibly have happened. Surely it was entirely coincidental, accidental, and unintended.

---

New York City

New York City is something of a tangled mess, particularly in Brooklyn and Queens. To some extent that is unavoidable because of the requirements of the voting rights act. But in some cases I went beyond that (for example, by giving NY-13 the most Democratic possible parts of Brooklyn) for partisan gain. Manhattan and the Bronx are relatively un-gerrymandered, because it is not really necessary to do so in order to make nearby districts more Democratic.

---

NY-09

Incumbent: Anthony Weiner (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	50%	8%	16%	19%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	55%	45%
New District	62%	37%
Change	+7%	-8%

NY-09 both helps out with making the Long Island seats more Demacratic and itself becomes more Democratic (or at least more Obama friendly). It is now a Queens-Nassau County seat rather than a Queens-Brooklyn seat. In Queens the district consists of much of the area around Jamaica, liberal Jewish areas around Forest Hills, and some other Democratic areas from the old NY-06 and NY-05. As mentioned previously, it crosses into Nassau County to pick up the most strongly Republican parts of the old NY-04. The Jewish population may have declined somewhat, but Weiner should be fine in this new district.

---

NY-10

Incumbent: Ed Towns (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	28%	50%	3%	16%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	91%	9%
New District	80%	19%
Change	-11%	+10%

I challenge you to tell me precisely what sort of serpentine monster NY-10 looks like. It meanders all around Brooklyn, picking up just enough African Americans to make it a black majority district, while also picking up all of the most Republican precincts that it can find. Ed Towns probably lives in this district. If not, it should be easy to draw him in.

---

NY-11

Incumbent: Yvette Clarke (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	28%	50%	3%	16%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	91%	9%
New District	77%	22%
Change	-14%	+13%

Like NY-10, NY-11 is shamelessly gerrymandered, combining African American neighborhoods with Orthodox Jewish and McCain precincts, meandering as much as is necessary, and then meandering even more than that. Yvette Clarke should have no difficulty winning in this district.

---

NY-12

Incumbent: Nydia Velázquez (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	22%	7%	16%	51%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	86%	13%
New District	75%	24%
Change	-9%	+11%

Hispanic population growth has been high enough that it is very easy to meet the VRA requirements for NY-12. The district no longer has to cross into Manhattan and no longer has to go as much into Brooklyn – this district is now mostly in Queens. There is also enough room to spare for it to pick up a pretty good helping of less Democratic and predominantly white precincts from Anthony Weiner and Gary Ackerman without lowering the Hispanic percentage too much. Velázquez remains completely safe.

---

NY-13

Incumbent: Michael McMahon (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	64%	9%	6%	19%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	49%	51%
New District	62%	37%
Change	+13%	-14%

NY-13 still includes all of Staten Island. It still crosses the Verrazano Narrows bridge to get to Brooklyn. But from there, it heads due north, through Sunset Park and towards the area around Carroll Gardens. The Brooklyn portion of the district is now very heavily Democratic (90% for Obama), and that makes the district as a whole pretty safely Democratic. As it turns out, it is not even necessary to send NY-13 into Manhattan in order to swing NY-13 27 points in the Democratic direction, from a McCain district to a 62% Obama district. All you have to do is mix up which bit of Brooklyn Staten Island is combined with.

---

NY-07

Incumbent: Joseph Crowley (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	44%	13%	7%	32%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	79%	20%
New District	76%	24%
Change	-3%	+4%

NY-07 remains a Queens-Bronx hybrid district. The Triborough bridge connects the pieces. Though some areas (e.g. Astoria and Greenpoint from NY-14) are new, much of the district is basically the same. Crowley himself could live in either NY-05, NY-12, or NY-07, but if he does not live in NY-07, it would be easy to draw him in. Regardless, he is safe.

I should also note that it is quite easy to turn NY-07 into a plurality Hispanic or even a majority Hispanic district, without even touching NY-12 or using Red Hook/Sunset Park (now in NY-13), simply by exchanging some territory with some combination of NY-14 (the Lower East Side), NY-16 (pretty much any part of the district), and/or NY-15 (by either heading into Northern Manhattan directly or by pushing NY-16 further into Manhattan). Though Crowley might be able to win such a district in a Democratic primary, it would not really be “incumbent protection” for him. But it would be good for Hispanic voting rights, and there will very probably be controversy over how NY-07 is redistricted, and how the Hispanic population is dealt with.

---

NY-08

Incumbent: Jerold Nadler (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	58%	4%	20%	14%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	74%	26%
New District	68%	32%
Change	-3%	+4%

NY-08 remains a Manhattan/Brooklyn hybrid, though only 1/7 of the district is in Manhattan, while 6/7 are in Brooklyn. Even without the Manhattan part of the district, NY-08 voted 61% for Obama. Because Jerold Nadler lives in the Upper West Side, he unfortunately no longer lives in his district. I would suggest that he think about moving to Brooklyn. This is the only case where I drew a Democratic incumbent out of their district. Other than that, Nadler is fine. His district is a little bit less Democratic, but he is in no danger.

---

NY-14

Incumbent: Carolyn Maloney (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	65%	4%	15%	13%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	78%	21%
New District	80%	19%
Change	+2%	-2%

Maloney’s NY-14 contracts entirely within Manhattan and becomes slightly more Democratic.

---

NY-15

Incumbent: Charlie Rangel (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	29%	30%	4%	35%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	93%	6%
New District	91%	8%
Change	-2%	+2%

NY-15 gives up heavily Hispanic parts of northern Manhattan to the 16th district, and extends southwards into the upper West Side. This reduces the Hispanic population a bit, and though it is still a plurality Hispanic district, these changes probably slightly increase effective African American “control” of the district. If the ethics issues are cleared up, Rangel is safe. If not, it’s possible he faces trouble in a Democratic primary.

---

NY-16

Incumbent: Jose Serrano (D)

	White	Black	Asian	Hispanic
Race	5%	26%	2%	65%

	Obama	McCain
Old District	95%	5%
New District	94%	6%
Change	-1%	+1%

NY-16 extends into northern Manhattan, but otherwise remains firmly anchored in the Bronx. This district becomes slightly more Republican, which is assuredly good news for John McCain and the Republican Party, and bad news for Jose Serrano. How can Serrano be expected to win when there is a full 17% (relative) percent increase in the number of Republican voters in his district?

I’m pretty sad and disappointed that I once again have to perform my least favorite activity. After the derail in this thread, I’ve suspended several users for a week. Those accounts will have access restored next Saturday. Also, one user who had received repeated warnings not to engage in derails (and promised me several times that he would stop doing so) has been permanently banned for his participation in this latest derail.

I will at some point put together an FAQ of some sort outlining my vision for the site. But everyone involved in that thread was a longtime user who knew exactly what was and wasn’t okay here. There weren’t many political sites you could go to during the 2007-2008 presidential primaries and avoid the ceaseless wars between competing factions. SSP was one of those few. And this site will remain a haven for all its days, whether it’s healthcare or some other contentious, emotional issue that crops up.

First, please follow our new-and-improved Twitter feed. Rather than have our RSS feed automatically pump out each post, we now lovingly handcraft our tweets from the finest artisanal electrons. So follow SSP today.

Second, if you haven’t already seen it, check out our awesome redistricting contest. There’s babka in it for the winner (natch). UPDATE: Check it out – we have our first entry, from MattTX2. Nice work!

And finally, check out Carly Fiorina addressing her supporters in Bakersfield, Calif.:

Carlyfornia dreaming indeed.

Since former Governor Terry Branstad started campaigning for governor again, I’ve been hoping that Bob Vander Plaats could capture the attention of national right-wingers looking to “take back” the GOP from establishment types. Democratic incumbent Chet Culver would be much better off facing Vander Plaats in the general election.

Vander Plaats is campaigning as a more reliable conservative than Branstad. Among other things, he promises to bypass Iowa’s constitutional amendment process, issuing an executive order on day one of his administration to halt same-sex marriage in Iowa until the public has had a chance to vote on the issue.

Self-styled constitutional expert David Barton is one of the few “scholars” who believes a governor can overturn a state Supreme Court ruling by executive order. This week he endorsed Vander Plaats.

From Barton’s statement:

“Bob Vander Plaats epitomizes the leadership our Founding Fathers envisioned when they stood up for our individual liberties,” Barton said in a prepared statement. “He knows that it’s the hard work and unfettered creative spirit of individuals made this country and states like Iowa great. He knows that more bureaucracies, more government employees, higher taxes and increased government spending will crush Iowa. And, he’ll articulate that message in winning fashion.”

Barton founded the socially conservative WallBuilders organization, based in Dallas. Here’s some background on his vision for America, chock full of Biblical interpretations supporting right-wing public policies. Barton gave the keynote address at the Iowa Christian Alliance fundraiser this fall (click that link to watch videos). His organization hosts a large annual “ProFamily Legislators Conference.”

Barton’s endorsement may help Vander Plaats raise money from around the country as well as recruit volunteers in Iowa. Vander Plaats will particularly need financial support from out of state in order to compete with Branstad, who built relationships with many major donors and local activists during his four terms as governor.

Vander Plaats already has the backing of former presidential candidate and current Fox TV host Mike Huckabee as well as pop culture icon Chuck Norris. Vander Plaats also was featured on the cover of Focus on the Family’s national magazine in November.

Could Vander Plaats become the darling of wingnuts nationwide? Branstad is not a social moderate, but he has flip-flopped on some tax and budget-related issues in a way that won’t impress the teabagger set.

• AR-Sen: Shortest Senate campaign ever. Former Arkansas Farm Bureau president Stanley Reed, about one week into his campaign, dropped out today, citing health reasons. Reed, with his resume and connections, was considered a very credible candidate when stacked up against the rest of the ragtag band of misfits running for the GOP. On the Dem side comes the intriguing news that the SEIU is paying down Lt. Gov. Bill Halter‘s campaign debt. Daily Kos’s Jed seems optimistic that the SEIU is facilitating a primary run against Blanche Lincoln (they said he “has a very bright political future,” although not specifically referencing the Senate race), although, considering there were rumors that the SEIU’s anti-Gilbert Baker ad was interpreted as a sign to Lincoln that they had her back (in exchange for her cooperation on an HCR cloture vote), it’s also possible this could be a carrot from the SEIU to Halter to stay out of the primary. This one’s worth keeping an eye on.

• AZ-Sen: This might be a clue that there’s some growing substance to the rumors that ex-Rep. J.D. Hayworth is gearing up for a primary run against John McCain. He’s in Washington DC this week, meeting with potential supporters including conservative advocacy group Citizens United.

• CT-Sen: I’m not sure how much sway former Democratic state party chair Ed Marcus has over Chris Dodd or anybody else, but he’s gone on the record advocating that Dodd hang it up and make way for Richard Blumenthal. Dodd’s people responded that Marcus has some sort of old grudge against Dodd.

• KY-Sen: Um, whoops. Rand Paul’s campaign manager Chris Hightower had to resign his post yesterday after local blog Barefoot and Progressive found racist comments on Hightower’s MySpace page (and also video of performances by Hightower’s death metal band… gotta love those crazy libertarians). (Wait… MySpace? Srsly?) Primary rival Trey Grayson’s campaign wasted no time jumping on this, adding some fuel to their argument that Paul isn’t coming from mainstream Republican turf.

• IL-Gov: Rasmussen added some gubernatorial numbers to their Illinois sample, finding fairly comfortable leads for both incumbent Pat Quinn and Dem comptroller Dan Hynes against their Republican opposition. It wouldn’t be a Rasmussen poll without something inexplicable in it, though, and this time it’s the decision not to poll former AG Jim Ryan, who’s probably the Republican field’s frontrunner. Still, Quinn beats state party chair Andy McKenna 41-33, state Sen. Bill Brady 45-30, and state Sen. Kirk Dillard 41-30, while Hynes beats McKenna 43-30, Brady 46-27, and Dillard 42-29. Interesting to see Hynes overperforming Quinn in the general, even as Hynes looks unlikely to make it out of the primary; that may have to do with some Blago-related stench coming off of Quinn (Blago’s ex-LG, although they had absolutely nothing to do with each other), or just the reversal of positions, where the former reformer Quinn is now the insider and the well-connected Hynes is now the outsider. In the Dem primary, long-time SoS Jesse White threw his endorsement to Quinn. The Dem field also shrank to only Quinn and Hynes as the two minor candidates were vanquished; attorney Ed Scanlon was knocked off the ballot, while activist Dock Walls withdrew.

• NY-Gov: It had looked like Erie County Exec Chris Collins had gaffed his way out of contention for a possible run for the GOP gubernatorial nomination (after a bizarre tirade against Assembly speaker Sheldon Silver). But with Rudy Giuliani pretty clearly out of the field and ex-Rep. Rick Lazio exciting absolutely nobody, it looks like Collins may still take a whack at it. He just hired a campaign consulting firm run by a former Giuliani aide.

• IL-10: One of the four GOPers in the field in the 10th, Bill Cadigan, has dropped out; without state Rep. Beth Coulson’s name rec or the money of Dick Green or Bob Dold, he really didn’t have a foot in the door. Speaking of Bob Dold, Bob Dold is now on the air with a TV spot touting Bob Dold’s conservative economic views. Bob Dold!

• MN-06: If there’s someone out there who seems like she’d be one of those crazy bosses, it’s Rep. Michele Bachmann. She’s had a terrible time holding onto chiefs of staff, and now she’s facing a rupture with her entire fundraising group, described as a “defection” (although it’s not clear where they’re defecting to).

• NH-02: This isn’t going to endear ex-Rep. Charlie Bass to the teabag set, as he seeks to reclaim his seat. Bass just got a $2,500 check from NRCC chair Pete Sessions’ PAC. The anti-establishment right already has to be inclined to support right-wing radio talker Jennifer Horn over the moderate Bass.

• OH-15: Ex-state Sen. (and 2008 loser) Steve Stivers won’t get the GOP primary to himself; he’s facing a challenge from the right from John Adams, who’s labeling himself as the “conservative alternative.” Stivers also faces third-party right-winger David Ryon in the general, similar to what hamstrung him last time and let Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy squeak into office.

• OH-17: Ex-Rep. (and ex-con) Jim Traficant is in the news again, sounding revved up to, well, yell and gesticulate a lot, as always. He’s also still talking about another run for Congress, although he’s not sure where. He said he’d circulate nominating petitions in three different districts. His former seat in the 17th is likeliest, although so too is the neighboring 6th.

• PA-10: The race in the 10th has been slow to take shape, compared with most other red-leaning districts held by Democrats. But with state Rep. Mike Peifer recently having announced he’s interested in a race against Rep. Chris Carney, now someone else potentially higher up the food chain is checking it out too: former US Attorney Tom Marino, who already (wisely) passed on the race in 2008.

• PA-15: Here’s one more district with teabagger troubles for the NRCC and the Republican establishment. Rep. Charlie Dent is facing his toughest challenge yet from Democratic mayor of Bethlehem John Callahan, and now comes word of a challenge in the GOP primary from 9/12 movement member Matthew Benol. There’s also a third-party teabagger awaiting Dent in the general, Jake Towne.

• TN-06: State Sen. Jim Tracy seemed to have an early edge on securing the GOP nod in the now-open 6th, vacated recently by Democratic Rep. Bart Gordon. That was bolstered by his recent announcement that he’d already raised $100K in funds just this week, and that he’d gotten the endorsement of fellow state Sen. (and potential primary rival) Bill Ketron. However, he’s got some competition from another fellow state Senator now: Diane Black announced that she’s joining the race too. (Black is from suburban Gallatin, while Tracy is from more rural Shelbyville.)

• TN-08: Republican candidate Stephen Fincher had been successfully playing the “I’m just a humble farmer/gospel singer who’s never even been to Washington” role for a while, it seems, but suddenly the teabaggers are turning their wrath on even him, too. They’re taking an issue with his fundraising, as almost all of his money is coming from nearby farm families who’ve maxed-out on donations (which is a good sign, as his big haul so far was just him picking the low-hanging fruit; now the real test comes). What’s alarming to the anti-pork crowd is that how deep in the pocket of Big Ag he seems to be; his supporters have received a cumulative $80,000,000 in farm subsidies, and Fincher himself has gotten $6,000,000 in farm subsidies over the years, including $800,000 in 2007 alone.

• WA-03: The Democratic field seems to be solidifying, with Olympia-area state Rep. Brendan Williams, a frequently-mentioned possible candidate, deciding against a run. With state Sen. Craig Pridemore and state Rep. Deb Wallace both in, the two main candidates are both from Vancouver instead. Also worth noting: peace activist Cheryl Crist is in the race for the Dems too. Crist primaried Brian Baird in 2008, doing well at the activist-dominated nominating convention but making little impact in the actual primary.

• GA-St. House: It’s official; David Ralston is the new Republican speaker of Georgia’s House, following the suicide attempt and resignation of former speaker Glenn Richardson. If you’re looking for broader implications, it takes Ralston’s name out of contention in the open seat in GA-09, where he’d been rumored to be interested in a run.

• Demographics: Josh Goodman does some neat number-tweaking, overlaying Census projections onto the 2008 presidential election to try and predict the 2052 election. Assuming that racial groups keep voting for the same parties at the same proportions, he projects 58-40 Democratic edge. Of course, that’s easier said than done, as, for starters, Hispanics could return to their 2004-level GOP performance; also, as he points out, “Heck, in 40 years the Tea Party and the Green Party might be the major players in contesting the all-important cyborg vote.”

Quinnipiac (12/8-14, registered voters, 9/22-28 in parentheses):

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 44 (42)

Pat Toomey (R): 44 (43)

Don’t know: 11 (13)

Joe Sestak (D): 35 (35)

Pat Toomey (R): 40 (38)

Don’t know: 22 (25)

(MoE: ±2.6%)

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 53 (44)

Joe Sestak (D): 30 (25)

Don’t know: 15 (28)

(MoE: ±3.9%)

Things have actually been pretty stable between Arlen Specter and Pat Toomey for the last few months; the previous two Q-polls gave a 1-pt. edge to Specter and then a 1-pt. edge to Toomey, and this month they’re flat-out tied. Specter’s problem, more than anything, is that everyone knows him, and they’re pretty even split on him (47/45 job approvals, with a re-elect of only 38%). Toomey puts up surprisingly high favorables (35/10), suggesting there’s lots of room for his negatives to go up once Specter starts filling in some of those blanks concerning Toomey’s Club for Growth nuttiness.

Joe Sestak still remains little-known, at 20/9, so the usual caveats about “room for growth” apply, but his head-to-head numbers seem to be eroding a little. He loses some ground against Toomey, and while he picked up some support in the Dem primary, Specter picked up even more support, pushing past 50%. A lot of that may have to do with Specter proving himself to a slice of the state’s liberals with his advocacy for the public option — which you’ve gotta wonder if he’d even be doing if he weren’t preoccupied with his left flank thanks to Sestak’s presence.

Quinnipiac (12/8-14, registered voters, 9/21-28 in parentheses):

Dan Onorato (D): 30 (28)

Tom Corbett (R): 45 (47)

Don’t know: 22 (24)

Jack Wagner (D): 33 (29)

Tom Corbett (R): 43 (44)

Don’t know: 23 (25)

Joe Hoeffel (D): 30 (NA)

Tom Corbett (R): 46 (NA)

Don’t know: 23 (NA)

(MoE: ±2.6%)

Dan Onorato (D): 14 (14)

Joe Hoeffel (D): 8 (12)

Jack Wagner (D): 7 (11)

Chris Doherty (D): 6 (8)

Tom Knox (D): 5 (5)

Don’t know: 59 (46)

(MoE: ±3.9%)

Tom Corbett (R): 38 (42)

Jim Gerlach (R): 12 (13)

Don’t know: 47 (43)

(MoE: ±4%)

Things look more dire in the Governor’s race, although it looks like a positive trend is underway as the Democratic candidates become (slightly) better known, and the numbers aren’t as bad as Rasmussen‘s data from earlier this week (which found, for instance, a 13-point spread on Corbett/Wagner).

The problem, as I’ve diagnosed at other times, is twofold: no one knows who any of the Democrats are (Auditor Jack Wagner has favorables of 22/5 and Allegheny Co. Exec Dan Onorato is at 18/9 — and the “don’t knows” in the Democratic primary are huge, and actually getting bigger) — but that part’s easily fixable, as the campaign season escalates. The other problem, though, is that AG Tom Corbett is constantly in the news with the Bonusgate investigation (which seems to climaxing conveniently timed with his gubernatorial campaign, not that I’d ever accuse anyone of orchestrating something like that…). Corbett manages to be the one wearing the white hat here (good for a 43/6 favorable), since he’s facing off against key figures in the state legislature, by far the least popular entity in the state (the lege gets a 25/64 approval, compared with Gov. Ed Rendell, who’s rebounding to a mediocre 43/49). There’s one other intangible the Dems have to overcome, too (although trends are meant to be broken, yadda yadda): the Governor’s chair changes between the parties like clockwork every eight years, with the same precision it does in Virginia.

The Pennsylvania governor’s seat is an important one for redistricting, but with it looking like there’s little chance of Dems flipping the GOP-held (30 R, 20 D) state Senate (after the Dems lost both special elections this year that offered potential pickups), it looks like we might be headed for a compromise map regardless of the gubernatorial race’s outcome. In fact, the Dems should emphasize shoring up their hold on the state House, where their edge is kind of shaky (104 D, 98 R). Simultaneous 2010 loss of the governor’s seat and the House would be disastrous; it would actually give the trifecta to the Republicans again, and they might actually be more successful with a GOP-controlled gerrymander this time than their 2000 dummymander that eventually wound up exploding in their faces.

RaceTracker: PA-Sen | PA-Gov

This is the third part of a series of posts analyzing the swing state Pennsylvania. Part four can be found here.



Philadelphia’s Suburbs

There used to be a time when Republicans could count on Philadelphia’s suburbs to counter Democratic margins from the city. This is Philadelphia, circa 1988:

Not anymore. Philadelphia, 2008:

(Note: Because the Times stopped updating before all absentee/provisional ballots were counted, this map does not fully reflect the actual results. I have corrected the discrepancy.)

Indeed, in 2008 President Barack Obama’s suburban margins were so great that Democrats did not even need Philadelphia to win Pennsylvania.

Philadelphia’s suburbs stretch across four counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery. Bucks contains more working-class, Catholic communities. Chester, on the other hand, is more exurban and conservative (in this century, Democrats have only incontrovertibly won the county twice – in 1964 and 2008).

More below.

The suburbs hold more importance than implied by the above maps, which tend to exaggerate Philadelphia’s size due to its one-sided voting pattern. While the city’s population continues its long, slow decline, its suburbs have grown at a rapid clip. Today, the number of votes they hold almost doubles the city’s reservoir.

While regional differences exist, Philly’s suburbs do have one thing in common: they compose the wealthiest area in the entire state. Chester, Bucks, and Montgomery Counties rank #1, #2, and #3 in the state’s median household income. They also lack diversity; the census classifies around 90% of Bucks County residents as non-Hispanic whites.

Given these characteristics, one might expect Philly’s suburbs to be rock-hard Republican strongholds. Until recently they did vote strongly Republican; Democrats only won the suburbs twice (in 1964 and – due to TR’s Bull Moose candidacy – 1912) before 1992. It was President Bill Clinton who changed this pattern; in 1992 he barely managed to turn Bucks, Delaware, and Montegomery blue (his greatest margin was 3.4%). Ever since then Democrats have been doing better and better.

This shift does not constitute an anomaly; Democratic candidates since Mr. Clinton have been winning a number of wealthy, white suburban counties that used to go strongly Republican. Before Clinton, Long Island and Westchester consistently gave Republicans double-digit margins; today they’ve voted Democratic for the past four consecutive elections. Detroit’s suburbs – Oakland and Macomb counties – have gone from Reagan Democrat fortresses to regions John Kerry tied. Senator John McCain barely won Orange County, that symbol of suburban Republican might.

Montgomery and Delaware counties are especially Democratic-friendly. They  identify more with the populous, sophisticated northeastern seaboard than the more conservative Midwest. As such, these counties by nature sympathize with liberal sentiment; George W. Bush lost both by double-digits. This does not necessary mean, however, that Montgomery and Delaware constitute bastions of acceptance; products of white flight from Philadelphia, they can at times be fairly hostile to people who are considered different.

Increasing Democratic strength in these well-off suburbs portends great trouble for Republicans. In 2008, Mr. Obama’s performance in Montgomery and Delaware counties eclipsed his suburban strength in practically every other swing state. Only suburbs in places like the Bay Area, Seattle, and New England voted more Democratic.

In total, Obama won the Philly suburbs by 15.56%. Combined with his landslide in the city itself, he came out of southeast Pennsylvania with a 682,392 vote margin. This meant that John McCain needed to win the rest of the state by 58.79%.

If Pennsylvania was like Missouri – if the remainder of the state voted strongly Republican – this might just have been possible. But Pennsylvania is not like Missouri; southwestern Pennsylvania used to be unchallenged Democratic territory, while Scranton, Erie, and the Lehigh Valley all lean Democratic. John McCain thus lost the state by double-digits.  His only successes occurred in southwestern Pennsylvania, which is reddening almost as quickly as the southeast is bluing.

–Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

• AR-Sen: Blanche Lincoln seems like she’ll take a lifeline from anyone who’ll throw her one these days, and she got a big one today — although it’s not a surprise who’s doing it. The nation’s most famous Arkansan, Bill Clinton, authored a fundraising e-mail on Lincoln’s behalf.

• CA-Sen: The war of words between Chuck DeVore and the NRSC keeps flaring up; DeVore keeps claiming the NRSC won’t meet with him. DeVore’s camp claims they got an offer to meet with the NRSC’s executive director rather than John Cornyn, which he turned down… but that came after e-mailing the NRSC once and then faxing them follow-ups twice. I must admit I share in the incredulity of NRSC spokesbot Brian Walsh, who said “Remarkably, every [other of the 60 GOP candidates who’ve met with the NRSC] knew how to set up a meeting with the exception of Chuck DeVore who apparently believed sending a fax to Senator Cornyn’s official government office was the most direct route. That alone might demonstrate a lack of seriousness, or at least raise questions of competency, by a statewide Senate campaign.” The Hill’s Aaron Blake looks at this brouhaha in the context of GOP outsider campaigns in general, with a subtext wondering if DeVore’s camp is intentionally miscommunicating as a means of burnishing outsider credentials (seeing as how the way to lose your Seal of Good Teabagging is by becoming one of the NRSC’s golden children).

• FL-Sen: Those Rasmussen numbers on the Florida Senate general election finally showed up. Like last time, and contrary to conventional wisdom, they actually show Marco Rubio overperforming Charlie Crist, vis a vis Kendrick Meek. Rubio beats Meek 49-35, while Crist beats Meek 42-36. Seems strange, but Florida pundit Mike Thomas speculates that Crist is losing ground not among conservatives (whom he never really had to begin with) but rather among indies and moderates, simply by virtue of his empty-suit opportunism, which might explain why the blank-slate Rubio is overperforming. Meanwhile, Rubio keeps trucking along on the fundraising front, as the Club for Growth has bundled $100K in contributions for him in the last month.

• CT-Sen: CQ highlights one more way that price is no object for Linda McMahon; she’s paying her campaign manager David Cappiello a $280K salary, which is at least double what the Rob Simmons and Chris Dodd managers make. Who’s the lucky guy? It’s former state Sen. David Cappiello. If that name sounds familiar, he’s the guy who got spanked by 20 points by then-freshman Rep. Chris Murphy in CT-05 last year… which I’d think might be a bit of a red flag if you were a savvy businessperson looking to hire someone based on campaign skills.

• NH-Sen: The fault lines are remarkably clear in the Republican primary in New Hampshire. GOP establishment candidate Kelly Ayotte was busy hitting a $1,000 per individual Washington DC fundraiser sponsored by telecommunications lobbyists yesterday, at around the same time conservative primary challenger Ovide Lamontagne was getting the endorsement of radio talk show host and Coulter-wannabe Laura Ingraham.

• CA-Gov (pdf): The Public Policy Institute of California has a full poll of the California gubernatorial race (they’ve previously polled on approval ratings, but not the horserace). They see a race between Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman that’s a little tighter (43-37 for Brown) than most pollsters have seen (although, of course, better than Rasmussen’s 41-41 tie). Brown makes short work of his other Republican opposition, Tom Campbell (46-34) and Steve Poizner (47-31). Whitman also has an edge in the GOP primary, at 32 with 12 for Campbell (who’s mulled moving over to the Senate race) and 8 for Poizner.

• GA-Gov: Rasmussen has numbers for the Republican gubernatorial primary (sorry, no numbers for the general, which I don’t think has ever been polled). This race looks pretty stable: they find Insurance Comm. John Oxendine with a sizable lead, as usual. He’s at 28, doubling up on SoS Karen Handel at 14. Rep. Nathan Deal is at 13, followed by Jeff Chapman, Eric Johnson, Ray McBerry, and Austin Scott, all at 2. I wonder if this might tarnish Oxendine a little, though: it was just revealed that he took a trip to the 2007 Oscars on the tab of a major campaign contributor who was also asking, at the time, for Oxendine’s intervention in an insurance dispute against Blue Cross/Blue Shield.

• MI-Gov: Democratic Lt. Gov. John Cherry has been lagging his Republican opponents in the polls lately, and a new poll from EPIC-MRA shows why: no one knows who the heck he is, and those who do don’t like him. Cherry is unknown to 39%, which is greater than any of his main Republican opponents. AG Mike Cox, for instance, has an unknown of 16%. (The release doesn’t mention any head-to-head numbers, at least not yet.)

• NE-Gov: The Democrats may actually get a good-sounding recruit in the Nebraska gubernatorial race? That probably doesn’t change Republican incumbent Dave Heineman’s “Safe R” status, but it’s still good news. Mike Boyle (who says he’s “considering” the race) was mayor of Omaha from 1981 until a recall in 1987; he’s currently in his third term as a Douglas County Commissioner. Boyle also ran for governor in 1990, losing the Democratic primary to now-Sen. Ben Nelson.

• OR-Gov: Former NBA player Chris Dudley officially embarked on his question to become the nation’s tallest governor, announcing his candidacy in a speech that didn’t give potential supporters much to judge where on the Republican spectrum he falls, other than the usual boilerplate on jobs and taxes. (He did mention in an interview, on the abortion issue, that he was “comfortable with [abortion laws] where they are now.”) At least he won’t have to deal with state House minority leader Bruce Hanna in the primary, who yesterday turned down conservative entreaties to get into the race.

• SD-Gov: PPP threw in some gubernatorial questions in its SD-AL poll, and it looks like Republicans have a generic edge here that should keep the state house in their hands, despite nobody knowing much of anything about any of the candidates. The good news for Dems is that their candidate, state Senate minority leader Scott Heidepreim, is better known than any of the GOPers (although 57% have no opinion of him). The bad news is that Heidepreim still loses to all four GOPers, even Some Dude Ken Knuppe (although only 32-30). He also loses to Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard 42-29, Senate majority leader Dave Knudson 39-29, and Brookings mayor Scott Munsterman 35-30.

• KS-03: Dems look to be getting closer to having a solid candidate for the open seat race in the 3rd. Kansas City, Kansas mayor Joe Reardon says he’s giving it “serious consideration,” and his mayoral predecessor, Carol Marinovich also said she’s not ruling out a run. Hopefully only one will run, at least giving the Dems smooth sailing into what’s likely to be a difficult general election.

• PA-11: The NRCC has to be pleased with Hazleton mayor Lou Barletta’s recently-announced third whack at vulnerable Rep. Paul Kanjorski in the 11th, and they just added him to their “Young Guns” program. He still starts on their lowest tier for now, though (“On the Radar”).

• PA-12: Septuagenarian Rep. John Murtha, who was briefly hospitalized this week for gall bladder trouble, is saying via his spokesperson that he has no intent to retire and will run again in 2010. This comes despite leaks of a memo written in October to the DCCC asking for legal advice on how to deal with his reelection funds if he decides to retire. (The request apparently originated with a constituent’s question.)

• Blue Dogs: The Blue Dogs added three new members yesterday: Scott Murphy (who I thought had been a member all along), Betsy Markey (not a surprise, given her tough district, although she’s taken some courageous votes like cap-and-trade), and Kurt Schrader. The decision by Schrader — who’s near the middle of the Dem caucus, in a slightly Dem-leaning district, and usually a good vote although a bit of a budget hawk — may raise a few eyebrows, but Blue Oregon’s Kari Chisholm offers a good defense of him.

• Texas: Lots to talk about as Democrats try to assemble a full slate of candidates to go with top gubernatorial recruit Bill White. Most notably, they have a former AFL-CIO executive VP interested in running for the all-important (in Texas, at least) Lt. Gov. spot: Linda Chavez-Thompson. They have another candidate interested in running for Comptroller (which ex-Rep. Nick Lampson has also scoped out): former Republican comptroller and then independent gubernatorial candidate Carole Strayhorn, who says she wants to run as a Dem this time. Finally, people are wondering whether Kinky Friedman even qualifies to run for Agriculture Commissioner. State statute requires actual agricultural experience, and Friedman is claiming that a ranch he owns with relatives has enough cattle on it for him to qualify.

• Pennsylvania: The Hill points to an interesting academic research paper that examined what’s going on with people who’ve participated in the widespread Republican-to-Democrat party switch that’s remade politics in suburban Pennsylvania in recent years. As one might expect, these are affluent people for the most part (with one-third making more than $80K). Unexpectedly, though, only 53% say they were driven out by “extremism” in the GOP’s positions, and they span the ideological spectrum (although with a plurality calling themselves “moderates”). Many, in fact, (over 40%) were at one point Democrats who had switched to the GOP and were now switching back.

• Votes: Yesterday’s House vote to lift the debt ceiling was another closely orchestrated one, passing 218-214. As might be expected, most of the most vulnerable members voted no… and also a few center-left types running for Senate who don’t want to get tarred with the ‘debt’ brush (Kendrick Meek, Paul Hodes). They were generously given some cover by three of the retiring Blue Dogs — Dennis Moore, John Tanner, and Bart Gordon — who all voted ‘yes,’ since their seats in the lifeboat weren’t needed (same with some of the other Blue Dogs facing lesser challenges this year, like Jim Marshall and John Barrow).