StephenCLE’s House Predictions 2010 – Early August Update

Another month, another edition of StephenCLE’s House Predictions.  

Last month, back on July 11th, I said that we were at a crossroads regarding the battle for the House, where the Republicans were one major problem/mistake by the Democrats away from surging toward re-taking the chamber.  Well, since then, it’s been one success after another for Team Blue, as the gulf oil spill has been plugged, financial reform was passed, unemployment benefits were extended, and the timeline for the Iraq pullout appears to be on schedule.  These might not necessarily be big items for independents but most of these will no doubt help base turnout in November.  Not only that, but Team Red has really hurt themselves with poor primary choices and candidate gaffes in recent weeks, especially in Nevada, Colorado, and Illinois (which will also be reflected in my Senate ratings to come later this week).  Bottom line, for the first month since I started this series, the red tide has ebbed, and Team Blue has gained back territory.

Beginning this month, I will be updating my House ratings twice a month.  I’ll keep that schedule probably until the end of the primary season, in which case it will move to once a week.    

Total House Math for August 2nd:

Old House – 256 Democrats, 179 Republicans

New House – 233 Democrats, 202 Republicans

National Swing – Republicans +23

Democratic Pickups (4) – DE-1, IL-10, LA-2, HI-1

Republican Pickups (27) – AL-2, AR-1, AR-2, FL-2, IL-11, IN-8, KS-3, LA-3, MD-1, MI-1, MI-7, MS-1, NH-2, ND-1, NY-24, NY-29, OH-1, OH-15, PA-11, TN-4, TN-6, TN-8, TX-17, VA-2, VA-5, WA-3,

Pickup Changes from last month:

Democrat to Republican – IL-11

Republican to Democrat – CO-4, WV-1, NH-1, NV-3

August Race Ratings Changes –

1.Illinois-17 – Solid D to Likely D – A shocking internal poll from last week gives the little known Republican challenger, Bobby Schilling, a lead against longtime incumbent Phil Hare.  Schilling hasn’t raised much this cycle and has kept a low profile, so I doubt the poll is correct, but in either case, this is enough to at least put the race on the board, especially because coattails in Illinois will definitely be breaking in the Republicans’ favor

2.Colorado-3 – Lean D to Likely D – With the GOP ticket imploding in Colorado, it’s very unlikely that they’ll be able to take out Salazar

3.Virginia-9 – Lean D to Likely D – Some recent polling here has shown Boucher with a double digit lead over his opponent, so that’s good enough for me to put this one to Likely.

4.Indiana-9 – Toss Up to Lean D – Much like the previous, Baron Hill has seen some positive polling in his race, so I think he deserves a more favorable rating as well.

5.Colorado-4 – Toss Up to Lean D – She may not be as lucky as John Hickenlooper, but the implosion of the GOP ticket in Colorado looks like it could really help Betsy Markey.  Tom Tancredo’s appearance on the ballot could give some people here Marilyn Musgrave redux jitters.

6.Iowa-3 – Toss Up to Lean D – I didn’t want to move this initially, as I’m still really worried about bad coattails in Iowa and Boswell’s relative weakness as a rep, but Brad Zaun has shot himself in the foot several times now with regard to farm subsidies and flood relief. (Really?)  Boswell has to be favored now.

7.Massachusetts-10 – Toss Up to Lean D – Pretty much all the pundits are taking this one out of the toss-up category.  I’m not really sure why, but I’ll be a follower on this one.

8.West Virginia-1 – Toss Up to Lean D – Man, total egg on face.  Can you believe it, following the primary I had this one at Likely R.  Now with Joe Manchin topping the ballot, so long as Oliverio doesn’t totally piss off the base with his anti-Pelosi, democrat-hating rhetoric, he’s in decent shape.

9.Alaska-1 – Likely R to Solid R – With Lisa Murkowski and Sean Parnell looking to clean up in the great white north, Don Young would need a major scandal to burst over his head to lose this year.  Safe.

10.California-19 – Likely R to Solid R – Surprisingly, I haven’t seen any action on the D side in this open seat race, so I take it off the board as well.

11.Ohio-15 – Lean R to Toss Up – With generally positive polling for both Lee Fisher and Ted Strickland recently (except for Scotty Rass of course) the situation here is looking better for Mary Kilroy.  She’s still locked in a very difficult fight though.

12.Illinois-11 – Toss Up/Dem Retention to Toss Up/Rep Pickup – Sometimes coattails can be a bitch, but in this case, Adam Kinzinger is really doing some good things in fundraising and on the campaign trail too.  Debbie Halvorson is in for a real fight here.

13.New Hampshire-1 – Toss Up/Rep Pickup to Toss Up/Dem Retention – Just when I thought New Hampshire was jumping off the deep end toward the GOP, polling comes out giving Carol Shea-Porter a lead, plus she actually cracked 200k in fundraising last quarter!  Strong moves, and that makes me change this race out of the red column.

14.Nevada-3 – Toss Up/Rep Pickup to Toss Up/Dem Retention – Dina Titus is looking better now than she did a month ago as well, as not only does polling show her with a slight edge, but also the vast improvement of Harry Reid’s election chances and Brian Sandoval’s recent gaffes have the democratic side looking much better throughout Nevada.  I balked to move it to Lean though, because of Titus’s weakness as a representative.

15.Florida-12 – Likely R to Lean R – As unlikely as this race seems given the PVI and the fundraising race, Lori Edwards supposedly is tied or leading in several polls here.  I would think that after the primary that whoever the R candidate is would be able to consolidate support, but you never know.  As weird a cycle as this looks to be in Florida, I don’t think we can assume anything.

2010 House Big Board (as of June update)

Solid Dem – 162 seats:

AL-7, AZ-4, AZ-7, AR-4, CA-1, CA-5, CA-6, CA-7, CA-8, CA-9, CA-10, CA-11, CA-12, CA-13, CA-14, CA-15, CA-16, CA-17, CA-18, CA-20, CA-23, CA-27, CA-28, CA-29, CA-30, CA-31, CA-32, CA-33, CA-34, CA-35, CA-36, CA-37, CA-38, CA-39, CA-43, CA-51, CA-53, CO-1, CO-2, CT-1, CT-2, CT-3, FL-3, FL-11, FL-17, FL-19, FL-20, FL-23, GA-4, GA-5, GA-13, HI-2, IL-1, IL-2, IL-3, IL-4, IL-5, IL-7, IL-8, IL-9, IL-12, IN-1, IN-7, IA-1, IA-2, ME-2, MD-2, MD-3, MD-4, MD-5, MD-7, MD-8, MA-1, MA-2, MA-3, MA-4, MA-5, MA-6, MA-7, MA-8, MA-9, MI-5, MI-12, MI-13, MI-14, MI-15, MN-4, MN-5, MN-7, MN-8, MS-2, MO-1, MO-5, NV-1, NJ-1, NJ-6, NJ-8, NJ-9, NJ-10, NJ-13, NM-3, NY-2, NY-4, NY-5, NY-6, NY-7, NY-8, NY-9, NY-10, NY-11, NY-12, NY-14, NY-15, NY-16, NY-17, NY-18, NY-21, NY-22, NY-27, NY-28, NC-1, NC-4, NC-7, NC-12, NC-13, OH-9, OH-10, OH-11, OH-17, OK-2, OR-1, OR-3, OR-4, PA-1, PA-2, PA-13, PA-14, RI-2, SC-6, TN-5, TN-9, TX-9, TX-15, TX-16, TX-18, TX-20, TX-25, TX-27, TX-28, TX-29, TX-30, VT-1, VA-3, VA-8, WA-1, WA-2, WA-6, WA-7, WA-9, WV-3, WI-2, WI-4

Likely Dem – 34 seats:

California-47 (Sanchez)

Colorado-3 (Salazar)

Colorado-7 (Perlmutter)

Connecticut-4 (Himes)

Connecticut-5 (Murphy)

Delaware-1 (Open)

Georgia-2 (Bishop)

Georgia-12 (Barrow)

Illinois-17 (Hare)

Indiana-2 (Donnelly)

Kentucky-3 (Yarmuth)

Louisiana-2 (Cao)

Maine-1 (Pingree)

Michigan-9 (Peters)

Minnesota-1 (Walz)

Missouri-3 (Carnahan)

North Carolina-2 (Etheridge)

New Jersey-12 (Holt)

New Mexico-1 (Heinrich)

New York-13 (McMahon)

New York-20 (Murphy)

New York-25 (Maffei)

North Carolina-11 (Shuler)

Ohio-6 (Wilson)

Ohio-13 (Sutton)

Ohio-18 (Space)

Pennsylvania-3 (Dahlkemper)

Pennsylvania-4 (Altmire)

Pennsylvania-17 (Holden)

Rhode Island-1 (Open)

Utah-2 (Matheson)

Virginia-9 (Boucher)

Virginia-11 (Connelly)

Wisconsin-3 (Kind)

Lean Dem – 25 seats:

Arizona-1 (Kirkpatrick)

Arizona-8 (Giffords)

Colorado-4 (Markey)

Florida-8 (Grayson)

Georgia-8 (Marshall)

Hawaii-1 (Djou)

Idaho-1 (Minnick)

Iowa-3 (Boswell)

Indiana-9 (Hill)

Kentucky-6 (Chandler)

Massachusetts-10 (Open)

Mississippi-4 (Taylor)

Missouri-4 (Skelton)

New Jersey-3 (Adler)

New York-23 (Owens)

North Carolina-8 (Kissell)

Oregon-5 (Schrader)

Pennsylvania-8 (Murphy)

Pennsylvania-10 (Carney)

Pennsylvania-12 (Critz)

South Carolina-5 (Spratt)

South Dakota-1 (Herseth)

Texas-23 (Rodriguez)

West Virginia-1 (Open)

Wisconsin-8 (Kagen)

Toss Up – 28 seats:

Alabama-2 (Bright)

Arizona-5 (Mitchell)

California-11 (McNerney)

Florida-2 (Boyd)

Florida-22 (Klein)

Florida-24 (Kosmas)

Florida-25 (Open)

Illinois-10 (Open)

Illinois-11 (Halvorson)

Illinois-14 (Foster)

Maryland-1 (Kratovil)

Michigan-1 (Open)

Michigan-7 (Schauer)

Nevada-3 (Titus)

New Hampshire-1 (Shea-Porter)

New Mexico-2 (Teague)

New York-1 (Bishop)

New York-19 (Hall)

North Dakota-1 (Pomeroy)

Ohio-15 (Kilroy)

Ohio-16 (Boccieri)

Pennsylvania-7 (Open)

Tennessee-4 (Davis)

Tennessee-8 (Open)

Texas-17 (Edwards)

Virginia-5 (Perriello)

Washington-3 (Open)

Wisconsin-7 (Open)

Lean Rep – 19 seats:

Arkansas-1 (Open)

California-3 (Lungren)

California-45 (Bono Mack)

Florida-12 (Open)

Indiana-8 (Open)

Kansas-3 (Open)

Minnesota-6 (Bachmann)

Mississippi-1 (Childers)

Nebraska-2 (Terry)

New Hampshire-2 (Open)

New York-24 (Arcuri)

New York-29 (Open)

Ohio-1 (Driehaus)

Ohio-12 (Tiberi)

Pennsylvania-6 (Gerlach)

Pennsylvania-11 (Kanjorski)

Pennsylvania-15 (Dent)

Virginia-2 (Nye)

Washington-8 (Reichert)

Likely Rep – 12 seats:

Alabama-5 (Open)

Arizona-3 (Open)

Arkansas-2 (Open)

California-44 (Calvert)

Indiana-3 (Open)

Kansas-2 (Jenkins)

Kansas-4 (Open)

Michigan-3 (Open)

Missouri-8 (Emerson)

South Carolina-2 (Wilson)

Texas-32 (Sessions)

Virginia-1 (Wittman)

Solid Rep – 155 seats:

AL-1, AL-3, AL-4, AL-6, AK-1, AZ-2, AZ-6, AR-3, CA-2, CA-4, CA-19, CA-21, CA-22, CA-24, CA-25, CA-26, CA-40, CA-41, CA-42, CA-46, CA-48, CA-49, CA-50, CA-52, CO-5, CO-6, FL-1, FL-4, FL-5, FL-6, FL-7, FL-9, FL-10, FL-13, FL-14, FL-15, FL-16, FL-18, FL-21, GA-1, GA-3, GA-7, GA-9, GA-10, GA-11, ID-2, IL-6, IL-13, IL-15, IL-16, IL-18, IL-19, IN-4, IN-5, IN-6, IA-4, IA-5, KS-1, KY-1, KY-2, KY-4, KY-5, LA-1, LA-3, LA-4, LA-5, LA-6, LA-7, MD-6, MI-2, MI-4, MI-6, MI-8, MI-10, MI-11, MN-2, MN-3, MS-3, MO-2, MO-6, MO-7, MO-9, MT-1, NE-1, NE-3, NV-2, NJ-2, NJ-5, NJ-4, NJ-7, NJ-11, NY-3, NY-26, NC-3, NC-5, NC-6, NC-9, NC-10, OH-2, OH-3, OH-4, OH-5, OH-7, OH-8, OH-14, OK-1, OK-3, OK-4, OK-5, OR-2, PA-5, PA-9, PA-16, PA-18, PA-19, SC-1, SC-3, SC-4, TN-1, TN-2, TN-3, TN-6, TN-7, TX-1, TX-2, TX-3, TX-4, TX-5, TX-6, TX-7, TX-8, TX-10, TX-11, TX-12, TX-13, TX-14, TX-19, TX-21, TX-22, TX-24, TX-26, TX-31, UT-1, UT-3, VA-4, VA-6, VA-7, VA-10, WA-4, WA-5, WV-2, WI-1, WI-5, WI-6, WY-1

MN-Gov: All Dems Lead Emmer, Dayton Leads Primary

Princeton Survey Research for Minneapolis Star-Tribune (7/26-29, registered voters, no trendlines):

Mark Dayton (DFL): 40

Margaret Anderson Kelliher (DFL): 30

Matt Entenza (DFL): 17

Undecided: 12

(MoE: ±7.8%)

Mark Dayton (DFL): 40

Tom Emmer (R): 30

Tom Horner (I): 13

Undecided: 17

Margaret Anderson Kelliher (DFL): 38

Tom Emmer (R): 29

Tom Horner (I): 13

Undecided: 18

Matt Entenza (DFL): 36

Tom Emmer (R): 31

Tom Horner (I): 15

Undecided: 17

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Things haven’t been going so well for Tom Emmer lately, who at one point immediately after the GOP convention had a unity-bounce lead in the polls (or at least in the Rasmussen/SurveyUSA likely voter universe). In the last few weeks, he’s released a weak fundraising report, been the target of big advertising blitzes from both Matt Entenza and a Dem 527, and won’t be able to ever eat in a restaurant in Minnesota again, as his waitstaff is likely to be serving him loogie sandwiches for the foreseeable future. On top of all that comes the new Star-Tribune poll, which may be the most bullish on DFL chances of any poll yet: it gives all three DFL candidates, even Entenza, a decent lead over Emmer.

They also look at the DFL primary, although the 7.8% MoE is pretty absurd. At any rate, the results mirror what other polls of the primary have found: Mark Dayton with a lead of 10 or so over Margaret Anderson Kelliher. The DFL-endorsed Kelliher also got the Star-Tribune’s endorsement over the weekend. Whether those endorsements help her to overcome Dayton and Entenza’s money, well, we’ll have to wait until Aug. 10 to find out.

CO-Sen, CO-Gov: Poll Roundup (Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Plagiarism)

SurveyUSA for the Denver Post/KUSA-TV (7/27-29, likely and actual voters for the primary, registered voters for the general, 6/15-17 in parens):

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 45 (53)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 48 (36)

Undecided: 8 (11)

(MoE: ±4.3%)

Ken Buck (R): 50 (53)

Jane Norton (R): 41 (37)

Undecided: 9 (10)

(MoE: ±4.1%)

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 43 (43)

Ken Buck (R): 43 (46)

“Third Party”: 7 (6)

Undecided: 7 (5)

Michael Bennet (D-inc): 46 (44)

Jane Norton (R): 43 (47)

“Third Party”: 7 (5)

Undecided: 5 (4)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 44 (40)

Ken Buck (R): 44 (49)

“Third Party”: 6 (6)

Undecided: 6 (5)

Andrew Romanoff (D): 40 (41)

Jane Norton (R): 45 (45)

“Third Party”: 8 (8)

Undecided: 7 (7)

(MoE: ±3.2%)

Yup, shit just got real for Michael Bennet. After dwarfing Andrew Romanoff in terms of both polls and fundraising for months, Bennet’s support has taken a major hit from the stream of negative ads that Romanoff has launched in recent days. I suppose it shouldn’t be surprising, considering that voters have no fealty to an incumbent appointed by an unpopular departing Governor who’s still struggling to project himself as more Senatorial than Some Dude, but it’s still remarkable, nonetheless.

Perhaps most disturbing for Michael Bennet is that his pushback against this poll, in the form of his own internal poll, was less than forceful. Bennet’s poll, conducted by Harstad Strategic Research from 7/28-29, has Romanoff trailing by only 41-37. Yikes!

Gubernatorial numbers:

Scott McInnis (R): 39 (57)

Dan Maes (R): 43 (29)

Undecided: 18 (14)

(MoE: ±4.1%)

John Hickenlooper (D): 48 (43)

Scott McInnis (R): 43 (47)

Undecided: 9 (4)

John Hickenlooper (D): 50 (44)

Dan Maes (R): 41 (45)

Undecided: 9 (6)

John Hickenlooper (D): 46

Dan Maes (R): 24

Tom Tancredo (ACP): 24

Undecided: 7

John Hickenlooper (D): 44

Scott McInnis (R): 25

Tom Tancredo (ACP): 26

Undecided: 6

(MoE: ±3.2%)

Is John Hickenlooper the luckiest candidate this cycle, or what? For what it’s worth, a Republican poll of otherwise unknown origin, flashed to Chris Cillizza, apparently has McInnis ahead of the unknown, poorly-funded Dan Maes by 15% — and Jane Norton ahead of Ken Buck by 45-40 in the Senate primary.

Senate and Gubernatorial Rankings – August

I’m going to do one of these on the first Monday of every month between now and election day. Though I expect movement in most of these races it is time to do away with the tossup cop out and get off the fence!

Rankings are ‘Tilt’ (less than 5 point race), ‘Lean’ (5-10 point race) and ‘Favored ‘(10-20 point race). Anything beyond that is ‘Solid’ for either party.

SENATE

Dem Tilt

IL (Absolute deadheat but since the topic of conversation is all about Kirk I’m giving it Alexi in such a blue state.)

NV (I’m less certain this is has become clear cut as some but Reid has definitely moved ahead at least for now.)

WI (Feingold never wins by whopping margins and races in Wisconsin always seem closer than most.)

WA (No fireable offence from Murray and decent approvals. Rossi has baggage and is only close because of the cycle.)

Rep Tilt

PA (Small lead for Toomey right now but I expect Sestak to improve his position when he gets better known.)

CO (Until the latest SurveyUSA poll both Buck and Norton lead both Dems. Until the primary shakes itself out we aren’t going to see movement.)

KY (Paul has the lead because he has kept his mouth shut lately. Hopefully ads and debates will help Conway.)

OH (I fear this is a huge missed opportunity. Portman is ripe for attack but Fisher doesn’t have resources to do it.)

MO (Will be close until the end and I still think Robin can do it despite the unsavory environment.)

NH (Ayotte has clearly been hurt recently but I’m skeptical Hodes can get over the top in this one.)

Dem Lean

CA (Small percentage lead for Boxer but much harder for a Republican to close that gap in real votes in California.)

FL*(I’m counting Crist as a Dem pickup though I still think there is a chance he caucuses with the GOP.)

Rep Lean

NC (Don’t see Burr losing here. Not this year, not with his CoH advantage.)

Dem Favored

CT (Blumenthal should be fine since he managed to ride out his exaggerations far better than Mark Kirk.)

WV (Without Capito in the race Manchin should be fine so long as he doesn’t coast.)

Rep Favored

IN (Ellsworth’s problem is name recognition and bad environment. He will close here fast but not sure fast enough.)

LA (Melancon is doing well just to keep this remotely competitive. The electorate wants someone to oppose Obama 100%.)

AR (Blanche shocked everybody once so can she do it again? No. Though I think it will be closer by election day.)

DE (Coons will surprise many and narrow the gap further as we go on but like IN I’m not sure it will be enough.)

We can put ND safely in the GOP column.

GOVERNORS

Dem Tilt

OR (Polls are tied but have to give it to Kitzhaber for his campaigning skills and the lean of the state.)

MN (Emmer is killing himself rather than anything the Dems are doing. I think Dayton will get a clear win in the end.)

RI*(I’m counting Chafee as a Dem since he is arguably more liberal than the actual Dem nominee.)

MD (O’Malley hasn’t committed a fireable offense and has decent approvals. Lean of the state should be enough.)

FL (The Republicans have nuked each other and Chiles looks like a non-factor.)

MA (Deval seems to be improving his approvals and Cahill means he has a decent shot at re-election.)

CA (Once Brown starts running ads he should be ok in such a blue state.)

Rep Tilt

GA (Barnes is an underdog in a red state but he is closer than he should be. Both Republicans have skeletons.)

IL (Brady leads but the lean of the state may be enough yet for Quinn if he can paint his opponent as too far right.)

ME (LePage is ahead but like in RI anything could happen here including an indie win.)

OH (Polling is mixed here but my best guess is Kasich has a narrow lead. Strickland can still pull it out though.)

VT (Dubie ahead here but probably more to do with name recognition than anything else. Suspect it will be close.)

TX (Bill White is doing a great job here but I expect the year and state is just too Republican.)

NM (Martinez with a small lead but Denish can win if she is able to seperate herself from Bill Richardson.)

WI (Small leads for both Republicans but Barrett was as good a nominee as Dems could get here. Still possible.)

Dem Lean

CO (What a mess for the GOP! Hick should win easily here unless McInnis drops out post-primary.)

CT (Lamont really should win this one and I think he will.)

Rep Lean

AZ (Great change in fortunes for Brewer. Maybe Goddard can make this close but I have my doubts.)

MI (Post-primary this may get interesting, especially if Hoekstra is the GOP nominee.)

PA (Onorato will close when he gets his name recognition up but PA has a pattern here that likely won’t change.)

OK (Not as big a Fallin lead as I expected but the year and state makes it very hard for Askins.)

Dem Favored

HI (Abercrombie has a big lead and should win this going away.)

Rep Favored

IA (Branstad is popular and Culver is not. Only one outcome looks likely here.)

NV (Maybe Harry’s improving fortunes helps Rory but Sandoval is no Sharron Angle!)

AL (Sparks is probably as good as it gets for Dems but a fresh face in Bentley in a GOP year makes this very tough.)

ID (Not as big a lead for the GOP as one would expect but it is still Idaho.)

KS (Brownback isn’t exactly loved by the entire KS GOP but I can’t see anything but a Holland defeat here.)

SC (Sheheen may shock people but again, red state in a terrible year for Dems means Governor Haley.)

SD (Daugaaurd is popular and once again, red state, GOP year.)

TN (McWherter is not his dad and the polls are ugly.)

UT (Herbert has anemic poll leads but it is Utah!)

Projection

SENATE – GOP +5

GOVERNORS – GOP +5

August Primaries to Watch

After a slow few weeks in late June and July, August promises to be quite exciting, primary-wise!

Here are some races to watch in August:

8/3:

MO-Sen (R) – Blunt v. teabagger

MO-04 (R) – Free-for-all

MO-07 (R) – open seat

Proposition C – It’s about NULLIFICATION!

KS-Sen (R) – Moran/Tiahrt

KS-01, 04 (R) – open seats

KS-03 (R) – Yoder v. Lightner

KS-04 (D) – will Raj Goyle get VicRawl’d?

MI-Gov (D), (R)

MI-01, 02, 03 (R) – open seats

MI-07 (R) – Rooney/Walberg

MI-09 (R) – Rocky v. Welday

MI-12 (D)

MI-13 (D) – Kilpatrick weak

8/5: (hey, two primaries in one week!)

TN-Gov (R) – open seat

TN-03 (R) – Wamp’s open seat

TN-04 (R) – clusterfuck

TN-06 (R) – open seat

TN-08 (R) – Kirkland v. Flinn

TN-09 (D) – impending Willie Herenton fail

8/10:

CT-Gov (D) and (R) – Lamont/Malloy and Fedele/Foley

CT-Sen (R) – ghost of Rob Simmons?

CT-02, 04, 05 (R)

CO-Gov (R) – McInnis and Maes double fail

CO-Sen (D) – Bennet v. Romanoff

CO-Sen (R) – the devil wears prada?

CO-03, 07 (R)

GA-Gov (R) – Palin Handel v. Newt Deal

GA-07, 12 (R) – more runoffs

GA-09 (R) – Graves v. Hawkins round 3

MN-Gov (D) – Dayton v. Kelliher

8/17:

WA-Sen

WA-03

WY-Gov (D), (R)

8/24:

AZ-Sen (D), (R)

AZ-03 (R) – Shadegg’s open seat

AZ-01, 05, 08 (R)

VT-Gov (D)

FL-Gov (R) – (yes!!!!!!)

FL-Sen (D) – Meek v. Greene

FL-12, 25 (R) – open seats

FL-02, 08, 22, 24 (R)

FL-02 (D) – challenge to a Blue Dog from the left, v4.1

FL-17 (D) – Meek’s open seat

AK-Gov (R) – Parnell and the ghost of Palin?

AK-Sen (R) – Murkowski v. Palin proxy

8/28:

LA-Sen (R) – Vitter v. Traylor

LA-02 (D) – Lafonta v. Richmond

LA-03 (R)

WV-Sen (D), (R) – Byrd special primary

SSP Daily Digest: 8/2 (Morning Edition)

  • CT-Sen: Linda McMahon has already spent at least $22 million on her senatorial bid – and though she has plans to shell out much more, she’s already the fourth-largest self-funder of all time. The good news is that the top three are pretty uninspiring: Jon Corzine (NJ-Sen 2000: $60 million, 50.1% in general); Blair Hull (IL-Sen 2004: $29 million, 11% in primary); Michael Huffington (CA-Sen 1994: $28 million, 45% in general). Check out the second page of CQ’s piece to see who rounds out the rest of the top 10. Only three actually won a seat in the Senate, and all of them served one term or less – by choice!
  • FL-Sen: Ah – live by the zillionaire asshole, die by the zillionaire asshole. Joe Trippi, who apparently thought he could make a buck by helping schmuckface Jeff Greene run negative ads against Kendrick Meek, has been axed. This is pretty unsurprising, in light of an in-depth story by the St. Pete Times which catalogs just how much of a jerkass Greene actually is. Here’s a representative sample:

    • Adam Lambert worked as captain of Greene’s 145-foot yacht, Summerwind, earlier this year.

    “He has total disregard for anybody else,” chuckled Lambert, who said he was Greene’s 20th and 22nd Summerwind captain (No. 21 quit after a few hours with Greene).

    “I don’t think I ever once had an actual conversation with him. It was always, ‘I should just get rid of you, what f—— good are you? You’re just a f—— boat driver. You’re the third-highest paid employee in my corporation and I should just get rid of you,’ ” Lambert, 43, recalled by phone from a yacht in Croatia. “It didn’t bother me. I just felt sorry for the man. He doesn’t seem very happy.”

    Quite apropos of all this, Dave Catanese takes a look at the “band of others” which has come together to run Charlie Crist’s campaign. Catanese says that Crist’s team “is staffed by a collection of misfits who run the gamut from longtime loyalists to out-of-state hired guns. They have worked for Democrats, for Republicans and even for prominent independents. As with Crist, ideology appears to take a back seat to winning office.”

  • MO-Sen: Mostly-failed teabagger Chuck Purgason has an internal poll out (at least, I think it’s an internal) from Magellan Strategies… but that’s not really the point. There are two super-huge problems with this poll. First off, there are literally zero undecideds – Purgason claims he’s beating Dem Robin Carnahan 56-44. Secondly, releasing a general election poll just days before an almost hopeless primary looks extremely unserious. I don’t give a damn about Purgason, but I don’t think either of these issues make Magellan look particularly good.
  • GA-Gov: Barack Obama is visiting Atlanta to speak to a disabled veterans convention and to host a DNC fundraiser today, but Dem gubernatorial candidate Roy Barnes will be visiting other parts of the state. Several prominent Dems are planning to attend the events, including Labor Comm’r Michael Thurmond (our senate nominee), and Reps. David Scott and Sanford Bishop, the latter of whom has a competitive race this fall.
  • NY-Gov: Steve Levy has completed his transition from widely disliked xenophobic DINO to memorable Republican loser: He said he wouldn’t seek the Independence Party’s line this fall, and formally gave his backing to Rick Lazio.  Meanwhile, Elizabeth Benjamin says a source tells her that another disgruntled Republican, the vile Carl Paladino, is doing the opposite – he’s reconsidering his decision not to run on a third-party line and may run on his own “Taxpayers Party” line if he loses the GOP primary in September. Apparently, the teabaggers are taking the long view here, hoping that they can create a “true” conservative rival to the, ah, Conservative Party, even if that means helping Andrew Cuomo win the gubernatorial race.
  • WY-Gov: Mason-Dixon did a poll of the Wyoming gubernatorial primaries for the Casper Star-Tribune. On the GOP side, state Auditor Rita Meyer leads with 27, followed by former U.S. Attorney Matt Mead with 24, House Speaker Colin Simpson with 17, and former legislator and state Ag. Director Ron Micheli with 12. For Democrats, former state Dem chair Leslie Petersen leads pilot and former University of Wyoming football star Pete Gosar by a 30-22 margin.
  • FL-08: Franking – the privilege that allows members of Congress to mail out nominally “informational” materials to constituents at taxpayer expense – is one of those things that’s usually a lame non-issue… until it’s an issue. Incumbents have been pushing the boundaries of proper franking for centuries, and it rarely gets traction in campaigns, but I really wonder if Alan Grayson’s gone too far with this one. He recently sent out a DVD to 100,000 homes in his district (at a cost of $73K) titled “Watch Congressman Grayson in Action!” featuring a few dozen clips of his greatest hits in office. Maybe the video will be popular, maybe no one will care, maybe some Republicans will howl and get ignored – we’ll see.
  • IL-10 (PDF): It’s a bit musty, but Mike Memoli got his hands on an internal poll from the Dan Seals campaign taken in mid-May by Anzalone-Liszt. The numbers are a damn sight better than most Dem internals, showing Seals with a 46-38 lead over Republican Bob Dold, and a 41-32 lead among independents. Despite the poll’s age, I’d be surprised if things had changed a whole lot since then, given that the air war hasn’t really been joined yet.
  • IL-13: Dem Scott Harper had apparently been trying to shop the results of an informed ballot test on a recent internal poll from Global Strategy Group but didn’t seem to get many bites. So he finally decided to pull a Raul Labrador and release the proper toplines, despite their utter – almost extreme – suckitude. Rep. Judy Biggert leads Harper by a 55-29 margin. The most ridonc thing is that Biggert felt compelled to put out her own, not-exactly-dueling internal in response. I say that because the numbers in Biggert’s survey (taken by American Viewpoint) show her up 61-28. This was really not a well-managed move by the Harper campaign.
  • KY-06: Republican Andy Barr, formerly a top legal aide to disgraced former Gov. Ernie Fletcher, is coming under fire for his shoddy handling of a response to a government records request under the state’s equivalent to the Freedom of Information Act when he worked for Fletcher. In a 2007 report, then-AG Greg Stumbo (a Dem) said that Barr’s failure to produce records on account of their alleged non-existence meant that he was responsible for “records mismanagement.” However, Stumbo’s office did not determine that Barr had actually violated the state open records law.
  • LA-02: The DCCC added state Rep. Cedric Richmond to its Red to Blue program on Friday. This tells me two things: First, the D-Trip doesn’t think much of Richmond’s primary challenger, fellow state Rep. Juan LaFonta. Second, DC Dems are concerned enough about Rep. Joe Cao’s staying power that they’re getting involved in a reasonably contested primary, something they have largely avoided this cycle. Now in fairness, Louisiana has a very late primary – August 28th – with an absurdly late runoff on October 2nd. So I can understand wanting to avoid a pressured one-month campaign. Still, this suggests to me that this race is not the “gimme” we might have once imagined.
  • NY-01: Stuck behind Newsday’s paywall is a story which says that GOPer Christopher Cox has filed a lawsuit seeking to invalidate fellow Republican Randy Altschuler’s ballot petitions. This is exactly the kind of war that Democrats in New York have been hoping for. I can’t wait to read more about it. And don’t forget that there’s a third candidate in the race, George Demos, who is being publicly slammed for alleged ethical lapses while he was an SEC attorney by a former supporter, John Catsimatidis. You may recall that Cox is engaged to Catsimatidis’s daughter, which explains the old man’s turnabout.
  • NY-15: You’ve probably already seen this, but Barack Obama said in an interview with CBS News that Charlie Rangel should “end his career with dignity.” Really wonder if the old bull is going to keep fighting this thing.
  • NY-24: Mmm… donuts. The owner of a local donut shop, Michael Sadallah, filed a lawsuit trying to knock Republican Richard Hanna off the Independence Party line. Sadallah, an Independence Party member, has also donated to Rep. Mike Arcuri. Oral arguments are this week – good luck, dude!
  • OK-05: True Some Dude James Lankford just earned the endorsement of third-place finisher (and state Rep.) Mike Thompson, who scored 18% in the first round despite spending $900,000. Lankford took 34% and former state Rep. Kevin Calvey had 33%. Lankford and Calvey face off in an August 24th runoff.
  • Kansas: A rare bit of good news on the voter registration front: Over the last year in Kansas, “Democrats gained 11,260 voters, rising to 460,318; unaffiliated voters increased 38,764 to 490,395, and Republican ranks increased 3,189 to 744,975.” Obviously, that’s a pretty sizable edge for the GOP, but it’s still nice to see Dem gains both in absolute numbers and percentages outstrip the Republicans – especially in such a red state, and especially in a year like this.

    • MI-Gov: Bernero, Snyder Lead Primaries

    EPIC-MRA for Detroit Free Press (7/26-27, likely voters, 6/? in parentheses):

    Virg Bernero (D): 40 (24)

    Andy Dillon (D): 32 (34)

    Undecided: 28 (42)

    (MoE: ±4.9%)

    Republican primary:

    Rick Snyder (R): 25 (20)

    Mike Cox (R): 24 (26)

    Peter Hoekstra (R): 18 (24)

    Mike Bouchard (R): 16 (16)

    Tom George (R): 1 (2)

    Undecided: 15 (12)

    (MoE: ±4.9%)

    About the only thing we can say for certain about the Michigan gubernatorial primaries is that they’re both very unstable. On the Democratic side, state House speaker Andy Dillon has led most polls, but Lansing mayor Virg Bernero seems to be catching a late surge (to the extent that he’s been in the lead in the two most recent polls), perhaps as labor households finally find out that he’s the “labor” candidate.

    EPIC-MRA finds Rick Snyder on top, although Snyder, Rep. Peter Hoekstra, and AG Mike Cox have all been taking turns on top of a closely-matched trio for months now, and there’s no reason to see Snyder as any likelier than the other two to win Tuesday’s primary. Snyder may have a path to victory though, in that he has the moderate side of the equation pretty much to himself; although the conservative part of the Republican primary electorate is certainly bigger, there are three viable conservatives in the field, splitting that segment. Snyder has the endorsement of noted moderates like ex-Gov. William Milliken and ex-Rep. Joe Schwarz, and moreover, he’s actively seeking crossover votes from Dems and indies in this open primary state. In a one-on-one primary, I don’t think this approach would work, but with such a conservative pile-up in the GOP field, Snyder has more than a fighting chance.

    California: How Demographic Changes Impacted Partisan Changes (Part 2)

    Our next stop is the inland area of Central and Northern California. Back in the old days, while the Republicans dominated the cities, Democrats dominated the countryside. The shift to the Republicans began in the 1960s after Civil Rights, though some areas held out until the 1980s. The only counties to resist the rightward trend were heavily urban Sacramento and college town Yolo (home of UC Davis).

    In recent decades, population growth began a reversal of the Republican trend in counties such as San Joaquin as well as the tiny ski-based counties of Alpine and Mono and to a lesser extent Inyo. Other counties (Butte, Merced), with significant college towns, also reversed course. Fresno and El Dorado (suburban Sacramento) are beginning to follow those counties. Fortunately for California Democrats, aside from Kern and Kings, none of the counties that are still trending Republican are growing very fast, and this region has never made up more than 21% of the state’s population so the Republican shift has been far outweighed by the dramatic Democratic shifts in the NorCal and SoCal megalopolises.

    Alpine

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    243
    -21.4%
    0.01%
    R+25.8
    1930
    341
    40.3%
    0.01%
    R+21.6
    1940
    323
    -5.3%
    0.00%
    R+15.4
    1950
    241
    -25.4%
    0.00%
    R+33.0
    1960
    397
    64.7%
    0.00%
    R+24.4
    1970
    484
    21.9%
    0.00%
    R+8.7
    1980
    1,097
    126.7%
    0.00%
    R+7.9
    1990
    1,113
    1.5%
    0.00%
    R+3.7
    2000
    1,208
    8.5%
    0.00%
    R+3.5
    2008*
    1,061
    -12.2%
    0.00%
    D+7.4

    Amador

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    7,793
    -14.2%
    0.23%
    D+1.9
    1930
    8,494
    9.0%
    0.15%
    D+14.8
    1940
    8,973
    5.6%
    0.13%
    D+12.8
    1950
    9,151
    2.0%
    0.09%
    D+4.9
    1960
    9,990
    9.2%
    0.06%
    D+6.8
    1970
    11,821
    18.3%
    0.06%
    D+3.7
    1980
    19,314
    63.4%
    0.08%
    R+3.2
    1990
    30,039
    55.5%
    0.10%
    R+3.7
    2000
    35,100
    16.8%
    0.10%
    R+9.4
    2008*
    38,238
    8.9%
    0.10%
    R+11.4

    Butte

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    30,030
    10.0%
    0.88%
    R+1.5
    1930
    34,093
    13.5%
    0.60%
    D+3.6
    1940
    42,840
    25.7%
    0.62%
    D+4.4
    1950
    64,930
    51.6%
    0.61%
    R+6.3
    1960
    82,030
    26.3%
    0.52%
    R+4.5
    1970
    101,969
    24.3%
    0.51%
    R+6.1
    1980
    143,851
    41.1%
    0.61%
    R+8.0
    1990
    182,120
    26.6%
    0.61%
    R+2.9
    2000
    203,171
    11.6%
    0.60%
    R+10.1
    2008*
    220,337
    8.4%
    0.60%
    R+3.1

    Calaveras

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    6,183
    -32.6%
    0.18%
    R+0.6
    1930
    6,008
    -2.8%
    0.11%
    D+7.6
    1940
    8,221
    36.8%
    0.12%
    D+7.1
    1950
    9,902
    20.4%
    0.09%
    R+3.9
    1960
    10,289
    3.9%
    0.07%
    R+1.7
    1970
    13,585
    32.0%
    0.07%
    R+5.5
    1980
    20,710
    52.4%
    0.09%
    R+6.3
    1990
    31,998
    54.5%
    0.11%
    R+3.5
    2000
    40,554
    26.7%
    0.12%
    R+10.2
    2008*
    46,843
    15.5%
    0.13%
    R+10.6

    Colusa

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    9,290
    20.2%
    0.27%
    D+7.1
    1930
    10,258
    10.4%
    0.18%
    D+7.3
    1940
    9,788
    -4.6%
    0.14%
    D+7.0
    1950
    11,651
    19.0%
    0.11%
    R+2.1
    1960
    12,075
    3.6%
    0.08%
    D+1.4
    1970
    12,430
    2.9%
    0.06%
    R+1.9
    1980
    12,791
    2.9%
    0.05%
    R+7.0
    1990
    16,275
    27.2%
    0.05%
    R+9.5
    2000
    18,804
    15.5%
    0.06%
    R+16.1
    2008*
    21,204
    12.8%
    0.06%
    R+14.9

    El Dorado

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    6,426
    -14.2%
    0.19%
    D+2.6
    1930
    8,235
    28.2%
    0.15%
    D+15.5
    1940
    13,229
    60.6%
    0.19%
    D+13.2
    1950
    16,207
    22.5%
    0.15%
    R+1.7
    1960
    29,390
    81.3%
    0.19%
    D+2.2
    1970
    43,833
    49.1%
    0.22%
    D+0.1
    1980
    85,812
    95.8%
    0.36%
    R+5.8
    1990
    125,995
    46.8%
    0.42%
    R+7.5
    2000
    156,299
    24.1%
    0.46%
    R+12.7
    2008*
    176,075
    12.7%
    0.48%
    R+10.0

    Fresno

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    128,779
    70.2%
    3.76%
    D+3.4
    1930
    144,379
    12.1%
    2.54%
    D+8.7
    1940
    178,565
    23.7%
    2.59%
    D+15.6
    1950
    276,515
    54.9%
    2.61%
    D+7.4
    1960
    365,945
    32.3%
    2.33%
    D+9.9
    1970
    413,329
    12.9%
    2.07%
    D+6.1
    1980
    514,621
    24.5%
    2.17%
    R+0.4
    1990
    667,490
    29.7%
    2.24%
    D+0.4
    2000
    799,407
    19.8%
    2.36%
    R+5.7
    2008*
    909,153
    13.7%
    2.49%
    R+4.7

    Glenn

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    11,853
    65.3%
    0.35%
    D+0.7
    1930
    10,935
    -7.7%
    0.19%
    D+0.8
    1940
    12,195
    11.5%
    0.18%
    D+2.6
    1950
    15,448
    26.7%
    0.15%
    D+7.0
    1960
    17,245
    11.6%
    0.11%
    D+1.1
    1970
    17,521
    1.6%
    0.09%
    R+5.9
    1980
    21,350
    21.9%
    0.09%
    R+10.2
    1990
    24,798
    16.1%
    0.08%
    R+10.7
    2000
    26,453
    6.7%
    0.08%
    R+19.4
    2008*
    28,237
    6.7%
    0.08%
    R+15.8

    Inyo

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    7,031
    0.8%
    0.21%
    D+0.9
    1930
    6,555
    -6.8%
    0.12%
    D+4.5
    1940
    7,625
    16.3%
    0.11%
    D+0.4
    1950
    11,658
    52.9%
    0.11%
    R+12.1
    1960
    11,684
    0.2%
    0.07%
    R+6.8
    1970
    15,571
    33.3%
    0.08%
    R+9.9
    1980
    17,895
    14.9%
    0.08%
    R+13.4
    1990
    18,281
    2.2%
    0.06%
    R+11.4
    2000
    17,945
    -1.8%
    0.05%
    R+14.6
    2008*
    17,136
    -4.5%
    0.05%
    R+8.7

    Kern

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    54,843
    45.4%
    1.60%
    D+10.8
    1930
    82,570
    50.6%
    1.45%
    D+5.1
    1940
    135,124
    63.6%
    1.96%
    D+10.2
    1950
    228,309
    69.0%
    2.16%
    D+2.5
    1960
    291,984
    27.9%
    1.86%
    D+2.8
    1970
    330,234
    13.1%
    1.66%
    R+1.6
    1980
    403,089
    22.1%
    1.70%
    R+6.6
    1990
    544,981
    35.2%
    1.83%
    R+9.5
    2000
    661,645
    21.4%
    1.95%
    R+13.6
    2008*
    800,458
    21.0%
    2.19%
    R+14.3

    Kings

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    22,031
    35.7%
    0.64%
    D+2.6
    1930
    25,385
    15.2%
    0.45%
    D+9.8
    1940
    35,168
    38.5%
    0.51%
    D+13.3
    1950
    46,768
    33.0%
    0.44%
    D+7.6
    1960
    49,954
    6.8%
    0.32%
    D+11.4
    1970
    66,717
    33.6%
    0.33%
    D+2.8
    1980
    73,738
    10.5%
    0.31%
    R+2.7
    1990
    101,469
    37.6%
    0.34%
    R+4.1
    2000
    129,461
    27.6%
    0.38%
    R+8.6
    2008*
    149,518
    15.5%
    0.41%
    R+12.8

    Lassen

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    8,507
    77.2%
    0.25%
    D+0.6
    1930
    12,589
    48.0%
    0.22%
    D+7.6
    1940
    14,479
    15.0%
    0.21%
    D+16.2
    1950
    18,474
    27.6%
    0.17%
    D+12.1
    1960
    13,597
    -26.4%
    0.09%
    D+12.3
    1970
    16,796
    23.5%
    0.08%
    D+6.0
    1980
    21,661
    29.0%
    0.09%
    R+0.1
    1990
    27,598
    27.4%
    0.09%
    R+6.3
    2000
    33,828
    22.6%
    0.10%
    R+18.2
    2008*
    34,574
    2.2%
    0.09%
    R+21.0

    Madera

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    12,203
    45.8%
    0.36%
    D+5.0
    1930
    17,164
    40.7%
    0.30%
    D+8.9
    1940
    23,314
    35.8%
    0.34%
    D+14.0
    1950
    36,964
    58.5%
    0.35%
    D+6.7
    1960
    40,468
    9.5%
    0.26%
    D+11.7
    1970
    41,519
    2.6%
    0.21%
    D+5.3
    1980
    63,116
    52.0%
    0.27%
    R+0.4
    1990
    88,090
    39.6%
    0.30%
    R+4.8
    2000
    123,109
    39.8%
    0.36%
    R+14.0
    2008*
    148,333
    20.5%
    0.41%
    R+12.0

    Mariposa

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    2,775
    -29.9%
    0.08%
    D+8.0
    1930
    3,233
    16.5%
    0.06%
    D+7.5
    1940
    5,605
    73.4%
    0.08%
    D+11.6
    1950
    5,145
    -8.2%
    0.05%
    R+11.0
    1960
    5,064
    -1.6%
    0.03%
    R+3.6
    1970
    6,015
    18.8%
    0.03%
    R+1.2
    1980
    11,108
    84.7%
    0.05%
    R+3.4
    1990
    14,302
    28.8%
    0.05%
    R+2.5
    2000
    17,130
    19.8%
    0.05%
    R+12.7
    2008*
    17,976
    4.9%
    0.05%
    R+10.2

    Merced

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    24,579
    62.3%
    0.72%
    R+0.9
    1930
    36,748
    49.5%
    0.65%
    D+4.9
    1940
    46,988
    27.9%
    0.68%
    D+9.9
    1950
    69,780
    48.5%
    0.66%
    D+2.9
    1960
    90,446
    29.6%
    0.58%
    D+9.9
    1970
    104,629
    15.7%
    0.52%
    D+5.8
    1980
    134,558
    28.6%
    0.57%
    D+2.0
    1990
    178,403
    32.6%
    0.60%
    D+0.7
    2000
    210,554
    18.0%
    0.62%
    R+3.7
    2008*
    246,117
    16.9%
    0.67%
    R+2.7

    Modoc

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    5,425
    -12.4%
    0.16%
    D+4.3
    1930
    8,038
    48.2%
    0.14%
    D+7.1
    1940
    8,713
    8.4%
    0.13%
    D+4.9
    1950
    9,678
    11.1%
    0.09%
    R+3.3
    1960
    8,308
    -14.2%
    0.05%
    D+1.1
    1970
    7,469
    -10.1%
    0.04%
    R+3.7
    1980
    8,610
    15.3%
    0.04%
    R+9.7
    1990
    9,678
    12.4%
    0.03%
    R+9.2
    2000
    9,449
    -2.4%
    0.03%
    R+21.7
    2008*
    9,184
    -2.8%
    0.03%
    R+22.8

    Mono

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    960
    -53.0%
    0.03%
    R+4.7
    1930
    1,360
    41.7%
    0.02%
    D+0.8
    1940
    2,299
    69.0%
    0.03%
    D+0.7
    1950
    2,115
    -8.0%
    0.02%
    R+21.0
    1960
    2,213
    4.6%
    0.01%
    R+16.5
    1970
    4,016
    81.5%
    0.02%
    R+14.0
    1980
    8,577
    113.6%
    0.04%
    R+13.9
    1990
    9,956
    16.1%
    0.03%
    R+6.9
    2000
    12,853
    29.1%
    0.04%
    R+7.8
    2008*
    12,774
    -0.6%
    0.03%
    D+2.2

    Nevada

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    10,850
    -27.4%
    0.32%
    D+0.3
    1930
    10,596
    -2.3%
    0.19%
    D+6.4
    1940
    19,283
    82.0%
    0.28%
    D+11.1
    1950
    19,888
    3.1%
    0.19%
    R+5.8
    1960
    20,911
    5.1%
    0.13%
    R+3.1
    1970
    26,346
    26.0%
    0.13%
    R+1.5
    1980
    51,645
    96.0%
    0.22%
    R+6.6
    1990
    78,510
    52.0%
    0.26%
    R+5.6
    2000
    92,033
    17.2%
    0.27%
    R+11.6
    2008*
    97,118
    5.5%
    0.27%
    R+2.0

    Placer

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    18,584
    1.9%
    0.54%
    D+5.3
    1930
    24,468
    31.7%
    0.43%
    D+11.6
    1940
    28,108
    14.9%
    0.41%
    D+14.2
    1950
    41,649
    48.2%
    0.39%
    D+6.7
    1960
    56,998
    36.9%
    0.36%
    D+8.8
    1970
    77,632
    36.2%
    0.39%
    D+6.5
    1980
    117,247
    51.0%
    0.50%
    R+2.0
    1990
    172,796
    47.4%
    0.58%
    R+7.7
    2000
    248,399
    43.8%
    0.73%
    R+13.0
    2008*
    341,945
    37.7%
    0.93%
    R+10.8

    Plumas

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    5,681
    8.0%
    0.17%
    D+0.8
    1930
    7,913
    39.3%
    0.14%
    D+15.3
    1940
    11,548
    45.9%
    0.17%
    D+17.7
    1950
    13,519
    17.1%
    0.13%
    D+12.3
    1960
    11,620
    -14.0%
    0.07%
    D+14.0
    1970
    11,707
    0.7%
    0.06%
    D+10.8
    1980
    17,340
    48.1%
    0.07%
    R+0.2
    1990
    19,739
    13.8%
    0.07%
    R+0.3
    2000
    20,824
    5.5%
    0.06%
    R+13.9
    2008*
    20,275
    -2.6%
    0.06%
    R+10.6

    Sacramento

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    91,029
    34.2%
    2.66%
    D+0.6
    1930
    141,999
    56.0%
    2.50%
    D+9.9
    1940
    170,333
    20.0%
    2.47%
    D+15.5
    1950
    277,140
    62.7%
    2.62%
    D+7.2
    1960
    502,778
    81.4%
    3.20%
    D+9.5
    1970
    634,373
    26.2%
    3.18%
    D+8.3
    1980
    783,381
    23.5%
    3.31%
    D+2.0
    1990
    1,041,219
    32.9%
    3.50%
    D+2.0
    2000
    1,223,499
    17.5%
    3.61%
    D+1.1
    2008*
    1,394,154
    13.9%
    3.81%
    D+3.7

    San Joaquin

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    79,905
    57.5%
    2.33%
    D+3.3
    1930
    102,940
    28.8%
    1.81%
    D+2.1
    1940
    134,207
    30.4%
    1.94%
    D+4.9
    1950
    200,750
    49.6%
    1.90%
    R+2.1
    1960
    249,989
    24.5%
    1.59%
    D+0.0
    1970
    291,073
    16.4%
    1.46%
    D+0.5
    1980
    347,342
    19.3%
    1.47%
    R+3.7
    1990
    480,628
    38.4%
    1.62%
    R+1.2
    2000
    563,598
    17.3%
    1.66%
    R+2.4
    2008*
    672,388
    19.3%
    1.84%
    R+0.4

    Shasta

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    13,361
    -29.4%
    0.39%
    D+1.7
    1930
    13,927
    4.2%
    0.25%
    D+10.8
    1940
    28,800
    106.8%
    0.42%
    D+11.1
    1950
    36,413
    26.4%
    0.34%
    D+2.6
    1960
    59,468
    63.3%
    0.38%
    D+12.2
    1970
    77,640
    30.6%
    0.39%
    D+9.1
    1980
    115,613
    48.9%
    0.49%
    R+3.7
    1990
    147,036
    27.2%
    0.49%
    R+8.3
    2000
    163,256
    11.0%
    0.48%
    R+17.9
    2008*
    180,214
    10.4%
    0.49%
    R+16.9

    Sierra

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    1,783
    -56.5%
    0.05%
    R+0.9
    1930
    2,422
    35.8%
    0.04%
    D+10.4
    1940
    3,025
    24.9%
    0.04%
    D+13.6
    1950
    2,410
    -20.3%
    0.02%
    D+1.9
    1960
    2,247
    -6.8%
    0.01%
    D+4.9
    1970
    2,365
    5.3%
    0.01%
    D+6.9
    1980
    3,073
    29.9%
    0.01%
    D+1.4
    1990
    3,318
    8.0%
    0.01%
    R+1.5
    2000
    3,555
    7.1%
    0.01%
    R+17.0
    2008*
    3,263
    -8.2%
    0.01%
    R+14.6

    Siskiyou

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    18,545
    -1.4%
    0.54%
    D+4.4
    1930
    25,480
    37.4%
    0.45%
    D+7.8
    1940
    28,598
    12.2%
    0.41%
    D+8.2
    1950
    30,733
    7.5%
    0.29%
    D+1.4
    1960
    32,885
    7.0%
    0.21%
    D+7.2
    1970
    33,225
    1.0%
    0.17%
    D+3.9
    1980
    39,732
    19.6%
    0.17%
    R+4.0
    1990
    43,531
    9.6%
    0.15%
    D+1.9
    2000
    44,301
    1.8%
    0.13%
    R+13.0
    2008*
    44,542
    0.5%
    0.12%
    R+9.7

    Stanislaus

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    43,557
    93.4%
    1.27%
    R+1.0
    1930
    56,641
    30.0%
    1.00%
    R+3.3
    1940
    74,866
    32.2%
    1.08%
    R+0.4
    1950
    127,231
    69.9%
    1.20%
    R+1.7
    1960
    157,294
    23.6%
    1.00%
    D+4.5
    1970
    194,506
    23.7%
    0.97%
    D+5.3
    1980
    265,900
    36.7%
    1.12%
    D+1.4
    1990
    370,522
    39.3%
    1.25%
    R+0.3
    2000
    446,997
    20.6%
    1.32%
    R+4.4
    2008*
    510,694
    14.2%
    1.40%
    R+5.4

    Sutter

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    10,115
    59.8%
    0.30%
    D+3.2
    1930
    14,618
    44.5%
    0.26%
    D+9.2
    1940
    18,680
    27.8%
    0.27%
    D+5.7
    1950
    26,239
    40.5%
    0.25%
    R+9.2
    1960
    33,380
    27.2%
    0.21%
    R+9.4
    1970
    41,935
    25.6%
    0.21%
    R+9.2
    1980
    52,246
    24.6%
    0.22%
    R+10.6
    1990
    64,415
    23.3%
    0.22%
    R+15.0
    2000
    78,930
    22.5%
    0.23%
    R+17.5
    2008*
    92,207
    16.8%
    0.25%
    R+14.4

    Tehama

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    12,882
    13.0%
    0.38%
    D+1.0
    1930
    13,866
    7.6%
    0.24%
    R+1.9
    1940
    14,316
    3.2%
    0.21%
    R+0.6
    1950
    19,276
    34.6%
    0.18%
    R+7.6
    1960
    25,305
    31.3%
    0.16%
    D+1.7
    1970
    29,517
    16.6%
    0.15%
    D+2.5
    1980
    38,888
    31.7%
    0.16%
    R+3.9
    1990
    49,625
    27.6%
    0.17%
    R+3.5
    2000
    56,039
    12.9%
    0.17%
    R+15.3
    2008*
    61,550
    9.8%
    0.17%
    R+16.2

    Trinity

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    2,551
    -22.7%
    0.07%
    D+2.3
    1930
    2,809
    10.1%
    0.05%
    D+13.2
    1940
    3,970
    41.3%
    0.06%
    D+7.9
    1950
    5,087
    28.1%
    0.05%
    R+1.4
    1960
    9,706
    90.8%
    0.06%
    D+9.2
    1970
    7,615
    -21.5%
    0.04%
    D+4.4
    1980
    11,858
    55.7%
    0.05%
    R+3.6
    1990
    13,063
    10.2%
    0.04%
    D+2.5
    2000
    13,022
    -0.3%
    0.04%
    R+10.9
    2008*
    14,317
    9.9%
    0.04%
    R+3.1

    Tulare

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    59,031
    66.6%
    1.72%
    R+0.8
    1930
    77,442
    31.2%
    1.36%
    D+0.6
    1940
    107,152
    38.4%
    1.55%
    D+4.0
    1950
    149,264
    39.3%
    1.41%
    R+1.4
    1960
    168,403
    12.8%
    1.07%
    D+0.4
    1970
    188,322
    11.8%
    0.94%
    R+3.5
    1980
    245,738
    30.5%
    1.04%
    R+6.7
    1990
    311,921
    26.9%
    1.05%
    R+8.2
    2000
    368,021
    18.0%
    1.09%
    R+12.9
    2008*
    426,276
    15.8%
    1.17%
    R+13.5

    Tuolumne

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    7,768
    -22.2%
    0.23%
    D+3.1
    1930
    9,271
    19.3%
    0.16%
    D+6.2
    1940
    10,887
    17.4%
    0.16%
    D+9.9
    1950
    12,584
    15.6%
    0.12%
    R+3.7
    1960
    14,404
    14.5%
    0.09%
    D+3.0
    1970
    22,169
    53.9%
    0.11%
    D+1.7
    1980
    33,928
    53.0%
    0.14%
    R+3.0
    1990
    48,456
    42.8%
    0.16%
    R+1.3
    2000
    54,501
    12.5%
    0.16%
    R+8.6
    2008*
    55,644
    2.1%
    0.15%
    R+9.9

    Yolo

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    17,105
    22.8%
    0.50%
    D+1.2
    1930
    23,644
    38.2%
    0.42%
    D+6.0
    1940
    27,243
    15.2%
    0.39%
    D+5.8
    1950
    40,640
    49.2%
    0.38%
    D+2.0
    1960
    65,727
    61.7%
    0.42%
    D+7.3
    1970
    91,788
    39.7%
    0.46%
    D+13.9
    1980
    113,374
    23.5%
    0.48%
    D+6.4
    1990
    141,210
    24.6%
    0.47%
    D+11.8
    2000
    168,660
    19.4%
    0.50%
    D+9.1
    2008*
    197,658
    17.2%
    0.54%
    D+13.3

    Yuba

    Year Population Change % of state PVI
    1920
    10,375
    3.3%
    0.30%
    R+2.8
    1930
    11,331
    9.2%
    0.20%
    D+11.0
    1940
    17,034
    50.3%
    0.25%
    D+11.7
    1950
    24,420
    43.4%
    0.23%
    R+3.1
    1960
    33,859
    38.7%
    0.22%
    R+0.2
    1970
    44,736
    32.1%
    0.22%
    R+1.2
    1980
    49,733
    11.2%
    0.21%
    R+1.8
    1990
    58,228
    17.1%
    0.20%
    R+8.8
    2000
    60,219
    3.4%
    0.18%
    R+13.5
    2008*
    73,067
    21.3%
    0.20%
    R+14.0

    Legacy of the Class of ’94: Part One, Success Stories

    In 1994, the GOP swept to power, picking up 54 House seats.  Of course, this led to numerous House freshmen.  I’m going to examine every single Freshman from that year and see how their legacy played out.

    Category One: High Success: Still in Congress/Governorships/Cabinet (as of 2011)

     Brian Bilbray, San Diego —Lost in ’00 and came back to win a different House seat after the incumbent resigned due to corruption.  Successful and non-controversial representative.  Possibly vulnerable in 2012, depending on redistricting.

     Saxby Chambliss, S. Georgia (current Senator)—Has been very conservative, non-controversial Senator (other than the Cleland election, as sapelcovits pointed out).  Ranking Member of Ag. Committee.

     Ray LaHood, C. Illinois (current SoTrans.)—I don’t think he’s done anything wrong.  Obama likes him.

     Tom Latham, C. Iowa—A sane conservative.  Will probably fight Boswell in 2012 due to redistricting, but I think he’ll win.  He’s a good guy, even if he’s a Republican.

     Sam Brownback, Topeka—A non-sane conservative.  Future Gov. of Kansas, loved by Religious Right.  He won a Dem-held open seat in ’94 and proceeded to bring on teh crazy.  Now he wants to ban all centaurs (look it up).

     Ed Whitfield, W. Kentucky—Still a Representative, ideologically slightly moderate, but mostly conservative.  Free from controversy.

     Bob Ehrlich, Annapolis—Hopefully will not become Governor again this year.  But hopefully he’ll stay out of sight.  I really don’t know much about him.  

     Roger Wicker, N. Mississippi—Relatively new Senator, replaced Trent Lott.  In middle of GOP Caucus.

     Charlie Bass, W. New Hampshire—Will be a Rep. again next year after losing in ’06.  Sane as well, defeated SSP fave Dick Swett.  

     Frank LoBiondo, S. New Jersey—Another moderate Republican, one of perhaps 10-15 in the caucus today.  Broke term limits pledge.  

     Rodney Frelinghuysen, NW New Jersey—Yet another moderate Republican.  Six members of his family have been in Congress.

     Richard Burr, Winston-Salem—The definition of Meh.  Anyone who reads SSP knows enough about this vulnerable Senator.  

     Sue Myrick, Charlotte—Former mayor, very popular, pretty conservative.  One of many anonymous GOPers who follow party line but don’t speak up.  

     Steve Chabot, Cincinnati—Will be back in Congress this year, most likely.  Another noncontroversial conservative.  

     Steven Latourette, Cleveland Suburbs—Another rational Republican, similar to Latham, Frelinghuysen, although pro-life.  He defeated an incumbent freshman and probably has this seat for as long as he wants it, in my opinion.  

     Tom Coburn, E. Oklahoma—Bring on teh crazy.  Coburn is the definition of a wingnut Senator, one of the 3 most conservative in the Senate, I believe.  However, he’s pretty safe in his seat and is a strong campaigner.  

     Lindsey Graham, Upstate SC—Yet another rational Republican.  Probably will lose in his next Senate primary, but still.  He’s yet another Senator from this class.  They had ambitious Congressmen.  

     Mac Thornberry, W. Texas—Crushed incumbent Bill Sarpalius in this yellow dog district, and has been safe since.  However, we can see that at this point, there will be fewer than 25 active politicians left from this 70-ish+ person class after only 16 years.  

     Doc Hastings, Yakima—WA’s delegation went from 8-1 Democrat to 7-2 Republican, but he’s the only one left.  GOP head of the Resources Committee, advocates for ruining our planet.

     Jon Kyl, Arizona—Now on to those elected as Senators.  Kyl is second-in-command for the GOP and has been very conservative and very successful.  He impresses me.

     Olympia Snowe, Maine—A moderate, although not so much on HCR. Will retire in two years, I believe.  Has had huge amount of tragedy in her life, read about her.

     James Inhofe, Oklahoma—Where to begin? Global warming mocker, religious nutcase, IDK what else to say.  At least no corruption, that’s the only plus.

    And, that’s it for successful, non-corrupt politicians from the class of 1994.  22 members.  Part two will be the corrupt/scandal-plagued ones and part three the retired/retiring ones.  Please respond with what you think of this diary set, I’m interested.

     

    House 2010: The 39 Steps

    Thirty-nine is an important number to consider heading into this fall’s elections–it’s the net number of House seats the GOP will have to gain in order to take control of the chamber. There’s been quite a bit of prognosticating and guesswork going on as to how many seats will change hands this fall, and I’m not seeking to add to those, but to predict which seats are most likely to change hands, sort of like what Chris Cillizza does with his Friday Lines. So, without further ado, one humble SSP user’s suggested “path to 39.”

    1. Tennessee’s 6th (Middle TN)–Democrats have given up on holding Bart Gordon’s district, this Thursday’s primary will determine the next Rep.

    2. Louisiana’s 3rd (South)–See above. Republican Hunt Downer is likely to represent this district for its final two years of existence.

    3. Arkansas’ 2nd (Central)–Joyce Elliott is an intriguing woman who would be a good candidate in many parts of the country, but not in Arkansas, and certainly not this year.

    4. New York’s 29th (South Tier)–Ah, the Empire State, home to the country’s most pathetically dysfunctional state GOP (sorry, Florida, you’re a close second), as well as several freshman and sophomore Democrats in swing districts. If the House is going to flip, Republicans are going to need 3 takeovers in New York, and not even the state party should be able to screw this open-seat race up.

    5. New Hampshire’s 2nd (West)–Most people have this ranked much lower, but Charlie Bass is a great candidate for this cycle and district. He’s led in every public poll of the race, and his fundraising disadvantage won’t be particularly significant in this small-market district.

    6. Maryland’s 1st (Eastern Shore)–If Frank Kratovil is keeping things close here on election night, it will be a great sign for Democrats nationwide.

    7. Kansas’ 3rd (KCK)–Some people are high on Stephene Moore as a candidate, but I’m just not seeing it. Again, if Republicans can’t win here, they won’t be winning many places at all.

    8. Indiana’s 8th (Southwest)–Brad Ellsworth would have held this seat with little difficulty, but as an open seat it represents one of the Republicans’ easier pickups. Indiana has tacked rightward since giving its electoral votes to President Obama in 2008.

    9. Virginia’s 5th (Southside)–It took Robert Hurt a while to get his campaign off the ground, but polling now indicates that he’s consolidated conservative support. Perriello is a great fundraiser but the money alone may not be enough.

    10. Mississippi’s 1st (North)–The GOP fielded the best candidate it could in Alan Nunnelee, but Travis Childers hasn’t really given his constituents any reason to fire him. Should he survive, he may be in for a career like his colleague Gene Taylor’s.

    Now, if Democrats curb losses at 10, that’s a great night for the President’s Party. However, given the current environment, we’ll keep going.

    11. Ohio’s 1st (Cincinnati)–Steve Chabot is back for revenge after losing this seat in 2008, in large part because of unprecedented levels of minority turnout. If Driehaus loses here, watch for him to try again in 2012 with Obama atop the ballot.

    12. New Mexico’s 2nd (South)–The battle of the oilmen! With fundraising not likely to be a problem for either side, the environment and the reddish nature of this district should give Steve Pearce an edge.

    13. Virginia’s 2nd (VA Beach area)–Glenn Nye has done a better job of voting his district than has Tom Perriello, but there seems to be enough anger in his district to make that point irrelevant. This may come down to how much of his own money Scott Rigell is willing to spend.

    14. Ohio’s 15th (Columbus)–Steve Stivers came oh-so-close to winning this open seat in 2008, and is back for another shot at now-incumbent Mary Jo Kilroy, who has been a reliable liberal vote so far. If Kilroy survives, it probably means Strickland and Fisher are on their way to victory.

    15. Florida’s 8th (Orlando)–Lightning rod Alan Grayson, the Michele Bachmann of the left, is just as good as the Tea Party Queen at raising big money from national donors. The difference? Bachmann’s district is R+7, Grayson’s is a tough R+2.

    16. New York’s 24th (Central Upstate)–The second GOP target in New York is the seat of sophomore Michael Arcuri, who’s been an underwhelming Congressman to this point and again faces his 2008 challenger, quirky businessman Richard Hanna. The further away from this race the state party stays, the better Hanna’s chances will be this time.

    17. Pennsylvania’s 7th (Philly Suburbs)–Like New York, Pennsylvania is chock-full of one- and two-term Democrats in swing districts, the result of the 2001 GOP “dummymander.” And like New York, the Republicans will need at least 3, and probably 4 seats out of the Keystone state to retake the House. The easiest pickup is Joe Sestak’s open seat, which despite its PVI is fertile Republican turf (see Nate Silver’s excellent article on “PPI” from this week for more details on this).

    18. North Dakota (the whole state)–Earl Pomeroy is a political survivor, and Republicans haven’t even bothered seriously challenging him in almost a decade. But Rick Berg is Pomeroy’s toughest opponent since the 90’s, and John Hoeven will provide some good coattails atop the ticket. If Pomeroy wins this year, this will be his seat for life.

    19. Illinois’ 14th (North Central)–Yet another large state with several freshman and sophomore Democrats in swing seats (broken record, I know). Illinois looks tougher than NY or PA for Republicans, but Bill Foster is an obvious target in the 14th. He’s won twice against a less-than-perfect opponent, and now faces St. Sen. Randy Hultgren in Dennis Hastert’s old district. Full Disclaimer: I’m dating a Hultgren volunteer, and she’s ordered me to keep this race in the top 20. Interpret this ranking as you will.

    20. Pennsylvania’s 11th (East Central)–Another Keystone opportunity for Republicans, this time for the seat of the embattled Paul Kanjorski. Touted small-city mayor Lou Barletta has is back for a third run at this seat after a close loss in ’08, and his signature issue of immigration has been on the forefront of everyone’s minds this year. Is this the cycle Barletta breaks through?

    21. Colorado’s 4th (East)–On paper, this looks like a fairly easy pickup, but the Colorado GOP’s self destruction in the gubernatorial race gives Betsey Markey a better shot at holding her seat after flipping her HCR vote. Still, Cory Gardner is a strong challenger who will keep this one interesting regardless of how the statewide elections go.

    22. New Hampshire’s 1st (East)–Here’s the other, and more conservative, Granite State seat, held by the enigmatic Carol Shea-Porter. Once again, this is an easy target on paper–an incumbent elected on a now-unimportant single issue (getting out of Iraq) who is about two clicks to the left of her district and has never fundraised well. Yet Shea-Porter has won twice against the odds, and I’ll only believe she’s beatable if January rolls around and she’s out of office.

    23. Tennessee’s 8th (West)–The second open seat in Tennessee will be a much tougher takeover than the first. Republicans have three strong candidates, but need someone to survive the primary intact in order to have a shot. Well-funded Democrat Roy Herron awaits the winner in this ancestrally Democratic district.

    24. Michigan’s 1st (North and Upper Peninsula)– See “Tennessee’s 8th” above. Open seat, traditionally Democratic, GOP primary, good environment, good Democrat, gubernatorial race to drive turnout………let’s just call ’em both pure tossups for now. The PVI here is a little better for Dems though.

    25. Florida’s 24th (Space Coast)–Suzanne Kosmas also got herself into trouble by vacillating on HCR and this time must face a Republican who is not Tom Feeney. Sandy Adams excited the base when she entered the race but has been an unimpressive fundraiser, and the other Republicans in the field all have their flaws as well. But, if the national mood persists, might “generic R” be good enough here?

    At 25 seats gained, this is the dividing line between a “good” and “very good” night for the GOP. All seats below this point are uphill battles, yet still winnable.

    26. Nevada’s 3rd (South Vegas Suburbs)–Dina Titus is a tough politician who will not go down without a fight, but it’s hard to envision a Republican controlled 112th Congress that doesn’t include Joe Heck.  This tossup may come down to how well the Reids are faring atop the ticket.

    27. North Carolina’s 8th (South Central)–Democrat Larry Kissell narrowly lost his first bid for this seat in 2006, and then roared back to win it in 2008. The key difference? The 8th is 26% black, and Obama’s presence atop the ticket turned out the voters Kissell needed to put himself over the top. Can he validate that win this year against a rather generic Republican opponent? Stay tuned.

    28. Ohio’s 16th (South of Cleveland)–This looks like a slugfest. Challenger Jim Rennacci has matched freshman Rep. John Boccieri dollar for dollar in the fundraising department each quarter so far in this slight McCain district. A pure tossup that will probably indicate the direction the other Ohio races are going in this year.

    29. Michigan’s 7th (South)–Another freshman in a marginal district, Mark Schauer scored less than 50% last time and now faces a much more difficult environment. However, his saving grace may be that Republicans could nominate Tim Walberg to run for his old seat again instead of the more electable Brian Rooney. This will move up or down the list depending on who wins the primary.

    30. Arizona’s 5th (Scottsdale area)–Harry Mitchell is a very lucky politician. First, he had the chance to knock out erratic Rep. JD Hayworth in 2006. Then, a brutal Republican primary seriously weakened his opponent in 2008 and Mitchell ran up a big margin. And now, with the national headwinds finally on their side, Republicans run the risk of beating themselves up again. If the primary is more civil this time, we’ll learn if Harry Mitchell is really lucky or just plain good.

    31. New Mexico’s 1st (Albuquerque)–Never expected to see this on the road to retaking the House, but Jon Barela has been one of the most pleasant Republican surprises of the cycle. He’s running strong against freshman Martin Heinrich, who posted a big win here in ’08. There are other options for the GOP if Heinrich recovers before Election Day, but a loss here would make the math a lot harder for Democrats.

    32. New York’s 19th (Hudson Valley)–I promised you 3 New York seats, and here’s the third and final. In the 19th, we find 70’s crooner John Hall seeking a third term against moderate Republican Dr. Nan Hayworth. The grandmotherly challenger has been a fundraising machine, and was one of the few non-Democratic beneficiaries of the NYGOP’s dysfunction, as her too-conservative primary challenger Greg Ball unexpectedly quit the race. Hall has a tough race on his hands, but will be helped out by Cuomo, Schumer, and Gillibrand’s big margins atop the ticket.

    33. South Dakota (the whole thing)–Stephanie Herseth Sandlin is another incumbent who has done nothing to deserve a pink slip, aside perhaps from voting Pelosi for speaker, and seems to fit South Dakota well. However, she faces a strong challenge from young State Rep. Kristi Noem, and could become a casualty if it’s a big national night for Republicans.

    34. Pennsylvania’s 3rd (Northwest)–Freshman Kathy Dahlkemper outran Obama by 2 points as she ousted Rep. Phil English, and now faces the underfunded Mike Kelley. However, the district remains fundamentally Republican, and the GOP needs a few wins in Pennsylvania if their pickups are going to be in the mid-30’s or higher.

    If 25 seats is a very good night, 35 seats is a national wave, and most waves are marked by the fall of an entrenched titan of the opposing party. If the Republicans get to that point in 2010, the fall guy is likely to be……..

    35. South Carolina’s 5th (Midlands)– John Spratt, the stately Southern gentleman whose district has not elected a Republican since Reconstruction. Mick Mulvaney is seeking to break that streak, and his fundraising has been good enough to keep him in the race–which is all he needs to do at this point. If DeMint and Haley can fire up some grassroots anger and seats across the country are flipping, the Budget Chairman will be in trouble.

    36. Washington’s 3rd (Southwest)–It’s hard to get a good read on Washington, and particularly on this open-seat race. On the one hand, the district voted for Bush twice and Republicans have an intriguing candidate in Jamie Herrera. On the other, the Democrats in the race are winning the fundraising war and the Pacific Northwest seems to slip further to the left every year. I only see this one flipping if the GOP is close to retaking the House. In fact, given that this is the Pacific time zone, this may be the race that everyone will be up watching on election night.

    37. West Virginia’s 1st (North)-This one was much higher on the list until two very favorable bounces for the Democrats. First, they replaced scandal-plagued Alan Mollohan with the cleaner Mike Oliverio, who is just the type of ConservaDem that can win in this district. Then, the Senate special got moved to this year and Joe Manchin will be leading the ticket. However, Appalachia continues to move away from the Democrats and David McKinley is the best candidate the GOP has fielded here in a lo-o-ong time.

    38. Pennsylvania’s 8th (NE Philly Suburbs)-The fourth and final Pennsylvania district on this list is an Irish O’Rematch of one of the closest races of the 2006 cycle. Incumbent Patrick Murphy, a rising Democratic star, again faces former Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick, who has fundraised well since his late entry into the race. Fitzpatrick came very close to holding this in a tough environment four years ago, and now must dismantle the goodwill Murphy has built up while in office.

    Which brings us to (drum roll, please)……..

    39. Florida’s 22nd (North of Miami)-There’s some big money being raised here. In fact, the $5 million combined that Rep. Ron Klein and challenger Alan West have amassed is probably the highest in the country for a competitive race without a lightning rod (Bachmann, Grayson.) This is an old, white, Jewish district gerrymandered to be a partisan battleground, and Klein beat West by 10 two years ago. A West win would be monumental for the GOP-not only he be a rare black Republican in Congress, he would also be the 218th vote, by my math, for Speaker Boehner.

    But wait, there’s more!

    As I’m sure you’ve realized, Democrats are looking to play some offense this year as well. And while they’ve won most of the marginal seats over the past two cycles, there are four obvious Democratic pickups on the horizons this year:

    Illinois’ 10th, where Dan Seals should win on his third try

    Delaware, although Michelle Rollins and her money will keep this interesting

    Hawaii’s 1st, where Colleen Hanabusa gets Charles Djou to herself this time

    Louisiana’s 2nd, where barring another miracle Joseph Cao will go down

    Democrats are targeting about a dozen other seats, but since we’re envisioning an environment where the GOP is in position to take over the House, let’s assume their gains are limited to those four. Which would necessitate:

    40. Iowa’s 3rd (Central)-Is this heaven? No, this is the 3rd, and the Field of Dreams is in the 1st. I originally had this higher, but user desmoinesdem has provided consistent good news for Leonard Boswell, and as our resident expert on Iowa politics, I’ll take his/her word here. Still, the road to a Republican majority probably has to run through Iowa, and Brad Zaun will have to find a way to eke one out over Boswell.

    41. Illinois’ 11th (Exurban Chicago)-Debbie Halvorson, a strong recruit in ’08, ran up the score in this open swing district. Her first challenger is Iraq Vet Adam Kinzinger, who offers an intriguing, non-generic R, candidacy. If he’s to beat Halvorson, however, he’ll need strong performances from Brady and Kirk to drive Republican turnout here.

    42. Alabama’s 2nd (Southeast)-Yep, I have Bobby Bright this low because the man can vote his district, and there’s a good chance that he hangs around even if the GOP takes over the house. But this race remains enticing if only because of the PVI and the fact that Bright barely won two years ago with Obama driving black turnout. The 2nd is unlike some other Southern districts in that it has elected Republicans since reconstruction, so challenger Martha Roby has a shot at knocking off the House’s most conservative Democrat.

    And finally, that leaves……(second drum roll)

    43. Wisconsin’s 8th (Northeast)-No one is talking about this swing district, where sophomore Steve Kagan has maintained a pretty low profile. Yet this race jumps out at me for a couple of reasons. First, Kagan ran about even with Obama, and has yet to run in anything but a favorable environment for his party. Second, Wisconsin is a good grassroots state, and Scott Walker and Ron Johnson will both be campaigning heavily here. Finally, Kagan’s principle challenger is an outsider with one of the best names in politics: Reid Ribble. It’s nothing overwhelming, but all the small factors are telling me that Green Bay Packer country could be the region that upon which control of the House pivots.

    And there you have it. Forty-three possible Republican pickups, countered by four likely Democratic gains, leaves the House with a 218-217 Republican majority. Chet Edwards and Walt Minnick survive, and Dave Reichert becomes the swing vote under this scenario. I’ll leave it to you to draw the cutoff line in my list as to where you think the gains will stop (personally, I have it around 30), and will update as the races begin to take shape this fall.

    By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...