Swing State Project

The upcoming 2010 mid-term elections are causing me some mild anxiety, and I don’t know if there is an appropriate historical model for this election.  I’m asking for some insight from the SSP nation on what they see is the best historical model.

Facts

1.  A moderately popular Democratic President currently occupies the White House, although his popularity is not as strong as the day he was sworn in.

2.  The United States’ economy is hopefully in “recovery” mode from The Great Recession.  Most of the events leading to The Great Recession began under the Bush Administration.

3.  The opposition to the Obama administration is energized (note:  I don’t necessarily believe that “opposition” is solely the Republican base.  Certain factions within the Tea Party movement seems to be at odds with both the Obama Administration and the Republicans that were in power during the Bush Administration).

4.  Health Care legislation.  This is not to debate the health care legislation, but instead to compare how the electorate reacted to other administrations’ attempts to pass meaningful health care reform.

5.  Since the 2004 elections, the Democrats have (net) gained 14 seats in the Senate, 54 seats in the House, and the White House.

6.  The United States has 2 wars, 1 in Iraq and 1 in Afghanistan.

Mid-term elections in the past

I haven’t included all the mid-term elections in the past, but instead a select sample that we may compare to the current environment:

1930 mid-term elections.  The Stock Market crashed in October 1929, and the Great Depression was sinking into the United States.  Democrats won 8 seats in the Senate, and 52 seats in the House.

1934 mid-term elections.  Combining the results from the 1930 and 1932 elections, the Democrats had already picked up 149 seats in the House and 21 seats in the Senate, plus a new Democratic President.  In the 1934 mid-terms, the Democrats picked up an additional 9 seats in both the House and the Senate.  During this time FDR passed some key New Deal legislation.

1938 mid-term elections. Although in 1936 the Democrats won an additional 12 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate, there was certain opposition to some of FDR’s “court-packing” plan.  In addition, a recession hit the United States around 1937.  In 1938, the Democrats lost 7 seats in the Senate and 72 seats in the House.

1946 mid-term elections.  Harry Truman is now President, but he’s not a popular President.  At the time, Truman was not considered by most to be as presidential as FDR.  Although WWII was over, the Dems becaming the minority party, losing 55 seats in the House and 12 seats in the Senate.

1966 mid-term elections.  After the 1964 elections, with LBJ winning in a land-slide, the Dems had a 295-140 advantage in the House and a 67-33 advantage in the Senate.  The LBJ introduced the Great Society, which included Medicare/Medicaid.  In addition, the Vietnam war had heated up.  The Dems lost 48 seats in the house and 3 seats in the senate.

1978 mid-term elections.  In 1976, the United States elected a Georgian named Jimmy Carter.  Jimmy Carter was considered an honest man who could clean up DC.  Instead, President Carter fought with his own party over various issues.  The economy wasn’t strong, but it wasn’t yet weak from subsequent stagflation.  In the 1978 mid-terms, the Dems lost 3 seats in the Senate and 15 seats in the House.

1982 mid-term elections.  The United States elected former California Governor and former actor Ronald Reagan as President.  However, the economy was in recession with inflation and unemployment high.  Although Reagan is charismatic, his popularity had started to plunge.  In the 1982 mid-terms, the Dems gained 27 seats in the House.  The Senate, in Republican control (54-46) did not change.

1994 mid-term elections.  Bill Clinton was elected 2 years prior with 43% of the vote, and he pushed some ambitious legislation to Congress.  Gun-control legislation passed, but Health-care reform died.  The Dems lost 54 seats in the house and 8 seats in the Senate.  The Republicans are now in control.

As most of you can see, the current 2010 elections are not exactly like any of the above, but all of them have certain similarities to the current environment.  Please vote on which model is the closest to our current situation.  I’d like any additional thoughts to this diary.

Beau Biden announces that he is running for re-election to AG in Delaware:

http://www.delawareliberal.net…

(I apologize for the very brief diary, but I wanted to post it as soon as possible)

Another firehose-blast of Rasmussen polls….

AZ-Sen (1/20, likely voters, 11/18 in parens):

John McCain (R-inc): 53 (45)

J.D. Hayworth (R): 31 (43)

Chris Simcox (R): 4 (4)

Other: 3 (2)

Undecided: 8 (7)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

CA-Gov (1/19, likely voters, 9/24 in parens):

Jerry Brown (D): 43 (44)

Meg Whitman (R): 39 (35)

Other: 7 (3)

Undecided: 11 (18)

Jerry Brown (D): 45 (45)

Steve Poizner (R): 35 (32)

Other: 9 (5)

Undecided: 11 (18)

Dianne Feinstein (D): 43

Meg Whitman (R): 42

Other: 6

Undecided: 9

Steve Poizner (R): 39

Dianne Feinstein (D): 43

Other: 8

Undecided: 10

(MoE: ±4.5%)

GA-Gov (1/20, likely voters, no trendlines):

Roy Barnes (D): 42

John Oxendine (R): 44

Other: 6

Undecided: 8

Roy Barnes (D): 43

Nathan Deal (R): 42

Other: 7

Undecided: 8

Roy Barnes (D): 43

Karen Handel (R): 42

Other: 5

Undecided: 10

Thurbert Baker (D): 32

John Oxendine (R): 50

Other: 8

Undecided: 10

Thurbert Baker (D): 32

Nathan Deal (R): 49

Other: 7

Undecided: 11

Thurbert Baker (D): 34

Karen Handel (R): 46

Other: 8

Undecided: 11

(MoE: ±4.5%)

MO-Sen (1/19, likely voters, 12/15 in parens):

Robin Carnahan (D): 43 (46)

Roy Blunt (R): 49 (44)

Some other: 3 (4)

Not sure: 5 (6)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

NY-Gov (1/18, likely voters, 11/17 in parens):

David Paterson (D-inc): 38 (37)

Rick Lazio (R): 45 (41)

Other: 9 (13)

Undecided: 8 (8)

Andrew Cuomo (D): 54 (57)

Rick Lazio (R): 35 (29)

Other: 5 (6)

Undecided: 7 (9)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

NY-Sen-B (1/18, likely voters, no trendlines):

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 39

Republican Candidate: 34

Harold Ford, Jr. (I): 10

Not sure: 17

(MoE: ±4.5%)

PA-Sen (primary) (1/18, likely voters, 12/8 in parens):

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 40 (42)

Pat Toomey (R): 49 (46)

Other: 4 (4)

Undecided: 8 (8)

Joe Sestak (D): 35 (38)

Pat Toomey (R): 43 (44)

Some other: 6 (6)

Not sure: 16 (13)

(MoE: ±3%)

Arlen Specter (D-inc): 53 (48)

Joe Sestak (D): 32 (35)

Other: 4 (3)

Not sure: 11 (14)

(MoE: ±5%)

[A note to the winners: Please email me your address so that I can send you your babka! – DavidNYC]

So, I’m lazy and took my sweet time in writing this up. In my defense, Martha Coakley happened, and I chose to distract myself by working on more datasets for Dave’s App. I won’t steal Dave’s thunder, and I’ll leave it to him to announce any news on his time.

Nevertheless, here are the results from the Great Swing State Project Redistricting Contest, Round 1.

Some specifics first. I received 18 entries that were judgable; if I was missing anything from you, I tried my best to reach out and get everything I needed to judge your entry.

Of the 18 entries, with David’s generosity, I selected two winners: abgin, and MattTX2.

The first, I hope, is of no surprise – abgin’s 28-0 map, I think, made everyone’s jaw drop in its brilliance/hideousness/all-around-awesomeness. His/her entry was simply too good not to reward with babkaness!

For the other 17 entries, there was only one 26-2 plan, from silver spring. Three of you tried 28-0 plans, and the remaining 13 of you gave us 27-1 plans.

I tried to come up with some objective measures to help me consider them. Here are the two I considered:

1. To determine the amount of gerrymandering, I created a “county fragmentation index,” which indicates the number of “unnecessary” splits.

2. I also created a “swing index,” to measure quantitatively the improvements given to each district. I used a “safe line” concept (ala my New York State Senate district diary). Since reasonable people can disagree on what an appropriate safeline is, I evaluated each plan on safe lines at 1% increments from 50% Obama to 60% Obama.

Without further ado, I chose MattTX2 as the second winner. I thought he executed the screwing of Peter King in the most precise way, and as the first entrant, showed that this could be done (something I was skeptical of; I believed that the population simply wasn’t in place for that to happen.) His map also produced the best objective improvements, improving the 27 Democratic districts by an aggregate of 5,600 basis points in the 57-60% ranges, the best among the 27-1 plans. The performance, notably, didn’t drop off in the 54-56% range either. Matt’s map, compactness wise, wasn’t a horrendous gerrymander either; with 26 more county fragments than minimally necessary, this was solidly in the middle of the pack (the median, in fact.)

Here are improvement and county fragment scores for every entry.

I would be remiss in judging, though, if I didn’t mention some other notable entries:

• Abgin obviously had the loosest defintion of “contiguity”, but I think the award for loosest definition of “water contiguity” goes to andgarden.
• duffman gets the award for most compact map, creating just 11 more county fragments than necessary.
• bschak made the best attempts for population equality, acheiving a total deviation of only 3,902.
• AdmiralNaismith played population equality the loosest, racking up a total deviation of more than 113,000.
• Alibguy had the best 28-0 plan, yielding the best improvements from 52-60%.

In conclusion, thanks to everyone who participated, to Dave for developing this wonderful time-sink (I could never get GUIs down when programming), and to DavidNYC for giving me this opportunity to judge the contest, and for spreading the glory that is Green’s chocolate Babka! Congratulations again to abgin and MattTX2!

Update: I should better explain what the swing index is: the swing index is, in total, a slightly-adjusted measurement of the Democratic percentage improvement. The index is the sum, across all Democratic districts, of swings toward Obama in basis points.

When I say slightly adjusted, for example, I want to punish someone for unpacking Louise Slaughter’s district. So you have the Obama percentage before (Ob1), and the Obama percentage after (Ob2), and the “Safe line” percentage (SL).

So you have four situations:

1. Ob1 > SL, and Ob2 > SL: the district was above the safeline before, and the new district is above the safeline. The contribution to the swing index from the district is 0.

2. Ob1 < SL, and Ob2 > SL: the district used to be below the safeline, the new district was boosted above the safeline. The contribution to the swing index from the district is Ob2-Ob1, in basis points.

3. Ob1 > SL, and OB2 < SL: the old district was above the safeline, the new district was weakened. The contribution to the swing index from the district is SL-Ob2, in basis points. I did this so that you’re not being punished for an astronomic drop for a district that was much much too safe before, like Louise Slaughters.

4. Ob1 < SL, and OB2 < SL: the old and new districts are both in marginal territory; the new district could be stronger or weaker than the old. The contribution to the swing index from the district is Ob2-Ob1 in basis points. This can be positive or negative.

So I totaled up the numbers from each district, yielding the swing index that you see.

Also, the ones highlighted in green are the highest two indexes for a given safe line.

Lastly, the CFI is the “County Fragment Index” – the number of excess county fragments created over what is minimally necessary for 28 districts with perfect population equality.

The Fix:

Arkansas Rep. Marion Berry is expected to announce his retirement tomorrow morning, according to three sources briefed on the decision. […]

Berry, first elected in 1996, had been noncommittal about his re-election bid for months although, privately, his allies insisted he was planning to run for re-election. […]

The field to replace Berry isn’t yet set although Democrats mentioned include state Rep. Keith Ingram and Jason Willett, a former state party chair. On the Republican side, broadcaster Rick Crawford is in the race.

Yet another open seat for Democrats to defend, and the second one in Arkansas after neighboring Rep. Vic Snyder announced his retirement last week. While Al Gore actually won this district by a 50-48 margin in 2000, the CD, like much of the rest of Arkansas, has taken a redder turn in recent years. John Kerry lost the district by five points in 2004, while McCain beat Obama by a 59-38 margin in 2008.

Nonetheless, this is Arkansas, a state where Democrats have dominated further down the ticket and where they have a pretty deep bench of home-grown candidates. (This explains why the GOP hasn’t been able to come up with a stronger candidate than Crawford at this point.) Candidate recruitment will be pretty key for Democratic hopes here — and even then, expect a tough fight.

UPDATE: The Hotline has some more candidate buzz:

GOPers are not set on Crawford as their nominee. One source pointed to State Rep. Davy Carter (R), businessman/’84 GOV nominee Woody Freeman (R) and businessman Chris Fowler (R) as possible candidates. Ex-AR Farm Bureau chair Stanely Reed (R) lives in the district, but he abandoned a Senate bid after a single week for medical reasons.

AR AG Dustin McDaniel (D) would be an instant front-runner, if he decides to make the race.

RaceTracker Wiki: AR-01

If you’re like me, you missed this one.  Ted Strickland picked his new runningmate to replace Lee Fisher, and it’s President of the Center for Child and Family Advocacy and former Franklin County Judge Yvette McGee Brown.

You can see the video here:

http://www.tedstrickland.com/c…

This just about confirms our worst fears:

Our conversation ended with a surprising request from the vice president as he hurried off to a national security meeting. Spontaneously, he turned to the possible Delaware senatorial campaign of his son Beau.

Biden: “If you run into Beau, talk him into running; he respects you.”

Me: “I don’t think he wants to run, though.”

Biden: “I don’t think he does either. I know he doesn’t want to. … I’m so proud of the job he’s done [as attorney general].”

It’s kind of amazing that, without Beau, Democrats don’t really have anyone on the bench in this solid-blue state who wouldn’t start off as an underdog against Mike Castle. This is a very disturbing development, indeed.

UPDATE (David): Sheesh – this is bush league:

But a transcript provided by the VP’s office makes it clear that Biden was talking about current senator Ted Kauffman.

VP to Harry Themal:  Always a pleasure of seeing you buddy.  Talk Ted into running, if Beau doesn’t.   Talk him into running – he respects you.  I wish I had the power of appointing Senators.  I’d appoint him from Maryland if he wouldn’t do Delaware.

Harry Themal: “I don’t think he wants to run, though.”

VP:  No I don’t think he does either. I know he doesn’t.  I’m so proud of the job he’s done.  God.

I’m still skeptical as to whether Beau Biden will run, but man, this was a serious flub on the part of the News Journal. And even though they’ve added a correction to the article, their front page still has the wrong headline. They should have posted the entire raw transcript online in the first place – that should be standard operating procedure for all media outfits.

Note: The original title of this piece was “Joe Biden Says Beau Not Interested in Running.”

RaceTracker Wiki: DE-Sen

Indiana is where I live now, so I thought I’d do a rundown here too, though I don’t know the politics as well and the results won’t be as interesting as for the Arizona races.  The big story here is a colossal recruiting failure on the part of Republicans in IN-01, IN-02, and IN-08, and a sticky situation for them in IN-09.  As of now, I predict only one competitive race in the entire state in 2010.  Read on for more…

IN-Sen: Evan Bayh is beloved in this state.  I’ve heard liberals and conservatives alike talk about how great he is — it’s the darnedest thing.  Plus, he’s sitting on $12 million, which is what happens when you don’t seriously challenge a guy for twelve years.  State Sen. Martin Stutzman and former Rep. John Hostettler aren’t going to give Bayh much of a scare.  Rep. Mike Pence could pose a stiffer challenge, but it’s not at all clear that he’s going to pull the trigger.  Even if Pence did run, the smart money would still be on Bayh; his iconic status and unbelievable warchest would make him difficult to beat even in the best of electoral climates for Republicans.  Prediction: Likely Dem hold.

IN-01: Exhibit A in the GOP’s recruiting woes saga in this state.  Rep. Pete Visclosky is embroiled in scandal and being investigated by the FBI, and even though it’s a deep-blue district, the Republicans should put up a Joe Cao-like candidate in case Visclosky’s legal troubles worsen.  So far, all they’ve been able to manage is frequent candidate and carpenter Mark Leyva, last seen getting pasted by Visclosky last cycle…and the cycle before…and the one before that…and the one before that.  Yes, Leyva has been the Republican nominee against Visclosky four consecutive times, and is trying for his fifth — a situation roughly analogous to that in IN-09.  Leyva’s best showing was 32% back in 2004, so there’s nothing going on in this district unless someone else steps up.  Prediction: safe Dem hold.

IN-02: Rep. Joe Donnelly is always afraid he’s going to lose this red seat, but he just keeps getting lucky.  The GOP’s infamous recruiting failure here last cycle resulted in their hand-picked candidate, Luke Puckett, nearly losing the primary to a neo-Nazi sympathizer en route to getting steamrolled 67-30 by Donnelly.  Republicans put some muscle into getting a better recruit this time, but the candidate they got, State Rep. Jackie Wilarski, is scarcely better than Puckett.  Given the national climate and the district’s lean, this seat should be the Republicans’ for the taking, but “Wacky Jackie” isn’t going to cut the mustard.  Unless someone else steps up for the Republicans, Donnelly only loses in a 70-seat landslide.  Prediction: likely Dem hold.

IN-03: The Democrats have a better candidate in this race than they have any right to expect given the national mood and the hard-right lean of the district: Tom Hayhurst, a medical doctor and former Fort Wayne City Councilman.  Hayhurst came shockingly close to beating Rep. Mark Souder back in 2006, garnering 46% of the vote despite a complete lack of national Democratic support.  Had he made his second try in a better year for Democrats — for instance, in 2008 — Hayhurst might have had a shot at this seat.  As it is, the national Democrats will have too many incumbents to defend to bother with a long-shot race like this one, and Souder righted his sputtering campaign machine in a convincing 2008 win over 28-year-old attorney Michael Montagano.  Souder has to be heavily favored to win both his primary against former congressional aide Phil Troyer and Paulist Rachel Grubb, and the general election against Hayhurst.  If Grubb or Troyer somehow beat Souder in the primary, however, Hayhurst might have a chance.  Prediction: likely GOP hold.

IN-04: Last cycle, attorney Nels Ackerson briefly posed a serious challenge to Rep. Steve Buyer before completely imploding on the campaign trail.  This year, no one is even bothering to run against the well-funded and effective Buyer.  Prediction: safe GOP hold.

IN-05: In the most conservative district in Indiana, the only question is which of the ten thousand conservative Republicans running — including incumbent Rep. Dan Burton — will be on hand to steamroll cancer physician Nasser Hanna in the general election.  Prediction: safe GOP hold.

IN-06: This district, represented by arch-conservative Rep. Mike Pence, is actually somewhat interesting in that it’s the most moderate district in Indiana currently represented by a Republican — more so than IN-03, which was seriously in play during the past two cycles.  Pence’s personal popularity and influence in Washington has kept it safe for him, but with rumors that he’ll be moving up to Senate or Presidential races soon (either this cycle or next), there would seem to be an opening here for a popular and/or well-funded Democrat.  On the other hand, the complete lack of Dem candidates running for the seat this cycle — exactly zero last time I checked — indicates that this isn’t the year to bank on a pickup here.  Prediction: safe GOP hold.

IN-07: Republicans used to do well in this district because the incumbent, former Rep. Julia Carson, was too ill to campaign.  When her grandson Andre trounced the most popular Republican in the district by 13 points in a 2007 special election, the GOP realized those days were over.  The Republicans aren’t even trying this cycle; college professor Marvin Scott, last seen getting 38% of the vote against Evan Bayh in 2004, won’t pose much of a threat to Carson.  Prediction: safe Dem hold.

IN-08: The “bloody Eighth” stopped being bloody after wildly popular sheriff Brad Ellsworth beat Rep. John Hostettler by 24 points back in 2006.  The Republicans might have a shot at this seat given the national climate, but Ellsworth is so popular that no serious candidate has stepped up thus far.  Hostettler would rather make a kamikaze run against Evan Bayh than face Ellsworth again, and cardiologist Larry Bucshon won’t even make Ellsworth break a sweat.  Prediction: safe Dem hold.

IN-09: This is the main show in Indiana this cycle, and it’s one residents of the district have seen four times before.  Get ready for the fifth installment of Rep. Baron Hill vs. former Rep. Mike Sodrel.  Hill is 3-1 in their previous matchups, including a 20-point pasting of Sodrel in 2008 (all three of the other races were very close).  A new poll, however, shows Sodrel beating Hill by eight points if the election were held today.  I don’t doubt that people in this district are fed up with Hill — his milquetoast campaign style has failed to make him as entrenched as Ellsworth is in the neighboring district — but I really can’t see them voting for Sodrel after they basically told him to take his ball and go home just fourteen months ago.  If Sodrel wins his primary against attorney Todd Young and teabagger Travis Hankins, I’d have to say Hill is favored to win reelection.  It’s just as likely, though, that the establishment candidate Young will beat the more conservative Sodrel, and if that happens, Hill’s toast.  Since Hill wants to run for governor in 2012, he might also decide to bail on this race; in that case, term-limited Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan, who’s been trying to build a national profile lately, might run for the seat, but he’s too liberal for the district and would be heavily outgunned by either Sodrel or Young.  On balance, I’d give the slight advantage to the Republicans here.  Prediction: tossup.

Seats in order of likelihood of flipping: IN-09, IN-Sen, IN-02, IN-03, IN-01, IN-07, IN-06, IN-08, IN-05, IN-04.

Predicted outcome: Republicans pick up IN-09, Burton loses to another Republican in IN-04, all other seats stay in the same hands (I’m least sanguine about IN-09, and wouldn’t count Dems out yet).

Finally:

Andrew Cuomo is ready to run for governor.

New York’s state attorney general is set to take on Gov. Paterson in the Democratic primary, a source close to Cuomo told the Daily News.

Cuomo spokesman Richard Bamberger declined comment, but a source close to Cuomo told The News, “He will make an announcement at the end of March. And what he will say is that he intends to run for governor. … He thinks there are a lot of problems in the state and he thinks he can help solve them.”

Poll after poll has shown Cuomo not only winning the general election with ease, but also trouncing Paterson in every primary match-up we’ve seen — including a recent Siena poll giving Cuomo a 38-point lead over Paterson in the primary and a 42-point lead on the current Republican front-runner, ex-Rep. Rick Lazio. The primary could still get pretty lively, but it’ll be a futile exercise for the embattled governor. He’d be much better off fading into retirement, but there are no signs that Paterson’s willing to concede the race without a fight.

RaceTracker Wiki: NY-Gov

Market Shares Corp. for the Chicago Tribune/WGN-TV (1/16-20, likely voters, 12/2-8 in parens):

Pat Quinn (D-inc): 44 (49)

Dan Hynes (D): 40 (23)

Other: 2 (7)

Undecided: 13 (21)

(MoE: ±4%)

These are some pretty remarkable trendlines, though the toplines are very close to a recent Hynes internal, which had him down 44-37. As the Tribune notes, Hynes (the state’s Comptroller) has been hammering Quinn on TV, aided by his somewhat surprisingly larger warchest. Hynes’s jump is also a tribute to the power of negative campaigning, as this race has turned quite ugly – he’s come under fire of late for ads which dredge up hoary old Chicago racial politics. This move may backfire on Hynes, but with the primary just over a week away, there’s no doubt that this contest is very much a tossup.

(An aside: For an excellent exegesis on the importance of Harold Washington, Chicago’s first black mayor, and how his ascent and untimely death made an indellible mark on the city’s politics, I highly recommend Barack Obama’s Dreams from My Father. Obama’s years as a community organizer in Chicago came during and after Washington’s tenure.)

The Tribune also polled the GOP primary:

Andy McKenna (R): 19 (12)

Jim Ryan (R): 18 (26)

Kirk Dillard (R): 14 (9)

Bill Brady (R): 9 (10)

Adam Andrzejewski (R): 7 (6)

Other: 14

Undecided: 17

(MoE: ±4%)

Talk about unsettled – and what a drop for Ryan, the former AG (and not to be confused with disgraced former Gov. George Ryan or disgraced 2004 GOP senate nominee Jack Ryan). I tend to think that Ryan would be the GOP’s strongest candidate, but he’s suffered at the hands of McKenna (the former state party chair), who, like Hynes, has been blitzing the airwaves. Interestingly, McKenna has also targeted Quinn, which might also help explain Hynes’s surge. In any event, much like the Dem primary, this is anybody’s race.

The full polling memo is not available online yet, but I’d expect the Tribune to post it here. (It’s nice to see the tradmed making better use of resources like Scribd and putting original documents online to allow greater scrutiny.) I also expect that the Trib will release senate numbers soon as well.