Swing State Project

Using Dave’s Application, I have drawn a redistricting plan for Oregon.  The state will either keep the current five seats or may gain one seat in 2012.  This plan is drawn for six seats.  I have seen several other proposals for a six-seat Oregon plan; however, those plans were either quite gerrymandered and/or were drawn to elect four Democrats and two Republicans.

In this plan, the districts are very compact and the plan is designed to elect five Democrats and one Republican.  County lines are used as the demarcation for districts to the fullest extent possible.

MAPS:

DISCUSSION OF DISTRICTS:

District 1 – Portland and Coastal Oregon

New district: Obama 63%, McCain 35% (current district: Obama 61%, McCain 36%)

David Wu lives in Portland, and about 45% of his new district is in Multnomah County.  He currently represents areas of west Portland.  Additional parts of Portland are added (a southern area currently a part of OR-5, and parts of north and northeast Portland currently a part of OR-3).  The remainder of the new district includes Columbia and Clatsop Counties, which Wu also currently represents, as well as all of Oregon’s other coastal counties (Tillamook, Lincoln, Coos and Curry), coastal communities of two inland counties (Florence in Lane Co. and Reedsport in Douglas Co.), and Josephine Co. in southern Oregon.  The Democratic percentage goes up a notch, and Wu is set to go.

District 2 – eastern Oregon

New district: Obama 41%, McCain 56% (current district: Obama 43%, McCain 54%)

This district is designed to remain the one Republican district in the state.  The new district includes 18 counties in their entirety (17 voted for McCain, while Obama won Wasco with 52%) as well as the most GOP parts of Clackamas County.  The incumbent, Greg Walden, lives in Hood River, but that 64% Obama county is no longer in the district.  The Republican percentage here goes up a notch.

District 3 – Portland and environs

New district: Obama 70%, McCain 28% (current district: Obama 71%, McCain 26%)

Earl Blumenauer’s Portland-based district remains largely intact.  67% of the new district is in Multnomah, while the rest includes all of Hood River Co. and part of Clackamas (the southern boundary of the new OR-3 in Clackamas corresponds very closely to the current southern boundary of OR-3).  The Democratic percentage goes down ever so slightly, but remains at a very comfortable 70% Obama level.

District 4 – Eugene and southern Oregon

New district: Obama 54%, McCain 43% (current district: Obama 54%, McCain 43%)

The new OR-4 contains Lane, Douglas and Jackson Counties, almost in their entirety.  The only discrepancy is that coastal communities in Lane and Douglas become part of OR-1 — this works out perfectly in terms of making each district equal in population and also in terms of keeping all coastal communities together.  Btw, does anybody know why coastal communities like Florence and Reedsport are part of otherwise inland counties, it doesn’t seem to fit the pattern of other coastal areas in Oregon which form their own counties, but I’m sure there are historical reasons (?)  The new district is almost exactly the same as the current one in terms of partisanship (and just like the current OR-4, went barely for John Kerry in 2004).  Not sure if Peter DeFazio is running for re-election, but if he does, he is set to go.  If not, other Democrats should be very competitive here.

District 5 – Salem and Willamette Valley

New district: Obama 54%, McCain 43% (current district: Obama 54%, McCain 43%)

The new district includes Marion, Benton and Polk Counties in their entirety as well as suburban parts of Clackamas Co. south of Portland (Lake Oswego, West Linn, Oregon City and Canby home of incumbent Kurt Schrader).  The new district is exactly the same as the current one in terms of political preference.

District 6 – Washington and Yamhill Counties

New district: Obama 58%, McCain 39% (current district does not exist)

The new OR-6 corresponds almost perfectly to Washington and Yamhill Counties.  To make the population perfectly equal, two precincts in Multnomah are added.  Apparently this area has experienced high population growth over the last decade, and if Oregon gains a seat in 2012, it can easily be drawn here.  The new district, if created here, would be one that is quite Democratic.  The territory here is currently represented by David Wu, but the new OR-1 is designed for him; not sure who could run in the new OR-6 (?).

That’s my plan for Oregon.  As always, I welcome comments and suggestions.  Thanks.

Mason-Dixon for the Las Vegas Review-Journal (10/6-8, likely voters, 8/17-18 in parens):

Harry Reid (D-inc): 43 (38)

Danny Tarkanian (R): 48 (49)

Harry Reid (D-inc): 39 (40)

Sue Lowden (R): 49 (45)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Hm, you mean that parading around the state with Sarah Palin’s father didn’t result in any Tarkmentum? That’s a head-scratcher. But maybe that sort of thing will play better in the GOP primary:

Sue Lowden (R): 23 (14)

Danny Tarkanian (R): 21 (33)

Sharron Angle (R): 9 (5)

Bill Parson (R): 1

Robin Titus (R): 1

Mike Wiley (R): 1

Undecided: 44 (47)

(MoE: ±6%)

Oh, I… guess not.

Anyhow, the general election numbers speak for themselves. But at least Harry has company even further down the barrel: while his 38-51 favorable rating is bad, at least it’s not John Ensign bad (23-43) or Jim Gibbons bad (14-51). In fact, it’s too bad that Ensign’s term isn’t up next year, because Nevadans apparently can’t wait to kick his sorry ass to the curb: his re-elects are at an abysmal 22%, with 44% saying they’ll vote to eject him from the Senate.

And how about that gubernatorial race? Mason-Dixon looked at a number of scenarios for that contest, too:

Rory Reid (D): 49 (47)

Jim Gibbons (R-inc): 37 (35)

Rory Reid (D): 33 (32)

Brian Sandoval (R): 50 (49)

Oscar Goodman (I): 36

Rory Reid (D): 27

Jim Gibbons (R-inc): 24

Oscar Goodman (I): 33

Rory Reid (D): 25

Brian Sandoval (R): 33

In the GOP primary, Sandoval beats Gibbons by a 41-20 margin. It’s hard to imagine Gibbons finding a way to claw back from oblivion, but it may be amusing to watch him try.

At this point, though, Democrats might be better off asking Goodman, the colorful mayor of Las Vegas, to enter the Democratic gubernatorial primary. He’s the most popular pol in the state (or more accurately, the most popular dude tested by Mason-Dixon), with a surprising 49-9 favorable rating. Rory Reid, meanwhile, is saddled with a 21-29 rating off the starting blocks — which is no match for Sandoval’s shiny 38-7. Yet, Democrats seem content to let Rory take a crack at bat, even when the evidence suggests that Harry is displeased with his son’s efforts to climb the ladder at such an inopportune time. I don’t think it would be too much of a challenge for Goodman, or anybody else with talent, to dispose of Rory in a Democratic primary. Unfortunately, no hypothetical Dem primary match-ups were tested this time around.

Joe Wilson’s campaign is reporting he raised $2.7 million in the 3rd quarter from 50,000 contributions.  The FEC website doesn’t have his Q3 report up yet, though.

And after all the buzz online, Rob Miller’s ActBlue page is not even at $1 million (though he obviously raised more than that from non-ActBlue places).

WTF, people?  I’m thinking it’d be really bad form to lie about how much money you raised, so I’ll assume Wilson really did raise $2.7 million in Q3.  Does this mean just about every teabagger donated to him?  Are we underestimating this movement to our peril?

By: Inoljt, http://thepolitikalblog.wordpr…

Democratic candidates in Utah must feel as if they’re facing an impossible task. The state is often considered the most far-right Republican stronghold in the United States. Winning Utah is akin to slaying a mighty dragon with only a bow as one’s chosen weapon.

Like all dragons, however, Utah has a weak spot. The year 2012 may be a ripe time for Obama to shoot an arrow through it.

The majority of Utah’s voters are Mormon; the religion is a heavy influence on daily life in the state. The vast majority of Mormons are also conservative, because Mormonism is an inherently conservative beast. In every presidential election so far, Mormons have proved to be strongly Republican.

Mormons like to think of themselves as average, normal Americans. They’re good people. They help with the community. They love their children and teach them traditional values. Nobody cares if they have a different religion.

Except many people do care very much indeed, especially the type of person who tends to vote Republican. Many would never vote for a Mormon.

Imagine the following scenario, below the flip.

Mitt Romney decides to runs for president in 2012 and starts as the front-runner. The race quickly narrows down to Romney and another Republican – perhaps a Huckabee-type figure. Romney’s Mormonism becomes a strong undercurrent and then explodes into the media spotlight, much like race did in the 2008 Democratic primary. It becomes clear that Romney is losing support because of his religion; eventually he loses the primary and ends up faintheartedly endorsing the Republican nominee. The good folk of Utah, angered by Romney’s treatment, turn out in drastically reduced numbers during the general election. Many vote for Obama – enough that, in an election he’s winning by 10% or so – he barely takes the state.

An unlikely scenario? Not really. First, Romney seems nearly certain to run in 2012; even now he is running a shadow campaign. In 2008, Mormonism was a strong undercurrent; Romney even gave a speech on his religion. There is no reason to think why it wouldn’t be in 2012. I doubt Mitt Romney will win the nomination in a competitive race; apart from his Mormonism, he is a terrible politician who lost all the important states in the 2008 primary (except for Michigan, which he won by promising to bring back jobs that will never come back).

On the other hand, its not certain that the media will pick up on the Mormon issue. And Republicans are strong enough in Utah that they might still win the state, even if all the above did occur.

Then again, Obama won Indiana when everybody said it couldn’t be done. Moreover, in 2008 he made strong gains in Utah, improving by 18% from John Kerry’s performance. Partly, this is probably because Obama is very popular in the West.

And maybe, just maybe, the Mormon factor had something to do with it.

This is my first redistricting diary. I’ve used Dave’s redistricting before for other states; I’ve just never cared to post it. I chose to do Massachusetts, which is poised to lose one seat in 2010. Barring a Republican win at the state house (which is increasingly unlikely with the candidacy of Tim Cahill), Democrats should be able to push through a liberal gerrymander. Here were my goals:

1. Take out Stephen Lynch: Lynch is the very definition of a DINO. He represents a D+11 district, but votes like a Blue Dog. I don’t know a single progressive in Massachusetts that doesn’t have sweet  dreams about primarying him.

2. Make sure that all representatives continue to live in the district they represent: This, I knew, would be hard, considering that 4 representatives live in Middlesex county alone, but it remained important to maintain the Democratic machine

3. Make the state look less gerrymandered: This, for reasons described above would also be hard, but I hoped that I could, at the very least, make my map look better than this:

4. Give Boston a compact district: Just personal, for me. I want the best city in the country to basically have a district all to itself

Here’s what I came up with:

State Map:

Boston area:

District 1-Blue-John Olver(D): I know that others who have redistricted MA decided to take out Olver, because of his age, but, again, my goal is to send Lynch packing.  This district loses some territory in Berkshire and Worcester, but gains in Middlesex and Norfolk (this was to allow other representatives to eat up Lynch’s strongholds in center-east Norfolk). Olver retains his home base in Amherst (assuming he runs). Looks a little gerrymandered, but it isn’t too bad, in my opinion.

District 2-Green- Richard Neal(D): This district just changed to take in more population. Gains territory from District 1 in Berkshire and Worceter.

District 3-Purple-Jim McGovern(D): Out of all the districts, this one probably looks the most gerrymandered. I had to make sure that McGovern kept his home base in Worceter (the city) while still gaining most of Frank’s territory in Bristol  (so that Frank was free to eat up the bulk of Lynch strongholds). McGovern will be very happy with this district, since he’ll probably be even safer than he was before (if that’s even possible)

District 4-Red-Barney Frank(D): Yeah, I know, Frank isn’t going to exactly be thrilled about this district, but I had to make do. He loses strongholds in exchange for Lynch territory (which is obviously less progressive) in Norfolk. But he retains his home in Newton and a stronghold in Taunton, and he also picks up territory in the city of Brockton, which is decently progressive. Frank’s margins may go down, but it won’t be my much. He’ll be fine.

Note: Theoretically, since this district contains a lot of his old strongholds, Lynch could run here, but I doubt he’d want to go head up against Frank.

District 5-Yellow-Niki Tsongas(D): Not much going on here, really. Tsongas loses some territory in Essex and gains some in Middlesex, at the expense of Markey. Her margins shouldn’t change at all, and she ratains her base in Lowell.

District 6-Turquoise-John Tierney(D): I decided to make this more compact, putting almost all of it in Essex. I did, however, have to give Tierney the town of Melrose to avoid splitting Methuen between two districts and retain population equality. Looks a bit prettier than before, and Tierney should have an easier time when he is essentially responsible for one county.

District 7-Gray-Edward Markey(D): This will be the Boston suburb district. It contains every town and city adjacent to Boston except for Newton (where Frank lives) and Somerville (where Capuano lives). Markey keeps his home in Malden, and should be happier with this more compact district

District 8-Light Purple-Stephen Lynch (D) vs. Michael Capuano (D): This district contains all of Boston, as well as Capuano’s home in Somerville and a small bit of Norfolk. I’m hoping that something like this will put Lynch in a rage, since he loses all of his old district in the moderate parts of Norfolk and Plymouth and now has to deal with the entire city of Boston. Given that this is urban and the most liberal district in the state (indeed, it would rank pretty high nationwide, I’d imagine), I’d expect Capuano to be favored on his merits (he should also win the labor backing), though things could get interesting if Lynch is still ahead in the money column. Another thing: at only 53% white, this district is almost minority-majority, and could very well be in a decade or so.

District 9-Teal-Bill Delahunt(D): I knew that Lynch might try to be clever and run in this district with this map (even though he lives in Boston), so I had Frank’s district take up as much of Norfolk as possible. Now this district is just Quincy (Delahunt’s home base), a small bit of Lynch’s old territory, and the Cape, where Lynch isn’t accustomed to.

[Update 10/13 3:41 PDT: the Hispanic data for California, Kentucky and Wisconsin was incorrect. I’ve now uploaded the correct data. Thanks to CalifornianInTexas and nico for noticing.]

Now in Daves Redistricting!

My time coming, any day, don’t worry about me, no

…

California, preaching on the burning shore

California, I’ll be knocking on the golden door

Like an angel, standing in a shaft of light

Rising up to paradise, I know, I’m gonna shine

I added the data for California to the server last night. I had to make a little modification to the code to handle the new format for block group data. Both these states use block groups because no shapefiles for voting districts were provided to the Census Bureau.

Warning: for California, the Assign Old CDs operation took 10 minutes on my desktop machine (3 year old dual core AMD chip, 2.2GHz chip speed, 2GB RAM, Windows XP — CPU bound operation). But it works!

I haven’t totally verified that everything is correct, but the population numbers look right and the assigned old CDs look reasonably close.

[Updated] All states with more than 1 CD are now supported. (OK and RI fixed!)

Enjoy!

It’s time to get things started.

When Republican power-brokers formed the Draft Branstad PAC last month, I assumed that the entity was a political action committee, as implied by the name “PAC.” However, the Draft Branstad PAC registered with the Iowa Ethics & Campaign Disclosure Board as a 527 committee. The distinction is important, because unlike PACs, 527 groups do not have to disclose their donors and are not allowed to advocate for candidates.

Today the Iowa Democratic Party caught the folks in charge of the Draft Branstad effort running their 527 group like a PAC.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 9, 2009

DRAFT BRANSTAD GROUP IGNORES IOWA ELECTION LAW

DES MOINES, IA -The political action group called Draft Branstad, formed to promote Terry Branstad’s candidacy for Governor before he became a declared candidate, is ignoring Iowa ethics law and engaging in express advocacy for Branstad, who became a candidate on Wednesday, Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Michael Kiernan said Friday.

• FACT: Last night Draft Branstad hosted an event at Graze restaurant in West Des Moines.  The event included Branstad campaign paraphernalia and free drinks.  It was paid for by Draft Branstad and apparently the materials came from the same group.

• FACT: Draft Branstad continues to advertise on conservative websites.  Screen captures made Friday showed activity on multiple sites.

“This Draft Branstad group has spent funds directly benefiting the Branstad campaign,” Kiernan said Friday.  “That’s a blatant violation of Iowa campaign ethics law.”  Iowa election law prohibits 527 groups from engaging in express advocacy on behalf of any candidate or candidate’s committee.  

“Branstad should either embrace the spending of this group, since it’s a group designed by him to promote his candidacy, or publicly disavow it,” Kiernan said Friday.

Iowans know better.  They aren’t confused by the tactics being used to avoid both the letter and the spirit of campaign ethics law.  They know Branstad was behind the “movement” to draft him – and he knows why.  This campaign-that’s-not-a-campaign is a mockery of our system of democratic government and a slap in the face to Iowa’s bipartisan tradition of clean elections.

Now, we call upon Terry Branstad to:

1 Call upon the Draft Branstad group to cease and desist public statements and representations in his favor;

2 Disavow any expenditures already made by the Draft Branstad group after Tuesday, Oct. 6;

3 Call for the immediate disbanding of the Draft Branstad group based on Branstad’s decision to become a candidate on Wednesday, Oct. 7.

The leaders of the Draft Branstad PAC should know better than to make this kind of mistake, and Iowans should know better than to elect Terry Branstad again.

Hey everyone, there haven’t been as many redistricting diaries lately, so I thought I’d make one for Virginia, since it’s a state that’s very close to home for me and has seen some big changes recently.

The first thing I did was I assigned all of the precincts in the state 4 colors (Blue for Obama over 56%, Green for Obama under 36%, Purple for McCain under 56%, and Red for McCain over 56%. I figure this would give a good visual representation of VA’s electorate and make things easier for me or anyone else.

This allowed me to do some stats on the entirety of all strong-Obama, weak-Obama, Strong McCain, and weak-McCain precincts in the entire state. Here’s what I came up with:

39.95% of all Virginians (or 3,104,205 people) live in precincts that went strongly for Obama.

13.73% of all Virginians (or 1,066,544 people) live in precincts that went weakly for Obama.

12.26% of all Virginians (or 952,461 people) live in precincts that went weakly for McCain.

34.06% of all Virginians (or 2,645,879 people) live in precincts that went strongly for McCain.

Aggregating votes using winner-take-all precincts gives Obama a win of 53.68%.

For strong Obama precincts, the racial stats were: 48% white, 31% black, 7% Asian, and 10% hispanic.

For weak Obama precincts, the racial stats were: 68% white, 15% black, 7% Asian, and 7% hispanic.

For weak McCain precincts, the racial stats were: 75% white, 14% black, 3% Asian, 4% hispanic.

For strong McCain precincts, the racial stats were: 85% white, 8% black, 1% Asian, 2% hispanic.

Now, since congressional districts are assigned based on precincts, I decided that the strong precincts represent the base number that a party should have. Thus, the Democrats should have 39% of the Congressional seats, and the Republicans 34%. The weak precincts in between represent the areas where manipulation through gerrymandering are most effective. Thus, if the Democrats controlled redistricting, a “safe” map for them to draw would consist of 7 Democratic seats and 4 Republican seats ((1-.3406)(11 districts))=7.25. The same goes for the Republicans, who are more likely to control redistricting ((1-.3995)(11 districts))=6.60. One could gerrymander beyond this, but not without introducing some serious partisan territory into their districts that could make them vulnerable down the road (as what happened to Republicans when they tried to pack all the Dems into 2 districts).

Therefore, I decided to draw a “safe” map that the Republicans would be smart to draw if safety is their greatest concern. I chose the Republicans because I’m not sure if the Dems will have a hand in this in VA come 2012. The outcome gives Republicans an additional 2 seats and would ensure that NO seats would change hands after the 2012 elections.

Here’s what I got:

District 1 – Blue – Rob Wittman (R)

Changes very little. Needs to expand more into NoVA due to population growth, but less than 10% of the district lives there. The NOVA part voted for Obama, but the rest of the district is fairly conservative. In fact, just to make sure, I traded some majority-black precincts and counties out for some of ultra-conservative Hanover County and other deep-red areas around Richmond. McCain probably got about 55% here. (71% white, 17% black, 2% asian, 6% hispanic)

District 2 – Green – Glenn Nye (D)

Changes greatly. Goes from being Virginia Beach and Eastern Shore based to being a liberal Hampton Roads district. I know some of you think that this district is unnecessary, but without it the Republicans would need to do some serious cracking, because there are still many majority-black precincts left over after packing VA-03 so much that it becomes 64% black (this is why Obama won Forbes’ district and almost won Nye’s). Obama probably got 65-75% here, as the district ONLY consists of strong Obama precincts. Nye would probably be challenged from the left by a black democrat in this district (39% white, 49% black, 3% Asian, 4% hispanic)

District 3 – Purple – Robert Scott (D)

Expands out into the countryside, into areas that helped Obama win Forbes’ district. I could’ve made it more black, but I wanted to keep the lines clean so that the courts couldn’t say anything. Still crosses the river, but not as obnoxiously as before. Obama probably got 65-75% here. (41% white, 50% black, 1% Asian, 5% hispanic)

District 4 – Red – Randy Forbes (R)

District becomes completely bleached and safe for anyone who succeeds Forbes in any political environment. Added the lean-Dem Eastern shore in so that the district isn’t too packed. McCain probably got 60% here. (72% white, 17% black, 3% Asian, 4% hispanic)

District 5 – yellow – No incumbent

Getting rid of Periello’s district was easy. I decided to break open Goodlatte’s and Boucher’s districts because they are overpacked with Republicans. This district takes in liberal areas in Roanoke, VA Tech, and Harrisonburg just to make VA-06 more conservative, but the district is still safe for any Republican who runs. McCain probably got 60% here. (82% white, 11% black, 1% Asian, 2% hispanic)

District 6 – teal – Bob Goodlatte (R) vs. Rick Boucher (D)

I know they worked out some kind of deal back in 2002, but if Republicans really want this seat, they really have no reason to care what Goodlatte thinks. This is mostly Goodlatte’s territory, but it takes in Boucher’s home. Goodlatte should win easily since nearly every precinct is strong-McCain. McCain probably got above 65% here. Republicans can unpack this after 2022 if they want. (91% white, 4% black, 1% hispanic)

District 7 – gray – Eric Cantor (R) vs. Tom Periello (D)

This district is anchored by the strongly-Republican Richmond suburbs. I took out some majority-black areas in Richmond, but I added some liberal areas in Charlottesville and majority-black areas from VA-01 to compensate. McCain’s performance is probably unchanged at 53%, but Cantor should be fine. I did not want to expand this district into NoVA, but I had to since I wanted to keep Wolf’s district partially in the Shenandoah Valley. Part of it was already in the DC media markey anyway. (77% white, 12% black, 4% Asian, 4% hispanic).

District 8 – purplish blue – Jim Moran (D)

Unpacked some to expand into heavily Obama areas in NoVa. Almost every precinct in this district was strong-Obama (he probably got 65% here). (59% white, 7% black, 14% Asian, 16% hispanic.

District 9 – light blue – No incumbent

Made this district too conservative for Boucher to win if he moved into it (he’d have to air ads in the Richmond suburbs where fire-breathing Republicans would hate him anyway). Really doesn’t include any liberal areas except maybe Danville. McCain probably got 60% here. (75% white, 19% black, 1% Asian, 3% hispanic)

District 10 – pink – Frank Wolf (R)

Wanted to keep one Republican district in NoVa. Basically trades Dem areas for Rep areas, while trying not to take in any strong-Obama precincts. Obama got 55% in Wolf’s current district, but I’d wager that drawn this way, the district would’ve went for McCain by about 52-53%. This is the only district that might change hands if the Dems haven’t peaked in NoVA, but given some recent elections there, I think they have. (76% white,

76% white, 6% black, 8% Asian, 7% hispanic).

District 11 – light green – Gerry Connolly (D)

Loses Republican areas, gains Democratic areas. It was hard for me to believe, but some of the Prince William County precincts went over 75% for Obama, and this was a district that was drawn for a Republican; well, there’s no way this one is going back to them anytime soon; thus, this is their second concession. (49% white, 17% black, 12% Asian, 18% hispanic), and yes, Virginia gets 3 minority-majority districts under this plan.

Whew, well, let me know what you all think of all this.

Field Poll (pdf) (9/18-10/6, likely voters, primary trendlines from March):

Carly Fiorina (R): 21 (31)

Chuck DeVore (R): 20 (19)

Undecided: 59 (50)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

Barbara Boxer (D-inc): 49

Carly Fiorina (R): 35

Undecided: 16

Barbara Boxer (D-inc): 50

Chuck DeVore (R): 33

Undecided: 17

(MoE: ±3.2%)

With the exception of a Rasmussen sample from July, Barbara Boxer has been posting double-digit leads against her Republican opposition. Today’s release from the respected Field Poll is no exception; she beats former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina by 14 and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore by 17. Boxer is hovering right around the safety zone of 50% — same with her approvals, which are 48/39 — but considering the approvals of her opponents (9/9 for DeVore, not well-known outside Orange County, and 12/16 for Fiorina, reviled in tech circles for her HP tenure) she’s looking pretty safe.

The more interesting part of the poll is the GOP primary, where the more conservative DeVore is starting to draw even with Fiorina. Based on trendlines from March, DeVore isn’t gaining so much as Fiorina is losing support to the “undecided” column, as she seems to be racing Meg Whitman to see whose campaign can implode first, what with Fiorina’s own tepid voting record and the universally-panned launch of her new website.

RaceTracker Wiki: CA-Sen