Swing State Project

The presidential-results-by-congressional-district crowdsourcing project at Swing State Project just keeps rolling along, and we’re really getting close to total completion. We’re adding 31 more districts today, having scored precinct-level data from some of the largest counties still outstanding (most notably, Queens County, NY, and Wayne County, MI). That leaves only 18 districts with problem counties left to go! (Nassau and Erie Counties, we’re lookin’ at you…)

As always, big thanks to all SSP readers who’ve contributed to this project, with extra thanks for this batch to Democratic Luntz and jeffmd, who rocks an Excel pivot table like nobody’s business. If you want to see a handy list of all districts in one place, look here. If you want a fuller picture, waves one, two, three, and four are here. And if you want an absolutely crushing level of detail, just click on our master database and then on a particular state to see each district in all its precinct-level glory.

District	Obama #	McCain #	Other #	2008 %	2004 %	2000 %
CA-11	169,183	139,863	5,495	53.8/44.5	45/54	45/53
CA-14	213,671	72,707	5,883	73.1/24.9	68/30	62/34
CA-15	174,571	75,753	4,837	68.4/29.7	63/36	60/36
CA-16	154,324	63,975	3,585	69.6/28.8	63/36	64/33
CA-18	104,299	68,629	3,141	59.2/39.0	49/50	53/44
CA-19	124,533	141,013	4,990	46.0/52.1	38/61	39/58
CA-20	77,158	50,146	2,257	59.6/38.7	51/48	55/44
CA-21	93,578	125,293	3,591	42.1/56.3	34/65	37/61
CA-23	172,348	85,261	6,312	65.3/32.3	58/40	54/40
CA-24	160,738	151,678	5,916	50.5/47.7	43/56	43/54
IN-06	133,459	151,596	3,933	46.2/52.5	35/64	40/59
MI-11	196,909	163,190	6,075	53.8/44.6	47/53	47/51
MI-12	212,850	108,752	5,626	65.1/33.2	61/39	61/37
MI-13	167,242	32,722	1,763	82.9/16.2	81/19	80/19
MI-14	189,406	33,533	1,906	84.2/14.9	83/17	81/18
MI-15	219,674	106,322	5,680	66.2/32.1	62/38	60/38
NJ-01	198,196	103,992	3,687	64.8/34.0	61/39	63/34
NJ-02	165,983	137,448	3,967	54.0/44.7	49/50	54/43
NJ-04	150,975	169,848	3,914	46.5/52.3	44/56	50/46
NJ-12	198,145	139,367	3,575	58.1/40.9	54/46	56/40
NY-06	185,890	22,302	598	89.0/10.7	84/15	87/11
NY-07	148,242	38,170	943	79.1/20.4	74/25	75/21
NY-09	111,237	88,307	1,533	55.3/43.9	56/44	67/30
NY-12	154,394	23,504	1,283	86.2/13.1	80/19	77/15
NY-14	212,802	56,946	2,402	78.2/20.9	74/25	70/23
OH-06	142,474	150,551	6,268	47.6/50.3	49/51	47/49
OH-13	183,254	136,316	4,640	56.5/42.1	56/44	53/44
OH-16	152,509	160,914	6,355	47.7/50.3	46/54	42/53
OH-17	179,531	104,773	6,011	61.8/36.1	63/37	60/35
TX-15	100,398	66,501	922	59.8/39.6	49/51	54/46
TX-27	97,830	84,366	1,283	53.3/46.0	45/55	50/50

So what are the highlights and lowlights for this installment? As we’ve seen earlier, California just went from dark blue to even bluer, and that seeped all the way down to some of its reliably red districts (CA-24 in Ventura County went narrowly for Obama… which hopefully will convince Elton Gallegly of the many botched retirement attempts to actually get off the pot this time… and we even came close in CA-19, which stitches together the Sierras and the whiter parts of the Central Valley). A lot of that movement may have to do with California’s huge Latino population, fed up with the GOP’s increasing reliance on immigrant-bashing; parallel movement is seen in Texas, where two mostly-Latino districts (TX-15 and TX-27) also show wide swings in the Democratic direction.

Also, as we’ve seen in other districts, Indiana had some of the biggest Democratic swings in the nation, simply by virtue of the Democrats showing up and competing there for once. Check out IN-06. Remember, this is the district represented by Mike Pence, arch-wingnut who just got promoted from leading the RSC to the #3 position in the whole GOP caucus… and now he’s in a district that McCain won by just 6 points.

On the bad side of the ledger, we’re seeing continued declines in some of the blue-collar white-ethnic districts in the NYC area. These districts suffered some of the biggest declines in that nation from Gore to Kerry, and I thought that might be a temporary 9/11 effect since those districts were some of the ones hardest hit. However, we’ve continued to lose ground in NY-09 (the old-school parts of Brookyln and Queens), and are stagnant in NJ-04 (Ocean and Monmouth Counties, where people from NY-09 go to retire). Not that it matters too much; these districts are outweighed by the overall blue trends in these already-blue states. And in NY-09 they still managed to kick out state senator Serphin Maltese to finally flip control of the New York senate; Obama’s performance may have to do more with 2008-specific racism/latent PUMAism than an overall trend.

Also troubling is what’s going on in eastern Ohio, where we lost ground in OH-06 and OH-17. It’s not hard to explain — OH-06 is considered the Appalachian part of Ohio, while OH-17 is centered on Youngstown, a place similar to Pittsburgh’s collar counties where the once-strong union base is dying off or drifting away as the manufacturing sector evaporates. This is more worrisome since Ohio is a swing state where every vote counts, but as this part of the state is hollowing out while the Columbus and Cincinnati areas are starting to move into our column, it’s not a killer.

Finally, I’m making good on my promise of some updates, based on further refining of early-vote or split-precinct data, or finding more data from small counties where we’d previously made a “close enough” judgment. As you’ll see, the numbers haven’t moved that much, with a few exceptions (perhaps most significantly in IL-18, which we originally thought Obama had won by a few thousand votes but turns out he lost by a few hundred; see also improvements in FL-06 and FL-07, SC-01 and SC-06). This will only be of interest to people who are real sticklers for accuracy or who are keeping their own spreadsheets on this subject. (Of course, since we’re talking about Swing State Project here, that probably describes most of our readership!) The updates tables is over the flip…

District	Obama #	McCain #	Other #	Updated %	What we’d said
FL-01	112,793	234,185	4,349	32.1/66.7	32.2/66.7
FL-02	163,954	199,591	4,207	44.6/54.3	44.7/54.3
FL-03	169,406	60,062	1,636	73.3/26.0	73.0/26.4
FL-04	143,324	233,446	3,765	37.7/61.4	37.6/61.5
FL-06	174,701	228,651	4,662	42.8/56.0	38.4/60.6
FL-07	183,619	213,831	4,516	45.7/53.2	42.0/57.0
FL-08	189,402	168,842	2,742	52.5/46.8	52.4/46.8
FL-11	178,935	89,793	2,691	65.9/33.1	65.7/33.3
FL-12	163,745	168,399	3,112	48.8/50.2	47.7/51.3
FL-13	178,967	199,216	4,525	46.8/52.1	46.7/52.3
FL-14	169,067	226,967	3,827	42.3/56.8	42.3/56.9
FL-15	186,597	200,229	4,638	47.7/51.2	46.9/52.0
FL-16	175,017	192,431	4,038	47.1/51.8	47.2/51.8
FL-23	194,488	39,578	1,152	82.7/16.8	82.8/16.7
FL-24	189,895	197,541	3,937	48.5/50.5	47.3/51.7
FL-25	127,290	129,940	1,382	49.2/50.3	49.3/50.2
IL-08	167,812	129,030	4,208	55.7/42.9	56.6/42.1
IL-11	175,033	147,758	5,059	53.4/45.1	53.6/44.9
IL-14	168,611	132,838	4,298	55.2/43.5	54.4/44.2
IL-15	143,659	151,477	5,264	47.8/50.4	48.8/49.4
IL-17	149,220	112,197	3,837	56.3/42.3	58.1/40.4
IL-18	143,140	143,551	4,823	49.1/49.2	49.6/48.7
IL-19	139,335	171,883	5,616	44.0/54.3	42.0/56.2
IN-04	142,930	185,843	3,557	43.0/55.9	43.0/55.9
IN-08	140,063	151,570	3,727	47.4/51.3	47.4/51.3
IN-09	154,628	160,248	3,930	48.5/50.3	49.1/49.7
KS-02	134,337	170,635	6,013	43.2/54.9	43.1/54.9
KS-03	187,372	177,814	5,186	50.6/48.0	50.6/48.1
LA-01	78,325	221,781	4,868	25.7/72.7	25.3/73.1
LA-02	137,748	46,205	1,873	74.1/24.9	74.3/24.7
LA-03	101,428	167,046	5,411	37.0/61.0	36.6/61.4
LA-04	108,273	162,198	3,152	39.6/59.3	39.6/59.3
LA-05	106,097	177,277	3,718	37.0/61.8	36.7/62.0
LA-06	132,556	184,422	4,297	41.3/57.4	41.4/57.3
LA-07	105,117	188,576	4,953	35.2/63.1	35.0/63.4
MA-01	195,983	102,450	6,984	64.2/33.5	66.0/34.0
MA-02	178,090	117,272	6,269	59.0/38.9	60.3/39.7
MA-05	175,986	117,710	4,968	58.9/39.4	59.9/40.1
MA-06	192,502	135,956	5,474	57.7/40.7	58.6/41.4
MA-07	189,228	97,123	4,948	65.0/33.3	66.1/33.9
MA-08	202,152	32,445	1,612	85.6/13.7	86.1/13.9
MA-09	188,863	120,436	3,545	60.4/38.5	61.2/38.8
MA-10	196,304	155,992	5,461	54.9/43.6	55.8/44.2
MD-01	147,543	215,918	7,136	39.8/58.3	39.8/58.3
MD-02	178,241	113,929	5,684	59.8/38.3	59.6/38.5
MD-03	192,690	128,593	6,523	58.8/39.2	58.6/39.5
MD-04	270,377	45,014	2,486	85.1/14.2	85.1/14.1
MD-05	233,917	119,020	4,520	65.4/33.3	64.9/33.9
MD-06	139,744	200,475	7,528	40.2/57.7	40.2/57.7
MD-07	234,422	59,183	3,929	78.8/19.9	78.7/20.0
MD-08	232,533	77,730	4,461	73.9/24.7	73.4/25.2
MO-08	101,889	173,128	4,651	36.4/61.9	36.3/62.1
OH-18	115,868	132,972	6,226	45.4/52.1	45.5/52.0
OR-02	154,848	193,002	10,473	43.2/53.9	43.3/53.7
OR-04	201,143	161,079	11,698	53.8/43.1	53.7/43.2
PA-02	298,834	31,584	1,435	90.1/9.5	90.7/8.9
PA-08	192,570	160,695	3,905	53.9/45.0	53.6/45.3
PA-15	179,589	139,396	4,158	55.6/43.1	56.3/42.4
SC-01	146,919	196,389	4,298	42.3/56.5	39.9/58.8
SC-02	159,063	189,949	3,567	45.1/53.9	43.2/55.8
SC-03	103,434	188,316	3,803	35.0/63.7	34.4/64.3
SC-04	119,259	190,113	5,254	37.9/60.4	37.9/60.4
SC-05	144,267	167,072	3,635	45.8/53.0	45.2/53.7
SC-06	189,507	103,057	2,829	64.2/34.9	61.9/37.1
TX-01	81,872	184,963	1,433	30.5/69.0	30.5/68.8
TX-04	93,316	213,565	2,262	30.2/69.1	30.1/68.9
TX-06	114,283	172,535	1,870	39.6/59.8	39.7/59.5
TX-08	74,545	215,377	2,058	25.5/73.8	25.4/73.8
TX-10	150,713	187,496	2,941	44.2/55.0	44.3/54.6
TX-11	58,275	184,814	1,915	23.8/75.4	23.6/75.4
TX-13	53,860	181,541	1,786	22.7/76.5	22.9/76.2
TX-17	82,326	172,822	1,992	32.0/67.2	31.8/67.3
TX-19	65,020	170,969	1,693	27.4/71.9	27.4/71.8
TX-23	124,716	117,817	1,630	51.1/48.3	50.9/48.1
TX-26	137,613	193,132	2,213	41.3/58.0	41.8/57.3
TX-31	124,608	172,570	2,879	41.5/57.5	41.5/57.3

Sounds like Robbie Simmons is full of piss and vinegar:

“My consideration of running against Sen. Dodd is not poll-driven,” said Simmons, who criticized Dodd for losing touch with his constituents. “When I first ran for Congress in 1999, the Republican brand was way down in the toilet, and people said I was crazy to run when the GOP was out of favor – and I was able to beat a 20-year incumbent.”

Simmons said that, if he runs, he would face a significant fundraising disadvantage against Dodd. Still, he believes he would be financially competitive enough to run a formidable statewide campaign.

“He’ll go to his pals in the banking industry and get lots of money – and I won’t have that opportunity. But I don’t believe that Senate offices are meant to be bought and sold,” Simmons said.

Even more spunk:

“I’m definitely interested,” Simmons told Capitol Watch. “I’m angry about what’s going on in Washington, D.C. … I’ve worked all my life, and I’ve watched my IRA go down 50 percent, and I’m luckier than most.”

If I were to guess, I’d say that Simmons will go for it. And why not? He certainly has nothing to lose, and a scrappy campaign against a stodgy, troubled incumbent could be pretty fun.

(H/T: Genghis Conn)

PS: In case you’re wondering, yes, Simmons is still an asshole:

“Good for him to stand up for his beliefs,” Simmons said of Gregg. “It’s ironic that the Democratic choices don’t get approved because they don’t pay their taxes, and the Republicans don’t get approved because they won’t sell out their principles.”

This may be what Charlie Cook had in mind last month:

David Leavitt, the former Juab County attorney best known for his successful prosecution of polygamist Tom Green, has been telling folks at the various Republican Party’s Lincoln Day dinners this month that he plans to run for the Senate next year. That is a direct challenge to the incumbent Bennett, who will be seeking his fourth term.

David Leavitt, the brother of former Utah Gov. and Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, ran for Congress last year, but was defeated at the State Republican Convention by then-incumbent Chris Cannon and eventual winner Jason Chaffetz. Earlier, David Leavitt was defeated in his bid for re-election as Juab County attorney.

Other Republicans mentioned as possible challengers to Bennett include Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Mike Lee, former counsel to Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.

(Hat-tip: The Hill)

To paraphrase Mary McCarthy, every word Michele Bachmann utters is moronic, including “and” and “the.” Delightfully, Dump Bachmann caught her doing an interview on wingnut radio the other day, and Steve Benen has excerpted the best goodies:

• ACORN is “under federal indictment for voter fraud,” but the stimulus bill nevertheless gives ACORN “$5 billion.” (In reality, ACORN is not under federal indictment and isn’t mentioned in the stimulus bill at all.)

• Many members of Congress have “a real aversion to capitalism.”

• the stimulus bill includes a measure to create a “rationing board” for health care, and after the bill becomes law, “your doctor will no longer be able to make your healthcare decisions with you.”

• The recovery package is part of a Democratic conspiracy to “direct” funding away from Republican districts, so Democratic districts can “suck up” all federal funds. Bachmann doesn’t think this will work because, as she put it, “We’re running out of rich people in this country.”

• The “Community-Organizer-in-Chief” is also orchestrating a conspiracy involving the Census Bureau, which the president will use to redraw congressional lines to keep Democrats in power for up to “40 years.” When the host said he was confused, noting that congressional district lines are drawn at the state level, Bachmann said Obama’s non-existent plan is an “anti-constitutional move.”

God I love Michele Bachmann. The only thing that would have made this interview more perfect would have been some hot anti-light rail fulmination. But I’m sure she’ll get right on that next weekend.

It looks like Tim Ryan will be staying out of the race for retiring GOP Sen. George Voinovich’s Senate seat, but he isn’t staying out of the primary war between Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher:

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who mulled running for the Senate seat, will now be endorsing Fisher according to a senior Ohio Democratic source.

So it begins. Expect more movers and shakers to pick a side in the near future. One key player to keep an eye on: Sherrod Brown.

But hey, at the very least, with Ryan taking a pass on the Senate race, we won’t be seeing Capri Cafaro in Congress anytime soon.

Quinnipiac (2/10-15, registered voters):

David Paterson (D-inc): 23

Andrew Cuomo (D): 55

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 24

Carolyn McCarthy (D): 34

(MoE: ±4.6%)

David Paterson (D-inc): 43

Rudy Giuliani (R): 43

Andrew Cuomo (D): 51

Rudy Giuliani (R): 37

Kirsten Gillibrand (D-inc): 42

Peter King (R): 26

(MoE: ±3%)

In the political chess game, David Paterson may have felt he was thinking ten moves ahead by picking Kirsten Gillibrand to fill the vacant Senate seat, by picking a young, charismatic woman with monster fundraising capacities who may well be holding the seat 40 years from now. However, it’s starting to look like, in doing so, he wasn’t thinking two moves ahead… as Quinnipiac now shows both Paterson and Gillibrand highly vulnerable in the 2010 primary. Picking Andrew Cuomo to fill the Senate seat would have killed two birds with one stone in the short-term for Paterson (get a Senator who’s known statewide and ready to stand on his own, and give his electoral archrival something to do other than challenge him in the 2010 election). Instead, he gambled on long-term dividends, and it’s possible neither he nor Gillibrand will be around to enjoy them.

The Gillibrand/McCarthy numbers seem likely to evolve over time, as 39% remain undecided. And both candidates seem largely unknown outside their respective corners of the state; Gillibrand’s favorables are 24/9 with 65% “haven’t heard enough,” (and 81% “haven’t heard enough” in the NYC Suburbs) while McCarthy’s are also 24/9, with 66% “haven’t heard enough” (with 88% “haven’t heard enough” upstate). An uncontroversial two years for Gillibrand, combined with tacking left on guns and immigration issues, should bring her numbers up (although revelations like the one today that she keeps two guns under her bed can’t be helping matters). Gillibrand has little trouble disposing of Rep. Peter King in the general (there’s no polling of an all-LI slugfest between King and McCarthy).

Paterson, however, trails Cuomo by a 2-1 margin, and, unlike Gillibrand, everyone knows who he is. His favorables are a fairly grim 41/35, while Cuomo clocks in at 63/15. Cuomo also dominates a hypothetical matchup against Rudy Giuliani while Paterson only ties him. Much of this does, in fact, seem to be blowback from the senator selection process. Paterson gets a mark of 35/52 for approval/disapproval of how he handled the process, down from 44/42 from last month. We may be looking at a truly epic miscalculation from Paterson here, one for the history books.

Politico:

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner will be announcing that she’s running, according to a senior Ohio Democratic operative. She will be declaring her candidacy in a statement to be released this afternoon.

If elected, Brunner would become the first woman elected to the Senate from Ohio.

Brunner will be receiving the endorsement of the women’s group EMILY’s List, which will help her raise the millions necessary for a statewide campaign.

This comes as something of a surprise, as Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland was engaged in something of a blocking pattern for his Number One, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher — who has himself set up an exploratory committee and was expected to announce a decision within a few weeks. It remains to be seen whether Strickland and Fisher would want to go ahead with a major primary skirmish.

Two recent polls have actually shown Brunner in slightly weaker shape than Fisher against Rob Portman (PPP and Quinnipiac), although Brunner may be suffering a bit from a contentious election (and post-election) season after engaging in a number of battles with the Ohio GOP on early voting and the drawn-out OH-15 saga. (Although, according to Quinnipiac’s latest, voter resentment on this score may be fading away.)

In any case, holding Brunner’s SoS seat will be imperative for a lot of reasons. (UPDATE by Crisitunity: Of course, there’s making sure that there’s no voter suppression in Ohio in the 2012 presidential election. But Democrats also desperately need to hold the SoS seat for purposes of state legislative redistricting (decisions for which are made by a 5-member board, one member of which is the SoS). Dems hold a 3-2 advantage on the board right now, so holding the SoS seat is necessary to crack the current ridiculous pro-GOP gerrymander of Ohio legislative districts.)

UPDATE (James): Fisher is now in, too. Get ready to rumble. (Hat-tip: LeftistAddiction)

LATER UPDATE: Brunner announcement video available here.

Our friends over at Public Policy Polling are letting their readers choose their next freebie state poll of hot (or potentially hot) 2010 races. So please take a moment to drop by the PPP blog and cast your vote. The choices this time are Connecticut, Delaware, and Texas — a very difficult choice to make, indeed.

Tell us how you voted in the comments!