Swing State Project

Until 20 years ago the suburbs around New York City were strongly Republican. Now they are strongly Democratic. In the area I would consider the NYC metro area there are 30 Congressional Districts. These are NY-(01-19), NJ-(04-13), and CT-04. (I know, it’s debatable what is and what isn’t.) Only 5 of the 30 are represented by Republicans: NY-03, NJ-05, NJ-11, NJ-07, and NJ-04. Amazingly, there are 6 districts in this area that have a PVI of D+30 or better.

All across the country, suburbs are trending Democratic. Older suburbs are now reliably Democratic. However it looks like some of the suburban areas around New York City may have peaked in around 2000. Some of these “traditionally Republican” areas may be trending Republican again.

For a reference to the names of counties, see this map provided by Wikipedia.

The Bad News

County	2000	2004	2008
Staten Island	50/42	43/56	48/52
Nassau County	56/36	52/47	54/45
Suffolk County	52/39	49/49	53/47
Rockland County	54/37	49/50	53/47
Bergen County	55/42	52/47	54/45
Sussex County	37/58	35/64	39/59
Monmouth County	50/46	45/55	47/51
Ocean County	47/49	39/60	40/58

The Good News

County	2000	2004	2008
Westchester County	57/35	58/40	63/36
Orange County	45/47	44/55	52/47
Fairfield County	52/43	51/47	59/40
Essex County	71/26	70/29	76/23
Somerset County	47/50	47/52	53/46
Morris County	43/54	42/58	45/53
Hunterdon County	38/57	39/60	43/56
Mercer County	61/34	61/38	67/31

Some of the biggest Democratic losses at the presidential level from 2000 to 2004 came from the suburban counties around New York City. It’s tempting to dismiss these as short-term losses, and blame them on September 11. But we did worse in some of these counties in 2008 than in 2000, so this could be the beginning of a long-term trend. If we don’t take it seriously it could eventually cost us elections.

NY-13 and NY-03 currently have PVI‘s of about D+1. After they are recalculated to consider 2008 results, they will probably be about R+4.

Of the 5 Republican-held districts, we should strongly contest these 2 in 2010:

NY-03 will be an open race in 2010. Its Republican incumbent, Peter King, will vacate the seat in order to unsuccessfully run for the Senate. This race is a toss-up, depending on what the political situation is like in 2010. It’s tempting to take it for granted, because Tim Bishop and Steve Israel were able to flip NY-01 and NY-02 earlier this decade. If we win it’s because we had an excellent candidate and and excellent campaign that earned every last vote.

Meanwhile, Republican-held district NJ-07 is trending in our direction. NJ-07 was designed to be Republican, but now it’s a swing district that Obama won. I’m on the record stating we should try again in 2010 to win NJ-07.

Cross-posted to Daily Kos.

Like Punxsutawney Phil yesterday, Katrina Swett emerges:

With U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., ready to announce his candidacy for Judd Gregg’s U.S. Senate seat within a week, veteran Democratic activist Katrina Swett will become a candidate for his 2nd District U.S. House seat, Democratic sources say.

Swett briefly ran for senate last cycle, but dropped out when Jeanne Shaheen got into the race. Afterwards, as Dean says, she made nary a peep for the whole campaign. And as far as I can tell, she didn’t make any donations to Paul Hodes, who currently holds the seat she now seeks. Mind you, at no point was Swett hurting for cash. She raised $1.5 million before bailing in 2007 and still has $900K in the kitty.

I have several other problems with a Swett candidacy, among them the fact that she’s wobbly on reproductive choice. Worse still, she was a national co-chair of Joe Lieberman’s campaign for president in 2004, and she supported him to the end against Ned Lamont in 2006. But I’ll let her own words do the talking:

Swett believes Lieberman lost because of three perceived Democratic “sins”: the sin of supporting the Iraq war and being tough on defense, the sin of being bipartisan and the sin of displaying religious faith. Swett said those traits might make Lieberman undesirable to many Democrats but they could be key for Democrats in winning future national elections.

“Round two in Connecticut is going to be a battle between two Democrats: Joe Lieberman, a centrist Democrat, and Ned Lamont, a pretty-far-left-of-center Democrat,” said Swett. “I’m convinced that Joe Lieberman is the better leader… and I’m also convinced that he’s the better positioned politically for the future of the party that I love.”

That’s not the sort of person I’d like to see fill a blue-leaning open seat. Hopefully some other challengers, undeterred by Swett’s warchest, will emerge. Some possible names include: Jay Buckey, an astronaut and professor of medicine at Dartmouth who also briefly sought the senate nomination in 2007; state Sen. Molly Kelly; Stonyfield Farm CEO Gary Hirshberg; and retired Adm. John Hutson, dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center (who shot down speculation that he might run for this seat two years ago). I’m sure we’ll see how the field shakes out soon enough.

Sorry, open seat fans:

U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Mobile, told the Press-Register today that he will not run for governor of Alabama in 2010, ending months of speculation over whether he would join a crowded field of candidates seeking to replace term-limited Gov. Bob Riley.

“After a lot of serious thought and consideration, as well as many heartfelt prayers, Janee and I have concluded that now is simply not the right time to launch a statewide campaign,” Bonner said.

Bonner nabbed a spot on the Appropriations Committee last year, which makes life in the minority a bit more palatable. And a few weeks ago, he earned some upgrades on his other assignments. In any event, this move scratches a name off of our open seat watch, but both the GOP and Dem gubernatorial fields are still up in the air.

Lynch makes it official:

New Hampshire Governor John Lynch officially announced this afternoon that Republican J. Bonnie Newman will replace Judd Gregg in the US Senate if Gregg is confirmed as commerce secretary. […]

Newman, 63, who has not previously held elected office, was an assistant commerce secretary under President Reagan and also worked in President George H.W. Bush’s White House. She also worked for Gregg when he was a US representative and supported Lynch for governor. […]

Lynch said Newman will not run in 2010, and will not endorse any candidate in that race in a state turning more Democratic.

While the merits of the Gregg appointment are pretty troubling (after all, we are talking about a dude who, in the 1990s, voted to abolish the same Department that he is now going to run), this isn’t a bad deal for us. Newman couldn’t possibly be more conservative than Gregg, and she’s promising not to even make an endorsement for her successor.

Paul Hodes has an excellent shot at this next year.

UPDATE: With Gregg exiting the Senate, SSP has moved our rating of this race from “Lean Republican” to “Tossup“. With a competent campaign, though, Hodes should be able to earn himself an edge.

Well, this is surprising:

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who announced Monday he will seek a sixth term, is mulling a challenge against Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) in 2012.

Multiple Connecticut Democrats, speaking on condition of anonymity, say Blumenthal has begun informing influential members of the state’s political class that he will prepare for a run against Lieberman.

Blumenthal has been Connecticut’s AG since forever (well, 1990, to be precise), and it has long been assumed that he’s been looking for an opportunity to move on up. Still, after passing on gubernatorial campaigns time and time again, Blumenthal always struck observers as fairly risk-averse, and he has already committed himself to running for another term as AG in 2010. So it’s fairly surprising that he’s thinking of making a splash against Lieberman:

“My only focus and my sole interest right now is on the race in 2010 and seeking reelection as attorney general,” he said.

Still, serving in the Senate “would be an honor, and it’s always been a career goal,” Blumenthal added. “I’ve said that I look forward to continuing opportunities for public service in the future.”

Should Blumenthal run against Lieberman, it would set up a clash between two well-known Connecticut politicians. “He’s probably the most popular Democrat in the state,” said Quinnipiac University pollster Douglas Schwartz. […]

“I would certainly consider other opportunities that fit the skills I have, the aptitudes. The U.S. Senate would be a huge honor and a great challenge and opportunity,” Blumenthal said Monday. “We have two United States senators who are incumbents, and I would have to see what their plans are.”

If either Dodd or Lieberman retire, you can bet that Blumenthal would finally pounce. But with Blumenthal turning 66 in 2012, perhaps he sees the clock ticking on his ambition to join the Senate — if Dodd sticks around in 2010 (as most assume), a Lieberman challenge could be his last real window to try.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is running radio ads in 28 Congressional districts held by Republicans.

Link:

The ads focus on the Republicans out of step priorities by putting bank bail outs and building schools in Iraq before the needs of the Americans in the struggling economy. The Putting Families First ads begin airing on Tuesday morning during drive time and will run for a week.

In addition to the strategic radio ads in 28 Republican districts, the DCCC will also begin a grassroots initiative which includes targeted e-mails to 3 million voters and nearly 100,000 person-to-person telephone calls.

House Republicans just don’t get it.  They celebrate being the party of no and status quo, while more than 2.6 million Americans have lost their jobs, the stock market has plummeted wiping out nearly $7 trillion stock market wealth and endangering thousands of investors’ nest eggs, and one in 10 homeowners was delinquent on mortgage payments or in foreclosure this fall.

“These are serious times, hard working families are worried about keeping their jobs, health care and homes – they want action, not House Republicans cheering about doing nothing,” said Brian Wolff, Executive Director of the DCCC. “Republicans’ champagne wishes and caviar dreams simply don’t connect with middle class families struggling to make ends meet and furious that their tax dollars are going to bail out banks, build schools in Iraq, or send American jobs overseas.  The Putting Families First campaign is only the first step, we will continue to go district by district to hold Republicans who continue to vote in lockstep with party leaders and against the folks in their districts accountable.”

There are several versions of the ad, all featuring elements of the economic stimulus bill (click here for transcripts). Here is one focusing on the education angle:

Did you know Congressman Thad McCotter opposed over $526 million to modernize crumbling Michigan schools, but supported building new schools in Iraq?  Times are tough, tell Thad McCotter to put American jobs first.

If you’ve heard any of these radio ads, please post a comment or send me an e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com) to let me know where you are and what issue it covered.

There is a lot of overlap between the 28 districts where DCCC ads are running and this list of the 20 most vulnerable House Republicans going into 2010, which Crisitunity compiled at Swing State Project last month. However, there are a handful of Republicans on Crisitunity’s list who are not (yet) being targeted by the DCCC’s ad campaign.

Conversely, the ads are running in some districts where the incumbents may not seem vulnerable at first glance. Tom Latham did not make Crisitunity’s list after he won re-election by more than 20 points in November, despite the fact that Barack Obama carried Iowa’s fourth district. However, the DCCC is running ads in IA-04 and clearly has not ruled out making a serious play for this district in 2010.

It’s worth noting that Bruce Braley (IA-01) is now the DCCC’s vice chair responsible for “offensive efforts including recruitment, money, and training.”

Taking out Latham in 2010 would make it highly likely for Iowa Democrats to hold three out of the four Congressional districts we will have after the next census. Even if we don’t beat him in 2010, running a strong campaign against Latham could bring down his favorables and improve our chances of holding IA-03 if that district includes Story County in 2012.

UPDATE: At Daily Kos, brownsox demolishes Fred Hiatt’s criticism of this ad campaign.

Say hello to two possible new senators in 2011: Robin Carnahan and Paul Hodes. Both confirmed today that they will be running in 2010, Carnahan in Missouri and Hodes in New Hampshire.

Missouri Sec. of State Carnahan will be running for the seat left open by Kit Bond’s retirement; her opponent won’t be known for a while (there will probably be a competitive GOP primary, with Rep. Roy Blunt, ex-Sen. Jim Talent, and ex-Treasurer Sarah Steelman eyeing the race), but a recent PPP poll shows her ahead of all of them. Her announcement video is here.

Rep. Paul Hodes is running for a seat that may or may not be open; it’s still unclear who Gov. John Lynch will appoint to replace Judd Gregg (who will become Commerce Secretary), although sources point to Gregg’s former chief of staff Bonnie Newman. The Union-Leader reports: “She is not expected to run for a full term in 2010.”

Hodes had already been considering an uphill battle against an incumbent Gregg, but with the Gregg’s departure and the expectation that Newman will serve two years and not run for re-election, it looked like too good an opportunity for Hodes to pass up.

The developments surrounding that surprising appointment by President Obama “has sped up his timeline and he will make a formal announcement within the week,” the source said.

McAuliffe 18%

Moran 18%

Deeds 11%

http://www.publicpolicypolling…

Huge number of undecideds but check out the approvals.

“Moran has the best favorability marks from likely primary voters, with 34% having a positive opinion of him and just 10% viewing him negatively. McAuliffe is the most well known of the candidates, which cuts both ways. He has the second highest favorable rating, 30%, but also has easily the highest unfavorable rating at 23%. Deeds is the least well known of the trio with 67% of respondents having no opinion of him one way or the other.”

Looks like anything could happen here but I guess McAuliffe has the edge with his financial advantage. Does anybody actually think he could win in November? This is a genuine question and not rhetorical.

Since we now know the presidential results in most congressional districts for 2008, we now possess all the tools we need to calculate the new PVIs.

Charlie Cook’s official results will be out in a few months, but unlike in 2004 (where results from 2000 had to be fitted to the new congressional districts) there’s no reason we shouldn’t jump the gun and have our own figures ready. And there’s every reason to want to know who’s representing their districts and who’s a lot more vulnerable than they used to be.

I’m therefore going to attempt to calculate the new PVIs for the states listed in the diary title. They were picked because we have all the results from districts in those states, and because they represent around 20% of America’s congressioanl districts and I’m too lazy right now to do more than that in a sitting.

My methodology conforms to that given in David NYC’s comment to DGM’s diary. My figures are taken from this spreadsheet. My figures are approximate and you should probably ignore everything beyond the decimal point, because I’m using data rounded to the nearest whole number for the district-by-district results.

Details in the extended entry:

If anybody knows how to render this in tabular form, I’m all ears. There’s a Google spreadsheet with my data here and I’ve given a brief list of the new PVIs below.

The numbers aren’t that great, but that’s mostly because of Obama’s improved performance over Kerry. Expect a lot of these numbers to move back slightly towards the Dems if Obama can perform similarly in 2012, and bear in mind that D+0 is now a lot safer than it used to be. It’s also worth noting that the likes of Arkansas and north Florida were much better territory for Gore than for Obama.

AK-AL: R+15.6

AR-1: R+10.4

AR-2: R+7.0

AR-3: R+18.0

AR-4: R+9.4

AZ-1: R+8.2

AZ-2: R+15.3

AZ-3: R+11.8

AZ-4: D+10.7

AZ-5: R+7.2

AZ-6: R+16.8

AZ-7: D+3.6

AZ-8: R+7.0

CT-1: D+10.0

CT-2: D+3.7

CT-3: D+6.7

CT-4: D+2.8

CT-5: R+0.2

DE-AL: D+4.4

FL-1: R+23.6

FL-2: R+8.0

FL-3: D+15.7

FL-4: R+19.2

FL-5: R+11.5

FL-6: R+15.0

FL-7: R+11.0

FL-8: R+5.0

FL-9: R+9.5

FL-10: R+3.2

FL-11: D+9.0

FL-12: R+8.5

FL-13: R+8.0

FL-14: R+13.5

FL-15: R+9.5

FL-16: R+7.0

FL-17: D+31.8

FL-18: R+5.2

FL-19: D+12.2

FL-20: D+10.1

FL-21: R+7.7

FL-22: R+1.7

FL-23: D+25.8

FL-24: R+7.5

FL-25: R+7.0

GA-1: R+18.4

GA-2: R+1.7

GA-3: R+21.4

GA-4: D+21.7

GA-5: D+23.2

GA-6: R+20.4

GA-7: R+19

GA-8: R+12.5

GA-9: R+30.1

GA-10: R+17.0

GA-11: R+22.6

GA-12: R+1.7

GA-13: D+12.2

HI-1: D+8.5

HI-2: D+11.6

IA-1: D+2.4

IA-2: D+4.6

IA-3: R+1.2

IA-4: R+2.4

IA-5: R+11.6

ID-1: R+20.4

ID-2: R+20.0

IL-1: D+31.3

IL-2: D+33.3

IL-3: D+8.1

IL-4: D+29.2

IL-5: D+16.7

IL-6: R+1.9

IL-7: D+31.8

IL-8: R+2.9

IL-9: D+17.0

IL-10: D+3.6

IL-11: R+3.2

IL-12: R+0.1

IL-13: R+4.0

IL-14: R+4.0

IL-15: R+8.7

IL-16: R+4.5

IL-17: D+1.7

IL-18: R+7.5

IL-19: R+12.8

Here’s something that’s way past due: SSP’s first Open Seat Watch chart of the 2010 cycle. This chart was a recurring feature on the front page here throughout 2007 and the first few months of 2008, and we’ll be sure to keep it updated regularly over the coming months. Just like we did last time, I’ve put together charts tracking confirmed retirements/vacancies, potential retirements, and a new third chart tracking seats that were once considered potentially open, but now are not. Here we go:

So that’s ten open seats right off the bat — although three of these will soon be filled by special elections. A bit of a dog’s breakfast, but the list should soon grow to include some even better pick-up opportunities.

Potential Retirements/Vacancies:

Just to be clear here, “age” refers to the incumbent’s age on election day, 2010. (If I have fudged any birthdays by accident, please let me know in the comments.) And once Charlie Cook bakes some new PVIs, I’ll swap out the old numbers in our chart.

Off the Watch List:

If there are any names that I am missing, please share ’em (and your rationale/sourcing) in the comments. Thank you.