Swing State Project

Says the AP:

Republican Rep. Dave Reichert survived a strong challenge from Democratic newcomer Darcy Burner, winning a second term in this historically slow-counting suburban Seattle district.

Reichert, best known as the sheriff who nabbed the Green River Killer, retained his seat after new returns were posted Monday night from King County. His lead stood at 4,727 votes, or 51.1 percent to Burner’s 48.9 percent. Overall, 208,225 votes had been counted in the race.

Washington’s 8th has yet to elect a Democrat since its creation in the early 80s.  We’ll get to this one yet, but regrettably not this year.

Cross-posted from MN Campaign Report – now with even more snarky wonkishness!

U.S. Senator Norm Coleman has made it clear that his vote is available to prevent deadlock in the Senate once Democrats take control in January.  The writing is on the wall – Coleman is vulnerable in 2008, representing a state that kicked out Republican officials up and down the ticket and didn’t give him 50% of the vote against a dead incumbent and a former VP thrown into the race at the last moment.  In light of these factors, Coleman has flip-flopped on his party – all too happy to go with the flow when the Republicans have a majority, his vote is available to the Democrats when it’s their turn in charge.

I’ve written before about some of the factors affecting this race before it begins – the 2008 Republican National Convention will be held in the Twin Cities, perhaps seeking to bolster Coleman’s vulnerable profile.  2002 was an up year for the Republican Party in general, and if the 2006 winds stay at the Democrats’ backs, 2008 promises to be a dangerous year indeed for Coleman.

Coleman has called the new Democratic majority an “opportunity” for him to extract gains for Minnesota.  An “opportunity” indeed.  Much like the “opportunity” that presented itself in the late 1990s to switch his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican for a gubernatorial run, and the “opportunity” to play the blame game with Michael Brown over the FEMA/Katrina debacle, Coleman’s career is full of opportunistic moves that betray a lack of conviction on important issues facing our nation today.

Having betrayed the DFL once before, and now betraying the Senate Republican caucus for political gain, Coleman’s latest move begs us to ask, “who’s expected to vote for you in 2008?”

It is nice to be the Majority again. One of the main reasons Democrats are back in the Majority is that they were able to put a lot more races into contention then were the Republicans.  It is vitally important that we keep this playing field imbalance, so that we can continue to be in and expand our Majority. It is my contention, that at least one quarter of House Republicans remain vulnerable today.  This statement is even truer if the Republicans were to nominate a true social conservative for President in 2008.  Democrats need to compete as if we were behind rather than ahead 15 seats. Being in the Majority makes everything easier for us, and everything harder for them. We also may see a large group of retirements, none of which should catch us off guard. Which is why the advantage must be pressed. It is also important to note that challengers help force legislators to vote with their constituencies on the hopefully popular Democratic legislation we put forward. Rather than having to water down our legislation for Bipartisanship, we can threaten defeat to those members who go against popular sentiment in their districts.  Here is my comprehensive list of seats Democrats could still gain as well, as the criteria by which the decisions were reached.  Also the currently uncalled races are omitted.

Under 55
All Republican members of Congress who received 55% or of their vote must be consider vulnerable they are listed by How Democratic the District voted in 2004 Presidential race.  Those that were not targeted this time receive a *
CT 4 Chris Shays
IL 10  Mark Kirk
PA 6 Jim Gerlach
NY 25 Jim Walsh
PA 15  Charlie Dent  *
VA 11 Tom Davis*
OH 1 Steve Chabot
MI 9  Joe Knollenberg *
NV 3  Jon Porter
PA 3 Phil English*
MI 11 Thaddeus McCotter *
NJ 7 Mike Ferguson
IL 6 Peter Roskam
AZ 1 Rick Renzi
MI 8 Mike Rogers
MI 7  Tim Walberg*
IL 11 Jerry Weller *
CA 50 Brain Bilbray
NY 26 Tom Reynolds
NY 29 Randy Kuhl
NJ 5 Scott Garrett  *
MN 6 Michelle Bachmann
NV 2 Dean Heller
VA 2 Thelma Drake
CO 4 Marilyn Musgrave
NE 2  Lee Terry *
CA 4 John Doolittle
KY 4 Geoff Davis
KY 2 Ron Lewis
IN 3 Mark Souder
ID 1 Bill Sali
NE 3 Adrian Smith

All Republicans from district Where John Kerry got 45% of the vote or More [listed by State excluding those were a Democrat held the Republican to less than 55%] Their Re-election Percent next to name
DE AL  Mike Castle  57%
FL 10  Bill Young  66%
FL 18  Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 62%
FL 24 Tom Feeney  58%
IA 4  Tom Latham  57%
MI 6  Fred Upton  61%
MN 3 Jim  Ramstad  65%
NJ 2 Frank LoBiondo  65 %
NJ 3 Jim Saxton 59%
NY 3 Peter King 56%
NY 13 Vito Fossella  57%
NY 23  Bob McHugh  63%
OH 3 Mike Turner 59%
OH 12 Pat Tiberi 58%
OH 14  Steve  LaTourette
OH 16 Ralph Regula 59%
PA 18  Tim Murphy 58%
WI 1  Paul Ryan 63%

Others, The members of Congress who are potentially vulnerable for other reasons:

AK AL  Don Young
MT AL  Dennis Rehberg
CO 6  Tom Tancredo
VA 10 Frank Wolf [ possible retirement] 
IL 14  Dennis Hastert[Possible retirement]
CA 26  David Dreier 

(Bumped. – promoted by James L.)

From the Hotline:

In the contest between Joe Courtney (D) and Rep. Rob Simmons, new results are in:

So far today, Simmons (R) has picked up 105 votes. The gap is now about 60 votes with many more towns to compete and report. Spirits in the Simmons camp are high (Hotline sources).

Yikes.  It looks like we’ll know what happens by Wednesday.

Update: The Courant has the current margin at 66 votes.  As Samuel L. Jackson would say, hang on to your butts.

Update II: The AP has Courtney recovering slightly–to a 109 vote lead.

Update III: The Courant shows Simmons picking up a few more votes.  Now Courtney is only 82 votes ahead.  We’ll know the final score in this “stomach-churning” recount tomorrow night.

The goal is simple: Blue Majority wants to raise $10,000 for Democrat Karen Carter this week. I’ve already laid out in detail exactly why we’re backing Carter in her runoff against the corrupt William Jefferson, and I encourage you to read that earlier post. But the most important point is this one: We need to send a message that we won’t tolerate corruption on the part of any public official, regardless of party.

Jefferson has a long rap sheet and doesn’t deserve to be a part of the Democratic caucus. If we’re going to run a clean House, then we need to clean house first. Karen Carter can beat Jefferson, but she needs our help. We’ve already raised some cash for her, but I know we can do more. So let’s get her another ten grand this week from the grassroots. The runoff is soon – Dec. 9th – so time is short.

Let’s get to work!

On Oct. 24th, 2006, Survey USA released the last batch of Senate approval ratings before the election. Who were the least popular senators facing re-election?

1. Santorum, -19% net approval
2. DeWine, -17% net approval
3. Burns, -16% net approval
4. Menendez, -13% net approval
5. Talent, -5% net approval
6. Chafee, -1% net approval
7. Kyl, 0% net approval
8. Allen, +1% net approval

Are approval ratings a good way of determining which incumbents are vulnerable? DUH, YES!

Below the flip, let’s see how the class of 2008 is looking. Hey, do you smell that? Smells like… Wayne Allard. Yeah, he’s a little over-ripe. Prepare for harvest!

Bottom of the class: Least popular senators, class of 2008:

1. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), -12% net approval
2. James Inhofe (R-OK), -9% net approval
3. Wayne Allard (R-CO), -4% net approval
4. John Cornyn (R-TX), -3% net approval

Paging Brad Henry, Mark Udall, and Chet Edwards… strong challengers wanted!

If we managed to pick off George Allen, we can defeat Inhofe and Cornyn with the right challenger. Yes, we can, even in Texas and Oklahoma.

Of course, fortunes can change… One year before that poll was taken, on Oct. 17, 2005, Lincoln Chafee had 19% net approval. Don’t let today’s approval rates discourage you too much, because things can change. Chafee’s steady, quiet fall from grace proves that. John Kyl had a net approval of +17% in August – a good, hard campaign can do a lot. George Allen had a +31% approval rating in December.

Now, for God’s sake, can we please stop saying that Lautenberg is safe? He’s overdue for his next retirement. If you want to see him re-elected, he’s going to have to save a few drowning puppies or something.

So, what about the rest of the class?

Lamar Alexander (R-TN), +3%
Norm Coleman (R-MN), +5%
Pat Roberts (R-KS), +6%
Carl Levin (D-MI), +6%
Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), +7%
Tom Harkin (D-IA), +7%
Mary Landrieu (D-LA), +10%
Lindsey Graham (R-SC), +10%
Gordon Smith (R-OR), +11%
John Sununu (R-NH), +11%
Mitch McConnell (R-KY), +12%
Richard Durbin (D-IL), +13%
John Kerry (D-MA), +14%
Jeff Sessions (R-AL), +19%
Joe Biden (D-DE), +19%
Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), +20%
Mark Pryor (D-AR), +24%
Michael Enzi (R-WY), +27%
Pete Domenici (R-NM), +31%
John Warner (R-VA), +31%
Max Baucus (D-MT), +31%
Ted Stevens (R-AK), +32%
Thad Cochran (R-MS), +33%
Larry Craig (R-ID), +33%
Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), +34%
Jack Reed (D-RI), +38%
Tim Johnson (D-SD), +46%
Susan Collins (R-ME), +48%

Conclusions:

1. I wouldn’t start worrying about Tim Johnson just yet. He’s almost as popular as Kent Conrad. Unless Gov. Mike Rounds challenges Johnson, this seat is safe. Against Rounds, I’d still give the edge to Johnson by a fair amount.

2. I wouldn’t get too excited about a Collins vs. Allen matchup. She’s almost as popular as Olympia Snowe. What’s Allen gonna do, knock her margin of victory down to 15%? Let’s hope she defects or retires.

3. Warner vs. Warner – competitive maybe, but not likely to be a win for Mark. Let’s hope John retires.

4. Max Baucus is safe. And I mean Kent Conrad safe.

5. Mark Pryor is safe. With Beebe as the new governor, it’s clear that Arkansas votes Dem on anything that isn’t Presidential.

6. John Sununu and Gordon Smith are good targets, if we can knock them down. They’re popular enough now, but a good candidate running a good campaign could knock either of them into vulnerability with some hard work.

7. Graham = Akaka. Those who don’t approve of his performance are probably not likely to vote for his opponent, either.

8. Landrieu is defensible. +10% is a good base to work from.

9. Harkin and Levin have a little work to do. Hopefully their majority status will raise their image some.

10. Saxby Chamblis and Pat Roberts ain’t untouchable! I’d rate them as Likely Republican now, but a great candidate could beat either. Yes, even in Kansas!

11. Lamar Alexander and Norm Coleman can be defeated.

12. Cornyn and Inhofe need conservative Dem challengers who will fight against these two incumbents. Do that, and we win.

13. Defense in New Jersey – maybe we should encourage Lautenberg to retire.

14. Allard’s going down!!!

(From the diaries. If Ciro can’t do it this year, this seat is clearly a ripe pick-up opporunity in 2008. – promoted by James L.)

Of the 10 US House seats still not called, 2 of them are because they are actual run-off elections. Of the two, one is between 2 Democrats. The other, here in Texas, is between former Netroots candidate Ciro Rodriguez and Rep. Henry Bonilla, who is soon to lose his seat because of court ordered redistricting changes.

On November 7th, the Republican vote total was 48%. The combined Democratic total was 49% though only 20% was Ciro’s. The seat is ready to be taken but some ask why there has been a wait.

A couple things. Right now I can tell you that there have been talks between the DCCC and folks in San Antonio. Someone has been asked to draw up a mail/TV/field budget for a one month long run-off campaign.  They have asked around in the district to see if there is someone to run a field program, one possibility being a friend of mine who just spent the last year helping to elect a Democratic state Senator and then hold his open state House seat last Tuesday.

In a couple days, I have been made aware that new online tools will become available for Democrats across Texas (and beyond) to call Democrats in TX-23 in a system very much like MoveOn’s call for change. They were built by former state Rep. Glen Maxey who nearly took over the chairmanship of the Texas Democratic Party this June and just got done successfully running the Austin area coordinated campaign that picked up 1 state house seat, 1 Justice of the Peace, and 1 3rd Court of Appeals seat.  These are www.TrueBlueAction.com and www.OnlinePhoneBanking.com.

Netroots candidate John Courage, who just wrapped up his campaign this afternoon is in the process of transferring his San Antonio volunteers and staff to help out Ciro in any way they can. Former TX-23 candidate Lukin Gilliland has apparently offered up his campaign staff and team (whom I’m familiar with and are good folks) to help out Ciro as well.

Of course, the district won’t be won without a lot of money and volunteer investment. As of now, that major commitment hasn’t been declared yet. But I wanted to let folks know, that things are in the works.

(From the diaries. I like maps. – promoted by James L.)

This is the second in a series of diaries graphically depicting the Democratic victory in this year’s midterm elections. The first diary in this series covering New England may be seen here.

Today we will be looking at Democratic gains in New York, both in the city and upstate.  First, the money shot, maps detailing simple change in district control, because no seats changes hand in the NYC area the city inset will only be displayed after the fold under the 2006 results.

2004

2006

NYC

Of 3,561,072 votes cast in 2006 US House races in New York,  2,285,020 (64.2%) were cast for Democrats, while 1,266,295 (35.2%) were cast for Republicans.

Democrats took the open seat in the NY-24 (Utica), with Arcuri (D) defeating Meier (R) by 16,469 votes, 53.8% D to 45.2% R.

Democrats defeated Republican incumbents in the NY-19 and NY-20. In the NY-19 (Orange/Putnam County), Democrat John Hall beat Republican incumbent Sue Hall by 13,642 votes votes, 51.2% D to 48.8% R. In the NY-20 (Upper Hudson valley) Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand defeated Republican incumbent John Sweeney by 13,642 votes, 53.1% D to 46.9% R.

The following map shows Democratic gains over their 2004 Democratic performance in the district (in % terms), improvements of less than 5% will be displayed in light blue, under 10% in the darker blue, and over 10% in the darkest blue. Republican gains will be shown in the same manner, with the light red signifying a gain of less than 5% and so on. Races that were contested in neither year will be displayed in gray.

The single greatest Democratic gain in a race contested by Republicans in 2004 was in the NY-27 (South Buffalo) where Democratic incumbent Brian Higgins surged by 25.9% over his 2004 performance.  Democratic candidates in the NY-19, NY-20, and NY-24 all improved upon 2004 Democratic performance by more than 10%. Candidates in the NY-1, NY-3, NY-20, NY-22, and NY-29 all improved upon 2004 Democratic performance by over 5%.  Again, the races coded in the light blue showed less than 5% improvement over 2004.  The only red spot was in the NY-18 where Democratic incumbent Nita Lowey saw her vote share drop from 81.3% in 2004 to a mere 70.3% this year. This is the only kind of victory Republicans could muster in the Empire state.

Looking more closely at the margin of victory in 2006 races & the scale of Democratic victory in this midterm, and pickup opportunities emerge, the following map displays the margin of victory in 2006 races. The deepest blue represents and Democratic margin of victory over 10%, the medium color represent more than 5%, while the lightest blue indicates that the Democratic candidate won by less than 5%. Corresponding measures of Republican victory margins display progressively darker shades of red at the same intervals.

What emerges is a map to guide our 2008 strategy. Beginning with this edition of the series I will be producing a tier system for 2008 races based upon the results of the 2006 returns.  Tier 0 races are those where the Democratic candidate won by a margin of less than 5%, the presumption being that incumbency grants an advantage of 5-10% that with the fundraising advantage that comes with holding office should be sufficient for these candidates to defend their seats without funding from the party.  The assumption that incumbency gives a 5-10% advantage drives the classification of the pickup categories.  Tier 1 races are those where the incumbent won by less than 5% in 2006, while tier 2 races are those where Republicans won by less than 10%.

Tier 0

Race      D%      R%     Margin    2006 D Cand.

NY-19     51.2    48.8   6.1       John Hall

Tier 1

Race      D%      R%     Margin    2006 D Cand.

NY-25     49.1    50.9   1.9       Dan Maffei

NY-29     48.5    51.5   3.1       Eric Massa

NY-26     48.1    51.9   3.7       Jack Davis

Tier 2

Race      D%      R%     Margin    2006 D Cand.

No races meet the criteria for this tier.

While our one defend NY-19 is near NYC in Orange/Putnam counties, the 3 2008 Dem Pickup opportunties are in Western New York with the NY-25 in the Rochester/Syracuse area the NY-26 is between Rochester and Buffalo, and the NY-29 is immediately to the south of that. Jack Davis self funded his campaign run on a pro-fair trade message, while Massa and Maffei were relative newcomers to politics.  (New Yorkers please correct me if I got this wrong.)

Building upon the Tier 0 race in the NH-01 and the Tier 1 race in the CT-04, this means that my running total shows two Tier 0 races to defend in 2008 and four Tier 1 pickup opportunities.  I strongly believe that if we want to win we need to maintain our infrastructure in these close races. If our 2006 candidates want to run in 2008, absent a compelling reason to challenge them in the primary.  And if we know who the 2008 candidate is going to be we need a continuing netroots effort to give these candidates a running start on 2008. In the form of seed money, the netroots can press forward on our 2006 Democratic gains defining the battlefield for 2008.  We must not allow the Republicans to define the battlefield for the next cycle, and only by providing minimial funding to allow the candidate to retain a single staffer to fundraise and keep the infrastructure intact can we make this work.

This is a logical continuation of the 50 State Strategy, by keeping the infrasructure intact there’s no need to start all over in 2008, and that will allow campaigns to be more efficient in their use of funds. If we can avoid the first spending the first $25,000-$50,000 needed to reconstitute the campaign infrastructure in each cycle we will be able press further into Republican held districts.  Our goal must  be to contain the  Republicans to their base in the Deep South, no Copperhead must go unchallenged.

Somewhat obscured by the hoopla of the Democrats picking up 6 seats in the Senate and 29+ seats (at this point) in the House of Representatives is the deep blue surge by Democrats in state legislatures around the country. Using data from a number of sources including the DLCC, Wikipedia, and various news outlets, I’ve managed to construct a detailed breakdown of Democratic and Republican gains in state legislatures this past Tuesday. This chart isn’t 100% accurate–some races have yet to be called–so if you have a correction or an update, please let me know so I can amend these totals accordingly. Additionally, the situation in Montana is a bit tenuous. While the Republicans did manage to make enough gains in the state Senate (including, I might add, an easy pick-up of Jon Tester’s open seat) to pull even in the body, one Republican Senator, Sam Kitzenberg, is considering defecting to the Democratic Party or becoming an independent depending on the outcome of a House race recount. Kitzenberg, an admirer of Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer, says he wants to ensure that the Governor has a “foothold somewhere, either in the Senate or the House”. So look for Montana’s totals to change accordingly once the dust is settled.

By my initial count, Democrats netted 268 pick-ups in state Houses and 60 pick-ups in state Senates. Republican pick-ups? A lowly eight in state House races and eight in state Senate races. Democrats won enough seats to take control of the following chambers: the Indiana House, the New Hampshire House and Senate, the Iowa House and Senate, the Minnesota House, the Michigan House, the Wisconsin Senate, and the Oregon House. See below for the full carnage:

State	Senate	Margin	House	Margin
Alabama	R+2	23D-12R	N/C	62D-43R
Alaska	D+1	11R-9D	D+3	23R-17D
Arizona	N/C	18R-12D	D+7	32R-28D
Arkansas	N/C	27D-8R	D+3	75D-25R
California	N/C	24D-15R-1?	N/C	42D-32R
Colorado	D+2	20D-15R	D+4	39D-26R
Connecticut	D+1	25D-11R	D+6	105D-46R
Delaware	N/C	13D-8R	D+3	22R-18D
Florida	N/C	26R-14D	D+7	78R-42D
Georgia	N/C	34R-22D	R+2	105R-74D-1?
Hawaii	N/C	20D-5R	D+2	43D-8R
Idaho	N/C	28R-7D	D+6	51R-19D
Illinois	D+5	37D-22R	?	65D-49R-4?
Indiana	N/C	33R-17D	D+3	51D-49R
Iowa	D+4	29D-21R	D+5	54D-45R
Kansas	N/C	30R-10D	D+6	77R-48D
Kentucky	N/C	21R-16D	D+5	61D-39R
Louisiana	N/C	24D-15R	D+1	63D-41R
Maine	R+1	18D-17R	D+15	89D-60R
Maryland	D+1	34D-13R	D+10	108D-33R
Massachusetts	D+1	35D-5R	D+4	141D-18R-1?
Michigan	D+1	19R-17D-2?	D+6	58D-52R
Minnesota	D+6	44D-23R	D+20	86D-48R
Mississippi	N/C	27D-23R-2?	N/C	75D-46R-1?
Missouri	D+2	21R-13D	D+5	91R-71D
Montana	R+2	25D-25R	?	49D-50R-1?
Nevada	D+1	11R-10D	D+1	27D-15R
New Hampshire	D+6	14D-10R	D+84	234D-156R
New Jersey	N/C	22D-18R	N/C	49D-31R
New Mexico	N/C	24D-18R	N/C	42D-28R
New York	N/C	34R-27D-1?	N/C	105D-45R
North Carolina	D+2	31D-19R	D+5	68D-52R
North Dakota	D+6	26R-21D	D+6	61R-33D
Ohio	D+1	21R-12D	D+7	53R-46D
Oklahoma	R+2	24D-24R	D+1	56R-45D
Oregon	N/C	17D-11R	D+4	31D-29R
Pennsylvania	N/C	29R-21D	D+7	101D-101R-1?
Rhode Island	N/C	33D-5R	D+1	61D-14R
South Carolina	N/C	26R-20D	N/C	72R-50D-2?
South Dakota	D+5	20R-15D	D+1	50R-20D
Tennessee	D+1	17R-16D	N/C	53D-46R
Texas	R+1	20R-11D	D+5	81R-69D
Utah	N/C	21R-8D	N/C	56R-19D
Vermont	D+2	23D-7R	D+10	93D-49R
Virginia	N/C	23R-17D	N/C	57R-40D
Washington	D+6	32-17R	D+7	62D-36R
West Virginia	D+2	23D-11R	D+4	72D-28R
Wisconsin	D+4	18D-15R	D+7	53R-46D
Wyoming	N/C	23R-7D	D+3	43R-17D
Net	D+52		D+260

A pretty amazing breakdown, isn’t it? Take Minnesota, for example. Over the past two election cycles, the DFL has managed to reverse an 81-53 Republican majority in the state House into a lopsided 86-48 Democratic majority. Similarly, the Democratic tidal wave in New Hampshire is nothing short of historical and breathtaking, with Democrats controlling both bodies of the state legislature for the first time since the late 1800s, if I’m not mistaken!

Why is this important? Aside from some legislatures controlling congressional redistricting powers, and aside from the political capital to deliver on Democratic priorities on the state and local level, Democratic gains in state legislatures are crucial for building the “farm team” for higher offices. Just take some of the gains made in Congress this cycle, and look at their political resumes. Chris Murphy? State Senator. Jon Tester? State Senator. Charlie Wilson? State Senator. Ed Perlmutter? State Senator. Joe Courtney (fingers-crossed)? State Representative. The list goes on.

Much of the credit for the blue surge should be given to the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, whose partnership with Actblue.com helped activate online fundraising for candidates in state legislative races across the country. They helped such candidates raise around $250,000 online–in a very abbreviated time frame. With Actblue.com now operational in time for the full 2008 cycle, the power of online fundraising for state legislative candidates has just started to be tapped.

(Bumped – promoted by DavidNYC)

I think you guys are gonna like this. Based on this suggestion from Terry312, I went ahead and created a brand new wiki at WetPaint.com called 2008 Race Tracker. The name is pretty self-explanatory: This wiki is designed to be a database for information on all 2008 House, Sen and Gov races. The main focus now is inputting candidate information, both incumbents and possible challengers.

The WetPaint system is incredibly easy to use – everything is WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). If you’ve ever waded into Wikipedia and quailed at the thought of editing its quirky code, fear no more. Absolutely no code of any kind is necessary to create pages on WetPaint. The only thing you’ll need to do is create a user account, which takes 30 seconds. (I set this requirement to ward against vandalism.)

I’ve created easy-to-use templates for each type of race which I strongly encourage you to use. (Here’s an example of what a page ideally looks like.) The idea is to create a page for each race, so we have a lot of info to fill in. I figure our first objective should be to fill in all the incumbent data. Anyhow, check out the main wiki page for some more info and just jump right in! This should be fun.