Targeting 75 House seats?

[zorkpolitics]

With Hackett's close race in OH-02 there is increasing pressure on the Democrats Congressional Campaign Committee to expand their focus from their current 10 most vulnerable Republicans to 75 Republican districts:
see:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dems10aug10,1,6618306.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

At one extreme is a call for a 435 seat strategy:
http://jerome-armstrong.mydd.com/story/2005/8/1/84548/24795
which is really another version of Dean's 50 state strategy:
http://www.democrats.org/a/party/a_50_state_strategy/

Perhaps more reasonable is a 75 seat strategy that has been proposed :
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/3/155855/3061

Would a 50 or 75 seat strategy energize the Democrats and give them a shot at winning he House on 2006?
Or will it dilute their effort too thinly and leave them with next to nothing?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

A broader strategy wouldn't be a bad idea, after all no one expected Crane to go down. But no one should get too delusional.

[Smash255]

NY-03  Tom Suozzi please run against Peter King

[TeePee4Prez]

PA 08- KEEP GINNY SCHRADER OUT!!!!

[phk]

Keep Costa in CA-20.

[Torie]

I suspect a 25 seat strategy is more likely and productive. Below are the 25 GOP seats that seem possibly in play  in no order of vulnerability. A few are close to wishful thinking, but 25  has a certain ring to it. * seats have no incumbent, and the ** seat probably will have no incumbent.

1   Florida   Harris*   13
2   Texas   Delay   22
3   N.M   Wilson   2
4   Arizona   Renzi   1
5   Calif   Drier   26
6   Color   Beauprez*   7
7   Wash   Reichert   8
8   Conn   Simmons   2
9   Conn   Shays   4
10   Penn   Fitzpatrick   8
11   Penn   Gerlach   6
12   Ohio   Tiberi   12
13   Ohio   Pryce   15
14   Minn   Kennedy*   6
15   Iowa   Nussle*   1
16   Illinois   Hyde*   6
17   N. C.   Taylor   11
18   Indiana   Sodrel   9
19   Indiana   Chicola   2
20   Indiana   Hostettler   8
21   Wisconsin   Green*   8
22   Colorado   Musgrave   4
23   W.V.   Capito**   2
24   Calif   Cunningham*   50
25   Kentucky   Northrup   3

How many House  seats do I think the Dems will gain in 2006 as of the moment?  The answer is 8. But it could easily bump up to 15 without much of a shock.  I think the higher number would result in  a Dem takeover. I recall the GOP has 231 seats (I could be off), and 231-15= 216. 435-216=219.

And there you  have it.


PS: I forget about the Beauprez district. His district goes in, and Porter of Nev goes out.

[Alcon]

Torie,

Nice first post.  Welcome!

I do strongly disagree with Harris and DeLay, though.  Both are very GOP seats.

[Defarge]

An excellent first post Torie, I was going to post around the same thing myself.

[Torie]

Thanks for the  kind words. Bush won the Harris seat by about 10%, and the Delay seat, well has Delay running, and the Bush numbers don't matter in Texas. Delay ran relatively poorly in 2004, as did Harris. The Delay seat is not that GOP generically, and is trending Dem. The GOP has the edge in both, but they are in play. Now how do I put up my beautiful state of California in my posts in soothing blue? 

[Torie]

Thanks!

[nini2287]

Good list Torie, a few I'd tweak around but overall nice job.  The dailyKos 75 list was funny...assuming that there would be a national surge against the GOP and we'd be able to pick up all those seats.  OH-2 especially cracked me up, especially since we couldn't win it with all of our resources focused on it.

[TheresNoMoney]

Democrats should shoot big in 2006. I can't tell you exactly how many seats they should target, but the number should be fairly large.

Who would've thought that the Republicans would've had a 50-something seat pickup in 1994?

Americans are not happy about the current Congress, and with a strong and clear message, Democrats  can do very well in 2006.

[A18]

The 1994 election was only a blowout because the solid south finally realigned at the congressional level.

[socaldem]

Its about time for the northern suburbs to realign at the congressional level...

[Sam Spade]

I suspect a 25 seat strategy is more likely and productive. Below are the 25 GOP seats that seem possibly in play  in no order of vulnerability. A few are close to wishful thinking, but 25  has a certain ring to it. * seats have no incumbent, and the ** seat probably will have no incumbent.

1   Florida   Harris*   13
2   Texas   Delay   22
3   N.M   Wilson   2
4   Arizona   Renzi   1
5   Calif   Drier   26
6   Nev   Porter   3
7   Wash   Reichert   8
8   Conn   Simmons   2
9   Conn   Shays   4
10   Penn   Fitzpatrick   8
11   Penn   Gerlach   6
12   Ohio   Tiberi   12
13   Ohio   Pryce   15
14   Minn   Kennedy*   6
15   Iowa   Nussle*   1
16   Illinois   Hyde*   6
17   N. C.   Taylor   11
18   Indiana   Sodrel   9
19   Indiana   Chicola   2
20   Indiana   Hostettler   8
21   Wisconsin   Green*   8
22   Colorado   Musgrave   4
23   W.V.   Capito**   2
24   Calif   Cunningham*   50
25   Kentucky   Northrup   3

How many House  seats do I think the Dems will gain in 2006 as of the moment?  The answer is 8. But it could easily bump up to 15 without much of a shock.  I think the higher number would result in  a Dem takeover. I recall the GOP has 231 seats (I could be off), and 231-15= 216. 435-216=219.

And there you  have it.

This looks like a good list to me.

I guarantee much money will be spent on DeLay's race from the Democrat side, but I don't think it will be won unless the GOP loses the House nationally.  It may not even still be won then, unless the Democrats in Texas learn how to revamp their GOTV efforts (which have been terrible in recent years).  The District may be trending Dem, but slowly and only in Fort Bend County (not Brazoria). 

And the Galveston County part is already set in against DeLay.  I don't know whether any candidate (Nick Lampson) can bring any more votes against DeLay from that area than there already are.

[AuH2O]

The GOP didn't take out 50+ Dems in '94. They got 30-something (34?) in a once-in-a-generation, maybe not even that likely, event.

The most Republicans the Dems could take out is, in the extreme, a net of 10. But even that is essentially impossible, barring... well I have no idea, but presumably some series of things could happen to render that possible.

Now, that is different from saying how many seats should be targetted, because you won't hit all your targets. However, something in this discussion seems off to me, because the GOP has substantially greater resources. Thus, a 'shotgun' type strategy appears particularly dumb on the part of Democrats.

Given the current structure of the electorate, I would say Democrats should simply maintain a swing-district strategy in 2006, and then throw everything they have into 2008. With a national race at the top, it is more likely the party, which essentially has no message or reason for being aside from not being Republican, could score some kind of multi-tiered electoral victory.

That said, without ideas, the Democrats will never, ever, ever retake the House. Do nothing on Social Security and spend more everywhere else does not count as "ideas," by the way. The Democrats could fully fund a 435-seat strategy in 2006 and still would not retake the House.

[Torie]

In 1994 the GOP picked up something like 51 seats. Some of it was a delayed redistricting effect, some the  collapse of the Dems in House races in the South, and some the  national mood in general, about the doings of the Dems in the House, and about the Clinton tax increase, and some just luck.  The Pubbies won most of the close ones.

[socaldem]

I suspect a 25 seat strategy is more likely and productive. Below are the 25 GOP seats that seem possibly in play  in no order of vulnerability. A few are close to wishful thinking, but 25  has a certain ring to it. * seats have no incumbent, and the ** seat probably will have no incumbent.

1   Florida   Harris*   13
2   Texas   Delay   22
3   N.M   Wilson   2
4   Arizona   Renzi   1
5   Calif   Drier   26
6   Nev   Porter   3
7   Wash   Reichert   8
8   Conn   Simmons   2
9   Conn   Shays   4
10   Penn   Fitzpatrick   8
11   Penn   Gerlach   6
12   Ohio   Tiberi   12
13   Ohio   Pryce   15
14   Minn   Kennedy*   6
15   Iowa   Nussle*   1
16   Illinois   Hyde*   6
17   N. C.   Taylor   11
18   Indiana   Sodrel   9
19   Indiana   Chicola   2
20   Indiana   Hostettler   8
21   Wisconsin   Green*   8
22   Colorado   Musgrave   4
23   W.V.   Capito**   2
24   Calif   Cunningham*   50
25   Kentucky   Northrup   3

How many House  seats do I think the Dems will gain in 2006 as of the moment?  The answer is 8. But it could easily bump up to 15 without much of a shock.  I think the higher number would result in  a Dem takeover. I recall the GOP has 231 seats (I could be off), and 231-15= 216. 435-216=219.

And there you  have it.

This looks like a good list to me.

I guarantee much money will be spent on DeLay's race from the Democrat side, but I don't think it will be won unless the GOP loses the House nationally.  It may not even still be won then, unless the Democrats in Texas learn how to revamp their GOTV efforts (which have been terrible in recent years).  The District may be trending Dem, but slowly and only in Fort Bend County (not Brazoria). 

And the Galveston County part is already set in against DeLay.  I don't know whether any candidate (Nick Lampson) can bring any more votes against DeLay from that area than there already are.

I tend to agree with your analysis, though I think the seat can be won with a great targeted campaign even without a wave.

The most obvious opportunity the list is missing is C0-07 Beauzprez (open), Perlemutter being the Dem here...

Other than that, I would include the following races on a target list:

LA-07, if Chris John runs, this is definitely top tier...

FL-22, I have my doubts about the ability of Dems to win against Shaw here, but State Sen.  Klein will make it a race...

PA-18 should also be included if Hafer runs, especially since there might be a good coattail effect from Casey....

NC-08, Hayes is really asking for a challenge now that he's been pivotal in not one, but two trade votes...

That said, I'd probably take Porter and maybe Renzi off the list because they're becoming more entrenched by the day.  Northup, too, seems to be nearly invincible in her district and I dont think too many dems are going to be stepping up for the challenge...we'll have to wait for her to take a shot at the senate. 

[Keystone Phil]

PA-18 should also be included if Hafer runs, especially since there might be a good coattail effect from Casey....

Hafer is running but what people need to realize is that PA 18 is a conservative district. Hafer is a Democrat turned Republican turned Democrat again. Republicans despise her. Conservative Democrats (which are pretty much the majority in this district) won't go for her. She has a big name but it's not positive name ID.

There is also bad blood between Hafer and the Caseys. She endorsed Casey for Senate because her owner (Rendell) told her to. She had to do it. She'll help him a bit, too, but will Casey help her? No.

The Dems best chance at picking up a seat in this state is PA 6 and even a pickup there is unlikely. PA 8 and PA 18 will not go Dem in 2006.

[Sam Spade]

I suspect a 25 seat strategy is more likely and productive. Below are the 25 GOP seats that seem possibly in play  in no order of vulnerability. A few are close to wishful thinking, but 25  has a certain ring to it. * seats have no incumbent, and the ** seat probably will have no incumbent.

1   Florida   Harris*   13
2   Texas   Delay   22
3   N.M   Wilson   2
4   Arizona   Renzi   1
5   Calif   Drier   26
6   Nev   Porter   3
7   Wash   Reichert   8
8   Conn   Simmons   2
9   Conn   Shays   4
10   Penn   Fitzpatrick   8
11   Penn   Gerlach   6
12   Ohio   Tiberi   12
13   Ohio   Pryce   15
14   Minn   Kennedy*   6
15   Iowa   Nussle*   1
16   Illinois   Hyde*   6
17   N. C.   Taylor   11
18   Indiana   Sodrel   9
19   Indiana   Chicola   2
20   Indiana   Hostettler   8
21   Wisconsin   Green*   8
22   Colorado   Musgrave   4
23   W.V.   Capito**   2
24   Calif   Cunningham*   50
25   Kentucky   Northrup   3

How many House  seats do I think the Dems will gain in 2006 as of the moment?  The answer is 8. But it could easily bump up to 15 without much of a shock.  I think the higher number would result in  a Dem takeover. I recall the GOP has 231 seats (I could be off), and 231-15= 216. 435-216=219.

And there you  have it.

This looks like a good list to me.

I guarantee much money will be spent on DeLay's race from the Democrat side, but I don't think it will be won unless the GOP loses the House nationally.  It may not even still be won then, unless the Democrats in Texas learn how to revamp their GOTV efforts (which have been terrible in recent years).  The District may be trending Dem, but slowly and only in Fort Bend County (not Brazoria). 

And the Galveston County part is already set in against DeLay.  I don't know whether any candidate (Nick Lampson) can bring any more votes against DeLay from that area than there already are.

I tend to agree with your analysis, though I think the seat can be won with a great targeted campaign even without a wave.

The most obvious opportunity the list is missing is C0-07 Beauzprez (open), Perlemutter being the Dem here...

Other than that, I would include the following races on a target list:

LA-07, if Chris John runs, this is definitely top tier...

FL-22, I have my doubts about the ability of Dems to win against Shaw here, but State Sen.  Klein will make it a race...

PA-18 should also be included if Hafer runs, especially since there might be a good coattail effect from Casey....

NC-08, Hayes is really asking for a challenge now that he's been pivotal in not one, but two trade votes...

That said, I'd probably take Porter and maybe Renzi off the list because they're becoming more entrenched by the day.  Northup, too, seems to be nearly invincible in her district and I dont think too many dems are going to be stepping up for the challenge...we'll have to wait for her to take a shot at the senate. 

I'd forgotten about Beauprez.  In all honesty, take Harris off of the list and put Beauprez on it, even though Torie has it as #1.  IIRC, Harris always underperformed in that district as compared to Bush and that district is a decently Republican one (for central Florida). I could be wrong on this, corrections will be noted (this is StatesRights territory)

Besides, the state Democrat party in Florida is close to being on life support and in order to run strongly in local races, your state party needs to be in order (no matter how much money is spent nationally).  It's one of the reasons why I rate DeLay higher than does Torie.

I agree with regards to Renzi.  Of course, if he doesn't run, then the seat becomes swing again.  Porter also has the advantage of a strong state Republican party in Nevada that Northrup does not have as much of in Kentucky.  For that reason, I rate her higher.

In short, the Democrats' best chance to pick up seats in 2006 is probably within the Rust Belt/Ohio Valley and the two Connecticut seats.  Just my gut feeling on the matter.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

NY-29 has a strong candidate, Eric Massa.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Its about time for the northern suburbs to realign at the congressional level...

Agreed, far too many of them remain in Dem hands when they should be Republican seats.

[socaldem]

I suspect a 25 seat strategy is more likely and productive. Below are the 25 GOP seats that seem possibly in play  in no order of vulnerability. A few are close to wishful thinking, but 25  has a certain ring to it. * seats have no incumbent, and the ** seat probably will have no incumbent.

1   Florida   Harris*   13
2   Texas   Delay   22
3   N.M   Wilson   2
4   Arizona   Renzi   1
5   Calif   Drier   26
6   Nev   Porter   3
7   Wash   Reichert   8
8   Conn   Simmons   2
9   Conn   Shays   4
10   Penn   Fitzpatrick   8
11   Penn   Gerlach   6
12   Ohio   Tiberi   12
13   Ohio   Pryce   15
14   Minn   Kennedy*   6
15   Iowa   Nussle*   1
16   Illinois   Hyde*   6
17   N. C.   Taylor   11
18   Indiana   Sodrel   9
19   Indiana   Chicola   2
20   Indiana   Hostettler   8
21   Wisconsin   Green*   8
22   Colorado   Musgrave   4
23   W.V.   Capito**   2
24   Calif   Cunningham*   50
25   Kentucky   Northrup   3

How many House  seats do I think the Dems will gain in 2006 as of the moment?  The answer is 8. But it could easily bump up to 15 without much of a shock.  I think the higher number would result in  a Dem takeover. I recall the GOP has 231 seats (I could be off), and 231-15= 216. 435-216=219.

And there you  have it.

This looks like a good list to me.

I guarantee much money will be spent on DeLay's race from the Democrat side, but I don't think it will be won unless the GOP loses the House nationally.  It may not even still be won then, unless the Democrats in Texas learn how to revamp their GOTV efforts (which have been terrible in recent years).  The District may be trending Dem, but slowly and only in Fort Bend County (not Brazoria). 

And the Galveston County part is already set in against DeLay.  I don't know whether any candidate (Nick Lampson) can bring any more votes against DeLay from that area than there already are.

I tend to agree with your analysis, though I think the seat can be won with a great targeted campaign even without a wave.

The most obvious opportunity the list is missing is C0-07 Beauzprez (open), Perlemutter being the Dem here...

Other than that, I would include the following races on a target list:

LA-07, if Chris John runs, this is definitely top tier...

FL-22, I have my doubts about the ability of Dems to win against Shaw here, but State Sen.  Klein will make it a race...

PA-18 should also be included if Hafer runs, especially since there might be a good coattail effect from Casey....

NC-08, Hayes is really asking for a challenge now that he's been pivotal in not one, but two trade votes...

That said, I'd probably take Porter and maybe Renzi off the list because they're becoming more entrenched by the day.  Northup, too, seems to be nearly invincible in her district and I dont think too many dems are going to be stepping up for the challenge...we'll have to wait for her to take a shot at the senate. 

I'd forgotten about Beauprez.  In all honesty, take Harris off of the list and put Beauprez on it, even though Torie has it as #1.  IIRC, Harris always underperformed in that district as compared to Bush and that district is a decently Republican one (for central Florida). I could be wrong on this, corrections will be noted (this is StatesRights territory)

Besides, the state Democrat party in Florida is close to being on life support and in order to run strongly in local races, your state party needs to be in order (no matter how much money is spent nationally).  It's one of the reasons why I rate DeLay higher than does Torie.

I agree with regards to Renzi.  Of course, if he doesn't run, then the seat becomes swing again.  Porter also has the advantage of a strong state Republican party in Nevada that Northrup does not have as much of in Kentucky.  For that reason, I rate her higher.

In short, the Democrats' best chance to pick up seats in 2006 is probably within the Rust Belt/Ohio Valley and the two Connecticut seats.  Just my gut feeling on the matter.

I agree, I think Dems should really put resources into Indiana and Ohio.  In IN-08, the DCCC recruit Sherriff Ellsworth is impressive.  Sodrel is also beatable in 09.  If we can get recruits against Pryce, Tibieri, Chabot, Ney, or LaTourrette, we can play ball there, too...

I'm also hoping for gains in NC with Schuler in 12....

Certainly, Democrats should always pay attention to the NE but I have no reason to believe Shays should be any more vulnerable this year than last.  I think, however, that we have a shot at simmons.

As for the open seats: Co-07 and IA-01 have a generic dem advantage and I'm bullish on Dem chances in WI-08, where Dems have two good candidates...

The California seats mentioned, btw, are likely not vulnerable... Dreier's poor showing was a fluke caused by a talk radio show crusade.  Now that he's sponsored immigration legislation, he's likely okay.  With Cunningham out, there's no way Dems win the 50th...

I'm working on a California redistricting map, however, that would make the 50th and a few other republican seats competitive and that would create a few more dem-leaning seats while also making sure that the lines are fairly neat looking...

[Virginian87]

Let's hope that the Congressional Committee has the organization and the greenbacks to get this done.

[AuH2O]

Err, excuse my math, but when a challenger beats an incumbent, that is only 1 seat. It has the effect of widening or shrinking the gap by 2 (-1 and +1).

The GOP took out 34 Democrat incumbents in 1994. With today's districts, that is impossible. The same atmosphere would produce perhaps 20 incumbent defeats.

Given that Democrats are actually still in decline-- though apparently somewhat oblivious to it (in 2004 more people identified themselves as Republicans than Democrats for the first time in recorded history-- though presumably in 1928 there were more Republicans but no survey to measure).

For a "Republican," Torie seems mighty convinced about the greatness of Democrats. No matter, those of us in the real world see the 2006 environment for what it is... stalemate.