Talk Elections

It is available  here (http://article.nationalreview.com/433360/house-races-in-2010/jim-geraghty?page=1). It is not the greatest analysis (and of course from a conservative partisan), but it does contain a lot of information on a seat by seat basis of the seats deemed potentially in play, and thus some might find it of interest, or wish to comment on individual races.

Oh, and here (http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/47049/ranking-those-99-house-races-degree-difficulty-gop-challengers) are the 99 seats in play are ranked in trenches of difficulty for the GOP to take.

Thnaks, Torie, though I prefer Larry Sabato and CQ Politics.

There is some really interesting info in there, even though I don't agree with all of the analysis.  One particular tidbit is on Chellie Pingree - not raising much money.  Id like to see a poll on that race. 

The only guy that could have made it a race, ran for Governor instead.

I think it's actually a pretty good list for what the Republican partisan should be aware of if a wave appears.  A couple of the choices are strange, and I don't agree, but whatever.

I don't think it's very good at all.




This is filled with glaring holes that shows he's not really aware of the differences between these races.  Arcuri is tossup while the GOP should be measuring the drapes in Phil Hare's office?

Yes Lunar,  the dude does seem to be on amphetamines or something, I admit. Hey, maybe the wave is already here and we just missed it. :)  But whatever, he lists the candidates and the money, and has some other tidbits, and not all of us are Sam Spade, and need cheat sheets.

I read the first article and not the second, Lunar, FWIW, because I didn't see the link.  :P 

Looks like I made the correct choice.  The second article is rather silly.

It's not just that he skews things in favor of the GOP, it's that he's skewing the wrong things.

Arcuri is probably the best example of that.  I assume he thinks that because Arcuri flipped his vote from yes to no on HCR that he's more likely to be reelected, but in reality, that flip doomed him.

I mean, he generally gets a vague idea of what seats are in danger +/- some, but he's just....off.

There are tons of cheat sheets far better than this one, check out Cook & Rothenberg.

It is hard to see something that wasn't there typically. I added it later. :P

But they don't have the detailed chat that CS has of each race (at least not for folks who are looking for freebies rather than pay for more access), which for those who have not made this a project might be helpful.

Lunar is there some poll confirming that Accuri committed Seppuku because of his flip?

Trying to make me look like an idiot, eh!  :P

That is not hard; just ask Opebo. Vicious "rightest" too. :)

Well, everyone who flipped away from a yes committed Seppuku imo except for the really random ones (Lynch & Lipinski).  It's logically irrational, as the Senate version was more conservative.

Arcuri is just...I mean, the entire Democratic county apparatus up there is completely deflated.    Everyone is completely baffled by wtf he's doing.

I mean, Arcuri hasn't even made it clear whether or not he's even going to bother to run for reelection.  He's the only representative left in the House, as far as I'm aware, who's still publicly teasing his retirement.  

Oh. So did he flip out of principle, or political miscalculation (trying to cut his losses, and instead opened up an artery), or because he didn't understand the bill the first time, or because ... ?

Arcuri & Space, as far as I can tell, both just panicked.


In Upstate New York, Democrats feel betrayed by Rep. Arcuri
By SANDHYA SOMASHEKHAR
WaPo

Woodman's Pub has been the site of many celebrations over the years. On a recent evening, though, four Democrats gathered at the neon-lit bar to take stock of their problems.

Their county committee is splintered and has neither a Web site nor a headquarters. Their enthusiasm is outmatched by that of their Republican counterparts, who were jolted awake by the "tea party" movement. A liberal third party that had been an ally is now a threat.

And Rep. Michael Arcuri, the first Democrat to represent this area in the House since 1983, has become one of Congress's most vulnerable Democrats, unpopular not only with conservatives but with many of the activists who helped him get elected.

"We have a congressman we fought long and hard for, and you know, he didn't come through for us," said Sean Mack, a real estate agent, who sipped a Coke at the bar.

This year, he said, he will vote for Arcuri, but "my plan is not to, like, pound the pavement and go overboard and be a real zealot about it."

In a sun-filled kitchen a couple of blocks away, another group of Democrats tried to muster enthusiasm over slices of sausage-and-pepper pizza. Jo Schaffer, the Democratic committee's secretary, said she is waiting for Arcuri to visit them and personally explain his vote against the health-care bill.

"What has happened is a big disappointment. It's a betrayal -- I can't think of any other word," she said. "We are receptive to what he has to say about it. We want to hear his rationale, and I have no doubt we will come together behind him in the end."

Arcuri is part of a class of Democrats that some Republicans derisively refer to as the "wave babies," swept into office in 2006 at the peak of anger over President George W. Bush and the Iraq war. Republicans believe they can take back some of those seats this fall -- especially in GOP-leaning districts such as Arcuri's, which covers a swath of rural Upstate New York as well as several college towns, including Cortland.

Like Democrats elected recently in similar districts, Arcuri has tried to please both his base and his crossover supporters. Shortly after taking office, he joined the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition. He voted in favor of the stimulus but against a "cap and trade" bill aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Then last month, he reversed course on the health-care bill, voting against it along with 33 of his Democratic colleagues after supporting it for months.

"We certainly appreciate the hard work that activists do, but I represent a largely moderate district and voted the way the district and I thought was best," Arcuri said in an e-mail. On his Web site, he said he was concerned that insurance premiums would rise for families, seniors and small businesses.

The vote deflated his most ardent backers -- "like a razor to a balloon," said Henry Steck, a Democratic activist and professor at the State University of New York at Cortland. "People were willing to roll with the punch [on cap and trade], but health-care reform is the signature issue of our time, of the Obama administration, et cetera. It's taken a lot of the wind out of the sails of his base."

His vote also provoked an immediate backlash from unions and the liberal Working Families Party, which delivered crucial support in Arcuri's narrow 2008 reelection. The party is considering fielding its own candidate this year.

Arcuri's Republican opponent, Richard Hanna, outraised Arcuri during the first three months of the year, collecting about $358,000 compared with Arcuri's $208,000.

Many Democrats say they share the frustrations that motivate Republicans and independents. Unemployment in Cortland County is higher than the national average, worsened by state budget cuts to schools and highway construction. Taxes are a near-universal concern.

Democrats, too, have been disappointed by their party's leadership in Washington. They think Obama's attempts to reach bipartisan agreements on health care and other issues has been naive. And they say Democratic leaders have not articulated their message clearly and forcefully enough to win over independents and quash the vocal tea party movement.

The tea party has a foothold here. Activists came out in force at rallies designed to sway Arcuri against the health-care bill. And a handful of signs that recently sprouted along the highway taunt some of the community's more liberal members. One says: "Double your taxes. Vote Democrat." Another advocates drilling for oil; a third condemns socialism.

At Woodman's, where they used to gather during the 2006 campaign, Mack and the other Democrats reminisced about another sign -- the giant one bearing Arcuri's name that they strapped to the back of a pickup and paraded around town that year.

"There's maybe 1 percent of the population that's willing to do the kinds of things I've done," Mack said. Though he had said he probably would not volunteer again for Arcuri's campaign, on this day he allowed: "It's still early. Let's see what happens."

Of course, maybe Arcuri has been completely tarnished by what happened in 2008.

mmm?

Tarnished is not the best word, scarred is better.  Whatever...

I don't recall the scaring myself. What happened?

He came within an inch of having his head handed to him by Hanna in a "Democratic" year.

This list actually had Shelley Berkley listed as vulnerable in the inner city Las Vegas district.  Does this guy realize that the current NV-01 isnt even close to being like the district that she won in 1998 and John Ensign represented for four years in the 1990's?

That was one of about four on the list that I thought was pretty ridiculous, as mentioned above.

I'm pretty sure Arcuri is dead meat at this point, I'm just waiting to see an independent poll to confirm it.

Phil Hare? LOL.

Arcuri is an idiot, plain and simple. The fact that the guy is considering retirement when he's only been in two terms and isn't that old is quite amusing but frankly we'd probably have a better chance with someone else.

Phil Hare is not completely ridiculous actually to put on a watch list now.  Unlike thinking that NV-01, CA-51 or MA-06 should be watched right now or should be put on any real list.  Or putting Phil Hare in TN-06 territory.

Phil Hare is in a district that was gerrymandered to put every possible Democratic county and precinct in Central and Western Illinois in one district.  He isnt going anywhere.   This isnt the district that Lane Evans held in the 1990's.  Its a good five points more Democratic. 

Oh, it hasn't made my list yet.  But if 100 seats fall - expect it to be there.  :P

Btw, it's only D+3 fyi with Obama at top, which really isn't that Dem in my book (though I understand it has more history as Dem, and all that).

It's fine to have Hare ad vulnerable, just not okay to say beating him is like beating the Rams.

Putting CA-51 on the same level as CA-11 is just retarded. That was one of the mistakes that really caught the eye.

That caught my eye too, which is what precipitated my caveat that his conclusions were questionable, as opposed perhaps to the raw information. Indeed, it is retarded.

Campaign spot fights back on his being termed on amphetamines  about his perception that Hare and Berkeley being in the cross-hairs with this (the assumption being I guess that unemployment is the uber trump card):


Looking Hard at the Districts of Phil Hare and Shelley Berkley
May 13, 2010 11:54 AM
By Jim Geraghty   

Few predictions have generated more “Jim, you must be gargling with Maker’s Mark again” responses than my assessment that defeating Illinois Democrat Phil Hare is roughly as difficult as beating the St. Louis Rams. (Actually, the discussion here is whether I’m “on amphetamines” or whether  I’m “retarded.”)

If someone wants to argue that Hare doesn’t belong among the most absolutely vulnerable Democrats, fine, but anyone who thinks he’s a safe Democrat is, I suspect, extraordinarily mistaken.

For starters, let’s take a look at the jobless rate in some of the cities in Hare’s district.

    Sterling: 12.5 percent in March 2010, 13.7 percent in February; it was only 7 percent in November 2008, the last time Hare went before the voters (and with no Republican opponent).

    Rock Island: 10.2 percent March 2010, 10.8 percent the previous month; 5.5 percent in November 2008.

    Quincy: 8.9 percent in March 2010, 9.7 percent in February; 5 percent in November 2008.

    Springfield: 9.3 percent March 2010, 10.1 the previous month; 5.9 percent in November 2008.

    Decatur: 13.8 percent March 2010, 14.6 percent the previous month; 7 percent in November 2008.

Illinois’s unemployment rate is increasing faster than the national rate, and the counties in Hare’s district have pretty bad foreclosure rates (although Chicago’s is worse).

While March saw a bit of improvement, in most cities in Hare’s district, unemployment is close to double what it was the last time he faced the voters. This is not a circumstance where an incumbent can use the old Ed Koch slogan, “How am I doing?” Yes, this is a district gerrymandered to include a lot of Democrats. But even partisan Democrats who are out of work for long stretches can get dissatisfied with their incumbents and think about staying home or voting for the other guy.

Then there’s the matter of those polls conducted by Hare’s campaign but never released. What could they have shown? How good could they possibly have been for Hare if he’s decided to keep them under wraps, even after needling from GOP challenger Bobby Schilling? 55–45? If it were, say, 57–43, wouldn’t Hare have released them to show he’s still in fine shape?

Late last year, a poll found only 40 percent inclined to reelect Hare; in March, another poll found Hare leading Schilling 39 percent to 32 percent, a not-quite-so-daunting margin.

Of course, Hare can always rely on his raw charisma, charm, and dashing good looks to carry him to victory:

Then there’s the listing of Rep. Shelley Berkley, Democrat of Nevada, where one commenter objects, “This list actually had Shelley Berkley listed as vulnerable in the inner city Las Vegas district.  Does this guy realize that the current NV-01 isnt even close to being like the district that she won in 1998 and John Ensign represented for four years in the 1990′s?”

Yes, Berkley’s district is most of Las Vegas – where the unemployment rate is 13.8 percent, was 13.9 percent last month, and was only 7.9 percent in November 2008. (Las Vegas unemployment has been 13 percent or higher for 8 of the last 9 months.) And then there are the epic troubles of Las Vegas homeowners: “highest foreclosure rate in the nation, 80 percent of homeowners ‘underwater’ on their mortgage, half of homes with 25 percent or more negative equity, 16 percent of homeowners delinquent on their mortgage.”

The Republican challenger to Shelley Berkley will have the simplest and most compelling of messages: “It’s time for a change.” Berkley will have to offer some argument that no one could possibly do her job better than she has so far, and that better times are just around the corner.

And this isn’t even getting into the top-of-the-ticket effects, from Harry Reid and Rory Reid in Nevada and Alexi Giannoulias and Pat Quinn in Illinois.

Top of the ticket effects?  Both John Kerry and Al Gore won NV-01 by huge double digit margins and even John Ensign lost the district in both 2000 and 2006 as he was winning by 15%+ statewide.  Both Harry Reid and Rory Reid will win this district no matter how they do statewide. 

I can see Phil Hare losing in a really, really bad year, but if that were to happen, we're talking 80-90 seat loss. His district isn't that Democratic, but his opponent isn't top-tier, just a Generic Republican Businessman.

Shelly Berkeley losing, however, is ridiculous. Quoting unemployment statistics as if that's just going to magically override everything else is silly, and if you've looked at the quality of candidates running against her, you'd know she's not going anywhere.

After seeing Hare on the tube, it is hard for me to fathom how he ever won the seat in the first instance, but whatever.

He was Lane Evans chief of staff, so he knew the district. As noted it was gerrymandered to maximize Dem support for Evans in 2002. In any case, this district has much more Dem lean than any of the others listed (IL-8, 11, or 14) so it's hard to see why this would be rated the tops for switching in IL.

Yes, I know. I was alluding more to how he ever secured the Dem nomination originally, and you have now filled in that blank. I suspect however, if the GOP does take over the House (I still tend to doubt that despite all the hype), my guess is that he might well be a casualty. He certainly won't appeal to voters on the fence I don't think, and the Dems just don't seem to be doing very well in Anglo areas outside the big cities at this juncture in a lot of places like this.

Phil Hare pretty much looks exactly the way I'd expect a congressman from Illinois to look. Especially one from an area that refers to itself as the Quad Cities.