Talk Elections

Here's the list from Sabato's Crystal Ball (http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/article.php?id=LJS2007060701) in no particular order.  Please explain any no votes.

FL-13: Vern Buchanan (R)
FL-16: Tim Mahoney (D)
IA-2: Dave Loebsack (D)
TX-22: Nick Lampson (D)
OH-18: Zach Space (D)
PA-4: Jason Altmire (D)
PA-10: Chris Carney (D)
NH-1: Carol Shea-Porter (D)
NH-2: Paul Hodes (D)
KS-2: Nancy Boyda (D)
IN-2: Joe Donnelly (D)
NY-19: John Hall (D)
WI-8: Steve Kagen (D)
MN-1: Tim Walz (D)
CA-11: Jerry McNerney (D)

Loebsack? Haha.

The list should consist only of Lampson and Mahoney.

I'd have thought Baron Hill in IN-09 was more vulnerable than Joe Donnelly in IN-02. That said, although the former seems to be the more Republican at the presidential level, it may have the stronger tradition, of the two, for sending Democrats to the House (but I'm far from certain on that). IN-02 certainly moved more strongly to Donnelly than IN-09 did to Hill last November

Thus far, Donnelly, along with Brad Ellsworth of IN-08, is among the more conservative of the Democratic freshmen (culturally and fiscally)

Dave

Here's my rankings:

First tier: The GOP is pretty much guaranteed at least 2 of those, and has at least a 50/50 chance of taking all three:

Lampson
Carney
Mahoney

In that order. Lampson is clearly the most vulnerable, while Mahoney has the best chance of hanging on.

Second tier: Almost guranteed of one, 50/50 chance at taking 2, and between a 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 chance of taking them all:

Hall
Kagen
Boyda

Also in that order.

Walz, against his current opponent, is not too vulnerable. Dick Day is a horribly incompetant State Senator from a district that isn't likely to make too much of a dent in Walz's strongholds, plus he's about as charismatic and articulate as Mark Kennedy.

Aside form that, Walz has a very strong base. He outperformed Klobuchar in Blue Earth and Nicollet counties, and even carried Olmsted, his opponent's home county and where his whole political career has been based. Also Mower and Freeborn counties, while DFL, are pro-incumbent, and as a result Gutknecht overperformed there. Walz should get a boost there now. The rest of the district is pretty solidly Republican, but doesn't have enough votes to win.

Hall isnt going anywhere.  That district almost has Dem registration advantage and both Hillary and Spitzer carried it by 2 to 1 margins in 2006.  He is will probably be reelected by something like 55-45.

Loesback, Hodes, Donnelly, and Walz are not vulnerable.  Neither are Space or Kagen yet since Republicans can't seem to get top recruits to run.

BRTD, I would switch Mahoney and Carney around right now for the simple reason that I read some publications where Mahoney said he was "bored in Congress".  If he were to decide to leave, the Dems really have no decent candidates in that area of the world at all.  Carney will have problems holding on.

I agree that Hall should be off the top list and wouldn't even be in my Top 20 at this moment (I have no list, yet).  Quite frankly, I think the Republicans stand a much better chance of knocking out Gillibrand than Hall, especially if Giuliani is the nominee.  Still, once NY has those incumbents, they vote them like crazy, so still...

On Sabato's Crystal Ball list, I would knock off IA-02 and add AZ-05 and I would replace NY-19 with NY-20.  I'm also not too hot with NH-02 or IN-02, but  possible replacements depend on the nominee, frankly.

Gillibrand is definately more vulnerable than Hall, but the Republican most likely to get the nomination is someone who was very close to Bush and Rove and this will be brought up over and over again by the Democrats.  Walz seems likely to hold on as well up in Minnesota.

FL-13: Vern Buchanan (R)
-obviously very vulnerable

FL-16: Tim Mahoney (D)
- not as vulnerable as many make him out to be, but obviously needs to work hard to win reelection

IA-2: Dave Loebsack (D)
-not vulnerable

TX-22: Nick Lampson (D)
-very vulnerable

OH-18: Zach Space (D)
- I don't think he will be that vulnerable

PA-4: Jason Altmire (D)
-don't know much about his district but i believe he will win again

PA-10: Chris Carney (D)
-depends, don't know any challengers but district suggests he's vulnerable

NH-1: Carol Shea-Porter (D)
-not vulnerable

NH-2: Paul Hodes (D)
- not vulnerable

KS-2: Nancy Boyda (D)
-I believe she will be reelected if she goes back up against Ryun

IN-2: Joe Donnelly (D)
-nah

NY-19: John Hall (D)
- I think he has a highly funded challenger but I don't think this district will go back anytime soon

WI-8: Steve Kagen (D)
- not as vulnerable as suggested, depends on the candidates

MN-1: Tim Walz (D)
-nah

CA-11: Jerry McNerney (D)
-district would suggest so but i think he can win reelection

I will compile a list of the ones I think are the most vilnerable later.

Shea-Porter is definately vulnerable, but I have a feeling that this is going to look like the MA-06 rematch between Tierney and Torkildsen in 1998. 

It's amusing that the two weakest Democratic freshmen, Carol Shea-Porter and Dave Lobesack, are both likely shoo-in's in 2008. I know that Porter's district is pretty evenly divided, but the NH GOP is still recovering from its decimation last November and will probably lack the resources to lure a good candidate into the race.

Nah, I believe she will be reelected.

Jeb Bradley appears to be running, but his fundraising has been very weak.  He only raised $7000 in the first quarter.

I would add to that list Heather Wilson, John Doolittle, Rick Renzi and Frank LoBiondo.

I see Hall as being so vulnerable because what he represents is basically a RINO district but still conservative enough to vote for Bush. A more moderate Democrat could certainly hold it, but Hall is one of the most liberal members of the freshman class, and the GOP bench is pretty deep. I've seen Hall as likely to hang on only if the GOP ends up nominating a Bachmann-esque candidate, could be wrong, but we'll see who they run.

The most amusing thing about Loebsack is he's probably the single safest one of the Democratic freshmen.


None of whom are freshmen.

BTW, MN-01 is more marginal than PA-04, and I would definitely have Walz as safer than Altmire, also because Altmire is much more likely to face a strong candidate. The GOP bench here sucks, they have plenty of potential candidates, but none are likely to appeal district-wide since they're all mostly extreme incompetents (Mark Kennedy-esque) and/or wingnuts. And no one is able to break Walz's big margins in Blue Earth/Nicollet and Freeborn/Mower counties.

Oops, sorry, freshmen. I missed that. Then I have none to add (maybe Bill Sali; we'll see).

In NH-02, Hodes is not vulnerable.

In NH-01, Shea-Porter may be vulnerable, but not as much as the Republicans think.  I just can't see a Democratic incumbent being defeated in NH with the political climate the way it is.

The district went for Bush by about 2000 votes in 2000 and went for Clinton handily in 1996.  The district is trending Dem and Republicans are unlikely to get it back.

Also, Democrats are likely to extend the district into the Bronx in the 2011 redistricting and shear off a good portion of the marginal Orange county.  This would essentially wipe out any chance of the Republicans holding the seat as it would add a good chunk of territory that votes about 90%-10% Democratic. 

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that it went for Dukakis. After all, Swann carried this district against Rendell last year.

Casey carried it by about 18 points over Santorum though.

Not that I disagree that Republicans are going to win it back, but by your own admission, Republicans have gotten an increasingly large chunk of the vote there on the Presidential level since 1996.

The 2000 to 2004 increase in the Bush vote was probably 85% due to 9/11.

Which is pretty much what he won by statewide, no?

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

In what sense are they the weakest?

Only if the Dems control the NY State Senate after the 2010 elections.  If that does not occur, then such blatant gerrymandering is extremely unlikely.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

It is only a matter of time before Republicans lose the NY State Senate.

Yes, the current precincts.

I don't know why you think that.  That district is a swing district with a very large Dem registration advantage.  Any Republican would have to pick up about 16% of the districts Democrats to win the district and hold on to all of the moderate Republicans and that is nearly impossible as a non-incumbent.

Yeah, that would be my question, too.


Ok, which just proves that it is a very unique district.


He thinks that because Hart is very personally popular there. She had that race won but she let that get to her head. Hart picking up the 16% of the district's Dems isn't a big deal because they like her to begin with.

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

Yes, I do. Hart is basically the incumbent. They've known her from her State Senate and Congressional days way better than they know Altmire and they like her.

If they liked her, they would not have voted her out.

She took them for granted. She wasn't campaigning seriously and got caught up in a terrible year.

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though.  ;)

Why do you say that?

That said, if the Democrats lose seats like this, they are likely to lose the House and the Presidency in a landslide.

I think the GOP will have a stronger party head than we did in 2006.

You mean Bush?

Bush was our head in 2006. That won't be the case in 2008.

He still will be President.  Do you not think that Clinton being President hurt Democrats in 2000 or Johnson being President hurt them in 1968?

It also helped we ran a conservative Democrat who fits the district rather than a Rendell type.  You can make the Swann argument, but that's also Steeler Country.

Oh, it most certainly did. I'm not making the argument that Altmire isn't a good fit ideologically. However, I don't think he is as well liked as Hart is in that area. I really believe that the voters of that district will likely "forgive and forget" Hart for her mistakes in 2006.

 
So what happens if it is Swann vs. Altmire (which I really don't think is likely, thank God)? Altmire is a better fit in the district than Rendell but he's not as strong of a candidate in other areas. You think Swann can win there because it is Steelers Country?

Do you think Hart would have beaten Ron Klink if she ran against him in 2000 if he didn't run for Senate?  Because Klink and Altmire's ideologies are almost identical.

Yeah, but remember that both men had their respective Vice Presidents running in those years.



It would have been a close race. Hard to say who would have won.

The answer is that Klink would have won handily. 

I wouldn't be too sure of that. Hart was very popular. An easy win was the win he had over current State Representative Mike Turzai in 1998 when he took 64% of the vote. Hart was much more popular than Turzai. It would have been a real battle. The Bush - Gore race would have made it tight, too. Bush won the district with 51% to Gore's 47%.

Klink would have gotten at least 54%.  He was the incumbent and people trusted him.

Tim Mahoney WILL lose in 2008, no doubt about it.

Why do you say that? I know the district is very Republican but are the candidates lining up on the GOP side strong?

The District is not very Republican.  Bush won it 54%-46% in 2004 and by 53%-47% against Al Gore. 

Actually, I just checked and if I read it correctly, Gore won with 51% of the vote in the district. Very odd since the media has always noted this is a very Republican seat. I wonder what the party registration breakdown is.

Gore won the old seat before redistricting. The seat after redistricting voted about 52% for Bush.

The problem is that while the seat is basically split down the middle politically, it's very partisan, Republicans vote Republican, Democrats vote Democratic. I still think Mahoney will win if the GOP nominates a far right winger though.

The district is not very Republican at all.  Bush only got 52% and 54% in 2000 and 2004 and Clinton carried it in 1996.

Being the incumbent, Mahoney should be able to pick off at least a few of those partisan Republican voters(likely the more elderly ones, especially when the Social Security issue comes up).

Ok, I got that...

As of 10 October, 2006, FL-16 had 202,702 Republicans; 171,474 Democrats and 85,913 NPAs, whom I assume are Independents

Dave

Mahoney still almost lost with Foley's name on the ballot.

People knew they were voting for Negron.