US House Redistricting: New York
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:53:55 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  US House Redistricting: New York
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 41
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: New York  (Read 135285 times)
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #825 on: March 11, 2012, 08:28:28 PM »

Is his voting record markedly different from that of, say, Spencer Bachus or John Fleming on anything significant?

He's a member of the Main Street Partnership... I also vaguely remember he and Rep. Hanna not siding with most Republicans on a couple of votes, though I can't recall which. He's definitely not a Buerkle. (And his MoV in 2010 was nearly 10%.)

correct, Gibson is a good fit for this district. Remember, this is a district who used to elect wingnut Gerald B.H. Solomon every two years.

That was the district--it's gotten more Democratic with the remap. Also, the national party has gone way to the right and exerts much more discipline than in the past on its foot soldiers.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #826 on: March 11, 2012, 09:16:16 PM »
« Edited: March 11, 2012, 09:23:37 PM by Torie »

Is his voting record markedly different from that of, say, Spencer Bachus or John Fleming on anything significant?

He's a member of the Main Street Partnership... I also vaguely remember he and Rep. Hanna not siding with most Republicans on a couple of votes, though I can't recall which. He's definitely not a Buerkle. (And his MoV in 2010 was nearly 10%.)

correct, Gibson is a good fit for this district. Remember, this is a district who used to elect wingnut Gerald B.H. Solomon every two years.

That was the district--it's gotten more Democratic with the remap. Also, the national party has gone way to the right and exerts much more discipline than in the past on its foot soldiers.

NY-19 still has a GOP PVI, around GOP +1%.  I was working on putting up a complete matrix chart, when I got distracted by yet another gay marriage fire fight, which was and is quite a barn burner (you might want to check it out, and assess how well I (and others) performed for "the cause").  And now it's Miller Time. Smiley
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #827 on: March 11, 2012, 11:18:36 PM »

We seem to be missing the point.  The smart members of the state GOP (i.e. the State Senate and its Congressmen) are looking towards two things only:

1) shoring up incumbents insofar as they can be shored up (and they will compare to prior congressional incumbents and State Senate incumbents in Long Island and upstate NY in that regard, which is the correct, though as you can imagine, risky, measure, but considering they've had great success in the past 25 years amidst really bad, and continually worsening returns upballot, it's the correct model).

2) getting as many potentially competitive seats as possible using the above congressional incumbent/State Senate incumbent measure that are either competitive now or certainly could be under circumstances (i.e. retirement, wave).  Let's break this down...

Given Republican exploits in the past decade, that means a CD of D+3 PVI or less, I suspect, though it might be extended to D+5 in upstate, but to be cautious, let's say the former.  In the 2000 map, the number of those seats is 10 out of 29, of which Republicans hold 9.  If we extend it to D+5, we add 3 more (Higgins, Turner and Israel), of which Republicans now hold 1. 

I would need to get exact numbers to calculate PVI for the proposed court map, but it is almost certain that NY-1 through NY-3 are D+3 PVI or less (NY-1 and NY-2 will both be about R+1, NY-3 about D+0 or D+1), and it is likely that NY-4 is D+3, maybe D+4, but my suspicion is the former.  Sure King is a good bit less safe, and could be in trouble if a wave hit, but let's remember he did get 56% in 2006 and 64% in 2008.  Obviously, it becomes a greater problem if he retires, but that's the tradeoff.  The State GOP will likely view all four as potentially competitive under the above standard.

NY-9 is dead.  NY-11 remains about R+4, maybe R+5.  NY-17 (Lowey) is probably pushed down to D+6, but it might be D+5.  The State GOP may view this as competitive is vacant, but let's say for theoretical purposes they don't.  I'm almost certain that NY-18 (Hayworth) has a GOP PVI (probably R+1), but NY-19 (Gibson) is probably right at even, not going to make guesses there.  At any rate, these are two more competitive CDs.  NY-20 (Tonko) should stay at D+6.  NY-21 (Owens) did not get any help, and will be at R+1, I'm almost certain.  That's another four competitive seats for the NY GOP.

Continuing further, Hanna really gets favorable treatment in NY-22 - his CD is probably R+3 now or R+4.  To benefit Hanna, Reed in NY-23 is probably now about R+3 also.  Buerkle in NY-24 looks roughly the same as before, but may lose a point to D+4.  The NY GOP is likely to consider that potentially competitive, given Republican strength in years past - I tend to agree with those who say that this view is probably right, just not with Buerkle.  Slaughter is complaining in NY-25 because she's going to get a D+6 or D+7 district.  I don't see how this one is going to be viewed as competitive by the NY GOP, but obviously she's concerned about something (whether real or imagined).  NY-26 (Higgins) becomes safe, and NY-27 (Hochul) is probably about R+8 or so in an area that typically acts more Republican than that downballot.  Good luck to her.  So, four more seats for the state GOP to view as potentially competitive.

So, we have 12 seats that the state GOP is going to view as potentially competitive under possibly my measure (D+3) vs. 10 seats in the 2000 map (D+3).  Even if I'm wrong about NY-4 and NY-24, such that they're outside the D+3 measure, that's still 10 vs. 10.  Going with the broader measure of D+5, it is certainly 12 vs. 13, which again means that the GOP didn't really lose anything.  Going further than that, the 2000 map had 3 D+6 seats, whereas this map also has three seats that will probably be such.

Given this evaluation, why would the smart people in the GOP ever voice any opposition to what the Court is doing, other than to ask for a little help for Gibson and King's districts?  Sure, they'd like to play games to constitute a Turner/NY Jew district, but they don't hold all the cards, obviously...
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #828 on: March 11, 2012, 11:38:34 PM »

Yes, the Pubs have had good times lately. We shall see if it holds, but 2012 particularly in NY, looks rather promising absent some surprise, in a certain Pub primary, but I digress. Tongue Anyway, here is the start of the matrix chart, which I meant to, but didn't, finish tonight. Most of the seats don't move much from what they were before, except for the ones chatted about a lot here. Lowey however is indeed possibly within range, if the Jews get angry enough at Obama maybe. Her CD moved quite a bit.

Anyway, I thought the numbers for the Pubs in Long Island were really just about as good as they could get really. I would have drained King by just about as much in any Pub gerrymander I might draw.

Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #829 on: March 12, 2012, 10:18:02 AM »
« Edited: March 12, 2012, 10:20:27 AM by Torie »

The hacks were busy this weekend, and apparently have reached agreement on legislative lines, and won't reach an agreement on Congressional lines, as was anticipated. So it looks like the court map will be the map. I suspect the appellate panel will make no changes at all to the lines. Why would they?

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #830 on: March 12, 2012, 12:45:58 PM »
« Edited: March 12, 2012, 09:45:42 PM by Torie »

Here is the complete matrix chart which illustrates why one party is probably considerably happier with the court map than the other party. In a Pub tsunami, the delegation would be 15 (R) - 12 (D). Of course, with the reverse, it would be 1 (R) - 26 (D).  Notice how in general things get more competitive, with the more extreme partisan colors moving towards something less so in many instances (the Buffalo seat being the spectacular exception as the earmuffs were undone). That is what happens when you unravel a prior bi-partisan gerrymander. New York should be a fun place for the next decade. Smiley

Logged
Miles
MilesC56
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,324
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #831 on: March 12, 2012, 12:58:41 PM »

A Republican delegation from NY? Thats a thought. I think Slaughter would still be safe in a 59% Obama district though.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #832 on: March 12, 2012, 01:00:24 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #833 on: March 12, 2012, 01:03:45 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.

Yes of course. Lowey just has to worry about a Jewish rebellion against Obama, and that she might be a tad liberal for the CD now. Tonko isn't going anywhere. Action there would require both an open seat and unusual circumstances.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #834 on: March 12, 2012, 01:16:11 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.

Yes of course. Lowey just has to worry about a Jewish rebellion against Obama, and that she might be a tad liberal for the CD now. Tonko isn't going anywhere. Action there would require both an open seat and unusual circumstances.

I think Lowey should be able to moderate a little if need be, at least rhetorically, and I don't really see too many Jews in this particular area turning against Obama (the Jews over in Rockland and Orange are another story, even some of the non-Orthodox ones, which is part of why I think Hayworth would likely, unfortunately, hold on under these lines absent a very strong opponent). Tonko's actually from everything I've heard about him a fantastic constituency Congressman.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #835 on: March 12, 2012, 01:20:08 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.

Yes of course. Lowey just has to worry about a Jewish rebellion against Obama, and that she might be a tad liberal for the CD now. Tonko isn't going anywhere. Action there would require both an open seat and unusual circumstances.

I think Lowey should be able to moderate a little if need be, at least rhetorically, and I don't really see too many Jews in this particular area turning against Obama (the Jews over in Rockland and Orange are another story, even some of the non-Orthodox ones, which is part of why I think Hayworth would likely, unfortunately, hold on under these lines absent a very strong opponent). Tonko's actually from everything I've heard about him a fantastic constituency Congressman.

Lowey has all of Rockland (packed with orthodox Jews), and she lost Jewish, secular, liberal and rich Scarsdale.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #836 on: March 12, 2012, 01:22:58 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.

Yes of course. Lowey just has to worry about a Jewish rebellion against Obama, and that she might be a tad liberal for the CD now. Tonko isn't going anywhere. Action there would require both an open seat and unusual circumstances.

I think Lowey should be able to moderate a little if need be, at least rhetorically, and I don't really see too many Jews in this particular area turning against Obama (the Jews over in Rockland and Orange are another story, even some of the non-Orthodox ones, which is part of why I think Hayworth would likely, unfortunately, hold on under these lines absent a very strong opponent). Tonko's actually from everything I've heard about him a fantastic constituency Congressman.

Lowey has all of Rockland (packed with orthodox Jews), and she lost Jewish, secular, liberal and rich Scarsdale.

...she picked up Rockland? Ah. Crap. Yeah, I wouldn't call her entirely safe in that case. I thought it was still with Engel.

Honestly, I think it was probably time for Slaughter to retire last cycle. Yes, I know it was a Republican wave, but the earmuffs were D+15 and I'm sure there are Democrats in Rochester who'd be better primed to hold the district going forward now.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #837 on: March 12, 2012, 01:24:23 PM »

Numbers aside, I tend to think Tonko and Lowey are safer than Slaughter, because they're just better representatives for the most part than she is.

Yes of course. Lowey just has to worry about a Jewish rebellion against Obama, and that she might be a tad liberal for the CD now. Tonko isn't going anywhere. Action there would require both an open seat and unusual circumstances.

I think Lowey should be able to moderate a little if need be, at least rhetorically, and I don't really see too many Jews in this particular area turning against Obama (the Jews over in Rockland and Orange are another story, even some of the non-Orthodox ones, which is part of why I think Hayworth would likely, unfortunately, hold on under these lines absent a very strong opponent). Tonko's actually from everything I've heard about him a fantastic constituency Congressman.

Lowey has all of Rockland (packed with orthodox Jews), and she lost Jewish, secular, liberal and rich Scarsdale.

...she picked up Rockland? Ah. Crap. Yeah, I wouldn't call her entirely safe in that case. I thought it was still with Engel.

Honestly, I think it was probably time for Slaughter to retire last cycle. Yes, I know it was a Republican wave, but the earmuffs were D+15 and I'm sure there are Democrats in Rochester who'd be better primed to hold the district going forward now.

Here's Nita's new CD for you.

Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #838 on: March 12, 2012, 01:31:16 PM »

Yeah, ouch. She should still be able to hold that most years but she probably will have to moderate a bit and might actually have to--well--campaign. On the other hand, I'm sure Engel is pleased as punch.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #839 on: March 12, 2012, 02:07:24 PM »

We seem to be missing the point.  The smart members of the state GOP (i.e. the State Senate and its Congressmen) are looking towards two things only:

1) shoring up incumbents insofar as they can be shored up (and they will compare to prior congressional incumbents and State Senate incumbents in Long Island and upstate NY in that regard, which is the correct, though as you can imagine, risky, measure, but considering they've had great success in the past 25 years amidst really bad, and continually worsening returns upballot, it's the correct model).

2) getting as many potentially competitive seats as possible using the above congressional incumbent/State Senate incumbent measure that are either competitive now or certainly could be under circumstances (i.e. retirement, wave).  Let's break this down...

Given Republican exploits in the past decade, that means a CD of D+3 PVI or less, I suspect, though it might be extended to D+5 in upstate, but to be cautious, let's say the former.  In the 2000 map, the number of those seats is 10 out of 29, of which Republicans hold 9.  If we extend it to D+5, we add 3 more (Higgins, Turner and Israel), of which Republicans now hold 1. 

I would need to get exact numbers to calculate PVI for the proposed court map, but it is almost certain that NY-1 through NY-3 are D+3 PVI or less (NY-1 and NY-2 will both be about R+1, NY-3 about D+0 or D+1), and it is likely that NY-4 is D+3, maybe D+4, but my suspicion is the former.  Sure King is a good bit less safe, and could be in trouble if a wave hit, but let's remember he did get 56% in 2006 and 64% in 2008.  Obviously, it becomes a greater problem if he retires, but that's the tradeoff.  The State GOP will likely view all four as potentially competitive under the above standard.

NY-9 is dead.  NY-11 remains about R+4, maybe R+5.  NY-17 (Lowey) is probably pushed down to D+6, but it might be D+5.  The State GOP may view this as competitive is vacant, but let's say for theoretical purposes they don't.  I'm almost certain that NY-18 (Hayworth) has a GOP PVI (probably R+1), but NY-19 (Gibson) is probably right at even, not going to make guesses there.  At any rate, these are two more competitive CDs.  NY-20 (Tonko) should stay at D+6.  NY-21 (Owens) did not get any help, and will be at R+1, I'm almost certain.  That's another four competitive seats for the NY GOP.

Continuing further, Hanna really gets favorable treatment in NY-22 - his CD is probably R+3 now or R+4.  To benefit Hanna, Reed in NY-23 is probably now about R+3 also.  Buerkle in NY-24 looks roughly the same as before, but may lose a point to D+4.  The NY GOP is likely to consider that potentially competitive, given Republican strength in years past - I tend to agree with those who say that this view is probably right, just not with Buerkle.  Slaughter is complaining in NY-25 because she's going to get a D+6 or D+7 district.  I don't see how this one is going to be viewed as competitive by the NY GOP, but obviously she's concerned about something (whether real or imagined).  NY-26 (Higgins) becomes safe, and NY-27 (Hochul) is probably about R+8 or so in an area that typically acts more Republican than that downballot.  Good luck to her.  So, four more seats for the state GOP to view as potentially competitive.

So, we have 12 seats that the state GOP is going to view as potentially competitive under possibly my measure (D+3) vs. 10 seats in the 2000 map (D+3).  Even if I'm wrong about NY-4 and NY-24, such that they're outside the D+3 measure, that's still 10 vs. 10.  Going with the broader measure of D+5, it is certainly 12 vs. 13, which again means that the GOP didn't really lose anything.  Going further than that, the 2000 map had 3 D+6 seats, whereas this map also has three seats that will probably be such.

Given this evaluation, why would the smart people in the GOP ever voice any opposition to what the Court is doing, other than to ask for a little help for Gibson and King's districts?  Sure, they'd like to play games to constitute a Turner/NY Jew district, but they don't hold all the cards, obviously...

NY-20(Tonko) is not a competitive seat.  No Republican is ever going to win a seat where half of the votes come from Albany county. 
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #840 on: March 12, 2012, 02:28:16 PM »

Color me surprised, again, that Owens and Bishop survived the tsunami of 2010 given these stats.

Lowey and Tonko are not losing to Republicans in this decade absent a scandal.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #841 on: March 12, 2012, 02:33:01 PM »

Color me surprised, again, that Owens and Bishop survived the tsunami of 2010 given these stats.

Lowey and Tonko are not losing to Republicans in this decade absent a scandal.

Why are you so confident Lowey? She took a big hit, with more potential for an even larger one embedded (but not reflected in the 2008 voting stats), in the orthodox Jewish vote,  has not had to campaign much for years, and is presumably somewhat too liberal for her CD now. Sure, she is no Slaughter.  I just see it as a potentially interesting situation to watch.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,930
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #842 on: March 12, 2012, 02:49:30 PM »

Lowey's new seat is D+4, which is out of reach for an Republican except in an open seat, 2010, poor Democratic opponent situation and even with all that, it's still a stretch.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #843 on: March 12, 2012, 03:27:08 PM »

I wonder if Hochul might try to primary Slaughter. As you can see, in her current district is a pretty good chunk of western and southwestern Monroe County (in that lime green color), which has been moved into Slaughter's CD.

Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #844 on: March 12, 2012, 03:28:15 PM »

I wonder if Hochul might try to primary Slaughter. As you can see, in her current district is a pretty good chunk of western and southwestern Monroe County which has been moved into Slaughter's CD.



She's from the Buffalo area, so likely not. Pelosi will see that she lands somewhere comfy in Obama's administration, I guess.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,704
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #845 on: March 12, 2012, 03:36:18 PM »

If Slaughter lost that would be like the second strongest Obama district in the country held by a Republican even after 2010 (the only other one I know of stronger for Obama as mentioned was that guy in Illinois), and if Lowey lost that would be like the fourth or fifth probably. Neither should be too worried.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #846 on: March 12, 2012, 03:54:46 PM »

We seem to be missing the point.  The smart members of the state GOP (i.e. the State Senate and its Congressmen) are looking towards two things only:

1) shoring up incumbents insofar as they can be shored up (and they will compare to prior congressional incumbents and State Senate incumbents in Long Island and upstate NY in that regard, which is the correct, though as you can imagine, risky, measure, but considering they've had great success in the past 25 years amidst really bad, and continually worsening returns upballot, it's the correct model).

2) getting as many potentially competitive seats as possible using the above congressional incumbent/State Senate incumbent measure that are either competitive now or certainly could be under circumstances (i.e. retirement, wave).  Let's break this down...

Given Republican exploits in the past decade, that means a CD of D+3 PVI or less, I suspect, though it might be extended to D+5 in upstate, but to be cautious, let's say the former.  In the 2000 map, the number of those seats is 10 out of 29, of which Republicans hold 9.  If we extend it to D+5, we add 3 more (Higgins, Turner and Israel), of which Republicans now hold 1. 

I would need to get exact numbers to calculate PVI for the proposed court map, but it is almost certain that NY-1 through NY-3 are D+3 PVI or less (NY-1 and NY-2 will both be about R+1, NY-3 about D+0 or D+1), and it is likely that NY-4 is D+3, maybe D+4, but my suspicion is the former.  Sure King is a good bit less safe, and could be in trouble if a wave hit, but let's remember he did get 56% in 2006 and 64% in 2008.  Obviously, it becomes a greater problem if he retires, but that's the tradeoff.  The State GOP will likely view all four as potentially competitive under the above standard.

NY-9 is dead.  NY-11 remains about R+4, maybe R+5.  NY-17 (Lowey) is probably pushed down to D+6, but it might be D+5.  The State GOP may view this as competitive is vacant, but let's say for theoretical purposes they don't.  I'm almost certain that NY-18 (Hayworth) has a GOP PVI (probably R+1), but NY-19 (Gibson) is probably right at even, not going to make guesses there.  At any rate, these are two more competitive CDs.  NY-20 (Tonko) should stay at D+6.  NY-21 (Owens) did not get any help, and will be at R+1, I'm almost certain.  That's another four competitive seats for the NY GOP.

Continuing further, Hanna really gets favorable treatment in NY-22 - his CD is probably R+3 now or R+4.  To benefit Hanna, Reed in NY-23 is probably now about R+3 also.  Buerkle in NY-24 looks roughly the same as before, but may lose a point to D+4.  The NY GOP is likely to consider that potentially competitive, given Republican strength in years past - I tend to agree with those who say that this view is probably right, just not with Buerkle.  Slaughter is complaining in NY-25 because she's going to get a D+6 or D+7 district.  I don't see how this one is going to be viewed as competitive by the NY GOP, but obviously she's concerned about something (whether real or imagined).  NY-26 (Higgins) becomes safe, and NY-27 (Hochul) is probably about R+8 or so in an area that typically acts more Republican than that downballot.  Good luck to her.  So, four more seats for the state GOP to view as potentially competitive.

So, we have 12 seats that the state GOP is going to view as potentially competitive under possibly my measure (D+3) vs. 10 seats in the 2000 map (D+3).  Even if I'm wrong about NY-4 and NY-24, such that they're outside the D+3 measure, that's still 10 vs. 10.  Going with the broader measure of D+5, it is certainly 12 vs. 13, which again means that the GOP didn't really lose anything.  Going further than that, the 2000 map had 3 D+6 seats, whereas this map also has three seats that will probably be such.

Given this evaluation, why would the smart people in the GOP ever voice any opposition to what the Court is doing, other than to ask for a little help for Gibson and King's districts?  Sure, they'd like to play games to constitute a Turner/NY Jew district, but they don't hold all the cards, obviously...

NY-20(Tonko) is not a competitive seat.  No Republican is ever going to win a seat where half of the votes come from Albany county. 

Lowery is also not going anywhere. Population losses of course are bleeding upstate NY cities and rurals; its tough to say where those seats are going over 10 years.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #847 on: March 12, 2012, 04:13:11 PM »

The Orthodox Jews in her district will be easy enough to please and won't swing against her on an anti-Obama vote the way that garden variety grumpy old Jews in Florida swung against him. She's an incumbent and she will very easily be able to nail down their vote. I don't see any evidence for the rest of the assessment of her weakness.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,704
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #848 on: March 12, 2012, 04:14:32 PM »

Yeah I really hope GOP donors get excited about beating Lowey and Slaughter and pour millions into their opponents instead of the GOP incumbents upstate/vulnerable Republicans in other states and Mitt Romney's superPACs. Reminds me of the idiots who gave millions to Christine O'Donnell instead of Sharron Angle or Ken Buck (or even Joe Miller).
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #849 on: March 12, 2012, 04:41:03 PM »
« Edited: March 12, 2012, 04:43:25 PM by Torie »

If Slaughter lost that would be like the second strongest Obama district in the country held by a Republican even after 2010 (the only other one I know of stronger for Obama as mentioned was that guy in Illinois), and if Lowey lost that would be like the fourth or fifth probably. Neither should be too worried.

Sure, they are long shots. It just depends on the circumstances.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 41  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.