NY-09, Special Election Thread

[DrScholl]

Well, they do hold a handful of 55% Obama districts, which is the problem here.  This is one of the few districts Obama did worse than Kerry in.

It's still 56% Kerry, though and Obama's under-performance doesn't undercut that fact, there's very Democratic presence here. 2008 numbers are lopsided, 2004 ones are much more accurate. Critz was supposed to lose PA-12 because Obama did worse than Kerry, but that didn't pan out at all.

[DrScholl]

Turner's own internal has him stuck at 42%, which is right around where he is in most polls. I don't see how he wins this.

[DrScholl]

Magellan's polls are far from accurate. I think they've missed the mark more than once.

[DrScholl]

That's not what the tweet said, just for honesty reasons, I'll post it.  It did not mention any numbers or even who was up

http://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls/status/111985726626873344

My pretty straight forward take on the first night of our NY-9 poll: Dems in BIG trouble. It deserves the caps.

That is the actually tweet, not what was posted above.

[DrScholl]

Obviously, it's getting cut not matter who wins it, it's all about what is easiest to remove.

[DrScholl]

I believe Rangel's district has to at least give somewhat of an opportunity for black voters to elect a candidate of their choice. That was part of what happened in California redistricting, districts with high numbers of black voters were drawn, not 50%, but still enough for those voters to have a choice.

[DrScholl]

I think we should also take into consideration that a sizable portion of people in Serrano and Rangel's districts who mark down Hispanic are also African American. Many Dominican immigrants are racially Black, but still ethnically Hispanic.

I was just about to mention that, it is a really valid point.

[DrScholl]

I really hope Weprin pulls it out, just because I want to see Republicans get their faces crack and because I don't want to see them going on about New York trending heavily Republican and how even Palin could win in a landslide. Petty, but it's how I think.

[DrScholl]

Petty, but it's how I think.

Stupid but it's how you think.

There you go with the name calling. Let's keep this thread on track, one person already threw it way off already.

To ignore you go.

[DrScholl]

It is just so special that Weiner quit right before redistricting. His CD is now going to live on,  and be way out of reach of the Dems.  Mr. Weiner had an impact on history which will have legs. Isn't that special? 

It's still getting cut. There is no way Democrats are going to agree to give Turner a safe seat and eliminate a Democratic seat somewhere else, that would be tantamount to eliminating to Democratic seats. Controlling the state senate narrowly is hardly enough for Republicans to force a map that favorable.

[DrScholl]

Structurally, it's definitely possible for Weprin to scrape together enough votes. It can be difficult at this late stage, but not impossible.

[DrScholl]

50% Weprin
47% Turner

As I said, the structure of the district makes it not a guaranteed win for the Republican. This isn't an R+ district by any stretch.

[DrScholl]

Now the Democrats can start planning how they are going to dismantle this seat. I will not be hard to totally vaporize it.

And I won't even get into why it makes zero sense to draw conclusions about national trends from special election results in House seats.

It's not like this is even a district full of liberal Democrats, it's mostly very conservative religious voters. What did the GOP really gain here?

[DrScholl]

I really think some in this thread at two steps away from declaring that Perry will win the state of New York by double digits. And the sad thing is, they'll actually fully believe that just based off of one House race in a very unique district with heavy religious factors.

Neither of these special election results say a thing about next year, not one single thing.

[DrScholl]

PPP stated in their poll that Democrats were not turning out in NV-2. Presidential year turn out will be different.

Why is it so hard for logic to get through to some people?

[DrScholl]

No, only someone dropping crazy statements on here for a while would accuse folks of thinking that way on here.

But I will say that a race like this does mean that the Philly suburbs are likely in play this year and that the Dems can't blindly count on Pennsylvania this year.

I've seen some pretty out there predictions from Republicans here before, I'll just leave at that.

There is a difference difference between a House races and Presidential races. NY-9 was decided on Israel, probably almost totally.

[DrScholl]

Get your sh*t straight. You could make an argument for that in Brooklyn, you absolutely cannot write off the piss poor performance in Queens on the Israel issue. That is Obama through and through right there.

You can leave the cursing out if you are posting to me, thank you very much. There are lots of conservative, religious Democrats all over the district, they are the ones who showed up. The district trended Republican last time around and it's not exactly a bellwether for anything. I don't think you should use it to predict presidential results.

[DrScholl]

Oh, come on. This is horrible news for the Dems. Deal with it.

That is your opinion. I just don't think you should take a special election for a House seat and turn it into a narrative about the Presidential election, it doesn't work when either side does it. You can't expect everyone to subscribe to the same opinion.

[DrScholl]

That is your opinion. I just don't think you should take a special election for a House seat and turn it into a narrative about the Presidential election, it doesn't work when either side does it. You can't expect everyone to subscribe to the same opinion.

Have you been following the Nevada election? I wonder how the Dems will do in Solano County next year. If Garamendi runs in that seat, which also contains Yuba and Sutter Counties, he could be in trouble.
[/quote]

The Nevada seat was a Republican seat, it went Republican, the result was not a surprise to me.

Republicans didn't gain anything in California in 2010, one of their best years, that doesn't say much for the future. Garamendi has represented Republican areas in the past, he'll be fine there, D+3 is close to safe for California Dems.

[DrScholl]

Hey this is right here is what separates you from other folks on this thread. Of course we would all like to be good team players and spin things our losses in the most positive light, but some of us actually have allegiance to calling these things based on how they actually are even when they lose. Apparently you don't.

I don't how you try to spin this thing. Between the polls with Obama's approval ratings in this district and the horrid performance in Queens you can't possibly spin your way out of the fact that Obama played a pretty big roll in this loss. Clearly he isn't particularly liked right now there. That doesn't mean he wont be liked in the future, that doesn't mean he wasn't liked in the past. But today he just cost you a congressional seat...Deal with it!

My point is, it's not a bellwether. Yes, Obama's approval was a factor, but Israel was also one, as was the candidate. By placing it squarely on Obama, you concede it wasn't based on the Republican candidate's merits. Thanks for making a valid point.

[DrScholl]

PVI is only a measurement of the Presidential numbers over two elections.

[DrScholl]

PVI is only a measurement of the Presidential numbers over two elections.

I'm aware of this. One decent answer was given above, but I'll rephrase the question. Why do you think that such a strong Democrat district would be voting as close to the middle as it is in the last few elections?

What is happening on the ground?

Is everybody in agreement that its an identity thing. Its expected to be a registered Dem in that area, but only after that you vote what makes sense to you? Leading to the large disparity?

Look at the trend lines, the district got less Democratic, from D+14 to just D+5. It's always had more conservative Democrats on average, but a shift has occurred, much like many districts in the South have had.

[DrScholl]

But this district isn't anything like a southern district populated with conservative Dems 20 YEARS AGO! Nor is it like Appalachia districts, the Iron Range, or Blue Collar districts in the Rust Belt.

This district shares a lot in common economically with economically well off close suburbs that have been trending Dem up until 2010 except that it has a Jewish population that agrees with right on some social and foreign policy issues.

But I ask you this. The Jewish vote has historically been 75-25 Dem if not worse, do you really think that trend is going to continue after this election? What is all that different between Jewish voters in this district and Jewish voters in Florida?

In being socially conservative, it is like some southern districts, which hinged on those issues.

Mainly Orthodox Jews are heavily present in the district, Jewish voters in Florida are not largely Orthodox and lean more liberal overall.

[DrScholl]

By the way do you have any data to show that the very elderly Jewish population in Florida is not very Orthodox and the younger Jewish population in NYC is?

Also keep in mind that Orthodox Jewish stronghold is in Brooklyn, not in Queens. Care to explain what happened with those non Orthodox Jews in east Queens?

The vote patterns pretty much show that the population there is a lot different than the one in NY-9, it's not something I just made up. These are two separate places, they are not equal. But, you can believe whatever you like.

Not everyone in the district that is conservative is Orthodox Jewish, there are other conservative Democrats all throughout it. There are also Republican pockets in Queens.

[DrScholl]

The PPP bashing is beyond old, it's really not even worth responded to and should be ignored.