CA-52/SurveyUSA: Rep. Scott Peters (D) trails Scott DeMaio (R) by 7

[Tender Branson]

554 likely voters:

51% Carl DeMaio (R)
44% Scott Peters (D-Inc.)

Geography: CA 52nd CD
Data Collected: 06/11/2012 - 06/12/2014
Release Date: 06/13/2014
Sponsor: KGTV-TV San Diego

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=8ce91ac1-7a4a-4acb-8b38-daa2ea4ba640

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yep, Bilbray should have ran again. Wouldn't have been the first time he returned from a previous defeat. I have more confidence in him then this DeMaio guy.

[IceSpear]

I think Peters will probably lose. But if he wants his seat back, he'll probably be able to get it in 2016 with higher turnout.

[DrScholl]

Democratic incumbents don't lose in California. For example, we held CA-11 when it was a gerrymandered mess drawn for a Republican in 2010. This seat isn't like UT-4 or NC-7, it's not some heavily Republican bastion that a Democrat was just lucky to have won, it is an Obama seat and as a D+ PVI.

[Holmes]

Gun to my head, Peters will win it in November.

[krazen1211]

Great news!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I dont think we will lose a Ca seat. But the lack of interest in the gov race may be holding Dem support down. Dems hopefully will come home at the end.

[Vosem]

DeMaio won this district by double-digits in 2012 running for another office; Peters just barely edged out his opponent, in spite of how good of a year it was for his party. Peters is easily the most vulnerable Democrat in Obama territory, and probably within the Top Five.

Democratic incumbents don't lose in California.

California spent the last decade under an incumbent-protection gerrymander; 1 incumbent lost total. Until 2012, you could've made the argument that Republican incumbents don't lose (and been just as invalid).

For example, we held CA-11 when it was a gerrymandered mess drawn for a Republican in 2010.

It was a failed dummymander that voted for Obama by 9 points. That you still came perilously close to losing.

This seat isn't like UT-4 or NC-7, it's not some heavily Republican bastion that a Democrat was just lucky to have won, it is an Obama seat and as a D+ PVI.

Your cute little belief that once Democrats have taken a marginal seat, it's theirs forever continues to be both highly entertaining yet a little concerning. This seat is probably Leans R; at best for Democrats it's a Tossup.

[DrScholl]

Ah, the usual suspects arrive, how surprising.

1. Not understanding the difference between municipal elections and federal ones is an amateur mistake. Last cycle, Louise Slaughter was supposed to lose, because her opponent had won a local election by double digits, but instead, Slaughter won by double digits. Winning big locally does not guarantee that a candidate can win federally.

2. CA-11 was still drawn for a Republican, seats with similar numbers in other states fell to Republicans in 2010. The other close contest, CA-20, still resulted in a Democratic hold. On a fair map, Democrats chances are even better of holding seats.

3. You don't have to be so condescending, but if that's your bag, whatever. Peters is a non-offensive incumbent and DeMaio isn't even a moderate, that does not suggest Lean Republican. But, when the election results are in, we'll see who is correct.

[free my dawg]

This also had 90% of the people polled voting in the primary.

The actual election had 50%. I'd say it'd probably be closer to 60 or maybe even 70, but not 90.

Still too close to call before putting it as Leans R.

[krazen1211]

DeMaio won this district by double-digits in 2012 running for another office; Peters just barely edged out his opponent, in spite of how good of a year it was for his party. Peters is easily the most vulnerable Democrat in Obama territory, and probably within the Top Five.

Yep. And Faulconer got well over 60% here. Of course, those results don't even include the most Republican 10% of the Congressional district.

[Sbane]

I think Peters is in a lot of trouble but Republicans shouldn't be so confident. If DeMaio can be tied to the extremely conservative national republicans, he will likely lose. The type of people who vote Democrat here are well educated and vote in all elections so you can't count on a drop in turnout here.

That being said, those people are also the type who would vote for a moderate Republican and were voting Republican till about 2008 or so. DeMaio being gay helps him since he can use that to position himself as a moderate Republican. Remember, this sort of district will be just fine with conservative positions on fiscal matters.

TL;DR version: The La Jolla vote will be key.

[Maxwell]

I hope so, DeMaio would be good.

[Vosem]

1. Not understanding the difference between municipal elections and federal ones is an amateur mistake. Last cycle, Louise Slaughter was supposed to lose, because her opponent had won a local election by double digits, but instead, Slaughter won by double digits. Winning big locally does not guarantee that a candidate can win federally.

Louise Slaughter was never "supposed" to lose -- she was always favored; it was thought that Brooks might be able to take advantage of a Democratic meltdown if that occurred. NY-25 is a significantly more Democratic district than CA-52 (NY-25 voted Obama +20; CA-52 voted Obama +6); and Slaughter is a much more entrenched incumbent than Peters, having been first elected in 1986. Nevertheless, Brooks held her to her closest margin since 1992, and did generally credibly. Scott Peters is no Louise Slaughter.

2. CA-11 was still drawn for a Republican, seats with similar numbers in other states fell to Republicans in 2010. The other close contest, CA-20, still resulted in a Democratic hold.

It was, but demographic changes had negated that advantage by 2010. Seats with similar numbers did fall in other states, but seats with similar numbers were also held in other states -- McNerney happened to run a strong campaign, Harmer to some extent took victory for granted, and it was (just barely) enough. CA-20 was a very late-breaking contest that most Republicans didn't realize would be competitive until the last few weeks; Vidak was a no-namer at the time, though he's since parlayed his good performance then into the state legislature.

On a fair map, Democrats chances are even better of holding seats.

On the contrary, your 'fair map' has created a bucketload of marginal districts in a state where there used to be almost none. Both Democrats and Republicans will have to get used to having a lot of those marginal districts (gasp!) shift from party to party during elections. Living under a non-gerrymandered map doesn't make voters like the Democrats more -- in fact all but the most politically in-tune will never realize it.

3. You don't have to be so condescending, but if that's your bag, whatever.

That's rich.

Peters is a non-offensive incumbent and DeMaio isn't even a moderate, that does not suggest Lean Republican.

DeMaio is definitely moderate on social issues; he supports marriage equality (he's also gay) and medicinal marijuana. But that's beside the point -- CA-52 is a swing district where even a strongly conservative Republican could win in a good year; it would just be harder for them (to win and to hold it).

But, when the election results are in, we'll see who is correct.

I'm looking forward to it.

[Sbane]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

[Maxwell]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

Which district are you talking about? because isn't DeMaio pro-gay marriage and pro-choice?

[All Along The Watchtower]

Never heard of DeMaio. Seems like he would be a fairly formidable candidate in the district. Definitely keeping an eye on this race.

[free my dawg]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

He's not a strong socon. He's an economic conservative.

Honestly, gun to my head, DeMaio wins at this point in the game, but not by this big of a margin. Expect about a 53-47 win.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Wasn't there some kind of controversy late last year regarding DeMaio?

[Miles]

Wasn't there some kind of controversy late last year regarding DeMaio?

He was accused of whackin' it in a San Diego City Hall bathroom.

[Sbane]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

Which district are you talking about? because isn't DeMaio pro-gay marriage and pro-choice?

I was responding to Vosem's statement that a strong conservative could win in this district. A strong social conservative would not be able to win.

[Sbane]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

He's not a strong socon. He's an economic conservative.

Honestly, gun to my head, DeMaio wins at this point in the game, but not by this big of a margin. Expect about a 53-47 win.

Apparently no one read my first post in this thread where I broke down what would happen with DeMaio as the candidate.

[International Brotherhood of Bernard]

Wasn't there some kind of controversy late last year regarding DeMaio?

He was accused of whackin' it in a San Diego City Hall bathroom.

I'm gonna go out jackin' it in San Diego! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhNneU5shTs

[Holmes]

Wasn't there some kind of controversy late last year regarding DeMaio?

He was accused of whackin' it in a San Diego City Hall bathroom.

He's also a plagiarist. lol

[Vosem]

A strongly socially conservative Republican (except for an immigration hardliner) won't be winning this district any time soon, Vosem.

I don't see one primarying DeMaio either