Analysis of House Races- 2004

[JNB]

 
  A few things. One, should Rep. Bud Cramer retire, the Democrats probably have a 40% chance at best of retaining his seat. He was almost defeated in 94, had a better run but held to 56% in 96, and had to move his record to the right since then. His seat gave Bush 55% of the vote, and like other rural seats in the South, there is less and less ticket splitting going on. The fact that Rep Mike Rogers won in a high Democratic GOTV effort last year in a district that gave Bush a little more than 52% of the vote points to how much steeper the hill Democrats must climb in the South. The vacant seat in TN that voted for a Democrat had about 4% of GOP strength trimmed off(It gave 49% of the vote for Bush in 2000 vs almost 54% in its previous incarnation) that gave him the winning edge(51%). At 55% of the vote, while its not the most Republican seat in the South, it is almost at a point where Democrats will have difficulties trying to remain vaible in it.

[JNB]

 Exactly, unless there is a tidal wave that is anti Democrat, a wave that we saw in 94, the Democratic incumbents will have little trouble holding on in  the South. Many like Rep McIntyre of NC, Rep. Lucas of KY and Rep Cramer vote with the GOP on a majority of issues anyways.  People also forget the redistricing i n TX, if upheld, should produce at least 5 more GOP seats.

    People need to cast what took place between the mid 50s and 94, the era that Democratcs controled the house aside. The advantages that enabled the Democrats to hold the house, such as a lack of a viable ground level GOP in the south and the Democrats financial advantage backing liberal incumbents in conservative districts in the Midwest is long gone. If the Democratic nominee is painted as a Northren/Northeastren liberal and even loses like Dukakis did in 88, meaning a solid loss but not losing by a landslide, the GOP probably stands to gain 10 house seats. The ability for Democrats down the ticket to survive has been severely compromised because of the financial advantage they once had being gone.

[JNB]

 Yep, its back to the lines used in the 2002 election in CO. The CO 3rd districts, a seat that will be a open seat should not be too much trouble for the GOP to hold, it gave Bush 54% of the vote in 2000. The CO-7th district, a seat that had the closest election in 2002 has a Republican incumbent, but the area the seat is in voted narrowly for Gore. This will be a very expensive race that will require the GOP to kick up its registrationand get out the vote efforts.

[JNB]

 Rep Rodgers is going to have a serious fundraising advantage, and last year he overcame a massive Democratic GOTV effort. At the very worst, his district leans Republican. By the way Pealpolitik, since you are from the UK, why do you have the WVA marker on your name?

  Anyways Realpolitik, as I said before, you really need to understand the cultural dimension(culture wars) of US politics before making more predictions.

[JNB]

  The news about Rep. Harman may have put her in danger if her district either had its old lines and demographics, but her district in the 90s made a large jump towrds teh Democrats, from giving GHW Bush a 60-39 win in 88 to giving Gore 52% in 2000(under the old lines).

  As for Rep. Hall, he allways has been a nominal Democrat to the point that when it comes to vote counting, he is allways placed as a reliable GOP vote.