Analysis of House Races- 2004

[DarthKosh]

I'm no expert on Alabaman politics, but what I do know is that the Democrat vote was seriously depressed in several areas in the last Presidential election.

And problely will be again.   Problely more so if Dean is the nom.

[DarthKosh]

Not so much Dean(he should do O.K in small towns etc. But not in Alabama), but Kerry et al...

I think Dean will be great for the liberal base but a disaster for down ticket races.

[DarthKosh]

 
  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.

Only if the Dem holding the seat retires.

[DarthKosh]

 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.

If the Dem canidate lose like Dukakis not only will it be bad in the house it would be devistating in the senate.

[DarthKosh]

(Potentially) vunerable incumbents:

+= Potentially in trouble, but should be safe
++= Long shot
+++= In moderate danger of losing
++++= In danger of losing
+++++= In SERIOUS danger of losing

Alabama:
03=Mike Rodgers(R)+++++

Arizona:
01=Rick Renzi(R)+++++

Arkansas:
03=John Boozman(R)+

More soon...

Rogers will be help because Alabama is a big Bush state.

[DarthKosh]

Thune is saying he will decide and announce int eh next few days if he will enter the House race in SD or the Senate race.

He will problely win either one.

[DarthKosh]

Gosh Senator John Thune sounds so good!

He already should be considering the last election.

[DarthKosh]

Anyone notice that the Justice Dept.  approved the Texas House map as NOT being against the civil rights act?

Plus the courts won't throw it out now.

[DarthKosh]

yes this could be a NET gain of 7 seats for the GOP.

Wish they'd get rid of REp. Sheila Jackson Lee, but I think she is still in a safe district.  

Isn't she in central urban district?

[DarthKosh]

She is in the 18th district which is in Houston.

Then that is a Demseat forever.

[DarthKosh]

Good list but not many will lose.  Maybe B-1 Bob can will.

[DarthKosh]

So the GOP have picked up a new congressman on paper at least.
In practice he has been a Republican for a very long time...

Glad he's gone.

Soon all the Dems are are going to be hard lefties.

[DarthKosh]

The current Rothenberg Political Report has an analysis of Senate, House and Governor races.  A subscription is needed to see the analysis, but all the competitive House races are listed at the free site.  As of Jan 10, only 17 Republican and 15 Democratic seats are listed as competitive.  With such a small number of competitive seats it is unlikely the Democrats can win control of the House.  Given the new TX redistricting the Republicans will very likely expand their control.
see:
http://www.rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/

Texas has made sure the Dems will not take the house.

[DarthKosh]

The Texas Gerrymander in theory acts as a safeguard for the GOP. The Dems might make some strong gains elsewhere, but because of the Texan plan, will struggle to get the GOP majority below 5.

There is no place in the country where they can get 14 seats to get with in five.

[DarthKosh]

Er... you all seem to be misinterpreting me...

What I mean is that IF the Dems can make strong/solid gains elsewhere they would still struggle to get the GOP's majority below 5 seats in the House, due to the Texan map.

Sorry then.

[DarthKosh]

as to person about IA delegation.  They are safe seats, dems tried last time hard and were all defeated soundly.  They may have a chance in 2006 as Rep King ( west IA) and Nussle , budget chairman  I think, wboth have expressed interest in running for Governor.

Your right in Iowa the best chance for Dems was 2002.