Top 40 House races of 2008

[InsideTheBeltway]

EDIT:  I have added what I could fit from my other post here-since this one had far more views.

The races are ranked from least likely to change hands to most likely.

40) IL-06 Pete Roskam (R) Bush won 53%-47%.  This was the only open seat in a "marginal" district won by the Republicans in 2006.  Democrats have easier targets in 2008 than Roskam.

39) WY-AL Barbara Cubin (R) Bush won 69%-29%.  Cubin's 48%-47% win this year shows how astonishingly bad a politican she is.  She only won 61% in 2006 against a token primary opponent.  If any prominent WY Republican wants a House seat (and eventually a good shot at the Senate), here's your chance.

38) OH-02 Jean Schmidt (R) Bush won 64%-36%.  This situation is virtually identical to the situtation in WY-AL.  Seat should be safe GOP, but crazy lady keeps it competitive, could be beaten in a primary...

37) FL-08 Ric Keller (R) Bush won 55%-45%.  Democrats barely targeted Keller, and he won just 53%-46% in 2006.  He already has a primary challenger.

36) VA-02 Thelma Drake(R) Bush won 58%-42%.  Drake won only won her second term in 2006 very narrowly, but she is starting to get a little more entrenched.  Should be in good shape if 2008 if a better GOP year.

35) IA-01 Bruce Braley (D) Kerry won 53%-46%.  If 2008 is like 2006, Braley is in great shape.  Otherwise, the district is competitive enough that he should have a real race.

34) IN-08 Brad Ellsworth (D) Bush won 62%-38%.  On the one hand, Bush did great in this district.  On the other hand, Ellsworth won by almost as much, and this district likes socially conservative Democrats.

33) AZ-05 Harry Mitchell (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  Mitchell ran as a pretty moderate Democrat, and should be OK if he votes like one.  This is the only AZ district where Kerry did better than Gore.

32) CO-04 Marilyn Musgrave(R) Bush won 58%-41%.  Musgrave's 46% this year shows how unpopular she is, Paccione's 43% shows how Republican this district is.

31) PA-04 Jason Altmire (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  This race would be ranked higher if Hart was 100% running again, but as it stands, a Pro-Life Democrat can do OK here (see Ron Klink).

30) NY-25 James Walsh (R) Kerry won 50%-48%.  Hard to believe Democrats didn't even bother opposing him in 04, and he came very close to losing just two years later.  This time, Democrats may be more aggressive here, but Walsh won't be caught off guard.

29) AZ-01 Rick Renzi (R) Bush won 54%-45%.  Rumors are floating around of ethics issues for Renzi, and this district is marginal enough that if Democrats seriously target him for a whole cycle, he'll be in real trouble.

28) IA-03 Leonard Boswell (D) Bush won 50%-49%.  Boswell's 52%-46% win in a Democratic lanslide (especially in IA) isn't so impressive.  There's a real chance he could retire, but this seat should be hotly contested either way.

27) MI-09 Joe Knollenberg (R) Bush won 51%-49%.  Democrats came reasonably close despite barely spending any money here.  Eventually Democrats will look at that 9-6 GOP majority in MI and try to win some seats in this area.

26) IL-08 Melissa Bean (D) Bush won 56%-44%.  Bean won with just 50% in 2006, but that was with a left-wing challenger taking 5%.  This district is probably too Republican for the GOP not to take a shot at her again.

25) NH-01 Carol Shea-Porter (D) Bush won 51%-48%.  How much of 2006 was a fluke in NH?  If there's any swing back towards the GOP here, former Rep. Jeb Bradley should make it competitive.

24) NV-03 Jon Porter (R) Bush won 50%-49%.  Porter won this year just 48%-47%.  Safe to say this district is pretty competitive.

23) FL-13 Vern Buchanan (R) Bush won 56%-43%.  Buchanan won by some 300 votes this year (although Democrats might disagree with that premise).  Jennings' calls for recounts and lawsuits may hurt the Democrats' chanes in 2008, and this district is naturally Republican.

22) NY-19 John Hall (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  This was one of the most surprising results of 2006, not because this district is so Republican, but because Sue Kelly seemed like a really good fit for this district.  Anyway, a moderate Republican in the Kelly mold would have a very good shot here, especially if Hall compiles a liberal voting record.

21) OH-15 Deborah Pryce (R) Bush won 50%-49%.  Surprisng that Pryce won in 2006.  Mark Foley won't be an issue for her in 2008, though, and she's no longer in the leadership and should have more time for her constitutents the next two years.

20) PA-08 Patrick Murphy (D) Kerry won 51%-48%.  I won't go into this district too much, as I can see people are very passionate about it.  Suffice it to say, if Fitzpatrick runs again, there's not much reason to believe it won't be very competitive again.

19) CA-04 John Doolittle (R)  Bush won 61%-38%.  He could have a serious primary challenge in 2008, and Democrats will have a good shot if Doolittle is the GOP candidate, despite how Republican the district is.

18) NJ-07 Mike Ferguson (R) Bush won 53%-47%.  Ferguson won just 49%-48% in 2006, and he isn't as moderate as most of the other NJ Republican Representatives.

17) PA-15 Charlie Dent (R) Kerry won 49.9%-49.7%.  As competitive a district as they come, but Dent, a moderate, wasn't targeted by the Democrats in 2006.  That makes Dent's 53%-44% win look pretty weak, and Democrats could have a shot here with the right candidate.

16) MI-07 Tim Walberg (R) Bush won 54%-45%.  This district leans GOP, but I'm guessing more people in this district were comfortable with Joe Schwarz then they are with Walberg.

15) WI-08 Steve Kagen (D) Bush won 55%-44%.  The question is whether or not Mark Green, who won 70%-30% in 2004, wants his old house seat back.  Kagen, who can self-finance ("Dr. Millionaire"), is probably a slight favorite if Green passes.

14) NC-11 Heath Shuler (D) Bush won 57%-42%.  Sure,  a socially conservative Democrat isn't a bad fit for this district, but Shuler would've probably lost if (a) Charles Taylor wasn't a terrible candidate and (b) 2006 wasn't such a great year for the Democrats.  He needs to keep a moderate record to win again.

13) NM-01 Heather Wilson (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  Wilson would've probably lost if Madrid hadn't made those gaffes during the debate.  Republican spin:  2008 can't be as bad as 2006, and Wilson won in 2006.  Democratic spin:  Whoever the Democrats run in 2008 won't be as bad a candiate as Madrid.

12) WA-08 Dave Reichert (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  Reichert has won two straight close elections here, and his anti-anti-surge vote won't help in this district.

11) NC-08 Robin Hayes (R) Bush won 54%-45%.  Hayes won by some 360 votes by the final tally and Larry Kissell has already said he's running again.  It's also possible Hayes could run for Governor, but I'm not sure an open seat would be easier for the Democrats than beating Hayes.

10) GA-08 Jim Marshall (D) Bush won 61%-39%.  Marshall was one of only two House Democrats to vote against the anti-surge bill, which may be and indication that he knows he's vulnerable.  In a Presidential election year, Marshall will be in big trouble in 2008.

9) OH-18 Zack Space (D) Bush won 57%-42%.  Did Space win 61%-39% because of the circumstances of this district, or is he actually that good of a candidate?  Probably some of both, and Republicans are hoping the memories of the Bobs-Ney and Taft-fade in the next two years.

8 ) CT-04 Chris Shays(R) Kerry won 52%-46%.  Shays didn't win by a tiny margin in '06, and the district seems pretty comfortable with him.  It sounds like former NY Rangers goalie Mike Richter might be interested.

7) CA-11 Jerry McNerney (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  No one is rooting harder for Richard Pombo to run again and win the GOP primary than Jerry McNerney.  If he doesn't Republicans should have a pretty good shot, and even Pombo would stand a fair chance.

6) KS-02 Nancy Boyda(D) Bush won 59%-39%.  Even Dennis Moore had some close calls in the neighboring 3rd after he won his first term, and this district is more Republican.  The GOP primary looks like it could get really nasty, but this being a Presidential Election (and not a Gubernatorial Election) year should help the GOP.

5) IN-09 Baron Hill (D) Bush won 59%-40%.  It sounds like Mike Sodrel is running again, and if I lived in this district, I would be really sick and tired of seeing ads from these two guys.  Anyway, a presidential election year, again, should help Sodrel.

4) PA-06 Jim Gerlach (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  It's kind of like the DCCC is the coyote, and Jim Gerlach is the roadrunner.  This should be a big battleground again in 2008 for this race, and in the Presidential election.

3) FL-16 Tim Mahoney (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  OK, so the name "Mark Foley" got 48%.  Would any other Repubican actually get a lower percentage than that?

2) PA-10 Chris Carney (D) Bush won 60%-40%.  So a guy who runs as a "values Congressman" cheats on his wife, gets sued for choking his mistress, and has to run an ad saying he didn't in the worst GOP year in decades, and still gets 47%?  Carney's just renting this seat.

1) TX-22 Nick Lampson (D) Bush won 64%-35%.  The question is:  Is there any way the Repubicans don't get this seat back?

As always, I welcome all comments, questions, criticisms, "you moron"s, etc.

[Mr.Phips]

I don't know if Jim Marshall should be that high up on the list.  Georgia was the one state where the Republicans made gains in 2006.  Democratic turnout was very poor and Marshall faced the best challenger he could have possibly faced.  Bush did win 61%/39% here in 2004, but that is not uncommon in Southern districts to have a district voting quite Republican at the Presidential level but sending a Conservative Democrat to Congress.

I don't know if Zach Space should be that high either.  He did get 62% of the vote there, which shows that he didn't win by default. 

[InsideTheBeltway]

I don't know if Jim Marshall should be that high up on the list.  Georgia was the one state where the Republicans made gains in 2006.  Democratic turnout was very poor and Marshall faced the best challenger he could have possibly faced.  Bush did win 61%/39% here in 2004, but that is not uncommon in Southern districts to have a district voting quite Republican at the Presidential level but sending a Conservative Democrat to Congress.

I don't know if Zach Space should be that high either.  He did get 62% of the vote there, which shows that he didn't win by default. 

I put a lot of stock, perhaps too much, in the Presidential Election voting, particularly in a Pres. election year (look at John Thune, David Vitter, and Mike Sodrel in 04, for instance).  I'm not sure how strong of a challenger Collins was at the end of the day-he ran quite poorly for Senate in 2004. 

By the way, I realized after making this list that I forgot about Mark Kirk of IL-10.  He won 53%-47% this year after winning with 64% in 2004.  He could be vulnerable, but his voting record is quite moderate.

[Mr.Phips]

I don't know if Jim Marshall should be that high up on the list.  Georgia was the one state where the Republicans made gains in 2006.  Democratic turnout was very poor and Marshall faced the best challenger he could have possibly faced.  Bush did win 61%/39% here in 2004, but that is not uncommon in Southern districts to have a district voting quite Republican at the Presidential level but sending a Conservative Democrat to Congress.

I don't know if Zach Space should be that high either.  He did get 62% of the vote there, which shows that he didn't win by default. 

I put a lot of stock, perhaps too much, in the Presidential Election voting, particularly in a Pres. election year (look at John Thune, David Vitter, and Mike Sodrel in 04, for instance).  I'm not sure how strong of a challenger Collins was at the end of the day-he ran quite poorly for Senate in 2004. 

By the way, I realized after making this list that I forgot about Mark Kirk of IL-10.  He won 53%-47% this year after winning with 64% in 2004.  He could be vulnerable, but his voting record is quite moderate.

If Mark Kirk can hang on, I think Space, Hill, and Marshall should be OK.

[okstate]

By "Top" House races do you mean the most competitive or most likely to switch?

Certainly TX-22 is the most likely to switch, but it's almost definitely not going to be the most competitive (which will probably be PA-06 if Democrats throw everything against Gerlach again or IN-09 if Sodrel runs against Baron Hill)

[Adlai Stevenson]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

[InsideTheBeltway]

By "Top" House races do you mean the most competitive or most likely to switch?

Certainly TX-22 is the most likely to switch, but it's almost definitely not going to be the most competitive (which will probably be PA-06 if Democrats throw everything against Gerlach again or IN-09 if Sodrel runs against Baron Hill)

Yeah, that's what I meant.

[Mr.Phips]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

[socaldem]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

But, then, how do you explain good old Rep. Holden PA-17?  Pennsylvania's fabled "T" has shown its comfortable with conservative Democrats, too.

[socaldem]

And the rest...

25) NH-01 Carol Shea-Porter (D) Bush won 51%-48%.  How much of 2006 was a fluke in NH?  If there's any swing back towards the GOP here, former Rep. Jeb Bradley should make it competitive.

24) NV-03 Jon Porter (R) Bush won 50%-49%.  Porter won this year just 48%-47%.  Safe to say this district is pretty competitive.

23) FL-13 Vern Buchanan (R) Bush won 56%-43%.  Buchanan won by some 300 votes this year (although Democrats might disagree with that premise).  Jennings' calls for recounts and lawsuits may hurt the Democrats' chanes in 2008, and this district is naturally Republican.

22) NY-19 John Hall (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  This was one of the most surprising results of 2006, not because this district is so Republican, but because Sue Kelly seemed like a really good fit for this district.  Anyway, a moderate Republican in the Kelly mold would have a very good shot here, especially if Hall compiles a liberal voting record.

21) OH-15 Deborah Pryce (R) Bush won 50%-49%.  Surprisng that Pryce won in 2006.  Mark Foley won't be an issue for her in 2008, though, and she's no longer in the leadership and should have more time for her constitutents the next two years.

20) PA-08 Patrick Murphy (D) Kerry won 51%-48%.  I won't go into this district too much, as I can see people are very passionate about it.  Suffice it to say, if Fitzpatrick runs again, there's not much reason to believe it won't be very competitive again.

19) CA-04 John Doolittle (R)  Bush won 61%-38%.  He could have a serious primary challenge in 2008, and Democrats will have a good shot if Doolittle is the GOP candidate, despite how Republican the district is.

18) NJ-07 Mike Ferguson (R) Bush won 53%-47%.  Ferguson won just 49%-48% in 2006, and he isn't as moderate as most of the other NJ Republican Representatives.

17) PA-15 Charlie Dent (R) Kerry won 49.9%-49.7%.  As competitive a district as they come, but Dent, a moderate, wasn't targeted by the Democrats in 2006.  That makes Dent's 53%-44% win look pretty weak, and Democrats could have a shot here with the right candidate.

16) MI-07 Tim Walberg (R) Bush won 54%-45%.  This district leans GOP, but I'm guessing more people in this district were comfortable with Joe Schwarz then they are with Walberg.

15) WI-08 Steve Kagen (D) Bush won 55%-44%.  The question is whether or not Mark Green, who won 70%-30% in 2004, wants his old house seat back.  Kagen, who can self-finance ("Dr. Millionaire"), is probably a slight favorite if Green passes.

14) NC-11 Heath Shuler (D) Bush won 57%-42%.  Sure,  a socially conservative Democrat isn't a bad fit for this district, but Shuler would've probably lost if (a) Charles Taylor wasn't a terrible candidate and (b) 2006 wasn't such a great year for the Democrats.  He needs to keep a moderate record to win again.

13) NM-01 Heather Wilson (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  Wilson would've probably lost if Madrid hadn't made those gaffes during the debate.  Republican spin:  2008 can't be as bad as 2006, and Wilson won in 2006.  Democratic spin:  Whoever the Democrats run in 2008 won't be as bad a candiate as Madrid.

12) WA-08 Dave Reichert (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  Reichert has won two straight close elections here, and his anti-anti-surge vote won't help in this district.

11) NC-08 Robin Hayes (R) Bush won 54%-45%.  Hayes won by some 360 votes by the final tally and Larry Kissell has already said he's running again.  It's also possible Hayes could run for Governor, but I'm not sure an open seat would be easier for the Democrats than beating Hayes.

10) GA-08 Jim Marshall (D) Bush won 61%-39%.  Marshall was one of only two House Democrats to vote against the anti-surge bill.  In a Presidential election year, Marshall will be in big trouble in 2008.

9) OH-18 Zack Space (D) Bush won 57%-42%.  Did Space win 61%-39% because of the circumstances of this district, or is he actually that good of a candidate?  Probably some of both, and Republicans are hoping the memories of the Bobs-Ney and Taft-fade in the next two years.

8 ) CT-04 Chris Shays(R) Kerry won 52%-46%.  Shays didn't win by a tiny margin in '06, and the district seems pretty comfortable with him.  It sounds like former NY Rangers goalie Mike Richter might be interested.

7) CA-11 Jerry McNerney (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  No one is rooting harder for Richard Pombo to run again and win the GOP primary than Jerry McNerney.  If he doesn't Republicans should have a pretty good shot, and even Pombo would stand a fair chance.

6) KS-02 Nancy Boyda(D) Bush won 59%-39%.  Even Dennis Moore had some close calls in the neighboring 3rd after he won his first term, and this district is more Republican.  The GOP primary looks like it could get really nasty, but this being a Presidential Election (and not a Gubernatorial Election) year should help the GOP.

5) IN-09 Baron Hill (D) Bush won 59%-40%.  It sounds like Mike Sodrel is running again, and if I lived in this district, I would be really sick and tired of seeing ads from these two guys.  Anyway, a presidential election year, again, should help Sodrel.

4) PA-06 Jim Gerlach (R) Kerry won 51%-48%.  It's kind of like the DCCC is the coyote, and Jim Gerlach is the roadrunner.  This should be a big battleground again in 2008 for this race, and in the Presidential election.

3) FL-16 Tim Mahoney (D) Bush won 54%-45%.  OK, so the name "Mark Foley" got 48%.  Would any other Repubican actually get a lower percentage than that?

2) PA-10 Chris Carney (D) Bush won 60%-40%.  So a guy who runs as a "values Congressman" cheats on his wife, gets sued for choking his mistress, and has to run an ad saying he didn't in the worst GOP year in decades got 47%?  Carney's just renting this seat.

1) TX-22 Nick Lampson (D) Bush won 64%-35%.  The question is:  Is there any way the Repubicans don't get this seat back?

As always, I welcome all comments, questions, criticisms, "you moron"s, etc.

A pretty good list, I'd say, though, of course it doesnt include the competitive GOP open seats that I expect will balance out some of the Dem vulnerabilities (OH-16, FL-10, etc). 

At the very least WY-AL deserves a place on the list as well. 
NY-20, Rep. Walsh's district definitely deserves a mention as well.

I also expect Republican Rep. Murphy PA-18 and Rep. Renzi AZ-01 to face stiff challenges if they continue to face legal trouble.

I'd also move CT-04 farther down the list; I think Shays survived his toughest challenge.

[Keystone Phil]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

But, then, how do you explain good old Rep. Holden PA-17?  Pennsylvania's fabled "T" has shown its comfortable with conservative Democrats, too.

I have worried about Carney becoming a Holden type figure but it was pointed out that Holden was a seasoned campaigner when he beak Gekas in 2002 and was swept into office in the following years.

It could happen with Carney but he doesn't have Holden's strength as a campaigner.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Heath Shuler should probably be moved way down.  Over all a very good list.  Question: will David Hobson's seat be competitive when he retires (he is very likely to do so soon; by which I mean in 2008 or 2010)?

[Adlai Stevenson]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

Well considering how vulnerable Marshall was in 2006 and that 2008 is a Presidential year I think he would lose.  He should run for the Senate or begin a serious entrenchment effort. 

[Mr.Phips]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

Well considering how vulnerable Marshall was in 2006 and that 2008 is a Presidential year I think he would lose.  He should run for the Senate or begin a serious entrenchment effort. 

Marshall was reelected by 63-37 in 2004, which was a great year for Republicans.  The district has been made five points more Republican since then, so that would now transfer into a 58-42 margin.  I think he'll be OK.

[Adlai Stevenson]

I think TX-22 and GA-8 are the most vulnerable Democratic seats.  Georgia is becoming aggressively Republican and Marshall barely won in 2006.  TX-22 is rather obvious and Sam Spade informs us its a highly-partisan district, voting 64%-36% for Bush in 2004.

I think PA-10 is much more vulnerable than GA-08.  GA-08 is used to electing Conservative Democrats while PA-10 is not.

Well considering how vulnerable Marshall was in 2006 and that 2008 is a Presidential year I think he would lose.  He should run for the Senate or begin a serious entrenchment effort. 

Marshall was reelected by 63-37 in 2004, which was a great year for Republicans.  The district has been made five points more Republican since then, so that would now transfer into a 58-42 margin.  I think he'll be OK.

I realise that but for whatever reason in 2006 he was vulnerable.  That means unless he gains new supporters he is probably on the verge of defeat in 2008. 

[AndrewTX]

I'd also move CT-04 farther down the list; I think Shays survived his toughest challenge.

I agree with you on that one. The dems won't nominate Diane Farrell again, and the only person who I could think of who might have had a chance against him would be Dannel Malloy from Stamford, but I don't think he would chance it now.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I'd also move CT-04 farther down the list; I think Shays survived his toughest challenge.

I agree with you on that one. The dems won't nominate Diane Farrell again, and the only person who I could think of who might have had a chance against him would be Dannel Malloy from Stamford, but I don't think he would chance it now.

I still cannot reconcile Chris winning in 2006 while Nancy and Rob lost, but I stand firm in my opinion that Shays' chunk of the Nutmeg State will only get more Democratic, not less.  Democrats should stay on top of that one.

And rematches seldom turnout well anyway.  Shays and Gerlach probably could have been beat by a fresh face.

Still, mark Gerlach's 2006 win as "impressive" -- he was supposed to be a sure loser in the type of environment we had.  I'd drop him down on the list to a "lean Republican" category, since its a better district than the one Shays has.

Meanwhile, Republicans should feel good about Georgia.  Republicans would have scored two pickups there had the national mood not been so piss poor.  Marshall and Barrow seem doomed to lose eventually as the GA Democratic Party fades further and further into irrelevance and the GOP continues to steamroll.

Dent and Ferguson seem unlikely targets, but any listing of vulnerable seats should include both New Hampshire seats.  The GOP has a deep bench in the state, and inexplicably, Hodes has weaker favorability numbers than the (IMHO) inherently weak Shea-Porter.

There's no reason for the NH GOP to accept 2006's results as a permanent shift of the partisan landscape.  Even if New Hampshire drifts two or three points to the Democrats, Republicans can still play there.

One warning sign to Democrats going in to 2008: Democrats skillfully exploited their strength in districts that split their vote between a GOP Representative and John Kerry in 2006.  But they exploited that strength so well that there are now somewhere around 8 Dem Representative/George Bush districts for every 1 GOP Representative/John Kerry districts, and most of those GOP/Kerry districts (like, say, Delaware-at-large) are just plain going to be impossible to win without a retirement.

A few other thoughts:

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

2) Vern Buchannan will be in terrific shape if Christine Jennings runs again (and are there any doubts she won't?).  Some people need to learn how to just 'let it go.'  And, as an added bonus, Katherine Harris won't drag down Buchannan's numbers in 2008.

If the GOP plays its cards right, they could possibly pick up about ten next year.  If Democrats have a really good run, I could see them gaining maybe two or three net.  Overall, I'm expecting a net gain of about five for the GOP in the House, and unlike 2006, Republicans seem to have a better upside potential than the Democrats do.

[Mr.Phips]

I'd also move CT-04 farther down the list; I think Shays survived his toughest challenge.

I agree with you on that one. The dems won't nominate Diane Farrell again, and the only person who I could think of who might have had a chance against him would be Dannel Malloy from Stamford, but I don't think he would chance it now.

I still cannot reconcile Chris winning in 2006 while Nancy and Rob lost, but I stand firm in my opinion that Shays' chunk of the Nutmeg State will only get more Democratic, not less.  Democrats should stay on top of that one.

And rematches seldom turnout well anyway.  Shays and Gerlach probably could have been beat by a fresh face.

Still, mark Gerlach's 2006 win as "impressive" -- he was supposed to be a sure loser in the type of environment we had.  I'd drop him down on the list to a "lean Republican" category, since its a better district than the one Shays has.

Meanwhile, Republicans should feel good about Georgia.  Republicans would have scored two pickups there had the national mood not been so piss poor.  Marshall and Barrow seem doomed to lose eventually as the GA Democratic Party fades further and further into irrelevance and the GOP continues to steamroll.

Dent and Ferguson seem unlikely targets, but any listing of vulnerable seats should include both New Hampshire seats.  The GOP has a deep bench in the state, and inexplicably, Hodes has weaker favorability numbers than the (IMHO) inherently weak Shea-Porter.

There's no reason for the NH GOP to accept 2006's results as a permanent shift of the partisan landscape.  Even if New Hampshire drifts two or three points to the Democrats, Republicans can still play there.

One warning sign to Democrats going in to 2008: Democrats skillfully exploited their strength in districts that split their vote between a GOP Representative and John Kerry in 2006.  But they exploited that strength so well that there are now somewhere around 8 Dem Representative/George Bush districts for every 1 GOP Representative/John Kerry districts, and most of those GOP/Kerry districts (like, say, Delaware-at-large) are just plain going to be impossible to win without a retirement.

A few other thoughts:

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

2) Vern Buchannan will be in terrific shape if Christine Jennings runs again (and are there any doubts she won't?).  Some people need to learn how to just 'let it go.'  And, as an added bonus, Katherine Harris won't drag down Buchannan's numbers in 2008.

If the GOP plays its cards right, they could possibly pick up about ten next year.  If Democrats have a really good run, I could see them gaining maybe two or three net.  Overall, I'm expecting a net gain of about five for the GOP in the House, and unlike 2006, Republicans seem to have a better upside potential than the Democrats do.

NH-02 is not vulnerable.  Kerry won that by about seven points and the district continues to get more and more Democratic. 

As with Georgia, the state was the one state in 2006 that had horrible Democratic turnout.  Barrow's district is nearly majority black so he should be OK.  Marshall knows how to hold on and he should be able to again.  His district is also a third black. 

I sort of agree with you on WI-08.  That has always been a volatile district and can unexpectedly throw out Democratic incumbents.

[Adlai Stevenson]

I'd also move CT-04 farther down the list; I think Shays survived his toughest challenge.

I agree with you on that one. The dems won't nominate Diane Farrell again, and the only person who I could think of who might have had a chance against him would be Dannel Malloy from Stamford, but I don't think he would chance it now.

I still cannot reconcile Chris winning in 2006 while Nancy and Rob lost, but I stand firm in my opinion that Shays' chunk of the Nutmeg State will only get more Democratic, not less.  Democrats should stay on top of that one.

And rematches seldom turnout well anyway.  Shays and Gerlach probably could have been beat by a fresh face.

Still, mark Gerlach's 2006 win as "impressive" -- he was supposed to be a sure loser in the type of environment we had.  I'd drop him down on the list to a "lean Republican" category, since its a better district than the one Shays has.

Meanwhile, Republicans should feel good about Georgia.  Republicans would have scored two pickups there had the national mood not been so piss poor.  Marshall and Barrow seem doomed to lose eventually as the GA Democratic Party fades further and further into irrelevance and the GOP continues to steamroll.

Dent and Ferguson seem unlikely targets, but any listing of vulnerable seats should include both New Hampshire seats.  The GOP has a deep bench in the state, and inexplicably, Hodes has weaker favorability numbers than the (IMHO) inherently weak Shea-Porter.

There's no reason for the NH GOP to accept 2006's results as a permanent shift of the partisan landscape.  Even if New Hampshire drifts two or three points to the Democrats, Republicans can still play there.

One warning sign to Democrats going in to 2008: Democrats skillfully exploited their strength in districts that split their vote between a GOP Representative and John Kerry in 2006.  But they exploited that strength so well that there are now somewhere around 8 Dem Representative/George Bush districts for every 1 GOP Representative/John Kerry districts, and most of those GOP/Kerry districts (like, say, Delaware-at-large) are just plain going to be impossible to win without a retirement.

A few other thoughts:

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

2) Vern Buchannan will be in terrific shape if Christine Jennings runs again (and are there any doubts she won't?).  Some people need to learn how to just 'let it go.'  And, as an added bonus, Katherine Harris won't drag down Buchannan's numbers in 2008.

If the GOP plays its cards right, they could possibly pick up about ten next year.  If Democrats have a really good run, I could see them gaining maybe two or three net.  Overall, I'm expecting a net gain of about five for the GOP in the House, and unlike 2006, Republicans seem to have a better upside potential than the Democrats do.

NH-02 is not vulnerable.  Kerry won that by about seven points and the district continues to get more and more Democratic. 

As with Georgia, the state was the one state in 2006 that had horrible Democratic turnout.  Barrow's district is nearly majority black so he should be OK.  Marshall knows how to hold on and he should be able to again.  His district is also a third black. 

I sort of agree with you on WI-08.  That has always been a volatile district and can unexpectedly throw out Democratic incumbents.

The Democrats may well pick up several Republican-held Kerry districts due to retirements in 2008; elder members do not want to be part of the minority.

I think New Hampshire underwent a seismic shift in 2006 - I think 2008 will confirm that with both Shea-Porter and Hodes re-elected and Sununu defeated. 

As has already been stated, Barrow should be safer due to the Presidential year, the reverse of Marshall, who will be weakend by it.  Marshall, I maintain, is one of the most vulnerable Democratic incumbents.

[HardRCafé]

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

What lie?

[MarkWarner08]

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

What lie?

Read my signature's quote.

[Mr.Phips]

1) Kagen is on thin ice with that ridiculous lie he got caught up in.  That alone might not be enough to sink him, but it shows he has horrible judgement and lackluster political sense.

What lie?

Read my signature's quote.

That?  That was no big deal.  People in his district don't even like Bush anymore. 

[HardRCafé]

Having no idea how to behave in public is not a lie per se.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Having no idea how to behave in public is not a lie per se.

When pressed by the media, he admitted that he didn't really say that stuff -- which matches up with the White House's version of events.

It'd be embarassing for him if he really did disrespect the First Lady, but it's maybe even more embarassing that he'd lie about disrepsecting the First Lady in the first place just to whip up a partisan crowd.

That?  That was no big deal.  People in his district don't even like Bush anymore. 

Again, please read: it is not the quote itself, but the incredibly poor judgement saying it represents.

Linda Stender had a similar problem when she initally said (to a partisan crowd, surprise surprise) that the first bill she'd pass in the new Congress would be one to impeach the President.  Two days or so after she defended her quote in PoliticsNJ, she was forced to backpedal and issue a retraction.

Poor political judgement.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Having read the Wikipedia article on Steve Kagen I am unfortunately convinced that he will certainly be near the top of the most vulnerable Democratic Congressmen in 2008; particularly if Mark Green decides to run for his old seat or if John Gard seeks a rematch.