NY GOP facing near extinction?

[Mr.Phips]

They could stretch NY-19 all the way into the Bronx by a narrow tentacle that takes away some of Engel's current territory.  Then there would be another tentacle coming up from Engel's district to take Orange county out of NY-19.  This would put NY-19 out of reach for Republicans. 

That would be godawful ugly and indefensible. I hope they don't do anything like that.

Republicans drew maps much like this in Florida and Texas.  Democrats did in California and Georgia(but no longer exists in that form) and Texas too (back during the day) 

I know your list wasn't meant to be cumulative, but I wanted to add one that deserves to be. 

I can agree with this, but that was only because of the Voting Rights Act interpretations in the early 1990's.  In the 1980's, Democrats drew a fairly regular looking map. 

[DownWithTheLeft]

I'm taking a trip up to NY-20 next week, I've been there a lot.  The area does not scream Democrat.  Let's put it this way, you have to look real hard to find a minority.  I also spend a lot of time in NY-19 and NY-18 and they seem like hardcore Dem areas. 

Anyone know what district Monsey is in?  It would be interesting to see their swing from 2000 to 2004.

[Gravis Marketing]

I'm taking a trip up to NY-20 next week, I've been there a lot.  The area does not scream Democrat.  Let's put it this way, you have to look real hard to find a minority.

Yes, it's not particularly diverse. It's like a western extension of New England in many ways, only bound in the same state as New York City.

I also spend a lot of time in NY-19 and NY-18 and they seem like hardcore Dem areas. 

NY-19? Really?

[DownWithTheLeft]

I also spend a lot of time in NY-19 and NY-18 and they seem like hardcore Dem areas. 

NY-19? Really?
[/quote]
Wait, scratch that I always thought were I went was the middle, its just the bottom, it probably gets more conservative further up.

[Gravis Marketing]

I also spend a lot of time in NY-19 and NY-18 and they seem like hardcore Dem areas. 

NY-19? Really?

Wait, scratch that I always thought were I went was the middle, its just the bottom, it probably gets more conservative further up.
[/quote]

The lines shifted a lot with the redistricting. It used to include more of Westchester.

[Jacobtm]

CQ Politics has recently shifted their ratings on two US House seats in NY in favor of the Democrats.  If their predictions all turn out to be true NY would be left with only 4 GOP Representatives.  Furthermore, CQ rates two of those GOP seats as only leans Republican which means there is a distinct possibility that only 2 GOP Congressmen could be left standing on NY once the dust settles.  It seems crazy to me that a state with 29 districts has the potential to become so lopsided.  What do you guys think?  How plausible is it that Democrats will control 27 of NY's districts during the 111th Congress?

In the NY Senate,  where districts aren't decided based on population, the Republicans are still in control because they dominate in the rural upstate areas. The NY GOP isn't dead, but no one'll say they're doing too horrorshow.

[Gravis Marketing]

In the NY Senate,  where districts aren't decided based on population, the Republicans are still in control because they dominate in the rural upstate areas. The NY GOP isn't dead, but no one'll say they're doing too horrorshow.

It's more as if they're still in control because they hold several seats in New York City and, until recently, a total lock on Long Island. If and when the city and L.I. start voting for state senate anything like they do federally, the GOP is doomed. They've already started doing so for open seats.

[Vasall des Midas]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

[Smash255]

In the NY Senate,  where districts aren't decided based on population, the Republicans are still in control because they dominate in the rural upstate areas. The NY GOP isn't dead, but no one'll say they're doing too horrorshow.

It's more as if they're still in control because they hold several seats in New York City and, until recently, a total lock on Long Island. If and when the city and L.I. start voting for state senate anything like they do federally, the GOP is doomed. They've already started doing so for open seats.

Trying to hold their seats on Long Island is probably played a pretty big role in Dean Skelos getting the new Majority seat.  A few races could wind up being competitive on LI.  The one big one right now is in the 3rd State Senate district.   LI has several Incumbent State Senators that are pretty old and have been there forever.  Ceaser Trunzo who is 82 is one of them and is likely to face Brookhaven Town Supervisor Brian Foley in November.  Against Foley, Trunzo's seat is definatley in danger.

[Sam Spade]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

Well, look, first of all one seat is going to have to go in that area, regardless.  Slaughter's seat has lost about 60,000 people and Hinchey has lost about 30,000.  Both Reynolds and Kuhl's seats have gained about 15,000 or so.  That means that the population of the area will likely be about 3 1/2 CDs worth come 2010.

So, if we eliminate Slaughter's seat, how can we divide the remaining three seats in a way to be most favorable to Democrats.  Just on its face, the four CDs combined end up being around 51-49 Dem using 2004 numbers.  In order to get marginal lean Dem numbers for one or two CDs (and possibly create one safe, we'd have to probably dump 1/2 CD of Republican favorable lands in the lap of present-day NY-22, NY-24 and NY-25.

In other words, it's possible, but tough.  And retirements or good Republican year could lead to problems considering the historical tendencies of these areas (even with the NY incumbency advantage).

Anyway, food for though.

[MarkWarner08]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

Well, look, first of all one seat is going to have to go in that area, regardless.  Slaughter's seat has lost about 60,000 people and Hinchey has lost about 30,000.  Both Reynolds and Kuhl's seats have gained about 15,000 or so.  That means that the population of the area will likely be about 3 1/2 CDs worth come 2010.

So, if we eliminate Slaughter's seat, how can we divide the remaining three seats in a way to be most favorable to Democrats.  Just on its face, the four CDs combined end up being around 51-49 Dem using 2004 numbers.  In order to get marginal lean Dem numbers for one or two CDs (and possibly create one safe, we'd have to probably dump 1/2 CD of Republican favorable lands in the lap of present-day NY-22, NY-24 and NY-25.

In other words, it's possible, but tough.  And retirements or good Republican year could lead to problems considering the historical tendencies of these areas (even with the NY incumbency advantage).

Anyway, food for though.

If Chris Lee wins in NY-26, Democrats could draw a district with  a slight Democratic edge for Slaughter. A Slaughter-Lee race would be a marquee election contest in 2012. If Democrats have a down year (say, in 2014), the Upstate packing plan could backfire ala the 1990 Georgia plan.

As a cautious redistricter, I'd err on the side of shoring up Democrats 2006 gains, eliminating one Republican district, and creating two uber-Republican seats. A 27-2 advantage isn't too shabby!

[Gravis Marketing]

If Chris Lee wins in NY-26, Democrats could draw a district with  a slight Democratic edge for Slaughter. A Slaughter-Lee race would be a marquee election contest in 2012.

(broken record)

Monroe County has a population of 730,000. Kerry carried it by 3 points, which makes a district there D+3, I believe. (I'm not going to do the math for 2000 now.) That's the district Slaughter and her successor should have.

Taking that out of the equation, how hard would it be to draw to Dem-favoring district and one strong Republican district? Not hard at all. Erie+Niagara+Chautaqua+Cattaraugus have a combined population of 1,350,000 and a PVI of D+5. I don't know how much more damage adding some of the more conservative counties in will do, but it's not hard to see Dem-leaning districts coming out of this.

At the point, if Republicans have such a good year that they can unseat Democratic incumbents, good for them and good for democracy. Republicans tried playing Dorian Gray through gerrymandering and everyone can agree it was bad for all involved, not least the representatives themselves who saw no downside to corruption.

[Mr.Phips]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

Well, look, first of all one seat is going to have to go in that area, regardless.  Slaughter's seat has lost about 60,000 people and Hinchey has lost about 30,000.  Both Reynolds and Kuhl's seats have gained about 15,000 or so.  That means that the population of the area will likely be about 3 1/2 CDs worth come 2010.

So, if we eliminate Slaughter's seat, how can we divide the remaining three seats in a way to be most favorable to Democrats.  Just on its face, the four CDs combined end up being around 51-49 Dem using 2004 numbers.  In order to get marginal lean Dem numbers for one or two CDs (and possibly create one safe, we'd have to probably dump 1/2 CD of Republican favorable lands in the lap of present-day NY-22, NY-24 and NY-25.

In other words, it's possible, but tough.  And retirements or good Republican year could lead to problems considering the historical tendencies of these areas (even with the NY incumbency advantage).

Anyway, food for though.

If Chris Lee wins in NY-26, Democrats could draw a district with  a slight Democratic edge for Slaughter. A Slaughter-Lee race would be a marquee election contest in 2012. If Democrats have a down year (say, in 2014), the Upstate packing plan could backfire ala the 1990 Georgia plan.

As a cautious redistricter, I'd err on the side of shoring up Democrats 2006 gains, eliminating one Republican district, and creating two uber-Republican seats. A 27-2 advantage isn't too shabby!

1991 Georgia plan was actually drawn by Republican courts.  The map was highly unfavorable to Democrats because it packed minorities into GA-02 and GA-11 that were 57% and 64% black respectively, making the formerly Democratic seats GA-01, GA-03, GA-04, and GA-10 pretty much unwinnable for Democrats because they had their black populations halved to create GA-02 and GA-11. 

[MarkWarner08]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

Well, look, first of all one seat is going to have to go in that area, regardless.  Slaughter's seat has lost about 60,000 people and Hinchey has lost about 30,000.  Both Reynolds and Kuhl's seats have gained about 15,000 or so.  That means that the population of the area will likely be about 3 1/2 CDs worth come 2010.

So, if we eliminate Slaughter's seat, how can we divide the remaining three seats in a way to be most favorable to Democrats.  Just on its face, the four CDs combined end up being around 51-49 Dem using 2004 numbers.  In order to get marginal lean Dem numbers for one or two CDs (and possibly create one safe, we'd have to probably dump 1/2 CD of Republican favorable lands in the lap of present-day NY-22, NY-24 and NY-25.

In other words, it's possible, but tough.  And retirements or good Republican year could lead to problems considering the historical tendencies of these areas (even with the NY incumbency advantage).

Anyway, food for though.

If Chris Lee wins in NY-26, Democrats could draw a district with  a slight Democratic edge for Slaughter. A Slaughter-Lee race would be a marquee election contest in 2012. If Democrats have a down year (say, in 2014), the Upstate packing plan could backfire ala the 1990 Georgia plan.

As a cautious redistricter, I'd err on the side of shoring up Democrats 2006 gains, eliminating one Republican district, and creating two uber-Republican seats. A 27-2 advantage isn't too shabby!

1991 Georgia plan was actually drawn by Republican courts.  The map was highly unfavorable to Democrats because it packed minorities into GA-02 and GA-11 that were 57% and 64% black respectively, making the formerly Democratic seats GA-01, GA-03, GA-04, and GA-10 pretty much unwinnable for Democrats because they had their black populations halved to create GA-02 and GA-11. 

Wasn't that the 1995 re-draw? I thought Speaker Tom Murphy crafted a '91 plan to gerrymander Gingrich out of his seat. Didn't the Democrats, not the courts,  overplay their hand?

[Former Moderate]

The initial draw of the Georgia lines for the 1990s redistricting was indeed a Democratic plan.  It was designed to relegate Republicans to obscurity, but they way overplayed their hand and got absolutely decimated in 1994.

[Mr.Phips]

The initial draw of the Georgia lines for the 1990s redistricting was indeed a Democratic plan.  It was designed to relegate Republicans to obscurity, but they way overplayed their hand and got absolutely decimated in 1994.

Oh, come on.  If that was their aim then why did they turn GA-01 from a 60% Bush district in 1988 to a 65% Bush district, or GA-03 from 57% to 68%, or GA-04 from 59% to 64% or GA-06(Gingrich's district) from 67% to 75%!!!, or GA-08 from 54% to 64%.  These Democrats already had distrits that were somewhat Republican leaning even for Georgia, why would they make it worse?

[Mr.Phips]

Like I said before, you can protect the Dem incumbents upstate, but it requires making two fairly safe Republican districts (definitely safe for their incumbents).  That doesn't mean the Dem incumbent seats would be safe Democrat if the incumbents left and the environment changed, far from it.  But that's not the point.

Otherwise, if you try to take every seat, you risk the environment changing and a good number of those Dem incumbents being in danger.

Which is your choice?

They wont take every seat.  What they will do is concede one very Republican seat to John McHugh by placing pretty much every heavily Republican area(Hamilton county, Essex county, Herkimer county, Jefferson county, Oneida county, Warren and Washington counties, and everything in Saratoga county except the Democratic stronghold of Saratoga Springs).  This would create one very Republican upstate district and would make NY-20 about four or five points more Democratic and make NY-24 a point or two more Democratic. 

That's would they should do, but there's nothing that says that NY redistricters are not like PA redistricters. 

And I'm sure you would also agree about the necessity of combining the Republican areas of Reynolds and Kuhl's districts to create the second seat.  I don't think there's any way to get around that.

Are we talking the realistic scenario (they hang on in 2008 and 2010, in which case it's obvious that one of them will be districted out and the other left with an ultra safe seat) or the worst case scenario (they lose)? In the latter case, obviously these districts should be left roughly intact, with missing population coming from Dem seats nearby. Slaughter's very old. Maybe she could retire and her seat (which is a dumpster for upstate Democratic votes right now...) could go on the chopping block.

Well, look, first of all one seat is going to have to go in that area, regardless.  Slaughter's seat has lost about 60,000 people and Hinchey has lost about 30,000.  Both Reynolds and Kuhl's seats have gained about 15,000 or so.  That means that the population of the area will likely be about 3 1/2 CDs worth come 2010.

So, if we eliminate Slaughter's seat, how can we divide the remaining three seats in a way to be most favorable to Democrats.  Just on its face, the four CDs combined end up being around 51-49 Dem using 2004 numbers.  In order to get marginal lean Dem numbers for one or two CDs (and possibly create one safe, we'd have to probably dump 1/2 CD of Republican favorable lands in the lap of present-day NY-22, NY-24 and NY-25.

In other words, it's possible, but tough.  And retirements or good Republican year could lead to problems considering the historical tendencies of these areas (even with the NY incumbency advantage).

Anyway, food for though.

If Chris Lee wins in NY-26, Democrats could draw a district with  a slight Democratic edge for Slaughter. A Slaughter-Lee race would be a marquee election contest in 2012. If Democrats have a down year (say, in 2014), the Upstate packing plan could backfire ala the 1990 Georgia plan.

As a cautious redistricter, I'd err on the side of shoring up Democrats 2006 gains, eliminating one Republican district, and creating two uber-Republican seats. A 27-2 advantage isn't too shabby!

1991 Georgia plan was actually drawn by Republican courts.  The map was highly unfavorable to Democrats because it packed minorities into GA-02 and GA-11 that were 57% and 64% black respectively, making the formerly Democratic seats GA-01, GA-03, GA-04, and GA-10 pretty much unwinnable for Democrats because they had their black populations halved to create GA-02 and GA-11. 

Wasn't that the 1995 re-draw? I thought Speaker Tom Murphy crafted a '91 plan to gerrymander Gingrich out of his seat. Didn't the Democrats, not the courts,  overplay their hand?

Again, Democrats would have been moronic to draw the 1992 map.  A Democratic map would have conceeded a very Republican seat to Republicans in the Atlanta suburbs(which they did in GA-06) and then make the new black majority district around 50% black and 46% white.  They would have done this by taking some blacks away from John Lewis in GA-05 and reducing the black population from 62% in his district to around 50% and making GA-04 a 50% black district as well by taking the African American parts of DeKalb and linking them with African American parts of Fulton.  This would not have harmed any other Democratic seats. 

[Former Moderate]

Well, Democrats WERE moronic, because they DID draw the 1992 map.

The main goal was to defeat the lone GOP rep, Newt Gingrich, and simultaneously craft minority-majority districts under pressure from the DoJ.

[Mr.Phips]

Well, Democrats WERE moronic, because they DID draw the 1992 map.

The main goal was to defeat the lone GOP rep, Newt Gingrich, and simultaneously craft minority-majority districts under pressure from the DoJ.

And at the same time create a bunch of heavily Republican districts that Democratic incumbents would have a very tough time holding?

[Former Moderate]

Well, Democrats WERE moronic, because they DID draw the 1992 map.

The main goal was to defeat the lone GOP rep, Newt Gingrich, and simultaneously craft minority-majority districts under pressure from the DoJ.

And at the same time create a bunch of heavily Republican districts that Democratic incumbents would have a very tough time holding?

Dude, it was Georgia in 1990.  Republicans had a better shot in Massachusetts than Georgia.

[Dan the Roman]

It was the Bush justice department that forced the map through. The Democrats made the best of the Department's mandates for the majority minority districts. Same thing happened in NC.

[Mr.Phips]

Well, Democrats WERE moronic, because they DID draw the 1992 map.

The main goal was to defeat the lone GOP rep, Newt Gingrich, and simultaneously craft minority-majority districts under pressure from the DoJ.

And at the same time create a bunch of heavily Republican districts that Democratic incumbents would have a very tough time holding?

Dude, it was Georgia in 1990.  Republicans had a better shot in Massachusetts than Georgia.

Are you serious?  The Democratic incumbent in GA-04 barely won in 1990, a good Democratic year.  The Dems in GA-09 and GA-10 were both held to just 56% and 58% respectively that year.  There was clear evidence by that time that the states demographics were shifting away from Democrats. 

[Mr.Phips]

It was the Bush justice department that forced the map through. The Democrats made the best of the Department's mandates for the majority minority districts. Same thing happened in NC.

Also in Alabama.  The North Carolina map was even worse and one of the few states in the South in 1992 were Democrats didnt lose seats, although Democrats were hard pressed in NC-02 and NC-03 after those districts had their black populations slashed.  They lost both in 1994. 

The Bush justice deparment also forced the creation of VA-03 in Virginia for 1992.  This made the Democratic held VA-04 more Republican and put the formerly competitive VA-01, where the Republican incumbent barely won in 1990, out of reach for Democrats. 

[Gravis Marketing]

And at the same time create a bunch of heavily Republican districts that Democratic incumbents would have a very tough time holding?

Democrats in Texas made the same decision. There was a school of thought that if you had a "bleached" district full of conservative white yellow dog Democrats, it would elect a conservative white Democrat in the primary, and then he'd have smooth sailing in the general. They were upended by history. I wouldn't call it overplaying their hand so much as being overtaken by events.

[Torie]

As to New York, I suspect the Dems will create two GOP seats upstate (one sucking up GOP areas around Rochester and other odd bits around the Western part of the state, and the other on the East side). King could be wiped out. Nassau is Democrat enough now to do that, and Suffolk marginal enough. The issue is whether or not the Dems will tolerate creating a couple of seats that are somewhat marginal for them, and could slip away in a wave. The Dems will probably choose to leave Staten Island alone. Nobody wants it. They may or may not dump heavily  Dem parts of Brooklyn into it, depending on the Brooklyn infighting. In any event, some upstate CD's will remain only marginally Dem, because so much of the place is marginal.

I don't expect to see a GOP House for a very long time. The redistricting in 2012 should be ugly, unless there is a GOP tide in the state legislative and governor's races in 2010. Maybe that will happen if Obama is elected, but I tend to doubt it.