Special state legislative elections thread (see OP for results/upcoming races)

[Mr.Phips]

I should also note that both Mike Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani carried this New York district by large margins in their mayoral races.  

[Mr.Phips]

Another to file in the annals of NM weird elections.  (Al will love this one) 

Richard Berry defeats incumbent Marty Chavez for Albuquerque Mayor.  Helped, of course, by Richard Romero stealing some votes (though those votes may have gone for Berry otherwise, given Romero's campaign was basically anti-Chavez).

Chavez, much like Bloomberg, overturned the term-limits law to run for a fourth-term.  Berry is a Republican (and quite conservative at that).  Chavez is a Dem (pro-business is the left's major complaint).  Romero is a Dem too (for those who don't know NM politics), though Romero used to be a Republican.

With 93% in (40% needed to avoid runoff)
Richard Berry 43%
Marty Chavez (i) 35%
Richard Romero 21%

http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S1178683.shtml?cat=500

I was going to post this.  I am wondering what is going to happen in New York City with Bloomberg after his overturning term limits.  I am hearing that the Dems internal polls in that race see it surprisingly very close. 

[Mr.Phips]

Bloomberg is trying to give Obama political capital in the healthcare fight in exchange for Obama not endorsing Thompson

If Bloomberg thinks that will help in any ways towards re-election, then he really is tone-deaf politically.  The minorities will return to the minority candidate in NYC elections no matter what the polls say or what Obama does (see 2005).

Of course, Marty Chavez was also tone-deaf politically.

I dont know.  Didnt Bloomberg get a significant number of black votes in 2005?

[Mr.Phips]

What the hell is happening to the Democratic party?  If Democrats do indeed lose the New Jersey Assembly, something is VERY, VERY wrong.  I havent seen a party get beat up this badly in an off year election since Watergate. 

[Mr.Phips]

Eh, I wouldn't read that much into some election for a house seat in the western suburbs of Oklahoma City.

The one in Tennessee is more important because it gives the GOP there a much more secure hold on the State House than before and GOP prospects to win the governorship in 2010 look pretty good right now (which would affect redistricting).

Let's see what happens in NJ and VA next month.  I have to say that Moderate's proposition that Jersey voters may CTA voting Republican in Assembly elections if they think Corzine will be re-elected is certainly not an unreasonable one.

I dont think most voters think that way.  Are voters going to vote Democratic in 2010 because they think there will likely be a Republican President in 2012?  I guess a more reasonable comparison would be Virginia voters electing a Democratic House of Delegates because they are certain that McDonnell will win. 

[Mr.Phips]

What the hell is happening to the Democratic party?  If Democrats do indeed lose the New Jersey Assembly, something is VERY, VERY wrong.  I havent seen a party get beat up this badly in an off year election since Watergate. 

Eh? Republicans held the NJ Assembly during this very decade. And the chances of the Democrats actually losing control are essentially nil due to way seats are elected: only half of the seats are up for election. The Republicans could win the PV by as much as 8-10% and still fail to take the Assembly.

Not since redistricting they haven't.

But yeah, the deck is HEAVILY stacked in the Democrats' favor.  Republicans winning the Assembly hinges on the GOP taking seats that Obama probably won with about 70% of the vote.

What kind of seats did Republicans have to hold in the 1990's to keep a majority?  Were the district lines just very GOP favorable then?

[Mr.Phips]

What the hell is happening to the Democratic party?  If Democrats do indeed lose the New Jersey Assembly, something is VERY, VERY wrong.  I havent seen a party get beat up this badly in an off year election since Watergate. 

Eh? Republicans held the NJ Assembly during this very decade. And the chances of the Democrats actually losing control are essentially nil due to way seats are elected: only half of the seats are up for election. The Republicans could win the PV by as much as 8-10% and still fail to take the Assembly.

Not since redistricting they haven't.

But yeah, the deck is HEAVILY stacked in the Democrats' favor.  Republicans winning the Assembly hinges on the GOP taking seats that Obama probably won with about 70% of the vote.

What kind of seats did Republicans have to hold in the 1990's to keep a majority?  Were the district lines just very GOP favorable then?

District lines were much more favorable to the GOP, yes.  The 1990s lines are generally considered a GOP gerrymander; 2000s are a Dem gerrymander.  Even though both were technically drawn by independent commission.

Republicans scored 58 seats to Democrats' 22 in the 1991 anti-Florio superlandslide.  They slowly hemorrhaged the unholdable, intensely Democratic seats throughout the decade, but always had solid control.

Since redistricting, the main Dem pickups were in District 1 (Heavily GOP, but Republicans essentially handed Democrats these seats via a 2005 ballot-access signature snafu); District 3 (both longtime GOP incumbents retired during a good Dem year); District 4 (top GOP prospect this year, always "lean Dem" but made slightly more Dem through redistricting); District 22 (shifted from lean GOP to strong Dem via redistricting); District 34 (shifted from toss-up to safe Dem via redistricting); District 36 (shifted from toss-up to strong Dem via redistricting); and District 38 (shifted from lean GOP to strong Dem via redistricting).

Was the 1970's map a Dem gerrymander?  I know Democrats held a two to one lead after the 1973 election, which slowly shrank until about they finally lost control again in 1985.  Democrats must have held seats in places like Hunterdon county to have that many seats. 

[Mr.Phips]

And the chances of the Democrats actually losing control are essentially nil due to way seats are elected: only half of the seats are up for election.

You're mistaken there.  From the New Jersey Legislature's Our Legislature page:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Two State Assemblymen/women (in each odd year) and one State Senator (in years ending in "1", "3" or "7") are elected from each Legislative district.  Comparing both the 2007 primary and general election results for State Senate and General Assembly, normal "block voting" or "plurality at large" seems to be used for elections to the New Jersey General Assembly.  Interestingly though, two Assembly candidates can bracket themselves with each other.  Slogans are used in the primary to indicate ideology or who are the "regular" party candidates (presumably those endorsed by the local county committee).  I'm not sure if voters can vote for both candidates by checking one box of not, but they clearly don't have to as I see candidates bracketed with each other with different vote totals.  Perhaps a New Jersey forumite can explain how that works, and whether or not New Jersey has a "big box" or "one lever" voting option in the general election (Maine got rid of its big box in 1972).

Nope, you need to vote for each candidate separately.  There's no party-line lever.


And there are two Special Elections in New Jersey for the State Senate, though neither is competitive.

Senate District 6 was Adler's old district, it's pretty safely Democratic.
Senate District 23 was Lance's old district, it's pretty safely Republican.

If either flips, it'll be 6 due to the environment, but certainly if something happens there it'll be really ugly on the Assembly side.  Like, REALLY ugly.

Adler's seat is Cherry Hill, right?  Even Corzine will probably get at least 60% in that district. 

[Mr.Phips]

37th update - Looks like Marsden is the front-runner for the Democrats, while three Republicans (two generic business types and a former school board member) are running.

Democrats should be able to pick up the 37th.  Im sure they are hungry for a win after last Tuesday. 

[Mr.Phips]

37th update - Looks like Marsden is the front-runner for the Democrats, while three Republicans (two generic business types and a former school board member) are running.

Democrats should be able to pick up the 37th.  Im sure they are hungry for a win after last Tuesday. 

Never underestimate the laziness of Democratic voters. They nearly lost the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors chairmanship and Brian Moran's House of Delegates seat (and *did* lose Sharon Bulova's BoS seat) back in January.

I dont think they will be lazy anymore after what happened on Tuesday. 

[Mr.Phips]

This special election in Kentucky brings Republicans up to a net gain of 10 seats in special electoins since Obama's election.

I dont think Democrats will be winning much of anything until they can get Obama out of the White House.  This is almost as bad as Nixon to the Republicans in 1974. 

[Mr.Phips]

I think having McDonnell as governor may have prompted some voters to choose Marsden so that Republicans would not have a chance to control the whole state government. 

[Mr.Phips]

Just wonderful.  This is what Obama's Presidency is doing to the Democratic party.  This makes a net loss of eleven state legislative seats since Obama's election.  Democrats should take this guy, put steel boots on him and drown him for what he is done to the party.  This is a huge price for Democrats to be paying just to have a symbol sitting in the White House. 

[Mr.Phips]

Just wonderful.  This is what Obama's Presidency is doing to the Democratic party.  This makes a net loss of eleven state legislative seats since Obama's election.  Democrats should take this guy, put steel boots on him and drown him for what he is done to the party.  This is a huge price for Democrats to be paying just to have a symbol sitting in the White House. 

Obviously, a Republican hold in a state legislative seat is far more important than control of the White House.

Holding several and likely holding Congress is far more important than control of the White House.  The White House is the weakest branch of government.

[Mr.Phips]

VA HD-41 update: Since the 22nd, Eileen Filler-Corn has reported another $63k in last-minute donations over $1000 (including donations from her former boss, Sen. Mark Warner, and everyone's favorite ex-DNC chief Terry McAuliffe). Kerry Bolognese? $9k. I think this is a Dem hold at this point, which is not too surprising, since Bolognese was a pretty weak candidate who tried to ride the McDonnell wave last year.

Part of me thinks that Democrats will lose this seat since they have done so horribly in other special elections(look at New York and Delaware), but if Bolognese couldnt win with McDonnell winning 55% in the district in 2009, I dont think he can win now. 

[Mr.Phips]

I've seen a couple of Laird signs here.

Who does it look like will win here?  Laird should win since this district is very Democratic and he represented half of the district for many years until 2008 in the State Assembly.  However, Democrats have been doing awful in winnable special elections lately. 

[Mr.Phips]

I can't say, personally. I mean Laird was the mayor of Santa Cruz and he's a good candidate for the area, so obviously his support is gonna be really high down there compared to the rest of the district.

I expect Laird to run up the score in Santa Cruz and Santa Clara and do well in Monterey, while his opponent will probably win big in San Luis Obispo, which he represents in the Assembly and is about a third of the district. 

[Mr.Phips]

I've seen a couple of Laird signs here.

Who does it look like will win here?  Laird should win since this district is very Democratic and he represented half of the district for many years until 2008 in the State Assembly.  However, Democrats have been doing awful in winnable special elections lately. 

I don't see the district as being very Democratic (if it were so Democratic, perhaps Abel would have had an opponent), and I'm not sure to what extent state legislative special elections in Louisiana or wherever impact the election results here. Tht said, I haven't been along the coast much south of Monterey since I was 7. Laird will clean house in the places I'm familiar with.

The district is certainly very Democratic.  Obama won here by 20 points and even John Kerry won it by seven points. 

[Mr.Phips]

The pre-election fundraising reports for the two Virginia House of Delegates seats (previously held by Republicans) on 6/15 were posted on VPAP today. Surprisingly, the Democrat in HD-26 (Harrisonburg Mayor Kai Degner) outraised the Republican, $109k to $96k. There's also an independent candidate who raised about $500. In HD-27, not very exciting, the Republican outraised the Democrat $109k to $6k.

And HD-27 is the district Obama won.  Amazing how inept Democrats are at these special elections.

[Mr.Phips]

The pre-election fundraising reports for the two Virginia House of Delegates seats (previously held by Republicans) on 6/15 were posted on VPAP today. Surprisingly, the Democrat in HD-26 (Harrisonburg Mayor Kai Degner) outraised the Republican, $109k to $96k. There's also an independent candidate who raised about $500. In HD-27, not very exciting, the Republican outraised the Democrat $109k to $6k.

And HD-27 is the district Obama won.  Amazing how inept Democrats are at these special elections.

That really doesn't mean much; Obama overperformed in a lot of suburban districts that are otherwise solidly Republican.

That is true, but in November, Democrats lost some districts Obama carried heavily and even some that John Kerry won and in some cases even Steve Shannon and Jody Wagner won like AD-86, AD-51, the Vanderhye seat and a few others.  Democrats had no excuse to lose these as there werent even coattails for Republicans here. 

[Mr.Phips]

I've seen a couple of Laird signs here.

Who does it look like will win here?  Laird should win since this district is very Democratic and he represented half of the district for many years until 2008 in the State Assembly.  However, Democrats have been doing awful in winnable special elections lately. 

I don't see the district as being very Democratic (if it were so Democratic, perhaps Abel would have had an opponent), and I'm not sure to what extent state legislative special elections in Louisiana or wherever impact the election results here. Tht said, I haven't been along the coast much south of Monterey since I was 7. Laird will clean house in the places I'm familiar with.

The district is certainly very Democratic.  Obama won here by 20 points and even John Kerry won it by seven points. 

Schwarzenegger carried the district by 30.

Schwarzanegger carried almost every district. 

[Mr.Phips]

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/special/1559.htm

27% in and Blakeslee is up 9%. For what it's worth, it seems Santa Cruz is the only county that hasn't reported anything yet, just its early votes. As expected, Blakeslee is winning San Luis and Santa Barbara big, and Laird is winning Monterey and Santa Cruz big. Santa Clara is pretty much tied and will probably decide it... but I bet there'll be a runoff, barely.

If Laird is to win the runoff, he is going to have to flip Santa Clara in his favor.  He should be able to do that.  Its very liberal and Obama won 63% there.

[Mr.Phips]

Using my spreadsheet, I have Blakeslee with 48% and Baird with 43%.  Even though Baird represented 55% of this district and Blakeslee only 45%, Baird is behind because he is only winning his Assembly district 52%-40% and Blakeslee is winning 59%-31% in his.  Baird is going to have to win over more Democrats, especially in Santa Clara, if he is going to win the runoff.

[Mr.Phips]

Winning over Democrats isn't the problem.

Just look at Santa Clara county.  The result there implies a pretty significant crossover vote as well as low Democratic turnout.   Obama won 63% in the portion included in the district and John Kerry got 56% there.  Laird has to win there with room to spare to have a chance in the runoff.

[Mr.Phips]

Winning over Democrats isn't the problem.

Just look at Santa Clara county.  The result there implies a pretty significant crossover vote as well as low Democratic turnout.   Obama won 63% in the portion included in the district and John Kerry got 56% there.  Laird has to win there with room to spare to have a chance in the runoff.

Ehh, did you read my post? Santa Clara has 1.6million residents, and probably 150k people from Santa Clara are actually in this district, most from small cities and towns, and unincorporated areas. You can't use any county-wide result and apply it to this district considering <10% of the county actually lives in this district. And San Jose is hardly in this district too, and that city carries a lot of weight in county-wide results.

That said, yeah, Laird should be able to win it, but not by much. He needs to work harder till August.

The part of Santa Clara in the district went 63% for Obama as opposed to 69% for Obama in the county as a whole.