what part of the country will the democrats do best in in 2012

[freepcrusher]

by that I mean where will a lot of the pickups be? I can see them picking up a lot of seats in the great lakes areas.

I mean the republican party isn't even trying to hide their disdain for organized labor anymore. I can see the dems picking up MN 8 (Iron Range is heavily unionized), and dave obey's old seat.

Then you have a D+8 state like Illinois where republicans strangely enough have an 11-8 delegation. The 17th district is heavily unionized and I could see a backlash in that district. Although the 8th district is heavily white collar and non-union, I don't see how they will re-elect a teabagger like Joe Walsh (although Phil Crane was as nutty if not nuttier and represented that area for 30+ years).

Michigan is another state with a democratic PVI where the democrats are underrepresented. Even worse in Pennsylvania. I can see the democrats pick up some low hanging fruit there. Its interesting how in Pennsylvania you have R+5 districts held by democrats and D+5 districts held by republicans.

Another area the democrats could pick up one or two seats is Ohio. Ohio is a state where the AFL-CIO has a lot of strength and with Brown on the ballot, he may have some electoral coattails.

Another thing that helps is that you probably have a lot of "Reagan Democrats" in this region, who are quickly becoming the democratic party's prodigal son.

[Miles]

Democrats will gerrymander the hell out of Illinois. I'm expecting at least a pickup of 3 seats in IL.

I'm expecting a pickup of about 2/3 in NY with 2 more in NV.

Probably 1 pickup each in WA, AR, WI, MN, WV, AZ and NH.

[Dgov]

Republicans will hold MN-8--they'll just trade the Iron range with MN-7 for some Republican parts of West MN.

Illinois--the Reason the Republicans have a majority of the seats there is because they hold all the marginal seats around the Chicago Burbs and all but one of the downstate districts.  Democrats have 1 congressional district not overwhelmingly in Cook county (East St. Louis district), but they win those districts by such a huge margin it basically carries the rest of the state.

PA and OH--See the redistricting thread.  Democrats are more likely to actually lose a seat in both states due to reapportionment and Republican gerrymanders.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Republicans will hold MN-8--they'll just trade the Iron range with MN-7 for some Republican parts of West MN.

Not going to happen with Dayton holding the veto stamp. Minnesota's map is probably going to end up being drawn by the courts, and I doubt they would radically change the map like you're suggesting.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You forget that Dgov lives in a fantasy world of his own creation.

[Dgov]

Republicans will hold MN-8--they'll just trade the Iron range with MN-7 for some Republican parts of West MN.

Not going to happen with Dayton holding the veto stamp. Minnesota's map is probably going to end up being drawn by the courts, and I doubt they would radically change the map like you're suggesting.

Yeah it is--it makes Peterson much safer by taking him out of a McCain District and ensuring that democrats can hold his seat if he retires (which is now only 2 points less Republican than Bachmann's MN-6).  It's also a much more logical geographic fit (Moorhead to Duluth) than the current map which ties the Iron range down with some Republican-leaning St. Paul Exurbs.  The whole reason it was drawn that way in the first place was to try to protect both Peterson and Oberstar in their North-MN districts, which is both no longer needed and no longer possible given that Republicans control the MN legislature.

Its not like this is some nakedly partisan gerrymandering--its actually making the map cleaner and safer for both parties.

[they don't love you like i love you]

The Democrats have no reason to care about shoring up Peterson, he obviously has that seat as long as he wants it. He could retire perhaps, but a 5-3 map with him that'll likely go 4-4 upon retirement is preferable to a solid 4-4 map. Also put Duluth in Peterson's seat and he most likely gets primaried, even ignoring ideology people from Duluth don't want to be represented by someone from a place where North Dakota is associated with urban city life anymore than they want to be represented by someone from the exurbs.

[Dgov]

The Democrats have no reason to care about shoring up Peterson, he obviously has that seat as long as he wants it. He could retire perhaps, but a 5-3 map with him that'll likely go 4-4 upon retirement is preferable to a solid 4-4 map. Also put Duluth in Peterson's seat and he most likely gets primaried, even ignoring ideology people from Duluth don't want to be represented by someone from a place where North Dakota is associated with urban city life anymore than they want to be represented by someone from the exurbs.

. . . Do you honestly think Dayton will veto a map over one provision that will probably be included in a court-drawn map anyway?  Its not like the Democrats have control over the redistricting process like they did last time and are merely debating the benefits of moving it or not--they're going to get a take-it-or-leave-it map, where the "leaving it" option will probably wind up being similar to the Republican map anyway.

[bgwah]

Democrats will gerrymander the hell out of Illinois. I'm expecting at least a pickup of 3 seats in IL.

I'm expecting a pickup of about 2/3 in NY with 2 more in NV.

Probably 1 pickup each in WA, AR, WI, MN, WV, AZ and NH.

Would states like WA, NV, and AZ really be pickups? They're probably seats already held by the Democrats, they just happen to be located in different states at the moment.

[Dgov]

The Democrats have no reason to care about shoring up Peterson, he obviously has that seat as long as he wants it. He could retire perhaps, but a 5-3 map with him that'll likely go 4-4 upon retirement is preferable to a solid 4-4 map. Also put Duluth in Peterson's seat and he most likely gets primaried, even ignoring ideology people from Duluth don't want to be represented by someone from a place where North Dakota is associated with urban city life anymore than they want to be represented by someone from the exurbs.

. . . Do you honestly think Dayton will veto a map over one provision that will probably be included in a court-drawn map anyway?  Its not like the Democrats have control over the redistricting process like they did last time and are merely debating the benefits of moving it or not--they're going to get a take-it-or-leave-it map, where the "leaving it" option will probably wind up being similar to the Republican map anyway.

Actually, let me comment on this one a bit more.  From my limited understanding of Minnesota demographics, I believe that a Duluth to MN-exurbs district is not as demographically coherent as a Duluth-Moorhead district.  I don't really understand why it would be the other way around, but if there's something I'm missing please tell me, cause you can't draw a district from Duluth that doesn't include at least one of those two areas (without ugly gerrymandering)

[they don't love you like i love you]

It's kind of silly to expect a court to draw a Republican gerrymander over basically just keeping a map that was already drawn by a court last time.

[Miles]

Democrats will gerrymander the hell out of Illinois. I'm expecting at least a pickup of 3 seats in IL.

I'm expecting a pickup of about 2/3 in NY with 2 more in NV.

Probably 1 pickup each in WA, AR, WI, MN, WV, AZ and NH.

Would states like WA, NV, and AZ really be pickups? They're probably seats already held by the Democrats, they just happen to be located in different states at the moment.

WA wouldn't be a "pickup", you're right.

In Nevada, Dems will gain a Las Vegas seat plus NV-02 if the Republicans nominate Angle.

Democrats could pickup AZ-01 with Kirkpatrick.

[DrScholl]

Regarding Minnesota, Peterson needs zero protection and the Democrats would have a shot at retaining it in the event of his retirement, as an agrarian Democrat could win it. Dayton would never sign a map that made MN-8 safe Republican nor should he even consider it.

[cinyc]

I'm expecting a pickup of about 2/3 in NY with 2 more in NV.

Gross or net?  New York is losing 2 seats.  Downstate Democrats will lose one seat for sure when the new map is drawn.  Upstate Republicans will likely lose the other seat.  That leaves you with 6 Republicans - King in NY-03, Grimm in NY-13, Hayworth in NY-19, Gibson in NY-20, and two of Hanna in NY-24, Buerkle in NY-25 and Reed in NY-29.  (It would 7 Republicans if Corwin wins the NY-26 special election. - 7 out of 27 post-redistricting seats)  

Which 2 or 3 of those 6 or 7 are Republicans going to lose in 2012?  New York State Senate Republicans will try their hardest to shore up the districts held with Republican voters, which shouldn't be too hard since they only have 6 or 7 seats to shore up, and all but NY-25 are traditionally Republican districts with R+ PVIs.

New York Republicans are not overstretched.  If anything, the 2010 election reverted representation back to the norm.  2006 and 2008 were the aberrations.

[Miles]

Yeah, maybe I was being to ambitious.

The obvious target would be Buerkle.

If I had to chose 1 other potential pickup, I'd say Hanna in the 24th.

[cinyc]

Yeah, maybe I was being to ambitious.

The obvious target would be Buerkle.

If I had to chose 1 other potential pickup, I'd say Hanna in the 24th.

Before Lee decided to post quasi-pornographic pictures of himself on Craigslist, conventional wisdom was that Buerkle would be redistricted out of her seat.  Now, it's not as clear, but if Corwin wins the special election, I still think she'll be the odd Upstate Republican out.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

I'd figure Corwin would have a better shot at retaining a seat, since she's in the Assembly. Friends that could influence redistricting and all.

[cinyc]

I'd figure Corwin would have a better shot at retaining a seat, since she's in the Assembly. Friends that could influence redistricting and all.

Assembly Republicans are pretty powerless, but if Corwin were smart, she wouldn't have run in the special election without getting assurances from state Senate Republicans that they wouldn't redistrict her out of a job.

Carving up NY-25 makes the most sense because parts of the Syracuse area could be used to shore up Democrats in NY-23 and the rest could shore up the remaining Republicans in Central and Western New York.   Carving up NY-26 doesn't seem to help Democrats much at all.

[Jordan Gwendolyn]

I think with Minnesota, they should draw Peterson from Detroit Lakes down the I-94 corridor to the MN exurbs. Yes, it will make it more Republican, but hey, Peterson is a closet Republican.

That way, we can create an Iron Range-Reservations-Moorhead Northern seat where Chip Cravaack would likely lose.

[Dgov]

I think with Minnesota, they should draw Peterson from Detroit Lakes down the I-94 corridor to the MN exurbs. Yes, it will make it more Republican, but hey, Peterson is a closet Republican.

That way, we can create an Iron Range-Reservations-Moorhead Northern seat where Chip Cravaack would likely lose.

Cravaack lives in the MN exurbs part of the district, so he'd be running against Peterson under that sort of map.  Also, Republicans hold both chambers in the MN Legislature, so i don't think they're going to draw a D Gerrymander

[TheGlobalizer]

@OP: Union country.

Everywhere else favors the GOP, unless Dems succeed in scaring the bejesus out of grandma.

[freepcrusher]

@OP: Union country.

Everywhere else favors the GOP, unless Dems succeed in scaring the bejesus out of grandma.

not true at all, especially if Obama wins by 10-15 points. I could see the northern head of AZ 5 being chopped off and Harry Mitchell running again (although he will be 72 in 2012)

[Jordan Gwendolyn]

I think with Minnesota, they should draw Peterson from Detroit Lakes down the I-94 corridor to the MN exurbs. Yes, it will make it more Republican, but hey, Peterson is a closet Republican.

That way, we can create an Iron Range-Reservations-Moorhead Northern seat where Chip Cravaack would likely lose.

Cravaack lives in the MN exurbs part of the district, so he'd be running against Peterson under that sort of map.  Also, Republicans hold both chambers in the MN Legislature, so i don't think they're going to draw a D Gerrymander

Well, I would draw Chisago into the 8th, thus making it the only exurban county, pretty much everything north of there is Iron Range.

[TheGlobalizer]

@OP: Union country.

Everywhere else favors the GOP, unless Dems succeed in scaring the bejesus out of grandma.

not true at all, especially if Obama wins by 10-15 points. I could see the northern head of AZ 5 being chopped off and Harry Mitchell running again (although he will be 72 in 2012)

Well, sure.  If the South goes communist, the GOP will probably struggle to hold the House, too.