CA-11

[Хahar 🤔]

http://www.k4a.net/

Website of one of the candidates. Look at all the black text at the bottom designed to gain hits.
Interestingly, though, Andal and McNerney are the only registered candidates.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I think he may skate by in 2008, but he is one of those Democratic Congressman that is probably secretly hoping McCain wins so 2010 wont be a bad midterm year where he would likely lose. 

The problem with this is that whomever assumes the Presidency in January 2009 will be "fortunate" enough to inherit a terrible, 1982-esque economic situation that will likely be either resolved or in the process of being resolved by November 2010.

I don't think there's going to be a whole heck of a lot of benefit to being the party opposing the president in 2010.  It may be more of a neutral 1990-esque environment.

[Mr.Phips]

I think he may skate by in 2008, but he is one of those Democratic Congressman that is probably secretly hoping McCain wins so 2010 wont be a bad midterm year where he would likely lose. 

The problem with this is that whomever assumes the Presidency in January 2009 will be "fortunate" enough to inherit a terrible, 1982-esque economic situation that will likely be either resolved or in the process of being resolved by November 2010.

I don't think there's going to be a whole heck of a lot of benefit to being the party opposing the president in 2010.  It may be more of a neutral 1990-esque environment.

1990 was actually a fairly Democratic year.  The only reason why Democrats picked up only eight seats in the House that year was because they already had 260 seats, leaving almost no more seats for them to pick up from Republicans. 

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I think he may skate by in 2008, but he is one of those Democratic Congressman that is probably secretly hoping McCain wins so 2010 wont be a bad midterm year where he would likely lose. 

The problem with this is that whomever assumes the Presidency in January 2009 will be "fortunate" enough to inherit a terrible, 1982-esque economic situation that will likely be either resolved or in the process of being resolved by November 2010.

I don't think there's going to be a whole heck of a lot of benefit to being the party opposing the president in 2010.  It may be more of a neutral 1990-esque environment.

1990 was actually a fairly Democratic year.  The only reason why Democrats picked up only eight seats in the House that year was because they already had 260 seats, leaving almost no more seats for them to pick up from Republicans. 

And Democrats aren't going to be overloaded with vulnerable seats going in to 2010?  Especially if 2008 is decent enough so that people like McNerney scrounge their way to a second term?

[Mr.Phips]

I think he may skate by in 2008, but he is one of those Democratic Congressman that is probably secretly hoping McCain wins so 2010 wont be a bad midterm year where he would likely lose. 

The problem with this is that whomever assumes the Presidency in January 2009 will be "fortunate" enough to inherit a terrible, 1982-esque economic situation that will likely be either resolved or in the process of being resolved by November 2010.

I don't think there's going to be a whole heck of a lot of benefit to being the party opposing the president in 2010.  It may be more of a neutral 1990-esque environment.

1990 was actually a fairly Democratic year.  The only reason why Democrats picked up only eight seats in the House that year was because they already had 260 seats, leaving almost no more seats for them to pick up from Republicans. 

And Democrats aren't going to be overloaded with vulnerable seats going in to 2010?  Especially if 2008 is decent enough so that people like McNerney scrounge their way to a second term?

Depends on how 2008 goes. 

[Хahar 🤔]

The way I see it, if McCain wins, McNerney is defeated in 2008. If Obama wins, McNerney hangs on to 2010, where he has a hard fight. If he wins then, he's defeated in 2014.

[Mr.Phips]

The way I see it, if McCain wins, McNerney is defeated in 2008. If Obama wins, McNerney hangs on to 2010, where he has a hard fight. If he wins then, he's defeated in 2014.

If McNerney gets through 2010 he is likely to get a pretty solid Dem seat from redistricting. 

[Хahar 🤔]

The way I see it, if McCain wins, McNerney is defeated in 2008. If Obama wins, McNerney hangs on to 2010, where he has a hard fight. If he wins then, he's defeated in 2014.

If McNerney gets through 2010 he is likely to get a pretty solid Dem seat from redistricting. 

Oops. Forgot about that. They'll give him the Tauscher treatment, I suppose.

[Verily]

I think he may skate by in 2008, but he is one of those Democratic Congressman that is probably secretly hoping McCain wins so 2010 wont be a bad midterm year where he would likely lose. 

The problem with this is that whomever assumes the Presidency in January 2009 will be "fortunate" enough to inherit a terrible, 1982-esque economic situation that will likely be either resolved or in the process of being resolved by November 2010.

I don't think there's going to be a whole heck of a lot of benefit to being the party opposing the president in 2010.  It may be more of a neutral 1990-esque environment.

1990 was actually a fairly Democratic year.  The only reason why Democrats picked up only eight seats in the House that year was because they already had 260 seats, leaving almost no more seats for them to pick up from Republicans. 

And Democrats aren't going to be overloaded with vulnerable seats going in to 2010?  Especially if 2008 is decent enough so that people like McNerney scrounge their way to a second term?

It is possible that a holdover seat from 2006, especially one that is not really a top GOP target given candidate recruitment and moderate partisan score (R+3, right?), especially in a state with a weak Republican Party, will be overlooked or ignored in 2010. Comparable cases on the GOP side exist right here in New Jersey, although now that it's open NJ-03 will see a contest.

But we don't really know what 2010 will be like; if the Democrats are again flush with cash and the Republicans financially struggling, a two-term incumbent will look much less appealing than a one-term incumbent, but if the reverse is true a stronger challenge may be made.

[Sbane]

I think Mcnerney will hold his large advantage here in Pleasanton and the whole tri valley region of the bay area. Where he needs to win again is in Tracy and hold his own in the suburbs around stockton and lodi. He did it in 06 in large part due to Bush but what may save him now is the subprime mortgage mess. I hear the stockton area has been hit very hard and many cannot even sell their homes and have to walk away. Thus playing up economics around here just may save him. As for a good gerrymander we have ca-09 just across the hill full of democratic votes that can merge with the tri valley to create another safe dem district. Especially if the Oakland hills is merged with the tri valley it will create a perfect district for a socially liberal and fiscally moderate democrat.

[cannonia]

Andal will do best in the Stockton/Lodi area.

It's too bad Doug Ose isn't running in this district, though.

[Mr.Phips]

Andal will do best in the Stockton/Lodi area.

It's too bad Doug Ose isn't running in this district, though.

That's probably the only part of the district Andal will carry.  Whether it is enough to win remains to be seen, since San Joquain county does cast about half of the district's votes.  If McNerney can make it past 2010, he will likely be relieved of the most heavily Republican parts of SanJoquain and given some heavily minority territory to the west. 

[Sbane]

Andal will do best in the Stockton/Lodi area.

It's too bad Doug Ose isn't running in this district, though.

That's probably the only part of the district Andal will carry.  Whether it is enough to win remains to be seen, since San Joquain county does cast about half of the district's votes.  If McNerney can make it past 2010, he will likely be relieved of the most heavily Republican parts of SanJoquain and given some heavily minority territory to the west. 

Tracy is a very important city in san joaquin county which increasingly has more in common with the bay area than the central valley. It is a relatively big city, about 80000+, and it is totally in the district. If Mcnerney does well in Tracy in combination with the bay area parts he could win. Castro valley and the Oakland Hills would be the perfect combination with the tri valley and Tracy. That could be a nice gerrymander for mcnerney.

[Хahar 🤔]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

[Mr.Phips]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

[Хahar 🤔]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

Gerrymandering in California is bipartisan and designed to favor incumbents.

[Mr.Phips]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

Gerrymandering in California is bipartisan and designed to favor incumbents.

That's generally not true.  In 2002 Democrats draw the lines to protect incumbents because they had more of them in tough seats to defend.  The only states where gerrymandering is bipartisan are in Washington, Arizona, New Jersey, and Iowa. 

[troosvelt]

I just don't see Andal winning this one.

I don't care for McNerney but Andal is even worse. I seriously debated entering the primary against Andal but knew I had no chance and didn't want to be a victim of the Parson attack machine. (those who live in the area know what I mean)

[cannonia]

Well, it's too early to write Andal off.  He will have a very tough race, though.

McCain on the top of the ticket should help him.  McCain is well-liked in California, and he should not turn off moderates (or Hispanics).  Also, if McCain makes a credible argument on Iraq, it may neutralize the issue down-ticket.

The San Joaquin part of the district overlaps with another very competitive race, the 5th State Senate district.  The Democrat in this race will be Lois Wolk, former mayor of Davis.  She should prove to be very unpopular in the southern part of the 5th District.  The Republican in the race is Greg Aghazarian, also from Stockton.

The Governator could also help the Republicans in these races.  He won every part of this district by wide margins.  Will he campaign or raise money for these races?  If he can swing any elections in the state, these would be the two to try.

And any of these could backfire.  McCain could shoot his mouth off and turn off Republican voters.  The other races overlapping with the district could energize Democrats.  And as has happened in the past (with ballot measures), Schwarzenegger's endorsement could be a kiss of death.

[Хahar 🤔]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

Gerrymandering in California is bipartisan and designed to favor incumbents.

That's generally not true.  In 2002 Democrats draw the lines to protect incumbents because they had more of them in tough seats to defend.  The only states where gerrymandering is bipartisan are in Washington, Arizona, New Jersey, and Iowa. 

I'm just going by what Wikipedia (which is never wrong) says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California%27s_congressional_districts#Bi-partisan_Gerrymandering

[cannonia]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

Gerrymandering in California is bipartisan and designed to favor incumbents.

That's generally not true.  In 2002 Democrats draw the lines to protect incumbents because they had more of them in tough seats to defend.  The only states where gerrymandering is bipartisan are in Washington, Arizona, New Jersey, and Iowa. 

I'm just going by what Wikipedia (which is never wrong) says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California%27s_congressional_districts#Bi-partisan_Gerrymandering

Yes, the 2002 redistricting was a bipartisan scheme to protect incumbents.  The Legislature wanted to protect their own jobs and to provide safe districts to move up to.  The Republicans wanted to avoid having their districts redrawn to be more Democratic.  The Democrats were still alarmed by losing 3 House seats and the state Assembly in 1994, and Vic Fazio's House seat in 1996.  The current districts are a job security plan, and that shows since all the scandals in California's Republican House delegation only cost the party this one seat.

[minionofmidas]

In the case that Andal won, how would this seat be gerrymandered for him?

It would likely be gerrymandered to get rid of him or possibly place him in the same district as Rick Randovich.  Democrats are likely to control redistricting here and California is one of the few big states that they control. 

Gerrymandering in California is bipartisan and designed to favor incumbents.

That's generally not true.  In 2002 Democrats draw the lines to protect incumbents because they had more of them in tough seats to defend.  The only states where gerrymandering is bipartisan are in Washington, Arizona, New Jersey, and Iowa. 

Someone is confusing gerrymandering with redistricting, bipartisan with nonpartisan and New Jersey with Arkansas. Hard to make many more such obvious mistakes in three lines.

I hope you were under the influence when you wrote that.

[Хahar 🤔]

Bump. Heard another anti-McNerney ad.

[Sbane]

Bump. Heard another anti-McNerney ad.

Hey man where do you live? I guess my parents and you share a CD. Anyways how is the competition you think? Isn't it some no name from Stockton? I really wonder how he plays in Tracy and Brentwood. That is where the election will be decided.

[Хahar 🤔]

Bump. Heard another anti-McNerney ad.

Hey man where do you live? I guess my parents and you share a CD. Anyways how is the competition you think? Isn't it some no name from Stockton? I really wonder how he plays in Tracy and Brentwood. That is where the election will be decided.

Live right by Cupertino, in the 15th. You're right about Andal, but he's a weak candidate. If this is all the GOP can muster, it's really in bad shape.