2010 House Election Predictions Seem to Ignore Something...

[JohnnyLongtorso]

The only predictions I have seen are the GOP gaining 5 to 10 seats from some of the Highly GOP territory they lost like ID-01, CO-04, MS-01, VA-05, NM seat held by Pearce(Hispanics would be important here.) and maybe 1 or 2 suprises like ME-01.

The Republicans would win a House majority before they knocked off Chellie Pingree next year.  She won an open seat in 2008 by 9.80% (54.90% to 45.10%) against an opponent, 2004 nominee, 1994 primary candidate and 1990-1994 State Senator Charlie Summers, who was definitely not a wingnut (the person he defeated in the primary could have been spun as one, although I don't think he was although he was an unappologetic conservative).  It doesn't matter (in terms of gauging Pingree's vulnerability going forward) that Summers was probably grossly underfunded.  She won by 10% (the "mainstream media" coverage will almost certainly round the percentages in her last election to the nearest percent) and will be running as an incumbent in a district Obama got 61% in (really only 60.52% but again the mainstream media will likely round up).  Yeah she's a liberal who will probably vote for almost every if not every Democratic bill that the party whips its members on that would not be popular even in this district (I live in ME-01, a couple towns away from the nearest town in ME-02), but most voters won't have that in their mind (if they've ever been aware of it) when they go to vote on November 2, 2010 or earlier by absentee ballot.  Whoever challenges her (I haven't heard of any challengers to her so far, while Mike Michaud actually does have a challenger, although he seems like an "I'm a superior person" ass (see second post) without the je ne sais quoi of Michaud's 2008 opponent that made that worthwhile for a spectator of the race) will likely have even less money than Summers did last year while Pingree will be loaded with cash (she was dating a hedge fund manager who has been a major contributer to her and to the Maine Democratic Party in 2008 - a reporter for a local alternative weekly followed her on the state primary election night to help break the story - and I haven't heard anything about them splitting up).  I'm not saying she could never be unseated (Maine's first district tossed out a four-term Democratic incumbent in 1974), but there's too much of a new car smell for that to happen next year.

This seems to be based on the assumption that she is safe because she won't face a strong candidate, though if she did she would be vulnerable. I tend to be wary of this, not least because term-limits ensures she will face a half-decent foe a number of times. Secondly, there are decent people looking at the race, ones who could easily outraise Summers(who was rightly not a joke, but was a has-been).

Do you think Charlie Cook was right to rate LA-04 (where Republican John C. Flemming, Jr., defeated Democrat Paul J. Carmouche by 350 votes (0.38%)) as a tossup for 2010 in the immediate aftermath of that delayed general election?  I know you're not saying ME-01 is a tossup but ME-01 wasn't as close in the last election and I think the same dynamic is at play.  You can't turn back time.

Also, Tom Allen's greatest percentage margin of victory (29.52%, the second greatest being 27.61% in 2002 against a challenger with no major (if any) political experience) and his second greatest percentage of the vote (60.84%, compared to 63.81% in 2002) was in 2006 against a moderate third-term State Representative (who had been a lead supporter of the well publicised "Tina's Law" cracking down on those driving with a suspended license) with the only other candidate in the race being an anti-war Independent running to Allen's left.

I'll take back my statement that the Republicans would win a House majority before they defeated Chellie Pingree next year, but I think they would have a better chance of picking up or holding enough other seats (worded that way so as not to include LA-02 ) that if they won all of them they would have a majority.

'

I think Charlie Cook made the right decision in rating LA-4 because it is a traditionally Republican seat with an incumbent who has done nothing wrong. Had alternatively Frank Harris won MD-1 instead of lost it by 1000 votes, and had McCain won the election and now had his approval ratings heading south fast, I would probably agree with a decision to keep that see vulnerable not because of the nature of the district but because Frank Harris would keep that seat competitive. Ditto for the decision to keep a focus on Sali in 2008.

That said this is not an argument for Pingree being imminently vulnerable. It is an argument that she is just the sort of incumbent in just the sort of seat that is likely to be in trouble in a 1994 type situation. There are obviously a dozen and probably two dozen Democrats in more vulnerable seats, but she is far more vulnerable than a Heath Shuler, or I would argue a Brad Ellsworth despite them being in much worse districts.

Right now I would have the seat labeled as likely democrat. If Steve Abbott or maybe even Peter Cianchette got in that would change fast.

Pingree isnt going anywhere, even in a 1994 style environment.  This is a seat that even John freakin Kerry won by 55%-43%.  If a Republican did manage to win it, they would likely lose it again in 2012 due to the drag of the Presidental ticket(like they did in 1996).

Well, a Republican did win the open 1st district in 1994 but got trounced by Tom Allen (then the mayor of Portland) in 1996.

Regardless, I agree with your assessment. Open seats are almost always more competitive than elections with incumbents, so Pingree will probably settle into the 60% area that Allen got in all of his re-election bids. It's like the open seat in Hawaii -- if Charles Djou picks it up, it means the Democrats are getting run out on a rail anyway.