Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Live Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.
Pres-by-CD: We're closing the books on two states today, Oregon and Utah.

Oregon (OR-02 and OR-04)

Utah (UT-02 through UT-04)

What more can we say here, other than which life of his nine is Dem Rep. Jim Matheson on? He hung on in a 30 percent Obama district. Incidentally, Rocky Ridge precinct in Juab County is a contender for the Republican-voting foil to the South Bronx; Romney outpolled Obama there 170-3! ..with 20 votes going to third-party candidates. (At the CD-level, GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz's UT-03, where Obama didn't clear 20 percent, takes the cake so far.)

In addition, we have statewide results from North Carolina, another fierce GOP gerrymander, but we're not quite closing the books just yet. With the exception of Dem Mike McIntyre (who holds a 40 percent Obama district), the other three Dem-held seats are all 70 percent-plus Obama while all the other districts have Obama mired in the high-30s to mid-40s. It's no surprise that the Republicans managed to flip both NC-08 and NC-11, at 41-58 and 38-61 margins, respectively.

Looking ahead, Dems may find the best opportunities in NC-09 (where Dem Jennifer Roberts kept the margin against Rob Pittenger in this 56 percent Romney open seat to a respectable 6 points), and NC-13, which at 44 percent Obama is the most hospitable district after the three Dem-held vote sinks.

These results rely on an allocation formula for early (one-stop) votes and absentees in some counties. This issue is particularly profound in Dem-heavy counties that did not allocate their early votes to precincts; these one-stops make up 74 percent of total votes in Durham County, 70 percent in Orange County (Chapel Hill), and 60 percent in Wake County. (You can view the unallocated share on the "Table" tab. It's ok, I'm not offended that no one would otherwise look at that.)

We've applied the very same formula in other states, but the sheer number of early votes needing allocating in North Carolina is noteworthy: more than 900,000 votes were allocated this way (out of about 4.5 million cast), or almost 20 percent. We have confidence in our formulas, but when the base dataset (i.e., allocated precinct votes) is dwarfed in size by the data needing allocation (i.e., the unallocated one-stops and absentees), the sensitivity of the method increases substantially (and the robustness decreases somewhat). (We discussed the allocation formula in greater detail here.) We will update our numbers as appropriate once more detailed data are available, but none of this changes the fact that the map here is quite the powerful gerrymander.

All of this makes for another 18 districts, bringing us to 266. Data challenges are the hardest part of this process, so once again, thanks to all of you who have given us/pointed us to the right data. (jeffmd)

8:39 AM PT: NJ-Gov: Democrats have their first candidate to take on GOP Gov. Chris Christie: state Sen. Barbara Buono, who has served in the legislature for almost two decades. She's described herself as a "progressive" and promises that she won't run "a conventional campaign," which could mean anything from "I won't hold back in sticking it to Christie" to "I don't expect to raise a lot of money." Buono's filed paperwork for her bid and says she'll make "a formal announcement early next year." That would give her a bit of an escape hatch if, say, a big gun like Newark Mayor Cory Booker decides to get in at the last minute. She also has a welcome video you can watch here.

8:53 AM PT: SC-Sen-B: Either this is one of those "authorized" leaks, or someone in Nikki Haley's inner circle is soon gonna find him or herself booted out of it. CNN reports that South Carolina's Republican governor has narrowed down her list of possible replacements for outgoing Sen. Jim DeMint to five finalists: Reps. Tim Scott and Trey Gowdy, former state AG Henry McMaster, former South Carolina First Lady Jenny Sanford, and state Dept. of Health chief Catherine Templeton. All those names had been circulated widely except for Templeton, who is apparently tight with Haley. There's still no timetable for a selection, though.

9:02 AM PT: P.S. This additional little detail is great—in an utterly "wow, she's cold-blooded" way:

Notably absent from the list is Rep. Mick Mulvaney, who boasted to Politico earlier this week that he was "obviously" being considered for the DeMint seat despite a history of tension between him and the governor.

9:21 AM PT: House: I just thought that this detail, buried in a much longer New York Times piece about fiscal cliff negotiations, was worth flagging:

House Democratic candidates won about 50.5 percent of the national vote in November, but took just 46 percent of the seats. In the last 40 years, only one other time—1996—did the party that won the majority of the votes end up with a minority of the House, said Nicholas Goedert, a political science researcher at Washington University in St. Louis in Missouri.

9:37 AM PT: SC-Gov: While all eyes are on GOP Gov. Nikki Haley as she chooses a replacement for resigning Sen. Jim DeMint, don't forget that she has a re-election battle of her own to deal with in two years' time. As is their wont, PPP has the first numbers of the cycle pitting Haley against the man she narrowly edged by just four points two years ago, Democratic state Sen. Vincent Sheheen. Now Sheheen's on top, 46-44, in a potential rematch, even though more than half of all voters don't even have an opinion of him. That's quite worrisome for Haley, who sports a weak 42-49 job approval rating herself.

And it also looks like the GOP will be stuck with her: By a 53-37 margin, Republicans want her as their nominee once more. Moreover, in hypothetical primary matchups against Lt. Gov. Glenn McConnell and state Treasurer Curtis Loftis, Haley absolutely crushes (58-26 and 66-18, respectively). I don't know if anyone's talked seriously about taking her out in a primary, but numbers like these aren't very encouraging. That's probably good news for Sheheen: He beats Loftis 46-37 and McConnell 44-41, suggesting he has a pretty high natural floor against Haley but might fare worse against a less damaged opponent.

P.S. You may recall last week's poll from Winthrop University that gave Obama a hard-to-believe 48-41 approval rating in South Carolina. PPP finds him with a much more down-to-earth score of 44-53.

10:02 AM PT: SC-Sen-A: Jim who? Pundits and prognosticators may be focused on the DeMint saga, but South Carolina's other senator, Lindsey Graham, has to worry about his own re-election fight. Yet while Graham might at one point have looked like the Republican most vulnerable to a primary challenge, PPP's new numbers suggest that title may now belong to Georgia's Saxby Chambliss. Among Republican primary voters, Graham earns a healthy 66-26 job approval rating, and against Republican Jesus (aka "somebody more conservative"), Graham actually leads 51-40—up from 37-52 in January of 2011. And he does even better against real human beings:

• 54-32 vs. Rep. Tim Scott

• 57-29 vs. Rep. Trey Gowdy

• 64-26 vs. ex-Gov. Mark Sanford

• 64-20 vs. Rep. Mick Mulvaney

• 67-17 vs. state Sen. Tom Davis

You have to wonder if Graham (who has lately turned himself into an utter jerkass over the U.S. embassy attack in Libya) will manage to re-invent himself the way Utah's Orrin Hatch did. Unlikely Dick Lugar, Graham seems to understand that the most important way to make yourself appreciated by conservative primary voters is to vocally express your disgust and hatred for Democrats all the live-long day. That may well be enough to rehabilitate his image and ward off a serious challenge from the right—we'll just have to see.

11:23 AM PT: NC-Sen: Tuesday saw PPP serve up helpings from both Carolinas, North and South, and the early numbers in the Tarheel State look pretty good for Dem Sen. Kay Hagan. Despite a mediocre 44-43 job approval rating, she leads all comers:

• 45-44 vs. retiring Rep. Sue Myrick

• 45-39 vs. Rep. Renee Ellmers

• 48-40 vs. Rep. Patrick McHenry

• 48-39 vs. Rep.-elect George Holding

• 49-39 vs. Rep. Virginia Foxx

• 48-38 vs. state House Speaker Thom Tillis

Hagan will likely be a top target for Republicans, given her status as a freshman holding a seat in still-red North Carolina. But the question is, who's gonna give her a challenge? To that end, PPP also took look at a kitchen-sink primary:

Virginia Foxx: 17

Sue Myrick: 14

Patrick McHenry: 13

Renee Ellmers: 11

George Holding: 9

Richard Hudson: 6

Mark Meadows: 4

Thom Tillis: 2

Other/undecided: 25

Right now, no one's putting up big numbers, but it would really be a hell of a thing if the absolutely lunatic Foxx (who also happens to be 69 years old) somehow ran for Senate and came away with the GOP nomination. Myrick, at 71, is even older, and I'm not sure why Tom Jensen's including her, since she just retired from the House. McHenry might be the closest thing to an establishment choice—well, except for Tillis, whom Tom says "essentially been running for this seat for the last two years" yet still puts up "humiliating" numbers. Hudson and Meadows, like Holding, are also two new incoming congressmen, but Holding (the guy who launched the failed prosecution of John Edwards) seems to be the most ambitious.

The reality is that despite Republican dominance at most levels of North Carolina politics, this is not an impressive list. (I mean, any list which includes the flukey and flakey Renee Ellmers is simply not going to be impressive.) But remember that Hagan was an unknown state senator when she managed to topple the well-known Elizabeth Dole back in 2008, so the GOP might pull a candidate from obscurity who turns out to be stronger than you'd expect.

11:58 AM PT: KY-Sen: Tuesday was a busy day for PPP, with three new Senate polls in three Southern states (see NC and SC below), and Tom Jensen's writeup of Kentucky starts with a real bang: "Mitch McConnell is the most unpopular Senator in the country." But despite his terrible 37-55 job approval rating, he'll be hard to beat, thanks to his home state's very red demographics. Here's how McConnell fares against a variety of potential challengers:

• 47-43 vs. actress Ashley Judd

• 47-43 vs. AG Jack Conway

• 47-43 vs. Lt. Gov. Jerry Abramson

• 46-41 vs. Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer

• 47-40 vs. SoS Alison Lundergan Grimes

• 48-38 vs. Rep. John Yarmuth

• 48-37 vs. former Ambassador Matthew Barzun

• 48-36 vs. Auditor Adam Edelen

As you can see, despite the fact that Democrats have a number of prominent possible candidates, McConnell's already at 46-48 percent against all of them. That puts him awfully close to victory, given that most undecided voters in a state like Kentucky are going to lean Republican. Of course, a sustained negative campaign could tear McConnell down, but any Democrat who takes the plunge will face a ton of incoming fire themselves.

And while we don't yet know if any big name will try to defeat McConnell, PPP does offer a sense of who Democratic primary voters like, tossing all these names into one big pile:

Judd: 29

Abramson: 16

Conway: 15

Grimes: 9

Yarmuth: 9

Fischer: 5

Edelen 2

Barzun: 0

Undecided/other: 15

I should note that Conway, Abramson, and Yarmuth have all declined, so the loyalties of a good 40 percent of this sample will have to get split up elsewhere at some point. Judd's strength is interesting: It seems to be based in part on her strong name recognition (she's the best-known Democrat), but Jensen also notes that she's "a particularly popular choice among young voters and those describing themselves as 'very liberal.'" She's also simply the most popular at 57-24, with only Conway (53-22) coming close in terms of favorability.

But if Judd wound up as the party's nominee, though, it could cause some serious awkwardness as a number of establishment Dems have already talked down a Judd bid publicly on account of her opposition to mountaintop removal coal mining. Indeed, PPP's primary sample gives you a sense of just how unusual the Democratic primary electorate is in Kentucky: Over a quarter supports McConnell! So while Judd performs as well as anyone in (these very early) general election matchups, she'd probably have the toughest time consolidating conservative Democrats behind her in a real campaign.

In any event, as I say, we're still waiting for someone to jump in—and give McConnell's already-enormous warchest of almost $7 million, sooner is much better than later.

12:19 PM PT: Heritage: Does anyone believe Jim DeMint when he says he won't get involved in GOP primaries for the 2014 cycle as chief of the Heritage Foundation? He already made a pledge just like that after the 2010 elections—then broke it by donating $500K to the Club for Growth, which played a key role in helping to unseat Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar. DeMint might actually be a bit more handcuffed at Heritage just because he'll now be in debt to his benefactors, and if they clamp down on him, he'll probably have to play along. But I wouldn't be surprised if he found a way to cause trouble, and in any event, his old group, the Senate Conservatives Fund, apparently isn't going anywhere.


12:26 PM PT (David Jarman): Pres-by-LD: Take the problem of the disparity between the overall U.S. House vote and the number of Dem-held House seats, and make it even worse -- and you've gotten a sense of the scope of the problem in many of our states' legislatures, thanks to Republican gains from 2010 getting locked in through gerrymandering. Case in point is Wisconsin: the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel crunched the numbers on the state's Senate and Assembly districts, and found that despite Barack Obama winning the state by 7 points, 17 of 33 state Senate districts and, even worse, 56 of 99 state Assembly districts went for Mitt Romney. In fact, 60 of 99 of the state's Assembly seats are more Republican than the state as a whole.

Of course, part of that isn't gerrymandering at work but the sheer geographic concentration of Democratic votes in Madison and Milwaukee. Still, though, check out their two graphs at the article's bottom, and see how many more districts were either solidly D or R this year, compared with 2008.

One problem with the JS article, though, was that it didn't contain a table with the actual district-by-district data. Well, Wisconsin is one of those nice states that has made all precinct-level data available in one handy place, so we were able to whip up a preliminary spreadsheet with that district data quickly enough, so you can drill down for more specifics. (We hope to eventually do a Pres-by-legislative-district spreadsheet for every state, so let's consider this the first one in the series.) As you can see, nearly half (47 of 99) of the state's Assembly districts fall in that GOP sweet spot of 50%-59% Romney, for maximally effective distribution.

12:42 PM PT (David Jarman): WATN?: Some of our younger readers may have no memory of Wes Cooley, who served in the House for only one term (1995-96), as a Republican representing OR-02, but who frequently appears on lists of all-time worst-ever House members. Perhaps most significant of his many problems at the time was lying about his military service in the state's voter pamphlet, a crime for which he eventually copped a plea and served probation. Well, almost two decades later, Cooley is finally going to prison for a year, though it's for the rather more humdrum charge of hiding income from the IRS.

12:43 PM PT: OH-Gov: Unlike PPP, Quinnipiac tends to wait until later in the cycle to start testing hypothetical head-to-heads, so all we have right now for GOP Gov. John Kasich is a new batch of job approval ratings. Lucky for him, they're the best he's seen in his two years as governor, with 42 percent approving versus 35 percent disapproving. Now, those are hardly great, though they do represent a sizable shift from June's 40-44 score, and a major improvement from his all-time low of 30-46 shortly after taking office.

In better news for Democrats, Kasich's re-elects stand at a weak 36-43, and in a possible sign of discontent, 41 percent of self-identified Republicans say they'd like to see someone challenge Kasich for the GOP nomination, versus 45 percent who wouldn't. Quinnipiac also offers some favorability ratings for various potential Dem challengers, though only ex-Gov. Ted Strickland puts up noteworthy numbers at 41-29. Former state AG (and current Consumer Financial Protection Bureau chief) Richard Cordray is at 19-11, Rep. Tim Ryan 15-10, and Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald 10-5.

12:50 PM PT (David Jarman): Same-sex marriage: You've seen the heartwarming photos, but now it's time to delve into how we were able to get to that point. The Atlantic's Molly Ball has a super-long (it's probably the print issue's cover story) but very interesting piece on how the same-sex marriage movement professionals learned from their mistakes with the Prop 8 campaign in California, and engaged in rigorous message testing and rapid-response techniques that let them outfox the opposition (who, by contrast, ran basically the same campaigns that they ran in 2008).

12:57 PM PT: NJ-Sen: Newark Mayor Cory Booker is still deciding on a possible gubernatorial bid, but now he's also sounding feistier about a potential Senate run as well—and he's even saying he might challenge Sen. Frank Lautenberg in the Democratic primary. Booker did also say, though, that Lautenberg "is a guy that every New Jerseyan—Republican, Democrat, independent—should give respect and gratitude to," and given how handily Lautenberg dispatched his last primary opponent in 2008 (Rep. Rob Andrews, 59-35), Booker might not actually be so eager to face off against him.

1:10 PM PT: Independence Party: In a scathing new editorial, the New York Daily News lacerates the state's Independence Party, calling it a "cult-like band" that "exploits voter deception" right up in the headline. Editorials, though, are cheap and we seldom pay attention to them for that reason—but as you might suspect, this one is a bit different. The News interviewed 200 NYC residents who are members of the Independence Party, finding that 85 percent had no idea they even were enrolled in a political party.

The explanation is simple: When you register to vote in New York, you leave the "party" section blank if you prefer to enroll as an "independent." But—and here's the "exploiting deception" part—thanks to its slippery name, tons of people sign up for the Independence Party, thinking they're marking themselves down as independents. It gets much worse, though:

The Daily News also interviewed 100 registered Independence Party voters who are listed by the Board of Elections as holding positions on Independence Party county committees. By law, these panels are constituted to act as the party’s governing bodies. Members are chosen at the polls in Primary Day elections.

Sixty-four of the supposed committee members said they were surprised to learn that records showed them as serving on the panels, and 23 reported no knowledge of belonging to the Independence Party at all. Party leaders filed official papers stating that the committees had been properly constituted, earning the panels legal standing.

On top of that, the party (such as it is) is riven between upstate and city factions—the former is controlled by a "small-time talent agent" and the latter is run by "followers of the late Fred Newman," a Marxist accused of running a "therapy cult." Unfortunately, the soulless Independence Party isn't showing any signs that it might soon disappear, and as long as Democratic and Republican politicians alike crave its indie-sounding label, it'll probably find a way to keep shambling along like the zombie it is.

1:12 PM PT (David Jarman): Counties: The Washington Post is out with an analysis that attempts to demonstrate that the auto-industry bailout didn't really affect the outcome of the election, seeing as how areas of the midwest with high concentrations of auto plants didn't swing toward or away from Obama in a significantly different manner than other parts of the country. (It doesn't account for the question of how Obama might have performed in midwestern states had the auto bailout not occurred and those states suffered crippling unemployment instead, but, granted, there's no way to run a regression analysis for that.) The money scatterplot comes at the end, and I thought it looked quite similar to the post-election work that our Xenocrypt has been turning out: overwhelmingly, counties performed in 2012 exactly as you'd expect them to perform, based on their 2008 performance... auto plant or not.

1:33 PM PT: MD-Gov: The potential Democratic gubernatorial field in Maryland is already thinning out: State Comptroller Peter Franchot says he'll seek re-election to his current post instead of running for governor. Franchot claims his polling showed him "competitive" but behind Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, who previously released an early survey that (predictably) showed him in the lead. Franchot has long tacked toward the rightward edge of the Maryland Democratic Party, so I wouldn't be surprised if his research found him poorly-positioned to win a primary against a more progressive candidate like Brown.

1:49 PM PT: PA-Gov: Ya know, would it really kill Bob Casey to say something a little more definitive? The latest statement on a possible gubernatorial bid from Pennsylvania's senior senator is just as maddening as anything he's said in the past: "I'm happy with the work I'm doing and I want to stay in the Senate, it's as simple as that." How about just, "No, I am not running for Senate" instead? The Hill even tried to prod him further:

The Hill then asked if it's best to say that he wasn't considering it.

"Right," he said with a laugh. "You actually said it better than I did."

This isn't Clarence Darrow delivering a closing argument that'll spare the unjustly accused a death sentence—it's about a run for office! It's really not that hard. So why is Casey still giggling about it and unable to actually speak the right words aloud? In any event, The Hill is framing this as a clear pronouncement from Casey, but the real test will be whether other Keystone Dems act accordingly—or if we continue to see potential candidates hesitate to enter the race.

1:53 PM PT: P.S. Cameron Joseph also mentions a new name in passing: ex-Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper. I can't really see her as much of a force, though. She served a single term in the House before getting ousted and is also anti-abortion, which would put her firmly at odds with Pennsylvania's Democratic primary electorate.

1:58 PM PT: MN-Gov, MN-Sen: After losing both chambers in the legislature this year and coughing up a House seat as well—just two years after winning them—Minnesota Republicans are back on their heels. They don't have much of a bench, and at a recent party meeting, no one seemed particularly enthused about a possible run for statewide office. A few folks aren't ruling it out, though: Incoming Senate Minority Leader David Hann and Hennepin County Commissioner Jeff Johnson both say they might challenge Dem Gov. Mark Dayton, and state GOP finance chair Bill Guidera says he could do that as well, or run for Senate.

2:02 PM PT: Crossroads: Some of the first spending of the 2014 election is already starting. Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, fresh off a disastrous cycle and hoping for better luck this time, is shelling out $240K on radio ads targeting give Democratic senators over some fiscal cliff malarkey. On the list: Mark Begich (AK), Mary Landrieu (LA), Kay Hagan (NC), Tim Johnson (SD), and Jay Rockefeller (WV).

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)

    Political Director, Daily Kos

    by David Nir on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:00:06 AM PST

  •  NJ Gov: Sen. Buono set to announce tomorrow (5+ / 0-)

    Let all the Bush tax cuts expire

    by Paleo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:43:47 AM PST

  •  PVIs (4+ / 0-)

    I'm inputting the Utah and Oregon data:

    UT-2: R+16 to R+18
    UT-3: R+25 to R+28
    UT-4: R+14 to R+16

    OR-2: R+10 flat
    OR-4: D+2 flat

    North Carolina, which I'm inputting as tentative (red text):

    NC-1: D+17 to D+19
    NC-2: R+11 to R+10
    NC-3: R+10 flat
    NC-4: D+17 to D+20
    NC-5: R+12 to R+11
    NC-6: R+11 to R+10
    NC-7: R+11 to R+12
    NC-8: R+12 to R+11
    NC-9: R+10 to R+8
    NC-10: R+11 flat
    NC-11: R+12 to R+13
    NC-12: D+23 to D+26
    NC-13: R+9 to R+8

    No wonder Pittenger only did so well, given that the district isn't monolithically red anymore (I define that as double digit PVI). His performance will only get stronger though, as the incumbency effect starts to kick in.

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:00:08 AM PST

  •  Republicans located in Philadelphia (13+ / 0-)

    As the count continues:

    Good news for Mitt Romney! Contrary to early vote counts, based solely on computerized returns from Philadelphia's voting machines, he did not get blanked in 59 of the city's 1,687 voting divisions.

    A groundswell of support among people voting by absentee and provisional ballots reduced the number of divisions where Romney received zero votes to 50.

    In addition, the certified results show 99 divisions where Romney was supported by exactly one voter.

  •  NJ-Gov: Here's Buono's announcement video. (7+ / 0-)

    20, Dude, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus! (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren for Senate!

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:07:06 AM PST

  •  PVIs (5+ / 0-)

    The district data that I currently have in the spreadsheet includes slightly more than what the DKE team has, so there might be some discrepancies.

    I've got data for 299 districts, some of which is tentatives.

    Of those, 128 have a D+0 or higher PVI.
    171 have an R+0 or higher PVI.

    These are ordered from highest D+ PVI to lowest:

    There are only two Republicans in a D+ PVI district:
    CA-31, D+5, Miller
    CO-6, D+1, Coffman

    There are fourteen Democrats in R+ PVI districts:
    CA-7, R+0, Bera
    AZ-9, R+1, Sinema
    NH-1, R+1, Shea-Porter
    CA-36, R+1, Ruiz
    FL-26, R+1, Garcia
    MN-1, R+1, Walz
    TX-23, R+3, Gallego
    FL-18, R+3, Murphy
    AZ-2, R+3, Barber
    AZ-1, R+4, Kirkpatrick
    MN-7, R+6, Peterson
    GA-12, R+9, Barrow
    NC-7, R+12, McIntyre
    UT-4, R+16, Matheson

    There are 52 districts between D+4 and R+4, which is a reasonable definition of "swing". Of them, only 17 have a D+ PVI. Of them, Democrats and Republicans hold exactly half each at 26 apiece.

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:20:15 AM PST

    •  Republicans in D+ districts (5+ / 0-)

      In the end there could possibly be four more:

      CA-21
      IL-13
      NJ-02
      NY-19

      I guess all of them will be around D+0 or D+1.

      The most dangerous worldview is the worldview of those who never viewed the world - Alexander von Humboldt

      by germanliberal on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:04:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  IDK (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, lordpet8, MichaelNY

        CA-21 was R+0 in 2008 so Obama would have to exceed his national margin slightly in that district to get it to D+0.

        IL-13 is probably a slam dunk. Obama would have to actually lose the district for it to have an R+ PVI this time (it was D+2 in 2008 numbers alone).

        NJ-2 could go either way. It was D+0 in 2008, so if Obama slipped just slightly more there than nationwide it'll be R+0 or R+1.

        NY-19 is the exact same as NJ-2.

        I'd put more money on NY-19 going R+ because it elected a non-entrenched Republican incumbent by a not insignificant amount at the same time.

        You're right though, they're all possibilities.

        23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

        by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:31:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've seen comments on Twitter... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, jncca, MichaelNY

          That Obama lost IL-13 narrowly - by a few thousand votes.  Which isn't surprising considering he won IL-12 by only a few thousand votes, and IL-12 was fractionally more Democratic in 2008.  

          As to NJ-02, check out the county maps on the NYT website.  Obama outperformed his absolute 2008 numbers in most of South Jersey.  He only lost ground in Gloucester, Salem, and Cape May.  In each of them the fall was significantly less than his national swing of -1.85% or so.  NJ-02 probably had Obama do slightly better in 2008 than 2012.  I'm guessing in 2012 numbers alone he's around D+2, and the new PVI for the seat will most likely be D+1

          NY-19 is different.  Ulster County is the only county entirely within the district where Obama improved his absolute percentage.  Elsewhere he fell, but mostly by less than his national numbers dropped.  I'd expect D+1 as his 2012 number, which could round the composite PVI up to D+1 or down to EVEN, depending upon what fraction of a percent it was.  

          CA-21 is a massively Latino district.  IIRC, it's actually majority Latino even by CVAP (although turnout was obviously abysmal).  Still, it would be a shock for Obama not to have won such a district.  

          (keep in mind these are preliminary numbers -- NYT hasn't updated its vote totals since the 29th, so they've probably shifted a bit to the left).  

    •  a birther got reelected in a D+1 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

      How did we screw that up?

      •  Incumbency matters (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wwmiv, DCPatriot, jncca

        It matters a lot, in fact.

      •  Stronger candidate would have been better (4+ / 0-)

        Miklosi put up a great fight and came close even though Coffman outraised and outspent him handily. Which by the way is part of the problem.

        Coffman will be a top target in 2014 guaranteed.

        •  Sen. Morgan Carroll would have cleaned up. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SLDemocrat, MichaelNY

          Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

          by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:47:47 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  is she that strong? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            She comes off as the most interesting woman in the world on her web page and she's moved up fairly quickly in the state senate. I think Dems would love her, but does she have much crossover appeal? I suspect that she would have raised more $ than Miklosi which might have enabled her to squeak past Coffman (who is a poor fit for the new lines), but I don't think she would have blown him out.

            SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

            by sacman701 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 10:33:31 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Miklosi put up a lousy fight (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sawolf, MichaelNY

          He was weak, didn't seem to try to raise money.  You have a wingnut foe with inflammatory rhetoric and votes, you can convert that into money.  He didn't.

          Very poor recruiting in this district.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:12:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  There was a former Democrat (7+ / 0-)

        On the ballot who ran as an independent, Kathy Polhemus. I wrote about this at length. She got 13K votes. Coffman won by 7K.

        Political Director, Daily Kos

        by David Nir on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:17:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And I wrote about it at length (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          even before this... here.

          Here is my prophetic quote:

          Yep this is a real problem right here - Kathy Polhemus might as well be Mike Coffman's campaign chair. Blah blah blah I am a moderate - system is broken - I will get 2 or 3% of the vote to give Coffman an edge. I love how this former Democrat has to pick a race where she can function as a devastating spoiler. As I write this, I am struggling to be polite - but I can't see how this is anything but a real vanity project.
          But I guess to get real for a second, nominating a Denver based Liberal rather than an Aurora based nominee opened the door for this spoiler.

          Town Planner, 30 years Old, Election Junkie, "If you agree with Bush's economic policy, Cheney's foreign policy, and Santorum's social policy, you loved Romney's speech" - James Carville (aka the Ragin Cajun) on the Colbert Report

          by CF of Aus on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:05:48 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We can't always control these things (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            If Polhemus really wanted her 15 minutes in the sun, she wouldn't have cared if Joe Miklosi was everyone in the district's priest, rabbi, and godfather -- she would have run anyway.

            Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

            by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:11:43 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  We cant control them but with Miklosi (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              we were a little bit more vulnerable to an Aurora independent like her.  But yes once on the ballot she always going to siphon a few votes no matter who the Dem was.

              I dont think he was a bad candidate at all... But he couldnt raise cash quick enough unfortunately.

              Next cycle !

              Town Planner, 30 years Old, Election Junkie, "If you agree with Bush's economic policy, Cheney's foreign policy, and Santorum's social policy, you loved Romney's speech" - James Carville (aka the Ragin Cajun) on the Colbert Report

              by CF of Aus on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:15:40 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well, I think it really hurt... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, CF of Aus

                That the DCCC didn't keep their eye on the ball in that case. They missed a few opportunities they sort of dipped their toes in but never really doubled down on -- NE-02, which was agonizingly winnable and received very little investment at all, comes to mind -- and maybe if resources and attention hadn't been diverted to the fools' gold that was CO-03, Miklosi could have been pushed over the finish line in CO-06.

                Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

                by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:20:15 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Sadly prescient (eom) (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Political Director, Daily Kos

            by David Nir on Thu Dec 13, 2012 at 04:42:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Our candidate didn't have a natural base (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skibum59, ArkDem14, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        allowing the incumbent to hold on to ancestrally GOP areas in the district that were used to voting for him.  The district did change significantly, but of the areas that were common to the old CO-06 (South Aurora and north Douglas County), Coffman cleaned up.

        I underestimated just how red those areas could still go.  Obama drawing close to even in those precincts is a more recent phenomenon for Democrats.

        I think we'll get this one within the next two elections.  Just need a better candidate.

    •  You left out Nick Rahall. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8
  •  CA-21 presidential results (6+ / 0-)

    Obama   Romney  Total Votes  Obama %   Romney %
      65193      51964      120824        53.96%    43.01%

    26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:04:54 AM PST

  •  SC-SEN: Shortlist reportedly down to 5 people (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, MichaelNY

    Reps Scott and Gowdy, former AG Henry McMaster, Catherine Templton, who serves in the Haley admin, and former First Lady Jenny Sanford.

    link.

    Haley previously said she wont appoint a placeholder, but I dont know if she would require some to run for re-election as a condition of appointing them.

  •  Sc-Gov. Haley trails Sheheen by 2 in PPP poll (7+ / 0-)

    According to a new Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey, Sheheen currently leads Haley in a general election matchup by a 46-44 percent margin – with ten percent of respondents undecided.  Two years ago Haley narrowly defeated Sheheen in a “wave” Republican election – nearly blowing a huge early lead.

    Haley would still win a GOP primary, although 37 percent of Republicans say they would “prefer someone else” to be their nominee in 2014.

    PPP is a Democratic-leaning firm based in North Carolina, although its Palmetto State results have proven remarkably reliable in recent elections.  The firm surveyed 520 South Carolina voters from December 7-9, and its poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percent.

  •  Sc-Sen A: PPP poll shows Graham winning primary (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    Lindsey Graham appears stronger than one might have thought among Republican primary voters, with a 66/26 approval rating among them and a 47/39 rating among all voters.

    Graham easily turns away several potential Senate primary opponents (Tim Scott comes closest at 54-32). 51% of Republican primary voters say they’d want Graham to be the Senate nominee in 2014 while 40% say they’d want someone more conservative.
    ---
    Given a Club for Growth endorsement, I still can see someone beating Graham.   If multiple candidates ran, and they held Graham below 50%, he would be in a runoff and their would be SERIOUS blood in the water from that.

    •  Primaries. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBraden, ramesh, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

      I feel like early polling is even more useless for primaries--which perhaps have an electorate that is smaller, more well-informed, more ideological, and hence more susceptible to advertising and campaigning--than for general elections.  I can't remember if I read this or if I've just thought it myself.  Remember how Joe Sestak had a big, late comeback to beat Arlen Specter, and all he had to do was remind everyone Specter used to be a Republican.  Deb Fischer kind of came out of nowhere too, didn't she?

      That's not to say Graham is doomed, but I don't think this tells us much.

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

      by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:48:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think that's true in the abstract, but... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...it's 100% true in the teabagger era.

        Before the teabagger era, we usually knew pretty early if an incumbent was vulnerable in his/her own primary, and it was usually based on non-ideological things, unless the officeholder had gone waaaaay off the ranch.  And of course it was the rare incumbent who lost a primary at all.

        Now, yes, early polling tells us less, at least if the incumbent is polling well.  If the incumbent is polling poorly in his/her own party, then that usually sticks.  But even then not necessarily, as John McCain managed to recover after looking at ugly numbers very early on.

        44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:20:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  McCain was lucky to get J.D. Hayworth, I suppose. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          (Which is saying something, given the kinds of candidates who sometimes win these kinds of primaries.)  

          27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

          by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:54:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hayworth was a jaw-dropping disaster for... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            ...the teabaggers upon the revelation he did cheap ads hawking "government money."

            That, for teabaggers, is like finding out the Pope is Muslim.

            Hayworth was the opposite extreme of what they demanded.

            44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:07:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  I think the key will be Graham's votes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      on any budget deals and a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

      If any of those votes anger the party base for whatever reason, a primary challenger would have a chance. If not, then Graham is probably fine in a primary regardless of how many candidates run.

      Same is true of Saxby Chambliss.

    •  I'm skeptical that Graham is toast (0+ / 0-)

      He backed McCain-Kennedy in 2007 and didn't even draw a serious primary opponent the next year.

      I don't care for the guy, but he seems pretty skilled at placating home-state interests. The rah-rah war talk probably isn't that out of line for such a military-heavy state, and stuff like his vote against CAFTA helps with textile workers and farmers. National groups are the only ones who seem to want to dump him, not that I can blame them, but he's actually in solid shape by all appearances. I don't think the poll is a fluke.

      Would I actually want a DeMint-style Repub instead of Graham? There's a choice: gutless pseudo-moderate who can't stop agitating for war vs. a hard-right nutcase. Two-way tie for last, probably.

  •  WH could be making news on something soon (0+ / 0-)

    The WH correspondent for NY Times, Helene Cooper, tweets to stand by for epic news. POLITICO's correspondent, Jennifer Epstein, says the WH press briefing has been pushed back 45 minutes so something could be happening.

    Might be related to a cabinet announcement, perhaps SOS? Could find out if we have an open Senate seat in MA or not.

  •  PPP: Sen. McConnell least popular senator... (12+ / 0-)

    In the country. Leads three potential Democratic candidates by just four points. Story here.

    Mitch McConnell is the most unpopular Senator in the country. Only 37% of Kentucky voters approve of him to 55% disapprove. Both in terms of raw disapproval (55%) and net approval (-18) McConnell has the worst numbers of any of his peers, taking that mantle from Nebraska's Ben Nelson.

    McConnell is predictably very unpopular with Democrats (23/73). But his numbers are almost as bad with independents (33/58) and even with Republicans he's well below the 70-80% approval range you would usually expect for a Senator within their own party (59/28).

    As unpopular as McConnell is, Kentucky is still a state that voted for Mitt Romney by 23 points last month and because of the political lean of the state, he leads all of the Democrats we tested against him in head to head match ups. 3 of them- Lieutenant Governor Jerry Abramson, Attorney General and 2010 nominee Jack Conway, and actress Ashley Judd- come within 4 points of McConnell at 47/43. Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer trails by 5 at 46/41, Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes has a 7 point deficit at 47/40, Congressman John Yarmuth is down 10 at 48/38, former Ambassador Matthew Barzun lags 48/37, and State Auditor Adam Edelen trails by 12 at 48/36.

    Judd leads for the Democratic nomination with 29%.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:23:02 AM PST

    •  Hah (5+ / 0-)

      Judd performing equally well as Abramson and Conway.  That's hilarious.  All the results give McConnell 46 to 48% of the vote, the difference is name recognition which holds down some of the other Dems.

      "Most unpopular senator" is a dangerous title to be holding, but this is still Kentucky.  Harry Reid came back from deadly approvals to win by 5 points.  Of course, you gotta hand some of that credit to Sharron Angle, but it's not like Tarkanian would have crushed Reid by 10 points or anything like that.  Still would have been a close election, and Reid may very well have beaten him too.  Point being, McConnell may have awful approval ratings but I think a lot of those people are still quite inclined to back him.

      But if the GOP picks a lot of politically unpopular fights with Obama over the next couple of years...then this could get interesting.

      •  I agree (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32, JBraden, KingTag, jncca, MichaelNY

        I maintain it would be a mistake to nominate Judd. Hopefully polls like this will entice the likes of Atty. Gen. Conway to reconsider. I think people's willingness to vote for Judd (as a stand-in, right now, for "Democrat whose name Kentuckians recognize") is going to plummet when her political views become more publicly known. I mean, you can't be anti-coal and anti-gun and still get elected statewide in Kentucky, or even still run a competitive race.

        People are going to fixate on the Judd performance from this poll today, though. I just hope the right people are looking past her numbers and seeing the numbers Conway and Lt. Gov. Abramson are posting, as well as that huge approval gap Sen. McConnell is sporting.

        Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

        by SaoMagnifico on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:42:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm very surprised (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        I wouldn't have guessed McConnell is so unpopular.  He's a conservative in a conservative state.  All the unlikeable things he's done are things conservatives should like.

        And I'm stunned Ashley Judd polls this well, even allowing people will say almost anything in a telephone survey about an election almost 2 years away.  But I would think they would laugh off Judd and more broadly say "no."

        Still, we won't beat McConnell or keep it less than 10 without a strong anti-GOP wave.  But I can see him eventually at risk of losing in the primary with these numbers, even though his GOP numbers seem strongly positive.  Problem is, 59-28 isn't really that strong, it's surprisingly weak for him to be performing among his own side's partisans in his own state where he's been doing their bidding as far as I can tell.

        But McConnell is watching his right flank, he hired Rand Paul's own top campaign guy to run his campaign!  I doubt anyone will be able to flank Mitch on the right......but I've doubted often about GOP incumbents and top non-incumbent recruits losing, and been wrong often.

        44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:28:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think being the one of the "leaders" in Congress (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sawolf, MichaelNY, DCCyclone

          in a time when Congress gets approval ratings in the teens is inevitably going to drag your numbers down, even if you're a conservative in a conservative state. Besides, a lot of those conservatives still identify as Democrats, even if only nominally, and when the guy they want to vote for ideologically is trashing their party all the time, they probably aren't that enthused about voting for him.

          •  Agree with your first point, not the second (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            I doubt the kinds of conservative Democrats in Kentucky who voted for Romney are upset with McConnell trashing his Democratic colleagues.  Those conservative ancestral Democrats don't like national Democrats.

            But your first point is necessarily correct, there's got to a be reason McConnell is unpopular, and that has to be it since there's really nothing else.  He has no personal or official scandal going against him, and he's not particularly personally disliked, or at least not anymore than any other politician.  And he hasn't cast any votes or pushed any legislation that would particularly upset Kentuckians.

            So you're right, it simply has to be that he's a leader in a very unpopular institution.

            44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:50:56 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  wow, didnt expect the numbers (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, JBraden, MichaelNY

      to be that bad for McConnell. Still think it will be difficult to win this, but hopefully, one of the people polling within single digits runs.

      I wonder how many of those Dems are looking at governor in 2015 or maybe even the Senate race in 2016.

    •  Sigh. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem

      We're in for a whole lot of useless polling, huh?  

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

      by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:44:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's useless about it? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        Other than any poll two years out is usless.

        This is auseful poll as it shows Judd performs better than the semi-anonymous downballot Dems like grimes.  But that's with a campaig,

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:04:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think any poll two years out is useless. (0+ / 0-)

          I'm actually wondering, though, how true that is.  Do we have examples of a poll that early revealing something interesting that held up until Election Day?

          27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

          by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:13:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's not about that (5+ / 0-)

            Let's be honest here. It isn't really always just about trying to find out who will win two years from now. It's about this being a form of entertainment by watching how things change from now until then. The subtle shifts in opinion and the moving the needle every few polls towards or away from a candidate. That's why these polls are interesting.

            They also do give us some valuable info in that some candidates can perform decently and some candidates can't. We knew pretty early on, for instance, last cycle which Senate candidates were better than others. Take Missouri for the GOP. We knew that Akin was slightly worse performing than the other two wackos, even if only slightly and even if they all did well against McCaskill. That was relevant info that was used by the McCaskill campaign, I'm sure, as they ratfucked their primary.

            23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

            by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:29:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah, functionally PPP (6+ / 0-)

              is providing entertainment for political junkies and journalists right now, and I suppose if I look at it that way, it's less annoying.

              27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

              by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:35:14 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  But this is an elections blog, and you're here (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, CF of Aus

                The election is over!  But you're still here!

                Why are we even here if we don't like polls?

                Also, I do think early polls have been more informative in recent cycles than you seem to realize.  I recall PPP measured pretty early that Democrats were tanking in the 2010 cycle, the numbers were getting bad in 2009, surprisingly not that long into Obama's first term.  And PPP's early 2012 cycle polling showed Democratic recovery, favorables and job approvals improving for our people.  Those polls did prove to be canaries in coal mines.  Now, I don't remember if any of those prescient polls were this early!  But they were still pretty early.

                44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:33:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I've never liked polls. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  We spent forever parsing why Obama would get re-elected because of his crushing advantage in Ohio that didn't even happen.  

                  There's all kinds of other things to talk about, though.

                  27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

                  by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:53:46 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  You have a long and difficult life in front of you (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    There will be only more polls!  More, more, more!  Never less!

                    On Ohio, yes the CW was proven wrong, but the polls actually weren't......they were predicting only a narrow Obama win!  We trusted them less than we should have, not more.

                    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                    by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:53:43 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  not useless (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JBraden, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        McConnell's poor approvals are interesting, even if a lot of it comes from tea partiers who will ultimately vote for him anyway. You'd think that with him underwater like that someone from the A team (the statewide officials and Chandler) would jump in.

        At this point Mongiardo and Lunsford may be on the B team with Judd, but is there any chance one of them would run again? Lunsford will be 66 in 2014, but Mongiardo just 54.

        SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

        by sacman701 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:10:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Unless the A team recognizes (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          markhanna, JBraden, DCCyclone, MichaelNY

          that "a lot of it comes from tea partiers who will ultimately vote for him anyway".  

          Don't get me wrong--I wouldn't be surprised if McConnell draws a credible challenger, but the number of incumbent Senators defeated in states strongly favoring their party is tiny.  (Anyone want to count?)  And politicians know that too.

          27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

          by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:19:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Exactly right (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            As wwvim said above, there are polls two years out that might be useful, but this isn't one of them. A lot of McConnell's disapproval comes from tea partiers who will vote for him anyway. And the Dem politicians know it, which is why none of them are racing to challenge McConnell.

            As for Ashley Judd, I'd be stunned if she even got 43 percent after McConnell gone done with her.

            •  Famous last words...... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              "...tea partiers who will vote for him anyway."

              If I had to give someone a penny every time I said something like that about a GOP incumbent or top non-incumbent recruit the past two cycles, I'd be broke and naked and would have to have faked my own death to avoid the collection thugs.

              Those poor overall job approvals, and relatively weak (yes, weak) 59-28 approvals with Republicans, show real vulnerability.

              Thing is, Mitch knows it and admits it.  That's why he hired...more than 2 years out!...Jesse Benton to be his campaign manager.  Benton, you might recall, is Ron Paul's son-in-law and Rand's brother-in-law, as well as Ron's former political director and Rand's former campaign manager.  Jesse was hired to protect Mitch's right flank.  That has a very good chance of working going forward, but his hiring also is an admission of vulnerability by Mitch.

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:39:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Mongiardo is thinking about running for Governor (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Zack from the SFV, MichaelNY

          28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

          by bumiputera on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:22:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  It's also very, very early for both McConnell (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          and his potential challengers. I believe this was the first time his approvals have been publicly polled in quite some time. Perhaps few people have done private polling, but if not, this might be the first indication he's vulnerable. Now, that might not hold up, but if they don't improve over the next year, I suspect there will be a lot more interest at the start of 2014.

          I'm a corporatist McGovernite Atari Democrat...I think.

          by bjssp on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 10:35:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  My Thoughts (6+ / 0-)

      I love the analogies to Harry Reid, but I think what's missing from those analogies (perhaps it was only unspoken, but it just makes the analogy even stronger) is that Harry Reid only won because he had an opponent who was extremely out of step with the state. McConnell would luck out if Ashley Judd were the nominee, because she's extremely out of step with the state. She'd be McConnell's Sharon Angle.

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:14:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, this is the correct analysis. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        You said the important part in many fewer words than me. The difference in my opinion, however, is that I'm pretty doubtful that even a first tier respectable, moderate Democrat could beat McConnell, while I think Reid could have easily lost to a second or even third tier Republican; really, his opponent almost had to be Angle bad. It goes without saying McConnell would thrash an Angle level candidate, but I'm not sure he even needs a bad opponent to win.

        (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

        by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:49:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The other big difference is that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        KY is much redder than NV.  We don't know how 2010 NV will compare to 2014 KY, but I think that's the question.

        27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

        by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:17:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But is Ashley Judd as offensive (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        askew

        as Sharrrrrron Angle was to so many Nevadans? I still will never forget her telling a bunch of high school kids at a latino group that "They look Asian." She was a straight up John Birch nut job.

        Judd may be anti-mountain top removal but that doesn't make her crazy or offensive to Kentuckians, or does it?

    •  Reid 2: Return of the unacceptable alternative (9+ / 0-)

      Judd would lose by 10+ points. Her support is all soft support, and she's going to come down to earth fast once she steps out of the celebrity arena and into the political one. I'd much rather have people who are known quantities on the campaign trail and who's support is already the product of them being thought of in a political way. The fact that she's never faced public criticism and has been portrayed in solely positive light and still trails by 4 is pretty bad in my opinion. Unfortunately, this is going to create another roadblock to convincing the party we can't run Judd (even if we have hardly any shot here anyways.)

      It makes me wish Abramson was interested though. Conway, Grimes and Edelen are the ones most likely to run for federal office, and from this we can see Edelen is unelectable (already knew that of course.) Another of our options (Conway) is feeling burned from 2010, and I think it might be a while before he runs for anything else, if he ever does. Grimes trailing by seven before McConnell is bad, I'm not going to lie. But, I think that Grimes' support measures something much more solid than someone like Judd; she's a very high profile office holder and I think that protects her from a lot of the obvious weaknesses a Democrat would have in a red state, because she's the most fully already being considered in a national frame of mind by voters (for example, her favorability is +14, while Conway is +7 and Abramson is -1. Why are they doing better? She's already being thought of in that way.)

      If Judd (who could be some sort of loose cannon for all we know) ran in the primary against her if she does run, I don't think she's worried. Judd might be able to keep it close against Edelen, but the in any other one on one matchup the lion's share of the other statewide officials vote will go to their fellow office holder; not Judd. Yarmuth and Edelen might produce a more even split in their votes between, say, Grimes and Judd, but Grimes would dominate (80+%) Abramson and Conway voters, and would take the lion share of undecided voters. There's just a pro-coal majority even within the Democratic party, plus Judd has no political machine, and most of these Dems are pro choice which should keep down any budding Judd support in Louisville down. Conway and Grimes are hardly toxic with the partisan Democratic base.

      I think Judd would lose any primary where the field wasn't heavily divided, and I still am very positive she'd get curbstomped by McConnell. (if nothing else, Barr's election should show the easy use of coal as a wedge issue against Democrats.) Although it's counterintuitive, I think what these results really do is cement Grimes as Democrats best option in this tough, uphill race, and reinforces the idea Judd would be a bad idea. That is, of course, assuming anyone but Judd runs, which I'm beginning to doubt.

      (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

      by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:45:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good analysis (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, bjssp, MichaelNY

        I'm very skeptical any Dem could beat McConnell, but you've made a good case if one could, it would probably be Grimes.

      •  alternatives and cranks (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, bjssp, MichaelNY

        I think that's mostly spot on, but I think Judd is only a bad idea if someone who can potentially win is prepared to make the race. If they all sit out, she may be a good idea because she would at least prevent a crank from winning the primary and making the party look ridiculous. Judd is too liberal to win, but she isn't a crank and could even help the party's image if she focused on issues where most voters prefer Dem positions. Dems would have to take care not to raise expectations for the race, though. If they puff Judd up into something she isn't, they'll look silly when she loses by double digits.

        Dems could probably find a former state legislator "X" better qualified and more conservative than Judd, but with no money or name rec there is no guarantee that X would win the primary even against a crank. Just ask Vic Rawl. Ultimately I think it would be easier and cheaper to coach Judd up to not say anything stupid than to give X enough money to lock up the primary.

        On the other hand if Judd intends to beat the drum on unpopular issues, the party would probably be better off if they could convince her not to run, then put up X and hope that some crank doesn't steal the primary.

        Unrelated: Why is Edelen obviously unelectable?

        SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

        by sacman701 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:22:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Why didn't they test Mongiardo? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, bumiputera

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:15:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thought experiment (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bumiputera

    So this almost definitely will not happen, but what would happen if Gov. Snyder unexpectedly vetoed right-to-work in Michigan?

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:32:54 AM PST

    •  Then it doesn't become law (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JBraden

      but when he does sign it, remember he'll sign the death certificate of his political career.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:37:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No he wont (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AUBoy2007, LordMike, bumiputera, MichaelNY

        He'll make his reelection harder, but he won't be dead in the water.

        •  I understand you're point of view (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JBraden

          coming from Wisconsin, and seeing what happened this past June. But I really think Snyder just done himself over with this one.

          Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

          by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:17:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The mistake with the Walker recall (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            itskevin, JGibson, BKGyptian89, MichaelNY

            Was not having a strong candidate waiting in the wings to jump in. They shouldn't have gone forward without one, it was a huge tactical mistake. Allowed Walker to paint himself as the victim of a rare and nearly unprecedented attack on him personally, which is probably what shifted the terrain there with voters in the middle. He went from feckless bully to innocent victim*. Barrett had no clue how to handle that terrain, and essentially ran a quasi-general election campaign rather than a sensitive one on the specific issues at hand.

            Snyder isn't going to be recalled, so he won't be able to fight back in the same way Walker did. A normal general election campaign isn't going to lend itself to that. This gets reversed by the public, Snyder looks weak and pathetic. And Gary Peters is as strong an opponent as he can get.

            * Of course, that's a ridiculous interpretation, but "nice politics" types were undoubtedly swayed by it.

            •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

              by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:42:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  That's maybe half-right but I think misses... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf, MichaelNY

              ...what the problem more precisely really was:  that there was no campaign against Walker for months while Walker and allies were on the air with tens of millions of dollars of TV ads.  That potentially could've been done without a candidate, if independent groups bankrolled by some rich liberals were willing and able to dive in with saturation ad buys.  That Walker's ads went unchallenged for so long shored him up, and yes by the time we had a candidate, it was too late.

              It would've been easier if we had a candidate early on, but that probably wasn't doable, or they would've done it.  Barrett wasn't willing to commit early when he was still looking over his shoulder at his Mayor's reelection.

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:45:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  When will the anti-RTW initiative be on the ballot (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                in Michigan? That's the big question, and the sooner, the better, obviously.

                I'm a corporatist McGovernite Atari Democrat...I think.

                by bjssp on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 10:43:19 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  november 2013 or 2014, I think. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                  by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:19:02 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Can this be done by public initiative? (0+ / 0-)

                    I've read conflicting things on whether a referendum on this is permissible.  If it can be overturned, then great...I suspect it will be, because it's these kinds of focused issue-based campaigns where we've been doing well.  Beating the Republican candidates who advocate this junk, that's been harder.

                    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                    by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 06:36:38 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I think it can't be repealed by referendum (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DCCyclone

                      but if they try to amend or replace it with an initiative then they can, it just is harder to do an initiative than a referendum, in terms of time or number of signatures, or something.

                      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                      by James Allen on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:17:57 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

    •  Wonder if he'll line-item veto the appropriation (6+ / 0-)

      And allow the thing to go through a referendum. "The people ought to be able to weigh in on this issue..." or some such. This would probably be politically ideal for Snyder--he signs the bill, but puts himself against the loophole and maybe scores some points for integrity. If that happens the whole thing will likely never become law, but he's insulated either way: if it passes, he respected the people enough to let them weigh in, if it fails, the whole thing gets forgotten a lot quicker, and he can pretend he did the right thing.

      Probably better than facing a year-long effort to pass an amendment or initiative overturning it that will likely be successful, a mobilization which will then turn to beating him. Given Snyder's alleged ambivalence, I wonder if this option has been considered.

    •  I take it he'd be in big trouble (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BKGyptian89, LordMike, jncca, MichaelNY

      and probably lose the R primary

      24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

      by lordpet8 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:24:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  can anyone get this to work for them? (0+ / 0-)

    I'm trying to get precinct results for this county but the link isn't working for me.  Could someone else try it and see if they can get there?

    www.deschutes.org/Clerks-Office/Elections/Past-Elections/Results-by-Precinct.aspx?F=11-06-12+canvass+report.pdf

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:37:17 AM PST

  •  MD-Gov 2014 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, James Allen, bumiputera, MichaelNY

    Comptroller Peter Franchot won't run, but will instead seek reelection to his current position.

    http://articles.centermaryland.org/...

    In a sense, this is a sort of victory for O'Malley's agenda, as Franchot has often criticized him for spending too much.  In fact, some Republicans have speculated that they might have done better to back Franchot than a difficult to elect candidate of their own party.

    37, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

    by Mike in MD on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:41:55 AM PST

  •  House popular vote (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Do you think the House democrats can repeat that feat of winning the popular vote again before the end of the decade?
    My eyes are on 2016 and 2020 elections. It would to do it during the low turnout midterms.

    The Democrats came very closein the 2000 house vote getting 47%  to the Republican's 47.3%

    Even the 1996 feat was narrow win 48.1%D-47.8%R, whereas this year the difference was even more noticeable.

    24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

    by lordpet8 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 11:47:26 AM PST

    •  I bet it does happen a couple more times... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, MichaelNY

      ...before new maps are drawn.  Demographic shift keeps making the turnout model more favorable for us in Presidentials and midterms alike.  The 2010 midterm had the same 23% nonwhite vote share as the 2004 Presidential.  Similarly, the 2014 midterm likely will have nonwhite vote share approaching the 2008 level, and if not quite there no more than a point or so less.

      This all means that in the national House vote, Democrats will win probably no less than half the time even as the minority!

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:50:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  West Virginia estimates... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Since people mentioned Rahall upthread, I thought I'd see where we were.

    WV hasn't certified, but all but two counties (Marshall and Taylor), both in WV-01, have certified, at least according to the one sheet in Wasserman's national popular vote tracker.  I'm not sure about his sources, so I'm sure this can't count as official for DKE purposes.  

    Anyway, here they are, measured in two-party vote

    WV-01 36.4%/63.6%* (R+13)
    WV-02: 38.73%/61.27% (R+11)
    WV-03: 33.57%/66.43% (R+15)

    Yes, the seat we hold is the most right-wing seat in West Virginia.  Keep in mind turnout was much lower though.  Only about 207,000 voted, as opposed to 234,000 in WV-02, and 226,000 (so far) in WV-01.

    •  Numbers are 08/12 PVI... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Since everyone gets confused when I post 12 PVI only.  

      2012 only is R+15, R+13 and R+18 respectively.  WV-03 had the fifth-biggest drift to the right in the U.S., and the largest outside of Utah.  Rahall is now the Democrat in the second most conservative seat in the country.  

    •  It's still by far the most Dem downballot (5+ / 0-)

      once the numbers are certified I'll average the plethora of statewide elections that WV held and I guarantee you that it will still be the 3rd by a good clip, then followed by the 1st, then 2nd being slightly more GOP than the state.

      I'm still hopeful we can flip the 2nd in 2014 and if we had bothered to field a candidate in the 1st this year who wasn't a liberal... oh well, maybe McKinley will do us a favor and primary Capito allowing us to pick up both seats and hold onto Rockefeller's seat, one can dream right?

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

      by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:22:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  French right falls apart (5+ / 0-)

    Link: http://welections.wordpress.com/...

    The UMP is stuck in a weird and confusing situation as things currently stands. It remains united as a political party, but only half or so of the party recognizes the party's de facto leader as the legitimate leader. The other half of the party remains in the party, but still does not recognize the legitimacy of the party's de facto leader. What is the way forward?

    (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

    by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:46:27 PM PST

    •  Sounds like the GOP here in the U.S. (0+ / 0-)

      Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee is a BFD!

      by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:53:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  How so? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

        by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:52:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fighting amongst each other (0+ / 0-)

          The infighting amongst the French right is just like the infighting that has been prevalent within the GOP since Obama got re-elected.

          Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee is a BFD!

          by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:18:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  In the sense (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            that all parties self-analyze after an important loss. The Republican party is hardly on the verge of dissolution though, and it's actually self-analyzing from a point of view of "How can Republican win nationally again?" The French right isn't worried about that. Hollande is unpopular and they see themselves as the natural beneficiaries. These internal debates are simply the front for egotistical inter-party jockeying for position, with most of the lines drawn along an abstract picking of sides, not clearly ideological (or even stylistic) lines.

            (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

            by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:44:41 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  In a few blue states I could see the GOP (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              pretty much at that level.

              Like in CA, the party had been basically only focused on getting 1/3 in the legislature that it has almost forgotten how to govern. Leadership is divided into differing factions. There was an article the other day about Log Cabin folks feeling hopeful about taking over the state party. At the same time the party is searching for a new chairman, I think they will end up with this former state legislator.

              But yes GOP still has the house and plenty of deep red states to keep it relavant

              24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

              by lordpet8 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:55:05 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  IL-Gov 2014 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JGibson, James Allen, ArkDem14

    Joe Walsh, once again, refuses to rule out a 2014 IL-Gov run, and says that Illinois needs "a Scott Walker" as its next governor.

    No, Joe, we don't need "a Scott Walker" as our next governor. We need a Lori Compas (not Lori herself, as even I wouldn't approve of her carpetbagging into Illinois) who can make the business case for progressive ideals, make the business case against conservative ideals, build up solid grassroots support across Illinois, and defeat Pat Quinn in the primary if he runs for re-election. Sadly, there isn't anyone within the Illinois Democratic ranks that is even remotely like Lori, and I won't be old enough to run for Governor of Illinois myself in 2014 (minimum age to run for Governor of Illinois is 25, I'll be 24 in 2014).

    Now, if Illinois Democrats screw around and lose the 2014 IL-Gov election, I'd be open to the idea of running for Governor of Illinois in 2018.

    Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee is a BFD!

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 12:52:06 PM PST

    •  if you really want to run for office, (7+ / 0-)

      run for something local, like a city council position or something.  If elected, you'd become a real part of the Dem bench there, and also you could probably raise some money here.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:10:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Lisa Madigan will probably run for (6+ / 0-)

        governor. She's a bit more progressive than her dad apparently. I like Quinn. He took some big political baggage on himself by pushing hard for a tough package of tax increase and moderate pension reforms to keep the state fiscally solvent without slashing government jobs or services. Illinois though, has a problematic, right-wing flat tax rate, which needs to be taken care of.

        "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

        by ArkDem14 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:22:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No kidding (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CF of Aus, MichaelNY, jncca, tietack

        Seriously, DownstateDemocrat, I like your fire and I like your attitude that activists should consider putting in their own names for public service rather than perching on an electronic barstool in an online watering hole and just talking shit. I think it's a welcome reminder that people with opinions have the right to a public referendum on their opinions, for the low low price of whatever their local jurisdiction's filing fee is.

        But for all your down-in-the-weeds fixation on such low-level players as Lori Compas and Kathy Dye, I think you sometimes miss that there are offices in between "couch potato" and "governor of a big industrial state" -- quite a few of them, actually. Depending on where you live, there's advisory committees, planning commissions, school boards, city councils, county supervisors, and more, and that's without even getting into state legislatures or local executive branches.

        If you're interested in being involved -- and I believe that, any autism spectrum condition you have notwithstanding, you should absolutely go for it if you are and you believe you could make a positive difference in your community and for your constituents, whomever they may be -- then you should explore the idea of running for a more local position. Hey, maybe it's small ball, but city and county government are the closest to the ground. More people may know the name of the president than know the name of their city councilor, or the president of their local school board, or their county executive, but local government is always going to be what affects them most immediately. They're the guys keeping their streets clean and their water running. And that's where a lot of people who eventually become household names start out. And some of them spend their whole careers there -- and there's nothing wrong with that, either.

        Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

        by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:09:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  What are your opinions on this MonkeyCage Piece? (0+ / 0-)

    http://themonkeycage.org/...

    It, once again, is shoddy analyisis for various reasons, one being that you can't simply look at the statewide share of the dam vote to calculate how many districts a party would win, because candidate quality matters.

    Of course, Dave Wasserman gives this piece lip service, and continues the meme that dems would have never won the house, even if there was no gerrymandering.

    It's really frustrating.

    Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

    by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:03:04 PM PST

    •  I'm sorry, but the meme is right. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hamtree, jncca, MichaelNY

      Let's go through the states:

      PA:  It wouldn't have taken much for Critz to win PA-12, and I think the Democrats would have picked up PA-07 and PA-11 under a map more like the 2002 map.  So let's say D+3

      NC:  Clearly we lost big time here, with three incumbents retiring or being defeated.  An argument could be made that a more neutrally-drawn map would bring together the Democratic areas which were formerly split between NC-07 and NC-08, but let's ignore that and restore status quo.  D+3

      OH:  Obama won Hamilton County again, so if there was a compact OH-1, it would have been a pickup.  We also would have had one more seat in NE Ohio - Sutton probably would have had something to run in, and Kaptur's seat would have stayed around Toledo.  D+2

      MI:  I think a neutrally-drawn map would have resulted in a Democratic seat around Lansing, and another Detroit suburban district.  D+2

      VA;  Dems were pushing for a compact seat in Richmond, with the VRA seat retreating to Hampton Roads.  I don't think even a neutrally-drawn VA-10 would have gone our way however due to incumbency.  D+1

      IN:  We clearly lost IN-02 due to gerrymandering, as the final result was so close.  Unless you want to talk about drawing an actual gerrymander in Southern Indiana, that's about it though.  D+1

      Wisconsin, Tennessee, and Missouri would have went as they did no matter what.  We didn't come close enough in WI-07 or WI-08 that the old lines would have mattered, and COI maps would have resulted in two very Democratic districts and a Republican rest of the state.  

      I count up 12 seats here.  Democrats would need an additional five to gain a majority.  Maybe there were that many potential seats hiding out in Texas, Florida, and Georgia.  Keep in mind that COI maps will tend to lump urban areas together though, and presuming the VRA is being followed to its current extremes, there may be limits to what can be done.   In addition, it would be fair to assume if the Republicans aren't gerrymandering, we weren't either, which would have set us back 2-3 seats in Illinois, and 1 seat in Maryland.  

      •  we can't really say that about Wisconsin (0+ / 0-)

        we may have had a much more vigorous effort if we had a better district there.  Also, in Missouri, Carnahan might've had a real option.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:36:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Carnahan wouldn't have (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, MichaelNY

          basically the 1st district as drawn is the same as a court would draw it or at best it cedes south Saint Louis.  That means the 3rd district becomes about 10% worse for Carnahan and I highly doubt he could win that, especially since it would have trended hard right this year.

          Basically he was screwed under anything but a Dem map.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

          by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:26:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  also (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Daman09, Chachy, MichaelNY

        you can't just pay lip service to Texas, of all places.

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:46:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, what's with the hand-waving reference (4+ / 0-)

          to Texas, Floria, and Georgia? Those are three of the biggest states that republicans gerrymandered. Plus there's Couth Carolina, Louisiana, and maybe Alabama, where neutral maps could have given us at least a shot in more more seat in each state.

        •  Didn't the court drawn map... (0+ / 0-)

          Only have one more D seat, since it kept a compact Austin district?

          •  not in the end. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

            the court drawn map added a D seat in DFW (Veasay) and improved the 23rd.

            They also tried to give another Hispanic seat in San Antonio and then a compact Austin white seat, but were smacked down by SCOTUS.

            23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

            by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:40:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's my point... (0+ / 0-)

              If the original court-drawn map was, at most, going to give us 1-2 more seats, that's pretty much the upper limit of what we'd expect from a neutral (nonpartisan) map.  

              •  Hmm (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                James Allen, Chachy, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

                No, I think that if we had a nonpartisan board along the lines that Rep. State Senator Jeff Wentworth had always proposed that we'd also get another Valley based district instead of the extra San Antonio Hispanic district and probably three more swing districts (urban racially mish-mash districts one each in Houston and Dallas due to regional CoI and a white CoI western Travis County district, since Travis is large enough to anchor two distinct districts, one heavily Hispanic and the other not) and probably a second African American district in DFW.

                That's 13 Dem districts and 4 Swing districts along with 19 Republican districts. That'd actually be quite representative of the state.

                23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:16:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Clarification (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  State Senator, not Rep. State Senator nor State Representative. Oops.

                  23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                  by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:16:57 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Can you give a link to his proposal (0+ / 0-)

                  if he made a formal one, or if you have a map drf that does something like that?

                  Texas was the one state I was dreading to redraw since last time I did the whole country I just used the San Antonio interim map because I was lazy and it was summertime.

                  NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                  by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:21:27 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Wentworth? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    He proposed a law every session to make an independent commission. It always died.

                    I've drawn up maps similar to what I'm talking about, but I've always done them in such a way as to make the tossup districts that I mentioned basically safely Democratic (you'd have to weaken them to get the product I think would be likely). If you want me to email you a copy, I'd be happy to.

                    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                    by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:32:43 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yeah I meant if he had proposed maps (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      James Allen

                      I know that a bunch of interest groups did and they were all on (the legislature's?) GIS maps.

                      But yeah you can email me yours if you'd like, since other than Travis County I feel like I'd be diving into a VRA quagmire the first couple of drafts.

                      NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                      by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:36:37 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  The "court-drawn map" (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                James Allen, sawolf, MichaelNY

                actually hewed closely to the map drawn by the legislature. And then SCOTUS said it didn't hew closely enough, so it got even worse for us. A neutral map that genuinely started from scratch would have been considerably better - there'd be the extra Austin seat, very probably the extra DFW seat, a stronger 23rd, and I would have to think at least one more competitive Houston-area district, if not two. So that would be, say, a 20-14-2 map, rather than the 24-11-1 map that we got.

      •  Re: MI (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, bumiputera, jncca, MichaelNY

        I think McDowell may have won under the old lines. The old MI-01 went down to Bay City, but that was put into Dan Kildee's MI-05 D-vote-sink. McDowell came ever so close to winning this year, and I was surprised when he didn't.

        Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.75, -3.18, One of 1,620,985 Wisconsinites to re-elect Barack Obama, and one of 1,547,104 Wisconsinites to send Tammy Baldwin to the US Senate!!!

        by WisJohn on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:46:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think he would have too (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

          under DRA it was like 1.5% more Dem on average and I doubt Benishek's incumbency advantage in that territory was worth more.

          However, drawing Traverse into the 1st and putting all the tri-cities into the 4th makes more sense (to me at least) and it makes Camp pretty vulnerable.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

          by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:27:47 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  The two states you left out (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, bumiputera, MichaelNY

        Florida and Texas, are the largest states that the GOP had complete control over, and while some may quibble about the Florida fair districts amendment, I think for all intents and purposes, it was a GOP gerrymander, perhaps not as agressive as the PA one, but still a gerrymander, I think we may have been able squeeze out another seat if a non-partisan map had been employed.

        Texas, on the other hand, that's a complete clusterfuck.  The gerrymander they employed this session looks more agressive than the DeLay gerrymander.  I've not looked extenisvely into what a fair districts map would look like, as I'm just not all the familiar with Texas geography, but I definitely think we would have made some gains.  I definitely think we could have made those five plus seats up somewhere if the whole nation was under fair districts.

        Has anyone been doing citizen commission/ fair districts redistricting diaries?  That would be a fantastic series.

        Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

        by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:50:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  FL was a mostly clean gerrymander. (0+ / 0-)

          Aside from Corrine.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:54:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Florida doesn't help us that much if at all (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Since Corrine Brown's seat gets dismantled into a compact Jacksonville seat where Alvin Brown would be more likely to win.  Patrick Murphy doesn't have a seat to win since Rooney ends up staying there and its more Republican so Murphy would have lost anyway.  Where that's neutralized is Webster gets trounced by Demings in a D+ seat.

          A fair FL map would help however with Youngs seat by making it D+3 or so, but he'd have held on this year.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

          by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:29:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  question re Jacksonville (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, bumiputera

            why does everyone have Alvin Brown running for a more conservative and compact district?  He may have no interest in congress.

            ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

            by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:32:05 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Because Corrine Brown couldn't possibly win (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              what would have been about a 52-53% Obama seat (R+1)  You need someone more like nearby Sanford Bishop for that and I think Alvin Brown would run if it were open since it's more Dem than the whole county.

              NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

              by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:38:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I don't think that would be a bad thing (0+ / 0-)

                Corrine Brown is awful.

                23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:00:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  but again (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                why assume he'd want to?  I'm a little hesitant to voluntarily make a seat that weak if we don't have someone who for sure would win it.

                ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:07:59 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh I'm not voluntarily making it that weak (5+ / 0-)

                  I just don't see how a court-drawn map would leave it as anything other than entirely within Duval County, meaning Brown is our best bet.  However, any moderate Democrat who runs a competent campaign should be able to win it since it's an Obama district in the deep south.

                  The ideal Dem configuration is to split Gainesville between Talahassee and Jacksonville, easily giving us Corrine Brown and Al Lawson.

                  NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                  by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:11:49 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  The big benefit of a clean FL map... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bumiputera

            Would have been another Orlando D seat.  But as you noted, we might not be favored in a seat which is only within Duval County, as it probably would have been a slightly Republican-leaning seat at best.  

            I broadly agree with your other points.  I think we basically did as best as we could in Southeast Florida, although the vote distribution within the seats wasn't the best.  I think a fair FL-25 wouldn't sweep across the Everglades, and would have been a narrow Obama win, but Diaz-Balert still would have won this year by a pretty wide margin.  

            A good map would set us up well for the future, of course.  But I don't see more than 1 extra pickup coming from a neutral map.  

            •  Honestly, population distribution (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf, James Allen, MichaelNY

              makes it hard to have no district cross the Everglades. Like nobody lives there.

              •  Yeah, it's national park land (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                Only a handful of year-round residents.

                Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

                by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:11:47 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Not really... (0+ / 0-)

                You can fit three Latino-majority districts into Dade County, and then have FL-24 as the only one which crosses the county line.  Then work your way up the coast on one side, and have another rung of districts on the far side.  

                Personally, from a COI standpoint, I like the look of having one big Republican rural district in the middle too.  It breaks up some counties, but honestly the interior places like Belle Glades don't have a COI with the rest of their county anyway.

      •  I'll give you an even better breakdown (12+ / 0-)

        since I literally did the whole damn thing prior to the election and it's my next major project once finals are over and results are certified:

        PA: Altmire easily stays, Critz is screwed, Rothfus loses a rematch.  Barletta's district is still D+5, he's screwed, Holden keeps Harrisburg and Holdengrad.  Meehan gets all of Delaware County and loses.  Charlie Dent and Mike Fitzpatrick sweat a top challenge but are reelected.
        +3

        NC: Shuler easily wins, Kissell is screwed but in place of him a Greensboro Democrat picks up a safe seat, Miller easily stays.  McIntyre cruises.  Ellmers faces a marquee match and probably loses narrowly.
        +4, +3 at worst

        MI: Wallberg is screwed by having his seat drawn into Ann Arbor, Rogers gets all of lansing and loses, Bentivolio gets a bluer district and loses (more like a totally different matchup but it becomes a blue seat).  Hansen Clark keeps his district.  So that's 3 right there, then you also have Gary Peters whose district gets more conservative than his old one but about 50% Obama, so he might win too.
        +3

        VA: Frank Wolf gets a compact D+5 seat and loses in a shocking upset thanks to half of it being new and Obama's coattails.  Rigell and Forbes get drawn together in a narrowly Obama district, hopefully they nuke each other and we pick it up.  Compact Richmond district is an easy pick up.  Charlottesville gets placed with the non Shenandoah peidmont/mountain territory for an Obama district, Periello wins.
        +2 to +4

        IN: The 2nd gets a few points more Dem, Mullen holds it.  The 9th gets a great deal more Dem downballot and narrowly Obama 2008 and Yoder or Baron Hill wins it
        +2

        WI: Duffy gets a much more Dem seat, attracts better opposition and loses.  Ryan gets a D+2 seat that becomes a huge money sink, but holds on.
        +1

        AR: The 1st gets 4-5 points more Dem downballot and better for Obama too by adding Pine Bluff and dropping Ozark territory, Crawfords a weak incumbent and attracts stronger opposition and loses.
        +1

        TX: No bullshit in the DFW area means at least a swing seat but probably a 3rd Dem seat.  Same with the San Antonio-Austin area.
        +2

        SC: Any fair map makes the 5th a good deal more Dem if not outright drawing a second VRA district and Mulvaney had a very unimpressive finish.
        +1

        AL: Compact 2nd district is waaay more Dem than Bobby Bright's old district and he'd take it back easily, or it becomes VRA like it's supposed to and he wins it.
        +1

        GA: Woodall gets a compact Gwinnett County seat that goes for Obama and bounces him.
        +1

        NJ: Bergen and Passaic each anchor their own district meaning Rothman is fine and Leonard Lance is screwed.
        +1

        WA: The 8th stays in King County and gets more Democratic rather than less, screwing Reichert.
        +1

        On the flip side:
        IL: all the suburban districts get much more GOP and we lose all 3.  The 13th gets much more Dem and we're never close, but the 12th stays the same and we hold it.  The 17th gets a few points more GOP but we still pick it up.
        -4

        MD: 6th becomes the same as it was.
        -1

        Florida is a wash, trading Murphy for Demings.

        MA: McGovern, Lynch, and Kennedy all get somewhat redder districts but they're all still blue.

        So all in all it comes out to us +20 without gerrymandering.  Suck on it Monkey Cage and prove me wrong with maps.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

        by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:18:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh how could I forget Ohio!? (5+ / 0-)

          Jesus that's the worst one.

          Okay her goes: Chabot gets a much more Dem district and loses a rematch with Driehaus.  Wilson's district gets about 4-5% more Dem and he lost by 8 so I think he'd have eked out a win.  Sutton gets a safe seat, Kucinich gets a safe seat.  Joyce is merged with any of his Dem neighbors and never wins.  Latta and Kaptur are thrown together in a Likely D district creating an open Lean D seat we pick up.
          +5

          So that's +25 total on top of what we actually won.  I'd be willing to bet just about anything that if we had totally non-partisan maps in all of the states we'd have flipped the house.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

          by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:21:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  WTF? (0+ / 0-)

            I'm sorry.  This is just wishful thinking.  

            I've played around with DRA, and as long as you have a district keeping the black Eastside of Cleveland intact, you cannot have more than two solid (55%+ in 2008) Obama districts in NE Ohio.  

            Can you draw these districts?  Sure, but that's a gerrymander, which I thought we were trying to escape here.  

            •  Okay looked at your map... (0+ / 0-)

              Do you really think that a nonpartisan body would draw OH-10 to surround OH-11?

              Really?  

              •  Here's an example... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                bumiputera, sacman701

                Of what I'd say is a neutral Ohio map.  

                Going from most to least Obama -

                Solid to Lean D

                OH-11 - 81.2%
                OH-16 - 65.2%
                OH-09 - 59.4%
                OH-16 - 57.5%
                OH-01 - 55.5%
                OH-10 - 54.8%
                OH-13 - 54.7%

                Competitive, but wouldn't flip in 2012

                OH-14 - 51.8%
                OH-03 - 49.8%
                OH-06 - 49.5%

                The rest aren't worth mentioning

                So I'd say this map is a 7D/9R map.  For 2012, it might work out 6/10 though, because I think Kucinich is a bad enough candidate he'd seriously struggle in his OH-13.  So somewhere between +3 and +4

                •  Okay, the map you drew gives the 6th to wilson (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, bumiputera

                  there's no way he wouldn't have won a seat that was 49.5% Obama in 2008 while coming within 8 in one where Obama got just 44%.

                  And your 10th is much more Dem downballot than Obama numbers indicate, just look at the partisan average and compare it to the state.  The 14th is the same way and I bet LaTourette would have drawn a stronger candidate who got screwed in legislative redistricting or just knew it was much more Dem than prior.

                  Yes, they wouldn't draw it as my mom does in the body of that diary, but if you look at the comments I end up drawing one more like yours.  Simply put, you would have a district we'd have held this year even if it wasn't incredibly safe.

                  The 5th is to me what's the real question mark since the 10th could feasibly have Lorain, which makes it safe and the 5th not a pick up, or otherwise.

                  NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                  by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:37:33 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Here's what I did last year(ish): (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sawolf

                Numbered

                from the diary.

                If only!

                Ok, so I read the polls.

                by andgarden on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:03:51 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I can't see Summit County being sliced n diced (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  andgarden

                  like that, but otherwise looks pretty decent to me :)

                  The ones I have no doubt about are Sutton, Driehaus, and Wilson since we have an actual comparison to real election results and those seats have fewer variations than say, the 5th.

                  Anyway, Ohio is one of those states where I'm going to redraw it at least slightly from how I diaried it last time.  I'm really trying to make the next version more researched so it'll be interesting to see if there are any advocacy groups that put out their own maps for any states.

                  NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                  by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:11:07 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Hope that didn't come across as rude. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf

              We all want to be cheerleaders for our side sometimes.  But I don't have any illusions that a neutral body will side with me in all cases.  

            •  in "fair" processes its not uncommon for (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sawolf, MichaelNY

              a map that is not quite fair, but tilted one way or another.  See Washington and New Jersey for examples of this happening and benefiting Republicans.  Or for a court doing essentially this in a way that benefits Democrats, see Oregon.

              ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

              by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:19:55 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  and Nebraska we'd have had a slightly better shot (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          in.

          ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

          by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:33:27 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh yeah, that's where I was getting 26 to (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Daman09, WisJohn, MichaelNY, bumiputera

            that I posted in Kos' rec list/front page diary.

            That district gets .6% better which I think would have gotten it better attention from Obama which would have helped Ewing close the remaining 1.2% of the margin.

            So +22-26 seats is what I feel very comfortable with right now, more than enough for a majority.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

            by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:49:45 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  To think the folks at monkey cage (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen, sawolf, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

              They do this for a living, and still don't get it right, and you're just doing this in your free time.

              It really gives me the sense that perhaps some political scientists like being contrarian more than actually being correct in their analysis.  Previously, they made a post saying,

              "Well, dems got more votes, but gerrymandering didn't give republicans a majority.  I'll prove it, I'm going to compare 2002 maps with this election's data. Looks like dems wouldn't have won under those maps either.  Take THAT conventional wisdom!"

              This follow up just sounded weaksauce from the first paragraph, they seemingly admitted the first bloggers analysis was incorrect, because 2002 maps were anything but fair maps, and anything other than a fair map is either a straight out gerrymander or a bipartisan gerrymander.

              I don't follow monkeycage at all really, but the two posts I've seen pushed out by them, and repeated by the likes of Dave Wasserman and other election people makes me really ill.  It's just bad analysis, and sets up the narrative that gerrymandering did change the outcome of the election, when it clearly did.

              Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

              by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:14:36 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well this is basically what my topic du jour is (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                James Allen, Daman09, lordpet8, MichaelNY

                And when I redo the whole thing I'm going to try to make it much more "academic" by backing up some of the maps I included and citing more stuff, but yeah.  The trouble is it's just hard to have hard data when you're dealing with counterfactuals so I can see why they're stumbling over it, but it isn't like redistricting experts don't exist to tell them about what the maps might have actually looked like.

                It does however leave me hopeful that someday I might actually get paid to do what I like to do anyways, that's always nice.

                NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:19:09 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I have to defend here (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ramesh, MichaelNY

                  There is not an overwhelming consensus about this in political science literature. It just so happens that the Monkey Cage crew are proponents of one position.

                  I also think that everyone here has caricatured that position. They aren't saying that gerrymandering doesn't matter. They're saying that because of the distribution of party voters, and the relative turnout of those voters, that it makes it a hell of alot easier for Republicans to pack Democrats than vice-versa, therefore Republicans have a built in advantage.

                  They aren't wrong. They're simply looking at the data in a more roundabout way than you all are.

                  23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                  by wwmiv on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:25:59 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm not disagreeing with any of that really (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    James Allen, Daman09, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

                    I just hate to see people recognize that Democrats are more inherently concentrated and draw the conclusion that that not gerrymandering, prevented us from taking the house; especially when those who assert said position can't or won't discuss actual alternative maps.

                    Using national or state based regression seems rather worthless to me here since at the end of the day you need a proposal to compare to, which is hard so I don't necessarily blame them for not trying, it's that they're leading the reader to a conclusion unsupported by the facts presented.

                    NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                    by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:30:37 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Sure they can make that arguement (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Jacques Kallis, MichaelNY

                    And by all accounts, they are correct, because dems are typically tightly packed in urban areas, it puts dems at a disadvantage in the house.  The problem I have is that they try to use THAT as proof as to why dems don't have a majority right now, and that gerrymandering wasn't the culprit.

                    I'm not exactly why they they keep pushing this idea that gerrymandering wouldn't have changed the outcome though, they gerrymandering that occurred this cycle was very agressive, and while I wasn't really aware of the redistricting process in 2002 and 1992, mostly because I was 11 and 1 during both those processes, it seems to me that the this round was probably more agressive than it had been in the past.

                    The only stat you really need to look at is that in every election in recent memory, the party that got a majority of the votes in the house won the chamber, except in 1996, where the difference was .3%, this election it was looking like more than 1%, which I would assume would be more than enough to sway marginal seats to give us a majority.  But, as it turns out, it wasn't.

                    Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

                    by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:37:15 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Honestly at this point (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      we need either a 7 point house popular vote win, a shitton of Republican Open seats, or both to take back the house. At least by old numbers, the median house district is now R+3.

                      •  The new lines under just 2008 (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MichaelNY

                        the median seat was R+2.25.  I'll be very interested to see how that shakes out this year, I'm not expecting it to get much better though.

                        NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                        by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:33:28 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  It will certainly be interesting (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MichaelNY

                        I don't think we will win the house in 2014, mostly because its a midterm, and there is a dem in the White House, but, if it becomes more of a neutral year, I can certainly see us make some gains, but probably not enough to garner a majority.  Then again, demographics favor us, and two years down the road gives us more democratic voters, and older republicans, dying off, so you never know.  I know there will be quite a few races here in CA that will be targeted, and I'm almost certain we will win Miller's district at this point.

                        Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

                        by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:45:35 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

        •  I'll just leave this here (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BeloitDem, MichaelNY

          Swingnut since 2009, 21, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

          by Daman09 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:00:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Hrmm... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          You're interpreting everything as optimistically as possible.  

          Sometimes we just lose the gimmies.  We should have been able to win IA-03 and CO-06, and we didn't.  

          Anyway, going down issues with your analysis.

          1.  Figuring Elmers to win seems unlikely.  Maybe she would under the old map lines, but assuming something neutrally-drawn you'd end up with whatever district Johnston County was in being pretty difficult for a Democrat to hold.

          2.  Your hypothetical Michigan honestly sounds like a fairly good Democratic gerrymander. There's no reason to think courts or a nonpartisan body would neither add Ann Arbor to a Detroit-based district, nor attach both to each other.  

          3.  You are making hopeful assumptions on VA-05 and VA-10.  In addition, it's pretty easy to have a compact NOVA district like VA-10 which would be no better than EVEN.  D+5 would take gerrymandering.  

          4.  Indiana is again optimistic, and relies upon assuming we get a great breakdown, and run a good campaign.  Honestly I think Bloomington in IN-08 would do us better.  

          5.  I just disagree on WI.  I think Duffy (sadly) would be favored even in a neutral map.  Obama's performance was pretty weak outside of the Lake Superior counties.  

          6.  Are you really telling me a neutral map would have been better for us than a Democratic-drawn one?  Not that I think they did a good job of course, but it's hard for me to see to assume the court would make a better job - particularly when you could argue Pine Bluff in AR-01 makes sense from a COI standpoint (traditionally black counties all in one place).

          7.  On SC and AL, the question comes down to how the courts (or the committee) would understand the Voting Rights Act.  I don't have faith they would consider the maximal position we favor.  

          8.  NJ was bipartisan, even if the tiebreaker sided with the Republicans in the end.  Regardless, NJ-09 retreating much further into upper Bergen would put it in danger of being lost, particularly depending upon if they try and draw a Latino seat (and how they draw it).  I'd say at best it would be a swing district.  Its entirely possible that other seats elsewhere in the state may have been endangered as well.  

          9.  Washington's bipartisan map was a bit more truly bipartisan than New Jersey.  I'm not saying it was the best map for us of course, but I don't think the resulting map was horrible by any means.  And again, assuming Reichert will lose because he gets a slightly bluer seat, which causes national Democrats to pour money in, and a more credible candidate -- it's all a best case scenario.  

          •  Well look at the maps in the diary (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, MichaelNY

            I'll probably redraw a handful of them, but for the most part that's what I'm going off.

            I could be totally off on Michigan but after drawing it several times that was the way it came out; regardless I think Walberg would be done even without Ann Arbor, but what I was really saying is that Walberg gets his district eliminated while an entirely Oakland County 9th is put in its place where Peters would have run.

            North Carolina Ellmers would get Johnston County, but also Cumberland since it can't fit into the 7th which means it's still R+ leaning and Romney won it, but one that's more open to local Dems and Ellmers is a fairly weak incumbent.  I could easily see her still win though, but the other 3 are beyond a doubt.

            I'm about to go to dinner, but I'll address the other points sometime when I get back.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

            by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:30:40 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Okay so to address the rest of your points (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen, MichaelNY

              In Indiana Mullen barely lost and it's not hard to see his district get drawn all of 1% more Democratic.

              The 9th gets way more Democratic despite not getting better for Obama.  This is because it drops the Indianapolis suburbs and is entirely Ohio river area + Bloomington and with it being much more Democratic we either could have gotten Hill to run again or Yoder would have been much better funded.  I'm not saying we'd have 100% won it and it would have been a tossup at best (unlike the 2nd) but I think it's reasonable to believe that we could have won it back had it been essentially as Democratic as it is now.  The 8th is where a fair map doesn't do shit for us unless you believe Bloomington belongs in it.

              On Wisconsin it totally comes down to candidate quality, since I have no doubt that Duffy would have beaten Kreitlow again.  But if we could have gotten someone like Julie Lassa then I don't see how Duffy holds a D+3 seat against a well funded opponent.  It might be narrow, but he would lose.

              On AR it absolutely would be better!  Pine Bluff belongs more in the delta district than those north-central Ozarks counties do, and it causes the district to get a good deal more Dem.  I just don't know if AR voters would split their tickets as much as they have in the past, but Crawford, who is a fairly weak incumbent, would have gotten a 1st tier challenger rather than the 3rd tier we were stuck with.  Arkansas Democrats intentionally spread themselves out, quite stupidly.

              On SC and AL it isn't just drawing a second VRA seat; even without one Roby and Mulvaney would be screwed since AL-02 would be at worst R+7 meaning Bright would crush her, or you'd have a compact Birmingham district (with a different VRA seat) that Obama carried.  SC there's just no way the 5th doesn't get a few points more Dem without gerrymandering and Mulvaney only won by 10 against a nobody.

              NJ and WA I know had a bipartisan map but it's still partisan and we got rolled by the tiebreaker siding with Republicans in New Jersey and the Democrat siding with Republicans in Washington, meaning the maps slightly favor them.  Given how well Obama did in NJ this year though I don't see how in the hell Rothman or Pascrell would lose a D+2 (by 2008) seat this year.

              In Washington I'd love to see alternate maps, but I just don't see why you would need to draw WA-08 out of King County and when that happens Reichert gets a seat that's at least as blue as his old one.

              NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

              by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:50:53 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  In general... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                I'm suspicious of any claim that Democrats can pick up deeply Republican PVI seats anymore for the House, whatever their ancestral lean.  After all, FL-18 is the most right-wing pickup we managed, and for 2012 it was roughly R+4.  No matter the strength of the individual candidates, there seems to be no more than a few percent of the electorate who will vote cross-party for anyone but a very established incumbent.  I do think that if you drew any seat that Obama cleared 50% in 2012, we'd be heavily favored to take in Presidential years however.  

                I can see the argument for two seats in Washington crossing the Cascades.  There is a state highway connecting the two, and without WA-08 crossing over, WA-03 would need to expand deeper into Eastern Washington.  As a knockoff, some other seat could become Republican-leaning, as Lewis county is quite right wing, as are interior portions of Pierce.  

                •  Perhaps, there's no way of knowing with Bright (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  James Allen, MichaelNY

                  since he didn't run this year.  What I do know is that he just barely lost his old district in 2010 and if it got 9-10% more Democratic he'd be a very formidable candidate.  Plus Obama would have held up fine meaning that the seat would be like R+6 (by 2012) so I don't think that's too much to expect of Bright to win.

                  NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

                  by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:27:37 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  What he suggested for MI isn't a Dem Gerrymander (0+ / 0-)

            At all. We're just so used to Republican Gerrymanders that stick Ingham with Livingston and northern Oakland County and split up Washentaw

    •  I'm curious to how they come up with (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      the Dem seats expected to win numbers

      sorry but 81% in NY seems tad too high in my book

      24, gay Atari Democrat CA-41

      by lordpet8 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:38:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is Nick Goedert, author of the cited MC piece (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Hey, this is Nick Goedert....I wrote the post from Monkey Cage last month that you just linked to.

      The gist of the piece is that two factors both contributed to the Democrats losing the House majority despite winning the popular vote: (a) the GOP controlled redistricting in more states (and more seats), and (b) Democrats are inefficiently geographically concentrated.  

      Because the overall popular vote was so close, either of these factors alone would probably have been enough to keep the Democrats from winning a majority.  But I think (b) was a slightly larger factor that (a).  If I had to make a rough estimate, I would guess (a) costs the Dems about 10 seats, and (b) cost them about 13.

      I would be happy to consider a different baseline for what we should expect in the absence of either (a) or (b); the one I have chosen is quite neutral and based on broad historical averages.  

      But I don't think you can just draw your own map ad hoc and call that the "ungerrymandered" result.  Just because you create new institutions or guidelines to reform the process doesn't mean they will create the map you want.  Look what happened in NJ and FL this time around...both states have ostensibly nonpartisan gerrymanders, but both ended up with maps very favorable to Republicans.

  •  NJ-Gov: I don't think Buono will lack for money. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JBraden, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

    Emily's List had invited her to the winter meeting of the DGA. Buono will undoubtedly be their main focus for 2013. They raised almost $200,000 for Hassan's campaign. I think they could definitely double, if not triple that amount. Considering they raised more than 1 million for at least 3 Senate campaigns this past cycle. No doubt she also have some union support as well and it appears her county officials will support her run.

    20, Dude, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus! (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren for Senate!

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 01:09:59 PM PST

    •  Do you know much it cost to run in NJ? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, MichaelNY, SaoMagnifico

      She's not going to raise as much money as a Corey Booker would if he decides to run.

      Emilys List won't be enough for Buono.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:38:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Buono isn't that big a name (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      I don't underestimate the power of EMILY's List, but New Jersey is one of the most expensive states in the country to go on television, and Buono isn't that well connected in her own right. Gov. Christie, regardless of Republican grumblings over his supposed "role" in Romney's electoral humiliation last month, is a rock star who is going to be getting in-state and especially out-of-state campaign dollars and dark-money support buys out the wazoo. Buono needs to make a lot more friends or she and EMILY's List will get drastically outspent, assuming she is the nominee (which is a big "if").

      I tend to think Mayor Booker passes on the gubernatorial race, gives an emphatic endorsement to the Democratic nominee without taking any personal shots at Christie, and runs for Sen. Lautenberg's seat in 2014. And I expect Buono or any other B-list candidate loses pretty badly to Christie, who runs for president in 2016.

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 12:58:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Christie has very little shot at President (0+ / 0-)

        He's simply way too moderate.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:20:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So maybe he ends up as 2016's Huntsman (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, tietack

          Huntsman bet the farm that the Republicans, stung by their 2008 loss, would move to the center in 2012. Instead, the Tea Party happened, Republicans got all excited when their extremism was inexplicably rewarded by a not-really-paying-attention electorate in 2010, and we got "severely conservative governor" Mitt Romney, a.k.a. the guy who once claimed he was more progressive on gay rights than then-Sen. Edward Kennedy.

          Maybe Republicans will recognize what sunk Romney and his merry band of guys who didn't really want to be seen in the same room as him, and they'll move back toward the center (and back toward reality). Gov. Christie would fit right in with that crowd.

          But more likely, Republicans will (once again) conclude that the reason they lost in 2012 is that they weren't conservative enough, move further to the right, double down on their efforts to suppress the vote, and lose again in 2016. I don't even know what will happen in 2014; for some reason, midterms are just harder to predict than presidential elections.

          Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

          by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:32:18 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  No, I agree and not everyone (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, tietack

        is a big name when they begin a run. Only some can break through and I think she has the potential. She also did a lot of fundraising for different legislative candidates and raised a lot of money, comparatively, for her last campaign. I don't think she's a slouch and I don't think she'd run if she didn't have certain chess pieces lined up.

        On the topic of Christie, I don't think he'll win big. I don't believe he'll be able to sustain his high approvals. He may still be able to win, but I don't think it will be a blowout.

        20, Dude, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus! (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin and Elizabeth Warren for Senate!

        by ndrwmls10 on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 03:51:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  where can we get more maps like in the post auto- (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32

    bailout article? there's a great map in there for 6 states showing the 2008-2012 shift. We really need this for the whole country!

    Looks like Obama performed massively better in central Kentucky this time around but was wiped out in eastern Kentucky. He did surprisingly better all around in Ohio, including eastern Ohio border counties, with the exception of a half dozen eastern counties. No surprise to see he did much worse this time around in IL (except northwest), IN, and MI.

  •  PA-GOV: Not Sen. Casey (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WisJohn, jj32, MichaelNY

    He is "not considering" a run.

    (Not a surprise.  The scenario many here have envisioned, however, is that he does run for Governor in 2018, when both the Governor seat and his Senate seat are up, setting up a mad scramble on both sides in a Senate primary.)

  •  Map Time, Kentucky Edition! (10+ / 0-)

    After deciding to recalculate all of the partisan averages I had done for my series on political geography without including the presidential result, I also wanted to update them to cover just the last 4 cycles (2006 to present) and the easiest states to do of course are those without 2012 statewide races such as Kentucky.  Behold:
    Photobucket
    (click for larger)
    Photobucket
    The second map shows how Obama performed compared to an "average" candidate who lost statewide by the same margin.  What immediately jumps out is how badly he did in the coal counties (most of the dark red).

    You can find my excel sheet with all of the data for you to look at (sheet 1) or do your own calculations (sheet 2) here.  The data used 2008 and 2010 senate and 2007 and 2011 governor, sos, AG, auditor, treasurer, and ag commisioner.

    Using those averages, I calculated the partisan lean of the state's 6 congressional districts (assuming whole counties):
    Photobucket

    Anyway, using this data I wanted to construct the best Dem gerrymander (without serious county splits) that I could.  At first I had tried just drawing Chandler the highest Dem average district possible while drawing Guthrie's base into Whitfield's district and making that a possible (relatively) open seat pick up.
    Photobucket

    Photobucket

    But seeing how Chandler underperformed woefully among the heavily coal depended counties in the east of the state, I realized that was a no go.  Instead, I moved the possibly open 2nd into a definitely open 5th district in the east tailor made for Dan Mongiardo while making Chandler's district both A) more Dem than the actual version and B) much, much less reliant on coal Democrats.  Behold, the Mongiardomander!
    Photobucket
    Photobucket

    Chandler's seat is a net .4% more Democratic but since it doesn't take in the conservaDem coal counties where he drastically underperformed the average, I think he would have held off Barr.  It's also trending slightly our way and didn't see Obama fall off considerably like the real district did.  26% is new, up from the actual 8.5% new, but the new portions have practically no coal and the parts I removed were where Chandler performed worst.

    Mongiardo's district is also just 3% less Dem on average than John Yarmuth's district, so I think he would have had a great shot at picking up this open seat, as long as Hal Rogers didn't run there.  This 5th district is a good 7% more Dem than the state senate one where Mongiardo cruised to a landslide from 2000 to 2006.  Rogers home is drawn into the second where he would crush Guthrie in the primary.   Mongiardo also got over 56% here in his 2004 senate run vs. Jim Bunning.

    Additionally, the 1st is made 1.4% more Dem than the state, or just .4% more Republican than the actual 6th district, so it would be competitive without Whitfield, who is 69.  On the off chance that you think Rogers might run in the 5th, Guthrie's base can be drawn into the 1st so that Rogers has maximum incentive to run in the 2nd where his home and base are under either configuration.

    NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

    by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:03:11 PM PST

    •  Here's the data for the old CDs (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen

      Photobucket
      Again, this is using no-county splits.

      So chandler got shored up 1.8% by Obama/12 numbers and  only 0.8% by the average numbers.

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

      by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:57:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It will be interesting to see if Democrats (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, MichaelNY

      keep control of the State House in 2014. They are at 55-45, but will control redistricting, which will eliminate a seat in Western KY and Eastern KY, and likely transfer the seats to the Golden Triangle. The lesson for Dems in 2014 is that they need to keep their retirements to a minimum. They lost 4 open seats in 2012, of which they hope to get some of them back in 2014. Also a wild card is if the Senate Republicans decide to block House maps and throw the whole process to the courts. Democrats will also hope that they will have a Senate candidate that helps them, particularly if they can get Bill and Hillary Clinton to campaign here.

      "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

      by SouthernINDem on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:45:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'll be very interested to watch that too (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen

        I don't know if we'd be strongly favored to lose the house under a court map, though I suspect we would and if that's right I think the risk is worth it for the GOP to a certain extent.  Of course if that made us much more likely to gain the senate then that would be incredibly dumb of them, but just looking at how poorly we've fared recently in legislative elections we probably won't without a favorable environment.

        It's too bad that both chambers weren't up in 2011 when we romped statewide.  I'd love to know what congressional map the Dems would have drawn if they actually could.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

        by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:02:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, it takes a lot of altruism (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen

          to surrender your map-drawing to the court when you could easily shore up your victories and create more opportunities elsewhere.  The current Senate map is a 2001 GOP gerrymander and a court map would help Democrats gain a few.

          Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

          by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:21:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sure, just look at how quiet the NY Assembly Dems (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            were about pressuring Cuomo over the Senate lines.  However, Kentucky Republicans don't have to worry about the Congressional map since they basically got more than they would have from a court map in 1 and 5 yet still picked up the 6th.

            NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

            by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:33:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Is that wild card being talked about (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        or is it just some potentiality?
        Also, the Dem party chair is cheered by the results of the PPP poll and says this will help with recruiting.  And McConnell's spokesman does the GOP schtick of lying about PPP's record:
        http://mycn2.com/...

        also, which likely candidate for the 6th is strongest, in your view?

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:19:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting that Pryor (7+ / 0-)

    WASN'T on Crossroad's target list.

  •  MI-GOV: Whitmer or Peters? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, bumiputera

    I just want to get peoples's preference and who they want to see. I think both are good. My preference will probably be to Whitmer. She's been in Lansing since 2000, plus has been the Democrat senate leader since 2010.

    Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

    by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:49:05 PM PST

    •  I'm a fan of Peters, don't know much about Whitmer (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ArkDem14, MichaelNY, bumiputera

      but a lot of people here say she'd be better suited for AG at this point.  I also like Schauer a lot but think going for gov right now is a bit much for someone who hasn't been in office since losing a congressional district in 2010 he'd held for all of one term.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 02:56:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Peters (5+ / 0-)

      I think Peters is our strongest candidate for Governor. I would prefer for Whitmer to pursue the office of Attorney General. We need to take back both offices, and I think they're both best suited for each of those respective offices. I'm also under the assumption that Levin will run for re-election and that a replacement won't be necessary.

      The Pragmatic Progressive (IN-4); Economic Left/Right: -7.12; Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

      by AndySonSon on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:10:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Whitmer (5+ / 0-)

      I think she would be better at building enthusiasm with voters.  If she runs for AG instead, that would ok but I prefer she run for governor.  

    •  Conflicted (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, MichaelNY, bumiputera

      I like Whitmer better, but think Peters is probably a slightly better candidate. However, I'm not convinced he's enough better that I wouldn't still vote for Whitmer in a contested primary if I lived in Michigan.

    •  I have to say about Peters (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, MichaelNY

      is that Im very happy he did not lose in the primary, because it would be a shame for a candidate with strong statewide potential like him lose in a D v. D primary.

      And at first I thought Levin was probably going to retire, but from what I read and seen it looks like he's running again. Which will be great, cause right now I think he knows this is not the time to retire, and he knows he's pretty much a shoe for re-election.

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:31:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Peters (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BKGyptian89, James Allen, MichaelNY

      I think it's more than a little early to be talking about this, and if there's a primary we'd all need to see their campaigns then to judge; but, while I personally like Sen. Whitmer, it seems clear at this point that Peters can raise more money, and probably has a better profile to appeal to rural UP voters than a partisan, leftist St. Sen. from Lansing. I almost always cast a primary ballot for the candidate I believe is best qualified to serve (and I certainly don't think Whitmer is unelectable by any stretch) but beating Snyder would make a statement; it would be narrative setting, and if Peters has better odds of doing that, which he certainly seems to from what I've heard, I hope he's the nominee.

      (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

      by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:53:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't really care... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, bumiputera

      As long as they don't end up running for the same thing.

      I think Rep. Gary Peters is probably a more logical successor to Sen. Levin, seeing as that both are in Congress -- but if it makes a difference that "congressman" is probably a better political launching point for a statewide run than "state Senate minority leader", I think the gubernatorial race will probably be more competitive than the Senate race, so maybe Peters should run against Gov. Snyder. But Whitmer has been speaking out against the Michigan Republican Party for longer, so I kind of prefer her as our torchbearer in that effort.

      As I said -- as long as they don't run for the same office. No use wasting Peters and Whitmer in a divisive primary if Levin retires and Snyder looks vulnerable (I think both are highly likely).

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 12:54:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  My Two Cents on Schauer, Peters and Whitmer (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      I know a good deal of Washtenaw County people that prefer Schauer over Peters and Whitmer. He represented part of the County and has a lot of supporters and former staff in the county.

      People forget that Schauer was once the State Senate Democratic Leader. He was elected in a State Senate seat that is more difficult than Whitmer's.

      Peters would be our best bet. His strength in Oakland County makes him an ideal choice. He clearly didn't intend to stay in his congressional seat very long. He pretty much is guaranteed a primary every cycle if he stays there. If Levin does not retire, Peters will probably go for Governor. If Levin does retire he will be our candidate for Senate.

      I am not the biggest fan of Whitmer. I feel sometimes the only reason people know of her is because she keeps other people out of the spotlight. A good example was when Republicans passed the anti-gay anti-bullying bill. State Senator Glenn Anderson (who lost the battle for minority leader) had worked so hard behind the scenes on anti-bullying policy. Instead of letting him shine on a policy issue he cared a lot about, she used it as a time to boost her national profile.

      M, 23, School: MI-12, Home: NY-18

      by slacks on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 02:29:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  MI-GOV 2014 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Snyder just signed RTW-FL.

    Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.75, -3.18, One of 1,620,985 Wisconsinites to re-elect Barack Obama, and one of 1,547,104 Wisconsinites to send Tammy Baldwin to the US Senate!!!

    by WisJohn on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:06:21 PM PST

    •  source (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.75, -3.18, One of 1,620,985 Wisconsinites to re-elect Barack Obama, and one of 1,547,104 Wisconsinites to send Tammy Baldwin to the US Senate!!!

      by WisJohn on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:08:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nail, meet political coffin (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WisJohn, BKGyptian89, CF of Aus

      Paging Governor Peters...

      NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

      by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:12:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Would this be the same sort of nail they used (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, jncca, BeloitDem, tk421, DCCyclone

        to seal Scott Walker's coffin? Because if so, we'd better get ready to see Zombie Snyder clawing his way out of the ground...

      •  long way to go (12+ / 0-)

        This probably ensures that Dems' base voters and volunteers will be motivated in 2014, but Snyder could still win especially if the economy improves.

        I think Dems will be especially angry that the GOP did this in a lame duck session, and this will hurt the GOP. My guess is that this was the GOP plan all along because they didn't want to have to run on this in a presidential year. They would have preferred to do this in January, but after the 2012 election recognized that they wouldn't have the votes to pass it then--so they had to do it in the lame duck session or not at all.

        Dems should also start recruiting for MI1, MI7, and MI11 now. Those seats look more likely to flip now than they did a few days ago.

        SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

        by sacman701 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:32:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Another thing that might fire up Dems (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JGibson, MichaelNY

          Detroit is about to be under the rule of an Emergency Fiscal Manager, as an older law that's been on the books for many years in Michigan allows Synder to assign an EFM to Detroit despite the 2011 EFM law being struck down in a statewide referendum.

          That is going to drive Detroit's black community to the polls in droves in 2014, trust me.

          Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee is a BFD!

          by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:32:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  why do you think it's his political coffin? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        RTW was at +10 approvals from Mitchell this week.  Adjusting for their ~5 point R lean, that's 50/50.

        19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
        politicohen.com
        Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
        UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

        by jncca on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:46:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In the sense that I thought he would be reelected (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, LordMike, blueonyx

          before and this is what I think is going to be the proverbial straw the broke the camel's back.  I don't think he's guaranteed to lose in a landslide, just that he's somewhat more likely to lose and before he was somewhat more likely to win.

          I guess that wasn't the best metaphor.

          NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

          by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:05:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Why though? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Why would doing something that is breakeven in popularity hurt him?  That's illogical. Either the polling is wrong or you're wrong.

            19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
            politicohen.com
            Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
            UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

            by jncca on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:07:21 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  EPIC-MRA had (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LordMike, itskevin

              RTW behind 41-52 once people were informed what it entailed.  It was tied without the information.  And EPIC MRA was the best of the pool of crappy MI polls this year.

              Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

              by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:15:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  What polling have we seen? Hardly any (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LordMike, James Allen, itskevin, MichaelNY

              I think the law will have become unpopular by the time 2014 is here.

              Most importantly is that he'll have a top tier challenger when before he might not have and that challenger will be well funded.

              NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

              by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:17:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  The poll is wrong (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KingofSpades, LordMike

              Mitchell was off in their polling. Their final poll was off by 4.5%.  Two of their other presidential polls had Romney leading or a tie which clearly wasn't accurate.  Additionally, the RTW poll was commissioned by a pro-RTW group.  

              •  I addressed Mitchell being off (0+ / 0-)

                by adding 5 points to the anti-RTW side.

                I think most people on here think voters like unions far more than they actually do.  And I continue to believe that, and will continue to believe it especially if Christie, Snyder, and Walker are all re-elected, which I expect to happen.

                19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
                politicohen.com
                Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
                UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

                by jncca on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:45:49 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Except (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  James Allen, LordMike, MichaelNY

                  Christie wouldn't be anywhere near where he is now if he had a Republican legislature.  So he hasn't been able to really attack unions like the other two and thus make himself truly controversial.  If he had, he would probably be much easier to beat.

                  Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

                  by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:51:05 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  If he's re-elected (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    it will be because people like the sense of balance, whether real or imagined.  These people will then go and vote Democratic for state legislature like they did in 2009 and 2011.

                    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

                    by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:52:45 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Yes... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Xenocrypt, MichaelNY

                  and I was expanding on your comment about the Mitchell polls being off.  You're assuming that Mitchell is only off by 5%.  It's clear that Romney was never leading in MI and yet Mitchell a had poll showing that he was.  So some their other polls were likely off by more than 5%.  You're also not factoring in that the poll was conducted for a pro-RTW group.      

                  •  Yeah, I'm also never sure how much (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    blueonyx, James Allen, MichaelNY

                    "correcting" for a pollster by some constant has proven to be useful.  The other problem is that we can check an electoral poll against an election result, but there's really no good way to check an opinion poll on an issue.

                    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

                    by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:06:42 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Christie said he loves collective bargaining. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  He has to at least pretend to not be anti-union.

                  ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

                  by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:16:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Agree (5+ / 0-)

            I think the race was lean R because incumbents tend to win.  Snyder has now ruined the entire premise of his candidacy (that he was a bi-partisan, moderate who would avoid divisive issues) and has given Dems a reason to be really excited about the 2014 election.  I would say the race is now a toss-up.  

      •  No chance. Economy is improving. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Snyder will get credit for it.  Same in Ohio, and probably even Florida.  

        Elections have consequences.  I can't get too riled up about this other than it was in the lame duck - I mean they didn't run on this in the lead up to 2012 elections - but then they have the gall to pass it now and Snyder has the gall to sign it?  But other than that - elections have consequences.  Where were all these protesters and union members in 2010 when the GOP swept the state?

        Union members and Unions don't seem to understand that they're not as popular as they think they are.  The GOP and Big Business has waged a 30+ year smear campaign against them, union membership has plummeted and the UER is at 7.7% and the only time you hear about unions is striking over money it seems.  

        They have the billionaires, We have the Big Dog!

        by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:15:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Bring it on (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      2014 is just around the corner.

      26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

      by DrPhillips on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 03:23:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  NC-SEN '14 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, JBraden, JGibson, MichaelNY

    Please Virginia Foxx run! Run, Virginia, run.

    They lady is insane. She somehow even managed to out crazy Vernon Robinson a few years ago to win her seat. But are North Carolina republicans crazy enough to nominate her?

    She or a mouth breather like Patrick McHenry would be Hagan's preferred candidate.

  •  OH-Gov: Is Strickland wanting to run again? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:17:12 PM PST

    •  Seems like he is thinking about it (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, JBraden, bythesea, MichaelNY

      link

      "Am I the candidate that is going to run against him? I'm certainly not prepared to say that," Strickland told The Plain Dealer just hours after both Obama and Brown were re-elected.  
      He has been pretty active politically since losing in 2010, against SB5 and for Obama and Dems in OH.

      The four candidates that get mentioned most seem to be Strickland, Rep. Tim Ryan, Richard Cordray and Cuyahoga County Executive Ed Fitzgerald.

      After Ryan's arrest for public drunkeness, I think Fitzgerald might be the strongest candidate.

      •  Public drunkeness at a wedding... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, MichaelNY

        and the charges were dismissed.  Unless he's some secret alcohol this is a total non-story.

        That aside, I'm fine with Strickland running if he's going to run for reelection (again..) but if he's one and done then no.

        NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

        by sawolf on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:50:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  So what, I got drunk at a wedding (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bythesea, MichaelNY

          I just HAD to try a little of every alcohol offered.

          Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

          by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 05:09:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, that's my concern (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, MichaelNY

          that it is an alcohol problem. If not, he would be my first choice, I think he would be a great candidate.

          Strickland would be good, but I agree. He is 71, so he might only seek one term and I would prefer someone who would run for re-election too.

          I think Cordray is doing fine running the consumer finance agency.

          Fitzgerald looks like he would be a good candidate, and is fairly young(44). He would be a rising star in the party if he got elected.

        •  Um, it signals possible substance abuse (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, CF of Aus

          Yes everyone (but me) gets drunk at weddings.

          But almost no one gets arrested for it.

          What did he do?

          Usually incidents like this signal a substance abuse issue.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:57:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  If it's a "one time" thing, I wouldn't jump to (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sawolf, LordMike, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

            conclusions. However, if Ryan has another such serious "incident" in his background, I think substance abuse is a serious question.

            I hope; therefore, I can live.

            by tietack on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:35:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This actually is a bigger signal to me than... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sacman701, MichaelNY

              ...a drunk driving arrest.

              Don't get me wrong, drunk driving is a much more serious crime as it jeopardizes lives, and drunkenness at a wedding does not.

              But as a signal of substance abuse, a lot of people who are not alcoholics make the dumb decision to drive drunk, and of course can get caught at any time.

              But to misbehave at a wedding to the extent the police get involved, well that's unusual to say the least.

              I note that I don't know anymore about this incident than what I've seen in this discussion thread, so it's always possible there are mitigating facts I don't know about.

              44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 06:34:14 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I suspect you've been to "out of control" parties (0+ / 0-)

                before.

                People make mistakes at such events, even at our "advanced" ages. "One strike" does not make someone a "troublemaker" (etc) in my book.

                I hope; therefore, I can live.

                by tietack on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:04:37 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  A wedding is not supposed to be... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  ...an "out of control party."

                  It's a major life event!

                  You've been through them twice yourself, me once, we know this!

                  That bride at the wedding where Ryan's conduct spurred a call to police is probably still pissed at him, and always will be.  You don't want to remember your wedding that way...a bride especially doesn't.

                  And that's just it, we all go to weddings knowing that.  Party up, yes, but it's not an occasion for public debauchery and vomiting.

                  44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:45:15 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  I'd like to see CFPB head Cordray... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, MichaelNY

      But I don't think Kasich will be beatable given the economic rebound.  Also Govs try to get their ideologue stuff passed in their first year or two and their second two are much less newsworthy and peoples memories fade.  I don't see Kasich picking any more hyper partisan fights - until after he is re-elected.  

      They have the billionaires, We have the Big Dog!

      by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:51:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He's still beatable... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, MichaelNY

        But, he gets the incumbent boost in a bettering economy.  He's still not likable, but it's sure not a slam dunk for us by any means.

        As long as he keeps his mouth shut as he's done the past year or so, he'll remain a slight (emphasis on slight) favorite for re-election.  We'll see if he continues to hide in the shadows or try something risky again.

        GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

        by LordMike on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:47:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  That strategy enrages me to no end, btw (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Pass shit you never campaigned on right after the election so you can't be held accountable until people forget.

  •  Quick... (13+ / 0-)

    If you guys don't mind keeping me in your thoughts and prayers tomorrow...

    I have a big music technique exam at 5, and if I fail, I leave piano. So I'm kinda nervous cause scales, etc. have never been my strong suit...

    21, Male, NC-02 home, SC-04 School. Majoring in Piano Performance.

    by aggou on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 04:19:09 PM PST

  •  Heileman and Halperin are writing a sequel (9+ / 0-)

    to "Game Change"  about the 2012 campaign called "Double Down."

    Not sure if the focus will be more on the Romney or Obama campaigns. First one was mostly about the pick of Palin as VP.

    link.

  •  Dahlkemper was my former representative. (7+ / 0-)

    I like her, but I don't think she's enough of a heavyweight to take on Corbett, at least not at the top of the ticket.

    That being said, she does have a compelling personal story (married young and had a son, left abusive husband, finished college as a single mother, became a dietitian, remarried, had four more kids, launched successful small business) and while she is pro-life (interestingly, she's also anti-capital punishment), it's more in the "hey, let's actually make this country conducive to raising a child" sense rather than the "throw 'abortionists' in jail!" one.  On economic issues, she's mostly left-of-center.

    I wouldn't mind seeing her as a pick for lieutenant governor.  Schwartz-Dahlkemper or Sestak-Dahlkemper would be great.

  •  NV: Sandoval will expand Medicaid (9+ / 0-)

    according to Jon Ralston.  

    I'm not sure if he was really mentioned as a 2016 presidential candidate, but this seems to rule him out.

    It will be interesting to see what Martinez does regarding Medicaid. Martinez and Sandoval were among the few GOP governors who opted for a state based exchange. Martinez is definitely considered more of a rising star in the party and a 2016 contender, and expanding Medicaid probably wont help her.

  •  How Democracy Corps Got It Right (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, jj32, LordMike, askew, MichaelNY

    http://www.nationalmemo.com/...

    Our final Democracy Corps poll (completed two days before Election Day) showed the race 49 to 45 percent –an unrounded margin of 3.8 points.  With other public polls still showing the race tied or Romney ahead, our poll was an outlier.
    Our accuracy in this election reflected years of intense study and a series of careful decisions about demographic and turnout trends among pivotal voting groups, notably Latinos.  And our accuracy also reflected our intense focus on the methodological changes necessary to accurately sample the full American electorate – such as insisting on a higher proportion of cell phone interviews, despite the higher costs.
  •  Arizona Presidential results by LD. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, CF of Aus

    Just did some tentative number-crunching with the precinct results and the AIRC "tentative final" change reports and the like.  I'll check tomorrow before I post more, but:

    There are 15 districts entirely in Maricopa County: 15, and 17-30.  

    Of these, it appears that (deep breath, sigh), Obama only won the 6 majority-minority ones, which are also the only ones that elected Dems to the Senate, which are also the only ones Obama won last time, which are also the only ones Kerry won.  (Assuming the "tentative final" districts match the enacted ones.)  It's like 2012 electoral bingo, and I just won.  These seats were also monolithic in electing their two House members each, except AZ-LD-28, where Eric Meyer narrowly snagged re-election (by, as CF of Aus pointed out, being the sole Democrat running against two Republicans for two seats).

    Not that there haven't been changes.  AZ-LD-19 and AZ-LD-29 (adjacent, in west Phoenix) went from 53% Kerry and 52% Kerry to 61% Obama and 57% Obama to 67% Obama and 66% Obama.  You can probably guess those are the two most Hispanic districts in the state.

    Obama came the closest in AZ-LD-18 and in AZ-LD-28, both of which I profiled, but then things get pretty iffy.  But he carried the majority-minority seats with at least 60% of the vote.

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

    by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:48:23 PM PST

    •  Note: "majority-minority" refers to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CF of Aus

      total population, not VAP, above.  (Although I don't know about 2012-VAP.)  Districts 24 and 26, the successors to Sinema's and Schapira's seats, are slightly majority-NHW in voting-age population.

      Other than that, District 8 (Pinal County), and Districts 9 and 10 (Tucson area), are majority-NHW from either perspective, and elected Democrats.  I'm sure Obama carried LD-09 and LD-10, and pretty sure he lost LD-08, although that'll be an interesting case study, as perhaps only really ticket-splitting district in the state.

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

      by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:09:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I assume Obama did reasonably well in LD-08 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        but I would guess that he still lost it.

        The Pintos are enough for a Dem to eek out a narrow win in this district. The Commission found that this seat was very inflexible in terms of voting strictly on racial lines. The conservatives of the district wont vote for a Hispanic who is not a member of the Rios family.

        Unfortunately Pinal County is lost to us with Babeau winning another term despite his shenanigans and Peter Rios being now the only Democrat on a 5 person County Commission (he was the Chair of a 3 person Commission for the past term).

        It is amazing how liberal Tucson's NHW areas are compared to Phoenix... as reflected by the Baja Arizona caucus on DKE !

        Town Planner, 30 years Old, Election Junkie, "If you agree with Bush's economic policy, Cheney's foreign policy, and Santorum's social policy, you loved Romney's speech" - James Carville (aka the Ragin Cajun) on the Colbert Report

        by CF of Aus on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:56:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Note 2: AZ-LD-09 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CF of Aus

      elected a Republican, Ethan Orr, who was the only Republican running against two Democrats for two seats.

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-10 (formerly PA-02/NY-12, then PA-02/NY-14).

      by Xenocrypt on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:12:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Being busy at work and working late (4+ / 0-)

    are not compatible with much participation in the comments.

    DKE for $200: why are there so many students here?

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:52:03 PM PST

  •  Obama % in Bend's state house district (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, jj32, MichaelNY

    55.87%.  Frustrating since the Republican incumbent got about 56.5%.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 06:55:14 PM PST

  •  PPP Michigan (10+ / 0-)

    PPP has decided to do a poll in MI.  They'll be polling about RTW, as well as the 2014 Governor and Senate races.    

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...

  •  How gay marriage won in WA, MD, and ME (8+ / 0-)

    http://www.theatlantic.com/...

    Great story. I think this bit may have a special appeal to the DKE demographic:

    All of these approaches were rigorously tested in controlled experiments. One population would receive one message; another, similar population would receive another; another would get no "treatment" at all, and pollsters would follow up to see what effect the message had. One of the first such trials actually happened in the heat of the Prop 8 campaign. A small nonprofit called Let California Ring aired a single television ad in the Santa Barbara media market and studied it in comparison with the similar population of the Monterey market, which got no advertising. (The small buy was all the group could afford; a plethora of small, uncoordinated groups was one of the Prop 8 opponents' many tactical problems.)
    snip
    Polling before and after the ad aired found that while support for gay marriage stayed the same in Monterey, it rose 11 points in Santa Barbara.

    I hope; therefore, I can live.

    by tietack on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 07:45:14 PM PST

  •  I drew Dem gerrymanders of (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoosierD42, bumiputera

    LA, MS, and WA.  should I post them in a diary for fun?

    Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

    by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:39:36 PM PST

    •  *I have drawn (0+ / 0-)

      Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

      by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:39:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well we have two Maryland diaries at the (0+ / 0-)

        moment so some non-Maryland gerrymanders would be nice !

        Town Planner, 30 years Old, Election Junkie, "If you agree with Bush's economic policy, Cheney's foreign policy, and Santorum's social policy, you loved Romney's speech" - James Carville (aka the Ragin Cajun) on the Colbert Report

        by CF of Aus on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:46:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  of course yes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:41:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm working on a second WA gerrymander (0+ / 0-)

        that's more outrageous than the last (which kept the 4th and 5 out of any ocean or sound counties).

        Age 23. Voting in NJ-03. Lived most of life in NJ-01. Had Rush Holt represent me during my undergrad years and am now represented by Frank Pallone in my grad school.

        by KingofSpades on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 08:53:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Well duh (0+ / 0-)

      I've drawn a MS map as well, with two black-majority seats (it's frightfully easy).

      24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

      by HoosierD42 on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 09:42:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  MI RTW supporters retaliating against WI progs? (0+ / 0-)

    Someone may have just hacked into the Facebook and/or Twitter accounts of Wisconsin progressive activist Lori Compas, as her personal Twitter account just sent out a spam tweet.

    It's possible (although I can't confirm that at this time) that Michigan right-to-work supporters may be retaliating against out-of-state progressive activists by hacking into their social media accounts.

    Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee is a BFD!

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Dec 11, 2012 at 10:35:34 PM PST

  •  Need a reason to smile? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Tyler R

    Reps. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich will no longer be congressmen in a month's time.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 01:38:38 AM PST

    •  I prefer Paul to most Republicans (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      At least he supports cutting defense and opposed the Iraq War.

      19, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
      politicohen.com
      Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
      UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.5.38, -3.23

      by jncca on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 07:14:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I also like some of his civil libertarianism (0+ / 0-)

        and skepticism of the Fed (though he goes a bit too far on that for my taste - only a bit, though).

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Wed Dec 12, 2012 at 03:38:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site