Skip to main content

Video TBD.

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

  •  Lookee what I found: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog

    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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:07:30 AM PST

  •  AK, SD, GA & NC-Sen races & PA-Gov (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, meralda, MichaelNY
  •  Reposting from the previous thread (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, HoundDog, WisJohn, CF of Aus

    because I spent literally minutes on the Maine CD results:

    There are about 3,000 votes not applied to any particular locality. I guess they're absentees or something like that. There are also "blank" votes listed, which I did not count as part of the totals.

    ME-01:

    Obama 221,952 (59.35%), Romney 142,573 (38.13%), Total 373,949

    ME-02:

    Obama 177,283 (52.74%), Romney 148,845 (44.28%), Total 336,177

    PVI: looks like ME-01 is D+9 (8.6, specifically) and ME-02 is D+2 (2.3). 2012 was actually better than 2008, it went from 2 points to 2.5.

  •  MO-Sen, MO-Gov: Claire got more votes than Nixon (12+ / 0-)

    http://enr.sos.mo.gov/...
    She got exactly 69 more votes than he did.  Isn't that unexpected, especially since Nixon insisted that he keep his primary night party separate from McCaskill's as he thought she was a likely loser.

    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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:17:37 AM PST

  •  CA SD-5 (3+ / 0-)

    It looks like they won't be calling the race for Galgiani for at least another week.

    We have to wait while

    election supervisors in San Joaquin County double-check about 4,000 ballot that were rejected.
    http://www.lodinews.com/...

    But overall I don't much of a way for the Republican to pull back into the lead at this point

    "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

    by lordpet8 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:19:25 AM PST

  •  my favorite by them (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lordpet8, HoundDog, JGibson

    The only tidbit of news I've got recently is that Shawn Lindsay seems to be strongly considering running again, despite losing his state house district this year and whining about how Oregon voters are too Democratic and partisan.

    ...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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:22:21 AM PST

  •  Weekend tune (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, JGibson

    I'm in a James Mercer mood today

    "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

    by lordpet8 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:24:34 AM PST

  •  Question I'm wondering if anyone here can answer (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, MichaelNY

    How many Senators have been elected since the passage of the 17th amendment?

  •  Recommendation. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lordpet8

    I just finished watching a series called battleground on hulu. You guys will love it.
    http://www.hulu.com/...

  •  Do we have a list of target congressional (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    meralda, MichaelNY

    districts for 2014?  Where should we be focusing our attention and energies to maximize our changes to regaining the House in 2014?

    This seems to be too important to not spend the extra effort to prioritize.

    Otherwise President Obama and Democrats are going to have a much tougher challenge to try to leave the kind of legacy to dazzle the voters and convince them that they want to have Democrats controlling the WH, Senate, and House, (and states and local as well.)

    The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

    by HoundDog on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:38:25 AM PST

    •  I personally want to wait until all Pres by CD (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, wu ming, jncca, HoundDog

      tabulating is done with (which necessitates waiting until the votes are counted completely), then it can be compared to the 2012 House results (ditto with vote counting), then that can be compared to the existing bench of candidates. I hate to say it because I'm itching for 2014 just as much as anybody else, and I know this sentiment has been repeated here, but it's just too early to start laying out targets.

      However, I do have a list of 39 the closest losses from this time around---some of the results being unofficial, of course:

      Within 6 points,
      IL-13, -0.4
      MI-01, -0.7
      MN-06, -1.2
      NY-27, -1.4
      IN-02, -1.4
      NE-02, -2.4
      CO-06, -3.6
      PA-02, -3.6
      FL-10, -3.6
      NY-23, -3.8
      KY-06, -3.9
      OH-16, -4.4
      FL-02, -5.4

      Wider than 6 points, but within 12 points,
      NC-08, -6.1
      MI-11, -6.4
      NY-11, -6.6
      OH-06, -6.8
      NY-19, -7
      CA-10, -7
      FL-16, -7.2
      NV-03, -7.6
      VA-02, -7.6
      MN-02, -8.2
      NC-09, -8.2
      MI-03, -8.6
      IA-04, -8.6
      IA-03, -8.7
      TX-14, -8.9
      NJ-03, -9
      SC-07, -9.8
      MI-07, -10.3
      IN-08, -10.3
      MT-AL, -10.3
      CA-25, -11.2
      SC-05, -11.2
      WI-01, -11.5
      TN-04, -11.6
      MI-06, -11.8
      WI-08, -11.8

      Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism.

      by Zutroy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:04:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  this leaves out KS-03, the most Democratic (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, HoundDog

        district in Kansas, where we let the Republican go unchallenged this year.

        ...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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:17:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The list isn't Pres by CD, but House race results. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          HoundDog, wwmiv

          My point is that I'd like to wait until Pres by CD numbers have been accurately compiled to compare with them. The list here does offer a few things to think about, though. You can see that a lot of the room left for expansion comes from the remaining Republican districts in Democratic gerrymanders (NY, IL, MN, CA), while close districts in Republican gerrymanders (PA, OH, etc) present a sharp decline in remaining opportunities.

          Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism.

          by Zutroy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:40:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  New York and Minnesota were not Democratic (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BeloitDem, MichaelNY, HoundDog

            gerrymanders.

            ...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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:41:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Nor was CA. (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen, MichaelNY, wu ming, HoundDog

              In fact, were there any Dem gerrymanders at all, other than IL and MD? Does MA count, or would a neutral MA map pretty much give us 9-0 Dems anyway?

              •  MA barely counts (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Chachy, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

                The 4th and 9th would have been a little bit more Republican but everything would have been at least D+3/4.  RI is the same in that the 1st wouldn't have gotten more Republican, at least by presidential.

                We basically only gerrymandered 2 states while drawing a GOP map in a 3rd.

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

                by sawolf on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:54:32 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  California (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, Zack from the SFV, wu ming

                Textbook example. In the 10 years under the previous incumbent-protection dummymandering, the State Senate remained the exact same and only one US House seat changed hands (and almost changed hands again in 2010). Yet the state shifted steadily more and more Democratic, something you could see at the State Assembly level thanks to the higher number of districts. And suddenly the new map gives us four more US House seats with the same share of the popular vote as in 2010. Says a lot about the virtues of independent commissions.

                •  the old CA map (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, BeloitDem, andgarden

                  was not a dummymander but an incumbent protection map which actually did what it was supposed to do, as very few seats changed hands.

                  But it made the GOP lazy and let them take their safe gerrymandered districts for granted, even as R voter Registration plummeted during the decade. So the GOP was basically caught sleeping when the new maps came out.

                  Now if they Dems had done an aggressive Dem Gerrymander back in 2002 we could have gotten ourselves many more seats and then the new maps we have today wouldn't have looked as awesome.

                  "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

                  by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:25:43 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  I misspoke. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, DCal, HoundDog

              Not-drawn-by GOP maps would have been the more appropriate description. Everything not wholly drawn by a Republican state government seems to fall within the same category in terms of opportunities present, whether it was some kind of legislative compromise, a court drawn thing, or the gnarly gerrymander in Illinois. Those are where most of the closest remaining opportunities are.

              Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism.

              by Zutroy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:53:08 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  KS-02, Too (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, KingofSpades, lordpet8

          Redistricting actually made KS-02 several points more Democratic, while reddening KS-03 by about the same amount. Though KS-03 is still slightly more Democratic, it's now fairly close.

          In 2012, incumbent Jenkins got 57% of the vote to ~39% for Tobias Schlingensiepen, a credible, but underfunded and definitely B-List sort of candidate. But remember that this is the district that elected Nancy Boyda in 2006 and nearly re-elected her in 2008. It is now more blue thanks to eastern Douglas County, which, in 2008, handed Dennis Moore a margin of 13,000 votes. (~20,000 votes for Moore, ~7000 for Republican opponent)

          The other reason KS-02 is probably just as competitive as KS-03? We actually have a bench there--state Sens. Laura Kelly, Anthony Hensley & Tom Holland would all be as A-List as KS Dems can get. Plus, Jenkins is now a junior member of the Republican House leadership, which will eat away the remaining shards of her moderate credentials.

          Kansan by birth, Californian by choice and Gay by the Grace of God.

          by arealmc on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:50:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'm guessing that (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, WisJohn, HoundDog, MichaelNY

        OH13 should be on the list too, as it was kind of a fluky situation (like IL13, only without a credible Dem)

        And honestly, I'd be interested to compare how the Ohio districts we won in 2006/2008 split in the 04 Presidential election compared to how the new Ohio districts split in 2012. There's not a direct comparison possible, obviously, but it might show some areas where ambition has kind of lacked (and we can go outside of Ohio for states that didn't have as much of a perfect storm).

        As i've typed in other places, i'm interested to see how the President did in his 217th and 218th best CDs this year.

        The Republican Party isn't a party of small government, it's a party of a government for the few. @bhindepmo

        by RBH on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:05:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  well here's what I have (6+ / 0-)

      Dem House Pickup Targets
      12.Reed (NY-23rd)
      11.Warloski (IN-2nd)
      10. Denham (CA-10th)
      9. Bachmann (MN-6th)
      9. Terry (NE-2nd)
      8. Benishek (MI-1st)
      7. Davis  (IL-13th)
      6. Grimm (NY-11)
      5. Hanna (NY-24)
      4. Valadao (CA-21st)
      3. Heck (NV-3rd)
      2. Coffman (CO-6th)
      1. Miller (CA-31st)

      "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

      by lordpet8 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:10:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  ID-01 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lordpet8, MichaelNY

    If anyone cares Jimmy Farris is going to run again. He is the NFL guy, got 30% this time. Still nice to have a live body I guess.

    http://jimmyfarris.us/...

  •  I'm interested in the Iowa Governor's race for (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    meralda, MichaelNY

    2014.  Should be interesting.  The race is already being discussed by some.  I sure as hell hope we get rid of Braindead once and for all.

  •  Links to Senator updated totals? (0+ / 0-)

    Hi..This morning i sent a tweet to Dave Wasserman from Cook Political Report asking if he had compiled updated totals for major senatorial races in light of the increasing Democratic vote tabulated for Obama...i have seen nothng back. I wanted to know if people like Sherrod Brown, Tim Kaine, Heidi Heidcamp, Jon Tester and Tammy Baldwin had increased their winning margins since those early results I saw till a few days after the election. Does anyone know if there is a link to see updated totals, like Wasserman's for the President and House vote...or where I could look to see these on an individual basis? Thanks.

    •  there may not be a single one (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Zack from the SFV

      but you could always check at the source, the state departments of elections in their respective states.

      ...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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:18:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Question for those who believe (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    okiedem, MichaelNY, itskevin

    that all the talk about Obama's demographic coalition is much ado about nothing, and the real explanation for his victory is simply the economic fundamentals:

    Now that his margin (so far) is sitting at 3.6%, do you still believe his performance was in line with the fundamentals?

    There's no simple answer to the question of what he should have gotten given the fundamentals, obviously, but most of the estimates I saw (like Nate Silver's) seemed to suggest a slight Obama advantage, of maybe 2-2.5%, or maybe less. Could it be that Obama outperformed economic conditions, then, and could this be based on the strengths of his demographic coalition?

    •  The bigger question is why economic fundamentals (9+ / 0-)

      would somehow dictate that Obama wins while losing white voters by 20 points (the same margin by which Dukakis lost white voters in 1988).

      Although there is clearly a tendency for two party systems towards competitiveness, there are long periods of time in which one party's demographic make-up gives it a distinct advantage against another (1820-1850 and 1932-1964 for the Dems, 1860-1875, 1900-1932, and 1972-1992 for the Republicans, not to mention the long periods of one party dominance in other two party systems such as that of the British Tories between the time of Thatcher and Blair and the French right from the end of Mitterand's presidency until 2012).

      We seem to be entering just such a time right now where Democrats have a distinct demographic advantage over Republicans. Although we will still occasionally lose elections due to exigent circumstances (just as the Democrats did to Eisehower or the Republicans did to Carter) we will likely continue to enjoy this advantage for a significant period of time until Republicans undergo a  near total transformation as a party and are reborn as a new party that can appeal to groups which it currently repels.

      26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

      by okiedem on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:52:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Also interesting how demographics and polarization (0+ / 0-)

        Over the last two decades have had an opposite impact on which party has the advantage in holding a majority in the House.

        "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

        by conspiracy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:59:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Question for those who believe (8+ / 0-)

    that the Democrats are not in an inherently stronger electoral position at the presidential level than they were in the 1970s and '80s, and that the fact that they're won the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections is just a function of Dem-favoring economic fundamentals in those years:

    What if 1992 was a realigning election?

    If a realigning election is defined as one in which a) a new electoral coalition emerges, which b) shifts the structural advantage from one party to the other, and c) that structural shift proves to be long-lasting... then shouldn't 1992 qualify? Specifically, shouldn't it qualify on the grounds that the non-South shifted dramatically from the Republicans to the Democrats in that year?

    If we define the South broadly, as including Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, and all states within that perimeter, here are the electoral vote totals for elections from 1968 to 1988 for non-Southern states:

    1968: 159 D-215 R
    1972: 17-356
    1976: 152-220
    1980: 27-345
    1984: 13-353
    1988: 106-260

    And then for 1992-2012:

    1992: 307-52
    1996: 304-55
    2000: 267-92
    2004: 252-102
    2008: 310-44
    2012: 290-58

    -In every year from 1968-1988, the Republicans won the non-South, in a range from 57% to 96% of the electoral votes.
    -In every year from 1992-2012, the Democrats won the non-South, in a range from 71% to 88% of the electoral votes.
    -The Democrats only won the popular vote in one election from 1968-1988, and in that year they barely managed 2/5ths of non-Southern EVs.
    -The Republicans only won the popular vote in one election from 1992-2012, and in that year they didn't even manage 1/3rd of non-Southern EVs.

    Clinton was a southerner, and was thought to have special appeal to southern voters; and given the recent history, it was assumed at the time that Democrats had to perform well in the South to win the presidency - which is kind of understandable, given the numbers above. For these reasons, it gets overlooked that Clinton's electoral coalition didn't actually rely on the South at all; he cleared 300 EVs outside the South both times, including wins in states like California, Illinois, and New Jersey, which hadn't been won by Dems since 1964, and which haven't gone Republican since. In fact, there are 242 EVs from states which have gone to the Democrats in every election since 1992, all of them outside the South.

    The electoral map has been pretty consistent for the last 6 elections now: the Democrats have a solid base in the Northeast, much of the Midwest, and the West Coast; the Republicans dominate the South and parts of the interior West.

    So why shouldn't we see this as a persisting electoral regime - one which provides a consistent advantage for Dems?

    •  Yes (3+ / 0-)

      But nobody noticed because of Perot.

      "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

      by conspiracy on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:53:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I actually think Clinton was a bit of a fluke (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Chachy, SaoMagnifico

      and that we didn't really see the true beginnings of the new Democratic coalition until 2000 or arguably even 2004. Clinton was still pretty much 50-50 in places like Fairfax, Wake, and Montgomery (PA) counties. He owed is win largely to thumping margins in lots of Demosaur areas that have swung had against us.  

      26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

      by okiedem on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:56:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think there's a solid case that (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen, itskevin

      the 1992 and 1994 elections marked a significant shift, but keep in mind both Mondale and Dukakis saw that same dynamic of doing much better outside the south.  I'd focus more on the downballot effects of that particular election since 1994 was when we first started to see the house elections align with that shifting south vs. non-south presidential dynamic.

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

      by sawolf on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:57:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, itskevin, MichaelNY

        I think it was an ongoing process that actually started with Reagan in 1980 - a lot of northern states trended D that year, and that continued with each election until the breakout in '92. The new electoral map is already partially constituted in '88, in fact.

      •  yeah Oregon had manifested by 1988 (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WisJohn, MichaelNY, Zack from the SFV

        again, the first time a Democrat won it without winning nationally in a landslide.  A Republican hasn't won it for either a presidential or gubernatorial election since 1986.  Washington is about the same.

        ...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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:29:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Correct: the suburban northeast realigned (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming, MichaelNY

      around about 1992. If I had to guess, I would say that it was about the threat Clarance Thomas represented to Roe v. Wade. Pro-choice voters realized that it was no longer safe to vote Republican for President.

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:03:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  the rise of the christian coalition and op rescue (7+ / 0-)

        to national prominance between 1988 and 1992 pushed the pro-choice mainline protestant white collar suburbanites that had been solid republicans for ages out of the party. the 1992 GOP convention brought my mother to tears, with pat buchanan and pat robertson taking her party over right in front of the cameras.

        people forget that the rockefeller bush the elder wing of the GOP used to be huge planned parenthood supporters, and had looked down their noses at fundies and bible bangers for generations.

        •  Everyone (correctly, IMO) assumed (4+ / 0-)

          that Bush Sr. didn't like those people. (He was pro-choice until the eve of the 1980 convention). But the Thomas selection proved that he was prepared to pander to them.

          Ok, so I read the polls.

          by andgarden on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:23:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  people were worried about souter, too (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            andgarden, MichaelNY, lordpet8

            but thomas was unambiguous, as was the parade of uglies the GOP put up at its convention. and the groundswell of grassroots fundie direct action like the summer of mercy was already starting to set pro-choice republicans' teeth on edge.

            even as a high school republican, i was easily as hostile to fundies as my liberal democrat friends, if not moreso. a lot of that came from my parents, i think. there's aa neat undercurent of this in "donnie darko," this unease with the rise of the christian right.

            •  Yes, that Souter turned out to be Souter (7+ / 0-)

              was a minor miracle. (Though in retrospect I think there's a case to be made that Bush, Sr. knew exactly what he was doing).

              Ok, so I read the polls.

              by andgarden on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:37:19 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  rec'd for Donny Darko (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wu ming, MichaelNY

              and for the interesting tale. I never realized you had to switch sides.

              "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

              by lordpet8 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:22:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  well, by the time i registered to vote (3+ / 0-)

                i was already creeping into decline to state limbo, but yeah, my ancestral roots go republican all the way to the civil war, and probably whigs before that, on all sides. that's what has made it so hard for my parents to grok that the logical place for a liberal republican is on the left edge of the democratic party, ideologically speaking. it's just really hard for them to get past the tribal identity. easier for me, since the party was already pretty well taken over by crazies and haters and purging liberals and moderates by the time i was old enough to register.

    •  I'm not entirely sure I buy realignment theory (7+ / 0-)

      But if you do, you could make a solid case for 1992. In particular, 1992 marked the first time in decades that a Democrat performed well and outright won much of the suburbs. Democrats had been getting killed in suburbs during 80s and 90s, which is why NJ for example had a Republican lean.

      That being said, if you put the 1988 results through uniform national swing, such that Dukakis had won the popular vote the Electoral Map, despite some key differences, has the broad outlines of the modern Democratic firewall. Here's what the map would have looked like had Dukakis done four points better (and Bush four points worse). That's with the popular vote at Dukakis 49.7, Bush 49.4, and it gives Dukakis 284 electoral votes. If you subtract South Dakota and Montana (on the theory that Dukakis was already way outperforming there and couldn't add another 4 points to his totals), that still leaves him Dukakis with 277 Electoral Votes.

      From today's perspective, it's weird to see a Democrat winning Missouri but not New Jersey. Or only barely carrying Vermont. But the map still shows a winning Democratic coalition of the Pacific coast, most of the Midwest, some of the Southwest, and much (if not yet all) of the Northeast. And even at that point, California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania were more Democratic than the national average.

      •  Yeah, see my comment above. (3+ / 0-)

        I don't really believe in realigning elections as sudden shifts that happen all at once; but the new dynamic began to emerge with Reagan, and was partially constituted with Dukakis in '88. '92 just put Dems past the tipping point throughout much of the non-South.

        •  Realignment started in 1984 (0+ / 0-)

          with the death of old school liberalism and the terminal illness of reactionary southern Democrats.  This lead to the GOP hurling rightward and southward, which moved most of the rest of the country leftward.

          Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

          by tommypaine on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:52:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't know what you mean by this (0+ / 0-)
            the death of old school liberalism
            Isn't Obama pretty much an old-school liberal, in that he believes in a powerful government that is activist in fields like social welfare, medicine, education, infrastructure, what we could call modernization or development (funding for scientific and technological research and development), regulation, and internationalist in foreign policy?

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 05:29:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Obama is nothing like an old school liberal (0+ / 0-)

              He isn't even liberal.  Except for being a war-quagmire president, he has little in common with Mondale.  For example, Mondale told everybody he was going to raise their taxes.  Obama would swallow his tongue before saying that.

              Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

              by tommypaine on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:36:34 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I disagree that he isn't liberal (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                askew, AussieforObama2ndterm

                And Kennedy also cut taxes. He wasn't all that liberal, though.

                I don't think being liberal requires increasing taxes on the non-rich. It's all about redistributing income and resources from the wealthiest to the non-rich and using an activist government to help shape the economy and society in ways that benefit the people.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:20:28 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  And another point (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                BeloitDem

                Mondale said that because he knew he was going to lose, anyway, and figured he would just be blunt. Smart politicians don't say those kinds of things in campaigns, under normal circumstances.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:21:33 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Uh, Obama DOES say that, and further... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                ...HAS raised everyone's taxes, in the health care law.

                And he campaigned explicitly on raising income tax rates on income above $250K.

                He promises to make "permanent" (in reality no such thing) the Bush tax cuts for income below that, and of course there has been recession-based tax cut stimulus, but those are the only instances of being tax-averse in his agenda and the stimulus part isn't really tax aversion anyway.

                Obama is clearly an old school liberal, Michael is right, there's not really any question of that.  If anything has changed, it's the times and the population, not the ideology......where Mondale relied on big labor in a time when the electorate was much closer to all-white and all-Christian, Obama runs and governs in a time of much greater racial and religious diversity.  Different populations require somewhat different tacks.  But Obama is just as liberal as Mondale.

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

                by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 05:15:23 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  I wrote a couple of diaries about 1988 vs. 92/96. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        andgarden, MichaelNY, lordpet8

        I'm a little iffy about some of it, but generally, Clinton did relatively better in "modern Dem" areas like outer L.A., D.C. suburbs, and south Florida than elsewhere, relative to Dukakis.  

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

        by Xenocrypt on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 04:02:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  the jersey suburbs are still republican (0+ / 0-)

        the states dem lean comes from the dems taking the urban areas from 60% dem to 80% dem.

        RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

        by demographicarmageddon on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:33:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I always get a kick out of this one (0+ / 0-)

    "I've got one little prayer I pray in years to come
    Don't ever let those kind of people serve in Washington"

    Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

    by tommypaine on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:58:06 AM PST

  •  I just found out yesterday that (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wu ming, okiedem, itskevin

    Terry Gilliam's Brazil is coming out on blu-ray from the Criterion Collection. You can get it heavily discounted from Amazon for a little over $20.

    An editorial review from Amazon gives a flavor:

    The movie presents such an unrelentingly imaginative and savage vision of 20th-century bureaucracy that it almost became a victim of small-minded studio management itself--until Gilliam surreptitiously screened his cut for the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, who named it the best movie of 1985 and virtually embarrassed Universal into releasing it.
    Interestingly, I haven't watched it since about 2004. I suspect it would play differently now that we have moved so far past the Bush Administration. (Heck, maybe Republicans would like it now?)

    One of my favorite movies, and I think a lot of people here would like it too. This edition is particularly special because it has a director's commentary that dates back to the laserdisc in 1996. It is, in my view, the director's commentary that set the stage for all good director's commentaries in the future.

    Really worth your while if you have a few bucks burning a hole in your pocket.

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:09:46 PM PST

  •  Realignment is usually a trend (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jncca, WisJohn, MichaelNY

    Good evidence of this? Bob Casey's win this year. He lost Cambria County (Johnstown) while winning statewide by about 10 points! And even John Kerry won one extra county in the SW (Washington) while winning the state by a far smaller margin. In most respects, Casey's 2012 map is closer to Obama's 2008 map than anything else.

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 12:35:16 PM PST

  •  virginia state election questions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    I have seen 3 names for the Democratic ticket.

    Mcauliffe - GOV
    Chopra - LG
    Herring - AG

    Are they all NOVA candidates? How important is the geographical balance in the state for Democarts?

    Are there any other candidate available (other than Periello) to balance this ticket?

    IMHO Warner is one of the best candidate for presidency in 2016. If we do not win the governorship, McDonnell will be the next senator from VA.

    •  Yes, they're all NoVa residents (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Zack from the SFV

      No, geographical balance is irrelevant. It didn't help the Dems any in 2009, nor did it result in the downticket Dems winning in 2005 (the ticket was Kaine/Richmond, Leslie Byrne/Fairfax, and Deeds/Shenandoah).

      Aside from Perriello, There's talk of State Sen. Ralph Northam running for Lt. Gov., he's from Hampton Roads. I honestly don't see any plus to him running. He's a moderate Democrat and he has a great background (his roots are on the Eastern Shore, he was in the Army, and he's a pediatric neurologist at CHKD) but he doesn't seem to be that inspiring a candidate.

      •  All Johnny said is right, but worth adding... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...is that Northam's potential appeal, according to Ben Tribbett ("Not Larry Sabato"), is that Chopra is not getting establishment backing, the state party leadership wants someone else, and Northam is who they are looking at for that.

        But Johnny is right, it's dubious that Northam would be favored over Chopra in a primary.  Democratic primary voters aren't going to see what party leadership sees, and if the issue is "electability," that argument blew up with a liberal black guy from Chicago named Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. winning the state twice for the Presidency, while a blue doggish white male Protestant from rural white Bath County named Creigh Deeds got destroyed 59-41.  It's going to be tough to argue persuasively that Northam would fare better than Chopra in today's Virginia.

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

        by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 05:20:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  PA St Rep Mike Fleck (R) (12+ / 0-)

    comes out as gay.  First Republican in a conservative district to do so? (he's from the T)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:20:57 PM PST

  •  Castor sister gettin sworn in the FL House last wk (5+ / 0-)

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

    by BKGyptian89 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:21:20 PM PST

  •  Allen West (6+ / 0-)

    http://www.politico.com/...

    Hinting at running for president in 2016?

  •  Anybody here watchin the SEC title game? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OGGoldy, jj32, LordMike

    Im rooting for Georgia, cant stand Bama. Anybody but them!

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

    by BKGyptian89 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 01:47:07 PM PST

    •  Whenever (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, Daman09, sapelcovits, LordMike

      I am watching a football game and I don't give a shit who wins, I always root for the team that comes from the more Democratic state.

      •  During the 2011 World Series... (5+ / 0-)

        I rooted for the Cardinals just because I wanted to see the sad look on President George W. Bush's face when the Rangers lost in Game 7. Alas, they didn't show him.

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

        by SaoMagnifico on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 02:33:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Something similar happened this year (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, lordpet8

          Totally wanted the giants to win the world series. Other than living I'm SF, I knew that Ann Romney was at Game four, I wanted to see her sad face when the Tigers lost.  Didn't get to see it :(

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

          by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:32:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I was a HUGECardinals fan when I was younger (0+ / 0-)

          13 to be exact. I started following them 10 years ago, and I could remember every starter at the postions from that season. I remember being so disappoint when we lost to Boston in '04, it hurted even more cause they sweep'd us.

          But we came back two years later and beat Detroit. So I havent been rooting for them like I did when I was younger,  after they won in '06, but I still root for them. Only when they're not playing the Mets. I too was happy they won last season, jus a shame they couldnt do it this year.

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

          by BKGyptian89 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 03:34:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  you'll probably like this B1G game (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fearlessfred14

        Wisconsin is wrecking Nebraska 70-24. Funny thing is the Huskers beat the Badgers 30-27 a couple months ago, but this evening has been very different.

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

        by sacman701 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:36:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I hate the entire SEC.... (0+ / 0-)

      They cheat by oversigning players... it's like a 19th century gilded age factory program for athletes.

      Unfortunately, Alabama is going to seriously crush Notre Dame.  It will be over in the first quarter.  Notre Dame's only chance is if Alabama gets too confident going into the game and their quarterback gets addicted to Miami Cuban food over the next month and gets fat and slow like Troy Smith did a few years back when he got lazy and parked himself at in and out burger for the month prior to the game.  He was literally busting out of his uniform.  What a disgrace!

      GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

      by LordMike on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:33:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Im not that gun ho and the SEC either (0+ / 0-)

        Im actually a Florida State fan. Im jus so pissed Bama is back at the title game. That was some poor clock management by Georgia at the end. I hope ND beats them silly.

        Also now that Louisville is going to the ACC, that leave a bad taste in the mouth. Kentucky doesn't even touch Atlantic waters, nor is it near it. Its completely landlock. They belong in the big 12 if you ask me. Some of these conference realignment are bringing in schools that dont belong in the region.

        Ridiculous man!

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

        by BKGyptian89 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:20:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Like the University of Maryland to the Big 10? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BeloitDem

          WTF is up with that???

          GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

          by LordMike on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:45:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maryland were a doormat in the ACC (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike

            and they're going be a doormat in the Big 10. They got a good basketball program but thats it. I would had like if Rutgers came in the ACC. Mainly for football reasons. And plus geography wise they would fit in the conference, being New Jersey is a coastal state on the Atlantic. Pitt and Syracuse are coming next season. And eventually UConn is coming to the ACC. It just a matter of when.

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

            by BKGyptian89 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:21:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  cable (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike

            B1G expansion has been driven entirely by the quest to get the B1G network on the basic cable package in the biggest markets possible. That's why they've added crappy teams in the NY (Rutgers), DC (Maryland), and Atlanta (G Tech) markets. Next up is probably Miami (the U, not Paul Ryan's alma mater) because I think FSU is holding out for the SEC.

            As a fan I think it sucks, but it makes financial sense at least in the short term.

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

            by sacman701 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:46:03 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  go noles! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BKGyptian89

          What makes you an fsu fan? I graduated from there in 2011.

      •  teh Securities and Exchange Commission (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoosierD42, BeloitDem, wu ming

          has football teams?

        Diehard Swingnut, disgruntled Democrat, age 54, new CA-30

        by Zack from the SFV on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:53:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  As a Notre Dame fan (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pademocrat

        I so hope you're wrong.

        24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

        by HoosierD42 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:57:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  it'll be closer than that (0+ / 0-)

        ND has the best front 7 in the country. Bama won't be able to just line up and steamroll them. I don't like ND's offense against the Tide defense at all, though. It will probably end up around 20-10.

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

        by sacman701 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:41:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  got Wasserman's Google docs spreadsheet (5+ / 0-)

    POTUS vote tracker up on my main screen.
    https://docs.google.com/...

    Dave must be updating it now right now, cause every couple of minutes some movement catches my eye and the top line vote totals have increased a bit since a few minutes before.

    Currently Obama is at 50.93%. I'm hoping it will wind up breaking 51% when it's all done.

  •  Walkin' Lawton Chiles. (10+ / 0-)

    http://politicalwire.com/...

    New book about former Senator and Governor Lawton Chiles of Florida. Looks quite interesting.

    In the preview, while they are talking about how uniformly Democratic FL was back in the day, it says that when future Gov. Buddy McKay first registered to vote, he sent for the Republican registration form, but his local clerk sent him the Democratic one, saying, "You will disgrace your family by registering Republican." McKay said that was how he became a Democrat. :)  McKay was the last Democratic governor of Florida.

    Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.75, -3.18, "Everyone's better when everyone's better"- Paul Wellstone

    by WisJohn on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 07:24:59 PM PST

  •  Next Queensland state election (4+ / 0-)

    Been a while since I've posted anything Australian related, but the Newman LNP government is starting to fall apart at the wheels as three LNP backbenchers leave the party and former LNP heavyweight and mining tycoon Clive Palmer continuing to attack his former party.

    By anyone’s standards, the past week has been an extraordinary time in Queensland politics.

    The Liberal National Party, which came to power with an unprecedented majority of 78 seats in March, could not shake free from scandal; three members of the party resigned, while one of the LNP’s biggest supporters, billionaire Clive Palmer, launched a scathing attack on the government leaders and threatened to establish a separate political party.

    Carl Judge, the first-term MP for Yeerongpilly resigned from the LNP on Thursday following a lockout from the party room on Wednesday night, where his fellow MPs voted to ask the LNP hierarchy to disendorse him.

    Announcing his resignation, Mr Judge told parliament his responsibility was to his electorate and that “sadly, I do not believe this government is fulfilling its election promises”.

    The member for Gaven, Alex Douglas, was dumped as the chair for the legal affairs committee on Wednesday, after speaking out against his move from the chair of the ethics committee and deputy chair of the parliamentary crime and misconduct committee on Tuesday. He also resigned on Thursday.

    The resignations of Mr Judge and Mr Douglas followed on from Condamine MP Ray Hopper’s resignation and subsequent jump to Katter’s Australian Party earlier in the week.

    Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/...

    The Newman government's poll numbers have been rapidly heading south in recent weeks unlike in NSW where Barry O'Farrell's Liberal government has consistently remained above 60% in the polling.

    You'd think that for someone who gave Labor its worst defeat in Australian political history, Campbell Newman would be able to keep party together. At this rate I expect Newman to be sacked as Premier in the near future.

    The Republican party is now an extreme right-wing party that is owned by their billionaire campaign contributors. - Bernie Sanders

    by ehstronghold on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 07:33:30 PM PST

  •  Nevada (5+ / 0-)

    Nevada certified their results. I added the final statewide to my spreadsheet. D+2.

    I've also updated the nationwide numbers to Wasserman's current.

    22 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 Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:05:09 PM PST

  •  Game Time (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kurykh, MichaelNY, WisJohn, pademocrat

    Just started some work on how San Francisco voted at the presidential level this year, specifically how the Romney performed at the precinct and neighborhood level.

    So, here are a few questions.

    Which Neighborhood contained Romney's best precinct percentage wise, and what was that precinct's Romney percentage?

    Also name the neighborhood Obama had his best precinct and what that percentage was.

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

    by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:09:45 PM PST

    •  For those that are ballsy (0+ / 0-)

      You could try to pick the precinct from the precinct map.

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

      by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:13:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  haha okay - worst = 9727 (0+ / 0-)

        where romney got 40% and best is 7026 where Obama got 99% of the vote (I'm amending my guess such that Romney did get a few votes).

        I will admit that I cheated a bit by looking at 2008 returns on DRA...

        26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

        by okiedem on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:37:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

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

          Amazingly close for Romney's best precinct!  9727 was Romney's 8th best precinct, and only voted for Obama 3.4% more than his best.

          7026, located in the Silver Terrace Neighborhood, was a little less Romney than the city average (13%), and gave Romney 11.73%

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

          by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:55:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'll do 7637 for Romney's best (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Just based on the fact that One Rincon is in that precinct, and maybe not much else residential is.  I've not referenced any prior election returns so I'm prepared to be embarrassed if necessary.    

        •  Funny you say that. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Because this is one of the larger precincts.  In fact, of the 550+ precincts, this is the 146th largest.

          Anyways, this is a extraordinarily average precinct Presidential vote wise.  Romney received 13.14%, just about what he received city wide.

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

          by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:08:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

      Best performance is in the Sunset District where Romney got 40% of the vote.

      Worst performance is in Hunters Point where he got zero votes.

      26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

      by okiedem on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:13:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

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

        Romney did better than the city as a whole a lot of sunset district precincts, but his highest precinct was not there

        Romney also did not break 40% in any precinct, but got close to it,

        Romney's worst performance was in Hunter's Point so you get a point, but he did get some votes.

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

        by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:34:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  My guesses (0+ / 0-)

      for best Romney percentage: Lake Merced's 9723 (SF Zoo area). 36%?

      Worst Romney percentage: Hunters Point's 7023. 1% (hah, 1%).

      I'm basing my Lake Merced guess on 2010 performance, when it voted for Steve Cooley over Kamala Harris for AG.

      22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

      by kurykh on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:51:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

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

        9723:  7th best Romney district.  I'm really amazed at how close many of you guys are coming. You came pretty close percentage wise, but gave Romney a little too much credit here though, he clocked in at around 35%.

        7023: Romney did 3.66% better in this district than his worst, not that that's saying much.

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

        by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:15:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

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

          Romney's best: Marina's 9203, 37%
          Obama's best: Hunters Point's 7029, 97%.

          By the way, it's great how SF precincts are numbered. It's very logical.

          22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

          by kurykh on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:11:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're so close (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            I'm sure you can taste it, but alas, no cigar.

            9203 is Romney's second best precinct, and the difference between his best and second best is 0.0375%.  Interestingly, his best precinct does not reside in the Marina neighborhood (if you go to google maps and type in marina anyway, the neighborhood boundaries were always a bit fluid for my taste, glad google maps attempts to straighten it out a bit.)  Percentage wise, you're very close, and i'll just give up the gun.  Romney's best precinct percentage was 37.69%, which for the purposes of this game I rounded up to 38%.

            You nailed the percentage in 7029 (97.27%), but there is still a district that gave Obama a bigger margin, as this precinct was  Obama's 13th best.  Mitt had a super strong showing of 15 votes

            I honestly just appreciate how the PDF of the precinct map has the numbers formatted as text, so I can search for them using the search tool instead of wasting my time scouring the map.

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

            by Daman09 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:17:34 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Third guess (I need a life) (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              Romney's best: St. Francis Wood's 9729.
              Obama's best: 7044, 98%.

              Most people don't really distinguish between Bayview and Hunters Point (note no apostrophe); they're for practical purposes the same neighborhood.

              It's strange how Obama's best precinct is in the Bayview. I thought it would be in the Castro.

              22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

              by kurykh on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:08:44 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Romney's best precinct is a toughie I guess (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                9729: Romney's sixth best precinct, received 36%

                7044: Nowhere close (more than 100 better Precincts for Obama), Romney recieved 5% here. BUT, you did guess the correct percentage for Obama's best precinct.

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

                by Daman09 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 05:13:39 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  Here's what has not yet been answered correctly (0+ / 0-)

      Obama's Best Precinct and percentage (Best Neighborhood was Bayview/Hunter's Point, technically bayview according to Gmaps)

      and

      Romney's Best Precinct and the Neighborhood that precinct resides in according to google maps (Best percentage was 38%)

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

      by Daman09 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:31:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Okay, Answers (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Romney's Best Precinct: 9221, located in Pacific Heights, gave Romney 37.69% of the vote (199 to 329).

        Obama's best Precinct: 7034, located in Bayview, gave Obama 98.35% of the vote (476 to 8).

        I think for my diary that I will cook up (which may not see the light of day for a while due to finals coming up soon) a  map showing precincts and/or neighborhoods where Romney did better than the city's average, as doing a map purely on who won the precinct would be a pretty futile endeavor.

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

        by Daman09 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:31:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Congressional freshmen dance for digs (4+ / 0-)

    http://www.pe.com/...

    I thought this was a fun story.

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

    by DrPhillips on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 08:59:33 PM PST

    •  Just happy to be here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Zack from the SFV
      Though happy with his luck Friday, Takano said the size and location of his office were of minor significance.

      “I’m just happy to be here,” he said.

      Shades of Bull Durham: Just what a good rookie major leaguer should say.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:00:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Pete (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, KingofSpades, R30A, askew

        Got to pick his office third. Vela was just after him. Their offices will be right across the hall from one another.

        Something that this story doesn't tell is that Brownley actually did her "lucky" dance before she drew (and everyone laughed at her), and then when she drew number one they were all stunned.

        22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:54:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  AZ cds (7+ / 0-)

    AZ-1: 48-50 R
    AZ-2: 48-50  R
    AZ-3: 61-37 O
    AZ-4: 31-67 R
    AZ-5: 35-64: R
    AZ-6: 39-60 R
    AZ-7: 72-27 O
    AZ-8: 37-62 R
    AZ-9: 51-47 O

  •  Which CA districts are considered VRA? (0+ / 0-)

    I'm working on an "intentional dummymander" California map that is technically intended to be 53-0, and I'd like it to be at least minimally VRA compliant.

    Male, 22, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02. "You're damn right we're making a difference!" - Senator-Elect Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)

    by fearlessfred14 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:24:29 PM PST

    •  I know Loretta Sanchez has a VRA district (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, fearlessfred14

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

      by Daman09 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 10:33:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think I've kept hers pretty Latino (0+ / 0-)

        though I'll check once I'm through with the LA area. I am curious about Maxine Waters' district; she'd hate what I did to it, but I didn't split the black neigborhoods in LA County.

        Male, 22, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02. "You're damn right we're making a difference!" - Senator-Elect Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)

        by fearlessfred14 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:07:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That might actually be a problem (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          There are three historically black congressional districts in the LA area, all of them around 25-30% black. Collapsing them to two can be construed as packing.

          22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

          by kurykh on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:26:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What's the third? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            I just know of Waters' and Bass' districts

            24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

            by HoosierD42 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:38:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  although that may be true (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen

            of the past, there is a good legal argument that three districts is no longer maintainable. The fact that Hahn won against an African American candidate means that that community is no longer able to elect their candidate of choice at current numbers, and would be better served (if they want, ofcourse) to be apportioned into the other two AA districts to make them more secure for an African American candidate.

            22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:57:31 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There was actually a huge debate (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, wwmiv, sapelcovits, James Allen

              about this in the redistricting commission, and they chose to keep the three districts given (and I'm paraphrasing them) the ability for blacks and Latinos to form coalitions to elect black candidates.

              Saying that Hahn winning against a black candidate means that the black community is no longer able to elect their candidate of choice is a bit dicey, since Hahn and her family have deep connections with the LA black community (stemming from her father, former LA county supervisor Kenneth Hahn) and Richardson was a scandal-plagued incumbent.

              Lastly, current assemblyman Isadore Hall (who is African American and considered a rising star in the state party) was planning to run here against Richardson, but withdrew and endorsed Hahn.

              22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

              by kurykh on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:15:35 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  it's not a good argument (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              the fact that a safe Democratic district in LA only has 25-30% African Americans means that the chances of electing someone of their choice is on its face going to be dicey, is a good argument.  You can make the argument kurykh references about coalitions, but if you make that argument for very long you start getting away from the intent of section 5 and you concede hard rules for standards that in many places would be used to dilute minority districts to the point where they'd be essentially useless.

              ...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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:21:14 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

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

                haste makes for mistakes.

                ...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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:23:59 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  The alternative (3+ / 0-)

                was creating two black districts that went above 50%, with the third becoming a majority Latino district. Given that there were several Latino districts already in the area (aka everything east of 710), there was a huge outcry from the African-American community that essentially accused the commission of packing.

                Also, these districts have been dipping below 30% black for quite a while, but one managed to elect Karen Bass in 2010. So the thing about coalitions isn't just a matter of legal argument: it was already a political reality for the past decade or two.

                Section 5 never required 50%+ black or Latino districts. It just required a high enough percentage for a community to elect candidates of their choice. The "hard rules" refer to areas where voting is more polarized along racial or ethnic lines, and that's just not the case here.

                22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

                by kurykh on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:54:12 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  but its not a better solution (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  than two African American majority districts and one Latino majority district.  And I think there's a better argument strictly from a perspective of representing those communities that it would be better.  That way there is no inherent compromise in having to build coalitions outside of their communities.  And that way Latinos would also be able to elect someone who represents their own community, rather than having their community divided and just helping to elect someone who would primarily represent the African American communities.

                  ...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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:08:04 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  California probably doesn't have to draw (4+ / 0-)

                any black majority districts. I don't think you could prove racial polarization sufficiently. That is, from, the  Thornburg v. Gingles test:

                in order to establish a vote dilution claim under Section 2. The test requires that a minority group prove that: 1) it is sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district, 2) it is politically cohesive, and 3) in the absence of special circumstances, bloc voting by the White majority usually defeats the minority’s preferred candidate.
                Even assuming prong three would apply to, e.g., a latino majority, I don't think you could establish sufficient polarization in LA.

                Ok, so I read the polls.

                by andgarden on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:46:36 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  CA VRA districts (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      CA-03 (Yuba)
      CA-20 (Monterey)
      CA-21 (Kings)

      CA-16 (Merced) was VRA, but Merced just got bailed out.

      22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

      by kurykh on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 11:05:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  TN-04 (11+ / 0-)

    I think from now on DesJarlais' issues are off the table from now on, because God forgave him. So it's all water under the bridge.

    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:08:53 AM PST

  •  LOLOLOLOL (11+ / 0-)

    presented without further comment: http://www.thedailybeast.com/...

    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:21:29 AM PST

  •  Nomination for video of the wee (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Danny Ricci, HoosierD42

    26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

    by okiedem on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:47:59 AM PST

  •  huh, Brian Schweitzer leaves the door open (10+ / 0-)

    to a 2016 presidential run.

    I had always thought he was a definite "no" given that he has talked about his dislike of the political atmosphere in DC.

    He's probably my second choice, after Hillary. Martin O'Malley third. At least as of right now.

  •  Has nate silver ever talked about his loses? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    Other than the Montana and North Dakota senate races, he had a flawless year, but has he ever talked about why his models didn't produce the correct outcome in those senate races?

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

    by Daman09 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:53:04 AM PST

    •  I don't believe he has (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, jj32

      But he just over-stressed the state's partisan lean.  And both states had fewer polls than most other competitive races (except Indiana)

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 12:40:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The polling favored Berg pretty clearly (7+ / 0-)

      but almost all of it was done by Rasmussen and Mason-Dixon, which turned out to be as R-leaning a set of polls as you could have. So ND was one case where the polling average approach was clearly misleading. Not much he could do about that, given his methodological commitments - though his state fundamentals thingy did pull him even farther from the actual outcome.

      In Montana, on the other hand, no polls done after October 1st showed Rehberg ahead, and they were all done by PPP (slightly R-leaning) and Rasmussen (hilariously R-leaning). Yet he predicted Rehberg would win. That's a pretty glaring misfire.

      •  PPP was slightly D leaning (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        in the end.  I just looked at all their competitive race polls, and they were 1/3 to 1/2 a point too Dem.  But nowhere near as Dem leaning as they were earlier in the cycle.

        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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:16:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  oh nevermind (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, itskevin

          that was only Presidential polling.  They were 2 points R leaning in Senate races.

          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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:17:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Speaking of his state fundamentals... (4+ / 0-)

        Of the nine battleground states, his state fundamentals improved his forecast over the adjusted polling average in North Carolina, New Hampshire, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Nevada, but caused him to do worse in Virginia, Florida, Colorado, and Iowa.

        5 out of 9? Not so great. I suspect my own favored method of "throw out Rasmussen and Gravis and average the rest" would have done better than his fancypants model.

        •  Clearly the case (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Nate didn't do very well because didn't apply common sense to polling.

          1) a pollster (Ras) who previously has demonstrated a terrible house effect one way is again demonstrating it in opposition to the mass of poling, so therefore should be tossed out

          2) no track record pollsters should not be included.  Just because you claim to be a scientifially-sound pollster doesn't mean you are.  Besides Ras, only Mason Dixon and Susquhaha were completely pitiful... except for the fly by night, dinky pollsters (think MI and TN).  There was no reason to include these new and/or dinky outfits, and there is plenty of reason not to include them in the future.

          Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

          by tommypaine on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 02:51:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  It also didn't make sense (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      why his state fundamentals favored GOP in MT and ND so heavily when they have a strong and recent history of electing Dems to the senate. Do we know if he used the same state fundamental formula for both the presidential and senate models? That would be a big mistake.

      Also, as this site often noted Berg never responded to Heitkamp's internals (which was a signal of something) and of course Nate doesn't use internals in his model, so the poll showing her ahead weren't incorporated.

  •  Are we gonna get a liveblog of the LA-3 runoff? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY
  •  question about the white vote (0+ / 0-)

    In the 1990s, it was thought that the democrats were in a much better position to get at least 45 percent and on occasion win white voters due to the fact that the cold war was over and the traditional issues that made whites vote republican (like law and order issues) becoming irrelevant.

    With the cold war being over (and lack of salience in the "weak on defense" moniker) and most violent criminals being locked up, why has the dem performance in the white vote gotten worse?

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:42:22 PM PST

  •  Governors don't care to hear from Jan Brewer (9+ / 0-)

    http://www.azfamily.com/...

    PARADISE VALLEY, Ariz. -- Although she was introduced as a political rock star Saturday, Gov. Jan Brewer wasn't a very big draw.

    The Western Governors' Association held its annual winter meeting in Paradise Valley. But of the 19 governors in the group, only two showed up to see Brewer deliver a brief keynote speech.

    Of the two that did show up
    Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) and Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R) were the two governor's who attended the meeting. They are the current vice chairman and chairman of the organization.

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

    by DrPhillips on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 01:48:35 PM PST

  •  CA-AD-36 (20+ / 0-)

    Democrats just won their 55th seat.

    LA County just updated (and may have finished counting), and Democrat Steve Fox edged ahead of Republican Ron Smith 66,005 to 65,860 (50.05%-49.95%), a margin of 145 votes. Fox has been trailing since Election Day, only coming out in front today.

    AD-36 is the Antelope Valley and parts of the Mojave Desert in Kern County. The largest cities are Lancaster and Palmdale.

    This is a stunning upset, perhaps more so than Sharon Quirk-Silva in AD-65 (Fullerton/Buena Park), considering that this race wasn't even considered a target.

    22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

    by kurykh on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:05:32 PM PST

  •  Final Los Angeles vote update (8+ / 0-)

    Obama nets about 20k of margin (27k to 7k), putting him within 17k of a 3 million vote margin in the state, which now should be a lock.

    In Assembly district 36, where Dem Steve Fox was behind by 318 votes... Fox gained 463 in this final LA count, which now puts him into 145 lead, expanding the Dem 2/3 hold of the Assembly even more.

    Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

    by tommypaine on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 03:06:56 PM PST

  •  Any word on NY state totals? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, jj32

    I can never tell where to look for their updates

    •  I don't think (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      the results have been updated. I randomly checked county BOE results, they have not updated since election night. The NY BOE is scheduled to meet on the 10th. I assume that is when the state would like to officially certify the election. That deadline might fly by though because at least one county (Dutchess, my home county) may not get their results in on time. Meanwhile, the court battle for SD-46 might prevent those counties from finishing. At some point each county should provide a precinct level re-canvas and the state BOE should have totals.

      M, 23, School: MI-12, Home: NY-18

      by slacks on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:04:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Question about D primary 2016 (0+ / 0-)

    if Biden decides to run, will you guys line up behind him, or will you still back some of the other top mentioned candidates?

    20, Male, NC the best state ever! Majoring in Piano Performance.

    by aggou on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:25:40 PM PST

    •  I can't speak for others (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      but I'm anti-Cuomo/Gillibrand, but other than those two I'm willing to back anyone in the primary.  It's way too early for me to say.  I could see myself behind Hillary, Biden, Hickenlooper, O'Malley, or Schweitzer, depending on how their campaigns unfold.

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:36:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What's wrong with Gillibrand? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bythesea

        I can understand why you wouldn't like Cuomo, but why not her?

        20, Male, NC the best state ever! Majoring in Piano Performance.

        by aggou on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:38:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't believe she has enough of a core (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          andgarden, MichaelNY

          She went from center-left as a Representative to down the line liberal as Senator in a span of two years.

          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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 05:35:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Most politicians adapt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            See Barack Obama as a state senator vs Barack Obama as President.

            •  Obama is a compromiser (0+ / 0-)

              But other than same sex marriage, he hasn't changed any core beliefs.
              I'm not counting the mandate because while he signed a bill having it, he wouldn't have written a bill containing one.

              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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:22:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  FISAAA and indefinite detention (0+ / 0-)

                Just to name two.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:51:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't know what FISAAA is (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  but good point on detention.  Although I think every executive becomes more hawkish once they realize all the power they have.

                  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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:08:35 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  FISAAA (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    lordpet8

                    Here's the Wikipedia article about it. Obama's Senate vote on the act was the first clear indication that he would favor the enlargement or/and maintenance of expanded (and in my opinion and many other civil libertarians' opinion, unconstitutional) Executive powers when he became President.

                    I think the well-founded fear about Gillibrand is that she might end up further to the right than President Obama if she became President. On the other hand, perhaps she'd be almost as liberal as she is now as Senator from New York. We really don't know, but I have my doubts that she'd win by campaigning as the super-liberal senator from New York, rather than the former moderately liberal Representative from Upstate New York. She's ambitious and charismatic, though, so there is a smidgen of hope that she could be our liberal Reagan. I just think there's a lot of room for doubt.

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:34:39 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Is Gillibrand even thinking about it? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            The only place I see Gillibrand mentioned is by random Democrats on the internet, not even published commentators but just people like us on DKE.  I've seen no reporting that it's crossed her mind, that she's mentioned any such idea to anyone.

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

            by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 06:22:34 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  There's not one ghost of a chance (6+ / 0-)

      that Biden would clear the primaries. If he chooses to run, he will have to win a strongly contested primary. And I, for one, would hesitate to support him, depending on who else runs. Let's not forget that he supported the Iraq War Resolution, which is not the only reason to call his judgment into question.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:37:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  additionally, although people won't remember it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        biden was chair on the senate committee that confirmed clarence thomas and shut down anita hill. and then there's the bankruptcy bill.

        great veep, mediocre prez candidate, IMO.

      •  Unfortunately on the Iraq War... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...a lot of liberal Democrats were cowards.  Tom Harkin, of all people, voted for the war.  As did John Kerry, our 2004 standard bearer, and John Edwards.

        A lot of these Senators voted against the Persian Gulf War in 1990 and felt burned by that vote, since it proved an easy win and Bush 41 was smart enough to stop after liberating Kuwait, leaving Saddam alone...that meant no quagmire.

        Beyond the Iraq War, one thing about Biden I also don't like was that his solution in 2008 was partitioning the country.  Oh Good God that was how European imperialists of the 20th century left their former lands, especially in the Middle East and Africa, and it was a disaster.

        But all that aside, Biden otherwise has the most stature he's ever had and while I agree he wouldn't clear the field, he'd be the frontrunner no less than Hillary in 2007.  He could lose the nomination, but he'd be the favorite through 2015 as long as Obama's job approvals are good.

        Of course the big question is whether Obama would endorse him, either explicitly or as an open secret, in the primaries.  If so, that matters a lot and probably makes him the nominee, assuming Hillary doesn't run (and I think she won't).

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

        by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 06:29:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  He has never been a very good presidential (0+ / 0-)

          candidate, and despite the improvement in his record from his work as VP, I would predict that someone will defeat him in the primaries again if he runs in 2016.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 10:50:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  He's not going to run... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MetroGnome

      He just talks about it now to keep the potential candidates from getting a little froggy and taking shots as the Obama Admin to try and show how serious they are and to separate themselves from the rest of the potential field.  

      They have the billionaires, We have the Big Dog!

      by Jacoby Jonze on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:49:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Biden isn't the best candidate (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, tietack, LordMike

      I'm sure better alternatives will line up.  But if none do, I'd stick with Biden...he would certainly run an interesting campaign.  It would depend heavily on people's impressions of Obama after eight years, if they want more of that I'd feel safe with Biden, if not I might be more inclined to go with a different choice.

    •  I'm not sure (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, LordMike, MichaelNY, bumiputera

      This is even something we have to worry about, because though I love him to death as VP, he isn't going anywhere in a Democratic primary in this Democratic Party.  Joe isn't stupid.  He knows like everyone else knew that the 2008 election was a sunset election for him, his job being to pave the way/make it smoother for future Democratic leaders.  He very may well throw his hat in the ring, but I don't think he's dumb enough to think he'd be a serious contendor.

    •  I'm theoretically open to a number of candidates, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, lordpet8, MichaelNY

      but I am hoping for Hillary to run. Scalia needs to lose the opportunity to retire on his own terms, so I am unwilling to take a risk. Her national profile has probably never been better. If the Economy picks up a bit and Obama remains popular, no Republican can beat her. Even if conditions remain the same, she has a great shot.

      Ok, so I read the polls.

      by andgarden on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:53:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's no "probably" in saying... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...Hillary's national profile has never been better.

        She was very polarizing with high negatives matching her high positives in 2007-08.

        Her image has just shot through the roof since she's been Secretary of State.

        She owes Obama for that, she wouldn't be so strong now if she'd been a private citizen the past 4 years.  He gave her the opportunity to build the image she now has.

        Agree on seeing her now as the best bet, but frankly I think she's serious about wanting to hang it up.  I think we'll know for sure before 2015, if she really wants to keep a foot in the door she'll stay politically active and lend her name to Democratic candidates in the midterms.

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

        by DCCyclone on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 06:34:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The reason I use "probably" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          is that there was a point in the spring of 2008 (around the PA primary) when she was clearly doing something right. Whatever her unfavorables may have been, she was pulling GE numbers in places like Florida and Ohio that any Democrat would envy. I think, for example, that she would have won the Cuban vote in 2008.

          That said, I think her position in the Administration has absolutely helped her.

          Ok, so I read the polls.

          by andgarden on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 02:56:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  biden's a perfect veep (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, BeloitDem

      but he wasn't a great presidential candidate in 2008, and by 2016 he will be in his 70s.

      new and future-oriented always beats old and nostalgic. dems need to be bringing the future into existence in 2016, not reliving the obama years. forward!

  •  Political Wire is talking about us! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, KingofSpades, lordpet8

    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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 04:31:54 PM PST

  •  Utah (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, Chachy, andgarden, MichaelNY

    And Montana certified:

    Montana stays at R+7 and Utah moves from R+20 to R+22.

    https://docs.google.com/...

    I'm close to finishing data for a few more Texas congressional districts (21, 25, and 35). But even without Hays County and Erath County precincts (which are likely to make the margin worse) I can tell you that Obama simply plummeted from his 2008 numbers in the 25th and the district will trend hugely Republican.

    In the 35th, Obama will improve in absolute terms (I think, as I still need Hays County and Caldwell County precincts) and the district will trend hugely Democratic.

    I've only done some of the 21st, so no tidbits on that.

    22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 06:35:14 PM PST

  •  So far (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    So far we've got data on 139 districts, although with some only as tentative (Kentucky, particularly). For being three weeks out only, this is really spectacular.

    Of those, 52 have a D+ PVI and 87 have an R+ PVI.

    No district has moved from leaning to one party to leaning toward the other, although NH-1 moved from even to R+1.

    With few exceptions, most of the movement has been insignificant. Where there has been large movement, it has usually been the case that Republican districts have become more Republican and Democratic districts more Democratic.

    Although, as with anything, there are exceptions to this: FL-26 (R+4 to R+1), FL-27 (moved from R+6 to R+2), FL-25 (R+9 to R+6), and CA-12 (R+12 to R+9).

    I.E. Cubans becoming less Republican and Cuban districts becoming less Cuban (I think that this is a more accurate depiction of reality given the growth of other Latino groups in those districts as well, Dominicans and Columbians especially) and rapidly diversifying suburbs.

    There has been no major equivalent movement towards Republicans among already Democratic districts.  In fact, among smaller number D+ districts, we see similar movement towards Democrats because of the same forces. A good example would be Joaquin Castro's district: D+3 to D+7. Mark Takano and Loretta Sanchez's districts are even more stark: both went from D+3 to D+9.

    I know that we only have this information after the fact, so it can't come into play during the campaign itself, but it amazes me given that huge swing towards Democrats that Republicans even bothered running a credible well-funded candidate against Takano at all. With the resources that they expended there they could have easily saved a few of their incumbents elsewhere in California.

    22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:32:49 PM PST

    •  CA-12 (Pelosi) (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, MichaelNY, sapelcovits

      is a Republican district?

      22, D, CA-12 (old CA-08).

      by kurykh on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:37:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's likely true on Cuban areas. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      MattTX listed some Little Havana precincts, all of which shifted Dem-wards from 2008 to 2012 (a few very strongly).  The big question is if the non-Cuban pop. there spiked or not.

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:42:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Although that was a very nice diary (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        The big problem with it was a the level of analysis issue. We can't really drawn decent conclusions about voting habits of individuals when looking at the voting results of precincts unless the population there is significantly (I.E. 90%+) of a single type.

        The booming non-Cuban population (which is growing much faster than the Cuban population) may have to do with the entire difference for all we know. I'm simply inclined to believe that it is a mixture of the small two trends causing large movement.

        22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:47:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  From what I understand from people inside the.. (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wwmiv, KingofSpades, lordpet8, MichaelNY, Skaje

          From what I understand from people inside the Cuban community there is a real difference between the younger Cubans (under 30) and the older generation.  The younger are acting more like Hispanics/youth elsewhere and the older generation is still staunchly conservative.  (Also still waiting to get their land back once castro dies).

          I know its not stats but it jives with some of the voting patterns.

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

      All this data is nice, but I think that what it really speaks to the likely inability of Democrats to retake the house over the next few cycles.

      With Republican districts becoming more Republican on average, that necessarily means that we will have fewer and fewer targets as time goes on. Yes, there are a few brights spots on the horizon, but even fewer of those are moving at a pace towards us that will bring them into contention sooner rather than later.

      Another extremely important variable to pay attention to is how many incumbents are in districts which lean to the other party. Here it seems that Democrats might actually be overextended.

      Republicans in D+ PVI:
      Gary Miller D+5

      Democrats in R+ PVI:
      Carol Shea-Porter R+1
      Raul Ruiz R+1
      Joe Garcia R+1
      Tim Walz R+1
      Pete Gallego R+3
      Patrick Murphy R+3 (and in a district that trended away from us from R+1)
      Collin Peterson R+6
      John Barrow R+9

      Granted, there are many more districts left to count, but what is outstanding will actually increase this disparity.

      Republicans likely or possibly in D+ PVI:
      Mike Coffman
      Rodney Davis
      Fred Upton
      Peter King
      Chris Gibson
      Jim Gerlach
      Pat Meehan
      Mike Fitzpatrick
      Charles Dent
      Jaime Herrera Buetler (only slim)
      David Reichert (only slim)
      Sean Duffy
      Rein Ribble

      Democrats likely or possibly in R+ PVI:
      Ann Kirkpatrick
      Ron Barber
      Kyrsten Sinema
      Bill Enyart
      Tim Bishop
      Sean Maloney
      Bill Owens
      Mike McIntyre
      Jim Matheson

      Even if you assume that all of these end up being true, Democrats will still have more. But look at those lists again. Every single one of the Democrats except Enyart and perhaps Bishop is almost guaranteed to have an R+ PVI, whereas almost all of the Republicans are at worst tossups for D+ districts.

      The playing field is very difficult from here on out.

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:01:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  IL-12 is more likely on the D side. (0+ / 0-)

        and Sinema's is probably EVEN.

        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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:24:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  well (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY
        it seems that Democrats might actually be overextended.
        That's almost always the case for the Dems. We were way overextended with our 2006/2008 House majority. Over 50 Dems were in R+ districts.

        I mean we really had no business holding onto to some of these seats (Gene Taylor, Ike Skelton, Rick Boucher, Bart Gordon, Lincoln Davis) in the long run. So even then it was going to be challenging holding onto the majority. Still I enjoyed the epic ticket splitting while it lasted.

        We'd really need either a massive wave/coupled with redistricting or just some non partisan redistricting in states like Ohio, PA, NC, etc.

        "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

        by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:24:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  PVI (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, wwmiv, lordpet8, jncca, bumiputera

        The PVI calculation is relative to the national average, but I think the national environment favors Dems a bit. In other words, a district with a PVI around zero (based only on 2012) is one that a mainstream Dem should be able to hold. If Obama can win a district by 3 or 4 points with the economy struggling, I like a Dem incumbent's chances there.

        Of the group you list at the bottom, I don't think most are in much trouble. Kirkpatrick's district is R+2 or R+3, but she's a good fit for it and came close to holding a much redder version of it in the 2010 wave. The GOP would likely need a great recruit to knock her out. Obama won Sinema's district, and the area is still trending blue. Enyart cruised in an open seat and shouldn't have much trouble as an incumbent. Owens' district is trending blue. Ruiz beat a long-term incumbent with room to spare, and the district is trending blue fast. Walz is nearly as entrenched as Peterson. Garcia's district might be gone forever for the GOP as Obama did far better in 2012 than in 2008. Bishop and Matheson have already taken the best shot the GOP can throw at them. Barrow won comfortably and will have 2 years to get in with his new constituents. Maloney beat a nontoxic incumbent in a neutral year and I like his chances going forward.

        The ones I think are in more danger: Barber just barely won this year even as an incumbent. McIntyre may be an underdog with midterm turnout. Murphy will have to deal with midterm turnout and possibly a sane opponent. Gallego's district went for Romney this year and its Dem base is especially prone to midterm dropoff.

        You left off Nick Rahall, whose district went big for Romney. I think he'll be ok as long as stays on the coal industry's good side.

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

        by sacman701 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:17:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lordpet8, MichaelNY

          I'm actually having a PM convo with someone about this right now.

          A 50/50 district will actually be R+2.8, because the national result in 2008 was D+3.7 from 50/50 and in 2012 currently stands at D+1.8 from 50/50 (will most likely increase to D+1.9).

          So far there are 51 districts on our side of that boundary.

          22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:32:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Neutral year (0+ / 0-)

          Why do you think this was a neutral year for House elections? The evidence shows that the Democrats had a significant nationwide edge in House voting. So I believe you are overly complacent about Maloney's chances, in case the Democrats don't have an edge in House voting in 2014.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:38:06 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

          I forgot about Rahall.

          22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:41:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Rahall ended up only winning by 5 (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          against an underfunded second-tier candidate. The Republicans need to come up with a decent candidate, but they'll probably pick that one off in the next few cycles.

      •  I'm sure Republicans felt the same way (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, bumiputera

        during the Reagan years. The house was out of reach for them for the decade. It might have been even more frustrating seeing as as Reagan probably won many of the districts that sent Dems to the house.

        You had the likes of some conservative Dems like Charles Bennett of Florida continuously elected in landslides even while Republicans carried the district.

        For instance, in 1972 he won 82 percent of the vote against a nominal Republican challenger (one of only six times the Republicans even put up a challenger against him) even as Richard Nixon carried the district by over 70 percent of the vote.
        Amusingly enough when this seat went red in 1994, we actually ended up with a moderate Republican who was Pro-choice, refused to take money from the NRA, and clearly to the left of Bennett.

        Southern ticket splitting along with favorable gerrymandering (in states like CA) didn't give the R's much hope of taking the chamber during Reagan's 1984 landslide.

        For example: the Burtonmander gave Dems 62% of the house seats in CA while Reagan carried the state with 57% of the vote!

        "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

        by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:40:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No way is Owens... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        Seat R PVI any longer.

        Warren, Saratoga, and Fulton were the only counties in NY-21 where Romney did a little bit better than McCain.  And in all cases the shift was less than 1%.  Meaning every single county in the district drifted a bit to the left.  This is before even considering the upstate provisionals, which aren't done being counted yet, IIRC.  

        The bottom line is I'd expect on 2012 numbers alone, NY-21 is now D+2 to D+3.  Thus I'd expect it's around EVEN or D+1 now.  

        •  Wow (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bumiputera, MichaelNY

          So you think Obama won that district with 54% or 55% of the two party vote? In which case Owens's performance would be extremely lackluster.

          I think more likely he won it with 52% or 53%, in which case the district would be R+1 or even (though the even in this case would be R+.01).

          22 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 Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 07:10:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You may be right... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Looking at whole counties in the district only, Obama got around 53.4% of the vote.  Mind you, only two of the counties are certified, so the vote totals here may rise.  

            The two split counties are Herkimer and Saratoga.  

            Herkimer is smaller, and doesn't really have a geographic split.  Obama got 45% countywide, and I'd expect roughly the same in the component in the district.

            On the other hand, while Obama got 51% in Saratoga, the best areas for Democrats traditionally have been in the south, meaning Obama almost certainly lost his portion of the county.  Still, most of the major population centers are in NY-20, meaning the dent isn't that bad.  

            Thus, I expect that the 2012 numbers alone will be around what you stated.  Still, in terms of 2012 numbers alone, I'm pretty sure it's narrowly D leaning now.  

    •  Correction (0+ / 0-)

      There are not 139 districts that I have data for so far, there are 139 districts plus non-at-large states that have certified that I have data for.

      There are 122 districts that we have data for so far (excluding at-large states that have not yet certified).

      There are 77 Republican+ PVI districts and 45 Democratic+ PVI districts.

      Sorry for that oversight.

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:18:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Close Districts (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, MichaelNY

      There are 22 districts with PVIs at or closer than +5.

      Of them, Democrats hold 14 and Republicans hold 8. Another indication that Democrats go into the 2014 cycle overextended.

      If you broaden the playing field to districts at or smaller than +8 (which really is the absolute max that parties play in), there are 39.

      Of them, Democrats hold 20 and Republicans hold 19. Better, but not really heartwarming.

      If you look only at districts between the Republican in the most Democratic PVI and the Democrat in the most Republican PVI (Miller and Barrow at the moment) there are 40 districts.

      Of them, Democrats hold 16 and Republicans hold 24. But that is simply a result of Barrow's extremely Republican district.

      If you look only at district between the highest D+ PVI that was contested this year and the highest R+ PVI that was contested (Takano D+9 and Weber R+12, excluding Cicilline D+15 who is an outlier) that we have data for already there are 63 districts.

      Of them, Democrats hold 25 and Republicans hold 38. But again, that results from the playing field being more tilted into the Republican side this year than anything else.

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:30:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yep. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wwmiv, MichaelNY

      Pretty much a "null hypothesis" election with some polarization added, at the Presidential level, at least so far.  

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

      by Xenocrypt on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 08:42:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  While I can't speak on Sanchez (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      The Takano race was focused on heavily by R's simply because this was in the Inland Empire (a once solid R bastion)Democrats have only just started to make inroad here. Republicans on the other hand still had a good working party apparatus and ran best candidate they could a moderate, popular county sup (who had won decent support from Democrats in previous elections).

      On paper a D+3 still looks possible with the right candidate. Plus I'm sure Republicans were expecting Obama's numbers to drop a little this year so the seat could have ended up near D+1. After the primaries a good deal of got a little nervous about our prospects. But in the end we really ran the table here winning 3/4 Riverside County districts!

      But yeah Hindsight is always 20/20

      "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

      by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 09:14:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Xavier Becerra Elected Dem Caucus Chair (11+ / 0-)

    leapfrogging John Larson on the leadership ladder

    I view this as good news, as I want Becerra to be our next Dem leader after Pelosi.

  •  GA-SEN: Broun may announce his bid in January (6+ / 0-)

    Ok, Price and Handel can win statewide. If it's Broun, we got to get Baker or Marshall in the race.

    http://www.politico.com/...

  •  Because you can never spend too much time lusting (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wwmiv, MBishop1, lordpet8

    after Texas' future demographics...

    The state is out with population projections through 2050. They offer three migration scenarios; taking the middle one, and filtering for the over-18 population, here are white/hispanic/black/other percentages (2010 is based on the census):

    2010: 50/34/11/5
    2015: 47/36/11/6
    2020: 44/38/11/6
    2025: 41/41/11/7
    2030: 39/43/11/7
    2035: 36/45/11/8

    ...well, you get the idea. The CVAP numbers will of course be lower for hispanics and others, and higher for whites and blacks, but the gaps between VAP and CVAP will probably gradually narrow over time, as young hispanics are far more likely to be citizens.

    Alternatively, if immigration remains as high as it was from 2000-2010, you get:

    2010: 50/34/11/5
    2015: 46/36/11/6
    2020: 42/39/11/7
    2025: 38/42/11/8
    2030: 35/45/11/9
    2035: 32/47/11/10

    Though in this scenario I would imagine the gap between VAP and CVAP wouldn't narrow so much. At any rate, though the hispanic population will pass the anglo population around 2017 or 2018, that probably won't happen for the 18+ population until about 6-7 years later, and later still for CVAP (and later still than that for actual turnout, of course)

    •  Awesome (0+ / 0-)

      I'd go with halfway between the mid-ground scenario and the fast scenario, but they don't offer that as an option.

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:35:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hmm (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chachy

      I'd rather look at election years:

      1/2 of '00-'10 immigration

      2016: 46/11/36/6
      2020: 44/11/38/6
      2024: 42/11/40/7
      2028: 39/11/42/7
      2032: 37/11/43/8

      at '00-'10 immigration

      2016: 45/11/37/6
      2020: 42/11/39/7
      2024: 39/11/42/8
      2028: 36/11/44/9
      2032: 34/11/46/10

      3/4 of '00-'10 (easy to calculate, just average the two previous)

      2016: 46/11/37/6
      2020: 43/11/39/7
      2024: 40/11/41/7
      2028: 38/11/43/8
      2032: 35/11/45/9

      The moment that whites hit less than 55% of the actual electorate is when Texas will become competitive. That looks to be around 2024 under the bottom two models and 2028 under the first.

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:09:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Israeli elections (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeloitDem, KingofSpades, MichaelNY, jncca

    I've been interested in learning more about Israeli politics, particularly where the traditional bases of power are for each of the main blocks (does left-right split among geography, class, etc). Anyone have any ideas?

    Can anyone speak to where the bases of power for? I know the right is strong with the settlers in the West Bank, I'd also assume they are with the Orthodox members, as well as Russian immigrants.

    I'd assume the center-left does better in Haifa and Tel Aviv, but I could be way off.

    I've been reading some articles from Haaretz and the Jerusalem Post but would love other suggestions.

    What with Tzipi Livni entering the race, I would just LOVE to see her wipe the smug smile off Bibi's face.

    In the, from what I can understand, outside chance that the moderate bloc is able to trump the right, I think chances for peace would greatly improve. Maybe BHO would be able to really earn his Nobel Peace prize.

    21, Male, LA-02, LA-06 (former), TX-08 (home), SSP: sschmi4

    by Stephen Schmitz on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:11:15 PM PST

    •  Tel Aviv is a bastion for the Labor party. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Stephen Schmitz

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:30:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  OK, I'm not close to an expert (4+ / 0-)

      But to get things started:

      Russian immigrants to Israel tend to be both hawkish and secular; indeed, quite a few are Russian Orthodox Christians, not Jews at all, or are merely nominally Jewish but essentially non-practicing. They give a lot of support to Yisrael Beiteinu, led by Minister of Foreign Affairs, Avigdor Lieberman.

      Sephardim, and especially Jews of Moroccan origin, plus Ethiopian Jews, offer a lot of support to the Shas party, which is relatively but not reflexively hawkish, supports a greater influence of Jewish religious law in public life, but is above all focused on getting as much support possible for their system of yeshivot (Jewish religious schools, more or less analogous to parochial schools in the US) and patronage for the Mizrachi communities, in general. The missile-scarred town of Sderot, near the Gaza Strip, is one of a number of impoverished Sephardic towns in Israel, and these towns, even in times of peace, often feel forgotten and dissed by the bigwigs in Jerusalem.

      The secular left, what remains of it, does indeed get a lot of support in secular, liberal Tel Aviv and other secular, liberal communities along the coast.

      Jerusalem and settlements across the Green Line do indeed support the right, and also hawkish religious ("ultra-Orthodox" or Hareidi) parties like United Torah Judaism.

      The triangle and other Arab areas of the Galilee are the strongholds of the Arab parties.

      I look forward to corrections or/and more detailed remarks by someone more familiar with Israeli local politics than I am.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:51:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm no expert (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, bumiputera

      But having been to Israel and having relatives there (who all vote for Likud :/) I know something.

      the Ultra-Orthodox vote for their own parties.  Jerusalem has many such areas, but other cities have them as well.  B'nei Brak near Tel Aviv is ultra-Orthodox.

      Tel Aviv (and neighboring suburbs) are known as the San Francisco of Israel.  Labor and even further left parties like Meretz do well there.

      The Arab parties get votes from Arab cities such as Afula and Umm al-Fahm.  Haifa also has a decent Arab population.

      Russian immigrants are conservative, but they vote for Yisrael Beiteinu more than Likud.  Northern Israel and Netanya both have large Russian populations.

      My guess is Eilat is also liberal and possibly the most secular place in Israel; it's basically Hawaii but in Israel.

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:27:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It would be nice... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        If the Israeli left and Arab parties would form a stable coalition. Probably wouldn't be enough to overtake the right, but it would be something.

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

        by SaoMagnifico on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 12:36:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I would love to see Arab parties included (0+ / 0-)

          in any coalition, ever. It's never happened.

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 01:16:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Some of the Arab lawmakers (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, sapelcovits

          are actually anti-Israel, though.  But including the moderate ones would be nice, and with Israel's dominance by the right wing, that may even be necessary.

          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 Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 01:51:18 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  From watching Israeli politics (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bumiputera

            My observation is that left-wing Zionist parties, with the possible exception of Meretz, would rather decline to take power than to ever depend on any of the Arab parties for coalition partners, even on an informal basis in which there was no written coalition agreement and no MK from any Arab party got any ministerial position. And this even includes the perpetual exclusion of Hadash, which is a non-Zionist but officially non-ethnic though mostly Arab party that was an outgrowth of Rakah, the Israeli Communist Party, but is no longer Leninist, to the best of my knowledge.

            Don't get me wrong: Hadash would probably be a very difficult coalition partner for any Zionist-dominated coalition, and might possibly refuse to join any such coalition. But if they were offered a role in government, I'm not convinced that Hadash, despite being colorful and non-Zionist, would be so much more difficult than some of the other Israeli parties like Shas, Yisrael Beiteinu, and United Torah Judaism, all of which present different problems to larger parties needing them for votes, though some of the difficulties would be of different kinds.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 02:25:07 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Hillary 2016 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, wwmiv, MBishop1, lordpet8

    This article is a little premature, but I just got insanely excited.

    Hillary is Running: A Dispatch from the Saban Forum

    21, Male, LA-02, LA-06 (former), TX-08 (home), SSP: sschmi4

    by Stephen Schmitz on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:12:31 PM PST

    •  Ah, Haim Saban. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, HoosierD42, LordMike

      The guy who brought us kids the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:31:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I always idolized Jason, the Red Ranger. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8

        And thought Tommy, the Green Ranger, was some uppity Johnny-come-lately.

        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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:35:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  yet he got be the longest serving Ranger (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          and got 4 colors(Green,white, Red zeo/turbo, black) and 5 and half seasons.

          You know they brought Jason back as the gold ranger briefly in the 4th season (Zeo)

          "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

          by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:56:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I was always a fan of the Blue ranger (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          mostly because I'm a nerd too.

          24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

          by HoosierD42 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 01:24:04 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  on another note I can't believe (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, BeloitDem

        that the show is still going on
        They've already got a 20th season ready for next year, Never would have though it would last this long.

        The show's been running longer than nearly 3/4 of the senators currently serving in the senate!

        "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

        by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:18:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  BTW, you know quite a bit on Louis. politics. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Is there any reason Obama outperformed 2008 there besides the obvious reason that there was no hurricane this time?

      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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:33:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  just from the geography (4+ / 0-)

        big jumps in New Orleans Area (Hurricane), but also places with big Black populations like Baton Rouge and Shreveport swung left in PVI. So my guess is it's all just Black turnout.

        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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:29:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Couple of reasons (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, KingofSpades

        I think the biggest is increased black turnout. They feel like the President has been disrespected.

        Also, NOLA is one of the fastest growing cities in the country. There has been a lot of liberal white growth in the city the passed few years, lots of young professionals.

        Also, I think what accounts for PVI shifts in non-NOLA part of the state is a backlash against Republican budget cuts, particularly to Charity/LSU hospital system.

        Jindal is dismantling the last remnants of Huey Long's legacy.

        21, Male, LA-02, LA-06 (former), TX-08 (home), SSP: sschmi4

        by Stephen Schmitz on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 08:16:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's a pity the only Long family member (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          to still be in politics is a flipping Republican.

          Yes, I'm glad NOLA springing back.  Furthermore, there's been a boom in minority growth in St. Bernard and Jefferson Parish from 2000 to 2010, so that explains the big shifts there.

          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 Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 03:08:09 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

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

      We haven't seen you in awhile!

      22 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 Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:36:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Been here just not commenting (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, KingofSpades

        I've been reading just haven't been commenting. About to write up a diary for some maps I drew in DRA.

        I've drawn a map of the state senate that would probably give Democrats a majority in probably every election save a 2010 wave.

        21, Male, LA-02, LA-06 (former), TX-08 (home), SSP: sschmi4

        by Stephen Schmitz on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 08:19:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  even my crazy birther uncle (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, MichaelNY

      wants to vote for her if she runs.
      I don't know whether to be a scared or just plain excited.

      "If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democratic administrations you had $3.9M at the end" -Forbes Magazine

      by lordpet8 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:57:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I dunno (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, LordMike

      It would be great if she ran -- I think she would win -- but one partisan's take on a speech she gave on the Middle East doesn't exactly counterweight her repeated Shermanesque statements, IMO.

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

      by SaoMagnifico on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 12:32:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site