The Hill polls 10 House districts (Sophomores, I guess?)

[JohnnyLongtorso]

http://thehill.com/house-polls/thehill-poll-week-3/124903-district-by-district

AZ-05
David Schweikert (R) -  45
Harry Mitchell (D) - 42

IL-14
Randy Hultgren (R) - 43
Bill Foster (D) - 42

IL-17
Bobby Schilling (R) - 45
Phil Hare (D) - 38

MS-01
Alan Nunnelee (R) - 44
Travis Childers (D) - 39

NH-01
Frank Guinta (R) - 47
Carol Shea-Porter (D) - 42

NY-19
John Hall (D) - 43
Nan Hayworth (R) - 43

NY-24
Mike Arcuri (D) - 47
Richard Hanna (R) - 37

PA-08
Patrick J. Murphy (D) - 46
Mike Fitzpatrick (R) - 43

PA-10
Chris Carney (D) - 41
Tom Marino (R) - 41

WI-08
Reid Ribble (R) - 45
Steve Kagen (D) - 44

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Is that borne out by facts or is it Barone depressing us all by just writing what he wants to be the case again?

It may well be the case that every blue dog who is safe, voted against it. There are some blue dogs who voted against it, who are either going down or polling in trouble (Edwards, Childers, Taylor, Lincoln Davis), so it didn't necessarily save them.

OTOH, voting for it seems to guarantee that a blue dog will be in trouble. Markey's seat is likely gone, and Salazar is in trouble (for some perspective, most considered it likely D last spring).

Can you think of any blue dogs that voted for it that are safe or heavily favored?

Looking at the list from Wikipedia, there's Baca, Cooper, Cuellar, Harman, Michaud, Schiff, David Scott, and Mike Thompson. Of course, some of these are probably BDINOs.