LA and NC 2016 Congressional Races

[IceSpear]

Burr leads Cowell and Foxx 44/38, Hagan 46/43.

So much for the "Burr would demolish Hagan easily" narrative. This race will clearly be very competitive.

[IceSpear]

Burr leads Cowell and Foxx 44/38, Hagan 46/43.

So much for the "Burr would demolish Hagan easily" narrative. This race will clearly be very competitive.

The narrative is built on his past history of crushing his opponents late in the campaign season. The numbers with Marshall were rather close for much of the season and he trailed Bowles. I don't think he will wait quite that long to take action, probably move to define the race in the mid to late Spring or early summer period instead. Either way, a poll showing a close race almost two years out isn't sufficient to end that narrative.

It will be competative in the beginning, even if he does eventually demolish her. Whatever the margin, I am fairly certain Burr wins unless Hillary wins the state by an at least somewhat decent single digit margin or greater.

2004 and 2010 were also strong years for Republicans in general.

[IceSpear]

No thanks to McIntyre. Wasn't he the most right wing Democrat in the entire House? NC can do better.

[IceSpear]

No thanks to McIntyre. Wasn't he the most right wing Democrat in the entire House? NC can do better.

He was one one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, yes. But in present days realities that means "slightly right of center" and "more liberal then any Republican". He ideally suited his district, and he was the only one who was able to hold it for Democrats for so long (look at 2014 results without him in the district). And North Carolina is NOT a very liberal state - in fact a median NC voter will be not far different from him.

Hagan was far more liberal than he was, and she won in 2008, and would've won in 2014 if the wave wasn't so huge. Obama also won in 2008. McIntyre would be a good candidate for South Carolina, maybe.

[IceSpear]

No thanks to McIntyre. Wasn't he the most right wing Democrat in the entire House? NC can do better.

He was one one of the most conservative Democrats in the House, yes. But in present days realities that means "slightly right of center" and "more liberal then any Republican". He ideally suited his district, and he was the only one who was able to hold it for Democrats for so long (look at 2014 results without him in the district). And North Carolina is NOT a very liberal state - in fact a median NC voter will be not far different from him.

Hagan was far more liberal than he was, and she won in 2008, and would've won in 2014 if the wave wasn't so huge. Obama also won in 2008. McIntyre would be a good candidate for South Carolina, maybe.

Forget about Obama. He was a "fashion" in 2008, that's why he won then. His loss in the state in 2012 has shown that even at highest possible minoruty turnout he was no more popular. And Hagan was more liberal then McIntyre, but not by so much. On social ussues - substantially, on economy - not by much. After all - Hagan lost to such flawed candidate as Tillis in 2014: yes, she gave campaign all she had, but even against him that wasn't enough.. And it was a "purple" North Carolina, not Louisiana or Arkansas.

P.S. IMHO - it's a big error to think that each North Carolina Democrat thinks and votes as people in Research Triangle....

I'm just saying, it seems silly to say Democrats NEED to nominate a very conservative candidate to win in NC when moderates/liberals have won there relatively recently. I mean jeez, McIntyre even supported the government shutdown. I wouldn't call that "barely" to the right of Hagan. It would be like telling Republicans that if Toomey loses, they'll need to nominate a Charlie Baker clone if they ever want to win PA again.

Barrow and Matheson were the only House Democrats who were more conservative than McIntyre in the ratings I looked at, and they'd both be good recruits in states where being a statewide Democrat tends to be a hopeless endeavor. That's not the case in NC.

[IceSpear]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

No more of a suicide mission than running in their deep red districts to begin with.

[IceSpear]

So, relatively conservative (relatively, because there are no REAL conservatives (like Larry McDonald, Bob Stump, John Rarick and David Satterfield were) in Democratic caucus now) are good for "suicidal missions" only, while all other seats "belong" to relative "progressives"?? Not the best fate, and i am sure they will object)))))

I tried to stress that North Carolina is NOT especially liberal state in federal elections, so rumming "non-progressive" makes a lot of sense. Hagan was typical "left of center" Senator (and - among more conservative Democratic senators, BTW). It's not always good to take into account "base" demands ONLY. It's this way (by catering to the "base" which doesn't represent majority view) that Republicans became almost non-competive, say, in California and Oregon, and Democrats - in many southern and border states

No more of a suicide mission than running in their deep red districts to begin with.

Frequently - more so. Matheson's disitrict, for example, was the most LIBERAL in Utah, despite being about R+16. Statewide it's even more difficult.

True for Matheson, but Barrow's district was actually more Republican than Georgia as a whole is.

[IceSpear]

Cowell would be a good candidate. Hagan can wait until 2020 when she's good and anonymous (plus, then she'll be able to exact revenge).

[IceSpear]

Unsurprisingly, the nomination is Hagan's if she wants it: she leads Cowell 66-12 in a hypothetical primary. She would also lead Cooper 43-31 in a gubernatorial primary, but I don't know why they would poll such a ridiculous scenario.

http://www.nccivitas.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/dem-primary-xtabs-3.25.15.pdf

[IceSpear]

Looks like Janet Cowell is out.

Ouch.

[IceSpear]

LA-1: Duke is strongly leaning towards a run.

KKK+1

[IceSpear]

LA-1: Duke is strongly leaning towards a run.

David Duke's campaigns, while horrifying and terrible, are at least useful for gauging what percentage of Louisiana voters are massive racists. I've always wondered which CD he would do best in, nationwide.

West...

Feliciana Parish

[IceSpear]

^ No one really knows whether 2015 Governor was a fluke because of Vitter or whether it means the state is purple (or purple-atlas blue) aside from the presidential race. The senate race will give us the answer.

Uh, yes we do? It was obviously a fluke. That's like saying we don't know if Massachusetts is still a blue state or not because they elected Baker.