GOP Pins Comeback Hopes on Winning Back the Suburbs

[Torie]

An interesting article is in today's WSJ here. It has some voting percentage numbers in it, with a particular focus on Virginia, and NOVA and Fairfax County in particular. Enjoy.

Oh dear, you need a subscription to access it. I will try to post some snips from it tomorrow. In any event, the suburban swing to the Dems has really been massive in some places since 2000, larger than I thought.

This thread that currently offers next to no content is also probably on the wrong board anyway and should be moved to Congressional Elections. Oh dear, I screwed up! 

[Brittain33]

Northern Virginia was a disaster in 2009 starting almost at the beginning of the year, long before the macro picture turned bad. Not long after Obama was inaugurated there was a special election for a safe seat in an inner suburban district in NoVa that the Dem almost lost because no Dems showed up to vote.

If the rest of the suburban northeast mirrors what happened in NoVa, the Dems are going the way of Gordon Brown's Labour Party.

[cinyc]

Anecdotal evidence from the 2009 off-year elections and my analysis of the Massachusetts special election suggest there's a good chance the GOP could pick up many seats in the suburbs.  Remember - the GOP gains in 2009 weren't just in New Jersey and Virginia, but in hyper-local suburban races in New York and (to a lesser extent) Connecticut as well, some of which (Westchester or Nassau County Exec, for example) I would have never thought would happen.  

That is, if Republicans don't screw this up, like they usually do.

[Brittain33]

Anecdotal evidence from the 2009 off-year elections and my analysis of the Massachusetts special election suggest there's a good chance the GOP could pick up many seats in the suburbs.  

I think this will come into play more with Senate races, particularly in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, then in House races, where Republican opportunities aren't as many as they might like. Democrats were killed in special elections in Nassau and NoVa because their turnout was utterly pathetic, and there's no way it's going to be so low in a general election that we're going to see House incumbents go down on that issue alone the way that Suozzi did. But note that in N.J., Democrats lost no seats in the legislature on high turnout. I don't think NJ-12, NY-2, CT-3, or NY-19 going down for reasons like this, for example. But where there are opportunities because of weak incumbents or open seats, they have a boost they haven't had since about 2000-2002.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

But note that in N.J., Democrats lost no seats in the legislature on high turnout. I don't think NJ-12, NY-2, CT-3, or NY-19 going down for reasons like this, for example. But where there are opportunities because of weak incumbents or open seats, they have a boost they haven't had since about 2000-2002.

Democrats struggled in seats that went to Obama by better than 2:1, and Republicans almost picked up a pair of seats in heavily Democratic Middlesex County with literally no financial investment whatsoever. Republicans did pick up a heavily Democratic open seat in South Jersey (AD 04) in a "shocker."

The deck in New Jersey State Leg races has been stacked heavily in favor of Democrats since DiFrancesco left office in 2002. Republicans not only had to contend against a set of lines that are skewed to heavily favor Democrats, but they simply have not had the means to raise anywhere near the kind of money Democrats have.

[Brittain33]

Democrats struggled in seats that went to Obama by better than 2:1, and Republicans almost picked up a pair of seats in heavily Democratic Middlesex County with literally no financial investment whatsoever. Republicans did pick up a heavily Democratic open seat in South Jersey (AD 04) in a "shocker."

The deck in New Jersey State Leg races has been stacked heavily in favor of Democrats since DiFrancesco left office in 2002. Republicans not only had to contend against a set of lines that are skewed to heavily favor Democrats, but they simply have not had the means to raise anywhere near the kind of money Democrats have.

Nonetheless, wouldn't you say it's surprising that Republicans made no net gains in the legislature? At the very least, doesn't that mean there was substantial ticket-splitting, and lots of people who one thinks don't like Democrats, voting for Democrats? As far as the implications for Congress, Republicans will be a serious financial disadvantage against incumbents in senate elections in Arkansas and Nevada this year, and all over in the House, and that gap isn't going to close.

[Sam Spade]

Anecdotal evidence from the 2009 off-year elections and my analysis of the Massachusetts special election suggest there's a good chance the GOP could pick up many seats in the suburbs.  

I think this will come into play more with Senate races, particularly in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Illinois, then in House races, where Republican opportunities aren't as many as they might like. Democrats were killed in special elections in Nassau and NoVa because their turnout was utterly pathetic, and there's no way it's going to be so low in a general election that we're going to see House incumbents go down on that issue alone the way that Suozzi did. But note that in N.J., Democrats lost no seats in the legislature on high turnout. I don't think NJ-12, NY-2, CT-3, or NY-19 going down for reasons like this, for example. But where there are opportunities because of weak incumbents or open seats, they have a boost they haven't had since about 2000-2002.

NY-2, CT-3?  I think you're a tad off on your seats there. 

Just be aware of the internals of the Gallup release last week on the monthly generic ballot.  I would place a bit more emphasis there than the elections ,imho.

[Lief 🗽]

Northern Virginia was a disaster in 2009 starting almost at the beginning of the year, long before the macro picture turned bad. Not long after Obama was inaugurated there was a special election for a safe seat in an inner suburban district in NoVa that the Dem almost lost because no Dems showed up to vote.

If the rest of the suburban northeast mirrors what happened in NoVa, the Dems are going the way of Gordon Brown's Labour Party.

It's hardly been a disaster. We recently won two special elections (S-37 and H-41) the former of which was a pickup of AG Cuccinelli's old seat.

Also this article sounds silly. Of course they're hoping to win back the suburbs. Where else would they gain votes? The inner city? College towns? The black belt?

[Brittain33]

NY-2, CT-3?  I think you're a tad off on your seats there.  

I meant CT-4, but I did also intend NY-2. After all, NY-2 is the kind of suburban district without a Democratic heritage that a wave like this would threaten if it were open or had a weak incumbent, but which offers no opportunity this year.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you're talking about enthusiasm, there's no doubt an enthusiasm gap now. The two challenges I have to that are:

1. Will that persist into fall? We saw several elections in 2006 and 2008 where Republicans appeared undecided or unenthusiastic in summer, hurting the topline numbers, and then came home to their candidate. It doesn't make a big difference when you're losing independents, but it matters for numbers here. I do think that people who hate, hate, hate the Dems are more tuned into politics right now than Dems are.
2. I saw a poll last week--I think Washington Post--that had a tied generic ballot (46-45 Republican), with Republicans having a big lead on people "very enthusiastic," Democrats with an equally big lead among people "somewhat enthusiastic," and then both parties close to parity on "not at all enthusiastic." One party was leading the other 46-42, I forget which. That puts the enthusiasm in context.

We have a record of elections where Democrats never woke up and came out to vote--1994, and 2002. I think it matters that in those years you had a national leader who was disliked by many in the party, and then absolutely no national leader at all. Obama remains an asset for the Democratic base.

But as one says, we'll see. Things look quite dire for Dems now but it's far too early for me to give up hope that we could get away with a mildly bad year.

[Brittain33]

It's hardly been a disaster. We recently won two special elections (S-37 and H-41) the former of which was a pickup of AG Cuccinelli's old seat.

I was thinking specifically of the Alexandria or Arlington seat very early in 2009--do you remember what I'm talking about? That presaged bad news.

We did win Cuccinelli's seat, but that came with a very heavy investment from Dems unmatched by Republicans, in a seat we should have won anyway. So it could have been worse, but it's not great. (On Edit: it may have only been the House seat that had the big discrepancy in spending. But they were both very narrow wins.)

[Beet]

brittain33,

The narrow win of Sharon Bulova in Fairfax county and a Republican being elected to succeed her position were early warning signs.

In order words, they are trying to go back to the old days before the Clinton realignment. They may be able to do it for one or even two cycles, but the GOP as it is currently constituted will not hold the suburbs in the long term.

[Sam Spade]

Don't mean enthusiasm (not at this point in the game, though it's not completely useless right now, I'm not really looking at it) - rather I'm talking about where the numbers have shifted on the generic ballot to Republicans vis-a-vis 2006 (last midterm) the strongest in RV, namely:

1) Olds (65 and older)
2) Folks making over $90K income.

That suggests that the swings should be strongest in wealthy suburban areas and areas with lots of old population.  For the former, this article would be appropriate.

[Torie]

Don't mean enthusiasm (not at this point in the game, though it's not completely useless right now, I'm not really looking at it) - rather I'm talking about where the numbers have shifted on the generic ballot to Republicans vis-a-vis 2006 (last midterm) the strongest in RV, namely:

1) Olds (65 and older)
2) Folks making over $90K income.

That suggests that the swings should be strongest in wealthy suburban areas and areas with lots of old population.  For the former, this article would be appropriate.

I agree that there will be a big shift in 1) and 2) Sam, absent some unanticipated contrary shift of plate tectonic proportions down the road. However, among 2) there was a big shift to the Dems in 2008, including well for the top spot, moi.  

[Sam Spade]

Don't mean enthusiasm (not at this point in the game, though it's not completely useless right now, I'm not really looking at it) - rather I'm talking about where the numbers have shifted on the generic ballot to Republicans vis-a-vis 2006 (last midterm) the strongest in RV, namely:

1) Olds (65 and older)
2) Folks making over $90K income.

That suggests that the swings should be strongest in wealthy suburban areas and areas with lots of old population.  For the former, this article would be appropriate.

I agree that there will be a big shift in 1) and 2) Sam, absent some unanticipated contrary shift of plate tectonic proportions down the road. However, among 2) there was a big shift to the Dems in 2008, including well for the top spot, moi.  

I know.  But the comparison between 2008 and 2010 here is not what I'm interested in, since we're only talking generic ballot.

[Smash255]

NY-2, CT-3?  I think you're a tad off on your seats there.  

I meant CT-4, but I did also intend NY-2. After all, NY-2 is the kind of suburban district without a Democratic heritage that a wave like this would threaten if it were open or had a weak incumbent, but which offers no opportunity this year.

NY-2 is pretty solidly Democratic.  It could have been open this year as Israel considered taking on Gillibrand in the Primary.  Even if he did the district would have remained Dem, and pretty safely at that.  Obama won the district by double digits, Dems have a decent registration advantage in the district.  Also keep in mind the lines aren't the same as when Lazio held it.  The incumbent protection gerrymandered flip some areas with King's district.  Even if it was the old lines it would be a tough one for the GOP.   The GOP has no bench whatsoever in the district.