Katie porter’s margin of victory. How should it be judged?

[Matty]

On paper, it looks decent against a man who is a huge name in mission viejo area.

This used to be red as ruby area

[Mike Thick]

Relative to what's going on everywhere else in the country, it isn't terrible. Relative to expectations it's catastrophic

[Roll Roons]

Not just her. Mike Levin, Sean Casten, Mikie Sherrill and Josh Gottheimer's races were rated as Safe D, but they're all winning by unimpressive 6-8 point margins.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Considering it & CA-10 were the only 2018 CA gains to swing left, I'll take it. It's meh, but not "catastrophic" for Porter.

I mean, we're talking about a Congressional district that voted for the Republican by 17% & 30% between 2012 and 2016.

I wonder how California would've been perceived this year if the 2018 gains didn't materialize to the extent that it did.

[Gracile]

Not just her. Mike Levin, Sean Casten, Mikie Sherrill and Josh Gottheimer's races were rated as Safe D, but they're all winning by unimpressive 6-8 margins.

Unimpressive is a pretty strong word considering two of those five people are outperforming their 2018 margins and four of the five are outperforming Hillary Clinton's margin in their district four years ago (Mike Levin is the big exception here, and his margin is a bit surprising to me as I thought that district was gone for good). If all of us went into this knowing that the House result would only be a 2-3% Democratic victory our reactions to these specific results would be much different (at least these are certainly better than some of their colleagues performed...).

[SevenEleven]

Not just her. Mike Levin, Sean Casten, Mikie Sherrill and Josh Gottheimer's races were rated as Safe D, but they're all winning by unimpressive 6-8 point margins.

That's why they were ranked safe D, a victory was assured even if Dems underperformed. Safe doesn't mean you win by X margin, it simply means that you win.

[Frenchrepublican]

Well she has to hope that the people on the redistricting commission will give her a much bluer seat otherwise she would be in big trouble in two years

[Pericles]

In a wave, which types of districts have a simple uniform swing and which one have a fundamentally different race from two years ago with a bigger swing? And which one is Porter's?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Her district was a Clinton district but not a solid Atlas-red one, so she did fine.

The biggest part of her win is that she's the only notable progressive to win/hold a swing district, although she's much more of a Warren Democrat than a Bernie/AOC type.

[KaiserDave]

Disappointing, but she's not losing anytime soon

[lfromnj]

Disappointing, but she's not losing anytime soon

4/7 D flips in 2018 are back to R or basically within a few hundred votes. Porter meanwhile faced a random nobody

SAFE D 2022!!!!

Redistricting can change this a bit but not sure what she could pick up.

[KaiserDave]

Disappointing, but she's not losing anytime soon

4/7 D flips in 2018 are back to R or basically within a few hundred votes. Porter meanwhile faced a random nobody

SAFE D 2022!!!!

Redistricting can change this a bit but not sure what she could pick up.

People keep saying "random nobody" like it means all that much. Were Republican and right leaning voters really gonna vote for Porter if the Republican wasn't a "random nobody." I mean, if the candidate is strong, than the candidate is strong, but running a "random nobody" shouldn't be a death knell.

The results in other Orange County districts only show that Porter is not in that much danger.

[KaiserDave]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why? In an election with record polarization, Golden cruised to victory, running much ahead of Joe Biden and rocketing ahead of Sarah Gideon's pitiful ME-2 performance. It's clearly because of his own unique strengths as a candidate.

Are we supposed to believe that Golden would have lost if Poliquin ran?

[Figueira]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why? In an election with record polarization, Golden cruised to victory, running much ahead of Joe Biden and rocketing ahead of Sarah Gideon's pitiful ME-2 performance. It's clearly because of his own unique strengths as a candidate.

Are we supposed to believe that Golden would have lost if Poliquin ran?

Poliquin wasn't even a strong candidate.

[KaiserDave]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why? In an election with record polarization, Golden cruised to victory, running much ahead of Joe Biden and rocketing ahead of Sarah Gideon's pitiful ME-2 performance. It's clearly because of his own unique strengths as a candidate.

Are we supposed to believe that Golden would have lost if Poliquin ran?

Poliquin wasn't even a strong candidate.

He’s actually a strong incumbent (TM)
And his defeats of well known electoral titan Emily Cain clearly show he’s a strong candidate (TM)

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Forgot to mention that the State Senate seat which overlaps the 45th ended up flipping to the Democrats. The Irvine Assembly district also stayed Democrat

[MT Treasurer]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why?

Maybe he wouldn’t have lost, but it would have been very close, and he’ll face an uphill battle in two years (which he wouldn’t if his victory was attributable solely to his "unique strengths as a candidate").

Jared Golden is about as unbeatable as Steve Bullock.

[KaiserDave]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why?

Maybe he wouldn’t have lost, but it would have been very close, and he’ll face an uphill battle in two years (which he wouldn’t if his victory was attributable solely to his "unique strengths as a candidate").

Jared Golden is about as unbeatable as Steve Bullock.

We will see. But I have him as the favorite.

[WD]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why?

Maybe he wouldn’t have lost, but it would have been very close, and he’ll face an uphill battle in two years (which he wouldn’t if his victory was attributable solely to his "unique strengths as a candidate").

Jared Golden is about as unbeatable as Steve Bullock.

We will see. But I have him as the favorite.

I doubt Golden is surviving a R leaning year (which 2022 will almost certainly be), especially considering the District he represents is the type to swing against Democrats most harshly.

I think ME-02 will be one of the first seats to flip in 2022

[MT Treasurer]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why?

Maybe he wouldn’t have lost, but it would have been very close, and he’ll face an uphill battle in two years (which he wouldn’t if his victory was attributable solely to his "unique strengths as a candidate").

Jared Golden is about as unbeatable as Steve Bullock.

We will see. But I have him as the favorite.

Normally I’d agree with you that the importance and/or impact of candidate quality (including in instances in which random nobodies are nominated) tends to be overstated, but when we’re talking about a considerable Democratic overperformance in an extremely rural/small-town/WWC Trump 2016/2020 district where Democratic support is arguably more likely to collapse than in any other district in the country, it’s pretty obvious that candidate quality plays a pretty big role. The fundamentals won’t be in Golden's favor here in 2022, and I doubt he’ll get as lucky again by facing similarly weak opposition/benefiting from the fact that the NRSC triaged the race.

[KaiserDave]

Like, Jared Golden was running against a "random nobody" and people are acting that if Republicans had put up a strong candidate (TM), than he would have lost because....why?

Maybe he wouldn’t have lost, but it would have been very close, and he’ll face an uphill battle in two years (which he wouldn’t if his victory was attributable solely to his "unique strengths as a candidate").

Jared Golden is about as unbeatable as Steve Bullock.

We will see. But I have him as the favorite.

Normally I’d agree with you that the importance and/or impact of candidate quality (including in instances in which random nobodies are nominated) tends to be overstated, but when we’re talking about a considerable Democratic overperformance in an extremely rural/small-town/WWC Trump 2016/2020 district where Democratic support is arguably more likely to collapse than in any other district in the country, it’s pretty obvious that candidate quality plays a pretty big role. The fundamentals won’t be in Golden's favor here in 2022, and I doubt he’ll get as lucky again by facing similarly weak opposition/benefiting from the fact that the NRSC triaged the race.

My candidate quality comments were more in regard to Porter’s race. But in ME-2, I think Jared does have a unique appeal. I find him to be very in touch and intelligent.

It’s not a coincidence he won by more than he did in 2018. And I'm not convinced it was just because he drew a weak opponent.