TN-5: Rep. Jim Cooper won't seek Re-Election

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Hopefully he can make a comeback later in the decade. (2026 or 2028 is what I have in mind)

He’s 67 and has already served two nonconsecutive terms stretching back to 83. I can see a democrat flipping it back eventually, but I imagine he’s retired for good

[Schiff for Senate]

Isn’t Nashville getting cracked? Not surprising

Although, he could have not spent years blue dogging it up in a fairly safe district if he was just going to retire the second he faced a red district.

Yeah, this is because Nashville is getting cracked. Cooper was probably just truly a Blue Dog. Not too many old White guys from the South are progressive and not all politicians are so spineless to abandon their personal beliefs to serve their party. Same applies to Manchin.

Manchin has no principles (one posters' signature has/had two images of Manchin - one where he indicated he was strongly pro-choice, another where he indicated he was strongly pro-life) and neither does Sinema (she used to be a liberal when she represented a blue district in the House but now she's a centrist because she somehow thinks it's the only way for a Democrat to win AZ).

Cooper had principles - he's been a genuine Blue Dog all along, even when it was not required for electability.

 And, his views aside, he seems like a massive FF and a true, genuine representative of TN-05 (from what the Twitter statement said, he even gave his private phone number so he was easily accessible - you don't get much better than that in terms of accessibility to your representative).

[Schiff for Senate]

Although, he could have not spent years blue dogging it up in a fairly safe district if he was just going to retire the second he faced a red district.

Not his fault. Not many of us saw Nashville being cracked up till recently and there's no point in preemptive retirement when he can just retire if and when Nashville is actually cracked.

[lfromnj]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Cooper#2006

Cooper voted for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in March 2010.[

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

According to 538 PVI (not entirely the same thing), it's R+15.

[Schiff for Senate]

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

It's R+8.

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

According to 538 PVI (not entirely the same thing), it's R+15.

538's is very different from CPVI, because in CPVI, if a district is R+15, they're saying it gives the GOP fifteen percentage points more and Demcorats fifteen percentage points less than the nation - so for 2020, and R+15 district might presumably go something like 62-36% (compared to 51-47% Democratic nationally) Republican. In 538 (they have a more complicated formula with 2020 having a bigger weightage than 2016), an R+15 district would give a margin about fifteen percentage points more than the nation - so instead of Biden+4, it'd be (roughly) Trump+11. The value of CPVI is obviously closer to zero than the 538 PVI as such - roughly half as much as the 538 PVI - and thus, instead of R+15, the CPVI would be roughly R+(15/2) - which, as it turns out, is basically correct since the CPVI is R+8.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

It's R+8.

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

According to 538 PVI (not entirely the same thing), it's R+15.

538's is very different from CPVI, because in CPVI, if a district is R+15, they're saying it gives the GOP fifteen percentage points more and Demcorats fifteen percentage points less than the nation - so for 2020, and R+15 district might presumably go something like 62-36% (compared to 51-47% Democratic nationally) Republican. In 538 (they have a more complicated formula with 2020 having a bigger weightage than 2016), an R+15 district would give a margin about fifteen percentage points more than the nation - so instead of Biden+4, it'd be (roughly) Trump+11. The value of CPVI is obviously closer to zero than the 538 PVI as such - roughly half as much as the 538 PVI - and thus, instead of R+15, the CPVI would be roughly R+(15/2) - which, as it turns out, is basically correct since the CPVI is R+8.

Thank you for expanding on the information I posted.
Your post here was very helpful.

[Schiff for Senate]

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

It's R+8.

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

According to 538 PVI (not entirely the same thing), it's R+15.

538's is very different from CPVI, because in CPVI, if a district is R+15, they're saying it gives the GOP fifteen percentage points more and Demcorats fifteen percentage points less than the nation - so for 2020, and R+15 district might presumably go something like 62-36% (compared to 51-47% Democratic nationally) Republican. In 538 (they have a more complicated formula with 2020 having a bigger weightage than 2016), an R+15 district would give a margin about fifteen percentage points more than the nation - so instead of Biden+4, it'd be (roughly) Trump+11. The value of CPVI is obviously closer to zero than the 538 PVI as such - roughly half as much as the 538 PVI - and thus, instead of R+15, the CPVI would be roughly R+(15/2) - which, as it turns out, is basically correct since the CPVI is R+8.

Thank you for expanding on the information I posted.
Your post here was very helpful.

Happy to help! 

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

It's R+8.

What’s the CPVI for the new TN-05?

According to 538 PVI (not entirely the same thing), it's R+15.

538's is very different from CPVI, because in CPVI, if a district is R+15, they're saying it gives the GOP fifteen percentage points more and Demcorats fifteen percentage points less than the nation - so for 2020, and R+15 district might presumably go something like 62-36% (compared to 51-47% Democratic nationally) Republican. In 538 (they have a more complicated formula with 2020 having a bigger weightage than 2016), an R+15 district would give a margin about fifteen percentage points more than the nation - so instead of Biden+4, it'd be (roughly) Trump+11. The value of CPVI is obviously closer to zero than the 538 PVI as such - roughly half as much as the 538 PVI - and thus, instead of R+15, the CPVI would be roughly R+(15/2) - which, as it turns out, is basically correct since the CPVI is R+8.

Thank you for expanding on the information I posted.
Your post here was very helpful.

Happy to help! 

No prob man, have a nice day.