Most vulnerable House freshmen

[Mr.Phips]

The district went for Bush by about 2000 votes in 2000 and went for Clinton handily in 1996.  The district is trending Dem and Republicans are unlikely to get it back.

Also, Democrats are likely to extend the district into the Bronx in the 2011 redistricting and shear off a good portion of the marginal Orange county.  This would essentially wipe out any chance of the Republicans holding the seat as it would add a good chunk of territory that votes about 90%-10% Democratic. 

Not that I disagree that Republicans are going to win it back, but by your own admission, Republicans have gotten an increasingly large chunk of the vote there on the Presidential level since 1996.

The 2000 to 2004 increase in the Bush vote was probably 85% due to 9/11.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Casey carried it by about 18 points over Santorum though.

Which is pretty much what he won by statewide, no?

[12th Doctor]

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

[minionofmidas]

It's amusing that the two weakest Democratic freshmen, Carol Shea-Porter and Dave Lobesack

In what sense are they the weakest?

[Sam Spade]

I see Hall as being so vulnerable because what he represents is basically a RINO district but still conservative enough to vote for Bush. A more moderate Democrat could certainly hold it, but Hall is one of the most liberal members of the freshman class, and the GOP bench is pretty deep. I've seen Hall as likely to hang on only if the GOP ends up nominating a Bachmann-esque candidate, could be wrong, but we'll see who they run.

The district went for Bush by about 2000 votes in 2000 and went for Clinton handily in 1996.  The district is trending Dem and Republicans are unlikely to get it back.

Also, Democrats are likely to extend the district into the Bronx in the 2011 redistricting and shear off a good portion of the marginal Orange county.  This would essentially wipe out any chance of the Republicans holding the seat as it would add a good chunk of territory that votes about 90%-10% Democratic. 

Only if the Dems control the NY State Senate after the 2010 elections.  If that does not occur, then such blatant gerrymandering is extremely unlikely.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

[Mr.Phips]

I see Hall as being so vulnerable because what he represents is basically a RINO district but still conservative enough to vote for Bush. A more moderate Democrat could certainly hold it, but Hall is one of the most liberal members of the freshman class, and the GOP bench is pretty deep. I've seen Hall as likely to hang on only if the GOP ends up nominating a Bachmann-esque candidate, could be wrong, but we'll see who they run.

The district went for Bush by about 2000 votes in 2000 and went for Clinton handily in 1996.  The district is trending Dem and Republicans are unlikely to get it back.

Also, Democrats are likely to extend the district into the Bronx in the 2011 redistricting and shear off a good portion of the marginal Orange county.  This would essentially wipe out any chance of the Republicans holding the seat as it would add a good chunk of territory that votes about 90%-10% Democratic. 

Only if the Dems control the NY State Senate after the 2010 elections.  If that does not occur, then such blatant gerrymandering is extremely unlikely.

It is only a matter of time before Republicans lose the NY State Senate.

[Mr.Phips]

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

Yes, the current precincts.

[Mr.Phips]

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

I don't know why you think that.  That district is a swing district with a very large Dem registration advantage.  Any Republican would have to pick up about 16% of the districts Democrats to win the district and hold on to all of the moderate Republicans and that is nearly impossible as a non-incumbent.

[Keystone Phil]

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

Yeah, that would be my question, too.

BTW, MN-01 is more marginal than PA-04, and I would definitely have Walz as safer than Altmire, also because Altmire is much more likely to face a strong candidate. The GOP bench here sucks, they have plenty of potential candidates, but none are likely to appeal district-wide since they're all mostly extreme incompetents (Mark Kennedy-esque) and/or wingnuts. And no one is able to break Walz's big margins in Blue Earth/Nicollet and Freeborn/Mower counties.

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that it went for Dukakis. After all, Swann carried this district against Rendell last year.

Casey carried it by about 18 points over Santorum though.

Ok, which just proves that it is a very unique district.

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

I don't know why you think that.  That district is a swing district with a very large Dem registration advantage.  Any Republican would have to pick up about 16% of the districts Democrats to win the district and hold on to all of the moderate Republicans and that is nearly impossible as a non-incumbent.

He thinks that because Hart is very personally popular there. She had that race won but she let that get to her head. Hart picking up the 16% of the district's Dems isn't a big deal because they like her to begin with.

[Mr.Phips]

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

Yeah, that would be my question, too.

BTW, MN-01 is more marginal than PA-04, and I would definitely have Walz as safer than Altmire, also because Altmire is much more likely to face a strong candidate. The GOP bench here sucks, they have plenty of potential candidates, but none are likely to appeal district-wide since they're all mostly extreme incompetents (Mark Kennedy-esque) and/or wingnuts. And no one is able to break Walz's big margins in Blue Earth/Nicollet and Freeborn/Mower counties.

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that it went for Dukakis. After all, Swann carried this district against Rendell last year.

Casey carried it by about 18 points over Santorum though.

Ok, which just proves that it is a very unique district.

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

I don't know why you think that.  That district is a swing district with a very large Dem registration advantage.  Any Republican would have to pick up about 16% of the districts Democrats to win the district and hold on to all of the moderate Republicans and that is nearly impossible as a non-incumbent.

He thinks that because Hart is very personally popular there. She had that race won but she let that get to her head. Hart picking up the 16% of the district's Dems isn't a big deal because they like her to begin with.

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

[Keystone Phil]

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

Yes, I do. Hart is basically the incumbent. They've known her from her State Senate and Congressional days way better than they know Altmire and they like her.

[Mr.Phips]

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

Yes, I do. Hart is basically the incumbent. They've known her from her State Senate and Congressional days way better than they know Altmire and they like her.

If they liked her, they would not have voted her out.

[Keystone Phil]

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

Yes, I do. Hart is basically the incumbent. They've known her from her State Senate and Congressional days way better than they know Altmire and they like her.

If they liked her, they would not have voted her out.

She took them for granted. She wasn't campaigning seriously and got caught up in a terrible year.

[Mr.Phips]

You think they would choose her over an incumbent that has more in common with them?  These voters are more likely to stick with the incumbent.

Yes, I do. Hart is basically the incumbent. They've known her from her State Senate and Congressional days way better than they know Altmire and they like her.

If they liked her, they would not have voted her out.

She took them for granted. She wasn't campaigning seriously and got caught up in a terrible year.

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

[Keystone Phil]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

[Mr.Phips]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

Why do you say that?

That said, if the Democrats lose seats like this, they are likely to lose the House and the Presidency in a landslide.

[Keystone Phil]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

Why do you say that?

I think the GOP will have a stronger party head than we did in 2006.

[Mr.Phips]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

Why do you say that?

I think the GOP will have a stronger party head than we did in 2006.

You mean Bush?

[Keystone Phil]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

Why do you say that?

I think the GOP will have a stronger party head than we did in 2006.

You mean Bush?

Bush was our head in 2006. That won't be the case in 2008.

[Mr.Phips]

Are you sure 2008 is going to be any better?

Yes, I do. We'll have to wait and see though. 

Why do you say that?

I think the GOP will have a stronger party head than we did in 2006.

You mean Bush?

Bush was our head in 2006. That won't be the case in 2008.

He still will be President.  Do you not think that Clinton being President hurt Democrats in 2000 or Johnson being President hurt them in 1968?

[TeePee4Prez]

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

Are the Dukakis numbers on the current boundaries?

Yeah, that would be my question, too.

BTW, MN-01 is more marginal than PA-04, and I would definitely have Walz as safer than Altmire, also because Altmire is much more likely to face a strong candidate. The GOP bench here sucks, they have plenty of potential candidates, but none are likely to appeal district-wide since they're all mostly extreme incompetents (Mark Kennedy-esque) and/or wingnuts. And no one is able to break Walz's big margins in Blue Earth/Nicollet and Freeborn/Mower counties.

Altmire would have to be a pretty awful politician not to be able to win in a district that even Michael Dukakis carried by 52%-47%.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the fact that it went for Dukakis. After all, Swann carried this district against Rendell last year.

Casey carried it by about 18 points over Santorum though.

Ok, which just proves that it is a very unique district.

Quite frankly, Altmire is going to get creamed when Hart comes back in 08.  The only way he has a chance is if Swann decides to run against Hart in the primary.  He is someone who only won because of the bad GOP climate and he will get ejected in no time flat.  The only reason he won was because no one took him seriously and Hart didn't even start a camapign until October, by which time, the momentum was soundly against her.  Reminds me of when the Patriots beat the Steelers in the 2001 AFC Championship game... the main reason we lost is because we assumed we had already won.

I don't know why you think that.  That district is a swing district with a very large Dem registration advantage.  Any Republican would have to pick up about 16% of the districts Democrats to win the district and hold on to all of the moderate Republicans and that is nearly impossible as a non-incumbent.

He thinks that because Hart is very personally popular there. She had that race won but she let that get to her head. Hart picking up the 16% of the district's Dems isn't a big deal because they like her to begin with.

It also helped we ran a conservative Democrat who fits the district rather than a Rendell type.  You can make the Swann argument, but that's also Steeler Country.

[Keystone Phil]

It also helped we ran a conservative Democrat who fits the district rather than a Rendell type.

Oh, it most certainly did. I'm not making the argument that Altmire isn't a good fit ideologically. However, I don't think he is as well liked as Hart is in that area. I really believe that the voters of that district will likely "forgive and forget" Hart for her mistakes in 2006.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So what happens if it is Swann vs. Altmire (which I really don't think is likely, thank God)? Altmire is a better fit in the district than Rendell but he's not as strong of a candidate in other areas. You think Swann can win there because it is Steelers Country?

[Mr.Phips]

It also helped we ran a conservative Democrat who fits the district rather than a Rendell type.

Oh, it most certainly did. I'm not making the argument that Altmire isn't a good fit ideologically. However, I don't think he is as well liked as Hart is in that area. I really believe that the voters of that district will likely "forgive and forget" Hart for her mistakes in 2006.

Do you think Hart would have beaten Ron Klink if she ran against him in 2000 if he didn't run for Senate?  Because Klink and Altmire's ideologies are almost identical.

[Keystone Phil]

He still will be President.  Do you not think that Clinton being President hurt Democrats in 2000 or Johnson being President hurt them in 1968?

Yeah, but remember that both men had their respective Vice Presidents running in those years.

It also helped we ran a conservative Democrat who fits the district rather than a Rendell type.

Oh, it most certainly did. I'm not making the argument that Altmire isn't a good fit ideologically. However, I don't think he is as well liked as Hart is in that area. I really believe that the voters of that district will likely "forgive and forget" Hart for her mistakes in 2006.

Do you think Hart would have beaten Ron Klink if she ran against him in 2000 if he didn't run for Senate?  Because Klink and Altmire's ideologies are almost identical.

It would have been a close race. Hard to say who would have won.