Google Ads


Site Stats

What About the Losers?

by: Crisitunity

Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 4:06 PM EDT


DavidNYC's great post about House election winners from 2008 who underperformed their district's presidential numbers got me thinking. It left me wondering: what about the incumbents who outright lost? Were there a lot of incumbents who overperformed their district and still lost?

It turns out, yes, there were quite a few. (In fact, it's not a difficult question at all; you can just reverse-engineer the previous diary to find the overperformers. For instance, if Jim Himes underperformed by 16 points, Chris Shays necessarily overperformed by 16.) So, while doing this, what turned out to be interesting was who the truly pathetic figures were... the ones on both sides of the aisle who underperformed their districts' leans on their way down to their own ignominious defeats. By doing this, we can separate out the representatives who simply got swamped by a wave from those who lost purely on their own merits.

Let's start with our five Democratic casualties:

State CD Member Party Dem
Margin
Obama
Margin
Difference
TX 22 Lampson (D) -7 -17 +10
KS 02 Boyda (D) -4 -12 +8
LA 06 Cazayoux (D) -8 -16 +8
FL 16 Mahoney (D) -20 -5 -15
LA 02 Jefferson (D) -3 49 -52

Bill Jefferson takes the prize for futility in 2008, with a 52-point disparity. Tim Mahoney also had a run-in with his own petard, while Nick Lampson, Nancy Boyda, and Don Cazayoux overperformed their dark-red districts and still lost.

Now for the Republicans:

State CD Member Party GOPer
Margin
McCain
Margin
Difference
CT 04 Shays (R) -4 -20 +16
NV 03 Porter (R) -5 -12 +7
OH 01 Chabot (R) -5 -11 +6
MI 07 Walberg (R) -2 -6 +4
MI 09 Knollenberg (R) -9 -13 +4
FL 08 Keller (R) -4 -6 +2
PA 03 English (R) -2 0 -2
VA 02 Drake (R) -5 -2 -3
VA 05 Goode (R) 0 3 -3
NY 29 Kuhl (R) -2 3 -5
NC 08 Hayes (R) -11 -6 -5
CO 04 Musgrave (R) -12 1 -13
FL 24 Feeney (R) -16 2 -18
ID 01 Sali (R) -1 26 -27

Not surprisingly, moderates Chris Shays and Jon Porter did what they could but simply got drowned by the blue tsunami in their districts. On the other hand, several unlikable wingnuts like Tim Walberg and Steve Chabot also overperformed, indicating that despite their out-of-whackness with their swing districts, they were primarily wave victims.

Instead, the majority of the GOPers who lost underperformed, some badly. Only two underperforming Republicans (Thelma Drake and Robin Hayes) were in districts that Obama narrowly won and thus have at least a partial excuse. The rest were in districts that McCain won, and have nothing to assign blame to other than their own loathsomeness. Bill Sali takes home top honors, managing to take a district that McCain won 62-36 and stil lose.

Crisitunity :: What About the Losers?
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Jefferson
Dollar Bill probably would have won if his general election were held in November along with everybody else's.  He got 92,000 voites in his primary runoff on November 4 and just 31,000 votes (losing by 2,000) when it counted.

Not probably
He would have.  There's not a snowball's chance it would have even been close on November 4th with high AA turnout.  Doubt Cao could have come within 12 points, probably closer to 20.

[ Parent ]
I'm still pissed about Cazayoux
That one will always be hard to take.

Yeah, it was Bad.
Okay, you're gonna tell me to take my comments and Beat It.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Not just Beat It
Moonwalk your @ss outta here.

[ Parent ]
I wouldn't necessarily . . .
On the other hand, several unlikable wingnuts like Tim Walberg and Steve Chabot also overperformed, indicating that despite their out-of-whackness with their swing districts, they were primarily wave victims.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this.  Incumbents should and almost always do overperform their districts.  It would be interesting to calculate by how much on average.  I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the average was more than +6 or +7, such that candidates like Wallberg and Chabot are better seen as slightly underperforming candidates, rather than particularly bad candidates like Kuhl and Hayes.


Sometimes, yeah
A lot of the incumbents who significantly outperform the Presidential candidate in their district do so because the out party has given up on trying to unseat them and doesn't really try to take them out.

26, white male, TX-24, liberal-leaning independent

[ Parent ]
2004 postmortem
In 2004, 76 Democrats and 68 Republicans in the House outperformed their Presidential candidate by 10.0% or more.  In the two elections since, Republicans have lost 24% of their House seats overall and 25% of these over performing seats.  This seems to mostly confirm your theory.

[ Parent ]
I agree
And also, as I pointed out in the other thread, McCain had pulled out of Michigan. If McCain hadn't given up, I don't think Walberg would have overperformed-- at least, not by as much.

[ Parent ]
Absolutely
There's a common theme among those on these lists.  

A. Corrupt incumbents - Feeney, Jefferson, Mahoney
B. Grade A jerks - Sali, Musgrave, Goode, Kuhl
C. People in districts trending against them - Knollenberg, Walberg, Hayes, Chabot, Drake, English, Porter, Shays, Keller
D. People who rode into office during the special circumstances, then got washed out in a Presidential year election - Lampson, Boyda, Cazayoux (though Jackson was partly to blame)


[ Parent ]
Jackson
That egotistical idiot was completely to blame.

[ Parent ]
Hmm...
I would put Robin "liberals hate real Americans" Hayes and Thelma "I made $400k on foreclosed houses but voted against helping people stay in their homes" Drake in category B.

[ Parent ]
Mahoney
I worked on Capitol Hill when he came in as a Freshman, and was in several meetings with him.  He was one of the biggest jerks I've met in politics.  

Heck
I got that feeling just watching him a few times on CSPAN.  

[ Parent ]
Good to know that
we're now rid of him.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Competetive States
It looks like the Obama field effort was probably a big help to Congressional Dems.  All our losers except the horrible Tim Mahoney came from states Obama didn't contest.  And all their losers except Shays, Kuhl and Sali came from states that Obama did contest.  

Maybe just a coincidence, but something to ponder.


Not so sure
I still don't understand how Dan Seals lost much worse in 2008 than in 2006?  If there was one district in the country we should have picked up, this was it.  I think it was Seals.  Some commenters have said he ran a poor campaign (but maybe that is based on the results).

Hines win is one of the brightest feathers in Obama's cap.  Perriello may well be another with higher black turnout in VA-5 even though McCain eked out a win.

Overall, Congressional Dems ran ahead of Obama.  He was a help in many areas but the extent is debateable.

Hind sight is 20/20 but Coleman's ability to stall the seating of Al Franken is incredibly irritating.  Gore's votes were never counted and that one ended in December.  An independent investigation paid for by several Florida newspapers and conducted IIRC by Florida State professors gave Gore a very easy win. Justice delayed is justice denied.  Remember that Coleman.  We will take the heat anyway.  We should have seated Franken in January.  


[ Parent ]
That would be a good thing to discuss
One seat did we not pick-up that you most thought we would.  The fun part about being poli sci nerds is that we can then explain why we think they lost.  Although I dont want to hijack a thread because once one person does it....

[ Parent ]
Seals actually did slightly better last year than in 2006.
Seals didn't do worse in '08 than he did in '06. In 2008, he scored 47.4% of the vote (tally here), which was actually a gain over the 46.5% he earned in '06.

[ Parent ]
I'm curious to kno who the biggest overperformers are
I have a feeling some of them might be blue dogs
For instance Gene Taylor must be somewhere at the top
over performing Obama around 42 points

Male 21 Dem Ca's 1st  

Think Appalachia
Where Obama's performance was the worst.  Reps in states like Tennessee, Arkansas, West Virginia and Oklahoma have to be near the top.  Boren in OK-02 and Lincoln Davis in TN-04 especially won easy re-elections in districts Obama did horrendously in.  Also Gene Taylor and Charlie Melancon.

[ Parent ]
Freshman Democrats running in 2008
In a similar analysis, I looked at the 36 freshman Democrats elected in 2006 or special elctions in 2008.  All chose to run for re-election.  30 of them increased their winning margin in their second run.  Courtney of CT was the champion with a 16 point increase. Of the six that did not, four lost.  The infamous Mahoney because of personal scandal, Boyda and Lampson in very red districts against stronger opponents than before, and Cazayoux because of a third party spoiler. (I agree, this one was tough to take, as was Boyda.)  Of the two that won, Zack Space fell from 62% to 60% against a stronger candidate than before. No worries here.  But the other one is very worrisome.  Michael Arcuri in NY 24 took the open seat in 2006 with 54%, then, as the incumbent, squeaked out a 51% win in 2008.  (He may have done slightly better than this as the finals numbers came in.)  What the hell happened here?  As a moderate Democrat in a swing district, he should have done much better than this.  By comparison, freshmen Gillibrand and Hall in neighboring districts improved their margins by 9% and 7% respectively.  I would appreciate any thoughts on why Arcuri so underperformed.

Arcuri still escapes me
His district is no more unfavorable that Hall's or Gillibrand's, and his opponent in 2008 was arguably quite a bit weaker than the one he had in 2006.  Maybe he just ran a lazy campaign and took re-election for granted and got caught flat-footed since the top-tier repubs all passed on challenging him.  I'm sure he's learned his lesson and will go all out in 2010.  It does seem as though his voting record this session is more moderate than his first term, probably trying to triangulate his opponent.

[ Parent ]
Arcuri
He may be a Blue Dog but Arcuri is not too moderate.  His Progressive Punch score of over 93 is easily tops among the Blue Dogs.

Arcuri lagged in fund raising vs. Hall or Gillibrand.  In 2006 he may have benefited by some left over bitterness within the district.  Sherwood Boehlert was pushed out by continual challenges from the Club For Growth and he was extremely open about it.  He also was treated poorly by the DeLay Hastert clique running the House and he was pretty open about that.  Republicans in 2008 may have been more unified and Democrats less enthusuastic.

I don't think Arcuri benefited either from the slow erosion in GOP registration that helped many Democrats.  I expect he will run a stronger campaign in 2010.


[ Parent ]
Space for Senate?
I think I remember a post from a while back that talked about Space speaking when candidates for US Senate spoke at a party gathering.  Has there been any news lately about him running for the seat?

[ Parent ]

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox