Google Ads


Site Stats

OK-01, OK-05: Dems Hoping to Test Pair of Deep Red GOP Seats

by: James L.

Thu Aug 27, 2009 at 6:10 PM EDT


You wouldn't think of Oklahoma as particularly fertile territory for Democratic pickups in Congress lately, but the Oklahoma Democratic Party (and, apparently, the DCCC) is hoping to line up a couple of stronger-than-expected challengers in a pair of GOP districts, according to the Southern Political Report. In the 1st CD, Democrats are attempting to test GOP Rep. John Sullivan for weaknesses. (Sullivan, as you may recall, checked into the Betty Ford clinic earlier this year due to his alcohol addiction.) However, any Democrat would likely have a tough time overcoming the district's GOP bent; McCain won the CD by a 64-36 margin (R+16 PVI) and the district hasn't sent a Democrat to the House since James Robert Jones held down the seat for seven terms until his retirement in 1987. The Southern Political Report identifies outgoing Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor, a potential self-funder, as a possible Dem recruit, but also names former state Sens. Scott Pruitt and Jim Williamson as potential Republican primary opponents for Sullivan.

Over in the Oklahoma City-based 5th CD, where incumbent Republican Mary Fallin is jumping ship in order to pursue her gubernatorial ambitions, the "hottest rumor" on the block is that Kim Henry, wife of Democratic Gov. Brad Henry and celebrated educator, is interested in running. The Governor's office, though, says that the First Lady has "no plans to run for public office". OK-05 looks like it has the potential to be the more interesting race of the Oklahoma duo, though, as it was the only district in Oklahoma that had an appreciable shift towards the Democrats in 2008. (Obama lost the district by 41-59, up from a 36-64 Kerry loss four years earlier.) For the GOP, an expensive primary is already brewing between state Rep. Mike Thompson and former state Rep. Kevin Calvey.

Popular Oklahoma City Mayor Tom Cornett, who ran for the open 5th CD GOP primary to Fallin in 2006, announced yesterday that he'll seek a third term in 2010. That takes a run for the House off the table, and he also explicitly ruled out a run for Governor or Lt. Governor, too.

RaceTracker Wiki: OK-01 | OK-05
James L. :: OK-01, OK-05: Dems Hoping to Test Pair of Deep Red GOP Seats
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

OK-01, OK-05: Dems Hoping to Test Pair of Deep Red GOP Seats | 52 comments
Isn't OK-1 Jim Jones' old seat?
ex Budget Committee chair
Yes
I mentioned him in the post.
[ Parent ]
My mistake
My eyes flew over "James Robert Jones" when he was always known as "Jim Jones".
[ Parent ]
Meh
Id be excited for the OK-05 if Henry gets in, OK-01, probably not at all.

Its great having huge majorities but electing more Blue Dogs only gives them more control of the caucus and legislation process.  If we dont need them to have a majority then who cares.

Basically what I was going to say.
Why waste money in Oklahoma when we've still got seats in blue areas held by Republicans that will be in our column forever once the incumbent is gone? The DCCC should be targeting/defending blue areas and rapidly bluing purple areas, not wasting time in Oklahoma, which was the only state in which Obama didn't win a single county.  
[ Parent ]
If they can find someone in OK-05
It might be worth a look considering the movement from Kerry to Obama when he was blown-out in the rest of the state.
[ Parent ]
Good point.
One can't be optimistic about NE-02 and not give OK-05 some credit for moving in the right direction. Hell, even Salt Lake City was narrowly won by Obama! I'm just concerned that a lot of our gains in this part of the world won't last once Obama doesn't deliver on his promises.  
[ Parent ]
Blue Dogs don't control the caucus
and never will.

There are several issues here, but the wet blankets just can't seem to get their head around progressive 9as in incremental) change.  NE-2 is a great example.  You gotta start somewhere.  Writing off parts of the country to be deep red is foolish and suicidal.  Since when are we a regional party?

Oklahoma looks like the toughest nut to crack, but really it should not be.  It should be more similar to Kansas, Arkansas, Texas and West Virginia than Bull Connor era Alabama.

Fred Harris was an Oklahoma Senator.  Brad Henry would be a great improvement over the two current Senators.

What we need is to move OK from batshit deep red to Kansas or Arkansas red.  In doing so, the country moves a little left.

The most interesting of these developments is Henry.  If she is willing to run for a House seat, Brad Henry will run against Inhofe next time.  It reveals a willingness to move to Washington.  And spending some money to replace Inhofe with a circus geek on crack would be worth it.

[ Parent ]
Henry would be an improvement
he is a Blue Dog but doesn't stab the party in the back with nonsense the way Dan Boren and Parker Griffith do.

If Dan Boren ran for OK-Sen, I'd root for the Repub.

[ Parent ]
Kansas
I agree with the gist of what you are saying, but I live 5 blocks from the Kansas state line and KS is the most bat-nut crazy state in the region.  I really don't see how any state should ever aspire to be as progressive as Kansas

26, D, MO-05, Hispanic
[ Parent ]
Well
Obama did win a few counties in Kansas, and McCain's margin there was half of Oklahoma's (15% vs. 31%).

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
fair enough
But wait; OK has Inhofe and Coburn, KS has Brownback and Roberts.  KS Dems lost ground in '08 (Boyda went down); Tiller was gunned down; don't forget about old Fred Phelps in Topeka (god hates f**s); and this is the state where PHIL FREAKING KLINE was the AG and barely lost re-election.
I'm not saying OK is great but maybe they should be aiming more for AR or even MS than KS

26, D, MO-05, Hispanic
[ Parent ]
Hmmm, Kline barely lost?
The was the incumbent AG as a Republican in KS, and he lost 41,4/58,5, I wouldnt call that barely losing...

KS results 2006 (pdf): http://www.kssos.org/elections...  

33, living in Germany  

[ Parent ]
Morrison broke away in the last two weeks
Polling less than a month before the election showed Kline with a narrow lead.  Bluestem (A Sebilius PAC) ran a series of hard hitting ads that smacked Kline around as he sunk fast after that.
Make no mistake that was a tight race; it just ended in a blowout

26, D, MO-05, Hispanic
[ Parent ]
Thank you!
I'm extremely frustrated with the blue dogs in Congress. But I still think we should try to get Democrats elected to Congress from Oklahoma. It doesn't only mean fewer Republicans in Congress, it means more people in more parts of the country get used to voting for less-conservative candidates.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
[ Parent ]
Exactly the point
It is hard to pull the D lever if you never, ever pulled it before, or if you haven't in ten years.  People need to know and try alternatives, that's how they grow.

Most people don't moderate or even become nicer overnight.  They work up to it.

[ Parent ]
Exactly, it's all about identity politics
If an entirely new district was won for D's in OK it would go a long way towards convincing people it was okay to vote for Democrats and it would change their perception that Democrats in OK are only minorities, super liberal, from the east part of the state, etc.

Growing, urban areas like Tulsa and OK City are the battlegrounds of the future and Democrats do not need to just give these areas up because they might elect conservative Democrats or it might be really difficult to win initially. I think going forward it would pay huge dividends to put in some effort in districts like these.

[ Parent ]
Here's my reasoning on would be Blue Dog Congresscritters
The seats they are going to win are Republican seats.  Im fine with that.  I can accept that there are some areas of the country we have no business winning.  OK-5, why bother?  Now, if the candidate was a progressive, like Kleeb wouldve been for NE-2, then sure, Ill be excited if they can possibly pull it out.  But why spend money and get excited over a candidate wont be helpful on the tough votes.  Who always has to be given cover, etc.

The seats are Republican seats, they vote Republican and have Republicans downballot.  Why spend the resources on someone who isnt going to be helpful towards pushing progressive legislation?

As said above, there are many other places we should spend resources and get some better Dems, Dems in seats that are sustainable in the long run and are meant to vote in Republicans.

Maybe once we max out, sure, whatever.  But we havent yet and Ill be damned if we lose IL-10 but win one of these potential conservadem seats.

[ Parent ]
I do have a different attitude towards the Senate
Every seat is needed always.
[ Parent ]
Agree completely
If we can't get better than Dan Boren, than Jim Marshall, than Lincoln Davis, than Bobby Bright, than Parker Griffith, than Wilt Minnick, and would have the majority without them, then screw it, it's not worth the cost for such a shitty "reward."

To me, the Blue Dog Coalition is a parasite that risks significantly harming the Democratic Party, and we should starve the beast.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

[ Parent ]
Why bother? Why not just kill 'em all then?
We bother because people matter, and some of us think that changing people over time is a better strategy than blowing them off and not giving a crap about them.

One seat more or less in Illinois matters not at all because we can win it next time.  Writing off a whole section of the country is pathetic philosophy.

And if you can't tell the difference between Ben Nelson and James Inhofe, get some freaking glasses.

[ Parent ]
I think that argument is utter bullshit
This argument that electing Dems in really unfriendly territory will show the voters that all Democrats aren't scary coastal liberals is such crap as I have yet to see a single example of that ringing true.  (You arent the only who makes it, Im sure Ive made it myself at some point.)

Taylor's been in his seat since 88 (IIRC, and I almost wish I didnt IIRC, I should have to look things like that up!) and that seat isnt any closer to voting for a Democrat for President than next door GOPer Harper whose district is just north of Taylor's.

Until I see numbers and facts portraying having a Blue Dog Democrat representing a solidly Republican area with that causing that area to shift blue, then to me, electing conservadems to districts that are inherently solid red to me is fruitless and not a sustainable way to build a progressive Democratic majority.

There is certainly the argument to counter this that the Dems only choose liberals for president so that is a bad measurement, and that's legit.  If we had a Carter or Clinton on the ballot, ok, there'd be some shifting.  But that shifting wont be any different than the shifting of neighboring Republican districts that are actually held by Republicans.  When it comes down to it, these districts arent electing Democrats, they are electing conservatives and that's the important distinction we need all need to get our heads around.  It has nothing to do with being a Democrat, about caring about the Democratic Party, or about wanting the Democratic Party to succeed, it's about electing a conservative who they wont mind representing them in office.

And I am no conservative.

[ Parent ]
Though Taylor votes more liberal than he did
It may not move the voters but gradually when the get used to their Rep. they are willing to put up with more.
[ Parent ]
You can't be serious
Obama carried Indiana because of two words, Evan Bayh.

If Bayh hadn't started the process of getting people in the habit of pulling the D lever, we would not have won the state on the presidential level and would have two or three more Burton-like hard right House members.

The evidence is solid and plain as day to anyone not blind as a Club for Growth member.

And it isn't over.  There is realistic talk of electing a solid Democrat to replace Lugar.  A dozen years ago that would be nonsense talk.  Indiana is still the most conservative Midwestern state, but it is clearly, absolutely for sure bluing at moderate pace.

Nebraska 2, Virginia, Colorado (Salzar), and other examples are similarly clear.

The idea that we should not contest some areas of the country and let them send extremist people to Congress to frame the national debate is fully discredited and illogical.  

[ Parent ]
Agreed
The GOP is in the mess it's in right now (power base only in the south and some pockets in the west/midwest, unable to reach women and minorities) because they were unwilling to budge ideologically and gradually drove out their moderate members.  It's why we've destroyed them in the Northeast and will likely sweep them out of California in the next 10 years if trends continue.  Politically, a party suffers when it restricts itself too much as it concedes too much territory.  Ideologically, it hurts when there's no moderating influence on a party.  We criticize the GOP for being too extreme to the right, yet fail to appreciate the diversity in our own caucus that will (hopefully) prevent us from going down a similar path.  For those complaining about the health care debate, the Blue Dogs are why we don't have that garbage piece of legislation that Waxman and Rangel pushed through( that would have had the small business community right us off for a generation) as our final piece.

People also tend to forget that electing conservadems helps blunt conservative extremism.  Those are the very districts that would never elect a moderate GOPer (they'd get primaried out of existence) and, if left unopposed, would elect the very type of fire-breathing conservatives that tend to significantly slow progress.  Given the recent jokes by GOP nutjobs in Idaho about hunting Obama, I'll take Minnick over whatever else that electorate is capable of spewing out.  

I am a proud progressive.  But I understand we need Blue Dogs and centrists because my political beliefs are in the minority, and achieving our goals takes time.  Sure, there are some Blue Dogs in districts that would produce a better progressive.  Much of that is a function of certain districts becoming bluer since the incumbent was originally elected (Jim Costa of the CA-20 is good example).  In those cases, I will support a primary opponent that can be better for us on the issues.  But to write these off altogether or to condemn the Blue Dogs is childish and short-sighted.      

[ Parent ]
Thank you!


party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Not the caucus but
Blue Dogs at least temporarily are portrayed as controlling the whole process.  I think their strength is overstated but for 20% of the Democratic caucus thay get too much publicity, too many promises, too much power.

Some are legit but many are not. Yes, the rep is they are southern but 60% (30 of 51) are not.  There is no way that the 7 Californians for example should all be Blue Dogs.  Why is it cool for hispanics in California representing poor districts to want to reduce spending?  Why is there an equal number in the Northeast including Patrick Murphy? Why are several blacks belonging to this awful collective?  For that matter, even Jim Cooper is now well to the right of his affluent, educated, creative Nashville district.

There should be at least 20 fewer Dogs but the cool factor and the pub is a major draw.  That can and should be turned around.  Spay and neuter?

[ Parent ]
As I've said many times before
The people you mention may be Blue Dogs but they hardly ever vote against the party. Does it really matter what they call themselves if it helps them get elected but then vote the right way?
[ Parent ]
Yes
It gives that caucus more legitimacy and bargaining power.  If you are only portraying yourself as a Blue Dog for political cover when you aren't even voting that way, then that makes you a giant tool.
[ Parent ]
Nah
The only power they have is with their own votes. Beyond the usual suspects (Bright, Griffith, Minnick etc) most are reliable floor votes.
[ Parent ]
They're still wusses
for hiding behind the Blue Dog collar.  
[ Parent ]
If it helps them get elected in conservative districts
Fair enough.
[ Parent ]
We've seen the damage they can do
look at the health care debate. A unified Democratic Party could guarantee a strong public option, but the concern trolling from the Baucus/Conrad/Ross crowd and the progressives' stupid abandonment from the outset of single-payer has pulled the debate far to the right.

I'm willing to suffer some blue dogs, if they will vote with the Democrats on at least some of the time on important legislation. I'm not thrilled with the way my Congressman Glenn Nye has been voting, but he has at least voted for things like the Matthew Shepard Act and the Lily Ledbetter Act. However, "Democrats" like Parker Griffith, Walt Minnick and Bobby Bright who vote against every important bill, but still vote procedurally with the Democrats on throwaway votes so their defenders can say "It's better to have a Democrat that votes with us 50% of the time than a Republican who votes with is 0% of the time", are worthless and a waste of party money to prop up in tough districts.

[ Parent ]
The most progressive candidate who can win
I think it's important to support candidates who can pull a district / state more towards us.

Just about every Blue Dog is more progressive than just about every Republican.

It would be nice to have candidates like Pete DeFazio (OR-4) - real progressives who win in marginal districts. But that's rare.

So I support any reasonable Blue Dog in deep red districts.

However, there is no excuse for Blue Dogs in districts with good PVIs, e.g. Jim Cooper of TN.

[ Parent ]
Retracting my non-interest in OK-1
I for some reason was under the impression it was one of the big rural CD's.  Nope, not at all.  Both are solid.

Hell, it'd be awesome if you could somehow combine Tulsa and OK City into one CD, that'd be killer.

[ Parent ]
Jim Roth almost beat Dana Murphy is '08
OKLAHOMA CORPORATION COMMISSIONER (SHORT TERM)

Dana Murphy (R) 52%-738,671
Jim Roth    (D) 48%-674,905

Jim Roth was originally appointed by Brad Henry for the position but was not able to survive a special election in blood red Oklahoma to fill out the remainder of his term. It is almost amazing that he got 48% of the vote in blood red Oklahoma given the landslide wins by McCain and Inhofe. I think he should challenge Tom Coburn for senate in 2010 while I don't think Roth would win, I do think that it could help him create a statewide profile future elections. In addition, Jim Roth is the first gay man to serve in statewide office in Oklahoma.

Oh my god
I wouldnt even want to see the disgusting homophobic shit that would come out of that campaign...
[ Parent ]
Mayor Taylor and Kim Henry
Both of them would be spectacular candidates. If we're going to knock off Sullivan, 2010 is the year to do it. Sullivan's always been whacky but coming off of his stay at the Betty Ford clinic, he has really gone off the rocker (he made headlines a couple weeks ago for his despicable appeasement of the birthers).

Unfortunately, however, I seriously doubt that Taylor will run. Earlier this summer, I talked to someone who works with her about the possibility of a challenge to Sullivan. This particular person said a campaign for Sullivan's seat was almost entirely out of the question. This person said that Taylor would gladly accept an appointment from a Democratic governor (either Attorney General Drew Edmondson or Lt. Governor Jari Askins). I should note, however, that I'm pretty sure this person was an unpaid intern so take that information with a grain of salt.

Based on what's happening in Tulsa, I find it very easy to believe that Taylor wants to back out of politics for the time being. It should be noted that she abruptly aborted her campaign for re-election despite her high approval ratings, which were well into the 60s%. The Great Recession's impact on the city has thus far been relatively slow but Tulsa is only late to the game. Many people predict that the budget is bound for a crisis and that Taylor is bailing because she wants no part of the impending mess.

I'm not too familiar with Oklahoma City politics but I can almost guarantee that Kim Henry won't run for Fallin's seat. I've always felt like her husband has expressed little interest in running against Coburn or Inhofe because of his family's insistence on staying in Oklahoma. If Kim Henry runs for anything, it will be for state superintendent of public education where she would replace outgoing Democrat Sandy Garrett.  

I'm a Ralph Yarborough Democrat

These are the two districts
where Democratic strength is growing rather than shrinking.  Even though we are very likely to certain to lose these seats, it is certainly worth an attempt here.

OK-2, OK-3, and OK-4 are a different story.

Yup
OK City is winnable -- it feels no different than the white parts of Dallas or Charlotte. Now, it's not as diverse as those cities, so tougher. But if you can win Omaha, you can win OK City.

[ Parent ]
Courtesy of Wikipedia
OKC
72.7% White (60.7% non-Hispanic White)
16.1% Black
7.6% American Indian/Alaska Native (2.7% non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native)
4.7% Asian
0.2% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
5.4% other race
6.3% from two or more races
13.9% Hispanic or Latino of any race

Omaha
78.7% White (71.0% non-Hispanic White)
11.8% Black or African American
1.7% American Indian and Alaska Native
2.4% Asian, 0.1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
5.0% other race
2.5% from two or more races
11.0% Hispanic or Latino of any race

So yes, OKC is winnable.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)

[ Parent ]
Doesn't Omaha have a significant gay population? n/t
I know that's difficult to quantify but Omaha seems to be a much more tolerant city than OK City just from anecdotal things I've heard but I'd like to know if I'm wrong I mean Andrew Rice represented OK City and he was a good enough progressive.  
[ Parent ]
The Culture/Income/Educational Differences are huge
Even if the ethnic breakdowns are nearly the same, Omaha doesn't have big oil, they have more unions, more universities and a number of statewide democrats that have built up campaigns using Douglas county as a base.  Traditionally OK campaigns (if you are a dem) are won on the reservations and the low county; we just try not to get plastered everywhere else.
Culturally eastern NE is much more like Iowa or MO than OK.

26, D, MO-05, Hispanic
[ Parent ]
Anyone
know why Republicans have a strong hold on the urban areas of OK?s

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Getting there
Here's the way I can explain it as a Texas, Texas is 10 years behind the rest of the nation and Oklahoma is 10 years behind us.

Notice what happened in OK, the rural stuff got redder, the urban stuff got bluer. When Texas was a blue state it was similar, then when the Republicans took over it was by winning over the rural folk. Now the urban areas are leaning blue after the last 6 years of hard work. Oklahoma is just starting to go through the same transition.

Urban areas tend to start as giant suburbs controlled by big businessmen and investors. Republicans.  As business grows it attracts the poor and eventually they outnumber the pro business forces with the voice of the people. Democrats.

Ta-da!

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

[ Parent ]
That alone is the reason why I'm not going to write these off
If these were more rural areas, I'd say screw it, it's not worth the trouble for the "reward."  But I think we can build on something for the future here.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
OK-5 is definitely something to grow on.
I say go for it. We'll get a blue dog now, but the area may become more at ease with democrats as we start with this one seat and we can get someone more liberal lately.

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26
[ Parent ]
I agree
It's a lot easier to replace a blue dog with a progressive eventually than it would be to never have a Democrat at all.
[ Parent ]
And it is easier for a blue dog to move left over time
Maybe not all, but some do.

This whole f"ck 'em attitude is childish.  if someone is less shitty than an opponent, fine.  It makes getting someone even less shitty later, whether by electing someone else or the blue dog moving left and the people going with him/her.

It's crazy politics to list the five worst blue dogs and say any blue dog is not worth winning.  That sort of talk is like saying we don't need to win Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and the Dakotas win the Presidency so let's not bother having any Blue Dogs from those states.  It's just such a hopelessly blind way to look at things.

[ Parent ]
OK-1 electoral history
When Sullivan was first elected, it was a January 2002 special election (to replace conservative Congressman Steve Largent, who stepped down to run for Governor).

In that election, Tulsa School board member Doug Dodd held Sullivan to a 53-45% margin. (The DCCC didn't invest anything in the race, Dodd was underfunded, and a real upset opportunity was missed.)  For a Democrat to come that close in Tulsa just a few months after 9/11 is fairly impressive.

The regular election in November 2002 was held under new district lines that had specifically been made more Republican to strengthen Sullivan. Dodd ran again, but this time Sullivan took 56%. In 2004 Dodd ran again, this time Sullivan won 60-38%. (In 2004 he faced a very tough Republican primary challenge that he nearly lost.)

Democrats haven't made any real effort in the district since then. (There was some hope that the 2008 challenger would be a serious self-funded candidate, but she never really put much of a campaign together.)

So while this clearly isn't a Democratic district, there is at least evidence that there is some openness to voting for Democrats among some chunk district voters.

With Sullivan likely to face another serious  primary in 2010, it seems that a candidate like Mayor Rogers who has proven she can win elections in this conservative territory could be a serious challenger.

I continue to believe that the "50 state strategy" continues to make sense, and putting Republicans on defense in as many of their strongholds as possible is an important part of a national electoral strategy.

Mayor Kathy Taylor, not Rogers....
Not sure why my brain did that.
[ Parent ]
How much of a "blue dog" is Kathy Taylor?
People seem to assume that she is a conservative Democrat, but I'm not sure that is a safe assumption.

For example, this is what the "City Mayors" website describes:

As a member of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns coalition, Taylor has inevitably attracted the attention of the state's gun-owning community, who have vowed to thwart any gubernatorial ambitions she may have. Her admirable stance of restricting city police checks of immigration status to only those accused of a felony crime has also drawn the predictable ire of local 'patriots' and conservatives. Taylor is currently a member of the National Conference of Democratic Mayors' nominating committee.

Those are hardly typical "blue dog" stands, so it seems that she isn't a complete conservative.

Her campaign bio included involvement in a number of groups dealing with things like domestic violence, women's empowerment, etc. While not a firm indicator of political stances, it does demonstrate some degree of social awareness.

(I get the impression that she identifies with the business community and is probably more conservative on economic issues.)

If she were to run, she would have the ability to self-fund, her husband is CEO of a couple of national car rental companies, and she has sat on a number of corporate boards.

The Tulsa paper article that announced her not running for re-election as Mayor said that in November 08 a poll showed 60% of Tulsans would vote to re-elect her -- so she clearly has some continuing local popularity.

Anyone from Oklahoma know anything more about what kind of Mayor she has been, or what kind of member of Congress she would be?

OK-01, OK-05: Dems Hoping to Test Pair of Deep Red GOP Seats | 52 comments

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

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox