Depends on definition of "bulk"...

He found that the bulk of the district's population growth is coming from non-Hispanic whites, which led to a drop in the GOP's registration advantage from 11% to 2% from 2002 to 2008.

From what I see, less than 1/3 of the new CA-03 are white. I think that explains the GOP's registration edge slipping away. ;-)

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 19:20:40 PM UTC

I'm assuming

that he meant most of the growth came from Hispanics.  Growth from non-Hispanic whites would cause the GOP's registration advantage to increase, not decrease.

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

---

by: TDDVandy @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 19:29:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks

Yeah, that's what I meant.

---

by: James L. @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 19:48:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wonder

If this was the poll to cause CQ to change the rating to tossup?(something which I'm still scratching my head about)

Male 21 Dem Ca's 1st  

---

by: lordpet8 @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 20:10:52 PM UTC

Lots of undecideds

In better year, this one would likely flip, but it looks like it's shaping up to be one to watch this year. Bera could find an opening.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

---

by: DrPhillips @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 20:46:32 PM UTC

This race is TIED. Polling's missing Prop 19 voters

The marijuana initiative will bring many non-regulars to the polls, especially young ones and growers in the Sierras.

Even the growers voting against the initiative shou7ld vote against Lungren, who as AG in the '90s was the most stroident player against medical marijuana.

Only 5% of the poll's respondents were under 30. Were ANY under 20? Major methodology fail.

---

by: Ben Masel @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 20:53:19 PM UTC

Win or lose, Lungren is in big trouble

It would be easy for Democrats to redistrict him out of existence if Brown wins the governorship, and even if he keeps his current district, he's in big trouble for 2012 when Bera could seek a rematch in a (likely) better environment.

If Lungren wins this yeat, I hope he runs for DiFi's senate seat in 2012 so we can run someone in CA-03 who doesn't have the stench of a career politician.  

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

---

by: MassGOP @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 22:15:21 PM UTC

PPP's poll for the whole state had a 5% Obama no show rate

relative to Mccain voters, while this poll of the district has a 10% Obama no-show rate relative to Mccain voters.

Only those dwelling in PPP-land can explain why twice as many Obama voters will absitain from voting in this suburban district compared to the rest of the state, but whatever, it's just notable this sample more favorable to Lundgren than the statewide one.

Bottom line, Bera is running 3% behind Obama in the sample, which means he'll lose if voter turnout mirrors 2008.  On the other hand, changing the minds of a couple percent of voters and getting a few more previous voters more to the polls is not an impossible task.

(Fire up those redistricting apps in any case.  This is one district that should be able to be made blue.)

---

by: tommypaine @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 23:35:47 PM UTC

I can tell you that this district

was one where Obama turnout surged in 2008 to get him to win the the district, narrowly.

These are the kinds of districts where a high Obama no turnout is expected because of all the first time voters that are staying home. John Kerry lost this district 58-41 so I would expect the 2010 electorate to be something like McCain +9.

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 23:43:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, nothing like that is possible

2004 Presidential voters = about 202,000
2008 Presidential voters = about 229,000
That's an increase in 27,000 voters total.  

Population growth (statewide) during that time was about 2.5%... or about 5000 votes of the 27,000 could be ascribed to population growth.  So that 22,000 "new" voters (if every single one is ascribed to Obama and none to Mccain).

The 2008 Pres vote was about 50/50, so going from a +.5 Obama electorate to a +9 McCain electorate requires about 18% of Obama's voters to stay home.

18% of 165,000 = about 30,000

30,000 is greater than the entire sum of 22,000 new voters that can be ascribed to "new Obama voters".  

To get +9 Mccain, every single "new Obama voter" has to not show, in addition to 6.5% of the Kerry voters.

That's just not going to happen.

Additionally, to get a +9 Mccain turnout... if Mccain turnout for the midterm is 80%, then Obama turnout would be about 65.6%.  

---

by: tommypaine @ Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 00:19:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah, after second thought,

I probably overstated the McCain electorate here. And my first numbers were just based off the Obama/Kerry numbers, with no account for the new voters.

I would expect it to be in the realm of McCain 3-5, which accounts for the overall trendline of the district from 2004-2010. And now you may blast off another long post on why that electorate is not reasonable and it will be Obama +3 or something.

Upon further consideration, the enthusiasm of CA-03 should be a point or two to the right of the state as a whole, like this district as is to the state.

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 00:55:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

And yes, I am implying that the PPP poll on the state of California

was a tad bit off.

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 01:08:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I won't blast off anything

I pointed out your off the cuff number did not fit with reality, or possibility, as it amounted to much more than all the "new Obama voters" put together.

This is a common theme here, for people to ignore the math and make statements that are literally impossible regarding the no-shows.  They can not abstain this year in greater numbers than they voted in 2008.

---

by: tommypaine @ Thu Sep 23, 2010 at 03:45:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]