Ralph Hall is a Democrat again?

News to me. ;)

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.

---

by: Nathaniel90 @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 22:07:40 PM UTC

Sorry, showing my age

Heck, I remember when he was a Whig.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:58:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Joe Heck's NV-03 will probably...

Look much different come 2013, depending on whether The Legislature can agree on a redistricting plan. So far, negotiations are heated on the budget, though both sides essentially realize some revenue (i.e. taxes) will have to be raised.  If The Legislature can get its act together on the budget and get redistricting done in time (or at least get it done by the time a July special session ends), NV-03 will probably end up looking more like this, while the more diverse (and Democratic heavy) parts of the current NV-03 likely end up in the new NV-04 seat.

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

---

by: atdleft @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 22:23:39 PM UTC

Black & Hispanic Gains

As I argued yesterday (http://rootedcosmopolitan.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/waking-up-to-a-more-complex-reality-about-redistricting/), increasing the percentage of black voters in an area has a disproportionate effect on the partisanship, because even in the areas where white voters are most rabidly Republican they're still almost never more than 3-1 Republican, but black voters everywhere tend to be 8-1 or 9-1 Democratic. When you factor in the Hispanics and Asians, who aren't as heavily Democratic as blacks but are still more Democratic almost everywhere than whites are almost anywhere, an increasing share of the minority population will almost everywhere make an area more Democratic. This is especially true if those minority voters in previously all or mostly white areas are moving from areas that were overwhelmingly minority. That means it's harder to corral the Democrats together because they're not concentrated, but those smaller but still overwhelmingly Democratic enclaves are less likely to be able to stand by themselves and have to be grafted on to areas that had been more likely to be in either a Republican or swing district.

Democratic votes are becoming more efficiently distributed, which is a redistricting plus for Democrats.

---

by: Dana Houle @ Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 22:41:46 PM UTC

Yep.

The flipside to that is that with more and more neighborhoods becoming integrated, VRA districts are going to become more difficult to create or protect (at the very least, it's going to become more difficult to make them complete vote-sinks.)

For example, there's been a prevailing argument that there will have to be a new Hispanic-majority district in the DFW Metroplex, but the problem is that the Hispanic population in the Metroplex is fairly evenly distributed.  There really aren't that many major concentrations of Hispanics (or, in many places, they're interspersed with African-Americans.)  But there also aren't many places, at least within Dallas and Fort Worth and the inner-ring suburbs (and Mid-Cities), where Hispanics are absent, either.

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

---

by: TDDVandy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 02:16:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

As for the DFW district

I've found it pretty easy on Dave's application to make a Fort Worth-to-Dallas serpentine seat that is about 60% Hispanic, 20% black, and 20% white. That seat might elect an African-American in the short term, though.

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.

---

by: Nathaniel90 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 03:04:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I should fix that

to say that it's very difficult to create a DFW Hispanic seat that wouldn't likely be overturned as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

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

---

by: TDDVandy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 18:15:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A new DFW D-seat would be smart

I'm sure there are plenty of ways to further crack DFW however making a second safe D district would be more beneficial for the GOP longterm that way they can easily get all those pesky Democrats in their own seats.

---

by: TXMichael @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 13:14:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It would be smart

But as we all know, the Republicans in the Texas legislature aren't about to create a Dem seat that's not a VRA district.

While Sessions might be in some immediate danger, the problems for Reps. like Marchant are more long-term than short-term.

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

---

by: TDDVandy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 18:16:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, there's Doggett's seat.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 18:18:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

TX-04

White gains slightly outnumber non-white gains there as well (though only by about 300 or so.)  Like GA-09, that's basically the receptacle for white flight from Dallas.

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

---

by: TDDVandy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 01:21:55 AM UTC

I considered

a sentence of explanation about TX-04 but figured no one would double-check my math. (Never a good assumption to make at Swing State Project.) At any rate, the chart only has the "big 4" racial categories; the 4th also gained approx. 6000 "two or more," 1500 Native Americans, and even 237 Pacific Islanders, so, although you wouldn't know it from my chart, non-white growth did outstrip white growth. But I certainly agree with your characterization of the 4th.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:56:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

GA-07: Holy crap!

I knew it had diversified, but I had no idea to that rate.  Assuming Wikipedia is right, GA-07 went from 80% white to 53% white.

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 02:54:25 AM UTC

I found this the most interesting as well

I haven't seen a redistricting map from Georgia, and don't claim to know the state myself. There are already 3 minority-majority districts in the Atlanta metro (and not coincidently, 3 dem seats). I wonder how much the inner metro will have to absorb of the suburban growth to stay solvent, and how much could be used to create a 4th, swingish district.

---

by: gopherprof @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 03:16:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

See my reply to Answer Guy's comment below.

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:34:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No wonder Perdue of all people

called on Republicans to be sane on immigration issues.  He can read the writing on the wall.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 03:20:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The smart ones can.

At least, the politically smart ones can. Say what you want about the values and competence of the Bush administration, but they could see that if they didn't get to work on broadening the party, it would be a fairly quick slide into irrelevance for a long time.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:00:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Hispanics

In Georgia are growing quickly. Already, Hall County with Gainesville is 25% Hispanic. Georgia's statewide Hispanic population is nearing 9%. What is important though is to register these new voters and wait for their children to turn 18 and when they do, get them registered as quickly as possible.

Also, this article here describes how Georgia is not only experiencing a Hispanic in migration but an African American in migration as well while African Americans leave the northern inner cities and head for Georgia. http://online.wsj.com/article/... In 2012, the Democrats can do in Georgia what the Republicans did in 2002. In 2002 in Georgia, Republicans won the Gubernatorial and Senate races by performing well in the Atlanta area by winning exurban counties such as Cherokee and Forsyth. Republicans registered Republican voters Democrats did not know were there. The minority population in Georgia has grown so quickly in suburban counties such as Gwinnett so Democrats can register and turn out those new Democrats Repulicans do not know exist yet. This is why I believe Obama should contest Georgia.

There is another factor Obama needs to capitalize on too. There are some white moderates in northern Fulton County which lean Republican but if Obama campaigns hard there, he can do well with not only the Downtown Atlanta whites but the whites in northern Fulton County too. These areas lean Republican but as conservative whites head out to the exurbs and these areas become more urban, Democrats will have a shot there.

Also though, Democrats need to remember that turning out the African Americans in rural Georgia is important too. Large turnout by African Americans in the rural areas helped Obama get close in 2008. Georgia's rural areas are trending away from the Democrats and they are not the main key to winning Georgia but they are very helpful.  

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

17, CA-06,  

---

by: Alibguy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 17:46:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

All in all, it sounds

like you are saying that the Democrats have a lot of room to grow, in both the immediate future and the long-term, in the state. Is that an accurate description of your thoughts?

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 18:54:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It is

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

17, CA-06,  

---

by: Alibguy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 19:12:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That Number Will Go Back Up for 2012...

Districts from outer portions of large metro areas will probably get whiter since many central cities shrunk or at least failed to grow much; the districts covering the central cities are going to expand into the first-ring or second-ring suburbs that account for a large chunk of the new diversity of the peripheral seats. Especially in any of the many places the GOP controls redistricting, since it will help keep those seats pretty safely red.  

In the case of GA-07, GA-05 is going to have to expand, and one strong possibility is that it ends up with the closer-in parts of Gwinett County.

The good news for Dems is that Republicans can't do this forever. A party that for the most part only gets white votes is going to have more and more trouble putting a majority together.  

36, M, Democrat, MD-03

---

by: Answer Guy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 12:04:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

GA-04 would be the one to expand into GA-07

GA-05 doesn't border GA-07.  

The problem Republicans are going to run into is that you can't fit all of these areas into three districts.  GA-13 has an excess population that is too big to fit into GA-05 and GA-04; it leaves about 4,500 people.  And then you have the excess in GA-07.  

They might could shift some of the minority areas into Republican districts, like having GA-03 absorb the remainder of Douglas County from GA-13 or put some of the minority parts of Cobb County into GA-11.  The problem is the Republican Metro districts also have to contract already.  Giving them a lot of minority areas while dropping white, Republican areas could get dangerous for the Republicans at some point.

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:31:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also regarding GA-07...

The fact that the growth is heavily black is also promising.  Unlike with Hispanics and Asians, you typically don't have the problems of lack of citizenship (or even the lack of legal residence).  And, of course, blacks vote Democratic to a higher degree than Hispanics and Asians.  For example, Gwinnett County has an Asian-American in the State House, a Republican named BJ Pak (is that a Korean name) as well as a Hispanic Republican (David Casas, who's Cuban, IIRC).

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 17:24:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

CA-25 seems most interesting ...

only one of these fastest growing where net decrease in white population ...

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 04:12:47 AM UTC

It testifies to

 The increasing white flight out of SoCal. Originally, one would expect the white population to grow because it is an exurban district. Large numbers of whites did move there in the 80s and 90s. I was in Santa Clarita recently and I saw that there is some growth there but they are running out of room pretty quickly.

As for Lancaster/Palmdale, the houses there are more affordable (although the summer there is another story...) and there are so many new communities so they are attracting people from the inner city.  

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

17, CA-06,  

---

by: Alibguy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 17:19:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just out of curiosity

which districts gained the most AA population in the whole country? is it GA-07?

19, Male, Conservative, NC-06 (SC-04 college)  

---

by: aggou @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 12:11:09 PM UTC

Actually, no

GA-07 is #2 in terms of both raw numeric gain and percentage change. GA-13 is the leader, gaining 183,000 black residents, going from 41% to 56% black. The reason it isn't on this list of the top 25 overall gainers is that over 90,000 white people fled the district. (I'll talk about that in more detail on Monday with all the rest of the race data.)

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:16:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One of most interesting maps/charts I've seen recently ..

source: http://www.nationaljournal.com...

Georgia looks really interesting (ponder this: if Obama got the same percentage of the white vote in GA as he did in SC in 2008, he would have won GA)... would not be surprised if Obama makes a play for it ...

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 14:20:42 PM UTC

Georgia and Arizona

are the two states most likely to be added to the list of target states initially. After that, it's probably South Carolina and Texas, but as the article notes, Texas is a hard state. I could see them making a play for it if only as a tactical move, but if they sense there's a chance to flip a few House seats and help the senate candidate, they could throw some money in the state, especially if the fund raising looks strong. I'm not sure where states like the Dakotas and Montana fit in, but if the fund raising is strong, why the hell not? And if he really wants to screw with them, why not Alabama, too? If they can comb through the data and figure out a way to get to 25 or 30 percent of the white vote, it's cheap enough to make a play.

All in all, it's a very interesting article. Kudos to Mr. Brownstein.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:09:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

on the flip side ...

the chart makes clear that Obama has to pay special attention to OH & FL (fortunately, states like VA and CO are now there as backup in terms of electoral math) ..

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:16:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why do you say that?

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:17:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

b/c if he loses just a little % of the white vote there ...

he's in danger of losing the state .. (he can apparently afford to lose a bigger percentage in other states relative to OH and FL) ...

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:22:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

More in Ohio than in Florida.

In Florida, I'd say the bigger danger is the minority turnout not being there. As the article notes, he can slip a little in Florida amongst whites but still make it up with minority voters. The difference between his share of the white vote and Kerry's share in the state was very minor, if not non-existent. I have to think that that part of the electorate is more or less fixed, so moving the needle depends on what happens with non-whites. In Ohio, I'd say the situation is a little different, only because the white voters there are different and there are fewer non-whites.

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:30:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, very good point ..

there's a lot more room for Democratic-positive growth among minorities in FL relative to OH ..

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:35:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also

 It truly comes down to not only the young Cubans but the non Cuban Hispanics in Florida. In 2004, Bush won 56% of the Hispanic Florida vote. It was not because he overperformed among Cubans. Kerry improved on Gore's numbers with Cubans. In the heavily Cuban 18th district, Bush won 54% in 2004 while he won 57% there in 2000. The reason Bush did not improve his Miami Dade performance over 2000 much was not that the Democrats turned out more African Americans and Jews (they did but Bush improved among those voters,) but the Cubans swung toward Kerry. In 2004 though, Bush overperformed with non Cuban Hispanics which is why he won heavily Hispanic (not heavily Cuban) Osceola County in 2004. Osceola swung back to the Democrats though with Obama performing extremely well there and even Sink won Osceola County.

To really win Florida with the Hispanic vote, I believe the most successful way is to turn out the voters because Sink won the right counties but not enough people voted in them. For example, Hillsborough County votes 1 or 2 points more Republican than Florida. Sink won it but still lost the election. To really get these voters out, Florida needs better organization. Ohio is not gaining many new voters and the organization there is strong. Florida is gaining Hispanics quickly. We need to be able to turn out those new voters because when the economy picks back up, Florida will keep growing and we will need it more and more.  

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

17, CA-06,  

---

by: Alibguy @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 17:27:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

PS. not saying he's in danger of losing whites in OH or FL ..

but just saying that IF he does lose a certain percentage, then OH & FL (and IN too) would be first to go ... the chart is really neat in enabling us to see this ...

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:25:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

meant to say ..

(and IN and NC too) ...

---

by: silver spring @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:26:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, I know what you meant.

I've long figured the same thing, but this article and its charts confirm it.

As far as Indiana goes, there was some sort of informal poll amongst Democratic party strategists (I can't remember where I saw it) that talked about which state was most likely to go back to the Republicans in 2012. Indiana was at the top of the list (and interestingly, I don't think Pennsylvania was named by anyone, or if it was, it was at the bottom.) That makes sense, but I think it's way too early to say he's not winning the state. It would be close unless it's an absolute blowout on one side or the other, but I have to think they will spend money there to support the Democratic senate candidate. And not to get too far off topic, but I'm a little sick and tired of the notion that some states are flatly opposed to all candidates from one party. Maybe Rhode Island and Wyoming are, but what the hell is so different about Indiana compared to Ohio that would make John Kerry, that awful Massachusetts liberal, more amenable to Ohio voters than Indiana voters?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:38:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

larger urban population

columbus is basically equal to indy
cleveland is at least twice the size of gary and just as black
cincinnati has a large black pop.too

so it's the black % thats different, i believe

18, Dem, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college, next year). social libertarian, economic liberal, fiscal conservative.   Everybody should put age and CD here. :)

---

by: jncca @ Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 00:19:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'd focus more on Montana and Dakotas than Texas

At pretty much all levels.  We have outperformed in these states at the Senate and Congressional levels to some extent, and cultivating that seems a good strategy attempt.

I also think NM is worrisome.  It swung badly in 2010 and when I look at that state I say to myself they shouldn't elect GOP Senators, Guvs or whatever, and yet they do sometimes.  Similar to Maine, what investment would it take there to kill the Maine GOP permanently?  (Probably should have done this in 2010 Guv race to start)

I think its always easier to keep people being Dem rather than converting them, kind of similar to how companies always say its cheaper to keep an existing customer than to acquire a new one.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:03:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

New Mexico and Maine

What makes you say that New Mexico swung badly? Denish lost by eight points in the worst year her party had in a long time, but she was also following a hugely unpopular Richardson administration. All things considered, the results weren't that bad. Don't get me wrong: eight points is a solid loss, but hardly embarrassing like Santorum's loss or Edwards' loss. Perhaps Obama won't win the state by 15 points, but if he wins it by 11, who the hell cares? It's still a huge victory.

As far as Maine goes, I feel as if it's only a matter of time. The state clearly doesn't have a problem electing moderate Republicans, but it's not at all clear the Republican party will continue to nominate moderates. Assuming they survive a primary, Collins and Snowe will have those seats for a while, but if they turn Democratic, they will probably be so for a while. Come on, Teabaggers, help us out!

Anyway, as far as Montana and Dakotas, I don't think they need to come at the expense of something bigger. Assuming his fund raising holds up, Obama's totals will be essentially limitless. He could probably afford to contest all three simply because he won't have a primary opponent this time. I'd like to see him contest North Dakota to give the Democratic senate candidate a boost. Tester could probably use help, too, but he'll be strong as it is.

And yes, Texas will be expensive, but I'd rather it be expensive because the Democrats build up a solid ground game rather than focus mostly on advertising. There has to be some money devoted to that, but the key is in turnout. I could be wrong, but I imagine that it would be somewhat less expensive, or at least not considerably more expensive after the initial costs, to register voters and make plans to mobilize them than it would be to run ads out of those expensive media markets.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:51:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How fun would it be if whites everywhere voted like whites in Hawaii?

There'd be like two Republicans in the entire Congress.

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:48:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Probably, yes,

but they don't need to vote that strongly. If the Democrats could regularly get 40 percent of the white vote in states like Georgia and North Carolina, the Republicans wouldn't win a national election for a long, long time.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 15:53:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But that wouldn't be as fun as 71%.

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

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:13:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The US would make The Netherlands look like a fascist state

---

by: TrueBlueDem @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 19:43:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow.

   It looks like my adoptive state of Georgia will competitive in 2012. I am only sorry that neither a senate seat nor the governorship will be up for election then.
  I suppose I will be driving to the exurbs again to register and canvas voters. In 2008 I drove to Prince William County almost every weekend in from August to October.

24, Male, GA-05

---

by: cilerder86 @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:15:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The usual

problems between a midterm election and a presidential election would certainly be a factor, but if Obama contested Georgia as vigorously in 2012 as he did Virginia in 2008, I'd be surprised if it didn't make trying to unseat Chambliss easier in 2014. Yes, if it's a bad year, it won't be easy, but finding highly motivated Democratic voters in a growing state should give us an advantage.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

---

by: b.j. @ Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 16:53:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]