The general belief seems to be that it is important to "clear the field" in primaries to get a winning hand in the fall general election. The belief is founded on a number of factors. Many interest groups will not back a candidate with a primary election opponent. Primary election campaigns can be costly and challengers generally have less money to spend than incumbents. Anecdotal evidence points to a number of campaigns easch cycle where a strong primary is followed by disappointing results in the fall.
I decided to test this thesis by looking at election results for all 31 Democratic pickups in the House during the 2006 cycle (including Peter Welch as a pickup in Vermont) and comparing the results to close losses. The close losses were not systenmatic but I looked at 20 races that fit the bill.
Overall, 14 of the 31 pickups (45%) were preceded by primary elections, a higher than expected number. Although some of these were blowouts, a surprising number were close and in many cases surprise winners emerged despite less money. As a comparison, among the 20 close but losing elections only seven (35%) were preceded by primaries and only one of those was close: the Tammy Duckworth-Christine Cegelis- Scott duel in IL-6.
Recent news that Linda Stender, Eric Massa, Dan Maffei and Larry Kissell, to name a few, are all considering rematches inspired me to create a diary to help find challengers to vulnerable Republicans. Who better to suggest candidates than people who live in or no these districts on an intimate level.
Finding the next Harry Mitchell could turn a Safe GOP seat into a pickup.
Here's my list of the top fifty GOP house seats that could be in danger in 2008.
