I think
the first edition of this series went extremely well. I listed sixty-eight seats that seemed worthy or a serious challenge and readers brought several new winnable districts to my attention. I have added one on my own, IL-14 (Hastert!), and I was sold on eleven of the seats you guys mentioned, bringing us to our goal of eighty. I detail all eleven in the extended entry along with a complete list of all the seats we have agreed upon and a call for commenters to list even more seats (or to argue against seats I have listed). First, I would like to respond to one of the comments in that thread
by reader SlinVA:
That list is rather optimistic. Anyone winning by more than 5% is usually considered reasonably safe, absent some major development. Once you get to #10 on that list, the margin is almost 10%. Absent an open seat, the chances aren't that good for most of the list.
Of course most of these seats are longshots. However, you never know what you might pick up if you give it a serious challenge, and putting our full weight behind all eighty would stretch Republican resources extremely thin--especially if we challenge the leadership like Delay and Hastert who are both potentially beatable, if only by longshots. I wrote about this in an article entitled
Uncontested.
Kos also summed this up perfectly, as he explained how our efforts in two House races that almost went uncontested, both of which we lost, helped us significantly in other races:
Richard Morrison
Morrison started out as a fringe candidate with no money when he was adopted by the Daily Kos community. He raised $60K, which he then turned into a real campaign, one that actually threatened DeLay.
DeLay garnered only 55 percent of the vote, his lowest total ever. He opened up campaign offices in the district and ran television commercials for the first time since his initial House victory. He remained in the district when he could've been out campaigning for other at-risk Republicans. He spent nearly $2 million to defend himself.
We pinned down DeLay in his home district. Mission accomplished.
Stan Matsunaka
Hatemonger Marylin Musgrave was headed to an easy, unchallenged victory, when Stan Matsunaka stepped up to the plate. We raised $44K for him. He lost 52-44.
Musgrave sweat this one. Not only did Musgrave spend $3 million of her own money, but the NRCC also threw in another $2 million to back her up. Matsunaka spent close to $600K and forced Republicans to spend $5 million that could've gone to other races -- all in a district that was almost uncontested.
Mission accomplished.
Only by challenging everywhere will we win. Only by pushing every conceivably vulnerable Republican as hard as we can will we win. That must be our goal.
Here are the seats I added on your recommendations:
- AZ-05: Commenter zii writes:
AZ-5
Rogers (D) 38.2%
Hayworth (R) 59.5%
Rogers is a young woman with little professional or political experience beyond being an extremely enthusiastic and hard working supporter of the local (AZ) Dean for President campaign. She leveraged these latter qualities (and the district's moderate tendancies) to a decent showing. (District is approx. 28% Dem, 45% Rep, 24% Ind, 1-2% Lib)
- MI-07: This is just too good to pass up in a district where Bush only won 51% of the vote in 2000. Fitzy writes:
Michigan's 7th District could have been taken this year if we hadn't wasted the opportunity.
It was open this year (Nick Smith retired), and on the Republican side there were a bunch of conservatives and one moderate in the primaries, and the moderate, Joe Schwarz, won. All it would have taken would be to run a moderate Democrat (Doug Spade would've been good, he's extremely popular in Lenawee County), and he could have been beaten. Instead, we had Sharon Renier, a nice woman who, sadly, was too liberal for this district.
Since Schwarz is so moderate (called a RINO by some), I suspect he'll be challenged in the primaries in 2006. It would be tough, but in the right atmosphere a Democrat could win.
It'd also send a powerful message: Jackson, MI is in the district, and Jackson, MI is where the Republican Party first formed in the 1850s.
- MT-AL: Why not go for it all in Montana? We are clearly on a roll in this state. It looks as though it will be an open seat as well.
- NH-01 and NH-02: To paraphrase one commenter, how did I miss these two? Voter registration in New Hampshire is titling strongly away from its Republican past, and Dems are now almost equal. Kerry won the state despite losing he popular vote. For these reasons alone, both districts must be winnable, especially NH-02 held by Charlie Bass, who has been targeted in the past, as the second is more blue than the first.
- OH-16: Tagris notes that "Ohio-16 is most likely going to be an open seat," and it is not a heavily Republican seat either, as Bush won 54% here in 2000 and probably less in 2004.
- PA-03: See Tim's piece on this one.
- TX-21 and TX-23: I am keeping all of the Texas challenges in place, as the Supreme Court might still overturn the DeLay map. I am also adding TX-23 and TX-21. Kuff writes:
TX-23, currently held by Henry Bonilla. Raginillinoian is correct that he squeaked by Henry Cuellar in 2002, but that was before his district was made more Republican by the redrawing in 2003. What may make this a good target is that Bonilla is
all set to run for Senate if Hutchison steps down as expected. I'd like to see State Rep. Richard Raymond challenge for this seat, but if it's open, it ought to be a free-for-all.(...)
TX-21, held by Lamar Smith. Smith nearly lost the Travis County portion of his district to a no-name perennial candidate. A strong candidate, perhaps one based in Smith's Bexar County, could make a race out of this. I've been hoping for current San Antonio Mayor Ed Garza, who is term-limited this year, to take a shot at it.
- VA-10 and VA-11. Commenter jjbman writes:
Va 10th
Frank Wolf has held this seat for 13 terms now, and despite his 26 years in the house, he will only be 67 in 2006, making it unlikely this will be an open seat anytime soon. This district went pretty solidly for Bush both times, 57% in 2000 and 55% this time around, but it is much more friendly to us than other parts of the state. Also, though Bush pretty much held steady in this district, Wolf's support fell from 84% in 2000 to 71% in 2002 to 63% this time around. The district includes a large part of suburban Fairfax county, which has been becoming steadily more liberal for almost a decade now. Also, the district is relatively friendly for us demographically, as 43% of residents have college degrees.
Va 11th
The rest of Fairfax county resides in the 11th district, which has been represented by Tom Davis for the last decade. This is probably the most winnable district for Democrats, as Bush lost this district both times, albeit by narrow margins. Also, in this most recent election Davis' support fell from 82% to 60%. This district can be quite fertile for Democrats, as Gov. Warner won this distrit 55-45 4 years ago. In terms of education, the 11th is even more friendly than the 10th, with 48% of residents having a college degree or higher.
That brings us up to eighty. I would like to make the list even longer, if possible. I certainly would like to make it better--if I failed to list a good seat but included a hopeless seat, let me know. Here is the preliminary list of eighty Republican seats we have come up with worthy a serious challenge:
AL-03
AZ-01; AZ-05; AZ-08
CA-26
CO-04; CO-07
CT-02; CT-04; CT-05
DE-AL
FL-10; FL-13; FL-22
GA-11
IL-06; IL-10; IL-11; IL-14
IN-02; IN-08; IN-09
IA-01; IA-02; IA-04
KS-02
KY-03; KY-04
LA-05; LA-07
MI-07; MI-09; MI-11
MN-02; MN-03; MN-06
MO-09
MT-AL
NE-01
NV-03
NH-01; NH-02
NJ-02; NJ-03; NJ-04; NJ-05; NJ-07
NM-01; NM-02
NY-03; NY-13; NY-19; NY-23; NY-24; NY-25; NY-26; NY-29
NC-05; NC-08; NC-11
OH-01; OH-04; OH-16
PA-03; PA-06; PA-07; PA-08; PA-15
TX-02; TX-19; TX-21; TX-22; TX-23; TX-32
VA-02; VA-10; VA-11
WA-05; WA-08
WV-02
WY-AL
What else needs to be added? Make your case in the comments.
