Rocking The House--Another 30 Seat Dem Gain in 2008?

The conventional wisdom (which, as Molly Ivins dutifully pointed out, is often wrong) is that the Democrats will pad their respective majorities in the Congress this year, but that said gains are likely to be marginal.

Looking at the landscape, there are signs that (just as in 2006) the Democratic wave might be considerably larger than initially anticipated. I base this on three factors--fundraising, candidate recruitment, and polling data.

Follow me beyond the fold for the information...

1. FUNDRAISING
According to the FEC (as of today), Democratic House candidates have raised a net amount of just over $206 million. Republican House candidates trail at $148.7 million. This is just shy of a 3-to-2 advantage in fundraising.

The differences are even more acute in several of the more competitive contests. New figures will be out next week, as the deadline for the first quarter filings for 2008 is April 15th. But the year-end reports for 2007 already showed a considerable gap in favor of the Democrats in several key races. Here are some examples, with the total amount raised in 2007 in parentheses:

REPUBLICAN-HELD SEATS
AZ-01: Kirkpatrick (D--403K) vs. Hay (R--169K)
ID-01: Minnick (D--410K) vs. Rep. Sali (R--332K)
IL-11: Halvorson (D--427K) vs. Baldermann (R--103K)
MI-07: Schauer (D--577K) vs. Rep. Walberg (R--576K)
NJ-07: Stender (D--622K) vs. Whitman (R--200K)*
NY-29: Massa (D--628K) vs. Kuhl (R--525K)
OH-02: Wulsin (D--501K) vs. Schmidt (R--382K)
OH-15: Kilroy (D--828K) vs. Stivers (R--404K)
OH-16: Boccieri (D--385K) vs. Schuring (R--269K)
VA-05: Perriello (D--266K) vs. Goode (R--171K)
*--Did not include potential GOP frontrunner Leonard Lance, who had not filed as of 1/31/08.

DEMOCRATIC-HELD SEATS
CA-11: McNerney (D--1,400K) vs. Andal (R--534K)
CT-02: Courtney (D--1,266K) vs. Sullivan (R--186K)
CT-05: C. Murphy (D--1,419K) vs. Cappiello (R--399K)
FL-16: Mahoney (D--1,852K) vs. Rooney (R--552K)
IL-08: Bean (D--1,926K) vs. Greenberg (R--410K)
PA-04: Altmire (D--1,210K) vs. Hart (R--388K)
WI-08: Kagen (D--920K) vs. Gard (R--371K)

There are only a handful of seats where the Democratic incumbent is looking at being heavily outraised. Nancy Boyda in Kansas-02 comes to mind, and one might expect Nick Lampson (TX-22) and Chris Carney (PA-10) to be in similar straits when their competitive primaries are resolved.

2. CANDIDATE RECRUITMENT
One of the most underreported stories of the campaign season is the number of potentially vulnerable Democratic incumbents who may well be facing minimal opposition.

Every new day seems to bring a new tale of a prized Republican recruit thinking better of it and heading for the exits. Some (like Tim Baldermann in IL-11) elected to hit the eject button after already winning their nominations.

Among the potentially vulnerable Democrats who, thus far, seem to have earned a near-pass from the Republicans in 2008: Ed Perlmutter (CO-07), Ron Klein (FL-22), John Barrow (GA-12), Brad Ellsworth (IN-08), Leonard Boswell (IA-03), Tim Walz (MN-01), John Hall (NY-19), and Charlie Wilson (OH-06). Granted, all eight of these incumbents have announced challengers who might put it together down the line, but as of the last quarter, all of their challengers had raised modest sums of money, at best, in order to defeat House incumbents.

Indeed, 57% of the House challengers raising more than $150K for the 4th quarter of 2007 were Democrats.

3. POLLING DATA
One poll today, released by the team at the non-partisan Capital Survey Research, underscores the challenge for GOPers in 2008. In the first public poll out of Alabama's 5th District, the presumed Democratic nominee (state senator Parker Griffith) has a double-digit lead over the presumed Republican nominee (94/96 nominee Wayne Parker). Griffith's sixteen point edge in the poll (48-32) has to be jarring to the folks over at the NRCC.

Consider--this is considered to be the #1 pickup opportunity for the GOP in this election cycle, one of only two (OR-05 is the other) Democratic-held seats that the Cook Political Report rates as a tossup. An open seat, in the heart of Bush country.

And the presumed Republican nominee is down 16, according to an independent poll.

A March NBC/WSJ poll had the generic house ballot (a flawed, but not useless measure) at Democrats 49%, Republicans 35%. When the Democrats reclaimed the House in 2006, the margin was approximately eight points (53-45).

Other independent polls in the 2008 cycle that portend a good Democratic year:

1. WY-01--Trauner (D) leads 41-40, according to a 1/23 Mason Dixon poll.

2. MI-07--Schauer (D) leads an informed ballot 49-48, according to a 3/2 EPIC/MRA poll.

3. LA-06--Cazayoux (D) leads by three points, according to a 3/18 REPUBLICAN poll.

4. KY-03--Yarmuth (D) leads Northup (R) by two, according to a 1/14 REPUBLICAN poll.

5. AK-01--Berkowitz (D) leads Young (R) by seven, according to a 12/6 Research 2000 poll.

THE BOTTOM LINE
Democrats seem unusually well-suited to build on their majority, and the extent to which the GOP has failed to generate any energy for their bid to reclaim the majority is truly startling. Indeed, when John Boehner claimed this week that the GOP would gain seats, and that they had a shot at reclaiming the majority, the general reaction was "What the hell is THAT guy on??!!??"

If the Democrats pick up LA-06 in next month's special election, one has to wonder if another wave election is in the offing. Special elections do not always portend general elections (see: SD-AL, KY-06, and the 2004 general election). However, there is little in the election cycle to date to dampen DCCC and Democratic enthusiasm.

•  Tips, Comments, Recs, Love, Hate...

  It is good to be on Spring Break (from my teaching job). I get to think about politics again.

  Plus, I thought folks might like an Obama/Hil free diary on the elections.

  Any thoughts??!!??

  by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:05:59 PM PDT

  •  Sorry to rain on the "Obama/Hil free" parade...

    ...but do you know anything about indications of coattails for either candidate should they win the nomination? I would imagine the coattail effect could be very important in tight races.

    by wiscmass on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:09:48 PM PDT

    •  I Think It Depends on the State...

      The state polls show Obama doing WAY worse than Hillary in the South and Appalachia. I mean REALLY bad (down 28 in Tennessee, for example).

      But in the rest of the country, Obama seems to do better than HRC.

      At the end of the day, it might be a wash.

      by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:12:26 PM PDT

      •  Yeah, I've seen that

        It strikes me as bizarre, given how incredibly similar they are on most issues, that there would be that much difference in the polls by region. I have to wonder if it suggests latent (or not so latent) racism and sexism in certain respective parts of the country.

        by wiscmass on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:16:37 PM PDT

        •  Ya think?

          :)

          by bherner on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:17:39 PM PDT

          •  For what it's worth

            In the elections when Bill Clinton was in office, the biennial ones, Democrats lost seats in congress in each succesive election.  

            by pikkel on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:52:31 PM PDT

          •  It's not really that simple, though

            Consider some of the Southern states, where we're getting reports of people saying they'd never vote for either an African American or a woman. Clinton is ahead in the polls in some of them and Obama in others. Does that mean that sexism is stronger in the states where Obama leads and racism is stronger in the states where Clinton leads? Or is it more complicated than that?

            And what of the Northern states, which so many people erroneously believe not to be afflicted with the same biases? Does Clinton do better in some states because the people of those states are racist, and does Obama do better in other states because the voters there are sexist? I don't think it's that straight forward.

            by wiscmass on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:25:50 PM PDT

•  Hey, where's John Adler? 629,000 to 0.

  by DemocraticLuntz on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:11:17 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, That's Why I Waited On Him...

    We don't know what the GOP guy (Myers) has raised as of yet. I did not include PA-08 for the same reason, although there are rumors that the GOP candidate against Murphy (a guy named Manion) actually raised quite a bit in the 1Q.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:13:33 PM PDT

•  add more to the list

  There are a whole bunch of winnable seats out there.

  I like the optimism of the diarist and we should view ourselves as a supermajority.

  by davefromqueens on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:22:30 PM PDT

  •  Yeah, Dave, I Agree....

    I did not include every potentially winnable race out there. I see a lot of great prospects, and a huge number of "keep an eye on them" prospects.

    When you are seriously thinking that districts like NM-02 and TX-10 should be targetted by the DCCC, it is clearly a target-rich environment.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:18:36 PM PDT

•  One of the House pickups

  is likely to be in NJ-7; check out this newly-launched website:

  http://www.lindastenderforcongress.com/

  by Greasy Grant on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:22:44 PM PDT

  •  I Am Waiting To See What Lance Does...

    The GOP establishment there has kind of coalesced around him, despite Christie Whitman's daughter being in the field.

    If he raises north of $300K for the quarter, I think this is very much a race. What he raises vis-a-vis Stender in this first quarter will be VERY telling.

    If he does not beat her for the quarter, that is a disastrous bit of news for the GOP--he is in his first quarter in the race, there should be a lot of low-hanging Jersey GOP fruit for him to pluck.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:21:40 PM PDT

•  Great diary, as usual, Steve

  Love the figures for Wulsin vs. Schmidt.  Jean can't go soon enough to suit me.

  by Miss Blue on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:25:52 PM PDT

  •  Thanks Kindly, Miss Blue :)....

    Mean Jean did submit a poll showing her up 18 on Wulsin (51-33) last month, but that one did not strike me as particularly believable.

    Only up two in 2006, and now up 18?? Nah....

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:23:27 PM PDT

•  Great stuff

  PLUS of course, there are many more Republicans retiring than Democrats (I think it's 22 to 2....) AND there are many more Democrats than Republicans facing no opposition at all.  

  In Benawu's diary today, he notes that, of states where the filing deadline has passed, there are 11 Republicans with no opposition, and there are, I believe, 28 such Democrats.

  by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:28:49 PM PDT

  •  A Fine Point...Also Worth Noting...

    Is how many big-hitting challengers the Dems are piling up in districts that one or two cycles ago NO ONE would think of as competitive.

    Not just Cazayoux in LA-06, but Michael Skelly in TX-07, Bill McCamley in NM-02, Bob Lord in AZ-03, Tom Perriello in VA-05, Grant and Minnick in ID-01, Kay Barnes in MO-06, and...well...you get the idea.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:12:26 PM PDT

    •  I did an analysis like that

      comparing 2004 and 2006, but that was after the election, when votes were in.  It's called how badly did the Repubs do?

      What to do for 2006 - 2008?

      Fundraising would be good, if someone has the data entered

      by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:50:10 PM PDT

      •  I Have The Year-End Reports...

        Catalogued. It is not the most accessible file, unfortunately (it is a microsoft works database file, IIRC).

        by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 06:09:10 PM PDT

        •  Not sure I can read that

          I do have dbmscopy, which can handle lots of things, but not microsoft works.

          Anyway to write it out to a csv file or something?

          by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 06:19:09 PM PDT

•  Plus 30

  I predicted over 20 last time, and made the prediction fairly early.  I took on one of those races, one that almost nobody thought could be one, because I thought in March it was going to be a big year.  And I believe this year--because of retirements, the presidential year, the money disparity, and the sorry shape of the GOP image--will be bigger.  

  We picked much of the low-hanging fruit last time, but we did it with very few open seats.  This time there are a ton of them, and the NRCC is broke.  Things could change--mostly likely a tight race at the top of the ticket, or Dems don't get their crap together and run a strong ground game and independent expenditure campaigns against McCain and on behalf of our ticket--but if things continue on like they look right now, it could be a turkey shoot.  

  by DHinMI on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:35:09 PM PDT

  •  I Couldn't Agree With You More...

    I did not cite the NRCC/DCCC disparity in my diary, but I noted it in another comment. This matters a lot.

    The NRCC is going to have to be very selective in how they disburse funds, which is why we are hearing rumors that they won't even bother to play on Woody Jenkins' behalf in the Louisiana 6th. The DCCC can spread the love far and wide, by comparison.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:25:26 PM PDT

•  Kratovil, MD-1

  Count that as a pick up.  Open seat, was R, going D this time.  

  by LarsThorwald on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:42:52 PM PDT

  •  I Thought About That One....

    Harris has raised a lot of money, and led Kratovil in an early poll.

    However, the Baltimore suburb/Eastern shore divide, plus current incumbent Wayne Gilchrest's refusal to tamp down the rumors that he may wind up endorsing the DEMOCRAT in this race, makes this a very attractive race for the DCCC to weigh in on.

    BTW, that's ANOTHER factor to consider. While the NRCC has managed to get out if the hole, they have very little cash on hand compared to the DCCC, who can be a little more liberal (pun unintended) with their targets in 2008.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:16:31 PM PDT

  •  If the Republicans lose that one

    I'm pretty sure Tom Cole will have some words with the Club for Growth.  I'd love to see that, the CfG has already lost them Walberg's seat in Michigan, and gave the GOP vulnerable incumbents in safe districts in Idaho and Nebraska.

    by Skaje on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:40:57 PM PDT

•  thanks Steve

  I enjoy when you post these diaries. You put a lot of work into them and it's greatly appreciated. I'm typically a glass half-empty kind of guy (although that does keep me motivated) and I voted 15-19. We'll see what happens, but even I'm feeling optimistic again this time around :)

  by Prison4Bushco on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 03:58:46 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for the Kind Words... :) N/T

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:16:49 PM PDT

•  I think it is clear that the environment

  this year is even more favorable to Democrats than it was in 2006 and we will probably pick up 30+ seats.

  You didn't mention just how lopsided an advantage the DCCC has over the NRCC when it comes to money.  With the DCCC having around $38 million cash on hand and the NRCC having only around $5 million it means the NRCC has to be far more careful where it spends its money.  The election in IL-14 has made them gun shy.  They dumped over $1 million in the race and Bill Foster clobbered their guy.  The special election in LA-06 could eat up another $1 million or the NRCC may just give up on the seat in the hopes that they will have a better chance with other races in the general election.

  While it may appear that Democrats picked up the low hanging fruit in 2006, remember that many of the Republicans had not had a challenger for years and had built up substantial warchests.  They also had a White House working to keep them in Congress and a lot of PAC's hedging their bets.  Many Democratic candidates and volunteers were untried in these districts and the race in 2006 has helped them get much needed and useful experience.  

  Democratic candidates should also benefit from the increase in voter turnout for this Presidential campaign.  

  by msstaley on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:04:04 PM PDT

  •  Good Point, But Interestingly...

    There was an article at TPM Election Central today which intimated that the NRCC might not even PLAY the LA-06 race. Their guy even made a comment that the race was "doable, but difficult" for Jenkins.

    A district that went 59-40 for Bush in 2004 is "doable, but difficult" for the GOP??!!??

    Wow.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:58:32 PM PDT

  •  Doesn't quite work that way

    if you look at the 'environment' on a national level, then, in order to duplicate our gains of 2006, we would need a much more favorable environment, because we picked up some of the low-hanging fruit in 2006; in 2008, there are some Democrats who won narrowly in 2006 and who will have to spend money and effort defending their seats.  

    This could be a very interesting exercise in modeling....hmmm....I gotta think about it

    by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:53:45 PM PDT

    •  Man, You Can Just Hear The Salivating...

      When math and politics intersect for you, huh??

      :)

      by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 06:09:54 PM PDT

      •  Yeah..... now, if I could make a living with that

        it would be so cool

        But that's what after-hours are for

        by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 06:17:35 PM PDT

    •  Except that the environment for

      Republican challengers in 08 is far less favorable than it was for them in 06 and it is far more favorable to Democratic challengers in 08 than it was in 06.

      It was not obvious until late in 06 that the Republicans would lose the House and some people thought the Republicans might be able to keep the Senate until election night.  It is obvious now that Republicans will not make gains in Congress at all and will lose seats in both chambers.  That has a huge impact on candidate recruitment and on fundraising.

      by msstaley on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 07:01:02 PM PDT

•  Great post, Steve. Thanks.

  by Gary Norton on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:18:06 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for the Kind Words...

    It's nice to be writing again. Spring break...gotta love it!!

    After AP tests next month (and the end of track season), I'll have a little more time to be blogger guy, instead of just teacher guy.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:30:29 PM PDT

•  I've thought of it as a bell curve

  with 0 and 50 on the farthest wings, and 15 on the center point.  If things get bad, it'll be single digits, if things get bad the other way, it'll be 40.

  by Dcoronata on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 04:54:15 PM PDT

  •  40 Would Be Awfully Tough...

    But I don't think 25 is out of the realm of possibility.

    There is a critical mass of longshots that would only come across in a total landslide.

    In other words, if we win 40 seats, we could win 60. But I think either is a bit unlikely.

    by Steve Singiser on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:00:18 PM PDT

    •  Sort of my Sigma point

      Things could get catastrophic if McCain keeps pushing the war, and the war gets worse.  

      I've thought in the back of my mind that the Republicans will abandon him and put their money in the senate.  If he loses, and they lose 8 seats it will be a total disaster of biblical proportions for them.  So they'd rather settle for Dem president, and 4 senate seats and let him go essentially bankrupt.  But if they go for him, and the senate campaigns gets no dough, with nobody on the top or the senate to vote for, the house will suffer terribly.

      by Dcoronata on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:05:07 PM PDT

      •  Coattails don't mean THAT much

        witness the many CDs where they voted for Bush, but elected a Democrat to Congress.... not just in 2006, but over time.

        by plf515 on Mon Apr 07, 2008 at 05:56:10 PM PDT