Last time Republicans won a majority of the Senate popular vote was in 1946

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday April 04, 2022 · 1:39 PM PDT

2022/04/04 · 13:39

ScreenShot2022-04-04at2.08.42PM.png — US Senate by party vote 1946-2020

Yes, you read that headline correctly.

A few months ago I read a fascinating analysis by Stephen Wolf, linked below (Mr. Wolf wrote it in February 2021, but I only saw it recently):

How minority rule plagues Senate: Republicans last won more support than Democrats two decades ago

www.dailykos.com/…

In the diary, Mr. Wolf wrote that “even though Democrats narrowly won a majority in the Senate this year, the institution as a whole still gives Republicans a massive undue advantage — and has done so for decades. To illustrate this, Daily Kos Elections (calculated) the popular vote for the Senate going back nearly three decades and also (calculated) the proportion of the country’s population that Senators from each party represent ... The implications of this data are astonishing: as shown on the chart below, Senate Republicans have neither won more votes nor represented more Americans than Democrats since the late 1990s. Despite that fact, the GOP has controlled the Senate just over half the time since then ...”

One thing that stood out for me in Mr. Wolf’s analysis was the year 1998 as the last time Republicans won more support than Democrats. What was particularly interesting was the GOP percentage that year — 49.7% (versus 47.9% for Democrats). I immediately noticed that the percentage was still not a MAJORITY of the national popular vote. I wondered how far back would we have to go to find the year in which the Republican Party won a majority of support among Americans who voted for the Senate? After all, according to Mr. Wolf’s chart, covering the last quarter of a century, Democrats have managed to win just such a majority in 8 elections out of 14 (not counting another 5 elections where Democrats won a plurality), including the last 8 elections in a row, going back to 2006.

The answer is not as easy as it first appears. As Mr. Wolf pointed out in his analysis, “Senators are of course elected to staggered six-year terms, with a third of the chamber up every two years. To determine the popular vote for any given Senate, therefore, we’ve combined each party’s vote totals for every Senate election over a three-cycle period … The figures for 1998, for instance, include all Senate contests from that year as well as 1996 and 1994 ...”

In my diary today, I perform the same calculations, except I go further back in time. The chart that summarizes my findings is included here.

One thing you will notice right away is that some of my numbers are a bit different from Mr. Wolf’s. In some years, my calculated share of the Democratic advantage is larger than Mr. Wolf’s (for example, 2020), in some years it’s smaller (for example, 2014), and in some years it’s exactly the same (for example, 2002). Like Mr. Wolf, I included the votes for independent candidates who caucus with a major party or candidates who for all practical purposes are de facto members of a major party (for example, Bernie Sanders) as votes for that major party. However, I counted elections that feature multiple candidates from the same party on the same general election ballot differently. Where as Mr. Wolf’s methodology allowed for the counting of multiple Democrats on the same ballot in Louisiana but not in California, I also included both Democrats (where applicable) on California’s “top-two” ballot. For all practical purposes, this is why my Democratic numbers are noticeably higher only for the most recent three elections (note: there was no Senate election in California in 2020, but remember - it’s a three-cycle average!). As Mr. Wolf did in his analysis, I used data from Dave Leip’s Atlas for numbers going back to 1990, cross referenced with numbers from statistics kept by the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives for all Congressional Elections from 1942 to 2020. (I adjusted those slightly to count votes for major party candidates who also ran on other parties’ ballots in the same election. So, for example, in 1986, the Conservative Party and Right to Life Party in New York endorsed Al D’Amato, but the Clerk of the House of Representatives did not tabulate their votes, totaling 347,487, into the national Republican total … however I did.)

The major thing to notice from my chart, of course, is that the Democratic Party has, in effect, won the popular national vote for the U.S. Senate in 34 of the last 38 elections. Democrats have, in fact, obtained a majority of that vote in 25 of those elections, and a plurality in another 9 elections. Republicans, on the other hand, have achieved a plurality on 3 occasions (1952, 1954 and 1998) and a majority only once, in 1946, with 50.1% and that was the MOST RECENT time they achieved a majority of the vote. I personally find that truly amazing. It should also be noted that the Republicans’ 43.4% in 2020 was their 3rd lowest percentage over the previous 74 years. And more disturbingly — in 2018, the GOP achieved their literally LOWEST percentage, 42.9% during the last three-quarters of a century (at least that long, as I don’t include data here for years prior to 1946) YET still managed to achieve a 53-47 Senate majority. Disturbing, because the Senate plays an outsized role in our system of government, and, even with the current nominal Democratic control (albeit at the personal whims of Senators Manchin and Sinema) it’s becoming increasingly difficult to describe this arrangement as anything other than a tyranny of the minority.

Maryland Redistricting

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday October 16, 2021 · 6:54 AM PDT

2021/10/16 · 06:54

Back in February, I posted a proposal here to redistrict Maryland:

www.dailykos.com/…

A few weeks ago, when Census numbers came out, I slightly adjusted my proposal and submitted to the Governor’s Redistricting Committee via their citizens’ portal — it’s plan #1022 here:

redistricting.maryland.gov/…

I have now adjusted again (and submitted as plan #1079 in the link above), and believe (yes, just imho) that this would be the perfect map for Maryland. It’s an 8-0 gerrymander that preserves both African-American seats, and very likely creates a 3rd Black-represented seat in my version of MD-1. I strongly believe in a Fair Maps type of system, but only when it’s applied uniformly across all states. Democrats should not unilaterally disarm on this issue.

MARYLAND REDISTRICTING 2021

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday February 18, 2021 · 7:19 AM PST

2021/02/18 · 07:19

ScreenShot2021-02-18at10.23.11AM.png — Maryland proposed map

It’s almost that time, and here’s my map for Maryland. Yes, I know, I’m jumping the gun a bit as Census numbers haven’t been released yet. But, imho, we should do something along these lines. And Maryland Democrats should have done something like this 10 years ago. Speaking of guns, Andy Harris in the news (link below) is what made me think of Maryland redistricting.

link: politicalwire.com/…

Biden received 60%+ of the vote in all of my proposed districts (and Trump 37% or less in all). Districts 4 and 7 have an African-American majority. District 1 is around 40% African-American.

All maps below done on 2020 Dave’s Redistricting Application, LLC. (sorry if the maps look small; I can’t seem to get them to appear larger, so did a few zooms into Baltimore and D.C. areas).

The Flying Train (1902) - Wuppertal, Germany

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday August 23, 2020 · 11:22 AM PDT

2020/08/23 · 11:22

ScreenShot2020-08-23at2.19.37PM.png — Wuppertal, Germany (1902)

This story has nothing to do with politics — except perhaps somehow as a lesson and reminder that even the most industrially and technologically advanced countries can fall far from grace under the wrong leadership.

This video was taken in 1902 in Wuppertal, Germany, and was released last week by the Museum of Modern Art:

YouTube Video

It is shot on 68mm film and is unusually clear. The subject matter too seems kind of surreal — but it’s a train that’s unique to that location in Germany, see below:

en.wikipedia.org/…

Here’s another version that’s been colorized. Mesmerizing, imho, and just wanted to share ...

YouTube Video

Is Chief Justice Roberts becoming a moderate Democrat?

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday August 13, 2020 · 7:53 AM PDT

2020/08/13 · 07:53

ScreenShot2020-08-13at10.48.58AM.png — Donald Trump and Chief Justice Roberts at State of the Union Address

A few days ago, I noticed a most interesting story in Above the Law, a news website about the law, law schools and the legal profession, link below:

Supreme Court Clerk Hiring Watch: A Closer Look At The Clerk Class Of October Term 2020

The article provides a report into the demographics of the October Term 2020 Supreme Court law clerk class. Normally, each of the nine Justices is assigned four law clerks each, with Retired Justices assigned one (but the ones assigned to a Retired Justice are always also assigned to work with the Chambers of a sitting Justice, so that they may gain the necessary legal experience while at the Court).

Virtually all of the Supreme Court law clerks come to the Court via lower court “feeder” judges, discussed in the article. Ideological alignment of feeder judges with Supreme Court Justices is usually a very important factor in the selection process. Conservative Justices have normally and uniformly drawn more law clerks from conservative feeder judges and liberal Justices have likewise drawn from liberal feeder judges.

Some conservative Justices prefer only law clerks from conservative feeder judges, without exception (and some liberal Justices likewise prefer only liberal feeder judges and their clerks) while others often like to hire one law clerk per Term from the opposite site of the ideological spectrum in order to have sort of a “devil’s advocate” on their team. Nevertheless, the hiring of a clerk from a liberal feeder judge by a conservative Justice is almost always very limited, and, in fact, most feeder judges themselves are notorious for being on the extremes of the judicial spectrum (please see more sources below).

www.nytimes.com/…

en.wikipedia.org/...

www.ncsc.org/…

This brings me to what I noticed in the Above the Law article a few days ago:

Chief Justice Roberts disappointed conservatives with a number of his votes in OT 2019, leading one court watcher I know to complain that JGR is now basically a moderate Democrat. And in terms of his clerk hiring practices, he looks like a moderate Democrat too ...

For OT 2020, the Chief’s four clerks served eight different lower-court judges. Of those eight judges, five were appointed by Democratic presidents, and three were appointed by Republican presidents. And looking ahead to OT 2021, his one hire so far clerked for two Democratic appointees.

So, out of 10 feeder judges for the clerks hired by Roberts for OT 2020 and OT 2021 so far, 70% are coming from liberal lower court feeder judges. This seems like an unusual pattern, to say the least … The author of this article does point out that there has indeed been more “across the aisle” law clerk hiring at the Court recently versus around 10 years ago … but Chief Justice Roberts’ recent hiring pattern still seems like a big “anomaly” to me.

And another interesting observation - among the feeder judges for Chief Justice Roberts are James Boasberg -twice (Obama-appointee), Vince Chhabria (Obama), Paul Watford (Obama), Sri Srinivasan (Obama), Robert Katzmann (Clinton), Jed Rakoff (Clinton) and Jeffrey Sutton (George W. Bush). I mention Sutton as he’s also on the feeder list for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (as the “devil’s advocate” feeder I presume) … but guess who are some of the other feeder judges for RBG: Boasberg, Watford, Srinivasan, Katzmann and Rakoff ... a huge overlap with Roberts, imho!

Now, do I think that Chief Justice Roberts is becoming a “moderate Democrat”? No, he isn’t. But, is he still the same very conservative John Roberts as when he started as Chief Justice back in 2005. I say that he isn’t either.

Perhaps — and this is just my own personal theory — Donald Trump’s extremism has so alienated John Roberts as an individual and as a jurist that he has naturally drifted away from many conservative positions he has held in the past while hanging on to other conservative ideas and ideals. I think this has happened to many traditional conservatives as of late (you can certainly see the drifting of historically Republican suburbs away from the party in 2016 and 2018 election results).

Some “never-Trumpers” have become very anti-Trump while still considering themselves to be conservative Republicans, while others’ alienation from Trump has also expressed itself in a slow drifting away from what Trump and today’s Republican Party represent ideologically.

Many articles have been written recently re. this subject (some examples below). This is all food for thought … and a story that is still being written and unfolding.

www.nytimes.com/…

www.npr.org/…

www.cnn.com/…

www.newyorker.com/…

verdict.justia.com/...

GOP's "Operation Chaos" did indeed occur last night

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday March 01, 2020 · 10:44 AM PST

2020/03/01 · 10:44

ScreenShot2020-03-01at1.41.12PM.png — Operation Chaos in South Carolina Democratic Primary

I’m a big political nerd and I went ahead to examine the precincts in South Carolina that voted for Bernie Sanders in last night’s OPEN Democratic primary (source below) and compared them to how those precincts voted in the 2016 general election (source below also) ...

www.nytimes.com/...

and

www.nytimes.com/…

Lo and behold, guess what? … it appears that the GOP’s “operation chaos” (the goal was to vote for Bernie in order to pick the “weaker” candidate as the Democratic nominee) was indeed active ... Of course, a large majority of Republicans did not participate, but some did.

I have listed every single precinct that voted for Bernie last night by its 2016 GE percentage for Trump (I did not include a few precincts because their boundaries have changed in the last few years). It appears that a very large number of the Bernie precincts are some of the most Republican in the state. The MEDIAN Trump percentage for the Bernie-won precincts was 76 ... while Trump’s South Carolina statewide percentage in 2016 was only 55.

Thus, “operation chaos” did indeed occur, although it appears to have been limited in its scope. Nevertheless, as a Biden supporter, I’m so glad that he was still able to win by such a large percentage!

95
93
93
93
90
89
89
89
89
88
88
88
88
87
87
87
87
87
87
87
86
86
86
85
85
85
85
85
85
85
84
84
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
83
82
82
82
82
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
81
80
80
80
80
79
79
78
77
77
77
76
75
75
74
74
73
73
72
71
71
71
71
70
70
69
68
68
68
67
67
67
67
66
65
65
64
63
63
63
63
62
62
62
62
62
61
58
58
57
55
55
54
54
53
52
52
52
52
50
50
49
49
48
48
46
44
44
43
41
41
40
38
37
36
32
30
29
27
26
25
2

Georgia May Be Turning Blue Faster Than We Think

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday November 24, 2019 · 12:21 PM PST

2019/11/24 · 12:21

ScreenShot2019-11-24at3.14.42PM.png — Turn Georgia BLUE !

Democrats need to make a very concerted effort to win the state of Georgia in November 2020. Georgia has 16 electoral votes as well as two U.S. Senate seats up for grabs next year. President Obama lost Georgia by 8 points in 2012, Hillary lost it by 5 points in 2016, and Stacey Abrams lost by a bit over 1 point (or 50,000 votes out of almost 4 million cast) in 2018:

www.washingtonpost.com/...

Most pundits rate Georgia as lean-GOP or even likely-GOP.

Imho, it should be rated as a pure tossup - as several recent datapoints lean in that direction.

First point …

Three separate polls of Georgia came out in the last week or so, below:

Atlanta Journal Constitution:

Biden 51% — Trump 43%

Sanders 48% — Trump 44%

Warren 47% — Trump 44%

Buttigieg 46% — Trump 43%

Survey USA:

Biden 47% — Trump 43%

Sanders 47% — Trump 44%

Warren 46% — Trump 45%

Buttigieg 41% — Trump 45%

Climate Nexus:

Biden 48% — Trump 47%

Sanders 46% — Trump 48%

Warren 47% — Trump 47%

Buttigieg 42% — Trump 49%

Sources for polls above:
https://politicalwire.com/2019/11/13/trump-trails-top-democrats-in-georgia/

https://politicalwire.com/2019/11/20/several-top-democrats-lead-trump-in-georgia/

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/11/20/1900862/-Two-Polls-Show-Presidential-Race-Will-Be-Close-in-Georgia

Second point ...

“Georgia’s voting rolls have swollen over the last 10 months. Many of those newly-registered voters are new to the state, and Democrats think they’re going to help flip the state next year … The surge is rooted in a new state law that automatically registered hundreds of thousands of new voters ...

The state says more than 310,000 new voters have registered in 2019. Of those, 47 percent of them are people of color. Another 45 percent are under age 30, according to Fair Fight Georgia, the liberal group launched by Democrat Stacey Abrams.”

Source:

www.11alive.com/…

Third point …

“In Georgia, new citizens constitute more than 440,000 potential voters, the group estimated. President Donald Trump won the state by roughly 200,000 votes in 2016.”

Source:

www.politico.com/…

There are several factors here which are aligning just right for us Democrats. We really do not want to miss an opportunity to turn Georgia blue in 2020.

Georgia poll completely contradicts idea that African-Americans more reluctant to vote for Buttigieg

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday November 13, 2019 · 5:00 PM PST

2019/11/13 · 17:00

Over the last few weeks or so I’ve read several stories claiming that, due to their more socially conservative and religious background, African-American voters may have a problem with voting for Pete Buttigieg in a general election.

Even the New York Times ran a piece re. this (providing nothing more than anecdotes as evidence):

www.nytimes.com/…

Now, I like looking at poll crosstabs, and I saw something really interesting in the Atlanta Journal Constitution poll of Georgia that was released today.

Here’s the poll below:

www.ajc.com/…

And the crosstabs:

ajc-isabetai.s3.amazonaws.com/…

The poll had good news for Democrats in that all of our main candidates appear to be leading Trump in the state:

Biden 51%, Trump 43%
Sanders 48%, Trump 44%
Warren 47%, Trump 44%
Buttigieg 46%, Trump 43%
Harris 45%, Trump 44%

What stood out to me, though, were the numbers of how each individual Democratic candidate performed against Trump among African-American voters. You can examine the crosstabs yourself, but in summary, the numbers below indicate the percentage Trump would receive in Georgia among black voters against each Democrat listed :

against Biden 7.1%

against Sanders 7.7%

against Warren 8.7%

against Buttigieg 10.0%

against Harris 10.0%

The numbers for the last two Democrats, Pete Buttigieg and Kamala Harris, jumped out at me …

Yes, it appears it’s the same number for Buttigieg, who’s gay and for Harris, who is the only black candidate polled here. Furthermore, the exact breakdown among black voters in Georgia is:

Pete Buttigieg 76.5% — Donald Trump 10.0%

Kamala Harris 76.7% — Donald Trump 10.0%

And, if we want to go down even further into the weeds, the raw vote counts are:

Pete Buttigieg 237 — Donald Trump 31

Kamala Harris 237 — Donald Trump 31

Exactly the same ! (The slight difference in the percentage numbers is because the “don’t know/undecided” raw numbers are ever so slightly different; also, please keep in mind that the overall number of undecided voters is higher for the less “high-profile” candidates like Buttigieg versus, for example, Joe Biden in this poll.)

So, imho, a pretty clear and unambiguous repudiation of the proposition that black voters have any sort of problem voting for Pete Buttigieg in a general election (and keep in mind, with this poll we’re looking not just at African-American voters, but southern African-American voters at that).

Why Warren's Wisconsin Numbers May Not Be What They Seem

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday September 07, 2019 · 6:45 AM PDT

2019/09/07 · 06:45

I haven’t posted here in a while, and I do so these days only when I see a “narrative” in the news which I believe to be misleading and one which nobody seems to be correcting or clarifying ...

I’m a Biden supporter (well, leaning that way, but I also like a number of our other candidates) and I wanted to write a small diary here just to clarify some of my thoughts re. the recent Wisconsin poll from Marquette University, link below:

law.marquette.edu/...

I have made many comments re. this poll on various other political sites in the last few days, and so I’m sort of just putting my thoughts together here in one diary … Again, these are just random thoughts, and the purpose of this diary is really to invite a discussion from others ...

I believe there’s a strong chance Wisconsin will be the tipping point state in 2020, so whether our nominee wins it or not will be crucial. On the surface, it appears that there’s a great difference in the Marquette poll in how Biden and Warren perform in the general election — Biden leading Trump by 9, while Warren and Trump appear tied at 45% ...

Well, yes, I believe that as of now, Biden does perform better, BUT, when you look at the crosstabs of the poll, you realize that Warren may wind up doing significantly better than it appears here … It's true that Biden does better than the other Democrats including Warren, but it may only be by a few points, and not really the 9 point difference between Biden and Warren everyone has been pointing to ...

First thing, the poll summary rounds up all the numbers ... When you look at the actual crosstabs, the precise Biden v. Trump percentage is 50.6 - 42.5 (which is really an 8 point lead, not 9); for Warren it's a lead over Trump of 45.3 - 44.6 (actually 44.55, but whatever, either way it's closer to a 1 point Warren lead than a perfect tie with Trump) ...

Much more important than the above, imho, is the actual Trump number: when facing Biden it's 42.5, Sanders 44.5, Warren 44.6 (or 44.55), Harris 44.1. In other words, against Sanders, Warren and Harris, Trump performs almost exactly the same (Biden does a little better).

As others have pointed out, how do we interpret the other number, i.e., what each Democrat is getting (50.6 Biden, 48.1 Sanders, 45.3 Warren, 43.8 Harris)? There's obviously more undecideds; is it a function of name recognition? ...

Parts of the poll point towards Biden just genuinely doing better than the others; for example, he has a significantly better lead among independents (49-40) than Warren (42-45). Other parts, though, do point to something like name recognition. For example, among black voters, Biden has 84% support, for Warren it's only 69% with a lot more undecided/don't know …

Perhaps, the most interesting way to compare Biden and Warren is by looking at the Wisconsin “regional” breakdowns. Here we see how they do in various parts of the state. In many geographical areas there’s surprisingly little difference (considering the toplines of the poll, i.e., Biden over Trump by 9; Warren tied with Trump) in how Biden and Warren perform. For example, in the Milwaukee suburbs, Biden loses to Trump 41-52, while Warren loses by 38-53; in both instances, Trump’s number is 52 or 53 …

In other areas, it APPEARS that Biden is doing a lot better, but is he really? Looking at Milwaukee itself, Biden beats Trump 66-26, while Warren wins by 55-27. What’s interesting is that Trump’s number is, again, basically the same here (26 or 27), but in Warren’s case, there’s just a lot more “don’t know”, 13% for Warren, but only 1% for Biden. For Milwaukee, this also dovetails with the other data point, race, where Biden has 84% support among African-Americans while Warren only has 69%.

Similarly to Milwaukee, the numbers for Madison have Biden beating Trump 62-30 (with 1% “don’t know”), while Warren is 55-32 (with 7% “don’t know) … The Madison numbers, imho, are very counter-intuitive, and to me, the most perplexing part of this poll. Perhaps others here could shed more light …

The Green Bay/Appleton area appears to be the only part of the state where Biden’s numbers vs. Trump are solidly and significantly better than Warren’s. Biden loses to Trump by 42-50, while Warren loses 34-55 (the “don’t know” numbers are very similar for Biden and Warren).

Finally, in the “rest of the state” (most of rural and small town Wisconsin), there’s almost no difference in performance, with Biden beating Trump 56-39 and Warren beating Trump 54-39. The fact that both Biden and Warren beat Trump in this region is, imho, very encouraging.

So, bottom line, yes, Biden does better in Wisconsin, but perhaps not by as large a margin as this poll seems to imply when you first look at it.

HISTORIC U.S. House Realignment

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday November 12, 2018 · 3:00 PM PST

2018/11/12 · 15:00

Screen_Shot_2018-11-12_at_4.21.41_PM.png — US House of Representatives, source: New York Times

I noticed something extraordinary about the House districts that became Democratic last week -- about half of them have not been represented by a Democrat in a quarter of a century or longer, in some cases, much longer.

In this diary I have tried to provide a brief chronological history of these districts' history under continuous GOP representation. Obviously, district lines have changed over the years, and I decided to use the best geographical approximation of the territory currently in each district and how that area was represented in the past. In many cases, you can see that some very famous Republican and conservative names represented these once rock-ribbed Republican areas: George H.W. Bush, John Schmitz, Newt Gingrich, George Allen, Mark Sanford, Eric Cantor and others.

But all these districts will now be represented by Democrats for the first time in a very long time. Donald Trump has given us a political realignment truly of epic proportions.

GA-6: northern Atlanta suburbs (Republican for 26 years)

1993-1999 Newt Gingrich, R (GA-6)*

1999-2005 Johnny Isakson, R (GA-6)

2005-2017 Tom Price, R (GA-6)

2017-2019 Karen Handel, R (GA-6)

2019-elect Lucy McBath, D (GA-6)

……………………………………………………..

* Gingrich served in GA-6 from 1979 to 1999, but prior to 1993 the area he represented was in another part of the Atlanta suburbs

FL-27: Miami (Republican for 29 years)

1989(Aug.)-2013 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R (FL-18)

2013-2019 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R (FL-27)

2019-elect Donna Shalala, D (FL-27)

WA-8: Seattle suburbs (Republican for 36 years)

1983-1993 Rod Chandler, R (WA-8)

1993-2005 Jennifer Dunn, R (WA-8)

2005-2019 Dave Reichert, R (WA-8)

2019-elect Kim Schrier, D (WA-8)

SC-1: coastal South Carolina (Republican for 38 years)

1981-1987 Thomas Hartnett, R (SC-1)

1987-1995 Arthur Ravenel, R (SC-1)

1995-2001 Mark Sanford, R (SC-1)

2001-2011 Henry Brown, R (SC-1)

2011-2013 Tim Scott, R (SC-1)

2013-2019 Mark Sanford, R (SC-1)

2019-elect Joe Cunningham, D (SC-1)

VA-10: northern Virginia (Republican for 38 years)

1981-2015 Frank Wolf, R (VA-10)

2015-2019 Barbara Comstock, R (VA-10)

2019-elect Jennifer Wexton, D (VA-10)

CA-48: north coast Orange County (Republican for 40 years)

1979-1983 Dan Lungren, R (CA-34)

1983-1989 Dan Lungren, R (CA-42)

1989-1993 Dana Rohrabacher, R (CA-42)

1993-2003 Dana Rohrabacher, R (CA-45)

2003-2013 Dana Rohrabacher, R (CA-46)

2013-2019 Dana Rohrabacher, R (CA-48)

2019-elect Harley Rouda, D (CA-48)

OK-5: Oklahoma City (Republican for 44 years)

1975-1977 John Jarman, R (OK-5)

1977-1993 Mickey Edwards, R (OK-5)

1993-2007 Ernest Istook, R (OK-5)

2007-2011 Mary Fallin, R (OK-5)

2011-2015 James Lankford, R (OK-5)

2015-2019 Steve Russell, R (OK-5)

2019-elect Kendra Horn, D (OK-5)

VA-7: Richmond suburbs / Culpeper (Republican for 48 years)

1971-1985 J. Kenneth Robinson, R (VA-7)

1985-1991 D. French Slaughter, R (VA-7)

1991-1993 George Allen, R (VA-7)

1993-2001 Thomas Bliley, R (VA-7)

2001-2014 Eric Cantor, R (VA-7)

2014-2019 Dave Brat, R (VA-7)

2019-elect Abigail Spanberger, D (VA-7)

TX-32: north Dallas (Republican for 51 years)

1968-1983 James Collins, R (TX-3)

1983-1991 Steve Bartlett, R (TX-3)

1991-2003 Sam Johnson, R (TX-3)

2003-2019 Pete Sessions, R (TX-32)

2019-elect Colin Allred, D (TX-32)

CO-6: southern Denver suburbs (Republican for 52 years)

1967-1973 Don Brotzman, R (CO-2)

1973-1979 William Armstrong, R (CO-5)

1979-1983 Ken Kramer, R (CO-5)

1983-1999 Dan Schaefer, R (CO-6)

1999-2009 Tom Tancredo, R (CO-6)

2009-2019 Mike Coffman, R (CO-6)

2019-elect Jason Crow, D (CO-6)

TX-7: west Houston (Republican for 52 years)

1967-1971 George H.W. Bush, R (TX-7)

1971-2001 Bill Archer, R (TX-7)

2001-2019 John Culberson, R (TX-7)

2019-elect Lizzie Pannill Fletcher, D (TX-7)

CA-25: northern L.A. Co. / Simi Valley (Republican for 54 years)

1965-1969 Edwin Reinecke, R (CA-27)

1969-1973 Barry Goldwater, Jr., R (CA-27)

1973-1975 John Rousselot, R (CA-24)

1975-1983 Barry Goldwater, Jr., R (CA-20)

1983-1987 Bobbi Fiedler, R (CA-21)

1987-1993 Elton Gallegly, R (CA-21)

1993-2015 Howard McKeon, R (CA-25)

2015-2019 Steve Knight, R (CA-25)

2019-elect Katie Hill, D (CA-25)

MN-3: western Minneapolis suburbs (Republican for 58 years)

1961-1971 Clark MacGregor, R (MN-3)

1971-1991 William Frenzel, R (MN-3)

1991-2009 James Ramstad, R (MN-3)

2009-2019 Erik Paulsen, R (MN-3)

2019-elect Dean Phillips, D (MN-3)

NJ-7: Union County / northern N.J. (Republican for 62 years)

1957-1967 Florence Dwyer, R (NJ-6)

1967-1973 Florence Dwyer, R (NJ-12)

1973-1983 Matthew Rinaldo, R (NJ-12)

1983-1993 Matthew Rinaldo, R (NJ-7)

1993-2001 Bob Franks, R (NJ-7)

2001-2009 Mike Ferguson, R (NJ-7)

2009-2019 Leonard Lance, R (NJ-7)

2019-elect Tom Malinowski, D (NJ-7)

CA-49: north coast San Diego County (Republican for 66 years)

1953-1963 James Utt, R (CA-28)

1963-1970 James Utt, R (CA-35)

1970-1973 John Schmitz, R (CA-35)

1973-1975 Clair Burgener, R (CA-42)

1975-1983 Clair Burgener, R (CA-43)

1983-1993 Ron Packard, R (CA-43)

1993-2001 Ron Packard, R (CA-48)

2001-2003 Darrell Issa, R (CA-48)

2003-2019 Darrell Issa, R (CA-49)

2019-elect Mike Levin, D (CA-49)

NJ-11: Morris County (Republican for 86 years)

1933-1953 Charles Eaton, R (NJ-5)

1953-1975 Peter Frelinghuysen, R (NJ-5)

1975-1983 Millicent Fenwick, R (NJ-5)

1983-1985 Marge Roukema, R (NJ-5)

1985-1994 Dean Gallo, R (NJ-11)

1995-2019 Rodney Frelinghuysen, R (NJ-11)

2019-elect Mikie Sherrill, D (NJ-11)

IL-6: DuPage County (Republican for 126 years)

1893-1895 Robert Childs, R (IL-8)

1895-1903 Albert Hopkins, R (IL-8)

1903-1911 Howard Snapp, R (IL-11)

1911-1923 Ira Copley, R/Progressive (IL-11)

1923-1935 Frank Reid, R (IL-11)

1935-1949 Chauncey Reed, R (IL-11)

1949-1956 Chauncey Reed, R (IL-14)

1957-1958 Russell Keeney, R (IL-14)

1959-1965 Elmer Hoffman, R (IL-14)

1965-1983 John Erlenborn, R (IL-14)

1983-2007 Henry Hyde, R (IL-6)

2007-2019 Peter Roskam, R (IL-6)

2019-elect Sean Casten, D (IL-6)

PA-6: Chester County (Republican for 158 years)

1861-1863 John Hickman, R (PA-6)

1863-1869 John Broomall, R (PA-7)

1869-1875 Washington Townsend, R (PA-7)

1875-1877 Washington Townsend, R (PA-6)

1877-1883 William Ward, R (PA-6)

1883-1887 James Everhart, R (PA-6)

1887-1891 Smedley Darlington, R (PA-6)

1891-1897 John Robinson, R (PA-6)

1897-1903 Thomas Butler, R (PA-6)

1903-1923 Thomas Butler, R (PA-7)

1923-1928 Thomas Butler, R (PA-8)

1928-1933 James Wolfenden, R (PA-8)

1933-1945 J. Roland Kinzer, R (PA-10)

1945-1947 J. Roland Kinzer, R (PA-9)

1947-1966 Paul Dague, R (PA-9)

1967-1970 G. Robert Watkins, R (PA-9)

1970-1973 John Ware, R (PA-9)

1973-1975 John Ware, R (PA-5)

1975-1993 Richard Schulze, R (PA-5)

1993-1997 Robert Walker, R (PA-16)

1997-2003 Joseph Pitts, R (PA-16)

2003-2015 Jim Gerlach, R (PA-6)

2015-2019 Ryan Costello, R (PA-6)

2019-elect Chrissy Houlahan, D (PA-6)

MI-11: northwestern Detroit suburbs (Republican for 52 years*)

*In my humble opinion, MI-11 should also be on this list, despite Democrat David Curson’s brief tenure from November 2012 to January 2013. Curson was elected to fill the remainder of Thaddeus McCotter’s term when McCotter resigned in the summer of 2012. Curson ran only for the special election, and under district lines that had become moot due to the 2012 redistricting. The general election for the district that same November election day, under the new district lines, was won by Republican Kerry Bentivolio.

……………………………………………………………..

1967-1973 Jack McDonald, R (MI-19)

1973-1983 William Broomfield, R (MI-19)

1983-1993 William Broomfield, R (MI-18)

1993-2003 Joe Knollenberg, R (MI-11)

2003-2012 Thaddeus McCotter, R (MI-11)

2013-2015 Kerry Bentivolio, R (MI-11)

2015-2019 David Trott, R (MI-11)

2019-elect Haley Stevens, D (MI-11)

……………………………………………………………..

Lastly, it should be noted that if Democrats manage to wrest control of CA-39, CA-45 and/or GA-7 from the GOP, those districts have been held by Republicans for 50 years, 76 years, and 26 years, respectively. I will update this diary if we win any of these districts. If anyone sees any other districts that should be included here, please let me know (as well as any errors, as this was a quite cumbersome assignment for me) and I will update. Thanks.

UPDATE: looks like Katie Porter will be the winner in CA-45, so I will add that district to the list:

CA-45: central Orange County (Republican for 76 years)

1943-1953 John Phillips, R (CA-22)

1953-1963 James Utt, R (CA-28)

1963-1970 James Utt, R (CA-35)

1970-1973 John Schmitz, R (CA-35)

1973-1975 Andrew Hinshaw, R (CA-39)

1975-1977 Andrew Hinshaw, R (CA-40)

1977-1989 Robert Badham, R (CA-40)

1989-1993 Christopher Cox, R (CA-40)

1993-2003 Christopher Cox, R (CA-47)

2003-2005 Christopher Cox, R (CA-48)

2005-2013 John Campbell, R (CA-48)

2013-2015 John Campbell, R (CA-45)

2015-2019 Mimi Walters, R (CA-45)

2019-elect Katie Porter, D (CA-45)

Ominous Maps and Numbers for the GOP

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday March 14, 2018 · 7:30 AM PDT

2018/03/14 · 07:30

One thing that really caught my eye last night was the New York Times map of PA-18 precinct shifts -- the map with the little arrows which, in virtually every case, shifted blue:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/13/us/elections/results-pennsylvania-house-special-election.html

I thought strange ... and wonderful!

Wonderful, of course, if you're a Democrat … but ominous if you're a Republican.

Ominous for the GOP because PA-18 is really like two types of Congressional districts in one. There are two very different types of demographics here. In both cases, these have been very Republican voters as of late …

Yet, last night, among both demographic groups, there was a significant shift to the left.

The map below shows the two types of voters here; you will need to zoom in to the Pittsburgh area ...

http://rynerohla.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2012-16-Presidential-Swing-by-Precinct.png

On the one hand, you have the traditionally Republican, relatively upper-income, highly-educated suburban voters like those in southwestern Allegheny County. That area is colored mostly blue on this map – meaning that Hillary performed better there in 2016 than Obama did in 2012. Yet, last night, that area moved even further in the Democratic direction.

On the other hand, you have the blue collar, steel and coal country voters (historically union and Democratic, but steadily moving towards the GOP over the last few decades) … the quintessential Trump voters, if you will. That area is colored mostly red on this map – meaning that Hillary performed worse there in 2016 than Obama did in 2012. This is perhaps best represented by Greene County in the southwestern corner of the state. Obama lost Greene Co. by 18 points in 2012; Hillary lost it by 40 points in 2016. Yet, last night, this area too moved in the Democratic direction.

All this happened while the economy is doing almost as good as can be possible. Trump came into this Republican district multiple times. The GOP outspent Democrats significantly here (counting party money as well as outside group spending on behalf of the two candidates). Yet, apparently all this to no avail. The GOP did worse among BOTH the upscale voters of suburban Pittsburgh AND the blue-collar “Trump Country” voters in the rest of the district. Bottom line … Trump and the GOP are politically in some deep doo-doo ...

Lastly, I wanted to share just a few sets of numbers that speak for themselves:

Trump’s margin in Pennsylvania in 2016:

44,292

Trump’s margin in PA-18 in 2016:

72,397

Conor Lamb’s margin last night (may change slightly based on absentees):

641

Difference between Democratic win last night and Democratic Presidential loss in district in 2016 (and, please remember, this is just one district out of 18 in the state):

73,038

Trump’s ‘Shithole’ Comments Put U.S. Troops in Danger

silver spring

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday January 14, 2018 · 6:34 AM PST

2018/01/14 · 06:34

Screen_Shot_2018-01-14_at_9.20.18_AM.png — Trump: unfit to be Commander-in-Chief

I believe one important matter that’s been really overlooked in the reaction to Donald Trump calling African countries (in addition to El Salvador and Haiti) ‘shitholes’ is the negative effect such comments may have on the lives of American troops currently stationed in Africa.

Trump’s racist and idiotic comments may now -- literally -- place the lives of thousands of our troops stationed in African countries in danger. The United States has at least 5,000 troops stationed all over Africa (source: http://www.newsweek.com/how-many-troops-does-us-have-africa-top-senators-didnt-know-military-was-niger-690937). Anti-American sentiment is already quite high among certain segments of many of these countries’ population, and Trump’s comments may only serve to inflame further. Who knows what nutcase may now use Trump’s words as a weapon -- whereby anti-American sentiment turns into violence against American soldiers?

Just a few months ago, Trump was in the midst of controversy over comments he made in the follow-up to a deadly attack on U.S. troops in Niger (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/23/us/politics/soldiers-widow-says-trump-struggled-to-remember-sgt-la-david-johnsons-name.html) … Surely -- one would think -- Trump would have gained some knowledge of the dangerous situation we currently face on that continent?

In light of the tragic circumstances of what occurred in Niger, the wording Trump used the other day is beyond reprehensible. Forget for one second the broader implication of his comments for Africans and people of African descent (just for the sake of argument here) and focus only on what Trump’s ‘shithole’ comments mean for the lives of U.S. troops.

Through his words, Trump proves once again that he is not fit to be Commander-in-Chief nor fit to be President. For that matter, as a recent USA Today editorial so accurately put it (https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/12/trump-lows-ever-hit-rock-bottom-editorials-debates/945947001/) -- and this is especially apt in terms of Trump’s ‘shithole’ comments -- Trump is not fit to clean the toilets in Obama’s presidential library.

Newer
Older

RSS