Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Seven, Growing Democratic Trends

by FreeDem

(Welcome to this twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats. If you've missed past diaries, follow these links: Day One, Competitive Districts. Day Two, Turnout Problems. Day Three, Past Mistakes. Day Four, Downstate Democrats. Day Five, Unchallenged Incumbents. Day Six, Present Opportunities. And as always, at the end of the diary there is a poll! Thank you for reading, and have a happy 2014!)On the seventh day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me ... Encouraging signs of growing Democratic trends in the state's largest counties and most competitive districts! Take a look at the vote trend between 2001 and 2013 from Daily Kos. There's a lot of red there, but it's in the most rural, slow-growth parts of the state. All of the major population areas, from Northern Virginia to Richmond to Tidewater, are trending blue. The population growth in the state is heavily concentrated in this urban crescent. Favorable demographic trends and the alienation of moderate suburban voters by the hard-right have combined to turn Virginia into a blue state ... at least statewide in higher turnout elections. Yeah, but what about in the General Assembly?

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Seven, Growing Democratic Trends

Sure, there have been problems in the past few campaign cycles, and we know that a number of factors have limited Democratic successes. But there's every reason to believe that it gets better. Consider the trends we've currently seen from 2008 to 2012, and also from 2009 to 2013.There's only one competitive delegate district where the overall trend from 2008 to 2012 was significantly against us: the 12th around Blacksburg. Not only that, but it's the only competitive, currently-Republican held district where the trend from 2009 to 2013 was negative. That's frustrating when Democrats need to find every seat they can, but if there's only one seat that's going the other way we should find some comfort. For the State Senate, although I'm still finalizing the district numbers for 2013, there looks to be only one bad trend from the Presidential results in the Democratic held districts: Phil Puckett's 38th district. In two others, John Edwards' 21st and Creigh Deeds' 25th, the trend from 2008 to 2012 was practically flat. The downside is that among the competitive, Republican held State Senate seats, the trend is minor in Dick Black's 13th, Bill Stanley's 20th, Bryce Reeves' 17th, and John Watkins's 10th district. Only the 7th with Frank Wagner had strong Democratic trends. Ben Tribbett has discussed this demographic tidal wave on his blog and estimated low points for off-year elections until 2017 to 2023. While I see this as broadly true in the big picture, because of gerrymandering (both in the House and Senate) the number of relatively safe Democratic seats is close to a rock bottom already. Even if demographics won't turn the off-year elections around until next decade, I think most Democratic-held seats will be immune to these trends. Furthermore, there are pockets of positive trends within some of the most competitive delegate seats. What that means is that in most other Republican-held Obama, or Kaine, or McAuliffe delegate district, the trends from 2008 to 2012, and from 2009 to 2013, are in our favor. The Obama coalition is the way forward not just for winning Virginia in a presidential year, but also for finding ways to make progress in Richmond. There are two exceptions for the House of Delegates: the 34th, which had almost no trend from 2008 to 2012 and we've highlighted as a district that needs special attention, and the 100th, which is currently at risk in the special election and may be difficult to take back in the future. But let's not dwell on the challenges, let's look at the opportunities, where trends are surprisingly in our favor. It's not surprising to see minority-majority districts or liberal districts in Northern Virginia stick with the Democratic Party in good times and bad. Many had higher percentages for Obama in 2012 than in 2008. But consider the 94th in Newport News, where Obama actually improved his performance from 50% to 51.9% despite the trends against him nationally. That may not seem like much, but it's a sign of strong base Democratic support. Although Fairinholt fell short of knocking off Yancey this year, we've seen how competitive this Tidewater district has become.  We also see strong trends in the 1st State Senate district, which overlaps the 94th; a good sign for Miller in 2015. South of the James River, Obama's 42.76% in the Suffolk and Chesapeake based 76th district jumped to 44.77%. It's still a Republican district, but it stands out as a surprisingly close district in the governor's election as well:  McAuliffe 47.10% to Cuccinelli's 47.63%. Although certainly some of that margin is due to Sarvis, the Attorney General's race was a close 47.28% for Herring and 52.72% for Obenshain. In fact, this was also a district where Deeds did better than expected, and McAuliffe did much better than expected. Given the trends in Suffolk and Chesapeake, we also see Democratic trends in the 14th State Senate seat, even though it's still very Republican. There are other Democratic trends in Tidewater, especially in the Virginia Beach seats of the 21st, 84th, and 85th in the House of Delegates and the 7th State Senate seat. There are just too many Democrats in Virginia Beach to draw a gerrymandering without at least one delegate's district going blue, eventually. Pockets of diversity in Prince William (51st, 50th, 31st) continue to trend Democratic, but we know that it will take a special effort to translate these topline numbers into local success. Are Virginia Democrats going to sweep Northern Virginia and turn all of Tidewater blue? Not any time soon, but it's encouraging to see these growing Democratic trends beyond just Northern Virginia. In 2015, Virginia Democrats not only have another crack at the Republican gerrymandering in the House of Delegates, but a need to defend their precarious State Senate majority. We can all agree that Puckett, occupying an otherwise deep red district, is the most vulnerable State Senator. But who's the second most vulnerable? Vote below! And note, I've divided the 29th into two options, one believing that Chuck Colgan himself is vulnerable, the other voting for the 29th being the most vulnerable if he should retire.

Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Six, The Ghost of Christmas Present

by FreeDem

We are now halfway through this twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats. If you've missed past diaries, follow these links: Day One, Competitive Districts. Day Two, Turnout Problems. Day Three, Past Mistakes. Day Four, Downstate Democrats. Day Five, Unchallenged Incumbents. At the end of the diary there is a poll to vote in, please show your support by voting!On the sixth day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me...Come in and know me better! Of course, if day three was the Ghost of Christmas Past, day six is the Ghost of Christmas Present! Virginia Democrats may be depressed with the first part of this series, but this holiday season, they have a lot to be thankful for. In honor of this being New Year's Eve, we'll be looking at reasons to look forward to 2014. First, good girls and boys of all ages across Virginia have opened up their invitations to an inauguration featuring three Democratic officials. Combined with Senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, the party has demonstrated that the far right is no longer welcome in statewide elections in the Commonwealth. In 2014, Mark Warner will be up for reelection and Virginia Republicans are desperate to find a warm body with a pulse to run against him. Earlier this year, Warner's approval ratings were above 50% and he was leading all challengers by double digits. Right now, with concerns over the implementation of Obamacare, his numbers may be softer, but this will be temporary as the health care roll out improves in 2014. I question what Republican will be foolish enough to run; Warner will march onward to reelection. Even with a strong challenger, only delusional Tea Partiers believe Warner is truly vulnerable.

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Six, The Ghost of Christmas Present

Here's one prediction for 2014. Although he will win, Warner will look back on his 2008 win and wonder why he couldn't break 60% again. Make no mistake; the presidential hopeful is preparing a significant campaign in order to run up his margins. But as he has been forced to take stances on national Democratic issues, including health care, Warner's once messianic status in some parts of rural Virginia has a little tarnish. This will bring his total under 60%.Also, stay tuned for a return of Sarvis. His big donor supporters wanted to secure ballot access in Virginia for the Libertarian Party. They fell short in 2013 but have another shot in 2014. The likely Republican nominee will have no chance at winning and won't be an impressive candidate, giving an opening to Sarvis to pick off dissatisfied Republican. Also watch for efforts to target Democratic voters by selling Sarvis as a protest vote and a way to express support for a more liberal agenda on gay marriage or marijuana than what Warner currently supports for. In an early Christmas surprise, long-time Republican Congressman Frank Wolf announced his retirement next year. Democrats have rallied behind Fairfax Supervisor John Foust, while Republicans are looking at candidacies by Delegate Barbara Comstock, State Senator Dick Black, and some guy who's lost twice before, Keith Fimian. Earlier, there were hopes that there would be a wide-open Republican primary, featuring everyone from Tim Hugo to Artur Davis. That's not going to happen, but the Comstock-Black feud could be good to watch. While Black is clearly the crazier of the two, Democrats shouldn't count their chickens before they hatch if he is the GOP nominee. Black's 13th state senate district is a marginal district; Romney and Allen only won with 51% of the vote. Black knows how to win by mobilizing the socially conservative base; the lower turnout of a midterm means he could win if there's just a little bit of a pro-GOP breeze nationally. Foust will have a hard fought campaign, one that we'll be following closely this year. Can Virginia Democrats pick up other congressional seats? Doubtful. The national party is going to target Rigell, again, but they'll come up short unless there's a strong Democratic swing. Don't expect any surprises in the 2014 elections in Virginia, but here's a final prediction, not for 2014, but 2018 and beyond. Watch Randy Forbes for a potential retirement in the next few cycles. As a senior Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, Randy Forbes has attracted attention recently for his push to have the NRCC deny support for the party's gay congressional candidates. Was this an attempt by Forbes to rally support for his desire to be Chairman of Armed Services, or a hit job leaked by his opponents? In either case, it will be very ironic if one of the gay Republicans, Carl DeMaio, manages to win and then goes on to serve on the Armed Services Committee with Forbes (very plausible for a San Diego area representative). If Buck McKeon retires, and the Armed Services Chairmanship passes to Texan Mac Thornberry instead of Forbes, it will be at least six years before Forbes has another shot at the gavel. Facing a long wait until 2020, will Forbes stay in the House instead of cashing in and becoming a lobbyist? If the 4th district opens up, is there even a Democratic bench to provide a strong challenger? Delegate Roslyn Tyler? Evandra Thompson, who lost to Delegate Rosalyn Dance in the Democratic primary earlier this year, might be an interesting choice if she can find a way to put more public experience under her belt. What can we do to build this bench now? Given the important role that Virginia has played in electing Barack Obama, twice, and our bench of nationally recognized leaders (Warner and Kaine), we should also be ready for the chance that one of them will join the next Democratic Administration. I'm actually starting to upgrade Warner's chances for the presidential if Hillary doesn't run, but that's still unlikely and that hypothetical is for after 2014. But if not as VP (doubtful), Kaine could still make a good cabinet pick. What would Governor McAuliffe do if facing a vacancy? Would he try to avoid a bitter Herring-Northam primary? Or look elsewhere for an appointment? Vote below!

For Anyone Still Under the Bizarre Delusion the Media is "Liberal"...

...check out the following graph and post by Steven Benen. The bottom line is that Republicans absolutely dominate the Sunday talk shows - "In all, 10 of the top 13 are Republicans, as are six of the top seven." And even among the Democrats, notice that one of them - Joe Manchin of West Virginia - is THE most conservative Democrat in the Senate? Also note that Newt Gingrich, "who hasn't served in public office since resigning in disgrace 15 years ago, was tied for third place with Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), one of only a few Democrats to make the cut." In sum, it isn't just that the media's not "liberal," it's that it's wildly biased to the right. But don't expect Republicans to believe that, as they live in an alternate universe where empirical evidence is irrelevant (for yet another example, see Republicans' belief in evolution plummets, poll reveals - and no, this isn't an Onion parody!).

Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Five, Unchallenged Incumbents

by FreeDem

This is the fifth part of a twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats. Here are the previous diaries: Day One, Competitive Districts. Day Two, Turnout Problems. Day Three, Past Mistakes. Day Four, Downstate Democrats. To show that you've read this diary and support the project, please vote in the poll at the end. Thank you!On the fifth day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me ... Incumbents who are so safe in their seats they don't remember the last time they had to actually campaign. Could they even fundraise if they tried? Do they know anything about targeting, polling, and tools like Votebuilder or Catalyst? In 2013, 41 incumbent Delegates were not even challenged by another candidate, either by the other major party or by a minor party candidate. One more was able to win their first election without any challenge at all, walking right into office. That may seem sad, but it's an improvement over 2011, when 59 incumbents were unchallenged in their newly drawn districts. That's similar to elections in 2003, 2005, and 2007, where over 60 delegates on average, almost two-thirds of the chamber, were unchallenged. In the ten years from 2003 to 2013, well over half of all delegate races were unchallenged.

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Five, Unchallenged Incumbents

What are some of the worse offenses of democracy? Roxann Robinson in the 27th hasn't seen an election since winning a special election in 2010. In fact, the 27th hasn't seen a contested general election in a long time. Previous Republican Delegate Sam Nixon had held the district uncontested since winning it in a special election in 1994. Elsewhere, Republican Tommy Wright hasn't been challenged in over ten years, since 2001. The biggest winner of this do-nothing political system? Riley Ingram, who hasn't been challenged since 1995!When the 27th became open during a special election in 2010, the Democratic Party ignored the district and instead devoted resources to a more Republican district in Harrisonburg. At the time, the 27th was a district where Barack Obama had won. Focusing more on candidate than district, Ward Armstrong and his advisers decided to spend $60,000 in the more Republican district where they liked the candidate. In 2010, Ben Tribbett wrote on the 27th: "This is a seat that is more Democratic than the 26th, would be tougher to tear up in redistricting, and is exactly the kind of area Democrats need to win to take back the House.  Instead, we are not even competing.  Which tells you all you need to know about where Democrats are in the House of Delegates right now and how their immediate future looks." That was in 2010, do you think things have changed since then? We need to find ways to contest every district, especially every competitive district. We aren't there right now, but we're getting a lot better.. However, many of these candidates in long-shot races are going to be running bare bone campaigns with little outside support. They need to live off the land, getting the resources they can from the local community. That's not going to be easy. Incumbents who aren't even challenged aren't the only problem; some districts are so safe that a challenger gets next to no attention from the incumbent. If an incumbent Democrat doesn't have to campaign, why do we expect them to know how to help challengers? Can we learn any lessons from the Democratic challengers in 2013? O'Quinn and McGrady in Southwest Virginia ran better than McAuliffe, but not enough to be competitive. An assortment of other Democrats running in more conservative areas ran slightly ahead, including Cathcart, Harris, Cyphert, and Daniel. None were in districts that could ever be competitive without a blue moon, and then some. Only Qarni kept his race against Bob Marshall close in a competitive district, almost pulling off an upset when few gave him a chance. Why are our Democratic challengers doing worse than the top of the ticket in the most competitive districts, while long-shot challengers seem to shift more voters? I can understand why coal-country Democrats like O'Quinn and McGrady may have been more popular than McAulliffe. But what explains the better performance of Cathcart in Roanoke County, Harris and Daniel in the exurbs of Northern Virginia, and Cyphert around Lynchburg? Daniel received attention and support because of the controversy surrounding LaRock's campaign. Cyphert and Qarni were running against the most outspoken of social theocrats in Richmond. Is that all that explains it? Why did all of our challengers, with the exception of Qarni, wilt under the pressures of a competitive campaign? The logical explanation is that in these overwhelmingly Republican seats, the incumbent hardly has to campaign, and so the more intrepid underdog can pick off a few crossover votes. But in marginal districts, the challenge to the incumbent Republican awakens a sleeping giant. The response from the GOP campaign apparatus smacks aside the challenger, ensuring enough crossover support from Democratic voters to protect themselves. However, not every Democratic challenger in the long-shot races ran better than McAuliffe. In many other Republican districts, the Democratic challenger ran behind the top of the ticket. There's probably more to this story, but when will the party step up to analyze this tale?

Ranking My 11 Years as a Progressive Political Blogger from Best to Worst

I first got heavily involved in progressive political blogging in 2003, with the Draft Wesley Clark movement (I attended my first Clark "Meetup" at Stetsons in DC on July 7). I can't believe it, but that's nearly 11 (ELEVEN!) freakin' years ago. Am I crazy to still be doing this? OK, don't answer that - thanks! :) Anyway, given that it's just about the end of 2013, I thought it might be fun to rank my nearly 11 years of political blogging in order of "best" to "worst," taking into account how much fun I had in a particular year, how successful that year was, and other intangibles. Of course, the list has to kick off with...#1. 2006: In early January, we (Josh Chernila, Lee Diamond, Corey Hernandez, Mary Detwiler, myself and a few others) fired up the "Draft James Webb" website and movement, kicking off what was undoubtedly the most wild, crazy, exhilarating, fun year I've ever had in politics. In addition to being involved in a unique movement  comprised of thousands of citizen activists, we also managed to a) persuade Jim Webb to run for U.S. Senate; b) get him on the ballot; c) help him win the Democratic primary against "establishment" pick Harris Miller, despite being outspent heavily; d) combine a "ragtag army" and the formal campaign (on which I served as netroots coordinator) to defeat the supposedly unbeatable (by the so-called "experts") incumbent Senator George Allen; and e) in the process help Democrats win back a majority in the U.S. Senate. As if all that's not good enough, Democrats also took back the U.S. House of Representatives that year (although, sadly, we had no pickups in Virginia, with Phil Kellam in the 2nd CD falling just short). I met a ton of people that year, made some great friends, and also left my federal government job (smart? crazy? both?). Wow, what a year! #2. 2005: Starting the blog "Raising Kaine" was my first real attempt at my own political blog. It also was my first serious dive into the politics of Virginia, despite having lived here since the late 1980s. All in all, it was a fascinating experience, as a website I had no idea if anyone would read became a well-read group blog. I met and/or talked on the phone with a ton of people that year, including many of the Democratic candidates; attended my first state "JJ Dinner;" and made a bunch of new friends (e.g., folks like Brian Patton, who became the Raising Kaine PAC treasurer). And, as we all know, Tim Kaine defeated Jerry Kilgore to become Governor of Virginia. On the down side, Creigh Deeds barely lost to Bob McDonnell for Attorney General (and almost certainly would have won if there had been a real recount), and Leslie Byrne lost by just 1 percentage point to Bill Bolling for Lt. Governor. Imagine if those races had turned out differently? Still, it was a great year. #3. 2008: I was running not one but three blogs that year -- "RK" (formerly known as Raising Kaine) and "Farewell Frank" (Frank Wolf, that is) in Virginia; and Badlands Blue in South Dakota. The latter effort was the brainchild mostly of former Jim Webb senior strategist Steve Jarding, who in 2007-2008 was Sen. Tim Johnson's campaign manager and who hired me to run a blog to defend Johnson against whatever attacks were launched against him. In the end, Johnson was reelected. As for Virginia, that was the year Barack Obama became the first Democrat since LBJ to carry Virginia. It was also the year we picked up 3 House of Representatives seats - Tom Perriello in the 5th CD, Glenn Nye in the 2nd CD, and Gerry Connolly in the 11th CD. As if all that wasn't good enough, that was also the year we elected Mark Warner to the U.S. Senate. Among other highlights of 2008 for me were getting to go on the Warner campaign kickoff "fly-around"; seeing RK reach its highest readership ever (e.g., around 200,000 visits in October 2008); becoming friends with Tom Perriello and helping him win his long-shot election against incumbent Rep. Virgil Goode; helping reelect Tim Johnson and getting to travel to South Dakota; hosting Obama volunteers in our house; and lots more. Finally, the book I co-authored with Nate Wilcox, Netroots Rising, was published, and Nate and I got to talk about the book on the radio; at Stanford, Berkeley, Vanderbilt, and UVA; etc. Come to think of it, maybe I should have made 2008 my "best" year as a political blogger (also one of the best years of my life, actually)? One downside: Judy Feder lost badly to faux-"moderate" Frank Wolf. Sigh...

lowkell :: Ranking My 11 Years as a Progressive Political Blogger from Best to Worst

#4. 2003: I didn't have my own blog that year, but I'm counting it because I posted a lot about politics on Daily Kos and other venues. The main topic? The Draft Wesley Clark movement, which was definitely one of the most fun experiences I've ever had in politics...for a few months, anyway. After the "draft" ended, it became super frustrating, as the "professionals" decided to pretty much ditch the grassroots. But prior to that, it was awesome, including lots of friendships made, some of which continue to this day.#5. 2013: This wasn't the most inspirational campaign, but the bottom line is that we swept the three statewide offices. I also had the privilege of consulting to Mark Herring, who won a tougher-than-expected primary over Justin Fairfax, and then went on to narrowly defeat Mark Obenshain for AG after a recount. Blue Virginia did very well this year in terms of traffic, as we approach 3 million visits since the blog was founded in 2009. I also attended events with Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The main disappointment of 2013? The House of Delegates, where numerous top Democrats were hoping to pick up as many as 10 seats, just a week or two before the election. In the end, we netted just one seat, which of course was incredibly disappointing. Again, I'd urge the "powers that be" to do a thorough "after-action" assessment to figure out what went wrong and to fix it for 2015. #6. 2012: Not a super-exciting year for me personally, and not nearly as fun as 2008 politically, but still a fairly successful year for Virginia Democrats, as Tim Kaine was elected to the U.S. Senate and Barack Obama once again carried Virginia in the presidential election. Of course, it's was fun to be able to participate not once but twice in driving a stake through George Allen's political career. Unfortunately, we weren't able to win back any U.S. House of Representatives races, so that definitely lowers this one in the rankings. #7. 2007: Not a bad year, overall, as Virginia Democrats took back the State Senate, flipping it from 23-17 Republican to 21-19 Democratic. We also picked up 4 House of Delegates seats, which sounds good but was actually a disappointment, as pre-election predictions by top Democrats like Tim Kaine had us expecting as many as 15 House seats (and 7-9 Senate seats). On a personal note, I spent a significant amount of time this year co-authoring the bookNetroots Rising with nate Wilcox. That was a great experience, no doubt about it. #8. 2004: A maddeningly frustrating year, in which the worst president in U.S. history, the guy who stole the White House in 2000 (with an assist by the Supreme Court), was actually reelected despite the increasing quagmire in Iraq and many other problems. My intense frustration after November 2004 led directly to my decision to "think globally/act locally" by starting up "Raising Kaine" (and generally getting involved in trying to elect Democrats in my own state). So at least something positive came out of that "annus horribilis," as they say in Rome... #9. 2011: The first election after the 2010 census and redistricting was no fun at all. As if losing two Senate seats (and control of the Senate, despite pro-Democratic gerrymandering) wasn't bad enough, we also got our butts handed to us in the House of Delegates, falling from 39 to 32 Democrats. We also had an extremely nasty/godawful primary between Barbara Favola and Jaime Areizaga-Soto. Definitely not a fun year in any way. #10. 2010: Not quite as bad as 2009, but not good either. I mean, any year when a superb Representative like Tom Perriello is defeated by an utter loser/stuffed shirt like Robert Hurt can't be good. Throw in the loss of Rep. Rick Boucher (to the climate-science-denying wacko Morgan Griffith) and the defeat of Rep. Glenn Nye by Scott Rigell, and there's really nothing good to say about 2010. Miserable. #11. 2009: Just a godawful year in every way; do we even have to talk about it? In brief, we got wiped out in the Tea Party madness, resulting in the loss of great Democrats in the House of Delegates, not to mention the election of far-right-wing extremist Ken Cuccinelli as Attorney General, etc, etc. Plus, the Democratic primary between Terry McAuliffe, Brian Moran and Creigh Deeds was one of the most unpleasant experiences most of us who were involved in it have ever experienced. Good riddance 2009, may you forever rot in hell.

Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Four, Silenced Downstate Democrats

by FreeDem

This is the fourth part of a twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats.Day one focused on challenges facing Virginia Democrats in competitive districts, day two focused on problems with turnout. Onday three, we were visited by the Ghost of Christmas Past to teach us the lessons of past campaign mistakes. Thank you for reading, please make sure you vote on the poll at the end!On the fourth day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me...A Republican gerrymandering that has silenced Democratic voters downstate at the House of Delegates! Wait, another post on gerrymandering? Lame! Hold on, hear me out, this is about an aspect of Republican gerrymandering that has gone more unnoticed. As we know from day one, the Republican gerrymander isn't the only problem facing Virginia Democrats in the House of Delegates. But the gerrymandering's impact has negatively influenced Democratic recruits for higher office outside of Northern Virginia.

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Four, Silenced Downstate Democrats

Before the redistricting, there were 38 delegate districts where Obama had received over 55% of the vote in 2008. I use this threshold because we saw how important it was in determining safe Democratic seats. After redistricting this was slashed down to 33 seats.Republicans created one new 55% Obama district by moving the 2nd from Southwest Virginia to Northern Virginia. But the district's Democratic voters were largely minority voters in Prince William and less likely to turnout in off-year elections. Though Democrats won it in 2013, it will be a difficult district to hold until demographics catch up. But if Futrell can hang on in 2015 I think he could be set for the rest of the decade. Although they modified some districts, such as making Rust's district a few points more Republican (which was crucial in keeping him in office this year), the big changes were the six over 55% seats where they significantly reduced Democratic performance, including five in Northern Virginia: the 51st (Anderson), the 42nd (Albo), the 31st (Lingamfelter), the 50th (Miller), and the 67th (LeMunyon). In all of these, a 57 to 58% Obama district was brought down to 52% or 53%. That may not seem like a big difference, but look at how narrowly Republicans pulled out wins in 2013, a higher turnout electorate than what they'll face going into 2015. This gets many incumbents to at least 2017, if not beyond, when another Republican gerrymandering may save them again. A smaller tweak was needed in the 32nd (Greason), which was just under 55% Obama to begin with but was brought down closer to 53% by redistricting. And finally, as part of the unappreciated theme of the Republican redistricting, Paula Miller's district in Hampton Roads was moved to an under 55% Obama district (in 2008) in Northern Virginia. Ramadan won the seat by 51 votes in 2011 and then 195 votes in 2013. Not only did Democrats lose a stronger Democratic seat, they lost the voice of a non-Northern Virginia Democrat to demonstrate the regional diversity of our party. Demographic trends have made it a more Democratic district, Obama was over 55% in 2012; Ramadan's days are numbered. But who can fill in and replace Paula Miller as a voice in Hampton Roads? With changes to the 12th around Blacksburg, the 14th around Danville, the 21st and 83rd in Virginia Beach, the 27th in Chesterfield, the 58th and 59th in Central Virginia, the 64th in Southside, and the 23rd in Lynchburg (and those are just some of the obvious examples!), the most competitive seats in Virginia outside of Northern Virginia were moved further away from Virginia Democrats. The difficulties in recruiting downstate Democrats for the House of Delegates spreads to higher offices. Wagner and McWaters could be vulnerable in Virginia Beach, but the Republican gerrymandering prevents local up and coming Democrats from getting a foothold. Could we find a strong challenger to Bill Stanley if we had more competitive districts around Danville and Martinsville? The number of Obama-won delegate seats dropped from 50 to 47. In 9 more he was over 48% in 2008 under the old lines, but this was reduced to just 5 in the new lines. While many seats in Northern Virginia remained competitive, downstate saw larger changes. Virginia Beach in particular was hit hard, denying Democrats the chance of having a stronger farm team for running for higher office in the State Senate, Congress, or statewide. The 58th and 59th, two districts in Central Virginia that include portions of Albemarle, were made safely Republican. As a result, Republicans have prevented a local politician from developing a strong reputation and posing a risk to Robert Hurt in the 5th District. Democrats saw the pool of competitive seats shrink from 59 to 52 after redistricting. The route to a majority in the House of Delegates is still there, but it's narrower and depends a lot more on competitive seats that Democrats have struggled to win. The net five-seat reduction in safe Democratic seats is a primary reason that the House Democrats have hit rock bottom. But fewer competitive seats downstate also reduces the farm team of good candidates for other elected offices, painting our party into a corner in Northern Virginia. It's hard to say how independent redistricting could improve Democratic fortunes in the House of Delegates, but based on two proposals put forward during redistricting (one from a college team from the University of Richmond, the other from George Mason University), those maps would have created around 36 to 33 safe Democratic districts. The number of Obama won seats would have been around 45 seats, and over 48% in 53 to 58. Overall nonpartisan redistricting would produce small, marginal improvements over Republican gerrymandering for Democrats. The biggest impact would be a few more safe Democratic seats, and a larger playing field of potentially competitive seats, especially outside of Northern Virginia. As we've seen, Democrats still struggle in these competitive seats, so independent redistricting wouldn't cure all problems. But by giving downstate communities more of a choice in our two-party system, wouldn't the benefits exceed anything Democrats themselves gain?

NY Times Benghazi Investigation: More Evidence that Frank Wolf's Completely Off the Deep End

As I'm sure everyone's well aware, often times politicians say things that they don't really believe. In recent weeks, we've had a prime example of that with the announced retirement of Rep. Frank Wolf (R-10th, VA), and the praise heaped upon him by Democrats and Republicans alike. For instance, Senator Kaine praised Wolf has having "exemplified the best in public service," while Gov. Bob McDonnell claimed that Wolf has "sought out common ground...has worked across the aisle...has represented the people of this Commonwealth with distinction and with grace."Common ground? Working across the aisle? The "best in public service?" Really? Well, actually...not so much. First off, if you look at Wolf's voting record, he ranks a dismal 390th out of 433 in terms of "progressive score vs. district tilt." In other words, Wolf has been one of the most right-wing members, relative to his district (the 10th CD is a "purple," swing district) in Congress. How far-right is this guy? Well, Wolf's lifetime 7.19% progressive score on "crucial votes" places him further to the right than some of the most extreme members of Congress (e.g., rabid Paul Broun of Georgia, Dana Rohrabacher of California) and on just slightly less right wing than this maniac. It shouldn't come as a surprise, then, that Wolf has earned horrendous ratings on women's reproductive health and freedom (e.g., ZEROES by NARAL and Planned Parenthood; 100% rating by the National Right to Life Committee); on civil liberties (e.g., ZEROES by the American Civil Liberties Union); on LGBT equality (e.g., a string of ZERO ratings by groups like PFLAG and the Human Rights Campaign; and a 100% rating by the Christian Coalition); the environment (e.g., a pathetic 17% from the League of Conservation Voters in 2012). For good measure, Wolf also received a 100% rating from the fossil fuel/far-right-wing-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute, which pushes climate science denial and opposes almost any government regulation - for health, safety, whatever). So much for Frank Wolf being in any way, shape, or form a representative who has sought out "common ground" or has "worked across the aisle." In fact, behind his generally quiet, reserved demeanor, the guy's about as far right/wingnutty as they come. But it's not just that Wolf holds hard-right positions on almost all the issues. It's also that he's a big-time conspiracy theorist and a corrosive, negative force in Congress. Exhibit A has been Wolf's obsession with the 2012 tragedy at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. For instance, Wolf has called for a select committee to  "get to the truth once and for all so we can find out what happened" in Benghazi. In that statement, note that Wolf referenced Fox "News" in his assertion that "the direct ties to the Al Qaeda senior leadership undercut early characterizations by the Obama administration that the attackers in Benghazi were isolated 'extremists' - not Al Qaeda terrorists - with no organizational structure or affiliation.'" Wolf also referenced the completely discredited 60 Minutes piece by Lara Logan, which according to Wolf "confirmed what Wolf had detailed on the House floor this past July: 'a quick reaction force from the CIA Annex ignored orders to wait and raced to the compound, at time running and shooting their way through the streets just to get there.'" Well guess what? You guessed it: Frank Wolf was wildly, outrageously wrong on basically everything he was hysterically raving about regarding Benghazi. Just today, in fact, the New York Times is out with the results of a months-long investigation into the Benghazi consulate attack. What the Times found was, in sum, that almost none of what Wolf and other Republicans have been ranting about is true. To the contrary:

Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Three, The Ghost of Christmas Past

by FreeDem

This is the third part of a twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats. Day one focused on challenges facing Virginia Democrats in competitive districts, Day two focused on problems with turnout. Thank you for reading, make sure you vote on the poll at the end!On the third day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me...FLASH! Hark! I am the Ghost of Christmas Past! I represent poor choices, mistakes, and questionable judgment. Let us travel first to 2009, the year in which eight Democratic incumbents were defeated during a landslide Republican election. Listen to my warnings! In 2009, the Democratic Caucus spent almost $100,000 assisting Democrat Carole Pratt's campaign in the 6th District, an overwhelmingly Republican district where Bush had won over 60% of the vote in 2004 and where Anne Crockett-Stark had knocked off Democrat Benny Keister in 2005. In 2008, Obama managed just under 38% of the vote, 1% ahead of Kerry's 2004 performance. Yet the House Democratic Caucus led by Matt Mansell decided to prioritize this race where his mother was running ... The result? Pratt received less than 35% of the vote. And elsewhere, incumbent Democrats dropped left and right, for a total of eight defeated incumbents, including some by the narrowest of margins: Mathieson by 14 votes, Valentine by 209, Nichols by 269, and Vanderhye by 422.

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Three, The Ghost of Christmas Past

Let's travel now to 2011, when long time Delegate Watkins Abbitt retired and opened up the 59th District. Connie Brennan ran against Republican Matt Fariss, who had a questionable legal record.There was blood in the water, but unfortunately the district had been heavily gerrymandered. Brennan's base in Nelson was split in half, while more conservative Campbell County was added to the district. Under the old lines, Obama tied McCain almost 50%-50%, but he lost under the new lines with only 41% of the vote. A pretty impressive work of gerrymandering, kudos GOP! As a result, Fariss still won with 53% of the vote, which was behind Republican performance but not enough to keep him out of office. A good lesson on just how difficult it is to change the dynamics of a race, even with a questionable candidate. Have Virginia Democrats learned the lessons of these campaigns? Decide for yourself. In 2013, the party again highlighted a challenger in the 6th District. Party insiders widely believed that Democrat Jonathan McGrady was going to defeat Republican Jeff Campbell for the open seat. The House Caucus's select pollster (they won't allow top-tier candidates to use any other pollster) had McGrady up by double digits in early October. The 6th District is heavily Republican. Obama received 34% of the vote in 2008 and 31% in 2012. It would have been a significant coup if McGrady had pulled off an upset, so much so that leading by double digits should have been a very questionable poll result. The result? McGrady won less than 37% of the vote. I don't know the true details of what went wrong with the polling; the establishment has circled the wagons and won't discuss how they blew this one. I've been told that the excuse is that the polling firm incorrectly weighed party identification in the poll. But if that were truly the case, the poll should also have produced bizarre results in the top of the ticket, either showing McAuliffe winning or competitive with Cuccinelli. Such a result would have been a significant outlier compared to other polling at the time and should have triggered a re-polling by the firm, but that didn't happen. This is inexcusable for a professional political polling firm; they were allowed to do so by the House Caucus and its outgoing director, Jody Murphy. Also in 2013, long time incumbent Republican Joe May was defeated in his primary by conservative Tea Partier Dave LaRock. Democrats had hopes for their candidate, Mary Daniel, to win against the out of touch LaRock. He may have been out of touch with mainstream Virginia, but LaRock's conservatism did not alienate the Republican base in the district. The 33rd was a district where Obama received less than 42% of the vote, the district trending more Republican in 2012 than in 2008. It would have been a significant gamble to bet that just being an outspoken and offensive Tea Partier could cost LaRock the race in this heavily Republican district. But it's a gamble the House Democrats took, devoting resources into the long-shot race instead of focusing on low-hanging fruit elsewhere. Daniel won 43%, LaRock down to "only" 54%, with a third party candidate grabbing 3% of the vote. Boysko of course lost by 32 votes after a recount, Bell lost by 195 votes, McPike lost by 234, Murphy lost by 431, Qarni lost by 498, Farinholt lost by 537, Miller lost by 634, and Harder lost by 892. As I leave you to ponder these lessons from the past, consider this future possibility. Republican State Senator Emmett Hanger is being targeted by the far right over Medicaid expansion. Hanger is no stranger to primary challenges, having won in 2007 against a proto-Tea Party revolt over his vote for Warner's tax increases. Could Hanger be knocked off by the Tea Partiers in 2015? If they do, should Democrats devote resources trying to win the district? Could an extreme Tea Partier put the district in play? The State Senate majority depends on Phil Puckett. Democrats need to challenge more competitive districts as an insurance policy. Hanger represents a district where Obama received just 36% of the vote in 2008 and 35% in 2012. It is a district that Mark Warner, with his landslide win against the incompetent Jim Gilmore, won only 51% of the vote. If Warner himself, walking on water, can only barely win the district in the best political climate for Democrats in decades, what are the odds of another Democrat coming close?

Former RPV Chair Enraged by RNC Happy Kwanzaa Tweet

Ah, Jeff Frederick, remember him? Yep, this guy was  a Republican member of the Virginia House of Delegates from 2004 to 2010. Frederick also was chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia, until he was ousted in 2009 for reasons that are still not totally clear (although it certainly seems that this had elements of "Tea Party" vs. "establishment" to it).Anyway, Frederick is baaack, this time livid that the Republican National Committee (RNC) had the audacity to wish people "Happy Kwanzaa." Admittedly, I find it surprising the RNC would do that, since they're usually all about "War on Christmas" faux outrage, including their principled stance of NOT recognizing others who celebrate non-Christmas holidays this time of year. So it's hilarious to see former RPV chair (and former RNC member) Jeff Frederick going off on the RNC for celebrating a "made up holiday" (after first mocking the RNC, then being accused of racism by a Democrat, who Frederick claims is being a "tool of the hysterical left" - lol). Of course, the fact is that ALL holidays are "made up" by humans, pretty much by definition (e.g., we're humans, we're the ones who come up with culture, religion, custom, whatever). As for Kwanzaa, it was created in 1966 "as the first specifically African-American holiday, with the name deriving "from the Swahili phrase matunda ya kwanza, meaning 'first fruits of the harvest.'" What on earth is wrong with that is beyond me, but apparently it set off the former chair of the Virginia Republican Party. From the responses on Twitter, it looks like it set off a bunch of other right-wingnuts as well (e.g., one wrote, "@GOP Kwanza. R U kidding? It was started by a communist convicted felon who beat and tortured women."). Yikes. P.S. See the photo of Jeff Frederick on the far right (appropriately enough), celebrating something or other -- apparently NOT Kwanzaa or Festivus, though! LOL

Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Two, Turnout Problems

by FreeDem

(This is the second part of a twelve part series looking at the challenges, obstacles, and future possibilities of Virginia Democrats. Check out day one. Please join in by commenting below your thoughts on some of the topics raised in the diary, and please vote in the poll at the end on which rematch you'd like to see in 2015!)On the second day of Christmas, the Commonwealth of Virginia gave to me ... A system of odd-year elections, shared mainly by Southern outliers and hotbeds of two-party democracy (hah!) like Mississippi and Louisiana that depresses voter turnout from high profile elections in even-years. In 1948, the great American political scientist V.O. Key wrote that Virginia was a "political museum piece . . . more akin to England about the time of the Reform Bill of 1832 than to any other American state." Have we changed much since then?

FreeDem :: Twelve Days of Christmas for Virginia Democrats: Day Two, Turnout Problems

Virginia now has something resembling a two-party democracy. Based on the last two Presidential elections, the last two Senate elections, and the Democratic sweep of all of the statewide offices in 2013, you might mistake Virginia for a blue state even!But the system of odd-year elections for state offices distorts turnout, particularly in the growing minority population in Northern Virginia. Looking back, there are now two completely different gubernatorial races to compare to the last two presidential elections. There were vastly different campaigns in 2009 and 2013, waged by two very different candidates. Although the toxic political environment of 2009 (among other problems) saw Deeds crushed across the commonwealth, a careful analysis can sort out pockets of stronger than expected support (Deeds Country?). But that's not the focus of this diary. Instead, I'm interested in areas where both Deeds and McAuliffe did worse than expected. We can explain an area (like Southwest Virginia) where Deeds did better but McAuliffe did worse. On election night in 2013, some may remember that votes were coming in much weaker than expected for the Democrats in Danville and a few other Southside areas. Although at first this gave reason to worry, it instead ended the night as a localized phenomenon explained by difficulties in voter turnout in the poorer, more African-American precincts of Southside Virginia. Some Virginia politicos may also remember that it was poor turnout in Danville that ended State Senator Roscoe Reynolds's reelection night in 2011. In 2009, Deeds ran statewide roughly 11 points behind Obama's average performance and was close to this expected performance in most delegate districts. But in the 13th District represented by Bob Marshall, Deeds was 5.61% behind his expected performance. Four years later, while winning statewide with a coalition that closely resembled Obama's winning formula, McAuliffe ran 4.73% behind his expected performance in the 13th district as well. The 13th is the poster child for a district where a growing minority population has turned a seat blue in high turnout years, but hasn't caught up (yet) in lower turnout years. Another seat to look at is the 2nd, where Futrell was elected by just 223 votes. In 2009, Deeds ran 5.49% behind his expected performance, an indication of turnout problems very similar to the 13th. In 2013, McAuliffe ran 3.37% behind. This is a 58% Obama district, strongly Democratic in high turnout years, but more conservative if turnout doesn't occur in the right Democratic-leaning communities. In fact, all of Deeds's worst performing districts had minority-heavy areas in Prince William County: 52nd (Torian), 50th (Miller), 13th (Marshall), and 2nd (Futrell). Even with McAuliffe's win, Prince William was a problem for turnout in the campaign. McAuliffe's worst performing districts were more diverse, ranging from the 16th outside of Danville (the open seat that elected Adams), to the 13th, and the 22nd (Byron), 30th (Scott), 19th (Austin), 2nd (Futrell), and 14th (Danny Marshall). If there is a theme, it's that problems with Prince William turnout continue, and we also see problems in Danville and Southside. Deeds did not do as poorly in Danville and Southside, probably because he was running better with Southside whites and able to compensate for lower black turnout. Is there a trend to where both McAuliffe and Deeds both do worse? Here's what I've found. We've talked about the 13th and 2nd in Prince William, and also the 50th. Another cluster is in the exurbs of Stafford and Spotsylvania: 54th (Orrock), 88th (Cole), and 28th (Howell), and the neighboring 30th (Scott) in Culpeper and Orange. Is there a deeper trend in these Northern Virginia exurbs? (Comment below if you have thoughts!) Finally, a red flag in this special election season, the 100th left vacant by soon-to-be State Senator Lewis. In both gubernatorial elections, Deeds and McAuliffe underperformed on the Eastern Shore. Is this just because it was an overlooked region for field offices and GOTV? It could be a bad omen if Republicans win the seat in the special election, our future candidates in statewide office won't have enough coattails to knock off the Republican in future years. Elsewhere, the 2nd will be a tough seat to hold in 2015. And with lower turnout, the ever-elusive quest to defeat Bob Marshall may be better for 2017 than 2015. Between the Republican gerrymander, odd-year elections, and problems connecting with swing voters in competitive districts, Virginia Democrats may wish they had gotten a lump of coal for Christmas instead. Is there a silver lining? Well, there are some areas where local, Virginia Democrats do better than expected, even if they are as different as Deeds and McAuliffe. It's hard to believe, but even McAuliffe ran slightly better than expected in some of the coal parts of Southwest Virginia. But these districts are so overwhelmingly Republican that minor improvement is meaningless. Other affluent, liberal districts in Arlington, Alexandria, and Fairfax don't have the variance in turnout that we see in Prince William. These are among the safest seats out there for Democrats. Personal antics are more likely to end careers than electoral defeats. Congratulations Delegate Krupicka! Among competitive seats, there's only one where the population is affluent and well-educated enough so that we don't see a dropoff in Democratic performance in gubernatorial years: Comstock's 34th district. It also had a high crossover of Romney-Kaine voters. So where's the autopsy on what's gone wrong in this districts two elections in a row? (Comment below with your thoughts!)