KHOU on CD22
Dems now gunning for DeLay? (Via Kuff)
Curious how the fulltime media critics score this one? Is it anti-DeLay because it focuses on the opposition to him ... or is it anti-Morrison because it repeats heretofore insignificant rumors of other candidates getting into the race on the Democratic side?
In any event, KHOU is now quoting Quan as having spoken to national party leaders and Nick Lampson as having the unqualified support of "Democratic activists" in the belief he may run. Neither of those two, however, is quotes as having expressed a serious interest in the race.
Quan would be toast were he to run against DeLay. Simple as that. Quan brought up the City Council resolution against war in Iraq and also cast a vote supporting a study of reparations for descendants of slaves. Either or both of those are deal breakers for moderates in the district.
Lampson has a bit more going for him, namely his more moderate roots and name recognition in parts of the district that were carved out of his old 9th CD. But Morrison's base is out of Ft. Bend and combined with his name recognition among Democratic voters from the past election, I don't see a serious opening for Lampson in this district. If he wanted a peice of DeLay, he could have had it last time.
Now, aside from all this speculation over a primary challenger that will never materialize, what in the holy hell is Rice's Bob Stein doing perpetuating the DeLay talking point about the district being drawn to be more Democratic?
"Of course, it's a Republican district, but not as heavily Republican as it has been. DeLay had to bleed that district to help out some of his friends. So the result is that the district is only about 54 to 56 percent Republican," says KHOU political analyst Bob Stein.
Pure bullcrap, Bob!
It was drawn to be a point or so more Republican than DeLay's old 22nd. Reason being, DeLay saw his support fading in even THAT drawing of the map. Now he's in a district that he can't find that 56th percentage and he's high on the DCCC list of targeted seats. Truth of the matter is that Richard Morrison ran about 6-7% better than the top of the ticket in getting his 42%.
Categories
Politics-200611 Comments
Morrison's base of friends / most enthusiastic supporters may be out of Fort Bend... but his margin of victory is not.
58,444 votes - DeLay
46,151 votes - Morrison
Everything's relative. Here's the % totals county by county.
Galveston County
DeLay 42.62%
Morrison 57.38%
Kerry 50.27%
Bush 49.73%
Fort Bend County
DeLay 55.88%
Morrison 44.12%
Kerry 36.62%
Bush 63.38%
Harris County
DeLay 60.72%
Morrison 39.28%
Kerry 32.53%
Bush 67.47%
The noteworthy thing is how much DeLay underperformed Bush in Fort Bend and how much better he did in Harris County than in Fort Bend. Those who know him best like him least.
Lampson almost ran in 22 in 2004.
I've heard the rumors that both Quan and Lampson are looking at running.
Nate -- Your statistics provide only negligible support for your conclusion. Moreover, you left out Brazoria County, where DeLay did quite well.
Greg -- The facts don't tend to support your theory that redistricting strengthened DeLay's district.
In 2002, DeLay won the portions of his 2004 district by 74,243 - 39,684 (65.2% - 34.8%). In the portions that were added to the 22nd in redistricting 19160 Republican votes (12,545 (Williams in 9) and 6615 (Reiser in 25)) against 17850 Democratic votes (12474 (Lampson in 9) and 5376 (Bell in 25).
If you add Reiser and Williams to DeLay's votes and add Lampson and Bell to Riley's votes, then you find that DeLay would have won his new 2004 district with 61.88% of the vote. He won in 2002 with 64.3% of the vote.
And in fact, the new 2004 portions of District 22 voted a slight majority Dem in 2000 instead of the slight majority GOP in 2002.
It's hard to square those facts with your assertion that redistricting made DeLay's district more GOP. In fact, it appears that redistricting hurt DeLay by about 2-3%.
Evan,
There's some problems with your algebra. You look at the region continuous to the 2002 and 2004 election and then compare the new areas to their 2002 performace while ignoring whether it was replacing a more Democratic-leaning or GOP-leaning area. Right off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure the parts of Ft. Bend he gave up were mostly out of the new 9th that Al Green represents.
In other words, if the older regions DeLay gave up were worse than "19,160 Republican :: 17,850 Democratic" from the GOP perspective, then my statement holds true. Furthermore, you don't mention the 2002/2004 comparison in the continuous areas of the district. If Morrison did better there than Riley, then this bolsters my statement (showing, at a minimum, that Morrison ran more strongly than Riley overall).
I say that not to disprove your own point, I'm curious how those other numbers come out. I do, however, say this out of laziness in the hopes that I compel you to put the math forward. ;-)
Greg -- I suppose this is my fault because I obviously wasn't clear enough.
I was afraid you were going to respond as you did, so I really wasn't clear enough.
In the aggregate, DeLay gave up As Kuff pointed out on his blog, some of those areas were heavily Dem (the Ft Bend County precincts now in Green's district). But, in the aggregate, the precincts DeLay gave up were very significantly more than the 50%ish areas (in the same election cycle) that he gained.
I hope I'm being more clear this time.
Actually, I think I have a better way to be more clear.
Basically, every criticism that you said I didn't do...well, I actually did. Perhaps it wasn't easy to tell from my descriptions of the data.
Also, you can check all my figures at the TLC redistricting site.
Dammit, you're placing the burden on me now to show the math? I curse you with a thousand spam comments!
I'm not intending to. If I were more clear, I tihnk it'd be obvious.
Try this: http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/redist/congress.htm
And look at 2002, 2000 Election results by District. There you can find the election results based on 2004 districts. This is where I got my numbers.
Okay, here's an easy way to make my point. I think it's easy anyway.
Parts of 22 that Delay represents in both 2002 and 2004 election cycles: 74,243 - 39684.
New parts of 22 (not in the old 22): 19160R - 17850D
Old Parts of 22 (not in the new 22): 26,256R - 16032D.
So DeLay lost territory that voted about 62.5%ish GOP in 2002 and picked up territory that voted about 50%ish GOP in 2002.
Does this make my point more clearly?
Also, in 2000 the numbers were similar to 2000.
The territory DeLay lost in 2004 voted 56.5%GOP (58,016 to 45,258) in 2000 congressional races, while the territory Delay gained in 2004 voted slightly Dem in 2000 congressional races (37.5k GOP - 38k Dem)