Just Two More Congressional Races Left To Call In California-- One District Held By A Democrat And One Held By A Republican

 

Officially, there are 3 uncalled congressional races in California-- CA-21 in the northern Central Valley, CA-25 in the northern part of L.A. county and part of Ventura County and CA-39 in northeast Orange County with bits of Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties. But... there really are just two races left, and both are incredibly close.

New Dem Gil Cisneros, the lottery winner who bought a seat in 2018 with $9 million of his winnings, didn't want to spend much of his own money and not many people wanted to donate to him... and he lost to Young Kim, the woman he beat two years ago. AP called the race late Friday. So far, Biden is beating Trump in Orange County 811,916 (53.51%) to 674,231 (44.44%)

Cisneros, a pointless New Dem, was a waste of a seat. His ProgressivePunch grade is "F" and there isn't a reason in the world for anyone to vote for him other than knee jerk Democrats. That wasn't enough this year, even though Hillary beat Trump in CA-39 by about 8 and a half points in 2016. Of the 4 Democrats elected in the 2018 anti-red wave, the two progressives were re-elected and the two rich, reactionary "ex"-Republicans lost. Cisneros' district has an even PVI so it should have been easy to hold by a halfway decent incumbent. Katie Porter's seat is much trickier (PVI is R+3) but she's a great congresswoman and her constituents love her. She won by 7 points. Levin's district has a PVI of R+1 and he has been an outspoken champion of the Green New Deal and won reelection by about 6 points. The other loser, like Cisneros, Rouda, a right-of-center New Dem who contributed money to Romney when he ran against Obama, lost by a bit over 2 points in a difficult R+4 district. The DCCC and Pelosi's PAC spent $9.5 million, $840 on Katie Porter, $135 on Mike Levin and $2.6 million on Cisneros (who conceded on Twitter).

So, that leaves one Democrat-- a New Dem actually-- and one Republican in races still too close to call: TJ Cox and Mike Garcia. Cox's district has a PVI of D+5 and should be an easy hold for a decent candidate (which he isn't) and Garcia's district's PVI is even, although the Democrats have a registration advantage and, again, a decent Democrat should win there-- which Christy Smith is about as far from being as anyone could imagine.

Absentee ballots being counted now in CA-21 heavily favor Cox and Valadao's election night lead has been cut in half. As of Friday, just 2,065 votes (50.6% to 49.4%) separate them and Cox still has a decent shot at reelection. It's one of the most pitifully low-turn out districts in the country but perhaps more people would vote if there weren't always being asked to pick the lesser of two evils. In 2018, the race wasn't decided for weeks of counting, surprising everyone when Cox ousted Valadao (57,239) to 56,377 (49.6%). Cox raised $4,798,088 to Valadao's $3,721,619. The DCCC and Pelosi's PAC kicked another $7 million into the race. There is no real telling who's going to win this time but the absentee ballots need to be stronger than they've been for Cox to pull this one off.

CA-25 is another sad district with two dreadful candidates, neither of whom should be anywhere near Congress. Christy Smith isn't a real Democrat and Garcia is a Trumpist imbecile. But it's one of the closest races in the country, just 104 votes separating the two of them. On Friday Garcia was leading by 219 votes so it looks like Smith will win if there are enough absentees to be counted, something that is unclear now.

By the way, New York has 7 uncalled congressional races. We'll get to that mess soon.

Dirty Deeds, Done Dirt Cheap... California

Progressive woman, Katie Porter, vs Dave Min, backed by the corrupt reactionay New Dems

Do you want to hear something funny? Last week I was talking with someone about Dave Min, a truly reprehensible New Dem, trying to claw his way into Congress by telling everyone he meets whatever he thinks they want to hear. He actually managed to use some really gross tactics to win the California Democratic Party endorsement just over a week ago. My DCCC contact told me the DCCC should back him now out of respect for the California Democratic Party. Min won their endorsement, which was disputed by all the other candidates, by 1 vote. On the same day, Emilio Huerta won the endorsement of the California Democratic Party in a massive landslide. That triggered an avalanche of DCCC activity to pressure Huerta out of the race for a ghost candidate. Among the congressmembers who landed on Huerta-- or chatted with him respectfully-- were Zoe Lofgren, Jim Costa, Pete Aguilar and DCCC regional vice chair Ted Lieu.

Min was also able to use that "respect for California" argument to block progressive Katie Porter from being endorsed by the Congressional "Progressive" Caucus. So what about these reprehensible tactics Min has been using. If you're following the race, you know Min and his backers-- including Rep. Mark Takano-- used intimidation against signature gatherers at the Democratic state convention. Republican Mimi Walters has already started advertising Min's vile behavior towards progressive Democrats at the convention She sent out this video of Min in action in an e-mail which also used these tweets (among others):







But that's out there already and it isn't what I want to discuss today. This I believe hasn't been reported previously. Although when he was caught Min has been trying to worm out of this by claiming it was done by an unaffiliated supporter of his, I know from first hand experience with him that this has his stink all over it. He had one of his staffers call Katie Porter's Asian law students to see if they had been discriminated against. And now there are rumors that the dean of the law school got win of it and flipped out and demanded Min apologize. I haven't been able to get my hands on whatever apology he sent to the students but this is the bullshit he sent to the convention delegates:

So how do I know this isn't just campaign gossip? Min is an asshole. As soon as he noticed I was writing about him being a New Dem-- long before I had ever called him an asshole-- he went whining to friends of mine in DC that I'm an anti-Asian racist. I got three calls about that in one day-- from Asian friends.

More DCCC skuttlebutt that I just heard, although this sounds like it is wishful thinking from another conservative candidate, gun-nut and death penalty fanatic Andrew Janz. The rumor he's spreading is that the DCCC is trying to get Ricardo Franco, the progressive running against Devin Nunes, to run against Valadao. Total bullshit. And the good California progressives running for Congress this cycle are easily found by clicking on the ActBlue congressional thermometer in the right. I asked Ricardo if he has anything of the rumors Janz and his allies are spreading. He hadn't. He did send me a statement though:

I was made aware of Emilio Huerta's resignation from his race this morning through various media outlets. I was saddened to see my friend Emilio would no longer be fighting for labor rights, income inequality or better healthcare as a candidate for congress, but am confident he will still find a way to serve the good people of his district in another fashion as he always has. He and his family always have been and will continue to be an inspiration for all of us working-class folks from the Central Valley.

I also want to clarify that I have not had any contact with any members of the DCCC regarding my campaign jumping ship from CD-22 over to CD-21. I have great respect for CD-21; our districts are incredibly similar. However, the communities in CD-22, specifically Fresno, Dinuba, Clovis and Visalia have played an important role in my family's history for the last 100 years. I buried my uncle last year in Dinuba and have already purchased my burial plot in Fresno. My god-children live in Clovis and my cousins are in Visalia. These are the faces I will remember when I am making tough decisions in Congress. Theirs, along with the faces of countless volunteers that have supported me over the last 9 months with their blood, sweat and tears remind me why we cannot give up nor get distracted by issues out of our control.

I did not enter this race to simply win. I got into it to improve lives. Until we have Medicare for all, clean air in our valley, affordable housing, water with which to live, repatriated deported veterans and provided affordable means of housing for all of our citizens I will not stop fighting. Hasta la victoria!

And now, despite the DCCC, some good news for 2018-- another poll. Voters are pissed off at Trump and his Regime and at the Republicans who enable him-- and they're looking towards 2018 as a way to remedy that. That's what a wave is and that's what we've been seeing in those tremendous red to blue swings in special elections in every part of the country. Republicans are happy enough... but normal Americans are out for blood. Sure Democrats are anti-Republican and that accounts for gigantic voter enthusiasm. But even more important is that independents have turned away from the GOP in staggering numbers. USA Today reported that "Seven in 10 Republicans say the country is headed in the right direction. But more than eight in 10 Democrats say it's off on the wrong track, and seven in 10 independents agree with them... If the election were held today, though, those surveyed say they are more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate for Congress than the Republican one by 47%-32%-- a yawning 15 percentage-point advantage. Democrats need to flip 24 seats now held by Republicans to gain control of the House of Representatives. Winning control of the Senate is more difficult in a year in which 26 Democratic seats and just eight Republican seats are on the ballot.

Sixty percent of those surveyed say they disapprove of the job Trump is doing as president, his highest negative rating in the USA TODAY Poll since he was inaugurated last year. Thirty-nine percent "strongly" disapprove; just 16% "strongly" approve.

Ratings for the Republican-controlled Congress are even worse: 75% disapprove of the job its doing. Thirty-six percent "strongly" disapprove and just 5% "strongly" approve.

That intensity of feeling could affect efforts to convince voters to go to the polls. Turnout traditionally is lower in midterm elections than in presidential years.

...The Republican Party has a dismal rating: 27% had a favorable opinion of the GOP; 60% an unfavorable one. That's a net negative rating of 33 percentage points.

That's not to say voters have a rosy view of the Democratic Party. Its favorable-unfavorable rating was 37%-48%, a net negative of 11 points.

Attitudes toward the nation's two major parties are so dyspeptic that even a share of partisans who claim membership in them express a dim view. One in five Republicans and one in five Democrats say they have an unfavorable opinion of their own party. Among independents, half have an unfavorable view of the Democratic Party; two-thirds have a negative view of the GOP.

DCCC Busy Clearing The Field In California-- Emilio Huerta And Christina Prejean Are Out

Emilio Huerta and his very special mother, Dolores Huerta

I'm pretty sure David Valadao is, by the numbers, the most endangered incumbent running for reelection this year. His Central Valley district, CA-21, stretches from the suburbs south of Fresno, through Hanford and Corcoran, Coalinga and Delano down to the east side of Bakersfield. The district is over 72% Latino and Obama won it with 52% in 2008 and with 55% in 2012. Hillary beat Trump 55.2% to 39.7% and the 2016 PVI (D+2) is now D+5. The only other D+5 district occupied by a Republican is FL-27, where Ileana Ros-Lehtinen finally had the good sense to announce her retirement and get out of the way of the inevitable. I'm thinking some of the newly redrawn Pennsylvania districts are in the category too, but it's too soon to tell exactly.

So why is Valadao still even in this seat? Simple and clear: a series of pretty weak Democratic opponents, handpicked by the DCCC numbskulls, and unbelievably low voter turnout (a function of bad Democratic candidates and an unbelievably incompetent DCCC). All congressional districts have approximately the same number of people. In 2012 every single Minnesota district had over 300,000 people turn out to vote. On the same day Valadao's district had just 93,532 voters. Now, that's a contrast! How about the other Central Valley districts? These are the voter turnouts for 2012 and 2016 congressional race for each of the 6 districts that make up the Central Valley:

• CA-09 (Jerry McNerney)-188,389--- 184,377
• CA-10 (Jeff Denham)- 193,060--- 211,305
• CA-16 (Jim Costa)- 109,956--- 124,681
• CA-21 (David Valadao)- 93,532--- 118,124
• CA-22 (Devin Nunes)- 159,009--- 210,135
• CA-23 (Kevin McCarthy)- 195,578--- 216,188

That's why Valadao is still in office. Last cycle Emilio Huerta was the Democratic candidate. Valadao beat him. First Huerta barely won a spot in the primary and was then beaten by Valadao-- in this blue district-- 56.7% to 43.3%. Valadao spent $2,806,588 to Huerta's $648,918. The DCCC gave up on Huerta quickly, having spent just $27,195, but Pelosi's superPAC put in $1,751,651, towards the end, when it was already too late. The NRCC and Ryan's SuperPAC responded with just $155,795.

This cycle, the DCCC has been wringing it's collective hands over the district. Huerta got in again and his locally powerful family cleared the field quickly. The DCCC's attitude was the he couldn't win but they had no one to go up against him. So far this cycle Valadao has raised $1,346,307 and Huerta has taken in just $94,814. It was looking like Valadao could actually win in a wave election in a blue district!

The DCCC jumped in last week and, gently, persuaded Huerta to withdraw over the weekend. Several California members of Congress-- Ted Lieu, Jim Costa, Zoe Lofgren and Pete Aguilar, from what I've heard-- pressured him, "respectfully," one told me, to get out of the race. Ben Ray Lujan tried to paint a smiley face on it with a statement to the media: "Emilio Huerta and his family have made immense contributions to the Central Valley and our country as a whole. Every hardworking Californian owes them a debt of gratitude for their advocacy on behalf of families, children and our progressive values nationwide."

The DCCC has lost previously with establishment candidates John Hernandez, president of the Central California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and Amanda Renteria, an EMILY's List corporate Dem from DC. This time there are strong rumors that the DCCC is importing TJ Cox, who was gaining traction against Josh Harder, the corporate Dem the DCCC is hoping to run against Jeff Denham.

Footnote: by Friday someone seems to have talked Christina Prejean into dropping out of her short-lived attempt to win the already crowded CA-49 primary in southern Orange County/northern San Diego county.
 Prejean's departure from the race is probably good news for Doug Applegate since she was also a military veteran in a heavily veteran district. Applegate is already the frontrunner.

You'll have to click on the image to read this poll

Finally, A Democratic Candidate For The Blue Central Valley District Dave Valadao Occupies-- Emilio Huerta

I don't know Emilio Huerta yet, but I do know his mom, Dolores Huerta, a national treasure who I've been urging to run for Congress for years. She always smiles but I get the idea she knows her national activism is accomplishing more than anything she could do in Congress. I knew Emilio had been considering running for one of the Central Valley seats and over the weekend he announced he would be taking on Republican David Valadao in CA-21. The district, which covers all of Kings County and chunks or Kern and Fresno counties, practically surrounds Bakersfield and heads north to Delano, Cesar Chavez's old headquarters, and through Lost Hills, Coalinga and Hanford into the southern parts of Fresno. The district is nearly three-quarters Hispanic and Obama beat Romney 55-46%. The Democratic Party has a 16.4-point registration advantage over the GOP. So why do they have a Republican congressman? Meet Steve Israel, the infamous, highly destructive force behind DCCC atrophy.

A few weeks ago we reported on the growing anger among Central Valley Democrats towards the DCCC and their interference. Democrats throughout the Central Valley and in most of the country feel the DCCC is more a hindrance than a help in winning congressional races, recruiting congressional candidates with virtually no local input and then imposing corrupt out-of-state hacks as staffers to the candidates, who consistently make idiotic decisions and consistently lose races.

Emilio is 58, an attorney in Bakersfield with a name that speaks volumes to his fellow Valley residents. The other Democrat in the race, Fowler Mayor Pro-Tem Daniel Parra, hasn't been able to make any fundraising headway and if he's smart he'll bow out and endorse Huerta asap. Last week, the Bakersfield Californian speculated that Huerta might run and give Valadao a tough time.

[H]is pedigree-- he’s the son of United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta-- could give Valadao some trouble... [A] complicating factor for Valadao would be Donald Trump at the top of the ticket. That would bring out a huge Latino turnout and could be enough to simply swamp him."

Randy Borntrager is the Political Director of People For the American Way and his organization has spent time with Emilio discussing the issues that are motivating his campaign. This afternoon he told us that "If Democrats are serious about winning the House back anytime soon, we have to win Congressional seats like this one. By all accounts, Emilio Huerta's strong connection to the area, and his compelling life story should easily make this one of the best pick-up opportunities in the nation."

Why Grassroots Democratic Activists Have Had It With The DCCC

Anger at the DCCC is spreading. Well, anger at the DCCC has been huge for over a decade; that it's being talked about more openly and more aggressively at the grassroots level is what's different. Chris Van Hollen and Steve Israel lost dozens and dozens of Democratic House seats (incumbents) and ruined the chances of even more Democratic challengers trying to beat Republicans. Their DCCC organization is riven with self-serving, careerism and corruption and, some would say, even worse: incompetence. John Ellis isn't a Beltway hack. He lives in California's Central Valley and writes about politics for the Fresno Bee. Over the weekend he focused on how Democrats in the Central Valley feel about the DCCC trying to run their party. The story could be written about anyplace in the country. Contempt for the DCCC is nearly universal. Democrats in the Central Valley-- and everywhere else-- all feel the DCCC "is more a hindrance than a help in winning local elections." When you read this, keep in mind that Obama won-- by increasing margins-- his Central Valley elections while the DCCC was losing (all) theirs:

• CA 21- Obama over McCain 52-46%, Obama over Romney 55-44%
• CA 10- Obama over McCain 50-48%, Obama over Romney 51-47%

The DCCC, local Democrats say, recruits congressional candidates with little local input. It imposes out-of-state staffers on these candidates, many of whom never have run a campaign in the Valley and instead rely on their knowledge from working other races-- an approach that doesn’t work here. Worse, local Democrats say, those staffers don’t want local experience on how to run an effective campaign.


Much of the anger and frustration centers on the 21st Congressional District, where Hanford Republican David Valadao has trounced two straight Democratic Party challengers, even though Democrats have a commanding 17 percentage point lead in voter registration over the rival GOP. To a lesser extent, it is also the case in the 10th Congressional District, which is represented by Turlock Republican Jeff Denham. In that district, Republicans hold a slim registration advantage.

“There’s a frustration with the DCCC deciding what the rules are,” says Doug Kessler, Region 8 director for the state Democratic Party, an area that covers the Valley. “We want some say who a candidate is, and more importantly, have people who respect and understand the Valley and do not dictate to us.”


Defenders of the DCCC say the goal for the national organization is the same as local Democrats-- to win [which is an interesting argument since they never win, only lose]. Whatever the DCCC does, they say, is done with an eye toward victory.


In a short statement, the DCCC said pretty much the same thing.

“The Central Valley deserves a representative that will stand up for them in Washington, unlike David Valadao,” spokeswoman Barb Solish said. “We are confident that a strong Democrat can and will win this seat.”

Local Democrats, however, aren’t convinced.




Last year, Valley native Amanda Renteria returned home from Washington, D.C., with a sterling résumé and a mission to unseat Valadao. She raised more than $1.7 million. She lost in a landslide.

Renteria was well liked locally, and there is broad agreement that she worked hard.

But some local Democrats say she was handcuffed by the DCCC.


Her first campaign manager came from Boston with previous political experience that included a stint as campaign manager for Boston Mayor Thomas Menino as well as time working for John Edwards’ presidential campaign and Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill’s campaign. After the primary election, she left and was replaced by someone from the Los Angeles area.

Victor Moheno, a Visalia attorney and prominent Valley Democrat, liked Renteria and thought she had promise. He recalled the start of the campaign, when he and other local Democrats recommended a kickoff event that would identify local leaders in the district’s major towns, and then send Renteria on a campaign kickoff caravan across the district. It would, Moheno said, give the campaign a grassroots feel.

The suggestion fell on deaf ears and went nowhere.

Moheno said the second campaign manager was Hispanic like Renteria and a majority of the 21st District, but he was from Los Angeles.

“There’s an urban-rural distinction among Latinos that is dramatic,” Moheno said. “It ain’t the same. He didn’t run a Valley campaign. Sadly, those are the pros. They get paid a lot of money, but they don’t listen to people.”

Valadao ended up beating Renteria by the same 15-percentage point margin as his 2012 win over Fresno Democrat John Hernandez, who ran a campaign on a shoestring budget and had nearly no DCCC support.

“Unfortunately, I think it’s the culture of the Democratic Party hierarchy,” Moheno says of the tendency toward top-down micromanaging, be it from Sacramento or Washington.

After the loss, Democrats chalked it up-- at least partly-- to low turnout and a bad overall showing nationally by Democrats. They then looked to 2016, a presidential election year with guaranteed higher turnout, and said they would do better in their quest to knock off Valadao.


But this year-- a key time leading up to the 2016 election when candidates decide to run and start raising money and earning endorsements-- has been a disaster for Democrats.

Kessler recalls a Region 8 Democratic Party meeting in Visalia this past summer, when the DCCC was invited. The organization ended up attending via telephone-- and got an earful. The message to the DCCC: Why don’t you care about the Valley?

Holly Andradé Blair, executive board representative for the Kings County Democratic Central Committee, wonders if the DCCC does care.

“I’m proud to come from Kings County and proud to be from the Valley,” she says. “I enjoy living here, and when outsiders, particularly the DCCC-- they’re clear across the country-- look at this area, it’s an afterthought. It gets to me. We’re not an afterthought.”

Then, Fowler Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Parra was the only Democratic challenger to Valadao.

He entered the race in mid-April but has been unable to raise money. As of Sept. 30, he had raised less than $40,000 and has a little more than $10,000 in his campaign account.

The DCCC wasn’t impressed and began looking for another candidate, a move that upset some local Democrats.

In early September, word leaked that Tulare County native Connie Perez was being courted by the DCCC. In mid-October she announced her run using a slick campaign video. Less than a month later, she was out.

For some Democrats, she couldn’t be gone soon enough. Perez was a Tulare County native but was living in Pasadena while she worked as a partner at the Bakersfield-based Brown Armstrong Accountancy Corp. It also seemed she was hand-picked and groomed by the DCCC. Her campaign announcement came from a prominent Democratic communications firm in Los Angeles.

“What’s important about representation is we pick somebody we want to represent us, not some Democrats in Washington, D.C., or in Sacramento,” Blair said. “I don’t want somebody from outside picking my candidate for me. I’m perfectly capable of choosing my own candidate. Even if that candidate loses, it’s my choice.”

But it was no picnic for Perez, some supporters say.

She was being micromanaged by the DCCC, they contend. The organization designed her campaign and demanded she use their vendors. That means, for instance, that well-known Valley pollster Jim Moore was out, even though he knows the region. The DCCC would withhold money unless the candidate played by its rules, Perez supporters say.

A short time later, Bakersfield City School District Trustee Andrae Gonzales said he was exploring a run. A week later, he decided against it.

Now, the name of Bakersfield attorney Emilio Huerta, son of United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta, has emerged.

The National Republican Congressional Committee-- the DCCC’s Washington, D.C., counterpart-- is watching the spectacle with glee, firing off snarky emails with each Democratic Party move in the 21st District. One sentence in a news release on Huerta’s possible candidacy starts, “After four high-profile rejections…”

By this time, local Democrats say, the DCCC shouldn’t be recruiting candidates but should instead be turning its attention to winning the election.


Moheno, the Visalia Democrat, says the locals learned what it takes to win congressional elections with Cal Dooley, a Democrat who used to hold the seat that now covers much of the same territory as Valadao’s 21st District.

Others say home-grown success goes beyond congressional wins with Dooley or Fresno Democrat Jim Costa-- it also stretches to the state Senate and Assembly, to Democrats like former state Sen. Michael Rubio and outgoing Assemblyman Henry T. Perea.

The reason those Democrats won in the Valley, they say, is they understood the need to be moderate and to win crossover support from agriculture and business. Going too far left, they say, is a death knell here, but it is often part of the DCCC playbook.

Blair, the Kings County Democrat, says being local is also important, as is visiting little towns like Stratford, Avenal and Kettleman City.

“In Kings County, Democrats here will vote for a local person every time over an outsider,” she says. “Even a Republican.”

Maybe that’s why the NRCC is hitting on Huerta not for having UFW lineage, but for living just a few miles outside the 21st District’s boundaries.

Michael Evans, chairman of the Fresno County Democratic Central Committee, says there must be an understanding that the Valley’s political landscape is not only unlike the rest of California, but also the rest of the nation. Within the Valley, Kings County is different from Fresno County. These nuanced differences make local input into campaigns vital, he says.

“If you bring someone in from Sacramento, they have maybe a little bit of understanding, but you bring someone in from D.C., they have zero understanding, so yeah, that can be very frustrating,” Evans says.

The Democrats will never win back the House-- never-- until the disastrous Rahm Emanuel/Chris Van Hollen/Steve Israel Republican-lite recruitment policy and their highhanded decision to override local Democrats are laid to rest. If the DCCC is supporting a candidate, be very wary before contributing or even voting for him or her. It's up to all of us to help defund the DCCC careerists. You can contribute to progressive candidates directly through ActBlue.




Van Hollen's strategy immediately lost 63 House seats... but he still insists on it

There Is No Reasonable Case To Be Made For A Democratic Take Back Of The House, Not While Steve Israel Is Still There

As venal as Rahm-- but with fewer functioning brain cells-- DCCC wreckers, Israel and Van Hollen

There is virtually no serious coverage of the colossal failure of the DCCC under Chris Van Hollen and Steve Israel, two incompetent Pelosi allies who have presided over the loss of dozens of Democratic House seats in 2010, 2012 and 2014-- and for countless missed opportunities. (Guided by the conservative "ex"-Blue Dog, Israel, Pelosi's latest disaster-in-the-making, Ben Ray Luján, looks like he won't do any better.) DCCC incompetence and fundamentally flawed recruitment strategy is completely responsible for Democratic seats that were lost in Alabama (1), Arizona (3), Arkansas (3), Colorado (2), Florida (5), Georgia (2), Hawaii (1), Idaho (1), Illinois (6), Indiana (3), Iowa (2), Kansas (2), Kentucky (1), Louisiana (1), Maine (1), Maryland (1), Michigan (2), Minnesota (1), Mississippi (2), Missouri (1), Nevada (2), New Hampshire (1), New Jersey (1), New York (10), North Carolina (5), North Dakota (1), Ohio (6), Oklahoma (1), Pennsylvania (6), South Carolina (1), South Dakota (1), Tennessee (3), Texas (4), Utah (1), Virginia (3), Washington (1), West Virginia (2), Wisconsin (2). This week, Kyle Kondik wrote a story in Politico to make the DCCC feel good about themselves, How Democrats Could Win the House. Really. It's really about how Republicans could lose the House by nominating a crackpot like Trump or Carson. Kyle never mentions that the reason the "Republicans have a seeming lock on the majority" is because of the incompetence of the DCCC. That's not part of the Beltway conventional wisdom.

It’s true that the Democrats’ odds of flipping the 30 seats needed to win back the House of Representatives are just a couple ticks greater than zero. But the two current polling leaders for the Republican presidential nomination, Trump and Carson, happen to be the two candidates almost perfectly designed to turn off voters in the districts Democrats need to retake the House.

We know from Republican primary polling that Trump, as explained in a great analysis by National Journal’s Ron Brownstein, does far better among Republicans who do not have a college degree than among those who do. We also know, through polling and by virtue of his new lead amongst Iowa’s heavily white, conservative and evangelical Republican caucus electorate, that Carson is a candidate of the religious right.

Let’s assume these bases of support would continue into a general election. There are 10 states that rank in the top third for both smallest percentage of college graduates over 25, according to the U.S. Census, and for highest percentage of white evangelical Christians, according to the Public Religion Research Institute’s American Values Atlas polling. These are some of the states where Carson or Trump might do best. They are, in alphabetical order: Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia and Wyoming. All of these states voted for Mitt Romney by at least 10 percentage points in the last election. They have something else in common: None of the most competitive House seats are in these states.

The 38 Republican-held seats rated as at least potentially competitive in the University of Virginia Center for Politics’ Crystal Ball House ratings all lie outside their borders. The nation’s increasing political polarization suggests Republicans would largely unify behind their standard-bearer. But Carson, through his highly conservative rhetoric on culture war issues, and Trump, through his anti-immigrant stances and lack of traditional political polish, could really hurt Republicans in the affluent suburbs, which just so happens to be where future Democratic House majorities are almost certain to be made.

Carson and Trump, through their lack of experience and long histories of overheated rhetoric, could easily turn off some of the voters who might have otherwise happily supported someone like Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio but don’t think Carson and Trump pass the smell test as a potential president. That could lead to depressed GOP turnout in crucial swing districts, robbing some incumbents of votes, or could even prompt a wholesale rejection of the Republicans in certain districts down the ticket, effectively making 2016 a Democratic wave year.

In the places one might expect Carson and Trump to best retain their strength-- Appalachia and parts of the South-- Democrats do not have any House seats they can plausibly target. Outside of a handful of urban and majority-minority districts in these areas that Democrats already hold, they cannot credibly compete there, at least right now.

Whenever the Democrats next control the House, it’s likely that their majority will include hardly any seats from Appalachia and the Deep South, which would be a change from any of their previous House majorities. The seats Democrats are likely to target in the future are in places like suburban Philadelphia, Greater New York and New Jersey, suburban Denver, Greater Chicago, Northern Virginia, Las Vegas, Minnesota’s Twin Cities and other suburban areas. These are districts where the number of college graduates is generally higher than the national average and where there are below-average numbers of white evangelicals. It is not outlandish to suggest Carson or Trump would perform poorly in these places.

A widely-cited obstacle to Democrats winning back the House is that, even while Barack Obama was defeating Mitt Romney by four points, Romney won 226 House districts. There’s no question the House map is skewed toward Republicans, thanks in part to the GOP controlling redistricting in many key states after the last census. But what would those House districts look like if, in 2016, the Democratic nominee did better than Obama did in 2012? Again, a historically poor Republican nominee could help make that happen.

Let’s say the Democratic nominee wins about 53 percent nationally in 2016, two points better than Obama in 2012 and matching his 2008 win. Obama won 237 House districts in 2008 under the current lines. Many of these districts are more Republican than the nation as a whole, but a rising Democratic tide could lift many boats. If the GOP nominee is bad enough, it may be difficult for the rest of the party to quarantine itself from a top-of-the-ticket electoral affliction.

...At the moment, Republicans are only defending six open seats in districts that the Crystal Ball rates as competitive. Generally speaking, open seats are riper for takeover because the power of incumbency is removed-- for all the supposed resistance in American life to establishment, insider candidates, incumbent re-nomination and reelection rates remain quite high. Since the end of World War II, on average about 98 percent of House incumbents win re-nomination and 92 percent win reelection. So far 10 members of the House have announced their retirement, according to Roll Call’s running tally. Given that the average over the last 40 years is 23 per cycle, more retirements are coming, but there’s no reason at this point to expect a GOP exodus, and many of the open seats will come in seats where the competition will be in the primary, not the general.

Ultimately, though, most Americans don’t care about the House and what it does, unless it becomes so toxic that it makes persistent and damaging national news (like during a shutdown, although we saw in 2013 how the polling effects of shutdowns are ephemeral).

To the extent that Americans pay attention to electoral politics, they focus on the White House. If they did care about the House, more of them would vote in midterms (turnout is typically 15-20 percentage points less in midterms than in presidential races), and their votes in midterms wouldn’t be almost uniformly so reactionary against the party that holds the White House (after last year, the president’s party has now lost ground in the House in 36 of 39 midterms).

This is a long way of saying that, while House Republicans over the last few weeks have done a good job of taking care of their business, they do not necessarily control their fate if conditions for them are bad next year. After all, there were fewer House members elected from districts that the other party’s presidential candidate won in 2012 than in any presidential election since 1920. While there are entrenched swing district members on both sides who can weather these trends, we’re not in an era where there’s a high level of House ticket-splitting.

Now, in the event of a weak GOP standard-bearer, the voters might not punish the whole party. That was the case in Richard Nixon’s “lonely landslide” on 1972, when voters separated George McGovern from his fellow Democrats. Or maybe the whole party would falter-- Democrats went into the 1964 presidential election with a big House majority and added 37 seats to it as Lyndon Johnson routed Barry Goldwater. We just don’t know.

But the point is just to say that the districts are there for Democrats to make a move if conditions are terrible for the Republicans because of a disastrous presidential nominee.

Even if they lose the White House, Republicans still remain heavy favorites to hold the House next year. But a presidential candidate who alienates the middle of the country poses a threat, precisely because the middle of the country-- the swingy suburbs-- now represents the Democrats’ path back to the House.

This week Connie Perez, the weak DCCC/EMILY's List recruit for CA-21 (all of heavily Hispanic Kings County and parts of Fresno and Kern counties in the Central Valley), the D+2 district represented by Republican David Valadao, quit the race. This leaves the DCCC without a candidate in a district won 55-44% against Romney, an increase for Obama of 3 percentage points since beating McCain there.

Why bring up one little district in the Central Valley? It's a random example of something that happen just hours ago. Hours pass and the DCCC loses another district and another and another. The DCCC decides to help conservative New Dem shithead David Calone's campaign against Lee Zeldin in eastern Suffolk County. But Steve Israel wants to get into Anna Throne-Holst's pants-- not even a Democrat but in the process of re-registering-- so he drops $10,000 on her and rounds up a bunch of his crooked cronies to give her even more money. So Zeldin, in an R+2 district is almost guaranteed to be reelected-- while the DCCC completely ignores the more vulnerable Peter King in the bluer (R+1) district next door (NY-02), because Israel hates progressives with a passion and has already been undermining the strongest opponent King has ever drawn, DuWayne Gregory, the head of the Suffolk County Legislature.

There's barely a state in the country where DCCC bumbling, corruption and incompetence isn't ruining the Democrats' chances to take back the House. I admire and respect Nancy Pelosi but until she and Hoyer go, the DCCC will, inadvertently, serve the interests of the Republican Party. Van Hollen was rewarded for the most catastrophic failure of any DCCC chair ever and Israel was rewarded for proving it was possible to be even worse than Van Hollen. It's what made me feel that Nancy just doesn't want to be Speaker again... no matter what fantasies Kyle Kondik can spin. Trump or Carson or Cruz will certainly help the Democrats take back the Senate but the House... the DCCC is simply beyond help. It wouldn't surprise me if they actually lose seats in the most favorable year for Democratic victories in ages. The only hope the Democrats have would come in 2018 and that would depend on crackpot Republican David "Bull" Gurfein beating Israel next year, in the third Long Island congressional district.

Meanwhile, if you'd like to help build a base of independent-minded progressives in the House who won't become lackeys to Steve Israel and his destructive clique... we have a page just for you.

Will Yet Another Bout Of DCCC Ineptitude Guarantee A Third Win For Republican David Valadao In A Blue California District?

DCCC and EMILY's List working towards a redux

Republican David Valadao is the congressman from CA-21-- a Central Valley district that includes all of heavily Hispanic Kings county and chunks of Fresno and Kern counties, including the Hispanic neighborhoods of Bakersfield, Fresno's southern and western suburbs, Hanford, Delano, Wasco, Coalinga and Mendota. The district is 72.1% Latino, has a D+2 PVI saw Obama beat McCain 52-46% and then beat Romney 55-44% and yet... sheer DCCC incompetence has saddled the district with Republican David Valadao as a congressman. In the last election Valadao whalloped ridiculous DCCC-EMILY's List recruit Amanda Renteria 41,167 (58.5%) to 29,244 (41.5%). Two years earlier-- with Obama wracking up a big win against Romney, Valadao had also prevailed, this time against John Hernandez, President of the Central California Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, 67,164 (57.8%) to 49,119 (42.2%). Although Hernandez edged Valadao in Kern County (52-48%), Valadao racked up big wins in Fresno County (61-39%) and Kings County (70-30%). In 2012 the DCCC had refused to help Hernandez and he spent $99,754 to Valadao's $1,181,113 (who also had $592,026 thrown into the race on his behalf by Rove and another $27,466 from McCarthy's, Ryan's and Cantor's Young Guns PAC). Last year the DCCC did make an effort to help Renteria. She spent $1,690,530 against Valadao's $2,732,693. The DCCC put a paltry $94,400 into the race on behalf of Renteria while the NRCC spent $118,625 for Valadao, which was dwarfed by the $550,150 the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent on Valadao.

2016 could be a bad year for Valadao. People are disgusted with the inability of the House Republicans to get beyond their internal petty bickering and do the people's business for starters. On top of that, he had continued to amass ax execrable voting record against one popular position after another. The Democratic turnout in a presidential (and senatorial) year is likely to be extremely high. And yesterday Valadao was hit with an ethics complaint "for violating 31 U.S.C. § 1301 and House ethics rules prohibiting official resources from being used for campaign or political purposes."

This cycle Air Force vet and Fowler City Councilman (since 2008) and Mayor pro tem, Daniel Parra seemed the likely Democratic opponent. He was born into an impoverished farm family and worked in the fields before joining the Air Force. He has a huge number of endorsements from California elected officials and from organizations and he sounds like a pretty standard decent Democratic Party candidate. From his bio: "I'm running for Congress because of the contradiction that my community faces: America wouldn't be able to eat without the food grown in my district, yet too many people in my district don't have enough to eat. The #1, #2, and #3 agricultural Counties in the United States all lie within California's 21st-- yet two of the nation's five poorest cities also are in my district. My story is not unlike the story of thousands of people in my district. I grew up in a small town called Parlier-- which today has a poverty rate of nearly 50- - that's double the poverty rate of Detroit... The United States Air Force gave me a chance to better my life and I took it. I learned how to repair computers, and I was able to make a career out of it at Northrop Grumman. I'm one of the lucky ones. I have dedicated my life since then to helping the less fortunate, because the great depression never ended in my district. I was spurred to run because my opponent-- a multi-millionaire farmer-- doesn't get that people are hurting in our district. In one of the poorest districts in the country, he has voted again and again to slash Medicaid, Social Security, Head Start, Food Stamps, and other programs that our community relies on-- instead voting to increase subsidies toward his own farms. As a Fresno Economic Opportunity Commissioner, I oversee many of the programs my opponent wants to cut, and I grew up with many of the people they help."

But the DCCC isn't one of the organizations backing him and, in fact, they seem to have teamed up with EMILY's List again to recruit another terrible candidate with no chance of winning, this time former non-Democrat Connie Perez. The DCCC is unhappy Parra hasn't raised enough money and EMILY's List is unhappy he has the wrong plumbing. An outsider from Pasadena, Perez, is just the kind of rich stiff the DCCC and EMILY's List always goes for-- and loses with. She's Amanda Renteria but without the knowledge of any issues.

But Parra shows no signs of backing down, setting up the possibility of a three-person primary election next June. Only the top two finishers, regardless of political party, advance to the November general election. When asked for comment, the Parra campaign responded with a written statement from Michael Evans, chairman of the Fresno County Democratic Party.

“Central Valley Democrats are enthusiastically united behind lifelong Democrat Daniel Parra’s campaign for Congress,” Evans’ statement said. “He is the only candidate who is truly homegrown here in the Central Valley, who shares our values and who we are fully confident will fight on our behalf in Washington. Unlike this prospective opponent, who appears to be a recent convert to the Democratic Party and is currently registered to vote in Pasadena-- a metropolitan area well outside of the district-- Daniel Parra is a committed, lifelong Democrat who is firmly dedicated to our party and our principles.”

Before the DCCC and EMILY's List jumped in on behalf of Perez, Allan Hoffenblum, publisher of the California Target Book, thought Parra had a chance of replacing Valadao next year.

“Some have said that Parra is not a strong candidate,” he said. “But I heard the same thing about the little-known dairy farmer, David Valadao, when he first ran for (California) Assembly.”

Next year features a presidential election and a strong California U.S. Senate race, he said, so more people will turn out to vote.

“Voters in this district will vote Democratic for the first two,” Hoffenblum said.

Whether those voters also vote Democratic in the congressional race will determine whether Valadao keeps his seat, Hoffenblum said. The most recent registration numbers for the 21st District show 47.4 percent are Democrats, 31 percent are Republicans and 17.9 percent have no party preference.

Cal State Bakersfield Political Science Professor Mark Martinez said Parra needs to learn from the losses of the past two Democrats who’ve challenged Valadao.

“The people from Sacramento and Washington don’t always know what’s best,” Martinez said.

Parra will need to connect with voters on a very local level to make headway, Martinez said. And he will have to blunt Valadao’s strong support in Republican-heavy Kings and Tulare county sections of the 21st District.

Parra doesn’t have to win in those areas, he said, but he does have to blunt the overwhelming margins of victory Valadao has commanded in those Republican areas.

UPDATE: Perez Quits

The DCCC candidate dropped out of the race against Valadao, basically because she was unable to raise any money and would have probably lost a primary battle against Daniel Parra.

When Perez launched her campaign, state Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, said Democrats have fared badly in the 21st District due to a "lack of a strong 'hometown' Kern County elected official that actually owns a home, has a family and has done well at the ballot in the past."

On Tuesday, Florez shared thoughts on her exit.

"On the face of it, it looks like another case of outside interests trying to manufacture a political campaign by trying to 'find' the best match-up rather than fostering real home-grown leaders in the Central Valley," he said by email. "As a candidate, at first, it's fun when outside party tacticians flatter you with promises of support and facts and figures showing how you can win, which I'm guessing happened to Perez."

Short version: another race the incompetent DCCC has ruined for the Democrats who will never take back the House until that whole nest of imbeciles is cleaned out-- starting with the corrupt and venal Steve Israel and his sock puppet Ben Ray Luján.