Saw this on Twitter, and it got me thinking:
For those upset about critique of establishment politics:
There are D reps in SAFE blue seats who side w/ the NRA, are anti-LGBT+, and yet are protected because they advance the interests of big donors, Wall St, fossil fuels, etc.
It’s not “wrong” to take that on and do better.
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) 8:58 PM – 22 February 2020
AOC isn’t the only person I’ve observed referring to CD28 as “safe” Democratic. This WaPo story from 2019, reprinted in the Trib, calls CD28 “a strongly Democratic district…which gave the president just 38.5 percent of the vote in 2016”. This DMN story has a subhed that calls CD28 “Vast and overwhelmingly Democratic district”, and notes that “Trump lost here by 20 percentage points”. The American Prospect is a bit more circumspect, saying CD28 is “a safely (though not extremely) blue district, with a +9 Democratic lean”, and also noting the 20-point margin for Clinton over Trump in 2016.
But 2016 isn’t the only election we’ve ever had, and the Clinton-Trump matchup isn’t the only data point available. Here’s a broader look at the recent electoral history in CD28:
Year Candidate Votes Pct
===============================
2012 Obama 101,843 60.2%
2012 Romney 65,372 38.6%
2012 Sadler 90,481 55.1%
2012 Cruz 68,096 41.5%
2012 Hampton 93,996 58.5%
2012 Keller 61,954 38.6%
2014 Alameel 41,901 46.6%
2014 Cornyn 42,010 46.7%
2014 Davis 48,451 52.7%
2014 Abbott 41,335 45.0%
2014 Granberg 45,658 51.7%
2014 Richardson 38,775 43.9%
2016 Clinton 109,973 57.8%
2016 Trump 72,479 38.1%
2016 Robinson 95,348 52.6%
2016 Guzman 77,590 42.8%
2016 Burns 102,778 57.1%
2016 Keasler 69,501 38.6%
2018 Beto 97,728 58.7%
2018 Cruz 67,483 40.5%
2018 Valdez 87,007 52.7%
2018 Abbott 75,939 46.0%
2018 Jackson 94,479 58.3%
2018 Keller 63,559 39.2%
Yes, in 2014, John Cornyn topped David Alameel in CD28. To my mind, if it is possible for a candidate of the other party to beat a candidate of your own party in a given district, that district is by definition not “safe”. It’s true that in Presidential years, most Democrats win CD28 comfortably, with the closest call being a win by just under 10 points. But in off years, even factoring out the crapshow that was the Alameel campaign, Dems generally win CD28 by smaller margins.
None of this is to say that CD28 is a swing district. It’s not, and I have no reason to be concerned about it in 2020. But if Trump-versus-Clinton-in-2016 is the gold standard here, I’ll point out that of the six districts Dems are targeting this year, four of them (CDs 02, 10, 22, and 31) were won by Trump by larger margins than Wendy Davis won CD28 by in 2014 and Lupe Valdez won it by in 2018. Different years, different conditions, and different candidates may provide a different perspective.
Another way of looking at this is to see how Democratic CD28 is compared to other Congressional districts represented by Democrats:
Dist Clinton Beto
=====================
CD07 48.2% 53.3%
CD32 48.4% 54.9%
CD15 56.2% 57.4%
CD28 57.8% 58.7%
CD34 59.1% 57.7%
CD20 60.2% 66.2%
All other Dem-held districts were at least 63% for Clinton and 70% for Beto. Again, none of this is to say that CD28 is vulnerable. Whoever wins the CD28 primary will be the strong favorite, like 99%+, to win it in November. This is not a comment on that race, but on public perception and objective reality. It’s why I generally try not to make blanket statements like “safe district” but try instead to put a number or two on it, so you have some context to my evaluation. I doubt anyone will adopt this as their style guide, but it’s very much how I prefer to operate.
And I have to say, I might have let this go by if I hadn’t also seen this little gem in the Chronicle story on the announced resignation of State Sen. Kirk Watson:
Abbott soon will have to schedule a special election for the remainder of Watson’s four-year term, which ends in 2022. Watson’s District 14, which mostly lies in Austin, leans Democratic.
“Leans Democratic”??? Here’s that same set of numbers for Watson’s SD14:
Year Candidate Votes Pct
===============================
2012 Obama 193,112 60.2%
2012 Romney 116,001 36.1%
2012 Sadler 187,717 59.4%
2012 Cruz 109,877 34.7%
2012 Hampton 181,614 59.1%
2012 Keller 106,581 34.7%
2014 Alameel 123,058 56.2%
2014 Cornyn 80,818 36.9%
2014 Davis 140,602 63.3%
2014 Abbott 75,206 33.9%
2014 Granberg 127,108 59.7%
2014 Richardson 73,267 34.4%
2016 Clinton 249,999 65.3%
2016 Trump 106,050 27.7%
2016 Robinson 218,449 58.8%
2016 Guzman 124,165 33.4%
2016 Burns 223,599 60.8%
2016 Keasler 120,727 32.8%
2018 Beto 289,357 73.8%
2018 Cruz 98,589 25.1%
2018 Valdez 257,708 66.3%
2018 Abbott 119,889 30.9%
2018 Jackson 264,575 69.4%
2018 Keller 104,375 27.4%
LOL. SD14 “leans” Democratic in the same way that a wrecking ball leans against the side of a building. Data is your friend, people. Use the data. I know I’m tilting against windmills here, but at least you can see why I noticed that tweet.
I’ve been in the valley for the last couple of days and Cuellar’s opponent has been running ads that “Cuellar is Trumps favorite Democrat.” That could leave a mark.
I once tried to find a mapping of probabilities winning to race ratings, and the closest thing I could find was a 538’s Atlas of Redistricting project, but is has only 3 categories, Usually Democratic, Highly Competitive, and Usually Republican. It looks like that if both parties have a better than 17% (5 out of 6) chance of winning, then it’s considered a highly competitive seat. I don’t subscript to CPR, so they may say what those numbers are. If you forced me to guess, it’s something like this:
If the favorite has less than a 60% chance to win, then it’s a toss up.
Else if the favorite has less than a 75% chance to win, then it’s lean.
Else if the favorite has less than a 90% chance to win, then it’s likely.
Else it’s safe.