Thread by @burningpalefire

in december, i proposed a new method for measuring electoral strength (see quoted tweet). now here is the data, updated with new york final results and corrected new mexico results, with analysis and highlights:

https://twitter.com/burningpalefire/status/1342159965692129280

the data:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…

so the best-performing dem incumbents are:
case (hi-2), 8.26% above biden
golden (me-2), 8.19%
higgins (ny-26), 7.20%
cuellar (tx-28), 6.79%
meng (ny-6), 6.29%
brindisi (ny-22), 5.65%
peterson (mn-7), 5.54%
s garcia (tx-29), 5.14%
harder (ca-10), 5.07%
chuy garcia (il-4), 5.05%

best republicans:
stewart (ut-2), with his opponent 14.21% under biden
katko (ny-24), 10.4%
lahood (il-18), 9.8%
a smith (ne-3), 8.97%
g graves (la-6), 8.95%
curtis (ut-3), 8.39%
fitzpatrick (pa-1), 7.98%
upton (mi-6), 6.67%
bacon (ne-2), 6.02%
crenshaw (tx-2), 5.82%

we see this as a combination of biden's hispanic/asian weakness/strong incumbents, and also mormons in utah.

weakest d incumbents:
omar (mn-5), -15.21%
mfume (md-7), -6.15%
veasey (tx-33), -6.11%
waters (ca-43), -5.12%
d davis (il-7), -4.88%
cox (ca-21), -4.66%
cisneros (ca-39), -4.62%
craig (mn-2), -4.54%
roybal-allard (ca-40), -4.18%
mccollum (mn-4), -4.11%

here we have strong challengers/weak incumbents (california), strong third party challenges (minnesota, but omar's drop is too big for that to explain it all), and money funneled into viral r candidates (waters, mfume). i'm curious about veasey, in a majority hispanic district

weakest rs:
mooney (wv-2), -4.18% (4.18% d overperformance)
miller (wv-3), -3.26%
desjarlais (tn-4), -2.70%
young (ak-al), -2.48%
lamalfa (ca-1), -1.99%
hagedorn (mn-1), -1.76%
gaetz (fl-1), -1.60%
hudson (nc-8), -1.17%
mckinley (wv-1), -0.82%
joyce (pa-13), -0.79%

we've got the usual suspects in desjarlais/mooney, but the whole wv delegation is here, and now i'm wondering if @lxeagle17 might have some thoughts with this residual downballot performance relative to stabilization of elasticity of the state

and who's john joyce?

now for the losing incumbents (all dem) and the freshmen (mostly r; 34 of them). with this we want to see just how strong the incumbents really were, and how potentially weak the freshmen can be. recall the average adjusted relative performance is -0.69%:

losing incumbents:

dem freshmen (look at frank!):

r freshmen:

(and issa/sessions aren't true freshmen, so their relative strength speaks a lot about their opponents/their personal weakness)

now we explore, in the runup to performance relative to ideology, just a very linear graph of the whole caucus as of the end of the last congress:

and then we have dem incumbent performance in r-contested swing districts (d+5->r+5 per daily kos, including all d incumbents who lost) relative to ideology (greater is more conservative). the slope is slightly positive.

there are, of course, caveats--the sample size of votes isn't great, because dems only controlled 1/3 of elected government, for one--but the trend is there.

then the democratic misses:
columns are district, r-incumbent, d-challenger, 16/20 DK PVI, and adjusted relative performance:

which goes to show that for all the contention about kara eastman on here, dana balter should take like twice the heat

@MaronAoriak @SenhorRaposa @adriaeln

@Aseemru not sure if you're interested in the arizona performances