Editor’s Note: This diary has been promoted from the new MNpublius Diaries page. This is the third of nine articles in Jeff’s Daily Liberal Mapping Project. These articles examine Minnesota’s voting patterns precinct by precinct, with data from the 2006 election. Perhaps you missed my analysis of CD8 and CD7?
In this edition of the Daily Liberal Mapping Project, we finally get to a race with a serious Congressional campaign — the 6th Congressional District. CD6 is the former district of Republican Mark Kennedy and currently held by Republican Michele Bachmann. Elwyn Tinklenberg, a moderate Democrat, is challenging Bachmann for the seat. RealClearPolitics recently called Bachmann one of the most endangered representatives in the country, and but CD6’s conservative voting patterns mean a tough race for Tinklenberg. Handicapper Stuart Rothenberg labels the race “favored Republican”.
The district voted overwhelmingly Republican in 2006, and has a Cook Partisan Voting Index of R+5. Almost all of the precincts in the district, except those in the southeastern corner, voted Republican in 2006. However, less than half voted heavily (60% or more) for Republicans, which may indicate an opportunity for Tinklenberg to pick up some votes. MNPublius noted a while ago that being cross-endorsed by the Independence Party should help Tinklenberg close the gap. Al Franken, who is more liberal than Tinklenberg, should expect trouble in this district.
Another difficulty for Tinklenberg and Franken may be that 6th district voters are less likely than many Minnesotans to cross party lines. Volatility is a measure of variation across races. Precincts with high volatility are those that see a lot of ticket-splitters. As the map below shows, only a few districts have volatility higher than the state median.
There’s one thing keeping this race competitive — turnout. Turnout is moderate to poor throughout the district, with one exception — the democratic-leaning southeastern portion of the district. With John McCain heading the ticket for the Republicans in 2008 and conservatives’ enthusiasm at a low, turnout could be even more depressed. Low turnout from Republicans and high turnout from Democrats could make this race seriously competitive.
The final map shows the combined effect of turnout and party preference, and illustrates the above point clearly. This map combines voting percentages and turnout into a single measure, the percent of eligible voters that voted for the winning party. Looking at this measure, there are no precincts that had a high proportion of Republican voters. Democrats, on the other hand, are helped slightly by turnout. Just as McCain’s campaign may depress turnout further, expect Obama’s candidacy to drive turnout by Democrats. Will his coattails be enough to put Tinklenberg in the House?
Loading ...
Should any of Tinklenberg’s people read this blog, here are some things to get Michele Bachmann on…
1)The ISSUES!!! Bachmann tends to avoid talking about the inportant issues like Veterans, Seniors, those struggling, etc.
2) Her VOTING RECORD!! Bachmann needs to be challanged hard on her Voting Record. Her many NO votes are a concern when it involves the very people she says she represents.
3)The lack of Constituent services in the 6th District!! Bachmann has not held one IN PERSON Town Hall meeting with residents in the 6th District to explain her votes, work with the people about the issues. Her office staff are less than helpful. Rather, she is gallavanting all about the country, propping herself for a higher position. Like our Governor has been doing.
4) Who does Bachmann actually REPRESENT!!!!!?? Special Interests and Lobbies?? Just look at her FEC reports as to where her campaign contributions come from. Mostly from Banks, Big Oil, Lending institutions, Drug Companies, etc.
We here in the 1st CD can be proud of our Rep. in Tim Walz. He does not have to rely on gimmicks to stay relevant. I have met many people from the 2nd CD and the 6th CD who want a Rep. like Walz to acknowledge them regardless of Polital Party affliation, involve them in the process, to work with them on solutions to problems, etc. Which is why he will win re-election handily over Brian Davis or Dick Day come November.
I’d actually like to see Bachmann lose. And I’m a Republican.
Unfortunately the district is just too Republican to lose.
I’d like to see some polling data for this race and the Madia/Sarvi races. Tinklenberg seems to be flying under the radar compared to Madia and Sarvi. That district is brutal, but Wetterling came close 4 years ago. Minnesotans have proved that they’re willing to vote for a liberal and a conservative on the same ballot. The era of Wellstone and Grams in the Senate never made sense.
Paulsen/Madia could be close.
But Kline/Sarvi is no competition. I’d be completely shocked if Kline won by less than 20 points.
I have been doorknocking in Blaine, I get positive responses about Tinklenberg at the doors. Even when they decline to say anything, they have a small smile. Also, people will, without prompting, mention Amy Klobuchar positively!
I think the people that I encounter, definitely fit the profile of putting personal candidates ahead of party affiliation, so I think there is plenty of opportunity in the 6th.
Michele Bachmann’s latest rant is that the Democrats are to blame for everything!!!
For the high gas prices
For the unemployment rates
For nothing getting done in COngress
and the list goes on. Bachmann doesn’t say that the Republicans in the House and Senate are obstructing good legislation from getting passed or that she has anything to do with Congress’s poor rating.
The http://www.dumpbachmann.com/blog has been posting some great stuff lately.
Grace:
If Tinklenberg doesn’t get a warm reception in Blaine he’s done. Wright County, Sherburne, and Stearns outside of St. Cloud is where he’s going to get clobbered. Hopefully the North Metro and St. Cloud will come-out strong for him.
Kathy,
Give me a break. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have both refused to bring up bi-partisan energy legislation which includes oil drilling off the outer continental shelf. The legislation has enough votes to pass both houses of Congress and would be signed by the president; yet the leadership refuses to allow a vote and adjourned without passing any new energy policies. This is not Republican obstruction, Kathy. This is the House and Senate leaders bowing down to their special interests while the American people suffer. Moreover, Kathy, you should know better than to accuse anybody in the House from obstructing anything. The minority has virtually no rights in the House as illustrated yesterday when the Speaker shut the lights off, turned the microphones off, and cleared out C-SPAN and the press from the chamber even though there were 40 Republicans lined up to speak. I guess she must think she’s running the Polit Bureau or something.
I’m no Bachmann fan, but she will win because the DFL ran the wrong candidate. If they had nominated Tarryl Clark, Bachmann would have a tough race.
Minnesota Republican Chris, I agree 100%,
What Kathy ignores is what we Republicans got done when we controlled the House, Senate, and White House in and 2006.
I would urge her to recall the fine record of legislation we Relublicans passed that year.
The 109th congress will go down in history as perhaps the greatest.
The 109th congress spent the most time time in session, it easily passed budget resolutions and appropriations bills, there was actual serious oversight of the war in Iraq, there were major substantive policy achievements, and no corrupt Republican members were forced from Congress.
Perhaps, Chris, you could help me refresh her memory of this Republican controlled congress with some examples of how the legislation passed by the 109th congress have made life in America, and Minnesota, better.
Great Job Smartest Man In MN Publius and Minnesota Republican Chris!!
If teh 109th Congress was so productive, why did many of them lose their seasts in the House and Senate???
One would have thought the opposite would have taken place that more Republicans would have elected instead. Hmmm!!
Kathy,
The 109th Congress wasn’t particularly productive and a lot of Republicans made it clear they weren’t satisfied with what happened by staying home and not re-electing their members. But the 110th Congress has the lowest approval rating ever registered and it sure as hell isn’t because the minority is blocking anything. It’s because Pelosi and Reid are catering to the fringe left environmental agenda instead of voting to protect pocket books by passing a comprehensive energy plan which includes tapping into the billions and billions of barrels of discovered, but prohibited, oil.
Chris, I agree 100%,
Explain to Kathy why the oil companies do not want todrill on the land they already leased, and why Republicans blocked legislation that would have forced them to do just that.
Great Job Smartest Man In MN Publius and Minnesota Republican Chris
The Oil Companies do not want to drill on the land acres and ocean acres they have leases to is because they do not want to spend the money to do so. The name of the game is ever increasing profits.
They have donated so much in PAC Monies to GOP politicians over the years like Bachmann, Coleman, and others to be their spokespersons,
We all know that any oil from Offshore drilling and ANWR would take 10 to 13 years to come online. American consumers would be the ones footing the bill for this at the pump, along with continued Tax Breaks while this all were to take place. Any oil from these sources, and sources now, are for sale on the Open World Markets.
How much of actual Domestic Oil drilled here is refined for American consumer use and what is sold on the Open World Markets? According to T. Boone Pickens, over 70% of the oil refined for American consumer use is imported from elsewhere.
Are the Oil Companies going to tell Japan, India, China…”Get your oil from someone else? This Oil we drill and refine is for American Consumer use only?” Hell no!!! The Oil Companies are out to make as much money as they can for their stockholders and CEOs as they can.
TFRWG!! Can you actually think for yourself? Or have you been indoctrinated with the GOP talking point verbatim?? Digest this.
Republican House conservative members engaged in political theater once again on Friday, 1 August 2008, before the House adjourned for the summer recess, only to attack Democrats for leaving town without doing something to lower gas prices.
Before the lights went out in the House, House Minority Leader, John Boehner(R-Ohio) had asked that Congress be brought back and have an up or down vote on gas prices.
Fact of the matter is, there had been such a vote two days before and Boehner was responsible for ensuring it did not pass.
During that vote on the Commodity Markets and Transparency Act (H.R. 6604) to rein in oil profiteers, House Republican leaders pressured 13 of their members to switch their vote from “yes” to “no.”
Strong arm tactics and weak members, the bill to lower gasoline prices by controlling profiteers failed by a vote of 276-151, falling ten votes shy of the two-thirds majority required for passage under the suspension of the House rules. Once again, the GOP leadership used their power to help keep oil prices and profits high, while hurting the average driver.
Just another example by the GOP to blame the Democrats in the House for doing nothing regarding Energy Policy and Gas Prices.
Remember, Bachmann voted “NO” twice before the Congress recessed for the summer. She needs the time to “connect” with her constituency if she wants to win re=election. Like she actually “connects” with everday people who live in the 6th CD.
Also, Bachamann’s “NO EARMARK” attitude will hurt her.
Her refusal to seek needed Federal Transportation Tax Dollars for the DeSoto Bridge, just illustrates how out of touch she is. Her attitude was…”Let the state of Minnesota pay for it with their new Gas Tax increase.” Very cold and Marie Antionetteish of her.
There are EARMARKS and there is PORK. Sen. Ted Stevens’s “Bridge To Nowhere” is an example of PORK, in which he profited greatly from with kickbacks he recieved from the contractors who built the Bridge. Which is why Stevens has been indicted for Ethics Vilations and other charges.
Transparancy in requesting EARMARKS is important. It does not mean that what monies a Senator or House Rep. requests will be granted in an Appropriations Bill. But refusing to seek monies needed means that money will go to someone else’s District that could have been used properly in the 6th, 2nd, or 1st CDs.
Michele Bachmann must get her cues from John Kline. Those two must be joined at the hip somehow.
@ Kathy
“TFRWG!! Can you actually think for yourself? Or have you been indoctrinated with the GOP talking point verbatim??”
TFRWG is lampooning (dare I say satirizing) republican morons and trolls.
Kathy,
I love how you tell someone to think for themselves and then repeat talking points from the DFL. The oil companies aren’t drilling on acres of land where there isn’t oil. I’d be happy to lease my backyard pond for gold panning, but you’re not going to find one grain of gold. Moreover, it’s hogwash to say it will take a decade to get oil out of ANWR and other places. The only way it will take a decade is if special interests sue the oil companies in federal court to stop the drilling.
lojasmo,
The #1 internet stalker isn’t lampooning anybody. He’s being a prick and I don’t think the guys at MNPublius are particularly fond of his rantings.
Chris,I agree 100%,
Everybody knows that the people who disagree with we Republicans are pricks, among other things.
Luckily, the anonyous structure of a blog means we Minnesota Republicans call people we disagree with pricks more easily on blogs than is possible if, for example, it was some guy at the grocery store with an Obama shirt who we hated because of his shirt.
Great Job Typical Minnesota Republican and Smartest Guy In The Room Chris
Chris-
TFRWG is lampooning you. It is a testament to your obtuse nature that you don’t understand.
1) The DFL doesn’t have talking points regarding oil drilling.
2) It would clearly take 8-10 years to see results from new oil leases…especially since oil is a fungible resource, will be sent overseas, and will mostly just enrich the coffers of the oil industry and it’s executives.
lojasmo,
No talking points? Now isn’t that cute. Pelosi and Reid say the exact same thing about oil, which you have repeated. It’s not true that it would take 8-10 years to see results from new oil leases. Fortunately the private sector doesn’t work as slowly as government. At today’s price, oil companies would have every reason to get the oil out of the ground as fast as they can. You can make a hell of a lot more money selling a billion barrels at $80 a barrel than you can selling 300 million barrels at $125 a barrel. At the same time I freely admit that lawsuits over EIS studies, etc. could take years to sort out and I would expect liberal special interests to sue the oil companies to prevent drilling. As for oil being sent overseas, you may be right and I think most people would support requiring new oil to stay in the U.S.
As for the #1 internet stalker, he’s only showing what an ass some on the left can be. He’s not interested in having a dialogue about issues or ideas. He’s only interested in personal attacks and negativity. As for your comments about me being “obtuse,” it’s sad when you have to label the opposition just because we don’t agree. Truth be told, I get along with Matt, Zack and Sean much better than a lot of you people who post on their site.
Chris
The DFL is a MINNESOTA organization.
The DEMOCRATIC PARTY may have talking points.
Seriously, dude. Your ignorance is showing. At least try to get your terms right.
As far as how well you get on with this person or that: Who gives a rat’s ass? I have seen not one iota of evidence that you are willing to have a good faith conversation. I will treat you accordingly, whether you like it or not.
lojasmo,
Your comments about the DFL and the Democratic party are absurd.
So what’s a good faith conversation? I guess it’s one where everyone agrees with you.
Chris, I agree 100%,
The only conversations that are in good faith with no name calling that these moonbats know how to have are ones where everyone agrees 100%.
Great Job Typical Minnesota Republican and Smartest Guy In The Room Chris
It’s called RESEARCH Chris!!!
For someone who repeats GOP Talking Points, with all due respect, just look in the mirror.
If there were no oil to be drilled on lands and waters in which the Oil companies own the leases, why would they own those leases in the first place???
Kathy,
The government sells leases to oil companies on millions of acres of federal lands and waters. Just because a lease is sold does not mean there is oil to be found on all of the millions of acres. There may be lots of oil, little oil or no oil. The government sells the leases and the oil companies explore to find out where the oil is. As I had mentioned, I would be happy to sell you a lease to pan for gold in my back yard pond. It’s possible there is gold, but it’s very, very unlikely.
Chris, I agree 100%,
That’s why the oil companies should not even bother inverstigating the land they are leasing.
Great Job Smartest Man In The Room Chris
Chris — If high oil prices are a function of a limited supply, why would oil companies want to move quickly to increase that supply? Isn’t in their self-interest to keep prices (and thus profits) higher?
Incidentally, the Department of Energy estimates that it will take at least five years before newly leased areas bein producing any oil. That is due to the time requirements for contructing new infrastructure, not to mention actually finding where the stuff is located. Litigation is not factored in.