Why Dennis Kucinich Has a Target on His Back

[Joanne98]

With redistricting looming, the Ohio congressman’s plight shows how the GOP will be able to make 2012 more difficult for Democrats across the country.
(Page 1 of 2)
From 1998 to 2008, longtime Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich won each of his reelection campaigns by at least 49,000 votes. Even in the Democratic bloodbath that was the 2010 midterms, the former mayor of Cleveland and presidential candidate carried his district in northeast Ohio by a 16,000-vote margin, more than 8 percent. So why should he be worried about 2012?

Because it’s redistricting season again, the time when legislators redraw district boundaries based on new census data, and Republicans in Ohio are holding the pen. The Ohio GOP won the governor’s seat and took over the state legislature in the midterms, part of a nationwide statehouse surge that has placed Republicans in charge of redrawing congressional-district lines in 17 states, which account for a full 193 out of 435 seats in the House of Representatives, including all the seats from the swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Come 2011, the GOP will control more state legislatures than at any time since 1928. Democrats, by contrast, have maintained control of the redistricting process in six states and will have sole say over 44 districts (that will rise to seven states and 72 districts if Democrats end up holding the New York state Senate).

Is all that a prescription for Republican dominance until the next round of redistricting in 2020? Not quite. District borders are only part of the election equation. “You still have to have good candidates good campaigns,” says Tim Storey, senior fellow at the National Conference of State Legislatures. But redistricting can give certain candidates a “head start,” as Storey puts it. And the quagmire Kucinich is facing illustrates how the GOP will be able to make life more difficult for Democrats across the country.

The five Democrats in Ohio’s congressional delegation are crowded in and around Cleveland, Akron, and Youngstown (see map above), where an exodus of population in the last decade is part of the reason that Ohio is expected to lose two congressional seats after the Census Bureau releases its decennial population count on Dec. 31. If that prediction holds, new district lines will cut the state’s 18 current representatives down to 16.

Republicans will push to lose Democratic districts, naturally, says GOP state chairman Kevin DeWine. “It’s my job to go advocate for a map that finds a way for Ohio’s 13 Republican members of Congress to have a district that is eminently winnable” in 2012, he says. “I see a path to making that happen.” DeWine declined to name specific districts that the state legislature and governor, who will have to approve the plan like any other new law, might target. But political observers named Kucinich’s 10th District, Rep. Marcia Fudge’s 11th District, and Betty Sutton’s 13th District as ripe for reworking.

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/15/redistricting-could-spell-trouble-for-democrats.html

[OHdem10]

1. He is a Liberal with a spine.. and principles in which he believes.

Strong Liberals are a threat to the myth that the
country is RW Conservative.

[pnorman]

3. If by that, ar you're implying that obama has none?

He was strongly focused on minimizing the expected losses in the mid-term election, and that meant keeping as many Blue Dogs inside the tent as possible. The House loss was serious but not fatal, but much more could have have been a`DISASTER. Does anyone here REALLY believe that had he pursued a more "DU-friendly" course, a more "BLTG-friendly" course, the elections would have turned out more favorably?

[zipplewrath]

7. Yes

"Does anyone here REALLY believe that had he pursued a more "DU-friendly" course, a more "BLTG-friendly" course, the elections would have turned out more favorably?"

We'd have to agree what that course was, but a less "bank friendly" course and a more populist course would have changed the course of these elections. Getting unemployment below 8%, by having fewer tax cuts and more, earlier, direct government spending on construction and other job creating efforts would have. Isolating the Blue Dogs, instead of the progressives, would have helped. Cram downs in the mortgage industry would have helped.

[karynnj]

2. Your title is not borne out by the article

There is no special effort to get Kucinich here - there is an effort to draw the districts to get the maximum number of districts that would favor republicans. This is done by looking at the map and trying to create a few extremely Democratic districts where they might normally give over 80% of their vote to Democrats - and a large number of districts where they have say 55% Republican vote. This results in a state with - say 50% Democrats - having say 65% of their districts favoring Republicans.

This is where the term Gerrymandering came from.

In Ohio, the opportunity is that they again have all the power - and we know how honestly they used that in 2004! Cleveland is losing population - this means that even if the Democrats were in power, some of the districts centered in Cleveland would have to cover more of the suburbs. They list 3 districts that had the potential of being redrawn this way. If the Democrats were in power, they would opt for many districts that take part of Cleveland and a smaller part of Republican suburbs. In reality, if this was taken to an extreme - abstracted picture 2 concentric circles - where the city is defined by the center circle - divide the outer circle as if it were a pie. If the outer circle was well chosen, you could create n Democratic leaning districts that each have part of the Republican suburbs. Obviously computer models which use geographical precinct or lower voter information would be used - the circles example was to show conceptually how it could be biased - and that it can happen either way.

Here, there is no special effort to go against Kucinich or any of the other representatives mentioned. I doubt they have any view that eliminating him will hurt the Democratic party more than another representative.

[John Q. Citizen]

4. The title is from the article. So write Newsweek a letter. it's not the

OPs title, it's Newsweek's title.

[karynnj]

5. My apologies - but I still say it has nothing to o with who he is.

[BlueIris]

6. Dennis Kucinich has a target on his back because

he's one of the people who could actually lead this Party, and this country. Al Gore is, too, which is where those insane rape accusations came from a couple of months ago.

[Arkana]

8. He sure is.

And the reason you can tell that Kucinich is such a natural choice for President is from those two wildly successful Presidential campaigns he's run.

[Kaleva]

9. Popularity here at DU doesn't always equal popularity with the rank & file

[brooklynite]

10. Actually, not likely...

The best thing for the Republicans to do is concentrate the most liberal voters together, to make the rest of the districts more competitive for conservatives. Kucinich is about as liberal as you can get.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

11. Shit!! I didn't think about Kucinich's district! Fucking Repukes!! n/t