A Look Back at the 32nd District (2007)

A couple years ago we published our "look back at the 32nd District" focusing on what carried David Poisson past then Delegate Dick Black into the legislature as the Democrats only defeat of an incumbent in 2005.  What we found was Poisson had run closer with Tim Kaine precinct by precinct than any other legislative candidate in Virginia.  This was largely caused by Dick Black assuming the district- which had gone for Mark Earley over Mark Warner by eight points in 2001, would stay in the Republican column and thus he only needed to win Jerry Kilgore voters.  When the district swung to Kaine by six points, it also swung to Poisson by six points.  Right place, right time.

But this year was supposed to be a major blowout for Poisson.  In fact, every Democratic candidate in Virginia in the last ten years who unseated a legislative incumbent won their first re-election with about 60% of the vote.  Couple that with the unpopular Loudoun County Republican Board of Supervisors sharing the ballot with him and Poisson was expected to overwhelm his opponent, Lynn Chapman. 

The results:

David Poisson 10,504 (52.9%)
Lynn Chapman 9,358 (47.1%)

What makes this even worse for Poisson was the situation around him. He outspent Chapman by a 2-1 margin and still ended up in a very close race.  His numbers were below Mark Herring in 20 of 22 precincts, and in the districts with a two person race for Supervisor (some had three ways) he finished behind the Democratic Supervisor challenger in all nine precincts.

What is causing this under-performance and what does it mean for 2009?  Let's check out the results by magisterial district:

The 32nd overlaps with four magisterial districts in Loudoun- Broad Run, Dulles, Potomac and Sugarland Run.  All four had incumbent GOP Supervisors seeking re-election- in Broad Run it was Lori Waters, in Potomac it was Bruce Tulloch, in Dulles it was Steve Snow and in Sugarland Run it was Mick Staton.   Tulloch, Snow and Staton were all defeated for re-election after being part of the "pro-growth" faction of the Loudoun County Board, while Waters was overwhelmingly re-elected after being the only Republican to break with her party on the growth issue.

Let's start with the two districts where Poisson can be compared to both Herring and the Democratic challengers for Supervisor where it was a two man race.

Dulles District- 16% of electorate in 2005, 16% of the electorate in 2007

The three precincts in Dulles District saw Poisson run the lowest of all three major Democrats on the ballot:

Precinct 101:  Herring 48.8%, Miller 56.1%, Poisson 44.4%
Precinct 102: Herring 50.8%, Miller 57.8%, Poisson 42.3%
Precinct 105:  Herring 53.3%, Miller 63.7%, Poisson 51.7%

Overall in these three precincts, that means the local Supervisor candidate Stevens Miller (challenging an incumbent) won 1,686-1,151- Mark Herring won 1,496-1,430 while David Poisson lost 1,583-1,359.  That's a lot of people voting a Democratic ticket that are voting against Poisson while they are there. 

But a far more ominous sign for Poisson is the crossover issue compared to 2005 in this district.  In 2005, he finished 0.2% ahead of the top of the Democratic ticket in these precincts- by 2007 he finished 4.9% behind the top of the ticket- a major 5.1% shift of crossover voters against Poisson.

Sugarland Run District- 25% of electorate in 2005, 26% of the electorate in 2007

All of Sugarland Run is in the 32nd District.  This is the district where Susan Buckley defeated incumbent Mick Staton.  In each of the six precincts, once again Poisson was the lowest vote getter of the three Democrats on the ballot:

Precinct 604:  Herring 55.2%, Buckley 54.2%, Poisson 53.3%
Precinct 605:  Herring 55.4%, Buckley 56.1%, Poisson 52.4%
Precinct 606: Herring 58.1%, Buckley 56.8%, Poisson 55.7%
Precinct 607:  Herring 58.4%, Buckley 66.0%, Poisson 54.7%
Precinct 608:  Herring 59.5%, Buckley 62.7%, Poisson 57.1%
Precinct 609: Herring 57.8%, Buckley 61.8%, Poisson 55.6%

Ouch.  In real vote totals, what this means is Mark Herring won here 2,729-2,045 while Susan Buckley won 2,814-1,938- and those same voters only voted for Poisson 2,600-2,164.  In addition, Poisson saw a decline here in Sugarland Run with crossover voters- in 2005 Poisson finished 1.4% behind the top of the ticket here, by 2007 that had almost doubled to 2.6% behind the top of the ticket.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The other two magisterial districts both had major three way races for Supervisor that make them very hard to compare the Supervisor's race to the Delegate race, so in those districts we will only compare Delegate Poisson to Senator Mark Herring.  For informational purposes- in the Potomac District, Andrea McKimsey won in Potomac District 2,133-1,245-945 over Bruce Tulloch and Ken Mikeman, while in the Broad Run District the winner was Lori Waters by a 3,860-2,376-1,766 count over Phyllis Randall and Jack Ryan.

Potomac District- 18% of electorate in 2005, 20% of the electorate in 2007

This is Poisson's home base, and was the only magisterial district where he had any precincts that he ran ahead of Mark Herring.  Still in Potomac, three precincts saw Mark Herring run better than Poisson, while only Poisson's precinct and one other saw him run better than Herring.  The results:

Precinct 207:  Herring 56.6%, Poisson 55.9%
Precinct 208:  Herring 58.1%, Poisson 54.9%
Precinct 209:  Herring 56.8%, Poisson 58.6%
Precinct 210:  Herring 58.8%, Poisson 59.8%
Precinct 213:  Herring 55.4%, Poisson 55.0%

What's much worse for Poisson in this district was how much his net crossover plunged.  In 2005, he finished 2.5% ahead of the top of the ticket in these precincts, by 2007 he was 0.5% behind the top of the ticket in his home area- a shift of 3.0% of crossover voters against him.  However, even with that fall, this remains Poisson's best area in the 32nd District in percentage of the vote and margin- giving him a 1,968-1,487 victory over Chapman or about half his total winning margin.

Broad Run District- 41% of electorate in 2005, 38% of the electorate in 2007

Once again, every single precinct votes for Herring in greater numbers than Poisson:

Precinct 808:  Herring 55.7%, Poisson 51.8%
Precinct 809:  Herring 55.0%, Poisson 51.9%
Precinct 810:  Herring 54.1%, Poisson 51.8%
Precinct 811:  Herring 55.5%, Poisson 51.3%
Precinct 812:  Herring 57.2%, Poisson 54.8%
Precinct 813: Herring 58.8%, Poisson 57.0%
Precinct 814:  Herring 47.1%, Poisson 45.7%
Precinct 815:  Herring 57.4%, Poisson 55.6%

Also, again in this district, Poisson's crossover rate declined.  In 2005 he finished 0.3% behind the top of the ticket here, in 2007 it was 2.5% behind the top of the ticket- a huge increase for crossover voters.  In this district, Mark Herring won 4,282-3,532 or a margin of 750 votes.  Poisson won 4,088-3,738 or a margin of 250 votes.  This crossover was significant enough to cost Poisson 2/3 of the total Democratic margin up-ballot.  That's very troublesome once again.

---------------------------------------
So the statistics all seem to be pointing to a huge weakness here. If Poisson ran with the same crossover he got this year in 2009- and the Democratic Governor's candidate ran identical with Tim Kaine- his percentage of the vote would decline to 50.61%- barely a one point margin of victory.  Given that this is the only Kaine/Byrne/McDonnell district in Virginia there is a fairly good chance that Bob McDonnell could run slightly better here in 2009 than Kilgore- even a 0.6% shift to McDonnell over Kilgore numbers could be enough to turn this district Republican downballot unless Poisson improves his crossover numbers.

What's causing this?  I don't know for sure, but I have a couple ideas.  I don't think voters ever totally warmed up to Poisson, I think they saw him as a way to get rid of Dick Black in 2005 and he has never gotten his own identity out to them for them to support him rather than oppose the Republican. In addition, I think Poisson made a major tactical error when he compiled a poor environmental record in his first two years in Richmond- leaning heavily towards big business.  In fact he was the lowest rated Democrat on the environment from Northern Virginia both sessions according to the League of Conservation Voters.  Environment voters have been key to the Democratic surge in Loudoun, and I think part of Poisson's weakness this year may have been his weak scores on that issue.

So now what?  First of all, if the Republicans can nominate even a somewhat tolerable candidate here in 2009, they have a great shot of unseating Poisson.  At the same time, if his environmental record doesn't improve, I wouldn't be surprised to see a primary challenge here.  In fact, the perfect candidate for a primary challenge may have been elected this year- Supervisor Andrea McGimsey of Potomac is a major player in those groups- and now sits in Poisson's district as a Loudoun County Supervisor.  With potential challenges from his left and his right, Poisson might be the most vulnerable incumbent on the Democratic side in 2009.  I have a feeling this won't be the last time we take a careful look at this district! 

And I doubt 2007 will be the last time David Poisson is walking around a room dazed on election night wondering why he wasn't stronger.

Comments

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

It's spelled "LOUDOUN". Not done reading yet, but wanted to point that out...

[Not Larry Sabato]

Where did I spell it wrong?

[Not Larry Sabato]

Found it- fixed the typo- thanks. It was right most of the times. :-)

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Good analysis of the numbers Ben. However, I am surprised that you missed the biggest factor that differentiates 2005 from 2007--the governor cycle election versus a local-only cycle. There will be bigger turnout again in 2009. The Loudoun County electorate that considers itself Democratic, even with the growth lately, has always been a fickle turnout gang--turning out in droves on federal and governor year elections, but not so much on off-year local elections. In fact, in 2003, countywide turnout was among the lowest in the state with several magisterial districts not even hitting 30% turnout.

Now, I would disagree somewhat with your idea that his pro-business stances hurt him in this district. This is a very pro-business demographic in Loudoun. I do not think voters will approve anything pro-business at the expense of the environment, so perhaps that is where some of the perception comes from.

While I admit I was surprised by the closeness of this race, I think it was simply a miscalculation of expected turnout.

Clearly, Dave needs to vigorously stay in touch with his constituents and get out there strongly to make sure he is seen serving their interests. But I find it hard to believe that with increased turnout in 2009 likely to appear again, and continuously increasing Democratic performance out there in almost every cycle since the late 90's, that Dave is not going to get reelected again in 2009.

Look for a lot of money to go to him, and look for the results in 2008 which will be a big indicator if 32nd District voters are still inclined to trust Democrats over Republicans.

Let's just hope it's Obama they'll be voting on, because if it's Hillary, she may very well pull performance in the 32nd for Democrats back in the wrong direction!

[Not Larry Sabato]

Doug, when I first heard that Poisson had a close race on election night I was thinking the same thing. But I think a closer look at the numbers makes that theory shaky at best. Mainly because everyone else was doing better than him on the ballot as Democrats. In total it appears 750-1000 people in this district voted for Herring and a Dem Supervisor but then voted against Poisson. To me that is a problem with him, not with Democratic turnout.

[LoudounLady7]

Totally agree with your "right place, right time" theory. Poisson's in trouble in 09.

Dave spent a lot of time, maybe too much time, helping other candidates during the cycle. He didn't canvas nearly as much as he did the first time around.

By doing this, he appeared much more partisan than Herring. Loudoun is still a Republican leaning county.

[LoudounVoter]

Poissons problems are actually the oposite of what anon 958 suggests. Poisson is a Democrat in Republican clothing and the voters knew it. This is a Democratic leaning county and the voters wanted to elect Democrats, not Republican light.

I'd support a primary challenge of POisson. It might at least wake him up.

[LoudounVoter]

What I meant to say was Poisson is a Republican in Democratic clothing. I guess I shouldn't post on blogs after downing a six pack.

[Former Poisson Ally]

I received an email a little while ago from a friend of mine who thought I'd be interestd in this article. I've never been to this web page before and I think your analysis is very thorough.

For a long time I've been a close friend and ally of David's. Right now, I'm one of many who are leaning away from him. It's not because of his environmental record (which was news to me) but more because he has strangely distanced himself from those who have always been by his side. It's not even clear why. It feels like he is lost sometimes. He doesn't know what he wants to stand for. And he doesn't seem to know who his friends are.

If you are right that David is in trouble, I think it's because he hasn't paid attention and listened to his key supporters. As someone who was very much behind him four years ago, I did vote for him against Chapman, but I wasn't as excited about it as I was before.

Hopefully this criticism shakes him up.

NLS, Are you saying the Dems should primary Poisson to help the ticket in 09?

[Chapman for Delegate, Again, Always, Or Something]

NLS just spelled out for all Republicans that they should pay attention to Lynn Chapman, who ran a good campaign last year. He seems to be still running and could very well knock off POisson next time if the state party gives him the resources.

Very interesting numbers indeed.

seems like poisson is in a box. vote too progressively and be vulnerable on the right. but be too 'pro business' or not green enough and be suceptible on the left. not a good spot for this guy.

Yes, CALLING ALL DEMOCRATS: PLEASE PRIMARY POISSON. Run a progressive liberal and see what happens in Nov 09.

Aside for the far left democratic activists no one gives a care about the environment. That is the harsh truth. Especially in a swing district that could go either way.
People in this part of Loudoun want three things from the state government: 1.Transportation, 2.Transportation,
3. Transportation.
Until Republicans and Democrats figure this out all elections will be close.

This they DO NOT CARE ABOUT:

1. Abortion
2. Going Green
3. Partisanship on either side.

These folks want their basic bread and butter issues taken care of, the rest is just not important to them. They are to busy commuting to care about other issues that do not affect them on a daily basis.

[t]

Poison is simply a disaster.

Oh, and 12:16, t cares DEEPLY about abortion and our stewardship responsibility for the environment.

[George Templeton]

So is Lynn Chapman tolerable enough to unseat Poisson or should the GOP take a look at Lori Waters to unseat Poisson?

[t]

How 'bout the MOST Hon. Richard Black

Anon 1216, the point is Poisson doesn't speak to these people. I'm not sure what he stands for at all. He was hurt against Chapman on the toll road issue. Where was Poisson on that? He wasn't speaking for me? He wasn't speaking at all. He was giving excuses for toll increases.

So, if he's not a real Democrat, and he's not going to fight for us on bread and butter issues (that I agree are most important to these voters, of which I am one) then why not primary him?

How'd he vote on abuser fees? Not the right way? His position on the toll road? Bad. Has he led the charge to find transportation solutions? Um, no.

I say challenge him from the right and left, make him be a leader, and in the end we'll either have a delegate who might stand for something or a progressive or conservative who will be under pressure to do the same. For an independent like me, I'll take that.

[LoudounD]

Ben, I like your style, but I think in this particular race you are relying too much on the numbers alone. there were a lot of factors in this race that made it very unique. A few things to point out in your analysis: Loudoun was and still is a Republican leaning County; In the 32nd, the LCV and environmental issues take a huge backseat to kitchen table issues like transportation and education; and the one thing that you have to realize about Loudoun is that each of these races is specific in it's own right. The Dem Board of Supervisors, especially Miller and McGimsey, got elected on an anyone but Snow/Tulloch vote, not b/c of themselves as candidates - -actually they were pretty terrible candidates.

There are two main reasons why it was a close race: 1)The biggest difference between this year and 2005, and this may sound too simplistic, is that Poisson just didn't campaign as hard as he did in 2005. He took Chapman for granted and didn't hit the ground in full stride until after Labor day. 2) Poisson just hasn't distinguished himself and created a name yet. It's not a poor recorde, its just not one that stands out yet. I trust he knows what he has to do, If he is anything, he is resiliant in that he can learn from his mistakes. but in a district that is still Republican, I would predict another close race in 09, but Poisson will pull it out and head back to Richmond.

[fairfacts]

I didn't read this post

[Loudoun girl]

Ben, I love your blog and your in depth look at the Districts, but Loudoun D is totally correct on this one.

I know you will never believe this but the strongest Dem running was the one that lost, (Phyllis Randall). She also happened to be the only D the VLF did not endorse. They needed to have a bi-partisan ticket so they backed Waters. Add to that the fact that Scott York ran adds and sent out mailings with the entire Dems slate along and Randall's opponent, Waters. Pretty nasty stuff. Look at the numbers again and you will find that Randall actually pulled more votes in her District then McGimsey did in hers. McGimsey and Miller won because of who they were not vs. who they were. To a lesser degree this was also true for Buckley who spent her whole campaign introducing he opponent as “Dick Black’s son in law”. The only Dems who pulled votes on their own merits was Randall, Burke and Kurtz. Add to that Poisson did not campaign at full strength. In short there was a lot going on the ground a behind the scenes. But mostly it was a VLF ticket not a Dems ticket that won.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

OK, I do have a slight issue with all you D's who are saying this district DOES still lean Republican. LOUDOUN still leans Republican, but this district actually now leans Democratic because of the strong Dem performances in the Potomac & Sugarland Run districts, and a few Broad Run precincts that have clearly become populated with more liberally-minded people (Selden's Landing, Farmwell Station).

Look at the numbers since the late 90's folks--it's a solid trend. And I do not see it abating until average Dem performance hits about 58%.

The 2008 election numbers should be very interesting. In 2004, Kerry won only 3-4 precincts in eastern Loudoun, and only 1-2 of those were in the 32nd. I would be willing to wager that this time around, you'll see that 47-48% performance increase over 50% for the first time, and you'll almost all the eastern precincts in the 32nd go blue, especially the ones like Algonkian, Cascades, Lowes Island, Sugarland South, and maybe even Countryside---those are the areas where the biggest jump in Democratic performance seems to have solidified and they may all break 50% for the first time.

I don't know about the Democratic nominee winning all of Loudoun, especially if it's Hillary, but I do think an Edwards or Obama could do it.

But no, the 32nd is NOT a Republican-leaning district anymore. It's a true toss-up, on its way to becoming blue.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

OK, after reading what NLS & other Loudoun folks have to say, it does seem that it may not have only been turnout.

I think it was a combination of lower turnout, less vigorous campaigning by David, and possibly (although I am not convinced because this is a bread n butter district and has always leaned pro-business) some concern among Democrats on Dave's commitment to the environment.

Regardless, it was definitely an interesting race in 2007.

[Loudoun Insider]

It's nice to see the liberal wingnuts causing internal strife within their own party for a change! You cannot blame Randall's loss solely on the VLF endorsement. As much as people like and respect Phyllis Randall it just may be possible that she is not the best candidate for office. She lost to the goofy Bob Ohneiser for the School Board in 2003 and was soundly defeated in a three way race where her two opponents were Republicans (GOP Convention loser Jack Ryan ran as an "Independent"). In a big year for the Dems most people would pick the Dem in that situation to win, but she only pulled in 30% of the vote. The VLF slate was picked by the VLF, and York basically ran his own slate of candidates that coincided with VLF. There can be no question that "Scott York Party" is more influential with the voters than either major political party in Loudoun at this time. Now there are all sorts of calls for retribution against the elected Dems who the liberal wingnuts feel aren't liberal enough for them. This is the LCRC playbook deja vu! Maybe it is time for an official Independent Party led by York, and let the wingnuts on either side fight about how pure they are.