2014 VBM returns through 10/29 (updated)

Ask and ye shall receive. PDI has updated their charts to include an additional 100k ballots from yesterday. Based on the county VBM return rates it now looks like most counties are probably up to date. Those that aren’t are smaller. Republican leaning counties have returned ballots at a rate that’s 22% higher than Democratic counties. That’s believable, as it was 9% higher in 2012. The difference comes largely from low returns in LA county, which had very low returns in the primary.

The first batch which I reported earlier were more from Republican leaning counties. Los Angeles was among them, however, and those races had a definite Democratic push. These returns are much more from Democratic leaning counties, but there’s a Republican lean to the results. Overall, VBMs are 42.2%D/37.6%R. That’s 3% more Republican than 2012, but slightly less Republican than 2010. It’d be tough to expect a more Republican electorate in 2014 than 2010. Voter registration statewide is D+15 and it was D+13 then. We also had competitive statewide races where Republicans, mostly Meg Whitman, spent a lot of money to drive turnout. This year, the majority of Republican statewide candidates are just so the party has names on the ballot.

Congress
CA-3: Remember those VBM gains Democrats made due to Solano county? They’ve been wiped out. VBM remains at D+2.8%, the same as it was Tuesday.

CA-7: A bunch of new ballots came in but the VBM didn’t move. Democrats still have a 0.2% advantage, 41.0%-40.8%.

CA-9 and 10: VBM made a small move toward the GOP in both districts.

CA-16: There was a point where the Democratic returns were D+18. They are now down to D+12, only 1 point more Democratic than 2012. That’s certainly encouraging for Republican Johnny Tacherra, but probably not enough to make the district competitive.

CA-21: Remember that big jump when Democrats had a 17% advantage in ballot returns? Well, it dropped again from D+11.7% to D+10.3%. That scare David Valadao had seems to have brought a Republican response.

CA-24: There was a small move R+2.5% to R+2.1%, but Santa Barbara county reported VBM ballots while San Luis Obispo county did not. So that may not be much of a change.

CA-31: The Democratic return advantage shrunk slightly and the difference is smaller than 2012. Considering that there was no Democrat on the ballot in 2012, that’s a little surprising and may provide a ray of hope for Republican Paul Chabot.

State Senate
SD-14: As with CA-21, the GOP has wiped out much of a big margin for Democrats. The Democratic VBM advantage has dropped from D+18.9% to D+14.4%. There should be a slight sigh of relief as the GOP hopes to hold this district. Assembly
AD-8: Virtually unchanged.

AD-16: Movement towards the Democrats from D+2.9% to D+3.5%.

AD-21: The Republican surge in Central Valley VBMs shows here as the Democratic advantage drops from D+4.8% to D+4.1%.

AD-32: And it shows here in the drop from D+18.6% to D+17.0%.

AD-40: Movement towards the Republicans from R+6.4% R+6.9%.

Thank you to PDI for compiling this data.

2014 VBM returns through 10/29

There were only reported VBM returns in 18 of 58 California counties. Of those 18 counties, the only ones that matter are Los Angeles, San Joaquin, Solano, Orange, San Diego, Ventura, and Riverside. There are now less VBM ballots returned than 2010, despite the presence of over 3 million more VBM ballots mailed. I suspect that some counties aren't reporting all their VBM ballots when they report and others that haven't reported in the last few days will have quite a few when they do. On the other hand, this could be a very low turnout election.

Congress
CA-3: VBM ballots updated were only from Solano county, which leans left. Democrats picked up ballots and the district is now D+3.7%, instead of D+2.8%. That's much better for John Garamendi.

CA-26: Not much movement but it did help the Democrats. Now D+3.1%, instead of D+2.8%.

CA-33: For the second time this week, the VBM returns moved toward the Democrats, up from D+4.2% to D+5.5%. Republican Elan Carr's chances may be diminishing.

CA-36: There is a bright spot for the GOP. Returns ticked up from R+2.8% to R+3.2%. Brian Nestande shouldn't be dismissed with these VBMs.

CA-47: Remember that surprising Republican advantage? Well, it's almost all wiped out. The district went from R+2.9% to R+0.3%. This district was always an extreme long shot.

CA-52: I skipped a bunch of districts which either had no new ballots or a small number that didn't change anything. There were just under 7k ballots reported here, about 10% of the total. There was no change. Republicans still have an R+9.3% VBM advantage. This is a high turnout district, but there have been a significant number of VBM ballots returned. Carl DeMaio still looks good.

State Senate
SD-34: It was a very good day for Democrat Jose Solorio. Returns dropped from R+8.5% to R+6.5%. This may yet be a race.

Assembly
AD-36: Like other LA county districts this one moved to the Democrats, from R+10.3% to R+9.8%. Democrat Steve Fox improbably won in 2012 with an R+15.1% VBM. So he can't be dismissed despite the large Republican advantage.

AD-60: VBM returns ticked toward Democrats from R+11.6% to R+11.2%. The GOP is still ahead of 2012 when Eric Linder won his first term.

AD-65: Like the overlapping SD-34, this district moved toward the Democrats, going from R+10.7% to R+8.4%. While still more Republican in 2012, Democrat Sharon Quirk-Silva looks stronger.

AD-66: VBMs moved from R+3.1% to R+2.0%. It's still more Republican than 2012, but not a lot.

Thank you to PDI for compiling this data.

2014 VBM returns through 10/28

Tuesday had 189,654 ballots reported, bringing the total to 1,711,227. The returns remain anemic. That’s only 19% of all VBM. In 2010, returns were 28% by the same day. Because there are so many more VBM ballots now than there were then, this could result in substantially lower number of total votes. In 2010, there were 10.3 million total votes. While it’s tough to estimate how many there will be this year I think there could be a million less votes than there were then.

Yesterday’s returns were 40.4%D/39.4%R, another good day for Republicans. Los Angeles and Alameda county didn’t report any returns, as Los Angeles reports Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and Alameda reports Monday and Wednesday. Even after they report today, these counties will have low return rates. It’s possible they aren’t reporting all the ballots or that they aren’t getting a lot of ballots. Los Angeles was very low in the primary. The numbers right now look like Republicans Pete Peterson and Ashley Swearingen might have a shot in their statewide races, but the district races are easier to look at. The low returns in some counties don’t have a significant impact on district ranges, because most Los Angeles county districts are mostly in the county.

Congress
CA-3: The dramatic Republican returns dissipated slightly yesterday, with the Democratic advantage ticking up from D+2.4% to D+2.8%. That’s still 1.8% better than 2012 and at the edge of the territory where Republican Dan Logue could win.

CA-7: The district had another small tick toward the GOP, going from D+0.4% returns to D+0.2%. There should be the same number of ballots from each party with the current trend. Republicans are running 1.5% better than 2012 when Democrats had a 1.7% advantage in VBM. This is the only district where more Republicans than Democrats voted on election day in 2012. It’s still a toss-up.

CA-9: Jerry McNerney’s ballot advantage continues it’s sharp drop, down from D+8.6% to D+7.8%. Similar to the two district above, that’s 1.4% ahead of 2012. It’s difficult to see Republican Tony Amador winning, but McNerney should be doing a better job of getting out the vote.

CA-10: VBM are now R+3.7%, up through R+2.5%. The Republican advantage is now 1.3% above 2012. Jeff Denham has little to worry about.

CA-16: VBM was decidedly Republican yesterday and the Democratic advantage drops from D+14.6% to D+13.4%. Democrats are still running ahead of 2012 here, so Jim Costa is probably safe.

CA-21: Remember that big Democratic advantage in ballot returns. Well, there’s still a bigger advantage than 2012, but a massive Republican return has moved the VBM returns from D+15.7% to D+11.7%. There were no returns reported from Kern county, the Democratic stronghold in this district. So the returns look more dramatic than they probably are. Still, a move of this size is good news for Republican incumbent David Valadao.

CA-24: No change here. It’s still at R+2.5%. That’s a bit ahead of 2012. If Democrats have dramatically increased spending, as was indicated yesterday, holding steady isn’t bad for Republican Chris Mitchum.

CA-26: Remember when returns were D+6? They dropped from D+3.3% to D+2.8%. Democratic returns are still running better than 2012, but if Republicans keep reducing the Democratic advantage Jeff Gorell could win.

CA-31: No real change. Now D+1.5% return.

CA-33: Los Angeles county didn’t report. Update tonight.

CA-36: No real change. R+2.8%.

CA-41: No real change. D+3.6%.

CA-47: Because Orange county reported returns and Los Angeles county didn’t, returns for this district ticked up from R+2.2% to R+2.9%. The Republican improvement, it was D+2.3% in 2012, is the second largest of the cycle, but Democrats should have better numbers after Los Angeles reports tonight.

CA-52: Still steady at R+9.4%. Democrat Scott Peters needs to cut down that Republican advantage and there hasn’t been real movement.

This was a neutral to good day for Republicans in many districts. In most cases the VBM returns are running ahead of 2012. I’m not sure they are running enough ahead for the Republican to win. We might be looking at a bunch of 52%-48% Democratic wins. As I’ve mentioned before, however, Republicans did better on election day than VBM in 31 of 40 primary races. This was a dramatic change from previous years. If that isn’t a fluke we could see some Republican wins.

State Senate
SD-12: The district moved a little more Republican, from D+7.0% to D+6.6%. Still not competitive. Easy Republican win.

SD-14: As with CA-21, there was big movement to the GOP. Here it was from D+18.9% to D+15.5%. Good news for Republican Andy Vidak.

SD-34: Returns remain at R+8.5%.

Assembly
AD-8: This district probably isn’t competitive, but it overlaps CA-7 and had higher Republican turnout on election day in 2012. It’s D+3.2% now, compared to D+4.6% in 2012. AD-16: Slight tick toward Democrats from D+2.6% to D+2.9%.

AD-21: Returns at D+4.8%.

AD-32: VBMs were strongly Democratic at D+23.7% but that dropped to D+18.6%. That’s good news for Republican Pedro Rios.

AD-36: Returns at R+10.3%. Again that’s ahead of 2012 for Democrats but Steve Fox will have to hope for a huge Democratic turnout on election day and that might be a bridge too far.

AD-40: The strong Republican advantage is now R+7.1%. It should easily remain Republican.

AD-44: Returns are now slightly more Republican, at R+0.4%. As with the Ventura county congressional district, CA-26, that’s much better for Democrats than 2012. They still can’t afford the returns to keep moving in this dirction.

AD-60: Returns are now R+12. Safe for Republicans.

AD-65: Returns stay steady at R+10.7%. Democratic incumbent Sharon Quirk-Silva may be doomed.

AD-66: Returns are now R+3.1%. Democratic incumbent Al Muratsuchi is getting more Democratic VBMs in now than before, but Republicans are returning at a greater rate than 2012.

Thank you to PDI for compiling this data.

CA-24 may actually be competitive

The DCCC is putting some last minute money into CA-24 to help Lois Capps.

Some Democrats, for example, have begun to worry about the prospects of California Rep. Lois Capps... the DCCC is making a last-minute purchase of $99,000 worth of radio advertising in the Santa Barbara area to boost Capps, according to a committee aide.

I don't know why the DCCC is putting money into the district, but I'd expect them to be professional enough that they aren't reacting to Chris Mitchum's internal poll. If that were all it took, Republicans would be happy to put out internals showing close races in 100 more districts. That said, VBMs should have them a little worried, but I also assume they've polled this race themselves. This morning I was cautious about positive VBM returns for the GOP, but this is a sign that there may something more than Republican wishful thinking in some of these districts.

Capps had $1,072,500 COH on September 30 and $736,206 on October 15. In a race where her opponent has spent $302,214 the entire cycle, she shouldn't need DCCC help. If she can't get re-elected with that money in the bank, another $99,000 won't help. If the DCCC is looking to help a California incumbent who could be in trouble, they should really be getting behind John Garamendi. He's cash poor and Dan Logue has already put $785,050 of his own money in. If Logue thinks he has a chance, he'll be putting more in.

2014 Congressional race VBM returns through 10/27

Another 194,279 ballots were reported for yesterday, 8 days from election day. This is 54,838 less than the same day for 2010. While ballots are roughly 100k ahead of 2010, there are a lot more VBM ballots out today. Thus far, only 17% have been returned. In 2010, 25% had been returned on the same day. We may be talking about fairly low turnout this year. Overall, Democrats did better Monday. Their spread was 43.6%D/36.2%R. That was similar to the overall return in 2012, however, not a good day. While some Democratic leaning counties haven't reported VBMs at the same rate as Republican leaning counties we're so far along that it's possible those counties won't return VBMs at the same rate. The overall return is 42.2%D/37.6%R. That's still very good for Republicans.

PDI also has the ethnic and age breakdown of returns. I'll start with a qualifier here. We don't know if certain groups send in their VBM ballots first and others do it later. So this data could change. The VBM ethnically in between 2010 and 2012. So there's not much there. Ballot return right now is 73% over 55 years old. It was 63% in 2012 and 71% in 2010. The older voters voting right now don't have to be Republican or Republican leaning independents, but older people tend to vote more Republican than younger people. So an older independent is more likely to vote Republican than a younger one. This percentage favors the GOP.

CA-3: The Democratic advantage keeps dropping. Yesterday it went from D+3.1% to D+2.4%. It went D+5 in 2012. I'm not ready to declare this race as competitive yet, but I think I'm being cautious here. D+2 should make it competitive. Through self-funding Logue has matched incumbent Democrat John Garamendi's fundraising. I'm guessing that if Garamendi's internals said he was in trouble, we'd hear something but that's making a big assumption. Neither candidate has gotten independent expenditure help.

CA-7: The district went from D+0.6% returns to D+0.4%. So it didn't move at all. There's a ton of outside spending and I anticipate this one still in doubt at the end of election night.

CA-9: Can you name the Republican nominee here? I'm guessing a lot of people don't know who it is until they get their ballot. Tony Amador hasn't spent any money, but the returns dropped nearly a point D+9.5% to D+8.6%. I don't think incumbent Democrat Jerry McNerney is in a competitive race, but if Republican returns get this down in the D+5 range, it's possible.

CA-10: No change. Jeff Denham still sitting fine.

CA-16: More Democratic ballots, as it moves from D+14.0% to D+14.6%. The Central Valley is difficult to predict based on party breakdown, but I think Jim Costa is probably safe.

CA-21: More Democratic ballots here too, as it's moved from D+15.2% to D+15.7%. I'll reiterate that while that looks bad for Republican David Valadao, Democratic independent expenditures have pulled out of the district and SurveyUSA reported Valadao up 5 with already voted. If that's accurate then these Democratic returns aren't a concern for him.

CA-24: A good day for Democrat Lois Capps as the returns are now R+2.5%, compared to R+3.0% before. Like CA-3, this district could be competitive with these returns.

CA-26: A good day for Republican Jeff Gorell, as the Democratic ballot advantage dropped from D+4.0% to D+3.3%. I've said all along that if the VBM skews this Democratic then Republican Jeff Gorell will probably lose. But it isn't an advantage that we shouldn't look at returns on election day.

CA-31: Returns are now D+1.6%, down from D+2.0%. Democrat Pete Aguilar has spent a lot more money and has independent expenditures supporting him, while Republican Paul Chabot does not. But VBMs are fairly low here and this is a range where Chabot can still win.

CA-33: This district had the biggest drop in Democratic spread from 2012 to 2014. Despite a very strong day in Democratic ballot returns, it still does. The district went from a D+2.3% Democratic advantage to D+4.2%. That's still well below the D+10.9% in 2012. This is an open seat with candidates who don't fit the usual Republican-Democratic dynamic. There's a Jewish Republican from Santa Monica against an Asian Democrat from Torrance. If Carr makes inroads with either Jewish voters or West Siders, this may be a race.

CA-36: Returns moved more Republican from R+2.2% to R+2.7%. In most districts that's pretty good for the GOP but they were R+4.5% in 2012. Raul Ruiz likely did well with the independent vote then and there's no reason to think that's changed. Ruiz remains a strong favorite here, but Republican Brian Nestande can't be dismissed.

CA-41: No change here. I don't think Republican Steve Adams has a shot at an upset but this district had VBM returns of D+8.5% in 2012 and is now D+3.4%. Returns are the lowest of any competitive district right now. I think the VBMs will have to get closer to even for it to be a race, but again this may be a district to watch on election night.

CA-47: Democrats cut the Republican advantage down from R+3.0% to R+2.2%. Again this is a district with a some dude Republican going up against an incumbent Democrat. The difference between Democratic VBM and election day turnout was heavier here than any other district, but it's tough to dismiss a district where there are more Republican ballots. I'm not saying that Republican Andy Whallon has a shot any more than I said that Tony Amador or Steve Adams could win, but the numbers remain good for Republicans.

CA-52: Steady at R+9.4%. Carl DeMaio remains the favorite. This sort of advantage would be a death sentence for incumbent Democrat Scott Peters elsewhere, but that's not certain here. Still, he can't like this many Republican ballots.

I'm not trying to declare a Republican pick-up of 6 or 7 seats here. Democrats will most likely return almost every seat they have and pick-up CA-31. Still, the VBM returns suggest there may be more competitive races than expected.

Once again, a big thank you to PDI for compiling these numbers.

California Voter Registration

PDI, the gods of registration data, has a chart on new California voter registrations. The Secretary of State hasn't released the final registration data, but I assume it came from them or directly from the 58 counties. The new registrant numbers for the year are positive for the Democrats, as they lead the GOP 35%-17%, a little bit above the overall current spread of 43%-28%. This is the new registrants for the year, so we don't know the breakdown of the last six weeks.

The Secretary of State puts out statistics on their website of overall registrations, not new registrants. Those statistics for the first eight months of 2014 showed a net negative number of registrants, as it included additions and deletions. So while the new registrant numbers are good for Democrats, bad news for the GOP, I'm not sure they have a huge impact for this election. We should keep in mind that only 35% of new registrants are Democrats, compared to 43% of all people currently registered. So while having 17% of registrants is pathetic for Republicans it's also possible that the GOP has a better shot at the new 47% that's neither Republicans nor Democrats.

If there is good news for Republicans it's that there were only 272k new registrants for the last six weeks before this election. There were 332k in 2010 and a whopping 1,327k in 2012. Those new 2012 registrants voted at a higher rate than people who were registered before and Democratic registrations outnumbered Republican ones by 3 to 1. That likely killed Republicans and cost the party 1-3 seats in congress, the assembly, and the state senate. The new registrants in the last six weeks actually had more Republicans in 2010. I don't think that's the case now, but it'd appear that the GOP won't be hurt much by late registering new voters, as the party wasn't in 2010.

The lack of new registrants fits in with the low primary turnout and lower returns in VBM. The enthusiasm isn't there in California. And lower turnout here benefits Republicans.

2014 VBM returns through 10/24

California has reported receiving 1.3 million VBM ballots. That’s an increase from 2010, but that’s mostly because the number of VBM ballots is way up. In fact, only 15% of VBM ballots are in. At this point in 2010, it was 20%. The number of total registered voters isn’t much higher. So unless a significant number of people turn in their VBM ballots on election day we’re going to see a lower overall number of people voting in California. The primary had a record low participation.

This is important to know when looking at the numbers. We’re still at 42%D/38%R. That’s better for Democrats than 2010 if Democratic VBM participation rate is the same as it was then. Due to a Democratic party effort, however, their VBM returns were up in the primary. This mostly, but not entirely, cannibalized their election day vote. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. If someone votes earlier it save you money on a mailer and means you can call or knock on the door of a different voter. So I’d cautiously say these numbers are good for the GOP.

One caveat is that Democratic leaning Los Angeles county has one of the lowest VBM returns. They are reporting ballots every other day, just as they’ve done in the past. They did have a low primary turnout. So it’s possible there aren’t unreported ballots.

Congress
CA-3: VBM return dropped again. This time it was from D+5 to D+3, after starting at D+12 with the first ballots. Both 2012 and the primary were D+5 VBM. So if this trend continues, Republican Dan Logue might have a shot.

CA-7: VBM moved from even to D+1. Any movement of 1 point isn’t really significant due to rounding. In this case, the change is less than half a point. The VBM has been bouncing 1 point either way the whole time. It’s still a toss-up.

CA-9: VBM now at D+9, the same as 2012. That’s a good number for incumbent Democrat Jerry McNerney.

CA-10: VBM remains at R+2, the same as 2012. That’s a good number for incumbent Republican Jeff Denham.

CA-16: VBM is steady at D+14. The Central Valley is difficult to judge because so many Democrats vote Republican down ballot, but I don’t see any reason that incumbent Democrat Jim Costa should worry.

CA-21: VBM is steady at D+15. As I discussed previously this could be cause for concern for incumbent Republican David Valadao. As I also said previously, however, he romped in 2012 when the actual final electorate was 47%D/36%R.

CA-24: VBM remains at R+3, a tick higher than 2012. That’s a slightly favorable electorate for Republican Chris Mitchum. Lois Capps should be out there getting out the vote and spending some of that campaign cash. Mitchum’s internal says this district is competitive and it certainly has the partisan make-up to be competitive. I wouldn’t put it in the GOP column, but it bears watching.

CA-26: The district bounced back to D+3. I’ve maintained that Republican Jeff Gorell will have a tough time winning if there are more Democratic VBM ballots than Republican, but now isn’t the time to dismiss him either.

CA-31: The district is still at D+2. That’s positive for Democrat Pete Aguilar but Republican Paul Chabot shouldn’t be dismissed.

CA-33: The district finally started moving toward the Democrats, ticking up to D+3 from D+2. So it’s not much of a move. Normally, D+3 isn’t sunny for Republicans, but it depends on the district. As mentioned above, it can be encouraging in CA-3, while discouraging in CA-26. It’s very encouraging here. The biggest reason is that this district was D+11 in 2012 and you’re dealing with an open seat that has challengers from parts of the district that are usually the other party’s stronghold.

I know a lot of people would dismiss making a play for a district like this for the GOP. After all, a district this Democratic is sure to flip back in 2016. I think it’s a good idea for Republicans to try in a couple of Democratic districts like this one. The GOP hasn’t taken any light to medium blue districts in the last few cycles. It’d be nice to know that they can.

CA-36: The district is still at R+2. In some places that’d make Republican challenger Brian Nestande look strong, but R+2 here is like D+2 in CA-31. Nestande is in this but a definite underdog.

CA-41: I haven’t mentioned this district before, but it’s one the GOP thought they could win in 2012. It was an epic fail. The VBM is actually D+4, 5 points lower than 2012. That’s good, but I don’t think Republican Steve Adams is a serious threat to incumbent Democrat Mark Takano. It still is one to watch.

CA-47: The district is still R+3 VBM. This is a very similar district to CA-33 and CA-41 in voting patterns, if not demographically. They are all D+10-11 on a Presidential level. The differences in the congressional race are that CA-41 and 47 have incumbents and challengers who haven’t raised much money. CA-33 has no incumbent and a Republican who has raised a decent amount of money. The VBMs in CA-41 and 47 are 5 points more Republican than 2012, while the VBM in CA-33 is 7 points more Republican.

It’s likely that none of these will be competitive districts and Republicans will wish that this increased Republican turn-out had happened in a more competitive district. This could be a sort of control group/experimental group thing. CA-33, 41, and 47 are control group districts where Democrats and Republicans aren’t trying hard. The environment in such a case is strongly favoring the GOP. In districts where both parties are trying, however, Democrats are holding the Republican turnout gains down.

CA-52: This is one district that Republicans look healthy in that is competitive. While it’s now R+9 instead of the previous R+10, that exceeds the R+6 in 2012. I believe Republican challenger Carl DeMaio should still be the favorite.

State Senate
SD-12: District moves a tick more Democratic at D+7. Still fine for the GOP.

SD-14: District stays at D+19. Still worrisome for GOP incumbent Andy Vidak. We won’t know how worrisome until election day.

SD-32: I include this one not because I think it’ll be competitive, but because a Republican independent expenditure is going in. I’m wondering if Republicans are operating the theory I had above that you only know where you can compete and how much you can move the needle by trying it somewhere. The VBMs so far are D+8, more Republican than the D+12 in 2012 and D+12 in the primary. That’s not a reason to think this district will be competitive, however. Republicans aren’t going to win a D+8 in Los Angeles county and the district’s final tally was D+24 2012. So a lot of Democrats came out on election day then.

SD-34: At R+8 it's still tough odds for Democrat Jose Solorio.

Assembly
AD-8: I haven’t mentioned this one because I don’t think it’ll be competitive. It looks like a district that could be. VBMs are D+4, down from D+5 in 2012.

AD-16: There are some similarities between this district and AD-8, but I don’t think Democrats have anything to worry about either. Returns remain at D+3.

AD-21: Returns tick up from D+5 to D+6, good territory for incumbent Democrat Adam Gray.

AD-32: Returns remain steady at D+24. This has the Valley dynamic of CA-21 and SD-14 as the ballots are the same ones reported there. Here, however, there’s a Democratic incumbent.

AD-36: VBMs go from R+11 to R+10. I still think incumbent Democrat Steve Fox remains a goner.

AD-40: VBMs go from R+7 to R+6, but the real movement is smaller than that.

AD-41: I’m including this one even though I think there’s no chance it’ll be competitive. Incumbent Chris Holden is running against a challenger who qualified by being a write-in. That said, VBM returns are D+1 so far and I’ve included any district that has VBMs that close. They were D+3 in 2012 when Holden won comfortably.

AD-44: This open Ventura county district is currently held by the GOP. For the first time, the ballots are even. There had been a Democratic advantage since the first ballots came in. While even isn’t terrible here for the GOP, I think it favors Democrat Jacqui Irwin. It was R+6 in 2012.

AD-57: Republican Rita Topalian beat Democratic incumbent Ian Calderon in the primary in a district that shouldn’t be competitive. Speculation centered around the Calderon name hurting the Democrat, as two members of his family are under indictment. Sometimes scandal can throw a race completely out of whack. People who normally would never vote Republican probably voted Republican just because of it. Returns are D+6. They were D+9 in the primary and D+10 in 2012. It would be stunning if Democrats take AD-44 from the GOP but are deprived of their 2/3 majority with a loss here.

AD-60: I continue to include this one, even though I don’t think it’ll be competitive. It moves from R+11 to R+12.

AD-65: The district stays at R+11, a margin that I feel may doom Democratic incumbent Sharon Quirk-Silva.

AD-66: Good news for Democratic incumbent Al Muratsuchi is that VBMs dropped from R+6 to R+4. They were R+1 in 2012, so he isn’t safe.

Once again, a big thank you to PDI for compiling these numbers.