Incumbents' Performance vs. 2004

Looking deeper into the data, we can see more troubling signs for the Republicans coming out of the House elections. For example, lets look at those incumbents who did worse this year.

Compared to 2004:

158 Republicans got a lower percentage of the vote in 2006 than 2004.
70 of these received less than 60% of the vote this time.

39 Democrats got a lower percentage of the vote in 2006 than 2004.
6 of these received less than 60% of the vote this time.

Thus, aside from first term members (who tend to be the most vulnerable), the Democrats have many fewer members who might be vulnerable in '08--at least based on their recent performance.

To give some examples:

Jim Walsh (NY25)--91% to 51%
Mark Souder (IN3)--69% to 54%
Ron Lewis (KY2)--68% to 55%
Mike Castle (DE-AL)--69% to 57%
Deborah Pryce (OH15)--62% to 51%
Mark Kirk (IL10)--64% to 53%

None of these members were vulnerable this year due to scandal. Now it should be noted that oftentimes members recover from a close race and build up their support to previous levels. Challenger quality is also of great importance. And of course, we don't know what the political terrain will look like two years from now. Nonetheless, one can be sure that these members already have targets on their backs for '08.

Next, lets look at those members who did better this year.

Compared to 2004:

37 Republicans got a higher percentage of the vote in 2006 than 2004.

127 Democrats got a higher percentage of the vote in 2006 than 2004.

So--164 incumbents improved their performance; 197 saw their performance decline. Comparing the two cycles, Democratic incumbents vastly outperformed their Republican colleagues.