Republicans maintained their 5-1 edge in seats in 1996, but Bill
Clinton's performance improved significantly in several districts, in part due to the
national trend of Democratic improvement in districts with large Latino populations.
Elections could be more competitive in 1998 than in 1996 when five of six winners won at
least 65%.
click here to go to key to explain symbols
| PREDICTION: Landslide Win (4: 3R, 1D) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996: | 1994: | 1992: | Clinton: | First: | |
| 2. Ed Pastor (D)* | 65% | 62% | 66% | 64% (+15, up 7) | 1990 |
| 3. Bob Stump (R)* | 67% | 70% | 62% | 41% (-8, up 3) | 1976 |
| 4. John Shadegg (R)* | 67% | 60% | - | 44% (-5, up 7) | 1994 |
| 5. Jim Kolbe (R)* | 69% | 68% | 67% | 47% (-2, down 1) | 1984 |
| PREDICTION: Comfortable Win (1: 1R) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996: | 1994: | 1992: | Clinton: | First: | |
| 1. Matt Salmon (R)* | 60% | 56% | - | 46% (-3, up 6) | 1994 |
| PREDICTION: Vulnerable (1: 1R) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996: | 1994: | 1992: | Clinton: | First: | |
| 6. J. D. Hayworth (R)* | 48% | 55% | - | 47% (-2, up 3) | 1994 |
click here to go to key to explain symbols
back to Summary page