why did Jim Costa come so close to losing last election?

[AlanCranston]

I was following some races last year and I remember it took a few days for the race to be decided and he was trailing for a few days. I was surprised for a few reasons

A. His district gave Obama nearly 59 percent of the vote
B. He isn't as liberal as your average CA democrat
C. Although he's been in Washington for only six years, he has name recognition as he was in the state legislature in the 80s and 90s

The district as it currently stands is a fairly gerrymandered district and will probably be less democratic with compact boundaries. I hope he doesn't end up in the same situation as Richard Lehman did 20 years ago.

[tularetom]

1. There were signs all over the district tying Costa to Pelosi

and blaming both of them (+Boxer) for a big giant "water grab" that was going to turn the west side of the central valley into a desert (not true but that is what it always was anyway). It was designed to appeal to "low information voters" which that district is crawling with.

[Le Taz Hot]

2. He's in a conservative, rural district.

Consequently, he's a Blue Dog that votes with the Republicans most of the time. The second they get a decent Republican candidate to run against him, he's gone and I say good riddance. (I've known him well since the 1980's and he's just as slimy as his votes are.)

[AlanCranston]

3. You're wrong on a few accounts

While he is a member of the Blue Dog Caucus, he isn't that conservative. Here are his ACU ratings:

2005 32
2006 56
2007 4
2008 9
2009 12
2010 8
AVG: 20.2

So as you can see, he started out as a conservative democrat, but he has voted more with the liberals since they took control in 2007. Second you say that he is in a conservative rural district. Here are the election returns for his district:

2000
Gore 55
Bush 44

2004
Kerry 51
Bush 48

2008
Obama 60
McCain 39

So as you can see, its actually a fairly democratic district.