List extrapolated from here from Reid Wilson:
|Mike Ross||AR-04||R+7||Likely Dem|
|Allan Boyd||FL-02||R+6||Likely Dem|
|Suzanne Kosmas||FL-24||R+4||Lean Dem|
|Sanford Bishop||GA-02||D+1||Safe Dem|
|Bill Foster||IL-14||R+1||Lean Dem|
|Ike Skelton||MO-04||R+14||Lean Dem|
|Earl Pomeroy||ND-AL||R+10||Lean Dem|
|Mike McMahon||NY-13||R+4||Lean Dem|
|Michael Arcuri||NY-24||R+2||Lean Dem|
|Chris Carney||PA-10||R+8||Lean Dem|
|Ciro Rodriguez||TX-23||R+4||Likely Dem|
...and the reason that you can tell that they're worrying is because everyone on that list commissioned a poll in the last three months of 2009. Reid explains why this is interesting:
Some political professionals advising their clients have told them to hold off conducting polls until this 3-month period, when the health care debate calms down. Dems saw a demonstrable drop in support during the final half of the year, thanks to health care, and polling during such a turbulent time gives unnecessarily worrying, or inaccurate, results.
Which last may or may not be true; but it still begs the question why these fourteen are worrying. Aside from the fact that they're all in competitive districts. And that all but one of them is in a race rated as competitive. And that more than half of them are already at serious risk of losing their jobs. And that it's turning out to be a bad year to be an incumbent Democrat. Other than that, no worries, yes?
Yes, 'worry' is an interesting word, 'isn't it? It originally meant 'to strangle,' you know.
Crossposted to Moe Lane.