The third poll of the Georgia runoff (released by Research 2000 yesterday) finds comforting news for Saxby Chambliss. The Republican Senator increases his lead to a 6% advantage (51% to 45%, up from a 3% lead).
What is most troubling for Democrats is that the sample is more Republican than that of the previous week: 26% of respondents are African-American, and when asked who they voted for on November 4th, the sample gives Chambliss an 8% lead - rather than a 2% one last week. This could naturally be the result of statistical noise (and the poll’s 3% trendline is certainly within the margin of error); but it could also mean that Research 2000’s likely voter screen finds that the Republican base is more energized than the Democratic one.
That would be a striking turn-around from the enthusiasm gap we have observed throughout 2008, but it is one that continues to be supported by actual numbers from the ground: Georgia’s official early voting statistics find that the share of African-Americans among early voters remains stuck under 23% after the completion of the fourth day of early voting even as the overall pace is accelerating (more than 100,000 voters have already cast their ballot). Martin cannot win the runoff without substantially improving that percentage.
Meanwhile, both camps are stepping up the ad wars, and Barack Obama finally came through for Martin by cutting a radio ad on his behalf. Of course, this will not energize the Democratic base as much as a presidential visit would, but it does not look like Obama’s team is willing to risk his political capital in a difficult battle in the Peach State:
Republican forces are stepping up their attack against the Democratic nominee with two very harsh new ads that hits him on a range of issues, most specifically crime. Freedom’s Watch’s new spot blames Martin for having voted against a bill toughening sentences against drunk driving and domestic abuse; the announcer accuses him of having “failed to look out for Georgia families.” The ad’s most vicious moment comes with footage of two men threateningly eying children:
The NRSC’s spot calls on voters to learn about the “real Jim Martin” - a common strategy in political advertisement that the McCain campaign unsuccessfully used against Barack Obama. The spot’s most memorable image is footage of Martin holding a “Women for Obama” sign - an obvious attempt to ridicule the Democrat:
What is most remarkable in a runoff or a special election is that neither party has any reason to court undecided voters or independents. Voters who are not sold on one of the two candidates or who are not a Democratic or Republican partisan are simply unlikely to come out and vote. That is a crucial difference with the run-up to November 4th, and it explains the tone of the ads and the identity of the surrogates both campaigns have been using .
November 21, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Going into 2010, Democrats cannot afford to have a shift where Republicans are more energized to vote than Democrats. This would be a disaster for Democrats in 2010 and also in several 2009 elections and special elections.
November 21, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Bill - I don`t think you can extrapolate from this runoff that the Dems are less energised. Obama would be much more involved in driving turnout for the mid terms than for a Georgia race.
November 22, 2008 at 1:15 am
It is very clear that Obama doesn’t want to get too involved in this race and have his political capital be wasted in a state that clearly leans for the GOP even before he gets into office. Guy is right, the Democrats may very well be less enthused, but remember that the Democrats have already had a great night on Nov 4 and probably glad the long campaign is over. I assure you, if Obama was going all out for Jim Martin, then Martin would be doing much better in the polls and the race would be closer. However, Georgia is a strong Republican state, and those efforts could have still fallen short, and would have significantly hurt Obama’s agenda and increase GOP confidence. Don’t worry about 2010 or about special elections in 2009 and beyond: by that time Obama will be president and he will have to get involved lest he starts to fail in implenting his ambitious agenda.
November 23, 2008 at 8:38 am
A Chambliss win will increase GOP confidence and Obama does’nt have a “finite” amount of “capital”. Obama needs to show he’ll FIGHT for ALL Democrat candidates. If Obama and the Dems sit on their butts now, they deserve to lose seats in 2010.
November 23, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Anonymous, 8:38 - sorry, but that doesn’t make sense.
Obama (as David Brooks put it this AM) is about the best natural politician we’ve seen in a lifetime, and with what he’s got on his plate and what he wants to accomplish , he doesn’t want to start spending your political capital on what is at best an up hill struggle. Think about convening the Senate after 1-20 with a conviction amongst the GOP that whatever Obama accomplished on 11-4 was due to Ws weakness and McCain’s stumbles, and that he’s been weakened by Martin’s defeat in GA.
As much as I detest Chambliss, its just not a good use of political capital, IMO.
November 28, 2008 at 7:20 pm
zoot, who gives a rat’s ass what the GOP thinks? Everyone expects Martin to lose anyway. I doubt many Americans would think Obama would be “weaker” just cause some guy they never heard of loses a Senate race. That’s a false perception created by the “talking heads echo chamber”.IMHO. Are we to believe Obama will lose support in Congress just cause he trys to help a fellow Democrat?