Archive for the 'MN-06' Category

Dems get bad news in two red districts they’d made 2010 priorities

Published
by
Taniel
on December 23, 2009
in MN-06 and TX-10
. 4 Comments

Within hours of Parker Griffith’s defection, the DCCC got two other signs that the political winds have shifted over the past year, transforming strong Democratic opportunities into long-shots. Indeed, at the start of the cycle Democrats had not given up the hope of scoring substantial gains: With California looking like it has untapped resources and a number of GOP incumbents coming out of the 2008 cycle with an aura of vulnerability , 2010 was the opportunity to pick-up additional seats.

One such incumbent is Rep. Michelle Bachmann. Defeating her has been a liberal priority ever since she became one of the far right’s leading spokespeople, and the party has recruited strong challengers against her: state Senator Tarryl Clark and Maureen Reed, a doctor who has been insisting she will now bow out for Clark and who’s been able to maintain herself due to surprisingly strong fundraising. With Bachmann regularly in the news for some statement or another, Democrats have been hoping these candidates can appeal to independents and perhaps even moderate Republicans.

Yet, a new PPP shows Bachmann is a strong position to win a third term. Not only does she have a solid approval rating (53% to 41%), including 51% approval among independents, but she has large leads against both Democrats: 55% to 37% against Clark, 53% to 37% against Reed. While her challengers are less-known that the incumbent, the poll doesn’t suggest respondents are reluctant to vote for Bachmann since she easily crosses the 50% threshold in both match-ups. There is no substantial pool of voters who are turned off by the incumbent and are looking for an alternative.

Given that MN-06 was one of the DCCC’s top eight offensive priorities according to comments made over the summer by the committee’s executive officer, these numbers sure are rough.

PPP compares Bachmann’s standing to that of Herseth Sandlin, the South Dakota Democrat who led her top competitor 46% to 39% in a poll released last week. Both incumbents have a similar approval rating spread (+12% and +11%, respectively), yet the latter has a far smaller lead and fails to cross 50%. That’s striking considering the fact that Herseth Sandlin has coasted to triumphant re-elections in 2006 and 2008 whereas Bachmann has struggled to win on both occasions. This suggests that many voters typically open to voting for a Democrat are very reluctant to do so this year, whereas there is no such qualms among those who typically lean right.

This situation might not limit Democratic opportunities in districts like LA-02, DE-AL, PA-06 and IL-10, and it doesn’t prevent the party from winning swing seats like MN-03 and the California districts that swung to Obama. But it does make it tough to envision a Democratic challenger pick-up a red district like MN-06, which did give McCain a 8% victory: Wave or no wave, the sort of cross-over voting this would be required is unlikely to occur in the midterm election of a Democratic president.

That situation is surely weighing hard on the mind of candidates who are challenging Republican incumbents in challenging districts: They got in at a time Democrats seemed like they could do anything, and they’re now stuck in races that look rather unwinnable - or at least far more difficult to pull off. One such candidate was businessman Jack McDonald, who was challenging Rep. Michael McCaul.

TX-10 is one of those districts which are bound to be very competitive some time in the future due to demographic changes, and while we aren’t there yet the past three presidential results are telling: Bush won by 33% in 2000, he won by 24% in 2004 and McCain won by 11% last year. That same day, McCaul was held to 54% by a Democrat who was barely noticed by national observers until the final weeks of the campaign. His 2010 opponent, however, was noticed within the first few months of 2009: He massively outraised the incumbent in the first quarter ($311,000 to $98,000), a rare discrepancy that he managed to repeat in the second and third quarter. Reporting nearly $1 million in contributions in an off-year is certainly enough to get national Democrats’ attention: The DCCC’s executive officer also included TX-10 among the party’s top eight priorities.

Fast forward to December: While the DCCC is no longer as focused on playing offense, it is nonetheless excited when McDonald finally formally announces a run (he had only formed an exploratory committee for most of 2009). But in a bizarrely speedy twist, McDonald announced last night that he was dropping out. There are only 10 more days before the filing deadline and $1 million in contribution that just evaporated: Gone are Democrats’ chances of contest the district. McCaul will most probably coast to an easy re-election.

For one of the party’s eight priorities to suddenly go completely off the map is quite a blow, not only because of what it does to TX-10 but also because of what it says about Democrats’ mood elsewhere. Consider that the party’s top recruit also recently dropped out in another of the DCCC’s top priorities: OH-02! I was never convinced that race merited an inclusion on that list when there were so many more promising districts in California, but at the very least this speaks to Democratic fortunes in those races the DCCC was looking to focus on.

If these developments are troubling for the DCCC, they’re all the more worrisome for Blue Dogs. We already knew that the coalition will lose many members (senior members are retiring, a number of junior recruits will probably lose their re-election races, and one of their members just became a Republican yesterday!), but we are now learning that they’re unlikely to gain any new members. The districts Democrats pick-up next year will be in districts like DE-AL and IL-10, which are unlikely to elect a conservative; Democrats who were looking to join Blue Dogs (McDonald and Maureen Reed have both been using that label to describe themselves) are running in districts that are looking like increasingly tough propositions for the party. Democrats might lose seats next year, but it won’t necessarily make it that harder for Nancy Pelosi to pass her priorities.

In House races, both parties land prominent challengers

Published
by
Taniel
on July 17, 2009
in KS-04, MI-07 and MN-06
. 7 Comments

Both parties landed a high-profile House candidate this week, though Democrats have more reason to be satisfied with their recruit than Republicans do.

MN-06: Bachmann gets 3rd Democratic opponent

Democrats already had two credible candidates hoping to face Rep. Michelle Bachmann: 2008 nominee Elwyn Tinklenberg and Maureen Reed. This week, they got a newest entrant who could be Bachmann’s most formidable challenger yet: Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark. Her decision is a sign of confidence: Clark is up for re-election in 2010, so she is giving up her position to run against Bachmann and she will have nothing to fall back on if she loses.

Based on this crowd of candidates, you might think we’re talking about a staunchly blue seat rather than this conservative-leaning district that twice voted for George W. Bush by double-digits and gave John McCain an 8% victory. Bachmann has revealed herself to be such a caricatural representative of the political spectrum’s far-right that she’s sure to be a highly vulnerable target come 2010, but the district is conservative enough that Democrats need a top-tier candidate who can mount a flawless political operation. Clark could be such a candidate.

In the state Senate since 2004, Clark represents portions of three districts that all decisively voted for McCain in 2008 - just like the district as a whole. Her prominent profile makes her the favorite to win the party’s nomination: The winner at a springtime party convention generally goes on to face an uncontested primary and Clark should benefit from establishment support. It also guarantees that a match-up between Bachmann and Clark will be a high-profile affair that wil be covered as such, thus magnifying the effect of any new Bachmann bombshell.

On the other hand, Reed and Tinklenberg definitely remain in the running. The former proved that she should be taken seriously with her surprisingly high fundraiser haul in the second quarter, and the second is vowing to press ahead to get a second chance against the woman he almost defeated last fall.

MI-07: Walberg guarantees high-profile race, is not GOP’s best shot

Republicans insist that Mark Schauer’s 2008 victory was a fluke, that he was helped by Obama’s coattails and by the divisions within the Republican base resulting from Mike Walberg defeating moderate Rep. Joe Schwarz in the 2006 Republican primary. That year, Walberg went on to win the general election as Democrats had not thought of fielding a top candidate but he lost to Schauer by 3% two years later; the 2008 campaign was marked by Schwarz’s decision to cross party lines and endorsed Schauer’s bid, blasting Walberg as a conservative firebrand.

Sure, Schauer might not have won the election had the GOP not split and had the party nominated a less conservative candidate. (This is, after all, a swing district.) But the best way to test that theory is not to renominate the man whose ideological profile was an important reason for the Democrats’ pick-up: This week, Tim Walberg announced that he would seek his old job back via a rematch with Schauer.

Now, Walberg is definitely a strong contender for the seat: He has already served a term, he has higher name recognition than a typical challenger and he can tap into the politico-financial network he acquired in the 2006 and 2008 cycles (especially Club for Growth donors). Furthermore, Michigan is an economically distraught state whose voters could seek to punish Democrats come 2010 (both at the federal and state level). If nothing else, Walberg’s bid guarantees that MI-07 will feature a competitive race well worth watching.

Yet, former lawmakers often do not make the best challengers - especially if their defeat came after a hard-fought race and had nothing to do with the element of surprise. (The NRCC alone spent more than $1 million in the district in 2008.) Also, it’s not like Republicans faced a dearth of candidates: state Senator Cameron Brown and Jackson County Prosecutor Hank Zavislak could have made strong Republican candidates.

KS-04: DCCC lands recruit but district remains tough

The district left open by Rep. Todd Tiahrt is staunchly Republican - Bush received 64%, McCain 58% - and not the best place we would expect Democrats to contest. And yet, the DCCC scored a big enough recruitment coup that KS-04 should at least remain on our radar screen: state Rep. Raj Goyl announced his candidacy last week. Since defeating a Republican incumbent in 2006, Goyl has represented a red-leaning district - giving him as much of a shot for Tiahrt’s House seat as the DCCC can hope for.

While this is undoubtedly good news for Democrats, too much should not be made of it: KS-04, which is far more conservative than Goyl’s state district, did not suddenly become a top-tier race just as HI-01 and CA-47 are not top-tier races because Republicans recruited Charles Djou and Van Tran. It is true that Democrats picked-up open seats that were in even more conservative territory in 2006 and in 2008, but the dynamics of the 2010 cycle will be far different and far less favorable to such upsets. As such, Republicans remain highly favored to win the general election. At the very least, Democrats will need to hope that the GOP primary gets nasty and divisive.

The Birther cause gains new House champions

Published
by
Taniel
on July 7, 2009
in Birther, CA-48, FL-15, MN-06 and TX-07
. 11 Comments

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.

When Rep. Bill Posey introduced H.R. 1503 back in March, he gained wide attention as the most prominent Republican official to take up the birther cause. That movement, which falsely charges that Obama is refusing to produce his birth certificate and that he is thus not a natural-born citizen, long had as its highest-profile members far-right figures like Alan Keyes and Phil Berg. But here was a freshman Republican, sworn in the House just two months before, willing to make a congressional issue out of the fear that Obama is not a legitimate president.

When asked whether he believed Obama was a natural-born citizen, Posey avoided offering an answer. “I haven’t looked at the evidence. It’s not up to me to look at the evidence,” he explained. “I can’t swear on a stack of Bibles whether he is or isn’t.”

For two months, Posey was the only Republican willing to champion that bill but his isolation was broken in early May when Rep. Bob Goodlatte became H.R. 1503’s first co-sponsor. In June, four other Republicans added themselves to the list: Rep. Marsha Blackburn, Rep. John Campbell, Rep. John Carter, Rep. John Culberson and Rep. Randy Neugebauer.

One thing these seven representatives have in common is that they are all members of the Republican Study Committee, a congressional caucus that groups the GOP’s conservative wing. Their association with the birther bill is now tagging them as members of the party’s most extreme right, so let’s take a closer look at what we know about these representatives and whether they could face competitive re-elections races; in the last column, I indicate whether they are signed-up as co-sponsors of Michele Bachmann’s paranoid constitutional amendment that seeks to defend the dollar’s role as the U.S. currency against depressingly misunderstood threats:

Name District First elected 2008 Prez vote 2008 score Bachmann bill
Posey FL-15 2008 51% McCain 54% Yes
Blackburn TN-7 2002 65% McCain 69% Yes
Campbell CA-48 2005 49% Obama 55% No
Carter TX-31 2002 58% McCain 60% No
Culberson TX-7 2000 58% McCain 56% Yes
Goodlatte VA-6 1992 57% McCain 61% No
Neugebauer TX-19 2003 72% McCain 72% No

CA-48 obviously stands out. John Campbell represents a district that voted for Obama in 2008; while it only did so narrowly, it was enough to label Campbell as vulnerable. Not only does CA-48 appear in my ratings, but is rated in the already moderately competitive “lean retention” category because Democrats have a highly credible challenge lined up: former Irvine Mayor Beth Krom has already jumped in the race.

Two other districts that are moderately competitive are FL-15 and TX-07. In the former, Posey (the leader of the House Birthers) is only a freshman and he occupies a district that is barely staying faithful to its Republican roots. While Democrats didn’t put up much of a fight in 2008, Posey is not entrenched enough to be certain he’ll easily win a second term. As for Culberson, he represents a staunchly Republican district but he had trouble closing his 2008 campaign: Democrats were excited by their nominee and the race created some buzz, though Culberson did prevail by 14%.

Of course, championing the birther bill will not end any of these 7 Republicans’ congressional tenure. For those, like Neugebauer and Blackburn, who are looking to move into higher office and know they have nothing to worry about but the Republican base, it could even prove a career booster. But the 3 congressmen who are already vulnerable - Campbell, Posey and Culberson - should to be careful not to make themselves into extremists isolated at their party’s fringe; as both Bill Sali and Bachmann showcased in 2008, that is a sure way to put yourself in electoral danger and lose your grip on a red-leaning district.

Speaking of Bachmann, isn’t the biggest surprise of this list her continued absence from it? The Minnesota congresswoman recently declared “I’m a foreign correspondent on enemy lines,” so would you not think she’d be interested in proving that the president is indeed a foreigner? Perhaps Bachmann is too busy in her newest crusade: The U.S. census. She recently declared that her family would not be filling any more information than the number of people in her household because she is concerned about governmental intrusion and about ACORN’s involvement with data collection.

Bachmann’s outburst led three conservative Republicans - Patrick McHenry (North Carolina), Lynn Westmoreland (Georgia) and John Mica (Florida) - to pen a letter urging her to reconsider her decision. The GOP does have reason to worry: If movement conservatives pick up Bachmann’s concerns as their new crusade and massively boycott the upcoming census, it could lead to conservative households to be undercounted. Even a small phenomenon could have consequences in terms of district allocation and redistricting, none of them to the GOP’s benefit.

House: Bachmann draws two challengers, Markey lands one

Published
by
Taniel
on May 8, 2009
in CA-04, CA-47, MI-11, MN-06 and VA-02
. 1 Comment

MN-06: Two challengers for Bachmann

Targeting Michelle Bachmann is a top priority for many Democrats and the prospect of being a netroots favorite proved appealing to two candidates who announced they would challenge Bachmann this week.

The first is Elwyn Tinklenberg, the party’s 2008 nominee. In the final weeks of October, Bachmann’s comments on “un-American” congresspeople led Tinklenberg to receive more than $1 million in donations the span of a few days. But that money came too late for Tinklenberg to have time to use it: He was left with more than half-a-million. In March, Tinklenberg transferred $250,000 of his leftover funds to the DCCC. At first, I took that as a sign that he would not seek a rematch, but his gesture now looks to have been intended to get in the DCCC’s good graces.

Indeed, state Democrats might decide that Tinklenberg wasted a great opportunity in 2008 (the environment was favorable, Bachmann was the center of a firestorm) and that a new candidate deserves a chance. Enter Maureen Reed, the former Chairwoman of the University of Minnesota Board of Regents and the Independence Party’s nominee for LG in 2006. Reed announced this week that she would seek the Democratic nomination; a DCCC official cheered her entry.

Reed announced that she will also seek the Independence Party’s endorsement. If she does secure the support of both parties, it could boost her general election campaign. (Last year, the Independent Party nominee got 10% of the vote; that might have cost Tinklenberg the support of many anti-Bachmann voters and contributed to his 3% defeat.)

But Tinklenberg also has a major asset: His campaign still possesses the list of people who donated to his campaign in 2008 - including the thousands of out-of-staters who helped him raise $1 million in the space of four days; many of them are presumably still interested in helping defeat Bachmann so Tinklenberg has a far larger network of potential donors than your average challenger starts with.

CO-04: Markey gets top challenger, with more likely to come

In a district narrowly won by McCain, freshman Betsy Markey might face a tougher race than she did last year: The environment is likely to be less favorable, and her opponent should be more electable than the anti-gay-obsessed Marilyn Musgrave. This week, state House minority whip Cory Gardner announced he would challenge Markey - giving the incumbent a credible challenger who should be able to drawn on establishment support to mount an aggressive campaign. (Gardner will not have the GOP field to himself, however.)

VA-02: Drake will not seek a rematch

We knew former Rep. Thelma Drake was vulnerable in 2008, but she was still considered a slight favorite to win re-election. But the Democratic wave that submerged the Old Dominion proved too much and allowed Glenn Nye to score a 4% victory. Drake had been considering a rematch, but she announced this week that she will not run.

While Drake would obviously have been a dangerous opponent for Nye to face, the GOP has enough of a bench not to be worried about the former representative’s withdrawal. In fact, repeat candidates often have a tougher time than new names as voters are often unwilling to reconsider their past decision without a clear reason to do so.

MI-11: This is what happens when all obvious candidates bow out

Thad McCotter, who sits on an economically distraught district Obama won by 9%, is one of the most obviously vulnerable House Republicans but Democrats are proving unable to recruit a strong challenger. Well, they now at least have a candidate: Fundraising consultant Natalie Mosher announced her candidacy this week.

While it is always good to have a challenger in a race in case circumstances get really tough for the GOP, McCoter is entrenched enough that he is unlikely to lose to anyone but an experienced Democrat fully supported by his national party. And Mosher, well, isn’t quite at that level. As Roll Call reports, the DCCC’s welcome was not particularly warm: “A spokeswoman for the [DCCC ...] confirmed that Mosher had contacted them about her bid, but she added that there are several other candidates still looking at running for McCotter’s seat.”

A final note on CA-47

My post on Van Tran’s candidacy in CA-47 generated some discussion about Tran’s ties to the district. A number of you pointed out that much of Tran’s state legislative district is not part of the congressional district he is running in and that this might pose a problem for him in the general election.

Well, it looks like Tran himself is already furthering that meme. His campaign’s first event is drawing mocking articles in the local press because it was not held within the 47th district but in the neighboring 46th. Tran’s staffers insist that they had not overlooked this and that the event was only one block away from CA-47, but they should be more careful given that this only plays into a pre-existing attack line. And it’s never good for a candidate when the main news out of his campaign kickoff is that the event was held in the wrong location…

Bachmann’s crusade against “One World Currency”

Published
by
Taniel
on March 27, 2009
in MN-06
. 18 Comments

Ever since she became the center of a firestorm over her comments about “anti-American” activities in Congress, Rep. Michelle Bachmann has unleashed a constant stream of jaw-dropping statements - most of them rather incomprehensible.

First came her mid-February interview about the stimulus plan: Her factually inaccurate statements and her bold declaration that “We’re running out of rich people in this country” once again attracted national headlines. Since then, Bachmann has called for a “revolution,” has reproached Obama for going “down the lane of economic Marxism,” engaged in a bizarre exchange with Timothy Geithner over the constitutionality of his actions, called herself a “foreign correspondent reporting to you from enemy lines” and asked Americans to be “armed and dangerous” over energy policy.

Now comes the most head-scratching episode: Her new-found crusade against an alleged threat to the U.S. dollar.

Some background

Earlier this week, China proposed replacing the dollar as the international reserve currency. Currently, the dollar is the dominant currency that is held by governments, institutions and central banks around the world in order to serve as a liability and stabilize the domestic currency. Worried that the weakness of the American economy will create trouble across the globe, the Chinese government proposed reducing the global financial system’s reliance on the dollar by making the International Monetary Fund’s already-existing Special Drawing Rights into the new currency reserve system.

While it is virtually impossible to imagine such a change being coordinated without Washington’s participation, this has ultimately very little to do with American policy and with America’s use of the dollar. China’s proposal concerns the policies of other countries; it is calling on them to stop piling up dollars in their reserves and turn to another currency to stabilize their economy.

Put it another way: This absolutely nothing to do with getting the United States to convert to another currency; and it has nothing to do to with any push to abolish the U.S. dollar! We are not talking about a currency that would be shared by all countries of the world (a sort of global euro) but about a reserve currency  that would fulfill its international role and serve as a stabilizing back-up precisely because it is not shared by all the financial systems.

Bachmann’s crusade

Yet, Michelle Bachmann is so (inexplicably) convinced that the Chinese are proposing that America get rid of its currency that she has made this into her defining issue of the week, going as far as to propose a constitutional amendment “that would bar the dollar from being replaced by any foreign currency” and would “denounce efforts to move towards a global currency.”

One might think that Bachmann is only trying to say that the United States should not condone other countries getting away from the dollar; whatever the merits of such legislation, it would at least make sense. But that is certainly not Bachmann’s intention; the worry she is trying to address is unquestionably that the dollar might no longer be the currency used within the United States. Here is the text of the bill:

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit the President from entering into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.

Now, take a look at her remarkable radio interview with Glenn Beck:

Let me tell you, there’s something that’s happening this week in Congress that could be the eventual unravelling for our freedom.. As you know, Russia, China, Brazil, India, South Africa, many national have lined up now and called for an international currency, a One World currency. And they want to get off the dollar as the reserve currency…

What that means is that all of the countries of the world would have a single currency. We would give up the dollar as our currency and we would just go with a One World currency. And now for the first time, we’re seeing major countries like China, India, Russia, countries like that, calling for a one world currency and they want this discussion to occur at the G20… Once you lose your economic freedom, you lose your political freedom. And then we are no more, as an exceptional nation, as we always have been. So this is imperative.

Finally, here are Bachmann’s comments on Hannity’s show:

If Tim Geithner is successful under President Obama, and they move us to an international currency, then we have no hope of standing on our own as a sovereign nation with our own economic system. It’s over. We can’t do that.

Needless to say, such statements can only be the sign of a paranoid mind; Bachmann does not just believes that her political enemies are guided by false ideas or that they cling to failed policies, she also believes that the Administration is out to deliberately sell out the United States, consciously weakening it to destroy its independence and its power. This obviously ties back to Bachmann’s mid-October warnings about the “anti-American” activities of members of Congress.

Let’s briefly recap the substantial problems with Bachmann’s arguments:

  1. Bachmann does not seem to understand that the reserve currency is not the same thing as the currency you and I use when we go out to buy bread. That is somewhat tragic considering that those two things are very different (if a country’s reserve currency was the same as the currency people use to buy bread, how would it be a reserve at all? how could it stabilize markets and serve as a back-up?).
  2. Even if Bachmann understood the difference, even if she understood that we are talking about a reserve currency, her bill would make little sense: It is other countries and their central banks who would strip the dollar of its international role by taking on other currencies in their reserves; if anything, the U.S. already holds other currencies like euros and yen.
  3. Bachmann is not grasping the difference, and she is essentially talking about the currency used within a country. That makes things even worse: Her fear is that the dollar might be abolished altogether and that American citizens might be forced to buy their bread in “One World Currency.” (Her press release frames her bill as protecting “Title 31, Sec. 5103 USC,” which “prohibits foreign currency from being recognized in the U.S.”) Yet, as I explained above, no one is talking about a “One World Currency” that would come to replace the dollar as the United State’s currency; that has nothing to do with the current discussions.

What is truly remarkable is that Bachmann never takes a step back: The more commentators point out that her understanding is factually flawed, the more she insists that there is a conspiracy to strip the United States of its currency - just as she insisted last spring that there was an anti-American conspiracy in the halls of the United States Congress.

Bachmann might have survived the 2008 elections, but she undoubtedly remains vulnerable in upcoming cycles: MN-06 is Republican enough to accommodate an outspoken conservative, but Bachmann has made herself into more of a provocateur than a conservative - and we saw what happened to Idaho’s Bill Sali. Bachmann became such a controversial figure last fall that any comment she now makes is bound to be closely scrutinized. She survived by 3% last fall, but her opponent’s fundraising surge came too late in the cycle - not to mention that an independent candidate took 10% of the vote.

29 co-sponsors

Interestingly, Bachmann’s proposed legislation has already attracted 29 co-sponsors: Reps. Hensarling, Price, Shadegg, Kirk, Foxx, Pitts, Bartlett, McClintock, Gingrey (of Georgia), Wamp, Fallin, Fleming, Blackburn, Broun, Akin, Issa, King (of Iowa), Burton (of Indiana), Gohmert, Thompson (of Pennsylvania), Lamborn, Paul, Culberson, Biggert, Brown (of South Carolina), Jones, Posey, Roe (of Tennessee) and Conaway.

Most - though not all - of these Republicans have very conservative reputations. A few observations: Kirk represents a heavily Democratic district and is reportedly considering running for Senate in 2010; Posey just attracted headlines for introducing a bill on presidential candidates’ birth certificates…

House races in MN: Bachmann delivers yet more controversial comments, remains a target

Published
by
Taniel
on February 21, 2009
in MN-01, MN-02, MN-03, MN-06 and MN-07
. 4 Comments

In late October, Rep. Michelle Bachmann put her re-election prospects in danger with an unbelievable rant against anti-American sentiment in Congress. Within 48 hours, her opponent raised more than $1 million and the DCCC committed as much money to the district. On November 4th, Bachmann survived by 2%. That this was a disappointment to Democrats should not obscure the fact that Bachmann significantly under-performed compared to the top of her ticket.

MN-06 is a staunchly Republican district: George W. Bush crushed John Kerry by 15% in 2004, and John McCain managed to beat Barack Obama 53% to 45%. That is a solid enough red lean that the GOP would have little trouble defending it if it was not for Bachmann’s profile as one of the House’s most outspoken conservatives. Bachmann has a history of incomprehensible statements, starting with her description of the liberal agenda back in August:

This is their agenda… I know it is hard to believe, it’s hard to fathom — but this is ‘mission accomplished’ for them. They want Americans to take transit and move to the inner cities. They want Americans to move to the urban core, live in tenements, [and] take light rail to their government jobs. That’s their vision for America.

And Bachmann is attracting attention once again for an interview she gave about the stimulus. First, Bachmann claims that ACORN has been indicted by the government and that the stimulus bill is giving that group $5 billion. Both statements are false: ACORN has been under investigation for months, but they have not been indicted; and the group is not mentioned in the stimulus bill. Later in the interview, Bachmann lamented that, “We’re running out of rich people in this country.” (The interview contained some more gems.)

Bachmann’s comments appeared on the front page of Minnesota’s Star Tribune, and they made headlines on CNN. After all, Bachmann became such a controversial figure last fall that any comment she now makes is bound to be closely scrutinized. The underlying arguments of Bachmann’s statements are not necessarily different from those of other Republicans; but Bachmann delivers comments that are bound to make her a punching bag for liberals and create fodder for late-night jokes.

Democrats will make sure she faces a top-tier opponent who is funded enough to topple her. Bachmann did survive the 2008 cycle, but she is in a situation comparable to other Republicans so controversial that they endangered safely red seats. Rep. Bill Sali’s antics allowed the DCCC to pick-up ID-01 last fall, while a series of controversies surrounding Jean Schmidt gave Democrats a shot one of Ohio’s most conservative districts. Schmidt did survive a couple of times by narrow margins, but OH-02 is far more Republican than MN-06. (McCain got 62% in the former, 53% in the latter.)

In short: Bachmann still has a giant target on her back.

There are other House races in Minnesota worth keeping an eye on. Swing State Project has been compiling district-level results of the presidential election, and the data of several districts is interesting:

  • In what is undoubtedly the biggest disappointment for Democrats, MN-03 swung decisively towards Democrats at the presidential column (Obama won by 6%, Bush had won by 3%) but the open seat race was won by Republican Erik Paulsen. The new representative has an obvious target on his back; his ability to over-perform relative to McCain had as much to do with his Democratic opponent as with his own strength.
  • After voting for George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004, MN-01 swung to the Democratic column by 8% to give Barack Obama a 51% to 47% victory. That makes Democratic Rep. Tim Walz look less vulnerable than he did since his upset victory in the 2006 midterms.
  • MN-02 and MN-07 are both known as conservative districts, won by Bush by 9% and 12% respectively. They now look much tighter: McCain won MN-02 by 2%, MN-07 by 3%. Interestingly, the latter district is represented by a Democrat, Rep. Peterson.

While these swings sound impressive, there are all inferior to the national average of Obama’s improvement over Kerry - 10%. And this is confirmed by down-the-ballot results: From Bachmann’s survival to Paulsen’s victory, Minnesota proved resistant to Democrats last fall. Even if Al Franken looks like he will replace Norm Coleman, similarly placed Democrats like Jeff Merkley and Kay Hagan won far more easily. Will this prove a one-cycle phenomenon, or will Minnesota Republicans confirm their good disposition in 2010?

Down-ballot polling: Hagan closes strong, Georgia heading to runoff, GOP set to pick up PA-11

Published
by
Taniel
on November 3, 2008
in AK-AL, AK-Sen, GA-Sen, IN-09, IN-Gov, MN-03, MN-06, MN-Sen, MO-Gov, NC-Gov, NC-Sen, NH-01, NH-02, NH-Sen, PA-11, VA-05, VA-Sen and WA-Gov
. 0 Comments

The gigantic amount of presidential polling that has been released today leads me to do something I haven’t done for a while: devote a separate post to congressional polling. There is a large number of competitive Senate and House races, and they have tended to be overshadowed by the presidential race, so we might as well give them more room tonight.

At the Senate level, most of the attention tomorrow should be devoted to those races that look the most unpredictable, starting with Minnesota where there is no consensus as to which candidate has the lead. Al Franken and Norm Coleman have come out ahead in a number of surveys over the past few days, and the main disagreement between different outlets appears to be over the Barkley factor. Some surveys find Barkley drawing disproportionately from Democrats (for instance today’s SUSA poll), while others find him playing less of a spoiler effect, in which case Franken does much better.

In Georgia, meanwhile, three new polls suggest that the Senate race is likely to head into a runoff. Chambliss comes narrowly ahead in all three but there are very few undecided left for him to get over 50%. Furthermore, we know that at least SUSA predicts African-Americans to make up the same share of the electorate as they did four years ago (26%, up from 25%); given that African-Americans make up 35% of early voters (which are likely to be more than half of all voters), it would mean that tomorrow’s voters are overwhelmingly white for the racial breakdown to be at the 2004 level.

In the two races that are rated lean take-over in my latest ratings, Kay Hagan and Mark Begich confirm that they have the lead; Hagan especially appears to have pulled ahead even more in the final days, possibly because of the controversy over Dole’s Godless ad.

At the House level, both parties get good news: Democrats are looking good in AK-AL and their incumbents in NH-01 and IN-09 are heading into Election Day in a better position than most would have predicted a few months ago. Furthermore, VA-05, a district that has only recently been added to the list of competitive districts, looks ripe for a pick-up.

On the other hand, the GOP is poised to pick up PA-11, as Rep. Kanjorski is finishing in as week a position as he started. And SUSA’s dual polls from Minnesota bring good news to Republicans, as Erik Paulsen is not only alive but slightly ahead in MN-03 while Rep. Bachmann has stopped the bleeding.

  • Minnesota, Senate race: Coleman leads 44% to 39% in a SUSA poll, with 15% going to Barkley; Coleman led by 2% two weeks ago. Barkley draws 15% of Democrats and only 8% of Republicans.
  • North Carolina, Senate: Kay Hagan leads 51% to 44% in a PPP poll, expanding her lead and coming ahead by 15% among those who have already voted. Hagan leads 50% to 43% in a SUSA poll; she led by 1% two weeks ago.
  • Georgia, Senate: Saxby Chambliss leads 48% to 46% with 4% for Buckley in a PPP poll. Chambliss leads 48% to 44% in a SUSA poll, with 5% for Buckley; SUSA predicts blacks will make up 26% of the electorate; the two candidates are tied if we recalculate it with blacks making up 31% of the electorate (they made up 35% of early voters). Chambliss also leads 48% to 44% in a Strategic Vision poll.
  • New Hampshire, Senate: Jeanne Shaheen leads 48% to 42% in UNH’s final poll conducted Friday through Sunday.
  • North Carolina, Governor: Bev Perdue leads 49% to 48% in a PPP poll.
  • Washington, Governor: Christine Gregoire leads 50% to 48% in a University of Washington poll and in Strategic Vision.
  • Safe(r) seats: Mark Warner leads 62% to 36% in a PPP poll of Virginia’s Senate race. Jay Nixon leads 54% to 39% in a SUSA poll of Missouri’s gubernatorial race. Mitch Daniels leads 60% to 37% in a PPP poll of Indiana’s gubernatorial race.
  • In MN-06, Michelle Bachmann leads 46% to 45% in SUSA, a margin that is well within the MoE; it’s a slight improvement for Bachmann over Tinklenberg’s 47% to 44% lead 10 days ago.
  • In MN-03, GOP candidate Erik Paulsen leads 46% to 41% in SUSA after seizing a 1% lead a few days ago and trailing by 3% last month.
  • In PA-11, Republican challenger Lou Barletta leads 51% to 45% against Rep. Kanjorski in a new SUSA poll.
  • In VA-05, GOP Rep. Goode only leads 50% to 47% in the latest SUSA poll; he led by 13% a month ago and by 34% in August.
  • In NH-01, Rep. Shea-Porter leads 46% to 41% in UNH’s final poll conducted Friday through Sunday. Rep. Hodes leads 52% to 31% in NH-02.

I imagine a few more congressional polls might be released by mid-day tomorrow, but that will probably not change the fact that we have not seen any independent polling from a huge number of House races that are currently listed as vulnerable on my House ratings. And in some districts in which polling was released, we might not have gotten numbers in more than a month or two (say AL-02 or CO-04, for instance). This means that the results in a number of House races will be largely unpredictable and we should expect some big surprises - just as in 2006.

NRCC’s new expenditures boost defense, play some offense

Published
by
Taniel
on October 30, 2008
in AL-02, AL-05, AZ-03, CO-04, FL-08, FL-24, FL-25, ID-01, IL-10, IL-11, KS-02, KY-02, LA-06, MD-01, MI-07, MN-03, MN-06, NC-08, NH-01, NJ-03, NJ-07, NM-01, NV-03, NY-29, OH-02, OH-15, OR-05, PA-03, PA-10, PA-11, PA-12, TX-22, VA-02, VA-05, WA-08, WI-08, WV-02 and WY-AL
. 0 Comments

As expected, the NRCC posted most of their expenditures after the first round of spending I documented yesterday morning, and their decisions on where to spend money over the final week offers us a wealth of information on which districts Republicans thinks are still winnable, which they are resigned to losing, and which they are feeling some confidence in. Meanwhile, new expenditures posted by the DCCC confirm Democratic determination to expand the map.

First, Democrats are not giving up and Republicans are not feeling overconfident in two of the most endangered Dem-held seats: TX-22 and PA-11. Both are rated lean take-over in my latest ratings, but both parties are heavily investing. The NRCC poured more than $700,000 against Rep. Nick Lampson in Texas (bringing its total to more than $1 million) and more than $270,000 against Rep. Paul Kanjorski in Pennsylvania. Both districts have appeared to be gone for months now, so it is somewhat puzzling that the DCCC has not abandoned these incumbents; it just spent $600,000 in Texas (for a total of $1 million) and more than $200,000 in Pennsylvania (for a total of $2.3 million).

The NRCC played offense in a few more districts, spending more than $300,000 in KS-02 and LA-06 and around $100,000 in AL-05 and WI-08. The rest was devoted to defense: $506,000 was just spent in WA-08 (bringing the total above $1 million), more than $400,000 in FL-25 and MI-07 (bringing the total in the latter to $1.5 million), more than $300,000 on in FL-08, NJ-07, OH-15, more than $200,000 in NY-29, MN-03 and OH-02, and more than $100,000 in AL-02, ID-01, NJ-03, PA-03 and VA-02. (Note that the NRCC had already reported six figure buys yesterday in WY-AL, NE-02, IN-03, MO-06 and MO-09).

A few notes about these districts: This is the NRCC’s first ad buy in FL-08, a seat that I recently moved to the lean take-over category - albeit the race remains highly competitive. The DCCC just released its first ad for the race yesterday, meaning that both committees are moving in Orlando for a last-minute push. Furthermore, it is fascinating to see which highly endangered open seats the NRCC is contesting and which it is not: OH-15, NJ-07 and NJ-03 at one point looked like they would be easily Democratic pick-ups, but the GOP candidates have proved resilient and the NRCC is providing some help; open seats candidates in OH-16 or NM-01 have been completely abandoned. As for Erik Paulsen, he can thank Michelle Bachmann for her anti-Americanism rant, as that led the NRCC to move resources out of MN-06 and into MN-03.

In fact, even more interesting than the seats in which the NRCC is spending are the seats in which they are not: Given the NRCC’s budgetary constraints, they cannot afford to spend on seats in which there isn’t a very clear and accessible path to victory. As had already been reported but not yet confirmed, the NRCC is spending no new money in CO-04, all but abandoning Rep. Musgrave; there also appear to be no new ads in NV-03 and NH-01, which is more of a surprise. The NRCC’s new buy in KY-02 is two thirds smaller than it was the previous week, which is probably more of a sign of confidence than of despair. And the NRCC has still spent no money whatsoever in a number of highly competitive seats: AZ-03, IL-10, IL-11, FL-24, MD-01, NC-08 or NM-01, for instance. (The DCCC has spent more than $1 million in each of these districts.)

Meanwhile, the DCCC’s latest spree lavishes resources on two top contenders - Darcy Burner gets more than half-a-million in WA-08 and Kathy Dahlkemper gets almost $400,000 (for a total of more than $2 million) in PA-03. But as noticeable are the DCCC’s expenditures in long-shot districts in which they only started investing last week: $350,000 goes to VA-02, almost $300,000 to VA-05, to WV-02 and to WY-AL. Smaller sums go to playing defense in OR-05 and PA-10.

Not all publicity is good publicity, however. A day after Elizabeth Dole provoked the type of firestorm that is very likely to backfire with her ad “accusing” Kay Hagan of atheism, Minnesota’s GOP is facing similar bad press over allegations that they darkened the skin of Democratic candidate and Indian-American Ashwin Madia (MN-03). Such charges are unlikely to cause much movement if they remain topics of discussion on blogs, but at least one TV station devoted a segment to this in their local news (watch video here), getting independent experts to confirm that images of Madia were in fact darkened. Paulsen’s campaign got in trouble earlier this fall for insisting that Madia did not “fit the demographics” of the district, in what serves as a reminder that the presidential race could have gotten far uglier. [Update: Politico's Reid Wilson is far more skeptical of Democratic complaints than that TV station.]

In MN-06, finally, the DCCC’s second ad hitting Michelle Bachmann once again makes no mention of the anti-Americanism controversy - nor does it need to, since the comments have already gotten wide play in the district. What Democrats now need to do is convince voters that Bachmann is extremist on substantive issues as well, and for the second ad in a row the DCCC is focusing on one issue: regulation.

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q740nXMu0ZI"]

In the other district in which an incumbent’s recent words have gravely endangered his reelection prospects, the NRCC has released a very hard hitting ad against Rep. Jack Murtha (PA-12), playing footage of his declaring that Western Pennsylvania is “racist” and “redneck” to make the case that Murtha does not “respect us:”

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSmUQdZG2D4"]

Murtha and Bachmann’s races both appear to have turned into highly competitive seats over the past two weeks. Will they balance themselves out on Election Day? Given his seniority and the fact that he is a very entrenched incumbent, Murtha is far more likely to survive than his opponent - though he certainly is not helping himself.

DCCC goes on one of its last spending sprees

Published
by
Taniel
on October 29, 2008
in AK-AL, AL-05, AZ-01, AZ-03, AZ-05, CA-04, CA-11, CO-04, CT-04, FL-08, FL-13, FL-18, FL-21, FL-24, FL-25, IA-04, ID-01, IL-10, IL-11, IN-03, IN-09, KS-02, KS-03, KY-02, LA-06, MD-01, MI-07, MI-09, MN-03, MN-06, MO-06, MO-09, MS-01, NC-08, NE-02, NH-01, NJ-03, NJ-07, NM-01, NM-02, NV-03, NY-20, NY-26, NY-29, OH-01, OH-02, OH-15, SC-01, Uncategorized and WY-AL
. 0 Comments

With a week remaining before Election Day, all campaigns and national committees are budgeting their final advertising push and buying media time to last them through November 4th. The DCCC has poured in nearly $15 million in almost 40 districts already this week. More investments are likely to come today and tomorrow, first because the DCCC has left out a number of districts in which it regularly invests and because it appears that the NRCC has yet to make its last round of expenditures. But the DCCC’s $14 million latest spending spree gives us a good idea of which seats Democrats are the most committed to. (Most of the following numbers come from SSP’s always very handy House expenditure tracker.)

In three districts did the DCCC go for broke; all are currently held by the GOP: In IL-10, the DCCC just poured in an impressive $929,279, bringing its total investment in the district to more than $2 million. (This is partly explained by the fact that IL-10 is in the expensive Chicago market). In NV-03, the DCCC bought more than $750,000 of air time against Rep. Porter, bringing its total to more than $2.3 million. And in IL-11, $600,000 worth of advertisement (and a total that surpasses $2 million) should help Debbie Halvorson win this open seat.

Another group of seats - here again predominantly GOP-held - saw massive investments of more than $500,000. Those include the once-safe AZ-03, NC-08, NH-01, NM-01, OH-15 (the total surpasses $2 million in each of these five districts), MN-06 (the DCCC has now spent more than $1 million in two weeks on Bachmann’s seat) and the conservative NM-02 (for a total of $1.5 million). This makes New Hampshire’s Carol Shea-Porter the most protected Democratic incumbent, and confirms the remarkable development by which the DCCC has poured more effort in AZ-03 than in many seats that were more obviously competitive.

Also notable are the DCCC’s expenditures that top $400,000. Here again the list is made up of Republican seats: MD-01, MN-03 and OH-01 (total spending in each now tops $2 million), MI-07 and MI-09 (total spending in each tops $1 million), CA-04 and NY-26. Between $200,000 and $400,000, we have AZ-01 (an open seat that is considered an easy Democratic pick-up but where the DCCC has now spent more than $2 million), CO-04, KY-02, MO-09, FL-24 (all now more than $1 million total), FL-21, FL-25, NE-02, OH-02, NY-29, FL-08, IN-03 and IN-09. Rounding up six-figure expenditures are AK-AL, CA-11, CT-04, LA-06, NJ-03 and NJ-07 (all more than $1 million total), AL-05, ID-01, KS-02.

A few observations about this spending spree. First, the DCCC did not expand the map this week. The only new seat they invested in yesterday is FL-08, a district that has looked highly competitive for weeks and that I just moved to the lean take-over category this past week-end. Also noteworthy is NE-02, where the DCCC’s media buy this week is eight times higher than it was last week. However, there are a number of districts we have been talking about lately in which the DCCC is not playing despite the massive loan it took last week; those include California’s seats, IA-04, FL-13, FL-18 or even SC-01 where the DCCC has not followed up on a small investment it made last week. Furthermore, the national committee appears to have given up on MO-06, which was once considered a top opportunity but in which the DCCC has not bought air time for two weeks now.

Second, Democrats seem to be very comfortable about playing defense. They have largely pulled out of AZ-05, AZ-08 or MS-01, all districts that the GOP had high hopes of contesting; they have not had to spend a dime in places like KS-03 or NY-20, seats Republicans had vowed to contest. And they do not seem to feel particular energy in many of the blue seats in which they are investing. However, we do know that the DCCC is starting to air this ad in PA-12 on behalf of Murtha, though they have yet to report that expenditure.

The NRCC, meanwhile, posted a few expenditures over the past two days though a lot more should come tonight. Noteworthy investments include $375,000 spent in WY-AL, more than $250,000 in NE-02 and MO-09, more than $100,000 in MO-06, IN-03. What do all these districts have in common? They are extremely heavily Republican (Bush won IN-03 with 68% of the vote, for instance, and let us not even talk about WY-AL) and Republican candidates are in such a bad state that the NRCC is forced to spend its money in such districts.

(There is something to be said against the NRCC’s decision making, and we might talk about this more in the coming week: Swing seats like NM-01 or OH-16 will likely be lost for a decade or more if Democrats pick them up, yet the NRCC is not spending a dime there. Conservative seats like WY-AL or IN-03 would be likely to fall back into GOP hands in the coming cycle or two, but the NRCC is spending all of its resources in such places.)

Let’s take a closer look at Southern Florida, where the battles in FL-21 and in FL-25 have become truly vicious. Both seats are in the same Miami media market, and they are represented by the (Republican) Diaz-Balart brothers. So Democrats have decided to save money - and just air an ad targeting both Diaz-Balarts:

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpMgxd3aiWo"]

The GOP’s response in FL-25 is also fascinating because it bears such a close resemblance to what is going on in the presidential race. Democratic candidate Joe Garcia is blasted for being in favor of “redistribution of the wealth,” underscoring how much Republicans are banking on Joe the Plumber at this point:

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTm91xZQhl0"]

House ratings, House edition: 17 GOP-held seats now rated lean Democratic

Published
by
Taniel
on October 26, 2008
in AZ-01, FL-08, IA-04, ID-01, IL-11, MI-09, MN-06, NC-08, NJ-05, PA-12 and WA-08
. 0 Comments

Another week, another round of Democratic gains. Of the 11 races whose ratings I am changing here, 10 are moving in the Democrats’ direction, and three new GOP-held seats are entering the lean takeover category for the first time (FL-08, MI-09 and NC-08). That brings the total of Republican districts in which Democrats are currently favored to seventeen, with 21 more GOP-held seats rated as toss-ups.

Needless to say, the GOP hasn’t flirted with such dismal lows for decades.

The one race in which Republican prospects have improved is Rep. Jack “Western Pennsylvania is racist” Murtha’s PA-12. That means that this is the second week in a row in which the one Republican gain is caused by self-inflicted Democratic wounds. Murtha’s statements aren’t as much of a game-changer as the Mahoney scandal, but they are in a sense more worrisome for Democrats since they have made what was previously a safe seat into a competitive contest.

Yet, the developments in PA-12 serve as a reminder of just how unlucky the GOP has been in most other Democratic-held seats. In December 2006, Republicans seemed assured that they would regain a number of the seats they had just lost, and their predictions sounded accurate: how could Democrats possibly TX-22, PA-10 or OH-18? They were also facing very difficult races in places like IN-09 and KY-03. Now, the GOP is on the run in most of these districts: We have gotten to the point at which a double digit lead for Reps. Hill and Yarmuth does not seem surprising, no one has talked about OH-18 for months, and even ultra-conservative TX-22 no longer looks like a slam dunk or Republicans.

One last thing to keep in mind is that there is a crucial difference between Senate and House ratings. Senate seats that are rated as “likely retention” will not switch over unless something huge happens; the rating is meant to indicate that a surprise is within the realm of the possible. We can predict, however, that there will be a few House seats that are rated as “likely retention” that will switch over. We simply do not have enough polling data and indications from the ground to figure out which GOP incumbents in that list are truly endangered: some will win by huge margins, others will fall.

  • Safe Democratic: 207
  • Likely/Safe Democratic: 226
  • Lean/Likely/Safe Democratic: 245
  • Toss-ups: 26
  • Lean/Likely/Safe Republican: 164
  • Likely/Safe Republican: 153
  • Safe Republican: 127

Full ratings available here.

Arizona’s 1st district, lean Democratic to likely Democratic: No one gives Republican candidate Sydney Hay much of a chance to beat former state Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick in this open seat, but the DCCC is taking no chances. It has already poured $1.7 million in the district, including a $338,000 buy this week. The DCCC’s continuous spending suggests that their internal numbers aren’t showing the easy pick-up that has come to be expected, but those $1.7 million spent labeling Hay a “corporate lobbyist” should close any door the Republican might have had.

Florida’s 8th district, toss-up to lean Democratic: It looks like Rep. Keller will be the victim of the Democrats’ gains in the Sunshine State, and Obama’s ground game risks overpowering the GOP machine in this Orlando-based district. In fact, Democrats just gained an edge in voter registration in the district, reversing the GOP’s 14,000 voter advantage just two years ago. Add that to Keller’s own weakness (he only received 55% of the vote against a weak opponent in the primary), and you get an explosive combination. The DCCC just released a poll showing its candidate Allen Grayson leading by 11%, even though they have curiously still not spent a dime in the district. Keller quickly replied with a survey of his own showing him leading 47% to 43%, but you know things are bad for an incumbent when he feels compelled to release such weak numbers.

Iowa’s 4th district, off-the-map to likely Republican: Rep. Latham is sitting in one of the least Republican districts held by his party, and that’s not a good district to hold in a heavily Democratic year. Becky Greenwald is now in a position to score one of the year’s biggest upsets, just as her party shockingly picked-up IA-02 out of nowhere two years ago. A just-released Research 2000 poll shows Latham leading by only 5%, and Barack Obama’s strength in Iowa could further boost down-the-ballot Democratic totals in the state.

Idaho’s 1st district, lean Republican to toss-up: That GOP Rep. Bill Sali is endangered in a district Bush won with 69% of the vote in 2004 is entirely due the incumbent’s personality and extremism. Sali is despised by much of Idaho’s Republican establishment, and he is best known for incidents such as these, in which he disturbed his opponent’s chief of staff’s interview with a local journalist with heckling and… bunny ears. Democratic internal polls have shown a competitive race for months, and a recent SUSA poll has Democratic candidate Walt Minnick leading by 6%. A sure sign that this race is highly competitive: The NRCC is pouring significant amount of money to defend Sali. Who would have thought the GOP’s meager fundraising would have to be spent defending a seat in Idaho?

Illinois’s 11th district, lean Democratic to likely Democratic: Debbie Halvorson was once one of the Democrats’ biggest recruits, while Republicans did not even have a candidate well into 2008. But eventual GOP nominee Martin Ozinga proved surprisingly resilient in a district Democrats were expected to pick up easily. Not anymore. The Democrats’ surge over the past month has erased the GOP’s hopes of pulling off come-back victories in districts like this, and the DCCC’s money (more than $1 million) is helping Halvorson close the deal. Independent polls and private Democratic surveys find Halvorson pulling ahead.

Michigan’s 9th district, toss-up to lean Democratic: Joe Knollenberg is a well-established incumbent who would be very difficult to beat in a neutral environment, but the Democratic wave is now threatening to submerge him. Not only did the incumbent receive a terrible blow when McCain abruptly pulled out of Michigan, undercutting Knollenberg’s hopes of relying on the GOP’s presidential ground game to turn out his own base, but the NRCC has canceled all of the $600,000 it had planned on spending on his behalf. By contrast, the DCCC has already spent $1,6 million on behalf of Democratic candidate Gary Peters and the Obama campaign is still organizing in the state. A just-released DCCC poll has Peters ahead by 10%; that might be overstating his lead, but the NRCC’s decision to pull out of the race confirms that even the GOP thinks the race is drifting away.

Minnesota’s 6th district, lean Republican to toss-up: It is too early to tell whether Michelle Bachmann’s anti-Americanism rant on MSNBC will prove to be her macaca moment, but it has seriously endangered her reelection chances. Two polls released over the past week showed Bachmann trailing within the margin of error, a remarkable turn of events in a race that until two weeks ago was considered to be relatively safe.And you can’t accuse Bachmann of backing down easily.  After standing her ground in the immediate aftermath of her comments, Bachmann is now airing an in which she asks voters to understand that “I may not always get my words right, but I know that my heart is right.” Far from apologizing, Bachmann repeats her argument that liberalism stands in opposition to American values. “We could embrace government as the answer to our problems,” she says. “Or we can choose freedom and liberty:”

[youtube="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3_VRUHStOg"]

New Jersey’s 5th district, off the map to likely Republican: Not that Rep. Garrett is sitting in an overwhelmingly Republican district (Bush got 57% of the vote in 2004, but only 52% in 2000), but he was not expected to face that competitive a challenge this year. Yet, Democratic gains have been the strongest in the Northeast, and that has put this seat on the Democrats’ radar screen. Garrett’s opponent is progressive candidate and netroots favorite Rabbi Dennis Shulman, a credible enough contender to benefit if voters are looking to reject Garrett. A just-released Research 2000 poll has a 7% race, and Garrett is feeling nervous enough about his chances to have released one of the most vicious ads we have seen this year, juxtaposing his opponent to Ahmadinejad.

North Carolina’s 8th district, toss-up to lean Democratic: What a difference two years make. In 2006, Democrat Larry Kissell was pleading for the DCCC to invest some resources in his race against Rep. Robin Hayes. The DCCC left him in the cold, and Kissell lost by about 300 votes. This year, the DCCC is not committing the same mistake: they have already poured in $1.7 million, while the NRCC has invested nothing. Kissell is also benefiting from Democratic gains in North Carolina. And the expected boost in African-American turnout (as testified by the early voting numbers) should make a huge difference in this district, which has a substantial African-American population. As if this was not enough, both an internal DCCC poll and a SUSA survey showed Kissell with a large lead over Hayes over the past month.

Pennsylvania’s 12th district, off-the-map to lean Democratic: Rep. Murtha’s comments describing Western Pennsylvania as a “racist” area transformed this race overnight from a safe Democratic district to a competitive race, and Murtha’s subsequent attempts to explain himself did not help the situation. In a neutral environment, that might be enough to allow Republican candidate Russell to upset an entrenched incumbent like Murtha, but the Democrat could be saved by the political environment. Another factor that will hinder Russell’s hopes is that the NRCC has no money to come to his aid (unlike, say, in MN-06 where the DCCC quickly committed $1 million to attacking Bachmann after her MSNBC comments).

Washington’s 8th district, lean Republican to toss-up: Rematches tend to be the most brutal races, and the second match-up between Rep. Reichert and Darcy Burner is no exception. The latest salvos include both camps questioning their opponent’s college degree, with the conservative Seattle Times taking care of the (now discredited) hit job on the Democrat. That said, Burner has significantly improved her poll numbers over the past two weeks; after two Democratic surveys found her ahead, SUSA and Research 2000 both confirmed that she had erased Reichert’s lead.

In a sure sign that both sides are taking this race very seriously, both national committees are pouring resources in the district, and this is one of the seats where the NRCC has spent the most for now (more than $500,000). That is both an indication that the NRCC thinks Reichert is highly endangered and that they think his seat is salvageable; in short, it is a toss-up.

Full ratings available here.

Poll watch: Opposite trends in OH and FL, Bachmann in trouble, GA Senate heading to runoff

Published
by
Taniel
on October 24, 2008
in AL-Pres, FL-08, FL-Pres, GA-Pres, GA-Sen, IL-10, IN-Pres, KY-03, KY-Pres, MI-Pres, MN-06, NC-Gov, NC-Pres, OH-Pres, OR-Pres, PA-04 and PA-Pres
. 10 Comments

Today’s polling roundup is certainly not as favorable to Barack Obama as yesterday’s, but there is still no sign that the tide is turning - with only 10 days of campaigning left before Election Day. The national polls, for one, remain where they have been for most of the past two weeks: Obama is above 50% in six of the seven tracking polls (a remarkable showing that confirms McCain has to do more than appeal to the undecided) while McCain is, once again, stuck in the low 40s (from 41% to 45%).

The one state in which McCain has not only stopped the bleeding but appears to be making up ground, however, is Florida. Over the past week, new surveys from Politico, Mason Dixon, Quinnipiac, PPP, Rasmussen, SUSA and Research 2000 all showed some movement (between 10% and 1%) towards the Republican nominee. That said, Obama remains ahead in a number of these surveys, and the best McCain can muster remains within the margin of error. The day’s second good news for McCain is a Rasmussen survey from North Carolina in which he is narrowly in the lead; this survey breaks a stunning series of 16 North Carolina polls without a McCain lead.

The overall picture that comes out of the day’s polling has little to suggest that McCain’s position in the electoral college is any less precarious than it was yesterday. That grabbing a 2% lead in North Carolina amounts to good news for McCain tell us all we need to know about the current dynamics and where the electoral battle is being waged. Besides North Carolina, the tightest states in this polling roundup are Indiana (where two polls find mirroring results) and… Georgia, where Obama grabs his first lead ever!

All three of these states were won by Bush by double-digits in 2004 - and they are the ones that look highly competitive today! The states that were expected to be tight continue to tilt towards Obama - and that is starting to include Ohio. Yes, McCain posts a 3% lead in a Strategic Vision poll, but Insider Advantage gives Obama a 10% lead which is very significant: No poll taken since the general election started had found Obama up by double-digits… until yesterday. Insider Advantage’s poll is the third poll in two days to have Obama leading by such a margin. On to the full polling roundup:

  • The tracking polls once again seem to converge towards the 7% mark, a margin that appears to be the epicenter of the race. Obama gains 3% in IBD/TIPP (46% to 42%), 2% in Research 2000 (52% to 40%) and Hotline (50% to 43%), 1% in Gallup (51% to 44%). Rasmussen remains stable, 52% to 45%. He loses 2% in Zogby (51% to 41%) and in Washington Post/ABC (53% to 44%). Thus, Obama’s leads today are: 4%, 7%, 7%, 7%, 9%, 10%, 12%
  • Ohio: Contrasting results and a wide gap in two polls: Obama leads by 10% in an Insider Advantage poll, his third double-digit lead in two days (there have been no others since he wrapped up the nomination), and he led by 5% in IA two weeks ago. However he trails 48% to 45% in a Strategic Vision poll of Ohio (he led by 2% two weeks ago).
  • North Carolina: McCain captures his first lead in a Rasmussen poll since September 18th, 50% to 48%. The poll was conducted last night, and it is a five point shift towards the Republican over a poll conducted on Saturday. This poll breaks a stunning series of 16 NC polls in which McCain had not led a single time.
  • Indiana: Contrasting results from two good pollsters: Obama leads 49% to 45% in a SUSA poll. McCain led by 3% three weeks ago. McCain leads 48% to 43% in a Mason Dixon poll.
  • New Hampshire: Obama leads 50% to 46% in a Rasmussen poll taken yesterday. He led by 10% three weeks ago, however, so there is some tightening.
  • Georgia: Obama leads 48% to 47% in a stunning Insider Advantage poll (this is the fourth IA poll in a row to find Obama gaining since McCain’s 18% lead in early September). McCain leads 50% to 44% in Strategic Vision.
  • Iowa: Obama leads 52% to 44% in a Rasmussen poll, maintaining his 8% lead from late September.
  • Michigan: Obama leads 54% to 40% in an EPIC-MRA poll (up from 10%).
  • Winthrop/ETV released three Southern polls today, all taken over an inexplicably long period of time: September 29th through October 19th! This means that these polls have very little value, but here they are nonetheless: Obama leads by 1% in Virginia and North Carolina and McCain leads by 20% in South Carolina.

Meanwhile, in down-the-ballot polls:

  • Georgia Senate race: Three polls show a tight race, all with GOP Sen. Chambliss leading within the MoE. He is ahead 44% to 42% in Insider Advantage (there was a 45% tie two weeks ago). Chambliss is also ahead 46% to 44% in a Strategic Vision poll, with 5% for Libertarian candidate Buckley.
  • North Carolina gubernatorial race: Pat McCrory leads 51% to 47% in a Rasmussen poll. He led by the same margin two weeks ago.
  • In MN-06, Elwin Tinklenberg leads GOP Rep. Michelle Bachmann 47% to 44% in a SUSA poll. He also leads 45% to 43% in a University of Minnesota poll, in which 40% of respondents say Bachmann’s rants makes them less likely to vote for her.
  • In IL-10, Dan Seals leads 49% to 44% against GOP Rep. Kirk in a Research 2000 poll. He trailed by 6% two weeks ago.
  • In KY-03, Rep. Yarmuth (D) leads 57% to 41% in a SUSA poll.
  • In FL-08, Alan Grayson leads 52% to 41% against GOP Rep. Keller in a DCCC internal. The Keller campaign responded by releasing an internal poll of their own taken over the same period and showing the incumbent ahead 47% to 43%.

The Georgia Senate race is in a category of its own at this point. Not only is it highly competitive (and the DSCC has already poured in more than $1 million), but the candidacy of Libertarian candidate Buckley could guarantee that the race goes in the runoff because of Georgia’s two-round of voting system. We can discuss another time who a runoff would help (and in my opinion it would clearly boost Chambliss), but for now an important metric is to look at how distant those candidates are from 50%.

In House races, meanwhile, the 5 independent polls all bring good news for Democrats - particularly the two from MN-06 that confirm that Bachmann’s comments have endangered her hold on the district. The polls were taken before the DCCC and Tinklenberg’s heavily funded ads had any chance to make an impact, so things could get worse for Bachmann.

Finances: NRCC drops out of MI-09, Obama’s fundraising not as stellar

Published
by
Taniel
on October 23, 2008
in CO-04, MI-09, MN-06 and financing
. 0 Comments

The NRCC has pulled the plug on its third incumbent in as many days. Rep. Knollenberg of MI-09, who until a few weeks ago seemed to be slightly favored in his re-election bid, will receive no help from his national party.

The NRCC had reserved more than $600,000 to be spend over the last two weeks of the campaign. It had already canceled the portion of that money that was intended to be used this week; now, it has also canceled next’s week media buy. This comes a few weeks after Knollenberg received a first blow when McCain abruptly pulled out of Michigan, undercutting Knollenberg’s hopes of relying on McCain’s ground game to turn out his own base. By contrast, the DCCC has already spent $1,6 million on behalf of Democratic candidate Gary Peters and the Obama campaign is still organizing in the Wolverine State.

Knollenberg is a well-established incumbent who would be very difficult to beat in a neutral environment, but the Democratic wave is now threatening to submerge him. Without the NRCC’s financial backing and the McCain campaign’s ground game, Knollenberg looks to be in a very precarious position and among the clearest victims yet of the GOP’s fundraising woes.

As if the NRCC did not have enough problems dealing with the difficult stategic positions it is facing, it is now facing harsh criticism from the Family Research Council, led by Tony Perkins. (Perkins played an important role last fall, you will recall, when the Religious Right was moving to sabotage Rudy Giuliani’s candidacy. Perkins was one of the most virulent anti-Rudy militants before issuing more positive statements about the former NYC Mayor.)

Today, Perkins voiced a protest against the NRCC’s decision to pull the plug on Reps. Bachmann and Musgrave’s campaigns. (Both incumbents are strong social conservatives.) “The left is attacking both of these outstanding women because they are true conservatives,” Perkins wrote. “This is no time to cut and run from a fight.” He called upon FRC members to no longer donate to the NRCC until it changed its decision on CO-04 and MN-06.

Now, this is unlikely to be a particularly effective method of blackmail. There are 11 days until Election Day, how much money is the NRCC expecting to raise from FRC members by Election Day? But it does illustrate the pressure the DCCC and NRCC find themselves under when the time comes for tough decisions as to which incumbents or challengers to fund and which ones to cut loose. This cycle, most of that pressure is falling on the Republican committees since their budgets force them to make more choices - and then deal with the consequences. After the NRSC decided to no longer spend money on Louisiana’s Senate race earlier this week, Sen. Vitter and Karl Rove quickly intervened to protest the decision - and the NRSC is now back on air.

Of course, the NRCC’s decision to cut funds in these districts is not driven by any disdain towards social conservatives but by hard math: The NRCC has very limited funds, and it has vulnerable districts poping up left and right. CO-04 has been rated lean take-over for weeks in my ratings; why would the NRCC invest there on an incumbent that has consistently underperformed in her district? The choice to not fund Bachmann’s race is more curious.

Bachmann hurt herself with her MSNBC rant, and that was enough to make the race highly competitive - not enough to make her the underdog. Perhaps the NRCC thought that either Bachmann’s comments truly damaged her (in which case she will fall anyway) or that they will be forgotten by November 4th (in which case she is likely to survive). Bachmann’s refusal to move on and her defiant posture over the past few days might have also made the NRCC think that the incumbent would not cooperate - and that there was thus little point in helping her.

—

Meanwhile, news from the front of presidential fundraising brings the somewhat surprising news that, as of October 15th, Obama and the DNC had less cash on hand than McCain and the RNC. (The committees and the campaigns had to file financial disclosure forms for the first half of October by midnight today.)

The Obama campaign spent a jaw-dropping $106 million over the first two weeks of October, and raised $37,7 million over the same period - meaning that it had $66 million left in the bank as of October 15th. (Full Obama statement here, for your browsing pleasure.) The DNC had $11 million left, bringing the Democrats’ total cash on hand to $77 million. Meanwhile, the McCain campaign had $25 million let, combined with $59 million for the RNC - bringing the total to $84 million.

This does not mean, however, that Democrats no longer enjoy a financially dominant position. First, it is possible that Obama had already bought ad time for the weeks after October 15th by that date, though the statement seems to be suggesting that this might not be a big factor: (1) The statement says that Obama has spent $80 million on media buys from October 1st to October 15th, however, which is not that far off from what Obama is known to be spending for two weeks of ads (we know he spent $32 million worth of ads airing in the first week of September). (2) Furthermore, Obama’s statement indicates that most of this money was spent by October 10th, suggesting that the buys were meant to cover the upcoming week - not the period until Election Day.

Second, a dollar held by the Obama campaign does not equate a dollar held by the RNC; as we have seen over and over again over the past few months, McCain has not been able to control his message effectively because of his need to pay for most of his ads with the RNC’s money or because the RNC’s independent expenditure division comes up with its own themes. Furthermore, while most of the RNC’s war chest will go to the presidential race, not all of it will.

Third, the Obama campaign is continuing to raise money as we speak while the McCain campaign is not - and any new money that will be injected into the GOP will go to the RNC, reducing any possibility of message unification even more.

Finally, and this is very important, the two parties were at near parity because of Obama’s astonishing spending spree, not because of a disappointing fundraising total by Obama ($37,7 in two weeks is a higher fundraising pace than Obama enjoyed in any month other than September.) His early October spending has a great deal to do with Obama surge to a dominant position. By swamping McCain in a large number of battleground states, Obama drastically transformed the electoral map over those two weeks: He put the blue states entirely out of play, confirmed Missouri and Indiana’s toss up status and edged slightly ahead in a number of red states.

Even if the GOP can avoid being financially demolished as badly as it has been over the next 11 days (and given that they have been crushed in the week since October 15th, that looks unlikely), the harm has already been done: Republicans now stuck playing on red turf - so red, in fact, that they can’t even keep up spending in purple Colorado.

If you like the website...

... Support Campaign Diaries

Archives