Tuesday, September 30, 2008

2008 House Ratings

Here are our latest House ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 10-20 seats.

Any seats not listed are currently considered to be at limited risk for the incumbent party. For our race-by-race analysis, you must subscribe to the print edition of the Report.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans
^ = Newly added

PURE TOSS-UP (7 R, 3 D)
  • AL 5 (Open; Cramer, D)
  • FL 8 (Keller, R)
  • FL 21 (L. Diaz-Balart, R) #
  • FL 24 (Feeney, R)
  • MN 3 (Open; Ramstad, R)
  • NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D)
  • NJ 7 (Open; Ferguson, R)
  • NM1 (Open; Wilson, R)
  • OH 15 (Open; Pryce, R)
  • PA 10 (Carney, D)
TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN (8 R, 1 D)
  • CT 4 (Shays, R) #
  • LA 4 (Open; McCrery, R)
  • LA 6 (Cazayoux, D)
  • MI 7 (Walberg, R) #
  • NM 2 (Open; Pearce, R)
  • NY 26 (Open; Reynolds, R)
  • NY 29 (Kuhl, R)
  • NC 8 (Hayes, R)
  • WA 8 (Reichert, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT DEMOCRATIC (6 R, 6 D)
  • AZ 1 (Open; Renzi, R)
  • CA 11 (McNerney, D)
  • CO 4 (Musgrave, R)
  • FL 16 (Mahoney, D)
  • GA 8 (Marshall, D)
  • IL 11 (Open; Weller, R)
  • KS 2 (Boyda, D)
  • NJ 3 (Open; Saxton, R)
  • NV 3 (Porter, R) #
  • OH 16 (Open; Regula, R) #
  • PA 11 (Kanjorski, D)
  • WI 8 (Kagen, D)
LEAN REPUBLICAN (9 R, 1 D)
  • AL 2 (Open; Everett, R)
  • FL 25 (M. Diaz-Balart, R) #
  • IL 10 (Kirk, R)
  • KY 2 (Open; Lewis, R) ^
  • MI 9 (Knollenberg, R)
  • MO 6 (Graves, R)
  • OH 1 (Chabot, R)
  • OH 2 (Schmidt, R)
  • PA 3 (English, R)
  • TX 22 (Lampson, D)
  • VA 2 (Drake, R)
LEAN DEMOCRATIC (1 R, 5 D)
  • AZ 5 (Mitchell, D)
  • AZ 8 (Giffords, D)
  • KY 3 (Yarmuth, D)
  • OR 5 (Open; Hooley, D)
  • PA 4 (Altmire, D)
  • VA 11 (Open; Davis, R)
REPUBLICAN FAVORED (9 R, 0 D)
  • CA 4 (Open; Doolittle, R)
  • FL 13 (Buchanan, R)
  • ID 1 (Sali, R)
  • IL 6 (Roskam, R)
  • MD 1 (Open; Gilchrest, R)
  • MN 6 (Bachmann, R)
  • MO 9 (Open; Hulshof, R)
  • PA 6 (Gerlach, R)
  • WV 2 (Capito, R)
DEMOCRAT FAVORED (2 R, 5 D)
  • AK A-L (Young, R)
  • IL 14 (Foster, D)
  • IN 9 (Hill, D)
  • KS 3 (Moore, D)
  • MS 1 (Childers, D)
  • NY 13 (Open; Fossella, R)
  • NY 20 (Gillibrand, D)
  • NY 25 (Open; Walsh, R)
Dropped : MN 1 (Walz, D) #

Monday, September 29, 2008

Kentucky Senate: Ratings Change Favors Democrats

Following the news that a SurveyUSA poll and a Louisville Courier-Journal survey of the Kentucky Senate race found Sen. Mitch McConnell and challenger Bruce Lunsford locked in a tight race, a third poll - this one not released - confirms the dead heat.

Because of that, we are moving this race from Clear Advantage for McConnell to Narrow Advantage for McConnell, and we would not argue with anyone who rated the contest as a Toss-Up.

2008 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 5-8 seats.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans

Likely Takeover (2 R, 0 D)
  • NM Open (Domenici, R)
  • VA Open (Warner, R)
Lean Takeover (4 R, 0 D)
  • Smith (R-OR) #
  • Stevens (R-AK)
  • Sununu (R-NH)
  • CO Open (Allard, R) #
Toss-Up (1 R, 0 D)
  • Dole (R-NC)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 1 D)
  • Coleman (R-MN)
  • Landrieu (D-LA) #
  • McConnell (R-KY) #
  • Wicker (R-MS)
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R, 0 D)
  • Collins (R-ME)
Currently Safe (12 R, 11 D)
  • ID Open (Craig, R)
  • NE Open (Hagel, R)
  • Alexander (R-TN)
  • Barrasso (R-WY)
  • Chambliss (R-GA)
  • Cochran (R-MS)
  • Cornyn (R-TX)
  • Enzi (R-WY)
  • Graham (R-SC)
  • Inhofe (R-OK)
  • Roberts (R-KS)
  • Sessions (R-AL)
  • Baucus (D-MT)
  • Biden (D-DE)
  • Durbin (D-IL)
  • Harkin (D-IA)
  • Johnson (D-SD)
  • Kerry (D-MA)
  • Lautenberg (D-NJ)
  • Levin (D-MI)
  • Pryor (D-AR)
  • Reed (D-RI)
  • Rockefeller (D-WV)

Wild Polling in the Wild, Wild West

By Nathan L. Gonzales

We’ve entered the season of dueling polls, and Montana’s gubernatorial race is no exception.

Earlier this week, the Montana Democratic Party released a poll showing Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) with a huge 39-point lead over his challenger, state Sen. Roy Brown (R). The poll, conducted Sept. 16-18 by the Mellman Group, showed the incumbent with a 63-percent-to-24-percent advantage.

The results may be on the upper end of Schweitzer’s advantage, but they certainly weren’t out of the realm of possibility in a race where the governor has consistently enjoyed the political and financial upper hand. A Mason-Dixon survey for Lee Enterprises in May showed Schweitzer with a 25-point advantage.

But the Brown campaign just couldn’t let it rest. A campaign spokesman ridiculed the poll in a Great Falls Tribune story on Wednesday, and released polling numbers to counter the Democratic results, which showed Brown leading Schweitzer by 4 points, 46 percent to 42 percent.

The problem is that those numbers, taken from a Sept. 11-12 Moore Information poll, were not the initial ballot test. That distinction was not made in the Tribune story and the numbers subsequently appeared in Thursday’s Hotline.

“The Montana gubernatorial poll numbers quoted from the Brown Campaign reflect the ‘educated’ ballot numbers after a series of statements about the candidates. The poll numbers quoted do not reflect sentiment before before respondents heard statements,” according to a statement by Moore Information to the Hotline.

“In political surveys, there is often an ‘initial ballot,’ followed by statements about the candidates, followed by an ‘educated’ ballot. The numbers you quoted reflect the ‘educated’ ballot. This is an important distinction when interpreting polling data.” As an informed ballot, the numbers would have never appeared in the Hotline.

The distinction does keep Moore Information’s well-earned credibility intact, since there is no evidence or reason to believe that Brown is winning the race. And Moore Information’s explanation reflects standard polling practices.

According to a Brown campaign aide, the Republican has no intention of releasing the initial ballot numbers, which give the truest picture of the state of the race. So it’s pretty clear that the Democratic numbers are not that far off because if Brown had dramatically different results, he would have released the numbers.

For better or worse, Schweitzer’s mouth tends to make things interesting, but for now, he’s well on his way to a second term.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 26, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

When Campaigns Lie, What Should the Voters Do?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Now that both campaigns have lost all of their credibility by distorting each other’s records and agendas, where does the 2008 presidential contest stand?

I don’t have data on this, but I’m willing to bet that at this point in the race most voters don’t believe anything that they see or hear in Sen. Barack Obama’s (Ill.) and Sen. John McCain’s (Ariz.) TV ads, or from talking heads supporting the candidates. I know that I don’t.

I’m tired of the bizarre distortions and half-truths, and of the endless platitudes. McCain, the straight-talker, isn’t doing that anymore, and Obama is equally bad. Both are running blatantly misleading campaigns.

So when I see an ad, the first thing I think about is how it might be a distortion. McCain wants the war in Iraq to last at least 100 years? Obama wants to teach sex ed to kindergartners? McCain’s Social Security plan would have cost senior citizens all of their retirement savings? Obama wants to raise everyone’s taxes?

How stupid do they think we are? Pretty stupid, apparently.

Campaign distortions are nothing new, of course. But maybe it’s the length of this campaign or, more likely, the fact that both Obama and McCain promised that they were different that makes this campaign so painful to watch.

If most people react to the charges and counter-charges as I do — and my travels around the country speaking to various groups reinforce my belief that they do — then how are people making decisions about the election?

First, voters are falling back on preconceived notions and stereotypes, the strongest of which remains the viewers’ partisan bent. Not surprisingly, polls show Republican voters are backing McCain, while Democrats are supporting Obama. When in doubt, cast your usual party vote.

In addition, voters are falling back on the “intangibles” of image, bio and mood.

McCain is the older guy who has been in government for almost three decades, so many voters see him as experienced, steadier, more reliable. Democrats, on the other hand, see him as part of the past.

Obama is younger and looks much younger than his opponent, and his governmental service is much shorter. Democrats view him as having new ideas and offering hope for the future. Republicans regard him as inexperienced and dangerously ill- prepared to serve in the nation’s top job.

And then there is race, which we are not supposed to talk about because it makes all of us very uncomfortable. But it, too, is a vote “cue.”

Many voters see an African-American politician and immediately pigeonhole him as a liberal who favors higher taxes, increased domestic spending, gun control and abortion rights and would pursue a generally left-of-center agenda.

This shouldn’t be surprising given that most of the most visible African-American political figures over the past few decades (though certainly not all) have been on the Democratic Party’s left and represented positions (including affirmative action) that many white voters don’t identify with.

I recently met a terrific African-American Congressional candidate from Louisiana, state Sen. Don Cravins Jr. (D), who is one of my favorite candidates this cycle. He’s personable, understands politics and, I expect, is going to lose.

You see, Cravins is black. He is a Democrat. He attended an Obama event during the Democratic primary. So, even though Cravins says he’s pro-life and pro-gun and describes himself as a conservative Democrat, I believe that most white voters in Louisiana’s 7th district, who are currently quite content to be represented by Republican Rep. Charles Boustany, will see him as just another black Democrat, and they’ll read a lot into that.

Because Cravins isn’t likely to be able to introduce himself well enough during the campaign to overcome stereotypes, many conservative white voters will look at him and think of Obama or embattled Louisiana Rep. William Jefferson (D) — or even the Rev. Al Sharpton.

Unfair, you say? Voters shouldn’t judge a candidate by his skin color. Maybe, but is it any more unfair than, for example, saying that because McCain and President Bush are both Republicans that a McCain administration would produce a third Bush term? No, it isn’t.

One vote cue is based entirely on party, while the other is based on a combination of factors that leads voters to end up at the same place.

When voters don’t believe anything the candidates say, they’ll use these familiar vote cues to figure out which candidate they prefer.

I believe that voters are already to this point, and that’s why the presidential contest is moving in a narrow range. The fundamentals of the election still work in Obama’s favor, since change is such a strong force this cycle and the financial crisis has benefited the Democrat.

As we saw last week, news — real news, not controversies manufactured by the campaigns — does have an impact on how people will vote since it can play to the candidates’ stereotypes.

This election could well turn on those voters who feel cross-pressured on the vote cues I’ve referred to. They may prefer Obama’s party but infer things about him — because of his age and experience, or his race — that they find troubling.

For many of these older, working-class voters (we used to call them “Reagan Democrats”), their votes will be determined on which stereotype they like, or fear, more. Frankly, given the quality of the two campaigns, I can’t really blame them regardless of their eventual choice.

This column
first appeared in Roll Call on September 25, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

New Print Edition: Senate Outlook & House Ratings

The September 26, 2008 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks (even more frequently as Election Day approaches) and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

Here is a brief sample of what's in this edition...


Senate Overview – The Lay of the Land


After a brief bounce that made Republicans hopeful about their prospects, public and private polling has soured some for the GOP. Republican enthusiasm following the Palin pick seems to have faded, and voters are tending to blame the nation’s financial crisis on Republicans.

Republican Senate seats in Virginia and New Mexico clearly favor Democrats, and Republican candidates continue to trail in New Hampshire and Colorado. Elizabeth Dole (North Carolina) and Gordon Smith (Oregon) also look to be even or behind. Maine’s Susan Collins continues to defy the odds and remain in good shape, while Senate races in Minnesota and Mississippi remain very competitive. On the Democratic side, only Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu is at risk, though she remains ahead in polling and has a narrow advantage. Democrats will gain Senate seats in November – and are raising our current estimate from 4-6 seats to 5-8 seats.

Subscribers to the print edition also get updated analysis and polling on the competitive Senate races, our new House ratings, and updated analysis and polling in ten House races.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Louisiana 6: Cazayoux’s Colleague Contributes to Independent Foe

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Louisiana Rep. Don Cazayoux (D) can’t rest easy after his special election victory in the 6th district just a few months ago. His victory expanded the Democratic Party’s House majority, but one of his new colleagues, Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), contributed to an Independent candidate who is complicating Cazayoux’s re-election effort in November.

Cazayoux won the May 3 special election narrowly, 49 percent to 46 percent, but this November, he faces a Republican candidate with broader appeal, state Sen. Bill Cassidy, as well as his friend and former colleague in the state legislature, state Rep. Michael Jackson (D), who is black.

Jackson and Cazayoux faced off on April 5 in the special election primary, with Cazayoux prevailing 57 percent to 43 percent. Jackson felt snubbed by the Democratic Party establishment, who backed Cazayoux, and subsequently filed as in Independent in the general election.

Cazayoux doesn’t have a lot of room for error in a district that President Bush carried with 59 percent in 2004. And he can’t afford to lose too many Democratic votes to Jackson in a district where one-third of the voting-age population is African-American.

After Jackson announced his Independent candidacy, Butterfield donated $500 to his campaign on July 26, after meeting the Louisiana legislator at a Congressional Black Caucus event. The contribution appeared on pre-primary Federal Election Commission reports filed nearly a month ago but went unnoticed until Swing State Project, a Democratic blog, pointed it out Wednesday morning.

“It was a mistake,” said Butterfield’s communications director, Ken Willis. “[Jackson] was just introduced at the CBC event as a Congressional candidate.” Apparently, Butterfield did not realize that his contribution was for the general election and that Jackson was running as an Independent against a Democratic incumbent.

“If [Butterfield] had known it would be for the general election, he wouldn’t have done it,” Willis added. “He didn’t want to do anything to hurt the party.”

Even though Butterfield is displaying a certain political naivete, at a minimum, his contribution was to a primary challenger for Cazayoux.

Butterfield’s contribution to Jackson has him on an island. House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) contributed $2,000 to Cazayoux on Aug. 15, for a total of $6,000 for the cycle. Reps. David Price (D-N.C), Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.), Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.), and John Dingell (D-Mich.) contributed to Cazayoux in the last reporting period, which ended Aug. 17.

Jackson is not expected to raise a lot of money, but he demonstrated an electoral base in the special election primary. He only had $13,000 in the bank on Aug. 17. In comparison, Cazayoux showed $212,000 on hand to Republican Cassidy’s $306,000.

A Sept. 17-21 Anzalone-Liszt Research poll for Cazayoux’s campaign showed the new Congressman leading with 48 percent, compared with 32 percent for Cassidy and Jackson at 9 percent. But Cassidy is just starting his television ads, and the Congressman is in for a tough fight.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 24, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Friday, September 26, 2008

Kentucky 2: DCCC to the Rescue

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is exercising its financial muscle with television ads on behalf of a cash-strapped candidate in Kentucky’s 2nd district.

State Sen. David Boswell (D) has a similar political profile to southern Reps. Don Cazayoux (D-La.) and Travis Childers (D-Miss.), who were elected earlier this year in special elections. The main problem is that Boswell’s initial fundraising was startlingly low.

Two public polls showed Boswell leading the race, including a June 27-28 SurveyUSA poll that had the Democrat up 47 percent to 44 percent and Boswell’s own poll, conducted Aug. 23-25 by Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group, which had him ahead 41 percent to 33 percent.

But Boswell’s lead was considered soft by race observers because he is running for an open seat in a district that President Bush won by 31 points in 2004 and because he faced a significant cash disadvantage to his opponent, state Sen. Brett Guthrie (R).

The Republican raised $766,000 through June 30 with $661,000 in the bank through the second quarter. In comparison, Boswell had a mere $45,000 on hand after taking in $238,000 through the first six months of the year.

Although he was not prohibited from raising money during his legislative session, Boswell self-imposed a fundraising ban in coordination with the law for state races. Even still, he didn’t raise a lot of money for a supposed top-tier takeover opportunity. GOP Rep. Ron Lewis is vacating the seat.

Now, the Democrat has been added to the DCCC’s exploding “Red to Blue” list and estimates he’s taken in another quarter of a million dollars since the May 20 primary. But the best news may be the DCCC reservation of $840,000 worth of ads in the district, with the ads slated to begin at the end of the week.

The DCCC’s ads could be in critical in the expensive Louisville media market, where about three-fifths of the voters reside and where neither Boswell nor Guthrie is particularly well-known. The National Republican Congressional Committee has not reserved time in the district.

Boswell was significantly outspent in his unsuccessful run for lieutenant governor in 1987. His media consultant back then, David Axelrod (now chief strategist for Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama), told him he would need more money to get out of the primary against wealthier candidates.

Now, with the DCCC’s help, it looks like Boswell could win despite a cash disadvantage to Guthrie. But Boswell’s road is still tough, considering he will have to run well ahead of Obama at the top of the ticket because Kentucky was one of the Illinois Senator’s worst-performing states in the Democratic primaries.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 23, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Will Schumer Get Democrats to 60 Seats This Cycle?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Nine Republican-held Senate seats continue to be at great risk, giving Democrats at least a theoretical possibility of getting to 60 seats after the November elections.

Increasingly, it appears that three seats could well determine whether the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee can reach that magic number: North Carolina, Minnesota and Mississippi.

Republican nominees in five GOP Senate seats are now running behind their Democratic opponents in at least some public polling: former Gov. Jim Gilmore in Virginia, Rep. Steve Pearce in New Mexico, former Rep. Bob Schaffer in Colorado, Sen. Ted Stevens in Alaska and Sen. John Sununu in New Hampshire.

One other GOP incumbent, Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith, appears to be in a difficult race with challenger Jeff Merkley (D), based both on some limited polling and Smith’s campaign decisions.

Two Republicans under attack, Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Kentucky Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Minority Leader, appear to be comfortably ahead and likely to win.

That leaves races involving Sens. Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina, Norm Coleman in Minnesota and Roger Wicker of Mississippi as the three most critical that will decide how close Senate Democrats get to 60 seats in the next Congress.

Of the five most vulnerable GOP seats, the two incumbents seeking re-election, Stevens and Sununu, appear to have the best chances for a surprise victory.

If the jury fails to convict Stevens in his upcoming trial, the Senate veteran would have a chance to win by reminding voters of his contributions to the state. But if he is convicted or if a decision is not yet reached by Nov. 4, Stevens’ chances seem very small.

Sununu has trailed for months in polls against challenger Jeanne Shaheen (D), but he remains confident he can remind voters why they preferred him six years ago to the former Granite State governor. Even some Democrats are worried about Shaheen, fearing she won’t be able to stand up to the Republican’s expected blows.

Smith’s recent two-ad sequence about an Oregon rapist and Merkley’s refusal to extend the statute of limitations for certain crimes is both compelling and curious.

Yes, the Smith ads drive home the point, but they are striking many observers as the sort of late-October ad that a campaign might use as a game-changer, not the kind of TV spot that a confident incumbent would run in mid-September.

Smith’s weak job ratings also ought to worry Republicans. Admittedly, Merkley isn’t a great challenger. The Democrat had only $570,000 on hand at the end of June, and he’s hardly a charismatic candidate. But with the DSCC’s resources, the mood for change, and Oregon’s Senate race turning into a referendum on Smith, the Republican clearly is in serious trouble.

Dole is increasingly regarded as political roadkill by campaign observers, but reports of her electoral demise may be greatly exaggerated.

Yes, Dole doesn’t have the financial advantage that she should at this time, hasn’t returned to her state often enough, and for too long failed to appreciate the danger that she was in. While her poll numbers were good initially, her popularity nose-dived after Democratic attacks on her ineffectiveness in the Senate.

But the National Republican Senatorial Committee’s independent expenditure effort has begun in the Tar Heel State, and Dole’s campaign has finally become more aggressive. Challenger Kay Hagan remained unscathed (and undefined) until recently, and the GOP attacks are likely to help Dole improve her position in the contest.

Still, that only means that the Republican Senator is in a dogfight and still seriously vulnerable, hardly the position Dole expected to find herself in. Of course, her state is better for a Republican than Oregon is for Smith, and unlike in Oregon, Republicans are only now starting to brand Dole’s Democratic challenger as a liberal big taxer.

In Minnesota, Coleman’s 10-point lead of the summer seems to have largely evaporated. Both Coleman and challenger Al Franken have high negatives, and that almost certainly benefits Independence Party nominee Dean Barkley. That doesn’t mean Barkley can win, but he becomes a tactical factor in the final six weeks of the race. Will Franken try to peel voters away from Barkley and to his own campaign?

Coleman may well lead by a few points (the same University of Connecticut poll that shows Franken up by a single point also showed him 3 ahead in January), and it wouldn’t be surprising if Republicans had more ammunition against Franken along the lines of embarrassing information that they used earlier.

Finally, Ronnie Musgrove now trails appointed Sen. Wicker narrowly, and Democrats remain hopeful about the contest. But anyone who has watched Mississippi politics for years ought to expect Republicans to use the 2001 referendum on changing the state’s flag against Musgrove as the campaign closes.

As governor, Musgrove proposed changing the state flag. Voters overwhelmingly defeated the proposal by a 2-1 margin, and Republican Haley Barbour used the issue to his benefit in ousting Musgrove in the 2003 gubernatorial race. Clarion-Ledger columnist Sid Salter has predicted that the issue is likely to re-emerge in this year’s Senate race.

The GOP’s only takeover opportunity, in Louisiana, is increasingly being forgotten. But while Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) currently has a comfortable lead over challenger John Kennedy (R), I’m still expecting the contest to close to the low to middle single digits, making for an interesting finish in the fall.

DSCC Chairman Charles Schumer (N.Y.) is once again at the right place at the right time. He will have another terrific election cycle, and he deserves plenty of credit for fundraising and recruitment. But reaching 60 seats still requires him to run the table, and even in this environment, that’s not an easy task.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 22, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Idaho Senate Race: Over Before It Began?

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Former Rep. Larry LaRocco (D) lost his 2006 bid to become Idaho’s lieutenant governor against Jim Risch (R). The two men are facing each other again this cycle for the Senate, and when LaRocco entered the race, some local Democrats and enthusiastic bloggers tried to make the case that 2008 was a much different race and that LaRocco could prevail.

LaRocco lost by 19 points in 2006, and with six weeks left, LaRocco has yet to crack 37 percent in more than a half-dozen public polls. It’s a remarkably clear trend.

Two years ago, Risch defeated LaRocco 58 percent to 39 percent. Risch was elected lieutenant governor previously but became acting governor when Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R) left for President Bush’s Cabinet. Risch opted for re-election as lieutenant governor because Rep. Butch Otter (R) was running for governor.

Ten months later, a September 2007 SurveyUSA poll had LaRocco at 36 percent (compared with 52 percent for Risch), and a November 2007 Myers Research and Strategic Services (D) poll pegged LaRocco’s support at 34 percent, while Risch was at 48 percent. A Robinson Research (R) survey showed LaRocco down 46 percent to 27 percent.

At the end of May, LaRocco’s own poll, conducted by Lake Research Partners, showed the former Congressman losing 43 percent to 28 percent.

The Democratic scenario is multifaceted, including Risch ducking debates and the difference between state and federal office, among other points, but it is simply not bearing itself out in the polls.

A July Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos (D) had Risch leading 42 percent to 32 percent, but a just-released Sept. 16-17 R2K survey showed Republican voters solidifying behind Risch (56 percent), with LaRocco stuck at 33 percent. A separate Greg K. Smith and Associates poll had Risch leading 41 percent to 30 percent.

Part of the Democratic scenario maintained that thousands of new supporters of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) were going to boost LaRocco and that the former Congressman would benefit from the strong campaign of businessman Walt Minnick (D) in the 1st district. But according to the latest Kos polling, Obama is losing the state 62 percent to 33 percent, and Minnick trails in his race by 11 points. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) received 30 percent of the vote in Idaho in the 2004 election.

Another problem is that LaRocco doesn’t have the resources to buck the trend. He raised $786,000 through June 30 and finished the second quarter with $242,000 on hand. Risch had $1 million on hand through June, after raising more than $1.5 million and putting in $369,000 of his own money.

To add insult to injury, Idaho voters don’t seem to like LaRocco all that much, according to the latest Kos poll, where he had a 33 percent favorable/55 percent unfavorable rating.

While the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has a significant cash advantage over its Republican counterpart, Democrats don’t necessarily need to win in Idaho to get to 60 seats and are very unlikely to invest in the race.

Independent candidate Rex Rammell is out for revenge against Risch, and some Democrats believe he will take a significant portion of the vote from the Republican’s totals. Rammell is at 3 percent in the latest Kos polling.

Scenarios and rhetoric are nice, but in this case, the numbers don’t lie. This race was over before it began.


This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 22, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

2008 House Ratings

Here are our latest House ratings. Any seats not listed are currently considered to be at limited risk for the incumbent party. For our race-by-race analysis, you must subscribe to the print edition of the Report.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans
^ = Newly added

PURE TOSS-UP (8 R, 3 D)
  • AL 5 (Open; Cramer, D)
  • FL 8 (Keller, R) #
  • FL 24 (Feeney, R) #
  • MN 3 (Open; Ramstad, R)
  • NV 3 (Porter, R)
  • NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D)
  • NJ 7 (Open; Ferguson, R)
  • NM1 (Open; Wilson, R)
  • OH 15 (Open; Pryce, R)
  • OH 16 (Open; Regula, R)
  • PA 10 (Carney, D)
TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN (6 R, 1 D)
  • LA 4 (Open; McCrery, R)
  • LA 6 (Cazayoux, D)
  • NM 2 (Open; Pearce, R)
  • NY 26 (Open; Reynolds, R)
  • NY 29 (Kuhl, R)
  • NC 8 (Hayes, R)
  • WA 8 (Reichert, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT DEMOCRATIC (4 R, 6 D)
  • AZ 1 (Open; Renzi, R)
  • CA 11 (McNerney, D)
  • CO 4 (Musgrave, R) #
  • FL 16 (Mahoney, D)
  • GA 8 (Marshall, D)
  • IL 11 (Open; Weller, R)
  • KS 2 (Boyda, D)
  • NJ 3 (Open; Saxton, R)
  • PA 11 (Kanjorski, D)
  • WI 8 (Kagen, D)
LEAN REPUBLICAN (11 R, 1 D)
  • AL 2 (Open; Everett, R) #
  • CT 4 (Shays, R)
  • IL 10 (Kirk, R)
  • FL 21 (L. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • MI 7 (Walberg, R)
  • MI 9 (Knollenberg, R)
  • MO 6 (Graves, R)
  • OH 1 (Chabot, R)
  • OH 2 (Schmidt, R)
  • PA 3 (English, R)
  • TX 22 (Lampson, D)
  • VA 2 (Drake, R)
LEAN DEMOCRATIC (1 R, 5 D)
  • AZ 5 (Mitchell, D)
  • AZ 8 (Giffords, D)
  • KY 3 (Yarmuth, D)
  • OR 5 (Open; Hooley, D)
  • PA 4 (Altmire, D)
  • VA 11 (Open; Davis, R)
REPUBLICAN FAVORED (10 R, 0 D)
  • CA 4 (Open; Doolittle, R)
  • FL 13 (Buchanan, R)
  • FL 25 (M. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • ID 1 (Sali, R)
  • IL 6 (Roskam, R)
  • MD 1 (Open; Gilchrest, R) ^
  • MN 6 (Bachmann, R)
  • MO 9 (Open; Hulshof, R)
  • PA 6 (Gerlach, R)
  • WV 2 (Capito, R)
DEMOCRAT FAVORED (2 R, 6 D)
  • AK A-L (Young, R) #
  • IL 14 (Foster, D)
  • IN 9 (Hill, D)
  • KS 3 (Moore, D)
  • MN 1 (Walz, D)
  • MS 1 (Childers, D)
  • NY 13 (Open; Fossella, R)
  • NY 20 (Gillibrand, D)
  • NY 25 (Open; Walsh, R)

Monday, September 22, 2008

What’s the Top Electoral College State This Year?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Two months ago in this space, I identified five states that I argued would pick the next president. Tell me how these states — Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, Nevada and Michigan — will go in November, I wrote, and I’ll tell you who will be our next president (“The Big 5: Picking the States That Will Pick the President”).

As the presidential race has developed, those five states seem to hold the same predictive value now that they did then. Sure, there are a handful of additional states that could turn the election to either Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) or Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) — New Hampshire, New Mexico, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina — but the longer the list, the less it tells us about who’ll win.

I’ve become convinced that my initial list of five states probably can be boiled down to just one — one state that is most likely to determine who will be the next occupant of the White House. And that state is Colorado.

If John McCain carries Colorado in November, I’d expect him to hold onto all of George W. Bush’s 2000 states, with the exception of New Hampshire. If he does that, and if Obama holds all of Al Gore’s states, plus New Hampshire, McCain would win 274 electoral votes to 264 for Obama.

If Obama carries the state, he has altered the arithmetic of the Electoral College so as to make it difficult for McCain to win.

It’s true, of course, that Obama could win Colorado and still lose the election. Republicans continue to look at Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota as possible swing states they could win to offset the loss of Colorado or Virginia. But if there is a single state among this group that is most likely to switch parties and therefore determine the winner of the presidential contest, it now appears to be the Centennial State.

Colorado, which generally has been characterized as a part of the conservative, Republican Mountain West, has voted Republican in nine of the past 10 presidential elections. George W. Bush carried it twice, including by 5 points in 2004.

But recently, the state has been trending Democratic. Democrats won a Senate seat in 2004 with Ken Salazar and the governorship two years later. With Sen. Wayne Allard (R) calling it quits, Democratic Rep. Mark Udall is a slight favorite to win the state’s other Senate seat this year. And Democrats now hold majorities in both chambers of the Colorado Legislature.

Until late July, polling in the state showed Obama ahead, from anywhere between 2 and 9 points. But recent polling has been more mixed. Polls have generally shown one candidate or the other ahead by the low single digits, making for a race that looks to be a tossup.

But my confidence in these surveys is not great. A number of the surveys are automated, and some of the internals look more than a little odd. That doesn’t mean the results are wrong. It just means that I don’t have a great deal of confidence that they are correct.

One of the recent surveys, conducted on Sept. 11 by Insider Advantage, showed Obama up by 3 points. But the survey found McCain getting an unbelievable one-quarter of the African-American vote and Obama winning both men and women by an identical 49 percent to 46 percent margin.

Given the gender gaps everywhere — with McCain running well ahead of Obama among men nationally, as well as in Colorado surveys conducted by Public Policy Polling (D) and even Rasmussen Reports for Fox News — it seems unlikely that there would be no gender gap in Colorado. And if McCain wins 25 percent of the black vote anywhere, I’d be stunned.

Still, the state looks to be made for a tight contest. With upscale white voters who would seem likely to prefer Obama, Hispanics, Boulder liberals and plenty of swing suburbanites, Colorado looks like a one-time Republican state where Obama should have appeal.

One of the problems facing Obama is that the Democratic nominee for president has not won more than 47 percent of the vote in the state since 1964, when Colorado went for Lyndon Johnson (D). Bill Clinton carried the state with only 40.1 percent of the vote in a three-way race in 1992, and John Kerry drew 47 percent last time.

Of course, with Bob Barr running as a Libertarian, Cynthia McKinney as a Green and Ralph Nader as an Independent (to say nothing of the 11 other tickets on the ballot in the state), the presidential candidate who carries the state need not win a majority of the total votes cast.

A month from now, the national landscape could look very different. The contest for the White House might have blown wide open. But at this point, with the race looking very tight, Colorado surely is one of the key swing states, and it now looks like the best indicator of how the nation will go.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 18, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

2008 Presidential Battleground Ratings

Total Electoral Votes
(270 needed to win)

Obama - 197 (safe/likely) + 63 (lean) = 260
McCain - 160 (safe/likely) + 67 (lean) = 227
Toss-ups = 51

Toss-Ups

  • Colorado (9)
  • Nevada (5)
  • New Hampshire (4)
  • Ohio (20)
  • Virginia (13)
Lean McCain
  • Florida (27)
  • Indiana (11)
  • Missouri (11)
  • Montana (3)
  • North Carolina (15)
Lean Obama
  • Michigan (17)
  • Minnesota (10)
  • New Mexico (5)
  • Pennsylvania (21)
  • Wisconsin (10)
Safe/Likely McCain
  • Alabama (9)
  • Alaska (3)
  • Arizona (10)
  • Arkansas (6)
  • Georgia (15)
  • Idaho (4)
  • Kansas (6)
  • Kentucky (8)
  • Louisiana (9)
  • Mississippi (6)
  • Nebraska (5)
  • North Dakota (3)
  • Oklahoma (7)
  • South Carolina (8)
  • South Dakota (3)
  • Tennessee (11)
  • Texas (34)
  • Utah (5)
  • West Virginia (5)
  • Wyoming (3)
Safe/Likely Obama
  • California (55)
  • Connecticut (7)
  • Delaware (3)
  • Hawaii (4)
  • Illinois (21)
  • Iowa (7)
  • Maine (4)
  • Maryland (10)
  • Massachusetts (12)
  • New Jersey (15)
  • New York (31)
  • Oregon (7)
  • Rhode Island (4)
  • Vermont (3)
  • Washington (11)
  • D.C. (3)

Sunday, September 21, 2008

2008 Gubernatorial Ratings

Here are our latest gubernatorial ratings. Democrats currently hold 28 governorships compared to 22 for the Republicans.

# - Moved benefiting Democrats
* - Moved benefiting Republicans

LEAN TAKEOVER (1 R, o D)
  • MO Open (Blunt, R)
TOSS-UP (0 R, 2 D)
  • Gregoire (D-WA) *
  • NC Open (Easley, D) *
NARROW ADVANTAGE INCUMBENT PARTY (1 R, 0 D)
  • Daniels (R-IN)
CLEAR ADVANTAGE INCUMBENT PARTY (1 R, 0 D)
  • Douglas (R-VT) #
CURRENTLY SAFE (2 R, 4 D)
  • Hoeven (R-ND)
  • Huntsman (R-UT)
  • Lynch (D-NH)
  • Manchin (D-WV)
  • Schweitzer (D-MT)
  • DE Open (Minner, D)

Friday, September 19, 2008

With Risk Comes Some Loss for EMILY’s List

By Nathan L. Gonzales

EMILY’s List has earned a reputation as a powerful interest group and has had its share of political victories through the years. When EMILY’s List endorses a candidate, people take notice. But you only have to look at last week’s primaries in New York to understand that the road isn’t always easy for the Democratic women’s group.

Open seats are key to helping EMILY’s List achieve its goal of electing more Democratic women who support abortion rights — particularly open seats in Democratic districts where winning the primary is tantamount to winning the seat, like in New York’s 21st district.

In the 21st district, EMILY’s List endorsed Tracey Brooks (D), a former regional director for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), in the race to replace retiring Rep. Mike McNulty (D). Brooks earned the EMILY’s List nod early, but former Assemblyman Paul Tonko (D) got into the race late and won the multi-candidate primary 39 percent to 30 percent.

EMILY’s List passed on endorsing environmental lawyer Alice Kryzan in New York’s open 26th district being vacated by Rep. Tom Reynolds (R). She ended up winning the primary with 42 percent of the vote over young Iraq War veteran Jon Powers (36 percent) and 2006 nominee and multimillionaire Jack Davis (23 percent).

In EMILY’s List’s defense, Kryzan’s victory was a surprise to everyone, but it shows that the group’s vetting process is not foolproof.

EMILY’s List worked with Kryzan before the primary and has now endorsed her for the general election, but she did not meet the group’s threshold for an endorsement in the primary.

“Every pro-choice Democratic woman who wants our help can get it,” EMILY’s List Communications Director Ramona Oliver said. The group is willing to work with every candidate to try to create opportunities, but not every Democratic woman who supports abortion rights receives an endorsement.

According to strategists at EMILY’s List, the organization analyzes the strength of the candidate and campaign operation, and looks for a path to victory. Kryzan attended the group’s candidate training last year, and the group gave her guidance on staffing decisions. But ultimately, EMILY’s List never saw her path to the nomination against a self-funding candidate with high name identification and a candidate who was endorsed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and supported by most of organized labor.

Kryzan won because the two men attacked each other and she slipped through the middle. If EMILY’s List had endorsed Kryzan, she probably would have raised more money, been taken more seriously and been unable to slip through the primary unscathed. An endorsement might have changed the dynamic of the race, if not the outcome.

Even with last week’s results, EMILY’s List already considers this cycle a success. Four women who support abortion rights have been added to Congress in special elections since 2006, and two of those won tough Democratic primaries: Niki Tsongas (Massachusetts’ 5th district) and Donna Edwards (Maryland’s 4th).

Other EMILY’s List candidates to win primaries this cycle include Chellie Pingree (Maine’s 1st district), Judy Baker (Missouri’s 9th), and Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-Mich.), who was in political trouble because of the scandal surrounding her son. Also, gubernatorial candidates Jill Long Thompson in Indiana and Beverly Perdue in North Carolina won with the group’s backing.

But EMILY’s List has taken its lumps this cycle, starting with Clinton’s loss in the presidential primary.

In Tennessee’s 9th district, African-American attorney Nikki Tinker lost her primary challenge to Rep. Steve Cohen (D) by 60 points in the majority-black district. EMILY’s List actually came out against its endorsed candidate at the end of the race, after she ran controversial and racially loaded television ads.

In Virginia’s 11th district, former Rep. Leslie Byrne failed in her comeback attempt, losing by 25 points in the primary to Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerry Connolly.

In Colorado’s 2nd district, former state Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald finished second in the three-way primary, losing 42 percent to 38 percent against free-spending Jared Polis.

And in Minnesota’s 3rd district, state Sen. Terri Bonoff failed to get the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party endorsement against young Iraq War veteran and political neophyte Ashwin Madia. After Madia took 58 percent on the eighth ballot at the party nominating convention, she dropped out.

On one level, EMILY’s List’s win-loss record doesn’t match up with the group’s public image. Last cycle, when Democrats were picking up 30 seats nationwide, many EMILY’s List candidates lost top tier races, including in New Mexico’s 1st, Connecticut’s 4th Pennsylvania’s 6th, New Jersey’s 7th, and Ohio’s 15th.

Kirsten Gillibrand’s win over incumbent Rep. John Sweeney in New York’s 20th district was a rare bright spot in the House. Carol Shea Porter (N.H.) and Nancy Boyda (Kan.) defeated incumbents without EMILY’s List support. The group has endorsed the Granite State Congresswoman this year.

Like any other group, EMILY’s List has had difficulty defeating incumbents. Along with Gillibrand, Claire McCaskill (2006), Melissa Bean (2004), Debbie Stabenow (2000) and Maria Cantwell (2000) unseated incumbents in the general election over the last four cycles.

And history paints a tough road ahead for EMILY’s List. Of the 14 Congressional challengers they have endorsed this cycle, some are top-tier opportunities, like Betsy Markey (Colorado’s 4th) and Dina Titus (Nevada’s 3rd), while others are real long shots, like Becky Greenwald (Iowa’s 4th) and Annette Taddeo (Florida’s 18th).

EMILY’s List candidates continue to have some of their best opportunities in top tier open-seat races, including Ann Kirkpatrick (Arizona’s 1st) and Debbie Halvorson (Illinois’ 11th). And some of last cycle’s challengers are now open-seat candidates, including Mary Jo Kilroy (Ohio’s 15th) and Linda Stender (New Jersey 7th).

To strategists at EMILY’s List, their strategy is inevitably risky, trying to get newcomers elected and often promoting candidates in tough races. The group is unafraid to challenge incumbents and get involved in messy primaries.

In one way, EMILY’s List is in the political venture capital business, where risky investments are sometimes necessary for long-term gains and where not every investment pays off.

Instead of giving money directly to candidates, EMILY’s List recommends candidates to its membership and advises donors to contribute to the candidates’ campaigns. As long as their members understand the risk, then EMILY’s List will continue to have the freedom to take some losses.

As some candidates will attest, the EMILY’s List endorsement is not easy to obtain and the group’s seal of approval brings a level of legitimacy to a candidate’s campaign. But while EMILY’s List candidates have demonstrated a path to victory to gain an endorsement, all of the paths are not equal in difficulty.


This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 17, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Print Edition: Gubernatorial Outlook, House Ratings, Presidential Battleground

The September 18, 2008 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks (even more frequently as Election Day approaches) and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

Here is a brief sample of what's in this edition...


2008 Gubernatorial Outlook

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Republican prospects are actually improving in the handful of competitive gubernatorial races this cycle.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) is in better shape than he was six months ago, while Washington is a tight race, even after four years, and North Carolina has emerged as a legitimate takeover opportunity. Republicans are still mending fences after their primary in Missouri, but still have a chance to hold that governorship.

Currently, the most likely range of outcomes in this cycle’s gubernatorial races is from D +1 to R +1.

Subscribers to the print edition get the entire issue, including race-by-race analysis and recent polling in the most competitive gubernatorial races, our updated competitive House races chart, and our first-ever handicapping of the states in the presidential race.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Now It’s the DCCC That Is Swimming Against the Tide

By Stuart Rothenberg

In a curious coincidence of timing, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has added a number of Congressional districts to its various lists of competitive contests at exactly the same time that Republicans are seeing an uptick in their poll and fundraising numbers and an improved political landscape.

GOP strategists are quick to point out that they don’t know whether their brightened prospects will last, but one noted that recently received survey data “were the most encouraging that I’ve seen in two years.” A number of different surveys have shown a closer Congressional generic ballot and a better GOP image recently.

“We are seeing a real change up and down the ballot, from state legislative races to Congressional to the presidential,” said one enthusiastic Republican operative.

Given that, it certainly appears that the DCCC is running a risk by promoting some candidates who have little or no chance to win in the fall, and by lumping together very strong contenders with second-tier campaigns.

The DCCC’s “Red to Blue” program, which presumably includes the committee’s top takeover targets, includes some likely winners, such as Ethan Berkowitz in Alaska, Ann Kirkpatrick in Arizona, Betsy Markey in Colorado, John Adler in New Jersey, and Michael McMahon and Dan Maffei in New York. But it also includes candidates with far less chance of winning.

The long shots include Sam Bennett, who is newly added to the program and faces an uphill fight against Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.). Dent, according to one knowledgeable GOP insider, is very popular in his Democratic-leaning district and is “in good shape for re-election.” Interestingly, in a year when observers have been flooded with upbeat Democratic polls, neither Bennett nor the DCCC has released survey data to prove her viability.

State Sen. David Boswell (D), running in Kentucky’s open 2nd district and also just added to Red to Blue, had a lead in some initial polling but faces considerable problems in his bid to win the GOP-held seat. He showed $45,000 in the bank on June 30, while his GOP opponent, state Sen. Brett Guthrie, had $661,000 on hand at the same point.

Boswell starts with a bit better name identification than Guthrie, but neither man is known in the all-important — and expensive — Louisville media market, which is why Boswell has serious problems in this race. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) isn’t likely to help Boswell at the top of the ballot, either.

Boswell certainly has a chance in this race, but only if the DCCC and its labor allies come in with a huge media buy.

Also on the list is Judy Feder (D), who has a long way to go to become a top-tier challenger to Rep. Frank Wolf (R) in Virginia’s 10th district. As she did two years ago when she drew 41 percent against Wolf, Feder is raising plenty of cash.

But Wolf’s numbers are in the stratosphere. He is personally popular and holds a huge lead over her in an expensive media market. And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is winning this district, which President Bush carried with 55 percent four years ago.

Democrat Anne Barth, who is also on Red to Blue, is challenging Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R) in West Virginia. Capito is also wildly popular and holds better than a 2-1 lead over Barth. And to no one’s surprise, McCain is clobbering Obama in the district.

But if Red to Blue is a mishmash of serious and long shot races, the committee’s two other candidate lists — “Emerging Races” and “Races to Watch” — include some truly odd contests.

The DCCC recently added Jim Harlan (D) of Louisiana’s 1st district to its Emerging Races list even though the district’s Democratic Performance Index is a microscopic 34.3 percent, meaning it is a rock-solid Republican seat. Bush drew 71 percent in the district four years ago, and when it became open earlier this year following then-Rep. Bobby Jindal’s (R) election as governor, Rep. Steve Scalise (R) won the special election easily.

Democrats say they have a self-funder in the race, but that alone doesn’t make this seat competitive. Nor does it make South Carolina’s 1st district (DPI 41.6 percent) a serious takeover opportunity, though it too is classified as an Emerging Race.

And then there is the DCCC’s all-new Races to Watch list. Quite simply, it is bizarre.

Included on the list are Josh Zeitz, running against Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Rob Hubler, running against Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa). Zeitz, who had $125,000 in the bank on June 30, is challenging a Republican Congressman who is both incredibly popular and holds a commanding lead in the race. Hubler, who had only $27,000 in the bank on June 30, is running in by far the most Republican district in Iowa, where McCain will run up a huge margin.

Some Democrats note that their party isn’t committed to spending money on the Emerging Races and Races to Watch, and go so far as to acknowledge that those contests are only long shots, at best.

But if the DCCC is going to go out of its way to promote certain races, it ought to be responsible for those selections. And if it puts absurd races on its list, it devalues those lists altogether.

The reality, of course, is that these lists are gimmicks — gimmicks to try to drive resources and media coverage to them without the committee necessarily having to spend its own money on candidates who have little or no chance of winning. In fact, these gimmicks often work.

But if the national landscape continues to move even slightly more back toward the Republicans, eroding (but certainly not eliminating) the Democrats’ huge early advantages, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) might find himself promoting dozens of candidates with no chance of winning. And that would be embarrassing and self-defeating.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 15, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

NRCC’s Spending Points to Potential Hot Spots

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Strapped for cash, the National Republican Congressional Committee will have to be more efficient than its counterpart when it comes to spending on House races. Recent independent expenditure spending on polling shows that the NRCC is searching for the best use of the money and proves that the playing field is still stacked against them.

From Sept. 3-9, the GOP committee spent a total of $73,046 on polling in a handful of Congressional districts. President Bush carried all five districts four years ago, and all are currently held by Republicans.

The two most Democratic districts of the lot are likely to be the toughest holds. In Nevada’s 3rd district, 2006 gubernatorial nominee Dina Titus (D) was a late entry into the race but is a serious threat to Rep. Jon Porter (R). The rapid population growth and Democratic trend of the district makes Porter’s task extremely difficult. And in New Jersey’s 3rd district, former Lockheed Martin vice president Chris Myers (R) is trying to hold the seat of retiring GOP Rep. Jim Saxton against state Sen. John Adler (D).

The NRCC also polled in Alabama’s 2nd district. Even though President Bush carried it handily in 2004 with 66 percent, Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright (D) looks like a strong candidate and Democrats believe they will win this open seat just like they won special elections in Mississippi and Louisiana earlier this spring. State Rep. Jay Love is trying to hold the seat for Republicans.

The last two seats are heavily Republican and shouldn’t be competitive, except they feature weak incumbents. President Bush carried Idaho’s 1st district with 68 percent and Ohio’s 2nd district with 64 percent, but the NRCC’s IE is rightly testing the vulnerability of GOP Reps. Bill Sali and Jean Schmidt. In the end, the presidential year and the recently energized GOP base could save both incumbents since the Democratic challengers —1996 Idaho Senate nominee Walt Minnick and Victoria Wulsin, the 2006 nominee against Schmidt — would need a sizable crossover vote from the presidential race.

The polls are being conducted by multiple firms including Tarrance Group (Nev.), Public Opinion Strategies (Ala.), National Research (N.J. and Idaho) and McLaughlin and Associates (Ohio).

The poll results are not likely to see the light of day, but observers shouldn’t assume the worst since neither party committee’s IE arm makes a habit of releasing the valuable data. But the spending does indicate where the committee is currently focused.


This item first appeared on RollCall.com on September 12, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Indiana 3: Democrats Claim Souder Is Vulnerable — Again

By Nathan L. Gonzales

A new poll done for young Democratic attorney Mike Montagano’s campaign claims that voters in Indiana’s 3rd district are tired of their incumbent, Rep. Mark Souder (R). But the results show Montagano still has some considerable ground to make up, and the polling looks similar to two years ago, when Souder ended up winning by 8 points.

The just-released Sept. 9-10 Cooper & Secrest Associates poll showed Souder leading Montagano 50 percent to 37 percent in a general election matchup. That’s an improvement from April, when the Democrat trailed by 27 points, but Montagano has been on television since, boosting his name identification.

Recently, the problem for Democrats hasn’t been fundraising or keeping Souder near 50 percent. The problem is winning the district.

Two years ago, Democratic polling at the end of July showed Souder with a 50 percent-to-32 percent lead, and it found almost half of the voters willing to elect “someone new” to Congress. A late October poll by the nonpartisan Research 2000 showed the Congressman with an underwhelming 52 percent-to-40 percent advantage as well.

On Election Day, Souder prevailed over Democrat Tom Hayhurst 54 percent to 46 percent.

Montagano also likes to boast about his fundraising this year, compared with Souder’s lackluster totals. Through June 30, the challenger had more cash on hand than the incumbent, $352,000 to $323,000, and held his own in fundraising, $468,000 to Souder’s $559,000.

But the money discrepancy is no surprise. Two years ago, Hayhurst outspent Souder $708,000 to $642,000 and it wasn’t enough.

It’s unlikely Souder will ever have stellar poll numbers, and Democrats picked up three seats in the Hoosier State last cycle, but Democrats have dozens of better opportunities than Indiana’s 3rd. Montagano remains on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s list of “Emerging Races” this cycle, meaning that the contest has not yet broken through to the top tier of competitive “Red to Blue” races.


This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 12, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Beyond Congressional Battleground, Close Gubernatorial Races Lurk

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Even with the tightening of the presidential race and renewed GOP excitement, Democrats are still widely expected to gain seats in the House and the Senate in November. But Republicans could actually see a net gain of seats in this year’s small crop of gubernatorial races.

Only 11 states are electing a governor this year, and really only four of those races are up for grabs. The competitive races are divided evenly between the two parties, with the most likely outcome ranging from Democrats gaining a governorship to Republicans gaining one.

North Carolina is proving to be a battleground up and down the ballot. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) are battling for the Tar Heel State’s electoral votes, and Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R) is in the fight of her political life for a second term.

Meanwhile, Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue (D) and Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory (R) are locked in a tight race to replace outgoing Gov. Mike Easley (D). Poll results over the past three weeks range from each candidate being up by a couple points to a dead heat. Historically, Republicans aren’t usually in this position.

Perdue won the Democratic nomination by a convincing margin over a well-financed statewide officeholder. McCrory got into the race late, but he overtook the underwhelming GOP field with high name identification and a large geographic base.

North Carolina has had only two Republican governors in the past 70 years, but if McCrory can put together the money to compete in a state with expensive TV markets, he could make this a race until the end.

In Missouri, Republicans caught a break when unpopular Gov. Matt Blunt (R) decided not to run for a second term. Rep. Kenny Hulshof (R) subsequently won a bitter primary, and Republicans are still healing their wounds.

State Attorney General Jay Nixon (D) has yet to put the race away, despite a divided GOP and the fact that he’s been running for more than two and a half years. An Aug. 13-17 Public Policy Polling (D) survey and a July 29-31 SurveyUSA poll showed Nixon with an identical advantage over Hulshof, though he was leading with less than 50 percent. Nixon still has the edge, but it looks to be a close race in a state McCain should win.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) made some unpopular decisions during his first term as governor, and he once looked like a prime Democratic target. His Democratic opponent, former Rep. Jill Long Thompson, narrowly won her primary (50.6 percent to 49.4 percent) against a wealthy opponent, but she’s having difficulty keeping up with Daniels in the polls and in fundraising.

An Aug. 29-30 Howey-Gauge poll had the governor ahead 53 percent to 35 percent. Almost two weeks earlier, SurveyUSA showed Daniels up 52 percent to 38 percent. And a July poll for the governor’s campaign had him up by 18 points. He’s not out of the woods, but Daniels is a good campaigner and it will be tough for Thompson to set the tone without more resources.

Meanwhile in Washington, Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) can’t shake her 2004 opponent, former state Sen. Dino Rossi (R). The two battled to a near draw four years ago, with Gregoire prevailing by 133 votes. Almost four years later, the race remains virtually unchanged.

Gregoire and Rossi were within 3 points of each other in all but one of six public polls since July. And because of Washington’s new “top two” primary, the two faced the voters on Aug. 19. Of course, Gregoire edged out Rossi, 48 percent to 46 percent.

Rossi outspent the governor in August, but Gregoire should enjoy a financial advantage during the stretch run. Obama is expected to carry the state easily, but Rossi is certainly still in the game, and that’s all Republicans could hope for at this point.

Finally, in Delaware, state Treasurer Jack Markell proved that “change” is still a potent message. His opponent, Lt. Gov. John Carney, had the support of outgoing Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (D), organized labor and most of the establishment. But Markell prevailed in Tuesday’s Democratic primary and is the heavy favorite in November.


This story first appeared on Roll Call.com on September 12, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, September 15, 2008

Latest Polls Raise Questions About the Political Landscape

By Stuart Rothenberg

Don’t assume that the first flurry of polls we’ve seen this week will reflect the 2008 electoral landscape two or three weeks from now. Like the Democratic convention bounce that benefited Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), the Republican bounce that now benefits Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) is likely to dissipate.

Where the race will be a month from now depends not only on what happens during the daily campaign war, but also on whether the most recent CNN/Opinion Research survey is a mirage or an accurate indicator of a fundamental change that has occurred in public opinion.

The CNN survey, and to a lesser extent some of the other recent surveys, suggest an electorate that is hardening along traditional lines, with half the country preferring change, Democrats and Obama, and half opting for strength and experience, Republicans and McCain.

If that’s true, it suggests a return to the partisan equilibrium that we saw in 2000 and 2004, and a tight race all the way to November. Given the strong mood for change and the sense of impending doom in Republican ranks just a few weeks ago, that would be disappointing news for Democratic partisans who hoped to avoid a nail-biter.

The most recent CNN/Opinion Research poll found a dramatic rebound by the Republican Party. If that has occurred — and it still is nothing more than an “if” — then it changes the entire dynamic of the election.

The survey showed a significant drop in the public’s view of the Democratic Party — from 56 percent favorable/35 percent unfavorable in late April to 51 percent favorable/40 percent unfavorable now — and a corresponding improvement in the GOP’s image, from 38 percent favorable/53 percent unfavorable in April to 48 percent favorable/45 percent unfavorable now. That still leaves the Democratic Party with a better image, but the difference between the parties’ standings is far less dramatic than it was.

It also showed what can only be described as the total collapse of the party’s advantage in the “generic Congressional ballot” question, which asks respondents whether they plan to vote for the Republican or the Democratic candidate for Congress.

The Sept. 5-7 CNN poll showed Democrats with a 3-point advantage on the generic ballot, 49 percent to 46 percent. In November, the Democrats held an 11-point advantage (53 percent to 42 percent), and in June of 2007, their advantage was a dozen points (53 percent to 41 percent).

Most surveys have shown the Democratic Congressional generic ballot advantage to be 8 points to 15 points for more than a year, so a dramatic narrowing of those numbers would be significant. I’m not yet ready to believe that has happened until I see corroborating data.

For months, I’ve argued that the public’s disconnect between McCain’s brand and the GOP brand was filled with both risk and opportunity for Republicans. Either the party’s terrible image could rebrand McCain, causing him to plummet in the polls and dragging him down to defeat, or McCain could redefine the Republican Party and improve its image.

While the CNN poll suggests that McCain’s image — or running mate Sarah Palin’s — has re-branded his party, it is far too early to conclude that that is exactly what has happened. The recently released NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey, which rarely jumps around erratically and therefore has earned my admiration, showed less redefinition of the parties.

That survey found Republicans now with a 40 percent positive/43 percent negative image, compared with a 27 percent positive/48 percent negative image in April. The obvious explanation is that rank-and-file Republican partisans are now feeling better about their party and have responded that way to pollsters. Unlike the CNN survey, the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed the Democrats’ image essentially unchanged from the spring, and that they have a far better reputation than the GOP.

Unfortunately, none of the NBC News/ Wall Street Journal, the USA Today/Gallup or the ABC News/Washington Post poll included questions about the generic Congressional ballot.

Whether or not the Republican Party’s image has improved is no small matter.

McCain has been forced to swim against a strong current, and his task would be made easier if voters had a significantly more positive view of the GOP. Just as importantly, a much closer generic Congressional ballot, especially combined with a more positive image for the Republican Party, would improve GOP prospects in upcoming House and Senate elections, reshaping a landscape where some Republican incumbents are at risk primarily because of their partisan label.

Republicans, quite naturally, will prefer to believe the CNN numbers. But unless and until other surveys confirm a new political reality in the electorate, it’s wise to be cautious and assume that Republicans are still swimming against a strong tide.

This column
first appeared in Roll Call on September 11, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Sunday, September 14, 2008

2008 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings.

Likely Takeover (2 R, 0 D)
  • NM Open (Domenici, R)
  • VA Open (Warner, R)
Lean Takeover (2 R, 0 D)
  • Stevens (R-AK)
  • Sununu (R-NH)
Toss-Up (3 R, 1 D)
  • CO Open (Allard, R)
  • Dole (R-NC)
  • Smith (R-OR)
  • Landrieu (D-LA)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 0 D)
  • Coleman (R-MN)
  • Wicker (R-MS)
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (2 R, 0 D)
  • Collins (R-ME)
  • McConnell (R-KY)
Currently Safe (12 R, 11 D)
  • ID Open (Craig, R)
  • NE Open (Hagel, R)
  • Alexander (R-TN)
  • Barrasso (R-WY)
  • Chambliss (R-GA)
  • Cochran (R-MS)
  • Cornyn (R-TX)
  • Enzi (R-WY)
  • Graham (R-SC)
  • Inhofe (R-OK)
  • Roberts (R-KS)
  • Sessions (R-AL)
  • Baucus (D-MT)
  • Biden (D-DE)
  • Durbin (D-IL)
  • Harkin (D-IA)
  • Johnson (D-SD)
  • Kerry (D-MA)
  • Lautenberg (D-NJ)
  • Levin (D-MI)
  • Pryor (D-AR)
  • Reed (D-RI)
  • Rockefeller (D-WV)

Friday, September 12, 2008

Pentecostal Democrats Lead Party’s Faith Outreach

By Nathan L. Gonzales

After diving headlong into GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s past, the media is questioning the governor’s Pentecostal background and treating it as if it were a liability to her candidacy.

Yet for months, the media has been obsessed with Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and the Democratic Party’s outreach to evangelicals and other faith voters in the presidential race. And two Democrats with Pentecostal roots have been put in charge of those efforts. So far, that has gone unmentioned.

“Pentecostalism obscured in Palin Biography,” the Sept. 5 Associated Press story headline read, clearly with an undertone that, if unearthed, Pentecostalism could torpedo her candidacy.

“Sarah Palin often identifies herself simply as Christian,” the piece began, “Yet [Arizona Sen.] John McCain’s running mate has deep roots in Pentecostalism, a spirit-filled Christian tradition that is one of the fastest growing in the world. It’s often derided by outsiders and Bible-believers alike.”

CNN sent a team of reporters to Alaska to find out more about Palin and became fascinated by her former church. “Pastor: GOP Downplaying Palin’s Pentecostal Past,” read the headline of a piece that ran on Monday night’s Anderson Cooper 360 program. “For decades, Sarah Palin went to church with people who spoke in tongues and believed in faith healing and the ‘end times.’”

Of course, all Christians do not believe in Pentecostal theology. But aside from the fact that Palin left Wasilla Assembly of God six years ago, Pentecostalism is not a fringe set of beliefs.

Palin’s former church belongs to the Assemblies of God, a denomination of 12,000 churches nationwide, including a constituency of more than 2.8 million people. It is the second largest evangelical denomination in the country, behind the Southern Baptists, and the world’s largest Pentecostal denomination.

Aside from the lack of context, the vast majority of the media coverage of Palin’s Pentecostal background has also failed to mention the roots of two key Democratic staffers involved in the presidential race.

Both Obama’s national director for religious affairs Joshua DuBois and Democratic National Convention Committee CEO Leah Daughtry boast Pentecostal rĂ©sumĂ©s.

DuBois is a lay minister with a Cambridge, Mass., congregation affiliated with the United Pentecostal Council of the Assemblies of God, a small, largely African-American denomination with about 35 congregations in the United States and the Caribbean, not affiliated with the Assemblies of God (USA). DuBois originally worked for Obama’s Senate office before moving to the campaign.

Daughtry is chief of staff at the Democratic National Committee and heads up the party’s Faith in Action program. She pastors a small Pentecostal church in Washington, D.C., that is affiliated with the House of the Lord Pentecostal Church, the small denomination her grandfather started.

Democrats have been promoting the Pentecostal résumé item as a connection point with voters of faith who may normally vote Republican.

The second volume of the Obama campaign’s “American Values Report” featured a testimonial from “Jason H.,” a self-described “born again Pentecostal believer in the Assembly of God tradition.” Clearly the campaign would not have included his testimonial if they didn’t believe it was a credible view and an asset to Obama’s candidacy.

Religion News Service’s Adelle Banks wrote a piece Aug. 27 titled “Pentecostals leading Democrats’ Faith Outreach,” just two days before McCain’s pick of Palin was announced. But her story didn’t draw any particular curiosity, and it didn’t spark teams of investigative reporters visiting the Democrats’ churches.

In fact, countless other stories about Daughtry and DuBois have included their Pentecostalism, but if the media thought twice about it, it was in a positive sense.

Because Palin is running for office, one could make the case that her background should be more heavily vetted than a staffer. But if Pentecostalism is a fringe belief that should be shunned, then the media should question Obama and the DNC about leaving their faith outreach to a couple Pentecostal aides.


This item first appeared on RollCall.com on September 10, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

For Obama, McCain, Standing Pat May Be The Wrong Approach

By Stuart Rothenberg

The final phase of the 2008 presidential campaign has begun. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has the edge over Republican standard-bearer Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), but the race is competitive, so the next two months will determine the winner.

McCain has the ability and a strong incentive now to change his emphasis as he tries to appeal to swing voters. Obama doesn’t appear to have as urgent a need to make a statement about himself and his candidacy, but if he does, he could dramatically improve his prospects in a race that he has not yet wrapped up.

After solidifying and energizing his right flank with the selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, McCain surely has a newfound freedom to run back to the political center, emphasizing his maverick credentials and differences with his party. He should do so, and he began that process with his acceptance speech.

While voters now tell pollsters that the economy is the top issue, Palin and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani spent much of their time Wednesday night in St. Paul, Minn., declaring what one convention Republican delegate called a “culture war,” pitting rural America against the national media, Hollywood and the nation’s elite.

That may seem strange, but it isn’t.

True, many Americans are concerned about the health and direction of the economy, and they surely want the next president to have a detailed economic agenda to restore the economy’s health. But because neither party has an easy answer to the nation’s problems, the nation’s still-deep cultural divide becomes an obvious place for the McCain/Palin ticket to go to energize conservatives and to appeal to voters who otherwise might think about voting for the Democratic ticket because of economic uncertainty.

Democrats still don’t understand the cultural divide — they think that talking about values or religion will automatically attract religious voters even if the party’s policy positions are totally at odds with those voters’ positions — and they have nominated a ticket that apparently still has limited appeal in small-town and culturally conservative America.

But McCain’s problem — and Obama’s advantage — is that it is very unlikely that there are enough voters in small-town America to elect McCain to the presidency this time. He cannot win by getting every Republican vote out there, since most polls show Democrats with about a 10-point generic advantage.

McCain must return to his maverick image, and he and Palin are well-positioned to deliver a reform message that diverges from Republican orthodoxy. This would, of course, require McCain to talk again about some issues and themes that will make Republican regulars and conservatives uncomfortable, not merely to ramble on about how Washington, D.C., is broken or how he will shake things up when he gets to the White House.

McCain will need to offer specifics and new ideas, something that he did not do Thursday evening. It’s his only way to appeal to swing suburbanites and working-class Democrats, two key constituencies for November.

Conservatives no longer find McCain merely acceptable as an alternative to Obama. They are with the McCain/Palin ticket wholeheartedly, which gives him considerable freedom over the next two months to tack left.

And Obama? The Democrat’s game plan looks pretty clear: Continue to ride the wave of change, convince still-undecided voters that he is a safer choice than they now think, and continue to portray McCain as little more than a Republican successor to President Bush.

It’s a good plan, and it may well be good enough to win at least 270 Electoral College votes, especially if Palin falters, McCain performs poorly in the debates, or Democrats truly have changed the political arithmetic by registering new voters.

But Obama has not done one thing that I was sure he would do by now — one thing that could have already improved his prospects in the fall. He needs to find an issue or controversy with which he strongly disagrees with his party — or with a core Democratic constituency group — to prove to swing voters that he’s not merely another elitist Northern liberal.

Obama talks a good game about disagreeing without being disagreeable and about coming together to solve the nation’s problems. But Republicans have rather successfully portrayed him as a man who is all talk and no action. And, they are sure to say, when he takes action, it’s predictably liberal.

I thought for sure that by now Obama would have found an issue or two to break with his anti-war left or with his labor union allies or with his environmental allies. But so far he hasn’t found that Sister Souljah moment that grabs the nation’s attention, causes real upset among some of his supporters and proves his political independence. He may need to find one to guarantee victory in the fall.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 8, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

New Print Edition: 2008 Senate Overview

The September 10, 2008 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks (even more frequently as Election Day approaches) and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

Here is a brief sample of what's in this edition...

Senate Overview – The Lay of the Land

The last three months has seen two more Republican seats put at considerable risk, as Alaska’s Ted Stevens has to fight both an indictment and a tough Democratic challenger, and North Carolina’s Elizabeth Dole has been damaged by a barrage of Democratic attacks. The DSCC’s financial advantage has been apparent on the ground for weeks, as the Committee has launched attacks against Republican candidates across the country. The NRSC has largely stayed on the sideline, but that is now changing.

Two GOP seats now appear to be gone: Virginia and New Mexico, with Republican candidates in New Hampshire and Colorado trying to mount counterattacks. Maine’s Susan Collins continues to defy the odds and remain in good shape, while Senate races in Minnesota, Oregon and Mississippi could well determine what kind of year the two parties have.

On the Democratic side, only Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu is at risk, though Democratic strategists express doubt that she is still vulnerable. The DSCC continues to have a big financial advantage over the NRSC, giving DSCC chair Chuck Schumer plenty of flexibility about where he spends his cash. Democrats are certain to gain Senate seats in November – with 4-6 our current estimate. A gain of nine seats, which would get the party to 60 seats, is not impossible, but remains unlikely, at least at this point.

Subscribers to the print edition get the race-by-race analysis and the latest polls.

Tuesday, September 09, 2008

Some Bellwether States Losing Their Status

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has vowed to compete in all 50 states this fall. While he should perform better than Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in some traditionally Republican states, he’s not going to achieve a Reagan-esque 1984 sweep.

If he defeats Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama’s path to victory will be different from the most recent Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, who came from the South. And an Obama victory will likely jeopardize the bellwether status of some Southern states. Even so, some of the 11 traditional bellwethers remain.

Missouri. Arguably, the champion of all bellwethers, the Show Me State has chosen the presidential winner in each election since 1904, with the exception of 1956. This year, Missouri remains a battleground, and the two vice presidential nominees will face off in St. Louis for the official debate. An Aug. 13-17 Public Policy Polling survey showed McCain ahead 50 percent to 40 percent.

Ohio. One of the most hotly contested states in recent years, Ohio remains a significant battleground. The Buckeye State voted for Richard Nixon in 1960 and has gotten it right ever since. The McCain campaign would like to challenge in Michigan, but it can’t afford to lose Ohio. An Aug. 31-Sept. 2 CNN/Time poll had Obama leading 47 percent to 45 percent, and an Aug. 17-24 Quinnipiac University poll gave the Democrat a similarly narrow edge of 44 percent to 43 percent.

Florida. After the 2000 fiasco, Florida will always get a significant amount of attention. The state has only two knocks against it since 1960, voting for George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Nixon in 1960. An Aug. 25-26 Mason-Dixon poll showed Obama with a 45 percent to 44 percent lead, while Republican firm Strategic Vision (Aug. 22-24) and Quinnipiac University (Aug. 17-24) give McCain 7- and 4-point leads, respectively.

Nevada. Nevada has picked the presidential winner every time since 1960, except for 1976. According to an Aug. 24-26 CNN/Time poll, Obama led 49 percent to 44 percent in a state that is experiencing a tremendous amount of population growth.

New Mexico. Since 1960, voters in the Land of Enchantment have voted for the presidential winner, except 1976 and 2000. President Bush prevailed in 2004 in one of the closest races in the country. New Mexico should be a battleground once again, although an Aug. 24-26 CNN/Time poll showed Obama with a significant 13-point lead.

North Carolina. Tar Heel State voters went for George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996, but have a great presidential track record beyond that. Recent polls have shown McCain with a slight advantage — he had a 45 percent to 42 percent edge in an Aug. 20-23 Public Policy Polling survey — but he can’t take this one for granted. If Obama is on the verge of winning North Carolina, he’s probably already won Virginia and well on his way to the Oval Office.

Arkansas. Since 1960, the Natural State has voted for every presidential winner, except for 1968, when it was one of five states to go for third-party candidate George Wallace. Today, Arkansas is one of the last to receive attention from the Obama campaign, after losing the state 70 percent to 26 percent in the primary to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), the former first lady of Arkansas.

Kentucky. In 1960, the Bluegrass State went for Nixon, who lost to John F. Kennedy, but the state has supported the presidential winner ever since. Kentucky is another Southern state where Obama performed poorly in the primary (30 percent).

Tennessee. Obama did slightly better in the Volunteer State primary (41 percent). But the Democratic nominee is not expected to carry the state in the general election, even though Tennessee has picked the last 11 presidential winners.

Louisiana. This state has only gotten it wrong twice (1964 and 1968) at the presidential level since 1960. McCain is favored to carry the state this fall.

Delaware. The First State has a great track record for choosing the presidential winner since 1960. But Delaware is trending Democratic, voting for the unsuccessful Democratic nominee in the last two presidential elections, and the presence of native son Sen. Joseph Biden (D) on the ticket makes the state neither a battleground nor a bellwether this year.

This item
first appeared on RollCall.com on September 4, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, September 08, 2008

Politics, Baseball Intersect in St. Paul

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Four years ago, St. Paul, Minn., residents gave Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) a narrow victory over President Bush — a margin of 18 bobblehead dolls, to be precise.

The “Bobblelection” was a pre-election promotion by the St. Paul Saints, an independent professional baseball team partially owned by actor Bill Murray. The promotion invited fans to vote by choosing the figurine of their candidate of choice. Last month, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama’s bobbling likeness prevailed over Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain 1,250-906 among Saints fans.

“We rarely repeat [promotions], but the first one was so successful,” Saints co-owner Mike Veeck said in an interview Wednesday.

Veeck, which rhymes with “wreck,” is part of one of baseball’s most famous front office families, known for its unique promotions — and for bucking the baseball establishment.

His father, Bill Veeck, owned the Chicago White Sox, St. Louis Browns and Cleveland Indians. He was the first to put players’ names on the backs of uniforms and planted the ivy on the outfield wall of Chicago’s Wrigley Field. The elder Veeck was elected to baseball’s Hall of Fame in 1991.

“If I hadn’t planned Disco Night, they probably would have put my dad in the Hall of Fame while he was still alive and could enjoy it,” Veeck said in the book “Slouching Toward Fargo,” which chronicled the Saints teams of the late 1990s.

In 1979, when his father owned the White Sox, Mike Veeck had the idea to grant fans 98-cent admission in exchange for their unwanted disco records. The records were then destroyed on the field between games of the doubleheader. But thousands of fans poured onto the field, riot police were called in, and the White Sox were forced to forfeit the second game because the playing field was unusable. It is one of the only forfeits in Major League Baseball history.

The Saints’ season ended last week, and Veeck has mixed feelings about the fact that his team’s schedule didn’t overlap with the Republican National Convention.

“I’m happy it didn’t overlap,” Veeck said, “We finished the season so strong.”

Even though the Saints finished in last place in the American Association’s Northern League, they averaged 6,500 fans in a stadium that comfortably fits 5,500. “I’m happy we finished when we did.”

On the other hand, Veeck realizes that the convention would have provided some natural opportunities for unique promotions. “I couldn’t be more sorry the season is over,” he said.

Veeck is a motivational speaker, author of the book “Fun is Good,” and has his hand in a total of six baseball teams as part of the Goldklang Group.

Even though Veeck has invited Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) to throw out the first pitch at a game for seven years running (unsuccessfully), he believes in some separation between baseball and state.

“Baseball should be apolitical,” Veeck explained. “It’s one place you should be all things to all people.”

“We’ve taken a strong stance on causes rather than people,” he continued.

In 1997, the Saints signed Ila Borders, the first female professional player in integrated men’s baseball. Borders began her collegiate career at Vanguard University of Southern California and was the first woman granted a scholarship to a men’s baseball team. As owner of the Indians, Veeck’s father signed the American League’s first black player, Larry Doby, in 1947.

The Saints, who are not affiliated with a major league baseball team, are known for giving well-known players second chances — and sometimes, their last chances — including Darryl Strawberry and Steve Howe. Jack Morris, Glenn Davis, and Kevin Millar also played for the team. Boston Red Sox outfielder J.D. Drew played for the Saints in 1997 and 1998 while in a contract dispute with the Philadelphia Phillies.

Bush has his own connection to the team. Former Saints manager Marty Scott was the one-time director of the Texas Rangers farm system.

Of course, sometimes the intersection of baseball and politics is unavoidable.

When now-Sen. Norm Coleman (R) was mayor of St. Paul, he and Veeck advocated for a new baseball stadium along the Mississippi River, but the city’s residents were not receptive. “Foolishly I wanted to [build the new stadium] too,” Veeck remembered. “Unfortunately fans had a different idea.”

Veeck subsequently rescinded his support, leaving Coleman alone and unhappy with the baseball owner.

“I just put him on the end of the limb and sawed it off,” Veeck candidly said about the situation.

But Veeck glowed about the job Coleman did in St. Paul. “He was absolutely spectacular to deal with,” Veeck said. “He understood the Saints.”

He also applauded Coleman’s efforts to build the Xcel Energy Center, the hockey-arena-turned-convention-hub in downtown St. Paul.

“Many politicians were asleep at the wheel, but Norm drove that thing,” Veeck said. “No matter what anyone says, that was pure Norm Coleman.”

The Republican Senator has made “bringing hockey back” to the Twin Cities a staple of his re-election campaign. In one television ad, a group of guys at a bowling alley repeat the mantra as part of Coleman’s key accomplishments.The National Hockey League’s Minnesota North Stars left for Texas in 1993, but the expansion Minnesota Wild began play in 2000 during Coleman’s tenure.

When asked about entering politics himself, Veeck demurred. “I have so many skeletons,” he said. “I don’t even bother putting them in the closet.”

This story first appeared in Roll Call on September 4, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Defying the Numbers, Gilmore Presses On

By Nathan L. Gonzales and John McArdle

Despite polling and fundraising numbers that show him badly trailing his Democratic opponent, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore (R) expressed optimism Tuesday night about his chances of winning a U.S. Senate seat this fall.

“It’s turning our way,” Gilmore said on the convention floor, just before President Bush spoke to the crowd by a video link. The Republican’s opponent, former Gov. Mark Warner (D), gave the keynote address at last week’s Democratic National Convention in Denver.

“Mark revealed himself at the DNC,” said Gilmore, who is not scheduled to take the main stage in St. Paul, Minn., even though he would welcome the opportunity. “When he gave that speech, he showed he is a true-blue Democrat who is going to support [Sen. Barack] Obama.”

And that, Gilmore said, will have an impact on voters in the commonwealth.

“All this business about Obama carrying Virginia isn’t true,” Gilmore said, “[Sen. John] McCain is going to carry Virginia.”

Still, Democrats do have reason to be confident about Warner’s chances.

An August 9-10 automated poll by SurveyUSA showed Warner leading Gilmore 58 percent to 34 percent in a general election matchup. Warner also held an extraordinary cash advantage of $5.1 million to $117,000, according to June 30 Federal Election Commission reports.

Still, loyal commonwealth Republicans who have joined Gilmore in Minneapolis this week said polling and FEC numbers don’t paint the entire picture of a campaign that they said is constantly evolving.

“I think things are starting to happen,” Republican Party of Virginia Chairman Jeff Frederick said after Wednesday’s delegation breakfast.

“Gilmore’s fundraising has quadrupled in the last month,” Frederick said, and while he acknowledged that Gilmore will never be able to match Warner on a dollar-for-dollar basis — Warner is a multimillionaire, in addition to being a strong fundraiser — he said a cash influx is already helping get the word out.

“We’re going up on TV here soon,” Frederick said. And, he said, “a lot of these business groups that had decided a long time ago that they are supporting Mark Warner are starting to learn more about this guy.”

Gilmore agreed that a number of economic issues are starting to turn in his favor, including expanded domestic oil drilling and the “card check” bill, known as the Employee Free Choice Act to Democrats.

“The business community in Virginia has not noticed [card check]. Now, they’re calling me,” Gilmore said. “Mark Warner will support card check. I’ll oppose it.”

Virginia delegate Tim Hugo added that with several major tax cuts from the past decade set to expire in 2010 and 2011, the next Senator will be in an important position to help keep them from being put on the chopping block, as many leading Democrats have indicated is their preference. With that in mind, Hugo said, “the business community has now taken a second good look at Gilmore.”

But several Virginia GOP delegates acknowledged that time is on Warner’s side and that it will be up to party activists and Gilmore himself to bring the fight to Warner, rather than simply letting the Democrat sit back and run out the clock.

And in that effort, Frederick said the party has to deal with the added pressure of not getting any help from local and national media.

“The press has had this love affair with Mark Warner and have failed to do their due diligence about who this guy really is,” Frederick said.

One GOP delegate described Warner as a “rock star” who is more glitz and cash than substance. It’s a similar line of attack to the one McCain’s camp has used to turn Obama’s much-publicized popularity into a negative.

“We need to knock it into people’s heads that the press has obviously chosen their candidate and are not a reliable source for information on this race,” Frederick said.

Also in attendance on the convention floor Tuesday night were former Virginia Sen. George Allen (R), who lost re-election last cycle, and former Virginia Attorney General Jerry Kilgore (R), who lost the 2005 gubernatorial race to Tim Kaine (D).

This story first appeared in Roll Call on September 4, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Friday, September 05, 2008

Business Interests Focus On the Fight for Senate Control

By Stuart Rothenberg

While most Republicans in Minneapolis-St. Paul are focused on the race for the White House, many in the business community are equally concerned about this year’s Senate contests. That’s because unless Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) wins the presidency, the Senate will be the only place where they can stop the passage of the Employee Free Choice Act.

The bill would allow employees to organize a workplace when a majority of workers sign a card indicating they want to join a union. It would also require binding arbitration to set the details of the first contract after union organization if the union and employer cannot agree.

Veterans of past business-labor political wars on Capitol Hill don’t mince words about what they say is at stake for the business community.

“Every 10 years or so, you get a huge business issue. This time, it’s two words: card check,” said one longtime trade association executive who is attending the GOP convention, using the business community’s handle for the EFCA.

“Card check is the one issue that agitates everyone from the small businessman on Main Street to corporate executives of the largest companies,” a business lobbyist said.

Political strategists who work for the business community fear that the proposal’s enactment into law will tip the scales toward organized labor and their Democratic Party allies, making it easier for unions to organize and raise more funds.

They also fear that those unions will “pair up” with other traditional Democratic constituencies, including environmentalists and trial lawyers, to pass other legislation that will burden business.

The Democratic-controlled House has passed the bill, but supporters of the legislation couldn’t get it through the Senate because of a Republican filibuster.

The proposed legislation has proved to be a heavily partisan proposal, with just two House Democrats (Oklahoma Rep. Dan Boren and Mississippi Rep. Gene Taylor) opposing the measure and only 13 House Republicans favoring it.

In the Senate, every Democrat supported cutting off the GOP filibuster except Sen. Tim Johnson (S.D.), who did not vote, and only one Republican, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, favored cutting off debate, the key test of the measure given Democratic control of the Senate this year and the certainty that they will control it again, with a far bigger majority, in 2009.

A number of veteran business political strategists believe that they will lose the votes of at least a few Republicans — possibly including the two Senators from Maine, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Specter and others — if and when Democrats try to break another GOP filibuster in the next Congress.

While those strategists surely will continue to woo a handful of more moderate Democrats who might, in theory, be inclined to join with Republicans to prevent a vote on the bill, the partisan nature of the measure limits the potential of their success. Both Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor and Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu voted to cut off debate this year.

Business strategists would make a major effort to persuade Ronnie Musgrove, the Democratic Senate nominee in Mississippi and a former governor of the state, to join with Republicans in fighting the measure if he wins his Senate race.

All of this means that November’s Senate contests take on a particularly crucial aspect both for business and organized labor, especially because McCain still trails in his bid for the White House.

As the Senate contests stand now, at least five Republican seats are at grave risk: Virginia, New Mexico, Alaska, Colorado and New Hampshire, with another handful also in play.

Losing five seats would take the Republican minority from 49 seats to 44 seats, possibly enough to continue to block a Senate vote on the pro-labor-union measure but far from the cushion that business strategists would like to have on such a crucial vote.

And the real danger of additional losses, including in North Carolina, Oregon and Minnesota, could take GOP numbers in the next Senate even lower, all but guaranteeing that Democrats could end the Republican filibuster and pass the bill.

Ironically, the best positioned of all the “endangered” GOP Senators this cycle, Maine’s Collins, is widely seen as one of the Republicans who might vote to allow a vote on the bill when it comes up again.

The business community has rallied around efforts, including those initiated by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to raise the visibility of the issue, and there is considerable evidence that they have succeeded. The TV ads and opinion pieces seem to be working. But unless McCain wins the White House or Republican Senate losses are limited to no more than five seats, organized labor could gain an important new organizing tool. And that, unquestionably, would be another win for the Democrats.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 4, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, September 04, 2008

For GOP Delegates, Sarah Palin on the Ticket Is a No-Brainer

By Stuart Rothenberg

We won’t know for at least a few days, maybe even a few weeks, whether Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was a smart addition to the Republican ticket, but it already is clear that delegates at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., are close to unanimous in their enthusiasm for the self-proclaimed “hockey mom.”

Yes, Palin’s selection pleased social conservatives and gun owners, who see her as an unapologetic supporter of their causes. As one former Member of Congress from a swing state told me on the floor on the opening night of the Republican convention, “The party was with McCain intellectually, but not emotionally. Now, with the selection of Palin, that’s changed.”

Another Republican, a moderate from New England who doesn’t necessarily agree with all of Palin’s positions on the issues, was no less enthusiastic.

“She connects with people. She’s the mom next door,” said the Republican, who argued that Palin’s greatest strength is getting presumptive GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) back to his maverick image and message.

Another Republican, who hails from a state that Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) surely will carry in November but who could help rebuild his party’s reputation in his home state, also raved about the pick, saying that all the feedback he received about Palin, including from family members, was positive.

McCain’s selection of Palin as his running mate clearly injected a dose of enthusiasm and energy into Republican regulars, who had already committed to support their party’s ticket but found the prospect less then exciting. But the selection of Alaska’s governor changed all that.

Surprises are energizing, even if they are inherently risky. But for McCain, the selection of Palin has energized Republicans in a way that could help the party eat into the Democrats’ advantage on fundraising and turnout.

But any neutral observer must be careful not to get caught up in momentary enthusiasm for Palin on the convention floor. Conventions tend to be misleading. Well- orchestrated events, whether with fireworks at football stadiums or with well-produced videos inside hockey arenas, lead one to draw premature conclusions.

The revelation that Palin’s daughter is five months pregnant didn’t seem to depress GOP delegates’ enthusiasm about her selection, but only a naive partisan Republican would fail to acknowledge the possible dangers of Palin’s nomination.

The Alaska governor remains an unknown, and it isn’t clear how she will perform on the campaign trail and during her sole debate with Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden (D), Obama’s running mate.

But at least Palin’s fortune is in her own hands. She will have the opportunity to prove to voters that she’s ready for the job, and she should benefit from relatively low expectations, particularly about her ability to debate Biden.

While Palin’s performance initially after being selected was good, she has never before been under the political microscope, and she’ll face a national media that will test her repeatedly, both on her knowledge of issues and on world leaders and events, as well as on her areas of agreement and disagreement with McCain.

One GOP consultant was even more explicit about the risks, arguing that reporters are likely to compete with each other to try to trip up Palin and embarrass her.

Some Republican insiders continue to worry about Palin’s selection, suggesting that her relative lack of experience undermines McCain’s great advantage against Obama, and fearing that Palin simply will fail to pass the smell test as a possible presidential successor.

Yes, Palin’s selection probably dilutes the effectiveness of the “experience” and “readiness” argument for McCain, but it does not obliterate it. Palin, after all, is running for her party’s No. 2 spot, while Obama is his party’s nominee for president.

And those GOP operatives who fear that Palin could be “another Dan Quayle” might remember that Quayle did not stop then-Vice President George H.W. Bush from being elected president of the United States in 1988.

That election, following Quayle’s embarrassing introduction to the American media and public, should remind us that vice presidential selections aren’t nearly as important six weeks after they are made as they are when they are announced. In any case, in her first few days as McCain’s VP pick, Palin has performed far better than Quayle did.

We’ll all have to see how Palin performs on the stump, in interviews and during her debate with Biden. But so far, the sheer shock of her selection has acted like a shot of adrenaline for a political party that seemed in a coma. That, in itself, is an accomplishment.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 3, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Stassen’s Son, Obama Fan, Recalls Conventions Past

By Nathan L. Gonzales

In 1940, young Minnesota Gov. Harold Stassen (R) gave the keynote address at the Republican National Convention that vaulted him into the national political spotlight. His son Glen was only 4 years old at the time, but he would have a front-row seat for his father’s long political career.

But Glen Stassen isn’t anywhere near the GOP convention this time, even though it is in his home state. He has contributed to Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) presidential campaign.

“Dad was an excellent speaker all his life,” Stassen reflected, comparing his father’s 1940 speech to Obama’s 2004 convention speech, which thrust the then-42-year-old Illinois state Senator into the national spotlight. Harold Stassen was 33 years old at the time, and was fresh off his election as governor in 1938. He won re-election in 1940 and 1942, but resigned a year later to join the military during World War II.

At the 1940 convention, Stassen was floor chairman for Wendell Wilkie and helped the Indiana attorney secure the GOP presidential nomination after six ballots. Eight years later, Stassen ran for president for the first time.

In 1948, Stassen came close to winning the GOP nomination, defeating establishment candidate Thomas Dewey, who also had been the party’s 1944 presidential nominee, in the key Wisconsin and Nebraska primaries, and performing better in general election matchups against President Harry Truman (D). But Stassen, who was part of the liberal wing of the Republican Party, lost Ohio to native son and conservative Sen. Robert Taft and Oregon to Dewey, who wound up with the nomination again.

Glen Stassen was 12 years old.

Stassen ran for president again four years later, but ended up helping Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) secure the nomination. Stassen’s credentials committee representative, future Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger, helped shift the momentum from Taft by seating the Texas and Mississippi delegations for Eisenhower.

“I remember dad calling to the Minnesota delegation, releasing them to put Ike over the top,” Glen Stassen said, recalling his view in the balcony. “Half of the people were celebrating while the Taft supporters were crestfallen.”

That was the closest Stassen would get to the GOP nomination in a career that would include a total of nine presidential runs. He last received votes at a Republican convention in 1968.

Combined with his runs for the U.S. House in Minnesota, governor of Pennsylvania (twice) and other offices, Stassen became known as the classic perennial candidate.

He didn’t run for president in 1972, but pushed President Richard Nixon (R) for the removal of troops from Vietnam.

“It was a bad time,” his son recalled. “I was worried for dad and for the nation.”

Today, Glen Stassen is a theologian, ethicist and author. He worked for 20 years as a professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and is currently the Lewis B. Smedes professor of Christian ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary. His book “Just Peacemaking: the New Paradigm for the Ethics of Peace and War,” is in its third printing.

“His lifelong commitment to peacemaking clearly influenced my same commitment,” Stassen said of his father.

Stassen isn’t officially backing a candidate in this election, but he donated $500 to Obama’s campaign in March.

He has contributed to the Democratic National Committee, former Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) in the past as well.

“I am a theological ethicist in a theological seminary, which is somewhat like being a pastor. I don’t declare for political candidates,” Stassen explained. “I do declare on issues. Our nation is so polarized now in economic injustice, in war and peace policies, in negative attack smears that distract from the real issues of injustice and peacemaking. We desperately need healing.”

Harold Stassen died in Bloomington, Minn., in 2001, at the age of 93. The Stassen Building is located in the State Capitol complex in St. Paul, not far from where the convention is taking place in the Xcel Energy Center.


This story first appeared in Roll Call on September 3, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

NRSC Finally Joins DSCC on the Air

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The National Republican Senatorial Committee launched its first television ads of the cycle this week, with spots in New Hampshire and North Carolina.

The North Carolina spot plays off the Olympics and attacks Sen. Elizabeth Dole’s (R) opponent, state Sen. Kay Hagan (D). “What if they gave gold medals for financial irresponsibility? The gold medal goes to Kay Hagan!” according to the ad, which goes on to “award” gold medals to Hagan for “government waste” and “twisting the truth.”

The New Hampshire ad doesn’t mention Republican Sen. John Sununu, arguably the most vulnerable Senate incumbent in the country, but it goes after his opponent, former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D) instead.

“There’s one problem in Washington where politicians in both parties agree. It’s spending, and it’s out of control. And Jeanne Shaheen says she can change it?” the ad begins. “As governor, Jeanne Shaheen doubled state spending. Shaheen increased the state budget by a billion dollars.

“Jeanne Shaheen and big spending in Washington, she’d fit right in.”

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is also up with a new ad in the Granite State. “In Washington, Senators have a choice. They can fight for powerful special interests ... or stand up for the middle class,” the ad begins.

“John Sununu has sided with George Bush to protect the special interests,” the ad continues, citing specific votes on insurance companies and Medicare.

And while Republicans gather in St. Paul, Minn., for the Republican National Convention, the DSCC has a new ad against Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman (R) titled “Running Man.”

“From the producers of the Iraq War, comes the story of one man, trying to outrun his own past,” according to the ad, which looks like a movie trailer, “Sen. Norm Coleman is the running man.”

The ad goes on to highlight Coleman’s 86 percent voting record with President Bush, an obligatory mention in just about every Democratic ad this cycle, and ends, “This fall, Norm Coleman can run, but can he hide who he truly is?”


This item first appeared on RollCall.com on September 2, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Is Congress Really a Juicy Target for John McCain?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Some Republicans are downright giddy these days about Congress’ unpopularity.

They argue that Republicans, including the party’s presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), will be able to tag Democrats with being unwilling to deal with the nation’s problems, and they are counting on the short Congressional session after the Republican National Convention to expose divisions in Democratic ranks, as well as the party’s liberal bent.

That’s exactly the argument made by Republican-political-strategist-turned-TV-commentator Karl Rove in a Wall Street Journal column late last week.

After sketching out a series of scenarios that are all unfavorable for Congressional Democrats, Rove writes, “The end result of all of these messy fights is that a Congress — which hit a record low 14 percent approval rating in a July Gallup Poll before its members left on summer vacation — may become even more unpopular.

“Inevitably, John McCain and Barack Obama will be drawn into these fights. And, although both are sitting senators, the advantage may go to Mr. McCain. Democrats control Congress, so they are accountable. Mr. Reid and Mrs. Pelosi are two of the worst advertisements for Congress imaginable,” he continues.

Rove concludes, “The 110th Congress is an excellent target for Mr. McCain. He ought to take careful aim at it and commence firing.”

This isn’t political analysis. It’s message.

Presidential elections rarely are about Congress, and this election will be no different. Instead, it looks to be about which presidential nominee is better able to run the country, McCain or Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.).

Voters are trying to decide whether they trust Obama in the nation’s top job, not whether they approve of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.). Any attacks on Congress could divert voters’ attention from Obama, a strange strategy since most observers seem to agree that the presidential contest will turn on voters’ views of the Democratic nominee.

If McCain spends a lot of his time in the fall bashing Congress, it might help Pete Olson (R) defeat Rep. Nick Lampson (D), thereby winning back ex-Rep. Tom DeLay’s (R) former seat in Texas (though Olson shouldn’t need much help from McCain to do that). But it isn’t likely to get swing voters in the presidential race to pick McCain over Obama.

Yes, Congress’ job ratings are half what Bush’s are in many polls, but Republicans ought not delude themselves about those numbers. Congress’ job approval is so low because Democrats are annoyed that their majorities haven’t been more aggressive about taking on Bush and trying to stop the war in Iraq, not because they oppose the party’s agenda.

In November, Democratic voters are likely to vote a straight ticket, just as many did two years ago. Their current dissatisfaction with Congress won’t change that, and because of that, Congress’ admittedly abysmally low rating is deceptive.

Finally, during the short Congressional session in September, Democrats may not mess up the way Rove assumes they will. So far, they’ve won the public relations war with the GOP. And since the Republican Party’s image is so bad these days, almost anything that happens in September could end up benefiting Democrats.

Aside from the drilling issue, which Pelosi seemed to botch, the party’s House and Senate leaders have hit most of the right chords since the party took power after the 2006 midterm elections.

And even if Hill Democrats do encounter problems, it isn’t certain that most voters will even notice.

Moments after the Republican convention is gaveled to adjournment, voters will start to be bombarded with campaign ads from all sides. And since the first presidential debate will be on Sept. 26, the last 10 days of September will be all about that major event.

Starting Friday morning, the media’s coverage of the presidential race will become suffocating, if it hasn’t been already. Even when Congress returns to Capitol Hill, journalists will be focused on the two national tickets, not on what is going on in the House and Senate. It would take a major legislative crisis to draw the media’s attention back to Capitol Hill.

Over the next four days, Republicans must keep their focus on only two Democrats: Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joseph Biden (Del.). Whatever most GOP delegates think about former President Bill Clinton and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), former Vice President Al Gore, Reid or Pelosi, those Democrats really aren’t all that important to McCain’s prospects.

After a successful Democratic convention, which included strong speeches by both Clintons and Obama, McCain is still the underdog. Further attacks on Obama may or may not change that, but beating up Congress definitely won’t.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 1, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, September 01, 2008

What I Did When I Wasn’t at the Convention

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Oregon Congressional candidate Kurt Schrader (D) has his sights set on Congress, and his path doesn’t go through Denver. While some of the Democrats’ most promising House candidates were highlighted from the convention floor Tuesday, Schrader chose to skip the week’s festivities.

Schrader serves in the state Senate and is locked in a battle with wealthy businessman Mike Erickson (R) in Oregon’s 5th district, which is being vacated by Rep. Darlene Hooley (D). It’s a rare Democratic open seat this cycle where Republicans actually have a chance of winning.

Not only could Schrader benefit from the extra time in the district, it looks like he’s got a better view from his television in Oregon than he would have if he were attending the convention himself.

Oregon’s 65-member convention delegation was relegated to the upper corner of the lower bowl of the Pepsi Center, to the left of the stage. But the Beaver State contingency made its voices heard Monday night, chanting “O-S-U” as Craig Robinson, the new head coach of the struggling men’s basketball team of Oregon State University, introduced his sister, Michelle Obama.

Part of Corvallis, home of OSU, is in the 5th district, which is more politically competitive than it seemed when Hooley was racking up comfortable re-election victories.

“There’ll be plenty of conventions,” Schrader said at the Aurora Colony Days Parade earlier this month. “I’ve learned you don’t mess around with that stuff until after you win.”

In reality, Schrader probably can’t afford the national party label in a district that President Bush carried narrowly, 50 percent to 49 percent, in 2004. And with African-Americans making up just 1 percent of the district, Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) looks like less of a downballot force.

“We really felt like it was more important to be in the district,” Schrader campaign manager Paul Gage said, particularly because the candidate still works part time.

This week looked like most others for Schrader, as he worked Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday mornings at his Clackamas County Veterinary Clinic in Oregon City and made fundraising calls in the afternoon.

On Monday evening, Schrader spoke to the Lake Oswego Rotary forum before catching part of the convention on TV. And on Tuesday, his convention-watching followed a house party in Milwaukie. Wednesday’s convention program featured Oregon state Speaker Jeff Merkley (D), who is challenging Sen. Gordon Smith (R), and Schrader planned to catch part of the coverage after a meeting with the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.

The 5th district could be a battleground at the presidential, Senate and Congressional levels. Hooley has held the seat since 1996, when she defeated then-Rep. Jim Bunn (R) 51 percent to 46 percent, and she’s won solid, but not overwhelming, re-elections ever since. A Republican House candidate hasn’t reached 50 percent in the district in almost two decades, but the GOP has been competitive.

In this race, Schrader and Erickson have spent their summer campaigning across the Willamette Valley and coastal counties, attending parades and fairs. And they’re leaving no stone unturned.

Aurora, population 655, recently played host to both candidates during their annual parade. The town covers less than half a square mile but featured Schrader and Erickson’s dueling 4x4 trucks emblazoned with campaign regalia and small troops of volunteers.

Don’t mistake Aurora’s size for political naivetĂ©. In 2006, Jennifer Strutz unseated incumbent Mayor Bill Carr, 230 votes to 185 votes. But just a year later, after Strutz subsequently proposed raising taxes, the town recalled her by a vote of 181-176.

“I thought it was nice that they came to such a small parade as ours,” said one woman, who spoke with Erickson before the parade and shook Schrader’s hand during it. “[Erickson] said he’s not a politician and he’s a businessman who’ll fix Washington. Sounds pretty good to me.”

Before the Aurora parade, Erickson, dressed in a tan polo shirt (complete with sewn-on campaign logo) and dress slacks, was vigorously shaking hands with everyone in the staging area, handing out palm cards and business cards. He paused to share a minute with Schrader, dressed in a red button down shirt, jeans and a large belt buckle, who was waiting with his staff for the parade to begin.

During the parade, Erickson weaved from sidewalk to sidewalk, breathlessly greeting potential constituents. An unrelated rolling port-a-potty followed the Erickson entourage in the parade, doing wheelies along the way.

On this day, the Republican was somewhat of a celebrity, not necessarily because of his politics, but because people recognized him from his television ads.

The wealthy businessman spent more than $1.5 million of his own money in 2006, in his double-digit loss to Hooley. And he has spent a similar amount already this cycle getting through a competitive GOP primary.

But this year, Erickson has often been on the defensive, answering questions about his personal life — particularly questions about whether he knowingly took an ex-girlfriend to get an abortion — to the point that GOP insiders aren’t particularly high on his chances.

Erickson had $400,000 in the bank on June 30, almost double Schrader’s $231,000. The Democrat raised more than a half a million dollars through the first six months of the year. He will need to step up his fundraising to compete with his wealthy opponent.

Schrader split his time on the parade route walking and waving behind the campaign banner being held by two staff members and greeting voters on the side of the street, with a hearse advertising Milburn’s Haunted Mansion and a handful of teenagers in gothic garb trailing a few feet behind.

The state Senator represents southwestern Clackamas County and still needs to increase his name identification districtwide. Some folks were more familiar with his wife, Martha Schrader, a Clackamas County commissioner who was also considered a potential 5th district candidate immediately after Hooley announced her retirement.

The Schraders moved to Oregon after graduate school and live on a historic farm near Canby.

After the parade, kids raced around Aurora’s sidewalks with Erickson for Congress stickers affixed to their helmets — partial evidence that the Republican may have won the day and the battle. But Schrader has a slight edge in the war.

The national environment continues to be poor for Republicans and the personal questions surrounding Erickson makes it difficult for him to get out any other message. And while the district is competitive, some Portland suburbs in Multnomah County, along with the Corvallis area, give Democrats a boost.

It looks like Schrader’s race to lose, but he’s got a few years to make it look as easy as Hooley did.


This story first appeared in Roll Call on August 28, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.