Friday, October 31, 2008

Democrats Try to Use McCain to Saddle GOP Candidates

By Nathan L. Gonzales

President Bush has been a mainstay in Democratic television ads for the last three years, as Democrats try to use him as an anchor to bring down Republican incumbents and candidates.

Earlier this year, GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) was thought to be an asset to Republican candidates downballot. But apparently Democrats believe McCain could be a liability in some districts, as he is starting to appear in some negative advertising.

“1980. Pac-Man is the new fad and Frank Wolf goes to Congress,” an announcer says in a television ad for Wolf’s Democratic challenger, Judy Feder, in Northern Virginia’s 10th district. “Twenty eight years later, Frank Wolf supports the McCain plan to tax your health care benefits.”

“Wolf even supports risking your Social Security in the stock market. And a constitutional amendment that criminalizes abortion, just like John McCain,” the ad continues. “Judy Feder will work with Barack Obama to fix our economy and fight for affordable health care.”

Two years ago, Wolf defeated Feder, 57 percent to 41 percent. Feder spent an impressive $1.5 million last cycle, compared with $1.8 million for Wolf. This cycle, each candidate raised about $1.9 million through Oct. 15 and both are advertising in the expensive Washington, D.C., media market.

Bush won Virginia’s 10th by 11 points in 2004, but Obama s doing very well in the region.



Earlier this cycle, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee used McCain and Bush against Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.).

The television ad used similar sound bites from all three men, talking about how the fundamentals of the economy are strong. McCain makes an appearance, but the last photo shows Shays hand in hand with Bush.

Bush lost Connecticut’s 4th district by 6 points in 2004, while Shays simultaneously won re-election by 4 points. But the Democratic wave is much higher this year.

McCain is losing the district by 20 points, according to an Oct. 15-18 University of Connecticut poll for Hearst Newspapers, and by 22 points, according to an Oct. 13-14 SurveyUSA poll for Roll Call.

It’s a stunning turnaround from earlier. McCain was precisely the presidential candidate that Republicans thought would help Members such as Shays and Wolf in their more moderate districts.



This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 29, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Republicans Turn to ‘No Blank Check’ in Final Days

By Nathan L. Gonzales

With Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) White House prospects dimming and just days to go before the elections, Republicans are turning to a “no blank check” strategy in an effort to minimize their losses in the House and Senate.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee has been hammering the "no blank check" theme in TV ads in North Carolina, where Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R) is in a tough fight with state Sen. Kay Hagan (D).

“Who’s the Senate race really about? Hagan or Dole? Neither one,” the announcer says in one spot. “It’s about liberals in Washington. They want complete control of the government. They spent $10 million dollars on a hoax,” with a picture of Hagan on the screen.

“The left wants 60 votes in the Senate. To push radical cuts to our military. Massive tax increases. Liberal judges. And expand welfare,” the ad continues. “Kay Hagan, if she wins, liberals get a blank check.”



This week, the NRSC continued the same themes in Louisiana, with an ad attempting to label Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) as corrupt, liberal and someone who has voted with presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) more than 80 percent of the time.

“Don’t give Washington liberals complete control. Don’t give them a blank check,” says to the NRSC spot, which hinges on the notion that Louisiana is one state where Obama won’t do well on Election Day.



The “no blank check” strategy is also creeping into House races. Republican businessman Chris Hackett sounded the theme in an ad that began airing Monday. Hackett is running against freshman Rep. Christopher Carney (D) in Pennsylvania’s 10th district.

“What if Washington becomes controlled at all levels by big-government Democrats? It could happen this election. One party dominance can be very dangerous,” the ad begins.

Hackett’s ad then features Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the Keystone State’s popular senior Senator, talking straight to the camera.

“I am very concerned about one-party rule in Washington,” Specter says in the spot. “That’s why it’s so important to elect Chris Hackett to Congress. With Chris Hackett, we’ll have a check against massive Democratic control. And that’s vital for our country.”



In the Minnesota Senate race, Democrats are making the opposite case.

“We don’t have a lot of time to turn our economy around. And it’s going to take a new president and 60 Senators willing to stand up for change. Now, any single Republican can block the progress we need,” Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said in a TV ad done for the Democratic nominee. “Al Franken could very well be that 60th vote. I hope you’ll vote for Al Franken. Let’s end the gridlock and get our country moving.”



This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 29, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Stu Talks Bill Clinton, Blank Checks, and the RNC's new radio ads on CNN.com

RNC, GOP tweak tactics to lure conservative Democrats

By Stuart Rothenberg and Nathan L. Gonzales

(CNN) -- While many in the media are single-mindedly focused on vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's outfits, Republican efforts to brand Sen. Barack Obama a socialist and the chances that Democrats will net nine Senate seats (giving them 60 seats in the next Senate), some other interesting things are going on -- things that are being missed.

One of those is an unreported major Republican National Committee radio buy in eight key states: Colorado, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia.

The buy is interesting because it includes some states expected to be in McCain's column by this time (Montana, North Carolina and West Virginia, for example), but also because of the message of the 60-second spot: gun control. Read the rest of the story on CNN.com.

Choosing Winners, Losers: Did NRCC Make Right Picks?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Like everyone who pays attention to House races, I was more than a little interested to see where the National Republican Congressional Committee would use its limited resources on independent expenditures this cycle.

Now, with Election Day fast approaching and Republicans likely to lose more than two dozen House seats — and quite possibly more than 30 seats — it’s possible to evaluate the NRCC’s decisions.

At least 19 of the 29 districts in which the NRCC advertised seem like good calls. Five others are debatable, while five are not justified, in my view.

The five Democratic seats targeted by the NRCC — Paul Kanjorski’s (Pa.), Nick Lampson’s (Texas), Carol Shea-Porter’s (N.H.), Steve Kagen’s (Wis.) and retiring Rep. Bud Cramer’s (Ala.) — all seem like reasonable choices.

Kanjorski’s ethics problems and poll numbers put him on the list. Lampson’s district is rock-solid Republican and favors challenger Pete Olson (R). Even Democrats will tell you Shea-Porter’s win last time was a fluke, and Cramer’s retirement opens up a generally conservative seat that’s an obvious GOP target. Kagen’s district also leans Republican.

All 11 open Republican seats on the list are obvious places for the NRCC to play. Normally, it shouldn’t have to spend money to defend an at-large seat in Wyoming or Alabama’s 2nd district. But given the national landscape and race-specific factors, nobody ought to question the NRCC’s decisions in those districts.

NRCC funding surely is warranted in three GOP-held districts that have proved to be competitive in the past, in Washington’s 8th district (Rep. Dave Reichert), Ohio’s 1st district (Rep. Steve Chabot) and Nevada’s 3rd (Rep. Jon Porter).

Reichert’s Seattle-area district went for Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential election, and Reichert has won two squeakers. Chabot’s district went only narrowly for President Bush in 2004, and the Democratic nominee this time, state Rep. Steve Driehaus, looks formidable, especially given the considerable African-American population in the district. Porter’s district was drawn to be a tossup, but a surge in Democratic registration has changed that. All three Republicans have campaigned hard.

In five other districts with Republican incumbents, it’s less clear that the NRCC’s help was justified.

Rep. Thelma Drake’s Virginia district gave Bush 58 percent four years ago, not quite the 60 percent that Rep. Lee Terry’s Nebraska district did and only a point more than Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart’s Florida district did. Two other Republicans, Michigan Rep. Tim Walberg and Pennsylvania Rep. Phil English, sit in districts that Bush carried with 54 percent and 53 percent, respectively — good margins but hardly overwhelming.

As incumbents, all five of these Republicans had the opportunity to solidify themselves for re-election — both by working hard to communicate with their constituents and by building up huge war chests. Terry raised the least of the bunch, at $1.4 million through Oct. 15. English raised the most, $2.2 million.

Changing demographics and the Democratic strength at the top of the ticket added to Drake’s woes, justifying NRCC action, in my view. The competitiveness of English’s district and Walberg’s also make it reasonable for the NRCC to expend valuable resources there, though as a candidate for the NRCC chairmanship this cycle, English surely should not be in the vulnerable position he now finds himself.

That leaves Terry, who has again run a lackluster campaign that took his re-election for granted, and Diaz-Balart, who represents a Republican district in the very expensive Miami media market. Given their situations, I’d argue that the NRCC should not have spent money in either race.

Five GOP incumbents who have benefited from a total of more than $2.2 million in NRCC spending also should have been cut loose immediately and told to fend for themselves: Reps. Randy Kuhl (New York’s 29th district), Bill Sali (Idaho’s 1st), Jean Schmidt (Ohio’s 2nd), Mark Souder (Indiana’s 3rd) and Marilyn Musgrave (Colorado’s 4th).

Each of the districts represented by these incumbents is reliably Republican under normal circumstances, and their vulnerability, even in this political environment, reflects their individual weaknesses. In 2004, Bush carried Sali’s district with 69 percent, Schmidt’s with 64 percent, Souder’s with 68 percent and Musgrave’s with 58 percent. Kuhl’s district was the closest of the bunch, with Bush winning it with 56 percent.

It says a great deal about Sali, Schmidt and Souder that they ran so far behind Bush. Not all conservative candidates in those districts necessarily would run so poorly. These three simply have limited appeal, and the NRCC shouldn’t have to spend considerable resources every two years to rescue them in districts that they should retain easily.

Finally, there is no way that the NRCC should have considered rushing into Michele Bachmann’s race after the Minnesota Congresswoman shoved her foot in her mouth on MSNBC recently. The conservative legislator turned a comfortable re-election into an uphill race by taking Chris Matthews’ obvious bait. She has no one to blame but herself, and she has been sitting on more than $1 million that she could have spent to support her candidacy.

Some conservatives had a cow when the NRCC’s IE unit decided to pull the plug on Musgrave and refused to spend its limited funds on Bachmann. Sorry, but the NRCC’s job isn’t to elect conservatives. It’s to elect Republicans.

While damaged GOP incumbents such as Sali, Schmidt and Souder continue to drain the NRCC’s cash in solid Republican districts, strong GOP open-seat candidates such as Darren White (New Mexico’s 1st), Erik Paulsen (Minnesota’s 3rd), Leonard Lance (New Jersey’s 7th), Chris Lee (New York’s 26th) and Steve Stivers (Ohio’s 15th) are fighting for their political lives.

If radio talk-show host Michael Reagan and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins want to spend their time productively, they shouldn’t be beating up the NRCC for its decisions not to waste money on incumbents who made themselves vulnerable. They should be hunting for personable, smart, politically savvy conservatives with campaign skills and thoughtful new ideas.


This column first appeared on RollCall.com on October 28, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

2008 House Ratings

Here are our latest House ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain 27-33 seats, up from a Democratic gain of 25-30 seats.

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

PURE TOSS-UP (10 R, 3 D)
  • AL 2 (Open; Everett, R) #
  • AL 5 (Open; Cramer, D)
  • FL 21 (L. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • KY 2 (Open; Lewis, R) #
  • LA 4 (Open; McCrery, R) #
  • LA 6 (Cazayoux, D)
  • MI 7 (Walberg, R)
  • NM 2 (Open; Pearce, R)
  • NJ 7 (Open; Ferguson, R)
  • OH 1 (Chabot, R)
  • PA 11 (Kanjorski, D)
  • VA 2 (Drake, R) #
  • WA 8 (Reichert, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN (7 R, 0 D)
  • CA 4 (Open; Doolittle, R) #
  • FL 25 (M. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • IL 10 (Kirk, R)
  • MD 1 (Open; Gilchrest, R)
  • MO 9 (Open; Hulshof, R)
  • NE 2 (Terry, R) #
  • NY 26 (Open; Reynolds, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT DEMOCRATIC (12 R, 3 D)
  • CO 4 (Musgrave, R)
  • CT 4 (Shays, R) #
  • FL 8 (Keller, R)
  • GA 8 (Marshall, D)
  • ID 1 (Sali, R) #
  • KS 2 (Boyda, D)
  • MN 3 (Open; Ramstad, R)
  • MN 6 (Bachmann, R) #
  • NV 3 (Porter, R)
  • NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D)
  • NJ 3 (Open; Saxton, R)
  • NM1 (Open; Wilson, R)
  • NY 29 (Kuhl, R)
  • OH 15 (Open; Pryce, R) #
  • PA 3 (English, R)
LEAN REPUBLICAN (2 R, 1 D)
  • OH 2 (Schmidt, R)
  • SC 1 (Brown, R) #
  • TX 22 (Lampson, D)
LEAN DEMOCRATIC (3 R, 3 D)
  • CA 11 (McNerney, D) #
  • IL 11 (Open; Weller, R) #
  • MI 9 (Knollenberg, R) #
  • NC 8 (Hayes, R) #
  • PA 10 (Carney, D)
  • WI 8 (Kagen, D)
REPUBLICAN FAVORED (8 R, 1 D)
  • AZ 3 (Shadegg, R)
  • CA 3 (Lungren, R)
  • CA 46 (Rohrabacher, R)
  • FL 13 (Buchanan, R)
  • FL 16 (Mahoney, D)
  • IL 6 (Roskam, R)
  • MO 6 (Graves, R) *
  • WV 2 (Capito, R)
  • WY A-L (Open; Cubin, R)
DEMOCRAT FAVORED (7 R, 3 D)
  • AK A-L (Young, R)
  • AZ 1 (Open; Renzi, R)
  • AZ 5 (Mitchell, D)
  • AZ 8 (Giffords, D)
  • FL 24 (Feeney, R)
  • NY 13 (Open; Fossella, R)
  • NY 25 (Open; Walsh, R)
  • OH 16 (Open; Regula, R)
  • PA 4 (Altmire, D) #
  • VA 11 (Open; Davis, R) #
Dropped :
KY 3 (Yarmuth, D) #,
MS 1 (Childers, D) #

Three hot states to watch on Election Night

By Nathan L. Gonzales and Stuart Rothenberg

(CNN) -- With the presidential campaign and more than 75 competitive races for the House and Senate, keeping track of it all on Election Day can be a bit overwhelming. But focusing on three states (North Carolina, Ohio, and Florida) will provide a window through the November 4 election chaos. Read the whole story on CNN.com.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Alaska Senate: Begich Now Favored

2008 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings. We are increasing our estimate to a Democratic gain of 7-9 seats, up from 6-9 seats.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans

Likely Takeover (4 R, 0 D)
  • Sununu (R-NH)
  • CO Open (Allard, R)
  • NM Open (Domenici, R)
  • VA Open (Warner, R)
Lean Takeover (3 R, 0 D)
  • Dole (R-NC)
  • Smith (R-OR)
  • Stevens (R-AK) #
Toss-Up (1 R, 0 D)
  • Coleman (R-MN)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 1 D)
  • Chambliss (R-GA)
  • Landrieu (D-LA)
  • McConnell (R-KY)
  • Wicker (R-MS)
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R, 0 D)
  • Collins (R-ME)
Currently Safe (11 R, 11 D)
  • ID Open (Craig, R)
  • NE Open (Hagel, R)
  • Alexander (R-TN)
  • Barrasso (R-WY)
  • 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)

Georgia 13: Democrats Sound the Alarm

By Nathan L. Gonzales

“Emergency Funds Needed for Rep. David Scott,” blared the subject line of the Oct. 21 e-mail about Georgia’s 13th district race.

It’s a strange juxtaposition in a national environment that strongly favors the Democrats and a Democratic Congressman who represents a district that Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) won in the 2004 White House election with more than 60 percent of the vote.

But publicly and privately, Democrats are trying to focus attention on the Atlanta-area Congressional district.

Scott, an African-American former state legislator, was first elected in 2002 with 60 percent. He ran unopposed in 2004 and took 69 percent in 2006. Scott, who is the brother-in-law of baseball legend Hank Aaron, represents a district that is approximately 41 percent black and about 8 percent Hispanic. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is expected to do very well in the district.

According to new Democratic polling for Scott’s campaign, Obama is winning the district 56 percent to 35 percent. But in the Congressional ballot test, the Congressman is only ahead narrowly, 43 percent to 38 percent, over physician Deborah Honeycutt (R). The poll was conducted Oct. 13-14 by Cooper and Secrest Associates.

Honeycutt, who is also African-American, ran against Scott two years ago and lost by more than 30 points. But the e-mail for Scott sounded the alarm anyway, pointing to the recent poll numbers and Honeycutt’s fundraising.

It is true that Honeycutt had raised a jaw-dropping $4.3 million this cycle, through Sept. 30. But the vast majority of that money was spent raising the money through direct mail, and only a small percentage was netted for the campaign. According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, roughly one-tenth of Honeycutt’s money has been spent on television, and virtually all of that has been on cable.

Scott raised $966,000 through the end of September. In 2006, Honeycutt and Scott each spent about $1.3 million.

“There is too much at stake to risk complacency here,” the e-mail said. Separate polling confirms that Scott is underperforming in the district, but the e-mail and Democratic push for attention looks to be less about a legitimate fear of a Republican takeover and more about lighting a fire under a lazy Congressman. Scott started airing an attack ad on Friday going after Honeycutt for supporting a “fair tax.”

It is simply unlikely that a Democratic seat like this would flip in the current political environment. And Honeycutt’s fundraising numbers are more bark than bite. Republicans are not optimistic about their chances in Georgia’s 13th and don’t have the money to throw at scenarios.

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

Monday, October 27, 2008

It’s Getting Bleaker for McCain, Worse for Hill Republicans

By Stuart Rothenberg

While major media outlets are hesitant to pronounce the presidential race over for fear of being harassed by Republicans and conservatives, there isn’t much doubt at this late date that it is over. Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) will be elected president in less than two weeks.

Previously undecided voters have now decided that Obama isn’t as risky a choice as they once thought, and that has changed the contest. Talk that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has been closing over the past week is simply not demonstrated in public and private polling. In fact, unreleased polls in a number of statewide and Congressional races show that McCain has weakened significantly over the past two weeks.

Obama is now over the crucial 50 percent mark in many credible national surveys, and public and private polling in key states from Wisconsin and Florida to Virginia and Colorado all show the same thing: The Democrat is now considerably over 270 electoral votes, and McCain is struggling to hold on to normally Republican states such as Indiana, North Carolina and Missouri.

Republicans, conservatives and some in the media (who don’t want the competitive race story to end) hang their hopes onto a poll here or there that shows a tight race. Those who want to believe Rasmussen’s national poll showing the presidential race at 4 points or the most recent Hotline survey showing Obama at only 47 percent can certainly do so, but the race is not that tight.

Two recent presidential polls in Florida, one by Fox News/Rasmussen and the other by SurveyUSA, showed McCain ahead in that state within the margin of error. They are more than balanced out in my own mind by a just as recent Republican poll in Florida that has not been released publicly and that showed Obama over the 50 percent mark and beating McCain by 8 points in the state.

But couldn’t things change in the final 10 days? Theoretically, yes. But the chance is so small as to be insignificant.

In what increasingly is looking like a historic election, Democrats continue to be headed for substantial victories in the House and Senate, though not everything has gone their way in the past week.

The revelation that Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fla.) has had multiple affairs, including at least one during his 2006 challenge to then-Rep. Mark Foley (R), has even Democrats uttering obscenities about the Congressman. GOP polling shows Mahoney is likely to be defeated by his Republican challenger, Tom Rooney.

In Senate races, there is remarkable agreement on the part of unbiased observers that Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R) chances of being re-elected have spiked after a trial in which the prosecution looked less than perfectly adept. But that race still hangs on the jury’s decision.

Still, Democrats are headed for huge gains in the Senate, and continuing competitive races in Kentucky, Mississippi and Georgia demonstrate how strongly the political landscape is tilted in their favor. Those three contests, plus races in North Carolina, Alaska and Minnesota, should determine whether Democrats reach the 60 mark in next year’s Senate.

So far, a five-seat Democratic pickup looks like a lock, with Democratic wins expected in Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado, New Hampshire and Oregon. A sweep of the other GOP Senate seats in play would give Democrats a double-digit gain. That’s certainly not the most likely scenario, but it is not impossible, because in a number of recent “wave” elections (including 2006), almost all of the close Senate races have been won by one party.

Obama’s weakness in Kentucky probably enhances Sen. Mitch McConnell’s (R) chances of surviving, while the Democratic presidential nominee’s strength in Georgia, combined with Sen. Saxby Chambliss’ (R) late advertising and his delay in attacking Democratic challenger Jim Martin, puts the first-term Republican Senator at greater risk. The possibility of a runoff in the Georgia race if no candidate gets an absolute majority of total votes cast probably improves Chambliss’ ultimate prospects.

Democratic House prospects are almost as good, and after winning 30 seats in 2006, that’s noteworthy.

When I wrote a few weeks ago that Democratic gains in the 20-30 seat range were reasonable, some Democrats told me that I was way too far out on the limb, and one Democratic Congressman telephoned me to suggest that I had gotten carried away about Democratic chances.

But Democratic gains in that range still look very reasonable, even though Republicans now seem likely to knock off a few incumbent Democrats, including Mahoney, Rep Nick Lampson (Texas) and possibly Rep. Paul Kanjorski (Pa.).

GOP polling over the past couple of weeks shows McCain’s numbers worsening in many places, creating a problem for Republican strategists who hoped that the top of the ticket would be a considerable asset. Indeed, in some places, McCain has gone from an asset to a liability.

Democratic House gains of 27 to 33 seats now looks likely. This is the kind of wave election when even second- and third-tier candidates pull off upsets, and I’d expect that to happen this year. It would be only a guess to pick those winners, so all I can say is that a couple of long-shot Democratic upsets are likely as the party’s wave crashes ashore in 12 days.

Republican Congressional candidates will hope to stop the bleeding and improve their prospects in the campaign’s remaining days. But Democrats still have the momentum.


This column
first appeared in Roll Call on October 23, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

New Print Edition: Senate and House Outlook

The October 24, 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). 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.

The latest edition is a special 16-page issue with our new Senate and House ratings, the most recent polling, and the latest analysis of the most competitive races across the country.

Friday, October 24, 2008

Bitter Primaries Lead to Cross-Party Endorsements

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Within the broad scope of presidential elections, party defections aren’t all that uncommon. But this cycle, across-the-aisle endorsements have become quite the fad in Congressional contests, with three Republicans supporting Democratic candidates in a trio of high-profile races.

In each case, the endorsements receive plenty of media attention, locally or nationally depending on the race, but their ultimate impact on races remains to be seen.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is the most recent and public example. Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president and spoke at the Republican National Convention. Former Iowa Rep. Jim Leach (R) endorsed Obama and spoke at the Democrats’ convention in Denver.

At the Congressional level, bitter primaries seem to be precursor to an elected official from one party crossing over to support a candidate in the other.

On Monday, Republican state Sen. Harri Anne Smith crossed party lines to endorse Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright (D) in Alabama’s extremely competitive open-seat 2nd district race. Smith received 21 percent in the initial six-way primary, but lost the July 15 runoff to state Rep. Jay Love, 53 percent to 47 percent. It’s clear that the tone of the runoff played into her decision.

“I also know firsthand what it’s like to be a victim of his opponent’s reckless and untrue attacks, so I wanted to stand up for [Bright] today,” Smith said, as part of the Democrat’s truck tour. Of course, Bright reciprocated by saying nice things about the woman he almost faced in the general election.

At the end of September, former Rep. Joe Schwarz (R-Mich.) endorsed Democrat Mark Schauer in Michigan’s 7th district. Schauer is challenging Rep. Tim Walberg (R), who defeated Schwarz in the 2006 GOP primary. Schwarz was sort of an accidental Congressman, after winning the 2004 GOP primary with 28 percent when multiple candidates (including Walberg) divided the conservative vote.

Needless to say, Schwarz was bitter after he lost renomination, and specifically mad at the conservative anti-tax group the Club for Growth for their involvement in the race. Schwarz considered a comeback this cycle and was even courted by the Democrats to switch parties, but he ultimately decided against it. But when the club started attacking Schauer, Schwarz got off the sidelines.

“That to me is the straw that broke the camel’s back,” Schwarz told the Associated Press. “I object to political dabblers who stand for nothing other than to create havoc and dabble in a Congressional race where they truly have no interest.”

In Maryland’s 1st district, another moderate Republican lost the primary and is now supporting the Democratic nominee. Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (Md.) garnered just 33 percent in his three-way GOP primary in February, losing to state Sen. Andy Harris.

The primary was personal, and in April Gilchrest’s longtime campaign aide joined the staff of the Democratic nominee, Queen Anne County State’s Attorney Frank Kratovil. So it was no surprise when Gilchrest himself announced his support for Kratovil.

Last year, before the Congressman lost the GOP nomination, Kratovil criticized Gilchrest for a failure of leadership and his lack of effectiveness and results. Now, the Congressman is appearing in a campaign ad for the Democrat.

“I see a man who can carry on with any tiny legacy I might have,” Gilchrest said at a press conference. “I see a man with an independent voice, someone of competence, integrity and courage. Most important, I see a man I trust. That is more important to me than party labels.”

It’s amazing how party labels seem to fade away when voters reject you.

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

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Late-breaking House races shift political playing field

By Stuart Rothenberg

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Every election cycle, a handful of races not taken very seriously early on become truly competitive contests, and this year is no exception.

Every candidate, of course, has a scenario. But most of those scenarios -- and most of those candidates -- evaporate well before October.

In the case of the candidates below, their scenarios are now supported by both polling and successful fundraising. Given the national political environment, it isn't surprising that most of the late surprises are in Republican-held seats. Read the rest of the story on CNN.com.

Nathan Talks Politics on CNN.com

Louisiana Senate: Worth Watching or Over and Done?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Like just about everyone else, I’m more than a little confused about the Louisiana Senate race.

According to OnMessage Inc., which conducts polling for Republican challenger John Kennedy in the Louisiana race, the two-term Democrat-turned-Republican state treasurer trails incumbent Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) by the mid-single digits, and the race has been closing. The pollster’s most recent three-day roll is just 5 points — 47 percent to 42 percent.

That assessment of the race is light years from where Landrieu’s campaign, national Democratic insiders and even plenty of veteran Louisiana campaign watchers see the contest, and a Mellman Group poll (also based on tracking) for the Democrat shows Landrieu holding a huge advantage — 52 percent to 34 percent — over Kennedy.

The difference between a 5-point race and an almost 20-point contest isn’t merely one of degree. While both polls show Landrieu ahead and more likely to win, the GOP survey shows a competitive contest, while the Democratic poll shows a race that already is over.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee decided to pull out of Louisiana until it saw recent OnMessage tracking and decided that Kennedy still had a chance to overtake the Democrat. The NRSC bought another week of TV in the state on the basis of the OnMessage track.

Last week, both the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the NRSC had TV buys up in the state. Apparently Democratic strategists weren’t entirely confident that the race was over, even with a 15- to 20-point lead.

What else do we know about the polls and the race?

While Democratic insiders argue that the Louisiana race has moved little in weeks, OnMessage tracking found Landrieu holding solid double-digit leads from Sept. 23 to Oct. 2, after which the race closed noticeably. Indeed, on Sept. 23, the GOP poll found Landrieu ahead by 20 points, 53 percent to 33 percent, over Kennedy.

On Sept. 27, Rasmussen Reports, an automated poll about which I have often expressed great reservations, showed Landrieu ahead of Kennedy by 13 points among likely voters, 54 percent to 41 percent. On Sept. 28, OnMessage’s three-day roll found virtually the same margin, with Landrieu holding a 14-point lead, 52 percent to 38 percent.

What else do we know?

We also know that the Democratic and Republican pollsters disagree about what percentage of the total electorate will be black. Blacks constitute a few more percentage points of the total sample in the Mellman Group poll than in the OnMessage surveys. This alone would explain some of the difference in the ballot test, since race is a strong predictor of the vote in Louisiana.

We know that the Mellman survey shows Landrieu with a much higher favorable/unfavorable net rating than the OnMessage survey, and that Kennedy’s favorable/unfavorable rating is good in the GOP poll and terrible in the Democratic survey.

What we have, then, is a consistent set of differences in the two surveys. Democratic tracking has McCain’s lead more narrow, Landrieu’s lead much bigger, Landrieu’s identification ratio much more positive and Kennedy’s ID ratio much more negative than does the Republican track.

If experience counts — and this year, at least in the presidential campaigns, it hasn’t — then we have to consider the pollsters.

Landrieu is notoriously fickle when it comes to consultants, so it should come as no surprise that she has switched pollsters. After using Al Quinlan last cycle, she has switched to Mark Mellman, a highly regarded political veteran whom I met many years ago when he was still a graduate student at Yale. In 1996, Mellman worked in Louisiana for an outside group that ran an anti-David Duke campaign when Duke was one of the Republican candidates running against Landrieu in an open-seat Senate contest.

Kennedy’s media and polling are being done by OnMessage, a relatively new combination of Brad Todd, Curt Anderson and Wes Anderson, whom I have also known for many years and hold in high regard. What’s most notable about the team is that it handled polling for both of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s (R) races, including his win last November.

The 2007 gubernatorial election was the first statewide contest in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina, and there is no doubt that the storm caused some residents to leave the state, changing Louisiana’s demographics and altering its electoral arithmetic. OnMessage’s involvement in that race and the firm’s accurate polling for Jindal cannot be ignored.

I’m not certain where the Senate race really is now, but I’m pretty certain that Landrieu is not going to win by 20 or 18 or even 15 points. I’d be surprised if she won by 10 points.

There is no doubt that she is currently ahead (both sides agree about that), and even some Democrats believe that the Senator will not get a lot of the undecided vote. My guess is that Landrieu will win with a final margin that is much closer to the margin now found in OnMessage tracking than in the Democratic polling.

As I write this, the NRSC is advertising in the state, while the DSCC has not extended its TV buy. Of course, it could decide to do so at any time.

Jindal, a wildly popular political figure in the state, so far hasn’t put his full weight behind Kennedy’s effort, and he has been politically averse in partisan races so far. But if the governor comes out strongly for Kennedy soon, he could affect the race’s dynamic.

Some observers no longer think this race is even worth watching. I’m not so sure. On election night, this contest may be closer than a number of races that those same people are watching breathlessly right now. And unlike many others, I have not ruled out a surprise.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 21, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Pennsylvania 11: Polling Differs on Kanjorski’s Prospects

By Nathan L. Gonzales

According to nonpartisan and Republican polls, Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) is one of the most endangered incumbents in the country. But public Democratic polls tell an entirely different story.

A recent Oct. 8-12 Franklin & Marshall College survey showed Hazelton Mayor Lou Barletta (R) leading the Congressman 40 percent to 35 percent. That poll came on the heels of an Oct. 6-8 Research 2000 survey for the liberal Daily Kos Web site that showed Barletta with an advantage of 43 percent to 39 percent.

A third poll, conducted Oct. 2 by Susquehanna Polling and Research for Barletta’s campaign, also gave the Republican an edge of 47 percent to 39 percent.

But the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released an Oct. 5-6 Grove Insight (D) poll showing Kanjorski ahead comfortably, outside the margin of error, 47 percent to 39 percent.

So what explains the dramatic discrepancy in the surveys? The difference could be in the partisan makeup of the samples.

Self-identified Republicans made up 34 percent of the sample in the Franklin & Marshall poll, 35 percent in the Research 2000 poll and 33 percent in Barletta’s polling. On the other hand, likely Republican voters constituted only 25 percent of the sample in the Grove survey done for the DCCC.

Self-identified Democrats made up 60 percent of the sample in the Franklin & Marshall poll, 48 percent in the Research 2000 poll and 58 percent in the Susquehanna survey, compared with 50 percent in the Grove Insight poll.

Another large difference was in the number of self-described independent or “other” voters tested in the polls. Those voters made up 26 percent of the sample in the DCCC poll, compared with 17 percent in the Research 2000 survey, 6 percent in the Franklin & Marshall survey and 8 percent in Barletta’s polling.

It’s unclear whether the lower Republican or higher independent sample explains Kanjorski’s advantage in the Democratic polling. It could be a combination of both. The lower Republican percentage could be depressing Barletta’s support, and Kanjorski could be getting a bump from the larger number of independent voters, who have been more likely to favor Democrats over the last three years.

The presidential ballot in these surveys complicate things a little further because Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) had a wide 20-point lead in Barletta’s survey and a 15-point advantage in the Grove survey. Research 2000 gave Obama just a 4-point edge, while Franklin & Marshall had his lead at 9 points.

Here is a chart with the polling numbers.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 20, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

2008 House Ratings

Here are our latest House ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 25-30 seats.

Any seats not listed are currently considered to be at limited risk for the incumbent party.

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

PURE TOSS-UP (8 R, 3 D)
  • AL 5 (Open; Cramer, D)
  • CT 4 (Shays, R)
  • FL 21 (L. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • LA 6 (Cazayoux, D)
  • MI 7 (Walberg, R)
  • NM 2 (Open; Pearce, R)
  • NJ 7 (Open; Ferguson, R)
  • OH 1 (Chabot, R)
  • OH 15 (Open; Pryce, R)
  • PA 11 (Kanjorski, D)
  • WA 8 (Reichert, R) #
TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN (10 R, 0 D)
  • AL 2 (Open; Everett, R)
  • FL 25 (M. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • ID 1 (Sali, R) #
  • IL 10 (Kirk, R)
  • KY 2 (Open; Lewis, R)
  • LA 4 (Open; McCrery, R)
  • MD 1 (Open; Gilchrest, R)
  • MO 9 (Open; Hulshof, R)
  • NY 26 (Open; Reynolds, R)
  • VA 2 (Drake, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT DEMOCRATIC (11 R, 4 D)
  • CA 11 (McNerney, D)
  • CO 4 (Musgrave, R)
  • FL 8 (Keller, R)
  • GA 8 (Marshall, D)
  • IL 11 (Open; Weller, R)
  • KS 2 (Boyda, D)
  • MI 9 (Knollenberg, R)
  • MN 3 (Open; Ramstad, R)
  • NV 3 (Porter, R) *
  • NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D) #
  • NJ 3 (Open; Saxton, R)
  • NM1 (Open; Wilson, R)
  • NY 29 (Kuhl, R)
  • NC 8 (Hayes, R)
  • PA 3 (English, R)
LEAN REPUBLICAN (4 R, 1 D)
  • CA 4 (Open; Doolittle, R)
  • MN 6 (Bachmann, R) #
  • MO 6 (Graves, R)
  • OH 2 (Schmidt, R)
  • TX 22 (Lampson, D)
LEAN DEMOCRATIC (1 R, 3 D)
  • PA 4 (Altmire, D)
  • PA 10 (Carney, D) #
  • VA 11 (Open; Davis, R)
  • WI 8 (Kagen, D)
REPUBLICAN FAVORED (9 R, 1 D)
  • AZ 3 (Shadegg, R)
  • CA 3 (Lungren, R) ^
  • CA 46 (Rohrabacher, R)
  • FL 13 (Buchanan, R)
  • FL 16 (Mahoney, D) *
  • IL 6 (Roskam, R)
  • NE 2 (Terry, R)
  • SC 1 (Brown, R) ^
  • WV 2 (Capito, R)
  • WY A-L (Open; Cubin, R)
DEMOCRAT FAVORED (6 R, 4 D)
  • AK A-L (Young, R)
  • AZ 1 (Open; Renzi, R) #
  • AZ 5 (Mitchell, D)
  • AZ 8 (Giffords, D)
  • FL 24 (Feeney, R) #
  • KY 3 (Yarmuth, D)
  • MS 1 (Childers, D)
  • NY 13 (Open; Fossella, R)
  • NY 25 (Open; Walsh, R)
  • OH 16 (Open; Regula, R) #
Dropped :
IN 9 (Hill, D) #,
OR 5 (Open; Hooley, D) #,
PA 6 (Gerlach, R) *

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Stu Talks Politics on CNN.com

GOP House candidates struggle against McCain drag

By Nathan L. Gonzales and Stuart Rothenberg

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Chris Shays of Connecticut, the last Republican in the House of Representatives from New England, is used to running against the partisan tide. But this year, the wave might be too high for the Republican congressman to overcome.

Shays is just one of many GOP candidates trying to win by outperforming Sen. John McCain's underwhelming performance in congressional districts nationwide. Read the rest of the story on CNN.com.

2008 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 6-9 seats.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans

Likely Takeover (4 R, 0 D)
  • Sununu (R-NH) #
  • CO Open (Allard, R) #
  • NM Open (Domenici, R)
  • VA Open (Warner, R)
Lean Takeover (3 R, 0 D)
  • Dole (R-NC)
  • Smith (R-OR)
  • Stevens (R-AK)
Toss-Up (1 R, 0 D)
  • Coleman (R-MN)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 1 D)
  • Chambliss (R-GA)
  • Landrieu (D-LA)
  • McConnell (R-KY)
  • Wicker (R-MS)
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R, 0 D)
  • Collins (R-ME)
Currently Safe (11 R, 11 D)
  • ID Open (Craig, R)
  • NE Open (Hagel, R)
  • Alexander (R-TN)
  • Barrasso (R-WY)
  • 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)

2008 Presidential Battleground Ratings

Total Electoral Votes
(270 needed to win)

Obama - 235 (safe/likely) + 71 (lean) = 306
McCain - 140 (safe/likely) + 23 (lean) = 163
Toss-ups = 69

Toss-Ups

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

Monday, October 20, 2008

Powell for Obama: Nothing More than a Real Yawner

By Stuart Rothenberg

With the amount of media coverage that retired General Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama received over the weekend, you might think that it was a game-changer. It wasn’t.

Powell remains an important and widely admired political figure, and he could have had some impact on the 2008 Presidential contest. But his endorsement wasn’t ever likely to be as crucial as some commentators said it was over the weekend, and the timing of his announcement made it even less important than it might have been.

If we’ve learned anything during the 2008 Presidential contest it ought to be that endorsements in high profile Presidential contests don’t matter very much. I cannot say that they don’t matter at all, but it’s pretty clear that they are of so marginal a value that they barely are worth noting.

Some people, I’m certain, still believe that the endorsements of Oprah Winfrey, Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg and John Edwards handed Obama the nomination, and nothing will dissuade them.

Bit if the endorsements of Governor Deval Patrick (D-Mass.) and Senators Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.), couldn’t deliver the state to Obama in the 2008 Massachusetts Democratic Presidential primary, then no endorsement is crucial.

This year’s contest was so long and so heavily covered in the national media that voters had plenty of time to observe the candidates themselves and decide who they preferred. Chuck Norris’ endorsement of Mike Huckabee didn’t help him much even though some Republicans like the actor. That’s not the way people decide how to vote in Presidential elections.

But Powell could have had at least some impact on the race if he had endorsed in mid September, when McCain was running even or ahead of the Illinois Democrat and when voters still had great doubts about Obama’s experience, particularly in national security matters.

At that point, Powell could have lent his stature and credibility on foreign policy matters to Obama, praising the Senator’s judgment and values and validating Democratic assertions about him.

Once the financial crisis hit in late September and early October, the public’s focus changed and the two candidates were evaluated in different terms. For Obama , that focus automatically was a plus, both because he has more credibility and experience on domestic issues than on foreign policy matters and because Republicans received more of the blame for the crisis. Moreover, McCain’s own behavior, especially compared to Obama’s coolness, benefited the Democratic nominee.

With national polling showing Obama having established a clear and consistent lead over McCain and polls in key swing states having shifted, Powell’s endorsement is little more than a postscript – an afterthought that doesn’t change the general direction of the race.

Should Congressional GOP Throw McCain Under the Bus?

By Stuart Rothenberg

A dozen years ago this month, with GOP presidential nominee Bob Dole mired far back in the polls, the National Republican Congressional Committee spent millions of dollars on a television ad that urged voters not to give Bill Clinton and “liberal special interests” a “blank check” on Election Day by giving Democrats control of Congress.

Now, with Nov. 4 approaching quickly and the campaign of presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) slipping into a hole that in all likelihood is inescapable, GOP House and Senate strategists — and individual candidates — must decide whether to do the same thing.

Should Republican operatives act as if McCain still can win next month or change their message to something like “Don’t give Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats a blank check in November,” thereby virtually accepting the inevitability of McCain’s defeat and giving House and Senate Republicans a new, potentially effective message in the election’s final weeks?

The NRCC’s decision in late 1996 was not without controversy. Dole’s running mate, former New York Rep. Jack Kemp, strongly criticized the strategy, and even those party insiders who supported it seemed embarrassed by the tactic, which tacitly accepted the idea that the Kansas Senator no longer had any chance to win the presidential race.

But the ad, which ran in more than four dozen Congressional districts, may have helped Republicans minimize their losses and retain their House majority that year.

Republicans don’t have the resources to blanket the country with a similar ad this cycle, and the circumstances are different because Bill Clinton already had served a term in the White House when the 1996 campaign was heading into the final stretch.

And for this strategic shift to work, the Republican National Committee would have to shift some spending away from the presidential contest, and individual candidates would have to take up the message, framing it on a case-by-case basis depending on the district or state.

Still, Republican candidates and strategists have to consider the “no blank check” strategy because it might change the nature of this year’s House and Senate contests from a referendum on President Bush and the financial industry’s meltdown to the next four years under Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and huge Democratic majorities in the House and the Senate. Any success in doing that would help GOP downballot candidates.

Not everyone agrees that the strategy would work.

One strategist I spoke with noted that voters have little patience with “process arguments” and suggested that the message would need to be more specific about what Obama and a heavily Democratic Congress might do.

But others pointed out that a stunning 40 percent of voters don’t know that Democrats control Congress and that a “blank check” argument could be an effective message for Republican challengers and open-seat candidates.

Still, even those who think the message is a good one are realistic about its potential effect. “It’s a good message, but it isn’t a winning message. I think that it may minimize the damage,” one GOP strategist speculated.

“Nothing else has worked very well this cycle anyway. It’s worth a try,” another Republican agreed.

But wouldn’t throwing McCain under the bus drain Republican enthusiasm, depressing GOP turnout and thereby hurting the party’s House and Senate hopefuls?

Two Republican strategists that I spoke with say it would not. Both argued that Republican voters see what is happening in national polls and increasingly expect McCain to lose. In fact, one said, a “blank check” message might actually increase Republican turnout by convincing the party’s voters that there is “something at stake in this election.”

The most obvious reason to oppose a “blank check” argument is that McCain still may be able to win, and if anyone is able to use the argument it should be McCain, because nothing can stop Democrats from controlling both chambers of Congress with big majorities after November.

In fact, while an external event could theoretically save McCain, the Arizona Republican’s current prospects are horrible.

Obama has now opened up comfortable leads in some supposedly swing states, and his image is improving as McCain’s worsens. As they did in 1980 when they swung late in the campaign to challenger Ronald Reagan, voters apparently have decided that Obama is not a risky choice.

One GOP poll shows McCain trailing by more than 15 points in Wisconsin, a state that Bush lost by two-tenths of a point in 2000 and four-tenths of a point in 2004. Even worse, Obama’s favorable rating in the state is more than 60 percent, while McCain’s is in the mid- to low-40s.

Anyone who thinks that all McCain needs is more TV ads doesn’t understand where this election is. Given the lateness in the cycle, the Republican Party’s current poor image and the party’s financial problems, additional spending on House and Senate contests may well be too little too late. But it just might help deliver a new “no blank check” message that could help Republicans win a few more races than now seems likely.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 16, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

2008 Gubernatorial Ratings

Here are our latest gubernatorial ratings. Democrats currently hold 28 governorships compared to 22 for the Republicans. Our current estimate is a Democratic gain of one governorship to a Republican of one governorship.

# - 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)

Sunday, October 19, 2008

New Print Edition: Senate, House, Gubernatorial, Presidential Ratings

The October 17, 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). 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.

In this edition, subscribers get our latest Senate, House, Gubernatorial, and Presidential ratings.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

House rematches may give clue to size of Democratic wave

By Stuart Rothenberg and Nathan L. Gonzales

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A dozen rematches are a good place to look between now and Election Day to see what kind of year the two parties are having in the fight for the U.S. House of Representatives.

There is no question about whether Democrats will retain control. But it is unclear exactly how many seats they will add to their majority. Read the whole story on CNN.com.

Friday, October 17, 2008

Louisiana Senate: NRSC Back In

The National Republican Senatorial Committee has reversed an earlier decision to cancel its last two weeks of advertising in Louisiana. Instead, it has purchased TV time next week and will wait to decide whether to buy the final week before Election Day. The decision comes on the heels of GOP polling showing that Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) has only a mid-single digit lead over challenger John Kennedy (R). Democrats dispute those numbers, arguing that Landrieu holds a substantial lead.

GOP May Target Mahoney Media Firm in Other Districts

By Nathan L. Gonzales

With Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fla.) embroiled in an alleged sex scandal, Republicans are putting on the full-court press to broaden the scandal to other districts by implicating House Democratic leadership — and, potentially, Mahoney’s former media firm.

According to the initial ABC News report, Mahoney allegedly promised his mistress a $50,000-a-year job with his media consultant’s firm, Fletcher Rowley Chao Riddle Inc., as part of a package to keep her from going public about their affair.

”This firm is attempting to disassociate itself from its seemingly unethical and potentially illegal behavior because they realize that many of their clients are sitting in targeted districts,” according to one GOP operative, “This is a liability that will undoubtedly be explored."

The Nashville-based FRCR received plenty of good press earlier this year by helping Democrat Travis Childers win the special election in Mississippi’s 1st district. Childers is at limited risk of losing his seat next month, but some of the firm’s other candidates are in much more competitive races.

FRCR works with Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) who knocked off then-Rep. Richard Pombo (R) in 2006 and faces Dean Andal (R) this cycle, as well as teacher Larry Kissell (D), who is in a rematch with Rep. Robin Hayes (R) in North Carolina’s 8th district. Long-shot challenger Jim Harlan (D) in Louisiana’s 1st is also a client.

Rep. Zack Space (D-Ohio) is another FRCR candidate, but Republicans failed to recruit a good candidate to take him on.

Once the Mahoney story broke, his media firm sought to sever all ties with the Congressman.

“FRCR Inc. has resigned from Tim Mahoney’s campaign and permanently ended our relationship with him,” CEO Bill Fletcher said. “According to ABC News, Tim Mahoney apparently included our company in a secret legal settlement without the knowledge of our firm. Our firm did not agree to any legal settlement. If these allegations are true, Tim Mahoney’s actions are unacceptable and not in line with FRCR’s business ethics.”

It may be too little too late to stop Republicans from pressing the issue.

UPDATE: In 2007, McNerney switched to McMahon, Squier, Lapp for media. On Thursday, the NRCC sought to make FRCR an issue against candidates in more districts including Don Cravins Jr. (LA7), Lincoln Davis (TN4), Tom Perriello (VA5), Paul Carmouche (LA4), and Joshua Segall (AL3).

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 15, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

California 3: Lungren Responds to Challenger With Two Polls

By Nathan L. Gonzales

On the heels of his opponent releasing a poll showing a statistically even race, Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) countered by paying for two polls by separate pollsters, each showing him with a significant lead.

An Oct. 7 survey for the Republican’s campaign, conducted by pollster Val Smith, showed him leading physician Bill Durston (D) 47 percent to 27 percent.

An Oct. 9 Moore Information poll, also paid for by Lungren, showed him with a similar 45 percent to 25 percent advantage, and third-party candidates combining for 3 percent.

The Congressman and his campaign said they simply did not believe the polling released early by Durston’s campaign and commissioned the polls to contest the results. An Oct. 4-6 survey by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates for Durston showed Lungren leading his Democratic challenger only 33 percent to 30 percent. A large 30 percent of the electorate was undecided.

Two years ago, Lungren defeated Durston 60 percent to 38 percent, with two third-party candidates combining for less than 3 percent of the vote.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 14, 1008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Massachusetts Senate: Kerry Visits ‘South Pacific’ for Re-Election Bid

By Nathan L. Gonzales

With Election Day just three weeks away, Sen. John Kerry (D) doesn’t seem the least bit worried about his re-election. The Massachusetts Senator was spotted exiting the Lincoln Center Theater in Manhattan on Saturday night after catching the revival of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s “South Pacific.”

Four years ago, Kerry probably envisioned his October 2008 looking much, much different, touring Ohio or Florida, not the Upper West Side, in his quest for a second term as president. Now, Kerry is heavily favored for a fifth term in his race against former CIA agent Jeff Beatty (R) in next month’s general election. “South Pacific” is one of the toughest tickets in New York these days, so Kerry must have figured it was worth the risk.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 14, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Swing Districts Will Show What Election Night Looks Like

By Stuart Rothenberg

As we inch toward November, it looks as if a couple of dozen House races will determine whether Democrats will have a terrific night or merely a good one. Expectations continue to change, and the bar is getting very, very high for Democrats.

Eighteen months ago, the idea that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee might net eight or 10 House seats, after the 30 seats the party picked up in 2006, was seen by most Democrats as a reason for popping corks and opening a case of champagne.

But now, gains of that magnitude would be a distinct disappointment for rank-and-file Democrats, and it would be GOP strategists who would heave a huge sigh of relief at losses limited to those levels.

Some pickups already seem like slam-dunks for Democrats. But here are a dozen races to watch to see whether Democrats are having a big night in the House races:

Florida’s 25th district: Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R) Vs. Joe Garcia (D). With three Cuban-American seats in play in South Florida, Mario Diaz-Balart’s isn’t the hardest (that would be brother Lincoln Diaz-Balart’s) or the easiest (that would be Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s) for the GOP to hold. A victory by Garcia would be a good sign for Democrats.

New York’s 26th: Rep. Tom Reynolds (R) is retiring. Republicans increasingly believe that they can hold this Western New York open seat. Their candidate, businessman Chris Lee, is running on three ballot lines — Republican, Conservative and Independence — and the district certainly tilts to the GOP. Democrat Alice Kryzan won her party’s nomination because two better-funded candidates destroyed each other.

Illinois’ 10th: Rep. Mark Kirk (R) Vs. Dan Seals (D). Kirk would win this rematch against Seals nine out of 10 times, but this could be the year that he doesn’t. The district is competitive, and Kirk will have to run far ahead of the rest of the GOP ticket. A Kirk loss would be bad news for another vulnerable GOP incumbent, Rep. Dave Reichert (Wash.).

New Jersey’s 7th: Rep. Mike Ferguson (R) is retiring. Democrat Linda Stender narrowly lost to Ferguson last time and faces a different foe this year: state Sen. Leonard Lance, a well-regarded moderate. But Lance had a tough primary and therefore began his general election far behind in cash. Still, polling shows this race very close, and the general Republican bent of the district means that Lance may be able to swim against a strong anti-GOP current.

New Hampshire’s 1st: Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D) Vs. Jeb Bradley (R). Shea-Porter came in on the Democratic wave in 2006, and she faces the man she beat two years ago. Polling suggests a close race, and if Bradley can come back and oust her, it could be a sign that the Democratic wave of 2008 peaked far too early.

Maryland’s 1st: Rep. Wayne Gilchrest was defeated in the GOP primary. This very Republican open seat could fall to Democrats, in part because Republicans are divided. Gilchrest lost his primary to conservative state Sen. Andy Harris. The Congressman has endorsed Democrat Frank Kratovil, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is invested in this race, in part because DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer are both from Maryland.

Ohio’s 1st: Rep. Steve Chabot (R) Vs. Steve Driehaus (D). Working-class voters and the size of the African-American vote could be keys to this district. Chabot won re-election with more than 52 percent last time in a bad political environment, and his defeat next month would signal an even bigger Democratic wave. Driehaus is a state legislator who insists he can take votes from Chabot’s base.

Ohio’s 2nd: Rep. Jean Schmidt (R) Vs. Victoria Wulsin (D). Schmidt narrowly beat Wulsin last time (by a single point) in a district President Bush carried with 64 percent in 2004. Both nominees have flaws, but if Wulsin wins, it’s a sign of either very low GOP turnout or more Republicans turning against their party. Either way, that would be disastrous news for Republicans.

New Mexico’s 2nd: Rep. Steve Pearce (R) is running for Senate. Polling suggests that Democrat Harry Teague has a narrow lead in this Republican-leaning district, and he is offering a moderate-to-conservative message. Republican Ed Tinsley hopes to make this a liberal vs. conservative choice, but that isn’t easy in an environment when people are worried about their jobs, mortgages and retirement accounts.

Kentucky’s 2nd: Rep. Ron Lewis (R) is retiring. Two state Senators, Republican Brett Guthrie and Democrat David Boswell, are locked in a tight contest. In any normal year, Guthrie probably would win, but national Democrats have dumped a lot of cash into this race to try to pull Boswell across the finish line, and they certainly have a chance of doing so. A Republican loss here would be a horrible sign for GOP prospects in New Mexico’s 2nd district.

Nebraska’s 2nd: Rep. Lee Terry (R) Vs. Jim Esch (D). Terry defeated businessman and veteran Esch by more than 9 points last time, but the worsening national mood has Democrats thinking upset. Polling shows that Terry isn’t safe, and some Republicans complain that he doesn’t run hard enough. But if Terry loses here, Democrats certainly should win 30 seats.

West Virginia’s 2nd: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R) Vs. Anne Barth (D). Thinking 30 seats-plus for Democrats? Capito’s district is a good place to look. Polling has shown that the Republican incumbent looks like winner, so if she is upset, you know something huge is happening.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 14, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

2008 Senate Ratings

Here are our latest Senate ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 6-9 seats.

# = Moved benefiting Democrats
* = Moved benefiting Republicans

Likely Takeover (2 R, 0 D)
  • NM Open (Domenici, R)
  • VA Open (Warner, R)
Lean Takeover (5 R, 0 D)
  • Dole (R-NC) #
  • Smith (R-OR)
  • Stevens (R-AK)
  • Sununu (R-NH)
  • CO Open (Allard, R)
Toss-Up (1 R, 0 D)
  • Coleman (R-MN)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 1 D)
  • Chambliss (R-GA) #
  • Landrieu (D-LA)
  • McConnell (R-KY)
  • Wicker (R-MS)
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R, 0 D)
  • Collins (R-ME)
Currently Safe (11 R, 11 D)
  • ID Open (Craig, R)
  • NE Open (Hagel, R)
  • Alexander (R-TN)
  • Barrasso (R-WY)
  • 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)

Candidate Gets Very Early Start

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Rick Hendrix announced his 2010 campaign for Congress a few weeks ago. But his campaign is off to an unconventional start — beginning with the fact that he hasn’t chosen a district to run in yet.

That hasn’t stopped the entertainment industry insider from promoting his candidacy, however.

“After his speech to a corner of celebrities and political icons during Vanity Fair and Google’s exclusive, elaborate blowout finale [at the Democratic National Convention], few are left in the dark of Mr. Hendrix’s plans and aspiration as he draws a sharp distinction between his political career and his lifelong dedication as a Christian,” began a news release that announced Hendrix’s campaign soon after the convention.

“Minds are wondering and circles have been a buzz for months concerning his shift and almost hierarchy acceptance into the political dynasties of the Democratic Party,” the oddly worded release continued.

Hendrix, 38, was born and raised in Granite Falls, N.C., a town of about 4,600 people on U.S. 320 between Lenoir and Hickory. Granite Falls is in North Carolina’s 10th district, where attorney Daniel Johnson (D) is taking on Rep. Patrick McHenry (R) this fall.

As owner of the Rick Hendrix Co., the self-proclaimed “#1 Promoter in American Music” handles one-third of all Christian and “positive” music on American radio, promoted the film “The Passion of the Christ” and built an “empire that has generated a quarter of a billion record sells [sic] since the 90’s,” according to his Web site.

The Next Barack Obama?

Hendrix’s Congressional announcement was buried at the end of a Sept. 19 Washington Post article about his efforts to team with Burns Strider, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) faith adviser, to reach out to potential Democratic voters through Christian radio. Hendrix was a part of Clinton’s Faith Outreach Committee during the presidential primary, and he was a pledged at-large delegate for the Senator in Denver.

He is also partnering with Strider and former Hill aide Eric Sapp of the Eleison Group to form Faithful Media, a for-profit endeavor designed to “provide unprecedented services and support to progressive causes and Democratic candidates.”

Hendrix might be one of the beneficiaries.

“Hendrix made his political aspirations clear to party notables such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Madeleine Albright, John Kerry, General Wesley Clark, and the Clintons,” according to his initial release, which read like a news story.

Pictures of Hendrix with Democratic luminaries are available on his MySpace page, including him “escorting” Albright and Kerry out of the Google party.

The release, which was long on name-dropping and short on substance, also compared now-Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) 2004 coming-out party at the Democratic convention in Boston to Hendrix’s 2008 appearance in Denver.

“After this year’s Democratic National Convention showcase of the party’s new and rising young stars, many Democrats are hoping that lightning will strike twice with Rick Hendrix,” the release said.

By announcing his candidacy so early, Hendrix is similar to Obama, since Obama, then a state Senator, began his 2004 U.S. Senate bid before the 2002 elections.

But Hendrix continues to be a candidate without a district. It appears he wants to run in the 10th district, but Johnson is already challenging McHenry, and while he is a distinct long shot, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recently added Johnson to its “Red to Blue” list, which should boost his fundraising.

For now, Hendrix is playing the part of a loyal party foot soldier and supporting Johnson’s candidacy. Hendrix considered temporarily turning his 2010 campaign Web site into a blog for Johnson’s cause, even though the two men have only traded messages and have never spoken.

“Mr. Hendrix is definitely supporting Daniel’s campaign, and I think it says a lot about what’s going on here in western North Carolina that high-profile people like Mr. Hendrix are getting involved in this race,” said Lauren Moore, Johnson’s deputy campaign manager.

Where Is Home?

Even if Hendrix had a clear shot at the 10th district, now or in 2010, it would not be easy. He was born and raised in the district, but it’s unclear where he lives now.

The Rick Hendrix Co. has offices in Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Nashville, Tenn. Hendrix said in an interview that he lives in Granite Falls and commutes to Nashville, where his kids attend school (he is divorced).

But he lists Nashville as home on his MySpace page, where 30 photos of “My Nashville Home” are available.

“He hasn’t lived here in 20 years,” said one Democratic operative in the Tar Heel State.

Another challenge would be the district itself. The 10th district takes in all or part of 10 counties in western North Carolina and gave President Bush 67 percent of the vote four years ago. The district has also sent a Republican to Congress for the past four decades.

McHenry, 32, was first elected in 2004 to fill the seat vacated by GOP Rep. Cass Ballenger and was re-elected with 62 percent last cycle. He is a reliable Republican vote and enjoys being combative, but he broke with his party by voting against the Central American Free Trade Agreement in 2005.

Hendrix’s friends in the national Democratic Party — he calls Pelosi one of his “favorite people in the world” — may not be as popular in the district.

“When the curtain pulls, I can see my mama voting Republican,” Hendrix half-joked, showing some instincts about his family and the district.

“You can be a Democratic candidate and serve well without being as red as your constituency,” Hendrix said in a phone interview, adding that he thought the Clintons were a “50/50 split” in the district. “I would not hide from them because of a poll.”

Former President Bill Clinton lost the district by 20 points to Bob Dole in 1996. So why run?

“This is a new door I feel opening,” Hendrix said. “There is a learning curve for all of us. Democrats have never tried this, and I’ve never tried the political thing before.”

Going National, Tapping Employees

It’s clear that the first-time candidate will have to work to transition from promoter to candidate.

Congressional candidates don’t usually launch their bids three years in advance for a two-year term, particularly without a district.

“This is a year if you are a Democrat you’ve got a get-out-of-jail-free card with Republicans who [traditionally] don’t like the Democratic agenda,” Hendrix said about the timing of his announcement.

RickHendrixforCongress.com is live, but with minimal information.

“Thank you for stopping by. An exploratory committee has been formed for Rick Hendrix and the 2010 mid-term elections,” it says on the site. According to Hendrix, he has filed an exploratory committee with the Federal Election Commission, but he is not yet raising money for a Congressional bid.

The Web site directs visitors to the “Rick Hendrix for Congress National Headquarters,” based in Washington, which could be a first for a Congressional candidate.

Most candidates are running away from D.C. these days, but Hendrix said that even though the national headquarters is not finalized, it could be a natural fit because of all the business that he conducts in Washington already.

“We serve ourselves well by having it there,” Hendrix said, “We need to be in big places and not be afraid.”

Currently, the line between Hendrix’s campaign and his company appears to be nonexistent. The contact phone number for Hendrix’s campaign is the same number listed for his company’s D.C. office. A call placed to the number was answered with an ambiguous, “Rick Hendrix’s office.” And two different staff contacts on the campaign news releases use the phone number as well as company e-mail addresses.

As his campaign ramps up, those distinctions will need to be made, because corporate campaign contributions are illegal and Democrats have been particularly critical over the past few years of Republican businessmen allegedly using their companies to leverage their campaigns.

For now, it’s all a part of Hendrix’s plan.

“We’ll engage the whole company,” Hendrix said, referring to his 2010 bid. “Anyone who works for me will work for the campaign.”

If employees do not want to be involved in the campaign (Hendrix estimates that number to be 20 to 30 out of more than 150), then they can keep their jobs on the music side, according to the candidate.

Official Launch Coming Soon

In general, Hendrix is banking on scores of people helping him after years of promoting and helping others. He believes that all or most of the 700 musical artists (about 70 percent of whom are Christian) that he represents will do fundraisers and concerts on his behalf.

Their willingness may not matter. “Hendrix has demanded that his musician clients let him stage rallies or set up informational tables for Democrats at or near their shows, whether they like it or not,” according to the Washington Post story, which highlighted some of Hendrix’s efforts during the presidential primary. “About half his artists are fine with that, he says, while the others agree somewhat reluctantly.”

Listening to Hendrix, you get the feeling that he is running a national campaign for Congress. Although it’s just in the preliminary stages, it sounds like the most massive Congressional campaign ever assembled.

His effort could officially launch as soon as Jan. 1, with the help of Strider and Sapp’s Eleison Group. Hendrix wants to go into the race with $4 million, hire “major advisers” and have an army of 10,000 volunteers. He’s also talking about 300 billboards, fliers in power bills and a book tour of 600 locations in three months during the campaign.

Hendrix plans to couple the massive e-mail list he’s built over the years with consumer information for micro-targeting. He also plans to reach out to the 34.5 million MySpace friends stretched across his 700 musical artists.

“As the night went on, Hendrix found the small posse he arrived with had blossomed into a room of the world’s most notable figures and their eyes and ears were fixed on his every word, jokes and smiles,” Hendrix’s announcement news release read. “Actress Anne Hathaway said, ‘Rick inspires and excites me about the future of our party.’”

The political world may not be ready for Rick Hendrix.

This story first appeared in Roll Call on October 9, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Why is Dole Vulnerable and Not Collins?

By Stuart Rothenberg and Nathan L. Gonzales

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Two years ago, as the 2007-2008 election cycle was beginning, one female Republican senator up for re-election looked to be in serious danger: Maine's Susan Collins.

But with just three weeks left until Election Day, the moderate Collins now appears to be one of the few embattled Republican senators who could survive the forthcoming Democratic wave.

On the other hand, North Carolina's Elizabeth Dole, once regarded as a lock for re-election, looks as if she is about to fall at the hands of Democratic challenger Kay Hagan.

How did Dole become more endangered than Collins? You can read the rest of the story on CNN.com.

2008 House Ratings

Here are our latest House ratings. Our latest estimate is a Democratic gain of 25-30 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, 5 D)
  • AL 5 (Open; Cramer, D)
  • CT 4 (Shays, R) #
  • FL 16 (Mahoney, D) *
  • FL 21 (L. Diaz-Balart, R)
  • LA 6 (Cazayoux, D) #
  • MI 7 (Walberg, R) #
  • NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D)
  • NM 2 (Open; Pearce, R) #
  • NJ 7 (Open; Ferguson, R)
  • OH 1 (Chabot, R) #
  • OH 15 (Open; Pryce, R)
  • PA 11 (Kanjorski, D) *
TOSS-UP/TILT REPUBLICAN (10 R, 0 D)
  • AL 2 (Open; Everett, R) #
  • FL 25 (M. Diaz-Balart, R) #
  • IL 10 (Kirk, R) #
  • KY 2 (Open; Lewis, R) #
  • LA 4 (Open; McCrery, R)
  • MD 1 (Open; Gilchrest, R) #
  • MO 9 (Open; Hulshof, R) #
  • NY 26 (Open; Reynolds, R)
  • VA 2 (Drake, R) #
  • WA 8 (Reichert, R)
TOSS-UP/TILT DEMOCRATIC (10 R, 4 D)
  • CA 11 (McNerney, D)
  • CO 4 (Musgrave, R)
  • FL 8 (Keller, R) #
  • GA 8 (Marshall, D)
  • IL 11 (Open; Weller, R)
  • KS 2 (Boyda, D)
  • MI 9 (Knollenberg, R) #
  • MN 3 (Open; Ramstad, R) #
  • NJ 3 (Open; Saxton, R)
  • NM1 (Open; Wilson, R) #
  • NY 29 (Kuhl, R) #
  • NC 8 (Hayes, R) #
  • PA 3 (English, R) #
  • PA 10 (Carney, D) #
LEAN REPUBLICAN (4 R, 1 D)
  • CA 4 (Open; Doolittle, R) #
  • ID 1 (Sali, R) #
  • MO 6 (Graves, R)
  • OH 2 (Schmidt, R)
  • TX 22 (Lampson, D)
LEAN DEMOCRATIC (5 R, 2 D)
  • AZ 1 (Open; Renzi, R) #
  • FL 24 (Feeney, R) #
  • NV 3 (Porter, R) #
  • OH 16 (Open; Regula, R) #
  • PA 4 (Altmire, D)
  • VA 11 (Open; Davis, R)
  • WI 8 (Kagen, D) #
REPUBLICAN FAVORED (9 R, 0 D)
  • AZ 3 (Shadegg, R) ^
  • CA 46 (Rohrabacher, R) ^
  • FL 13 (Buchanan, R)
  • IL 6 (Roskam, R)
  • MN 6 (Bachmann, R)
  • NE 2 (Terry, R) ^
  • PA 6 (Gerlach, R)
  • WV 2 (Capito, R)
  • WY A-L (Open; Cubin, R) ^
DEMOCRAT FAVORED (3 R, 6 D)
  • AK A-L (Young, R)
  • AZ 5 (Mitchell, D) #
  • AZ 8 (Giffords, D) #
  • IN 9 (Hill, D)
  • KY 3 (Yarmuth, D) #
  • MS 1 (Childers, D)
  • NY 13 (Open; Fossella, R)
  • NY 25 (Open; Walsh, R)
  • OR 5 (Open; Hooley, D) #
Dropped :
IL 14 (Foster, D) #,
KS 3 (Moore, D) #,
NY 20 (Gillibrand, D) #

Michigan 9: State Democrats Try to Use Palin as Wedge

By Nathan L. Gonzales

For the last three years, the predominant Democratic strategy has been to tie every breathing Republican to unpopular President Bush. Now, Michigan Democrats believe coupling the GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, with Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R) will help them win his seat.

“Knollenberg and Palin — Two Peas in a Pod of Delusion,” read the release from the Michigan Democratic Party on Thursday. The Congressman is locked in a very competitive re-election race against former state Lottery Commissioner Gary Peters (D) in the 9th district.

“Whether it’s supporting unfair trade policies that ship Michigan jobs overseas or thinking Alaska’s proximity to Russia qualifies as foreign policy experience, Knollenberg is out of touch with what will bring the change Michigan needs,” state Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer said. The release also highlights Palin and Knollenberg’s agreement on abortion rights and global warming, claiming that they are “too extreme” for Oakland County.

This appears to be the first time that Democrats have attempted to use Palin as a negative in a Congressional race. Democrats will surely continue to use Bush as an anvil around Republicans’ necks, but thus far, they have not tried to use GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) as an issue.

This story
first appeared on RollCall.com on October 9, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, October 13, 2008

2008 Presidential Battleground Ratings

Total Electoral Votes
(270 needed to win)

Obama - 214 (safe/likely) + 72 (lean) = 286
McCain - 160 (safe/likely) + 23 (lean) = 163
Toss-ups = 89

Toss-Ups

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

Big Five States: Tough and Getting Tougher for McCain

By Stuart Rothenberg

A few months ago in this space, I wrote that if you tell me who will win Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Ohio and Michigan, I can tell you who will win the White House in November (The Big Five: Picking the States That Will Pick the President, July 17, 2008).

With the campaign of Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) pulling out of Michigan, one of those battlegrounds, we are down to only four states. If any one of them goes for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), he will win the presidency. And, barring a game-changing development, it is increasingly difficult to see how he loses all four.

In taking Michigan off the board, McCain probably has only one path to victory, and it is a very difficult one. He must reassemble the Bush Electoral College coalition, winning all of the 29 states that George W. Bush won twice. (Bush won 30 states in 2000 and 31 in 2004. He won New Hampshire, Iowa and New Mexico only once during those two elections.)

Winning those 29 states would give McCain 274 electoral votes, four more than he needs to win the presidency. Losing even one of those 29 states with five or more electoral votes would give the White House to Obama.

Michigan was one of the few Al Gore/John Kerry states that McCain could have hoped to win this year.

Of course, it was always difficult for the Republican given his free-trade stance and party label. In 2004, the president lost Michigan by more than 3 percentage points, and in 2000, he lost Michigan by more than 5 points.

But the state’s Democratic governor, Jennifer Granholm, has been a serious disappointment to many Wolverine State voters, especially older, working-class whites, and the bad publicity Detroit has received recently over its now former mayor gave Republicans some reason for an upset.

But, by pulling its media, McCain’s campaign has acknowledged that its candidate can’t win it.

Two other states share some of Michigan’s characteristics and could replace it on my list of key indicator states. But McCain isn’t doing all that much better in Pennsylvania right now, another state with an older, white blue-collar electorate, and Wisconsin, which was close in both 2000 and 2004.

Of the two, Wisconsin may be McCain’s best chance, since Bush lost the state to Gore by just two-tenths of a point in 2000 and only four-tenths of a point to Kerry four years later. State polling suggests that the presidential contest is closer in Wisconsin than in Pennsylvania, but Obama leads.

Without any of those three, McCain is stuck in a rut — the Bush electoral map rut. I suppose there is a chance he could win one of the states Bush split with his Democratic opponents in 2000 and 2004 — New Mexico would seem to be the most likely choice — but that’s not very likely either, and losing Virginia or Colorado would offset that McCain takeaway.

Obama’s improved position in Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana makes it increasingly difficult to imagine a McCain victory without an event or events that dramatically remake the presidential contest. And any event that could be a game-changer is almost certainly out of McCain’s control.

Recent state polls show Obama even or ahead in all of these states, but he will need to win one or at most two of them to guarantee victory.

And while McCain needs a clear Electoral College majority, 270 electoral votes, Obama will win the White House if he and McCain tie with 269 electoral votes, since Obama would win if the election were to go to the House of Representatives.

While it’s true that Obama hasn’t locked up the election quite yet, it’s also true that McCain has been stuck at the low- to mid-40s in most national surveys, a significant sign of weakness.

Given all of the odd twists and turns that have taken place during the nominating phase and since, it’s probably dangerous to declare the presidential race over. As I have noted repeatedly, this election is being driven by news, not spin or handicappers’ assessments.

But it’s fair to say that the current trajectory of the race means Barack Obama is heading to victory in the 2008 presidential election, and John McCain must do something to change that trajectory to avoid a loss.

And McCain’s chances of doing that are growing dimmer and dimmer.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 9, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Sunday, October 12, 2008

California 3: Democratic Poll in California Shows Lungren Is Soft

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Maybe it’s the crummy national environment or maybe it was the topless attack ad, but a new Democratic poll in California’s 3rd district shows that Rep. Dan Lungren (R) may not be safe.

An Oct. 4-6 survey by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin and Associates (D) for physician Bill Durston (D) showed Lungren leading his Democratic challenger 33 percent to 30 percent. A large 30 percent of the electorate was undecided, according to the poll.

Two years ago, Lungren defeated Durston 60 percent to 38 percent, with two third-party candidates combining for less than 3 percent of the vote.

This cycle, Durston has been attacking the Congressman for taking junkets and money from special interests, culminating with a television ad of a shirtless Lungren walking poolside in swim trunks. Democrats have also narrowed their voter registration deficit in the district from 6 points to 4 points.

Of course, a majority of the undecided voters may end up breaking Lungren’s way in a district where President Bush garnered 58 percent of the vote in 2004. But Republican candidates can’t afford to take those voters for granted this cycle.

“Dan Lungren has done a great job representing the constituents in his district, and we’re confident the seat stays in Republican hands,” said Karen Hanretty, the National Republican Congressional Committee communications director.

This story
first appeared on RollCall.com on October 8, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Print Edition: Senate, House, Presidential Outlook

The October 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). 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.

In this edition, subscribers get our latest Senate ratings along with the latest analysis and polling, our latest House ratings, and our latest Presidential ratings.

Thursday, October 09, 2008

For Republicans, Another Blood Bath Looms on Horizon

By Stuart Rothenberg

I’ve seen this movie before, and I know how it ends. Republican candidates from presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) down to Congressional hopefuls have less than four weeks to figure out how to avert a repeat of 2006. Increasingly, it appears unlikely that they will.

It’s obvious to all that the national landscape — and the presidential map — shifted dramatically in the Democrats’ favor during the financial crisis. Americans are more dissatisfied with the present and worried about the future, all of which helps Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Democratic Congressional candidates.

Obama may not be comfortably over the crucial 50 percent mark in polls, but states that McCain hoped to compete in are moving out of reach, while more traditionally Republican states have come into play for Obama. McCain needs to change that dynamic quickly to have any chance of winning.

McCain still has a month to change the focus of the race, and Obama may have peaked too soon. But public concern about the economy isn’t likely to disappear over the next month no matter how much Republicans wish it would.

So far, there is no evidence that Democratic candidates are paying a price for the public’s sour mood, or that the election will be “anti-incumbent.” It is Republican candidates who are feeling the political pain.

The outlook in Senate races continues to deteriorate for Republicans, with Democratic gains at least in the high single digits increasingly likely. Where I once wrote in this space that Democrats had a chance of reaching 60 seats in 2010 (“For Democrats, Time to Pad Senate Majority and Think 60 Seats,” Feb. 12, 2007), I now can’t rule out 60 seats for this November.

Virginia and New Mexico are already gone, and Colorado, Alaska, New Hampshire and Oregon aren’t far behind. Add in North Carolina, and Democrats are plus-seven (and at 58 seats) without Minnesota or Mississippi, which are up for grabs.

Republicans can no longer count Kentucky as a lock, and if the Democrats spend significant sums of money against Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) in Georgia, they might even have a chance to swipe that unlikely seat.

In the House of Representatives, Democratic prospects have gone from good to great.

The National Republican Congressional Committee has plenty of problems, but the most immediate one for its House candidates who are fighting for their political lives may well be the financial disadvantage those candidates face in outside spending.

The NRCC’s independent expenditure effort has so far bought TV time in two relatively inexpensive districts: for Rep. Phil English (R) in his northwest Pennsylvania district and in support of challenger John Gard in Wisconsin’s 8th district, currently represented by freshman Democratic Rep. Steve Kagen. Each buy, so far, is less than $150,000.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, on the other hand, has spent more than $400,000 in 15 districts, including in Republican Rep. Robin Hayes’ district in North Carolina, retiring Republican Rep. Deborah Pryce’s district in Ohio, retiring Republican Rep. Rick Renzi’s district in Arizona and Democratic Rep. Paul Kanjorski’s district in Pennsylvania.

Neither the NRCC nor Freedom’s Watch, which Democrats regularly warn their allies has replaced the NRCC as the “outside” group with the primary responsibility of spending money to elect Congressional Republicans, has spent a dime in any of those districts.

To this point, Freedom’s Watch has spent less than $2 million on House races while the DCCC’s spending has almost reached $15.5 million. Freedom’s Watch has so far spent more than $400,000 in only one district, New Jersey’s 7th.

The NRCC has scaled back advertising in Nevada’s 3rd district and New Mexico’s 1st district, and the campaign committee is going to have to make key decisions over the next few weeks about which candidates it will try to save and which it will allow to drown slowly.

With only about $22 million available to spend on races and many contests requiring a media buy of $1 million to make any impact, the NRCC simply cannot play in all the districts it needs to. And when Republican and GOP-leaning groups do spend their cash in the final weeks of the campaign, it may be too late to rescue Republican candidates who have picked up heavy negatives over the previous month.

This financial discrepancy is no surprise, but its impact is being felt at the worst time for Republicans.

While I recently increased my expectation of Democratic House gains to 10-20 seats, that range looks too low. Hardly any Democratic-held seats are at great risk — Democratic incumbents Kanjorski, Carol Shea-Porter (N.H.), Nick Lampson (Texas), Tim Mahoney (Fla.) and Don Cazayoux (La.), as well as an open seat in Alabama, are a few obvious exceptions — so the DCCC is almost entirely on offense.

Democrats are now likely to net at least 20 seats, with gains closer to 30 quite possible given the cycle’s dynamics, poll numbers we are seeing and the Democratic financial advantage. This is the kind of cycle when even one or two third-tier Democratic challengers will win, inflating the party’s net gain even further.

While Democratic gains both in the House and Senate could still grow or shrink, for Republicans, the end of this movie won’t be pretty, no matter the ultimate number.

We could see a new modern floor for House Republicans made in November, and it’s likely to be in the 170s, if not the upper 160s. Given the realignment of the Reagan years and the GOP’s advantages coming from the last redistricting, this is an incredibly low level.

Over on the Senate side, Republican numbers could fall further in two years, since more GOP seats than Democratic seats are again up in 2010.

Republicans appear to be heading into a disastrous election that will usher in a very bleak period for the party. A new generation of party leaders will have to figure out how to pick up the pieces and make their party relevant after November.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 7, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Obama Maintaining Status Quo With White Evangelicals

By Nathan L. Gonzales

After months of well-publicized outreach to evangelicals, the Democratic Party and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign are struggling to outperform the normal Democratic vote.

A Sept. 4-21 Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D) survey for Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly showed Arizona Sen. John McCain (R) leading Obama 71 percent to 23 percent among white evangelical voters. In comparison, President Bush won white evangelical/born again voters 78 percent to 21 percent four years ago.

McCain was receiving only tepid support from evangelicals before he added Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to the GOP ticket. This survey provides some evidence that McCain is creeping closer to Bush’s totals with those voters.

The GQRR poll was accompanied by a memo, which highlighted how younger evangelicals were less supportive of McCain than older evangelicals. Subsequent media coverage generally focused on that point, but the results were more complicated.

McCain led Obama 62 percent to 30 percent among white evangelicals ages 18-29, compared with the Arizona Senator’s 73 percent to 22 percent advantage among white evangelicals ages 30 and older.

While Obama is doing better on the ballot test, younger evangelicals held a less favorable view of him compared to the views of evangelicals ages 30 and older. According to GQRR’s favorability “thermometer,” young evangelicals gave the Illinois Senator a 28 percent “warm” and 50 percent “cool” rating. Older evangelicals had a slightly better 36 percent warm and 48 percent cool view of Obama.

Younger evangelicals also viewed McCain, Palin and Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) less favorably than older evangelicals did.

But both Republicans were far more popular than the Democratic ticket. McCain did well with young white evangelicals (54 percent warm/31 percent cool) and older evangelicals (68 percent warm/18 percent cool). Palin also enjoyed favorable ratings among young evangelicals (52 percent warm/25 percent cool) and older evangelicals (60 percent warm/17 percent cool).

Biden received the lowest rating of the foursome. Young white evangelicals gave the Delaware Senator a 13 percent warm/41 percent cool, while older evangelicals gave him a 25 percent warm/40 percent cool.

Even President Bush scored better than Biden, including among young evangelicals who gave him a 39 percent warm/48 percent cool. Evangelicals ages 30 and older might be the last remaining voter bloc to give Bush a net positive rating: 57 percent warm/29 percent cool.

A level of caution should always be administered when evaluating polling data about evangelicals because each polling firm tends to have its own definition. In the case of GQRR, “Evangelical Christians were defined as Protestants or members of another Christian religion, and who identified as fundamentalist, evangelical, charismatic, or Pentecostal or who indicated they were born-again Christians.”

Any conclusions about young evangelicals from the survey should be even more tentative because of the survey’s methodology.

The survey started with a sample of 1,400 adults, including an over-sample of 400 evangelical Christians ages 18-29. But only 127 of the 427 sample of young evangelicals were contacted by telephone. The remaining 300 “were drawn from an opt-in Web panel that is designed to be demographically representative at a national level,” according to the firm.

This methodology means that the young evangelical over-sample is no longer “random,” a fact that GQRR acknowledged at the end of its own memo, and the margin of error listed for the young evangelical sample is statistically irrelevant.

The survey research firm noted that “Internet panels, like this one, use non-probability based sampling methods, by necessity, and these results need to be considered with that limitation in mind.”

Young evangelicals may be more conservative than older evangelicals, but more studies are needed. It is unclear whether young evangelicals will carry their current views throughout their lives or become more conservative or liberal. For the moment, however, Democrats have to be disappointed that after all of their talk and efforts, white evangelicals, as a whole, appear to be as supportive of the McCain-Palin ticket as they were of Bush.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 3, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Democratic Senate Candidates Bail on Rescue Bill

By Nathan L. Gonzales

While Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership in the Senate voted in favor of the bailout bill, the party’s top candidates for the Senate are almost unanimously against it.

The bill passed 74-25 in the Senate Wednesday, with the support of Obama (Ill.), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), vice presidential nominee Joseph Biden (Del.), Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Chris Dodd (Conn.), Majority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and a majority of the Democratic caucus.

Obama didn’t merely vote for the bill. He pleaded with his colleagues to back it.

“There will be time to punish those who set this fire,” Obama said on the Senate floor Wednesday night, “but now is not the time to argue about how it got set. ... Right now we want to put out that fire, and now’s the time for us to come together and do that.

“So to Democrats and Republicans who’ve opposed this plan, I say: Step up to the plate. Let’s do what’s right for the country at this time, because the time to act is now,” the Illinois Senator demanded.

But most Democratic candidates for the Senate think that Obama and their party’s Senate leadership are wrong, and they said so in public statements.

“There were plenty of additions that I strongly support, but this process is exactly what is wrong with Washington,” former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D) said in a statement against the bill. “Instead of adding sweeteners to woo a few extra votes, Congress should have addressed the problems with the bailout and given the public an economic rescue with strong oversight, accountability and taxpayer protections.”

Shaheen’s opponent, Sen. John Sununu (R), voted in favor of the bill.

Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith (R) voted for the bill as well and was promptly criticized by his opponent, state Speaker Jeff Merkley (D).

“I commend Ron Wyden for standing up for taxpayers and doing what is necessary to restore accountability on Wall Street,” Merkley said in a statement, siding with Oregon’s other Senator, who was one of nine Democrats to vote against the bill. “The easy thing to do would have been to vote yes on this bill.

“This proposal is badly flawed and adding a number of important unrelated items, no matter how worthy, does not fix the problems with this bailout,” Merkley added. “This is what they do in Washington. They take a bad proposal and add $150 billion of sweeteners to satisfy enough people. This is not how to solve problems.”

Badly flawed? Apparently, Obama, Biden, Reid and Dodd didn’t get Merkley’s memo about solving problems or about how badly flawed the bill was.

In Minnesota, GOP Sen. Norm Coleman and Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar voted in favor of the bill, while Senate challenger Al Franken (D) is against it. But Franken said he wouldn’t blame anyone for his or her vote.

“It’s a fix for Wall Street, not Main Street, and this isn’t a situation where we can afford to only address half the problem,” state Sen. Kay Hagan (D) of North Carolina said in a statement against the bill. Hagan’s opponent, GOP Sen. Elizabeth Dole, also bucked her president and party leaders by voting against the bill.

Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker (R) voted against the bill, and his opponent, former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove (D), opposes it as well.

“Like all Mississippians I am outraged at Washington and Wall Street for letting this get out of control and that Washington has not come together to find a solution,” Musgrove said in a statement. “It is time to put partisan bickering aside and deliver an investment package that will work. Not a bailout.”

Musgrove may not realize that, in Washington, when a majority of Senators from both parties support a bill, it’s usually regarded as bipartisan.

Reps. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who are running in open-seat races for the Senate, each voted against both the initial House bill that failed and the version that passed Friday, 263-171. Tom Udall’s opponent, Rep. Steve Pearce (R) voted against the bill as well.

In Maine, Rep. Tom Allen (D) voted in favor of both House versions. His opponent, Sen. Susan Collins (R), voted for the measure in the Senate.

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens (R) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also voted in favor of the bailout, but it’s unclear where their opponents stand.

Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (D) is one of the only Democratic Senate candidates to come out in favor of the bill. Warner is more of a lock for victory than any of the other Democratic candidates, and his position on the bill puts him in line with Virginia’s current Sens. John Warner (R) and Jim Webb (D)

“It’s clear that, from my perspective, this is what we need to do right now to prevent the possibility of a crisis turning into a catastrophe,” Obama said.

The widespread support for the bailout bill by both parties gives candidates an opportunity to run against Washington and show their independence. But it looks strange for Obama, the de facto leader of the Democratic Party, to implore people to support a bill and then have candidates within his own party ignore him.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on October 3, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, October 06, 2008

Wild Cards Create Wild Scenarios in Congressional Races

By Stuart Rothenberg

While third-party and Independent candidates for president remain largely irrelevant to the battle between Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), three nontraditional candidates in other races are proving to be more important.

In Minnesota, former Sen. Dean Barkley, running as the Independence Party’s nominee, is receiving almost one in five votes in the state’s Senate race, according to at least one unreleased survey.

In Louisiana’s 6th district, African- American state Rep. Michael Jackson (D), who is running for Congress as an Independent, could affect the outcome. And in Florida’s 13th district, Independent Jan Schneider remains a problem for Democrat Christine Jennings in her effort to defeat Rep. Vern Buchanan (R).

Barkley, who served very briefly in the Senate when he was appointed by then-Gov. Jesse Ventura (I), is benefiting from the increasing bitterness in the race between the two major party nominees, incumbent Republican Sen. Norm Coleman and comedian/satirist-turned-political-hopeful Al Franken (D).

Franken and his allies have painted Coleman as a junket-taking ally of President Bush who is close to “Big Oil.” Coleman and his allies have argued that Franken is a crude loudmouth who has failed to pay his taxes and doesn’t have the temperament to be in the Senate.

Through Aug. 20 (in their pre-primary reports), Coleman had raised more than $12 million and spent $8.5 million, while Franken had raised $13 million and spent $10.7 million. Barkley, in contrast, had raised $14,374 and spent $9,302.

None of those figures, of course, include independent expenditures from the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and other outside groups that are spending money on behalf of one of the major-party candidates.

Barkley is benefiting from the same phenomenon that helped Alice Kryzan win the Democratic primary in New York’s 26th district last month and Carol Moseley Braun win the Democratic Senate nomination in Illinois in 1992: voter revulsion from two candidates engaging in heavily negative campaigns.

While Barkley isn’t running the kind of full-scale campaign that would ordinarily get him much traction, he’s receiving plenty of “none of the above” votes from Minnesotans who are tired of the personal attacks coming from Coleman and Franken.

While this normally would benefit Coleman, since most elections are referendums on the incumbent and having two or more alternatives to the incumbent thereby divides the anti-incumbent vote, Barkley is doing so well that he must be taking votes away from both men.

I have long had doubts as to whether Franken could win the votes of a majority of Minnesota voters because of his controversial history. But Barkley’s strong showing means that the Democrat may be able to win the Senate race with as little as 40 percent of the vote, a number that does not seem unattainable for Franken.

Some Democratic operatives have been considering whether it might be necessary for Franken, or more likely the DSCC, to attack Barkley to try to pull liberal (or at least anti-Coleman) voters away from the Independence Party nominee.

But that’s a risky strategy that could, in theory, benefit Coleman, and it would seem less likely if Coleman and Franken are locked in a very tight race in the final weeks of the election campaign.

Barkley isn’t likely to win the Minnesota Senate race in November, no matter how nasty the race gets, but the two major-party candidates will need to try to figure out whether, and how, to deal with him as Election Day approaches.

In the Louisiana race, a recent poll shows Democratic Rep. Don Cazayoux holding a comfortable lead over state Sen. Bill Cassidy (R) and Independent Jackson, who was drawing just 9 percent of the vote.

But many observers doubt that Cazayoux will retain such a big lead in a Republican-leaning district, and they expect that his campaign, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, may have to take steps to keep African-American voters, who outnumber white Democrats in the district, to stick with Cazayoux rather than vote for Jackson.

Like Barkley, Jackson hasn’t raised or spent much money. As of Aug. 17, Jackson had just $12,603 in the bank after raising $132,950. But every vote Jackson wins is a vote he has taken from Cazayoux, and Democratic insiders have already considered whether they need presidential nominee Obama to make an explicit appeal to the district’s black voters to stick with Democratic nominee Cazayoux rather than backing Jackson (Obama has already endorsed Cazayoux).

In Florida, Schneider is also short of cash. But she has run three times, in 2002 and 2004 as the Democratic nominee for Congress, and she drew a respectable 38 percent of the vote in an unsuccessful 2006 Democratic primary race against Jennings.

Just as important, Schneider recently told a local newspaper that she would put $100,000 of her own money behind her bid in the next few weeks.

By the time Election Day rolls around, it’s possible that these third-party candidates will have faded into oblivion. But it’s more likely that they will continue to give at least one major-party candidate in each race heartburn, and they could well affect major-party strategies going down to the wire.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on October 2, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Friday, October 03, 2008

Two Democrats Earn Top Score From Conservative Group

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Two socially conservative groups unveiled their vote ratings this week, and a couple of Democrats made the list of House Members with perfect scores during the 110th Congress.

FRC Action and Focus on the Family Action released their Vote Scorecard, rating Members on 17 votes deemed critical to the groups’ causes. Votes on hate crimes, federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research and abortion, and religious liberty were included, among others.

In all, 107 House Members were given “True Blue” status by “voting for families 100 percent of the time.”

“Thanks goes out to this bipartisan bunch for standing up for families,” FRC Action President Tony Perkins wrote in an e-mail update on Monday. Six years ago, Perkins ran unsuccessfully for the Senate as a Republican in Louisiana.

Not surprisingly, the “bipartisan bunch” consisted of 101 House Republicans and just six Democrats.

North Carolina Reps. Heath Shuler (D) and Mike McIntyre (D) voted with FRC Action and Focus on the Family Action on all 17 votes during the 110th Congress.

Democratic Reps. Donna Edwards (Md.), André Carson (Ind.), Don Cazayoux (La.) and Travis Childers (Miss.) were also included as “True Blue.” But the four Members were elected in special elections this year and were only in Congress for one of the 17 votes.

Some other Democrats scored well but fell short of the perfect score. Mississippi Rep. Gene Taylor earned a 94 percent rating, Georgia Rep. Jim Marshall an 88 percent, and Reps. Collin Peterson (Minn.) and Lincoln Davis (Tenn.) both received 82 percent.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 30, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Plenty of Questions Still Remain in This Bifurcated Election

By Stuart Rothenberg

Is the presidential race opening up for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), or is GOP Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in the middle of a comeback even as analysts note that the financial crisis is hurting the GOP?

Are Democratic House and Senate candidates getting a bounce because of the crisis, or are Republican numbers on ballot tests around the country relatively steady?

There is so much contradictory data out there — some of it seemingly illogical based on the recent news — that it’s hard to know what to believe.

Two polls released the same day by major news-gathering organizations painted very different pictures of the state of the presidential contest. A Washington Post/ABC News poll showed that the financial crisis was damaging McCain and the GOP, and that Obama had opened up a 9-point lead (52 percent to 43 percent) in the race for the White House, while an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found Obama leading McCain by just 2 points, 48 percent to 46 percent.

Twenty-four hours later, Gallup’s tracking poll showed McCain erasing a 3-point deficit and pulling even with Obama at 46 percent for each. And 24 hours after that, Obama re-established a 3-point advantage in Gallup’s track — suggesting strangely dramatic movement in a three-day rolling average during heavy news days.

Then there are polls in Michigan’s 7th district, currently held by Republican Rep. Tim Walberg.

A Sept. 23-24 Myers Research & Strategic Services poll for challenger Mark Schauer (D) showed him leading the Republican by 6 points, 42 percent to 36 percent. A week earlier, a National Research poll for the Congressman showed Walberg holding a 50 percent to 40 percent advantage.

It’s certainly possible that a Congressional race could turn that dramatically in a week, especially when a dramatic event, such as a national financial crisis, occurs. But it seems unlikely.

The Democratic poll found the district’s partisan identification as 35 percent Democratic and 33 percent Republican, while the National Research survey found the generic Congressional ballot at 46 percent Republican and 41 percent Democratic, again suggesting two slightly different views of a district that went 54 percent to 45 percent for President Bush in 2004.

But there are some things about this election cycle that now appear crystal clear.

First, the Republican brand remains damaged. The most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed voters had a much more favorable view of the Democratic Party than the GOP, and the Republicans trail in both party identification and the generic ballot nationally. Any uptick in the public’s attitude toward the GOP after the party’s convention has now disappeared.

Second, we are in the middle of a bifurcated election, and there is no sign of that changing.

At the Congressional level, voters are using party to make their choice for change, and that has Republican candidates back on their heels in swing districts and in those states and districts that normally prefer Democrats. Democrats still have a very difficult road knocking off Republicans in reliably Republican areas, but elsewhere Democratic opportunities abound.

At the presidential level, however, voters are focusing on the two presidential candidates (not their running mates). Surprisingly, the ABC News/Washington Post poll did not ask respondents about their feelings about the two presidential contenders. But the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll did, and it found both men with nearly identical numbers: McCain 46 percent positive/ 38 percent negative to Obama’s 48 percent positive/38 percent negative.

Given those results, it’s easy to understand that the presidential ballot would be competitive.

The NBC poll also asked voters whether they preferred a candidate who would “end the Bush Administration policies” and “have active government oversight in areas such as prescription drugs and financial institutions,” or a candidate who would “clean up Washington” and “take on waste and fraud in the system such as reducing government inefficiency and pork-barrel spending.”

Those polled picked “clean up Washington” over “end the Bush Administration policies” by a stunning (to me, at least) 67 percent to 29 percent. Again, those results help explain why McCain has so far remained very much in the presidential race.

In general, Republican insiders remain exceedingly nervous about the national political environment, fearing that the economic crisis will keep the electorate’s focus on issues that benefit Obama and his party. That seems reasonable, given that Americans still hold Bush in low regard and seem inclined to give him and his party a disproportionate amount of the blame for bad news. (They also hold Congress in low regard, but so far there is no evidence that is hurting Democratic candidates in general.)

Events are likely to continue to shape and reshape the presidential race, but in the fight for the House and the Senate, the die is already cast. The only question in those contests is “how bad” it will be for the GOP.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on September 29, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

2 of 3 Cuban Republicans Vulnerable in South Florida

By Nathan L. Gonzales

At the beginning of each election cycle, Republican and Democratic campaign strategists are armed with a list of potential targets — based on anecdotes, possible challengers and carefully compiled statistics to make their case against supposedly vulnerable incumbents.

Not surprisingly, some targets turn into real opportunities while others simply don’t. In the case of three Republican-held seats in South Florida, the current state of the races is a mixed bag for Democrats.

Earlier this cycle, Democratic strategists declared all three Cuban Republicans in South Florida vulnerable, despite flimsy quantitative evidence to back up their assertion. They claimed that the growing non-Cuban Hispanic population in Florida's 18th, 21st and 25th districts, combined with voter registration trends, all favored the Democratic challengers.

Public and private polling now confirms that brothers Mario Diaz-Balart (R) and Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R) are in very competitive races, while Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R) still looks very strong in her re-election bid.

After months of talk, a June 6-22 poll taken by the Democratic firm Bendixen & Associates and not conducted for a candidate showed Lincoln Diaz-Balart ahead of former Hialeah Mayor Raul Martinez (D) 41 percent to 37 percent in the 21st district. Diaz-Balart countered with his own June poll, conducted by Hill Research Consultants, which had him ahead by a more comfortable 48 percent to 36 percent margin.

A late-August SurveyUSA poll done for Roll Call gave Martinez a 48 percent to 46 percent edge. And more recent unreleased polling confirms the tightness of the race, as well as Martinez’s high unfavorable ratings.

Martinez’s high negative ratings, stemming from a somewhat tumultuous time as mayor, is one reason why one GOP strategist believes Mario Diaz-Balart may, in the end, be the most vulnerable of the three Cuban Republicans.

In June, a Bendixen poll showed him with a 44 percent to 39 percent lead over Miami-Dade County Democratic Chairman Joe Garcia (D), but more recent polling has not been made available.

Businesswoman Annette Taddeo’s (D) challenge to Ros-Lehtinen is decidedly more uphill than the other two districts, and a scenario for her victory has yet to materialize.

A Sept. 23-25 Research 2000 poll done for the liberal blog Daily Kos showed the Congresswoman with a 53 percent to 36 percent lead over Taddeo. Ros-Lehtinen had 49 percent favorable/37 percent unfavorable ratings, compared to 38 percent favorable/32 percent unfavorable for Taddeo. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was taking 37 percent in the presidential race against Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the district, according to the poll.

The recent survey showed little movement from the June Bendixen poll where Ros-Lehtinen had a 58 percent to 31 percent advantage. Taddeo could end up mounting a stronger-than-expected challenge, but the time for viewing Ros-Lehtinen as a real target in 2008 appears to be coming to an end.

This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 29, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Florida 13: Jennings’ Poll Neglects Reality

By Nathan L. Gonzales

A new poll released by Florida Democrat Christine Jennings is a great example of why it’s important to not accept polling numbers and memos at face value.

Two years ago, Jennings lost the 13th district open-seat race by the slimmest of margins, 50.1 percent to 49.9 percent, to Republican Vern Buchanan. Jennings contested the results for months, claiming that voting machines in Sarasota County malfunctioned, resulting in a large number of undervotes and costing her the election.

The courts and, ultimately, the House, rejected those claims.

On Friday, the Jennings campaign released a poll showing her down by just 4 points in her 2008 rematch with Buchanan. According to the Sept. 22-23 Feldman Group poll, the GOP Congressman held a narrow 44 percent to 40 percent advantage in the head-to-head matchup, with 16 percent undecided.

The problem is that there are four candidates on the November ballot, not two, including 2002 and 2004 13th district Democratic nominee Jan Schneider, who is running as an Independent. The one-page polling memo makes no mention of Schneider or any third-party candidates, but asserts, “This contest has become too close to call with atmospherics that favor Jennings.”

Buchanan is vulnerable, but this polling memo and two-way ballot ignore the reality of the electoral situation and is a misleading attempt by the campaign to generate buzz around the race.

Schneider is not a fringe candidate. In 2002, she ran unsuccessfully against Katherine Harris (R), losing 55 percent to 45 percent, despite being heavily outspent.

Two years later, Schneider defeated Jennings, 47 percent to 38 percent, in the multicandidate Democratic primary and lost to Harris again, 55 percent to 45 percent, in the general election. In that race, Schneider was named one of the “Kos Dozen,” a list of candidates promoted by DailyKos.com, a liberal Web site.

Last cycle, Jennings defeated Schneider 62 percent to 38 percent for the Democratic nomination but lost the general election to Buchanan. Schneider was angry at the Democratic Party for backing Jennings in 2004 (and since), even though she came so close to upsetting Harris in 2002 without any party help. That’s largely why Schneider continues to run in the district.

One Democratic operative tried to make the case that Schneider’s candidacy would draw as many votes from Jennings as Independent Don Baldauf, who is a registered Republican according to his Web site, will draw from Buchanan.

But that assertion is not credible. While neither Independent has raised much money — through June 30, Baldauf, who is a licensed alarm contractor, raised $8,730 for the cycle, with $5 on hand, while Schneider had raised just $16,365 and had $13,110 in the bank — Schneider clearly has much higher name identification than Baldauf. And Schneider has a core of supporters who have voted for her repeatedly. Nobody currently knows anything about Baldauf.

In addition, Schneider told the Sarasota Herald Tribune on Sunday that she would spend $100,000 of her own money on the race before Election Day. During her past three races, Schneider’s campaigns spent a combined $1.2 million.

When asked about Schneider’s performance in the Feldman poll, Jennings Communications Director Melissa Smith responded, “We are releasing the information in the memo. We believe the voters of the 13th district want to replace Vern Buchanan, and that they will vote for Christine Jennings.” The omitted information screamed louder than the numbers themselves.

An Aug. 23-24 Public Opinion Strategies poll for the National Republican Congressional Committee showed Buchanan leading Jennings 48 percent to 30 percent, with Schneider drawing 6 percent of the vote.

Even though Jennings came close last cycle, she will need every Democratic vote possible in a district President Bush carried by 13 points in 2004.

A Sept. 23-25 Research 2000 poll for DailyKos.com gave Buchanan a 43 percent to 31 percentage advantage. “Other” received 6 percent, although Schneider’s name was not mentioned as a specific option. Twenty percent were undecided.

According to the R2K poll, neither candidate is particularly well-liked. Buchanan showed 37 percent favorable/42 percent unfavorable compared with 32 percent favorable/38 percent unfavorable for Jennings. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) led Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) 51 percent to 38 percent in the district.

Jennings also faces a cash disadvantage, with $391,000 on hand through Aug. 6 compared with over $1.2 million for Buchanan, who is personally wealthy and spent $5.5 million of his own money to win the seat in 2006.

Democrats are harping on Buchanan for his business practices — he and his auto dealership have been the subject of several unflattering articles in recent weeks. The Congressman certainly is in a vulnerable position, but the Jennings’ polling memo actually undercuts the challenger’s argument.

In refusing to release a true ballot test reflective of the November ballot, Jennings leads observers to the obvious conclusion that she is hiding something — and to the view that Schneider’s candidacy is fatal to Jennings’ electoral chances.


This story first appeared on RollCall.com on September 29, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.