Obama State Directors on Front Lines of 2010

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The men and women who served as state directors for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign were on the front lines of one of the best-run political operations in recent history.

After Obama’s victory, more than a dozen of them took jobs in the administration. But another group couldn’t stay away from the campaign trail, and they are now at the center of the party’s efforts to retain its Congressional majorities.

“It is important that they stay engaged,” Organizing for America Deputy National Director Jeremy Bird said about the state directors.

“Folks were amazing, some of the best people I’ve ever worked with,” added Bird, who was the Maryland state director for the Obama campaign during the Democratic primary.

A comprehensive look at where the 50 general election state directors are today shows that former Obama operatives have key positions in Democratic efforts to hold control of the Senate in the November midterms. Click here for the chart of all 50 state directors.

In Connecticut, former Obama New Hampshire state director Mindy Myers was recently hired to manage state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s (D) campaign for retiring Sen. Chris Dodd’s (D) seat. Obama’s Connecticut state director, Justin Kronholm, is also working with the Blumenthal campaign as director of political operations.

In California, former Obama state director Mike Dorsey is deputy campaign manager for Sen. Barbara Boxer’s (D) re-election campaign. In 2008, Dorsey landed in Montana for the general election, where Obama lost by only 3 points.

In Washington state, Carol Albert managed Sen. Patty Murray’s (D) re-election in 2004, was Obama’s state director in 2008 and is at the helm of Murray’s campaign once again.

And in Colorado, Craig Hughes was a senior adviser to the Obama campaign in the Centennial State and is now managing appointed Sen. Michael Bennet’s (D) tough election bid this year.

Republicans will likely need to win three of those four states to get to a 51-seat majority in the next Congress.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, complete with more Obama campaign veterans, will be there to back up the campaigns in those states, if needed. DSCC field director Rob Hill was Obama’s Oregon state director before moving to Nevada as a senior adviser. (He’s also married to Jarel LaPan, who moved into the Oregon role for the Obama campaign and now works for the administration.) Jackie Bray worked in Ohio during the 2008 general election and is now at the DSCC as well.

After being deeply involved in the Obama campaign and experiencing the organization and enthusiasm firsthand, former state directors are trying to apply 2008’s successful tactics to their 2010 campaigns.

“It’s a reminder of the importance of building a true grass-roots operation,” explained Aaron Pickrell, Obama’s Ohio state director who is managing Gov. Ted Strickland’s (D) re-election bid this year.

Multiple former state directors would speak only on the condition of anonymity for fear of disrupting the rhythm and message of their tough races, but they all agreed that the Obama campaign did a fantastic job fusing the old and the new when it comes to voter contact.

“It’s important to utilize the Internet and new media, not just for communications, but as a field tool and voter contact tool,” said Pickrell, who worked with Bird and Bray in the Buckeye State. But “the most effective campaign is still knocking on doors and neighbor-to-neighbor contact.”

Multiple former state directors also agreed on the necessity of replicating the “buy-in” of the Obama campaign. “If people feel like they have ownership in the campaign, they are more likely to be involved,” Pickrell explained. Democratic campaigns nationwide are hoping to take advantage of the infrastructure from the 2008 campaign and tap in to the larger pool of potential voters and volunteers.

As the state director in Ohio, Pickrell was part of a somewhat exclusive club. Ohio was one of the 18 states targeted by the Obama campaign, and those state directors had a different set of marching orders than the rest. The other targeted states were Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

Former Obama campaign operatives are also in key roles on the House side.

New Mexico state director Adrian Saenz is now chief of staff for Rep. Harry Teague, one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the country. Moving north, former Florida Campaign for Change field director Angela Botticella is running Rep. Betsy Markey’s (D) campaign in Colorado’s 4th district, also one of the most competitive races this cycle.

While some former state directors, such as Saenz and Pickrell, are using the local expertise to help individual Democrats in 2010, others are using their influence at a broader level.

Former state directors Steve Schale (Florida), Craig Schirmer (Pennsylvania) and others are involved in 2010 races as consultants instead of on official campaign staffs. Former Missouri state director Buffy Wicks (who was one of four regional state directors early in the campaign) moved from the White House Office of Public Engagement to AKPD Message and Media, senior White House adviser David Axelrod’s consulting firm.

Former Virginia state director Mitch Stewart is the head of OFA, which is essentially the Obama campaign embedded within the Democratic National Committee.

The DNC just announced that it plans to invest $50 million into races this year. A chunk of that money includes staffing, field support, data and targeting, and volunteer programs provided by OFA.

While the DNC is focused on 2010, the OFA’s purpose is to keep the president’s supporters engaged to help this year and looking ahead to his re-election.

“Whether it’s 2012 or 20 years from now, the investment we’re putting in now is helpful for the long term,” Bird said.

Tricia Miller, Daniel Newhauser, Jeremy B. White, Kristin Coyner and Zack Hale contributed to this report. This story first appeared in Roll Call on April 27, 2010 and on CQPolitics.com on April 28, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Is the GOP Headed to a Revival in the Land of Enchantment?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Talk about being down and out. After last year’s elections, the New Mexico GOP looked about as energetic as a three-week-old corpse.

Democrats controlled both of the state’s Senate seats, all three of its House seats and six of the state’s seven statewide offices. The Republicans’ only beachhead was the office of the state commissioner of public lands. The Legislature was equally overwhelmingly Democratic.

And in the presidential contest, the state that had two squeakers in 2000 (Al Gore by 366 votes) and 2004 (George W. Bush by 5,988 votes) turned into a 15-point blowout for Democrat Barack Obama.

But Republicans seem almost certain to win back at least one of the state’s Congressional districts, the 2nd district, and now appear to have a least a fighting chance to take back the 1st district.

Freshman Rep. Harry Teague seemed just the kind of Democrat who could hold the 2nd district, which is a huge land area that encompasses the southern half of the state. A moderate who defeated a supposedly credible GOP nominee by a dozen points in 2008, Teague understood his district and seemed to embody its conservatism.

But Republican strategists now burst into broad smiles at the mention of the New Mexico Democrat, believing that they have the right candidate — former Rep. Steve Pearce — and the right issue — cap-and-trade — to oust Teague in his oil- and gas-producing district.

Pearce ended March with $709,000 in the bank, not much less than Teague’s $927,000.

Democrats don’t put up much resistance when Teague’s name appears on “most vulnerable” lists, a clear indication that party strategists understand he has a very difficult path to re-election.

But while Republican strategists are confident of defeating Teague, they are guardedly optimistic of ousting freshman Rep. Martin Heinrich in the state’s Albuquerque-based 1st district.

A year ago, I wouldn’t have given you a nickel for GOP chances against Heinrich, the 30-something former Albuquerque city councilman who made women’s heads turn whenever he happened to be at Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee headquarters last cycle.

Two years ago, GOP operatives talked about the potential of the party’s Congressional nominee, Sheriff Darren White, holding retiring Rep. Heather Wilson’s open seat. But Heinrich buried White by more than 11 points in a district where a 2- or 3-point victory has been the rule.

Heinrich still has to be regarded as the favorite in his bid for re-election, but the change in the national mood and an unusually appealing GOP challenger make this definitely a race to watch.

Jon Barela is a graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and Georgetown Law. He worked on Capitol Hill for the late Rep. Joe Skeen (R-N.M.), including three years on the staff of the House Appropriations Committee, and later served as New Mexico assistant attorney general and director of the Civil Division.

Barela has also been in private practice, worked for Intel and started a small business. From 1999 to 2001, he served as chairman of the board of New Mexico First, a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank that addresses state issues, and in 2007-08 he served as vice chairman of the state Republican Party. He is also a former president of the Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce.

Through the first quarter of 2010, Barela had raised over $520,000, ending March with $392,000 in the bank. Given that White spent almost $1.8 million last cycle to Heinrich’s almost $2.5 million, Barela has work to do. Heinrich’s first-quarter Federal Election Commission report showed him with just over $1 million in the bank.

But Barela’s appeal is real. In a recent interview in the nation’s capital, he came across as thoughtful, mature and likeably low-key. His issue positions and party label aside, he’s the kind of candidate almost any voter would think would be an asset on Capitol Hill.

State and national Republicans have already coalesced around the attorney and businessman. He has considerable appeal to district Hispanics, in part because of his heritage, but also because, unlike most Republicans, he doesn’t favor the dismantling of affirmative action programs and backs a comprehensive solution of the nation’s illegal immigrant problem.

But Barela has plenty of ammunition to use against Heinrich, including the freshman’s votes for the stimulus, cap-and-trade and health care reform.

Two years ago, when I interviewed Heinrich during one of his trips to Washington, D.C., I knew that he was the real deal. I got the same feeling after meeting Barela. These are two very good candidates in what has proved to be a very competitive Congressional district.

About a week ago, the Rothenberg Political Report added this district to our list of almost five dozen House seats in play. We rated it as “Democrat favored.” But after meeting Barela and looking more closely at the race, I’ll have to reclassify it as “Lean Democrat” (a more competitive category), and as long as Barela raises enough money to be competitive and the current national mood is unchanged, I’d expect the race in New Mexico’s 1st district to go down to the wire.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on April 19, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Mexico 1 Moved to Lean Democratic

Cong. Martin Heinrich (D) is still the favorite in the race, but as long as Republican Jon Barela raises enough money to be competitive and the current national mood is unchanged, we expect the race in New Mexico’s 1st district to go down to the wire. We're moving the race from Democrat Favored to Lean Democratic. You can learn more about the landscape in the Land of Enchantment by reading Stu's recent Roll Call column.

Our bottom line in the House remains the same. Substantial Republican gains are inevitable, with net Democratic losses now looking to be at least two dozen. At this point, GOP gains of 25-30 seats seem likely, though considerably larger gains in excess of 40 seats certainly seem possible.

Here are our latest House ratings.
#- Moved benefiting Democrats
* - Moved benefiting Republicans
Special Elections in italics

Pure Toss-Up (1 R, 13 D)

• AR 1 (Open; Berry, D)
• FL 24 (Kosmas, D)
  
• IL 10 (Open; Kirk, R)
• IL 14 (Foster, D)
  
• MI 1 (Open; Stupak, D)
  
• MI 7 (Schauer, D)
• NH 1 (Shea-Porter, D)
• NH 2 (Open; Hodes, D)
• NY 24 (Arcuri, D)
• NV 3 (Titus, D)
  
• PA 7 (Open; Sestak, D)
• PA 12 (Open; Murtha, D)
  
• TN 8 (Open; Tanner, D)
• WA 3 (Open; Baird, D)

Toss-Up/Tilt Republican (0 R, 9 D)

• AL 2 (Bright, D)
• AR 2 (Open; Snyder, D)
  
• FL 8 (Grayson, D)
• ID 1 (Minnick, D)
• IN 8 (Open; Ellsworth, D)
  
• KS 3 (Open; Moore, D)
• MS 1 (Childers, D)
• VA 2 (Nye, D)
  
• VA 5 (Perriello, D)

Lean Republican (3 R, 7 D)

• CA 3 (Lungren, R)
• CO 4 (Markey, D)
  
• FL 25 (Open; M. Diaz-Balart, R)
  
• LA 3 (Open; Melancon, D)
• MD 1 (Kratovil, D)
• NM 2 (Teague, D)
• NY 29 (Open; Massa, D)
  
• OH 1 (Driehaus, D)
• OH 15 (Kilroy, D)
  
• WA 8 (Reichert, R)
  

Republican Favored (5 R, 1 D)

• CA 45 (Bono Mack, R)
• NE 2 (Terry, R)
• OH 12 (Tiberi, R)
• PA 6 (Gerlach, R)
  
• PA 15 (Dent, R)
• TN 6 (Open; Gordon, D)
  

Toss-Up/Tilt Democratic (0 R, 4 D)

• HI 1 (Open; Abercrombie, D)
• ND A-L (Pomeroy, D)
• SC 5 (Spratt, D)
• WV 1 (Mollohan, D)
  

Lean Democratic (1 R, 16 D)

• AZ 5 (Mitchell, D)
  
• AZ 8 (Giffords, D)
• DE -AL (Open; Castle, R)
  
• IN 9 (Hill, D)
• IA 3 (Boswell, D)
  
• MA 10 (Open; Delahunt, D)
  
• MO 4 (Skelton, D)
• NJ 3 (Adler, D)
  
• NM 1 (Heinrich, D)*
• NY 1 (Bishop, D)
• NY 19 (Hall, D)
• OH 16 (Boccieri, D)
• OH 18 (Space, D)
• PA 4 (Altmire, D)
• PA 11 (Kanjorski, D)
• VA 9 (Boucher, D)
• WI 7 (Obey, D)
  

Democrat Favored (1 R, 18 D)

• CA 11 (McNerney, D)
  
• CO 3 (Salazar, D)
• CT 5 (Murphy, D)
  
• FL 22 (Klein, D)
• IL 11 (Halvorson, D)
• IN 2 (Donnelly, D)
  
• LA 2 (Cao, R)
• NY 13 (McMahon, D)
• NY 20 (Murphy, D)
• NY 23 (Owens, D)
  
• NC 8 (Kissell, D)
• OH 13 (Sutton, D)
• PA 3 (Dahlkemper, D)
• PA 8 (Murphy, D)
• PA 10 (Carney, D)
• PA 17 (Holden, D)
• SD A-L (Herseth Sandlin, D)
• TX 17 (Edwards, D)
• WI 8 (Kagen, D)

Total seats in play: 79
Republican seats: 11
Democratic seats: 68

Rothenberg’s Dangerous Dozen House Seats for 2010

By Stuart Rothenberg

Regular readers of this column know that I’ve been rating the most vulnerable House seats — open and incumbent — for years. It’s that time again, and since there aren’t yet enough competitive open seats to rate by themselves, this list includes the dozen most vulnerable seats in the House.

There are two caveats that go with the list. First, there are strong arguments for including at least half a dozen other districts on the list. So, not being on this list doesn’t mean a contest is not extremely competitive. Second, since the midterm elections are still almost a year off, this list is likely to change significantly before November.

Louisiana’s 2nd: Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao, the only Republican to vote for the House’s health care reform bill, had no business winning this majority-black district. He won only because of the timing of the 2008 elections and the unique problems of then-Rep. William Jefferson (D). This time, Democrats are likely to have an unindicted nominee, which should end Cao’s service in Congress at one term. Two state Representatives have already announced they are running. Expect a turnover.

Delaware’s At-Large: Rep. Mike Castle’s decision to run for Senate was great news for the National Republican Senatorial Committee but bad news for House Republicans. Former Lt. Gov. John Carney (D) was already running when Castle made his announcement, so Democrats have a serious candidate in the race. Since the state leans Democratic, Republicans will need to find a formidable nominee even to contest the seat seriously.

Louisiana’s 3rd: With Rep. Charlie Melancon (D) running for Senate, this open seat gives the GOP an excellent takeover opportunity. The district gave President Barack Obama only 37 percent of the vote in 2008, so the Republican nominee should benefit from normal midterm dynamics. Of course, with a late August primary, the race won’t shake out for months.

Virginia’s 5th: Freshman Rep. Tom Perriello (D) seems more interested in doing what he thinks is right than getting re-elected. That’s the only way to explain his votes supporting House Democrats’ cap-and-trade and health care reform bills. State Sen. Robert Hurt (R) is expected to challenge Perriello, and the Congressman is in deep, deep trouble. Obama’s 48 percent showing last year in this district understates Perriello’s challenge next year.

Maryland’s 1st: Unlike Perriello, Rep. Frank Kratovil (D) has voted as if he is trying to be re-elected. But he barely scraped by Republican Andy Harris in an open-seat contest last time, and the midterm electorate will make his re-election bid more difficult. He has a chance to win another term, but the odds aren’t in his favor. Obama drew only 40 percent of the vote in the 1st in 2008.

Kansas’ 3rd: When Rep. Dennis Moore announced his retirement last week, Democratic prospects tanked. While Obama won this district with 51 percent, it generally leans Republican, and the open seat during a midterm election looks like a juicy GOP target.

Ohio’s 1st: Rep. Steve Driehaus (D) knocked off then-Rep. Steve Chabot (R) last year, and now Chabot is trying to return the favor. Expected lower turnout among Democratic core groups, especially younger voters and blacks, places this district at great risk even though Obama won it with 55 percent.

Ohio’s 15th: Freshman Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D) has many of the same problems — and the same challenges — that confront Driehaus in the state’s 1st district. Unlike Driehaus, Kilroy faces a rematch against an opponent who has never won district-wide. But former state Sen. Steve Stivers (R) should be a formidable foe.

Florida’s 8th: Rep. Alan Grayson (D), another freshman, has gone out of his way to be partisan and inflammatory. That’s a good way to raise money and attract the fawning admiration of liberal activists, but it isn’t the best way to get re-elected in this Republican-leaning district that went for Obama with 52 percent. The GOP doesn’t yet have a “name” challenger, and the party may never get one. But given Grayson’s recent behavior, they may not need one to take back this district after a single term.

New Mexico’s 2nd: Rep. Harry Teague faces former Rep. Steve Pearce (R), who gave up his seat in 2008 to run for Senate. Teague has tried to vote his district, but he isn’t being helped by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Obama, who drew 49 percent of the district’s vote in 2008. Definitely a midterm problem for Democrats.

New Hampshire’s 2nd: The Granite State has swung strongly Democratic of late — probably too strongly considering the state’s fundamentals. This open seat, and the likely candidacy of former Rep. Charles Bass (R), should give Republicans at least an even money chance of winning back the district during the midterm elections. But attorney Ann McLane Kuster, the early favorite for the Democratic nomination and the daughter of a former liberal Republican state legislator, should be a formidable standard-bearer for her party.

New York’s 23rd: Special election winner Rep. Bill Owens won his seat with less than 50 percent of the vote, and if Republicans find a nominee who can appeal to both conservatives and moderates, Owens will find himself in trouble. His first vote was for the House health care reform bill.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on November 30, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Print Edition: Florida Senate & New Mexico 2

The August 10, 2009 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers.

The print edition of the Report comes out every two weeks. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

Here is a brief preview of introduction to this edition:

Florida Senate: A Political Cristening?
By Nathan L. Gonzales

For once, a Republican resignation is neither a surprise nor a source of frustration for the GOP.

Last week, Sen. Mel Martinez (R) announced his intention to resign his Senate seat, but the news isn’t earth shattering since he previously announced he would not run for reelection in 2010 and Republicans already lined up their best possible candidate to replace him: Gov. Charlie Crist (R).

The political landscape in the Sunshine State remains virtually the same as it was before Martinez’s recent announcement. Crist will likely choose a placeholder to fill the remainder of Martinez’s term so that the governor can continue his Senate campaign without the baggage of a self-appointment. And Crist still faces a primary challenger from conservative former state House speaker Marco Rubio.

Meanwhile, Cong. Kendrick Meek (D) is the likely Democratic nominee after state Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink (D) disappointed national Democrats by running for governor instead of the Senate.

Crist has maintained good job approval numbers even with rising unemployment numbers and overall economic uncertainty. And he is favored to win both the primary and general elections. There’s still over a year to go, but thus far, this is one Senate seat Republicans feel better about than they did six months ago. Subscribers get the whole story in the print edition.


New Mexico 2: Don’t Call it a Comeback

Cong. Steve Pearce wasn’t defeated for reelection like many of his Republican colleagues, but he’s trying to reclaim his 2nd District seat in New Mexico next year.

When Pearce ran for the U.S. Senate last cycle, he left behind a competitive district he had held since 2002. Former Lea County Board Chairman Harry Teague (D) got into the open seat race, won a competitive Democratic primary, and took over the seat for the Democrats.

Since Pearce’s statewide run was unsuccessful, he’s back running for Congress. But this race won’t be a rematch; it is shaping up to be one of the most competitive races in the country, as both men vie for votes against their toughest opponent yet. Subscribers get the rest of the story in the print edition.

Bad News Comes Early for Senate Republicans

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The 2010 election cycle is just a couple months old, and Senate Republicans have almost equaled their number of retirements from last cycle, when their party lost eight seats. But this time around, Senators with one foot out the door appear to be making their decisions earlier, instead of keeping party strategists guessing.

Just in the last two weeks, Ohio Sen. George Voinovich (R) and Missouri Sen. Kit Bond (R) announced their decisions not seek re-election. They join Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback (R) and Florida Sen. Mel Martinez (R), who announced last year their plans to exit the chamber.

“These Senators did the right thing for the party by making their decisions early, and in each state, Republicans now have a solid bench of potential candidates who are already hard at work,” said Brian Walsh, communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Last cycle, then-Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) officially announced he wouldn’t seek re-election in January 2007, more than 20 months before Election Day. But the next four Republican announcements didn’t come until much later.

Former Sens. John Warner (R-Va.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) didn’t announce their retirements until September 2007. And former New Mexico Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) waited even a month later. Former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) never officially said he wasn’t seeking re-election, but now-Sen. Jim Risch (R) launched his campaign to succeed Craig in October 2007.

Republicans lost three of the five open seats last November, only retaining control of the seats in the two most Republican states (Idaho and Nebraska).

“At a time when statewide candidates need to raise millions of dollars to run a competitive campaign, there is no getting around the fact that an extra six months to raise money, develop an organization and travel around the state provides a tremendous advantage,” Walsh said.

There is no guarantee that Republicans would have won Virginia or New Mexico last cycle if Warner and Domenici had announced earlier. An early Allard decision didn’t help the GOP effort in Colorado.

Republicans would have preferred their incumbents run for re-election. But the early retirement decisions are better than waiting in limbo, and while an early start can’t change the political environment, it does give candidates more time for critical fundraising.


This story first appeared on RollCall.com on January 16, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Some Bellwether States Losing Their Status

By Nathan L. Gonzales

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Print Edition: New Mexico Senate & Minnesota 3

The June 13, 2008 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

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


New Mexico Senate: Simply Enchanting
By Nathan L. Gonzales

New Mexico will be one of the top presidential battlegrounds this fall, and Republicans are keeping their fingers crossed that the state hosts a hot Senate race as well.

Democrats cleared the field for Cong. Tom Udall, and he starts the general election with a significant lead over Republican Cong. Steve Pearce. Pearce just secured the GOP nomination on June 3 with a narrow victory over House colleague Heather Wilson.

GOP Sen. Pete Domenici’s retirement created the difficult open seat hold for the Republicans. And now, Pearce has to regroup, replenish his depleted campaign funds, and figure out a way to run against the national environment that still favors the Democrats. For the rest of the story, you must subscribe to the print edition.

Minnesota 3: Toss-Up

If you’re looking for a truly toss-up race in a swing district, look no further than Minnesota’s 3rd District.

The suburban Minneapolis district is precisely the type of territory and district that Democrats have experienced recent electoral success. And moderate Cong. Jim Ramstad’s (R) retirement left this seat prime for the picking.

But even in this environment, the race is not a shoo-in for the Democrats. Their nominee, Iraq War veteran Ashwin Madia is articulate and energetic, but also young and unknown.

The Republicans have Erik Paulsen, a former state House majority leader who votes like a conservative but doesn’t breathe fire or focus on social issues. So voters will have to replace a centrist like Ramstad with a candidate on either side of his ideology.

The 3rd District race may sit in the shadow of the U.S. Senate race between Sen. Norm Coleman (R) and comedian Al Franken (DFL) for most of the fall, but may actually be a better bellwether as to how bad Election Night really is for the Republicans. For the rest of the story, you must subscribe to the print edition.

New Mexico Senate: Udall Launches Third TV Ad

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The Republicans just chose their Senate nominee in New Mexico, but Rep. Tom Udall (D) is on the air with his third television ad.

The Democratic nominee to replace retiring Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), Udall didn’t face primary opposition on June 3, but during the last three weeks of the primary campaign, he still ran a 60-second bio ad as well as a 30-second ad on improving veterans’ benefits.

Udall’s third ad focuses on the economy and alternative energy, and begins airing Wednesday statewide. “The George Bush economy is crushing America,” the ad begins, but it doesn’t mention his general election opponent. The Albuquerque media market covers more than 85 percent of New Mexico, but Udall has also been advertising in the Amarillo, Texas, and El Paso, Texas, markets, which reach some areas in his state.

Rep. Steve Pearce (R) aired plenty of ads in the bitter primary against his House colleague Heather Wilson (R), but he spent virtually all of his campaign money (almost $2 million) securing the nomination.

Udall starts the general election with a significant lead in the polls and the overall advantage in the race.



This item first appeared on RollCall.com on June 11, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Mexico 2: Turnout Down in Competitive District

By Nathan L. Gonzales

There has been plenty of talk about Democratic excitement and turnout exceeding Republican turnout this year and how that bodes well for Democratic prospects in November. But in New Mexico’s open 2nd Congressional district on Tuesday, something odd happened: Republican turnout remained largely unchanged, while Democratic turnout slid.

In 2002, both parties had competitive primaries when the seat became open. More than 43,000 people voted in the Democratic primary (won by John Arthur Smith) compared with 35,182 on the Republican side. Despite the primary difference, now-Rep. Steve Pearce (R) won the general election easily, 56 percent to 44 percent.

On Tuesday, Democratic primary turnout in the district was down by about 5,000 voters from six years ago, while Republican turnout was up by a few hundred. There was a competitive GOP race for the Senate on Tuesday, featuring the 2nd district’s outgoing Congressman, Pearce. But Democratic turnout statewide was actually up from the Feb. 5 presidential primary, while it dropped in the 2nd district. Almost 145,000 people voted statewide in the presidential race on the Democratic side compared to more than 151,000 Democratic primary voters in Tuesday’s congressional races.

Restaurateur Ed Tinsley finished second to Pearce in the 2002 primary but is this year’s GOP nominee. He starts the general election as the favorite over former Lea County Commissioner Harry Teague (D). Republicans certainly can’t take the seat for granted, but Democrats should have plenty of other better opportunities this fall.

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

Rothenberg’s Dangerous Dozen Open House Seats

By Stuart Rothenberg

A significant number of retirements since my last Dangerous Dozen (Oct. 25, 2007) has shuffled the list and shows why the fight for the House is a one-sided battle, with Democrats having most of the targets.

Here are the dozen most vulnerable open House seats, starting with the most likely seats to flip. The first three districts are all likely to go Democratic and are in a class of their own.

Illinois’ 11th: State Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson (D) would be a formidable nominee in any case, but Republican prospects weren’t helped when their primary winner, New Lenox Mayor Tim Baldermann, dropped out of the race. Local GOP leaders are expected to select businessman Martin Ozinga III to replace Baldermann as the party’s nominee. The district is competitive (President Bush carried it by 7 points in 2004).

New York’s 25th: Republican Rep. Jim Walsh (R) barely beat challenger Dan Maffei (D) last time, and Walsh’s decision to retire gives Maffei a clear shot this time in the marginal upstate district. The race for the Republican nomination was scrambled when Peter Cappuccilli Jr., the former director of the New York State Fair, dropped his bid after having a mild stroke. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) won the district by 2 points in 2004.

Virginia’s 11th: Rep. Tom Davis’ (R) retirement and the general drift of Washington, D.C.’s Virginia suburbs toward the Democrats create a significant problem for the GOP. Gerry Connolly, who chairs the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, begins with an edge for the Democratic nomination over former Rep. Leslie Byrne. The most-mentioned Republican right now is businessman Keith Fimian, who has impressed in early fundraising and has invested some of his own money in the race.

Ohio’s 16th: Republican Rep. Ralph Regula’s retirement wasn’t a total surprise in a district that went for Bush by 8 points (54 percent to 46 percent) in 2004. State Sen. John Boccieri should be a strong Democratic nominee, while the Republican nominee, state Sen. Kirk Schuring, may have problems holding his party’s base.

Arizona’s 1st: GOP strategists breathed a sigh of relief when embattled Rep. Rick Renzi (R) announced he wouldn’t seek re-election, but this district is still in play. Former state Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick is the favorite in the Democratic race, though she faces a fight for her party’s nomination from former TV personality Mary Kim Titla and attorney Howard Shanker. The Republican race pits conservative activist Sydney Hay against state Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes, though former state Senate President Ken Bennett is reconsidering his earlier decision not to run. Bush won the district by 8 points in 2004.

Alabama’s 5th: Rep. Bud Cramer’s retirement creates a rare Democratic open-seat problem this cycle. His North Alabama district is only 17 percent black, and Bush carried it with 60 percent four years ago. Businessman Wayne Parker, who lost a squeaker to Cramer in 1994 (and by a larger margin in 1996) is running for the GOP nomination, while state Sen. Parker Griffith has entered the Democratic race.

New Jersey’s 3rd: Rep. Jim Saxton’s (R) retirement gives Democrats another target in the Northeast. State Sen. John Adler (D) also gives them a formidable nominee. Local Republicans are split, with Lockheed Vice President Chris Myers having the support of Saxton and the important Burlington County GOP. Myers faces Ocean County Freeholder Jack Kelly for the GOP nomination. The district is competitive.

Minnesota’s 3rd: Rep. Jim Ramstad’s (R) retirement adds to Republican woes given the competitiveness of the suburban district. The district went for Bush by 3 points in 2004. State Sen. Terri Bonoff is having a surprisingly hard time trying to fend off Ashwin Madia, an attorney and Iraq War veteran, for the Democratic nomination, while state Rep. Erik Paulsen is expected to be the GOP nominee.

New Mexico’s 1st: Republican Rep. Heather Wilson’s run for the Senate opens up a seat that she has held, though with significant difficulty, since a June 1998 special election. Last year, she was re-elected by 861 votes. Three Democrats are in the race: former Albuquerque Councilor Martin Heinrich, former state Health Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham and former Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron. But Republicans are upbeat about their chances, with Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White the favorite of party insiders. Kerry carried the district with 51 percent in 2004.

Ohio’s 15th: Republican Rep. Deborah Pryce barely held on last time, defeating Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy by 1,000 votes in a come-from-behind win. Kilroy is back, but Pryce has decided to call it quits. State Sen. Steve Stivers (R) initially passed on the race but has changed his mind. He should be a formidable candidate in November. While Bush barely squeezed by Kerry four years ago, Franklin County (Columbus) has been moving toward the Democrats.

Oregon’s 5th: Democratic Rep. Darlene Hooley’s retirement gives Republicans a competitive Democratic seat to shoot at. Each party has a primary. For the Democrats, it’s state Sen. Kurt Schrader and former gubernatorial aide Steve Marks, and for the GOP it is former party Chairman Kevin Mannix and ’06 nominee Mike Erickson. Bush carried the district narrowly in 2004.

New Jersey’s 7th: State Assemblywoman Linda Stender (D) is taking her second shot at the seat after losing to Rep. Mike Ferguson (R) by less than 2 points in 2006. With Ferguson retiring, she'll face either state Sen. Leonard Lance (R) or Kate Whitman (R), daughter of the former governor, in the general election. Bush carried the district with 53 percent in 2004, leaving another GOP headache.

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

A Crop of House Candidates Worth Taking a Look At

By Stuart Rothenberg

There is relatively little attention being paid to this year’s fight for the House of Representatives, since Republicans have no chance retaking the chamber in November.

Even more important, most reporters and observers are hypnotized by the fascinating presidential race, and those who care about Congress seem more interested in whether Democrats can gain nine Senate seats and true control of the chamber.

But while they aren’t the focus of the nation’s attention, hundreds of men and women are once again running for Congress, and there are plenty of good ones in the crowd. I haven’t met all of the people receiving positive buzz from national Democratic and Republican strategists, but I have met some. Here’s a quick rundown of the few candidates who have impressed me.

State Rep. Steve Driehaus is challenging Republican Rep. Steve Chabot in Ohio’s 1st district, which includes Cincinnati’s West Side, as well as suburban areas north and west of the city.

The 41-year-old hopeful calls himself a “raging moderate.” He is pro-life (and has been endorsed by right-to-life groups in the past) but supports embryonic stem-cell research. He voted for Ohio’s Defense of Marriage Act but opposes a federal Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, saying it’s unnecessary. And he opposes “artificial timelines” on withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, but he believes those forces should be withdrawn.

Driehaus is a political animal. Since he comes from the white, Catholic, middle-class part of the district and should benefit from the district’s considerable African-American population, the challenger should give Chabot a run for his money. But don’t give this seat to the Democrats just yet. Chabot is a survivor.

Ethan Berkowitz, 45, is the former Alaska House Minority Leader. He was the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor in 2006 when gubernatorial nominee Tony Knowles (D) went down to defeat, and now he is running for his state’s lone House seat.

A graduate of Harvard with an M.A. from Cambridge, Berkowitz is thoughtful and likable. He is significantly more liberal (he says “progressive”) than most Alaskans on social issues. He is pro-choice and opposed a state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage that passed by a 2-1 margin.

But Berkowitz is worth watching because the state GOP has plenty of headaches, and Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young are both under investigation. Young now faces a serious primary challenge from Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell (R). The chaos could help Berkowitz, who must be hoping that a bloodied Young survives to the general election.

I’m told that the ladies think that New Mexico’s 1st district Democratic hopeful Martin Heinrich is good-looking. All I know is that he seems pretty down to earth, is putting together a good campaign and has the kind of background that should be appealing to New Mexico voters.

A former Albuquerque city councilor and chairman of the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority, he has extensive background in environmental issues, as well as some experience in campaigns. He describes himself as “a big Second Amendment guy” and says he supports capital punishment.

Heinrich, 36, faces both a primary and a competitive general election, likely against Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White (R), but he is worth watching.

If you like your candidates young, you’ll find Illinois state Rep. Aaron Schock (R), 26, more than interesting. He was elected to the Peoria school board in 2001, even before he graduated from Bradley University.

In 2004, Schock knocked off an incumbent Democratic state legislator in a Democratic district, and he turned back a major challenge two years later. A conservative who says he focuses on constituent services, Schock is the GOP nominee for retiring Rep. Ray LaHood’s (R) open seat.

The clean-cut hopeful looks like the president of a College Republicans chapter (and acts far older than his years), and he sounded well-versed on most matters. If you can be a seasoned political pro at 26, Schock is. It’s a bit scary, actually.

The fact that Brett Guthrie (R) made it on the ballot this year is evidence enough of his political savvy.

The three-term Kentucky state Senator had an inkling that Rep. Ron Lewis (R) might retire, so he waited and watched, submitting his filing papers at the deadline, moments after Lewis withdrew his and the Congressman’s aide filed to run for the open seat.

Guthrie, 43, is likely to face state Sen. David Boswell (D). The Republican, who graduated from West Point and holds an M.A. from Yale, is personal and politically astute, and he’ll be a formidable candidate in the open seat.

Finally, Anne Northup (R), the five-term Kentucky Congresswoman who was swept from office in the 2006 anti-Republican wave, is seeking her old House seat.

Northup, who lost an ill-advised gubernatorial primary last year, has a history of running excellent campaigns, but she was always at risk because of the marginal nature of her Louisville-area district. She wasn’t going to run this time until the likely GOP nominee was called to active military duty.

The former Congresswoman is smart, politically astute and knowledgeable about her district. She also brought home the bacon while in Congress. It won’t be easy for her to dislodge freshman Rep. John Yarmuth (D), and fundraising is a huge question mark for her. But Northup has been through a great deal, including the death in July 2006 of one of her adopted children, and there is no one with greater inner strength.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on March 31, 2008. Copyright 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

New Print Edition: New Mexico 1 & Ohio 18

The new May 21, 2007 print edition of the Rothenberg Political Report is on its way to subscribers. The print edition comes out every two weeks and the content is not available online. Subscribers get in-depth analysis of the most competitive races in the country, as well as quarterly House and Senate ratings, and coverage of the gubernatorial races nationwide. To subscribe, simply click on the Google checkout button on the website or send a check.

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

New Mexico 1: Survivor
By Nathan L. Gonzales

Just when Heather Wilson thought she could take a breath, the road to a sixth full term just got tougher.

On one level the Republican congresswoman is a survivor. She won reelection in a Democratic-leaning district in an extremely Democratic year. But her subsequent involvement in the U.S. attorney's controversy this year has renewed Democratic interest in her Albuquerque seat and put her narrow 861 vote margin into serious jeopardy.

Even though some Democrats complain in retrospect about their 2006 nominee, state Attorney General Patricia Madrid, she was once showcased as one of their star recruits and Wilson's toughest challenger, and the Republican still turned her away. Now, Democrats are sorting through a list of potential candidates without a clear frontrunner for the nomination.

Just because Wilson survived the Democratic wave doesn't mean the storm is over. Missouri Cong. Harold Volkmer (D) survived the Republican wave of 1994, only to lose reelection two years later.

For the full five-page story, you must subscribe.

Ohio 18: Looking for a Do-Over

Republicans lost 30 seats last November, and some of them are gone for a very long time. But in that number are a handful of Republican-leaning seats that fell into Democratic hands after a cornucopia of scandals. Ohio's 18th District is one of those seats.

To say that Zack Space had a wind at his back in 2006 would be severely understating the situation. Not only did the Democrat have an unpopular President Bush looming over the election, but also out-going scandal ridden Gov. Bob Taft (R) and Cong. Bob Ney (R) who resigned the seat only days before the election after he pleaded guilty to corruption charges. Even better still, the replacement Republican candidate was easily tied to all of the above.

With Ney and Taft in the rearview mirror, Republicans are optimistic about defeating Cong. Space, who will now enjoy the power of incumbency in a sprawling district. Buckeye State Republicans are still licking their wounds after last year, and initial interest in the race has been surprisingly sparse. But this race is near the top of initial GOP opportunities.

As with many districts in the country, the current fight is whether the 2006 election was an aberration or if President Bush (and Taft in this case) has produced a general swing of the district and the state toward the Democrats.

For the full five-page story, you must subscribe.

Are Democrats Surging Out West? Numbers Say No

By Stuart Rothenberg

More than a few journalists and political pontificators have noted recent Democratic gains in the Mountain West, which includes Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico. Some see those gains in 2004 and 2006 as shattering a reliable Republican region, while others argue recent wins are only the beginning of a Democratic rally that will continue in 2008 and beyond.

After one of the best newspapers on the planet screamed “West Is Going Democrats’ Direction” and “Political Shift in Mountain States” in headlines, I figured I’d look at the numbers myself to see how much of an opportunity Democrats have to turn the Mountain West blue, or at least purple.

After dissecting the historical data over the past 25 years and comparing it to election results from the past few cycles, it’s very clear that not much is going on. I’m certainly not ruling out changes in 2008 or 2010, and I’m not saying that there have been no changes. But so far, the hype about a shift has overwhelmed the reality.

First, a bit of history. Democratic candidates have done pretty well in the Mountain West in the past couple of election cycles, but that’s nothing new. Democrats have had significant successes in the region for many years, so portraying recent results as some sort of breakthrough is flat-out wrong.

Election returns since 1980 show that the Mountain West is really two or even three regions, not one. Utah, Wyoming and Idaho are reliably Republican in most cases, while New Mexico and Nevada are politically competitive. Arizona and Colorado definitely lean Republican in presidential politics but are much more competitive in other respects.

Former President Bill Clinton carried four Mountain States — Colorado, Montana, Nevada and New Mexico — in his 1992 election victory over then-President George H.W. Bush, and he won three states four years later: Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico. It’s true that in the two elections since Clinton, Democratic presidential candidates have carried only a single state, New Mexico (very narrowly, in 2000), but that’s more a statement about the party and its nominees than about the region’s inherent competitiveness.

New Mexico and Nevada definitely are competitive in presidential contests, but only Idaho, Utah and Wyoming are beyond the Democrats’ reach in those elections.

Much of the hype about Democrats in the Mountain West stems from the party’s victories in gubernatorial races. Democrats retained three governorships last year and added a new one (in Colorado). Democratic governors now sit in Montana, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona and Wyoming — five of the region’s eight states.

But that’s nothing new in the region. I went back to 1980 and found that Democrats won five of the past seven gubernatorial elections in Colorado and Wyoming (yes, that’s right, Wyoming), four of the past seven in both New Mexico and Nevada and three of the past seven in Montana and Arizona.

In attempting to drive home the point of a realignment, one journalist noted, “In 2000, all eight mountain states had Republican governors; now five governors are Democrats.” But why use 2000 as the baseline? In 1984, seven of the eight states had Democratic governors. Using 1984 as the baseline, you could even say the region is moving toward the GOP!

Anyway, if gubernatorial results reflected fundamental partisan strength and the potential of carrying the state in 2008, then Wyoming would seem to be a reliably Democratic state in 2008. Obviously, it isn’t.

How about Senate races? Democrats won a Senate race in Montana, as well as holding onto a seat in New Mexico. But again, winning Senate races in the region is nothing new for Democrats.

In three of the eight Mountain West states, Democrats have won a majority of all Senate elections since 1980. That’s right, a majority. They’ve won six of nine in Montana, six of 10 in Nevada and five of nine in New Mexico. In Colorado, they have won a considerable four of the past nine. Even Arizona has elected Democrats to the Senate in two of the past nine elections.

Forget about that history. If you think Democrats’ ability to knock off a politically damaged Republican in the worst Republican environment in 30 years tells you something about a state’s or region’s political trend, you are free to. Of course, you would be terribly wrong.

But what about Congress? Didn’t Democrats make gains in the House in the Mountain West? Sure, but what kind of gains?

Democrats netted three House seats in November, one in Colorado and two in Arizona. The Colorado district was drawn to be politically competitive, but it was also referred to as the “Perlmutter district,” after the Democratic legislator who was expected to run — and win — in 2002. Ed Perlmutter passed then, but he won the open seat last year.

One of the Arizona districts already was competitive, but became hard for the GOP when an anti-immigration bomb-thrower won the party’s primary. In other words, if you focus only on the numbers, you will miss the story.

How about state legislatures in the region? Democrats made small gains in the Idaho, Colorado and Arizona state Houses. No chambers in the region switched control, however, except the Montana House, which went from a 50-50 tie to a one-seat GOP majority. Again, if there was a Democratic surge in 2006, you’ll have to look under the rug to find it.

There were, of course, some Democratic gains in 2006. Much of the hype, I suspect, came from stronger than usual (though unsuccessful) Democratic efforts in House races in Idaho, Colorado, Nevada and Wyoming, as well as a lot of buzz about the Idaho gubernatorial race. But those showings occurred in a landslide year for Democrats, making the results more likely to be an aberration rather than a trend.

The Mountain West is not the South. It’s less reliable than Dixie for Republicans, and it’s less conservative on social/religious issues. Moreover, Democrats have had considerable success in the region over the past three decades, and the party’s nominee could carry a few Mountain West states in the ’08 presidential race, particularly if there is a nationwide trend toward their party. But the evidence strongly demonstrates that there has been no Democratic surge in the region, even if the hyperbole makes for a better news story.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on January 29, 2007. Copyright 2007 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.