Sean Duffy, Welcome to Your New Real World

By Stuart Rothenberg

Wisconsin Republican Congressional hopeful Sean Duffy probably now feels like he’s a victim of a classic bait-and-switch. But in this case, it’s Duffy who is a victim of his own success as a candidate.

After running for months against veteran Democratic Rep. David Obey in Wisconsin’s sprawling 7th district, which includes much of the northwestern quarter of the state, Duffy now finds himself running in November against Julie Lassa, a 39-year-old Democratic state Senator who will force Duffy to alter his message.

I interviewed Duffy at length in mid-March, and I was more impressed with him than I expected to be. Like everyone else, I had heard about his time as a cast member on MTV’s “Real World” in 1997 and his subsequent appearance on the network’s “Road Rules,” and that certainly lowered my expectations.

But instead of finding merely a self-promoting pseudo-celebrity looking for the latest way to get media exposure, I found an outgoing, energetic and engaging county district attorney who had won five elections and was incredibly focused on ousting longtime incumbent Obey in November.

The Republican already had about $300,000 on hand in the middle of March, and he was confident that he could raise $1.2 million for the race. (His March 31 numbers were $506,000 raised and $340,000 on hand.)

Duffy, 38, seemed like the perfect Republican to challenge Obey, 71, this year, with voters angry at the political establishment and Democrats almost certain to face the public’s wrath about unemployment and deficit spending.

Obey, the House Appropriations chairman, could easily be painted as responsible for the nation’s spending spree, its deficit and its debt.

And since he was first elected to the House in an April 1969 special election (or as Duffy has been noting, before the United States put a man on the moon), Obey served for more than 40 years by the time his 2010 re-election rolled around. That remarkable achievement might not look so positive given the public’s dissatisfaction with Congress and desire for change.

During my meeting with him, Duffy presented 2010 as a perfect storm for Obey: an angry electorate, Obey’s role in the stimulus and the deficit, and Duffy as the GOP’s strongest challenger in years.

After my meeting with Duffy, I added the district to my list of competitive races, since I thought the challenger’s energy and enthusiasm, combined with the vulnerability of some senior Democrats, gave Duffy a real shot at upsetting Obey. Duffy still had an uphill trek, but his scenario was entirely reasonable.

Obey’s decision not to seek re-election changes the Congressional race dramatically and forces Duffy to toss almost all of his strategy into the nearest trash can.

Instead of running against an older man, Duffy faces a woman his own age. Instead of facing someone who has been in Washington for decades, he’s paired against a state legislator. And instead of facing the sometimes crotchety Obey, he faces a woman whose “soft-spoken demeanor is the polar opposite of the blunt, abrasive tone that marked Dave Obey’s political career,” according to a Wisconsin Public Radio report shortly after Lassa became a candidate for the open seat.

Lassa was elected to the state Assembly in 1998 and re-elected in 2000 and 2002. In 2003, she won a special election for an open state Senate district. She was re-elected twice to the district, in 2004 and 2008, and she isn’t up again until 2012.

While Duffy lives in a county in the lightly populated extreme northern end of the district, Lassa comes from the more populous southern end of the district. That could give Lassa a considerable edge.

As a whole, the district tilts Democratic. Barack Obama won it by a solid 13 points over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2008, but Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Al Gore each carried the district by only a single point, in 2004 and 2000. Bill Clinton carried the district, which was shaped only slightly differently, in 1992 and 1996.

I haven’t met Lassa yet, so I can’t vouch for her appeal. And I don’t know what kind of campaign she will put together.

Republicans note, quite correctly, that whatever his vulnerabilities, Dave Obey had plenty of support in the district, had $1.4 million in the bank when he exited the race and had earned a reputation as a feisty, tough opponent. His retirement creates an open seat, which can’t be good for Democrats in the kind of midterm that is developing.

But in some ways, Lassa might end up being a more difficult foe for Duffy than Obey would have been. In any case, Sean Duffy will now have to run a very different kind of campaign than he planned less than two months ago.

Welcome to the real world of American politics, Mr. Duffy.


This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on May 25, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

House Members Soft-Pedal Their Résumés in Gubernatorial Campaigns

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Even though having Washington, D.C., on your résumé is supposed to be like having a scarlet letter on your lapel this election cycle, more than a dozen current and former Members of Congress are running for governor — and trying to overcome voters’ ill feelings toward the nation’s capital.

Not everyone can be as lucky as Rep. Mary Fallin, the heavy favorite to win the July 27 Oklahoma GOP primary and the general election in November. Instead, Members are trying to figure out how to maximize their federal experience without taking on too much water in their campaign.

“It’s a handicap in more ways than a help. Even more so this time,” said one GOP consultant who has worked with multiple Members who ran for governor. Not only do they have to balance their calendar between official duties and the trail, Members are also casting potentially controversial votes in the middle of a campaign.

In Alabama, Rep. Artur Davis is favored to win the June 1 Democratic gubernatorial primary, but victory is not guaranteed. Davis has been running a general election campaign from the outset and voted against the health care reform bill. So even though Davis’ Democratic primary opponent, state Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, is running a mediocre campaign, he appears to be drawing votes from disenchanted Democrats who are upset with Davis for voting against health care reform.

In Georgia, GOP Rep. Nathan Deal postponed his resignation from the House in order to vote against the health care bill, hoping that doing so would give him a boost in the gubernatorial primary. But his departure from office was met with headlines about a possible ethics committee investigation into whether he used his Congressional office to help a family-owned business.

It’s exactly what Deal didn’t need in the middle of his battle with Secretary of State Karen Handel for the second slot in the Aug. 10 Republican runoff in the Peach State. State Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine is expected to finish first in the July 20 primary.

According to one GOP strategist, Members shouldn’t quit to run for governor. The line won’t be erased from their résumé, and they shouldn’t throw away an opportunity to make news.

In South Carolina, Rep. Gresham Barrett is using his office as a platform to demonstrate his opposition to President Barack Obama and the Democratic agenda. One of Barrett’s television ads points out that the lawmaker is “more opposed to Obama than any Congressman in America, but one.”

Barrett is in the middle of a competitive four-candidate Republican primary set for June 8. He’s competing with state Rep. Nikki Haley and Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer for a spot in the June 22 runoff against state Attorney General Henry McMaster, who is likely to finish first in the initial primary.

Rep. Zach Wamp, the eight-term Republican from Tennessee, talks about the Beltway from a distance, offering to meet people at the state line who want to take away guns.

Wamp doesn’t have the benefit of a runoff. He’ll have to knock off Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam, the frontrunner in the GOP race, and Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey in the Aug. 5 primary.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra appears to be the frontrunner in his race to become governor of Michigan, but there is a long way to go before the Aug. 3 GOP primary. An April 22 Rasmussen Reports survey showed him leading the primary with 28 percent. Wealthy venture capitalist Rick Snyder was second with 14 percent, state Attorney General Mike Cox had 13 percent and Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard had 9 percent. The automated survey had a 4.5-point margin of error.

Hoekstra voted in favor of both the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and the Troubled Asset Relief Program last year — decisions that could haunt him in the campaign.

In all four states (Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee and Michigan), the primary is critical because the GOP nominee will likely start the general election with a distinct advantage. But while Hoekstra is in a strong position in his primary, Deal, Barrett and Wamp are underdogs.

The Sept. 18 primary is critical in Hawaii, where the Democratic nominee will have the edge in November. Neil Abercrombie decided to resign his House seat earlier this year in order to focus on his gubernatorial bid. He should be able to spend more time on the campaign trail battling Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann instead of traveling the 5,000 miles one way from his district to D.C.

A number of former Members of Congress who have been out of the House for a lot longer than Abercrombie and Deal are also running for governor — with varying likelihoods of winning.

Former Rep. Scott McInnis is running in Colorado and doesn’t have much GOP primary opposition, but he faces a tough general election battle with Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (D).

In Ohio, former Rep. John Kasich secured the GOP nomination in last week’s primary, but he faces an extremely competitive race against incumbent Gov. Ted Strickland (D), who also served in the House. While Democrats will try to use Kasich’s House service against him, they appear to be more excited about the Republican’s subsequent work for Lehman Brothers.

In Wisconsin, former Rep. Mark Neumann (R), who served with Kasich and Strickland in the House, is presenting himself primarily as a small-business man, but he isn’t shying away from his time in Congress.

“People look back at 12 years ago and remember a much different time,” Neumann said in a recent interview. “They remember we balanced the budget and passed tax cuts.”

Neumann’s GOP primary opponent agrees.

“I liked what he did in Congress. I was for it,” Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker said about Neumann’s record in the House. “I’m not going to attack him on it.”

Neumann looks like a slight underdog to Walker in the Sept. 14 primary, with the winner facing Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, a former Democratic Congressman, in the general election.

Other former Members are much longer shots in either the primary or general elections.

Former Rep. Rick Lazio is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination in New York but would face an extremely tough race against state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D) in the general election.

In Pennsylvania, former Rep. Joe Hoeffel isn’t even polling in the double digits with the Democratic primary less than a week away.

Four other former Members are running for governor, but their House service is no longer their defining characteristic.

Former Rep. Bill McCollum has spent the past four years as Florida’s attorney general and has a slight advantage over state Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink (D) in this fall’s election. McCollum can’t overlook wealthy health care executive Rick Scott in the GOP primary either.

Former GOP Rep. Bob Ehrlich is running for governor in Maryland, but he was already governor for four years before being defeated for re-election in 2006.

Former Rep. Butch Otter (R) is running for re-election as governor of Idaho, and ex-Rep. Jim Gibbons (R) is running for re-election in Nevada. Otter should be re-elected easily, while Gibbons, who has been battered by personal scandal, will likely lose in either the Republican primary or general election.

This story first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on May 13, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

On, Wisconsin: Feingold Return No Sure Thing

By Stuart Rothenberg

When former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson (R) announced recently that he wouldn’t enter the 2010 Senate race and challenge Sen. Russ Feingold (D), many of us crossed the state off our list of competitive races.

Maybe we were a bit premature.

Two more Republicans — former state Commerce Secretary Dick Leinenkugel and businessman Ron Johnson — are joining the two GOPers already in the contest, businessman Terrence Wall and Dave Westlake, and the newly expanded field is just one reason for reconsidering my knee-jerk judgment.

None of these four hopefuls possesses all of the qualities of the ideal challenger. But this cycle, Republicans may not need ideal challengers to win, even in the Badger State.

Let’s be clear: Russ Feingold isn’t damaged goods the way Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is, and he isn’t running in a Republican-leaning state, the way Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) is. He’s an aggressive campaigner who has always tried to avoid the Washington insider label.

But Feingold’s numbers suggest a serious GOP challenger could make his life uncomfortable, and the fact that the three-term Senator would go up with his first television ad in April is reason enough to take another look at the race.

Feingold supporters will say that running the early media means that he won’t be caught napping and guarantees that he won’t become vulnerable. But the ad buy at the very least reflects an awareness that the political environment is working against him.

The Wisconsin Democrat’s initial spot, “Forward,” opens with black-and-white photographs of successful Wisconsinites, political and nonpolitical. Speaking over the photographs, other modern-day images and newspaper clips, Feingold notes that he has been “tough on wasteful spending” and stood up to “the big banks” by voting “‘no’ to the bailout.”

Feingold has built an image in the state and in Washington as a maverick, and the ad echoes that message, seeking to put him on the side of the average voter and against Congress.

“He’s the original maverick, but he’s been in the Senate for almost 18 years,” observed one Democrat, noting that Feingold’s longevity and association with the Senate is a problem for him in the current environment.

While a recent Research 2000 poll for the liberal Daily Kos website showed Feingold leading Thompson narrowly and holding comfortable leads over Wall and Westlake, other polling, both public and private, shows that the Senator has slipped noticeably over the past few months and now is under 50 percent against potential GOP challengers.

Given the electorate’s mood, one of the two newest entries into the Republican contest could turn into a serious threat to Feingold.

Leinenkugel’s family business, Leinenkugel Brewing Co., has given him some name identification, and his 18 months serving as the state’s commerce secretary gives him an aura of bipartisanship.

But Leinenkugel, who announced his candidacy last week, served for a year and a half as secretary of commerce in the administration of Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, and Republican primary voters may bridle at the idea of a Doyle cabinet member running for the Republican Senate nomination.

Those voters may not agree with Leinenkugel’s comment that was still on the Department of Commerce website last week: “We have a very ‘pro-business’ governor ... [who] governs from the center.” Still, if he can win the Republican nomination, he could have broad enough appeal to threaten Feingold.

Businessman Ron Johnson, who hasn’t formally announced his candidacy yet, has the same potential. Johnson, 55, owns PACUR Inc., an Oshkosh-based plastics company. He has never run for office before, but he has decided to enter the GOP Senate primary. Like many businessmen who take the plunge into elective politics, he’ll learn that running for office is harder than it looks.

Allies of Johnson describe him as “smart and personable,” but they acknowledge that as a first-time candidate he will have plenty to learn. He has considerable personal resources and apparently is willing to invest a considerable amount into his campaign.

One veteran campaign watcher told me recently that while Thompson ran best against Feingold in the polls, he was not going to win in November.

“The only way Republicans can beat Feingold is with a nonpolitician, a businessman — not with a longtime politician,” said the observer, a Democrat.

With Wall not catching fire and Westlake not running a serious race, Johnson and Leinenkugel would seem to have the opportunity to build momentum between now and the Sept. 14 primary. But both have plenty to prove.

After that, the eventual Republican nominee will have to hope that Feingold’s ads haven’t solidified his numbers enough to make him invulnerable.

But if voters are dissatisfied with the outlook on jobs, the performance of the Obama administration and the direction of the country, even Russ Feingold may find out that 18 years in Washington, D.C., makes for a pretty big target. Don’t forget about this race entirely.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on May 4, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

If Republicans Fail to Win the House, Look Behind the ‘Eight’ Ball

By Stuart Rothenberg

I’ve always said that the party campaign committees usually get too much credit for success and too much blame for failure, so I’m certainly not pointing fingers in this column. But if Republicans fall a handful of seats short of taking over the House in the fall midterms, it could be because of the party’s inability to recruit strong candidates in a short list of districts with highly vulnerable Democratic incumbents.

North Carolina’s 8th. Freshman Rep. Larry Kissell owes his membership in the Congressional fraternity to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which dragged him across the finish line in 2008. But if Kissell wins a second term, he ought to send a thank-you note to Tar Heel Republicans for failing to find a top-tier challenger in the best Republican year since 1994.

The DCCC spent just under $2.4 million to help elect Kissell — almost $1 million more than he spent on his own campaign. That made Kissell the second-largest beneficiary of DCCC independent expenditures, right behind New Hampshire Rep. Carol Shea-Porter.

The district, which stretches from Charlotte to Fayetteville and includes lots of rural territory in between, went narrowly for President Barack Obama in 2008 (52 percent) and more substantially for George W. Bush in 2004 (54 percent).

National Republican insiders aren’t writing off this race just yet, but they don’t have the challenger they once hoped for.

GOP insiders first tried to woo businessman Mike Minter, a former all-pro with the NFL’s Carolina Panthers, into the race. He ultimately decided against a bid. Then the National Republican Congressional Committee tried to coax former Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory into the contest. McCrory had recently lost a bid for governor and seriously considered the Congressional race. But he, too, said no.

The Republican field includes businessman Tim D’Annunzio, who calls Kissell a “socialist” in a video on his Web site and boasts endorsements from former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), activist Bay Buchanan, former sportscaster Harold Johnson and businessman Hal Jordan, who narrowly lost a state legislative race in 2006.

The favorite for the GOP nomination is Lou Huddleston, who spent three decades in the Army, retiring as a colonel in 2003. He, too, lost a state legislative race, in 2008, drawing 38 percent.

The Republican nominee may somehow ride a massive political wave to victory against Kissell. But unless that happens, this district will be the best example of a wasted GOP opportunity against a politically unimpressive, vulnerable House Democrat.

Georgia’s 8th. If Larry Kissell is at one end of the campaign quality spectrum, Rep. Jim Marshall (D) is at the other. Yet both constitute missed Republican opportunities.

Marshall is smart, cocky and politically astute. He got clobbered in his first run for Congress in 2000, but came back two years later to win an open seat. In 2006, he held off a former Congressman (who had represented part of the territory when the state’s districts were drawn differently) in a nail-biter.

Marshall defeated retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Rick Goddard (R) comfortably in 2008, 57 percent to 43 percent, and that may help explain why no top-tier challenger has stepped forward for 2010.

All of this is disappointing for GOP strategists given the nature of the district and the developing national Republican wave. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) carried the district with 56 percent in 2008, and Bush carried it in 2004 with 61 percent of the vote. In a year when voters may want to send a message to Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Republicans ought to have a candidate who can tap that voter sentiment in a district like Marshall’s. So far, they don’t.

Illinois’ 8th. Rep. Melissa Bean (D) is a tough adversary, like Marshall. She’s focused, politically astute and running in an expensive media market. But given her district and the kind of political year it may be, it’s hard to believe that Republicans came up empty-handed against her in 2010.

Her opponent this year is Joe Walsh (R), a favorite of tea party activists and an unsuccessful candidate for Congress (against then-Rep. Sidney Yates) in 1996 and for the state Legislature in 1998.

I don’t know if anyone can beat Bean this time, but her 6-point victory against David McSweeney (R) in a horrendous year for Republicans and her subsequent 20-point win over inept challenger Steve Greenberg (R) in a year when Obama was sweeping the state shouldn’t be enough to earn her a cakewalk in 2010. It has, however.

Wisconsin’s 8th. Finally, Republicans can’t be thrilled by their field against Rep. Steve Kagen (D). State Rep. Roger Roth, whose uncle served in Congress, could develop into a credible threat to Kagen, as could businessman Reid Ribble. Former state Rep. Terri McCormick and Door County Supervisor Marc Savard hope to do the same.

But no matter how you slice it, the Republican field in this GOP-leaning district doesn’t look particularly intimidating.

While McCain drew only 45 percent here in 2008, Bush won it with 55 percent four years earlier. Kagen barely won the open seat in 2006 but won it comfortably two years later. Still, given the national landscape, the district’s bent and Kagen’s personal style, a strong GOP challenger would put this district into play.

Right now, it’s not clear that the field includes a challenger who can win, though in a big Republican wave, even the current crop of contenders can’t be dismissed.


This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on April 15, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Don’t Believe the Hype ... or Everything That You Read

By Stuart Rothenberg

Periodically (it seems more often these days, actually), I come across some really silly political stuff that screams out for attention. Here are four examples. Caveat emptor!

Exhibit No. 1: A Feb. 17 survey of 500 likely Wisconsin voters by Rasmussen Reports.

Rasmussen is an automated poll that does not include live interviewers, and, as anyone who follows polling knows, it’s highly controversial, in part because of the large number of surveys conducted by the firm and the widespread belief that the firm favors Republicans.

The numbers in the Wisconsin survey that stuck out like a sore thumb were the favorable and unfavorable ratings of Republican Senate hopeful Dave Westlake. According to the survey, 33 percent of those polled had a favorable view of Westlake, while 31 percent had an unfavorable opinion of him.

What’s so weird about that? Well, Westlake isn’t exactly a public figure.

The self-described “entrepreneur and small businessman” went to West Point and earned an MBA from the University of Chicago, but as far as I can tell, he has no political experience and hasn’t spent any money to get known. His year-end Federal Election Commission report showed that at the end of 2009 he had raised $33,000, spent $31,000 and had less than $3,000 in the bank.

Dave Westlake probably is a nice guy, and I wish him well. But there is no way that two out of three likely Wisconsin voters know enough about him to have an opinion of him (unless Rasmussen provided other information, such as party). And that’s what the favorable/unfavorable question is intended to produce — information about the person’s name identification and image.

In November, Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling company, surveyed the Wisconsin Senate race and found Westlake’s ID at 2 percent favorable/9 percent unfavorable. Could Westlake’s name ID have skyrocketed from 11 percent to 64 percent from November to February? No, not without a statewide media blitz.

Exhibit No. 2: A Feb. 8 e-mail from Colorado Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff’s campaign touting his standing in recent Rasmussen polls.

Romanoff, a former Colorado Speaker, is challenging appointed Sen. Michael Bennet in this year’s Democratic primary, and given the political environment, anything is possible.

But there are two things about the e-mail that are ridiculous. First, Democratic strategists spend a good deal of time discrediting Rasmussen as a Republican pollster whose results rarely reflect reality. Yet, here is the Romanoff campaign basing its entire argument about Romanoff’s alleged electability on two Rasmussen surveys. Incredible.

And second, the argument that Romanoff is the stronger general election candidate because of the Rasmussen polls comes from Romanoff consultant Celinda Lake. Since Lake is herself a pollster, you’d think that she might refer to one of her own surveys, rather than the survey of another pollster. She doesn’t.

Exhibit No. 3: Rep. Joe Sestak (D) claims the White House offered him a job to get him out of the Pennsylvania Senate race.

Sestak’s assertion that he was offered a job by the administration isn’t shocking at all. It’s the media reaction to it that is.

What’s the big deal? This kind of thing happens all of the time. There is nothing immoral or unethical about it. It’s politics. The White House embraced Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) when he switched parties, and now they are trying to clear the primary field for him.

As news goes, it’s interesting but hardly shocking or outrageous. But it was treated as a big deal, not only by the Philadelphia newspapers but by the Associated Press and other newspapers and blogs.

Exhibit No. 4: All the hype about the Nevada Tea Party getting on the ballot and the likely candidacy of businessman Jon Ashjian.

News of the Tea Party’s ballot status in Nevada spread like wildfire. PoliticalWire reported on a Public Opinion Strategies poll by asserting that Ashjian “changes” the Nevada race, with Ashjian “helping” Sen. Harry Reid (D).

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee quoted highly regarded Nevada political analyst Jon Ralston as tweeting that Ashjian “could have huge impact” on the contest, and National Journal reported that Ashjian “could split conservative votes.”

CQ-Roll Call got caught up in the hype too, I must add.

First, as everyone who watched the New Jersey gubernatorial race last year should remember, Independent Chris Daggett received 5.8 percent of the vote, underperforming every survey from mid-September to Election Day.

Early polls always exaggerate the strength of third-party candidates, and there is every reason to believe that this is the case with the POS poll. (This is not a criticism of POS, which I continue to regard as one of the absolutely best survey research firms in the business.)

Second, only somebody with little background in polling would spend a lot of time at this point looking at general election ballot tests of candidates with dramatically unequal name identification.

A huge 94 percent of Nevada voters know enough about Harry Reid to have an opinion of him, while the comparable figure for the leading Republicans in the race is much lower. Sue Lowden is at 56 percent, Danny Tarkanian is at 52 percent and Sharron Angle is at 26 percent.

No matter what Ashjian draws in the hypothetical ballot tests, Reid is stuck between 37 percent and 39 percent of the vote in most polls, in the POS survey and in others. Until that changes, Ashjian will be a nonfactor in the race, and spending time on his potential is little more than wishful thinking by Democrats and media hype by reporters.


This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on March 1, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Plus 10 in the Senate? Republicans Certainly Not There Yet

By Stuart Rothenberg

Having seen victories by Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama, the 1994 Republican and 2006 Democratic Congressional sweeps, and Sen. Scott Brown’s (R) recent Massachusetts victory, I’m not inclined to rule out unexpected outcomes — especially nine months before an event.

But the recent explosion of talk of Republicans gaining 10 seats in the Senate is simply premature. Right now, the GOP has an opportunity to net as many as eight Senate seats. That’s a huge number, especially considering that Democrats have 18 seats up this fall, but it is well short of control.

The new political landscape has resulted in an improved environment for the GOP, including the very real possibility that the party can retain all four of its most vulnerable open seats, in Missouri, Ohio, Kentucky and New Hampshire.

For the moment, let’s assume the GOP avoids losing any of its own seats.

Republicans have the advantage in four Democratic-held Senate seats — North Dakota, Delaware, Arkansas and Nevada. In addition, they are no worse than even money in four others — Indiana, Illinois, Colorado and Pennsylvania.

So, any chance of gaining 10 seats would require Republican candidates to win at least two of the following four states: Connecticut, California, Wisconsin and Washington.

Early polling in Connecticut shows state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal ahead of both former Rep. Rob Simmons and businesswoman Linda McMahon, the two Republicans most likely to be the eventual nominee.

Simmons is a quirky ex-legislator who built a moderate record while representing eastern Connecticut in the House. McMahon is a wealthy, self-funding first-time candidate whose claim to fame and wealth, professional wrestling, is widely seen as crude and violent.

Sen. Chris Dodd’s (D) exit from the race hurt Simmons, whose main argument has been substance and electability. He is now an underdog for the GOP nomination. McMahon’s wealth (she has promised to spend tens of millions of dollars), outsider persona, poise and relatively conservative positioning makes her stronger than Simmons in a primary and potentially more of a threat to Blumenthal.

Still, both Republicans start far behind Blumenthal, in the polls and in handicapping. A four-term statewide officeholder, Blumenthal is a smart Democrat in a Democratic state. He’ll raise plenty of cash and begins with a clear advantage in the race.

In California, voters aren’t particularly enthusiastic about Sen. Barbara Boxer (D). She’s a polarizing political figure and running at or below 50 percent in ballot tests against either Assemblyman Chuck DeVore or businesswoman Carly Fiorina, two of the leading Republicans in the race.

Still, DeVore doesn’t have the breadth of appeal or money to defeat Boxer, while Fiorina has plenty of baggage.

Boxer’s prospects would take a hit, of course, if California Republicans were to nominate former Rep. Tom Campbell, a moderate who would have considerable statewide appeal — if he could accumulate the resources for an expensive statewide race. But Campbell’s past fundraising isn’t encouraging.

For now, Boxer’s weakness does not yet translate into a serious Republican opportunity.

In Wisconsin, some polling has shown Sen. Russ Feingold (D) having trouble in a race against former Gov. Tommy Thompson (R). The only problem is that Thompson isn’t now running for the Senate, though he is considering it. And Feingold, who voted against the Troubled Asset Relief Program, is a savvy politician who has developed a reputation for independence.

The main Republican contender currently is Terrence Wall, a prosperous real estate developer who put $300,000 into his campaign but hasn’t paid state taxes in nine of the past 10 years. Democrats apparently have other tax ammunition to use against Wall.

When I interviewed Wall recently, he refused to give his date of birth. He only offered the year of his birth (and his age), apparently because he is concerned about identity theft. Wall, in other words, has a long way to go before he is a serious threat to Feingold, even in a bad year for Democrats.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) is another smart politician, and while Republican insiders hope to recruit someone who can test the Senator, they don’t have a formidable challenger yet. Until they do, there isn’t any reason to see Washington as a GOP takeover opportunity.

Obviously, Sen. Evan Bayh’s (D-Ind.) sudden announcement Monday that he will not seek re-election improves GOP prospects in that state and therefore nationally.

While some polling showed the Democrat at risk, a recent Research 2000 poll for the liberal Web site the Daily Kos showed him leading former Sen. Dan Coats by 20 points. Bayh’s political savvy, strong connection to Hoosier voters and $13 million bank account would have made him a formidable foe for any Republican challenger, so his exit automatically improves GOP prospects, especially given the overall landscape of the election cycle.

Bayh’s retirement puts an eighth Democratic seat at considerable risk, forcing the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to be even more on the defensive than it was. But in another sense, it doesn’t change things fundamentally. For even after Bayh’s retirement, a Republican gain of 10 seats is more hype than reality.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on February 16, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

Where, Oh Where Are the Top House GOP Opportunities?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Not a single Democratic House seat switched to the GOP in 2006 while Republicans were losing 30 Congressional seats.

Could Democrats pitch another shut-out this year? It’s possible, though unlikely, even given the poor Republican poll numbers, the desire for change and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s financial advantage over the National Republican Congressional Committee.

After all, Democrats won a handful of reliably Republican districts in 2006 that they will struggle to retain, and no party has been shut out of taking over seats from the opposition in consecutive elections, at least since World War II.

So where are the best GOP chances?

Tier 1 Opportunities

Texas’ 22nd District, Nick Lampson (D). If only one Democratic seat switches to the Republicans, it’s likely to be Lampson’s. Lampson, of course, was defeated for re-election in 2004 (in a different district) only to come back and win Republican Tom DeLay’s open seat in 2006.

Although DeLay dropped his bid for re-election, the Republican nominee was unable to get her name on the ballot and was forced to run as a write-in candidate. Even then, Shelley Sekula Gibbs drew 42 percent of the vote.

Sekula Gibbs almost won her party’s nomination again this time, but she was defeated handily in the runoff by Pete Olson, a former aide to Sen. John Cornyn (R), who was generally regarded as the stronger general election candidate.

Lampson’s district gave President Bush 64 percent in 2004, a reflection of its Republican bent. While Lampson has built a much less liberal record than he did during his first service in the House, he is still a Democrat in a very Republican district. And that makes him the most vulnerable House Democrat in 2008.

Louisiana’s 6th District, Don Cazayoux (D). Cazayoux, a relatively conservative Democrat, is a reasonably good fit for his northeast Louisiana district. Despite that assessment, the reality is that he owes his seat in Congress to Woody Jenkins, the unelectable GOP nominee in the special election held earlier this year.

Cazayoux has a reasonable chance to win a full term in November, but if the Republicans nominate state Sen. Bill Cassidy, who has announced his candidacy, the freshman Democrat will have his hands full. The district definitely leans Republican, and a strong GOP nominee automatically becomes formidable. Republicans caught a rare break when Jenkins decided not to run again.

Tier 2 Opportunities

Kansas’ 2nd District, Nancy Boyda (D). Boyda upset then-Rep. Jim Ryun (R) last time, and the Republican nature of the district (Bush won it by 20 points in 2004) guarantees a serious contest. Ryun faces state Treasurer Lynn Jenkins for the Republican nomination.

Alabama’s 5th District, open seat. Rep. Bud Cramer’s (D) retirement opens up a conservative Southern district that will see stiff competition and should be a GOP target. But the likely Democratic nominee, state Sen. Parker Griffith, looks strong, while the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, Wayne Parker, lost to Cramer twice.

California’s 11th District, Jerry McNerney (D). Freshman McNerney rode the Democratic wave and help from the environmental community to beat Republican Rep. Richard Pombo two years ago, but he isn’t an ideal fit for his Republican- leaning district. The GOP nominee, former state Assemblyman Dean Andal, looks to be a serious threat.

Pennsylvania’s 10th District, Christopher Carney (D). Carney beat a scandal-plagued Republican in a solidly Republican district, and the question is how long he can hold onto the seat. His GOP challenger, businessman Chris Hackett, hasn’t united Republicans following a nasty primary. Still, Carney is in the kind of district that he can never take for granted.

Florida’s 16th District, Tim Mahoney (D). Much like others on the list, Mahoney would not have won last time except for a GOP scandal, but he has been a strong fundraiser and won’t be an easy target for Republicans, who won’t pick a nominee until late August. Still, the GOP is likely to have a credible nominee in this Republican-leaning district.

Other Districts to Watch

Pennsylvania’s 11th district, Paul Kanjorski (D). Democrats are nervous about veteran Kanjorski, who has received his share of negative publicity. The early campaign of Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta (R) has been underwhelming, but that may not matter by the time November arrives. Polling suggests that this may well be a top-tier GOP takeover opportunity by November.

New York’s 20th district, Kirsten Gillibrand (D). Freshman Gillibrand is a fundraising phenom, and she will be very hard to beat in 2008. But former state GOP Chairman Sandy Treadwell has plenty of personal resources and is running in a reliably Republican district that a flawed Republican lost two years ago. The district’s fundamentals alone make this a Republican opportunity.

Wisconsin’s 8th district, Steve Kagen (D). Republican John Gard narrowly lost this Republican open seat last time, but the presidential year should bring out more voters and freshman Kagen hasn’t had the smoothest term.

A handful of other Democratic seats could also produce GOP upsets, including two in Arizona (Rep. Harry Mitchell’s and Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s), Rep. Carol Shea-Porter’s in New Hampshire and Rep. Jim Marshall’s in Georgia.

No matter what happens, Democratic losses will be few and the party can expect a substantial net gain in November.

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