Showing posts with label New Hampshire. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Hampshire. Show all posts

Friday, May 14, 2010

Some Race Results Matter More Than Others

By Stuart Rothenberg

This year, it’s harder than ever to distinguish what really matters from what doesn’t. Special situations are adding to the confusion, as is a fickle public, which is showing a willingness to change its positions in the blink of an eye.

In Hawaii’s special Congressional election to fill the opening created by the resignation of Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie, Republican Charles Djou certainly looks headed for an upset victory over two Democrats, former Rep. Ed Case, who has already represented the other half of the state in Congress, and state Senate President Colleen Hanabusa, who has been described by the local media as “the candidate of the Democratic Party establishment.”

With Djou leading in polls and local Democrats unable to agree to support a single candidate in the election, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has announced that it won’t spend any more resources on the race, which it now thinks is unwinnable.

That’s a stunning decision given the Democratic nature of the district, but it reflects the DCCC’s frustration with the race — and particularly with the state’s two Senators, who remain bitter about Case’s 2006 Democratic primary challenge to Sen. Daniel Akaka and have refused to encourage Hanabusa to exit the race.

Since the two Democrats are effectively dividing the Democratic vote and allowing Djou to win with far less than a majority of the vote, the outcome doesn’t say much of anything about November. The outcome isn’t irrelevant, but it certainly isn’t an indicator of things to come.

The special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th district is a far more important event, since it’s a head-to-head contest in a Democratic part of the state. But while Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry won the district narrowly in 2004 and Al Gore carried it more comfortably in 2000, Barack Obama lost it narrowly in 2008.

This is the kind of district where voters could use the special election as an opportunity to send a message of dissatisfaction about the Obama presidency and the Democratic Congressional agenda.

Republican Tim Burns is about as strong a candidate as Republicans could have hoped for. I interviewed him months ago as well as in late April, and I found him to be a more poised and polished candidate than I did during his first visit.

Given the large Democratic registration advantage in the district and the district’s strong support for the late Rep. John Murtha (D), Democrat Mark Critz, who was an aide to Murtha, should have an advantage in the race. A Burns victory would be a bad sign for Democrats for the fall.

Recent events in Utah certainly were noteworthy but not as instructive as the media coverage would suggest.

Nominating conventions are usually dominated by activists and ideologues, and purists at both the state GOP convention and the Democrats’ 3rd district convention showed their muscle, if not their brains.

Republican delegates denied Sen. Bob Bennett even the right to go to a primary to win renomination, and Democrats in the 2nd district forced Rep. Jim Matheson into a primary with a more liberal opponent who criticized the Congressman’s vote against health care reform.

Conventions produce different outcomes than primaries, so the results in Utah say more about the process than the voters. But the results are a reminder that the ideologues are particularly intolerant and vociferous this cycle.

Finally, the dramatic changes in the Democratic Senate primary in Pennsylvania, the Republican Senate primary in Florida and the GOP gubernatorial primary in California are worth remembering throughout the cycle.

Rep. Joe Sestak’s campaign seemed very much stalled until a single brilliant TV ad jump-started it and changed the Democratic Senate race in Pennsylvania fundamentally. Using video of party-switching Sen. Arlen Specter (D) together with former President George W. Bush, Sestak redefined the choice Democratic primary voters face. Now it is Specter who will need to come from behind.

In Florida, Gov. Charlie Crist went from popular frontrunner in the GOP race to controversial also-ran in the Republican primary to Independent candidate in a matter of months. A year ago, nobody thought that could happen.

Similarly, in California, Republican Meg Whitman built up a large lead in the gubernatorial primary, only to see it largely evaporate when her opponent, state Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, hit her in a TV ad for her association with Goldman Sachs.

Whitman’s 50-point lead in a March Public Policy Institute of California poll has fallen to 2 points in a recent SurveyUSA poll.

These kinds of reverses ought to make favorites and frontrunners feel uncomfortable, whether Democratic Senators such as Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas and Michael Bennet in Colorado or Republican Senate hopefuls Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire and Sue Lowden in Nevada.

On the other hand, I’m not yet a believer in some races where recent polls show tightening in general election ballot tests, including Senate races in Iowa and North Carolina. That’s because I expect the 2010 midterms ultimately will be a referendum on Democratic control of the White House and Congress, making for a very difficult political environment for Democratic challengers in both states in the fall.

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

Friday, May 07, 2010

Why Illinois Senate Is a Tossup but N.H. Isn’t

By Stuart Rothenberg

Not long ago, my friends over at the Cook Political Report moved the Illinois Senate race from Tossup to Leans Republican, a significant development in my eyes.

Shortly after that development, my newsletter moved the New Hampshire Senate race from Tossup to Narrow Advantage for the incumbent party (my version of Leans Republican). But I did not move Illinois out of my Tossup category.

Why?

It’s probably important to note, right off the bat, that I am not on all that different a page from the Cook folks. Right now, I think the Republicans are positioned to win both Senate races. So it’s really a question of how comfortable each handicapper is about moving a particular race.

Despite what Granite State voters have done over the past two cycles, New Hampshire remains a competitive state. Recent Democratic gains in the state present an exaggerated picture of the state’s partisan bent, so it won’t be surprising if Republicans stage a comeback later this year.

I’ve met three of the four credible Republican candidates in the race — former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, millionaire businessman Bill Binnie and conservative Ovide Lamontagne, the GOP’s unsuccessful gubernatorial nominee in 1996 — and all three should have considerable appeal in the primary and in the fall.

Lamontagne is often portrayed by Democrats as a knuckle-dragging right-winger, but he is personable, articulate and easy to like. Though he clearly has an ideological strategy, Lamontagne has not yet emerged as “the” conservative in the race, in part because Ayotte, who is every bit as personable as Lamontagne, is running as a conservative as well.

Stylistically, however, Ayotte should also appeal to moderates. In this respect, she resembles retiring Sen. Judd Gregg (R), who is clearly in her corner.

Binnie, who is pro-abortion-rights, is running as an outsider and painting Ayotte as the insider in the race. The wealthy businessman is investing heavily in his own bid, and as one Granite State Republican commented, “He doesn’t lack for self-esteem.”

Binnie portrays the race as between himself and Ayotte, but he too quickly dismisses Jim Bender, another businessman with personal resources, whose more moderate positioning surely is taking votes from Binnie.

Ayotte and Binnie, I expect, would be difficult opponents for Rep. Paul Hodes, the presumptive Democratic Senate nominee. So might Bender, though I haven’t met him yet.

Hodes is poised, confident and well-spoken, but he seems to think that he can make former President George W. Bush a major issue this year and that his own accomplishments in the House will demonstrate his independence and draw a favorable contrast with his eventual GOP opponent.

In fact, I think that Hodes is far too optimistic about his ability to dictate what the 2010 Senate race will be about.

National political currents (including intensity) are likely to favor Republicans, and as long as the GOP nominee isn’t hemorrhaging support after the primary, Hodes, who voted for the health care bill, cap-and-trade and the stimulus, will be on the defensive when the fall arrives. An improvement in the national mood would, of course, improve the Congressman’s prospects.

Recent polling suggests that Hodes is trailing a number of the GOP candidates (particularly Ayotte), and the overall dynamic — including strong Republican bids to win both of the state’s House seats — makes it more likely than not that Hodes will come up short in November.

Illinois Democratic Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias isn’t in much better shape for November than Hodes. But he has one advantage: his state.

Illinois has an electorate that is much more favorable than New Hampshire for any Democrat, and while Giannoulias has plenty of headaches — particularly the failure of his family’s bank — I am less certain that Illinois voters won’t eventually return to their traditional partisan voting patterns before November.

Recent polling in the Land of Lincoln shows Republican Rep. Mark Kirk, a moderate who surely is his party’s ideal candidate for this seat, ahead in general election trial heats. But neither candidate is well-known statewide, even after their primary victories, so the race seems extremely fluid.

Moving Illinois to Leans Republican isn’t unreasonable. As I’ve already noted, I like Kirk’s current position in the horse race against Giannoulias. But I think it wise to see how that race unfolds and to look for more evidence that Illinois voters are making up their minds about both candidates, as well as about the president’s performance.

This column first appeared in Roll Call and on CQPolitics.com on May 6, 2010. 2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Ratings Changes in FL, NH Senate races

Florida Governor Charlie’ Crist’s switch out of the GOP Senate race and into the Senate contest as an Independent, combined with the entry of wealthy businessman Jeff Greene into the Democrat race, adds some uncertainty into the contest. But it doesn’t, in our view, change the bottom line entirely. Move from Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party to Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party. Marco Rubio (R) remains the favorite, but the three-way contest is more unpredictable.

While New Hampshire remains a competitive race, our interviews with the top candidates and recent polling leads us to believe that Republicans are more likely than not to retain this open seat. Move from Toss-up to Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party.

While events between now and November will affect the outlook for November, the GOP seems most likely to net 5-7 Senate seats, with a 8-seat gain certainly possible (but still short of the 10-seat gain the GOP would need for control). That means Democrats are likely to retain control of the Senate, but at a dramatically reduced level.

Here are our latest Senate ratings.
#- Moved benefiting Democrats
*- Moved benefiting Republicans

Lean Takeover (0 R, 4 D)
  • Lincoln (D-AR)
  • Reid (D-NV)
  • ND Open (Dorgan, D)
  • DE Open (Kaufman, D)
Toss-Up (3 R, 4 D)
  • KY Open (Bunning, R)
  • MO Open (Bond, R)
  • OH Open (Voinovich, R)
  • IL Open (Burris, D)
  • IN Open (Bayh, D)
  • Bennet (D-CO)
  • Specter (D-PA)
Narrow Advantage for Incumbent Party (3 R, 0 D)
  • Burr (R-NC)
  • FL Open (LeMieux, R) #
  • NH Open (Gregg, R)*
Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party (1 R,2 D)
  • Vitter (R-LA)
  • Boxer (D-CA)
  • CT Open (Dodd, D)
Currently Safe (11 R, 8 D)
  • Bennett (R-UT)
  • Coburn (R-OK)
  • Crapo (R-ID)
  • DeMint (R-SC)
  • Grassley (R-IA)
  • Isakson (R-GA)
  • McCain (R-AZ)
  • Murkowski (R-AK)
  • Shelby (R-AL)
  • Thune (R-SD)
  • KS Open (Brownback, R)
  • Feingold (D-WI)
  • Gillibrand (D-NY)
  • Inouye (D-HI)
  • Leahy (D-VT)
  • Mikulski (D-MD)
  • Murray (D-WA)
  • Schumer (D-NY)
  • Wyden (D-OR)

Tuesday, February 02, 2010

Dangerous Dozen Open House Seats

By Stuart Rothenberg

A little more than 10 years ago (Jan. 17, 2000, to be exact), I began writing my “Dangerous Dozen” columns about open House seats, and the recent flurry of retirements means there finally are enough to fill a list for the 2010 cycle.

The fact that so many of the districts on this list are currently held by Democrats reflects how strongly the political landscape is tilting toward the GOP. As always, races toward the top of the list are the most likely to change party control, but every race on this list is a serious possibility to flip.

Tennessee’s 6th. With few Democratic officeholders downballot in this Middle Tennessee district that went 62 percent for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in 2008 and 60 percent for President George W. Bush in 2004, you can already put retiring Rep. Bart Gordon’s (D) seat into the Republican column. The GOP primary will select the district’s next Member of Congress.

Louisiana’s 3rd. The field hasn’t really started to develop in the race to succeed Rep. Charlie Melancon (D), but the fundamentals look terrible for Democrats in a midterm election year with President Barack Obama in the White House. Bush carried the district in 2004 with 58 percent, and McCain won it with 61 percent four years later. Only a Republican screw-up could keep this district blue.

Delaware’s At-Large. Rep. Mike Castle’s Senate run is a double-edged sword for Republicans, since the party will have a hard time holding his House seat. It isn’t impossible, of course, but they’ll need an unusually strong nominee (and a strong political wave) to beat the likely Democratic nominee, former Lt. Gov. John Carney.

Kansas’ 3rd. For Democrats, this looks like a bad cycle for Rep. Dennis Moore to retire and this seat to come open. The party is not competitive in the two big statewide contests this year, so both national and state dynamics favor the GOP. Both primary fields are wide open, though the early favorite on the Republican side may be the party’s 2008 nominee, former state Sen. Nick Jordan. Of course, another ideological split within the local GOP could get Democrats back into the picture.

Tennessee’s 8th. Rep. John Tanner (D) is retiring, and Democrats got a solid candidate in state Sen. Roy Herron, a strong fundraiser and veteran officeholder. But Tennessee could be a giant headache for Democrats, and being a longtime Democratic state legislator may be more of a liability than an asset in 2010.

Hawaii’s 1st. The yet-to-be-scheduled special election to fill Rep. Neil Abercrombie’s expected open seat could be another rude surprise for Democrats. Without a runoff, Honolulu City Councilman Charles Djou (R) could sneak past multiple Democratic hopefuls to give Republicans another seat — and a major public relations victory before the midterms. Democrats need to figure out a way to keep the number of their candidates to a minimum.

Arkansas’ 1st. Bush carried this conservative northeast Arkansas district with 52 percent, but McCain drew a solid 59 percent four years later. Plenty of Democratic officeholders are looking to succeed retiring Rep. Marion Berry (D), while Republican options appear fewer. The key question mark is the size of the GOP wave and how disastrous the cycle is for Democrats in Arkansas.

Illinois’ 10th. If the seat held by Rep. Mark Kirk (R) had come open in 2006 or 2008, it would have been a slam-dunk for Democrats. But the environment is very different. The outlook for November depends somewhat on Tuesday’s primaries, but there is no doubt that Democrats see this as a rare takeover opportunity this cycle.

Arkansas’ 2nd. Retiring Rep. Vic Snyder’s (D) central Arkansas district went narrowly for Bush in 2004 and voted 54 percent for McCain in 2008. Former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin gives the GOP a solid nominee, but a number of serious Democrats are looking at the race.

New Hampshire’s 2nd. Oh how different things looked in New Hampshire a year ago. Democrats finished up their near sweep of the Granite State, and the GOP’s fortunes there suddenly looked like any other New England state. But the national mood has changed, and GOP optimism has soared. Former Rep. Charles Bass leads a large GOP field, while Democrats have a primary of their own to succeed Rep. Paul Hodes (D).

Pennsylvania’s 7th. The ranking of the last two races depends on whether you are making a selection based on where the race is now or where it may be in the fall. Former U.S. Attorney Pat Meehan gives the GOP a serious likely nominee. The district no longer leans Republican — Bush won 47 percent in 2004 and McCain only 43 percent in 2008 — and Democrats have a top-tier candidate of their own in state Rep. Bryan Lentz. Still, in a strong Republican year, Democrats have to be nervous about losing Rep. Joe Sestak’s district.

Washington’s 3rd. Retiring Rep. Brian Baird’s (D) open seat performed slightly better for McCain than for Bush in 2004 (and better than Pennsylvania’s 7th did for the same Republicans). But the nomination won’t be decided until the fall, and Democrats have a slew of bigger names looking at the contest. Still, if the GOP gets the right candidate and a partisan wave builds, this district could move up the list as a takeover opportunity.

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

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Don’t Hold Your Breath for an Anti-Incumbent Election

By Stuart Rothenberg

Voters are angry, especially at Washington, D.C., and with politicians. They are unhappy with both parties. All that is generally true.

But voters’ dissatisfaction with those in charge doesn’t mean that November is likely to be an “anti-incumbent election.” In fact, it almost certainly won’t. We never, or almost never, have true anti-incumbent elections, as I have noted before.

If Republican incumbents have problems, it will be in their primaries.

In Texas, Gov. Rick Perry looked to have enough momentum to pull away from his GOP primary opponent, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. But that hasn’t happened. The Senator hasn’t been a scintillating candidate, but she is still very much in the game against the governor, according to knowledgeable insiders.

Perry won re-election four years ago with only 39 percent of the vote in a four-way race. While conservatives have rallied behind him, there are many in the Republican Party who don’t like his smugness and his shoot-from-the-hip style.

Arizona’s GOP governor, Jan Brewer, who became the state’s top officeholder when her predecessor joined the Obama administration, faces a roomful of primary challengers in her bid for a full term, and her prospects are uncertain. She inherited a terrible budget situation and was forced to select from a number of unappealing choices.

Indiana Rep. Dan Burton, South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis and Utah Sen. Bob Bennett also face challenges that have developed to a stage that make them worth watching.

Nonincumbent Republicans who have the mantle of the establishment are also vulnerable given the current environment.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who is running for the state’s GOP Senate nomination, is the most obvious example. He faces a very difficult fight against former state Speaker Marco Rubio (R), who is running as the insurgent despite his previous position.

The same dynamic is taking place in New Hampshire, where conservative Ovide Lamontagne and two businessmen could give former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte a migraine in the Republican Senate primary.

And in Kentucky, Rand Paul, son of Texas GOP Rep. Ron Paul (a former presidential candidate), is running as an outsider for the Republican Senate nomination against Secretary of State Trey Grayson, the favorite of virtually the entire state and the national Republican Party. GOP insiders think Grayson can win the primary, but they are far from certain about the outcome.

But if those incumbents (and establishment-backed nonincumbents) get past their primaries, they will then benefit from the public mood, which currently looks likely to punish Democrats at the ballot box.

A rash of recent polling, much of it paid for by liberal Web sites Daily Kos and Firedoglake, show Democratic incumbents in horrible shape — about where Republicans were in 2006 and 2008.

Surveys over the past couple of weeks have shown former Rep. Mike Sodrel (R) ahead of Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.) by 8 points, Andy Harris (R) leading Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-Md.) by 13 points, former Rep. Tim Walberg (R) leading Rep. Mark Schauer (D-Mich.) by 10 points and former Rep. Steve Chabot (R) leading Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Ohio) by a whopping 17 points.

In addition, Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.) leads unknown challenger Randy Altschuler (R) by only 2 points, while controversial Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) is drawing 55 percent in an early ballot test against state Sen. Tarryl Clark (D).

Even if only most of these results are close to being accurate, they suggest that other Democratic House incumbents are seeing significant erosion in their numbers from what those same numbers were even a year ago.

Over in the Senate, Democratic numbers are equally terrible.

Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln and Nevada Sen. Harry Reid are sitting with unfavorable ratings larger than their favorable ratings. Former Rep. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who would be crushed if this year’s political environment resembled that of the 2006 or 2008 cycle, is running even or ahead of his potential Democratic opponents, and Democratic prospects over the past year have deteriorated in Ohio and Missouri.

Polling in North Carolina is particularly instructive. Recent surveys continue to show roughly equal numbers of respondents approving and disapproving of the job Sen. Richard Burr (R) is doing. But even with those mediocre numbers, Burr is holding clear (if unintimidating) leads over his potential general election opponents.

The bottom line on all of this seems pretty clear: Voters are not enamored of incumbents of either party, and GOP incumbents or “establishment” candidates facing strong “outsider” primary opponents could be in for more rough sledding than they would normally need to expect.

But when the general election rolls around, unless there is a significant change in the national mood, voter dissatisfaction will be aimed overwhelmingly at the candidates of one party. And that is why Democratic insiders are privately raising their own estimates of party losses.

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

Thursday, December 17, 2009

What a Difference a Year Makes: the 2010 Senate Outlook

By Stuart Rothenberg

As “Saturday Night Live” character Emily Litella (played by the late Gilda Radner) would say, “Never mind.”

Eleven months ago, still in the shadow of Barack Obama’s presidential victory over Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Democrats looked likely to gain anywhere from two to as many as five additional Senate seats.

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) was in trouble, while GOP open seats in Florida and Missouri were clearly at risk. Doubts about the prospects of at least four other Republican incumbents — North Carolina’s Richard Burr, New Hampshire’s Judd Gregg, Louisiana’s David Vitter and Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter (who has since switched parties) — ranged from uncertain to unsettling for party strategists. And that was before Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) announced he would not run again.

But since then, GOP recruiting successes and a change in the national political environment have shifted the outlook for next year’s Senate contests. Suddenly, Democratic seats started to look more and more vulnerable.

As 2009 draws to a close, Democrats now could lose seats, a dramatic change from January that could end the party’s 60-seat majority in less than two years. And GOP gains could be large enough to sink any major Democratic initiatives not passed before Congress adjourns for the midterm elections.

The national Republican brand shows no signs of improving dramatically, but polling conducted in a number of the states with Senate contests next year shows GOP candidates doing better in hypothetical matchups recently than they were a few months earlier.

In Arkansas, for example, a Nov. 30-Dec. 2 Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos (D) showed Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D) with a single point advantage over state Sen. Gilbert Baker, the apparent favorite for the GOP nomination. In early September, Lincoln had a much more substantial 44 percent to 37 percent advantage over Baker in another Daily Kos survey.

In Connecticut, a Nov. 3-8 Quinnipiac University poll showed former Rep. Rob Simmons, one of two serious contenders for the Republican Senate nomination, leading Sen. Chris Dodd (D) by 11 points, a larger lead than Simmons had in September (5 points), in July (9 points) or in May (6 points).

In New Hampshire, a Sept. 25-Oct. 2 University of New Hampshire survey found former state Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, probably the favorite for the GOP Senate nomination, leading Rep. Paul Hodes (D) by 7 points (40 percent to 33 percent), while a June 24-July 1 UNH poll had Ayotte up by 4 points, 39 percent to 35 percent.

In Ohio, a Nov. 5-9 Quinnipiac poll found former Rep. Rob Portman (R) leading Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher (D) 39 percent to 36 percent in a very competitive Senate trial heat pitting the two primary frontrunners against each other. In a Jan. 29-Feb. 2 Quinnipiac survey, Fisher held a commanding 42 percent to 27 percent advantage over Portman.

You can certainly quibble with any of these surveys or note that in some cases the movement is small, but the trend appears to be clear.

Other races, where there hasn’t been such movement, remain tight, with the race a statistical dead heat (in Missouri, for example), or with the Republican nominee holding a narrow advantage in most polling (including Kentucky, North Carolina, Illinois and Louisiana).

And in some contests, where there hasn’t been enough independent polling (or the same ballot tests repeated over time), Republicans look to be in much better shape than they ever could have hoped. Colorado is a good example, as is Pennsylvania.

Delaware remains an excellent GOP opportunity, and until Attorney General Beau Biden (D) actually announces that he will take on Rep. Mike Castle (R) in the open-seat Senate race, Democrats have to be at least a wee bit nervous.

Finally, I am struck how much Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) ballot test numbers resemble those of former Sens. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and John Sununu (R-N.H.), as well as soon-to-be-former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D). All three, of course, lost re-election bids.

Since a late July GOP poll, Reid has not exceeded 43 percent in a ballot test against a potential opponent, and he has generally drawn around 41 percent of the vote against his two most likely Republican challengers. His last lead was in a late November 2008 Daily Kos poll in which he had a 46 percent to 40 percent advantage over former Rep. Jon Porter (R), who has since taken himself out of consideration.

The overall shift in the psychology of the cycle may keep Democrats on the defensive and help Republican fundraising. And GOP nominees could well benefit from the fact that late tossups often break to one party, not evenly between the two parties.

A little more than four months ago, I wrote in this space (“Sizing Up the 2010 Senate Contests in the Summer of 2009,” Aug. 3) that for the first time this year I could “imagine a scenario where Democrats do not gain seats in 2010.” That has changed again, so that Republican Senate gains are now looking likely.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on December 14, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

Thursday, December 03, 2009

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.

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Some House Recruits Have Yet to Measure Up to Hype

By Nathan L. Gonzales

During the election off-year, the House campaign committees spend much of their time recruiting and then promoting their top candidates — like college football teams touting their class of high school prospects before they hit the field. But a year out from Election Day, Democrats and Republicans have highly touted recruits who have either flamed out or are far from living up to the early hype.

Simply put, both parties have candidates looking to get back on track.

This spring, Springfield, Ore., Mayor Sid Leiken was touted as one of a handful of top recruits by the National Republican Congressional Committee. By challenging Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) in the 4th district, Leiken was supposed to be an example of the GOP’s effort to recruit top-notch challengers in districts that haven’t been competitive in recent cycles.

Leiken filed on May 13, but his campaign derailed less than a month later after it came to light that he paid his mother $2,000 for campaign polling to a company that wasn’t registered with the state. Over a number of days the story grew bigger as facts trickled out.

“It’s the difference between an article and a story,” according to a House GOP strategist.

Leiken choked back tears as he admitted to failing to properly document the transaction, and the secretary of state is looking into it. The matter was not insignificant, but it didn’t have to completely disrupt his campaign.

“You have to get good people around these candidates for them to succeed,” according to one GOP consultant who believes Leiken could have weathered the storm with better advice.

Instead of giving DeFazio a run for his money (the incumbent had $583,000 in the bank on Sept. 30), Leiken is facing fundraising troubles on top of everything else. The mayor raised just $52,000 through the end of the third quarter and had a paltry $21,000 in his campaign account at the end of September.

According to one GOP source, Leiken is making some changes in his campaign, but it may be too late to change the narrative of the race. For now, he may not even be Republicans’ hottest race in Oregon, with strategists becoming more excited about their prospects in the 5th and even 1st districts.

Across the country in Florida, a once-hot Democratic candidate is having trouble living up to early expectations as well.

For years, Democrats have believed that Rep. Bill Young (R) is close to retiring in Florida’s 10th district. Growing impatient because the former Appropriations chairman continues to seek re-election, this cycle Democrats recruited state Sen. Charlie Justice (D) into the race to see if they could smoke Young out. But Justice’s early fundraising has been mediocre, and Democrats are a long way from scaring Young into retirement.

Justice filed on April 24, raised $86,000 his first quarter of fundraising and $77,000 in his second. Those are less than spectacular numbers for a star recruit. He ended September with $101,000 in the bank, but Young had four times that amount.

“He needs to put in the work to build his operation and make sure he has the money to compete,” admitted one House Democratic strategist. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), who is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s vice chairwoman for incumbent retention this cycle, has been assigned to Justice to help jump-start his campaign.

The jury is still out on several other notable early recruits.

Republicans believe Manchester Mayor Frank Guinta will mount a strong challenge against Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D) in New Hampshire’s 1st district. Guinta got into the race early and drew fire from Democrats after being at a bar when a brawl broke out and failing to call the police.

Democrats believe the mayor’s candidacy was derailed by the incident and highlight the fact that he only raised $126,000 in the third quarter. But Republicans point out that Guinta’s total was only slightly behind Shea-Porter’s $141,000 raised for the quarter and that he ended September only about $100,000 behind the incumbent in cash on hand.

Along with Leiken, California Assemblyman Van Tran (R) was part of a recruiting class built to expand the GOP playing field by challenging Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.).

And like Guinta, Democrats believe Tran’s candidacy has stalled after he raised $92,000 in the third quarter. But after raising a whopping $254,000 from mid-May to June, Tran was going to have difficulty keeping up. After tapping friends and family for contributions, a candidate’s second quarter of fundraising is thought to be considerably more difficult.

Tran had $283,000 in the bank on Sept. 30 compared with $769,000 for Sanchez.

When trouble begins to surface for candidates, early detection is critical.

“Now it’s an identified problem, and we can sit down and try and solve it,” according to one GOP strategist, who would rather advise a candidate after a poor fundraising quarter in the off-year than later next year after resources are invested. “We’re not trying to be ‘survival of the fittest.’ We’re trying to build something.”

Republicans joke that at least their alleged flameouts are raising more money than the Democrats.

Polk County Supervisor of Elections Lori Edwards was supposed to give Democrats a chance at competing for the 12th district seat that Rep. Adam Putnam (R) is vacating in Florida.

She filed on March 2, put together $101,000 through June but raised just $39,000 from July through September and had only $77,000 on hand on Sept. 30. Her likely GOP opponent, former state Rep. Dennis Ross (R), was sitting on $255,000 at the same point.

Similarly, Democrats believe state Rep. Todd Book (D) is their best possible challenger to Rep. Jean Schmidt (R) in Ohio’s 2nd district. But he comes from the least populated portion of the district and raised $64,000 in his first two months in the race, ending September with less than $45,000 in the bank. His opponent in the Democratic primary, David Krikorian, had a head start and showed $115,000 in cash on hand, while Schmidt had $235,000 in the bank.

Schmidt will never be completely safe and Book has time to get on track, but he’s not off to a roaring start. When candidates come up short in fundraising, it’s distressing because that’s all they should be doing at this point, according to one Democratic strategist.

But in the end, even an imperfect challenger could get significant support from their party’s national campaign committee if the race is ultimately deemed as a winnable opportunity.

This story first appeared in Roll Call on October 29, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, August 06, 2009

Sizing Up the 2010 Senate Contests in the Summer of 2009

By Stuart Rothenberg

Six months ago, the 2010 Senate battlefield looked relatively bare, with a few obvious skirmishes mostly in states with GOP incumbents. Three months later, the outlook had brightened dramatically for Democrats, largely the result of a number of GOP retirements and solid Democratic recruiting on those open seats.

But now, as the dog days of summer begin, the landscape has shifted again, this time improving significantly for Republicans.

Democrats no longer have the momentum they once possessed. Even more important, signs of some Democratic vulnerability have appeared, giving the National Republican Senatorial Committee opportunities to shoot at, rather than forcing it to play an entirely defensive game, as it has the past two cycles.

Fifteen months before the midterms, Democrats have major problems in two states — Illinois and Connecticut — while a third, Nevada, remains a potential headache. Republicans, on the other hand, have serious vulnerabilities in four states — Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire and Ohio — and potential problems in two others. But of late, even those Republican vulnerabilities look less daunting than they once did.

The announcement by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) that she will seek re-election rather than run for the Senate (or governor) immediately boosted Republican prospects in what remains a very difficult state for the GOP. But Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) should be a formidable candidate, while Democrats have a field that is less than intimidating.

And in Connecticut, veteran Sen. Chris Dodd (D) has aired multiple TV ads in an attempt to remind Constitution State voters what he has accomplished and what he stands for — an open acknowledgment that he has work to do to repair his image. Republicans now worry that Dodd, who just announced he will have surgery for prostate cancer, will retire rather than seek re-election, thereby damaging their prospects of winning the seat.

Democrats have two formidable candidates in Kentucky, while Republicans recently received a gift from Sen. Jim Bunning (R) when the endangered two-term incumbent announced that he would not seek a third term. That means Secretary of State Trey Grayson will likely be the GOP nominee, dramatically increasing the chances that Republicans can retain the seat.

Former New Hampshire Attorney General Kelly Ayotte (R) is moving toward a Senate bid in the Granite State’s open-seat contest, and while she is not yet a proven campaigner, insiders who know her speak effusively about her abilities and appeal. Democrats once viewed their likely nominee, Rep. Paul Hodes, as a solid favorite to win the seat, but the race now looks like a tossup, at best, for Democrats.

Meanwhile President Barack Obama’s sliding popularity is at least a troubling sign for Democrats in both Missouri and Ohio, where Republican Senate candidates may benefit from the public’s growing concerns about federal spending, possible tax hikes and bigger government.

Republicans still lack a top-tier challenger to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and Sen. John Ensign’s (R-Nev.) recent personal troubles certainly don’t boost Republican prospects next year. Still, as the president’s point man in the Senate, Reid simply makes himself a juicy target in the midterm elections.

Democrats have potential opportunities in North Carolina and Louisiana, but they still have work to do in both. The party has not yet recruited a serious threat to Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), and while Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-La.) is widely rumored to be leaning toward a challenge to Sen. David Vitter (R), the state’s fundamentals and the midterm environment raise questions about the viability of the challenge.

Republicans have three longer-shot opportunities that shouldn’t yet be completely discounted — Arkansas, Colorado and Pennsylvania — though in each case the Democratic incumbent has a considerable advantage. Pennsylvania, in particular, is intriguing, since a truly nasty Democratic primary seems likely and the GOP nominee, former Rep. Pat Toomey, is not without appeal.

Eleven Republican and 12 Democratic Senate seats up next year now look safe. But if Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) decides to run for the Senate, as some GOP insiders now believe he will, another of those safe Democratic seats suddenly becomes a tossup.

Republicans would be wise not to celebrate just yet. Their diminished vulnerability is, in part, the result of Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter’s leaving the GOP, which cost them a seat that they probably were going to lose next year. And with Democrats controlling 60 of the Senate’s 100 seats going into next year’s elections, any additional Republican losses would add to the party’s existing woes.

The widely expected resignation of Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) in the fall, which will lead to a special election in the first half of 2010, also creates some uncertainty. While Republicans will have a strong nominee and the NRSC will spend what it takes to hold the seat, the special election is at least a major distraction for the national GOP.

If politics is about momentum and message, then the outlook for ’10 has changed considerably over the past couple of months. Democrats still have a wealth of opportunities and some advantages, but Republicans now have momentum and an improving issue mix. For the first time this cycle, I can imagine a scenario where Democrats do not gain Senate seats in 2010.

This column first appeared in Roll Call on August 3, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Late Primaries Can Equal Big Headaches in Targeted Races

By Nathan L. Gonzales

As House Republicans are drawing up their list of top Democratic targets in 2010, a familiar enemy awaits: the primary election calendar.

A handful of the GOP’s best takeover opportunities are in states such as Arizona, Maryland, Florida and New Hampshire, where late and crowded primaries have the potential to put the party’s nominee at a distinct disadvantage heading into the general election.

In addition to often leaving the party’s base fractured, late primaries can produce battered nominees with depleted bank accounts and only a few weeks to recover.

Last cycle, in what one GOP operative described as a “train wreck,” Maricopa County Treasurer David Schweikert won the Republican nomination with 29 percent in a six-way primary in early September in Arizona’s 5th district.

While Schweikert began to reload for the general election, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee unloaded television ads attacking him the same week. Schweikert was never really able to regain strong footing, and Rep. Harry Mitchell (D) — who was then a top target after knocking off a Republican incumbent in 2006 — easily won re-election, 53 percent to 44 percent.

Schweikert “never got out of the box,” one Democratic strategist said.

Mitchell is once again a top target in 2010, but Republicans face yet another late primary. Schweikert is running again, and this time he faces a primary against former LucasArts President Jim Ward.

Along with the financial ramifications of a late primary, the increasing emphasis on early voting is a challenge because it narrows the window between when the primary ends and the general election begins. In Arizona, next year’s primary will be Aug. 24 while early voting begins Oct. 7.

Republicans also have their sights set on freshman Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-Md.), who won in the heavily Republican 1st district last year with 49 percent of the vote. Kratovil benefited greatly from a bloody GOP primary fight between moderate Rep. Wayne Gilchrest and state Sen. Andy Harris. Harris won, but the fight left the party heavily fractured, both ideologically and geographically, with Harris burning many bridges in the Eastern Shore-based district. Gilchrest went on to endorse Kratovil, and Harris couldn’t match the Democrats’ spending on Baltimore television.

Harris is running again, but he may face state Sen. E.J. Pipkin (who came in third in the 2008 primary) or former state Del. Al Redmer in the primary. More importantly, last year’s primary was held Feb. 12 in conjunction with the presidential primary, but next year it will be Sept. 14.

Last cycle, the National Republican Congressional Committee in particular took heat for not getting more involved in primaries in order to get the strongest general election candidate. But in an age when candidates are eager to run against the establishment, there isn’t a lot the national parties can do to clear primary fields.

“The NRCC’s policy on primaries is that there is no policy,” one committee official said. At times in the past, the committee’s intervention has created exactly the opposite effect of what was intended.

One thing the campaign committees can do is grease the fundraising gears. Earlier this decade, the NRCC created special funds to raise money for its eventual nominees in competitive races with contested primaries. The accounts were a repository for money from other Members and for money that the White House helped raise to be transferred to the Congressional nominee after the primary.

For example, in 2004, then-Washington state Rep. Cathy McMorris inherited $200,000 after she won the GOP nomination on Sept. 14 in a three-way primary. The infusion of money helped her gain the 5th district seat over a self-funding Democratic opponent.

“Late primaries have to be managed,”one GOP operative said. Aside from setting up special accounts, Republicans try to prepare by making sure potential nominees have their general election media and mail plans in places, including research on potential opponents.

The DCCC prepares research on all potential GOP opponents, but instead of setting up generic fundraising accounts in certain races, the committee immediately puts its nominees on the “Red to Blue” program list in order to jump-start their fundraising and boost the candidates’ ability to collect Member contributions.

In addition to the Arizona race, the DCCC went on the air in New Hampshire’s 1st district almost immediately after former Rep. Jeb Bradley secured the GOP nomination in early September of last year. The committee’s spending helped boost Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D) to a 52 percent to 46 percent victory in November.

Two years before, Shea-Porter surprised both parties when she knocked off state Senate Minority Leader Jim Craig, the DCCC’s preferred candidate, and went on to defeat Bradley without support from the national party.

This cycle, Republicans look to be headed for another September primary to determine who will take on Shea-Porter. But Democrats will also likely have a crowded primary in the state’s 2nd district, where they are trying to hold the seat being vacated by Rep. Paul Hodes (D) to run for Senate.

The DCCC chose not to immediately flex its fundraising muscle last year in New York’s 26th district after Alice Kryzan (D) was the surprise winner of the Sept. 9 primary over the DCCC’s favored candidate.

Recent Republican successes in races that featured late primaries have often been circumstantial.

Last year in Kansas’ 2nd district, state Treasurer Lynn Jenkins beat former Rep. Jim Ryun in a competitive Aug. 5 primary. But Jenkins’ general election victory over then-Rep. Nancy Boyda (D) had more to do with the Republican nature of the district and the relatively inexpensive media markets there. Another big factor was that Boyda shunned all outside help, so the DCCC didn’t come in with its usual TV blitz.

Back in 2000 when Republicans enjoyed more fundraising parity (and were able to use soft money), the NRCC helped elect Ric Keller (R) in Florida’s 8th district by going on television and attacking Orange County Chairman Linda Chapin (D) three weeks before the primary. Keller finished second in the Sept. 5 primary and first in the Oct. 3 runoff.

But a late primary also helped foreshadow Keller’s loss in 2008. The Congressman’s 53 percent to 47 percent primary victory over an unknown candidate on Aug. 26 demonstrated that he had significant cracks in his base of support. He lost in November 52 percent to 48 percent to now-Rep. Alan Grayson (D).

Multiple candidates are interested in taking on Grayson in 2010, setting up what could be a competitive Aug. 24 GOP primary in the 8th district. Republicans could also see a crowded primary in the 24th district represented by freshman Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-Fla.).

Democrats are not immune to the negative fallout from late primaries, but with a significant majority in the House, they are less of a concern.

Democrats will likely see a competitive September primary in Hawaii’s 1st district, where Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D) is running for governor. Honolulu City Councilman Charles Djou (R) is hoping for a repeat of 1986, when Republican Pat Saiki was elected to Congress in the wake of a bloody late Democratic primary.

Multiple Democratic candidates are lining up to take on Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), including 2008 nominee Elwyn Tinklenberg, physician Maureen Reed and state Sen. Tarryl Clark. Democrats hope the party’s nominating convention winnows the field before the September primary.

Similarly in Colorado’s 4th district, Republicans hope that state Rep. Cory Gardner’s early fundraising and the district’s convention sorts out the GOP race before the Aug. 12 primary.

This story first appeared in Roll Call on July 23, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Polling in Perilous Territory

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Are Sens. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) or Richard Burr (R-N.C.) this cycle’s Rick Santorum?

The former Pennsylvania Senator began his 2006 re-election race down in the polls and never recovered. And while Bunning, Dodd and Burr have something in common with Santorum’s early standing, each hopes for a different outcome.

Whether it’s trailing in polls from the get-go, as was the case for Santorum and then-Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) in 2008, or leading but at the mid-40 percent mark in ballot tests like then-Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), all three recent cases demonstrated the difficulty for vulnerable Senators to significantly improve their standing over the course of a campaign.

Santorum trailed now-Sen. Bob Casey (D) 44 percent to 43 percent in a March 2005 Keystone poll and by a wider 49 percent to 35 percent margin in an April 2005 Quinnipiac University survey. Overall,

Santorum never led over the course of two years and lost on Election Day, 59 percent to 41 percent.

In New Hampshire last cycle, Sununu trailed former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D) 44 percent to 34 percent in a March 2007 American Research Group survey and trailed in all but one of 35 public polls over the course of the campaign, never topping 45 percent. He lost 52 percent to 45 percent on Election Day.

Of course, each Senate race has some unique characteristics, but Bunning, Dodd and Burr start their re-elections from a position of fundamental weakness.

Bunning’s vulnerability has been known since his narrow victory in 2004. An early Research 2000 survey in February 2009 for the liberal Daily Kos Web site showed Bunning defeating four potential Democratic opponents but still in the mid-40s on the ballot tests. Two months later, the former Hall of Fame pitcher trailed all four opponents and polled in the low to mid-30s, according to a survey by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling.

Dodd’s vulnerability started with headlines and then was realized when a Quinnipiac poll in February showed that 51 percent of Connecticut voters would probably not or definitely not vote to re-elect the Democrat and that more people disapproved (48 percent) than approved (41 percent) of the job that he is doing.

A month later, Quinnipiac showed Dodd in a dead heat with former Rep. Rob Simmons (R), 43 percent to 42 percent. Later in March, a Research 2000 poll had slightly better news, with Dodd besting Simmons 45 percent to 40 percent.

“Their numbers are so bad that it goes well beyond the environment,” said one GOP strategist speaking on the condition of anonymity so that he could speak freely about Dodd and Bunning.

“It doesn’t matter if Obama finds a cure for cancer, Dodd is not coming back to the U.S. Senate,” he added, while predicting that Bunning would lose, too.

In North Carolina, Burr has consistently polled between 37 percent and 46 percent in ballot tests conducted this year by the PPP, which is based in the state. The Republican has led some potential Democratic opponents and trailed state Attorney General Roy Cooper, the party’s top prospect who has yet to announce his intentions. But Burr’s standing is more important than the margin.

Last cycle, Democrats hypothesized that Smith had an electoral ceiling in the mid-40s, and that’s why they weren’t discouraged even when their February 2007 survey showed him ahead of Rep. Peter DeFazio (D) 42 percent to 38 percent. Smith consistently polled in the low 40s throughout the race and received 46 percent on Election Day.

Supporters of Dodd and Burr maintain that the incumbents’ initial numbers are soft because they are still undefined in the voters’ minds.

Considering the significant recent population growth of North Carolina, it’s an easier argument for Burr to make after one term in office. But that doesn’t make him any less vulnerable. He had an extremely low 37 percent favorable/13 percent unfavorable rating in a mid-March poll for the Civitas Institute (R). Plus, he’s running in a tossup state that President Barack Obama carried very narrowly.

For Dodd, it’s much tougher to redefine himself after representing the state for almost three decades. He had 91 percent name identification in Quinnipiac’s March poll (46 percent favorable/45 percent unfavorable) and 87 percent name identification in the March survey by Research 2000 (47 percent favorable/40 percent unfavorable).

In the spring of the year before their losses, Santorum’s name identification was 60 percent while Sununu was closer to 70 percent.

Vulnerable incumbents tend to overestimate their ability to define their race as a choice between two candidates. This cycle, Democrats will attempt to tie Simmons to former President George W. Bush, former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, while Republicans will try to use Cooper’s record against him and declare whomever winds up the Democratic nominee in Kentucky too liberal for the state.

But it doesn’t always work. In the previous cycle, Sununu was confident that the race would shift once he refocused voters on Shaheen’s record as governor — the message that helped him defeat her six years earlier. Santorum, Sununu and Smith spent a combined $45 million trying to reframe their races to no avail.

Bunning and Dodd will likely watch the other party compete in a competitive primary, when Santorum and Sununu’s challengers had clear paths to the nomination. But that doesn’t guarantee success either, since the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee helped drag now-Sen. Jeff Merkley (Ore.) through the primary last cycle before he knocked off Smith.

But while Santorum, Sununu and Smith ran in states trending against them, Bunning and Dodd are running for re-election in more favorable territory. Obama carried Connecticut with 61 percent and Oregon with 57 percent, while Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) carried Kentucky with 58 percent.

Democrats believe this is most significant for Dodd, who simply needs to remind Democratic voters about the good things that the Senator has done for them. “I would much rather have to win back Democrats than have to win over Republicans,” Dodd campaign manager Jay Howser said.

And while Santorum and Sununu ran into a political headwind, next year’s political environment is uncertain. “Political die is not cast yet on next year’s election,” said one GOP strategist familiar with Burr’s race.

Still, using recent history as a guide, the longer an incumbent is mired at less than 50 percent, the more difficult it becomes to break out on Election Day.

This story first appeared in Roll Call on April 23, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

New Print Edition: New Hampshire 1 & South Carolina 1

The April 3, 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 this edition:

New Hampshire 1: Politics Goes On
By Nathan L. Gonzales

Two years ago, Carol Shea-Porter rode the Democratic wave into Congress. And she would have been swept out last cycle had she not learned some critical lessons.

Shea-Porter defeated incumbent Cong. Jeb Bradley (R) without the help of the national party in 2006, so she initially rejected party offers to help her win reelection. But she eventually reversed that decision, and the DCCC helped her turn back another challenge by Bradley in November.

This year, the congresswoman actively considered a run for the open U.S. Senate being vacated by GOP Sen. Judd Gregg, but she recently announced that she would take a pass on that contest. And even though Shea-Porter required some special attention from Democratic strategists last cycle, they are much happier having her run for reelection than defending an open seat. For the whole story, subscribe to the print edition of the Report.

South Carolina 1: We Didn’t Start the Fire
By Nathan L. Gonzales

Early last fall, it looked as if South Carolina Cong. Henry Brown (R) was on the fast track to involuntary involvement. He hadn’t faced a Democratic opponent in years, let alone a serious one, when he was suddenly confronted with a well-funded challenger and a national wave that was sweeping out many of his colleagues.

But Brown righted his campaign with just enough time to survive, and now Democrats are wondering whether they missed their opportunity.

In 2008, Democrat Linda Ketner ran a classic outsider race. She had the personal money to blast Brown with television ads turning his incumbency into a liability with an electorate unhappy with Washington. And she was nearly successful in a very Republican district until Brown finally returned fire.

The congressman’s narrow victory last fall demonstrated some vulnerability, and it could land him credible Democratic and Republican opponents next year. For the whole story, subscribe to the print edition of the Report.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Are Republicans Ready to Mount a Comeback in the Northeast?

By Stuart Rothenberg

It’s so widely accepted as a truth that the Republican Party is clinically dead in the Northeast that no warnings to the contrary would even get a second look. But like so many other sweeping generalizations with more than a grain of truth, the death of the GOP in the Mid-Atlantic and New England states has been greatly exaggerated.

True, over the past decade, the GOP has been slaughtered in New England. Republicans don’t control a single state legislative chamber in the six-state region, and Democrats now hold all 21 of New England’s House seats after losing their last holdout, Rep. Christopher Shays, in southwestern Connecticut last year.

Democrats also hold nine of the region’s 12 Senate seats and hope to pick up a 10th in New Hampshire next year.

In the Mid-Atlantic, things aren’t much better for Republicans. New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland each send two Democrats to the Senate, while Pennsylvania has one Democrat and one Republican, Arlen Specter — who is a top Democratic target in 2010. The GOP controls the Pennsylvania state Senate, but Democrats have a majority in each of the region’s other legislative chambers.

In the House, Republicans hold only one of Maryland’s eight districts, five of New Jersey’s 13 districts and just three of New York’s 29 districts. The GOP holds all of Delaware’s (OK, it’s just one), but only seven of Pennsylvania’s 19 House seats.

And in the 12 states in New England and the Mid-Atlantic, the GOP holds just three governorships: Rhode Island, Connecticut and Vermont.

But 2010 could be the start of a comeback for the GOP in the Northeast, in part because the party suffered such complete devastation that a bit of a rebound seems close to inevitable.

First, two of the party’s three governors are eligible to seek re-election, and Jim Douglas in Vermont and Jodi Rell in Connecticut are expected to do so. Rell is wildly popular and a solid favorite for another term, while Douglas is a more narrow favorite.

The GOP is likely to lose the Rhode Island governorship after holding it, somewhat surprisingly, for 16 years in a row. But Pennsylvania’s open governorship offers the GOP an excellent opportunity for a takeover, and Republicans may even be competitive in the race for Maine’s open governorship.

In New York, Republican Jim Tedisco is favored to win appointed Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s (D) open Congressional seat, adding to the GOP ranks in the state. Businessman Richard Hanna (R) came within an eyelash of upsetting Rep. Michael Arcuri (D) in November, and Republicans are certain to make another run at the two-term Democrat next year.

Assemblyman Greg Ball (R) is entering the race in New York’s 19th district (which stretches from Westchester almost to Poughkeepsie), giving the party a credible nominee against two-term Rep. John Hall (D) in a GOP-leaning district, and if the party can recruit a strong challenger to Rep. Eric Massa in the 29th district, the freshman Democrat could have major problems.

In statewide contests, Gillibrand could face a nasty Senate primary, as could Gov. David Paterson (D), giving Republicans two opportunities. The Democratic nominees would be favored in both races, but a strong GOP bid in either contest would boost party morale, helping further recruitment down the road and down the ballot.

In New Jersey, polling shows the favorite for the GOP gubernatorial nomination, former U.S. attorney Chris Christie, being a formidable opponent for Gov. Jon Corzine (D) later this year, especially given the state’s economic problems.

In Connecticut, Sen. Chris Dodd (D) suddenly looks weaker than ever, primarily because of allegations that he benefited from special treatment given to him by mortgage lender Countrywide Financial. Former Rep. Rob Simmons (R) is considering a run, and while he would be an underdog, he would at the very least be the most formidable GOP Senate candidate in Connecticut since Lowell Weicker in 1988.

If the National Republican Congressional Committee can recruit state Sen. John McKinney, 44, to run against freshman Rep. Jim Himes (D) in Connecticut’s 4th district, the GOP would also have a top-tier contest in the state. McKinney, the youngest child of former Rep. Stewart McKinney (R-Conn.), is in his fifth term in the state Senate, where he is Minority Leader.

Republicans will make major efforts to win back Maryland’s 1st district and Pennsylvania’s 10th — two seats that the party never should have lost because each remains very Republican territory. While the open New Hampshire Senate seat of retiring Sen. Judd Gregg (R) gives Democrats another opportunity for a gain in New England, Rep. Paul Hodes’ (D) Senate bid opens up his House seat, giving Republicans an excellent opportunity to win back another seat in the region.

I’m certainly not predicting major Republican gains in the Northeast, but given the avalanche of discussion about the death of the Republican Party from Maryland to Maine, it’s at the very least worth noting that, though fundamentally far weaker than it was 30 or 40 years ago, the GOP can still contest many races in the New England and Mid-Atlantic states.

It’s possible that 2009 and 2010 could be the beginning of a rebound for the party. While Democrats will continue to hold a clear advantage in the region, Republicans have the potential to become relevant once again.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on February 23, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Monday, February 09, 2009

New Hampshire Senate: Did Republicans Get Rolled in the Granite State?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Initial reports that Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) would be appointed Commerce secretary were invariably followed with a caveat that Gov. John Lynch (D) had agreed to appoint another Republican to fill the vacancy, thereby maintaining the current Senate balance of power and denying Senate Democrats a 60-vote majority.

The crucial question, however, is not whether New Hampshire’s soon-to-be- appointed Senator is a Republican or will caucus with Republicans, but whether she will vote with Democrats to limit debate when other Republicans are trying to keep a filibuster going or pass a key amendment.

If Sen.-designee Bonnie Newman becomes the Democrats’ 60th vote to bring the Employee Free Choice Act to the floor (assuming it ever gets that far) or to confirm a judge that other Republicans oppose, it won’t matter what her party affiliation is.

In the early 1980s, then-Texas Rep. Phil Gramm still caucused with Democrats for months after he started voting like a Republican and working strategically with members of the GOP.

Some Republicans believe that Newman will vote pretty much as Gregg would have on fiscal matters, though they express less certainty about her vote on cultural matters and education issues.

But conservatives clearly have more than enough reason to worry because all of the praise being heaped on her by New Hampshire Democrats suggests she won’t be as reliable as the least dependable of the GOP’s current sitting Senators.

Newman, after all, endorsed Lynch when he first sought the governorship in 2002 against the sitting governor, Republican Craig Benson. And she has described herself as a “reasonable Republican” — not exactly the kind of self-identification that suggests she has an altogether favorable impression of her own party.

Lynch’s selection of Newman, who has already indicated she will not seek a full term, is a political masterstroke (as was President Barack Obama’s selection of Gregg), even if the more liberal elements of his own party are unhappy that he picked a Republican.

In fact, the trade of Gregg for Newman is so one-sided in favor of Democrats that it is reminiscent of the 1964 deal in which the Chicago Cubs sent future Hall of Famer Lou Brock and two others to the St. Louis Cardinals for aging pitcher Ernie Broglio and others.

Democrats get rid of Gregg, who, had he sought re-election in 2010, would have been the GOP’s strongest nominee, and get an open seat to shoot at instead. They get a new Republican Senator who has supported Democrats in the past, calls herself a moderate Republican and has the kind of résumé that suggests she’ll fit in just fine with many of her new Democratic colleagues.

Obama gets a new Republican recruit who can push the president’s economic agenda and a new Senator who might look more kindly on some White House initiatives.

And Lynch once again seems to place himself above partisan politics, enhancing his already considerable stature and standing, and avoids having to anger either of the state’s two Democratic House Members by picking the other.

Democrats start out no worse than even money to pick up the Senate seat next year.

Rep. Paul Hodes (D), who had been preparing to challenge Gregg, quickly indicated he would run for the open seat. The state’s other Member, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D), has not indicated her plans, but insiders doubt that she will enter the race against Hodes.

“I think he is going to avoid a major primary,” one savvy political observer said, “but everyone needs to keep an eye on Shea-Porter.”

Veteran Granite State Republicans agree that the first name on most lists is former Sen. John Sununu, who was defeated for reelection last year. But they also agree that Sununu is “lukewarm” about the idea and already seems to have “moved on” after his loss. Only 44 years old, he has plenty of time to re-enter politics at a later date.

Still, the former Senator’s father, former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, is now state GOP chairman, putting him in a unique position to recruit his son, if he so chooses.

After the younger Sununu, the name mentioned most often is former Gov. Steve Merrill, who is president of the Bingham Consulting Group. He served two terms as governor, winning by overwhelmingly margins in 1992 and 1994 (the state still has two-year terms), but he did not seek a third term. Merrill ran unsuccessfully for Republican National Committee chairman in 1997.

Former Rep. Charles Bass (R-N.H.) is also mentioned. Bass, who was upset by Hodes in 2006, was a victim of the Democratic wave that year and would be a credible GOP nominee against Hodes for the Senate seat.

After Sununu, Merrill and Bass, the party is left with much lesser figures. Among those mentioned are radio talk-show host Jennifer Horn and former Health and Human Services Commissioner John Stephen. Horn lost to Hodes last year, while Stephen has lost two GOP primary bids for Congress — hardly the kind of résumés that would generate Republican optimism.

One more interesting name floating around is Sean Mahoney, a forty-something businessman and the state’s Republican National Committeeman, who finished third (behind Bradley and Stephen) in the 2002 1st district GOP primary for the seat left open when Sununu ran for Senate. Bradley won the nomination and the seat that year, but was ousted by Shea-Porter in 2006.

Mahoney owns Millyard Communications Inc., which publishes Business NH Magazine, and reportedly is showing at least some interest in the race. He has personal resources.

While New Hampshire is no longer reliably Republican, its voting behavior over the past few years may well exaggerate Democratic strength in the state. Both the Senate race and Hodes’ Congressional district could well see competitive races if the state GOP can recruit credible nominees.


This column first appeared in Roll Call on February 5, 2009. 2009 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

New Hampshire Senate: The Polls Didn’t Lie

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Even though New Hampshire Sen. John Sununu (R) trailed former Gov. Jeanne Shaheen (D) in the polls for almost two years, that didn’t stop some GOP operatives from maintaining a sliver of optimism about the race, even in the campaign’s final months.

But Republicans were too focused on the margin between the Senator and his Democratic opponent (whom he defeated six years ago in a better political environment) in public polls and in private GOP surveys and didn’t put enough weight on Sununu’s standing in ballot tests in the race.

In 35 public polls taken from March 2007 through the end of October 2008, Sununu trailed in all but one of them. A December 2007 American Research Group poll showed the Republican with an astounding 11-point lead, which was a clear outlier.

A crop of polls in early to mid-September showed Sununu narrowing a consistent double-digit gap to single digits, as the Senator invoked his campaign plan. Unlike some of his colleagues, Sununu chose not to advertise early, and instead kept his campaign cash until the fall.

While Shaheen’s lead narrowed below double digits in the fall, Sununu’s number remained unchanged — stuck in the low 40s. The strange December ARG survey was the only public poll in which the Senator exceeded 45 percent in a ballot test.

In the end, Sununu lost to Shaheen 52 percent to 45 percent.

The Republican’s decision to save his money until the fall probably didn’t hurt his chances. Some of his Republican colleagues advertised early (Gordon Smith in Oregon and Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina) and still lost re-election.

But Sununu was banking on Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) competing in and even potentially winning New Hampshire in the presidential contest (McCain wound up losing the state by 9 points) and hoping that the 2006 GOP bloodbath in the state was an aberration.

That proved to be wishful thinking. And what’s more, Sununu received support from only 37 percent of female voters against Shaheen — the lowest total by a Republican Senate incumbent in the country.

This story
first appeared on RollCall.com on December 1, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

NRSC Finally Joins DSCC on the Air

By Nathan L. Gonzales

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

Sunday, July 20, 2008

Mississippi Senate: Democrats Look to Defy History

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Former Mississippi Gov. Ronnie Musgrove (D) will have to defy history to win this year’s Senate special election in the Magnolia State.

Over the last 60 years, there have been 23 times when both of a state’s Senate seats were up for election. In 20 of those instances (87 percent of the time), one party won both seats.

This year, two states have elections for both Senate seats: Wyoming and Mississippi. While Wyoming Republican Sen. Mike Enzi and Mississippi Republican Sen. Thad Cochran have known for six years that their seats would be up, the death of Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.) in 2007 and the unexpected midterm retirement of Trent Lott (R-Miss.) have forced special elections in those states.

Republicans are not at risk of losing either of the Wyoming seats, but Democrats are excited about Musgrove’s prospects against appointed Sen. Roger Wicker (R). Cochran is a heavy favorite to win re-election.

But further analysis of the three instances where the two Senate races were won by candidates from different parties show an even tougher road for Musgrove. In two of the three instances, the split results maintained the partisan status quo before the election.

In Idaho in 1962, Democratic Sen. Frank Church won re-election while appointed Sen. Len Jordan’s (R) victory retained the Republican seat. And in South Carolina in 1966, Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond won re-election, just as Democrat Fritz Hollings held the Democratic seat after defeating the incumbent in the primary.

In the final case, in New Hampshire in 1962, Republican Sen. Norris Cotton won re-election, while his party lost the state’s other Senate seat. But the Senator who had been appointed to fill that vacancy and who ran to fill the rest of the unexpired term, Maurice Murphy Jr. (R), lost in the primary, and Thomas McIntyre (D) defeated Rep. Perkins Bass (R) in the general election. (Bass is the father of former Rep. Charlie Bass, who lost reelection last year in New Hampshire’s 2nd Congressional district.)

So if Musgrove wins this year, it will be the first time in at least six decades that an appointed Senator has lost election in the same cycle that his party won the state’s other Senate seat.

This item
first appeared on RollCall.com on July 16, 2008. 2008 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

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.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Are Senate Races Moving in One Partisan Direction?

By Stuart Rothenberg

Senate election cycles normally take one of two paths. Either all the close races fall toward one party in a political “wave,” or individual races are decided by race-specific factors, particularly the quality of the candidates, the power of incumbency and local issues.

We’ve had cycles when both parties have suffered a substantial number of defeats with only a minimal net change of Senate seats (1976 and 1978 are prime examples), but that’s not going to happen this cycle. Republicans have only a single reasonable opportunity for a takeover this year.

We’ve had four noteworthy Senate “waves” in the past 28 years, in 2006, 1994, 1986 and 1980, and it’s possible that we’ll see another one this year. But it’s also possible that all the talk about Democratic Senate opportunities is just a bit over-hyped, and that Democrats will have a good year, not a great one.

One way of anticipating whether a wave is likely to develop is to monitor competitive Senate contests periodically to determine whether they are moving in one direction. That’s what I intend to do in this column. Of course, any wave may not show itself until after the two presidential nominating conventions. Still, the way individual Senate races move in the near term may offer some clue about a trend.

I must begin with one caveat: In evaluating races, I do not factor in certain widely circulated polls, including those conducted by Rasmussen Reports, that I regard as less reliable. (In other words, I treat some polls as if they don’t even exist.)

Democrats continue to be well- positioned to take over three GOP-held seats: open seats in Virginia and New Mexico, and Sen. John Sununu’s seat in New Hampshire. There is no evidence of significant movement in any of those contests, though Republicans continue to insist that Sununu’s race will close.

Democrats, of course, don’t need movement in any of the contests. They lead in all three.

The fourth most vulnerable Senate seat, the open Republican seat in Colorado, remains competitive. But given the state’s recent political behavior and the national mood, GOP insiders have little reason to be optimistic about their chances.

The next most vulnerable Senate seat, in Minnesota, has moved toward the Republicans in recent weeks. GOP strategists have successfully put presumptive Democratic-Farmer-Labor nominee Al Franken on the defensive, both over his nonpayment of certain taxes and, more importantly, a variety of statements he has made over the years.

Franken has defended his remarks by insisting that they were part of his shtick and intended as satire, not statements of his beliefs. But his language has been crude and his comedy often biting, and even some Democratic officeholders have expressed concern about his judgment.

Republican Sen. Norm Coleman has benefited in the polls of late, and even though Franken has time to change the dynamic of the race, it now seems likely that the comedian turned politician will have to defend himself repeatedly over the next four months. At the very least, that puts the challenger constantly on the defensive, improving Coleman’s prospects.

There are no signs of movement in Alaska, and that’s good news for Democrats. Polls continue to show challenger Mark Begich (D) leading Sen. Ted Stevens (R) narrowly. The longer that race stays tight, the better for Democrats, who are trying to knock off a state political icon.

The fact that the Maine race has not closed in surveys widely viewed as reliable is disappointing news for Democrats. GOP Sen. Susan Collins continues to be well-regarded and has a comfortable lead over her challenger, Rep. Tom Allen (D). Sitting in a blue state that went for Al Gore and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Collins would seem to be a perfect target in a “wave” election, but so far, her prospects are undimmed.

Democrats remain upbeat about Jeff Merkley’s chances of ousting Sen. Gordon Smith in Oregon, but I’m not convinced that they are any closer to doing that now than they were four or five months ago.

True, the recent decision by Independent John Frohmayer to drop his Senate candidacy is good news for Merkley. But it is difficult to see it as all that significant, especially since Democrats spent so much time and effort arguing that Frohmayer’s candidacy was inconsequential when he was a candidate. If they were right that he wasn’t going to be a factor in the race, they cannot now claim that his exit is all that important.

Still, this definitely is a race to watch for possible “wave” evidence, and Smith almost certainly will have a fight on his hands all the way to November.

If a wave develops, the three best places to watch may well be North Carolina, Kentucky and Mississippi. Democratic prospects in all three seem to have improved recently (especially after post-primary polling in North Carolina and Kentucky), giving the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee more options in the campaign’s final months.

Even Republicans seem increasingly nervous about Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.), who hasn’t released polling numbers since February and has been up on TV since late May. Dole’s opponent, state Sen. Kay Hagan (D), has some liabilities, but I have little doubt about her work ethic.

Finally, the Louisiana Senate race, pitting incumbent Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) against her GOP challenger, John Kennedy, hasn’t changed at all. Polls show the Senator ahead, but the fundamentals almost guarantee a close race.

In sum, developments in two states, Minnesota and Maine, should have Republicans optimistic, while Democrats have reasons to be happy about some longer-shot races, as well as their top takeover opportunities.


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