When It Comes to Election 2008, You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet

By Stuart Rothenberg

America’s long national nightmare — the 2008 election — is coming to an end. But don’t worry. We still have another painful, gut-wrenching three months of campaigning, TV ads, direct-mail pieces and political telephone calls that will fill up our answering machines, jam our mailboxes and disrupt our family dinners.

Yes, the longest campaign in history is about to ratchet up in intensity to a level that you’ve never seen and possibly can’t yet imagine.

If you want to know what to expect, imagine the hype of the Super Bowl, the Olympics and the Oscars, multiply it by about a million, and you’ll have at least some idea about the political frenzy that you’ll start experiencing with the two national party conventions in late August and early September and continuing all the way to early November.

Consider the amount of money that the national party committees are sitting on.

As of June 30, The Republican and Democratic national committees, the two Congressional campaign committees and two Senate campaign committees were sitting on a combined $207 million.

On the GOP side, the majority of the cash was held by the Republican National Committee ($68.7 million of the three committees’ total of $101.7 million), while on the Democratic side, the fattest wallet was the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ($54.6 million of the three Democratic committees’ total $105.3 million).

Add to that bankroll the roughly $84 million in federal matching funds that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) will receive and spend and the more than $200 million that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is expected to raise and spend between the Democratic National Convention and Election Day, and you may start to see what kind of political deluge we are in for.

Of course, you still need to add in the many tens of millions that individual House and Senate candidates will spend between Labor Day and Nov. 4, and the spending from “outside groups” such as Freedom’s Watch, environmental and labor groups or other individuals or interests.

None of this includes the spending and time that the media will devote to hyping the election, which has drawn so much interest nationally and internationally that the suits who run big media companies have finally figured out that they can make money covering politics — as long as they cover it like the latest Paris Hilton development.

You can bet that between now and November, each of the campaigns will have to deal with at least one campaign snafu or controversy. And the media’s coverage of those problems will be suffocating.

So be prepared for more mindless chatter on the cable television networks, and more guests described as “Republican strategist” or “Democratic strategist” that nobody in politics has ever heard of.

Obviously, campaign spending won’t be distributed evenly, so the folks in Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado and a few other states will see a disproportionately large amount of the hundreds of millions of dollars that will be spent in the presidential race and in other campaigns between now and Election Day.

To them go our sympathies.

All of this leads to one question: Will this money really affect the election outcomes very much?

While it’s likely to have an impact in U.S. House races, and could determine the winner in a Senate race or two, it very well may not play a major role in deciding who will be the next president of the United States.

Few TV ads really change people’s minds this late in a race, and the national conventions, debates and “free media” coverage of the candidates from now to November are likely to have a much greater impact on how voters see Obama, McCain and their choice. If Obama closes the deal with undecided voters, it’s not likely to be because of a TV ad, but rather his overall exposure to those voters.

By this time in the election cycle, voters have seen more ads that they care to and have heard candidates and their surrogates promising everything imaginable. Another ad is, well, just another ad — meaningless blather about change or jobs or health care or taxes — that’s aimed at getting votes and getting elected.

Who knows what either McCain or Obama will do once he gets into the White House?

But that won’t stop the parties, campaigns and outside groups from their voter contact and get-out-the-vote efforts. You can never be criticized for raising and spending too much money, only for not raising and spending enough.

So, let the sprint to Election Day begin, with even more ads and more hype than we’ve already had to this point. There will be plenty of “news” shows and political ads to watch, plenty of news coverage to read. I’ll be watching “Bizarre Foods with Andrew Zimmern” on the Travel Channel.


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

Partisans Commission Nonpartisan Polls

By Nathan L. Gonzales

The roles of partisan, strategist, journalist and advocate are fuzzier than ever before. Democratic activist and blogger Markos Moulitsas has commissioned a series of polls in U.S. Senate races across the country this cycle, using the nonpartisan polling firm Research 2000.

“I know the polling I run will be often dismissed by outsiders as partisan polling anyway,” Moulitsas said, “so I wanted a nonpartisan pollster to combat that perception.”

Partisan interest groups do polls all the time, but Moulitsas is breaking the mold by making all of the results public, including the cross tabs, on his popular blog, DailyKos.com. “I publish everything I get from R2K, so it’s all public for whoever wants to use it,” Moulitsas explained. “I publish every poll I take, even if they suck for Democrats — and a bunch have.”

By polling primarily in second- and third-tier races, Moulitsas runs the risk of paying for some lackluster results. For example, Research 2000 polls had Democratic candidates trailing by wide margins in Oklahoma (by 22 points), Maine (by 23 points) and Nebraska (31 points and 27 points in two separate surveys).

Part of Moulitsas’ rationale is to illuminate potentially competitive contests in otherwise ignored states. But it’s not a cheap endeavor.

He’s commissioned at least 20 polls to date, at an estimated cost, according to one Democratic pollster, of between $6,000 and $8,000 each, for a total cost of between $120,000 and $160,000 so far this cycle. Moulitsas declined to discuss the specific cost or terms of his arrangement with Research 2000, but all the surveys are paid for by Kos Media LLC, which derives its revenue from advertising and site subscriptions.

The polls are the latest example of growing tension between Democratic activists who believe Democratic strategists in Washington aren’t paying enough attention to longer-shot races.

“I run a site for political junkies addicted to polls. And polling organizations weren’t polling some of the races I was interested in,” Moulitsas said, while pointing to his December 2007 Alaska survey as an example. That was one of the first public polls to show an extremely competitive race, with Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich (D) leading Sen. Ted Stevens (R) by 6 points.

Because all of the results are public at DailyKos.com, strategists, candidates and committees on both sides of the aisle can benefit from the numbers, particularly in races with a dearth of information, like Idaho, Kansas and Nebraska. Operatives at both the Republican and Democratic Senate campaign committees digest the Daily Kos/Research 2000 numbers with other public polls, but ultimately make spending and strategic decisions based on polls they pay for themselves.

Even though Research 2000 is an established, nonpartisan firm that does work for more traditional media outlets as well, the Kos numbers may still be viewed more skeptically because of the relationship with a liberal, Democratic Web site.

“I’m not going to change how we do questions or how we do polls [depending on who pays for them],” Research 2000 President Del Ali explained, while also being up-front about the business side. “I’m out to make money.”

“I’m turned off with the mainstream media in general,” Ali said. “These bastards [in the media] care more about celebrity. [Moulitsas] is covering what should be covered.”


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

Colts Coach Favors Obama

By Nathan L. Gonzales

Once criticized for speaking to a conservative Christian group, Indianapolis Colts head coach Tony Dungy favors Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in the presidential election.

“I was an Obama guy in the primaries,” Dungy said in an interview with Kenny Mayne in the Aug. 11 issue of ESPN the Magazine. “I remember hearing Dr. King’s ‘I have a dream’ speech when I was 7, but I never thought I’d see an African-American with an opportunity to win the presidency. So this has been stunning to me.”

“I haven’t made up my mind, but I’m definitely leaning toward Obama,” Dungy said.

On one level, the preference isn’t surprising, since both men are high-profile African-Americans. And with Indiana being talked about as a potential battleground state, few individuals are more popular than Dungy outside the sport of basketball.

But the coach’s nod doesn’t come without a potential downside for Obama.

Back in March 2007, Dungy was criticized, particularly by gay activists, for accepting an award from the Indiana Family Institute, specifically because of their opposition to same-sex marriage. In advance of his appearance, some individuals wanted the Super Bowl-winning coach do disavow the conservative Christian group’s views. But Dungy, who isn’t shy about his faith, did precisely the opposite.

“I’m on the Lord’s side, and I appreciate IFI for the stance their taking, and I embrace that stance, okay, and that’s important,” Dungy said in his speech.

“Family is important, and that’s what we’re trying to support. We’re not anti anything else, we’re not trying to downgrade anyone else, hate anyone else, but we’re trying to promote the family, family values, the Lord’s way, just like I’m trying to win on the football field the Lord’s way. No different,” Dungy added.

Obama already has strained relations with the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, whether it is rumors about him choosing former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn (D) to be his running mate or campaigning with gospel entertainer Donnie McClurkin in South Carolina early in the primary season.

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

Louisiana 4: Fleming’s Poll Shows Wide Lead in Primary

By Nathan L. Gonzales

John Fleming is ahead in the crowded GOP field in Louisiana’s 4th district, according to a recently-released poll for his campaign.

Fleming, who is a doctor and a businessman, received 43 percent in the survey, conducted July 25-27 by Southern Media & Opinion Research. Businessman Chris Gorman, who works for his family’s trucking company, was second with 17 percent, and former Bossier Chamber of Commerce President Jeff Thompson was third with 15 percent.

Retiring Rep. Jim McCrery (R) threw his support behind Thompson, hoping to propel him to the top of a field of previously unknown candidates. But according to this survey, Fleming is in the driver’s seat with a month to go before the Sept. 6 primary.

The winner of the GOP primary will face Caddo district attorney Paul Carmouche (D), in what is expected to be a very competitive race, particularly in light of recent Democratic success in the special elections in Louisiana’s 6th district and Mississippi’s 1st district. Carmouche is on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s list of “Red to Blue” candidates who are targeted to receive help from the national party.

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