Alan Keyes Award

I've been trying to keep the Alan Keyes Award out of the race for the White House, but the Joe Biden Follies almost won this award anyway. Luckily for Biden, Texas Governor Rick Perry emerged on Friday to snatch the trophy.

Southeast Texas is still trying to recover from the devastation of Hurricane Ike. Most of the coast in the area was evacuated, which was a good thing because a good deal of the area was destroyed. Property damage was widespread. Texas authorities have tried to keep people from returning home just yet, and after two weeks citizens are starting to grumble.

Perry tried to counsel patience and encourage people to stay away just a bit longer to let emergency management does their thing. Unfortunately, he did so in a somewhat insensitive way. As you may recall, the Texas Governor's Mansion was burned down recently, forcing Perry to reside in a $10,000 a month rental home in the meantime. Channeling this experience, Perry tried to feel the evacuees pain by stating, "I know people want to get back home. I want to get back to the Mansion, too."


The destruction of the Governor's Mansion was a tragedy for the State of Texas, no doubt. However, it is a wee bit of an understatement to say that Perry's temporary McMansion is slightly more comfortable than the shelters that many Texans find themselves in. It is a borderline offensive comparison, and really showed an astounding lack of empathy and compassion.

Perry and the State of Texas have generally done a fine job responding to the disaster. However, he needs to think twice before coming out with comments like that.

Read More......

State of the Race

All polling has shown Barack Obama opening up a notable lead on John McCain. Even with the financial situation, I'm a bit dubious of these wild swings we've seen the past three weeks. I'm sure transitory opinion changes occur, but for the most part the race hasn't changed. Barack Obama has a small but definite lead that John McCain is running uphill to try to overcome. He may do it, but he probably won't.

Republicans should perhaps be more worried about the Senate, where a potential of the Democrats holding 58-59 seats is becoming quite a possibility.

President

Barack Obama continued to expand his lead even as McCain "suspended" his campaign. McCain must be worried about Colorado. He basically has to win the state, but he is falling apart there. Colorado falls off to Tier II this week, which means now that the race is no longer too close to call. Since Obama would clearly win even if he lost all the toss up states, he is now clearly ahead and would win the election if it were today. The only question is margin, as we project Obama could win with anywhere between 282 and 375 Electoral Votes. Time is running out for McCain to turn it around.



Tier I (Toss Up)

Obama (29) - Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio

McCain (64) - Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina

McCain has slipped badly in North Carolina, even beyond his national polling. Last weekend, PPP showed a tie, which one could dismiss as PPP being PPP. On Monday, Rasmussen gave McCain a mere three point lead, but by Friday Rasmussen had a two point Obama lead. This may be noise, and I still give McCain an edge in North Carolina, but the state is too close to call.

Tier II (Leaning)

Obama (60) - Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia

McCain seems to have fallen off a cliff in Colorado. I expect PPP to show Obama up by seven points. Yet four other polls had Obama up this week. Rasmussen had the lead at three, CNN/Time and Quinnipiac/Wall St. Journal/Washington Post had it at four, and Insider Advantage/Poll Position had it at seven. We have consistently identified Colorado as the ultimate middle ground of this election. With Obama's lead nationally pushing five points, we'd expect to see similar results in Colorado. We do, and Obama would clearly win Colorado if the election were today. Colorado moves down to Tier II, which is the number one sign that McCain is in trouble.

The four polls in Virginia this week split. ABC News/Washington Post (3 points) and Rasmussen (5 points), show Obama in the lead. FOX News/Rasmussen (2 points) and NBC/Mason Dixon (3 points) had McCain in the lead. The two polls favoring Obama were taken later in the week, so I tend to believe them more. I also think Virginia has gone with the national trend. It isn't as obvious as Colorado, but Obama has a clear lead in Virginia, which makes it a Tier II state.

Tier III (Likely)

Obama (44) - Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Wisconsin

McCain (41) - Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, West Virginia

I haven't seen any polls in Arkansas, but Obama's surge compels me to move this state up since it has so many Democrats. I don't think Obama can really threaten to win it, but if Obama gets a landslide it might be faintly possible.

Similarly, Georgia moves up even though there were no new polls. No, Obama will not win Georgia.

McCain did get some positive news in Maine, where a SurveyUSA poll had him within five points. To be safe, I move the state to Tier III, but I don't think McCain can really seriously think about getting within the three point margin he needs to steal an electoral vote.

In Montana, CNN/Time gave McCain an 11 point lead and Research 2000 gave him a 13 point edge. I'll keep it in Tier III to be safe, but it doesn't look like Montana is in play for Obama.

John McCain led in two polls of West Virginia this week. CNN/Time gave him a four point lead and Rasmussen had the lead at eight points. Such a lead even during a McCain swoon indicated West Virginia is probably safe, so we move it ot Tier III.

Research 2000 gives Obama a six point lead. His perpetual leads in Wisconsin combined with his recent hot streak makes Wisconsin look great for Obama. It's a Tier III.

Tier IV (Safe)

Obama (178) - California, Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington

McCain (122) - Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming

We saw two polls in Iowa this week. The Quad City Times/Research 2000 poll gave Obama a 14 point lead. Marist had Obama's lead at a mere ten points. In any event, McCain conceded Iowa in the debate when he blasted ethanol subsidies. This one is over.

SurveyUSA had Obama up 11 in Oregon, while Research 2000 had him up 14. Oregon was always dicey for McCain, and his recent freefall has put the state away.

If Oregon is safe, Washington must be as well. SurveyUSA's 54-43 lead for Obama confirms this.

Current Outlook
Electoral Votes
Obama 311 (pick up CO, IA, NV, NM, OH, VA)
McCain 227

Popular Vote
Obama 51.2%
McCain 48.3%

Governors

There are no changes or major new developments in gubernatorial races this week.

Democrats lead 22-17 in states not up for election this year.

Tier I (Toss Up)

Republican (2) - North Carolina (Michael Easley retiring), Washington (Christine Gregoire)

Tier II (Leaning)

NONE

Tier III (Likely)

NONE

Tier IV (Safe)

Democrat (5) - Delaware (Ruth Ann Minner retiring), Missouri (Matt Blunt retiring), Montana (Brian Schweitzer), New Hampshire (John Lynch), West Virginia (Joe Manchin)

Republican (4) - Indiana (Mitch Daniels), North Dakota (John Hoeven), Utah (Jon Huntsman), Vermont (Jim Douglas)

Current Outlook
Democrats 27 (pick up MO)
Republicans 23 (pick up NC, WA)

Senate

The Republican standing in the Senate, already shaky, keeps getting worse. Oregon is now a jump ball at best for incumbent Republican Gordon Smith. We now project the Democrats to gain six seats. They will pick up four at a minimum and could end up with an eight seat pick up, leaving them just one short of a filibuster proof majority. Under filibuster rules, the difference between 55 and 59 seats is huge, so expect these races to be hotly contested.

Democrats lead uncontested seats 39-26.

Tier I (Toss Up)

Democrats (2) - New Hampshire (John Sununu), Oregon (Gordon Smith)

Republicans (2) - Minnesota (Norm Coleman), North Carolina (Elizabeth Dole)

New Hampshire is seeing a Republican resurgence. McCain has remained strong there while losing everywhere else. Then, Rasmussen shows a seven point lead for GOP Sen. John Sununu over Democrat Jeanne Shaheen. The University of New Hampshire gives Shaheen a four point lead, closer than previously but still more in line with other polls. Shaheen is struggling and Democrats are starting to worry. Sununu has put this in toss up range against all odds.

Just when it looked as if GOP North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole was safe, we get three polls this week showing her behind Democratic State Senator Kay Hagan. Rasmussen had Hagan up by six on Monday and three on Thursday. PPP had Hagan up five on Monday, though they always skew Democratic. Something seems to be happening in North Carolina because the bottom is dropping out of the state's GOP candidates. I am going against the polls and keeping this race with Dole, more on gut instinct than anything else.though if the election were today it would be close to a coin flip.

Jeff Merkley led Oregon GOP Sen. Gordon Smith in two polls this week, 45-40 in Research 2000 and 44-42 in SurveyUSA. Smith has been trending downward and the polls seem to indicate a small Merkley lead. While the race remains too close to call, the numbers and the fact that Oregon is very difficult for a Republican right now make the race favor Merkley ever so slightly.

Tier II (Leaning)

Democrat (2) - Alaska (Ted Stevens), Colorado (Wayne Allard retiring)

In Colorado, the Democrats at PPP as well as the Quinnipiac/Wall Street Journal/Washington Post poll show Democratic Rep. Mark Udall leading Republican Bo Schaffer by eight points. Rasmussen shows a two point lead. Throwing out the partisan poll, that averages to a five point margin, which is closer to a lean than a likely. Thus, we call it Tier II this week.

Tier III (Likely)

Democrat (2) - Louisiana (Mary Landrieu), New Jersey (Frank Lautenberg)

Republican (1) - Mississippi special (Roger Wicker)

Tier IV (Safe)

Democrat (12) - Arkansas (Mark Pryor), Delaware (Joseph Biden), Illinois (Richard Durbin), Iowa (Tom Harkin), Massachusetts (John Kerry), Michigan (Carl Levin), Montana (Max Baucus), New Mexico (Pete Domenici retiring), Rhode Island (Jack Reed), South Dakota (Tim Johnson), Virginia (John Warner retiring), West Virginia (Jay Rockefeller)

Republican (14) - Alabama (Jeff Sessions), Georgia (Saxby Chambliss) Idaho (Larry Craig retiring), Kansas (Pat Roberts), Kentucky (Mitch McConnell), Maine (Susan Collins), Mississippi (Thad Cochran), Nebraska (Chuck Hagel retiring), Oklahoma (James Inhofe), South Carolina (Lindsey Graham), Tennessee (Lamar Alexander), Texas (John Cornyn), Wyoming (Michael Enzi), Wyoming special (John Barrasso)

Current Outlook
Democrats 57 (pick up AK, CO, NH, NM, OR, VA)
Republicans 43

House

Other than a couple of blips, it was a quiet week in the House. Democrats remain poised to pick up anywhere between 2 and 14 seats, with the most likely number being nine.

Tier I (Toss Up)

Democrat (7) - AL-5 (Bud Cramer retiring), KS-2 (Nancy Boyda), NV-3 (Jon Porter), NJ-3 (Jim Saxton retiring), NM-1 (Heather Wilson retiring), OH-15 (Deborah Pryce retiring), OH-16 (Ralph Regula retiring)

Republican (5) - LA-6 (Don Cazayoux), MN-3 (Jim Ramstad retiring), NJ-7 (Robert Ferguson retiring), NC-8 (Robin Hayes), WA-8 (Dave Reichert)

Tier II (Leaning)

Democrat (4) - FL-16 (Tim Mahoney), NH-1 (Carol Shea-Porter), PA-10 (Christopher Carney), PA-11 (Paul Kanjorski)

Republican (7) - CO-4 (Marilyn Musgrave), CT-2 (Christopher Shays), FL-6 (Ric Keller), FL-24 (Tom Feeney), LA-4 (Jim McCrery retiring), NY-29 (Randy Kuhl), TX-22 (Nick Lampson)

On the heels of last week's leaked Democratic poll showing Democrat Alan Grayson leading GOP Rep. Ric Keller in FL-6, the DCCC added Grayson to their "Red to Blue" program. This means Grayson should be well funded and he is rapidly emerging as a threat to unseat Keller.

Tier III (Likely)

Democrat (7) - AK-AL (Don Young), AZ-1 (Rick Renzi retiring), CA-11 (Jerry McNerney), GA-8 (Jim Marshall), IL-11 (Jerry Weller retiring), MS-1 (Travis Childers), WI-8 (Steve Kagen)

Republican (5) - AL-2 (Terry Everett retiring), MI-7 (Tim Walberg), NM-2 (Steve Pearce retiring), NY-26 (Tom Reynolds retiring), OH-1 (Steve Chabot)

Tier IV (Safe, for now)

Democrat (29) - AZ-5 (Harry Mitchell), AZ-8 (Gabrielle Giffords), CT-2 (Joe Courtney), CT-5 (Chris Murphy), FL-22 (Ron Klein), GA-12 (John Barrow), IL-8 (Melissa Bean), IL-14 (Bill Foster), IN-2 (Joe Donnelly), IN-7 (Andre Carson), IN-8 (Brad Ellsworth), IN-9 (Baron Hill), KS-3 (Dennis Moore), KY-3 (John Yarmuth), ME-1 (Tom Allen retiring), MN-1 (Tim Walz), NH-2 (Paul Hodes), NY-13 (Vito Fossella retiring), NY-19 (John Hall), NY-20 (Kirsten Gillibrand), NY-24 (Michael Arcuri), NY-25 (James Walsh retiring), OH-18 (Zack Space), OR-5 (Darlene Hooley retiring), PA-4 (Jason Altmire), PA-8 (Patrick Murphy), TN-4 (Lincoln Davis), TX-23 (Ciro Rodriguez), VA-11 (Tom Davis retiring)

Republican (40) - AZ-3 (John Shadegg), CA-4 (John Doolittle retiring), CA-50 (Brian Bilbray), FL-13 (Vern Buchanan), FL-15 (Dave Weldon retiring), FL-21 (Mario Diaz-Balart), FL-25 (Lincoln Diaz-Balart), ID-1 (Bill Sali), IL-6 (Peter Roskam), IL-10 (Mark Kirk), IL-13 (Judy Biggert), IL-18 (Ray LaHood retiring), IN-3 (Mark Souder), IA-4 (Tom Latham), KY-2 (Ron Lewis retiring), LA-7 (Charles Boustany), MD-1 (Wayne Gilchrest retiring), MI-9 (Joe Knollenberg), MN-2 (John Kline), MN-6 (Michele Bachmann), MO-6 (Sam Graves), MO-9 (Kenny Hulshof retiring), NE-2 (Lee Terry), NV-2 (Dean Heller), NJ-5 (Scott Garrett), NC-12 (Patrick McHenry), OH-2 (Jean Schmidt), OH-7 (Dave Hobson retiring), OH-14 (Steven LaTourette), PA-3 (Phil English), PA-6 (Jim Gerlach), PA-15 (Charlie Dent), PA-18 (Tim Murphy), TX-7 (John Culberson), TX-10 (Michael McCaul), VA-2 (Thelma Drake), VA-5 (Virgil Goode), VA-10 (Frank Wolf), WV-2 (Shelley Moore Capito), WY-AL (Barbara Cubin retiring)

In IL-10, GOP Rep. Mark Kirk released a poll showing him leading Democrat Dan Seals by 22 points. I'd normally discount that, but that's the third such poll showing huge Kirk margins, and Seals hasn't countered. Kirk beat Seals in 2006, and he looks like a safe bet to do it again. This race has sunk to Tier IV.

Tier V (Totally Safe)

Democrat (198)

Republican (133)

Current Outlook
Democrats 245 (pick up AK-AL, AZ-1, IL-11, NV-3, NJ-3, NM-1, NY-13, NY-25, OH-15, OH-16, VA-11)
Republicans 190 (pick up LA-6, TX-22)

Read More......

Learning From Debates, Part IV: 1980

Read Part I here
Read Part II here
Read Part III here

Presidential Candidates: Ronald Reagan (R-CA) v. President James E. Carter (D-GA)

President Carter did not particularly want to debate in 1980. He thought he knew the issues better than Reagan, but he (correctly) feared that Reagan would come across well on television. More vehemently, he did not want to debate Independent John Anderson, who he felt stole votes mainly from him. Reagan wanted Anderson, who was getting 15-20% in some polls, in the debates. Carter used this is a pretext to avoid debate. Reagan actually debated Anderson alone at one point, which I'm ignoring for this analysis.

Finally, Reagan agreed to debate without Anderson. The week before the election with polls showing a dead heat, Carter and Reagan met for their one and only debate.

Debate 1: October 28 at Cleveland, OH

Reagan, of course, wanted to try to sell his conservative program. More generally, however, he wanted to come across with a Presidential bearings and appear as an acceptable, rational alternative for voters who disliked Carter but hadn't yet bought into Reagan.



Carter tried to do two things in this debate. First, he tried to appear more Presidential and serious than Reagan. Secondly, he tried to show that Reagan would cut funding for and/or eliminate a multitude of programs. He failed on both counts.

Carter undermined his first goal on the debate's first of three "moments". Discussing foreign policy, Carter explained that, "I had a discussion with my daughter Amy the other day before I came here to ask me what the most important issue was. She said she thought nuclear weaponry." The thought of the President of the United States discussing nuclear policy with his thirteen year old daughter struck most people as preposterous. It also undermined Carter's portrayal of himself as the adult in the race.

Reagan torpedoed Carter's second argument. For most of the evening, Carter accused Reagan opposing this and wanting to cut that. Late in the debate, Carter went after Reagan for opposing Medicare. Reagen memorably replied, "there you go again." He then explained that he had supported a Medicare alternative. The line stuck and was repeated endlessly, much to Carter's dismay.

In the closing statements, Reagan sealed the deal. In a line repeated multiple times since then, he asked the American people if they were better off than they were four years ago. It was a powerful question that Carter had no real answer for, and framing the race in those terms shifted the advantage to Reagan.

This was a debate about "moments" rather than the debate as a whole. All three moments went for Reagan, which the media focused on during the last week of the election.

Edge: Reagan, by a huge amount. The polls shifted dramatically to Reagan after this debate, and he won by a landslide. He had not only proven himself as a viable alternative to Carter, but he might have come across as the safer alternative, too.

Conclusion

The 1980 debate reinforced several lessons learned from 1976. First, we see again that the debates are not digested in whole. Rather, people focus on moments during the debate, and the whole ninety minutes come down to thirty seconds. This debate had three moments, all of which favored Reagan. Nobody remembered or cared about the rest of the debate.

This debate also demonstrated the danger of gaffes. Much like Ford had four years earlier with his Eastern Europe comment, Carter diminished himself by admitting he discussed nuclear policy with his daughter. It is alot harder to win a debate than to lose one.

However, 1980 did show it was possible to actively win a debate. This coincided with the birth of one-liners in debates. Reagan scored points on "there you go again" and "are you better off?" Those lines were part of larger answers, but everything he said beyond that was irrelevant. In future years, we will continue to see the "big lines" that get replayed endlessly, shaping perceptions of the debates.

By 1980, we have seen the focus on "moments", namely gaffes and one liners. This would shape debates going forward.

Read More......

State of the Day - Maryland

The Free State doesn’t much care for Republicans. It has some in the Eastern Shore and in Western Maryland, but they find themselves vastly outnumbered by the large amounts of affluent liberals, government employees, and blacks in the DC-Baltimore corridor. The state is one of the most Democratic in Presidential and Senate races, and Democrats easily hold six of the eight House seats. Democrats have huge majorities in the legislature.

Maryland tried electing a Republican governor in 2002, but it didn’t seem to take. Democrats took control back with emphasis in 2006, and they don’t look to give it up in 2008.


President – 10 Electoral Votes

1996: Pres. Bill Clinton (D) 54%, Bob Dole (R) 38%
2000: Al Gore (D) 57%, George Bush (R) 40%
2004: John Kerry (D) 56%, Pres. George Bush (R) 43%

It would take a Republican landslide for this state to go red. I feel safe in saying that will not happen this year.

Prediction: Obama (D) 60%, McCain (R) 39%

Governor – Martin O’Malley (D)

1998: Gov. Parris Glendening (D) 55%, Ellen Sauerbrey (R) 45%
2002: Robert Ehrlich (R) 52%, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (D) 48%
2006: Martin O’Malley (D) 53%, Gov. Robert Ehrlich (R) 46%

Governor O’Malley has suffered incredibly low approval ratings due mainly to tax increases, though he is now up to a still poor 37%. Even in a Democratic state like Maryland, that puts him in serious jeopardy. He still has time to pull out, but he will probably see a serious challenge.

Michael Steele, who impressed most observers in losing the 2006 Senate race, would probably be the best candidate. Robert Ehrlich has said he might be interested as well. Either one would crush O’Malley at this point. Even a bad candidate like State Senator E.J. Pipkin could make this interesting as of now. Based on the state’s bent, I think O’Malley will recover somewhat, but he is a less than even bet to win reelection, at least at this point.

Senior Senator – Barbara Mikulski (D)

1992: Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D) 71%, Alan Keyes (R) 29%
1998: Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D) 71%, Ross Z. Pierpont (R) 30%
2004: Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D) 65%, E.J. Pipkin (R) 34%

Senator Mikulski will be easily reelected should she run again. I can’t imagine either of the two best candidates Republicans could offer, Robert Ehrlich or Michael Steele, would even bother. State Senator E.J. Pipkin is a default option as the sacrificial lamb.

Junior Senator – Ben Cardin (D)

1994: Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D) 59%, Bill Brock (R) 41%
2000: Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D) 63%, Paul H. Rappaport (R) 37%
2006: Ben Cardin (D) 54%, Michael Steele (R) 44%

Cardin might not have won in 2006 without the wave. His anemic campaign paled at times in comparison with the dynamic Michael Steele. If Steele doesn’t run for Governor, Republicans will hope he runs for this seat. Robert Ehrlich could run for it as well. While both would run good campaigns, Maryland is so Democratic Cardin would have to mess up badly in order to lose. A more likely scenario for 2012 involves a token Republican candidate such as State Senator E.J. Pipkin.

House 1 – Wayne Gilchrest (R)

2002: Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R) 77%, Ann Tamlyn (D) 23%
2004: Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R) 76%, Kostas Alexakis (D) 24%
2006: Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R) 69%, Jim Corwin (D) 31%

Gilchrest lost the primary in this overwhelmingly Republican Eastern Shore district. State Senator Andy Harris capitalized on conservative dissatisfaction with the quite liberal, anti-war Gilchrest to win the Republican nomination.

Democrats are trying to take advantage of the situation by contesting this district that they should not be able to win. Democrat Frank Kratovil has managed to raise over $800,000 and is running a strong race, encouraging the DCCC to spend money here. Gilchrest endorsed Kratovil and dispatched his campaign manager to run the campaign. Kratovil needs to split the Republican party almost right down the middle in order to win. The odds are against him. While I have no doubt some Republicans will defect and Harris won’t approach Gilchrest’s margins, this district is just too Republican to elect a Democrat.

House 2 – Dutch Ruppersberger (D)

2002: Dutch Ruppersberger (D) 54%, Helen Bentley (R) 46%
2004: Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D) 67%, Jane Brooks (R) 31%
2006: Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D) 69%, Jimmy Mathis (R) 31%

Until we see 1994 again, Republicans will have to live with beatdowns of nominees like Richard Matthews in this mostly Democratic district.

House 3 – John Sarbanes (D)

2002: Rep. Ben Cardin (D) 66%, Scott Conwell (R) 34%
2004: Rep. Ben Cardin (D) 63%, Bob Duckworth (R) 34%
2006: John Sarbanes (D) 64%, John White (R) 34%

Republican Thomas Harris is a token candidate in this mostly Democratic district. Sarbanes looks likely to run for statewide office someday.

House 4 – Donna Edwards (D)

2002: Rep. Albert Wynn (D) 79%, John Kimble (R) 21%
2004: Rep. Albert Wynn (D) 75%, John McKinnis (R) 20%
2006: Rep. Albert Wynn (D) 81%, Albert Starkman (R) 19%
2008 special: Donna Edwards (D) 80%, Peter James (R) 18%

Edwards defeated Albert Wynn in the primary, which prompted Wynn to resign. Edwards won the special election in this ludicrously Democratic, black majority district. At least Republican Peter James now knows from experience he won’t have to stay up late on Election Night.

House 5 – Steny Hoyer (D)

2002: Rep. Steny Hoyer (D) 69%, Joseph Crawford (R) 31%
2004: Rep. Steny Hoyer (D) 69%, Brad Jewitt (R) 29%
2006: Rep. Steny Hoyer (D) unopposed

The Majority Leader has no opposition (yes, I know Republican Charles County Board of Education Member Collins Bailey is running) in this mostly Democratic district. He can devote his time to ensuring Nancy Pelosi doesn’t try to stab him in the back again.

House 6 – Roscoe Bartlett (R)

2002: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R) 66%, Donald DeArmon (D) 34%
2004: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R) 67%, Kenneth Bosley (D) 29%
2006: Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R) 59%, Andrew Duck (D) 38%

Maryland Democrats sure know how to pack Republicans in redistricting. That doesn’t help Democrat Jennifer Dougherty. Democrats will never win this one.

House 7 – Elijah Cummings (D)

2002: Rep. Elijah Cummings (D) 74%, Joseph Ward (R) 26%
2004: Rep. Elijah Cummings (D) 73%, Tony Salazar (R) 25%
2006: Rep. Elijah Cummings (D) unopposed

If this district got any bluer it would be the ocean. Republican Michael Hargadon is a Ron Paul acolyte who skewered me for dismissing his chances. After taking his opinion into account, I’d suggest using his $4,702 on hand to throw a big party, because it won’t help him win the election.

House 8 – Chris Van Hollen (D)

2002: Chris Van Hollen (D) 52%, Rep. Connie Morella (R) 48%
2004: Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) 75%, Chuck Floyd (R) 25%
2006: Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) 77%, Jeffrey Stein (R) 22%

This district won’t be electing any Republicans either. Republican Steven Hudson must have wanted to find a legal way to burn currency. Why else did he spend $20,000 of his own money?

House Predictions: 6 Democrats, 2 Republicans…NO CHANGE

Read More......

Learning From Debates, Part III: 1976

Read Part I here
Read Part II here

Presidential Candidates: James E. Carter (D-GA) v. President Gerald R. Ford (R-MI)
Vice Presidential Candidates: Senator Walter F. Mondale (D-MN) v. Senator Robert J. Dole (R-KS)

After 1960, televised debates disappeared from the landscape. In 1976, however President Gerald R. Ford challenged Democrat Jimmy Carter to debate "anytime, anyplace". Down thirty points in the polls at the convention, Ford felt forced to use novel tactics. Carter accepted the proposal, and Ford was climbing steadily in the polls as the debates got underway.

Debate 1: September 23 at Philadelphia, PA

This debate focused on domestic issues and saw both candidates use their familiar lines of attack. Carter tried to nail Ford on the struggling economy. Ford defended his pardon of former President Richard Nixon. The debate was not particularly animated or memorable, but Ford was especially eloquent and persuasive, and most media seemed to think he won.


The most famous occurrence of this debate occurred near the end as Carter was trying to discuss the lack of trust in government. The audio went out and stayed out for 27 minutes. Television stations went back to their anchors during the delay. Meanwhile, neither Carter nor Ford moved. They both stood still and silent behind the podium, as if it were a game of chicken and neither wanted to look weak. After what had to be an interminable amount of time for them, the debate concluded.

Edge: Ford, by a moderate amount. More importantly than anything that actually happened was the general consensus among the media that he won. His climb in the polls continued.

Debate 2: October 6 at San Francisco, CA

The second debate featured foreign policy. Ford thought he could excel in this debate against Carter, who had no foreign policy experience. Sadly for Ford, he committed probably the worst gaffe in debate history.

The only important moment in this debate occurred when Max Frankel asked Ford if the U.S. had been too soft with allowing the Soviet Union free rein in Eastern Europe. Ford's response boggled the mind:

I'm glad you raised it, Mr. - Frankel. In the case of Helsinki, 35 nations signed an agreement, including the secretary of state for the Vatican - I can't under any circumstances believe that the - His Holiness, the Pope would agree by signing that agreement that the thirty-five nations have turned over to the Warsaw Pact nations the domination of the - Eastern Europe. It just isn't true… There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be under a Ford administration.

An incredulous Frankel asked Ford if he had spoken correctly, prompting Ford to say that he didn't think the Romanians, Yugoslavs, or Poles felt dominated by the Soviet Union. This just compounded the error.

Ford said later that he meant to say that the spirit of the Romanians, Poles, etc. could never be dominated by the Soviets. That may have been true, but that isn't what he actually said. He said there was no Soviet domination in Eastern Europe, which was a facially preposterous idea. It made him look bumbling and clueless.

Ironically, most "instapolls" done after the debate showed Ford to be the winner. The media relentlessly hounded on Ford's error, and a week later polls overwhelmingly showed Carter the winner.

Edge: Carter, by a large amount. Ford's rise in the polls halted for a time after this debate. Carter himself speculated that Ford's gaffe might have made the difference in a very close election.

Vice Presidential Debate: October 15 at Houston, TX

For the first time, the Vice Presidential candidates debated each other. The focus was almost entirely on Bob Dole. While we think of him now as a distinguished statesman full of bipartisanship, class, and good humor, back then Dole had a reputation for meanness and ruthlessness. To combat this, Dole tried to use humorous answers. However, his humor tends to be of the biting sarcastic type, and it came across as mean spirited. For example, when asked about Carter's interview with Playboy, Dole cracked, "I couldn't quite understand what Governor Carter meant in Playboy magazine. I couldn't understand frankly why he was in Playboy magazine. But he was and we'll give him the bunny vote."

Dole eventually went too far in one of the worst answers ever given in a debate. Asked about the Watergate pardon, Dole somehow managed to give an answer that blamed Democrats for American wars of the twentieth century:

It is an appropriate topic, I guess, but it's not a very good issue any more than the war in Vietnam would be or World War II or World War I or the war in Korea, all Democratic wars, all in this century. I figured up the other day. If we added up the killed and wounded in the Democrat wars in this century, it would be about 1.6 million Americans, enough to fill the city of Detroit. If we want to go back and rake that over and over again, we can do that.

It's doubly bad to make such a bad error when not even answering the questions. Dole caught enormous flack for this comment and it further stalled Ford in the polls. Walter Mondale summed it up best in his response to these remarks, saying that "I think Senator Dole has richly earned his reputation as a hatchet man tonight."

Edge: Mondale, by alot. Mondale didn't do much, but Dole actively lost the debate.

Debate 3: October 22 at Williamsburg, VA

This debate was almost completely uneventful except for one moment. Carter had earned ridicule by recently giving an interview to Playboy Magazine in which he confessed that he had committed "adultery in my heart" many times. Not suprisingly, it came up in the debate.

Carter attempted to take responsibility for a mistake, but was a bit too defensive for that to work. He also seemed visibly embarrassed, and gave an answer that is really just plain funny:

The Playboy thing has been of great-- of very great concern to me. I don't know how to deal with it exactly. I agreed to give the interview to Playboy. Other people have done it who are notable - Governor Jerry Brown, Walter Cronkite, Albert Schweitzer, Mr. Ford's own Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Simon, William Buckley, many other people. But they weren't running for president. And in retrospect, from hindsight, I would not have given that interview if I had to do it over again. If I should ever decide in the future to discuss my deep Christian beliefs and condemnation and sinfulness, I'll use another forum besides Playboy.

I can only wonder, as I'm sure most Americans did in 1976, why Carter thought Playboy was a good forum to discuss his condemnation and sinfulness. The whole episode got Carter off track, both in this debate and the campaign as a whole.

Edge: Ford, by a moderate amount. Any time spent discussing your opponent's confessions to a men's magazine of looking on other women with lust is a positive for you.

Conclusion

These were really the first modern debates. As such, we learn quite a few lessons that remain relevant today. This debate coincided with Ford's final surge in the polls that left him heartbreakingly close.

First and most importantly, the spin, punditry, and media discussion matters. Ford "won" the first debate mostly because the media said he did. In the second debate, Ford's gaffe didn't become a gaffe until the media hit on it for a week.

Secondly, the debates as a whole don't matter as much as the "moment". Each of the debates had one answer or event that defined who won and which way the polls moved. Eighty nine minutes of brilliance is irrelevant if you spend the other minute saying there is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.

Finally, a candidate is much more likely to lose the debate than win the debate. These debates turned on mistakes, whether they be Ford's Eastern European moment, Carter's discussion of Playboy, or Dole's blaming of Democrats for America's wars. No candidate won a debate by making an incisive comment on policy or giving clearer issue answers than his opponents. This phenomenon indicates than any candidate really should want to "first, do no harm" in the debates.

Read More......

State of the Day - Maine

The Pine Tree State, like the rest of New England, has become quite liberal and generally favors the Democratic Party. It didn’t always do that. After all, the state never voted for Franklin Roosevelt. Even today, the state is not as Democratic as the rest of New England. George W. Bush even targeted this state for a time in 2000 and 2004.

Perhaps more than any other state, Maine likes third party and independent candidates. Ross Perot actually finished ahead of George H.W. Bush here in 1992, and the state elected independent Angus King Governor in 1994 and 1998. Independent candidates got over 30% of the vote in the 2006 Governor’s race as well. Even among partisan politicians, Mainers value independence. They seem to love their quite liberal Republican Senators. While Maine may be mostly a Democratic state, politics on the ground here aren’t that simple.


President – 4 Electoral Votes

1996: Pres. Bill Clinton (D) 52%, Bob Dole (R) 31%
2000: Al Gore (D) 49%, George Bush (R) 44%
2004: John Kerry (D) 54%, Pres. George Bush (R) 45%

Maine would normally be in play for a Republican, especially in a good Republican year. This is not a good Republican year. There is also no indication that McCain is going to try here. Despite two recent polls showing Obama leads of 4 (Rasmussen) and 5 (SurveyUSA), this is barren ground for McCain.

Maine gives two electoral votes to the winner of the state, and one to the winner in each Congressional district. The Second District is about six points more Republican than the First District. Thus, McCain needs to get the statewide margin down to around three points in order to steal an electoral vote. He doesn’t look to get anywhere close to that this year.

Prediction: Obama (D) 54%, McCain (R) 46%

Governor – John Baldacci (D)

1998: Gov. Angus King (D) 59%, James Longley (R) 19%*
2002: John Baldacci (D) 47%, Peter Cianchette (R) 41%
2006: Gov. John Baldacci (D) 38%, Chandler Woodcock (R) 30%

*Angus King ran as an independent in his gubernatorial elections. The official Democratic candidate in 1998, Thomas Connolly, received 12%.

Governor Baldacci cannot run for another term. Democrats seem likely to keep the Governor’s Mansion. The leading Democratic contenders at this point are State Senate President Beth Edmonds and Representative Michael Michaud. Republicans don’t have a strong potential candidate. Barbara Merrill may run again as an Independent. She received 22% in 2006.

Senior Senator – Olympia Snowe (R)

1994: Olympia Snowe (R) 60%, Thomas Andrews (D) 36%
2000: Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) 69%, Mark Lawrence (D) 31%
2006: Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) 74%, Jean Hay Bright (D) 21%

Senator Snowe and her brand of liberal Republicanism remain highly popular in Maine. Even in a Democratic leaning state in the Democratic wave year of 2006, she gave her opponent a beatdown. She seems totally impregnable to any sort of challenge, and Democrats are unlikely to try. If they do try to knock off Snowe, their best candidates would be State Senate President Beth Edmonds, Representative Michael Michaud (both of whom are potential 2010 gubernatorial candidates), Joseph Brennan, and Angus King. All would be heavy underdogs to Snowe, and thus are unlikely to run.

Junior Senator – Susan Collins (R)

1990: Sen. William Cohen (R) 61%, Neil Rolde (D) 39%
1996: Susan Collins (R) 49%, Joseph Brennan (D) 44%
2002: Sen. Susan Collins (R) 58%, Chellie Pingree (D) 42%

Senator Collins has never garnered the astronomical approval ratings of Olympia Snowe, even though she shares Snowe’s liberal Republican politics. Democrats have aimed at toppling Collins since she came into office. Representative Tom Allen is taking the shot this year. Collins seems to have won over moderate Democrats and looks to be in very strong position at this point. Allen is a credible candidate who has raised over $4.5 million (to Collins’s $6.5 million). Yet, he seems to have gotten no traction. Polls have consistently shown Collins over 50% and with double digit leads. The anti-Republican sentiment in the nation doesn’t help her, but she benefits from Maine’s preference for independent minded politicians. Combined with her pounding of a well funded opponent in 2002 and the overwhelming victory of the very similar Snowe two years ago, Collins looks well positioned to rack up an impressive victory.

Prediction: Sen. Collins (R) 58%, Allen (D) 41%

House 1 – Tom Allen (D)

2002: Rep. Tom Allen (D) 64%, Steven Joyce (R) 36%
2004: Rep. Tom Allen (D) 60%, Charles Summers (R) 40%
2006: Rep. Tom Allen (D) 61%, Darlene Curley (R) 31%

Allen is retiring to run for the Senate. This Southern Maine seat gets most of its population from Augusta and Portland, and leans Democratic. Republicans are making a decent effort in this seat behind Charles Summers, who ran a credible race in 2004. Democrats nominated Chellie Pingree, who lost to Susan Collins in 2002.

Pingree has raised almost $1.6 million, much more than Summers’s $289,000 and more than Allen ever raised. While she did have to spend a lot to win the primary, she has and will have more money than Summers. She also has good name recognition from her 2002 race. While Republicans could win this seat under the right circumstances, it’s hard to see them doing it this year. This race is worth keeping an eye on but looks like a relatively easy hold for the Democrats.

House 2 – Michael Michaud (D)

2002: Michael Michaud (D) 52%, Kevin Raye (R) 48%
2004: Rep. Michael Michaud (D) 58%, Brian Hamel (R) 39%
2006: Rep. Michael Michaud (D) 71%, Laurence D’Amboise (R) 29%

This is not the year for Republicans to knock off Democratic incumbents in Democratic leaning seats. Michaud has no worries against the GOP nominee Farmington Selectman John Frary, who currently has negative $8,969 on hand.

House Predictions: 2 Democrats…NO CHANGE

Read More......

Debate Review: A Tale of Two Bracelets

To be perfectly honest, I don't have much to say about this debate. I'm pretty sure that it won't change anything. If you support one of the candidates, you probably liked his performance and disliked the other one. If you're undecided, you were probably neither attracted nor repulsed by either one. There were no gaffes, memorable one liners, or unpredictable occurrences. We didn't learn anything about either candidate that we didn't already know.

Obama succeeded in not making a misstep, which was probably the most important thing during the debate. McCain seemed to have him on the defensive a bit at the end, but he didn't really seize opportunities to really hit Obama hard. Neither one really seemed to have much grasp of the economy. What struck me most was that neither would answer a question directly, most notably when neither answered Jim Lehrer's question about what priorities would have to be shelved due to the bailout. McCain, in particular, seemed unprepared to talk about the economy.

McCain seemed to hit his stride in the second half of the debate, repeatedly trying to show Obama's "naivete" on foreign policy. For his part, Obama tried to tie McCain to President Bush. I kept expecting McCain to have an aggressive rebuttal to that argument, but he never did. Neither of these arguments are new, and both appeal mainly to people who have already made up their minds.

Beyond that, we saw more of the oversimplification and distortion that has marked the campaign. I thought the discussion of bracelets from dead soldiers, highlighted by Obama's comment that "I have a bracelet too", to be the epitome of this campaign. Issues were discussed at only shallow depth, illustrated by another twenty minuted discussion about budget deficits with no real mention of Medicaid. This debate went over only old ground, and hence won't change anything.

Read More......

State of the Day - Louisiana

The Pelican State has probably the most unique and colorful politics of any state. For eighty years the state has been dominated by populist and usually roguish politicians such as Huey “Kingfish” Long, his brother Earl “The Last of the Red Hot Poppas”, and more recently by three time Governor (and current federal prisoner) Edwin “The Silver Fox” Edwards. “Reformers” like David Treen, Buddy Roemer, and now Bobby Jindal occasionally appear, but they have not tended to have lasting success. Despite this tolerance for corruption, Louisiana has always valued social conservatism. It is probably the most anti-abortion state in the nation. This has generally helped the Republicans, who have done well in Presidential races and have finally elected their first Senator. Yet, down home conservative Democrats still do well in state and local races. Democrats must now contend with a large emigration of their base of New Orleans blacks, after the 2005 Katrina disaster.

Louisiana has finally, after a Supreme Court mandate, abolished the Edwin Edwards “jungle primary” for federal races. Thus, House and Senate races now work like every other state. Gubernatorial and other state races will continue to use the all-party primary with runoff system. In the past, this system has seriously reduced the importance of parties, an effect which remains part of the political culture. Ticket splitting, party switching, primary challenges, and third party candidates make the party structure less important here than anywhere in America.

On a technical note, due to Hurricane Gustav, the primaries for this year will be on October 4 with the general election still set for November 4. However, in races that require a primary runoff, that election will be on November 4 and the general election will occur on December 6.


President – 9 Electoral Votes

1996: Pres. Bill Clinton (D) 52%, Bob Dole (R) 40%
2000: George Bush (R) 53%, Al Gore (D) 45%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 57%, John Kerry (D) 42%

Democrats have generally needed a Southerner to win here, and Barack Obama doesn’t fit the bill. Any chance he had here disappeared with a large number of black voters after Katrina. Unlike most other states, he probably can’t count on a larger black plurality than John Kerry had in 2004 when he won Louisiana blacks 90-9. That means he will need to do much better than John Kerry’s 24% among Louisiana whites. Don’t hold your breath.

Also, while some Democrats will say that racism will hurt Obama here (after all David Duke got 39% for Governor in 1991), don’t forget Louisiana did just elect the not very Anglo Bobby Jindal as Governor.

Prediction: McCain (R) 53%, Obama (D) 46%

Governor – Bobby Jindal (R)

1999: Gov. Mike Foster (R) 62%, William Jefferson (D) 30%
2003: Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D) 52%, Bobby Jindal (R) 48%
2007: Bobby Jindal (R) 54%, Walter Boasso (D) 17%

Governor Jindal has become a Republican sensation. However, while he has won praise as a reformer of Louisiana politics, we have yet to know after six months in office if he will succeed. Reformers have come along often, and they usually fail. Governors David Treen (1980-1984) and Buddy Roemer (1988-1992) entered office pledging to clean things up, but both ended up losing re-election badly against the ultimate anti-reformer, Edwin Edwards. While Jindal almost (this is Louisiana) certainly won’t lose to Edwards in 2011, the shine may have come off his wunderkind label by then. For now, with a 58% approval rating and plaudits from his performance during Hurricane Gustav, Jindal is in strong shape.

Senior Senator – Mary Landrieu (D)

1990: Sen. Bennett Johnston (D) 53%, David Duke (R) 44%
1996: Mary Landrieu (D) 50%, Woody Jenkins (R) 50%
2002: Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) 52%, Suzanne Haik Terrell (R) 48%

Senator Landrieu has never won by very much and saw a good portion of her base leave the state. She has drawn opposition from Republican State Treasurer John Kennedy, who ran for the other Senate seat in 2004 as a Democrat. This represents literally the only opportunity Republicans have to pick up a Democratic Senate seat in 2008. Kennedy has raised a good amount of money and has favorability ratings to rival Landrieu’s. Polls have consistently shown Landrieu with a small lead, but recent polls have shown her up by double digits. This would pose a bigger problem in the old system, where she’d face a runoff. She still looks to be in trouble, but I’m going to go against conventional wisdom and predict that she wins going away, for a few reasons. First, the DSCC can spend more money here than the NRSC, and if Obama continues to pretend he can compete here a turnout operation might help Landrieu. Also, she maintained solid approval ratings throughout her passionate response to Katrina. While McCain will win Louisiana the political atmosphere remains favorable to Democrats. She certainly won’t be talking up her agreement with President Bush as she did in 2002. What blacks remain should turn out heavily. Louisiana hasn’t had a competitive statewide election since then, so we don’t know quite what the “Katrina effect” will be. This all adds up to a larger than expected edge for Landrieu.

Prediction: Sen. Landrieu (D) 56%, Kennedy (R) 43%

Junior Senator – David Vitter (R)

1992: Sen. John Breaux (D) unopposed
1998: Sen. John Breaux (D) 64%, Jim Donelon (R) 32%
2004: David Vitter (R) 51%, Chris John (D) 29%

Senator Sinner has maintained strong approval ratings despite his peccadilloes. He looks like a strong favorite for re-election in 2010. The strongest Democrat would probably be either Representative Charlie Melancon or Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu. Second tier candidates include State Attorney General James Caldwell, Caddo Parish District Attorney Paul Carmouche (running in House District 4 this year), Charles Foti, Keith Hightower, Richard Iyeoub, State Representatives Michael Jackson (running as Independent this year in House district 6) and Michael Powell, State Senators Walter Boasso, Lydia Jackson, and Ben Nevers, Chris John, Andy Kopplin, and Bob Odom. Disaster scenario candidates for Democrats are Willie Banks (running in House District 4 this year), Joe Delatte, Vinny Mendoza (in the runoff to lose House District 1 this year), John Milkovich (also running in House District 4 this year), New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, and Mike Stagg.

House 1 – Steve Scalise (R)

2002: Rep. David Vitter (R) unopposed
2004: Bobby Jindal (R) 78%, Roy Armstrong (D) 7%
2006: Rep. Bobby Jindal (R) 88%, David Gereighty (D) 7%
2008 special: Steve Scalise (R) 75%, Gilda Reed (D) 23%

Democrats will never win this district. Jim Harlan should win the October Democratic primary with his self-financing, but it won’t matter.

House 2 – William Jefferson (D)

2002: Rep. William Jefferson (D) unopposed
2004: Rep. William Jefferson (D) 79%, Art Schwertz (R) 21%
2006: Rep. William Jefferson (D) 30%, Joseph Lavigne (R) 13%*

*In the runoff of the all-party primary, Jefferson defeated fellow Democrat Karen Carter 57-43.

Jefferson has been indicted on sixteen counts of corruption charges, yet he continues to pursue another term. He has three serious opponents in the October primary: New Orleans Councilman James Carter, Jefferson Parish Councilor Byron Lee, and State Rep. Cedric Richmond. One of them will almost certainly face Jefferson in the November runoff. I’m picking Richmond to go all the way and win the Democratic nomination. Whatever happens, Republican Anh Cao has absolutely no chance in this majority black seat.

House 3 – Charlie Melancon (D)

2002: Rep. Billy Tauzin (R) unopposed
2004: Charlie Melancon (D) 50%, Billy Tauzin III (R) 50%
2006: Rep. Charlie Melancon (D) 55%, Craig Romero (R) 40%

Melancon is unopposed in this Republican leaning seat.

House 4 – Jim McCrery (R)

2002: Rep. Jim McCrery (R) 72%, John Milkovich (D) 26%
2004: Rep. Jim McCrery (R) unopposed
2006: Rep. Jim McCrery (R) 57%, Artis Cash (D) 17%

McCrery is retiring from this Shreveport/Northwest Lousiana, mostly Republican district. This district looks a lot like the Sixth District won by Democrats earlier this year. Democrats are trying hard here.

Both parties have primaries. Caddo Parish District Attorney Paul Carmouche is the favorite on the Democratic side, and he can probably escape a runoff. Republicans Chris Gorman and John Fleming will do battle on the Republican side, but Jeff Thompson has enough support to where this will probably go to a November runoff. This puts the Republicans at a disadvantage, especially is Carmouche has the extra month to raise money and watch the Republicans hack at each other.

I could see this district go either way. It’s a good district for Republicans, but party doesn’t matter much in Louisiana. Gorman and Fleming both raised more money than Carmouche, but they have had to use it on each other. Obama could help in a district 33% black. Also, if Democrats have a good year, it will probably prove difficult for Republicans to mobilize voters in December. That same effect cost GOP Rep. Henry Bonilla his seat last election in Texas 23, which also had a December election.

Louisiana races break late, so we’ll have to keep following this. Right now, I rate it a very slight Republican edge, as the tint of the district slightly outweighs the Republican issues with a primary and scheduling.

House 5 – Rodney Alexander (R)

2002: Rodney Alexander (D) 50%, Lee Fletcher (R) 50%
2004: Rep. Rodney Alexander (R) 59%, Zelma Blakes (D) 25%
2006: Rep. Rodney Alexander (R) 68%, Gloria Williams Hearn (D) 29%

Alexander has no Democratic opponent. It’s hard to believe he was a Democrat when he won this overwhelmingly Republican seat.

House 6 – Don Cazayoux (D)

2002: Rep. Richard Baker (R) unopposed
2004: Rep. Richard Baker (R) 72%, Rufus Craig (D) 19%
2006: Rep. Richard Baker (R) unopposed
2008 special: Don Cazayoux (D) 49%, Woody Jenkins (R) 46%

Cazayoux faces a serious threat to hold on to this mostly Republican, Baton Rouge based seat. Republican Woody Jenkins, who has a history of losing elections, decided to pass on the November race, leaving the field open for State Senator Bill Cassidy.

This race looks like a tossup at this point. Cazayoux’s biggest problem at the moment is the decision of State Representative Michael Jackson to run as Independent. The African-American Jackson lost the Democratic primary for the special election to Cazayoux. African-Americans make up 33% of the population here, obviously the majority of the Democratic base. If Jackson takes away significant African-American support, Cazayoux can forget about re-election.

Cassidy is somewhat of an unknown at this point. There is somewhat of a mystery surrounding his campaign abilities. He has struggled to raise funds, as he has pulled in less than $400,000. Cazayoux has over $2 million, which suggests his name recognition should be much greater than Cassidy’s by Election Day. Cassidy could not be any worse that Woody Jenkins, however.

This looks like one of the closest races in the country. Cazayoux has a good number of advantages over Cassidy. However, he had more advantages over Woody Jenkins in the special election, and he only won by three points. Cazayoux may need a perfect storm to hold onto this seat, and it isn’t clear he will get it as he did earlier this year.

I give the slight edge to Cassidy at this point. While he needs to get his campaign in shape, he can expect significant help from the presence of Michael Jackson.

House 7 – Charles Boustany (R)

2002: Rep. Chris John (D) unopposed
2004: Charles Boustany (R) 55%, Willie Mount (D) 45%
2006: Rep. Charles Boustany (R) 71%, Mike Stagg (D) 29%

State Senator Don Cravins has found something of a pulse, giving Democrats somewhat of a chance in this mostly Republican Lake Charles/Lafayette Southeast Louisiana seat. The area elected a conservative Democrat as late as 2002, but it is not exactly prime Democratic territory.

Despite Cravins’s respectability, Boustany probably needs to mess up. With strong fundraising, a good conservative records, and no gaffes, it doesn’t look like he has.

House Predictions: 5 Republicans, 2 Democrats…+1 REPUBLICANS

Read More......

Debate Preview (Beyond Avoiding Gaffes)

It is impossible to say what, if anything, will make the difference in tonight's first debate. Based on history and the superficiality of coverage, we can expect a gaffe or a zinger of some sort to determine the "winner" of the debate. We won't hear anything new nor will we get an in depth discussion of policy of philosophy. I do expect an animated and entertaining debate, mainly due to the "open discussion" format of the debate.

Rather than try to guess which of the infinite number of potential gaffes that might occur, I will summarize each candidate's outlook on this debate.

Obama

Senator Obama wanted the first debate on foreign policy, going against conventional wisdom which says he should want his strongest issue, the economy, first. Obama made the right call here. The first debate probably will matter the most, but McCain's vaunted experience gives Obama the edge in the expectations game. Like George W. Bush in 2000, if he can merely hold his own with McCain, he'll be fine. He won't win the election on foreign policy, but he can assuage doubts on the issue.

That said, he needs to move beyond his mantra of his opposition to the Iraq War. He could help himself in his opening statement by neatly summarizing the different attitudes that he would bring to foreign policy as opposed to the current administration. While doing so, he should avoid too many overt attempts to tie McCain to Bush. This argument hasn't worked for him so far, and it isn't likely to start now.


Obviously, he must show mastery of the issues and requisite toughness. More specifically, he needs better answers to several questions he has struggled with throughout the campaigns. I expect a question about "meeting unconditionally" with foreign leaders. I know his answer will qualify that with "preparations" being necessary, but he could help himself by explaining what he meant in the first place. Secondly, he needs a position once and for all with regards to what the surge has actually accomplished, and what that means. He has been all over the map on this issue, giving off the impression that he is running for President in September 2008 with a September 2006 worldview.

On a lighter note, I'll give Obama 30 seconds before he mentions the economy.

All things considered, Obama enters this debate in good position. A merely adequate performance will work for him here, and he can help himself a good deal more than he can hurt himself.

McCain

Senator McCain wisely reconsidered his own meltdown and agreed to come to the debate. This debate focuses on McCain's supposed specialty, which makes it all the more thorny for him.

He simply cannot make a factual mistake in this debate. If he does, he risks losing his "experience" advantage on this issue. While he doesn't have the same level of inconsistent positions as Obama has, he certainly has vulnerabilities. Mainly, he needs to be ready to explain why he is not "Bush redux", especially on Iraq.

More generally, he needs to come across as calm and levelheaded. His recent outbursts and bizarre campaign suspension make him look too impulsive for the Oval Office. He needs to use this debate as a stage to be more of an "elder statesman".

I expect McCain to come armed with one liners designed to parry a "Bush third term" speech from Obama. If I were McCain, I would very aggressive in differentiating myself from Obama, and try very directly to convey and explain that my foreign policy approach would keep us safe and that Obama's wouldn't. Democrats would condemn him for scare tactics, but such an approach could recast the election around foreign policy and give undecided voters pause before choosing Obama.

Read More......

State of the Day - Kentucky

The Bluegrass State has turned more Republican over the past thirty years, but it has not changed all that much. It still has a mostly rural, older population, relatively few minorities, and values cultural conservatism and economic populism (especially with regards to tobacco). While Confederate General Braxton Bragg tried hard to force Kentucky to join the South in the Civil War, the Commonwealth of Kentucky has always been more Appalachia than Dixie.

Bill Clinton carried Kentucky twice, but George W. Bush easily took it in the last two elections. Democrats can be competitive with a southern accented ticket, but otherwise the state goes Republican. Kentucky does have a major Democratic presence, however, and the Democrats picked up a House seat in 2006 and the Governor’s Mansion in 2007.


President – 8 Electoral Votes

1996: Pres. Bill Clinton (D) 46%, Bob Dole (R) 45%
2000: George Bush (R) 57%, Al Gore (D) 41%
2004: Pres. George Bush (R) 60%, John Kerry (D) 40%

Barack Obama took a horrific beating in the primary. Indeed, polls showed Hillary Clinton very competitive here against John McCain while also showing Obama well behind the Republican. Any hope of a race here disappeared with Clinton. Obama never had this on his “expanded map”. McCain’s got Kentucky in the bag.

Prediction: McCain (R) 58%, Obama (D) 41%

Governor – Steven Beshear (D)

1999: Gov. Paul Patton (D) 61%, Peppy Martin (R) 22%
2003: Ernie Fletcher (R) 55%, Ben Chandler (D) 45%
2007: Steven Beshear (D) 59%, Gov. Ernie Fletcher (R) 41%

Governor Beshear won easily over scandal tarred Ernie Fletcher last November. His legislative centerpiece in his first seven months in office involves the legalization of casino gambling. As of July, his approval rating was a lowly 33%. If that holds up he will find himself out of a job in 2011. Handicapping this more than three years before the election does not accomplish much, but it’s what we do here. Given his numbers to this point and Kentucky’s Republican bent, Beshear has a less than 50% chance at this point of winning another term. He shouldn’t worry, however, as he has almost an entire term to better position himself.

Senior Senator – Mitch McConnell (R)

1990: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) 52%, Harvey Sloane (D) 48%
1996: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) 55%, Steven Beshear (D) 43%
2002: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) 65%, Lois Weinberg (D) 35%

Democrats always make an effort to pick off the Minority Leader, and always come up short. Citing low approval ratings and ties to President Bush, they are trying again in the form of Bruce Lunsford. Democrats are talking Lunsford up, but he is not going to win. As Minority Leader McConnell can call on essentially unlimited resources and unlike Tom Daschle in 2004, the state’s political bent works in his favor. McConnell is an aggressive and creative political operator who has survived tougher races than this. While SurveyUSA continually shows the race close, every other poll has had McConnell up by double digits. Frankly, I believe the polls with the big McConnell leads.

Prediction: Sen. McConnell (R) 55%, Lunsford (D) 44%

Junior Senator – Jim Bunning (R)

1992: Sen. Wendell Ford (D) 63%, David Williams (R) 36%
1998: Jim Bunning (R) 50%, Scotty Baesler (D) 49%
2004: Sen. Jim Bunning (R) 51%, Daniel Mongiardo (D) 49%

Senator Bunning may be the most conservative member of the upper chamber, but that doesn’t explain why he almost lost in 2004. Rather, Bunning embarked on a breathtaking series of gaffes, including using a teleprompter during a debate, insinuating his opponent was a homosexual, and claiming not to watch or read the news. Some questioned whether or not the Baseball Hall of Famer had gone senile. Democrats hope Representative Ben Chandler will challenge him in 2010. Lesser hopes include Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson, Steve Henry, Brereton Jones, State Auditor Crit Luallen, Ken Lucas, Jonathan Miller, State House Speaker Jody Richards. Greg Stumbo Representative John Yarmuth. Lieutenant Governor Daniel Mongiardo also may seek a rematch. Chandler might be a slight favorite, but Bunning probably has an edge over anybody else, absent more bizarre behavior. Two and a half years out, we’ll rate it a slight edge to the Republicans.

House 1 – Ed Whitfield (R)

2002: Rep. Ed Whitfield (R) 62%, Klint Alexander (D) 35%
2004: Rep. Ed Whitfield (R) 67%, Billy Cartwright (D) 33%
2006: Rep. Ed Whitfield (R) 60%, Tom Barlow (D) 40%

Democrat Heather Ryan was fired from her job as a theatre manager over her political activism. That’s really tragic for her, since she has no chance to win this heavily Republican seat.

House 2 – Ron Lewis (R)

2002: Rep. Ron Lewis (R) 70%, David Williams (D) 29%
2004: Rep. Ron Lewis (R) 68%, Adam Smith (D) 32%
2006: Rep. Ron Lewis (R) 55%, Mike Weaver (D) 45%

Lewis retired from this heavily Republican Central Kentucky seat after a less than scintillating victory in 2006. Emboldened by success, Democrats are running hard with State Senator David Boswell. After some intraparty hijinks, Republicans settled on State Senator Brett Guthrie.

Democrats are optimistic about their chances here, but I can’t pick them to take a seat that voted 65% for George W. Bush in 2004 without more evidence than we have so far. It does not help that Guthrie has $661,000 on hand to Boswell’s $45,000. Boswell leaked a poll showing him leading 41-33. As a partisan poll with a large number of undecideds, I don’t take much stock in that. SurveyUSA also had Boswell up by three, but they have leaned Democrat this cycle. We’ll keep our eyes out, but this looks like a Republican hold to me.

House 3 – John Yarmuth (D)

2002: Rep. Anne Northup (R) 52%, Jack Conway (D) 48%
2004: Rep. Anne Northup (R) 60%, Tony Miller (D) 38%
2006: John Yarmuth (D) 51%, Rep. Anne Northup (R) 48%

Democrats had targeted this Louisville swing district for years, and finally toppled Anne Northup in the 2006 wave. Northup then lost a primary challenge to Governor Ernie Fletcher before running to get her old seat back.

She has her work cut out for her here. No longer an incumbent, she won’t outspend Yarmuth this time. The political climate which defeated her has not changed much. If Barack Obama does lead to increase in black turnout, that will hurt her in a district 19% black. Northup is a strong candidate and will run a good race. She’s still an underdog because not much has changed here in two years. She has trailed in every public poll, and it is hard to see how she wins in this climate after losing as the incumbent in 2006. Yarmuth will probably need to help her out for her to pull it off.

House 4 – Geoff Davis (R)

2002: Rep. Ken Lucas (D) 51%, Geoff Davis (R) 48%
2004: Geoff Davis (R) 54%, Nick Clooney (D) 44%
2006: Rep. Geoff Davis (R) 52%, Ken Lucas (D) 43%

If the popular former Congressman Ken Lucas couldn’t win here in 2006, it’s never going to happen. Davis is safe against Democrat Michael Kelley.

House 5 – Harold Rogers (R)

2002: Rep. Harold Rogers (R) 78%,