More Electioneering: 2006 and 2008

2008 News

The big piece has been the emergence of Barack Obama as "CCC"--the Clinton Centrist Challenger. In the wake of Mark Warner's withdrawal, a vacuum was formed, and it took about a nanosecond for Barack O' to step forward, and in one fell swoop, assume center stage for that role. His advocacy for Democrats this year has been a major contributor to his emergence as a national party leader.

This guy would be a first in about as many ways as HRC would, so this is not a retreat to safe territory. Most interestingly, he's almost a post-boomer Generation X'er, suggesting that the second half of the boom (my half) might never be represented in the White House (the first half already has Clinton and Dubya, and they presume to trot out more of these burned out, narcississtic victims of the Culture Wars. Our generation just stays out of it. More of that another time.)

Barack is the real deal, more "post-liberal" than centrist, but it's way too early for him. The right time for him is after a two-term Democratic presidency starting in 2009.

One enters the stage, the other leaves. John Kerry has put himself in the George Allen category as a hyped contender who didn't even make it out of the paddock. He wasn't a good choice in 2004 (when we wanted a real "wartime candidate"), and he would've been a joke in 2008. If we wanted a candidate who lost a sure prospect due to insufficient fire in the belly, we would go for Al Gore. Sorry, John.

Seething in NM-01

I did some phone canvassing in the Rio Rancho suburb part of this neighboring district getting the saturation treatment for attack ads, being generated locally, from the national organizations (both), and from some independent groups. Patricia Madrid, the Democratic challenger and current state Attorney General, had forged to the lead in this naturally Democratic-leaning, large Hispanic minority district, over the four-term "moderate" Republican Heather Wilson, the only woman vet in the House (so far).

The voters I talked to were very angry, with both candidates, for the low blows and infantile tactics. To be honest, the message of the campaigns have been very simple, though; Wilson is a Bushite who supported the Iraq war, and Madrid can't be trusted.

The last Wilson salvo (by her campaign organization) is really making me hopping mad, though. From one of their debates, they took out of context a brain lock Madrid suffered while trying to respond to a Wilson-authored question about Federal tax increases. Instead of going for the easy "no increased taxes for working families" pledge, Madrid stumbled, froze, then started hesitantly. They don't even show her answer, that's not the point. The point is something on the order of, "Can you have a representative who doesn't speak fluently at all times?"

To me, this is about one step away from mocking your opponent's stutter. Apparently, though, it's working as an ad, and it truly does present Madrid unflatteringly.

I think it is time for the Madrid campaign to launch the whisper campaign about Wilson's being a closeted butch Foley co-dependent with a thing for girls in page-boy haircuts. It's simply the next step in the escalation process; I can't say if it's true, but it's certainly plausible.

Supplement to the NY Times Election Preview

First thing I want to say is, it's not that bad. If it were the product of a one-person blog, I'd say it was great. The graphics interface on the website works well and produces reams of factoids about money spent, last elections, demographics, etc.

What it doesn't do is tell you anything useful about the results to expect in the House races. One of the biggest omissions in the newspaper articles is any information whatsoever about seven of the 16 races they've called "tossups", but somehow not "key races".

For the record , these are MN-06, NH-2, WI-08, CT-05, CT-02, PA-06, and VA-02. These races apparently didn't have anything interesting that could be reduced to a one-sentence summary going for them. My view of those seven: Minnesota sixth looks like a five-point win for the Republican incumbent, as does WI-08 and VA-02. Those three should be "Leaning Republican", in my view. PA-06 looks like a narrow win for the Democratic challenger, and I'd say the same about CT-05 (Murphy over Nancy Johnson). CT-02 and NH-02 are the true tossups in that group, with the latter a race that has switched from Republican leading to a dead heat.

CQ has been shifting its views much more quickly than the Times in these late days, and has a few more tossups to throw into the pile: OH-01 and OH-02 (Times: both leaning Repub.); AZ-01 (a shocker, as most others consider that a safe Republican seat, but a late scandal has hit); AZ-05 (another LR with a shrinking margin), IN-02 and IN-09 (Democratic challenges in the process of being rebuffed), NY-20, NY-24, and PA-08. Bob Novak's excellent calls--he doesn't hedge, his tossup states are called one way or the other--include one Republican pickup, in GA-12. He's looking for a 20-seat net House pickup for the Dems.

Those looking at Bush's late tour as a something more than just a rote route are onto something here, and it's this: Bush's late visit to Red States indicates a clarification in the projected outcome set that is happening as we finish. It's back to polarization--most of the tossup races are not in Red states, and he can't help there. Most of the House gains for the Democrats will end up being at the expense of moderate Republicans in blue states. That's where the gerrymandered levee walls will be overtopped by the wave of anti-Bushite sentiment, and his late tour is just going to make this more clear.

RED STATE/BLUE STATE Updates

The key states are Pennsylvania, New York (upstate), Connecticut, and Ohio, where Republicans are being hounded from their holes; Florida, as always a battleground, but with the Democrats winning this year's key battles; and the mountain states of Montana, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. I'm looking for the Dems to gain 11 House seats and two Senate ones from the first four, governorships and legislatures as well, and to establish their challenges in the latter four, picking up a couple of seats and possibly more. Florida will deliver a couple pickups in the House, re-election of its Lieberman-WASP Democratic senator, and possibly a major governorship.

I'm sticking with my 218-217 prediction (14-15 seat pickup for Dems), one way or the other. I see slippage in some of the seats that have been predicted for the Dems for a long time, particularly the three in Indiana (check out CQ's article about bellwethers--http://www.cqpolitics.com/2006/11/election_night_bellwether_watc.html--
but expect bad news until Ohio's Republican debacle reports). There really aren't very many safe Democratic pickups, and even some of the "scandal seats"--like Foley's own FL-16--now are not sure things.

On the Senate: I'm still not confident about Virginia--a lot of closet racists will come home to Allen. I always expect Missouri to disappoint. I'm still looking for Tennessee to surprise with heavy black turnout, and I think there will be a surprisingly close race from either Nevada or Arizona. Maryland and New Jersey remain worries, though, and I'm sticking with my 50-50 prediction (Lieberman on the losing side, ours).