Sunday, September 28, 2008

What's Up With West Virginia?

Several weeks before last May's West Virginia primary, most of us political analysts who think we know everything had already written the script for the coming six months in the Mountain State. First Hillary would win a landslide pyrrhic victory in the West Virginia primary before inevitably losing the nomination to Obama, and then John McCain would go on to win the state in November by a bare minimum of 20 points, driven almost exclusively by abject racism. Some dime-store pundits even predicted West Virginia would prove to be Obama's worst state in the general election. I knew better than that, but those paying attention to my predictions early last summer may recall I predicted a McCain victory over Obama somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 points in West Virginia. The Obama campaign, which rather arrogantly snubbed West Virginia rather than lobbying for their votes in the primary back in May, must have felt the same as they withdrew all resources from the state immediately after the primary drubbing, accepting the storyline that it was a lost cause.

There's just one problem with all these conclusions about Obama's certain uncompetitiveness in the Mountain State....people forgot to ask the voters of West Virginia what they thought. After nearly three months without a poll, an early September poll emerged showing a five-point race. It certainly must have awoken the Obama campaign from its slumber as they reallocated a few resources out of the lost cause of Georgia and invested in a few ad buys in West Virginia. Still, the smart money was that the poll was an outlier and that future polls would certainly negate those numbers and show McCain comfortably ahead.

Again, conventional wisdom was wrong. There have been three polls in the last two weeks in West Virginia, all within single digits and two of them showing McCain with leads of only four percentage points. Suddenly, the national maps are showing West Virginia colored pink instead of crimson red, and it may yet emerge as a swing state despite the Obama campaign's rather insulting invisibility and a deluge of very insulting rhetoric directed towards the state by Obama supporters who didn't like the outcome of the May primary.

By no means am I predicting an Obama victory in West Virginia. In fact, the polls there today are similar to what John Kerry's numbers were four years ago, and Kerry ended up losing by 13 points when nearly every independent voter broke for Bush. I expect the same to happen this year, and a double-digit McCain victory on election night, but I'm struck that the numbers are not considerably worse....so struck in fact that it has forced me to challenge numerous other theories I've been applying to the state of the race in that part of the country.

West Virginia is the only American state that is entirely within Applachia. As we all know, Obama got destroyed throughout Appalachia in the primaries....from southern New York all the way down to northeastern Mississippi. But are those same huge deficits applying to the general election against McCain? There's anecdotal evidence that it is in some parts of Appalachia. Polls in Kentucky and Tennessee, for instance, consistently show Obama underperforming John Kerry, which is no easy task considering Kerry lost Kentucky by 20 points and Tennessee by 14 points. And the Obama campaign has publicly expressed gloominess about its chances in southwestern Pennsylvania outside of Pittsburgh, but then again they were probably just as gloomy about West Virginia until several polls showed things weren't nearly as bad as most probably expected.

But does it make sense that right in the heart of Appalachia in West Virginia, Obama would be pulling in an acceptable level of losses even though he's getting crushed in the rest of the region? It doesn't to me....and makes me wonder if my past assumption of Obama underperforming Kerry by 10 points in southern Ohio and southwestern Pennsylvania was erroneous. I hope I'm not the only one coming to this conclusion, as it heightens the importance of Obama amping up its ground game in places like Portsmouth, Steubenville, and Chillicothe in Ohio, and Washington, Uniontown, and Johnstown in Pennsylvania. If Obama can merely manage to pull in the same margins of defeat and/or narrow victory that John Kerry did in places like this, his chances of making up the difference in other regions of Ohio and Pennsylania (and Virginia for that matter) will be quite good.

Saturday, September 27, 2008

New Horse Race Analysis

Thanks to a self-imposed implosion by McCain in these last two weeks, Barack Obama has risen to what will likely prove to be the pinnacle of his success this election. Don't expect it to last, but it's worth taking a close look at Obama's Electoral College prospects at this snapshot in time. Even though Obama is performing 3-10 points better (depending on which poll you're looking at) than Al Gore or John Kerry were through the home stretch of the 2000 and 2004 campaigns nationally, it's striking that he's not in much better shape in shoring up 270 electoral votes than either of those candidates. In Gore's case, he narrowly led in Florida for the entire fall of 2000, and it was hard to imagine a scenario where he could win Florida but lose the Presidency. John Kerry was essentially tied with Bush in both Ohio and Florida in the fall of 2004, and if either of one those states went to Kerry, it was assured that he would be the 44th President.

But with Obama, most observers still see it as a longshot that either Ohio or Florida will be shaded blue this fall. Racial bias almost guarantees that any "undecided" voter in Ohio will ultimately be a McCain voter, so a "tie" in the polls in Ohio is ultimately misleading. And Florida always votes several points redder on election day than they poll in the weeks leading up to it, so Obama's ties or small deficits in the state even at what we can assume is the strongest week of his campaign ultimately bode poorly for his chances on November 4.

Taking Ohio and Florida off the table would certainly have killed Gore or Kerry in 2000 and 2004, so Obama is lucky that he has turned a couple other high-profile red states purple. The most important is Colorado, which seems like a decent bet to turn blue this year even if the race reverts back to advantage-McCain. Colorado won't get Obama to 270 electoral votes by itself, but together with 2004 red states Iowa and New Mexico, both looking good for Obama this year, it would. That takes us to Virginia, which I'm very skeptical about. The polls are erratic and those showing Obama with a lead strike me as questionable given the demographics of Virginia, fast-changing as they may be. Like Ohio and Florida, I can't see how the math works out for Obama in Virginia, encouraging as it is to watch it change so quickly.

Then of course some deep red states have turned pink this year, most notably North Carolina and Indiana. I was a big fan of Obama's decision to target seven red states that they thought they could flip (well, six of them anyway...Georgia was always a miscalculation), and it's paying dividends by keeping consequential states like Indiana and North Carolina competitive into late September. I have virtually no expectation of seeing Obama win either of these states, but their current competitiveness is part of the reason why he's outperforming Gore and Kerry nationally while still deadlocked with McCain in electoral votes.

Beyond that, and this is a factor scarcely discussed by the pundits, Obama's national poll lead can also be explained by his very strong performance in California. Gore won California by 12 points and Kerry by 10 points. In 2008, even in his weakest poll showings, Obama is winning California by 13 points. The average is closer to 16 points. Couple that with Obama's apparent near-double-digit margin in neighboring Oregon (this is the first time I remember Washington state appearing less blue than Oregon) and it goes a long way towards explaining Obama's better standing nationally than his predecessors, even if it won't do him much good in the Electoral College on November 4. In California's case, it could also prove to just be the latest example of overstating the strength of the Latino vote for Democrats, which certainly was the case in 2004.

Unfortunately for Obama, he still has glaring weaknesses in four blue states that he can't win without, meaning his current standing nationally puts him on no better footing than either Gore or Kerry. None of those blue states are Obama's weaknesses more pronounced than in New Hampshire. Kerry appeared to have a safe lead in New Hampshire on the eve of the 2004 election, but he squeaked it out with a mere one-point victory. Three polls late this week verified that Obama's "lead" in New Hampshire was a statistically insignificant one point. My thinking two weeks ago was that NH was one of the few states where Sarah Palin's presence on the ticket would hurt McCain more than it helps him since they tend to be libertarian conservatives and not social conservatives. Whether it's an enduring affection for Palin or merely and enduring affection for McCain, it's abundantly clear that Obama still has much work to do to shore up New Hampshire.

Obama's remaining three weak blue states are Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. While it appears that Obama has opened up a lead in Michigan, McCain has a couple particularly effective weapons to use on Obama in that state....his loose association with disgraced former Detroit Mayor and current felon Kwame Kilpatrick, and his support for strengthening CAFE standards on automobiles which is fiercely opposed by Detroit automakers. If Obama is to win Pennsylvania, it'll likely require a variation on "the Rendell coalition" (huge margins in suburban Philly that will offset deficits in the rest of the state) as opposed to the Gore and Kerry coalitions since even the Obama campaign sounds gloomy about their prospects in southwestern Pennsylvania outside of the city of Pittsburgh. I'm a little more optimistic about Minnesota, but McCain strikes me as the kind of Republican more likely to be viewed as acceptable to the moderate Republicans in Rochester and the second-ring Minneapolis-St. Paul suburbs that helped lead Gore and Kerry to victory in Minnesota. The closeness of most post-GOP convention polls in Minnesota suggest that McCain currently is winning many of those voters over. If Obama can't get them back, it's trouble.

Obama has a definite path to victory even if this race goes back to a tie, but if the national race reverts to where it was before both conventions (basically split down the middle) as I expect it to, Obama has to perfectly thread a needle to get to 270 electoral votes....holding all of the Kerry states, plus Iowa, New Mexico, and Colorado....or possibly Nevada. It's possible, but count me as somebody who sees at least one of the blue states causing us difficulty come election night.

Friday, September 26, 2008

Thoughts on the First Debate

I thought both guys candidates came across as fairly impressive and found this to be one of the better debates of recent memory. They filibustered a little bit on how they would deal with budget-cutting and priority-setting in the midst of the financial crisis, but that's not surprising since it's almost impossible to know how dire the economic situation will end being. Furthermore, neither is gonna address the elephant in the room when it comes to cutting spending, and that's Social Security and Medicare, both of which are likely to be on the chopping block out of necessity in the near future.

Overall, Obama won the economic part of the debate, but still came up short in making the gut-level connection with blue-collar America that he needed. McCain came across weakest when he constantly tried to frame our budget problems within the context of $18-billion-per-year earmarks, which is deranged and cheapens the entire discussion. Nonetheless, he managed to throw Obama off-message a bit by relentlessly saying that America's financial problems would be solved if we simply did away with earmarks. Obama never took the opportunity to really deliver home the message that he felt voters' pain on the economy, which probably means the retired steelworker from Steubenville still leans McCain.

I don't agree with McCain on foreign policy points, but he won that part of the debate hands-down. Obama never came up with a serious reply about his being wrong on the success of the surge. He had it on the tip of his tongue (that the military success is worthless without political progress), but for whatever reason didn't go there. Overall, McCain seemed like the wise man discussing these issues without seeming particularly "old", and was clearly getting under Obama's skin. Most of Obama's answers were coherent and intelligent but he definitely seemed like the precocious student arguing with the professor through most of the foreign policy exchange.

Both candidates had effective moments, but Obama had the most lost opportunities by my yardstick. On points, I would say McCain narrowly won (when your opponent says "I agree with you...." eight times in a debate, you gotta figure you will be viewed as victorious), but not by enough to where it'll likely change things much. Furthermore, McCain's strongest points in the debate came in the areas furthest removed from public consciousness right now.

And that leads me to the most important aspect of the debate....the intangibles. Most viewers probably glazed over much of the inside baseball that by and large dominated the second half of the debate, meaning the small ball likely loomed large as it usually does in these debates. On that front, McCain seemed like an ass. He refused to even make eye contact with Obama for an hour and a half, and maintained a snarky and condescending tone almost the entire debate. That's McCain's modus operandi and always has been. He simply does not respect most of his political opponents and refuses to acknowledge that they're worthy to share the stage with him. That clearly conflicts with his "bring the country together" campaign theme, and I could see some voters being turned off by that just like they were when Gore sighed his way through the first debate with Bush in 2000.

Nonetheless, McCain likely redeemed himself after a disastrous couple of weeks. Throw conventional wisdom out. The specific nature of this race overwhelmingly favors John McCain, and that would be the case even if the Democrats had a 30-point "generic advantage" heading into this election. That's why I've been so befuddled by McCain's manic and outrageous behavior in the last month, starting with the horrific selection of Sarah Palin as his Vice-President. By simply appearing as a steady-handed elder statesman facing off against this brash and controversial new kid, McCain would win this election by seven points. But he has chosen to operate half-cocked and undermine his advantage (he's not the "scary black Muslim with the kooky pastor and the America-hating terrorist wife"). If McCain behaves the rest of the campaign the way he did tonight, he wins comfortably. If he keeps up with the ridiculous stunts every time his poll numbers start to decline a little, he loses his edge and could, incredibly, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Looking forward to next Thursday's veep debate. If, after doing her best impression of Miss Teen South Carolina all week, Sarah Palin can somehow manage to go toe to toe with Biden, it'll be the greatest comeback since Lazarus.

Friday, September 19, 2008

Rudimentary Predictions on Battleground House Races

I've only recently become engaged in this year's House races, and have been rather amazed to notice just how many seats appear to be in play this year, both because of retirements and vulnerable incumbents. If anything, the battleground seems to be much larger than it was two years ago when the Democrats gained 30 seats. Overall, the picture looks quite good for Democrats to make at least modest gains, and potentially running the table. I must plead ignorance to specifics on some of these races, but here is my basic assessment of what can expect on November 4....

Democratic Seats (Lean/Likely Holds)
AL-05 (vacated by Bud Cramer)--would seem like an excellent opportunity for the GOP, but most see the Dem candidate as strongly likely to hold the open seat
AZ-05 (Harry Mitchell)--I would have predicted this one to go back to the GOP, particularly with McCain's home state coattails, but the Republican challenger is getting little buzz
AZ-08 (Gabrielle Giffords)
CO-02 (vacated by Mark Udall)
CO-07 (Ed Perlmutter)
CT-02 (Joe Courtney)
CT-05 (Chris Murphy)
FL-22 (Ron Klein)
GA-12 (John Barrow)
IL-08 (Melissa Bean)
IL-14 (Bill Foster)--no serious opposition, but he'll be taken out at some point in this district
IN-02 (Joe Donnelly)
IN-08 (Brad Ellsworth)
IN-09 (Baron Hill)--GOP challenger Mike Sodrel doesn't seem to be putting up as serious of challenge as he has in all of his first three challenges to Hill
IA-01 (Bruce Braley)
IA-02 (Dave Loebsack)
IA-03 (Leonard Boswell)--should be Boswell's first easy election since being redistricted into Des Moines in 2002
KY-03 (John Yarmuth)--Yarmuth's lucky to be in the only district in Kentucky that's not likely to experience devastating countercoattails from Barack Obama at the top of the ticket
LA-03 (Charlie Melancon)
ME-01 (vacated by Tom Allen)
MA-05 (Niki Tsongas)
MN-01 (Tim Walz)
MS-01 (Travis Childers)--not sure what it is about this guy that makes him electable in the Deep South, but he's looking good for winning the general in November
NH-02 (Paul Hodes)
NM-03 (vacated by Tom Udall)
NY-19 (John Hall)
NY-20 (Kristen Gillibrand)
NY-24 (Michael Arcuri)
NC-11 (Heath Shuler)
OH-18 (Zack Space)--would have been hard to believe two years ago that this perceived lightweight who stumbled into Bob Ney's old seat would prove to be so popular among his constituents
PA-04 (Jason Altmire)--kind of a tough call on this one, particularly since Altmire will likely face a headwind in this district from Barack Obama
PA-07 (Joe Sestak)
PA-08 (Patrick Murphy)
SC-05 (John Spratt)
TN-04 (Lincoln Davis)
TX-17 (Chet Edwards)--he continues to live on borrowed time, but doesn't seem likely to fall this year
TX-23 (Ciro Rodriguez)--this district still leans Republican, so it's kind of a tough call, but it's more Hispanic every day, so the Republican white boy running seems to have a tall order
UT-02 (Jim Matheson)

Republican Seats (lean/likely holds)
AL-02 (vacated by Terry Everett)--the Dems have a strong recruit in the mayor of Montgomery, but it seems hard to believe a Democrat could take a seat in Lower Alabama with Barack Obama at the top of the ticket under any circumstance
AK-AL (Don Young)--just like Ted Stevens, the coattails of Sarah Palin will save Young from overdue extinction
CA-04 (vacated by John Doolittle)--McClintock found a district perfect for him, likely denying Democrat Charlie Brown a perfect opportunity for a pickup
CT-04 (Chris Shays)--if they couldn't take him out last time, I'm doubtful they will this time
FL-13 (Vern Buchanan)
FL-21 (Lincoln Diaz-Balart)
FL-24 (Tom Feeney)
FL-25 (Mario Diaz-Balart)
ID-01 (Bill Sali)--arguably the most gaffe-prone wingnut in Congress, but this is Idaho...even Larry Craig would get elected running as a Republican
IL-10 (Mark Kirk)--always stays ahead of the curve to avoid becoming too vulnerable in an increasingly blue district
IL-18 (vacated by Ray LaHood)
IA-04 (Tom Latham)
LA-04 (vacated by Jim McCrery)
MD-01 (vacated by Wayne Gilchrest)--potentially one to watch with the Democrat endorsed by outgoing Republican Gilchrest, but it's still a tough district for Dems
MI-07 (Tim Walberg)--tough call, but weak Obama coattails should be helpful for Walberg
MI-09 (Joe Knollenberg)
MN-03 (vacated by Jim Ramstad)--Ashwin Madia's an appealing candidate, but I still suspect Terri Bonoff would have played better in this district...leans narrowly to Republican Paulsen
MN-06 (Michelle Bachmann)--sad that Democrat Tinklenberg isn't putting up a more serious challenge against this nut
MO-06 (Sam Graves)
MO-09 (vacated by Kenny Hulshof)
NE-02 (Lee Terry)
NV-02 (who is it again? Dean Heller?)
NM-02 (vacated by Steve Pearce)
NY-26 (vacated by Tom Reynolds)--Dems totally blew it by selecting the weak Alice Kryzan over Jon Powers in the primary; now it's advantage Republican with Chris Lee
NY-29 (Randy Kuhl)
OH-02 (Jean Schmidt)--another of Congress's most deplorable and reckless members who keeps slipping by because of her crimson-red district
OH-16 (vacated by Ralph Regula)--I'm not sure about the contenders in this district but it still leans GOP enough to make me give them a slight edge here
PA-06 (Jim Gerlach)--the Moby Dick of GOP Congressman is going largely uncontested this year, likely giving him his first victory better than 51-49 in four tries
PA-18 (Tim Murphy)
VA-02 (Thelma Drake)--we barely missed in our opportunity to snuff her out two years ago, and may never get another chance
VA-10 (Frank Wolf)
WA-08 (Dave Reichert)--I suspect Dems will finally give up their biennial quest to take out Reichert after the latest Darcy Burner failure
WV-02 (Shelley Moore Capito)
WY-AL (vacated by Barbara Cubin)--as strong of a candidate as Gary Trauner is, it's just hard to imagine he can win in Wyoming

Lean/Likely Turnovers to Dems
AZ-01 (vacated by Rick Renzi)--when the incumbent is prison-bound in a swing district, it's usually a safe bet that the opposition party takes the open seat
CO-04 (Marilyn Musgrave)--the fast-changing demographics of eastern Colorado coupled with this year's expectedly large turnout for Obama probably means Musgrave's hourglass finally ran out of sand
IL-11 (vacated by Jerry Weller)--with Barack Obama's home state coattails, Dem Debbie Halvorson would seem to have a distinct advantage in this open seat
NV-03 (Jon Porter)--robust Vegas-area turnout and a top-tier challenger in Dina Titus is probably gonna be Porter's undoing this year
NJ-03 (vacated by Jim Saxton)--seems like about as close to a slam-dunk pickup prospect as the Dems could hope for this year)
NJ-07 (vacated by Mike Ferguson)--Linda Stender came within one point last time and is certainly the favorite to pick it up as an open seat this year
NM-01 (vacated by Heather Wilson)--both parties did well with top-tier recruits, but the growing Dem party advantage gives an undeniable edge to Martin Heinrich
NY-13 (vacated by Vito Fossella)--seems unlikely the weak New York GOP will be able to overcome the Fossella crisis in a year as bad as this one
NY-25 (vacated by James Walsh)--another pickup that should be a freebie for Dem Dan Maffei
NC-08 (Robin Hayes)--I went out on a limb predicting this race for Larry Kissell two years ago and came with a couple hundred votes of being right...this year I will stand by Kissell and project another upset
OH-01 (Steve Chabot)--with a stronger candidate in Steve Driehaus and an expected surge in African-American voting in Cincinnati, I think this could be the year this district goes blue
OH-15 (vacated by Deborah Pryce)--another open seat that seems like a virtual freebie for Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy
VA-11 (vacated by Tom Davis)--northern Virginia's rapid shift to the Dems should make this open seat one of the brightest prospects this year

Lean/Likely Turnovers to GOP
CA-11 (Jerry McNerney)--this one's no sure thing, but this would seem to be the kind of district where McCain is likely to do well, and I expect GOP coattails for challenger Dean Andal
FL-16 (Tim Mahoney)--while Mahoney has a better chance of surviving than I would have predicted a year ago, I still think his one-point margin last time against "Mark Foley" was very telling of how tough this district still is for Dems
GA-08 (Jim Marshall)--fervent anti-Obama majorities in this 70% white district will finally do in the House's most conservative Democrat
KS-02 (Nancy Boyda)--Boyda's victory two years ago was the ultimate fluke, and I highly doubt it can be repeated in a Presidential election year
LA-06 (Don Cazayoux)--the most endangered Democrat of them all, Cazayoux would be in enough trouble in a one-on-one race, but with black Democrat Michael Jackson running as independent, a Cazayoux victory seems like an almost insurmountable hurdle
NH-01 (Carol Shea-Porter)--another fluke victor in 2006's purge of New Hampshire Republicans, I suspect better-than-even odds that Jeb Bradley regains the reins here this year
PA-10 (Chris Carney)--hard to say if Carney would be better positioned to hold this uber-Republican seat if Hillary was the Democratic nominee instead of Obama, but either way this one was gonna be brutally difficult to hold
PA-11 (Paul Kanjorski)--dead man walking....plagued by a minor ethics issue, the GOP swarmed in on Kanjorski like sharks in a feeding frenzy and have foisted celebrity anti-immigrant mayor Lou Barletta against him in a year where Barack Obama's weakness threatens to seriously hurt Democrats in rural PA; expect a blog entry from me in the near future on "losing Scranton"
TX-22 (Nick Lampson)--now more than ever after Hurricane Ike has thrown Galveston into turmoil, accidental Congressman Nick Lampson is probably in DEEP trouble
WI-08 (Steve Kagen)--I just have a bad feeling this one is gonna go to the bad guys

Overall, I only see the Dems gaining three seats based on this calculus. That's definitely less than most, but every generic Congressional ballot survey seems to be moving closer to the direction of traditional party affiliation, so right now I don't think it's unreasonable. Many seem to think the Dems could have another year as good as last year, but with a Presidential election polarizing Americans into their usual partisan allegiances, I'm not optimistic. Even in the best-case scenario, I can see the Dems gaining no better than 10 seats this year.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Senate Race Profiles

It's long past overdue for me to give some predictions and analysis for this fall's Senate races. On a Presidential year, I admittedly pay less attention to Congressional elections than I do in midterm elections. Beyond that, it seems like it took longer for the Congressional races to fully congeal this year than in 2006, and it's still kind of a tough read as to how many of them will go. So much depends on the turnout for the Presidential election, and the likely coattails (or countercoattails) each of the nominees bring with them. Nonetheless, here are my predictions on each of this year's Senate races as of mid-September....

Alabama--It's hard to understand why they even hold elections in Alabama anymore. The guy (or gal) with an (R) next to his or her name is the virtually guaranteed winner. That's particularly true of two-term GOP incumbent Jeff Sessions, who should cruise to a 2-1 margin over fourth-tier Democratic challenger Vivian Davis Figures. Predictions: Sessions by 32.

Alaska--As disgusting as it's been to watch a worthless culture war hack like Sarah Palin be lionized as some sort of reform crusader and role model for women in the past three weeks, the darkest irony of Palin's ascendancy to the national ticket has scarcely be discussed....her coattails in her home state could help re-elect both of the indicted GOP Congressional crooks that she's allegedly helped slay. Indicted veteran Senator Ted Stevens was behind by 13 points last month, but in the most recent poll has closed the gap against his strong Democratic challenger, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich. If Palin's coattails can't drag Stevens across the finish line for another term itself, expect voter disgust with the national Democratic Party running the state's reputation through the mud to try to take down Palin will likely get the job done. As much as Alaska pretends to be a frontier society of self-subsisting cowboys, it's the nation's most prolific welfare state. Democrats will be incessantly pointing that out....and the locals won't like what they hear. In much the way that Presidential ticket coattails helped the weak 2004 Republican incumbent Lisa Murkowski swing to a sizable victory despite trailing in the polls leading up to election day, the most corrupt member of Congress (Stevens) will slip in once again based on his party's anti-corruption message. Prediction: Stevens by 4.

Arkansas--Amazingly, one-term Democratic incumbent Mark Pryor has no Republican opposition this year. That's pretty incredible for a Southern state, even if it is heavily Democratic Arkansas and Pryor being one of the Senate's more conservative Democrats. I'm rather surprised the RSCC couldn't twist newly minted national celebrity Mike Huckabee to jump into the race. He would have likely beaten Pryor. As it stands though, despite the likelihood that Barack Obama will lose by 20 points at the top of the ticket in Arkansas, Pryor gets a free pass to a second term.

Colorado--Two Congressmen are facing off to fill this seat being vacated by two-term Republican Wayne Allard. Narrowly favored is Democrat Mark Udall, who serves the liberal Boulder and Aspen areas of Colorado is the son of legendary Arizona Senator Mo Udall. Republican Bob Schaffer used to serve eastern Colorado in Congress before coming out on the losing end of the 2004 GOP Senate primary. Four years ago, this race would have been tough to call given the geographic parity and mutual advantages both candidates bring to the ticket, but demographics have been swinging decidedly to the favor of Democrats in Colorado since 2004. While a Schaffer upset is not unthinkable, it's hard to see how Udall can lose in the current political environment. Prediction: Udall by 5. (Dems +1)

Delaware--Democrat Joe Biden is running unopposed in his attempt to extend his quest for a seventh Senate term. Obviously, his presence as Obama's running mate complicates the situation, but the Democrats seem assured of holding this seat no matter what. I'm not sure of the condition of this year's Delaware gubernatorial race, but I have to suspect the Democrat is heavily favored in a year such as 2008. That means that if Biden becomes Vice-President, another Democrat will be appointed to fill his Senate seat for the next two years.

Georgia--It was six years ago that Georgia essentially became a one-party state. Both incumbent Governor Roy Barnes and incumbent Senator Max Cleland, both Democrats, were comfortably defeated. Beating Cleland was Saxby Chambliss, now running for his second term. I don't know much about Chambliss' Democratic challenger Jim Martin, but have heard he's not a bad candidate. But it'll take a miracle worker to win Georgia with a (D) next to his name, and I'm doubtful Martin has miracles on his resume. As is almost always the case Southern Senate races, particularly in Presidential election years with dramatic GOP coattails, the Republican candidate will close very well. Prediction: Chambliss by 14.

Idaho--The Democrats are running one of their few success stories out of Idaho in the past few years in Larry LaRocco. If ever there was a situation where a Democrat was capable of winning in Idaho, one would have to surmise that this was the time, with disgraced incumbent Republican Larry Craig leaving this open seat on a year where Republicans in general are poorly received. Nonetheless, GOP candidate Jim Risch is (I believe) the Idaho Lieutenant Governor and faced LaRocco for that post two years ago, easily beating him. Expect the same result this year. Prediction: Risch by 16.

Illinois--Democratic incumbent Dick Durbin made some controversial comments, albeit taken completely out of context, comparing U.S. troops to the villians of history back in 2005, and looked like he might have vulnerable. That clearly has not happened as Durbin is going for his third term with only the token opposition of Steve Sauerberg. With Obama's coattails on the Presidential ticket, Durbin will cruise by a 2-1 margin or better. Prediction: Durbin by 34.

Iowa--Every six years, potentially vulnerable liberal Democratic Senator Tom Harkin finds himself in a situation where he heads the Senate Agriculture Committee just in time to dole out ladels full of pork for Iowa farmers only months before his re-election campaign. It allowed him to smack down a strong challenge six years ago from Congressman Greg Ganske, who was stupid enough to veto the farm bill months before the election. Going for his fifth term, Harkin finally finds himself in a situation where he doesn't face a stiff challenge, and should thus cross the 60% threshold for the first time in his career against token GOP opponent Christopher Reed. Prediction: Harkin by 24.

Kansas--Republicans always win in Kansas, and such will be the case for incumbent Senator Pat Roberts seeking his third term against Democratic challenger Jim Slattery. Prediction: Roberts by 30.

Kentucky--There's a strange disconnect in Kentucky politics. The Democratic Party seems to be growing at the state level even as the national Democratic Party grows weaker every election cycle. For that reason, Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford seemed poised to give Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell a serious run for his money in 2008. Now, the race seems less likely to be hotly contested. McConnell seems to have consolidated much of his base, and Lunsford will be forced to run on the same ticket as Barack Obama, who will be wildly unpopular in Kentucky, arguably the most racist state in the country. Obama is likely to lose by at least 30 points in Kentucky, making Lunsford already difficult job next to impossible. Unless McConnell melts down as badly as his colleague Jim Bunning did in the final weeks of this campaign, he should close well and secure another term. Lunsford's best hope is for a showing strong enough to compel Kentucky voters to give him a second chance in 2010. Prediction: McConnell by 15.

Louisiana--Ever since Hurricane Katrina, I've argued that Louisiana has become impossible terrain for a Democrat, particularly one like Mary Landrieu who isn't as conservative as former Democratic colleague John Breaux. Nonetheless, polls indicate that Landrieu MAY have gotten a break in that her challenger, Treasurer John Kennedy, who switched parties to the GOP to be able to run for this seat, has not caught on. But the thing about the South is that doesn't take much for a Republican candidate to be able to catch on. If Kennedy is able to fund some moderately competent ads, he'll close the gap considerably and could conceivably still pull out a victory here with a fiercely unpopular Barack Obama at the top of the ticket. Even under ideal circumstances, I can see Landrieu hanging on only by the skin of her teeth in the new and whiter Louisiana. Prediction: Landrieu by 2.

Maine--I was all pumped up when I discovered popular Portland-area Congressman Tom Allen was challenging two-term incumbent Senator Susan Collins. The northeast seemed poised to purge everyone who had the scarlet letter (R) next to their name, and surely pseudo-moderate Susan Collins would be among that group, right? Not so fast say the voters of Maine. It appears they not only wish to stand by real-deal moderate Republican Olympia Snowe, but also have a continued affinity for the more conservative Collins, who leads Allen by double digits in every poll I've seen. I'm sure this isn't what Allen was expecting when he abandoned his House seat, but it looks like it's what he's gonna get. The race is bound to tighten a little bit considering how Democratic Maine has become, but I still think Collins prevails handily, probably more handily than she did against a much weaker opponent in 2002. Prediction: Collins by 13.

Massachusetts--While Democratic incumbent and former Presidential candidate John Kerry is certainly a shoo-in, his failed Presidential run seems to have increased a perception about him that's a bit stale. Republican challenger Jeff Beatty doesn't seem like a serious threat, but expect him to give Kerry his biggest challenge since William Weld in 1996. Prediction: Kerry by 28.

Michigan--Senate institution and long-time Democratic incumbent Carl Levin should easily trounce fourth-tier GOP challenger Jack Hoogendyk. The big question with this race is will Levin be able to help Barack Obama in the state? Prediction: Levin by 35.

Minnesota--It was still August and the sleaze factor was already off the charts in this Minnesota Senate race pitting former comedian and unimaginably weak candidate Al Franken against slick Norm Coleman, the accidental one-term incumbent who won six years ago because the badly bungled memorial celebration for Senator Paul Wellstone left a poor taste in the mouths of independent voters. The race right now stands too close to call, with Coleman holding a narrow lead in most polls, but with dark horse independent candidate (and briefly, former Senator) Dean Barkley polling in the double digits and rising based largely on the absurd nastiness between Franken and Coleman. The fact that Barkley will participate in the televised debates makes me give him at least a one-in-five chance of pulling off an upset here. But for now, I'll stick with conventional wisdom and predict the right-leaning indepedents stay with Coleman. What a tremendous lost opportunity for Democrats. Prediction: Coleman by 5.

Mississippi--Virtually every Democrat in America was hoping that Republican elder statesman Thad Cochran would retire and give Democrats a chance at picking up a seat in this most hostile terrain. Their plans were dashed when Cochran announced he was seeking another term. He'll easily lay waste to Democratic challenger Erik Fleming. Prediction: Cochran by 36.

Mississippi #2--Thad Cochran may not have retired, but the Dems still got their chance to try to run a competitive race and pick off a Senate seat in the brutal turf that is Mississippi, the most racially polarized state in America by leaps and bounds, after Trent Lott announced his surprise retirement last winter and his seat was temporarily filled by Republican Congressman Roger Wicker. The Democrats tried to recruit popular former Attorney General Mike Moore, but he said nothing doing, so they settled for their second best candidate, former Governor Ronnie Musgrove. Winning as a Democrat statewide in Mississippi is brutally difficult, but Musgrove pulled it off, and judging from the first-rate ad he's running this year, should give the Dems a fighting chance against his opponent Wicker. The presence of Barack Obama on the ticket should cut both ways for Musgrove. It'll increase black turnout which will help Musgrove, but it will also likely decrease the number of whites willing to vote for a Democrat. In the end, Wicker is very likely to win and should close strongly as all Republicans do in the South, but it won't be for lack of a strong effort by Musgrove. Prediction: Wicker by 9.

Montana--If only one Democrat in America was able to survive this cycle, it would be Montana's moderate incumbent Max Baucus. It's not so much that Baucus is universally loved in Montana, even though he was nonetheless likely to win no matter who the GOP ran against him, but who could have imagined the accidental winner of the Republican primary would be a perennial candidate named Bob Kelleher who in the past has run with the Democrats, the Green Party, and even the Socialists. Kelleher is well to the left of Baucus on near every issue (the man favors gun control....in Montana!!!) and will likely motivate even most "real Republicans" to hold their nose and vote for "the conservative candidate" Baucus. Prediction: Baucus by 54.

Nebraska--Former Republican Governor and Ag Secretary Mike Johanns is the favorite in this open seat vacated by maverick Republican Chuck Hagel, but the only thing he has going for him is his familiarity among Nebraska voters. The Democrats have a tremendously appealing young challenger named Scott Kleeb, who waged a helluva effort two years ago in one of the most Republican Congressional districts in the country in western Nebraska. Kleeb hasn't caught on yet, but I'm not ruling out the possibility that he still could. You have to figure that Kleeb is vastly overperforming traditional Democratic numbers in uber-conservative NE-03 based on his familiarity in that part of the state. That means if he can run some well-received ads targeted to younger voters in Lincoln and Omaha where he's less well-known, it's entirely possible he could come out of nowhere and score a surprise victory much like Chuck Hagel did 12 years ago. It's odds-against given how tough of a state for Democrats Nebraska is and how little time is left to take on the Goliath known as Johanns, but it's still the sleeper race I think is most likely to dramatically change shape in the next seven weeks. For now though, I have to give significant odds to Johanns. Prediction: Johanns by 9.

New Hampshire--In a rematch of the 2002 contest, one-term incumbent Republican John Sununu will again face off against former Democratic Governor Jeanne Shaheen. Sununu prevailed in a Republican year last time, but New Hampshire had trended decidedly blue since then. Polls are erratic, but even the most pessimistic for Democrats still show Shaheen with a lead. The optimistic polls show her leading by double digits. One gets the feeling that the GOP has left Sununu for dead. A comeback is not completely out of the question, but I certainly sense that Shaheen has the advantage here. Prediction: Shaheen by 6. (Dems +2)

New Jersey--As is the case every cycle, New Jersey looks like it at least has the potential to be competitive with geriatric incumbent Democrat Frank Lautenberg making yet another run. Polls show Lautenberg leading, but not by much considering his challenger is perennial GOP also-ran Dick Zimmer, who appears to be addicted to losing. If Tom Kean, Jr., was making another go at this seat, we might have a race on our hands, but it seems like New Jersey will continue to be the "great white whale" that Republicans can never seem to catch. Prediction: Lautenberg by 9.

New Mexico--Republican Pete Domenici is retiring, leaving another golden pickup opportunity for Democrats. Democrats are running Santa Fe-area Congressman Tom Udall (yes, another in the long line of Udall Mormons) and caught a break when center-right Republican Heather Wilson was defeated in the primary by the most orthodox conservative, Congressman Steve Pearce. Polls show Udall with a decisive lead as it's unlikely a candidate as conservative as Pearce would be able to win statewide in New Mexico in an election year as tough as this one. Barring a huge game-changer, Udall will snag this race from the Republicans jaws. Prediction: Udall by 7. (Dems +3)

North Carolina--Polls are erratic but most are surprisingly close in the race to unseat one-term Republican incumbent Elizabeth Dole. The Democrats have an attractive and worthy challenger in Kay Hagan who is putting up much more of a fight than anyone expected in what appears to be a state moving quite rapidly to the left. Nonetheless, I think the "Old South" will prevail at least one more time to bring a posthumous smile to face of fallen right-wing icon Jesse Helms. Keep in mind that Erskine Bowles was leading at this point in his 2004 Senate race and went onto lose by five points when the national Democratic Party was used to bludgeon him to death. With Barack Obama at the top of the ticket, I anticipate something similar happening to Hagan this year and that Dole, weak as she otherwise is, will close well and sneak by with a semi-comfortable win. Prediction: Dole by 6.

Oklahoma--In most places in the country, this race would be a slam-dunk. Appealing and youthful Democratic challenger Andrew Rice would appear to be the dream candidate for Middle America in a Democratic year, where he faces controversial right-wing incumbent Republican Jim Inhofe who would not be electable statewide in too many American states. But this isn't just any American state....it's Oklahoma, one of the most hard-core enclaves of conservatism. Even in an off-year election, Rice would have his hands full in this state, but the likelihood is that McCain will get more than 70% of the vote in Oklahoma, meaning about 40% of McCain voters would have to cross over to vote for Rice downballot. Seems like an incredibly tall order. If Rice was challenging equally controversial Republican Tom Coburn in 2010, it might be a different story, but as it stands he has virtually no chance of winning. Prediction: Inhofe by 15.

Oregon--This race has turned to be much tighter than I ever expected. Gordon Smith is a moderate two-term Republican incumbent going out of his way to distance himself from the Republican Party, but is finding that is only helping him so much as polls have been tied for months between Smith and Democratic challenger Jeff Merkley. This is perhaps the toughest race to call. While it's expected that Barack Obama will win Oregon big, tradition has been that Democratic Presidential margins in Oregon are fairly modest, so I'm not expecting a serious coattail effect for Merkley. With that in mind, it strikes me that just enough Oregon voters will find Smith benign enough to bring back for a third act. Prediction: Smith by 1.

Rhode Island--Long-time Democratic incumbent Jack Reed is one of the surest bets for re-election of anybody this year. Lightweight GOP challenger Bob Tingle wouldn't be able to take down Reed even in the most perfect Republican year...and this year certainly is not that. Prediction: Reed by 50.

South Carolina--Early on, it was expected that the most exciting part of this race would be in the primary as GOP incumbent Lindsey Graham, who has a bit of centrist-maverick streak, voted on the wrong side of the immigration bill last year in uber-conservative South Carolina. That, among other perceived indiscretions, was thought to bring a primary challenge from the right capable of taking down Graham. The challenge happened, but it flopped, and now Lindsey Graham is virtually assured of cruising to re-election by simple virtue of having an (R) next to his name and running in South Carolina. Democratic challenger Bob Conley will be a cakewalk for him. Prediction: Graham by 22.

South Dakota--The comeback story of Tim Johnson is quite amazing at multiple levels. Six years ago, he survived the closest Senate race of the cycle, beating back a strong challenge by Republican John Thune by only about 500 votes. Four years later, he had a serious stroke that seemed as though it was likely to cripple him. Amazingly, Johnson returned within months and appears to be back to his old self. Beyond that, he faces only token opposition in his fight to hang on for a third Senate term this year despite the bullishness of Republicans hoping to pick him off. As it stands now, Johnson seems poised to score his first comfortable margin of victory in three attempts. Prediction: Johnson by 16.

Tennessee--There are a handful of states that have gone against the tide this past decade and have trended more and more Republican even in the last few years as the nation overall has trended leftward. Tennessee is one of those states and it seems almost impossible to believe that just eight years ago Tennessee was considered a swing state and perhaps the most politically moderate state of the South. Put a folksy center-right Republican incumbent like Lamar Alexander on the ticket (with the opposition ticket headlined by Barack Obama!) and you have a landslide in the making. Democratic challenger Bob Tuke will be a gadfly that Alexander easily crushes with a single swat. Prediction: Alexander by 33.

Texas--Six years ago, Democrats were irrationally exuberant about the chances of African-American Dallas Mayor Ron Kirk to win the open seat vacated by Phil Gramm. Despite polls indicating a close race on election eve, Kirk got swamped by 12 points (a trend that should scare the bejeezus out of any Barack Obama supporter) by Republican Jon Cornyn. This year, Cornyn is seeking re-election. While Cornyn hasn't exactly lit a fire under too many Texans, he has an (R) next to his name which at least for now all but assures victory in Texas. Democratic challenger Rick Noriega comes with some decent buzz, but it seems very unlikely that Texas would be ready to elect a Latino Senator, particularly a Democratic one. Noriega will suffer a fate similar to Kirk. Prediction: Cornyn by 14.

Virginia--I've never understood why so many people are so impressed with former Virginia Governor Mark Warner. Nothing about him seems particularly dynamic, yet he was heavily hyped as Presidential material heading into this election year. I'm glad he didn't run as he his presence in this year's open Virginia Senate race has given the Dems about as close to a sure thing as they could ever hope to get in terms of a pickup opportunity. Republican elder statesman John Warner is retiring and the best his party could find to follow in his footsteps is another former VA Governor, Jim Gilmore, with a less celebrated legacy. Not a single poll has even showed the race close. Warner would have won here even with Virginia's old demographics, but with the state's population growth and rapid shift to the Democrats, the race shouldn't even be remotely close. Prediction: Warner by 18. (Dems +4)

West Virginia--Even though West Virginia has been trending decidedly Republican since 2000, its "institution Democrats" like Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefeller still seem incapable of defeat. Shelley Moore Capito may have had a chance to take down Rockefeller in a more agreeable Republican year, but 2008 ain't that, and Rockefeller's lightweight GOP opponent Jay Wolfe will be another pushover no matter how badly Obama hurts the top of the ticket in West Virginia (and recent polls indicate it may not be nearly as bad as expected). Prediction: Rockefeller by 27.

Wyoming--Republican incumbent Mike Enzi is running unopposed, if that gives you any idea of how Republican Wyoming is.

Wyoming #2--The death of GOP Senator Craig Thomas last year led to the appointment of Republican John Barrasso to fill his seat. Barrasso is a comfortable enough fit for ultra-conservative Wyoming that the Dems were bearish about the prospect of replacing him with a Democrat for the remaining four years of the term. Democrat Nick Carter is the chosen fall guy. It's hard to tell how good of a fight Carter will be able to put up, but it seems almost certain that no matter how good his fight, he still won't prevail victorious. Prediction: Barrasso by 17.

So there you have it....all 36 Senate races this year. I've predicted a net gain of four seats for the Democrats, although that number will drop to three once Joe Lieberman begins to caucus with the Republicans immediately after the election. I'm skeptical of the Democrats picking up very many more seats beyond the four obvious ones (although Oregon remains a distinct possibility) and am still nervous about Landrieu's chances in Louisiana. Whatever the case, the Dems should still come out of the 2008 election with a comfortable cushion to their Senate majority, which could prove tremendously useful considering a much less favorable Senate map in 2010.

Monday, September 08, 2008

90% Odds for McCain

That's my call eight weeks before the election. And for the record, that was my call last week at this time as well, before the predicted McCain convention bounce. It's unlikely the needle will move much in the next two or three weeks, and may actually improve for McCain as the Obama campaign is gonna be almost exclusively on defense in the foreseeable future, constantly being asked to respond to the latest Sarah Palin buzz or the latest exasperated screech from McCain about media bias against him. Obama won't have an opportunity to get back in the game until the debates, and even those are no sure thing. Obama is not the caliber of debater that John Kerry was four years ago, and McCain is better positioned to be the Lloyd Bentsen to Obama's Dan Quayle, ridiculing Obama's "youth and inexperience".

Needless to say, every aspect of this horse race already strongly favors McCain at this stage. Let's forget about the daily reminder that the issues and partisan advantage this year strongly favor Obama. None of that will ultimately matter now that McCain has reinvented himself as a maverick and reignited the culture war. Voters can be expected to be as mindless of drones as they have in previous election cycles, voting "cultural connections" over positions on issues. But McCain's real advantage lies in the fact that undecided voters will almost assuredly break his way by wide margins on election day.

In the majority of primary contests earlier this year, the late-deciders broke almost unanimously against Barack Obama. There were a few high-profile exceptions to be sure, but whether it be blue states like California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts; purple states like Ohio, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania; or red states like South Dakota, Texas, and Tennessee, Hillary Clinton's performance significantly exceeded the polls released on the eve of election, often by double-digit margins. Why would we expect undecideds to behave differently in the general election?

Undecideds as a whole constitute a considerably larger slice of the electorate than was the case in 2004. The reason? Key demographic groups have serious issues with Barack Obama....and those issues are very unlikely to go away, particularly with a pseudo-maverick challenger as seemingly benign to low-information swing voters as John McCain as the alternative. Ultimately, the demography of the "swing voters" on election even won't matter much. Whether it's the upper-middle class female suburbanite and mother worried about "keeping her family safe" or traditionally Democratic senior citizens wary of Obama's race and experience, neither one of these groups has any intention of ultimately voting for Barack Obama barring an epic mistake by John McCain. For that reason, if Obama goes into November 4 with a poll advantage of anything less than five points, John McCain will be the 44th President of the United States.

Sunday, September 07, 2008

Ten Less Obvious Geographic Targets for the Obama Campaign

Anybody following the horse race at all has a pretty good idea where the key battlegrounds are expected to be. My personal opinion is that the three markets that are most likely to determine the 2008 election winner are, in this order, Denver (including Boulder and Fort Collins), Detroit, and Northern Virginia. Beyond those three, there are at least a dozen markets in key battleground states that will be sucking up the vast majority of campaign resources in the next 50-some days until the election. That's the way the game is played and always will be for as long as the Electoral College is a reality. My thought process this morning was dedicated to isolating some geographic hotspots that are perhaps under-the-radar of conventional wisdom yet could nonetheless be very productive investments of time and resources for the Obama campaign. The top-10 I came up with are listed below in descending order.

10. Flagstaff, Arizona--Because it's John McCain's home state, nobody expects Arizona to be a swing state in 2008. It probably won't be, but the most recent poll released from the state showed McCain leading by only six in Arizona, a smaller lead than he held in the expected battleground state of Nevada. The Obama campaign needs to do some internal polling in Arizona and see if their findings reflect the recent polling of a single-digit McCain lead. If it is, I think it would be entirely worthwhile to pour some campaign dollars in the less-expensive media market of Flagstaff, which is already favorable Democratic terrain, and also to set up a campaign stop there. It would be very embarrassing for the McCain campaign if Obama went to the university town of Flagstaff and filled the streets with tens of thousands of screaming fans in McCain's backyard. Obviously this is not something we're likely to see in the closing weeks of the campaign, but for headfake value alone, it's something worth doing in September.

9. Aberdeen, South Dakota--I've seen only one poll coming out of South Dakota, and it showed McCain with a scant four-point lead. I don't expect Obama to win there, but I'm puzzled why the prospect of a competitive South Dakota is not even being discussed even when the polls are similar to those of North Dakota, which is a battleground. Aberdeen is a worthwhile target for a September campaign stop and television ads for a number of reasons. This is the Democratic part of South Dakota. Tim Johnson and Stephanie Herseth pulled out statewide victories in 2002 and 2004 by running up the score in the counties in and around Aberdeen. Given that the Democrats have adopted a much more friendly platform to controversial-everywhere-but-the-Corn-Belt biofuels than Republicans in 2008, Obama could pick off alot of GOP-leaning farmers in eastern South Dakota who don't trust McCain's commitment to agriculture. Beyond that, Obama could do a rally with hometown boy Tom Daschle and really make some connections to voters who were out of reach for Gore and Kerry. I'm not certain about particulars of the Aberdeen media market, but I suspect it would be one of the cheapest in the country for advertising, and cuts into portions of North Dakota making it even more useful.

8. Wheeling, West Virginia--I have a good friend who lives deep into the hollers of Logan County, WV, and still insists from her interactions that she believes Obama will win West Virginia. I suspect that puts her in a minority small enough to count on one hand, but I still think some outreach effort into West Virginia would be valuable, particularly in the Wheeling area. Obama essentially ceded West Virginia to Hillary in the primary, making only one campaign stop in Charleston on the eve of the primary. Voters there don't know him, but I suspect that if more do, the margin for McCain in the state could potentially be far less lopsided than if he doesn't set foot there. More importantly though, I think Wheeling is important for the same reason it was important for Kerry four years ago. The market cuts into Ohio and Pennsylvania, specifically the very blue-collar regions of Ohio and Pennsylvania where Obama has the most work to do to win over skeptics. I suspect campaigning in this area is something of a defensive move, meaning his best hope is probably to cut losses rather than win over Bush voters, but in the context of controlling losses within statewide races in OH and PA, the old adage that the best offense is a good defense certainly seems to apply.

7. Council Bluffs, Iowa--Each new round of poll numbers indicate that Iowa appears less likely to ultimately be a battleground state, with Obama managing double-digit leads in the state. Again, I surmise that the untold story accounting for Obama's strong performance throughout the Corn Belt (even Indiana!) is ethanol, specifically McCain's previous hard-line opposition to it. The reason Council Bluffs is a secret weapon is twofold. It's location in the heavily Republican southwest side of Iowa means the Obama campaign is on offense there, competing for traditionally Republican votes in western Iowa, but also competing for votes in Omaha, Nebraska, just across the Missouri River from Council Bluffs. We don't hear much anymore about the prospect of Obama winning one (or even two) of the electoral votes in eastern Nebraska, and it remains a longshot. Nonetheless, raising Obama's presence in western Iowa will have spillover effect in Omaha and the corn farmers surrounding it in Nebraska, leaving the prospect of robbing McCain of a Nebraska electoral vote on the table while simultaneously running up the score in Iowa.

6. Durango, Colorado--Chances are, the suburban doughnut surrounding Denver will decide who wins Colorado's nine electoral votes, but if the race is as close there as most suspect it will end up being, smaller Colorado markets loom large. The fast-changing demography of Colorado was abundantly clear in the 2004 election, and perhaps no place was the change more obvious than Durango, formerly a Republican stronghold in Colorado's southwest corner, where population growth is apparently fronted by left-leaning young people drawn to the area's ski culture. I believe there were only five counties in America that Bill Clinton never won in 1992 or 1996, but where John Kerry won in 2004. La Plata County, Colorado, home of Durango, was one of them. If we assume that the trendlines that had clearly transformed Durango in 2004 have continued, Obama should be able to grow upon Kerry's margin rather significantly in the area in 2008. The fact that neighboring battleground state New Mexico is a few miles south of Durango is an an additional bullet point for its utility.

5. South Bend, Indiana--Congressman Joe Donnelly showed us the potential northern Indiana holds for Democrats if we simply try there. The lesson appears to be learned as Indiana is deemed a battleground state in 2008. South Bend strikes me as the most consequential market in Indiana. Notre Dame University gives Obama a youthful base of operation while simultaneously providing Obama an outreach to Catholic voters, a demographic long cited as one of his most difficult to reach. The South Bend market also reaches into southwestern Michigan, and despite fairly encouraging polls of late, I think Obama will ultimately need all the help in can get in Michigan. Probably outside of the South Bend market but still worthy of mention is another Indiana town in Joe Donnelly's Congressional district, Kokomo. This is a blue-collar factory town that Democrats should be winning, but rarely do. Voters in Kokomo may be some of the most likely to swing if the Obama campaign reaches out to them in a serious way.

4. Elko, Nevada--In 2004, it seemed like John Kerry was spending more time in Republican-leaning Reno than in Democratic-leaning Las Vegas. I didn't really understand it at the time, until I saw the election returns and noticed Kerry had significantly cut into the GOP's advantage in Reno and surrounding areas. The reason Kerry lost Nevada was that he got absolutely destroyed in rural Nevada. Obama, by contrast, beat Hillary in most rural Nevada counties, meaning there's at least a basis for thinking he could overperform Kerry in places like Elko. Campaigning and advertising in Elko would really be taking Kerry's 2004 effort to go on offense in Reno to the next level. Considering Kerry got less than 20% of the vote in Nevada's fourth most populous county, worse than both Mondale and Dukakis did back in the day, there's easily room for improvement in the area, and even a little improvement upstate Nevada could be the difference in the state.

3. Cincinnati, Ohio--Now considering Cincinnati is the third-largest media market in what is considered perhaps the most critical battleground state, calling for an Obama campaign presence there is on the surface a no-brainer, but most importantly, I see metropolitan Cincinnati as the region of Ohio where Obama is best-positioned to make gains over John Kerry. Kerry narrowly lost Hamilton County (home of the city of Cincinnati and the core of its suburbs), but with a high African-American turnout in 2008, I strongly expect the county to turn blue. Just as important are the three crimson red exurban counties surrounding Cincinnati, which accounted for Bush's entire margin of victory in Ohio in 2004. In every election since 2004, the needle has moved dramatically against Republicans in all of these counties (Butler, Clermont, and Warren), with Jean Schmidt, Ken Blackwell, and Mike DeWine, all badly underperforming traditional GOP margins in the area. If Obama can keep this trendline going and trim his losses by a few percentage points in suburban Cincinnati, it will go a long way towards offsetting his likely underperformance in the rural portions of Ohio. And to whatever extent the Cincinnati market is an outreach into Indiana is also a feather in our cap.

2. Michigan's Upper Peninsula--With the racial polarization of metropolitan Detroit, enflamed by the Kwame Kilpatrick scandal, and Obama's call for tougher CAFE standards fiercely opposed by Detroit automakers, the McCain campaign has some serious ammunition against Obama to take into Michigan. I fully expect Obama will underperform Gore and Kerry in metropolitan Detroit. With that in mind, the thought process should become where we can pick up additional votes in Michigan to offset the possible hemorrhaging in the population centers. To that end, it seems like a no-brainer for Obama to take his campaign up north...way up north. The blue-collar Upper Peninsula of Michigan is sparsely populated, but its demographics seem to align with other Midwestern areas that are Obama-friendly. More to the point, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan looks like Wisconsin, thinks like Wisconsin, and votes like Wisconsin. When you look at Obama's healthy standing in Wisconsin polls compared to Kerry four years ago or Gore's eight years ago, my thinking is that every Obama campaign rally that begins in Green Bay should make the quick drive to Marquette, Michigan, from there.

1. Fargo-Moorhead (North Dakota/Minnesota)--I suspect there is no other media market in the country where the needle will move more significantly in Obama's favor compared to 2000 and 2004 than Fargo-Moorhead. To the extent that North Dakota has already been identified as a battleground state, Obama's campaign already has a presence in the area, but may nonetheless not appreciate just how many things are working to their candidate's favor here. First of all, the cities of Fargo and Moorhead are islands of youth in a region otherwise dominated by gray hair. That cuts to Obama's advantage demographically. Furthermore, in addition to Obama's more farmer-friendly stand on biofuels, the Democrats have an additional ace-in-the-hole here because the region is one of the nation's top sugar-growing areas. The sugar industry has enjoyed its relative "cartel" status and has become decidedly protectionist since the passage of CAFTA in 2005, a vote which helped every Democrat on the ticket in Minnesota in 2006 score landslide margins in the Red River Valley. Particularly on the Minnesota side, this area is historically Democratic, even though both Gore and Kerry were destroyed here. This advantage on both sides of the river extends further to the Grand Forks area, a region of North Dakota where every Democrat needs to win big in a competitive statewide race. It's expected that Minnesota is leaning heavily Obama, but don't underestimate the pseudo-maverick image of John McCain fooling alot of moderate suburbanites in Minneapolis-St. Paul. That raises the stakes for Obama's need to win in places like the Red River Valley, which early indications suggest he is poised to do.

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

McCain's Veep Selection Does Exactly What Was Intended

John McCain was crazy--CRAZY!!!--to have made such a reckless selection for his running mate with Sarah Palin! He just cost himself the election, say the critics of the Sarah Palin selection. Well, crazy like a fox, maybe.

It's taken me several days to fully process the surprise selection of Sarah Palin, and we still won't know until her convention speech tonight (or is tomorrow? I can't even keep track anymore) if this woman has the gravitas to be an asset or a trainwreck for the McCain campaign. But even if she flops and the full-throated media and opposition scrutiny continues for weeks to come, the entire election campaign has now been reframed to John McCain's benefit. Remember those quaint fantasies everybody in Democratic circles was clinging to five days ago that the primary "issues" of the 2008 election would be the sagging economy, health care, and the war in Iraq? With the brief introductory comments of Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin last week, the entire framework of this campaign has collapsed in a political earthquake that goes right off the Richter scale. With the media fanning the flames every step of the day, we can now be assured the Obama campaign will be in a constant state of defense, debating oil drilling, teen pregnancy, gun ownership, and most devastatingly, abortion, for the next 60 days.

While it's indisputable that McCain forfeited the "experience" argument by selecting one of the incredibly few people in American politics who have even less experience than Barack Obama, the dirty little secret is that he has exhausted the need for that argument. Beginning on Labor Day weekend, the 2008 Presidential election is now exclusively about the culture war. Up until now, there have been vague and petty cultural obsessions like flag lapel pins and arugula that effectively deferred any worthwhile political discussion and assured us, unsurprisingly, that this would be just as "small" of an election as any in recent memory despite the quadrennial hype of it being "the most important election of our lifetimes". But there has not been any tangible culture war red meat for the right to latch their jaws onto. With the Palin selection, the red meat deficit quickly transformed into a surplus. Republicans can now fill the airwaves with righteous indignation about persecution at the hands of the media and fire up the cultural warriors on all the wedge issues, and the more legitimate (or illegitimate) fodder is put out there about Palin, the more we can expect the long-suffering far right to rally behind her. They haven't had a cross to carry for the future of humanity thus far this election year, but they do with Palin.

Does this in itself assure McCain of victory? Not necessarily. Palin is poised to be a very polarizing figure and it's not yet clear whether she'll end up on the majority (or plurality) end of that polarization and thus benefit McCain. But do not underestimate the prospects that she will, especially since she's pushing all the right buttons with the very "white working class" voters that represent Obama's most elusive demographic. Furthermore, don't underestimate the prospect of a redneck backlash, which the McCain campaign effectively seized upon after Obama's speech in Germany, painting him as a celebrity and turning popularity among "elitists" into a liability. It seems just as likely that a backlash will emerge among the public if scrutiny of Palin is perceived to be too personal. The Obama campaign seems to realize the necessity of treading lightly. The media does not, which feeds right into the same "everyday people vs. the elite" narrative the GOP has effectively exploited over and over in past election campaigns, most recently with the Obama "celebrity" theme.

The speech tonight is the test that will determine if Palin will play in Peoria (or Scranton, which we're now told is the new Peoria). If she pulls it off, Obama's in serious trouble. And even if she doesn't, the direction of the campaign will have permanently changed, the right-wing will be fired up, and the media will accommodate the Republican effort to reignite the culture war. Particularly as it applies to abortion, this is terrible news. Right-wing columnist Jeff Jacoby wrote a column today citing how Obama has "taken a harder line in defense of abortion rights than any other candidate the Democrats have ever nominated", and cited examples. The logic in the examples might be dubious, but the working-class cafeteria Catholics of rural Pennsylvania are unlikely to skeptically view the literature underneath their car windshield in the church parking lot on Sunday, November 2, citing the same examples Jacoby cites. While most Americans identify themselves as "pro-choice", a significant number of them put an asterisk next to that support. For the right to be able to paint Obama as a candidate who does not put an asterisk next to any aspect of his abortion platform will assure those voters identify themselves culturally closer to McCain than Obama. For this campaign to be about abortion would be devastating for Obama, and the Palin selection assures us that's where it's headed.