News & discussion on house and senate races

Handy run-down of the numbers in those primary results (or at least the most interesting 20-odd of them) here: Sept. 12 Primary Results Roundup

Its just the numbers, no article around it.

Any case, you've probably heard it all already or gleaned it from the links above, but in addition to the races mentioned in the "Big day for primaries" overview Walter posted, there was (from the top of my head so sorry for lacking first names):

Conservative, anti-immigrant Graf winning the GOP primary in Arizona 8 against the more moderate Huffman. The national Republicans had weighed in heavily on Huffman's side because they had considered him more electable in the general elections, but it backfired.
In Maryland 4, incumbent Democratic Rep. Wynn narrowly defeating (50-to-46) Edwards, a surprisingly succesful grassroots anti-war candidate.
In New Hampshire 1, establishment Democrat Craig failing in a similar endeavour, and instead being landslided (54-to-35) by grassroots, anti-war candidate Shea-Porter. Here, too, national support backfired: the national Democrats had heavily weighed in on Craig's side, which merely fuelled resentment.
In New York 19, same story. The national Democratic party had been glad when they found a former Republican cross-over candidate, Aydelott, to run in this wealthy, traditionally Republican seat, thinking that would be its best shot. But Hall, the former singer of Orleans, who had several famous musician friends come out in support for him, appeared as a more assertive challenger. He quickly won grassroots support with his anti-war position, and has swept the race 49-to-27.
An attempt by the liberal, anti-war candidate Lawless to unseat Democratic incumbent Langevin in Rhode Island 2 failed clearly, however: 62-to-38.
In Wisconsin 8, unions-backed Wall and Emily's List-backed Nusbaum were beaten by millionaire doctor Kagen, who mostly financed his own campaign and has no or little background in politics.
The gay Republican I posted about a few days ago, Koering, won his Minnesota State House primary 55-to-45.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

In Maryland 4, incumbent Democratic Rep. Wynn narrowly defeating (50-to-46) Edwards, a surprisingly succesful grassroots anti-war candidate.

This race is not quite over. Edwards is not conceding defeat.

First numerous election day snafus that had many voters casting "provisional ballots" and even, when those ballots ran out, casting votes on scraps of paper, delayed counting for days.

Now Edwards wants results from some of the voting machines thrown out because she claims they were left unsecured overnight.

Two news stories focusing on the latter issue sound very different: after reading the Baltimore Sun story I felt the events dont make Edwards sound very good, whereas after reading the NBC4 one as well I was back on the fence. Read for yourself:

Baltimore Sun: Wynn's challenger says she'll sue over some votes

NBC4: Candidates Challenge Election Outcomes

0 Replies

Quote:

Study Shows GOP Fundraising Edge Is Slipping

If any prediction is safe in this turbulent and closely contested election, it is that Republican candidates and their affiliated national party committees will raise more money than their Democratic counterparts.

But the fundraising advantages enjoyed by the current GOP congressional majorities over the challenging Democrats are closer than in recent election cycles, according to data presented by campaign finance experts at The Brookings Institution in Washington. [..]

In the first 18 months of the 2005-06 campaign cycle, the six major national party campaign committees reported raising a combined $574 million, of which $334 million, or 58 percent, was collected by the GOP organizations: the Republican National Committee (RNC), the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

Their Democratic counterparts ?- the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) ?- raised $240 million, or 42 percent, of the two-party total.

While the GOP advantage is substantial, it is actually smaller than the Republicans' edge at a similar point in the competitive 2004 campaign. At the 18-month mark of that campaign cycle, the party's three committees collected $385 million and the Democrats took in $230.6 million (63 percent to 37 percent). The GOP committees, through June in this cycle, raised about $51 million less than in 2004, while the Democrats raised about $9 million more.

In the first 18 months of the 2002 cycle ?- the last midterm election campaign and the last campaign of any sort in which party committees were allowed to raise unlimited "soft money" dollars ?- the Republican advantage was even more lopsided: the three GOP committees raised $404.8 million (64 percent of the total) and the Democratic committees raised $228 million (36 percent). [..]

A rundown of campaign fundraising figures cited in the report can be found here.

To list those numbers in one overview:

Code:



                      RNC + NRSC + NRCC    DNC + DSCC + DCCC



First 18 months

of 2001/2002            $405 mil (64%)       $228 mil (36%)



First 18 months

of 2003/2004            $385 mil (63%)       $231 mil (37%)



First 18 months

of 2005/2006            $334 mil (58%)       $240 mil (42%)

0 Replies

What changes have there recently been in the takes of the different electoral forecasters? A look at Senate races.

On Sep 13, the ever-cautious Congressional Quarterly moved the New Jersey race (Menendez vs Kean) from "Leans Democratic" to "No Clear Favorite":

Kean Uses Ethics Issue to Make N.J. Senate Race a Tossup

Rasmussen Reports agreed: it had already moved New Jersey from "Leans Democrat" to "Toss-Up" status on Sep 6:

Senate balance of power: New Jersey now a toss-up

This is problematic for the Democrats. Winning the Senate in November was always a long shot; it relied on winning all the states that are clearly possible gains (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Rhode Island, Missouri and Montana), plus one of a threesome of more unlikely possibilities (Virginia, Tennessee or, on the far end of unlikely, Arizona). If they are to pull that off, the last thing they need is to suddenly have to beef up their efforts in a state they considered safe.

Moreover, Rasmussen noted that "This is the sixth change in our Senate Balance of Power summary. All six changes have pointed to a tighter race [..] and five of the six have reduced the Democrats' advantage in a state".

Of those five, three had moved from Democrat to Leans Democrat. Republican-held Pennsylvania, Washington, and Minnesota had moved between August 24 and September 1; and just the day before they moved New Jersey, they had also moved Republican-held Rhode Island from "Leans Democrat" to "Toss-Up."

The only race moving the other way had been Virginia, moving from "Republican" to "Leans Republican" on August 18.

However, on Sep 8 Rasmussen followed up with good news, when it moved the Tennessee Senate race (Corker vs Ford) from "Leans Republican" to "Toss-Up":

Senate Balance of Power: GOP 49 Dems 45 Toss-Up 6

It was echoed by Mark Blumenthal and Charles Franklin on Slate's Election Scorecard on Sep 13, when they too moved the Tennessee race from "Lean Republican" to "Toss-Up":

The Election Scorecard

Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report disagrees on Tennessee however:

Tennessee Senate: How Important Is a Poll in Rating a Race?

Instead, Rothenberg keeps rating the race as "Clear Advantage" to Republican Corker, with a predicted 47-48% for Ford. In his take, Ford is simply reaching his plateau early, but there is little reason yet to think he will also get beyond it:

Quote:

The fact that Ford is getting 44 percent of the vote now ?- and 90 percent of the black vote ?- isn't hard to believe. Democratic candidates seem to be getting their votes early this cycle, and since I all along have expected the Congressman to get 47 percent or 48 percent of the vote, his poll doesn't shake my initial assessment of the contest

On the bright side again, on Sep 12 Rasmussen Reports moved Washington back from Leans Democrat to Democrat again, when Democratic incumbent Maria Cantwell opened a double digit lead:

Senate Balance of Power

Moreover, Congressional Quarterly has moved the Ohio race (DeWine vs Brown) from "Leans Republican" to "No Clear Favorite". And as added bonus, along with it, it moved the Ohio Governor's race (Blackwell vs Strickland) from "No Clear Favorite" to "Leans Democratic":

GOP Facing Prospect of Going 0-2 at Top of Ohio Ticket

Seeing DeWine face merely even odds against Brown is remarkable, because DeWine is a moderate Republican - and Sherrod Brown, currently a House representative, one of its most liberal members:

Quote:

Republicans have dubbed the Democrat as "Far Out Brown," pointing to a voting record that they argue is out of the mainstream of Ohio. [..] Their opposition researchers have not had to dig too deeply to find ammunition in Brown's record. In 2005, Brown opposed Bush's stated position on 93.5 percent of House votes on which the president took a position, more frequently than any other House member, and he regularly scores at or near the 100 percent mark in the voting surveys of liberal organizations. [..]

But Brown frames his approach as populism rather than liberalism. And it is far from implausible that his trademark issues, which include expanding health care access and opposition to most free-trade agreements on grounds that they kill American jobs, will draw support in a state in which the economy ?- particularly its once-thriving manufacturing sector ?- continues to face longterm difficulties.

One reason CQPolitics.com initially considered DeWine as a slight favorite is that he has a reputation as a [..] relative centrist in a Senate Republican Conference dominated by conservatives who take a harder line. Only three Republican senators in 2005 voted against Bush's stated position on legislation more often than DeWine.

But DeWine's moderate and often conciliatory demeanor carries some political risks. Many conservatives in Ohio have been angered by DeWine's voting record, which includes support for some gun restrictions, and his membership in a coalition that brokered a deal earlier this year that prevented a Senate vote to eliminate filibusters on judicial nominations, a cherished goal of many conservative activists.

While he avoided a threatened conservative challenge in the May 2 primary, it may be more challenging for DeWine to inspire a strong Election Day turnout by social-issue conservatives [..].

Interesting in this respect is that "despite unremitting criticism of Brown's legislative record by the incumbent and his Republican allies, in press releases and television advertisements, [..] Brown actually is polling better on average than he was earlier this year."

0 Replies

Finally, not wholly unimportantly, there is this...:

Quote:

09.14.06

IMAGE IS EVERYTHING:

Not the most important piece of campaign ammo, maybe, but I'll send it to a friend working for J.D. "Guido" Hayworth's challenger, anyway: Radar's list of the worst congressional hairdos, prepared after an exhaustive study of all 535 members. Winners include Maxine Waters in the "Painfully Precise Bangs" category and the amazing triptych of Jeb Hensarling, Tom Feeney, and Adam Putnam in "Childlike Hair." (Click the link to see the photo.)

--Eve Fairbanks

posted 12:45 p.m.

link

0 Replies

Cardin Fires Campaign Staffer Ove Racial Comments Against Steele

Congressman is 'deeply offended and disgusted by blog's racial and anti-Semitic overtones'

Rep. Benjamin Cardin has fired a campaign staffer who wrote racially charged comments on an Internet blog against his opponent, Republican Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, who is black, Cardin's campaign confirmed Saturday.

The blog includes a reference to "Devouring the Competition" by eating Oreo cookies, which Steele has said people threw at him during a 2002 debate as a slight directed at his race and political views.

In a statement, Cardin also condemned "anti-Semitic" comments written by the female staffer on her own Internet blog.

"I am deeply offended and disgusted by the blog's racial and anti-Semitic overtones," the 10-term congressman said in the statement. "The staff person responsible was promptly dismissed and will have nothing to do with my campaign."

Melissa Sellers, a Steele spokeswoman, sharply criticized the comments on the blog Saturday.

"It is deeply disturbing to learn that a staff member of ten-term Congressman Ben Cardin would keep a blog chronicling racial prejudices toward Lt. Gov. Steele and others," Sellers said. "This is the kind of attitude and gutter politics that Marylanders are sick of and why they are ready for change."

Oren Shur, a Cardin spokesman, said Saturday that the woman was "a junior staffer" who worked for the campaign about a month. He declined to identify her or elaborate on her duties.

Shur said the woman was fired Friday "as soon as we learned of this."

Some of the comments about Steele on the blog, titled "Road Diaries of the Persuasionatrix," were written in an Aug. 27 posting.

"It's an unfortunate situation when you're running an established, older, white candidate against a dynamic, younger African-American," the staffer wrote. "It's unfortunate, because the racism card hovers constantly, just waiting to be dealt."

In a posting written on Aug. 25, the blog refers to a stack of Oreo cookies "looming in the back of one of the campaign pantries" and how staffers have to "surreptitiously glance around" before eating them.

"The subterfuge would be unnecessary, and snack time would be far less amusing, had an angry citizen not thrown the aforementioned delicious snack food at one of our opponents to comment on his lack of racial loyalty," the blog continues.

Steele, who attended a fundraiser near Centreville for Rep. Wayne Gilchrest on Saturday, called the comments "very shocking."

"That it exists in a national campaign is very disappointing," Steele told The (Easton) Star Democrat.

Steele has said Oreo cookies were thrown in his direction during a 2002 campaign debate in Baltimore. The incident described by Steele surfaced again in November after another blogger depicted him in minstrel makeup, bringing up issues of race during the campaign as the Republican seeks to become Maryland's first black senator.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee recruited Steele to run in 2006 for the Senate seat that will become open with the retirement of Democrat Paul Sarbanes. Steele is the first black person to win statewide office in Maryland.

The Cardin staffer went on to write on her blog that "it would be bad to have the cookies lying around" where people could see them, because of the controversy.

She ends the Aug. 25 entry by writing: "Before I leave, however, I need a picture of all of us holding the forbidden cookies with the caption: "Devouring the Competition."

The blog also contains an Aug. 17 entry in which she asks "Why am I a Sex Object for Old, Jewish Men?" In it, she wrote that while she likes the candidate she is working for, "I do not, however, like some of my candidate's friends."

Cardin is Jewish.

"They are large men with strong, loud voices and Jewish noses," she wrote. "They are also overly friendly."

The writer added: "I'm certainly not one to shy away from physical contact, but when older men I don't know find it ok to squeeze my arm or my shoulder or shake my hand way too long, the toddler me comes out and wants to hide under the restaurant table or in the closet behind the coats."

She continued: "Some of the guys who have been with my candidate for years are like that. They don't mean anything by it; it's just the way they are. I wish that made it less uncomfortable."

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Kean Uses Ethics Issue to Make N.J. Senate Race a Tossup

Menendez is being investigated by the Justice Dept. (culture of corruption and all that, dontcha know) and this is probably why he's refusing to debate Kean.

Gotta love the phrasing by CQ, though.

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Gotta love the phrasing by CQ, though.

Whats with it?

(The CQ article already said that Menendez is being investigated, by the way)

0 Replies

On an aside, there's good news on the Governors' front, with Democrats establishing significant to overwhelming leads:

Tennessee Governor: Bredesen 63%, Bryson 30%

Colorado Governor: Ritter 50%, Beauprez 33%

Michigan Governor: Granholm 50%, DeVos 42%

Iowa Governor: Culver 48%, Nussle 43%

0 Replies

RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman: "cited Republican financial strength [and] said Republicans hold a $47 million cash advantage over Democrats when the resources of the national parties, state parties and individual congressional campaigns are combined.

"If you look at every single election that's been held since 1972, 93 percent of the time, when one candidate has $200,000 more than the other candidate, that candidate wins," said Mehlman."

(link)

Hmm. A statistic for every occasion, eh? It sounds plausible enough.. it's probably true.

But somehow I can never help thinking, when people shake a random uncheckable statistic like this out of their sleeve (I mean, who is ever going to recalculate this?) - did some unfortunate intern indeed spend a week peering over the results and financial resources of every single House and Senate candidate in 22 elections? Or do they just make these numbers up on the fly?

Recommended read (unrelated):

Craig Crawford: Bait and Pitch

0 Replies

Quote:

Back-and-Forth on Taxes Holds Sway in Ohio Senate Contest

6 September
Congressional Quarterly

In recent days, DeWine and Brown have brandished their records on tax issues, with each pointing to congressional votes to burnish his own credentials [..]

Brown proposed a five-pronged plan to steer tax relief to families with incomes of between $43,000 and $150,000 a year. He would provide tax relief for families who have new children, pay for child care, pay for college tuition or books, are buying a new home or care for elderly parents.

"What we should do is strengthen families, and the way to strengthen families is by getting serious about targeted middle-class tax cuts," Brown said in a conference call with reporters later Wednesday.

Brown's campaign estimated the plan's cost at $93.3 billion over five years. He proposes to pay for the measure by realizing $112 billion in savings, in part by eliminating some tax shelters and excising some benefits for oil and gas companies that Democrats say should not have been included in a 2005 overhaul of energy laws.

Brown described the latter measure, which overwhelmingly passed Congress, as "a gift that Mike DeWine and President Bush and others in Congress gave to the energy companies." [..]

DeWine, meanwhile, began airing an ad Wednesday that touts him as having a tax-cutting record ?- the senator vows in the ad to "keep fighting for lower taxes for you and your family" ?- and also criticizes Brown.

DeWine says in his ad that he voted for "two of the largest tax cuts in history, helping millions of Ohioans." He is referring to the 2001 and 2003 tax reconciliation bills that were promoted and signed into law by Bush with only minimal Democratic support. Brown voted "no" on final passage of both measures, on grounds that they were too heavily skewed toward higher-income earners.

DeWine's ad, as well as a spot from the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) that began airing last week, reference Brown's 1993 vote for a deficit-reduction measure promoted by President Bill Clinton that included tax increases on gasoline, some Social Security benefits and the incomes of wealthier taxpayers. No Republican in either chamber voted for the measure, which narrowly cleared a Congress then controlled by the Democrats.

"Disappointed in Washington?" says a narrator in the NRSC ad. "This congressman voted in favor of higher taxes over 35 times. Sherrod Brown let us down." DeWine's ad says that Brown's "yea" vote for the 1993 pact was equivalent to backing the "largest tax increase in history." [..]

Brown responded that the 1993 measure was needed to revitalize an economy that was then sluggish. Like many Democrats who favored the legislation, he claims vindication in the long period of strong economic growth that followed, despite Republican claims that the tax increases would kill the economic recovery.

"What I did in 1993 was vote for a budget pact that balanced the budget and led to eight years of economic growth," Brown said. "What Mike DeWine has done is voted for huge tax breaks for the oil industry that led to high gas prices that ended up in the pockets of the CEO of ExxonMobil, who makes more than $17,000 an hour."

Brown charged that Republicans concentrate more on cutting income taxes for upper-income taxpayers than on reducing payroll taxes, which he said were more onerous for most taxpayers.

Even as Brown defended that 1993 vote to raise some taxes, his campaign said that the congressman has actually voted to cut taxes 33 times. Brown's campaign pointed to his "yea" vote for a 2004 measure, overwhelmingly passed by Congress, to extend the $1,000 per child tax credit through 2009 and tax breaks for married couples through 2008. [..]

0 Replies

After seeing the Bush approval ratings rise back up from the low thirties to around 40%, it is unnerving to see signs of generic party preference polls following suit.

The latest Fox News poll has "the Democratic candidate in your district" down 7%, to 41%, between Aug 29 and Sep 13; and "the Republican candidate in your district" up 6%, to 38%.

That slashes the Dem lead right down from 16 points to just 3.

Trend or outlier?

The Fox label on the poll will make some suspicious, though there is little reason to believe that Fox would somehow now suddenly be more partisan than a month ago. (I tend to trust its polls, although not of course its news, as much as any other, anyway).

Zogby also has a post-9/11 poll out, and it too has the Democratic lead slimming, though not by as much as the Fox one. It has a generic Democrat down 2% to 37% - same as in July; and the generic Republican up 3% to 34% - the highest this year. So here the Dem lead shrinks from 8 points to just 3. Also uncomfortably precarious.

AP-Ipsos however also has a post-9/11 poll out. And it doesnt note any such shift. In fact, it has the unnamed "Democratic candidate in your congressional district" up 2 points to 53%, and the Republican one unchanged at 39%. So it has the Democratic lead actually increasing, from 12% to 14%.

Earlier polls this month (completed on or before the 11th) showed Democratic leads of 9%, 12%, 11%, 8% and 10%. (See this handy overview at RealClearPolitics, though note that it doesnt include Zogby.)

Wait and see.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

]Recommended read (unrelated):

Craig Crawford: Bait and Pitch

Quote:

While it was entertaining to watch this game of political hardball, my guess is that if Democrats cannot find a way to take the high ground and give voters a positive message for their own agenda, the White House will continue to frame the national security debate on its own terms ?- and seven weeks from now, on Election Day, the Republicans will get the last laugh.

Great news. Considering the Dems are more worried about the War on Global Warming than the War on Terror, I think we're safe.

And just imagine! The president discussing the war on terror on the anniversary of a related event. The Dems couldn't find the 'high road' if it smacked them upside the head.

0 Replies

SierraSong, wanna take part in my little survey? The great politician trust charts - you get to rank them!

You too of course, realjohnboy - and Blatham, and Keltic - and anyone else on this thread, though I think its mostly just been us.. <browses> yes, of course, Joe, Thomas and Soz, you've joined us as well, allayou, I'm curious!

0 Replies

I started to respond and got about half way through when my computer burped. That was probably good.
"Trust" Trust to do what?
I am going to have to ponder what is not a multiple choice question.

0 Replies

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that if a Republican blatantly campaigned from a church, the WAPO would be on this story like white on rice (as in their dozen or so articles on Allen & macaca).

Quote:

HOLY HAROLD:

How determined is Harold Ford to win over Tennessee's culturally conservative independents and Republicans? He's filmed his newest ad inside a church. (It's currently featured at the center of his home page.) Is there a precedent for that?

P.S. If you missed it, a Survey USA poll from earlier this week showed Ford holding a narrow lead. With Bob Menendez under fire in New Jersey, Democrats need a Ford win more than ever.

Update: A reader asks:

Wouldn't many Democrats be disgusted if a Republican filmed an ad inside a church? Wouldn't that be "politicising god" or suggesting that only Republicans could be good Christians?

I think he's right about that reaction. But what if Ford is cleverly goading Corker into a fight about the ad's propriety--thereby calling even more useful attention to his churchgoing?
--Michael Crowley

http://www.tnr.com/blog/theplank?pid=38577

0 Replies

Guess I would have to see the ad. In some communities, the church leaders are the community leaders, so if the commercial showed the reverend simply congratulating Ford for coming around and helping the neighborhood in various ways, that might not be so bad.

Now, if the ad showed people in church who are going to vote for Ford's opponent being told that they have to go to confession to atone for it, like a certain Colorado bishop did about Kerry, then I would say that the ad was indeed inappropriate.

0 Replies

The non partisan Rothenberg Reports rates the race between Democrat Joe Courtney and Republican Representative Rob Simmons a "toss-up" in Connecticut's Second Congressional district.

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that if a Republican blatantly campaigned from a church, the WAPO would be on this story like white on rice (as in their dozen or so articles on Allen & macaca).

Quote:

Using a church sanctuary as the backdrop in his newest campaign commercial, the Democrat running for the U.S. Senate has picked an unusual setting. One expert on religion and politics said it was the first political ad he'd heard of actually filmed inside a sanctuary.

Not everyone is saying hallelujah. Those turned off by it include Ford's opponent, Republican Bob Corker, and a national religious liberty group.

...

"I love it," Maury Davis, pastor of Cornerstone Church in Madison, said of Ford's use of a church as a backdrop. "I like that he brought church back into the political arena."

But Davis also is troubled by Ford's candidacy.

"My problem with it is, if people believe everything he says, he's a man who is a Democrat, a party that is pro-gay and has a pro-choice platform. So how do you reconcile that with the fundamentals of a Christian church?" Davis said.

... ... ...

Source

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Guess I would have to see the ad. In some communities, the church leaders are the community leaders, so if the commercial showed the reverend simply congratulating Ford for coming around and helping the neighborhood in various ways, that might not be so bad.

Now, if the ad showed people in church who are going to vote for Ford's opponent being told that they have to go to confession to atone for it, like a certain Colorado bishop did about Kerry, then I would say that the ad was indeed inappropriate.

You can see the ad, here.

http://www.haroldfordjr.com/

Click on the middle of the page.

Or, here.

0 Replies

News & discussion on house and senate races

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know