NRCC/DCCC Tea Leaves – Week 2 of 5

This is the second in what will be hopefully be a weekly segment, wherein I attempt to read the tea leaves of the independent expenditures made by the NRCC and the DCCC.  The battle lines have become much clearer this week, with both parties significantly expanding their targeted seats.  As a result, I have been able to come to more resolute opinions about what the behaviors of the party committees mean.  My opinions are probably ham handed and wrong, but I feel more resolute about them.  Without further ado:

Battlegrounds – Both parties engaged (36)

AL-02 – Dueling internals.  Still think Bright is slightly ahead.

AR-01 – Confident that Causey has made a race of this.  He may even be ahead now.

AZ-01 – Cook moved this to Lean R.  Republican polls show modest Gosar leads.

AZ-05 – Dueling internals, all very close.  Should be one of the closer races.

CA-11 – Very little reliable polling here.  Harmer is a good candidate.  Sleeper race.

CO-03 – Salazar destroyed Tipton just a few cycles ago.  Good chance he will win again.

FL-02 – Boyd awfully quiet in spite of two Southerland internals with double digit leads.

GA-08 – Dueling internals with big margins.  Somebody’s way off.  I think Marshall is ahead.

IL-14 – Unrebutted Republican polling suggests to me that Hultgren leads.

IL-17 – A good campaign should win this one for Hare.  A lot of unmotivated Dems here.

IN-02 – Polls reassuring for Donnelly.  Walorski does not seem like the best candidate.

IN-09 – Slightly dusty Republican poll showed a dead heat.  Seems like a true toss-up.

KY-06 – Race clearly tightening but Chandler seems to be ahead.

MA-10 – Don’t know how Perry survives the strip search scandal with the general electorate.

MD-01 – Kratovil hanging in there.  Could be the surprise of election night.

MI-01 – Dems investing a lot of money here.  They must see something worth pursuing.  

MI-07 – Schauer seems to be coming back on Walberg.

MO-04 – Skelton is in for the fight of his life here.

MS-01 – Polling suggests that Nunnellee is modestly ahead.

NH-02 – Public polling shows a surprisingly close race here.  Bass should win though.

NM-02 – Every poll of this race has been tight.  Teague is a strong candidate.

NV-03 – Mason-Dixon has been showing modest Titus leads.

NY-20 – Murphy seems to have a clear but surmountable lead here.

NY-24 – Similar to NY-20.  Clear but surmountable lead for Arcuri.

OH-16 – Boccieri seems to be coming back here.  Trajectory like MI-07.

OH-18 – Gibbs must be clawing his way into it for Dems to invest here.

OR-05 – Republican poll shows a toss-up race.  I think Schrader is slightly ahead.

PA-03 – Dahlkemper is in big trouble.  Would greatly surprise me if she won.

PA-11 – Surprised the Dems are spending anything here.  Kanjorski seems to be behind.

SC-05 – This is a very serious challenge for the veteran Spratt.  He could definitely lose.

VA-02 – Nye seems to be a little behind.

VA-05 – Glad the Dems are playing here, but Periello is behind.

WA-03 – Interesting news that Herrera is barely lifting a finger.  Heck seems to be closing a little.

WI-07 – Duffy seems to be ahead here.

WI-08 – Atrocious polling for Kagen.  This seems uphill for him.

WV-01 – No polling for a while.  Oliviero is the right kind of Dem to win here.

The Goners – Races where Dems are running behind and neither party committee is engaging (6)

AR-02 – After November 2, Elliott will not have to worry about whether to vote for Pelosi.

KS-03 – No polling, but Yoder must be in control.

LA-03 – Sangisetty will not have to sweat that Pelosi vote either.

NY-29 – Thanks Eric Massa.  Love ya!  Tickle, tickle…

OH-01 – Consistent, double digit leads for Chabot.

TN-06 – Carter will not have to sweat that Pelosi vote either.

The Triage List – Races where Dems are running behind, the NRCC is spending, and the DCCC is not (11)

CO-04 – Markey behind or tied in every poll.

FL-08 – Grayson may have done himself in with “Taliban Dan” ad.

FL-24 – Kosmas way down in several polls, statistically tied in her own.

IL-11 – Every poll shows a big lead for Kinzinger.

IN-08 – Big lead for Bucshon in internal poll.

ND-AL – Pomeroy holding his own on huge warchest, but seems to be slightly behind.

NH-01 – Shea-Porter down big in public polls, but Guinta is a poor candidate.

PA-07 – Could be a triage candidate, but the last public poll was close.

PA-08 – Murphy down double digits in last public poll.  Seems like DCCC would spend here.

TN-08 – Republican polls show solid Fincher lead.

TX-17 – Edwards down in his own internals.

Ambitious Republican Targets – Races where Dems are running ahead, NRCC is spending, and DCCC is not (7)

MN-01 – Recent addition to NRCC target list.  Must be tightening.

NC-07 – This one is definitely tightening, but DCCC has not stepped in yet.

NJ-03 – Dems may be milking Adler cash advantage before getting in.

NM-01 – Heinrich seems to be ahead, but NRCC has recently engaged.

OH-06 – Like MN-01, another recent addition to the target list.  Probably tightening.

PA-10 – Carney seems to be slightly ahead against damaged Marino.

SD-AL – Same shit, different district.

VA-09 – Boucher seems relatively safe, but NRCC keeps getting after him.

Emerging Democratic Firewall – Races where Dems are running ahead, DCCC is spending, and NRCC is not (7)

GA-02 – Self-inflicted wounds and poor fundraising force DCCC to spend here.

IA-03 – Zaun seems to be damaged, but Dems clearly don’t feel out of the woods.

NC-08 – Kissell is an awful fundraiser, but I suspect he is ahead.

OH-13 – May be able to stop worrying about this one given Ganley’s S&M scandal.

PA-12 – NRCC understandably reluctant to invest in Tim Burns again.

TX-23 – Surprised NRCC has not made a run at this.  Rodriguez may be ahead.

VA-11 – Connolly did not beat Fimian THAT overwhelmingly in 2008.

Confident Republicans – Races where Dems are running behind, DCCC is spending, and NRCC is not (2)

NY-23 – Doheny poll showed a big lead, but I would expect the NRCC to spend due to Owens $$$ advantage.

OH-15 – Stivers probably does not need the help.

No News is Good News – Pundit-declared, endangered Dem seats where neither party committee has made I.E.’s (16)

AZ-08 – NRCC has been pretty ambitious but has not gone after Giffords.

CA-47 – Lack of NRCC investment leads me to believe Sanchez is ahead.

CO-07 – No attention for Perlmutter from the NRCC.

CT-04 – Given the lack of NRCC investment, I suspect Himes is up more than 2.

CT-05 – I believe Murphy’s internal, not that weird Merriman poll.

FL-22 – Huge candidate money on both sides.  Klein is endangered.

IA-02 – No help for Miller-Meeks yet from the NRCC.

ID-01 – Consistent double digit leads for Minnick.

KY-03 – Yarmuth seems to be comfortably ahead.

MI-09 – No NRCC investment in spite of Rossman Group poll showing Peters trailing.

NY-01 – No polling here for a while, but lack of NRCC investment is comforting.

NY-13 – McMahon and Grimm internals show comfortable McMahon leads.

NY-19 – Neither party is spending, yet two public polls show a tight race.  Strange.

PA-04 – Dusty DCCC poll showed Altmire very comfortably ahead.

TN-04 – Davis up double digits in his internal.  Lack of NRCC involvement comforting.

WA-02 – No NRCC help for Koster so far.  Larsen seems to be ahead.

The Endangered Species – Dems on Offense (5)

DE-AL – No investment by either party.  Carney seems to be well ahead here.

FL-25 – Refreshing that DCCC is spending here.  Rivera is a loose cannon.

HI-01 – DCCC is spending here.  NRCC will surreptitiously fund the state party if anything.  

IL-10 – Only Dem target where both parties have engaged.  Seals seems to be ahead.

LA-02 – No investment by either party.   Cao down 11 in DCCC internal taken before Obama ad.

12 thoughts on “NRCC/DCCC Tea Leaves – Week 2 of 5”

  1. Interesting that the DCCC smells enough blood in the water in FL-25 that it’s spending there, but it’s not spending in a potentially salvageable race in TN-08 or on strong Democratic candidates in WA-08, CA-50, or CA-03.

  2. NRCC does not need to invest there. Randy Altshuler is a strong fundraiser and has self funded millions. They are trying to avoid expensive media markets, favoring to invest in cheaper races where our candidate may need more help.  

  3. Some thoughts on Indiana and Kentucky.

    IN-02: hoosierdem and I have discussed the apparent Donnelly lead here with some degree of puzzlement, given the apparent Democratic meltdown across the Midwest. I’ll concur that he’s ahead, but I still have no idea why. As for Walorski, I haven’t thought that she’s that great a cadidate, but hoosierdem’s heard she’s not actually turning out to be a decent recruit for the red team here, and I’m inclined to defer to him.

    IN-08: The only thing surprising about the DCCC bailing from this district is that they didn’t do it sooner. I think it’s a perfect example of a race this cycle where the Dems did everything right and still lost.

    IN-09: I still think this one’s tilting in Hill’s favor, but the national pundits seem to believe otherwise. Could go either way.

    KY-03: Yarmuth’s not going to be caught by surprise; I don’t expect the national Republicans to waste resources here, even if Yarmuth was unpopular enough to be vunerable (which he isn’t) I think Conway’s Senate campaign will provide generous coattails here whether he wins or loses statewide.

    KY-06: Not sure about this one. I think Conway’s campaign is key here; I don’t see a scenario occurring where Conway wins this district and Chandler loses.  

  4. look forward to these.

    looking back to 2006:

    districts where NRCC spent and DCCC did not, and Rep won: 10

    districts where DCCC spent and NRCC did not, and Rep won: 2

    districts where NRCC, DCCC both spent, and Rep won: 18

    districts where NRCC spent and DCCC did not, and Dem won: 4

    districts where DCCC spent and NRCC did not, and Dem won: 2

    districts where NRCC, DCCC both spent, and Dem won: 35

    IA-02, NH-01, NY-19 were the only three races where the democrat won to pick up a seat without the DCCC spending any money.  the two districts where DCCC spent and NRCC did not were light Dem defense.

    the playing field this year is much larger so there may be more districts that get ignored, but I think in general you can look at where the committees are spending to see where they can win.  the NRCC didn’t seem to triage in 2006, so does that mean the spots where NRCC is spending but DCCC is not this year are in better shape for us than we think?  CW about the races says no.

  5. Thanks for putting this together. A few comments:

    1.  In some of the seats that neither party have engaged in, the lack of interest reflects the cost of media, rather than the race itself. The nrcc would rather hit 10 dems in cheap markets than 1 tim bishop/ljohn hall, etc.  Hence the focus on donnelly, SHS, and Chandler who are likely somewhat less vulnerable than some of the more expensive targets.  Also better when you can spread over more districts–spend $1m on 5 districts and winning 2 or 3 beats spending $1m on one and possibly coming away with 0.

    2.  At this point, the big story on IEs is that the NRCC is not the big story when it comes to Republican IEs. A complete analysis should consider those groups. That would probably help explain some of the nrcc spending decisions. To a lesser extent on the dem side, se vulnerable incumbents have less to spend than others which may also affect dccc spending.  

    Final thought related to internal polls. Think about the incentives: candidates themselves want to show the rosiest possible numbers for their own fundraising or to attract/discourage outside groups. But what about the party committes:  driving a narrative of dem doom/recovery is always a factor to raise money, etc., however, the nrcc and dccc may have different incentives this cycle. The dccc is going it alone and needs donor enthusiasm for it and D incumbents. The nrcc is one of a few players that cannot coordinate with one another. Polling is expensive.  Maybe it’s internal polls released need to better reflect reality to aid other outside groups’ spending decisions.        

Comments are closed.