Everyone here probably saw the disturbing Survey USA poll from a few weeks back, which showed Dem Nikki Tsongas leading Republican Jim Ogonowski, heretofore a nobody, by just 51-41. No one has publicly polled the race since, but David Wasserman at the Cook Political Report (sub. req.) has lots more to say, little of it good:
Yet at this point in the race, there is little question that a Democratic nominee with a familiar political last name is significantly underperforming against a Republican political newcomer in the run-up to the October 16th general election. The evidence is not difficult to come by: former President Bill Clinton will be headlining a rally in the district on Sunday.…
[P]ollsters on either side of the partisan divide were sent into the field to double-check the [SUSA] numbers, as is standard procedure. As it turns out, this private polling only reinforced a Tsongas lead in this neighborhood and has led several Democratic insiders to concede that she has a real race on her hands.
The wankers at The Corner claim a Dem survey shows a mere 5-point lead, but no one has produced so much as a one-page polling memo to back this claim up. Still, I don’t like it. Anyhow, back to Wasserman:
So why in the world could this race be close?It is possible to view the race in any number of lights, but it is hard to deny that voters in the district are angry at Washington for a variety of reasons. Polling universally pegs the district’s job approval rating of Congress in the teens, and there is little doubt the district’s job approval of President Bush languishes at similar depths. For the district’s small band of Republicans, whose base probably comprises around a third of the vote in any given election, Ogonowski is an attractive prospect considering the party has been shut out of federal office in the Bay State for so long. But those familiar with the district say he will also receive substantial support from independents and even some Democrats who are clearly very frustrated with congressional Democrats’ inability to end the Iraq War and are eager to send Congress any message they can if they perceive they are in the national spotlight.
Then, there are race-specific factors at work. Surely, there are a handful of Democrats who still harbor bitter feelings from the closely contested primary and may not get behind her in the general. Local operatives, however, point to a larger image problem for Tsongas, stemming from her desire to transition from a community college position with a somewhat opaque title to Congress. For years, Massachusetts voters have endured numerous scandals and controversies involving highly politically-involved university officials: the names Bulger and Silber come to mind. As Tsongas seeks to follow in the footsteps of an outgoing congressman who left to become chancellor of the district’s largest university, she must be wary of the perception that there is a revolving door between higher education and public office and that public institutions conceal featherbedding operations for politicians in the state.
Ugh. Wasserman notes that Romney got 53% here, so a Republican win is not out of the question. Perhaps most troubling is that he moved this race not one but two notches – from Solid Dem to Lean Dem in one fell swoop. Such big moves are extremely rare at Cook or any of the professional prognostication outfits.
Wasserman also mentions the Hackett special in 2005, and my feeling is that we might be looking at the mirror-image of that race: We’ll probably pull out a win in the end, but narrowly enough that the GOP will feel bouyed. The only silver lining here is that I think the closeness of this contest likely isn’t a sign of a widespread rot lurking just below the surface, as OH-02 was for the Republicans.
But whatever the outcome – especially if the unthinkable happens – this had better shake Hill Democrats out of their unacceptable complacency. I don’t doubt for a minute that Wasserman is correct when he describes Tsongas’s weak showing as a proxy for the disgust many Democratic voters currently harbor for the Democratic Congress. It’s long past time for our caucus to stand up to the GOP, and the situation in MA-05 is just further proof of that.
Do you mean Solid Dem to Lean Dem?
The 2nd most GOP district in Massachussettes, with Kerry only recieving 57% here. Before Meehan’s acquiring of the seat, it was considered to be the most competitive seat in Massachussettes.
Now, I don’t think that we’ll lose it. I think we’ll underperform, and probably end up with a weak 8-10 point win.
The only scenario that worries me is complete special election complacency by our base and a disproportionate Republican turnout. But I think a more likely scenario is the one we see play out in New Jersey Senate and gubernatorial races every two years….where supposedly close races turn into Democratic landslides when voters have an epiphany about the consequences of electing Republicans.
3-5 point win max….it’s really hard to overcome the appeal of a candidate whose brother was the pilot of one of the 9/11 planes. Plus the close primary and this college/university/Congress revolving door issue make this race close.
This could be like the CA-50 special, but will Ogonowski commit some late gaffe? Is immigration the issue that could sink Democrats?
More importantly, a GOP win, or even a near miss could boost Republican fundraising.
A close race will be clear evidence of two things: the efficacy of the Iraq Blurring Strategy, and the impact of Congress’ overall low approval ratings on incumbents (or perceived incumbents).
Both are direct results of the Democratic Congress’ inability to do a single thing to end the war.
to know anything for sure yet, and don’t forget, this poll can prove to be an outlier in the future. There is not yet enough empirical data to compare.
So, take it easy, sit back and drink tea. 🙂
has had a poor track record in general elections for quite a while (and especially so in 2006).
Some examples from 2006:
Lois Murphy, PA-06
Diane Farrell, CT-04
Patricia Madrid, NM-01
Tammy Duckworth, IL-06
Patty Wetterling, MN-06
Mary Jo Kilroy, OH-15
Emily’s List does a good job of getting their candidates through the primary (or of clearing the field), but those candidates have consistently underperformed in general elections.
Maybe since Emily’s List-sponsored candidates are given hundreds of thousands of dollars, they haven’t had to do much on their own and have a sense of being annointed.
Nevertheless, it seems almost inconceivable that Niki Tsongas will lose.
This should be a 20%-25% win for any Democrat in a Special Election.
The problem is that, especially in the more urban areas of eastern Massachusetts, any Republican can run on the fact that Massachusetts has one of the worst, most incompetent and Kafkaesque bureaucracies of any state in the Union, and, aided by the likes of the Boston Herald, successfully blame it on the Democratic supermajority (see: every race for governor between 1988 and 2006). Toss in the “academic revolving door” corruption semi-issue (which you know the Republicans will trumpet out of proportion) and Ogonowski’s 9/11 connection and the race tips a bit more towards the GOP. Add the upset activists who hated Meehan, wanted a better Democrat than Tsongas, and won’t vote for Tsongas in the general and it tips a little more. Most of all, though, what needs to be taken into consideration is the fact that MA voters, as liberal as they tend to be in presidential politics, also have a tendency to want at least one Republican in the mix to “balance out” the Dem supermajority, as well as the fact that the MA-GOP, now that Romney’s screwed them out of their “inevitable GOP governor” pattern, needs to find a new outlet for this tendency. In conditions such as these, most mainstream MA voters are susceptible to any GOP extremist who can successfully pose as a moderate for long enough to get elected, because they genuinely want to believe that this time will be different. Just look at Romney. If he hadn’t been trying so hard to run for president, grandstanding on gay marriage and Massachusetts-bashing in South Carolina for half of his term, he’d probably have been re-elected. The major saving grace is that this is a Federal election, not a statewide, so MA’s bureaucracy problem isn’t going to come up as much as it otherwise would. Still, if Ogonowski runs as a moderate on the war and on social issues and puts in the usual GOP soundbytes catering to small business owners etc, even if he loses, he gives the GOP more hope than they should have here.
The key is to keep campaigning as much as possible against vulnerable GOP incumbents elsewhere. Even if we lose this seat, I wouldn’t worry too much. MA voters generally tend to behave in a contrarian and illogical fashion that has no bearing whatsoever on what the rest of the country thinks. Even if Ogonowski wins, he’ll still be the only GOP Congressman in New England (assuming the extreme likelihood that retired/defeated Shays won’t be back in 2009.) If we pick up enough seats elsewhere (Ohio, New Jersey, New York, NM-01, and WA-08 all spring readily to mind), it will just make MA-05’s folly that much more obvious. Ogonowski, if elected, will have to dance a lot harder to get RE-elected than Tsongas will.
I expect Kerry and Kennedy to make last minute campaign appearances with Tsongas. Ted Kennedy is the big dog Democrats should send to campaign on Tsongas’s behalf.