Author: Crisitunity

Rasmussen (7/23, likely voters) (6/18 in parentheses):

Jeanne Shaheen (D): 50 (53)

John Sununu (R-inc.): 45 (39)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

The UNH poll that came out yesterday showing a 46-42 lead for Shaheen seemed pretty sketchy, especially when looking at the crosstabs. But now along comes the newest poll from Rasmussen and it shows a margin that’s also narrowed quite a bit. (With leaners pushed, it’s 51-45 for Shaheen.)

The same sample shows Obama leading McCain 47-41 (49-45 when leaners are pushed), which is typical for New Hampshire. Just based on that, it doesn’t seem to be an unusually Republican-heavy sample.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (7/21-23, likely voters) (5/22 in parentheses):

Ronnie Musgrove (D): 44 (42)

Roger Wicker (R-inc.): 45 (44)

(MoE: ±4%)

Not much movement in Mississippi, but it shows a very close race. And one that will probably stay close the whole way through, dependent largely on how much extra African-American turnout is generated by Obama’s coattails.

How big are those coattails? The same sample says McCain is beating Obama 51-42. That’s up from 54-39 in the previous poll, and more importantly, up from the 59-40 margin from the 2004 presidential election.

Don’t be alarmed by the title; the link is work-safe.

“Foul-mouthed attacks on anyone he disagrees with. Tasteless, sexist jokes. Writing all that juicy porn.”

It’s Norm Coleman’s newest ad against Al Franken. I’m just left shaking my head. On the one hand, this is such a cliched and overly broad exaggeration of how Washington (both parties, I’m afraid) visualizes the swing-voting blue-collar slob demographic that I have to hope this blows up in their faces. On the other hand, the ad goes right at Franken’s Achilles heel and keeps hammering at it… so expect to see more of exactly this for the next three months.

The first reaction when someone sees a list of the states that are poised to gain House seats as a result of the 2010 census is usually “Uh oh, that’s a lot of red states.” Well, that’s true; of the nine states that Election Data Services projects as possibly gaining seats, only one (Oregon) has voted Democratic in the last few presidential elections. This might make the Electoral College more difficult in the short term.

The question is, though, who’s moving to these states (or being born in these states)? Over the long term, the answer is good news, because for the most part, it’s groups who are favorable to the Democratic party. (In particular, Latinos.) As immigrants get citizenship, and as their kids reach voting age, these states are likely to tip in our direction (unless the GOP somehow muzzles its nativist base and becomes all about inclusion). But this might have more immediate implications at the House level, because this may mean more minority-majority and/or ‘influence’ districts. Despite the fact that the new seats will be in red states, they might not be red seats. (Especially if we can control the redistricting process in as many of these states as possible.)

This table shows the raw numbers for population change for each major population group in each of these states between the 2000 census and the 2007 estimate. (White, Af.-Am., Asian = non-Hispanic white alone, non-Hispanic African-American alone, and non-Hispanic Asian alone.)

Last week we mentioned the $6 million DSCC ad buy in North Carolina, which is already huge, but not out of whack with high media costs in heavily-populated North Carolina. But today, Advertising Age is reporting that the DSCC upped the ante in some other states too:

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has also made more than $15 million in buys in North Carolina, New Mexico, Minnesota and Maine, with the buys in Maine and North Carolina exceeding $5 million each. A committee official declined to comment.

$5 million in Maine?!?!?!? Given how cheap a media market Maine is and that there are only about 1.3 million Mainers to reach, that goes well beyond the firepower of “moneybomb.” Call it a “moneynuke,” maybe. Also, by subtraction, that leaves $4 million to be split between New Mexico and Minnesota, which isn’t peanuts either. (Given how well Tom Udall seems to have things in hand, hopefully most of that money will find its way to Minnesota.)

Well, it’s beer o’clock here at Swing State Project, so it’s time to let loose on whatever downballot topic strikes your fancy.

Next week, once James and David have slept off their Netroots Nation-related hangovers, expect lots more analysis of the most recent round of fundraising numbers, and probably some serious remodeling of our Senate and House ratings.

 Loading ...

Here’s our summary of FEC filings for the quarter that ended on June 30, for the hot Senate races. (House filings are here.) The left column is total receipts for the second quarter. (This is based on slightly different criteria as ‘total raised’ from the House list, as ‘total receipts’ doesn’t include transfers between committees.) The right column is current cash on hand. All dollar amounts are in thousands.

There’s one omission: Kansas reports are not yet available, as their reporting period for 2Q covers April 1 to July 16. One other caveat: Oklahoma covers the period April 1 to July 9, although Rice’s report only runs through June 30. If there are any other races you want to know about, just ask in the comments.

This may be another one of those cases where I should wait until there’s actually been an election. But there have been a number of instances lately where I commented on a particular district’s PVI and thought to myself, “Yeah, but that PVI is going to change a lot after this election.” Nobody is polling the presidential race at the level of individual districts (except, of course, the states that have only one House district), so short of breaking out the crystal ball, I can’t address House districts with much specificity.

However, what I can do is use current polling to predict likely percentage splits for each state in 2008, and plug those numbers into the PVI formula along with the 2004 percentages to calculate new PVIs for each state. (PVI, of course, is used in the context of House districts, but the formula is easy enough, and can be applied to pretty much any unit of analysis: states, counties, legislative districts, precincts, and so on. In fact, I’m surprised it isn’t, as a means of analyzing Senate races.)

For 2008 numbers, I’m just going to use today’s projection for each state from 538.com. (These numbers fluctuate a bit every day, so this post will already be out of date tomorrow.) Not to say that Nate’s prediction model is the be-all-and-end-all, just that it’s a good model for my purposes, since it basically pushes every leaner and accounts for third-party votes (so that each total actually adds up to 100). Over the flip, for each state, is the old PVI (reflecting the 2000 and 2004 elections), the new PVI (reflecting the 2004 and 2008 elections), and the difference.

Not surprisingly (since we’re measuring the same thing, although my numbers are blunted by being averaged out with 2004 results), the “difference” results look a lot like this map Chris Bowers put together at Open Left showing the biggest shifts in the new Obama electoral map. Big D+ shifts in the West and Great Plains, R+ shifts in Appalachia and the Northeast. (This doesn’t mean that, for instance, the Northeast is most rightward or going to give a smaller percentage to Obama than Kerry. It’s more like it’s standing still while the rest of the country moves left.)

Lake Research Partners for Gerry Connolly (7/10-14, likely voters):

Gerry Connolly (D): 52

Keith Fimian (R): 21

(MoE: ±4.4%)

Public Opinion Strategies for Steve Chabot (6/30-7/2, likely voters):

Steve Driehaus (D): 37

Steve Chabot (R-inc.): 50

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Got the salt shaker ready? Hot on the heels of the laughable poll released yesterday in NJ-07 come a couple more internal polls from big House races where Democratic pickups are likely. Surprise surprise: each one shows the person who commissioned the poll up by a huge margin.

The Virginia poll isn’t that bizarre: it probably reflects that most people in the district know exactly who Gerry Connolly is, as he represents most of them as Fairfax County Supervisor and just got out of a headline-grabbing primary with another well-known local Dem, Leslie Byrne. And few know who Keith Fimian is (he’s never held office; he’s independently wealthy from his home inspection business). I don’t expect to see Connolly double-up on Fimian in November like here, but he’s gotta be seen as a clear favorite.

And I do note one area of weakness in OH-01: Steve Chabot, who has represented Cincinnati since 1994, is polling only right at the 50% danger mark in his own poll? Driehaus, who is a state representative (and thus familiar only to a portion of OH-01) can only go up from here, but Chabot may be near his ceiling. This one will be close (like almost every race for Chabot).

H/t JeremiahTheMessiah