July 2008 – Page 20 – Swing State Project

Breaking News: Ed Whitfield Receives a Huge Endorsement

The Ryan for Kentucky campaign in Kentucky’s First Congressional District recieved a huge setback in Murray this last Saturday, as Ed Whitfield received a huge endorsement. It came as quite a surprise to everyone there, and will probably make a huge difference in this race. Ryan for Kentucky was stunned, but vowed to keep fighting.

Vinnie, the Supreme Pizza slice shocked everyone by publicly endorsing Whitfield, and even walking with him in the parade briefly. When asked what steered his endorsement, Vinnie was quick to reply.

As a slice of Pizza, I know firsthand the problems of horsemeat. I have had many friends and family who have had horsemeat put upon them, by no fault of their own. I thank Congressman Whitfield for leading the charge against the eating of horsemeat. I can now rest assured that only quality meats will be placed upon myself, and my family.

He was referring to Whitfield’s major legislative accomplishment, a ban on eating horsemeat.

Proving that he was not a single issue voter, Vinnie was quick to add:

I also admire Congressman Whitfield’s positions on natural gas, and methane emissions. Besides, I have been slapped around by people in funny hats for too long.

At Ryan for Kentucky, although they were understandably disappointed, they were quick to respond. A spokesman for Ryan for Kentucky released this statement:

We are deeply disappointed that Vinnie, the Supreme Pizza Slice has decided to endorse our opponent, Exxon Ed Whitfield. We had been negotiating with Vinnie for a few weeks to attempt to win his endorsemet. We agree that the eating of horsemeat is an abomination, but we couldn’t seem to agree with Vinnie on the limiting of methane emissions. Our campaign respects Vinnie, and regrets his decision.

Please, help us recover from the crushing blow of Vinnie, the Supreme Pizza Slice here:

Best wishes everyone!!

LA-06: Jackson “Very Likely” to Run as an Independent

Bad news. State Rep. Michael Jackson (D-Baton Rouge) is telling Roll Call that he’s “very likely” to run for Congress again after losing the special Democratic primary to Don Cazayoux — only this time, as an independent:

Jackson, the vice chairman of the Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus, said he’s fully aware that some Republicans want him in the race and that Democratic leaders want him on the sidelines.

“Both sides have shown an interest in whether or not I’m in this race,” he said. “Republicans feel it might help their position and Democrats feel like it may hurt their position.”

However, Jackson said, “my goal would be to run to win and to maximize the opportunity and to maximize my chances. and it appears that the best way to do that right now is to do it as an Independent.”

Jackson, whose state legislative district is in Baton Rouge, said the main reason he’s filing as an Independent is because he’s concerned about the cost of running in a primary and general election. […]

“We’re just trying to utilize our resources in a way that makes sense,” Jackson said.

But he added that although he would be on the ballot as an Independent, he intends to preach a Democratic message during his campaign.

“It’s not that I’m disassociating myself [from] the Democrats … my banner will be an Independent-Democrat, I’ll stay connected to the philosophy that way.”

I’m not sure what Jackson is trying to accomplish. At “best” he will win enough support in Baton Rouge to split the Democratic vote and let GOP state Sen. Bill Cassidy defeat Cazayoux. It would be a terrible shame if that happened.

In Cazayoux’s corner, he will have incumbency, DCCC protection, and solid support from local Democrats (Jackson notwithstanding). But make no mistake: this would be an awfully hard race for Cazayoux to win, and it would put every political fiber in his body to the test.

SSP currently rates this race as Leans Democratic, but we will make an immediate race rating revision if Jackson enters this race as an independent.

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America For Make Benefit Glorious 2Q Reports of Raising

FL-24:

Suzanne Kosmas (D): $475K raised; $925K CoH (press release)

NC-Sen:

Kay Hagan (D): $1.6M raised; $1.2M CoH

NV-02:

Jill Derby (D): $280K raised; $350K CoH

NV-03:

Dina Titus (D): $575K raised (in two months)

CO-05:

Hal Bidlack (D): $103K raised; $77K CoH

AZ-01:

Ann Kirkpatrick (D): $329K raised; $669K CoH

IA-Sen:

Tom Harkin (D-inc): $632K raised; >$4M CoH

NJ-07:

Linda Stender (D): <$500K raised; $1.2M CoH

UPDATE:

FL-13:

Vern Buchanan (R-inc): >$600K raised; $1.5M CoH

2Q Fundraising Results Thread | …Stood Still | How I Learned To Stop Worrying… | I Know What You Raised… | …vs. the Saucermen From Mars | Attack of the 50’…

MO-Gov, MO-Sen: New Polls From PPP and Rasmussen

Rasmussen takes another crack at Missouri’s gubernatorial race (7/7, likely voters, 6/3 in parens):

Jay Nixon (D): 49 (54)

Kenny Hulshof (R): 38 (34)

Jay Nixon (D): 46 (56)

Sarah Steelman (R): 37 (34)

(MoE: ±4.5%)

This race was bound to tighten up, and the flurry of ads and activity in the GOP primary seems have given both Republican candidates a boost.

Public Policy Polling has similar numbers (7/2-5, likely voters):

Jay Nixon (D): 47

Kenny Hulshof (R): 37

Jay Nixon (D): 44

Sarah Steelman (R): 39

(MoE: ±3.6%)

Looking ahead to the 2010 Senate race, PPP finds that Republican incumbent Kit Bond could be in for a tough race if he chooses to run again:

Robin Carnahan (D): 42

Kit Bond (R-inc): 44

Susan Montee (D): 35

Kit Bond (R-inc): 47

(MoE: ±3.6%)

Bond’s approvals are at 39%, a very poor number for a longtime incumbent, while his disapproval rating is at 33%, indicating a serious pool of disgruntled voters. Carnahan is the Secretary of State for Missouri and comes from a well-known political family; she would bring a deep pool of name recognition to a Senate race. Montee is the state Auditor, and was first elected statewide in 2006 to fill the vacant office left behind by Claire McCaskill. Both appear to be solid candidates to run against Bond (or for his open seat), if they’re interested.

Bonus findings: PPP shows McCain’t leading Obama by 47-44 in Missouri, while Rasmu pegs the race at a slightly larger margin for the GOP: 47-42.

SSP currently rates MO-Gov as Leans Democratic.

The Bang-for-the-Buck Index

Over the last few months, I’ve come out with a variety of indexes that focused on the potential efficiencies of electing various new senators and representatives (for instance, in terms of the largest overall right-to-left shift, here and here). Part of this is to help netroots donors have some quantitative basis for seeing how their meager dollars might be best invested.

One thing that’s been missing from the equation, though, is any sense of how effectively those netroots dollars will be spent: not in terms of whether the campaign is likely to make good decisions (which is unknowable), but in terms of whether the media markets where an election takes place are a good buy. Think about how much further one netroots dollar goes in a race in Wyoming or Alaska, where there are few eyeballs to reach and the media markets are cheap, versus a race in New York or Texas. And yet, the result is the same: one more senator or representative.

Last week, Nate at 538.com had a few very interesting posts on this topic (creating the Return on Investment Index, and, then analyzing specific states’ media markets). Nate’s concept of efficiency turned largely on the idea of ‘wasted eyeballs,’ in other words, advertising in markets that bleed across state lines and where therefore ads run in front of non-targeted voters. However, his analysis was focused on the presidential race, where the concept of ‘wasted eyeballs’ may be overrated as a problem; after all, even if ads run in swing state markets bleed over into non-swing states, the voters in those states are voting in the same presidential election too. It may not maximize efficiency in the way a skilled media buyer would like, but it’s all part of a bigger whole.

We don’t have that luxury in Senate, and especially House races, though. Take Virginia as a case in point: Mark Warner needs to advertise in the Washington DC market in order to reach suburban northern Virginia voters, but that means paying top dollar in one of the nation’s most expensive media markets to tell millions of Marylanders to vote for him. (Of course, he can afford it, so don’t break out the tiny violin yet.) Kentucky may be even worse from a pure efficiency standpoint; none of its markets are brutally expensive, but blanketing all of Kentucky means advertising in Evansville, Cincinnati, and Nashville.

Over the flip, let’s look at all of the competitive Senate pickup opportunities. I’ll explain the methodology and the asterisked races after the table; for now, all you need to know is that the lower the number on the right is, the less expensive the race is.

State	Markets	Score
Alaska	Anchorage (141) Fairbanks (32) Juneau (24)	197
Maine	Portland (407) Bangor (143) Presque Isle (31)	581
Idaho	Boise (230) Idaho Falls (115) Spokane (390) Twin Falls (60) Salt Lake City (negligible)	795
Nebraska	Omaha (400) Lincoln (274) North Platte (15) Sioux City (157) Denver (1,415 *) Cheyenne (negligible) Rapid City (negligible) Wichita (negligible)	846 *
New Mexico	Albuquerque (654) El Paso (291) Amarillo (190) Odessa (negligible)	1,135
Oregon	Portland (1,100) Eugene (229) Medford (163) Bend (54) Yakima (negligible) Boise (negligible) Spokane (negligible)	1,545
Mississippi	Jackson (328) Memphis (658) Biloxi (136) Columbus (187) Hattiesburg (105) Meridian (71) Greenwood (77) New Orleans (672 *)	1,562 *
Kansas	Kansas City (904) Wichita (447) Topeka (171) Joplin (154) Tulsa (negligible) Lincoln (negligible) St. Joseph (negligible)	1,676
Oklahoma	Oklahoma City (665) Tulsa (510) Sherman (124) Wichita Falls (155) Ft. Smith (273) Shreveport (negligible) Joplin (negligible) Amarillo (negligible)	1,727
Colorado	Denver (1,415) Colorado Spgs. (315) Grand Junction (65) Albuquerque (negligible)	1,795
Minnesota	Minneapolis (1,653) Duluth (169) Rochester (143) Fargo (234) Mankato (51) La Crosse (negligible)	2,250
New Hampshire	Boston (2,375 *) Burlington (326) Portland (407)	3,108 *
Kentucky	Louisville (643) Lexington (479) Cincinnati (880) Evansville (289) Bowling Green (75) Paducah (383) Charleston WV (478) Nashville (928 *) Knoxville (negligible) Tri-Cities (negligible)	3,227 *
North Carolina	Charlotte (1,020) Raleigh (985) Greensboro (652) Greenville NC (270) Wilmington (168) Greenville SC (815) Norfolk (negligible) Myrtle Beach (negligible) Atlanta (negligible) Chattanooga (negligible)	3,910
Virginia	Washington DC (2,253) Norfolk (705) Richmond (511) Roanoke (440) Tri-Cities (324) Charlottesville (70) Harrisonburg (86) Bluefield (negligible) Raleigh (negligible) Greensboro (negligible)	4,389
Texas	Dallas (2,336) Houston (1,939) San Antonio (760) Austin (589) Waco (311) Harlingen (319) Corpus Christi (192) Laredo (64) Beaumont (167) Tyler (256) Sherman (124) Victoria (30) Wichita Falls (155) Abilene (113) San Angelo (53) Amarillo (190) Lubbock (152) Odessa (135) El Paso (291) Shreveport (negligible)	8,176

The middle column lists each media market that’s in the state in question. The number next to each media market is the number of thousands of TV households in that media market, according to most recent Nielsen numbers. (I deemed some markets ‘negligible,’ if they were out-of-state markets that barely spilled over the border and represented 2% or less of the state’s total population, thus unlikely to be part of a media buy.) The number on the right is simply the sum of all the TV households in the relevant markets, in other words, the number of households that need to be paid for in order to more or less blanket the state.

As you can see, there’s a pretty clear correlation between the expensiveness of a state and how populous it is. (As Nate points out, the cost per household may vary a bit from market to market, depending on the desirability of that market to advertisers. For the most part, though, the basic rule is that the more eyeballs you need to reach, the more dollars you’re going to pay. So the larger the number on the right is, the more expensive your race is going to be.) However, there can be some variations, depending on the ‘wasted eyeballs’ factor. States with nice clean media markets that correspond roughly to state borders are cheaper than some states that have smaller populations but more porous boundaries (for instance, Oregon is cheaper to blanket than Kansas, while Colorado is cheaper to blanket than Kentucky).

There are a few races that I asterisked; generally, it’s because of the presence of an out-of-state market that covers more than 2% of the state’s population but that’s also cripplingly expensive to compete in and that probably wouldn’t be part of an intelligent media buying strategy. Nebraska is a prime example: about 4% of the state’s population (most of the big empty western part) is served by the Denver market. But c’mon: you aren’t going to see Scott Kleeb TV ads running in Denver. Smart media buying would probably focus on AM radio or direct mail in that part of the state instead. (Adding Denver at 1,415 to the calculus boosts the net cost in Nebraska to 2,261.)

Likewise, a few counties in Mississippi (3% of the state’s population) are in the New Orleans market. (Adding New Orleans at 672 boosts the cost in Mississippi to 2,234, making it a much less attractive prospect. Mississippi also takes in the somewhat expensive Memphis market, but that covers 12% of the state’s voters and can’t safely be ignored.) Also, the Nashville market covers 5% of Kentucky’s population. Bruce Lunsford can pay for that if he wants to, but adding Nashville at 928 boosts the already high costs in Kentucky up to 4,155.

Finally, there’s the question of New Hampshire. The bottom half of the state is considered part of the Boston market, but there is one affiliate based in Manchester that is considered to operate within the larger Boston market. (As Nate points out, it may owe its entire existence to New Hampshire’s weird role in the presidential race and the targeted ad blitz that results.) Not really knowing how that shakes out in terms of ad rates, I’m leaving New Hampshire as is, but figure that the actual costs in New Hampshire are probably lower. [Update: According to DavidNYC, in 2006, the House candidates in NH mostly focused on the Manchester affiliate and steered clear of Boston in general, although the DCCC did a whole-Boston-market moneybomb right before the election.]

And of course, there are the usual caveats that TV and radio advertising are only a portion of a sane advertising strategy, which includes everything from internet and direct mail down to the totally unglamorous world of yard signs and stickers. This is only a rough guide to give you an idea of how expensive a particular race may be, and how far your dollar might go toward making a difference.

I’ll take a look at the House races using the same method tomorrow.

NM-01: Heinrich Leads White By Three in New Poll

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for Martin Heinrich (6/29-7/2, likely voters):

Martin Heinrich (D): 47

Darren White (R): 44

(MoE: ±4.4%)

As far as I’m aware, this is the first publicly-released poll of this race. Considering that White probably has higher name recognition as the sheriff of Bernalillo County, this isn’t a bad starting point for Heinrich.

SSP currently rates this race as a Tossup.

UPDATE: I stand corrected! On the NRCC’s website, they’re still touting a Public Opinion Strategies poll from October that has White leading Heinrich by a whopping 18-points. So much for White being “untouchable”.

Top 10 House “Incumbent” Primaries

The top 10 races featuring incumbents (ranked based on vulnerability):

1. Young (AK) – Young is being hit by scandal and a large part of his campaign war chest is going toward attorney fees. While it is a three-way primary race, the biggest threat is Lt. Gov. Parnell, who has been endorsed by popular Gov. Palin. Should Parnell win and defeat Young, then expect this seat to become less likely for a Democratic pickup. Outlook: Young loses.

2. Broun (GA) – This is a battle between who is more conservative, similar to one lost by Cannon in Utah. Broun defeated the establishment candidate in a special election. Many attribute this victory to cross-over Democratic voters from more liberal areas, such as Athens. Fleming is more of a “nut” than Broun and the cross-over appeal voters will not be able to rescue Broun this round. Outlook: Broun loses.

3. Jefferson (LA) – He has been scandal plagued for eternity. Even with scandal, Jefferson has managed to prevail in the past. A crowded primary would be considered beneficial to him. However, at a time when incumbents on both sides are being thrown out or retiring “voluntarily” there is no doubt that Jefferson is in trouble. Outlook: Jefferson loses.

4. Towns (NY) – In 2006 he barely survived a three way challenge. Kevin Powell is a charismatic public speaker and could hardly be considered a divisive figure, unlike Towns closest 2006 competitor, NYC Councilman Charles Barron. Labor unions, a strong political force in Brooklyn, will most likely target Towns for defeat. His support for Clinton over Obama is another issue that was not received well in his majority African American district. Should this remain a two way race then Towns could be in serious trouble. Outlook: Too Close to Call.

5. Kilpatrick (MI) – Detroit is souring over the Kilpatricks, more the son than the mother. Had she simply run as Carolyn Cheeks she would be safer. A three-way primary benefits Kilpatrick, yet Waters is viewed as the more serious candidate and Scott as a mere placement candidate meant to split votes. Coincidentally, Kilpatrick defeated a fellow incumbent in a 1996 primary to win this seat. That fellow Democrat now serves on the Detroit City Council, the same group that has been battling her son. Deja-vu has returned. Kilpatrick is in deep trouble. Outlook: Too Close to Call.

6. Cohen (TN) – He represents a majority African-American district, yet he is Jewish and white. He is being challenged by Tinker, an African-American who is supported by some religious leaders who believe that only a fellow African-American can represent other African-Americans (a joke at best). A crowded primary with fellow African-Americans, including Tinker, assisted Cohen in winning this seat last election. Most polls show Cohen with a decent favorability rating and he endorsed Obama early on. However, Tinker has sufficient funds to make this race competitive. Outlook: Leans Cohen.

7. Barrow (GA) – This is another district that is a little less than 50% African-American. Barrow is a conservative Southern Democrat. His opponent is State Senator Thomas. She is more of a liberal Southern Democrat, yet also African-American. A low turount benefits Barrow. He also has proven a winning streak against challenging Republicans. Outlook: Likely Barrow.

8. Lamborn (CO) – This is a three-way primary that was expected to be a two-way primary between “wacko” Lamborn and whoever polled best between Crank and Rayburn. Polls indicated Crank performed best against Lamborn, yet Rayburn decided that any deal made between him and Crank was not valid. As a result, a three-way primary continues to exist. This is not only a conservative district, yet also a military district and Lamborn can tout his seat on the Armed Services. A seat there does indeed matter here. Unlike Musgrave, Lamborn has also maintained a lower profile. Outlook: Likely Lamborn.

9. Blackburn (TN) – Big Oil’s darling is having her conservative credentials questioned. While Leatherwood has a struggle on his hands in defeating Blackburn, he has managed to catch her off guard for the time being. Blackburn has started to go on the defensive, not a position where any incumbent is considered safe. Outlook: Blackburn Favored.

10. David Davis (TN) – Davis is a freshman facing two opponents from 2006. Roe is the more challenging of the two, he is a mayor, physician, and veteran (executive, health care, and military experience). Not a bad mix for a conservative district. Outlook: Safe Davis.

Primary Dates:

7/15: Georgia

8/5: Michigan

8/7: Tennessee

8/12: Colorado

8/26: Alaska

9/6: Louisiana

9/9: New York

ALERT: CQ Ratings Change in NY-25

CQ has posted a ratings change as of 7/9 for NY-25, moving it to “Leans Democrat” from the previous “No Clear Favorite” category, moving another GOP held seat into the Democratic side. Democratic Candidate Dan Maffei now has the edge in the race against the GOP candidate former Onondaga County Legislature Chairman Dale Sweetland for the seat being vacated by Rep. James Walsh (R-NY).

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmsp…

This puts the CQ 111th Congress projections at:

236 Democrats, 186 Republicans, 13 No Clear Favorite

Of those 13 NCFs, 8 are GOP seats, while 5 are Democrats (AL-05, FL-16, KS-02, LA-06, & OR-05). Frankly, I think FL-16 is my biggest concern, and I’d throw in TX-22 in that category.

Filing in WI and NY

Today was the filing deadline in WI as well as the second day of New York’s four day filing period. Wisconsin information is partial as some candidates have filed the paperwork but the state has not validated their signatures.

The big news is that each side in Wisconsin will field at least one candidate with no major party opposition. For Republicans, James Sensenbrenner will face a primary challenger (Jim Burkee) and an Independent on the fall ballot (Robert Raymond) but no Democrat. Gwen Moore (D, WI-4) will also face an Independent in the fall (Michael LaForest) but no Republican.

Four Democrats appear to have qualified to oppose Paul Ryan in WI-1 (Paulette Garin, Mike Hebert, Marge Krupp, John Mogk). They will meet in a September 9 primary. Roger Kittelson has the signatures to oppose Tom Petri in WI-6 (unopposed in 2006). He may (or may not) face Mark Wollom in a primary depending on the validation of signatures.

Signatures must also be validated for three Republicans seeking to make the ballot in Wisconsin. Surprisingly, one of them is John Gard. This may show a bit of weakness in his candidacy in WI-8. The others are Peter Theron in WI-2 (vs. Tammy Baldwin) and Paul Stark in WI-3 (vs. Ron Kind). Could there be another free ride?

In NY, two of the three Republican House incumbents who have actually expressed interest in retaining their seats have filed: Peter King and John McHugh. It will be interesting to see if a candidate emerges in NY-13 and what the deal is in NY-25 and how many free rides come out of Democratic districts in the City.

The number of Republican House members who have not yet filed or announced their retirement is down to four in the entire country: Steve Scalise (LA-1), Rodney Alexander (LA-5), Mike Castle (DE-At Large), and Randy Kuhl (NY-29). At this point, I expect all to run.

On the Democratic side, the biggest question mark as we wrap up filing remains whether we will find an opponent in NY-3 for Peter King. This is an eminently winnable seat. I think there may be a cattle call when King retires. Only when will that be?

An interesting side note is the number of high profile primary challenges to Democratic state senators and assembly members. Reading the Albany Project blog or the Albany Times-Union (local politics don’t seem as big in the NY City dailies), you’d think the state senate had already changed hands.

LA-06: Jenkins Won’t Run

Well, well. With the qualifying period for state and federal elections beginning today, the GOP has finally caught a break in Louisiana this year, as unpopular Republican Woody Jenkins is pulling out of the November election against recently-elected Democratic Rep. Don Cazayoux:

“It’s a very critical time in America and very important that our party unifies,” Jenkins said. “It’s probably the only way we’re going to win.” […]

Jenkins said he felt as though he had the support to win the fall primary election. But the campaign would be a costly strain on either Republican candidate and would negatively effect their run in the general election.

“And I don’t want to take that chance,” Jenkins said. “Because of the district and the type of race this is, unity is at a premium. We just can’t afford any fighting among ourselves.”

Another retread loser, lobbyist and businesswoman Laurinda Calongne, also pulled out of the race late last month.

In their place, Republicans are running state Sen. Bill Cassidy, who, simply by virtue of actually holding an elected office, is a big step up from Jenkins or Calongne.

The biggest unanswered question for the time being remains the fate of Democratic state Rep. Michael Jackson, who vowed to run as an independent in November after he lost his primary bid to Cazayoux in April. The filing deadline passes this Friday, so we’ll have an answer soon.