Swing State Project

Harstad Strategic Research for Walt Minnick (9/9-11, likely voters):

Walt Minnick (D): 43

Bill Sali (R-inc): 38

(MoE: ±4.9%)

These numbers paint a dramatically different picture of the race than a recent Research 2000 poll conducted for Daily Kos that showed Sali leading by 46-35. In that survey, Minnick had suspiciously high unfavorable numbers (41% favorable, 40% unfavorable), which is hard to explain given that Minnick has been airing nothing but unanswered positive bio ads for the past two months. In Minnick’s poll, his favorables are at 39% and his unfavorables are at 12% — I find this spread much more believable than R2K’s poll.

The poll has some more good news: Bill Sali’s favorables are pretty low (36-37) and his job approval is even worse (28-52). The cherry on top: only 22% of voters say that they’re going vote to re-elect Sali, while 26% say they’ll consider someone else, and 33% are definitely voting for someone else. A good base of anti-Sali and persuadable voters there.

The full polling memo is available below the fold.

First this:

Democratic U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney has a homestead exemption on a house in Palm Beach Gardens and describes it as his primary residence.

But the address on Mahoney’s voter registration is a barn with a small apartment that he owns in the rural Caloosa area west of Palm Beach Gardens. The barn is in the 16th Congressional District that Mahoney represents; the homesteaded house is just outside Mahoney’s district.

And now this:

The campaign of Democratic U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney, who’s been under fire for registering to vote at a barn with an apartment rather than at his homesteaded primary residence, called Republican challenger Tom Rooney a hypocrite today upon learning that Rooney was registered to vote for five years at the Palm Beach Kennel Club dog track.

While Rooney was in law school and then in the Army in Texas and at West Point from 1998 to 2003, the address on his voter registration was the Kennel Club, which is owned by the Rooney family.

Where would you rather hang your spurs: a BARN down by the RIVER, or a dog track?

On the heels of recent polls by PPP and Rasmussen showing Democrat Kay Hagan leading Elizabeth Dole by mid-single digits, Civitas releases a new survey of their own (9/17-20, likely voters, 8/14-17 in parens):

Kay Hagan (D): 41 (41)

Elizabeth Dole (R-inc): 43 (44)

Christopher Cole (L): 5 (4)

(MoE: ±4.2%)

True, Civitas is a Republican group, but their numbers have been mostly in-line with what other reputable pollsters have told us about North Carolina this year, and I have no reason to doubt them — just like I have no reason to doubt Public Policy Polling despite their Democratic sympathies. In any case, Dole is in serious trouble.

Bonus finding: Civitas finds that the Presidential race is tied at 45-45 in North Carolina. Very nice.

This is nuts:

In an unusual campaign move, U.S. Rep. Tom Feeney will use a new television ad to apologize for his role in the Jack Abramoff corruption scandal.

Set to air Tuesday, the 30-second spot features Feeney alone at a kitchen telling viewers that he made a “rookie mistake” by taking a 2003 golfing trip to Scotland that was paid for Abramoff, whom he calls a corrupt lobbyist.”I embarrassed myself, I embarrassed you and for that, I’m very sorry,” said Feeney, holding a black coffee mug as soft music plays in the background.

Here’s the full script:

“Five years ago, when I was first elected to Congress I was invited on trip to Scotland.  I found out later that it was paid for by a corrupt lobbyist. It was a rookie mistake and I did everything I could to make it right.  I reported it to the ethics committee and I paid the money back. I embarrassed myself, I embarrassed you and for that, I’m very sorry. I’m Tom Feeney and I approve this message because public service means about being honest, even when you make a mistake.”

You don’t usually see incumbents in a tough election issue mea culpas like this. (Note also that he’s only apologizing years after the offending incident.) In fact, this move had shades of Don Sherwood all over it. Will voters be in a forgiving mood this November? I doubt it.

(Bumped – promoted by James L.)

In the wake of the Census Bureau releasing 2007 American Community Survey data by Congressional district, it’s time for another demographic data dump. (I previously wrote about population change here.) Today, let’s take a look at income and poverty numbers.

As with the population numbers, it’s more interesting to look at the change from 2000 to 2007, rather than simply asking who’s on top and who’s on bottom. VA-11 is always going to be wealthy; NY-16 is always going to be obscenely poor. Looking at change, however, provides some interesting insight into what districts are hurting more or less than before, and thus where economic-themed messaging might play best.

As you can see by many of the same districts showing up in each category, income and poverty correlate pretty closely. I’m including both median household income and per capita income since those can give very different results. They tend to vary depending on household size; PCI tends to be highest in affluent downtown districts with a lot of single-family households, while MHI is highest in suburban/exurban areas where people earn a lot but households full of kids drag down the PCI numbers.

Let’s start with biggest gains in median household income:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
VA-08	Moran (D)	$63,430	$90,662	$27,232
VA-11	Davis (R)	$80,397	$103,664	$23,267
VA-10	Wolf (R)	$71,560	$93,701	$22,141
NY-14	Maloney (D)	$57,152	$78,843	$21,691
CA-44	Calvert (R)	$51,578	$71,923	$20,345
CA-48	Campbell (R)	$69,663	$89,758	$20,095
NY-01	Bishop (D)	$61,884	$81,221	$19,337
MD-08	Van Hollen (D)	$68,306	$86,971	$18,665
MD-05	Hoyer (D)	$62,661	$81,179	$18,518
CA-30	Waxman (D)	$60,713	$79,149	$18,436

More over the flip…

Now for the smallest gains (or drops) in median household income:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
MI-14	Conyers (D)	$36,099	$35,228	– $871
MI-13	Kilpatrick (D)	$31,165	$30,842	– $323
TX-09	Green (D)	$34,870	$34,934	$64
GA-04	Johnson (D)	$47,943	$48,327	$384
TX-24	Marchand (R)	$56,098	$57,552	$1,454
MI-12	Levin (D)	$46,784	$48,417	$1,633
NC-12	Watt (D)	$35,775	$37,574	$1,799
MI-05	Kildee (D)	$39,675	$41,535	$1,860
NC-01	Butterfield (D)	$28,410	$30,441	$2,031
IL-02	Jackson (D)	$41,330	$43,380	$2,050

We’re getting into Dickensian tale-of-two-districts territory here, as you can see the rich districts getting richer (basically confined to the New York, Washington, and Los Angeles areas). The only surprise, to me, is CA-44, which is out in the Inland Empire and is seeing a lot of Latino growth. Apparently it’s also seeing a lot of growth of upscale subdivisions on its remaining patches of empty buildable ground.

Likewise, we’re seeing the poor getting poorer, as working-class blue-collar districts that have escaped the worst of urban poverty (like MI-14 and IL-02) slowly slide into poverty with the loss of manufacturing jobs. The main surprise (and only Republican held district) is TX-24, the suburban area around DFW airport, which is seeing a lot of Latino growth and white flight to the exurbs.

VA-11 has the highest MHI in both 2000 and 2007, followed by NJ-11. VA-10 (which was #12 in 2000), CA-14, and VA-08 (which was #28 in 2000) round out 2007’s Top 5, while CA-14, CA-15 (which fell to #16 in 2007), and NJ-07 round out 2000’s Top 5.

The lowest MHI for both 2000 and 2007 was in NY-16, followed by KY-05. In 2000, the bottom 5 also included WV-03, CA-31, and AL-07, while in 2007, several of the biggest plungers joined the bottom 5 (NC-01 and MI-13), along with MS-02.

Now let’s turn to per capita income, starting with the biggest gains:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
NY-14	Maloney (D)	$53,752	$71,409	$17,657
NY-08	Nadler (D)	$39,901	$57,462	$17,561
VA-08	Moran (D)	$35,613	$50,413	$14,800
CA-30	Waxman (D)	$34,552	$45,435	$10,883
MD-08	Van Hollen (D)	$36,245	$47,163	$10,918
CA-08	Pelosi (D)	$34,552	$45,435	$10,883
CT-04	Shays (R)	$41,147	$51,868	$10,721
CA-48	Campbell (R)	$37,242	$47,737	$10,495
IL-07	Davis (D)	$25,329	$35,697	$10,368
GA-05	Lewis (D)	$25,963	$35,979	$10,016

And here are the smallest gains:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
MI-14	Conyers (D)	$17,546	$18,047	$501
MI-13	Kilpatrick (D)	$17,078	$18,238	$1,160
MI-05	Kildee (D)	$19,823	$21,299	$1,476
MI-12	Levin (D)	$23,560	$25,263	$1,703
IL-02	Jackson (D)	$18,280	$20,004	$1,724
TX-09	Green (D)	$15,998	$17,825	$1,827
GA-07	Linder (R)	$25,214	$27,079	$1,865
WI-04	Moore (D)	$16,607	$18,591	$1,865
MI-15	Dingell (D)	$23,628	$25,651	$2,023
IN-07	Carson (D)	$19,559	$21,593	$2,034

These results show even more clearly the hit taken by Rust Belt inner cities, and in fact almost the entire Detroit area. The one surprise is another suburban GOP stronghold (for now): GA-07 in Gwinnett County, which is another area that’s increasingly becoming a first stop for immigrants of all nationalities, and a prime source of white flight to other burbs. (TX-09 seems to appear on these lists because it absorbed a large portion of New Orleans’ most impoverished residents.)

NY-14, followed by CA-30, had the highest PCI in both 2000 and 2007. The top 5 in 2000 also included CA-14, CT-04, and NY-08, while the top 5 in 2007 was rounded out with NY-08, CT-04, and VA-08.

The lowest PCI in both 2000 and 2007 was in NY-16, followed by CA-20 and TX-15. The bottom 5 in 2000 also included CA-31 and CA-34, while the bottom 5 in 2007 also included TX-29 and CA-34. Note that these lists are quite different from the bottom 5 in MHI; again, that tends to be a factor of household size. Here, the bottom 5 are all heavily Latino districts, where household size tends to be larger than the rural white or black districts that have the lowest MHIs.

Now let’s look at the highest poverty percentage changes:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
MI-13	Kilpatrick (D)	24.4%	32.5%	8.1%
CO-07	Perlmutter (D)	8.9%	15.0%	6.1%
TN-09	Cohen (D)	19.4%	25.0%	5.6%
MI-14	Conyers (D)	19.7%	25.0%	5.3%
IN-07	Carson (D)	13.5%	18.7%	5.2%
OH-15	Pryce (R)	10.8%	16.0%	5.2%
SC-06	Clyburn (D)	18.4%	23.4%	5.0%
NC-12	Watt (D)	15.9%	20.9%	5.0%
TX-16	Reyes (D)	23.6%	28.6%	5.0%
MI-04	Camp (R)	10.5%	15.2%	4.7%

Finally, let’s look at lowest poverty percentage changes:

District	Rep.	2000	2007	Change
CA-43	Baca (D)	20.7%	12.5%	– 8.2%
CA-20	Costa (D)	32.2%	26.4%	– 5.8%
LA-02	Jefferson (D)	26.8%	21.1%	– 5.7%
NY-15	Rangel (D)	30.5%	25.6%	– 4.9%
CA-34	Roybal-Allard (D)	26.0%	21.1%	– 4.9%
CA-28	Berman (D)	19.1%	14.4%	– 4.7%
CA-38	Napolitano (D)	16.3%	11.6%	– 4.7%
CA-31	Becerra (D)	30.1	25.5	– 4.6%
CA-35	Waters (D)	26.4%	21.9%	– 4.5%
NY-16	Serrano (D)	42.2%	37.7%	– 4.5%

Again, these numbers show Michigan taking a pounding, as well as other Rust Belt cities. Maybe most noteworthy, we’ve come across our first competitive race in an economically distressed area: OH-15, in downtown Columbus. (One other district catching my eye was CO-07 in the Denver suburbs, where I would guess there’s a lot of Latino growth.) The last set of numbers actually shows something good: a large reduction in poverty rates in mostly-Latino districts, especially in the Los Angeles area but in New York as well.

The most impoverished district in both 2000 and 2007 is NY-16 (despite its improvement over the years). In 2000, it was followed by CA-20 (which fell to #10 in 2007), NY-15 (which fell to #15 in 2007), TX-15, and CA-31. In 2007, it was followed by MI-13 (up from #20 in 2000), TX-15, PA-01, and TX-16 (up from #24 in 2000).

The least impoverished districts in 2000 were CO-06, IL-13, WI-05, NJ-07, and NJ-11. In 2007, that list changed to NJ-07, NJ-11, NJ-05, NY-03, and CA-42.

It’s no secret that Idaho’s Republican House delegation is a bit of a tense duo. Case in point: when Bill “Brain Fade” Sali and Mike Simpson served with each other in the Idaho state House (Simpson as Speaker, Sali as undistinguished GOP grunt), Simpson once threatened to throw Sali out of his office window. So perhaps it’s no surprise that Mike Simpson is publicly smacking Sali over his opposition to the recently-proposed federal Wall Street bailout:

“What’s his answer: to let the economy go down?” Simpson said. “Sometimes Bill puts himself in a philosophical position that’s untenable that he can’t get off of. We got into this mess because of the failure of government oversight. Consequently, I think there’s a role for government to play in trying to get us out of this, as much as I don’t like it.”

Now, whether or not you think the Wall Street bailout is a sound move is not really the issue here. What is important is that Sali just got publicly ripped by Idaho’s most senior House representative.

I’d buy that for a dollar.

The goal has been to get to 60 seats in the senate. Let’s assume that Lieberman still caucuses with the Dems, so that means we need 9 seats.

We’ve currently got 8 seats where we’re either tied or ahead: VA, NM, CO, NH, AK, MN, OR and NC. Its far from a sure thing that we’ll win all of these, but all are legitimate targets and I like our trendlines in all of them.

But that’s only 59, so we have to look beyond them to get to 60. There are a number of races that I think we got a shot to get that 60th.  

Three races that I’m giving up on are Oklahoma, Nebraska, and Kentucky. I know Rice and Kleeb are very popular around these parts. I still think Andrew Rice is a terrific candidate, but I always thought the only way Rice had a shot was a Macaca-type gaffe by Inhofe and he hasn’t done it. Kleeb is also a terrific candidate and he’s saying that once he gets his name ID up, his numbers will improve. My question is what is he waiting for, the election is in 6 weeks. I never thought Lunsford really had a shot, even when polls showed him ahead. I always thought this race was more about keeping McConnell occuppied and make him use his considerable warchest on himself

Here are the 3 races that I think could be #60

1. Georgia: Survey USA and Rasmussen show wildly different results of this race. Me being the cynic that I am tend to believe SUSA, but if Ras’ numbers are closer to reality, this is still a race.

2. Maine: I know a lot of people are throwing in the towel on Allen, but I’m not. I know he trails by 13, although I think that poll may have oversampled Republicans as evidenced by Obama’s scant 4 pt. lead. But Maine is the bluest state we’re contesting this cycle and I think a well done ad by Obama and the DSCC’s money-bomb we could see this race turn dramatically quite quickly.

3. Mississippi: This is the closest of the three, but I ahve to admit I’m most bullish about this one. Wicker has been slowly but surely moving up, and unlike Goergia or Maine I don’t really know how they stop Wicker’s momentum.

Public Policy Polling (9/17-19, likely voters):

Tom Udall (D): 57

Steve Pearce (R): 37

(MoE: ±3%)

Pearce better get out of the way, because the Udall Express is barreling down Route 66 at a blazing speed. No wonder the NRSC isn’t wasting a dime here.

Bonus finding: In the Presidential race, Obama enjoys a 53-42 lead over McCain. It looks like Sarah Palin doesn’t play well in New Mexico, as only 38% of voters say her selection makes them more likely to vote for McCain, while 46% say the opposite. This state is looking good.

Anzalone Liszt for Don Cazayoux (9/17-21, likely voters, July in parens):

Don Cazayoux (D-inc): 48 (43)

Bill Cassidy (R): 32 (36)

Michael Jackson (I): 9 (13)

Undecided: 11

(MoE: ±4.4%)

Those are some nice starting numbers for Cazayoux. Hopefully he can minimize Jackson’s impact, but it looks like he’s beginning the campaign with some breathing room.

We’ll post the full polling memo when we get it — which should be very soon. Oh, and while we’re at it, here’s Don Cazayoux’s latest ad.

UPDATE: Full polling memo below the fold, and it contains some more good news. Constituents are giving Cazayoux solid ratings for his work during Hurricane Gustav and its aftermath.

A Public Opinion Strategies poll done for the NRCC has Paul Hodes only up 43%-39% over right wing Republican talk radio host in NH-02.  Now if you adjust this for partisan bias, you get a 47%-35% lead for Hodes, but that still is not overly comforting in this blue district that John Kerry won by six points in 2004 and will need to go for Barack Obama for the same margin if he is going to eke out a win in the state.  

Having to defend Shea-Porter in NH-01 is annoying enough, but having to worry about both seats in this blue trending state is a real pain in the ass.  I cant imagine this state wanting to give control of their whole delegation back to the Republicans.  Watch for other polls in this race.  If Hodes’ lead is this small in public polls, then we can worry.