Swing State Project

Michele Bachmann, August 6, 2008:

“This is their agenda,” Bachmann states bluntly. “I know it is hard to believe, it’s hard to fathom — but this is ‘mission accomplished’ for them,” she asserts. “They want Americans to take transit and move to the inner cities. They want Americans to move to the urban core, live in tenements, [and] take light rail to their government jobs. That’s their vision for America.”

Joe Biden, September 16, 2008:

Meantime, Mr. Biden was assuring another passenger, “If we get elected, it will be the most train-friendly administration ever.”

UPDATE: Cilerder86 (via Lee, Peart, and Lifeson), September 16, 2008:

And the words of the prophets were written on the subway walls and tenement halls: Joe is coming for you Michelle, and he’s coming on Amtrak.

The Tarrance Group for Tom Rooney (9/7-8, likely voters):

Tim Mahoney (D-inc): 48

Tom Rooney (R): 41

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Mahoney isn’t out of the woods yet — only 32% say he deserves re-election, compared to 41% who say that it’s time for someone new. Rooney, a former Chicago-area high school principal Pittsburgh Steelers heir, won’t be hurting for the resources he needs to make his case.

SSP currently rates this race as Lean Democratic.

The DCCC is out with four new ads in OH-01, NH-01, CT-04 and MI-09. All pretty good, I think the anti-Chabot one is the best. Good to see them picking up the pace. Also it looks like most of these where released a week ago but the DCCC has all the ads they are running up at their YouTube (which was invented by John McCain, by the way.)

Also in VA-10 Judy Feder has a new ad

Quite frankly, I’m not a big fan of it. She’s got a lot of money but isn’t doing what she needs to win this campaign and that’s too bad because she would be a great congresswomen.

Seeing any other ads lately?

Swing State Project is moving its rating of the Washington governor’s race to “Tossup.”

While we’re reasonably confident in governor Chris Gregoire’s ability to prevail in her rematch with 2004 GOP opponent Dino Rossi, thanks to Obama coattails on top of Washington’s Democratic lean, it’s impossible to ignore the fact that the most recent round of polling from both Rasmussen and SurveyUSA has given narrow leads to Rossi. If there’s any question, look at the trendlines.

There are several factors at work here: a higher energy level on the part of Rossi’s supporters (who have spent the last four years feeling that they wuz robbed), and Rossi’s skill as a retail politician vs. Gregoire’s reluctance to toot her own horn. Most significant is a sustained Rossi ad blitz, funded by big bucks from the Republican Governor’s Association (who don’t have too many other wise places to spend their money) and even more from the Evergreen State’s principal behind-the-scenes right-wing string-pullers, the Building Industry Association of Washington. Rossi will still be running into a stiff Democratic headwind in November, but a Rossi win is no longer out of the question.

The Swing State Project is moving its rating of the North Carolina Senate contest from “Lean Republican” to “Tossup“.

Recent polling confirms a dramatic tightening of this race in the past month after the DSCC began unloading a series of advertisements calling into question Dole’s effectiveness in Washington and her ties to Bush and “big oil”. We’ve been waiting to see if Dole could mount an effective counter-attack against Hagan, but we still have yet to see a coherent GOP defense here. Whereas Hagan and the DSCC have chosen their narrative (Dole being an ineffective creature of Washington for the past 40 years) and are driving the message effectively and relentlessly. Dole’s sliding re-elect numbers confirm the shakiness of her position.

On the national scale, most polls are indicating a tight contest — certainly much closer than John Kerry’s performance against Bush in 2004. Democrats have already added over 130,000 voters to their registration advantage over the GOP here since 2006, and Obama’s ground game will be working hard to turn out the base vote. While his campaign is not favored to win the state, Hagan, with more crossover appeal as a down-home Democrat, could be poised to reap the benefits of his operation.

Dole will still be tough to beat, but we can no longer give her the edge in the face of a very effective campaign by Hagan and the DSCC.

Here’s a powerful new ad from Ronnie Musgrove:

There’s Ronnie Musgrove, standing in the dilapidated house that he grew up in, telling us about his family’s struggle after he lost his father at age seven, and talking about how he’ll help those who are currently struggling. It’s a powerful message — one that’s very reminiscent of the story of Travis Childers’ life.

Anzalone Liszt for Travis Childers (9/7-10, likely voters, 6/8 in parens):

Travis Childers (D-inc): 51 (46)

Greg Davis (R): 39 (39)

Undecided: 10 (-)

(MoE: ±4.4%)

The people can’t help but like Childers. His favorable/unfavorable rating is 55-24, while Greg Davis is still stuck in a special election hangover, with only a 40-32 favorable rating.

Anzalone has had a great track record with this race. Their polling correctly predicted a dead heat in early April, and private numbers also showed Childers with a slight lead heading into the final runoff in May. Despite Sarah Palin awakening a Zombie Republican Army across the nation, things are looking very good for Cold Chillin’ Travis this fall.

Boy, that special election sure was a lot of fun, wasn’t it?

Update: The full polling memo is available below the fold.

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for Michael Skelly (9/7-9, likely voters, 12/5-12/2007 in parens):

Michael Skelly (D): 37 (33)

John Culberson (R-inc): 44 (52)

Other: 6 (-)

Undecided: 13 (16)

(MoE: ±4.4%)

These are some nice numbers for Michael Skelly, whose summer ad campaign has clearly bought him some momentum against unaccomplished GOP Rep. John Culberson in this R+15.6 (but Dem-trending) suburban Houston district.

SSP currently rates this race as Likely Republican, but we’re diggin’ this trend.

There he goes again. Fresh off from trashing liberal bloggers (like us) for pushing “long shot” House candidates, Stuart Rothenberg is taking aim at DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen himself for the crime of, um, promoting Democratic House candidates. But let’s walk through Rothenberg’s latest opus one step at a time before we get to that.

After a long hangover spent lying face-first in the gutter, the GOP is on the upswing, Rothenberg says:

Given that, it certainly appears that the DCCC is running a risk by promoting some candidates who have little or no chance to win in the fall, and by lumping together very strong contenders with second-tier campaigns.

Running the risk of what, exactly? Losing the undeniably uphill races and having blowhards like Stu Rothenberg say “I told you so!” in their beltway-brained columns? I think that’s a risk that the DCCC would gladly take with a yawn.

Rothenberg singles out the campaigns of Sam Bennett (PA-15), David Boswell (KY-02), Judy Feder (VA-10) and Anne Barth (WV-02) as dubious choices for the committee’s “Red to Blue” program based on either the redness of their districts, the popularity of the incumbents, or their financial disadvantages. That’s all well and good, but who says the DCCC shouldn’t fight against the odds? After all, as well-timed expenditures by the DCCC in districts like CA-11, KS-02, KY-03, NY-20, and PA-04 showed in 2006, it’s worth keeping your options open and having as many strong campaigns in place around the country as possible. Instead, Rothenberg would rather see the DCCC wave the white flag like “sensible realists”.

Rothenberg seems to subscribe to a very particular view about politics: if a campaign is not in the obvious top tier of pickup opportunities, they are not worth your attention or even your respect.

Take his sniping against the candidates listed in the DCCC’s “Emerging Races” and “Races to Watch” slates, which he lambastes for including some “truly odd” and “bizarre” choices like Jim Harlan (LA-01), Linda Ketner (SC-01), Josh Zeitz (NJ-04) and Ron Hubler (IA-05). Rothenberg admits that Democrats are not expecting upsets by this bunch, and that their inclusion on these lists does not mean that the D-Trip is committed to funding them, but he can’t seem to wrap his mind around the fact that the committee wants to give these hard-working candidates a friendly pat on the back. I guess he would prefer Chris Van Hollen to give each candidate a personal kick in the ass instead.

Rothenberg goes even further:

But if the DCCC is going to go out of its way to promote certain races, it ought to be responsible for those selections.

Responsible how, exactly? Should the DCCC be tried before a jury of Stuart Rothenberg, David Broder and Brendan Nyhan on charges of slight exuberance in the service of politics? Should we be demanding that MAD Magazine devote an issue to mocking the D-Trip? Should we get out there and tar-and-feather Chris Van Hollen?

Somehow, I have a feeling that CVH’s reputation will do just fine after this election. Not that Stu Rothenberg would agree:

But if the national landscape continues to move even slightly more back toward the Republicans, eroding (but certainly not eliminating) the Democrats’ huge early advantages, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) might find himself promoting dozens of candidates with no chance of winning. And that would be embarrassing and self-defeating.

It’s sort of funny. This is at least the second time this year (by my count), that Rothenberg has implied that Van Hollen should be ashamed of himself. (Back in May, he claimed that CVH should be embarrassed for putting GOP incumbents on notice after Travis Childers’ win.) But does he deliver this kind of special scorn to NRCC Chair Tom Cole? No, he bends over backwards to call Cole “not the real problem”. Of course, the fact that Cole lost three special elections in deeply red seats is nothing to be embarrassed about. Not at all.

But hey, since we’re talking about people who ought to feel embarrassed, how about Stu Rothenberg himself for writing all this?

IL-10 (McLaughlin & Associates for Mark Kirk, 9/10-11, likely voters, 6/9 in parens):

Dan Seals (D): 29 (32)

Mark Kirk (R-inc): 51 (53)

Undecided: 21 (15)

(MoE: ±5.7%)

On its face, those are some un-sexy numbers for Dan Seals. However, the partisan breakdown of the poll is 35D-33R-29I. Labels and Lists pegs the district as 34D-21R-44I, and other internal Democratic numbers I’ve seen show Dems with a 7-point advantage here in terms of partisan identity. Also importantly, Kirk has saturated the airwaves (broadcast, cable, and radio) with $650K worth of ads in the last month. The DCCC has just started to enter the action here, sending out mailers and airing ads immediately after this poll was conducted. Seals himself has just gone back up on the airwaves:

NJ-03 (McLaughlin & Associates for Chris Myers, 9/8-9, likely voters):

John Adler (D): 29

Chris Myers (R): 33

Undecided: 37

Barack Obama (D): 42

John McCain (R): 45

(MoE: ±5.7%)

This is a D+3.3 district in South Jersey that Kerry lost by two points in 2004. I’d be surprised if Obama fared as bad as this poll suggests, but this is also a district that’s not accustomed to electing Democrats to Congress. On the bright side, Adler maintains a ginormous financial edge over Myers, and the DCCC has already been making their presence felt in the district. Still, never take anything for granted.

PA-06 (Public Opinion Strategies for Jim Gerlach, 8/19-21, likely voters, 5/21 in parens):

Some Dude Bob Roggio (D): 28 (30)

Jim Gerlach (R-inc): 57 (56)

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Yeah, I can’t say I have much in the way of positive spin to offer here. Roggio’s name ID has jumped a whopping 5 points since May — all the way up to 10%!