Swing State Project

Week four of my five-part series shows encouraging stability, rather than a rapidly growing wave.  There is only one race (NY-23) where the NRCC spent in Week 4 but not Week 3.  There were 10 races (CO-07, FL-02, IA-01, MN-01, NC-11, NY-19, PA-07, SD-AL, TX-17, WA-02) where the DCCC spent in Week 4 but not Week 3.  Three of those (FL-02, PA-07, and TX-17) were positive for Dems, in that they were finally spending in what I had long assumed were uphill districts to say the least.  Four (CO-07, IA-01, NC-11, and WA-02) were emerging Republican targets, but not sufficiently emergent for the NRCC to pay attention to them.  The buys in IA-01 and NC-11 were under $100K.  I consider these all to be in an abundance of caution.  The remaining three (MN-01, NY-19, and SD-AL) were all modest investments in races that have already been on the map.  There were no three alarm fires in the bunch.

Nor has the NRCC locked down any more seats than last week.  In fact, this week saw two Democratic districts (FL-02 and PA-11) achieve battleground status from the jaws of death, while only one new district (NM-02) was downgraded to the “I’m not quite dead yet” category.  As a result, I spotted the Republicans 17 seats last week, and I spotted them 16 seats this week.  The NRCC did, however, officially stop spending in five districts (CO-04, FL-08, FL-24, PA-03, TN-08) that it pretty much already had locked up as of last week.

Another interesting development is the emergence of a Democratic firewall.  There were very large increases in DCCC funding for certain districts, including CA-11, FL-25, IL-10, IL-14, IL-17, IN-09, MI-07, MO-04, NH-02, NM-01, OH-18, OR-05, PA-12, WA-03, and WV-01.  I suspect that these are some of the closest races in the country, and that the majority will hinge on the outcome of some combination of these races.  I am actually slightly more hopeful of retaining the House than I was last week, but to be clear I was not hopeful at all last week, and am only a little hopeful this week.  In any event, here is your weekly I.E. analysis.  

Goners (14D, 2R):

AR-02 – Nothing from either side ever.

CO-04 – NRCC stopped spending here this week.  DCCC never did.

DE-AL – Nothing from either side ever.

FL-08 – NRCC stopped spending here this week.  DCCC never did.

FL-24 – NRCC stopped spending here this week.  DCCC never did.

IL-11 – NRCC continued its token $30K spending here.  DCCC never spent here.

IN-08 – NRCC has not spent for a few weeks.  DCCC never did.

KS-03 – Nothing from either side ever.

LA-02 – Nothing from either side ever.

LA-03 – Nothing from either side ever.

NY-29 – Nothing from either side ever.

OH-01 – DCCC continued its token $30K ad buy.  NRCC never spent here.

OH-15 – DCCC stopped even its token ad buys this week.  NRCC never spent here.

PA-03 – NRCC stopped spending here this week.  DCCC stopped spending a few weeks ago.

TN-06 – Nothing from either side ever.

TN-08 – NRCC stopped spending here this week.  DCCC never did.

“I’m not quite dead yet!” (4D, 0R):

NH-01 – DCCC has never spent here.  NRCC stable at $320K.  Guinta must have a solid lead.

NM-02 – DCCC reduced its investment from $180K to $20K.  NRCC maintained a $175K pace.  Things are not going well for Dems in NM.

TX-17 – DCCC spent $60K here this week, its first spending to date.  NRCC stopped spending here this week.  Republicans seem to believe they have finished off Edwards.

WI-08 – DCCC stopped spending here this week.  NRCC decreased its investment from $110K to $100K.  Close Penn poll and Kagen self-funding ability are rays of hope.

Battlegrounds (39D, 1R):

AL-02 – DCCC increased from $245K to $265K.  NRCC increased from $220K to $240K.  Stable race, probably with a modest Bright lead.

AZ-01 – DCCC increased from $230K to $250K.  NRCC decreased from $250K to $225K.  Probably a modest, stable lead for Gosar.

AZ-05 – DCCC decreased from $250K to $240K.  NRCC decreased from $380K to $320K.  Would have expected Dems to increase here.  Not a great sign.

AR-01 – DCCC increased from $440K to $470K.  NRCC stable at $250K.  Dems clearly believe they can win this district.  Spending huge here for some time.

CO-03 – DCCC decreased from $330K to $250K.  NRCC increased from $270K to $340K.  I actually suspect that Salazar may be out in front a bit here.

FL-02 – DCCC spent $150K here this week, its first significant spending to date.  NRCC decreased from $400K to $155K.  Republicans must be feeling very good here.

FL-22 – No spending from either side amidst incredibly well funded candidates.  Polls show a toss-up.  I won’t argue.

GA-02 – DCCC increased from $150K to $180K.  NRCC increased from $120K to $160K.  Bishop may have a modest, stable lead.

HI-01 – Both parties maintained their level of investment, with DCCC at $160K and NRCC at $130K.  Seems like a stable race that could go either way.

IL-17 – DCCC increased from $320K to $390K.  NRCC increased from $150K to $440K.  Part of the emerging Democratic firewall.

IN-09 – DCCC increased from $270K to $450K.  NRCC stable at $200K.  Part of the emerging Democratic firewall.

MA-10 – DCCC increased from $130K to $160K.  NRCC decreased from $310K to $275K.  Dems seem relatively unconcerned here.  I take that as a good sign.

MI-01 – DCCC decreased from $270K to $250K.  NRCC increased from $210K to $245K.  This could be a big surprise Dem victory.

MI-07 – DCCC increased from $220K to $300K.  NRCC increased from $210K to $230K.  Another Dem firewall district.

MD-01 – DCCC decreased from $360K to $310K.  NRCC increased from $355K to $370K.  Kratovil is amazing to even be in this thing.

MO-04 – DCCC increased from $227K to $350K.  NRCC stable at $280K.  Yet another firewall disctrict.

MS-01 – DCCC maintained its investment at $230K.  NRCC decreased from $300K to $200K.  Republicans may be feeling good about this one.

ND-AL – DCCC maintained its $255K investment.  NRCC decreased from $240K to $170K.  Probably a modest but stable lead for Berg.

NH-02 – DCCC increased its investment 10-fold, from $34K to $340K.  NRCC maintained its $130K investment.  Dems may sense some momentum here, and are clearly all in.

NM-01 – DCCC increased from $115K to $370K.  NRCC maintained $160K investment.  Another firewall district for Democrats.

NY-19 – DCCC spent $90K here this week, its first spending to date.  Nothing from the NRCC.  I suspect both parties are reluctant to dive headlong into big NYC media buys.  Polls show a very close race.

NY-20 – DCCC increased from $110K to $230K.  NRCC decreased from $200K to $175K.  I suspect Murphy still has a decent lead.

NY-23 – DCCC increased from $160K to $220K.  NRCC spent $175K, its first spending to date.  Not sure why Republicans did not spend here previously.

OH-06 – DCCC increased from $65K to $290K.  NRCC increased from $100K to $130K.  This one is emerging as a significant concern, and part of the firewall.

OH-16 – DCCC stable at $295K.  NRCC decreased from $427K to $332K.  Renacci may be taking control a little here.

OH-18 – DCCC increased from $270K to $620K.  NRCC decreased from $550K to $315K.  One of the most heavily sought after districts in the country.

OR-05 – DCCC doubled its investment from $230K to $470K.  NRCC decreased its investment from $270K to $100K.  Republicans may be feeling good about this one (UPDATE – or maybe they’re bailing out if today’s Elway poll is believed).

PA-07 – DCCC spent $250K here this week, its first spending this week.  NRCC upped its spending from $45K to $70K.  Nice to see Dem investment, but I suspect Meehan is ahead.

PA-10 – DCCC increased from $140K to $170K.  NRCC decreased from $220K to $190K.  I fear that Marino may have a modest lead.

PA-11 – DCCC increases from $35K to $200K, putting this race back on the table.  Republicans maintain investment at $155K.  Kanjorski back from the dead.

PA-12 – DCCC increased from $250K to $400K.  NRCC decreased from $280K to $260K.  This is another firewall district, despite special election result.

SC-05 – DCCC decreased from $270K to $230K.  NRCC increased from $200K to $300K.  Spratt may be faring better than many think.

SD-AL – DCCC spent $80K here this week, its first spending to date.  NRCC decreased from $226K to $150K.  Noem is clearly making a race of it.

TN-04 – DCCC increased from $110K to $175K.  NRCC decreased from $310K to $220K.  I’m guessing Davis still has a modest lead.

TX-23 – DCCC decreased from $235K to $170K.  NRCC decreased from $265K to $245K.  Rodriguez may have a modest but stable lead here.

VA-02 – DCCC increased from $150K to $180K, while NRCC decreased from $150K to $130K.  Rigell probably has a modest but stable lead.

VA-05 – DCCC increased from $95K to $230K.  NRCC maintained $185K pace.  Real vote of confidence in Periello from the Dems here.

WA-03 – DCCC increased from $280K to $500K.  NRCC decreased from $310K to $275K.  Dems have been going after this district hard for a long time.

WI-07 – DCCC increased from $170K to $190K, while NRCC decreased from $155K to $140K.  Duffy probably has a small but stable lead.

WV-01 – DCCC increased from $250K to $330K.  NRCC increased from $190K to $220K.  Part of the Democratic firewall.

Head Scratchers (3D, 1R):

GA-08 – DCCC still spending a token $10K.  NRCC maintained its spending at about $75K.  I would have guessed Marshall was ahead, but Landmark Communications says Scott up big.  

IL-10 – DCCC increased from $125K to $670K.  NRCC maintained its token $50K spending.  I would suspect Seals is ahead, but We Ask America says different.

NV-03 – DCCC spent its typical $400K.  No spending from the NRCC here this week.  Truly do not know what to make of it.  Early voting may be telling Republicans they are either way ahead or behind.

PA-08 – NRCC continued its token $40K spending.  Still nothing from the DCCC.  I’m hesitating to downgrade this only because of the Penn poll showing Murphy up.

Lean Retention (21D, 1R):

AZ-07 – DCCC cut its spending for Grijalva from $60K to $30K.  Nothing from the NRCC.  I think this was a good wakeup call and nothing more.

CA-11 – DCCC made huge increase in spending from $50K to $350K.  NRCC continued its token $50K spending.   Seems the Dems are trying to put this one away.

CA-20 – DCCC increased its spending from $40K to $115K.  A little disconcerting, but probably just precautionary.  Nothing from the NRCC.

CO-07 – DCCC spent $164K here this week, its first spending to date.  Appears precautionary for now.  Nothing from the NRCC.

FL-25 – DCCC spent $362K here this week, a huge increase.  Encouraging, but the NRCC still has not felt the need to get involved.

IA-01 – DCCC did a $14K media production here this week, probably to counteract big outside spending.  Nothing from the NRCC.

IA-02 – DCCC spent $215K here this week.  Nothing from the NRCC.  This is probably the most endangered of the IA seats.

IA-03 – DCCC continued its weekly spending in the $125K range.  Nothing from the NRCC.  Boswell is in control.

IL-14 – DCCC made huge increase in spending from $75K to $400K.  NRCC maintained its token $50K spending.  Like CA-11, Dems are going for the jugular here.

IN-02 – DCCC increased its spending from $190K to $220K.  Republicans maintained spending at $80K.  Donnelly seems to be ahead.

KY-06 – DCCC spent a modest $140K, while the NRCC stopped spending this week.  I suspect Chandler has a high single digit lead or maybe better.

NC-07 – DCCC reduced its investment to $60K from $80K.  NRCC increased its investment from $45K to $75K.  Spending is not reflective of a great pickup opportunity.  

MN-01 – DCCC spent $125K here this week, its first spending to date.  NRCC decreased from $180K to $160K.  Dems probably just being cautious here.

MS-04 – DCCC still has not spent here.  NRCC decreased from $175K to $140K.  I suspect Taylor has a stable lead.

NC-08 – DCCC increased from $250K to $375K.  Still nothing from the NRCC.  I suspect this is precautionary to make up for the usual, sloppy Kissell fundraising.

NC-11 – DCCC spent $95K here this week, its first spending to date.  Nothing from the NRCC.  Again I suspect it is precautionary from the DCCC.

NJ-03 – NRCC increased its token spending from $30K to $45K.  Nothing from the DCCC.  Polls show this one close, but I am skeptical given lack of spending from both sides.

OH-13 – DCCC has stopped spending here this week.  NRCC not spending on self-funder Ganley.  Sutton is in good shape.

NY-24 – DCCC increased its spending from $190K to $230K.  NRCC increased from $70K to $80K. Arcuri seems to be ahead.

VA-09 – DCCC has never spent here.  This is the NRCC’s Moby Dick, as it increases from $180K to $200K.  Boucher seems to have the lead.

VA-11 – DCCC spent $240K here this week, buying its first TV ads.  Nothing from the NRCC.  It’s a big buy, but it’s an expensive district.  Probably precautionary.

WA-02 – DCCC spent $260K here this week, its first spending to date.  Nothing from the NRCC.  Virtually the same analysis of WA-02.

Here is Part 2 of my analysis of this fall’s elections in California, which will cover the Congressional races. Part 3 will cover the state legislature.

Cross-posted at Daily Kos, Calitics, and Democracy for California.

Incumbents are in boldface. In the case of open seats, the party of the retiring incumbent is listed without boldface.

D: Democratic

R: Republican

L: Libertarian

G: Green

AI: American Independent

PF: Peace and Freedom

SW: Socialist Workers

I: Independent

Senator: Barbara Boxer (D) vs. ex-HP CEO Carly Fiorina (R), Duane Roberts (G), Gail Lightfoot (L), Edward Noonan (AI), Marsha Feinland (PF), James Harris (SW-W/I)

Even after Arnold decided against running, and long before “Coakley” became a verb, I expected Boxer to be in a tough fight in 2010. Fortunately, she is no slacker and knows how to run a tough campaign, hitting her opponent where it hurts (in this case, on attacking Fiorina’s praise of outsourcing and using former HP employees). She is polarizing, but fortunately the Democratic base in California is big enough for her to win even if she loses independent voters by single to low-double digits.

Outlook: Lean Boxer

U.S. HOUSE (Composition: 34 Democrats, 19 Republicans)

CA-03 (Sacramento suburbs): Dan Lungren (R) vs. Dr. Ami Bera (D), Art Tuma (L), Lerry Leidecker (AI), Mike Roskey (PF)

Registration: 40.31% GOP, 37.55% DEM, 17.72% DTS, 4.42% other

Profile: This is one of the Democrats’ best chances of picking off a GOP-held seat in the House. This suburban Sacramento seat was strongly Republican early in the decade before rapidly swinging left to become an Obama-voting district in 2008, also nearly catching Lungren off-guard. Bera has outraised Lungren every quarter this cycle, and don’t be surprised to see this as one of the closest races in a GOP-held seat.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Toss-up/tilt Lungren

CA-11 (San Joaquin County and parts of East Bay): Jerry McNerney (D) vs. attorney David Harmer (R), David Christensen (AI)

Registration: 39.45% DEM, 39.00% GOP, 17.54% DTS, 4.01% Other

Profile: This was expected since the end of the last cycle to be another challenging race for McNerney, especially after Harmer won the primary. Harmer, as you may remember, made the 2009 special in the more Democratic CA-10 a 10-point race against Garamendi. Fortunately for Harmer, the 11th is much less Democratic and he now has more name recognition. Unfortunately for Harmer, the race in CA-11 will be in a general election rather than an off-year special, so turnout is guaranteed to be higher. Also, the trends in registration are more in McNerney’s favor, flipping to a Dem advantage in registration for the first time, mirroring the trend to the Dems statewide in registration.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Lean McNerney

CA-18 (Upper Central Valley): Dennis Cardoza (D) vs. agribusinessman Mike Berryhill (R)

CA-20 (Fresno, part of Bakersfield): Jim Costa (D) vs. farmer Andy Vidak (R)

CA-18 Registration: 49.85% DEM, 31.81% GOP, 14.32% DTS, 4.02% Other

CA-20 Registration: 51.45% DEM, 31.02% GOP, 12.64% DTS, 4.89% Other

Profile: Not on anybody’s radar screens until about a month ago, the Central Valley is now the source of two more competitive races, with water a hot issue here and the Republicans harping the issue nonstop. The 18th is less Democratic than the 20th, owing to the lack of a major urban center, having gone for Bush narrowly in 2004, but Cardoza is taking his tougher-than-expected reelection more seriously, so I expect Costa to have a slightly tougher reelection than Cardoza.

CA-18 10/23/2010 Outlook: Likely Cardoza

CA-20 10/23/2010 Outlook: Lean to Likely Costa

CA-44 (Riverside, Corona, San Clemente): Ken Calvert (R) vs. educator Bill Hedrick (D)

Registration: 43.11% GOP, 33.87% DEM, 18.38% DTS, 4.64% Other

Profile: One of the out-of-nowhere near-upsets of 2008, Hedrick is back for a rematch. Calvert is trying to avoid being caught asleep at the wheel again, and Hedrick is surprisingly lacking in the money department despite coming very close last time, so I don’t like his chances this time.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Lean to Likely Calvert

CA-45 (Most of Riverside County): Mary Bono Mack (R) vs. Palm Springs mayor Steve Pougnet (D), Bill Lussenheide (AI)

Registration: 41.29% GOP, 38.31% DEM, 16.17% DTS, 4.23% Other

Profile: Democrats got a top-tier recruit here in the openly gay mayor of Palm Springs. Bono Mack has taken heat for her vote against repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, even though her district has the highest proportion of gays of any Republican-held district, and Lussenheide is challenging her from the right, on some of her “insufficiently conservative” votes such as cap-and-trade. I expect Pougnet to perform better than Bornstein last time, though still come up short.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Likely Bono Mack

CA-47 (Anaheim, Santa Ana): Loretta Sanchez (D) vs. Assemblyman Van Tran (R), Ceci Iglesias (I), Gary Schank (I)

Registration: 46.90% DEM, 30.90% GOP, 18.67% DTS, 3.53% Other

Profile: Like the Central Valley Dem districts, the Orange County Dem district, which also voted for Bush like CA-18, is now a hot race after being off most radar screens until about a month ago. Sanchez didn’t help herself by the gaffe “The Vietnamese are after my seat”, which I thought was really boneheaded, considering all that she had done for them in the past. I still expect Sanchez to win, though by less than against Tan Nguyen from 2006.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Lean to Likely Sanchez

CA-48 (Central Orange County, including Irvine): John Campbell (R) vs. Irvine Councilwoman Beth Krom (D), Mike Binkley (L)

Registration: 44.41% GOP, 28.99% DEM, 22.45% DTS, 4.15% Other

Profile: Once expected to be a top-tier race, this district fell off the radar screen as the touted former mayor of Irvine Beth Krom has lagged on the money front.

10/23/2010 Outlook: Likely Campbell

Safe:

CA-01 (North Coast): Mike Thompson (D)

CA-02 (Northern Sacramento Valley): Wally Herger (R)

CA-04 (Northeast, including Tahoe): Tom McClintock (R)

CA-05 (Sacramento): Doris Matsui (D)

CA-06 (Northern SF Bay): Lynn Woolsey (D)

CA-07 (Northeast SF Bay): George Miller (D)

CA-08 (San Francisco): Nancy Pelosi (D)

CA-09 (Berkeley, Oakland): Barbara Lee (D)

CA-10 (Inner East SF Bay): John Garamendi (D)

CA-12 (Lower SF Peninsula): Jackie Speier (D)

CA-13 (Southern East Bay): Pete Stark (D)

CA-14 (Silicon Valley): Anna Eshoo (D)

CA-15 (Santa Clara, Cupertino): Mike Honda (D)

CA-16 (San Jose): Zoe Lofgren (D)

CA-17 (Northern Central Coast): Sam Farr (D)

CA-19 (Yosemite, part of Fresno): Jeff Denham (R) – vacated by George Radanovich (R)

CA-21 (Tulare): Devin Nunes (R)

CA-22 (Bakersfield): Kevin McCarthy (R)

CA-23 (Southern Central Coast): Lois Capps (D)

CA-24 (Inner Santa Barbara/Ventura): Elton Gallegly (R)

CA-25 (Palmdale, Big Empty): Buck McKeon (R)

CA-26 (Northeastern L.A. suburbs): David Dreier (R)

CA-27 (Western San Fernando Valley): Brad Sherman (D)

CA-28 (Eastern San Fernando Valley): Howard Berman (D)

CA-29 (Burbank, Glendale, Pasadena): Adam Schiff (D)

CA-30 (Malibu, Beverly Hills): Henry Waxman (D)

CA-31 (Hollywood): Xavier Becerra (D)

CA-32 (Covina, Baldwin Park): Judy Chu (D)

CA-33 (Culver City): Karen Bass (D) – vacated by Diane Watson (D)

CA-34 (Downtown L.A.): Lucille Roybal-Allard (D)

CA-35 (South Central): Maxine Waters (D)

CA-36 (Beach Cities): Jane Harman (D)

CA-37 (South Central, Long Beach): Laura Richardson (D)

CA-38 (Southeastern L.A. suburbs): Grace Napolitano (D)

CA-39 (Southeastern L.A. County): Linda Sánchez (D)

CA-40 (Northern Orange County): Ed Royce (R)

CA-41 (Most of San Bernardino County): Jerry Lewis (R)

CA-42 (Chino, Brea): Gary Miller (R)

CA-43 (Ontario, San Bernardino): Joe Baca (D)

CA-46 (Huntington Beach, Seal Beach, Palos Verdes): Dana Rohrabacher (R)

CA-49 (Temecula, Oceanside): Darrell Issa (R)

CA-50 (Northern San Diego suburbs): Brian Bilbray (R)

CA-51 (Imperial County, southern SD suburbs): Bob Filner (D)

CA-52 (Eastern San Diego suburbs): Duncan D. Hunter (R)

CA-53 (San Diego): Susan Davis (D)

Here’s one other activity for everyone in comments, one where you can genuinely help us out by doing some crowdsourcing. As you’ve probably noticed, the list of Dems on the House race ratings board keeps growing and growing, to the extent that the large majority of members in GOP-leaning or swing districts are already on there. However, in the interest of being thorough, we’re wondering if anyone else should be on there.

To help out, here’s a table of the remaining Dems in districts with a Cook PVI of D+10 or less. (I was going to stop at D+5, but that’d be a short list, and it seems like there are occasional rumors of vulnerable members that extend higher up the list than that.) So, with an eye toward commenters who actually live in or near these districts or are connected to them, we’re wondering: do any of the Dems in these districts have compelling opponents (or not-so-compelling ones who still have the money, or deep-pocketed third-party friends, to advertise)? Are any of them egregiously phoning their own campaigns in, not treating this year any differently than any other one? Are there any other under-the-radar reasons why we should be concerned about any of these races (i.e. minor scandals or ill-conceived votes that haven’t resonated outside the local media)?

A few of these races have had public polls where there was a wide margin (OK-02, CT-02); a few more have had the incumbent release a crushing internal in response to rumored close GOP polls that never really surfaced (MN-07, PA-13). (And one of them, of course, was on the board but got taken off thanks to a little Nazi problem.) But for most of them, we’re simply bereft of information… and that’s where you guys come in.

In case you’re wondering, there are only three Dem-held seats on the board that go higher up the list than this: the open seat race in RI-01 (D+13), John Dingell in MI-15 (D+13), and Barney Frank in MA-04 (D+14).

As October winds down, it’s time that we put up another Senate cattle call. By now, you should all be familiar with the rules: Rank the Senate seats that are up this year in order of likelihood of flipping from one party to the other. The traditional SSP way is to include seats held by both parties in a single list (separate lists make comparisons harder). Go as far down the list as you like.

It might also be helpful to indicate the cutoff point where you think the losses end and the retentions begin. But that’s up to you!

• KY-Sen: The Beltway chattering class seems to have either moved on from “Aqua Buddha,” or taken it as a given that it just backfired on Jack Conway. Josh Green at the Atlantic does some actual, y’know, reporting on what’s happening on the ground, though, and finds that the ad (and its rebuttal), and their aftermath, are still completely driving the conversation in Kentucky. Local GOP pols still seem to think that Rand Paul will squeak by in the end, but it’s thrown him deeply off message and the refusal to debate again doesn’t look good on him. (UPDATE: Actually, Greg Sargent just reported that the Conway camp is taking down the Aqua Buddha ad. To clarify “taking down,” though, this was a planned move, as it reached the end of its original run, to be replaced by this sales tax ad.)

• PA-Sen: Barack Obama will be making a four-state swing through the east coast and midwest over the weekend prior to the election; one of the stopping spots will be Philadelphia, where he’ll be doing a canvassing event. He’ll also be doing rallies in Chicago, Cleveland, and Bridgeport, Connecticut (indicating they’re still leaving nothing to chance with Richard Blumenthal).

• CA-Gov: Meg Whitman breaking self-funding records has become something of a dog-bites-man story around here, but one more for old times sake: she spent $23 million in the first half of October, bringing her all-cycle total to $163 million. Jerry Brown, by contrast, spent $14.6 million in that period, bringing his all-cycle spending to $25 million.

• CO-Gov: I doubt this is much of a game-changer, but it may help flip a few more Colorado Springs area votes in Tom Tancredo’s direction (if there were any Dan Maes supporters left there). Rep. Doug Lamborn became perhaps the most prominent elected Republican in Colorado to publicly come out in support of Tancredo, rather than Maes.

• MN-Gov: The RGA must be seeing something the polls aren’t telling them, because they’re still fighting till the end in Minnesota. (Of course, if one committee has money to throw at unlikely races and see what sticks, it’s the RGA.) They just gave $1 million to third party group Minnesota Future to run more anti-Mark Dayton (and probably anti-Tom Horner) ads. (You may remember Minnesota Future from the whole Target contribution controversy. Interestingly, Hubbard Broadcasting, owner of local TV station KSTP, also was just identified as having given $25K to Minnesota Future. Y’know, because they’re part of that liberal lamestream media.)

• FL-24: And here I’d thought we’d dodged something of a bullet when Karen Diebel got sent packing to spent more time guarding her swimming pool. Sandy Adams, who seems likely to be the next Representative for the Space Coast, has come out in favor of the “biblical teachings” rather than the theory of evolution. I look forward to hearing her proposals for a faith-based space program next.

• ID-01: The Tea Party Express finally endorsed Raul Labrador in the 1st. However, that comes only after they tried to endorse Democratic incumbent Walt Minnick as their token Dem fig-leaf and he rejected the endorsement (over racist statements by one of their, at the time, key members).

• Early voting: Ohio Democrats are pointing to an edge in early voting, where they’re leading 44 percent to 34 percent for Republicans in votes cast so far. The Republicans are claiming the edge after three days of early voting in Florida, with a 148,000 vote edge, although Dems pointed out that was about where the numbers were in the 2006 election.

• Redistricting: Here’s a good counterpoint to several articles that have shrugged off the possible large Republican advantage on the redistricting front coming out of this election, one that actually looks at the actual number of House seats that are likely to be influenced. Extrapolating likely control of state governorships and legislatures, the GOP will have “untrammeled” control over 125 House seats while Dems will control only 62, a worse outcome than 1990 or 2000. (43 are in commission-based states or at-large states, with 205 drawn by divided governments.)

• Chamber of Commerce: This article was been making the rounds, but it’s a must-read if you haven’t already done so and you’re interested in the “dark money” that’s swamping the transparent money, this cycle more than ever. The NYT digs into what corporations are using the national Chamber of Commerce as a pass-through for their contributions, including Prudential, Dow Chemical, and Dutch insurer Aegon.

• SSP TV:

• AZ-Sen: This looks like John McCain’s last ad, as it’s a soft-focus closing argument type of spot

• CO-Sen: The League of Conservation Voters hits Ken Buck on environmental issues

• DE-Sen: Here’s the first Chris Coons ad to take on Christine O’Donnell directly, saying she lives in the “Twilight Zone”

• NV-Sen: Harry Reid rolls out endorsements from various local business leaders in his newest ad

• WA-Sen: Waiting until the end to go after Dino Rossi for his anti-abortion stance seems to be tradition now, in order to swing any last-minute moderate women who haven’t decided, and the DSCC piles on

• HI-Gov: Barack Obama, fresh off his Colleen Hanabusa spot, also cuts an ad touting Neil Abercrombie

• RI-Gov: The DGA keeps pounding on Lincoln Chafee over the tax hikes he’d like (I’ve also heard the RGA is buying an ad here on behalf of John Robitaille, though I haven’t seen a link)

• WV-03: Ewwww… Spike Maynard plays the terrorist card against Arab-American Rep. Nick Rahall

• MoveOn: MoveOn seems to have saved their powder for one huge blast at the end, running ads in eight Senate races and 20 House races (here’s their WI-08 ad), helping only Dems who voted in favor of HCR

• Sierra Club: The Sierra Club is out with ads boosting Democratic incumbents in FL-22, MI-07, and AZ-08

• 60+ Assoc.: The AARP’s evil doppelganger is running two spots, a two-fer in Arizona hitting both Raul Grijalva and Gabby Giffords, and… here’s a new one… Solomon Ortiz in TX-27

• Rasmussen:

• MN-Gov: Mark Dayton (D) 44%, Tom Emmer (R) 41%, Tom Horner (I) 10%

• NY-Gov: Andrew Cuomo (D) 51%, Carl Paladino (R) 37%

• NY-Sen: Charles Schumer (D-inc) 59%, Jay Townsend (R) 31%

• SD-AL: Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-inc) 44%, Kristi Noem (R) 49%

AR-Sen (Mason-Dixon): Blanche Lincoln (D-inc) 34, John Boozman (R) 55

CA-Sen (Tarrance Group for NRSC): Barbara Boxer (D-inc) 44, Carly Fiorina (R) 44

CT-Sen, CT-Gov (PDF) (Suffolk): Richard Blumenthal (D) 57, Linda McMahon (R) 39; Dan Malloy (D) 49, Tom Foley (R) 38 (PDF of crosstabs)

Rather unusually, Suffolk included Blumenthal & Malloy twice in their head-to-head questions: once as the Dem candidate, and once as the Working Families Party candidate. Each got about 3-4% as the WFP candidate. I’ve never seen a pollster do this in New York, where the practice of fusion voting is best known.

IL-Gov (PPP): Pat Quinn (D-inc) 41 (35), Bill Brady (R) 42 (42)

FL-22 (Susquehanna for Sunshine State News): Ron Klein (D-inc) 44, Allen West (R) 47

MA-04 (Fleming & Associates for WPRI): Barney Frank (D-inc) 49, Sean Bielat (R) 37

MD-01 (Monmouth): Frank Kratovil (D-inc) 42, Andy Harris (R) 53

MI-03 (EPIC/MRA): Pat Miles (D) 37, Justin Amash (R) 46

MN-01 (Grove Insight (D) for Project New West): Tim Walz (D-inc) 50, Randy Demmer (R) 34

MS-04 (Tarrance Group (R) for Steven Palazzo): Gene Taylor (D-inc) 41, Steven Palazzo (R) 43

NC-11 (Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (D) for DCCC): Heath Shuler (D-inc) 54, Jeff Miller 39

NM-02 (Tarrance Group (R) for Steve Pearce): Harry Teague (D-inc) 41, Steve Pearce (R) 50

NY-20 (Public Opinion Strategies (R) for Chris Gibson): Scott Murphy (D-inc) 42, Chris Gibson 44

OR-05 (SurveyUSA for KATU-TV): Kurt Schrader (D-inc) 41, Scott Bruun (R) 51

Note: Among the 10% who have already voted, Schrader leads 47-46. This continues a pattern we’ve seen in other SUSA polls (and also some, but not all, of the early voting numbers by party registration).

PA-06 (Monmouth): Manan Trivedi (D) 44, Jim Gerlach (R-inc) 54

PA-17 (Susquehanna for ABC27 News): Tim Holden (D-inc) 58, Justin Argall (R) 28

TX-23 (OnMessage (R) for Quico Canseco): Ciro Rodriguez (D-inc) 39, Quico Canseco (R) 45

VA-02 (PDF) (Public Opinion Strategies (R) for Scott Rigell): Glenn Nye (D-inc) 41, Scott Rigell 46 (R)

VA-05 (Benenson Strategy Group (D) for Tom Perriello): Tom Perriello (D-inc) 46, Rob Hurt (R) 47

WA-08 (SurveyUSA for KING-TV): Suzan DelBene (D) 45 (45), Dave Reichert (R-inc) 52 (52)

I have been analyzing the available early/absentee vote totals from the first three days of voting in Texas.  Texas makes the cumulative early vote and absentee vote totals for the 15 most populous counties available, and also has day-by-day breakdowns available from previous years, providing great data for analysis.

http://www.sos.state.tx.us/ele…

Early vote numbers are up in every county.  So being that the numbers aren’t release by party, how can we tell who is turning out?  My choice was to arrange the 15 counties according to the performance of Barack Obama in the county, to get a rough idea of how Democratic the county is (arranging by Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s performance in 2006 gave a nearly identical inverse arrangement).  Then, I compared the 2010 vote so far to the vote in the county at this point in 2006, to see if there was a correlation between increased turnout this cycle and how Democratic the county was.  I then adjusted it for change in voter registration between 2006 and 2010.

This chart shows that the average county has so far cast 1.8 votes for every vote cast in 2006.  The counties on the left voted more strongly for Obama, and the counties on the right voted more strongly for McCain.  There is a spike in the middle for two counties: Harris and Fort Bend, near Houston, which were both roughly split in the vote in 2008.  If you ignore them for now, and look at the turnout in Obama counties (52% or more Obama vote), in these counties 1.57 votes have been cast for every vote in 2006.  In the McCain counties (47% or less Obama vote), 1.65 votes have been cast for every vote in 2006.

These numbers indicate that the advantage in Republican counties in Texas compared to Democratic counties is very slight, an advantage of 0.08 votes in 2010 for every vote in 2006.  No indication of Democrats getting crushed here.  What’s going on in Harris and Fort Bend?  My assumption is that these counties, being from the Houston area, are influenced by the presence of former Houston Mayor Bill White in the Governor’s race.  Whether people are coming out to vote for or against him, I can’t say.  I have seen it mentioned that turnout has been heavier in parts of Harris County that are more Republican-leaning, though I can’t confirm that, and it doesn’t seem to be part of a statewide trend.  Voters in urban, conservative Tarrant County are turning out at lower rate than urban, liberal Travis County.

The turnout numbers as a percentage of registered voters seem to indicate that the partisan make-up of the county has little effect on turnout, so far.  In short: no enthusiasm gap.  There is one gap, though.  Among the top 15 most populous counties in Texas, the ones that voted for Obama (counting Harris) have cast 284,635 votes so far.  The ones that voted for McCain (counting Fort Bend) have cast 149,764 votes.

UPDATE: Here is the graph with the 4 Houston metro area counties removed.  It’s clear that Bill White is having an effect on turnout in these counties, so I think comparing other areas of the state make a more clear apples-to-apples comparison.

In the non-Houston counties, we have 1.57 votes in 2010 for every vote in 2006 in the Obama counties, and 1.47 votes in the McCain counties.  An enthusiasm gap which slightly favors Democratic counties!