Swing State Project

This is the third in my five-week series focusing on House independent expenditures and what they tell us about the races.  This one should be much better than the previous ones because I have now taken into account not just whether the party committees are spending in a particular district, but how much and for how long.  The Republicans have relatively few seats in the bag compared to the apocalyptic conventional wisdom that this is the mother of all wave elections.  I would generously give them 17 – all of the ones listed in the first two categories below.  At the same time, the Republicans have genuinely put a lot of seats in play.  One or both parties has made I.E.’s in 73 districts – 68 Democratic and 5 Republican.  That is the problem for the Democrats – a broad playing field that is modestly expanding week by week.  The problem for the Republicans though, which will probably keep them from running up huge numbers, is that they are bogged down in pitch battles over seats that were seen as goners according to the early conventional wisdom (MD-01, MS-01, NM-02, and VA-05 to name a few).  Republicans are spending hundreds of thousands weekly on these types of districts.  The fact that these deeply endangered Democratic incumbents have refused to say die two weeks out is good news for the Democrats, as it focuses resources on those races instead of broadening the playing field even further.  All in all, I expect Republicans to take the House with a net gain of 40-55 seats.  I would love to be pleasantly surprised, but I don’t expect to be.  In any event, here is your weekly I.E. analysis:

Goners (9D, 2R)

AR-02 – Nothing from either side.

DE-AL – Nothing from either side.

IL-11 – DCCC has done nothing.  NRCC has been spending about $30K per week.

IN-08 – DCCC has done nothing.  NRCC had been spending but stopped this week.

KS-03 – Nothing from either side.

LA-02 – Nothing from either side.

LA-03 – Nothing from either side.

NY-29 – Nothing from either side.

OH-01 – One small, token ad buy from the DCCC.  Nothing from the NRCC.

OH-15 – Same shit, different district.

TN-06 – Nothing from either side.

“I’m not quite dead yet” (10D, 0R)

CO-04 – DCCC has not spent a dime here, yet the NRCC spent over $400K this week.

FL-02 – Exactly the same story as CO-04.  

FL-08 – DCCC has done nothing, and the NRCC spent over $200K this week.  Actually surprised it was not more given Grayson’s cash advantage.  Webster may be in good shape.

FL-24 – Exactly the same story as FL-08.

NH-01 – Still nothing from the DCCC, but the NRCC is spending over $300K per week.

PA-03 – Both parties have made persistent, small ad buys here, although the DCCC’s have declined.  Does not look good for Dahlkemper.

PA-11 – The DCCC seems to be waving the white flag here, reducing its ad buy from over $100K to $34K this week.  But the NRCC is still spending over $100K per week here.

TN-08 – Herron has only a faint pulse.  DCCC has not spent a dime here, but the NRCC still spent over $100K this week, although it reduced its buy.

TX-17 – The DCCC has not spent anything here either.  The NRCC has significantly increased its ad buys for the past two weeks, but they are still slightly under $100K.

WI-08 – The DCCC spent $45K here this week, while the NRCC spent just over $100K.  Looks uphill for Kagen.

Battlegrounds (31D, 1R)

AL-02 – Both parties pumped over $200K into this district this week.  Dueling internal polls.

AR-01 – DCCC just dumped over $400K into this race this week, while the NRCC spent over $250K.  Sorry Mark Penn, but this is a low single digit race and not a 12-pointer.

AZ-01 – Both parties spent over $200K each in this district this week.  Rumors of Kirkpatrick’s demise may be exaggerated.

AZ-05 – DCCC spent about $250K in this race this week, while the NRCC went for the jugular with about $375K.  Dueling internal polls.

CO-03 – DCCC spent $350K here this week, while the NRCC spent $275K.  NRCC poll showed a tie.

FL-22 – Nothing from either side, but huge fundraising from both candidates.  Dueling internal polls.

HI-01 – DCCC spent over $160K here this week, while the NRCC spent $120K in its first week of spending to date.  Polls consistently show a very tight race.

IL-17 – DCCC spent over $300K here this week, while the NRCC spent $150K.  This one is the real deal.  Hare should win it if he can lift Dem turnout just a little.

IN-09 – DCCC spent about $275K here this week, while the NRCC spent $215K.  Classic battleground.  No polling for a while.

MA-10 – NRCC must like what they see here, busting out over $300K this week.  DCCC spent about $150K.  Still have not seen a poll of this race.

MD-01 – Both parties spent in the mid $300’s here this week.  Kratovil is doing an amazing job of hanging in there.

MI-01 – DCCC spent about $275K here this week, while the NRCC spent just over $200K.  Toss-up race, as several recent polls have shown.

MI-07 – Both parties spent just over $200K here this week.  Another pure toss-up.

MO-04 – DCCC spent $225K here this week, while the NRCC spent $280K.  Skelton seems to be in a real fight, but there is a dearth of recent polling.

MS-01 – DCCC spent about $215K here this week, while the NRCC spent nearly $300K(!).  Like Kratovil, Childers is doing a great job of pulling a Houdini act so far.

ND-AL – Look who’s back from the dead.  Pomeroy has both parties spending $200K plus this week after weeks of silence from the DCCC.

NM-02 – Both parties spent just under $200K here this week.  Like Kratovil, Teague is a red-district freshman with unusual staying power.

NV-03 – One of the hottest districts in the country.  Both parties’ expenditures approached $400K this week.  Pure toss-up.

NY-19 – Neither party has deigned to spend in the NYC media market on this one.  Public polls paint a pretty clear picture of a toss-up race.

OH-16 – Huge battleground.  DCCC spent $300K this week, while the NRCC spent over $400K.  Like Kratovil and Teague, impressive staying power for Boccieri in red district.

OH-18 – Republicans see blood in the water here, spending well over $500K here this week.  DCCC spent about $370K.  SEIU pitching in for Team Red does not help Space.

OR-05 – Both parties spent well over $200K here this week.  Sleeper battleground seat.  NRCC poll showed a virtual tie.

PA-10 – DCCC spent $140K here this week, while the NRCC spent just over $200K.  Amazing that a guy like Marino can even be in a race like this, but that’s the kind of year it is.

PA-12 – Both parties spent in the mid-to-high $200K range here this week.  Republicans only started spending here this week.  They may see an opening in spite of the May result.

SC-05 – DCCC spent $170K here this week, while the NRCC spent $200K.  Spratt is in a serious fight, but no polling for a while.

TN-04 -DCCC has only spent about $100K, but the NRCC spent a whopping $310K here this week.  DeJarlais internal shows a 5 point lead.

TX-23 – Both parties spent in the mid-$200K range this week.  This one should be very close.  Have not seen any polling for a while.

VA-02 – Both parties spent in the mid-$100K range this week.  Nye has done a good job of hanging around in this one.

VA-05 – The DCCC is still spending here, although its latest ad buy was under $100K.  The NRCC spent about $185K this week.  Periello is still very much alive, but behind.

WA-03 – DCCC spent nearly $280K this week here, while the NRCC spent over $300K.  No, Survey USA, this is not a double digit race.

WI-07 – DCCC spent $175K here this week, while the NRCC spent about $155K.  This one is probably competitive, although I suspect Duffy is ahead by single digits.

WV-01 – DCCC spent $250K here this week, while the NRCC spent nearly $200K.  Manchin’s recent surge could help Olivieri.

Head Scratchers (6D, 1R)

CA-11 – Both parties spent about $50K here this week.  I suspect McNerney is up, but as usual a Survey USA poll creates confusion.  

IL-10 – DCCC spent $125K here this week, while the NRCC spent $55K.  Mirror image partisan polls with double digit leads for either candidate have my head spinning.

NH-02 – DCCC spent a paltry $35K here last week, while the NRCC spent $128K.  My sense has been that Bass is ahead, but that screwy UNH poll has me doubting myself.

NY-23 – Doheny internal shows a double digit race in his favor.  Siena shows a double digit race in Owens’s favor.  The NRCC has spent nothing.  The DCCC spent $160K this week.  Huh?

PA-07 – Polls have this one close, but the DCCC has not spent a dime.  The NRCC has made small, sub-$50K ad buys.

PA-08 – Same shit, different district.  Cannot figure these two districts out.

SD-AL – DCCC has not spent here in spite of Noem’s enormous 3Q haul.  DCCC internal showed a double digit SHS lead, while Rasmussen showed a 3-point Noem lead.

Lean Retention (21D, 1R)

AZ-07 – DCCC spent about $60K here this week, which is disconcerting.  Until the NRCC starts spending, I will assume it is precautionary.

CA-20 – DCCC spent about $40K here this week.  I view it the same way as AZ-07.

FL-25 – DCCC spent $75K on advertising on 10/5 and cut that to $18K on 10/12.  Not a good sign for Garcia.

GA-02 – DCCC spent $150K here this week, while the NRCC spent $100K.  Does not seem like an all hands on deck effort for the Republicans yet.

GA-08 – DCCC is spending virtually nothing here, while the NRCC spent about $85K this week.  I suspect Marshall is ahead.  Otherwise, both parties would be investing more.    

IA-02 – DCCC spent over $90K here this week, which is disconcerting.  But the NRCC has not taken an interest yet, so I will wait and see.

IA-03 – DCCC spent nearly $130K here this week, but the NRCC has never engaged.

IL-14 – DCCC spent $90K here this week, while the NRCC spent just over $50K.  DCCC internal showed a double digit Foster lead.

IN-02 – DCCC spent $190K here this week, while the NRCC spent $80K.  Like GA-02, seems like a tepid level of investment from the Republicans.

KY-06 – Both parties spent about $100K here this week.  Does not seem like an inspired effort from the Republicans.

MN-01 – NRCC invested about $180K here this week after targeting the race last week, but the Dems have not yet felt the need to reciprocate.  

MS-04 – NRCC invested $176K here this week, but nothing from the Dems yet.  This one could be real trouble.  Taylor is sub-Coakley in the hubris department here.

NC-07 – NRCC has made modest, $40K weekly ad buys here.  The DCCC finally started spending this week ($75K).  Seems like McIntyre is in decent shape.

NC-08 – DCCC has invested over $200K per week here, but that is probably just to counteract Kissell’s sorry fundraising.  Nothing from the NRCC yet.

NJ-03 – DCCC has done nothing here.  Modest, sub-$30K, weekly buys from the NRCC.  Have to believe that Adler is up here.

NM-01 – DCCC spent $115K here this week, while the NRCC spent over $160K.  Could be trouble, but I will wait to see if the DCCC ups the ante next week.

NY-20 – DCCC spent $110K here this week, while the NRCC spent $172K.  Like NM-01, I will wait to see if the DCCC feels the need to pick up the pace.

NY-24 – DCCC spent nearly $200K here this week, but the NRCC only spent about $70K.  Not an inspiring effort from the NRCC here.  Arcuri is probably up.

OH-06 – DCCC spent $65K here this week, while the NRCC spent just over $100K.  Both parties seem to be just feeling out this race at this point.

OH-13 – DCCC has reduced its ad buy from $220K on 9/21 to about $65K this week.  Dems have to be feeling good about this one.

VA-09 – The DCCC has not spent here, and polls have consistently given Boucher double digit leads.  Nevertheless, the NRCC upped its ad buy to $180K this week.

VA-11 – The DCCC has been spending token amounts of money primarily on mailers.  Nothing from the NRCC.

As to all of the other races where there have been no I.E.’s on either side, including AZ-08, CA-47, CO-07, CT-04, CT-05, ID-01, KY-03, MI-09, NY-01, NY-13, PA-04, and WA-02, I am expecting retention at this point.  I’m sure there will be some surprises, but I’m not going to predict them here.  I expect the overwhelming majority of the pickups to come from races targeted by one or both party committees.

So here goes.  Per request, I’m listing a rough approximation of the seats I think Democrats are gonna lose in 17 days.  For months, I’ve tracking generic poll results showing that voters plan to dump THEIR OWN Congressman by a 2-1 margin.  All bets are off with numbers that lopsidedly rotten, and I think the candidates most likely to perish in such a landscape are the long-time incumbents who everybody believes is safe until the guillotine falls in the bottom of the ninth inning and they’re caught completely off-guard.  

For instance, Jim Oberstar in Democratic northeastern Minnesota is probably more likely to lose this cycle than is Jason Altmire of the Republican suburbs of Pittsburgh.  This is counterintuitive perhaps, but Altmire had the time and funding to define himself and his opponent while Oberstar is caught off-guard finding himself  vulnerable to an undefined generic (R) opponent.  As the campaign narrative unfolds in these final weeks and Oberstar looks increasingly out of touch, it’s my projection that he gets snuffed out.  It’s probably a longshot, but this is gonna be the year of the longshot.  In other words, there are dozens of Jim Oberstars out there who are gonna be absolutely stunned on election night.

Another example is two neighboring districts in Ohio.  Betty Sutton is now probably gonna survive in OH-13 because the profile of her race put her flawed opponent in a spotlight.  Next door in demographically similar OH-10, however, Dennis Kucinich is ripe for the picking, oblivious to the possibility of a serious challenge despite his long-standing underperformance and facing a generic Republican challenger that I’m going out on a limb and predicting take him out.

With all this in mind, I’m gonna leave a two-tiered list of Democratic casualties, starting with seats I believe have better than even odds of turning over to Republicans….followed by a list of under-the-radar seats where there’s a hypothetical level of vulnerability and where at least a few on the list have a chance of being unemployed on November 3….

First off, the seats I believe Democrats will pick up….

1. DE-AL

2. LA-02

Now for the GOP pickups….

1. AL-02

2. AZ-01

3. AZ-05

4. AZ-08

5. AR-01

6. AR-02

7. AR-04

8. CA-11

9. CA-18

10. CA-20

11. CA-47

12. CO-03

13. CO-04

14. CT-04

15. CT-05

16. FL-02

17. FL-08

18. FL-22

19. FL-24

20. GA-02

21. GA-08

22. ID-01

23. IL-08

24. IL-11

25. IL-14

26. IL-17

27. IN-02

28. IN-08

29. IN-09

30. IA-01

31. IA-02

32. KS-03

33. LA-03

34. ME-02

35. MD-01

36. MA-05

37. MA-06

38. MA-10

39. MI-01

40. MI-07

41. MI-09

42. MN-01

43. MN-08

44. MS-01

45. MS-04

46. MO-04

47. NV-03

48. NH-01

49. NH-02

50. NJ-03

51. NJ-12

52. NM-01

53. NM-02

54. NY-02

55. NY-04

56. NY-09

57. NY-19

58. NY-22

59. NY-23

60. NY-24

61. NY-25

62. NY-29

63. NC-02

64. NC-07

65. NC-08

66. NC-11

67. ND-AL

68. OH-01

69. OH-10

70. OH-15

71. OH-16

72. OH-18

73. OR-04

74. OR-05

75. PA-03

76. PA-07

77. PA-08

78. PA-10

79. PA-11

80. PA-12

81. SC-05

82. SD-AL

83. TN-04

84. TN-06

85. TN-08

86. TX-17

87. TX-23

88. VA-02

89. VA-05

90. WA-02

91. WA-03

92. WV-01

93. WI-03

94. WI-07

95. WI-08

Without breaking a sweat, I’ve found 95 seats that strike me as 50% or better odds of turning for a net GOP gain of 93, based on either haunting polls…or haunting polls in nearby and demographically similar districts.  As I’ve said before, there are probably dozens more seats out there where the incumbent is poised to lose and nobody has even considered him or her vulnerable, and several of which may be revealed in the next 10 days or so.  They’ll be met with mocking skepticism by most….until election night when voters prove the polls true.  Here are a few seats that might fit this bill.  I’d bet money at least a couple of these seats flip, even though without further information I’ll keep them in the Democratic fold….

CA-10, CA-36, CA-38, CA-39, CO-07, GA-12, IL-03, IN-07, MA-03, MI-05, MI-12, MI-15, MS-02, MO-03, NV-01, NJ-06, NJ-09, NY-18, NY-27, NY-28, NC-13, OR-01, PA-13, TN-05, TX-27, UT-02, WA-01, WA-06, and WA-09.

Okay, throw your tomatoes at me now.  Just out of curiosity, what’s the threshold of lost seats where my dire predictions will be vindicated from “chump” territory?  Over 60?  70?

All the latest House polls in one place.

IL-09: Magellan for Joel Pollak (10/12, likely voters):

Jan Schakowsky (D-inc): 48

Joel Pollak (R): 30

(MoE: ±3%)

IL-10: We Ask America (10/15, likely voters):

Dan Seals (D): 39

Bob Dold (R): 50

Undecided: 11

(MoE: ±2.9%)

ME-01, ME-02: Critical Insights (10/10-11, likely voters, 9/27 in parens):

Chellie Pingree (D-inc): 48 (54)

Dean Scontras (R): 33 (36)

Mike Michaud (D-inc): 43 (44)

Jason Levesque (R): 30 (32)

(MoE: ±5.7%)

MN-01: SurveyUSA (10/12-14, likely voters):

Tim Walz (D-inc): 47

Randy Demmer (R): 42

Steven Wilson (IP): 4

Lars Johnson (I): 2

Undecided: 5

(MoE: ±4.1%)

MO-05: Pulse/Rasmussen for Jacob Turk (10/5, likely voters):

Emanuel Cleaver (D-inc): 52

Jacob Turk (R): 43

(MoE: ±4%)

NH-01, NH-02: University of New Hampshire (10/7-12, likely voters, September in parens):

Carol Shea-Porter (D-inc): 36 (39)

Frank Guinta (R): 48 (49)

(MoE: ±5.3%)

Ann McLane Kuster (D-inc): 43 (38)

Charlie Bass (R): 36 (43)

(MoE: ±5.1%)

PA-04: Public Opinion Strategies for Keith Rothfus (10/6-7, likely voters):

Jason Altmire (D-inc): 47

Keith Rothfus (R): 36

(MoE: ±5.7%)

PA-07: Franklin & Marshall College (10/5-11, likely voters):

Bryan Lentz (D): 31

Pat Meehan (R): 34

(MoE: ±4.9%)

PA-08: Monmouth University (10/11-13, likely voters):

Patrick Murphy (D-inc): 46

Mike Fitzpatrick (R): 51

(MoE: ±3.9%)

PA-10, PA-11: Critical Insights for the Times Leader (dates unspecified, likely voters):

Chris Carney (D-inc): 38

Tom Marino (R): 44

Paul Kanjorski (D-inc): 41

Lou Barletta (R): 43

(MoE: ±4.9%)

RI-01: Quest (10/4-6, likely voters, 9/15-17 in parens):

David Cicilline (D): 47 (49)

John Loughlin (R): 36 (26)

Undecided: 13 (25)

(MoE: ±6.2%)

SC-02: Anzalone Liszt Research (10/7-10, likely voters, 5/3-6 in parens):

Rob Miller (D): 39 (34)

Joe Wilson (R-inc): 46 (49)

(MoE: ±4.4%)

TN-04: Public Opinion Strategies for Scott DesJarlais (10/12 & 14, likely voters, 9/27-28 in parens):

Lincoln Davis (D-inc): 40 (42)

Scott DesJarlais (R): 45 (42)

(MoE: ±5.7%)

VA-09: SurveyUSA (10/11-13, likely voters, 9/27-29 in parens):

Rick Boucher (D-inc): 51 (53)

Morgan Griffith (R): 41 (38)

Jeremiah Heaton (I): 4 (5)

Undecided: 4 (4)

(MoE: ±4%)

WA-03: SurveyUSA (10/10-12, likely voters, 9/12-14 in parens):

Denny Heck (D): 42 (43)

Jaime Herrera (R): 53 (52)

Undecided: 6 (4)

(MoE: ±4.1%)

This is the last part of a series of posts analyzing the swing state Colorado.

Conclusions

Colorado is much like the previous state analyzed in this series: Virginia. Both states were seen until recently as Republican strongholds and rightfully so; President George W. Bush handily won both states in 2004 and 2000.

Yet in 2004, both states showed signs of shifting Democratic. Virginia barely moved Democratic even as the South swung heavily against Senator John Kerry. As for Colorado – it actually shifted 3.7% more Democratic, against the national tide. Indeed, in 2004 Mr. Kerry performed better in Colorado than he did in Florida.

More below.

This shift cumulated in the 2008 presidential election, which showed both Colorado and Virginia as influential swing states. Colorado has thus turned from a red state into a purple state. In doing so, the Democratic Party has carved out the following coalition:

Democratic gains since 1992 follow the “C” pattern that was also present in the actual 2008 county results. This is a pattern that is present in other parts of the country, as previous posts have observed. Democrats have generally improved along the Front Range, and especially in the Denver metropolis. They have also gained in two Republican strongholds: Colorado Springs and neighboring Douglas County.

On the other hand, Republicans have gained in several historically Democratic-voting Hispanic counties near Pueblo. They have also improved in the thinly populated rural stretches of east and west Colorado.

All in all, these changes have benefited Democrats more. This is because their gains have been in the more populated areas of Colorado:

The heart of Colorado is therefore in the Denver metropolis, as the map indicates. Since 1992 Democrats have improved in all but one of the orange and red counties. In 2000 Mr. Bush won seven of the eleven highlighted counties. In 2008 Mr. Obama won seven of them. This is responsible for Colorado’s 17.3% leftward shift from 2000 to 2008.

This leftward shift has not turned Colorado into a blue state, but rather into a vitally important swing state. Say, for instance, that Mr. Obama had tied Senator John McCain in the popular vote. North Carolina and Indiana would have immediately flipped Republican. This would be followed by the traditional swing states Florida and then Ohio. Virginia would flip Republican next; Mr. Obama would lose by less than a percent. At this point Mr. McCain would have 262 electoral votes.

And there he would remain. In a tied election, Colorado would go by 1.7% to Mr. Obama, handing the senator 278 electoral votes and the presidency.

In the 2008 presidential election, therefore, Colorado was the most important state to win. It may remain thus in 2012.

–Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

• AK-Sen: The elections officials in Alaska are out with some further guidance on just how stringent they’ll be about misspellings of Lisa Murkowski’s name: “Murkowsky,” for instance, will probably be OK, but misspellings of “Lisa” (hard to misspell, but anything’s possible in a state that elected Sarah Palin, I guess) won’t. Also, are MurkStrong bracelets on the horizon? They’ve said it’s acceptable for voters to wear wristbands with Murkowski’s name printed on them into the ballot booth, as long as they don’t show them to other people.

• IL-Sen: Alexi Giannoulias offers up an internal poll from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, taken Oct. 10-12, giving him a 44-41 lead over Mark Kirk (with 4 for LeAlan Jones and 3 for Mike Labno). I don’t know how much confidence to get filled with here (especially in view of Nate Silver’s seeming ratification of the +5 rule on internal polls, in fact saying it’s more like a +6)… but with most public pollsters, even Rasmussen, showing this race to be a game of inches, maybe this is truly worth something.

• NV-Sen: Here’s a clear illustration of burn rate, especially when your fundraising strategy is centered around direct mail appeals to small donors (including me… I just got another Sharron Angle snail-mail pitch yesterday). Despite her $14 million 3Q haul, her CoH is $4.1 million. That’s almost exactly the CoH that Harry Reid just announced ($4 mil, based on raising $2.3 mil in 3Q).

• FL-Gov: Wow, the next Alex Sink attack ad writes itself. It turns out that Rick Scott was actually sued by the state of Florida (the same state, of course, that he’s vying to lead) in the late 90s for insider trading at the same time that the FBI was investigating assorted malfeasance at Columbia/HCA. (The case never went to trial, getting subsumed into the larger federal case.)

• RI-Gov: This is pretty late in the game to fall into this state of disarray: Lincoln Chafee’s campaign manager, J.R. Pagliarini just resigned. It wasn’t over any sort of disagreement (or, Tim Cahill-style, over the candidate’s hopelessness), though, but rather because of the impropriety of having received unemployment benefits at the same time as working on the Chafee campaign (which he attributes to a payroll snafu). With or without Pagliarini, though, there’s already a cloud of disarray hanging overhead, as seen by how little attention the Chafee camp seems to have drummed up surrounding their own internal poll giving them a 34-30 lead over Frank Caprio (with John Robitaille at 15).

• CA-11: It was just yesterday that I was pointing out how clownish OR-04 candidate Art Robinson was a big proponent of eliminating public education altogether. Well, now it’s turned out that David Harmer, certainly a “serious” candidate by standard media definitions, is of essentially the same mind, having made the same argument in a 2000 op-ed article in the widely-read San Francisco Chronicle.

• FL-02: At this point I don’t expect to see Allen Boyd back in Congress next year, but this poll seems weird even if you feel the same. It’s from someone called P.M.I. Inc., only mentioned in a rather sketchily-reported article from the right-leaning Sunshine State News site (complete with a tasteless headline that sounds like something I would write) that doesn’t make it clear whether this is an independent poll or taken on someone’s behalf (and doesn’t include dates or MoE). It shows Steve Southerland leading Allen Boyd 56-30, with two independent conservative candidates pulling in an additional 14 percent of the vote.

• GA-02: With Mike Keown having released a poll showing him trailing Sanford Bishop by only 1, Bishop is rather predictably out with a poll of his own today. The Oct. 7-10 poll from Lester & Assocs. gives Bishop a 50-40 lead. (Keown’s poll was taken several weeks earlier, before the DCCC started running ads here.)

• MN-07: Here’s one more race where there were “rumors” (without an actual piece of paper) about a competitive race, where the incumbent Dem whipped out an internal to quash that. This is one of the more lopsided polls we’ve seen lately: Collin Peterson leads Lee Byberg 54-20 in the Sept. 28 poll from Global Strategy Group.

• NY-17: And here’s one more mystery poll (expect to see lots more of these bubble up in the coming weeks): it shows Eliot Engel at 31 but leading his split opponents: Conservative York Kleinhandler at 25 and Republican Tony Mele at 23. The poll is from somebody called “YGSBS.” Considering that “YG” is the initials of the proprietor of the blog where this poll first emerged (yossigestetner.com), and the “forthcoming” crosstabs still don’t seem to have arrived, color me a little suspicious.

• WV-03: Yet another internal poll in the why-are-we-still-talking-about-it WV-03 race: Dem Nick Rahall leads Spike Maynard by 19, in an Anzalone-Liszt poll from Oct. 10-12.

• Fundraising: Here are some fundraising tidbits: via e-mail press release, Taryl Clark just announced $1.8 million last quarter, giving her $1 million CoH. (In any other House race, that’d be huge, but she’s up against Michele Bachmann.) Two other fundraising machines who are sort of the polarizing ideological bookends of Florida also reported: Alan Grayson reports $967K last quarter while Allen West reports $1.6 mil (although no CoH numbers, important as his campaign relies heavily on direct-mail churn). Finally, CQ has some assorted other numbers, including $626K for Rick Boucher in VA-09, $700K for Dan Debicella in super-expensive CT-04, and $507K for Andy Harris in MD-01.

• RGA: And here’s the biggest number of all: yesterday the RGA reported $31 million in the 3rd quarter, which gives them a lot of leverage in the closing weeks in the tight races. (Bear in mind, of course, that a lot of that would have gone to the RNC instead in a more competent year.)

• Polltopia: Nate Silver adds some thoughts on the cellphone debate, reignited by new Pew findings that we discussed yesterday. His main takeaway, one that I agree with whole-heartedly, is don’t just go start adding 5 points in the Dem direction on every poll you see, simply because the cellphone effect isn’t likely to apply uniformly in every population and in every pollster’s method.

• SSP TV:

• AK-Sen: Lisa Murkowski finally, as promised, rolls out Ted Stevens dancing with a vacuum cleaner endorsing her from beyond the grave, in a one-minute ad

• KY-Sen: The NRSC is still pouring money into Kentucky (consider that good news), with another boilerplate Conway = Obama ad

• NV-Sen: The Harry Reid team must have spent all last night in the editing suite, as they’re already using Sharron Angle’s words from last night’s debate, on health insurance coverage exemptions, against her

• PA-Sen: If internal polling and press release content are any indication, they’ve finally something that works against Pat Toomey: China, and outsourcing more in general (which explains why the DSCC is out with another ad on the topic, and also pointing out that in Toomey’s last ad that, during the period where he was being a “small businessman” by owning a restaurant, he was really an absentee owner while being a large businessman in Hong Kong)

• WA-Sen: Ditto the DSCC’s new ad in Washington, up against Dino Rossi (which, I’ll admit, is a strange tack in Washington, one of the most pro-trade states you’ll see, and where Patty Murray is a regular vote in favor of trade agreements)

• MO-04: Vicky Hartzler’s ace in the hole? She has an ad up with footage of Ike Skelton telling fellow Rep. Todd Akin where to stick it, with repeated obscenities bleeped out (hmmm, that would just make me want to vote for Skelton more)

• NRA: The NRA is out with a planned $6.75 million buy in a number of statewide races, including a few of their Dem friends, but mostly on behalf of GOPers; you can see a variety of their TV ad offerings at the link

• Rasmussen:

• CA-Gov: Jerry Brown (D) 50%, Meg Whitman (R) 44%

• CO-Gov: John Hickelooper (D) 42%, Dan Maes (R) 12%, Tom Tancredo (C) 38%

• CT-Sen: Richard Blumenthal (D) 51%, Linda McMahon (R) 46%

• DE-Sen: Chris Coons (D) 51%, Christine O’Donnell (R) 40%

• HI-Gov: Neil Abercrombie (D) 49%, Duke Aiona (R) 47%

• NV-Gov: Rory Reid (D) 40%, Brian Sandoval (R) 55%

• PA-Gov: Dan Onorato (D) 40%, Tom Corbett (R) 54%

Orion Strategies for Marshall University (10/11-12, likely voters, no trendlines):

Joe Manchin (D): 48

John Raese (R): 38

Undecided: 12

(MoE: ±4.6%)

Here’s some more evidence that Joe Manchin’s on an upswing in West Virginia, after having bottomed out for a few weeks there when John Raese hadn’t yet been defined and was a shiny new object that fit nicely with voters’ discontent with Washington. We don’t have trendlines from this pollster (so, for all we know, their model might not have seen a Raese lead at any point), but it’s probably not a coincidence that Manchin climbing back into the lead in multiple polls has to do with Dems having engaged the ad war and exposed Raese, as well as help from surrogates like Bill Clinton and of course the NRSC‘s “hicky” ad controversy, which seemed to have more legs than I originally gave it credit for and, if nothing else, took the GOP off-message here.

Orion Strategies is a local firm that has worked on behalf of both Democratic campaigns and nonpartisan organizations. Here, they’re working on behalf of Marshall University, and the chair of the State Elections Commission (a registered Republican and professor) was consultant to the poll, so things seem above-board here.