2010 -- Plenty of Reasons for the DEMs to Be Getting More Scared
The Pro-GOP or at the very least, anti-Democratic trend appears to continue to build. President Obama's numbers are stable, at least for now, around the +3% to +5% range...this is better than being negative, but puts him in a similar position to where President Clinton was leading into the year that saw Newt Gingrich's revolution that led to a GOP-controlled House and Senate. It isn't that bad yet, so let's take a look at where the races are tracking, with our new updates from this week:
Safe DEM Hold (6)
Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Connecticut
Likely DEM Hold (5)
California, Indiana, Wisconsin, Hawaii, Massachusetts*
* Special Election January 19th
Lean Democratic Hold (2)
New York (Gillebrand), Illinois
Lean Democratic Pick-Up (1)
Missouri
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (2)
Pennsylvania, Delaware
Lean GOP Pick-up (4)
Colorado, Nevada, North Dakota, Arkansas
Lean GOP Hold (5)
New Hampshire, Kentucky, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona
Likely GOP Hold (5)
Georgia, Alaska, Kansas, Louisiana, Florida
Safe GOP Hold (7)
Iowa, South Dakota, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Total Projection: GOP Pick-up of 3 to 5 Seats
Best Case GOP (all leaners go to GOP): GOP +8 Seats
Best Case DEM (all leaners go to DEM): DEM +6 Seats
It certainly seems, given the national mood, that the Best Case GOP scenario is a heck of a lot more plausible than the Best Case DEM scenario at this point. This is because of all the states that fall in the "lean" category currently, the GOP is winning all but 3 of them. It does show, however, the vast impact a 5 point swing in the national mood can have on how races shape up.
The other things worth noting are that we do not have particularly recent polling in Missouri and Pennsylvania. One could surmise from the trend in other swing states that there is a reasonable probability that they will tip red when we do get such polling. This would push the GOP closer to their "best case" scenario.
Having said all this, I don't see a path to 51 for the GOP. In addition to picking up Missouri and Pennsylvania, they would have to win Illinois to get to +8, which is certainly possible, but probably no better than 50/50. On TOP of that, they would have to beat Gillebrand in New York (possible only if Pataki runs against her, and no sure thing even then), AND win at least 2 out of 5 in California (where they have a good candidate but are trailing), Indiana (where they don't even have a candidate yet against a well-liked moderate in Evan Bayh), Wisconsin (against Russ Feingold, seems like a no-hope race), Hawaii (when was the last time Hawaii sent a GOPer to the Senate?) and Massachusetts (closing fast at -9%, but still a long shot.)
So, the most realistic scenario to get there for the GOP would be to pull off the upset in Massachusetts, then win all the ones they are leading. Win the two toss-ups -- Delaware with Mike Castle and Pennsylvania with Pat Toomey. Win Missouri with Rep. Roy Blunt, New York's 2nd seat via convincing George Pataki to run. Finally, pull off the big upset with Carly Fiorna in California (hey -- they love tech celebrities there.) And you have 51 seats.
A long, long, shot, for sure. But for the first time I can actually construct a scenario where it could happen. First key, of course, is the Massachusetts special election a week from Tuesday, which I expect them to lose. But if they win that one, all bets are off.
In the House,
Democrats could be in huge trouble. Now, it's hard to tell, because we continue to be plagued by drastically different polls numbers (Rasmussen has it at GOP +9%, Gallup has it at DEM +3%), driven largely not by the fact that pollsters are asking the questions somehow differently, but more by the fact that they are making dramatically different modeling assumptions about who is actually going to vote in the mid-term. And the quagmire is real...after a massive turnout in 2008, clearly we all expect it to fall off for the mid-terms, but will it revert back to the normal for an off-year election? Will any of the newly registered voters in 2008 show up to vote for congress in 2010? We don't really know.
At any rate, my philosophy has always been that by building a larger sample poll, as well as looking at means and medians, we can mitigate the sample or weighting errors of any one given pollster. An our methodology produces a current projection of GOP +3.6%.
This leads to a House projection of: GOP +43 Seats
So, for the second projection in a row, I'm projecting a GOP takeover of the House. The margin is still slim, although it is 2 seats wider than it was last week. It could change obviously, with circumstances. But for now, the House Republicans are looking pretty darn strong. I doubt we'll see anything like Health Care reform moving through that chamber come 2011.
The Jobs Deficit -- John Edwards Was Right
I wrote about this some months ago, but I was struck recently by a personal experience. The company that I work for, which is a Fortune 500 company, was in the process of hiring entry-level engineers for a number of our factories, a process that I was involved in. We were recruiting principally for those who graduate this spring and conducted interviews over November and December, made offers in mid-December to 5 candidates and....were rejected 4 out of 5 times. Every single one of the 5 young engineers we were trying to recruit had multiple offers from multiple great companies. These are kids who are extremely intelligent, but let's face it, haven't actually DONE anything yet. And this punctuated my point -- the economy looks a lot different if you are a high school dropout who has been working at a factory in Michigan than it does if you are an Electrical Engineer from the University of Michigan.
The latest employment report, released yesterday, showed the unemployment rate remained flat at 10.0%, just a tick below the peak of 10.1% from two months ago. But the important numbers were even wore than that, with actually jobs declining by 85,000 and the unemployment rate only holding constant by virtue of people giving up on looking for work and dropping out of the work force, with this number rising to 929,000, it's largest level since 1985. So, with "normal" unemployment being in the 5% range, we have a gap of 7.6 million jobs, 8.5 million adding in the discouraged workers.
How does this relate to my story? Let's look at the unemployment rate by educational attainment one more time:
High School Dropout -- 15.3%
High School Graduate -- 10.5%
Some College or Trade School Graduate -- 9.0%
College Graduate with Bachelor's Degree or Higher -- 5.0%
The economy IS normal if you are a college graduate. Sure it isn't the heady days of the late 90s or the mid-00s when you could name your price, your location and your work hours. But you CAN find work if you have a degree and skills that are in demand. If you are a factory worker, however, your prospects are dim.
Which brings me to my point...we have focused so much on just creating jobs that we have neglected the other half of the equation...how do we raise the skill level of the unemployed to make them more productive and more attractive to potential employers? College tuitions continue to surge and achievement gaps between rich and poor school districts have sustained. How do we give the kid from Compton, rural Tennessee, Detroit or Mississippi a shot at being in the tier of people who are in demand? We have had zero political discussion in the past year about higher education and lifetime learning. And that's a crime.
In terms of what we have been discussing politically, we have the stimulus bill and we have the "jobs" bill creeping it's way through congress. The bill, which has been blasted by the GOP as "Son of Stimulus", would largely do more of the same that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act did...that is the threefold approach of transfer payments to states to stabilize state governments (to "save" jobs), infrastructure projects (to "create" jobs) and temporary extensions / expansions of various social programs to provide money for the unemployed and needy (to generate consumer demand.)
The approach has its merits as a short-term buffer to an economy still dealing with the aftershocks of a massive financial crisis. My criticism is that the way the original stimulus was laid out, we haven't really had a chance to see how that program, which was designed as a 3-year reshaping of the economy, will really play out.
Here are the latest stats on the first stimulus bill:
Tax Cuts -- $92.8 billion out of $288 billion paid out (32.2%)
Spending -- $164.2 billion out of $499 billion paid out (32.9%)
Total -- $257.0 billion out of $787 billion paid out (32.7%)
With more than two thirds of the first stimulus bill left to spend, why craft another measure?
The answer simply is political reality. Congressional Democrats want people to see they are doing SOMETHING, even if the best course might be to simply let the tools that are already out there work. Liberal economist Paul Krugman, who never believed the first bill was nearly large enough, has been leading the charge for a second stimulus for some time. And it appears likely that SOME sort of jobs bills will pass in the new congress.
But the reality is that we will all have to wait and see whether what they did the first run around will actually work.
Almost 1 Year of Obama
The President of the United States will cross the 1 year in office threshold, 25% of his term, right as voters in Massachusetts are picking a Senator that will potentially represent the 60th vote in the Senate for final passage of health care legislation. It's almost time to break out the red pens and grade the President's year. Given the amazingly high bar he set for himself with his early speech to congress, I suspect when I sit down to write his review, he will have some significant short-comings. The President's inner-circle is fond of talking about him taking the "long view". But you do have to produce results at some point.
So, next up, our 1 year report card on President Obama. We'll look at my assessment of grades against his key initiatives. We'll look at his public opinion polls and the American people's grades of his performance. And we'll tap our old friends at Politifact to look at how well he is keeping his promises. Stay tuned.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Showing posts with label House. Show all posts
Showing posts with label House. Show all posts
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Monday, December 21, 2009
As Partisan As They Come in the Senate, 2010 Updates
60-40 to Proceed
It is actually extremely rare that a vote in either house of Congress falls completely along party lines. In my last post, you saw that there hasn't been a single piece of legislation this year that passed strictly along party lines. Even the most contentious bill to date, the stimulus bill, garnered 3 GOP Senators voting in the affirmative, as well as some Democrats in the House voting negative.
But a straight-up, party line vote is what happened last night on the motion to bring the Reid "Manager's Amendment" to the floor. 60-40. All Democrats voting aye, all Republicans voting no (Independents Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman, also voted aye, Sanders being a Democrat in everything but name and Joe Lieberman being, well, Joe Lieberman.) And expect those vote totals at least 4 more times between now and Christmas. The remaining steps for the DEM's to move this forward are:
(1) Motion to Invoke Cloture to END Debate on the Reid Amendment (60 votes required)
(2) Adoption of the Reid Amendment (51 votes required)
(3) Motion to Invoke Cloture on the BIll (60 votes required)
(4) Passage of the BIll (51 votes required)
Expect 60-40 votes to abound.
2010 -- More Confirmation of the Same Story Line
Actually a fair amount of polling the last 3 weeks, but very little movement in the key races. Only one change.
In Florida -- Rubio has pulled even with Crist in the primary. If Rubio wins the primary, this is a pick 'em race. Crist holds a double digit lead in the general if he wins. This race moves from Safe GOP Hold down to Likely GOP Hold.
Other races with polls of note but no changes:
Connecticut -- Dodd is down by 13% in the latest poll, his worst margin yet. This one remains a Likely GOP Pick-up.
Illinois -- Giannoulis leads by 3% in the single new poll available I leave this one a Toss-Up for now, but another poll in that range would tilt it back into the blue column.
Pennsylvania -- after months of conflict polling data, the latest Quinnipiac poll shows this one, you guessed it, a dead heat. Specter appears now to be comfortable ahead in the Democratic primary. We'll keep it a Toss-Up.
Delaware -- polls are still split in the likely race between Rep. Mike Castle and Beau Biden, with the latest poll showing Castle with a 2 point lead. We leave it a toss-up.
Missouri -- Carnahan has a 2 point lead in the latest poll. This is the sixth straight poll in this race that shows the Dems with a 1 to 3 point lead. It isn't much, but it is consistent enough to keep this a Lean DEM Pick-up.
Ohio -- a pair of Rasmussen polls shows Republican Portman still ahead in the narrow single digits against both possible Democratic challengers. This remains a Lean GOP Hold.
Also of note:
The Kentucky and Georgia races are still categorized as Lean GOP Holds. This is primarily because of polling last year that showed them up for grabs and no new data since then. Given the general direction of polling in the past year (towards the GOP, away from the DEMs) and the fact that Sen. Bunning is not in the Kentucky race (his massive unpopularity was certainly dragging on the GOP in this race), these seem like races that could be more safely in the GOP column than I have them now. I hope that there will be some kind of polling to give me some direction on these races, but for now, in the absence of new data, I'm leaving them where they are.
This leaves us with:
Safe DEM Hold (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
LIkely DEM Hold (4)
California, Indiana, North Carolina, Massachusetts*
* Special election in January
Lean DEM Hold (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-up (2)
Missouri, New Hampshire
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (3)
Illinois, Pennsylvania, Delaware
Lean GOP PIck-up (2)
Colorado, Nevada
Likely GOP Pick-Up (1)
Connecticut
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Ohio, Georgia
Likely GOP Hold (8)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana, Florida
Safe GOP Hold (5)
Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Projection: GOP +1 to 4 Seats
GOP Gets All Leaners: GOP +10 Seats
DEM Gets All Leaners: DEM +4 Seats
The GOP would need to gain 11 seats to win control of the Senate, assuming that Independents Bernie Sanders (VT) and Joe Lieberman (CT) continue to vote for the Democratic leadership. If the GOP were to win 10 seats, the Senate would be split 50/50 and Vice-President Joe Biden would cast the deciding 51st vote for the DEMs.
In the House,
The latest generic polling puts our averages of averages at GOP +3.0%. The span is still wide, with polls varying anywhere from DEM +3% to GOP +7%. At the 3.0% level this would project:
GOP Pick-up of 41 Seats
This would be just enough to put the GOP in the narrowest possible control of the House. This is worth noting as it is the first time that I have projected a 2010 GOP takeover of the House, albeit this one is very close. Time will tell whether this is a trend or just an outlier in the data, but it is certainly good news for the GOP. With control of the House, they could effectively block any Democratic legislation from passage and because tax and spending bills must originate in the House, they could prevent such bills from even being discussed in the Senate.
Now, a 218-217 majority is hardly ironclad control. The reality is that it would throw control of Congress to the most moderate members of the House. And that might not be such a bad thing. But it is proof positive that if President Obama wants to get Health Care Reform and Cap and Trade done, it has to happen with this congress.
If you like this site tell your friends.
It is actually extremely rare that a vote in either house of Congress falls completely along party lines. In my last post, you saw that there hasn't been a single piece of legislation this year that passed strictly along party lines. Even the most contentious bill to date, the stimulus bill, garnered 3 GOP Senators voting in the affirmative, as well as some Democrats in the House voting negative.
But a straight-up, party line vote is what happened last night on the motion to bring the Reid "Manager's Amendment" to the floor. 60-40. All Democrats voting aye, all Republicans voting no (Independents Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman, also voted aye, Sanders being a Democrat in everything but name and Joe Lieberman being, well, Joe Lieberman.) And expect those vote totals at least 4 more times between now and Christmas. The remaining steps for the DEM's to move this forward are:
(1) Motion to Invoke Cloture to END Debate on the Reid Amendment (60 votes required)
(2) Adoption of the Reid Amendment (51 votes required)
(3) Motion to Invoke Cloture on the BIll (60 votes required)
(4) Passage of the BIll (51 votes required)
Expect 60-40 votes to abound.
2010 -- More Confirmation of the Same Story Line
Actually a fair amount of polling the last 3 weeks, but very little movement in the key races. Only one change.
In Florida -- Rubio has pulled even with Crist in the primary. If Rubio wins the primary, this is a pick 'em race. Crist holds a double digit lead in the general if he wins. This race moves from Safe GOP Hold down to Likely GOP Hold.
Other races with polls of note but no changes:
Connecticut -- Dodd is down by 13% in the latest poll, his worst margin yet. This one remains a Likely GOP Pick-up.
Illinois -- Giannoulis leads by 3% in the single new poll available I leave this one a Toss-Up for now, but another poll in that range would tilt it back into the blue column.
Pennsylvania -- after months of conflict polling data, the latest Quinnipiac poll shows this one, you guessed it, a dead heat. Specter appears now to be comfortable ahead in the Democratic primary. We'll keep it a Toss-Up.
Delaware -- polls are still split in the likely race between Rep. Mike Castle and Beau Biden, with the latest poll showing Castle with a 2 point lead. We leave it a toss-up.
Missouri -- Carnahan has a 2 point lead in the latest poll. This is the sixth straight poll in this race that shows the Dems with a 1 to 3 point lead. It isn't much, but it is consistent enough to keep this a Lean DEM Pick-up.
Ohio -- a pair of Rasmussen polls shows Republican Portman still ahead in the narrow single digits against both possible Democratic challengers. This remains a Lean GOP Hold.
Also of note:
The Kentucky and Georgia races are still categorized as Lean GOP Holds. This is primarily because of polling last year that showed them up for grabs and no new data since then. Given the general direction of polling in the past year (towards the GOP, away from the DEMs) and the fact that Sen. Bunning is not in the Kentucky race (his massive unpopularity was certainly dragging on the GOP in this race), these seem like races that could be more safely in the GOP column than I have them now. I hope that there will be some kind of polling to give me some direction on these races, but for now, in the absence of new data, I'm leaving them where they are.
This leaves us with:
Safe DEM Hold (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
LIkely DEM Hold (4)
California, Indiana, North Carolina, Massachusetts*
* Special election in January
Lean DEM Hold (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-up (2)
Missouri, New Hampshire
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (3)
Illinois, Pennsylvania, Delaware
Lean GOP PIck-up (2)
Colorado, Nevada
Likely GOP Pick-Up (1)
Connecticut
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Ohio, Georgia
Likely GOP Hold (8)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana, Florida
Safe GOP Hold (5)
Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Projection: GOP +1 to 4 Seats
GOP Gets All Leaners: GOP +10 Seats
DEM Gets All Leaners: DEM +4 Seats
The GOP would need to gain 11 seats to win control of the Senate, assuming that Independents Bernie Sanders (VT) and Joe Lieberman (CT) continue to vote for the Democratic leadership. If the GOP were to win 10 seats, the Senate would be split 50/50 and Vice-President Joe Biden would cast the deciding 51st vote for the DEMs.
In the House,
The latest generic polling puts our averages of averages at GOP +3.0%. The span is still wide, with polls varying anywhere from DEM +3% to GOP +7%. At the 3.0% level this would project:
GOP Pick-up of 41 Seats
This would be just enough to put the GOP in the narrowest possible control of the House. This is worth noting as it is the first time that I have projected a 2010 GOP takeover of the House, albeit this one is very close. Time will tell whether this is a trend or just an outlier in the data, but it is certainly good news for the GOP. With control of the House, they could effectively block any Democratic legislation from passage and because tax and spending bills must originate in the House, they could prevent such bills from even being discussed in the Senate.
Now, a 218-217 majority is hardly ironclad control. The reality is that it would throw control of Congress to the most moderate members of the House. And that might not be such a bad thing. But it is proof positive that if President Obama wants to get Health Care Reform and Cap and Trade done, it has to happen with this congress.
If you like this site tell your friends.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
2010 Election Updates -- Democrats Still Holding On, At Least for Now
Below are the latest updates for the 2010 election. Let me qualify them by saying that generally speaking, my projections are going to be a lagging indicator, at least until we get heavy into the election season. This is because, while we have a number of tracking polls that release new polling data on President Obama's approval rating every day (Gallup, Rasmussen, etc.), 2010 Senate polls and generic House ballot polls are a little harder to come by. What that means is that to the extent that President Obama's sliding approval ratings impact Senate and House races, we may not see the full effect in these projections for a couple of weeks. As I always do, I want to use real polling data to project results, not a projection on top of a projection. Plus, it is difficult to tell from national Presidential polls what the impact on state-level races will be.
With all of those qualifiers, despite the headwinds the Democrats face, they are actually faring reasonably well, at least in the Senate. Of course, less is at stake in the Senate in 2010 than in the House -- only a little over a third of the seats are up, of course, and to a large extent, the map is favorable to the Democrats, since this is essentially a replay of the 2004 Senate elections, while the Democrats made their large gains in the 2006 and 2008 races, which won't repeat until 2012 and 2014 respectively.
So, here are the latest projections:
2010 Senate
A few changes to report here and they are mixed in direction -- I will report on those changes, as well as other races that do have not changed in projection but have new polling data:
Connecticut -- moves from Lean GOP Pick-up to Likely GOP Pick-up. As improbable as it would have sounded just a year ago, this dark blue state now shows Chris Dodd behind by 10 to 11% in the latest polls. He is in big, big trouble.
Delaware -- moves from Lean GOP Pick-up to Toss-up-- a new Susquehenna poll has Beau Biden up by 5%. Castle (who is running) has led in other recent polls, so this is not enough to tip this race back into the blue column, but certainly puts the outcome back up in the air.
New Hampshire -- moves from Toss-up to Lean DEM Pick-up -- Hodes leads anywhere from 1 to 5% in three new polls. While these leads are small, the breadth and direction of the polling, puts this one back marginally in the blue column.
New York (Gillebrand) -- remains a Lean DEM Hold -- she is anywhere from down 2% to up 5% versus Pataki and way up on Rep. Peter King. If Pataki is in, this is a toss-up, if Pataki is out, this is a safe hold.
Illinois -- remains a toss-up. The race to replace the embattled Sen. Roland Burris, appointed by disgraced ex-Gov. Blago is a dead heat in the last poll we have.
Pennsylvania -- remains a toss-up. Specter is up 5% in one poll, down 2% in another -- still no clear direction in this race.
Missouri -- remains a Lean DEM pick-up -- DEM's are up from 1 to 3% in a variety of polls. This one is razor-close, but is still directionally in the DEM column.
Ohio -- remains a Lean GOP Hold -- Portman is up 3 to 5% in the latest two polls.
Florida -- remains a Safe GOP Hold -- while Crist is taking some heat from the right, he is still heavily favored in the Republican primary and is up 17 to 31% in general election polls. If Crist starts to fall behind in the primary, I will re-evaluate. Republicans would be crazy not to nominate him.
This leaves us with:
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachusetts*
* Special election to be held in January
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-ups (2)
Missouri, New Hampshire
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (3)
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Delaware
Toss-up -- GOP Controlled
None
Likely GOP Pick-up (1)
Connecticut
Lean GOP Pick-up (2)
Colorado, Nevada
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Georgia, Ohio
Likely GOP Hold (7)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah
Which leaves us with a projection of:
GOP Pick-up of 1 to 4 seats (central projection -- GOP +2 seats)
So, depending on the toss-ups, the new Senate would have 54 to 57 Democrats, plus 2 independents. Democrats would lose their filibuster breaking super-majority, but would retain a healthy margin.
The best case scenario for the GOP, that they take all the leaners, would lead to a GOP pick-up of 8 seats, leading to a new Senate with 50 Democrats, 48 Republicans and 2 Independents. This would still ensure Democratic control as the 2 Independents vote with the Democratic caucus and Vice-President Joe Biden is the tie-breaker in the event of a 50/50 split regardless.
In the House,
Generic polls are still all over the place, but I rely on my faith that aggregation produces the best results, reducing the impact of individual poll bias. The averaging shows:
GOP +0.5%
This leads to a projection of: GOP +30 Seats
Republicans would need a gain of 40 seats to regain control of the House. They don't have this kind of margin yet (unless you believe the more favorable polls that have their generic margin greater.) While it may seem kind of odd that an aggregation of polls that shows the GOP getting more votes wouldn't lead to a GOP majority, this has to do with the way the districts are drawn, which is marginally favorable to the Democrats, thanks to their greater control of redistricting after the 2000 census. This is the last election cycle that uses those districts, congressional seats will be reapportioned and redrawn for the 2012 election, following the 2010 census.
At present, the GOP would need to be at about +3% in order to retake the House. Still a tall order, but they are getting a whole lot closer than they were, even a few months ago.
It continues to appear that the GOP has a shot at taking the House in 2010, but little chance of retaking the Senate. Retaking the House would be huge for the GOP as they would essentially have the power to stop all tax and revenue bills, which constitutionally must pass the House before they are even considered in the Senate.
We have a long way to go before the 2010 mid-terms, so a lot could change in either direction. But the mid-terms are shaping up to be a very exciting set of races.
With all of those qualifiers, despite the headwinds the Democrats face, they are actually faring reasonably well, at least in the Senate. Of course, less is at stake in the Senate in 2010 than in the House -- only a little over a third of the seats are up, of course, and to a large extent, the map is favorable to the Democrats, since this is essentially a replay of the 2004 Senate elections, while the Democrats made their large gains in the 2006 and 2008 races, which won't repeat until 2012 and 2014 respectively.
So, here are the latest projections:
2010 Senate
A few changes to report here and they are mixed in direction -- I will report on those changes, as well as other races that do have not changed in projection but have new polling data:
Connecticut -- moves from Lean GOP Pick-up to Likely GOP Pick-up. As improbable as it would have sounded just a year ago, this dark blue state now shows Chris Dodd behind by 10 to 11% in the latest polls. He is in big, big trouble.
Delaware -- moves from Lean GOP Pick-up to Toss-up-- a new Susquehenna poll has Beau Biden up by 5%. Castle (who is running) has led in other recent polls, so this is not enough to tip this race back into the blue column, but certainly puts the outcome back up in the air.
New Hampshire -- moves from Toss-up to Lean DEM Pick-up -- Hodes leads anywhere from 1 to 5% in three new polls. While these leads are small, the breadth and direction of the polling, puts this one back marginally in the blue column.
New York (Gillebrand) -- remains a Lean DEM Hold -- she is anywhere from down 2% to up 5% versus Pataki and way up on Rep. Peter King. If Pataki is in, this is a toss-up, if Pataki is out, this is a safe hold.
Illinois -- remains a toss-up. The race to replace the embattled Sen. Roland Burris, appointed by disgraced ex-Gov. Blago is a dead heat in the last poll we have.
Pennsylvania -- remains a toss-up. Specter is up 5% in one poll, down 2% in another -- still no clear direction in this race.
Missouri -- remains a Lean DEM pick-up -- DEM's are up from 1 to 3% in a variety of polls. This one is razor-close, but is still directionally in the DEM column.
Ohio -- remains a Lean GOP Hold -- Portman is up 3 to 5% in the latest two polls.
Florida -- remains a Safe GOP Hold -- while Crist is taking some heat from the right, he is still heavily favored in the Republican primary and is up 17 to 31% in general election polls. If Crist starts to fall behind in the primary, I will re-evaluate. Republicans would be crazy not to nominate him.
This leaves us with:
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachusetts*
* Special election to be held in January
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-ups (2)
Missouri, New Hampshire
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (3)
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Delaware
Toss-up -- GOP Controlled
None
Likely GOP Pick-up (1)
Connecticut
Lean GOP Pick-up (2)
Colorado, Nevada
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Georgia, Ohio
Likely GOP Hold (7)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah
Which leaves us with a projection of:
GOP Pick-up of 1 to 4 seats (central projection -- GOP +2 seats)
So, depending on the toss-ups, the new Senate would have 54 to 57 Democrats, plus 2 independents. Democrats would lose their filibuster breaking super-majority, but would retain a healthy margin.
The best case scenario for the GOP, that they take all the leaners, would lead to a GOP pick-up of 8 seats, leading to a new Senate with 50 Democrats, 48 Republicans and 2 Independents. This would still ensure Democratic control as the 2 Independents vote with the Democratic caucus and Vice-President Joe Biden is the tie-breaker in the event of a 50/50 split regardless.
In the House,
Generic polls are still all over the place, but I rely on my faith that aggregation produces the best results, reducing the impact of individual poll bias. The averaging shows:
GOP +0.5%
This leads to a projection of: GOP +30 Seats
Republicans would need a gain of 40 seats to regain control of the House. They don't have this kind of margin yet (unless you believe the more favorable polls that have their generic margin greater.) While it may seem kind of odd that an aggregation of polls that shows the GOP getting more votes wouldn't lead to a GOP majority, this has to do with the way the districts are drawn, which is marginally favorable to the Democrats, thanks to their greater control of redistricting after the 2000 census. This is the last election cycle that uses those districts, congressional seats will be reapportioned and redrawn for the 2012 election, following the 2010 census.
At present, the GOP would need to be at about +3% in order to retake the House. Still a tall order, but they are getting a whole lot closer than they were, even a few months ago.
It continues to appear that the GOP has a shot at taking the House in 2010, but little chance of retaking the Senate. Retaking the House would be huge for the GOP as they would essentially have the power to stop all tax and revenue bills, which constitutionally must pass the House before they are even considered in the Senate.
We have a long way to go before the 2010 mid-terms, so a lot could change in either direction. But the mid-terms are shaping up to be a very exciting set of races.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
2010 Projection Updates
It is 352 days until mid-term election 2010. That's both a lifetime in politics (think about how much has happened politically in the past year) and shorter than you think (the Massachusetts special election takes place in January, primaries start in Illinois in February.)
Let's take a look at the state of the races:
The Senate
Two changes since our last projection, both favoring the GOP.
In North Carolina, 3 different polls show Burr with anywhere from a 7% to 12% lead against prospective challengers. It is a close call, as I had sort of informally set the bar between "lean" and "likely" at around 10%, but having three different polling firms find the same result is enough for me to shift this from Lean GOP Hold to Likely GOP Hold.
In Ohio, Portman is up by 3-4% against two possible Democratic opponents in a new Quinnipiac poll. This validates an earlier Rasmussen poll that showed him leading by 2% a few weeks ago, and causes me to shift this from a Toss-up to a Lean GOP Hold.
All of which leaves us with:
Safe DEM Hold (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Hold (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachusetts*
* Special election in January
Lean DEM Hold (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-up (1)
Missouri
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-up -- GOP Controlled (1)
New Hampshire
Lean GOP Pick-Up (4)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut, Nevada
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Georgia, Ohio
Likely GOP Hold (7)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
This projects:
GOP Pick-up of 2 to 5 seats, central projection of GOP +3 seats
The House
Democrats stand at +2.1% in our aggregated polling data, although the poll range is still extremely wide (from +7% for the DEMs to +5% for the GOP.)
This would imply:
GOP Pick-up of 16-20 seats, Central Projection GOP +17 Seats
So, the GOP still isn't in a position to retake either House, but they are slowly, steadily, eating into swing districts. The Democrats need an economic turnaround or they could be in big trouble.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Let's take a look at the state of the races:
The Senate
Two changes since our last projection, both favoring the GOP.
In North Carolina, 3 different polls show Burr with anywhere from a 7% to 12% lead against prospective challengers. It is a close call, as I had sort of informally set the bar between "lean" and "likely" at around 10%, but having three different polling firms find the same result is enough for me to shift this from Lean GOP Hold to Likely GOP Hold.
In Ohio, Portman is up by 3-4% against two possible Democratic opponents in a new Quinnipiac poll. This validates an earlier Rasmussen poll that showed him leading by 2% a few weeks ago, and causes me to shift this from a Toss-up to a Lean GOP Hold.
All of which leaves us with:
Safe DEM Hold (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Hold (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachusetts*
* Special election in January
Lean DEM Hold (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-up (1)
Missouri
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-up -- GOP Controlled (1)
New Hampshire
Lean GOP Pick-Up (4)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut, Nevada
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, Georgia, Ohio
Likely GOP Hold (7)
North Carolina, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
This projects:
GOP Pick-up of 2 to 5 seats, central projection of GOP +3 seats
The House
Democrats stand at +2.1% in our aggregated polling data, although the poll range is still extremely wide (from +7% for the DEMs to +5% for the GOP.)
This would imply:
GOP Pick-up of 16-20 seats, Central Projection GOP +17 Seats
So, the GOP still isn't in a position to retake either House, but they are slowly, steadily, eating into swing districts. The Democrats need an economic turnaround or they could be in big trouble.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
The Next Year in Politics
The 2009/2010 Schedule
The 2009 elections are now behind us and there are a mere 359 days until election day 2010. There is a heck of a lot of unfinished business in congress as well as a lot of mid-term primaries and campaigning that will commence shortly.
Let's take a look at the legislative calendar first.
There are 4 major categories of legislation that the congress will need to deal with in the next 359 days:
(1) Fiscal 2010 Appropriations
The status of Fiscal 2010 appropriations is below. The House finished its work on preliminary bills in late July (as it is supposed to.) Many of the bills have been slowly slogging through the Senate, which has been very slow to follow. Of the 17 major departments and categories requiring annual appropriation:
* 6 have been signed into law
* 5 have passed the House and the Senate and await work from a conference committee
* 6 have only had a version passed by the House with the Senate yet to act
The current continuing resolution (the second one passed) allows the 11 departments who are not yet funded to continue operating under Fiscal 2009 policies until December 18th, therefore this is the new "deadline" for congress to act on the remaining pieces of legislation. Of course, congress can always pass another continuing resolution and keep kicking the can down the road.
(2) Cap and Trade
The House has already passed a cap and trade bill, the Senate has been bogged down in various committees trying to construct something that could get 60 votes. There are recent signs of life and compromise on this bill, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) helping to craft a compromise that would bring along moderate members of teh GOP. Clearly whatever clears the Senate will be far more conservative than the bill that passed the House, but the President has some hope of getting something that fulfills this domestic policy priority passed in the next 3 or 4 months.
(3) Universal Health Care
Again, et tu, Harry Reid? The House on Saturday passed its sweeping, trillion-dollar bill. The Senate has no clear path to a 60-vote supermajority, although clearly it is going to require a much more conservative approach than the House. Reverting to a "trigger mechanism" is likely as are other concessions to centrists Lieberman, Snowe and Nelson. If those three get on board with a bill, it will pass. If they oppose it, it will get killed by the a "super minority" of 41+ votes.
(4) Fiscal 2011 Appropriations
In all my writing about Fiscal 2010, I should remind everyone that we are scarcely more than 10 months away from the start of Fiscal 2011 and that the House really needs to start taking up the 2011 bills by June or so. There will be a strong incentive for Democrats to get appropriations passed on time this year, since the incoming congress in 2011 seems highly likely to be more conservative than the outgoing one in 2010.
(5) Other Domestic Policy Priorities
Remember immigration?
How about Gays in the Military?
Entitlement reform? (yeah, right)
If we are going to add any new domestic policy priorities, it has to happen in a narrow window.
So how much time is left to do all of this?
Well..
Congress takes a break in November for Thanksgiving, in December and January for Christmas and New Year's, extended breaks in the spring and summer for district work periods and holidays and...let's face it, EVERYONE on both sides of the aisle wants to get home by next August to campaign for re-election.
So the window is fairly narrow.
The House clearly won't be the problem -- both the rules in the House and the nature of the Democratic majority make the House by far the easier of the two bodies to get legislation through. The Senate, as it usually is, will be the bottleneck. Stay tuned to see how things play out.
Election 2010
Don't kid yourself, the 2010 elections are upon us. Let's look first at the Senate.
Since my last update there has not been a ton of polling as pollsters had focused heavily on the 2009 races. Therefore, there are no changes to my projections. As a starting point, there are 39 Democrats, 22 Republicans and 2 Independents who are not up for re-election and will be returning to the Senate in 2011.
In addition, there are 7 Democratic seats that I consider very safe:
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin
There are also 6 GOP seats that I consider very safe:
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah
Add these in and you have 46 Democratic seats, 28 GOP seats and 2 Independent seats that are either guaranteed or highly unlikely to change hands over the course of the next year.
You can see from this the challenge the GOP will face, even in a pro-GOP year. With 48 Democratic or Democratic caucusing (Independents Lieberman and Sanders) seats basically out of play, trying to get to 51 will be very difficult.
The next category, the Likely Holds -- seats where one party is ahead by 10%+ bring further clarity.
They include 4 Democratic seats:
California, Indiana, North Dakota and Massachusetts*
* Special election schedule for January
And 6 GOP seats:
Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Factoring in these seats, we have:
50 Democrats, 34 GOP seats and 2 Independent seats that are likely to return.
Which leaves us with 14 races likely to be hotly contested:
Lean Democratic Hold (2) -- New York (Gillebrand)and Arkansas (Lincoln)
Lean Democratic Pick-up (1) -- Missouri (Bond's vacant seat)
Toss-up (4) -- Illinois (Obama/Burris open seat), Pennsylvania (Specter), New Hampshire (Gregg open seat), Ohio (Voinovich open seat)
Lean GOP Pick-up (4) -- Colorado (Bennett), Delaware (Biden/Kaufmann open seat), Connecticut (Dodd) and Nevada (Reid)
Lean GOP Hold (3) -- Kentucky (Bunning open seat), North Carolina (Burr) and Georgia (Isakson)
So my current projection, if we split the toss-ups evenly, gives us 55 Democrats, 43 Republicans and 2 Independents. If the GOP sweeps the toss-ups, that gets them to 45 seats. In their best-case scenario, where they sweep the toss-ups and take all the leaners (which is tough, but not inconceivable), they get to 48. They don't get to 51 votes (what they would need for the majority, with Vice President Joe Biden holding the tie-breaking vote if it hits 50/50) under any scenario that I can envision. If they were somehow to bust Democratic double-digit leads in the "likely hold" seats for the DEMs, they could get to 52, but that would require beating Evan Bayh in Indiana, Barbara Boxer in California, winning a special election in Massachusetts AND beating Byron Dorgan in North Carolina. Every single one of these events seems highly unlikely.
On the House side, all 435 seats are up, so the outcome has much more potential to shift. Current aggregated generic polling has the Democrats at +3% (although polling continues to vary widely depending on the poll you believe), short of the 7% they were polling going into 2008 or the 10% that they actually took the congressional vote by in 2008. These numbers would imply a GOP pick-up of 15 to 17 seats, short of what they would need to gain a majority by a significant amount, but a good pick-up for a mid-term. These numbers could shift dramatically if President Obama's poll numbers continue to fall.
Ironically, the Blue Dogs that have been pushing for more moderate policies and generally causing the Democratic leadership pain are the ones most at risk. That's the weird thing about the structure of House races -- the moderate seats are the ones that change hands in swing years.
I'll be with you every step of the way, tracking the races. It's going to be a fun year for elections as obviously much more is at stake than in 2009.
Some Side Notes
Based on 2009 election results, where Rasmussen was indeed more accurate than the majority of other polls, I will include their polling at full weight going forward, until empirical evidence suggest that I shouldn't.
Recovey.gov reports that as of last week, $123.5 billion in spending and $83.8 billion in tax cuts have been paid out as a result of the stimulus or about 26.3% of the bill's total reach. Given that we have lost 7 million jobs since the start of the recession and the total claim of the stimulus bill was to attempt to "save or create" (whatever that means) 3 million jobs, there is some credence to liberals like Thomas Friedman who feel we are drastically under stimulating. But the political reality is that there is no will to do more, at least explicitly. Small scale moves like extending unemployment benefits again (which the President signed into law this week) or small projects embedded into appropriations bills (of which there are plenty) may happen. Perhaps the Cap and Trade bill would be a good time to include a bunch of infrastructure spending to upgrade our electrical grid and build green power? It might accomplish two goals at once...
Politifact.com's latest grading of the President's promise keeping, shows of the 513 promises that it is tracking:
52 have been kept
14 compromised (half-kept)
7 broken
440 to be acted on (in the works, stalled or no action)
So, the President has acted on 14.2% of his promises. Of those he has acted on, he has been true to his work 80.8% of the time. His term is 20% over, so he is obviously behind schedule if he is going to do everything he promised. But his consistency of approach is actually pretty good compared to history.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
The 2009 elections are now behind us and there are a mere 359 days until election day 2010. There is a heck of a lot of unfinished business in congress as well as a lot of mid-term primaries and campaigning that will commence shortly.
Let's take a look at the legislative calendar first.
There are 4 major categories of legislation that the congress will need to deal with in the next 359 days:
(1) Fiscal 2010 Appropriations
The status of Fiscal 2010 appropriations is below. The House finished its work on preliminary bills in late July (as it is supposed to.) Many of the bills have been slowly slogging through the Senate, which has been very slow to follow. Of the 17 major departments and categories requiring annual appropriation:
* 6 have been signed into law
* 5 have passed the House and the Senate and await work from a conference committee
* 6 have only had a version passed by the House with the Senate yet to act
The current continuing resolution (the second one passed) allows the 11 departments who are not yet funded to continue operating under Fiscal 2009 policies until December 18th, therefore this is the new "deadline" for congress to act on the remaining pieces of legislation. Of course, congress can always pass another continuing resolution and keep kicking the can down the road.
(2) Cap and Trade
The House has already passed a cap and trade bill, the Senate has been bogged down in various committees trying to construct something that could get 60 votes. There are recent signs of life and compromise on this bill, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) helping to craft a compromise that would bring along moderate members of teh GOP. Clearly whatever clears the Senate will be far more conservative than the bill that passed the House, but the President has some hope of getting something that fulfills this domestic policy priority passed in the next 3 or 4 months.
(3) Universal Health Care
Again, et tu, Harry Reid? The House on Saturday passed its sweeping, trillion-dollar bill. The Senate has no clear path to a 60-vote supermajority, although clearly it is going to require a much more conservative approach than the House. Reverting to a "trigger mechanism" is likely as are other concessions to centrists Lieberman, Snowe and Nelson. If those three get on board with a bill, it will pass. If they oppose it, it will get killed by the a "super minority" of 41+ votes.
(4) Fiscal 2011 Appropriations
In all my writing about Fiscal 2010, I should remind everyone that we are scarcely more than 10 months away from the start of Fiscal 2011 and that the House really needs to start taking up the 2011 bills by June or so. There will be a strong incentive for Democrats to get appropriations passed on time this year, since the incoming congress in 2011 seems highly likely to be more conservative than the outgoing one in 2010.
(5) Other Domestic Policy Priorities
Remember immigration?
How about Gays in the Military?
Entitlement reform? (yeah, right)
If we are going to add any new domestic policy priorities, it has to happen in a narrow window.
So how much time is left to do all of this?
Well..
Congress takes a break in November for Thanksgiving, in December and January for Christmas and New Year's, extended breaks in the spring and summer for district work periods and holidays and...let's face it, EVERYONE on both sides of the aisle wants to get home by next August to campaign for re-election.
So the window is fairly narrow.
The House clearly won't be the problem -- both the rules in the House and the nature of the Democratic majority make the House by far the easier of the two bodies to get legislation through. The Senate, as it usually is, will be the bottleneck. Stay tuned to see how things play out.
Election 2010
Don't kid yourself, the 2010 elections are upon us. Let's look first at the Senate.
Since my last update there has not been a ton of polling as pollsters had focused heavily on the 2009 races. Therefore, there are no changes to my projections. As a starting point, there are 39 Democrats, 22 Republicans and 2 Independents who are not up for re-election and will be returning to the Senate in 2011.
In addition, there are 7 Democratic seats that I consider very safe:
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin
There are also 6 GOP seats that I consider very safe:
Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah
Add these in and you have 46 Democratic seats, 28 GOP seats and 2 Independent seats that are either guaranteed or highly unlikely to change hands over the course of the next year.
You can see from this the challenge the GOP will face, even in a pro-GOP year. With 48 Democratic or Democratic caucusing (Independents Lieberman and Sanders) seats basically out of play, trying to get to 51 will be very difficult.
The next category, the Likely Holds -- seats where one party is ahead by 10%+ bring further clarity.
They include 4 Democratic seats:
California, Indiana, North Dakota and Massachusetts*
* Special election schedule for January
And 6 GOP seats:
Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Factoring in these seats, we have:
50 Democrats, 34 GOP seats and 2 Independent seats that are likely to return.
Which leaves us with 14 races likely to be hotly contested:
Lean Democratic Hold (2) -- New York (Gillebrand)and Arkansas (Lincoln)
Lean Democratic Pick-up (1) -- Missouri (Bond's vacant seat)
Toss-up (4) -- Illinois (Obama/Burris open seat), Pennsylvania (Specter), New Hampshire (Gregg open seat), Ohio (Voinovich open seat)
Lean GOP Pick-up (4) -- Colorado (Bennett), Delaware (Biden/Kaufmann open seat), Connecticut (Dodd) and Nevada (Reid)
Lean GOP Hold (3) -- Kentucky (Bunning open seat), North Carolina (Burr) and Georgia (Isakson)
So my current projection, if we split the toss-ups evenly, gives us 55 Democrats, 43 Republicans and 2 Independents. If the GOP sweeps the toss-ups, that gets them to 45 seats. In their best-case scenario, where they sweep the toss-ups and take all the leaners (which is tough, but not inconceivable), they get to 48. They don't get to 51 votes (what they would need for the majority, with Vice President Joe Biden holding the tie-breaking vote if it hits 50/50) under any scenario that I can envision. If they were somehow to bust Democratic double-digit leads in the "likely hold" seats for the DEMs, they could get to 52, but that would require beating Evan Bayh in Indiana, Barbara Boxer in California, winning a special election in Massachusetts AND beating Byron Dorgan in North Carolina. Every single one of these events seems highly unlikely.
On the House side, all 435 seats are up, so the outcome has much more potential to shift. Current aggregated generic polling has the Democrats at +3% (although polling continues to vary widely depending on the poll you believe), short of the 7% they were polling going into 2008 or the 10% that they actually took the congressional vote by in 2008. These numbers would imply a GOP pick-up of 15 to 17 seats, short of what they would need to gain a majority by a significant amount, but a good pick-up for a mid-term. These numbers could shift dramatically if President Obama's poll numbers continue to fall.
Ironically, the Blue Dogs that have been pushing for more moderate policies and generally causing the Democratic leadership pain are the ones most at risk. That's the weird thing about the structure of House races -- the moderate seats are the ones that change hands in swing years.
I'll be with you every step of the way, tracking the races. It's going to be a fun year for elections as obviously much more is at stake than in 2009.
Some Side Notes
Based on 2009 election results, where Rasmussen was indeed more accurate than the majority of other polls, I will include their polling at full weight going forward, until empirical evidence suggest that I shouldn't.
Recovey.gov reports that as of last week, $123.5 billion in spending and $83.8 billion in tax cuts have been paid out as a result of the stimulus or about 26.3% of the bill's total reach. Given that we have lost 7 million jobs since the start of the recession and the total claim of the stimulus bill was to attempt to "save or create" (whatever that means) 3 million jobs, there is some credence to liberals like Thomas Friedman who feel we are drastically under stimulating. But the political reality is that there is no will to do more, at least explicitly. Small scale moves like extending unemployment benefits again (which the President signed into law this week) or small projects embedded into appropriations bills (of which there are plenty) may happen. Perhaps the Cap and Trade bill would be a good time to include a bunch of infrastructure spending to upgrade our electrical grid and build green power? It might accomplish two goals at once...
Politifact.com's latest grading of the President's promise keeping, shows of the 513 promises that it is tracking:
52 have been kept
14 compromised (half-kept)
7 broken
440 to be acted on (in the works, stalled or no action)
So, the President has acted on 14.2% of his promises. Of those he has acted on, he has been true to his work 80.8% of the time. His term is 20% over, so he is obviously behind schedule if he is going to do everything he promised. But his consistency of approach is actually pretty good compared to history.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Why the President Doesn't Have Much Time, 2010 Projection Update, The Bizarre World of NY-23, Hate Crimes Take 2
The Clock is Already Winding Down
President Obama has precious little time left if he is going to get major legislative accomplishments in his term.
That seems an odd statement to make just looking at a calendar in the abstract. Today is only day 279 of the Obama Presidency, a mere 19% of his term having expired. But, let's think about how the calendar shapes up.
Enough to make one wonder if he can really get health care and energy policy done, isn't it?
Intrade (the internet gambling site), rates the odds against health reform with a public option at 2.8 to 1 (it does not have a separate bet for whether health reform without a public option will pass.) The odds on cap and trade? 1.2 to 1 against.
Still breathing, but the deck is against the President getting both of his stated policy priorities done.
The 2010 Mid-Terms
(1) The Senate
Major changes in ratings from the polling of the past month:
Nevada -- the last 3 polls have shown Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) trailing by very small margins, but consistently trailing. This one, at least for now, moves from toss-up to Lean GOP Pick-up.
California -- Barbara Boxer is comfortably up by double digits in a couple of recent polls, despite the high profile run of Carly Fiorina. This one moves from Lean Dem Hold to Likely DEM Hold.
Louisiana -- Vitter still leads comfortably, but two polls that put the lead at around 10% indicate that he is not 100% safe. This seat moves from Safe GOP Hold to Likely GOP Hold.
New Hampshire -- New polls are split and the aggregate is right around the zero line, therefore this one moves back from Lean DEM Pick-up to Toss-up.
Ohio -- the Democrats have been slipping in the rust belt the last month and this one is no different. Recent polls show small GOP leads...not quite enough to move this one back in the GOP column, but certainly enough to take it from a Lean DEM Pick-up to Toss-up.
So where does this leave us?
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachussetts*
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-ups (1)
Missouri
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-up GOP Controlled (2)
New Hampshire, Ohio
Lean GOP Pick-ups (4)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut, Nevada
Lean GOP Holds (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds (6)
Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Holds (6)
Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Current Senate: 58 Democrats, 2 Independents, 40 Republicans
* Special election to be held in January, not November
Projection: GOP +3-7 Seats, central projection of GOP +5 Seats
2010 Senate with all toss-ups to GOP: 51 Democrats, 2 Independents, 47 Republicans
2010 Senate with all toss-ups to DEM: 55 Democrats, 2 Independents, 43 Republicans
2010 Senate with all LEANERS to GOP: 48 Democrats, 2 Independents, 50 Republicans
2010 Senate with all LEANERS to DEM: 62 Democrats, 2 Independents, 36 Republicans
Still no path to GOP control (even in the all leaners to GOP case, Lieberman and Sanders caucus with the DEM's and Joe Biden breaks the tie to retain Democratic control), but the most favorable reading on 2010 yet for the GOP.
(2) The House
The generic polling has as wide a range as I've ever seen it. Rasmussen shows GOP +5%, whereas CBS News has DEM +13%. That's an 18% spread between non-partisan polls (although some might question the partisanship of both the organizations mentioned there), an extremely rare circumstance.
My aggregation of all the polls puts the average at DEM +1%.
This puts my projection at GOP +17-22 seats.
If you believe the Rasmussen poll, that would imply a GOP pick-up of approximately 34 to 41 seats, enough to nearly seize control of the House. I don't see that yet.
So, in total, the GOP stands to gain in the mid-terms, but control of either body still looks unlikely.
Many have looked for a repeat of the Gingrich revolution of 1994. At this point, the structure of the election looks unfavorable to such a large swing for several reasons:
The 23rd district in New York is a moderately pro-GOP district (approximately 4% more Republican than the nation as a whole, based on the Presidential election results in November.) The President's popularity is down significantly. The GOP nominated a moderate for the seat. The GOP should be in good shape to retain this seat in the upcoming special election to fill the seat vacated by Army Secretary John McHugh, right?
Not so fast.
A splinter in the GOP has led to an indepedent / conservative party candidate that is receiving the endorsement of major national GOP figures such as Sarah Palin, splitting the GOP vote and creating a scenario where a Democratic win seems likely.
Congressional district level polling is a dicey exercise with limited accuracy, but two different independent polls show the same story -- Doug Hoffman (C) is stealing support from Dede Scozzafava (R), leading to a 4 to 5 point lead for Bill Owens (D).
This is close enough to shift, but Hoffman, currently in third by a fairly wide margin, is picking up money and endorsements, all of which probably plays into Owens' hands.
More an exception case than a bellweather because of the strange circumstances, it looks like the DEM's might be poised to add another seat to their House majority.
Hate Crimes Follow-up
Sometimes I write things that provoke a lot of repsonse. My posting on my opposition to hate crimes laws certainly was one of those times.
A lot of the feedback I found uncompelling. Yes, I'm aware that the historical reason for these laws was white juries in the South in the civil rights era that would not convict white of attacking blacks. Yes, this is a noble reason for wanting such a law. No, it does not change my view that this is the wrong solution to a real problem.
One piece of feedback that gave me pause though, was a point made by a reader. "You state that what is in a person's mind shouldn't be the basis for the severity of punishment. But isn't that exactly the difference between a first degree and second degree murder? An interpretation of a person's intent?" I must admit, this is a very strong point. We do use this distinction, based not inherently on the act itself, but based on evidence on what someone was thinking as a basis for the severity of punishment for murder. There is a legitimate parallel between that and a hate crimes law.
I still fear hate crime laws are a slippery slope towards thought policing and open the door to a more restrictive view of free speech. But I am not as confident in my opposition as I was 24 hours ago.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
President Obama has precious little time left if he is going to get major legislative accomplishments in his term.
That seems an odd statement to make just looking at a calendar in the abstract. Today is only day 279 of the Obama Presidency, a mere 19% of his term having expired. But, let's think about how the calendar shapes up.
- In 2010, the focus will shift to the mid-term elections. If you think Blue Dog Democrats in the House and at-risk Democrats in the Senate are nervous now about making major legislative change, this will increase exponentially as the mid-terms near. The White House has as much as admitted that major accomplishments won't happen in the 2010 congressional sessions.
- The congress that convenes in 2011 and 2012 will likely be significantly less favorable to bold policy changes. It will almost certainly be more Republican (more on that later) and a narrowly controlled Democratic-majority congress isn't likely to be willing to make big waves.
- In what is left of 2009, congress still has to deal with a fair amount of routine appropriations legislation (as covered here), in addition to debating the President's proposals. There are also several holidays -- Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's to work around.
Enough to make one wonder if he can really get health care and energy policy done, isn't it?
Intrade (the internet gambling site), rates the odds against health reform with a public option at 2.8 to 1 (it does not have a separate bet for whether health reform without a public option will pass.) The odds on cap and trade? 1.2 to 1 against.
Still breathing, but the deck is against the President getting both of his stated policy priorities done.
The 2010 Mid-Terms
(1) The Senate
Major changes in ratings from the polling of the past month:
Nevada -- the last 3 polls have shown Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) trailing by very small margins, but consistently trailing. This one, at least for now, moves from toss-up to Lean GOP Pick-up.
California -- Barbara Boxer is comfortably up by double digits in a couple of recent polls, despite the high profile run of Carly Fiorina. This one moves from Lean Dem Hold to Likely DEM Hold.
Louisiana -- Vitter still leads comfortably, but two polls that put the lead at around 10% indicate that he is not 100% safe. This seat moves from Safe GOP Hold to Likely GOP Hold.
New Hampshire -- New polls are split and the aggregate is right around the zero line, therefore this one moves back from Lean DEM Pick-up to Toss-up.
Ohio -- the Democrats have been slipping in the rust belt the last month and this one is no different. Recent polls show small GOP leads...not quite enough to move this one back in the GOP column, but certainly enough to take it from a Lean DEM Pick-up to Toss-up.
So where does this leave us?
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (4)
California, Indiana, North Dakota, Massachussetts*
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, New York (Gillebrand)
Lean DEM Pick-ups (1)
Missouri
Toss-up -- DEM Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-up GOP Controlled (2)
New Hampshire, Ohio
Lean GOP Pick-ups (4)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut, Nevada
Lean GOP Holds (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds (6)
Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota, Louisiana
Safe GOP Holds (6)
Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Current Senate: 58 Democrats, 2 Independents, 40 Republicans
* Special election to be held in January, not November
Projection: GOP +3-7 Seats, central projection of GOP +5 Seats
2010 Senate with all toss-ups to GOP: 51 Democrats, 2 Independents, 47 Republicans
2010 Senate with all toss-ups to DEM: 55 Democrats, 2 Independents, 43 Republicans
2010 Senate with all LEANERS to GOP: 48 Democrats, 2 Independents, 50 Republicans
2010 Senate with all LEANERS to DEM: 62 Democrats, 2 Independents, 36 Republicans
Still no path to GOP control (even in the all leaners to GOP case, Lieberman and Sanders caucus with the DEM's and Joe Biden breaks the tie to retain Democratic control), but the most favorable reading on 2010 yet for the GOP.
(2) The House
The generic polling has as wide a range as I've ever seen it. Rasmussen shows GOP +5%, whereas CBS News has DEM +13%. That's an 18% spread between non-partisan polls (although some might question the partisanship of both the organizations mentioned there), an extremely rare circumstance.
My aggregation of all the polls puts the average at DEM +1%.
This puts my projection at GOP +17-22 seats.
If you believe the Rasmussen poll, that would imply a GOP pick-up of approximately 34 to 41 seats, enough to nearly seize control of the House. I don't see that yet.
So, in total, the GOP stands to gain in the mid-terms, but control of either body still looks unlikely.
Many have looked for a repeat of the Gingrich revolution of 1994. At this point, the structure of the election looks unfavorable to such a large swing for several reasons:
- Democratic majorities are much more sizeable, particularly in the Senate
- The rotation of Senate seats that are up in 2010 is unfavorable to the GOP, unlike in 1994. 2012 will be a much better map for potential GOP pick-ups than 2010.
- There are far less projected House vacancies in 2010, a key opportunity the GOP seized in 1994.
The 23rd district in New York is a moderately pro-GOP district (approximately 4% more Republican than the nation as a whole, based on the Presidential election results in November.) The President's popularity is down significantly. The GOP nominated a moderate for the seat. The GOP should be in good shape to retain this seat in the upcoming special election to fill the seat vacated by Army Secretary John McHugh, right?
Not so fast.
A splinter in the GOP has led to an indepedent / conservative party candidate that is receiving the endorsement of major national GOP figures such as Sarah Palin, splitting the GOP vote and creating a scenario where a Democratic win seems likely.
Congressional district level polling is a dicey exercise with limited accuracy, but two different independent polls show the same story -- Doug Hoffman (C) is stealing support from Dede Scozzafava (R), leading to a 4 to 5 point lead for Bill Owens (D).
This is close enough to shift, but Hoffman, currently in third by a fairly wide margin, is picking up money and endorsements, all of which probably plays into Owens' hands.
More an exception case than a bellweather because of the strange circumstances, it looks like the DEM's might be poised to add another seat to their House majority.
Hate Crimes Follow-up
Sometimes I write things that provoke a lot of repsonse. My posting on my opposition to hate crimes laws certainly was one of those times.
A lot of the feedback I found uncompelling. Yes, I'm aware that the historical reason for these laws was white juries in the South in the civil rights era that would not convict white of attacking blacks. Yes, this is a noble reason for wanting such a law. No, it does not change my view that this is the wrong solution to a real problem.
One piece of feedback that gave me pause though, was a point made by a reader. "You state that what is in a person's mind shouldn't be the basis for the severity of punishment. But isn't that exactly the difference between a first degree and second degree murder? An interpretation of a person's intent?" I must admit, this is a very strong point. We do use this distinction, based not inherently on the act itself, but based on evidence on what someone was thinking as a basis for the severity of punishment for murder. There is a legitimate parallel between that and a hate crimes law.
I still fear hate crime laws are a slippery slope towards thought policing and open the door to a more restrictive view of free speech. But I am not as confident in my opposition as I was 24 hours ago.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
A Check-in on Obama's Promises, 2010 Updates, Ridiculous Protest?
Is Obama Doing What He Said?
Today marks President Obama's 230th day in office, 15.7% of his term now having been completed. Time for a check-in on if he is doing what he promised.
The continuing cry from conservatives around the country is that President Obama ran as a moderate and has governed as a liberal. I've written about this fallacy before -- to me, President Obama clearly ran as a liberal on POLICY issues (his views on taxation, health care, climate change and such were all well known early in the primaries), but ran as a post-partisan "uniter". On the post-partisanship question, he has failed more than he has succeeded, with the hallmark legislation of his administration passing in a partisan fashion and prospects for a highly bi-partisan piece of health care reform legislation floundering. That being said, I've noted by way of the partisanship index, that for all the rancor in Washington, there are actually a number of smaller pieces of legislation that have been quietly getting done in a very bipartisan manner. On balance though, it would be hard to credibly say that President Obama has changed the tone in Washington.
On the policy front, the emperical evidence indicates that President Obama is headed largely down the path that he committed to. First, on major policy inititaives: the stimulus, healthcare reform and carbon control legislation are all exactly along the lines of what President Obama articulated on the campaign trail. His policy in Iraq, is, if anything, more Conservative than how he ran -- combat troops are staying longer and 50,000 "non-combat" (whatever that means), troops are staying 2 years longer than he committed on the campaign trail. In Afghanistan, President Obama campaigned on escalating military efforts and he is certainly headed down that path.
Looking at the raw numbers, the latest, independent, politifact.com assessment gives President Obama the following scores on the 516 promises that they documented from the 2008 campaign:
Of the 516 promises, 59 have some sort of "final" disposition (they have either been kept, broken or compromised.) At 11.4% of his 516, this is slightly behind scheduled, if he is going to deal with all his promises in his 4 years in office.
Of the 59, 41 of the promises are rated "kept", 11 are rated "compromise" and 7 are rated "broken". Giving 1 point for kept promises and half a point for compromises, this gives President Obama a promise keeping rating of 79%.
Of the 457 that do not have a final disposition, 91 are rated "in the works", meaning President Obama clearly still supports them and is working towards implementation. 12 are rated "stalled" meaning that the President has not outright broken them, but appears to have either passed on opportunities to implement changes or has made it clear that it is not a policy priority. The remaining 354 are rated "no action", which simply means that the issue hasn't really come up yet.
This gives us the following rates:
(1) Promises Dealt With (11.4% of total)
Kept: 69%
Compromised: 19%
Broken: 12%
Overall Score: 79%
(2) Promises To Be Dealt With (88.6% of total)
In The Works: 20%
Stalled: 3%
No Action: 76%
Overall
Kept: 8%
In The Works: 18%
Compromised: 2%
Stalled or Broken: 4%
No Action: 68%
% Promises Completed (1 pt for Kept, 1/2 pt for In the Works or Compromised): 18%
% of Term Completed: 16%
Not too bad a record, all things considered. Of course, we don't have comparability with other Presidents, based on the relative newness of politifact.com, which is a fantastic project for holding politicans accountable. It would be hard to imagine a modern President who would have better ratings at this stage in his Presidency, though.
2010 Updates
Not a ton of new news in the races, but the trend definitely seems to be heading towards the GOP. Here is the latest news:
Nevada -- two new polls again possible opponents show Sen. Harry Reid (D) trailing two possible opponents, although both were withing the margin of error. This is enough to take the race all the way from a likely DEM hold to a toss-up. You could make a case to take it to a Lean Republican Pick-up, but I'll wait for some more information to confirm it -- I don't like to move races three notches in one update unless there is more information than this.
New York -- no change to the rating...yet. Incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillebrand (D) is crushing Rep. Peter King (R) in statewide polls, but is in a dead heat with Gov. George Pataki (R). I'm going to leave this a likely DEM hold for now, as it is unclear that Pataki will run, but it would move to a toss-up if Pataki announces that he is in.
Massachussetts -- we initiate coverage with the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D). It is very unclear who the candidates will be, but in this heavily blue state, I'm initiating this one as a likely DEM hold.
Illinois -- no change in the rating as this one remains a toss-up. New polls show Kirk and Giannoulis in a deat heat, confirming that this will be a hot race.
Pennsylvania -- remains a toss-up for now, but may shift back in the blue column. Polls show incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter (D) beating former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) in a general election. But he has to first get past a primary challenge. If Sestak unseats Specter in the primary, however, Toomey leads in the general. Specter is leading primary polilng now. Democrats would be wise to stick with him or they may give this seat up.
Florida -- more evidence that Gov. Charlie Crist (R) is way ahead in this one. He continues to hold double digit leads in new polls. This one stays a likely GOP hold.
All of which leaves us with:
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Hawaii & Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (3)
North Dakota, New York (Gillebrand), Massachussetts
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, California
Lean DEM Pick-ups (3)
New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri
Toss-ups -- GOP Held (0)
Toss-ups -- DEM Held (3)
Nevada, Illinois, Pennsylvania
Lean GOP Pick-ups (3)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Which leaves us with a projection of:
GOP Pick-up of 0 to 3 seats (central projection +1 seat)
GOP pick-up of 11 seats is needed to gain a majority
In the House, polls are all over the map. The Rasmussen Poll (which this year has almost always been the most GOP-leaning poll on all subjects), shows the GOP at +7%, whereas the Ipos-McClatchy poll shows the DEMS at +8%. Neither of these scenarios seems plausible right now. Taking a "margin of error overlap" approach to all the polls, my guess is that we are somewhere between GOP +1% and DEMS +2%. The sample-weighted average of all polls shows Dems +0.7%.
Based on this, my current projection is:
GOP Pick-up of 16 to 34 seats (central projection is +17 seats)
I'm not sure what to do about the Rasmussen polls going forward if the current trend of them being 10-15% more Republican than all the other polls continues. On the one hand, I could throw them out as an outlier. On the other hand, I don't really know whose sampling methodology is right and perhaps Rasmussen has found a formula that the other guys have missed that will prove to be more accurate. Without emperical evidence to validate polls versus results, it is difficult to know. And Rasmussen was well within the mainstream last November (+6% for Obama vs. an actual result of +7.2%.) My inclination is to leave them in the averages and hope to continue the trend from last November, where a large group of sample-weighted polls lead to a very reliable results.
The President Can't Talk to School Kids?
Even Democratic hypocrites (and there are plenty of them) would never have dreamed of protesting President George W. Bush reading to school children. Yet, conservatives across the nation are protesting President Obama speaking to school children, claiming some sort of political indoctrination. That's right, folks, the Orwellian plan of the Obama Administration is to indoctrinate third graders by having the President talk to them about achieving their goals while sending secret subliminal messages that will make them force their parents to support universal health care. What a joke.
President Reagan actually made a blatantly political speech to school kids in the 1980s, speaking out against the evil of taxes, and nobody protested or threatened to pull their kids out of school. All indications are that President Obama's speech will be a heck of a lot more benign than this. If these protestors are serious, than I fear for the type of education their kids are getting at home.
I'm not one to liberally throw the race card around, but does it strike anyone else that these protestors don't so much have a problem with the President addressing school kids, but perhaps with a BLACK President addressing school kids. Shame on them.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Today marks President Obama's 230th day in office, 15.7% of his term now having been completed. Time for a check-in on if he is doing what he promised.
The continuing cry from conservatives around the country is that President Obama ran as a moderate and has governed as a liberal. I've written about this fallacy before -- to me, President Obama clearly ran as a liberal on POLICY issues (his views on taxation, health care, climate change and such were all well known early in the primaries), but ran as a post-partisan "uniter". On the post-partisanship question, he has failed more than he has succeeded, with the hallmark legislation of his administration passing in a partisan fashion and prospects for a highly bi-partisan piece of health care reform legislation floundering. That being said, I've noted by way of the partisanship index, that for all the rancor in Washington, there are actually a number of smaller pieces of legislation that have been quietly getting done in a very bipartisan manner. On balance though, it would be hard to credibly say that President Obama has changed the tone in Washington.
On the policy front, the emperical evidence indicates that President Obama is headed largely down the path that he committed to. First, on major policy inititaives: the stimulus, healthcare reform and carbon control legislation are all exactly along the lines of what President Obama articulated on the campaign trail. His policy in Iraq, is, if anything, more Conservative than how he ran -- combat troops are staying longer and 50,000 "non-combat" (whatever that means), troops are staying 2 years longer than he committed on the campaign trail. In Afghanistan, President Obama campaigned on escalating military efforts and he is certainly headed down that path.
Looking at the raw numbers, the latest, independent, politifact.com assessment gives President Obama the following scores on the 516 promises that they documented from the 2008 campaign:
Of the 516 promises, 59 have some sort of "final" disposition (they have either been kept, broken or compromised.) At 11.4% of his 516, this is slightly behind scheduled, if he is going to deal with all his promises in his 4 years in office.
Of the 59, 41 of the promises are rated "kept", 11 are rated "compromise" and 7 are rated "broken". Giving 1 point for kept promises and half a point for compromises, this gives President Obama a promise keeping rating of 79%.
Of the 457 that do not have a final disposition, 91 are rated "in the works", meaning President Obama clearly still supports them and is working towards implementation. 12 are rated "stalled" meaning that the President has not outright broken them, but appears to have either passed on opportunities to implement changes or has made it clear that it is not a policy priority. The remaining 354 are rated "no action", which simply means that the issue hasn't really come up yet.
This gives us the following rates:
(1) Promises Dealt With (11.4% of total)
Kept: 69%
Compromised: 19%
Broken: 12%
Overall Score: 79%
(2) Promises To Be Dealt With (88.6% of total)
In The Works: 20%
Stalled: 3%
No Action: 76%
Overall
Kept: 8%
In The Works: 18%
Compromised: 2%
Stalled or Broken: 4%
No Action: 68%
% Promises Completed (1 pt for Kept, 1/2 pt for In the Works or Compromised): 18%
% of Term Completed: 16%
Not too bad a record, all things considered. Of course, we don't have comparability with other Presidents, based on the relative newness of politifact.com, which is a fantastic project for holding politicans accountable. It would be hard to imagine a modern President who would have better ratings at this stage in his Presidency, though.
2010 Updates
Not a ton of new news in the races, but the trend definitely seems to be heading towards the GOP. Here is the latest news:
Nevada -- two new polls again possible opponents show Sen. Harry Reid (D) trailing two possible opponents, although both were withing the margin of error. This is enough to take the race all the way from a likely DEM hold to a toss-up. You could make a case to take it to a Lean Republican Pick-up, but I'll wait for some more information to confirm it -- I don't like to move races three notches in one update unless there is more information than this.
New York -- no change to the rating...yet. Incumbent Sen. Kirsten Gillebrand (D) is crushing Rep. Peter King (R) in statewide polls, but is in a dead heat with Gov. George Pataki (R). I'm going to leave this a likely DEM hold for now, as it is unclear that Pataki will run, but it would move to a toss-up if Pataki announces that he is in.
Massachussetts -- we initiate coverage with the death of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D). It is very unclear who the candidates will be, but in this heavily blue state, I'm initiating this one as a likely DEM hold.
Illinois -- no change in the rating as this one remains a toss-up. New polls show Kirk and Giannoulis in a deat heat, confirming that this will be a hot race.
Pennsylvania -- remains a toss-up for now, but may shift back in the blue column. Polls show incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter (D) beating former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) in a general election. But he has to first get past a primary challenge. If Sestak unseats Specter in the primary, however, Toomey leads in the general. Specter is leading primary polilng now. Democrats would be wise to stick with him or they may give this seat up.
Florida -- more evidence that Gov. Charlie Crist (R) is way ahead in this one. He continues to hold double digit leads in new polls. This one stays a likely GOP hold.
All of which leaves us with:
Safe DEM Holds (7)
Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Hawaii & Wisconsin
Likely DEM Holds (3)
North Dakota, New York (Gillebrand), Massachussetts
Lean DEM Holds (2)
Arkansas, California
Lean DEM Pick-ups (3)
New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri
Toss-ups -- GOP Held (0)
Toss-ups -- DEM Held (3)
Nevada, Illinois, Pennsylvania
Lean GOP Pick-ups (3)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut
Lean GOP Hold (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Hold (6)
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Hold (6)
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Which leaves us with a projection of:
GOP Pick-up of 0 to 3 seats (central projection +1 seat)
GOP pick-up of 11 seats is needed to gain a majority
In the House, polls are all over the map. The Rasmussen Poll (which this year has almost always been the most GOP-leaning poll on all subjects), shows the GOP at +7%, whereas the Ipos-McClatchy poll shows the DEMS at +8%. Neither of these scenarios seems plausible right now. Taking a "margin of error overlap" approach to all the polls, my guess is that we are somewhere between GOP +1% and DEMS +2%. The sample-weighted average of all polls shows Dems +0.7%.
Based on this, my current projection is:
GOP Pick-up of 16 to 34 seats (central projection is +17 seats)
I'm not sure what to do about the Rasmussen polls going forward if the current trend of them being 10-15% more Republican than all the other polls continues. On the one hand, I could throw them out as an outlier. On the other hand, I don't really know whose sampling methodology is right and perhaps Rasmussen has found a formula that the other guys have missed that will prove to be more accurate. Without emperical evidence to validate polls versus results, it is difficult to know. And Rasmussen was well within the mainstream last November (+6% for Obama vs. an actual result of +7.2%.) My inclination is to leave them in the averages and hope to continue the trend from last November, where a large group of sample-weighted polls lead to a very reliable results.
The President Can't Talk to School Kids?
Even Democratic hypocrites (and there are plenty of them) would never have dreamed of protesting President George W. Bush reading to school children. Yet, conservatives across the nation are protesting President Obama speaking to school children, claiming some sort of political indoctrination. That's right, folks, the Orwellian plan of the Obama Administration is to indoctrinate third graders by having the President talk to them about achieving their goals while sending secret subliminal messages that will make them force their parents to support universal health care. What a joke.
President Reagan actually made a blatantly political speech to school kids in the 1980s, speaking out against the evil of taxes, and nobody protested or threatened to pull their kids out of school. All indications are that President Obama's speech will be a heck of a lot more benign than this. If these protestors are serious, than I fear for the type of education their kids are getting at home.
I'm not one to liberally throw the race card around, but does it strike anyone else that these protestors don't so much have a problem with the President addressing school kids, but perhaps with a BLACK President addressing school kids. Shame on them.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Health Care -- Have the Dems Lost All Control?, 2010 Continuing to Look Up for GOP
If you have only been reading my blog for the past month, you might draw the conclusion that I am aligned with conservatives. I've advocated giving up the public option on health care, I've noted crashing poll numbers for President Obama and I've noted the improving prospects for the GOP in 2010. Those of you who have read this blog longer know otherwise. I am an Independent, but have voted more with the Democrats than the GOP at least over the past 10 years. I voted for President Obama, John Kerry and Al Gore (but not Bill Clinton.) The last Republican that I supported for federal office was Arlen Specter in 2004, who is now a Democrat. But, I'm not a party hack and I call them like I see them. And the Democrats are having a really bad summer.
Health Care -- Is It Already Dead?
President Obama and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius say that they didn't shift their position on the public option over the weekend, but clearly they did. They shifted the discussion from a public option being a central tenant of health care reform to a position of willingness to compromise. It was a shift that they needed to make -- a full federal option appears to be DOA in the Senate and public co-operatives would largely achieve the same policy goal while being significantly more acceptable to moderates in both parties.
Predictably, the left-wing factions of the Democratic Party has nearly had a stroke over the past 48 hours. House progressives are threatening to vote against any bill not containing a public option.
Health care is certainly not dead yet and Democrats hold sizable majorities in both houses of congress, but I can't figure out what bill could pass.
All of which points to what I think is now a fair and relevant question -- can the Democratic party govern? In 1977, Democrats took control of both houses of congress and the Presidency. They failed to achieve a single lasting policy accomplishment and were run out of town as Republicans swept into control of the Presidency and the Senate in the 1980 elections. They didn't get another shot until 1993, when Bill Clinton took office with majorities in both houses. After a botched attempt at health care reform that failed, Democrats were crushed in the 1994 elections, with Republicans seizing control of both houses of congress. It wasn't until this year, when President Obama took office, that they got another shot at full control of government.
And so far....Presidential popularity bordering on free fall, health care and limbo and infighting galore. You have to go back to Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society to find a case where the Democrats were in control of both the legislative and executive branches and got major things done.
So can they govern? We'll see. We have a proud history of splitting tickets in this country. Republicans haven't had much more success in governing -- in the past 60 years, they've held control for only 4 years (from 2003 to 2007, although they were just 1 Senate seat shy from 2001 to 2003) and it basically ran them out into the wilderness that they found themselves in this year.
So it may be that we are just conservative as a nation, in the traditional sense of the word. We don't like big changes all at once, which is what one party in power tends to produce. We backlash towards the middle as we are doing now. President Clinton learned this lesson in 1994 and adapted, embracing welfare reform and balanced budgets. He won a resounding re-election in 1996 (by a larger popular vote margin than President Obama held this past November.) President Obama may likewise adapt. Or he may find a way not to have to, as FDR did (Lyndon Johnson was so unpopular by the end of his term that he did not seek a second full term.)
Regardless, the short-term news looks bad for Democrats and good for the GOP. Let's look at how the congressional races are evolving.
2010 Projections
Here are our changes from just a couple of weeks ago:
Illinois -- moves from lean Democratic hold to Toss-Up -- even with Burris out the likely match-ups are polling dead even
Delaware -- moves all the way from Likely Democratic Hold to Lean GOP Pick-up as Rep. Mike Castle surprisingly leads Beau Biden in 2 new polls
Pennsylvania -- Sen. Arlen Specter (D) falls further -- polls are all over the map but are trending GOP, for now we'll move this from Lean Democratic Hold to Toss-up
New York (Gillebrand) -- moves from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold -- this one really all depends on if Pataki runs. If he does, we have a race. If he doesn't, Gillebrand is a lock to win the rest of her term.
Missouri -- moves from toss-up to Lean Democratic Pick-up -- Democrats lead by 1 to 9% in two recent polls.
So, we now have:
Safe Democratic Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely Democratic Holds (4)
New York (Gillebrand), Indiana, Nevada, North Dakota
Lean Democratic Holds (2)
California, Arkansas
Lean Democratic Pick-ups (3)
New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri
Toss-ups -- Democratic Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-ups -- Republican Controlled (0)
Lean GOP Pick-ups (3)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut
Lean GOP Holds (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds (6)
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Holds (6)
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Which leaves us with:
Projected GOP Pick-up of 0 to 2 Seats -- Central Projection is +1 Seat
Best Case for the GOP (all leans) -- +7 seats
Best Case for the Dems (all leans) -- +6 seats
On the house side, generic ballot is all over the map right now, ranging from +6 for the Dems to +5 for the GOP (from our friends at Rasmussen, who have consistently had outlier polls that are more favorable to the GOP this year -- I just don't know if they are right or if everyone else is.) Throwing out the high and low polls gives us a range of +1% GOP to +3% Dems or a projection range of:
Projected GOP Pick-up of 17 to 35 Seats -- Central Projection is +22 Seats
Even in a very dark summer for the Dems, the GOP still has a structural problem in the Senate. From my first projection to now, I can't see any path to the GOP taking the Senate in 2010. They would need to not only win all of the presently close states (which includes winning California, Connecticut, Illinois and Delaware), they would also need 3 out of 4 in Likely Democratic states, which include popular Sen. Evan Bayh (IN), Senate Majority Leader Harry Read (NV), popular Sen. Byron Dorgan (ND) and Gillebrand's seat in New York. Seems highly, highly unlikely.
In the House, on the other hand, they could potentially get to the 41 seats that they need if Dems keep driving off a cliff. Of course, they face a structural challenge with the way districts are drawn there too. They lost the popular vote in the House by 10% in 2008. If you subtracted 10% from the margin of every Democrat who ran in 2008, the GOP would gain only 22 seats and they need 41 to reclaim a majority. In fact, using that math, they would need to win the popular vote nationally by about 5% to retake the House. Of course, that's exactly where the Rasmussen poll has them, right now.
Thanks for reading. I know August is a slow time for politics and I appreciate you tuning in to hear my thoughts. Please visit often and tell your friends. Also, note the Google search bar at the bottom of the page, which accesses the Google site. You can bookmark this site as your home site and use that bar for all your web-searching needs.
Health Care -- Is It Already Dead?
President Obama and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius say that they didn't shift their position on the public option over the weekend, but clearly they did. They shifted the discussion from a public option being a central tenant of health care reform to a position of willingness to compromise. It was a shift that they needed to make -- a full federal option appears to be DOA in the Senate and public co-operatives would largely achieve the same policy goal while being significantly more acceptable to moderates in both parties.
Predictably, the left-wing factions of the Democratic Party has nearly had a stroke over the past 48 hours. House progressives are threatening to vote against any bill not containing a public option.
Health care is certainly not dead yet and Democrats hold sizable majorities in both houses of congress, but I can't figure out what bill could pass.
All of which points to what I think is now a fair and relevant question -- can the Democratic party govern? In 1977, Democrats took control of both houses of congress and the Presidency. They failed to achieve a single lasting policy accomplishment and were run out of town as Republicans swept into control of the Presidency and the Senate in the 1980 elections. They didn't get another shot until 1993, when Bill Clinton took office with majorities in both houses. After a botched attempt at health care reform that failed, Democrats were crushed in the 1994 elections, with Republicans seizing control of both houses of congress. It wasn't until this year, when President Obama took office, that they got another shot at full control of government.
And so far....Presidential popularity bordering on free fall, health care and limbo and infighting galore. You have to go back to Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society to find a case where the Democrats were in control of both the legislative and executive branches and got major things done.
So can they govern? We'll see. We have a proud history of splitting tickets in this country. Republicans haven't had much more success in governing -- in the past 60 years, they've held control for only 4 years (from 2003 to 2007, although they were just 1 Senate seat shy from 2001 to 2003) and it basically ran them out into the wilderness that they found themselves in this year.
So it may be that we are just conservative as a nation, in the traditional sense of the word. We don't like big changes all at once, which is what one party in power tends to produce. We backlash towards the middle as we are doing now. President Clinton learned this lesson in 1994 and adapted, embracing welfare reform and balanced budgets. He won a resounding re-election in 1996 (by a larger popular vote margin than President Obama held this past November.) President Obama may likewise adapt. Or he may find a way not to have to, as FDR did (Lyndon Johnson was so unpopular by the end of his term that he did not seek a second full term.)
Regardless, the short-term news looks bad for Democrats and good for the GOP. Let's look at how the congressional races are evolving.
2010 Projections
Here are our changes from just a couple of weeks ago:
Illinois -- moves from lean Democratic hold to Toss-Up -- even with Burris out the likely match-ups are polling dead even
Delaware -- moves all the way from Likely Democratic Hold to Lean GOP Pick-up as Rep. Mike Castle surprisingly leads Beau Biden in 2 new polls
Pennsylvania -- Sen. Arlen Specter (D) falls further -- polls are all over the map but are trending GOP, for now we'll move this from Lean Democratic Hold to Toss-up
New York (Gillebrand) -- moves from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold -- this one really all depends on if Pataki runs. If he does, we have a race. If he doesn't, Gillebrand is a lock to win the rest of her term.
Missouri -- moves from toss-up to Lean Democratic Pick-up -- Democrats lead by 1 to 9% in two recent polls.
So, we now have:
Safe Democratic Holds (7)
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (Schumer), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely Democratic Holds (4)
New York (Gillebrand), Indiana, Nevada, North Dakota
Lean Democratic Holds (2)
California, Arkansas
Lean Democratic Pick-ups (3)
New Hampshire, Ohio, Missouri
Toss-ups -- Democratic Controlled (2)
Illinois, Pennsylvania
Toss-ups -- Republican Controlled (0)
Lean GOP Pick-ups (3)
Colorado, Delaware, Connecticut
Lean GOP Holds (3)
Kentucky, North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds (6)
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Holds (6)
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
Which leaves us with:
Projected GOP Pick-up of 0 to 2 Seats -- Central Projection is +1 Seat
Best Case for the GOP (all leans) -- +7 seats
Best Case for the Dems (all leans) -- +6 seats
On the house side, generic ballot is all over the map right now, ranging from +6 for the Dems to +5 for the GOP (from our friends at Rasmussen, who have consistently had outlier polls that are more favorable to the GOP this year -- I just don't know if they are right or if everyone else is.) Throwing out the high and low polls gives us a range of +1% GOP to +3% Dems or a projection range of:
Projected GOP Pick-up of 17 to 35 Seats -- Central Projection is +22 Seats
Even in a very dark summer for the Dems, the GOP still has a structural problem in the Senate. From my first projection to now, I can't see any path to the GOP taking the Senate in 2010. They would need to not only win all of the presently close states (which includes winning California, Connecticut, Illinois and Delaware), they would also need 3 out of 4 in Likely Democratic states, which include popular Sen. Evan Bayh (IN), Senate Majority Leader Harry Read (NV), popular Sen. Byron Dorgan (ND) and Gillebrand's seat in New York. Seems highly, highly unlikely.
In the House, on the other hand, they could potentially get to the 41 seats that they need if Dems keep driving off a cliff. Of course, they face a structural challenge with the way districts are drawn there too. They lost the popular vote in the House by 10% in 2008. If you subtracted 10% from the margin of every Democrat who ran in 2008, the GOP would gain only 22 seats and they need 41 to reclaim a majority. In fact, using that math, they would need to win the popular vote nationally by about 5% to retake the House. Of course, that's exactly where the Rasmussen poll has them, right now.
Thanks for reading. I know August is a slow time for politics and I appreciate you tuning in to hear my thoughts. Please visit often and tell your friends. Also, note the Google search bar at the bottom of the page, which accesses the Google site. You can bookmark this site as your home site and use that bar for all your web-searching needs.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Burris Out -- Checking In on 2010
Burris Will Not Seek Full Term
In what may have been the easiest political decision in recent years, Senator Roland Burris (D-IL), arguably the least popular member of the body (arguable only because of our old friend Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY)) apparently will not seek a full term in 2010. Burris, as you will recall, was appointed by the Gov. "A Senate Seat is a Valuable F***ing Thing" Blago right before he was yanked from office. Burris has been an utter embarrassment to the Democratic caucus and they should all be thrilled that he is standing aside, leaving the Illinois seat to a Democrat who could actually win.
With Burris out, it is a perfect time to re-look at my 2010 projections. Here are the latest changes:
Illinois
Moves from toss-up to lean Democratic hold. Illinois is a very blue state and with Burris gone, the donkeys are a good bet to hold on here, although the Blago/Burris stink still lingers.
Florida
Moves from lean GOP hold to likely GOP hold. Recent polls have had Charlie Crist up by 18 to 25%. I was close to moving this one to a "safe hold", but it seems a little early to declare an open seat safe, although this is certainly not looking good for the Dems.
New Hampshire
Moves from toss-up to lean Democratic pick-up. Three recent polls all have Dems winning all potential match-ups, by margins of 2 to 6%.
So this leaves us with:
Safe Democratic Holds -- 8
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (2), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely Democratic Holds -- 5
Delaware, Indiana, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania
Lean Democratic Holds -- 3
California, Arkansas, Illinois
Lean Democratic Pick-ups -- 3
Kentucky, Ohio, New Hampshire
Toss-ups (Democratic Controlled) -- 1
Connecticut
Toss-ups (Republican Controlled) -- 1
Missouri
Lean GOP Pick-ups -- 1
Colorado
Lean GOP Holds -- 2
North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds -- 6
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Holds -- 6
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
So, netting everything, I project:
Democratic Gain of 0 to 2 seats
Best case for GOP (pick-up of all the leans in both directions): GOP gain of 6 seats
Best case for the Dems (pick-up of all the leans in both directions: DEM gain of 5 seats
So, we are still looking at a fairly neutral mid-term with virtually no chance for control to change hands, but a lot left to be decided in terms of margin.
In the house -- current generic polling is at Dems +5%, leading to an updated projection of:
GOP gain of 8 to 16 seats
As with previous projections, the GOP makes a dent in the huge Dem majority in the house, but not near enough to get close to parity.
There is still a long time to go until 2010 and the GOP is starting to look a little more energized as President Obama's numbers have slipped some, so they certainly shouldn't give up hope yet, but it continues to look like a long road back for the once-might elephants.
Thanks for reading!
In what may have been the easiest political decision in recent years, Senator Roland Burris (D-IL), arguably the least popular member of the body (arguable only because of our old friend Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY)) apparently will not seek a full term in 2010. Burris, as you will recall, was appointed by the Gov. "A Senate Seat is a Valuable F***ing Thing" Blago right before he was yanked from office. Burris has been an utter embarrassment to the Democratic caucus and they should all be thrilled that he is standing aside, leaving the Illinois seat to a Democrat who could actually win.
With Burris out, it is a perfect time to re-look at my 2010 projections. Here are the latest changes:
Illinois
Moves from toss-up to lean Democratic hold. Illinois is a very blue state and with Burris gone, the donkeys are a good bet to hold on here, although the Blago/Burris stink still lingers.
Florida
Moves from lean GOP hold to likely GOP hold. Recent polls have had Charlie Crist up by 18 to 25%. I was close to moving this one to a "safe hold", but it seems a little early to declare an open seat safe, although this is certainly not looking good for the Dems.
New Hampshire
Moves from toss-up to lean Democratic pick-up. Three recent polls all have Dems winning all potential match-ups, by margins of 2 to 6%.
So this leaves us with:
Safe Democratic Holds -- 8
Hawaii, Maryland, New York (2), Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin
Likely Democratic Holds -- 5
Delaware, Indiana, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania
Lean Democratic Holds -- 3
California, Arkansas, Illinois
Lean Democratic Pick-ups -- 3
Kentucky, Ohio, New Hampshire
Toss-ups (Democratic Controlled) -- 1
Connecticut
Toss-ups (Republican Controlled) -- 1
Missouri
Lean GOP Pick-ups -- 1
Colorado
Lean GOP Holds -- 2
North Carolina, Georgia
Likely GOP Holds -- 6
Florida, Alaska, Arizona, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota
Safe GOP Holds -- 6
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah
So, netting everything, I project:
Democratic Gain of 0 to 2 seats
Best case for GOP (pick-up of all the leans in both directions): GOP gain of 6 seats
Best case for the Dems (pick-up of all the leans in both directions: DEM gain of 5 seats
So, we are still looking at a fairly neutral mid-term with virtually no chance for control to change hands, but a lot left to be decided in terms of margin.
In the house -- current generic polling is at Dems +5%, leading to an updated projection of:
GOP gain of 8 to 16 seats
As with previous projections, the GOP makes a dent in the huge Dem majority in the house, but not near enough to get close to parity.
There is still a long time to go until 2010 and the GOP is starting to look a little more energized as President Obama's numbers have slipped some, so they certainly shouldn't give up hope yet, but it continues to look like a long road back for the once-might elephants.
Thanks for reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
