Lots of news in the world of 2010 Senate races the past few days. Let me break it down.
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT)'s Retirement
Chris Dodd has represented Connecticut in the Senate for the past 30 years and has frequently won re-election easily, winning by 34% in his most recent re-election in 2004. But it was to be a massive uphill climb for the man who was the Senate's top watchdog over the financial services industry (oops!) and was exposed sneaking a change into the stimulus bill that allowed AIG to pay out massive bonuses after huge TARP fund injections (bigger oops!)
He was trailing prospective GOP opponents by as much as 13% in recent polls and had a huge PR problem. In fact, at the time of his announcement, his seat was the strongest projected change in the entire array of Senate races, being rated a "likely GOP pick-up."
With Dodd gone, this helps the DEMs. They are free to run a candidate in a deep blue state that has not so deeply offended the voting public. Attorney General Mike Blumenthal has announced his candidacy and he is highly popular in the state.
How much more popular than Dodd?
Dodd was trailing prospective GOP candidates by 6 to 13%. Blumenthal, in a just-released Rasmussen poll (validated by a Democratic-afilliated Public Policy Polling poll which showed even wider margins) leads these same candidates by 23 to 24%.
This race is effectively over. The Dems hold the seat.
Move Connecticut almost all the way across the spectrum: it goes from a Likely GOP Pick-up to a Safe Democratic Hold
Senator Byron Dorgan Retires
A different story entirely in North Dakota. Senator Dorgan was in trouble, to be sure. A red-leaning state is a bad place to be in a year that is shaping up to be on the red side to begin with. Couple that with the probably candidacy of a popular Republican Governor, John Hoeven, and you have a "lean GOP pick-up".
Take Dorgan out of the equation and you have....still a lean GOP pick-up. Dorgan wasn't the problem the way Dodd was, the dynamics of North Dakota, the quality of the opposition and the national mood are the key factors in play.
North Dakota remains a Lean GOP Pick-Up.
Could Coakley Actually Lose?
Losing Ted Kennedy's Senate seat in a state among the deepest blue would be a disaster of epic proportions for the Democrats and an ominous sign for November.
Could it actually happen? I doubt that it will. But it has moved from the realm of pure Republican fantasy to the realm of mere improbability. In a stunning closing of the race, a Rasmussen poll released this week shows Coakley with merely a 9 point lead over GOPer Scott Brown. This is a dramatic drop from November polls, which had the margin pegged at 30 or more points.
Make no mistake about it, I expect Coakley to prevail and avoid an outright disaster for the DEMs. But a single-digit win is still an embarrassment in what should be a walk for the DEMs.
Massachusetts moves from a Safe Democratic Hold to a Likely Democratic Hold with a week and a half to go until the special election.
Other Moves
The first New Hampshire senate poll in several months was released this week, conducted by ARG, shows Republican Kelly Ayotte leading Rep. Paul Hodes by 7 points. In the absence of other recent polling, the margin is sufficient enough for me to move this from a Lean Democratic Pick-up to a Lean Republican Hold.
In Arkansas, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D) may have made a very real choice to put her job on the line by supporting health care reform. A Rasmussen poll against 4 potential GOP challengers shows her trailing them all by margins of 8 to 12% after leading by single digits in late November and early December. This race moves from a Lean Democratic Hold to a Lean GOP Pick-up.
I suspect that there are other states that may move to the right as new polling data comes in (Missouri and Pennsylvania jump out, just to point out two), but we'll take the polls as they come in.
Complete rundown soon.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Monday, January 4, 2010
An In-Depth Look at Obama's Numbers Heading Into 2010, Terrorism Back in Focus, What To Look For In The Coming Weeks and Months, Predictions for 2010
Taking the "Long View"
It has become conventional wisdom in Washington that President Barack Obama is known for "taking the long view", virtually ignoring the short-term political ramifications of decisions and focusing instead on building a portfolio of policies that he believes will lead him to success over time. Sticking by Tim Geithner, expending massive political capital seeking health care reform, defending a stimulus plan that did little to defray unemployment in the near term are all part of the President's bigger plan, which will pay off over the long term, we are told.
You may believe or not believe that the President's policies will ultimately be successful in achieving their goals. And, frankly, you may agree or disagree with the underlying values that are implied by those goals. But one thing is for sure - while the President himself may have the luxury of taking a long view as he is not on the ballot again for almost 3 years, many of his Democratic partners in Congress do not have the same luxury, as all of Democratic House seats and 19 of the 58 Senate seats controlled by Democrats face elections this year.
So what can we glean of the President's current numbers? Let's start by grounding ourselves in them again. Below is the trend from his past month in his approve minus disapprove. As you can see, the President has remained in the channel between the zero line (an equal split between approval and disapproval) and the 7.2% margin of victory he achieved in 2008. Please note that the recent trends (since December 20th) have been impacted by a lack of available polling data. Gallup and Rasmussen both suspended their polling for a few days each around Christmas and New Year's and no other major national polls have come out in the past two weeks. So, the next few weeks will show if these numbers are still good, but below is what we have as of now.
Looking at the President's monthly numbers, he finished December with at +4.5%, his lowest number to date, down 42.4% from his massive numbers when he took office. This means, essentially, that 21.2% of the population or more than 1 in 5 people have changed their view of the President's performance from positive to negative since early in his term. This is a concerning, but not yet damning trend.
In total for 2009, the President averaged +23.1%, which would be an above-average year for a new President. But that was impacted, obviously, by his very high numbers early in his term and we are nowhere near those big numbers now.
In total, being +4 to +5% wouldn't be too horribly bad under ordinary circumstances. I'm sure that the President would be happy to take a 4 or 5 percentage point win in 2012. But, these are not ordinary circumstances. These are circumstances where Democrats have to defend massive majorities in both houses of congress.
Bear in mind, the House that is up for re-election in 2010 was elected in November 2008, when the President won by a 7.2% margin. Therefore, any Presidential approval numbers below that 7.2% spread imply losses in the fall for Democrats in the House. And there were a number of very close races in 2008 -- 6 within 1 percentage point, 11 within 2% and 23 within the President's margin of victory of 7.2%. Worse yet, Congressional Democrats, while they actually outperformed the President in total in 2008 (their aggregate vote margin in the House was about 9%) are underperforming him in current polling.
The Senate is a more complicated situation. Certainly Democrats are being hurt by the drag on their polls in close, open races such as Ohio and Missouri. But they are also a victim of individual failings, such as Chris Dodd's situation with AIG which may cost them a race that they should be winning easily, even in a down year, in Connecticut or the Blago/Roland Burris scandal, which has made a race in Illinois that should be a no-brainer a pick 'em. Republicans have also drafted some good candidates, such as Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware, a true Northeastern moderate, who has a real chance at claiming that seat for the GOP.
So, circumstances are conspiring against the Democrats. But all is not lost. If you look at how much ground the President lost in year one, amidst bloody battles on the stimulus bill and health care and while the economy continued to sag, it could all reverse just as quickly if unemployment turns upward, which it appears poised to do. The problem that they will face is that public perception about the economy tends to lag reality -- just ask former President George Herbert-Walker Bush, who got destroyed, receiving only 38% of the vote right as the economy was roaring back to life in 1992.
It seems inevitable that the Democrats will lose seats, certainly in the House and most likely in the Senate in November. Whether it is simply a minor correction (say 3 or 4 seats in the Senate and 20 or 25 seats in the House) or a 1994-style blood-letting (say 10 seats in the Senate and 40 to 50 seats in the House) remains to be seen. The best thing the Democrats can do is get healthcare down fast and move on to other issues, mainly the economy.
The National Security Dialogue Resumes
For a while in 2009, you could have forgotten that we were fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and that the focus of the political world from 2001 through the first half of 2008 had been all about terrorism, radical Islam and Al Qaeda. The focus of the political world was on the economy and health care. Two things have brought this issue back to being front and center: the President's decision to commit additional troops to Afghanistan and the attempted bombing of a Northwest / Delta flight from Amsterdam to Detroit.
We have been reminded again that people are still trying to kill Americans. We are also reminded of just how tricky fighting Al Qaeda radicals is. They were based out of Afghanistan. Now, while they are still there in small numbers, they are based in Pakistan but also operate camps in Yemen, Somalia and many, many other pockets throughout the middle east and Africa. Clearly, we can't win this by fighting them country by country, as we have been more or less attempting.
Nor can we realistically put in place security protocols that preclude a future attack. Sure, we are stepping up procedures in response to the attempted bombing. But, once again, we are chasing what Al Qaeda has already attempted, not what they will attempt next. Who is to say that the next attempt won't be on a train? A chemical factory? A nuclear power plant? A hazmat truck? How good do you feel about the security in these places?
The simple truth, that nobody wants to hear, but that I've said many times is that you CANNOT prevent terrorist attacks while retaining a free society. The shear volume of people that move through commercial airports, trains and roads precludes it. Not that we shouldn't attempt to put common sense security protocols in place, but let's not give the false sense that we can ever be in complete control. And let's not overplay the risk....on September 11th, the worst day in aviation history, you were still more likely to be killed driving a car a mile than flying a mile.
Things to Look for Upcoming
Health Care -- negotiations between the House and the Senate get kicked off in earnest in about a week. Look first to what process is going to be used -- a formal conference committee or something less formal. Also, look to see how the pressure from other states on the sweetheart deal Ben Nelson got for Nebraska impacts the final deal, keeping in mind that the Dems must retain Nelson in order to win final passage. If you don't see a vote by early February, the bill is in trouble.
State of the Union -- look for the President to focus on two themes -- the economy and terrorism. He has to. They are what is on everyone's mind. Also, look to see if he signals a willingness to drop Cap and Trade this year or if he forges ahead with another ambitious year.
Special Election in Massachusetts -- looks to see if it is closer than expected. Nobody seriously expects the GOP to win, but if they are within 15 points, it is a dangerous sign for the Dems heading into November.
Predictions for 2010
I've been known to get these horribly wrong, but I'll try anyway:
(1) President Obama will sign a health care bill into law in late February that looks a lot like the version the Senate passed on December 24th.
(2) A Cap and Trade bill will NOT pass the Senate before the mid-term elections, despite a push from the White House.
(3) President Obama's numbers will bottom out in February or March and then rise modestly the rest of the year as unemployment falls, ending the year between 8.5% and 9.0%
(4) Republicans gain ground in both the House and the Senate, but retake neither, picking up 30 House seats and 5 Senate seats. The Blue Dogs gain even more clout and talk the White House into a monthly breakfast to discuss their issues as they now hold the key swing votes.
(5) Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin all announce their candidacy for President. Palin leads with a plurality in early polling.
(6) Gitmo is still not entirely closed on December 31st.
(7) The President shows that his "deadline" for drawdown in Afghanistan is more flexible than we all thought.
Thanks for reading....if you like this site, tell your friends.
It has become conventional wisdom in Washington that President Barack Obama is known for "taking the long view", virtually ignoring the short-term political ramifications of decisions and focusing instead on building a portfolio of policies that he believes will lead him to success over time. Sticking by Tim Geithner, expending massive political capital seeking health care reform, defending a stimulus plan that did little to defray unemployment in the near term are all part of the President's bigger plan, which will pay off over the long term, we are told.
You may believe or not believe that the President's policies will ultimately be successful in achieving their goals. And, frankly, you may agree or disagree with the underlying values that are implied by those goals. But one thing is for sure - while the President himself may have the luxury of taking a long view as he is not on the ballot again for almost 3 years, many of his Democratic partners in Congress do not have the same luxury, as all of Democratic House seats and 19 of the 58 Senate seats controlled by Democrats face elections this year.
So what can we glean of the President's current numbers? Let's start by grounding ourselves in them again. Below is the trend from his past month in his approve minus disapprove. As you can see, the President has remained in the channel between the zero line (an equal split between approval and disapproval) and the 7.2% margin of victory he achieved in 2008. Please note that the recent trends (since December 20th) have been impacted by a lack of available polling data. Gallup and Rasmussen both suspended their polling for a few days each around Christmas and New Year's and no other major national polls have come out in the past two weeks. So, the next few weeks will show if these numbers are still good, but below is what we have as of now.
Looking at the President's monthly numbers, he finished December with at +4.5%, his lowest number to date, down 42.4% from his massive numbers when he took office. This means, essentially, that 21.2% of the population or more than 1 in 5 people have changed their view of the President's performance from positive to negative since early in his term. This is a concerning, but not yet damning trend.
In total for 2009, the President averaged +23.1%, which would be an above-average year for a new President. But that was impacted, obviously, by his very high numbers early in his term and we are nowhere near those big numbers now.
In total, being +4 to +5% wouldn't be too horribly bad under ordinary circumstances. I'm sure that the President would be happy to take a 4 or 5 percentage point win in 2012. But, these are not ordinary circumstances. These are circumstances where Democrats have to defend massive majorities in both houses of congress.
Bear in mind, the House that is up for re-election in 2010 was elected in November 2008, when the President won by a 7.2% margin. Therefore, any Presidential approval numbers below that 7.2% spread imply losses in the fall for Democrats in the House. And there were a number of very close races in 2008 -- 6 within 1 percentage point, 11 within 2% and 23 within the President's margin of victory of 7.2%. Worse yet, Congressional Democrats, while they actually outperformed the President in total in 2008 (their aggregate vote margin in the House was about 9%) are underperforming him in current polling.
The Senate is a more complicated situation. Certainly Democrats are being hurt by the drag on their polls in close, open races such as Ohio and Missouri. But they are also a victim of individual failings, such as Chris Dodd's situation with AIG which may cost them a race that they should be winning easily, even in a down year, in Connecticut or the Blago/Roland Burris scandal, which has made a race in Illinois that should be a no-brainer a pick 'em. Republicans have also drafted some good candidates, such as Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware, a true Northeastern moderate, who has a real chance at claiming that seat for the GOP.
So, circumstances are conspiring against the Democrats. But all is not lost. If you look at how much ground the President lost in year one, amidst bloody battles on the stimulus bill and health care and while the economy continued to sag, it could all reverse just as quickly if unemployment turns upward, which it appears poised to do. The problem that they will face is that public perception about the economy tends to lag reality -- just ask former President George Herbert-Walker Bush, who got destroyed, receiving only 38% of the vote right as the economy was roaring back to life in 1992.
It seems inevitable that the Democrats will lose seats, certainly in the House and most likely in the Senate in November. Whether it is simply a minor correction (say 3 or 4 seats in the Senate and 20 or 25 seats in the House) or a 1994-style blood-letting (say 10 seats in the Senate and 40 to 50 seats in the House) remains to be seen. The best thing the Democrats can do is get healthcare down fast and move on to other issues, mainly the economy.
The National Security Dialogue Resumes
For a while in 2009, you could have forgotten that we were fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and that the focus of the political world from 2001 through the first half of 2008 had been all about terrorism, radical Islam and Al Qaeda. The focus of the political world was on the economy and health care. Two things have brought this issue back to being front and center: the President's decision to commit additional troops to Afghanistan and the attempted bombing of a Northwest / Delta flight from Amsterdam to Detroit.
We have been reminded again that people are still trying to kill Americans. We are also reminded of just how tricky fighting Al Qaeda radicals is. They were based out of Afghanistan. Now, while they are still there in small numbers, they are based in Pakistan but also operate camps in Yemen, Somalia and many, many other pockets throughout the middle east and Africa. Clearly, we can't win this by fighting them country by country, as we have been more or less attempting.
Nor can we realistically put in place security protocols that preclude a future attack. Sure, we are stepping up procedures in response to the attempted bombing. But, once again, we are chasing what Al Qaeda has already attempted, not what they will attempt next. Who is to say that the next attempt won't be on a train? A chemical factory? A nuclear power plant? A hazmat truck? How good do you feel about the security in these places?
The simple truth, that nobody wants to hear, but that I've said many times is that you CANNOT prevent terrorist attacks while retaining a free society. The shear volume of people that move through commercial airports, trains and roads precludes it. Not that we shouldn't attempt to put common sense security protocols in place, but let's not give the false sense that we can ever be in complete control. And let's not overplay the risk....on September 11th, the worst day in aviation history, you were still more likely to be killed driving a car a mile than flying a mile.
Things to Look for Upcoming
Health Care -- negotiations between the House and the Senate get kicked off in earnest in about a week. Look first to what process is going to be used -- a formal conference committee or something less formal. Also, look to see how the pressure from other states on the sweetheart deal Ben Nelson got for Nebraska impacts the final deal, keeping in mind that the Dems must retain Nelson in order to win final passage. If you don't see a vote by early February, the bill is in trouble.
State of the Union -- look for the President to focus on two themes -- the economy and terrorism. He has to. They are what is on everyone's mind. Also, look to see if he signals a willingness to drop Cap and Trade this year or if he forges ahead with another ambitious year.
Special Election in Massachusetts -- looks to see if it is closer than expected. Nobody seriously expects the GOP to win, but if they are within 15 points, it is a dangerous sign for the Dems heading into November.
Predictions for 2010
I've been known to get these horribly wrong, but I'll try anyway:
(1) President Obama will sign a health care bill into law in late February that looks a lot like the version the Senate passed on December 24th.
(2) A Cap and Trade bill will NOT pass the Senate before the mid-term elections, despite a push from the White House.
(3) President Obama's numbers will bottom out in February or March and then rise modestly the rest of the year as unemployment falls, ending the year between 8.5% and 9.0%
(4) Republicans gain ground in both the House and the Senate, but retake neither, picking up 30 House seats and 5 Senate seats. The Blue Dogs gain even more clout and talk the White House into a monthly breakfast to discuss their issues as they now hold the key swing votes.
(5) Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin all announce their candidacy for President. Palin leads with a plurality in early polling.
(6) Gitmo is still not entirely closed on December 31st.
(7) The President shows that his "deadline" for drawdown in Afghanistan is more flexible than we all thought.
Thanks for reading....if you like this site, tell your friends.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Happy 2010! Welcome to the Cabinet Dead Pool
It is inevitable -- in Presidential administrations, key staff members leave. Some leave because they burn out after a few years in high-profile, thankless and frankly, fairly low-paying jobs. Some leave because they come to have policy differences with the President (think Christie Todd Whitman and Colin Powell.) Some leave because of public fire or because the President just feels there is a need to make a change (think Donald Rumsfeld.) But ultimately, no President holds his entire cabinet together, even for 4 years.
So, in the spirit of the New Year and the pending second year of the Obama Administration, I thought I'd rate our "cabinet dead pool" on the probability that each member will survive 2010 in their current job.
Department of State -- Hillary Rodham Clinton
There was a lot of speculation early on that Clinton was not in Obama's inner-circle, that her appointment was simply an example of "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" and that Hillary would quickly tire of being a senior official in name only, with the real foreign policy decisions being made behind closed doors with the Vice-President and Secretary of Defense Gates driving the policy.
To my eyes, Clinton has done what she tends to do when she gets a new job -- she has gone to work. She has been quietly effective, if not omnipresent in front of the camera. During her actually fairly low-profile Senate career, Hillary was a worker not a glory seeker and the same seems to be the case here. Whether he ambitions will get the best of her over the course of the term remains to be seen, but for now, she seems unlikely to leave and the President seems extremely unlikely to ask her to.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of the Treasury -- Timothy Geithner
Geithner certainly got off to a rocky start. Blistering criticism from the right on his tax dodges (or "errors", if you like) and a poorly received mortgage bailout plan early on had many clamoring for his ouster very early on. As time has passed, the criticism seems to have waned and Geithner's job seems safe for now. The work he and Ben Bernake did on TARP in the waning days of the Bush Administration looks better now than it did a year ago and while Geithner does not appear to be in Obama's inner circle, his skill set is pretty unique and not something that is likely to be found in one of Obama's Chicago friends or from anyone he knew from his Senate days.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of Defense -- Robert Gates
It was all supposed to be a temporary arrangement -- the rumor around Washington was that Gates agreed to stay exactly one year in the new administration when he came on board an no more. Gates, perhaps the most high-profile of all Obama cabinet members has been coy with the press, saying that he "serves at the pleasure of the President" but that it is "unlikely" that he will stay in the job for all of Obama's term. Still, clearly the year will pass without Gates leaving, there hasn't been a peep of a rumor about his departure in the past few months and Gates clearly has been effective in influencing policy (the Afghanistan strategy is largely his brain child as were modifications to the military budget to scrap expensive F-22's in favor of more enlisted troops) and most decidedly is President Obama's go-to guy on Defense policy. If he leaves, it is likely to be in the second half of the year and, in the continuation of his practice of doing things the right way, only after a successor is in place. President Obama should seek to hold on to Gates for as long as he can.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 50%
Department of Justice -- Eric Holder
There were probably better ways for Holder to introduce himself to the nation than to call us all a "nation of cowards" on race, although his point wasn't entirely wrong, but Holder seems to have weathered that storm as well as the criticism at his confirmation hearing about his role in Rich pardon while part of the Clinton-era Justice Department. Holder has been effective on a number of fronts, backing off federal prosecution of medical marijuana cases, vacating the prosecution against former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and starting to bring terrorists to trial in the US. It seems Holder is always at the center of controversy, but he IS, undoubtedly in Obama's inner circle and as such, his job is pretty safe, unless he REALLY steps in it in the new year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 10%
Department of Interior -- Ken Salazar
The former Colorado Senator appears to be having the time of his life, is generating no controversy and frankly, isn't in a very high-profile cabinet department. He is very safe.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Agriculture Tom Vilsack
Frankly, most of us probably forgot he even had this job. He has been very low-profile, although that could obviously change if there is a mad cow or hoof-in-mouth disease scare in the next year. Still, he is very well-liked on a bi-partisan basis and has generated no waves so far.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Commerce -- Gary Locke
President Obama's third pick for the Commerce Department (after his first two fell apart for various reasons) has a big task in 2010 -- execution of the census. We haven't heard a ton form Secretary Locke yet, but expect his profile to increase. And expect there to be the requisite controversy that always accompanies the census -- how the homeless are counted, how illegals are counted, whether statistical sampling will be used for funding purposes (the Supreme Court has already ruled that it cannot be used for House and Electoral allocation purposes.) Still, Locke is a seasoned political veteran nearing the end of his career. It's hard to imagine him departing this year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Department of Labor -- Hilda Solis
The subject of a confirmation fight for her unapologetically pro-union political stands, Secretary Solis has taken a lower profile in the first year of the Obama Administration. The union's crown jewel of legislation, the Employee Free Choice Act has not seen Congressional action yet, although the new Administration, at the urging of the Labor Secretary, has issued several executive orders favorable to public service unions. Secretary Solis certainly has a better job than when she was in Congress and doesn't have an obvious next step politically (she could be a Senate candidate down the road in California, but right now there are no Democratic vacancies.)
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Department of Health and Human Services -- Kathleen Sebelius
Among the higher profile Obama administration officials, Secretary Sebelius has been central in the fight for universal healthcare. She appears NOT to be in the Obama inner circle and as such at times appeared off-message during the debate. Her real test will be if a reform plan IS passed in overseeing the implementation, which could be a make-or-break for her career. She also seems to still have political clout back home, although the calendar would seem to preclude a 2010 Senate run at this point.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of Housing and Urban Development -- Shaun Donovan
Another Obama inner-circle member who seems to have created no controversy, even on the right. His job is very safe.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Secretary of Transportation -- Ray Lahood
One of Obama's Republican appointees, Lahood is a quirky guy. He can come off as oddly combative in interviews sometimes, has some controversial ideas (like taxing automobile mileage) and seems like a bit of a loose cannon. He is decidedly not an inner-circle member and seems like he could part ways with the administration at any time. Still, where would he go? He isn't going to be a statewide candidate for either party at this point and it frankly seems unlikely he could even win back his old seat in congress.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 10%
Department of Energy -- Steven Chu
A career scientist, not a politician, Chu is an exceptionally bright individual. He has been low-profile thus far, probably a product of the fact that he is more effective at speaking to scientists than to the general public. Chu has generated no controversy, although that could certainly change as debates ensue about Cap and Trade and the green economy and he is dispatched with greater frequency. Still, I would find it highly surprising to see Chu depart this year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Secretary of Education -- Arne Duncan
As bright and articulate as he has proved to be unconventional, Chicago-insider Arne Duncan has been a breath of fresh air in stale debates over educational reform. He has the President's ear, possibly more than any other cabinet member, and is well-liked on both sides of capital hill.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Veterans Affairs -- Eric Shinseki
A decorated ex-officer running Veterans Affairs -- he has the best possible job with his credentials and is well-liked on both sides of the aisles. He isn't leaving.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Homeland Security -- Janet Napolitano
It's been a tough few weeks for Napolitano. Her "the system worked" gaffe harkened back for many to the George W. Bush's tone-deaf "you're doing a heck of a job, Brownie" and convinced many that she is out of touch with the threat that exists in the US. Napolitano has been extremely high profile between the Mexican drug wars, the Fort Hood shootings and the Christmas Day bombing attempt and has not always appeared in the best light. She gave up an opportunity to oppose John McCain in Arizona in 2010 to come onboard and may ultimately regret doing so. Still, the Obama Administration has repeatedly stated that her job is not at risk and it seems likely she will survive the year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 15%
So, there you have it. I rate Gates (50%) by far the most likely to depart this year, Napolitano (15%) second and Holder (10%) and Lahood (10%) tied for third. In total, my percentages would imply a 71% probability of at least one Obama cabinet member departing this year.
Don't agree? Have another leader in your "dead pool"? Let me know.
Happy New Year's everyone.
So, in the spirit of the New Year and the pending second year of the Obama Administration, I thought I'd rate our "cabinet dead pool" on the probability that each member will survive 2010 in their current job.
Department of State -- Hillary Rodham Clinton
There was a lot of speculation early on that Clinton was not in Obama's inner-circle, that her appointment was simply an example of "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" and that Hillary would quickly tire of being a senior official in name only, with the real foreign policy decisions being made behind closed doors with the Vice-President and Secretary of Defense Gates driving the policy.
To my eyes, Clinton has done what she tends to do when she gets a new job -- she has gone to work. She has been quietly effective, if not omnipresent in front of the camera. During her actually fairly low-profile Senate career, Hillary was a worker not a glory seeker and the same seems to be the case here. Whether he ambitions will get the best of her over the course of the term remains to be seen, but for now, she seems unlikely to leave and the President seems extremely unlikely to ask her to.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of the Treasury -- Timothy Geithner
Geithner certainly got off to a rocky start. Blistering criticism from the right on his tax dodges (or "errors", if you like) and a poorly received mortgage bailout plan early on had many clamoring for his ouster very early on. As time has passed, the criticism seems to have waned and Geithner's job seems safe for now. The work he and Ben Bernake did on TARP in the waning days of the Bush Administration looks better now than it did a year ago and while Geithner does not appear to be in Obama's inner circle, his skill set is pretty unique and not something that is likely to be found in one of Obama's Chicago friends or from anyone he knew from his Senate days.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of Defense -- Robert Gates
It was all supposed to be a temporary arrangement -- the rumor around Washington was that Gates agreed to stay exactly one year in the new administration when he came on board an no more. Gates, perhaps the most high-profile of all Obama cabinet members has been coy with the press, saying that he "serves at the pleasure of the President" but that it is "unlikely" that he will stay in the job for all of Obama's term. Still, clearly the year will pass without Gates leaving, there hasn't been a peep of a rumor about his departure in the past few months and Gates clearly has been effective in influencing policy (the Afghanistan strategy is largely his brain child as were modifications to the military budget to scrap expensive F-22's in favor of more enlisted troops) and most decidedly is President Obama's go-to guy on Defense policy. If he leaves, it is likely to be in the second half of the year and, in the continuation of his practice of doing things the right way, only after a successor is in place. President Obama should seek to hold on to Gates for as long as he can.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 50%
Department of Justice -- Eric Holder
There were probably better ways for Holder to introduce himself to the nation than to call us all a "nation of cowards" on race, although his point wasn't entirely wrong, but Holder seems to have weathered that storm as well as the criticism at his confirmation hearing about his role in Rich pardon while part of the Clinton-era Justice Department. Holder has been effective on a number of fronts, backing off federal prosecution of medical marijuana cases, vacating the prosecution against former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and starting to bring terrorists to trial in the US. It seems Holder is always at the center of controversy, but he IS, undoubtedly in Obama's inner circle and as such, his job is pretty safe, unless he REALLY steps in it in the new year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 10%
Department of Interior -- Ken Salazar
The former Colorado Senator appears to be having the time of his life, is generating no controversy and frankly, isn't in a very high-profile cabinet department. He is very safe.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Agriculture Tom Vilsack
Frankly, most of us probably forgot he even had this job. He has been very low-profile, although that could obviously change if there is a mad cow or hoof-in-mouth disease scare in the next year. Still, he is very well-liked on a bi-partisan basis and has generated no waves so far.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Commerce -- Gary Locke
President Obama's third pick for the Commerce Department (after his first two fell apart for various reasons) has a big task in 2010 -- execution of the census. We haven't heard a ton form Secretary Locke yet, but expect his profile to increase. And expect there to be the requisite controversy that always accompanies the census -- how the homeless are counted, how illegals are counted, whether statistical sampling will be used for funding purposes (the Supreme Court has already ruled that it cannot be used for House and Electoral allocation purposes.) Still, Locke is a seasoned political veteran nearing the end of his career. It's hard to imagine him departing this year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Department of Labor -- Hilda Solis
The subject of a confirmation fight for her unapologetically pro-union political stands, Secretary Solis has taken a lower profile in the first year of the Obama Administration. The union's crown jewel of legislation, the Employee Free Choice Act has not seen Congressional action yet, although the new Administration, at the urging of the Labor Secretary, has issued several executive orders favorable to public service unions. Secretary Solis certainly has a better job than when she was in Congress and doesn't have an obvious next step politically (she could be a Senate candidate down the road in California, but right now there are no Democratic vacancies.)
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Department of Health and Human Services -- Kathleen Sebelius
Among the higher profile Obama administration officials, Secretary Sebelius has been central in the fight for universal healthcare. She appears NOT to be in the Obama inner circle and as such at times appeared off-message during the debate. Her real test will be if a reform plan IS passed in overseeing the implementation, which could be a make-or-break for her career. She also seems to still have political clout back home, although the calendar would seem to preclude a 2010 Senate run at this point.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 5%
Department of Housing and Urban Development -- Shaun Donovan
Another Obama inner-circle member who seems to have created no controversy, even on the right. His job is very safe.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Secretary of Transportation -- Ray Lahood
One of Obama's Republican appointees, Lahood is a quirky guy. He can come off as oddly combative in interviews sometimes, has some controversial ideas (like taxing automobile mileage) and seems like a bit of a loose cannon. He is decidedly not an inner-circle member and seems like he could part ways with the administration at any time. Still, where would he go? He isn't going to be a statewide candidate for either party at this point and it frankly seems unlikely he could even win back his old seat in congress.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 10%
Department of Energy -- Steven Chu
A career scientist, not a politician, Chu is an exceptionally bright individual. He has been low-profile thus far, probably a product of the fact that he is more effective at speaking to scientists than to the general public. Chu has generated no controversy, although that could certainly change as debates ensue about Cap and Trade and the green economy and he is dispatched with greater frequency. Still, I would find it highly surprising to see Chu depart this year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 3%
Secretary of Education -- Arne Duncan
As bright and articulate as he has proved to be unconventional, Chicago-insider Arne Duncan has been a breath of fresh air in stale debates over educational reform. He has the President's ear, possibly more than any other cabinet member, and is well-liked on both sides of capital hill.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Veterans Affairs -- Eric Shinseki
A decorated ex-officer running Veterans Affairs -- he has the best possible job with his credentials and is well-liked on both sides of the aisles. He isn't leaving.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 2%
Department of Homeland Security -- Janet Napolitano
It's been a tough few weeks for Napolitano. Her "the system worked" gaffe harkened back for many to the George W. Bush's tone-deaf "you're doing a heck of a job, Brownie" and convinced many that she is out of touch with the threat that exists in the US. Napolitano has been extremely high profile between the Mexican drug wars, the Fort Hood shootings and the Christmas Day bombing attempt and has not always appeared in the best light. She gave up an opportunity to oppose John McCain in Arizona in 2010 to come onboard and may ultimately regret doing so. Still, the Obama Administration has repeatedly stated that her job is not at risk and it seems likely she will survive the year.
Odds of Departure in 2010: 15%
So, there you have it. I rate Gates (50%) by far the most likely to depart this year, Napolitano (15%) second and Holder (10%) and Lahood (10%) tied for third. In total, my percentages would imply a 71% probability of at least one Obama cabinet member departing this year.
Don't agree? Have another leader in your "dead pool"? Let me know.
Happy New Year's everyone.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
My Favorite 10 Political Stories of 2009
It's the end of the year, time to look back at the year in politics. I have no scientific criteria for choosing these stories, but my general criteria are the historic significance of the event, the political impact, the national impact and the cultural impact.
Here are my top 10:
10. Arlen Specter switches parties
In a complete about-face, longtime Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter switched from the GOP to the Democrats. His official reasoning was fairly tortured...he was okay being a Republican for the last 8 years but all of sudden this spring they became to rightist? This story was at least 6 years in the making as the right has been attempting to ouster Specter, who was (and I think still is?) both fiscally and socially moderate. And the Democrats were more than happy to have vote number 60, although Specter wasn't given all of his seniority for his time as a Republican. Specter's departure from the GOP essentially left the Maine duo of Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe as the last true Senate GOP moderates.
9. The Blago Affair
Chicago corruption is nothing new, but Blago took it to a whole new level. His refusal to leave office, his flaunting his nose at party leaders by appointing Roland Burris to the Senate (who, incidentally, was needed to cast the 60th vote for Health Care cloture), his omnipresence in the media. It just doesn't get any better than this if you follow politics.
8. Sarah Palin quits as Alaska Governor and Hits the Blogosphere and Book Circuit
A bizzarre departure for the Alaska Governor...why did she quit again? She didn't like Freedom of Information requests? At any rate, the Ex-Governor quickly rekindled her GOP star, attacking health care "death panels", selling books like crazy and generally infuriating the left and revving up the tea baggers.
7. The Tea-Party Movement
Whether you think it is a Fox News conspiracy or an organic uprising of populists, the tea-party movement and the crashing of town halls this summer had an undeniable impact on the trajectory of both the health care debate and the political tone in America.
6. GOP wins in New Jersey and Virginia
Our only significant political contests saw Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie sweep into office amidst both national concenrs that Democrats were overreaching and local races that saw them square off against weak opponents. The GOP shows it still has life in it headed into 2010.
5. Fort Hood Shootings
Those awful events reminded us both of the heroics of our soldiers and the fragility, as well as the continued tensions between the Islamic religion and our culture.
4. Attempted bombing on a Northwest Flight
Lest we forget that there are still people in the world that want nothing more than to kill Americans, we were reminded this December after a failed bombing attempt on a Detroit bound Northwest flight from Amsterdam. We are also reminded again that all of the airport security added since 2001 has been costly window-dressing and that we can NEVER be absolutely safe in a free society.
3. The Government Takes Over GM
The biggest car maker in the United States becomes majority owned by the government after one of the largest and quickest bankruptcies in US history.
2. Senate passes Health Care reform on a party line vote
The most significant piece of social welfare legislation since LBJ's great society moves a step closer to reality. Call it socialism or call it human rights, but it's hard to argue its significance.
1. Barack Obama sworn in as President
Less than 8 years after September 11th, a man with the middle name Hussein was sworn into office. Less than 50 years after the end of segregation an African-American is sworn in as President, buoyed by victories in 3 southern states. I said it on election night and I'll say it again...only in this country would this even have been a possibility.
Lots of honorable mentions:
Joe Wilson's "You Lie!"
The Stimulus Bill Passing
Edward Kennedy's Death
New York's 23rd
Goldman Sach's bonuses
and many, many more.
Happy New Year! Lots of races to cover headed into 2010. We are closing in on the Massachusetts special election, the Illinois Senate primary and much, much more. 470 races of national significance next year! I look forward to spending the next 365 days talking with you about it.
Here are my top 10:
10. Arlen Specter switches parties
In a complete about-face, longtime Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter switched from the GOP to the Democrats. His official reasoning was fairly tortured...he was okay being a Republican for the last 8 years but all of sudden this spring they became to rightist? This story was at least 6 years in the making as the right has been attempting to ouster Specter, who was (and I think still is?) both fiscally and socially moderate. And the Democrats were more than happy to have vote number 60, although Specter wasn't given all of his seniority for his time as a Republican. Specter's departure from the GOP essentially left the Maine duo of Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe as the last true Senate GOP moderates.
9. The Blago Affair
Chicago corruption is nothing new, but Blago took it to a whole new level. His refusal to leave office, his flaunting his nose at party leaders by appointing Roland Burris to the Senate (who, incidentally, was needed to cast the 60th vote for Health Care cloture), his omnipresence in the media. It just doesn't get any better than this if you follow politics.
8. Sarah Palin quits as Alaska Governor and Hits the Blogosphere and Book Circuit
A bizzarre departure for the Alaska Governor...why did she quit again? She didn't like Freedom of Information requests? At any rate, the Ex-Governor quickly rekindled her GOP star, attacking health care "death panels", selling books like crazy and generally infuriating the left and revving up the tea baggers.
7. The Tea-Party Movement
Whether you think it is a Fox News conspiracy or an organic uprising of populists, the tea-party movement and the crashing of town halls this summer had an undeniable impact on the trajectory of both the health care debate and the political tone in America.
6. GOP wins in New Jersey and Virginia
Our only significant political contests saw Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie sweep into office amidst both national concenrs that Democrats were overreaching and local races that saw them square off against weak opponents. The GOP shows it still has life in it headed into 2010.
5. Fort Hood Shootings
Those awful events reminded us both of the heroics of our soldiers and the fragility, as well as the continued tensions between the Islamic religion and our culture.
4. Attempted bombing on a Northwest Flight
Lest we forget that there are still people in the world that want nothing more than to kill Americans, we were reminded this December after a failed bombing attempt on a Detroit bound Northwest flight from Amsterdam. We are also reminded again that all of the airport security added since 2001 has been costly window-dressing and that we can NEVER be absolutely safe in a free society.
3. The Government Takes Over GM
The biggest car maker in the United States becomes majority owned by the government after one of the largest and quickest bankruptcies in US history.
2. Senate passes Health Care reform on a party line vote
The most significant piece of social welfare legislation since LBJ's great society moves a step closer to reality. Call it socialism or call it human rights, but it's hard to argue its significance.
1. Barack Obama sworn in as President
Less than 8 years after September 11th, a man with the middle name Hussein was sworn into office. Less than 50 years after the end of segregation an African-American is sworn in as President, buoyed by victories in 3 southern states. I said it on election night and I'll say it again...only in this country would this even have been a possibility.
Lots of honorable mentions:
Joe Wilson's "You Lie!"
The Stimulus Bill Passing
Edward Kennedy's Death
New York's 23rd
Goldman Sach's bonuses
and many, many more.
Happy New Year! Lots of races to cover headed into 2010. We are closing in on the Massachusetts special election, the Illinois Senate primary and much, much more. 470 races of national significance next year! I look forward to spending the next 365 days talking with you about it.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Scouring the World for Rare Senate Polls, Terrorism in the Air, Obama Approval Holds In Its New Range
If They Are Out There, I Will Find Them....2010 Senate Updates
A break from the House and the Senate gave me a much-needed chance to search far and wide for polling data on the upcoming Senate races. If you have never attempted to assemble polling data, it's a bit like a treasure hunt. Some of the data, the stuff that I rely on the most, is easy to find. The big polling houses: Gallup, Rasmussen, Research 2000, Quinnipiac, they all make their polls very easy to locate and this is sufficient for 80% of the races. Come November of next year they will probably all be polling all of the competitive races. But the far harder finds are the Des Moines Register and WHAS polls that I present today. It isn't that it is hard to find a poll from WHAS...it's that who knew to look for it -- I had no idea WHAS did polling. This also presents some risk around the quality of the poll performed, as I have no idea what the credentials of the pollster who conducted these polls is, but in the absence of other data, you go with with you've got.
All of this background explained, I'm going to first go through every race for which I could not locate ANY polling. In almost every case this appears to be due to the fact that the race is not expected to be competitive:
Oregon, Vermont and Washington -- rated "Safe Democratic Holds"
Indiana -- rated "Likely Democratic Hold"
(not rated safe due to the redish purple battlefield in Indiana)
Georgia -- moved from "Lean Republican Hold" to "Likely Republican Hold" -- no serious opposition has been mounted against Isakson.
Kansas -- Likely Republican Hold
(this is not categorized as "Safe" because the seat is open)
South Dakota -- moved from "Likely Republican Hold" to "Safe Republican Hold" -- Republican state, Republican incumbent, likely Republican year = Republican victory
Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah -- all rated Safe Republican Holds
Now, we'll run through all the states that DID have at least some polling data. I'll give you the rating, if it's a change and the most recent poll or two:
Safe Democratic Holds (6)
Massachusetts - moved from LIkely Democratic Hold to Safe Democratic Hold for the January special election to replace Ted Kennedy. Democrat Coakley is up by 30 points in the latest poll from Suffolk.
Maryland -- Incumbent Barbara Mikulski is up by 36 points against a generic opponent in a September Gonzalez Research poll.
New York (Schumer) -- popular incumbent Chuck Schumer leads by a whopping 76 points in a November Sienna poll. Not likely to be a real competitive race.
(Oregon, Vermont and Wisconsin listed above)
Likely Democratic Holds (4)
Wisconsin -- moves down from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold as a Public Policy Polling report shows ex-Governor Tommy Thompson within 9 points of Feingold in a hypothetical match-up. No word on if Thompson is running.
Hawaii -- moves down from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold as a December 17th Research 2000 poll shows longtime incumbent Daniel Inoyue's lead at only 11%.
California -- latest Rasmussen poll from November shows incumbent Barbara Boxer with a 9 point lead.
(Indiana listed above)
Lean Democratic Holds (3)
Illinois -- moved from a Toss-up to a Lean Democratic Hold as December 11th Rasmussen poll shows Giannoulis up by 3 points. You have to go all the way back to April to get an earlier poll, which showed the race a tie.
New York (Gillebrand) -- latest match-up vs. Pataki shows Gillebrand at +5 points (Mason Dixon -- November). She trailed Guliani, who has declared he is not running and is up by 30 points or so on Rep. Peter King.
Arkansas -- a series of just-released Rasmussen polls show incumbent Blanche Lincoln anywhere from down 7 points to up 16 points against a whole host of potential opponents. I'll need more clarity around the field before feeling good about rating this race, but keeping it at a Lean Democratic Hold feels like it makes the most sense for now.
Lean Democratic Pick-up (2)
Missouri -- A December 17th Rasmussen poll shows Carnahan up by 2 points. Two other recent polls have shown 1 points and 3 points respectively as the margin.
New Hampshire -- really old data here...the most recent poll I could find from July 15th (a Research 2000 poll) shows Hodes up by 5 points. Two other polls around that time showed similar margins, but a heck of a lot has changed in 5 months, so I'd like some new numbers to feel good about projecting this race.
Toss-ups (2 -- both Democratically controlled)
Delaware -- Biden leads Castle by 5 points in a November 11th Susquehana poll. Other polls around the same time, most notably the Rasmussen poll, showed Castle with a modest lead (2 points.) Feels like a toss-up to me.
Pennsylvania -- still far too close to call between Specter and Toomey, in a rematch of the Republican primary from 5 years ago. The latest poll, a December 18th Quinnipiac survey, showed it dead even.
Lean GOP Pick-Up (3)
Colorado -- A December 11th Rasmussen poll shows possible challengers to Sen. Bennett leading him by margins ranging from 4 to 9 points, confirming early polls that show him trailing in the low to mid single digits.
Nevada -- more trouble for Majority Leader Harry Reid as he trails two possible opponents by 6 points in a December 12th Rasmussen poll.
North Dakota -- the shocking move of the week as this falls all the way from a Likely Democratic Hold to a Lean GOP Pick-up and if the poll I saw is right, it probably should move further. A December 21st Rasmussen poll shows Hoeven leading Dorgan by a stunning 22 points. Byron Dorgan may be among the most at-risk Democrats this year, in an utter surprise given his long service.
Lean GOP Hold (4)
Kentucky -- GOP candidates lead Democratic candidates by 2 to 7 points in a series of possible match-ups to replace embattled Sen. Bunning, according to an August 19th WHAS poll.
Ohio -- Portman leads by 2 to 7 points against possible Democrats in a December 10th Rasmussen poll.
North Carolina -- This goes from a Likely GOP Hold to a Lean GOP Hold. Burr leads in his bid for re-election by 5 to 7 points against possible challengers in December 17th polls from Public Policy Polling and Citivas. Both are partisan polling houses, which I normally ignore, but since I have PPP (a Democratic house) and Citivas (a Republican house) saying almost exactly the same thing, it stands to reason that they are fairly accurate.
Arizona -- This also moves down from Likely GOP Hold to Lean GOP Hold. McCain leads in his re-election bid by 2 points in a
November 20th Rasmussen poll. There are several polls that show him trailing by double digits to Janet Napolitano, but it is highly unlikely that she will run, given her gig at Homeland Security.
Likely GOP HOld (5)
Alaska -- Lisa Murkowski leads by anywhere from 8 to 29 points according to a December 18th Research 2000 poll. Actual opponent will determine if this race is competitive, but she will likely win either way.
Louisiana -- incumbent Vitter leads by 10 points in an October 7th Rasmussen poll.
Florida -- Crist leads by 6 and Rubio leads by 14 in a December 17th Rasmussen poll. It is amazing how as Rubio has attacked Crist, Crist's numbers have fallen not only against Rubio in the primary but by some 20 points in the general election.
(Georgia and Kansas mentioned above)
Likely GOP Pick-Up (1)
Connecticut -- Dodd trails by 6 to 13 points against likely opponents in a December 10th Rasmussen poll, confirming earlier polls.
Safe GOP Hold (7)
Iowa -- moves from a LIkely Hold to a Safe Hold as Charles Grassley leads by 27 points in his re-election bid, according to a November 16th Des Moines Register poll.
(South Dakota, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah mentioned above)
So with all of this movement, what is left when we sort all this out?
Projection: GOP +2 to 4 Seats
GOP Best Case (Win All Leaners): GOP +9 Seats
DEM Best Case (Win All Leaners): DEM +2 Seats
Same old story, even with all those movements -- no path to 51 votes yet for the GOP (this would require a pick-up of 11 seats)
In the House, still projecting a near even split. No significant new polls since my last update -- my next update, I'll relook at the projecting, but for now it is still GOP +41 seats, or a 218-217 majority for the GOP.
Obama Not Dropping Anymore
President Obama's approval polls seem to have leveled out at an approve minus disapprove of 3 to 5 points. The latest couple weeks of tracking is below.
Similarly, his monthly number for December has stabilized in the mid-4's. Much has been made of how his numbers are among the worst of Post-World War II Presidents...and they are. Only Clinton and Reagan had comparably bad numbers at this point in their Presidencies. It's worth noting that all 3 (Obama, Clinton and Reagan) came into office during recessions. It's also worth noting that Clinton and Reagan's parties got whacked in the mid-term elections, but that the Presidents then both went on to easy re-election. We'll see if history repeats itself.
Next Up -- 2009 Year in Review.
Thanks for reading. If you like this site, tell your friends.
A break from the House and the Senate gave me a much-needed chance to search far and wide for polling data on the upcoming Senate races. If you have never attempted to assemble polling data, it's a bit like a treasure hunt. Some of the data, the stuff that I rely on the most, is easy to find. The big polling houses: Gallup, Rasmussen, Research 2000, Quinnipiac, they all make their polls very easy to locate and this is sufficient for 80% of the races. Come November of next year they will probably all be polling all of the competitive races. But the far harder finds are the Des Moines Register and WHAS polls that I present today. It isn't that it is hard to find a poll from WHAS...it's that who knew to look for it -- I had no idea WHAS did polling. This also presents some risk around the quality of the poll performed, as I have no idea what the credentials of the pollster who conducted these polls is, but in the absence of other data, you go with with you've got.
All of this background explained, I'm going to first go through every race for which I could not locate ANY polling. In almost every case this appears to be due to the fact that the race is not expected to be competitive:
Oregon, Vermont and Washington -- rated "Safe Democratic Holds"
Indiana -- rated "Likely Democratic Hold"
(not rated safe due to the redish purple battlefield in Indiana)
Georgia -- moved from "Lean Republican Hold" to "Likely Republican Hold" -- no serious opposition has been mounted against Isakson.
Kansas -- Likely Republican Hold
(this is not categorized as "Safe" because the seat is open)
South Dakota -- moved from "Likely Republican Hold" to "Safe Republican Hold" -- Republican state, Republican incumbent, likely Republican year = Republican victory
Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah -- all rated Safe Republican Holds
Now, we'll run through all the states that DID have at least some polling data. I'll give you the rating, if it's a change and the most recent poll or two:
Safe Democratic Holds (6)
Massachusetts - moved from LIkely Democratic Hold to Safe Democratic Hold for the January special election to replace Ted Kennedy. Democrat Coakley is up by 30 points in the latest poll from Suffolk.
Maryland -- Incumbent Barbara Mikulski is up by 36 points against a generic opponent in a September Gonzalez Research poll.
New York (Schumer) -- popular incumbent Chuck Schumer leads by a whopping 76 points in a November Sienna poll. Not likely to be a real competitive race.
(Oregon, Vermont and Wisconsin listed above)
Likely Democratic Holds (4)
Wisconsin -- moves down from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold as a Public Policy Polling report shows ex-Governor Tommy Thompson within 9 points of Feingold in a hypothetical match-up. No word on if Thompson is running.
Hawaii -- moves down from Safe Democratic Hold to Likely Democratic Hold as a December 17th Research 2000 poll shows longtime incumbent Daniel Inoyue's lead at only 11%.
California -- latest Rasmussen poll from November shows incumbent Barbara Boxer with a 9 point lead.
(Indiana listed above)
Lean Democratic Holds (3)
Illinois -- moved from a Toss-up to a Lean Democratic Hold as December 11th Rasmussen poll shows Giannoulis up by 3 points. You have to go all the way back to April to get an earlier poll, which showed the race a tie.
New York (Gillebrand) -- latest match-up vs. Pataki shows Gillebrand at +5 points (Mason Dixon -- November). She trailed Guliani, who has declared he is not running and is up by 30 points or so on Rep. Peter King.
Arkansas -- a series of just-released Rasmussen polls show incumbent Blanche Lincoln anywhere from down 7 points to up 16 points against a whole host of potential opponents. I'll need more clarity around the field before feeling good about rating this race, but keeping it at a Lean Democratic Hold feels like it makes the most sense for now.
Lean Democratic Pick-up (2)
Missouri -- A December 17th Rasmussen poll shows Carnahan up by 2 points. Two other recent polls have shown 1 points and 3 points respectively as the margin.
New Hampshire -- really old data here...the most recent poll I could find from July 15th (a Research 2000 poll) shows Hodes up by 5 points. Two other polls around that time showed similar margins, but a heck of a lot has changed in 5 months, so I'd like some new numbers to feel good about projecting this race.
Toss-ups (2 -- both Democratically controlled)
Delaware -- Biden leads Castle by 5 points in a November 11th Susquehana poll. Other polls around the same time, most notably the Rasmussen poll, showed Castle with a modest lead (2 points.) Feels like a toss-up to me.
Pennsylvania -- still far too close to call between Specter and Toomey, in a rematch of the Republican primary from 5 years ago. The latest poll, a December 18th Quinnipiac survey, showed it dead even.
Lean GOP Pick-Up (3)
Colorado -- A December 11th Rasmussen poll shows possible challengers to Sen. Bennett leading him by margins ranging from 4 to 9 points, confirming early polls that show him trailing in the low to mid single digits.
Nevada -- more trouble for Majority Leader Harry Reid as he trails two possible opponents by 6 points in a December 12th Rasmussen poll.
North Dakota -- the shocking move of the week as this falls all the way from a Likely Democratic Hold to a Lean GOP Pick-up and if the poll I saw is right, it probably should move further. A December 21st Rasmussen poll shows Hoeven leading Dorgan by a stunning 22 points. Byron Dorgan may be among the most at-risk Democrats this year, in an utter surprise given his long service.
Lean GOP Hold (4)
Kentucky -- GOP candidates lead Democratic candidates by 2 to 7 points in a series of possible match-ups to replace embattled Sen. Bunning, according to an August 19th WHAS poll.
Ohio -- Portman leads by 2 to 7 points against possible Democrats in a December 10th Rasmussen poll.
North Carolina -- This goes from a Likely GOP Hold to a Lean GOP Hold. Burr leads in his bid for re-election by 5 to 7 points against possible challengers in December 17th polls from Public Policy Polling and Citivas. Both are partisan polling houses, which I normally ignore, but since I have PPP (a Democratic house) and Citivas (a Republican house) saying almost exactly the same thing, it stands to reason that they are fairly accurate.
Arizona -- This also moves down from Likely GOP Hold to Lean GOP Hold. McCain leads in his re-election bid by 2 points in a
November 20th Rasmussen poll. There are several polls that show him trailing by double digits to Janet Napolitano, but it is highly unlikely that she will run, given her gig at Homeland Security.
Likely GOP HOld (5)
Alaska -- Lisa Murkowski leads by anywhere from 8 to 29 points according to a December 18th Research 2000 poll. Actual opponent will determine if this race is competitive, but she will likely win either way.
Louisiana -- incumbent Vitter leads by 10 points in an October 7th Rasmussen poll.
Florida -- Crist leads by 6 and Rubio leads by 14 in a December 17th Rasmussen poll. It is amazing how as Rubio has attacked Crist, Crist's numbers have fallen not only against Rubio in the primary but by some 20 points in the general election.
(Georgia and Kansas mentioned above)
Likely GOP Pick-Up (1)
Connecticut -- Dodd trails by 6 to 13 points against likely opponents in a December 10th Rasmussen poll, confirming earlier polls.
Safe GOP Hold (7)
Iowa -- moves from a LIkely Hold to a Safe Hold as Charles Grassley leads by 27 points in his re-election bid, according to a November 16th Des Moines Register poll.
(South Dakota, Alabama, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah mentioned above)
So with all of this movement, what is left when we sort all this out?
Projection: GOP +2 to 4 Seats
GOP Best Case (Win All Leaners): GOP +9 Seats
DEM Best Case (Win All Leaners): DEM +2 Seats
Same old story, even with all those movements -- no path to 51 votes yet for the GOP (this would require a pick-up of 11 seats)
In the House, still projecting a near even split. No significant new polls since my last update -- my next update, I'll relook at the projecting, but for now it is still GOP +41 seats, or a 218-217 majority for the GOP.
Obama Not Dropping Anymore
President Obama's approval polls seem to have leveled out at an approve minus disapprove of 3 to 5 points. The latest couple weeks of tracking is below.
Similarly, his monthly number for December has stabilized in the mid-4's. Much has been made of how his numbers are among the worst of Post-World War II Presidents...and they are. Only Clinton and Reagan had comparably bad numbers at this point in their Presidencies. It's worth noting that all 3 (Obama, Clinton and Reagan) came into office during recessions. It's also worth noting that Clinton and Reagan's parties got whacked in the mid-term elections, but that the Presidents then both went on to easy re-election. We'll see if history repeats itself.
Next Up -- 2009 Year in Review.
Thanks for reading. If you like this site, tell your friends.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
On To The Conference, Happy Holidays!
Senate Wraps Up, Conference Debate Likely in New Year
The Senate today wrapped up what seemed like an endless string of procedural votes, including filibuster ending votes and points of order with a 60-39 vote on final passage of health reform legislation. This has become the familiar party-line margin by which all of the recent significant votes have occurred.
Congress is now headed to recess for the next couple of weeks (until approximately January 12th) and the President is headed to Hawaii for vacation, so the political news is going to get fairly scarce the next couple of weeks.
When everyone returns, the painful work of reconciling the House and Senate bills will begin. It appears that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled out my recommendation that the House simply adopt the Senate bill as is to avoid another fight for 60 in the Senate as liberal Democrats in the House want a chance to fight for some of the House provisions (the public options, the high-end income tax and the more liberal rules for joining Medicaid.) Social conservatives in the House, led by Bart Stupak, also want an opportunity to fight to include the more conservative House language which totally precludes abortion coverage in federally subsidized plans versus the somewhat more liberal Senate provision which allows the plans to contain abortion coverage, provided the abortion coverage is paid for with individual premiums and not the federal subsidy.
In the end, other than on the abortion issue, the final bill is going to HAVE to look a lot like the Senate bill. The public option has zero chance of survival in the Senate, with Senators Nelson and Lieberman clearly on record opposed. The House bill is also far more expensive, a fact that would potentially scare off additional moderates such as Lincoln and Webb.
The Democrats are talking about the goal of getting a bill to President Obama for signature prior to the State of the Union, which will take place either the last week in January or the first week in February. This seems optimistic, but it all depends on how quickly and how much liberals will be willing to give.
Health care is not done, but a sense of momentum is certainly on the Democrats' side at this point.
Happy Holidays
It's Christmas Eve and hopefully all of you, regardless of you religious or political stripes have time to spend with your families, appreciating what is really important.
As always, I want to thank all of those who will work over the holidays so that the rest of us can enjoy our holiday. Thank you to all our soldiers, police officers and movie theater workers.
I've been digging up hard to find polls on some of the Senate races and I'll update my projections over the holidays.
Thanks for reading and have a great holiday.
The Senate today wrapped up what seemed like an endless string of procedural votes, including filibuster ending votes and points of order with a 60-39 vote on final passage of health reform legislation. This has become the familiar party-line margin by which all of the recent significant votes have occurred.
Congress is now headed to recess for the next couple of weeks (until approximately January 12th) and the President is headed to Hawaii for vacation, so the political news is going to get fairly scarce the next couple of weeks.
When everyone returns, the painful work of reconciling the House and Senate bills will begin. It appears that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has ruled out my recommendation that the House simply adopt the Senate bill as is to avoid another fight for 60 in the Senate as liberal Democrats in the House want a chance to fight for some of the House provisions (the public options, the high-end income tax and the more liberal rules for joining Medicaid.) Social conservatives in the House, led by Bart Stupak, also want an opportunity to fight to include the more conservative House language which totally precludes abortion coverage in federally subsidized plans versus the somewhat more liberal Senate provision which allows the plans to contain abortion coverage, provided the abortion coverage is paid for with individual premiums and not the federal subsidy.
In the end, other than on the abortion issue, the final bill is going to HAVE to look a lot like the Senate bill. The public option has zero chance of survival in the Senate, with Senators Nelson and Lieberman clearly on record opposed. The House bill is also far more expensive, a fact that would potentially scare off additional moderates such as Lincoln and Webb.
The Democrats are talking about the goal of getting a bill to President Obama for signature prior to the State of the Union, which will take place either the last week in January or the first week in February. This seems optimistic, but it all depends on how quickly and how much liberals will be willing to give.
Health care is not done, but a sense of momentum is certainly on the Democrats' side at this point.
Happy Holidays
It's Christmas Eve and hopefully all of you, regardless of you religious or political stripes have time to spend with your families, appreciating what is really important.
As always, I want to thank all of those who will work over the holidays so that the rest of us can enjoy our holiday. Thank you to all our soldiers, police officers and movie theater workers.
I've been digging up hard to find polls on some of the Senate races and I'll update my projections over the holidays.
Thanks for reading and have a great holiday.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
