December 21, 2003
THE RACE STARTS IN MARYLAND:
The South: Will The Last Dem Turn Out The Lights? (Richard S. Dunham, 12/29/03, Business Week)
Many conservative whites see the Democrats as the party of minorities and urban elites who favor gay marriage, gun control, affirmative action, and abortion rights. That's why a good ol' Republican like Haley Barbour was able to win 80% of the white vote and oust Democratic Governor Ronnie Musgrove of Mississippi in November.The leftward tilt of the Democratic Presidential field could hasten a second Southern sweep by President Bush. Because the South gained Electoral College clout as a result of the 2000 census, Bush can now count on 128 solid Southern electoral votes -- forcing the Democratic nominee to capture 66% of electors in the rest of the country to prevail. Without the South and Rocky Mountain West, a Democrat must "pull an inside straight" to reach the magic number of 270, says Catholic University political scientist John Kenneth White. [...]
In the Presidential race, even Democratic optimists say that among the states of the Old Confederacy, only Arkansas and Florida may be competitive. "The Democrats have to remake themselves in the South," concedes party strategist Donna Brazile. But that won't happen until the dust settles from the likely debacle of '04. With more setbacks inevitable, there's scant hope for centrists to overcome the take-no-prisoners partisanship that drove Breaux to the sidelines.
It's more likely the Democrats will lose a sitting Senator in AR than that they'll make the presidential race competitive there, even if General Clark accepts Governor Dean's "offer". Posted by Orrin Judd at December 21, 2003 10:48 PM
Does the GOP even have a candidate for the AR Senate seat yet?
Posted by: AWW at December 22, 2003 12:02 AMNo, but it doesn't much matter.
Posted by: oj at December 22, 2003 12:06 AMOJ - I agree Bush will have coattails in '04 but I don't think they will be enough to get the Pulaski highway commissioner elected as the GOP senator.
Posted by: AWW at December 22, 2003 7:14 AMOJ I don't know where you get your information about Arkansas, but Blanche Lincoln will be extremely difficult to defeat. If you are correct then I would say Republicans will easily get the 60-40 split you refer to. I am not buying your prediction though.
Posted by: h-man at December 22, 2003 7:20 AMDo you really want to bring up Denton?
Posted by: M. at December 22, 2003 9:13 AMM.:
Yes, that's the point. The landslide of '04 will topple safe Democrats and bring in Republicans who got their nominations by default even though ill-suited to the office.
Posted by: OJ at December 22, 2003 9:20 AMoj --
I have been following your 60:40 Files vision with (wishful-thinking) interest. I think you are doing a great job of marketing an aspiration but not necessarily predicting it -- which is OK with me. Take the current claims on the AR race(s).
The initial claim that 2004 dynamics would make it more likely that Dems would lose a senate seat than they would vote Dem for President is actually not a very aggressive (GOP) claim. In fact is only a "spread" bet, which you can (essentially) reduce to who will beat second by a larger margin. GWB's margin over the Dem candidate is highly likely to exceed that of the Lincoln over her GOP opponent, which would be more or less what you would need to run your prediction through simulation and be correct most of the time. However, this does not mean that the W swing would reliably push the senate challenger over the Dem incumbent.
I can see quite a few scenarios in which (sadly) W would have achieved a very solid victory (which in today's polarized political landscape) may be no better than a 55 to 45 but a few of those pesky Dem incumbents will sneak through. I think the swing that has to be generated to go from being a relatively unknown challenger to beating an incumbent is probably bigger than the 10% swimg at the top of the ticket. So expect a lot of close but no cigars. And that is why recruiting disappointments hurt so much.
Posted by: MG at December 22, 2003 10:08 AMMG:
I don't really understand any of the numbers and statistical analyses, all I know is this: AR is a Republican state at this point and it's going to vote for George W. Bush by a wide margin in '04. Add to that the fact that Congressmen are most vulnerable in their first re-election bid. It looks very much like one of the '02 races, where the GOP won because it should, and none of the other factors much mattered.
Posted by: OJ at December 22, 2003 10:22 AMWill the Democratic incumbants run on the party's nominee and platform or with the President? Right now, I foresee a bunch of commercials showing the Dem standing with the president smiling, and narration to the effect that the Senator stood with the president and our troops to make America strong, but also stood up to the evil Republican majority to safeguard the interests of our state. This is what the Democrats did not do in '02. If they do it, of course, it means the nominee is toast.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 22, 2003 10:35 AMDavid:
Your point is excellent. The first question every Republican House and Senate candidate should ask (starting in March) is this: "Will my opponent be voting for Howard Dean?"
"And if not, why is he/she bothering to run at all? What does he/she stand for if the main issue of the campaign is blowing the Democratic party apart?"
Posted by: jim hamlen at December 22, 2003 11:43 AMMy point was that Mr. Denton went to Washington,pulled a W and got fired the by the folks back home.
Posted by: M. at December 22, 2003 12:55 PMThe GOP class of '80 mostly got sent back home--they had been sacrificial lambs with no chance of winning, until they did. Denton was a genuine hero, but not a good politician. Electing a Democrat in his place is about par for the course where "conservatives" are concerned. Boy, you taught us a lesson.
Posted by: OJ at December 22, 2003 1:33 PMDenton was seduced by the Washington Establishment(Katherine Graham of the WaPo,among others) and made no bones about separating himself from the folks back home.That's why he got fired.
Republicans seem to have that habit.
Posted by: M. at December 22, 2003 2:03 PMDenton lost because of his conservatism and political ineptitude:
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m2519/5_22/77257492/print.jhtml
Posted by: OJ at December 22, 2003 2:55 PM