Sam Spade's 2010 Predictions

[Torie]

It is a set of anti-wave predictions, which in the end, I consider more likely than wave predictions. However, in the Senate, putting Kentucky for example as a toss up is interesting. It must be the latest poll or something.  Anyway, Sam, with this set of predictions, the GOP would be lucky to gain four seats. It looks like a 20 seat or so gain in the House for the GOP from this set of predictions. That might be the top of the bell curve, but I suspect the non symmetrical tails suggest something a bit more. I would be surprised however if the GOP gains more than 30 seats in the House absent a robust wave. And I lack confidence in the GOP to manage effecting a wave, absent the economy remaining comatose. Heath care alone won't cut it. The GOP just hasn't been skilled or persuasive enough to present a case of the kind that I would present I suspect, on that one, and my case is more long term, and voters just don't have that kind of time horizon.

The real wild card at the margins, is whether there will be a disproportionate GOP turnout. Who knows?

[Torie]

Too many Dem incumbents at or below the 50% mark (or upside down in terms of approvals).

Good luck on predicting the election now Sam.

[Torie]

Governors:
Lean D
California* (R)

Sam Spade, if it were my list, I would put CA a  heavy lean to the GOP (yes I do at least follow local politics in CA if not elsewhere as to state offices). Whitman is well positioned now to win, and win by a clear margin. I am impressed with her presentation (including the detail), and the problem is the public employee unions to a substantial extent, and Brown is their symp. It is either about reining them in, or raising taxes, which at this point, probably won't raise that much revenue anyway, as the revenue to tax erodes as the rates rise. Even the Dems know they are trapped, which is why they are chatting about a state VAT and other such stuff, so that folks who are less able to decamp, can be soaked some more.

The state is in such desperate straits now (e.g., the LA mayor, a former symp of the public employee unions himself, is now close to at war with the unions), that I would put the Boxer Campbell race (assuming Campbell wins the nomination which is a pretty good assumption), as a tossup. Folks in California are now quite frightened. Social issues won't count. It will mostly be about government spending, and on that one, when folks want it cut, they know which party is more likely to do that, at least when in extremis.

[Torie]

Campbell really isn't a strong campaigner.  I met one of the staffers that worked with him, and he gets weird ideas in his head.  Like, he really wanted to make his last senate race all about the illegality of the Clinton war in Kosovo, and couldn't comprehend that no one in California cared about that.   I like Campbell a lot fwiw, and I view him as the most intellectually honest GOP politician in CA, and a good person (he also taught at my university)...it's just Boxer has a lot of money and a lot of talent.  

Boxer has money and a great campaign staff in California, and the GOP really hasn't been making any headway in CA as far as I can tell in the non-white communities, which are only growing day by day (although will be less represented than they were in 08 obvioustown).

I really disagree with Torie that the Governor's race should be considered lean-R.  In an anti-incumbent season, with a retiring, severely unpopular Republican governor in a Democratic state, Whitman still has a large hill to climb.  Brown's prospects went up a lot when he completely avoided a primary challenge and could tailer all of his platform to the general election.  

Lunar, two thoughts that I have about the CA governor's race: 1) I am now persuaded that Whitman has the right "style" to shave off a big chunk of socially moderate to liberal voters, concerned about fiscal issues, that have been voting Dem for most races in California, and 2) the issue in CA will be about reining in public employee pensions (BK city is looming for many municipalities, and Calpers cf's are now pushing the State itself to the brink), and few will believe  Brown is capable of that. I am pretty confident on this one.

We will see is Campbell is "masculine" enough to get into the snake pit with Boxer, and just "do her." It will be a close race, and some of it will be how much the CA economy recovers, if at all, which if it does some, might reduce the angst enough among some Dem voters, who need considerably angst to effect a break with their usual voting habits.

[Torie]

I completely disagree that social issues won't matter.  Once Boxer begins running abortion ads against Fiorina, then Carly is toast.  That's why this race hinges on whether its Campbell or Carly.  If its Campbell, we have a chance.  If its Carly, we don't.

Yeah, but dont you think Carly would be more willing in Tories words, to get in the snake pit with Boxer.  Some of the veteran analysts, particularly Sabato, think Carly is the strongest for that reason.  Boxer's gonna run a nasty campaign as she usually does - we have to go just as low as Boxer to beat her and she knows it.  That Boxer floating head ad, as weird as it is, is incredibly effective - it even incorporated the "Call me senator.  I earned it." flub.

Fiorina may be more willing to fight in the gutter, but that doesn't mean she can win in the gutter.  Once they get down there, Carly will get torn up on social issues and her record at HP.

She already tried her hand at negative campaigning in the primary.  The most recent poll shows that her attacks on Campbell have backfired on her.  She is now 14 points behind Campbell and only 2 points ahead of DeVore.

I know more about California politics than Larry Sabato.

Do you have a link to the poll showing Campbell 14% ahead?  I just want to see it with my own beady little eyes, before I jack off while staring at it.

[Torie]

http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=ysd83puwg9xiu6

I guess someone who knows how the database works should put this one in there?

I don't, but I will email a mod to help us.

[Torie]

What is jelling out there I wonder on the macro level that is causing the wave within the past few weeks to become considerably bigger as time goes on? Is it basically one or two major factors (HCR and the economy), or just excessive bleeding due to a thousand cuts? And I thought passage of HCR was supposed to help the Dems at the margins (that was the CV). What happened - at least so far?

[Torie]

What is jelling out there I wonder on the macro level that is causing the wave within the past few weeks to become considerably bigger as time goes on? Is it basically one or two major factors (HCR and the economy), or just excessive bleeding due to a thousand cuts? And I thought passage of HCR was supposed to help the Dems at the margins (that was the CV). What happened - at least so far?

I don't follow.

I assume he's referring to pundits moving seats in ways that favor the GOP since HCR passed. Many thought that failure to pass HCR was the larger concern going into the fall, but the trend continues in the GOP direction despite the legislative success.

Thanks Muon2 for parsing my convoluted prose correctly. By the way, I sent you a PM thanking you for your little effort on my behalf. I just want to be sure that you saw it. I really appreciate it.

[Torie]

Just bumping this up so I don't lose it when I want to update.  Couple of points...

House should really be bumped up to a 30-35 seat call now. 

In the Senate, I'm really only sensing cosmetic changes right now.  Nothing big.

Governor's races are still wide-open in some sense, but in general I'm seeing a potential Dem massacre really setting up here, perhaps moreso than in other places.  Go figure.

That is because states are in fiscal extremis, and it is time for more hard ass daddy rule, don't you think, is what is in play here, on the gubernatorial level?

[Torie]

I think it is really neat that the top the bell curve these days is close to an even House, with all the wheeling and dealing, and back stabbing, and ugly deals, and government jobs, and so forth buzzing around below the surface, as the parties jockey for power, and Darrel Issa pines for the subpoena power he so desperately wants, to scrub every sh*t everyone in the executive branch has ever taken, with probably some technical crimes involved committed in all of the horse trading, sounds like fun!  Go for it!

[Torie]

Per Sam's latest list, I come up with a projected 30 seat GOP gain.

(4*1)+(13*0.67)+(24*0.5)+(24*0.33)+(13*0.1)=33.93
                                       (-1*1)+(-2*.5)+(-5*.33)=-3.65
                                                                                30.28

                                                                                 

[Torie]

Yours says 30-35 now that I have checked, Sam, and mine says 30.28, so no, it doesn't.

[Torie]

A POS GOP internal has the GOP guy beating the Dem in Ill-11 by 11%.  Check out campaign spot.

[Torie]

A POS GOP internal has the GOP guy beating the Dem in Ill-11 by 11%.  Check out campaign spot.

He's attractive and serving in the AF doesn't hurt, but he's from the wrong part of the district and has never run for anything more than county board. Wave potential until something changes, I'd say.

Well, then either you think the poll sucks, or the Dem will recover, no? I mean 11% margin is pretty big, and might be hard to explain away, even in an internal, unless it is like that Washington State poll, that has now been exposed as gigo.

[Torie]

The way things are going, I suspect money will be rolling in to GOP candidates big time, particularly with campaign contribution limits largely dead. Money follows the smell of power.

[Torie]

updated

It looks like that if things stay the same, that you are joining the GOP is more likely than not to take over the House club. Assuming there is quite a bit of correlation between the seats that are really up in the air, that creates it looks like, if your calls are right, a swing of from about 40-55 to 60 seats, depending on the exact size of the wave, and to the extent the size varies by region, where it just chews up the beach, and where it also takes all out the beach houses.

Am I reading your tea leaves (and sometimes well camouflaged mind) correctly?  

[Torie]

I am wondering if MN-8 should be put on a watch list. I mean, the CD is getting rather marginal in its partisan balance these days (look at the MN 2008 Leips trend map for POTUS), and the right to lifers are heading up there to trash Oberstar as a traitor to the cause over the deal he brokered to get HCR passed with pro life Dem votes. And the GOP candidate appears highly presentable to me, fwiw. What I would watch for is money suddenly coming over the transom, and/or independent expenditures. In other words, in a big wave, this seat has some potential to be in play perhaps. We shall see if the money has the same perception.

MN-1 meanwhile has gone beyond watch list to me. It is more like, likely to lean Dem, to me.

[Torie]

The DFL vote in that part of Minnesota is very solid and has never shown any signs of scattering in the past. If that one were to fall, we'd be looking at over a hundred Republican gains.

More likely than not, I agree, but that is solely because Oberstar heretofore has been held in high esteem (he is a very nice man, and a class act btw on a personal level), and is very well entrenched. Sure, St. Louis County is reliably Dem, but vis a vis the national partisan balance, regressing some towards the mean, and the Southern part of the CD is GOP, including 3-4 exurban counties, and the demographic balance is slowly moving south.

This is how MN-8 voted in 2008:

Obama 195,147
McCain 163,520

Oh, and including the watch list, Sam has 105 Dem seats in play, so he met your 100 number and raised you.

[Torie]

I've certainly been giving thought to pushing MN-01 up to Likely D, most certainly.

With MN-08, I've got about 5-10 CDs I'd put on the watch list before it in my view, though I agree the candidate is presentable.

Though I agree with Al too - if MN-08 falls, 100 seats are falling, and probably every one in Iowa, just to get my drift.  We're not there, at all, imo.

Even the Iowa City CD? 

[Torie]

I've certainly been giving thought to pushing MN-01 up to Likely D, most certainly.

With MN-08, I've got about 5-10 CDs I'd put on the watch list before it in my view, though I agree the candidate is presentable.

Though I agree with Al too - if MN-08 falls, 100 seats are falling, and probably every one in Iowa, just to get my drift.  We're not there, at all, imo.

Even the Iowa City CD? 

Yes - I have my reasons actually.  Though don't read too much into this - it might make my top 100 seats to flip (barely), which means it's not that much further from MN-08, but whatever.

The GOP candidate is actually a good bit better than the one in IA-1 and the Dem is a good bit worse (Loesback ran weakly in 2008 imo).  Besides, it's not like this district hasn't voted for GOPers for Congress - and in wave elections that is often an important factor for me.  I also see a lot of ugliness for Dems in Iowa this year, generically, the polls pretty much say this.

Why are Iowans particularly mad?  They like balanced budgets?

[Torie]

50 seat gain, eh?  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Er, hasn't the further drift to the GOP in the generic numbers already happened? In other words, is not the text above (the 121 to 180 days out), now overtaken by events, since we are 68 days out now, or something?

[Torie]

Has this RCP House horse race utility that I just discovered hit anyone else's radar screen? It shows something like a 45 seat GOP gain, splitting the tossups. Some of the races have commentary to them.

[Torie]

Has this RCP House horse race utility that I just discovered hit anyone else's radar screen? It shows something like a 45 seat GOP gain, splitting the tossups. Some of the races have commentary to them.

How do they determine their race ratings? It seems that they base it too heavily on polling, which means that for many seats its based on internal polls.

Speaking of that, why haven't the Democrats released many internal polls?

Don't know, and I made some effort to find out, and came up empty.

[Torie]

You still think NV-03 is tilt GOP eh Sam?  It looks like a toss up to me at the moment. Did you factor in Bishop's (the Georgia one) recent ethical hitches?  

[Torie]

Below are snaps of my rankings and in the last column, Sam's, before his immediately prior update. I have put in bold where my major discrepancies are that matter (oh, I see that I forgot to bold IN-2, number 49 on my list, and NC-8, number 37 on my list). 5.5 means tossup, 6 is tilt/lean Dem, and 7 and above is stronger lean to likely to safe to watch D. Lower numbers are more GOP in reverse. I got the template, which I then played with, from here.





Oh, on the GOP side, the GOP drops LA-2 and Delaware, with toss ups in FL-25, Ill-10, and HI-1.