Cook Report: GOP surge in MA-05
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:39:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Cook Report: GOP surge in MA-05
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Cook Report: GOP surge in MA-05  (Read 4072 times)
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 02, 2007, 07:44:16 PM »
« edited: October 02, 2007, 07:46:49 PM by MarkWarner08 »

Cook Political Report has made a rare move: they're moving MA-05 two categories from Solid Dem to Leans Dem. David Wasserman of the Report says the following:

"So why in the world could this race be close?

It is possible to view the race in any number of lights, but it is hard to deny that voters in the district are angry at Washington for a variety of reasons ...snip...

Then, there are race-specific factors at work. Surely, there are a handful of Democrats who still harbor bitter feelings from the closely contested primary and may not get behind her in the general. Local operatives, however, point to a larger image problem for Tsongas, stemming from her desire to transition from a community college position with a somewhat opaque title to Congress. For years, Massachusetts voters have endured numerous scandals and controversies involving highly politically-involved university officials: the names Bulger and Silber come to mind. As Tsongas seeks to follow in the footsteps of an outgoing congressman who left to become chancellor of the district's largest university, she must be wary of the perception that there is a revolving door between higher education and public office and that public institutions conceal featherbedding operations for politicians in the state."


Ognowski has the "big mo" because of the emotional factor (he lost his brother on 9/11), the fratricidal factor (most of Tsongas foes are still bitter),  macro factors (Washington D.C's extremely unpopular right now), micro factors (Mr. Moderate and others have already outlined these), and demographic factors (this is Bush's second best Massachusetts district; Kerry only won 57% here).

I'm moving this race to my "Slightly Leaning Democrat" category.  Massachusetts has a history of close special elections --- Democrat John Olver eked out a win nearly two decades agao in a similarly low turnout election.

When the Democrats call in Bill Clinton for a rally (see: Ciro's stunning win), it's clear the Democrat is surging. When the National Democrats call in Bill Clinton for a late fundraiser/pep talk, it's clear the Democrat is sinking.

Current prediction: Tsongas: 50%
                              Ognowski: 47%
                              Other: 3%
Logged
CollectiveInterest
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 511


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2007, 07:47:19 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2007, 07:57:52 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2007, 08:49:39 PM »

I think Tsongas wins it by 52%-43%.  She will be saved by her 66%-29% margin in the Lowell/Lawrence area, where Democrats should be working to turn out every Democrat, while losing the rest of the district 44%-51%.  She will underperform badly in some areas.  For example, she will lose Dracut, Ogonowski's home area which John Kerry carried 52%-47% by 38%-56%.   She will also lose Tewksbury, which carry also won by 35%-61%.  After this, Tsongas is unlikely to be seriously challenged for the seat. 
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2007, 08:56:06 PM »

I think Tsongas wins it by 52%-43%.  She will be saved by her 66%-29% margin in the Lowell/Lawrence area, where Democrats should be working to turn out every Democrat, while losing the rest of the district 44%-51%.  She will underperform badly in some areas.  For example, she will lose Dracut, Ogonowski's home area which John Kerry carried 52%-47% by 38%-56%.   She will also lose Tewksbury, which carry also won by 35%-61%.  After this, Tsongas is unlikely to be seriously challenged for the seat. 

Wow. Those are some precise predictions. Seriously, if Tsongas indeed wins by 52%-43%, you should be awarded the prognosticator of the century trophy.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2007, 08:58:40 PM »

I think Tsongas wins it by 52%-43%.  She will be saved by her 66%-29% margin in the Lowell/Lawrence area, where Democrats should be working to turn out every Democrat, while losing the rest of the district 44%-51%.  She will underperform badly in some areas.  For example, she will lose Dracut, Ogonowski's home area which John Kerry carried 52%-47% by 38%-56%.   She will also lose Tewksbury, which carry also won by 35%-61%.  After this, Tsongas is unlikely to be seriously challenged for the seat. 

Wow. Those are some precise predictions. Seriously, if Tsongas indeed wins by 52%-43%, you should be awarded the prognosticator of the century trophy.

Correction, she wins 53%-42%. 
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2007, 09:00:28 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.

The problem is that Tsongas isn't anti-war enough to run solely on Iraq.  Truth is, Ogonowski opposes the war too, and there's not much ground there to differentiate herself in a way that'll move votes.

No doubt that Tsongas would love to tie Ognowski to the Southern GOP leadership, but the Southern GOP leadership isn't relevant in the House anymore.  That's part of the irony—if Democrats hadn't picked up the House last year, Republicans couldn't even play in this special election.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2007, 09:08:24 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.

The problem is that Tsongas isn't anti-war enough to run solely on Iraq.  Truth is, Ogonowski opposes the war too, and there's not much ground there to differentiate herself in a way that'll move votes.

No doubt that Tsongas would love to tie Ognowski to the Southern GOP leadership, but the Southern GOP leadership isn't relevant in the House anymore.  That's part of the irony—if Democrats hadn't picked up the House last year, Republicans couldn't even play in this special election.

They would be if they won back the House. 
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2007, 09:19:48 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.

The problem is that Tsongas isn't anti-war enough to run solely on Iraq.  Truth is, Ogonowski opposes the war too, and there's not much ground there to differentiate herself in a way that'll move votes.

No doubt that Tsongas would love to tie Ognowski to the Southern GOP leadership, but the Southern GOP leadership isn't relevant in the House anymore.  That's part of the irony—if Democrats hadn't picked up the House last year, Republicans couldn't even play in this special election.

They would be if they won back the House. 

Actually, Boehner and Blunt, the numero uno and numero dos men in the GOP leadership are from the Midwest. The days of Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay in charge have passed.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2007, 09:21:37 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.

The problem is that Tsongas isn't anti-war enough to run solely on Iraq.  Truth is, Ogonowski opposes the war too, and there's not much ground there to differentiate herself in a way that'll move votes.

No doubt that Tsongas would love to tie Ognowski to the Southern GOP leadership, but the Southern GOP leadership isn't relevant in the House anymore.  That's part of the irony—if Democrats hadn't picked up the House last year, Republicans couldn't even play in this special election.

Quite a delicious irony for Republicans. Why do you think Tsongas can't pivot leftward on the War? She has no voting record or past statements on the issue, right?
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2007, 10:06:59 PM »

If you're PO'd at the elites over Iraq, how does it make sense to elect a Republican?

I'm searching for some historical precedent for this kind of outcome. But I'm pretty sure that there have been past special elections in which the winning candidate represented the party that was unpopular at the time.

If I were Tsongas, I'd run solely on the War in Iraq. If she can aggressively differentiate her position on that and then pull a Connie Morella on Ognowski by tying him to the Southern conservatives in the GOP, then she'll be on much more favorable ground.

The problem is that Tsongas isn't anti-war enough to run solely on Iraq.  Truth is, Ogonowski opposes the war too, and there's not much ground there to differentiate herself in a way that'll move votes.

No doubt that Tsongas would love to tie Ognowski to the Southern GOP leadership, but the Southern GOP leadership isn't relevant in the House anymore.  That's part of the irony—if Democrats hadn't picked up the House last year, Republicans couldn't even play in this special election.

Quite a delicious irony for Republicans. Why do you think Tsongas can't pivot leftward on the War? She has no voting record or past statements on the issue, right?

Her opinion on the issue was thoroughly documented in the Democratic Primary, which was assumed to be the only election that mattered in MA-05.  If she "pivoted left," she'd get hammered for "flip-flopping."
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2007, 11:04:29 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 02, 2007, 11:29:31 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

October 16.
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2007, 11:43:59 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

If by "lazy," you mean methodical and cautious, then I agree. BTW, David Wasserman has now replaced Amy Walter as the House race editor.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2007, 12:54:19 PM »

the bottom line is that tsongas is a pretty lousy candidate.

she isnt very articulate.  and it is painfully obvious she is trying to get by on her late husband's name.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2007, 01:09:32 PM »

too bad kerry healey doesnt reside in the district.  she could have won this race!
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2007, 01:40:30 PM »

too bad kerry healey doesnt reside in the district.  she could have won this race!

Please, she's the most hated woman in the Commonwealth.  She let a bunch of idiots run her campaign in 2006 and her reputation is permanently ruined for it.

the bottom line is that tsongas is a pretty lousy candidate.

she isnt very articulate.  and it is painfully obvious she is trying to get by on her late husband's name.

You know, ever since I saw Verily post about the fallacy of Romney's strength in Michigan, I've been thinking much the same could apply here to MA-05 and the Tsongas name.  It won the Primary for her, sure, but not by a huge amount—she kinda limped to the finish line.

After all, Paul Tsongas hasn't won office in 29 years; hasn't served in office in 23 years; and hasn't been on the ballot in 15 years.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2007, 02:56:59 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

If by "lazy," you mean methodical and cautious, then I agree. BTW, David Wasserman has now replaced Amy Walter as the House race editor.

No, he was lazy.  Whenever you win your primary (although it was hotly contested) by only 4% and your opponent literally destroys his primary opponent, you can't put the race in safe, when the PVI is only about +8 to +9 Dem.

This is among other things that Cook does which show signs of not paying close enough attention to detail.  He's very intelligent, but lazy.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,543


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 03, 2007, 03:43:38 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

If by "lazy," you mean methodical and cautious, then I agree. BTW, David Wasserman has now replaced Amy Walter as the House race editor.

No, he was lazy.  Whenever you win your primary (although it was hotly contested) by only 4% and your opponent literally destroys his primary opponent, you can't put the race in safe, when the PVI is only about +8 to +9 Dem.

This is among other things that Cook does which show signs of not paying close enough attention to detail.  He's very intelligent, but lazy.

The district is D+11 and you must also consider who voted in the primary.  The Democratic primary attracted 60000 voters, while the Republican primary only attracted about 13000. 
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 03, 2007, 05:04:13 PM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

If by "lazy," you mean methodical and cautious, then I agree. BTW, David Wasserman has now replaced Amy Walter as the House race editor.

No, he was lazy.  Whenever you win your primary (although it was hotly contested) by only 4% and your opponent literally destroys his primary opponent, you can't put the race in safe, when the PVI is only about +8 to +9 Dem.

This is among other things that Cook does which show signs of not paying close enough attention to detail.  He's very intelligent, but lazy.

you say that because he is fat.
Logged
MatthewVA
Rookie
**
Posts: 19


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2007, 09:29:25 AM »

A Republican picking up this seat will be good press for them, but as far as this district is concerned it's irrelevant.  Any Republican who takes this district in a special election is very likely NOT to hold it in 2008.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2007, 09:44:17 AM »

Cook was lazy for putting it in Solid Dem anyway after the primary.  Should have been Likely Dem.  Then again, he's always kind of lazy.

When exactly is this election anyway?  I haven't been following it that closely.

If by "lazy," you mean methodical and cautious, then I agree. BTW, David Wasserman has now replaced Amy Walter as the House race editor.

No, he was lazy.  Whenever you win your primary (although it was hotly contested) by only 4% and your opponent literally destroys his primary opponent, you can't put the race in safe, when the PVI is only about +8 to +9 Dem.

This is among other things that Cook does which show signs of not paying close enough attention to detail.  He's very intelligent, but lazy.

you say that because he is fat.

lol, Walter.  Certainly not.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2007, 09:52:02 AM »

A Republican picking up this seat will be good press for them, but as far as this district is concerned it's irrelevant.  Any Republican who takes this district in a special election is very likely NOT to hold it in 2008.

Welcome to the Forum ! Smiley

My revised Prediction:

Tsongas: 53%
Ogonowski: 41%
Others: 6%
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 06, 2007, 10:28:05 AM »

This seems to be more like the worst sort of British by-election than anything else.
Logged
MatthewVA
Rookie
**
Posts: 19


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2007, 10:30:58 AM »

Thanks for the welcome.

Special elections are always hard to predict and characterize because of extremely low turnout.   In a way I think it would be funny to see a Republican take this district and be a near-guaranteed 14 month congressman.  That's probably not going to happen, but any open seat special election is worth a look (including OH-5).
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 13 queries.