Republican Richard Tisei and incumbent Democratic Congressman John Tierney had a very lively debate with Jim Braude acting as moderator on Broadside. Braude deserves a lot of credit as a questioner, as I see him as a probing interviewer who moves the debate along with a minimum of non-answering allowed. This seat has been moved by respected analyst Stu Rothenberg to “lean Republican“, and Tisei may well be the first Republican to represent Massachusetts at the Congressional level in quite some time.
John Tierney first ran for Congress in 1994, and although many may have forgotten he lost that race to incumbent Republican Peter Torkildsen. He ran again in 1996, defeating Torkildsen in a rematch. Torkildsen tried to reclaim the seat in 1998, but Tierney defeated him again, and has held the seat since then. If Tisei emerges victorious he better not get too comfortable, as there will likely be a strong Democratic challenge in two years. From where? That is a story for another post.
President Obama and Mitt Romney exchanged some good humor at the Al Smith dinner in New York. I am sure it will be back to the brickbats today, but it was some pretty good humor by both men at last night’s event.
Two new critical swing state polls have come out that have some good news for President Obama. The Wall Street Journal/NBC/Marist polling operation went to Iowa and Wisconsin, two states that are critical for both candidates, and are especially critical for Romney if he loses Ohio.
Before we get to the numbers let me say that while national polls are important, and can show a trend, I tend to look at the state by state scorecard, as the Electoral College is still how we elect the President. The Electoral College configuration, if Ohio goes to the President, makes the road to victory for Mitt Romney very difficult. Not impossible, just very difficult. The Iowa numbers please.
The President leads Mitt Romney by 51% to 43% in Iowa, (with 4% undecided, and 2% with other candidates) which is largely unchanged from the September WSJ/Marist poll which had the President up by a 50% to 42% margin, with 7% undecided.How about the impact of early voting. 34% of the respondents in this poll have already voted, and the President leads with that group by a 67% to 32% margin. Another 11% are planning on voting early, and the President leads in that group by a 55% to 39% margin. With the voters planning on voting on election day Romney leads by 54% to 39%. Early voting is having a major impact. Barring some major gaffe at the last Presidential debate I am satisfied that Iowa will be in the Obama column in November. Iowa has voted Democratic in five of the last six presidentials, breaking only to vote for George W. Bush in 2004. It had been reliably Republican, voting for Nixon in 1972, Ford in 1976, and Reagan in 1980 and 1984. But that has changed, and Iowa can be shaded a blueish purple for now.
Wisconsin has been a real battleground, and neither party can take it for granted. Governor Scott Walker fought off a recall attempt by Democrats this year, and Wisconsin has been ground zero in the battle fought by organized labor against attempts to roll back collective bargaining rights. Obviously Wisconsin held some promise for Republicans nationally after their local success in 2010. But it has been an uphill fight for Mitt Romney here. Wisconsin has voted Democratic in the last six presidentials, but did vote for Ronald Reagan twice. The Wisconsin numbers please.
President Obama leads Mitt Romney in Wisconsin by 51% to 45% (3% undecided, 1% other). That is about the same as the September numbers, which had the President leading by a 50% to 45% margin, with 4% undecided. Early voting? 15% indicated they have already voted, and Obama leads with that group by 64% to 35%. Election day voters break slightly for Obama, by a 48% to 47%. Early voting patterns again showing some strength in the field for the President. I am not quite ready to declare this one over, but it is leaning heavily Democratic. In the key Senate race Democrat Tammy Baldwin leads former Governor and HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson by a 49% to 45% margin, with 5% undecided. You cannot count Tommy Thompson out there, but Tammy Baldwin has had a small but consistent lead in the polls for a bit now. It would be a major upset if Baldwin were to win, and certainly hurt Republican chances of retaking the Senate.
I have put out the Manzi Electoral map, (October version), and hope you all participate in this as well. I have Barack Obama at 277 electoral votes, with Mitt Romney at 235, and toss-up at 26. Lets look at that map, and where the controversy will be. I have placed both North Carolina and Florida with Romney, although FLA may be back in play. I have made Virginia a toss-up, but giving it to Romney only moves him to 248. I have made both New Hampshire and Colorado toss ups, but I have given Ohio to Barack Obama. I have also given Nevada to Barack Obama, which may be questionable, but take away those six electoral votes and Obama is still sitting at 271, enough to win. I guess that this map shows you just how important it is for Mitt Romney to win Ohio. I have a funny feeling that we may be seeing David Paleologos with some Ohio numbers in the very near future.
Had a great discussion on AM Jive, with Seth Graham, about the rapidly changing face of technology, and specifically about Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft has just opened a “Microsoft Store” in the Rockingham Mall in Salem, NH, which I have not visited, but folks tell me it bears a striking resemblance to the Apple Store. Microsoft is getting into the hardware business, bringing out a new tablet, which will be running the new Windows 8. Here is a review from AOL. What do you think? Is there room for Microsoft in the tablet arena? As an IPad owner I am delighted with the product, but competition is a good thing.
Public Policy has released a new survey showing Elizabeth Warren leading Scott Brown by the largest margin she has yet recorded, leading by a 53% to 44% margin. This is an increase over the PPP polling from last week, which showed Warren leading by a 50% to 44% margin. What is going on here? The numbers please!
Scott Brown’s favorability has declined, with 46% viewing him favorably, and 45% unfavorably. Warren has increased her favorability, with 52% viewing her favorably, and 43% unfavorably. That is some solid movement in Warren’s direction. PPP has also looked at the two real key numbers in this race:
1) Democratic support for Scott Brown. From day one a central goal of the Elizabeth Warren campaign has been to peel back Democratic support for Scott Brown. It has been a key battle front, with Scott Brown fighting back by emphasizing his bipartisan record, and running away from the Republican label. PPP shows Warren having some success in this area, with only 14% of Democrats in this survey planning on voting for Scott Brown. Brown, in some earlier surveys, registered Democratic support in the 24% neighborhood. That is real slippage.
2) Independents. Scott Brown defeated Martha Coakley by a wide margin with independents (over 30% margin, I believe)and needs a wide margin with this group, especially with waning Democratic support. PPP has Brown’s lead with independents down to 15% from the earlier survey margin of 26%, a critical reason for the increasing Warren lead in this survey. If this number is accurate then Brown is in serious trouble. He needs a lead of 25-30%, in my opinion, to win this race.
Warren has opened a 15% lead with women, and this survey actually shows her leading by 2% with men. The gender gap is something that Democrats are trying to drive nationally, and you can see that in Massachusetts it is working. More on that national effort in another post. Another demographic hurdle for Senator Brown, as it is just very difficult to win this race trailing by 15% with women.
PPP also looked at the Presidential race in Massachusetts. As you might expect Barack Obama leads by a wide margin, but not as large as his biggest lead. He leads by a 57% to 39% margin, even drawing 16% of Massachusetts Republicans. I have written earlier about the “Romney drag” on Scott Brown, and I do believe that it is his bad fortune to be up during a Presidential election. It is hurting him, and will bring to the polls a different electorate than the one that elected him in the special election that he won.
PPP interviewed 709 Mass voters, and this survey has a margin of error of 3.7%. I have attached the PPP data below.
It was a pleasure to guest host on Internet radio show “AM Jive” with Seth Graham and George Scione. Had a great time, with lots of tech talk mixed in, as well as political talk. Here is the full show.
Round two of the Presidential debates, town hall style, was held last night. Plenty of anticipation, with Democrats looking for President Obama to rebound from his lackluster performance in the first debate. I think the President gave Democrats some reasons to smile last night. My own observations.
1) Romney does not like to be challenged. I thought that on a couple of occasions he looked like he had CEO complex. He was just going to issue directives, and everyone on the stage was going to comply. When they did not he was very put off. The moderator had to direct him to sit down at one point. That is a negative stylistic point.
2) Even conservatives seemed dissatisfied with the Romney approach on Libya. He was corrected by the moderator on the issue of whether President Obama had characterized the Libyan attack as a “terrorist act”, and seemed to lose a handle on what has been perceived as a politically winning issue for him. A negative substantive point for Romney.
3) Although the President finally answered the Romney charge on energy leases on government property (many leases discontinued on a use it or lose it basis) I think Romney tends to win this argument on the basis of high energy prices. He hits at President on this despite domestic energy production being on the upswing. Here is the chart.
Graph on Domestic Crude Production
CNBC did a fact check on both production, and production on federal lands. Here is what they found:
In 2008, the year before Mr. Obama took office, sales of crude oil produced on federal lands totaled 575 million barrels. The number jumped to 642 million in 2009, and 739 million in 2010. But public lands include “lands” offshore. And following the Deepwater Horizon disaster on April 20, 2010, the Obama administration declared a temporary moratorium on offshore drilling. Largely as a result, sales dropped to 646 million barrels in 2011—the 14 percent drop Mr. Romney cited.
The 2011 figure was still higher than it was when the President took office, however. And analysts have predicted when 2012 is over, the number will be higher still. In fact, a Citigroup report says “production is bouncing back” since the moratorium was lifted, and this year the U.S. “could well recoup the depletion it lost since 2010.”
The Romney claim on leasing is misleading. The Deepwater Horizon disaster was not President Obama’s fault, and output necessarily had to go down after that. But overall U.S. domestic oil production is at its highest level since 1998, and while that is not all attributable to President Obama the Romney charge that the President has been a drag on energy production is flat out wrong. Despite that, from a political perspective, I give Romney an advantage. High energy prices cannot help the President.
4) The $5 trillion question (again). Romney’s response to a request for specifics on his tax plan was to say “of course the numbers work”, because I say they do. He offered the idea of limiting deductions in some way, allowing taxpayers to compile a “bucket” of deductions that would be capped. (He mentioned a cap of $25,000) A quick fact check on that idea shows that it doesn’t even come close to paying the full cost of the proposal. From the Washington Post wonkblog:
When asked what tax breaks he’d get rid of to pay for his rate cuts, Romney suggested that “everybody gets $25,000 of deductions or credits.” That is, rather than get rid of individual deductions or exclusions, he’d have a total cap.
The problem is, a deduction cap at a $25,000 level wouldn’t come close to paying for the $5 trillion in rate cuts. The Third Way calculates that it would only generate $730 billion in revenue. Lowering the cap would raise more money, but it would risk hitting middle-class taxpayers, which Romney has also sworn not to do. So doesn’t resolve the central conundrum of Romney’s plan.
Romney’s answers on this are nothing short of ridiculous, and the President scored him pretty well on the subject. Romney essentially is saying two things.
1) My numbers work because I have balanced budgets in the past, and I am a businessman.
2) My numbers work because President Obama’s numbers are terrible.
Neither explanations work. Edge to President Obama on both style and substance.
Finally, and I think most importantly, the President made the necessary contrasts with Mitt Romney in the areas of immigration and women. We have seen Romney really try to narrow the gaps he faces with these constituencies,(hispanics and women) and he may have been having some success after the first debate. I think President Obama righted that ship politically, and you may see those gaps start to widen again in the President’s favor. That is speculation on my part, and we shall soon see polling data to confirm or rebut. But the President was not going to allow the far right positions taken by Mitt Romney during the Republican primary season to go forgotten. His associating Mitt Romney with the Arizona immigration law stung Romney, who desperately tried to get away from that position. He failed. The equal pay for equal work, and the Planned Parenthood attacks by the President, in my opinion, will resonate with women, and help the President. Romney’s binder full of women comment will make him the object of ridicule, and has shown to be a false claim. Check out the twitter feed hashtag #womenbinder for some of that humor. Big advantage, politically and on substance, to the President.
So overall I think the President takes the edge in this debate, and I do believe that he may move the needle in his favor as a result. Of course that polling data is right around the corner. Anyone know what state David Paleologos is hanging out in lately?
Yes there was a big debate last night. The 14th Essex State Representative debate took place at the MCTV Studio in Methuen. Candidates Diana DiZoglio(D) and Karin Rhoton (R) faced off in a largely polite forum that featured a pretty neat interactive component, with live questions emailed in during the debate. At least one was used on the fly. Great effort by MCTV. For more information on replays of the debate check out the MCTV website.
With swing state polling really tightening up the State of New Hampshire could really be a major factor in the 2012 Presidential election. As with the Bush-Gore election New Hampshire and its four electoral votes could make the difference between winning and losing for Barack Obama or Mitt Romney.
New Hampshire was once a reliably Republican state in national elections. Starting in 1968 the state went Republican 6 straight times, voting for Nixon in that year and in 1972, Gerald Ford in 1976, Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984, and George H.W. Bush in 1988. President Bill Clinton broke the streak, and New Hampshire voted for the Big Dog in 1992, and 1996, and a Democratic resurgence in the Granite State was started. But Al Gore took the pipe in 2000, losing to President George W. Bush narrowly, with the margin of victory being provided by the independent candidacy of Ralph Nader, who got 3.9% of the vote, tipping the state to Bush. (Bush 48.1%, Gore 46.8%). John Kerry carried the state in 2004, and Barack Obama in 2008.
Despite the gains made in the state by Democrats New Hampshire saw a Republican surge in 2010, with Republicans taking control of both Houses of the State Legislature by wide margins. It was a rout. So the State could not, in my estimation, be colored blue nationally. Republicans continue to show that they can win in this state.
Paleologos is showing that division in this poll, with Barack Obama and Mitt Romney tied at 47%, with 4% undecided. Independent candidate Gary Johnson is at 2%, occupying valuable real estate in a race this close. Paleologos took a measure of what some Johnson voters (and some undecided)would do if they could only vote for Obama or Romney. From the Suffolk Press release.
When a subset of 30 undecided and Gary Johnson respondents were given the choice between Romney or Obama only, Romney led 47 percent to 13 percent, with 40 percent remaining undecided.
“Politics is full of ironies. Gary Johnson voters are predisposed to voting against the incumbent president, but Johnson’s presence on the New Hampshire presidential ballot is actually helping Obama,” said Paleologos. “Those anti-incumbent voters – at least right now – aren’t finding their way to Mitt Romney.”
Ouch! Roger Stone of the Johnson campaign will be delighted to be tormenting Mitt Romney in such a potentially critical way.
Romney has narrowed the gender gap in this poll, with Obama leading with women by a 50% to 46% margin. Obama trails with men by a 49% to 43% margin. In terms of geography Romney leads Obama in the two largest New Hampshire counties, Hillsborough by a 46% to 43% margin, and Rockingham County by a 54% to 43% margin. Obama leads in the eight combined smaller counties by a 51% to 45% margin. Obviously Romney will be trying to drive turnout in those two large counties.
Barack Obama has a job performance rating of 47%, with 47% disapproving. His favorability, usually higher than his job performance numbers, stands at 50%, with 44% unfavorable. Romney stands at 48% favorable, and 46% unfavorable.
This is a jump ball, with field work critical for each side. Gary Johnson looks a little bit like Ralph Nader did in 2000, and could tip this race towards President Obama.
In the race for Governor Maggie Hassan (41%) holds a slight lead on Republican Ovide Lamontagne (38%), with Libertarian John Babiarz getting a critical 4% of the vote. It is another case of the third party candidate having a chance to change the course of this election. There is still a large bloc of undecided in this race at 16%, which means it is still wide open, and will bring some big spending by both candidates down the stretch.
Some interesting tidbits from the issue polling. On the ballot question to ban an income tax by constitutional amendment 41% were in favor, 39% opposed, and 19% undecided. That is a shocker to me, as opposition to a personal income tax has been a staple of New Hampshire politics for decades. The survey also asked about whether a sales tax should be instituted. 74% opposed that idea, with 16% in favor, and 10% undecided. Now that is not shocking.
Another key poll, with some great data, from David Paleologos and Suffolk.
A new Public Policy poll has some very interesting data from Ohio. Just about everyone agrees that the road for Mitt Romney is much more difficult if he loses Ohio. Romney would really have to run the table on the other “swing” states if he loses in Ohio. The value of the Buckeye State is shown by both campaigns pouring money into the state, as well as Virginia and FLA. Time and resources mean that we have found something that both campaigns do agree on. Ohio is critical.
With the first Presidential debate seeming to move the overall dial in favor of Mitt Romney the impacts of “early voting” are very important. In the PPP survey 19% of respondents reported having already voted, and those folks have broken out in favor of President Obama by a 76% to 24% margin. It is evidence of the superior Obama ground game in Ohio, but it is not over. Among those who have not voted Romney leads Obama by a 51% to 45% margin. As PPP points out Romney has some ground to make up before election day. The numbers please.
The President leads Romney by a 51% to 45% margin overall in Ohio. Obama’s favorability rating, in this survey, is at 50% (50%-48%), while Romney is slightly underwater at 45% favorable, 51% unfavorable. Ohio voters thought Joe Biden won the Vice Presidential debate by a 46% to 37% margin, with independents thinking Biden won by a 44% to 32% margin.
In the Senate race incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown leads Republican Josh Mandel by a 49% to 42% margin, consistent with polling throughout the race. I am ready to chalk up the Senate race in Ohio to Brown at this point.
So why has Mitt Romney not been able to move the numbers in Ohio? Well what about the auto industry and the Obama led bailout of the Big Three. I think it is a major factor, and the poll numbers seem to bear that out. Ohio voters support the auto bailout by a 54% to 37% margin, and with independents that number is 58% to 35%. 79% consider it to be an “important” issue, and 42% consider it to be a “very important” issue. Think it is impacting this race? The President used his weekly address to talk about the reemergence of the American auto industry. I am sure that is just a coincidence!
Bill Manzi.com 