The Cook Political Report

May 9, 2008

The Specials
By Charlie Cook
© National Journal Group Inc.
May 6, 2008

This column was originally featured on nationaljournal.com on May 6, 2008.

It is very easy, often tempting, to over-interpret the meaning of a special congressional election. Many read great importance into the results of a single congressional district and try to extrapolate that meaning to 434 other districts for the next election.

The truth is that there are often unique or local circumstances that play an important role in determining the outcome of the election. They don't call these contests "special" for nothing.

But it is also tempting, if one is on the losing side of a special election, to rationalize the outcome, to focus exclusively on the unusual circumstances and deny larger truths that emerge from that or from a pattern of special elections.

Take this past Saturday's special election in Louisiana's 6th District to replace Rep. Richard Baker, a Republican who resigned to take the top job with the Managed Funds Association.

There are plenty of unique circumstances behind the victory of Democratic Rep.-elect Don Cazayoux (Pronunciation hint: Think of a cashew but substitute zhew for shoe) in a district that President Bush carried with 55 and 59 percent in 2000 and 2004, respectively.

Republicans got saddled with a candidate who, to a certain extent, was the Pelican State's answer to Florida's former Rep. Katherine Harris.

Just as Harris couldn't lose a statewide primary and couldn't win a statewide general election, longtime conservative activist and former state legislator Woody Jenkins was very difficult to beat in a closed GOP primary but entered into a general election with a walk-in closet of political and personal baggage.

Jenkins came in on the short side of the 49-46 percent race, but a weekend in Baton Rouge last month convinced me that few thought Woody would win even then, though few thought he would lose badly either -- the district is too Republican for that.

A generic Republican would have outperformed Woody.

Similarly, the GOP loss in March of Illinois' 14th District -- formerly held by Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and which President Bush won with 54 percent in 2000, 55 percent in 2004 -- also featured another statewide loser of a Republican nominee, dairy magnate Jim Oberweis.

Oberweis brought his own complete set of Samsonite into the race, Democrats dubbed him "the Milk Dud," and the voters went with now-Rep. Bill Foster, D-Ill.

In both of these cases, again, there were unique circumstances: tough GOP primaries produced weak, ideological candidates.

Had Republicans been able to nominate better candidates in each case, they might have held onto the seats. To their credit, the National Republican Congressional Committee folks understood from the beginning that they faced significant challenges in both districts.

Another special election is coming up May 13 for the 1st District seat in Mississippi previously held by Republican Roger Wicker, who was appointed to the Senate. Democrat Travis Childers, a Chancery Court Clerk for Prentiss County, ran ahead of Republican Greg Davis, the Mayor of Southhaven, in the first round of balloting but failed to obtain the 50 percent required to avoid a runoff.

It is important to note that under Mississippi special election law, this was a nonpartisan election, and their parties were not on the ballot.

That Childers, the Democrat, ran ahead of Davis, the Republican, was viewed with considerable interest elsewhere. Was this another sign of how weak the Republican Party had gotten -- that even a Mississippi district Bush had won with 59 and 62 percent in 2000 and 2004, respectively, could go Democrat?

As is often the case, there are unusual circumstances besides the nonpartisan nature of the election in this district. Davis is from the section of the district comprised pretty much of Memphis, Tenn., suburbs. Childers is from the non-Memphis, or one might say anti-Memphis, part of the district. This situation has a lot more to do with geography than partisan politics.

But at the same time, both districts were and are heavily Republican. If Bush were more popular, if the Republican brand were not as dented and tarnished as it is today, Republicans would likely have won both, even with badly flawed candidates.

Much is being made of the fact that Republicans aired advertising tying the Democratic candidates in Louisiana and Mississippi to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill, and his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, despite the fact that there is no evidence that either Democrat ever met Obama or Wright.

Republicans are arguing that the ads took what would have been a Democratic runaway election and turned it close. Democrats are arguing that the ads didn't work. I never saw any polls showing a Cazayoux landslide. Indeed, the polls in the closing weeks were fairly close to the actual election result.

The thing to remember is that when times for a party are bad, they don't tend to get many breaks. When times are good, they do.

When a party is riding high in the polls, has a popular president, it can nominate flawed or inferior candidates and still win in favorable and often, even in neutral districts.

But when times are bad, they can even lose with superior and unblemished candidates in neutral or bad districts and have considerably lower chances of prevailing in good districts when their candidates are not up to snuff.

May 8, 2008

· House Editor David Wasserman foresees a photo finish in the MS-01 special election scheduled for Tuesday: If it is true that “time heals all wounds,” Republicans would not be panicking over next week’s north Mississippi special election. Yet, two weeks after Greg Davis (R) finished in second behind Travis Childers (D) in the initial round of balloting, private polls suggest that the needle has not moved and that the party’s chances of holding the seat in the runoff are 50/50 at best. Click here to read more.

· House Ratings Changes:

AK-AL Young Lean Republican to Toss Up

CA-11 McNerney Lean Democratic to Toss Up

CT-02 Courtney Likely Democratic to Solid Democratic

FL-21 L. Diaz-Balart Solid Republican to Likely Republican

FL-24 Feeney Likely Republican to Lean Republican

KS-02 Boyda Lean Democratic to Toss Up

KY-03 Yarmuth Likely Democratic to Lean Democratic

IN-02 Donnelly Likely Democratic to Solid Democratic

IN-07 Carson Likely Democratic to Solid Democratic

MI-07 Walberg Lean Republican to Toss Up

MI-09 Knollenberg Likely Republican to Lean Republican

MO-06 Graves Likely Republican to Lean Republican

NY-13 Fossella Likely Republican to Toss Up

NC-11 Shuler Likely Democratic to Solid Democratic

OH-02 Schmidt Lean Republican to Likely Republican

OH-14 LaTourette Likely Republican to Solid Republican

· SENATE: The 1st quarter Senate FEC chart is now available here.

· Check out the latest House, Senate and Governors At-A-Glances.

May 6, 2008

The Rev. Kamikaze
By Charlie Cook
© National Journal Group Inc.
May 3, 2008

This column was originally featured in National Journal on May 3, 2008.

With just nine contests remaining, the Democratic presidential nom-ination race is getting even more interesting. Just days ago, it seemed that the only way that Barack Obama could fail to clinch his party's nod would be to leave his wife and move in with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

That is, until Wright took to the lectern at the National Press Club to launch what amounted to a kamikaze attack on Obama's candidacy,

sputtering nonsense that must have left the senator's campaign operatives wondering whether they had accidentally tuned their TVs to the political horror channel.

Some suggest that the reverend's rant could breathe new life into Hillary Rodham Clinton's nearly moribund campaign and allow her to wrestle the nomination from Obama's grasp.

To be sure, the delegate arithmetic for Clinton is seemingly impossible. The NBC News count shows Obama with 1,732 delegates (1,490 pledged and 242 superdelegates) to Clinton's 1,599 (1,334 pledged plus 265 superdelegates), an advantage for the front-runner of 133 delegates. With a total of 4,048 delegates, 133 doesn't sound like much of a lead, but in the Democrats' proportional delegate-selection process, where changes are measured in millimeters, Obama indeed has a strong advantage.

Anthony Corrado, a political scientist and delegate-selection expert at Colby College, estimates that Clinton needs to win 69 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to catch up. To do so, she would have to get about 66 percent of the popular vote in the nine remaining primaries. So far, Clinton has reached that level of support in only the Arkansas primary. Superdelegates have not been helping her close the gap. Democratic consultant John Edgell's superdelegate count shows that 100 superdelegates have endorsed since March 1: 77 of them went for Obama, and 23 for Clinton.

Inadvertently or not, Clinton got one of her biggest boosts of the year from Wright, whose Monday speech seemed designed to pry the nomination from Obama's fingers. Many Democrats, and a considerable number of independents, have long assumed that in a general election Obama would not be much hampered by his race, his unusual name, his Muslim father, or his relative inexperience in dealing with national issues.

Certainly, young, well-educated Democrats seem the most open to Obama's exotic blend, just as they are to cutting-edge technologies and the newest music. "Change" is not a four-letter word to young latte Democrats.

But to downscale, high-school-educated, white Democrats who make less than $50,000 a year and are more likely to spend money at Wal-Mart than Starbucks, much about Obama seems a bit odd. And Wright's diatribe seems to be reinforcing stereotypes with these voters, presenting Obama with his gravest crisis yet as a candidate.

Arithmetically, Obama still seems unstoppable, but the past few days have made his unusual profile tougher for older and working-class white Democrats to embrace. Even before Wright grabbed the spotlight, presumptive GOP nominee John McCain was leading Obama by 6 points among voters with a high school education or less.

Everything that Clinton could have wished for seems to have happened over the last few weeks. The news media finally got around to scrutinizing the senator from Illinois more intensely. Obama stumbled in the last debate, appearing defensive and bordering on being testy. Clinton followed up her victories in Ohio, Rhode Island, and the primary side of the "Texas two-step" primary-caucus combination with a solid 9-point win in Pennsylvania. Then Wright turned in his performance.

The math is still the math, but a race that seemed to be over may not be over. What happens in Indiana and North Carolina on Tuesday could tell us a lot about how quintessentially middle-class states now view Obama.

May 2, 2008

The New New Math
By Charlie Cook
© National Journal Group Inc.
April 29, 2008

This column was originally featured on nationaljournal.com on April 29, 2008.

Despite the recent show of strength by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., the odds against her winning the Democratic presidential nomination are as imposing as ever — and probably worse.

There was a time when one of the stronger arguments in favor of nominating Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was that he was more electable than Clinton.

The thinking at the time was that Clinton was so polarizing, she could get close to winning a general election but would have difficulty getting over the top.

Now, about the only plausible argument that Obama is more electable is to claim that Clinton’s backers would probably get over an Obama nomination better and sooner than vice versa.

Indeed, while Obama might lose some states by narrower margins than Clinton, his weakness among downscale and older white voters raises questions about whether he would be as competitive as Clinton in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, or, for that matter, run as strongly as Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., did in 2004.

But the delegate math is the delegate math, and there is little if any good news there for Clinton.

Almost half of the delegate advantage she netted against Obama in Pennsylvania was offset by losses of superdelegates the same week. Colby College political scientist and delegate selection expert Anthony Corrado estimates that Clinton would need to win about 69 percent of the remaining delegates, a virtual impossibility given proportional representation of the nominating contests.

In recent months, Clinton has been losing up to three superdelegates for every one she has picked up.

One superdelegate in a Southern state, clearly a Clinton sympathizer, said it would be political suicide for him to oppose Obama, pointing out that the black community would be furious. The best support he could offer Clinton would be to remain neutral until it’s over.

One of the most salient arguments made these days by superdelegates is the fear of what would happen to the party if Obama were to be spurned.

Even if they wanted to nominate Clinton, the fear of damage to the party is sufficient to argue against it. Between the newbies — the young and new voters who are so enthusiastic for Obama — and the black community — who ironically were somewhat late to join the Obama bandwagon after his Iowa win — the fallout from a spurning of Obama would be profound.

What has happened is that a bit of the bloom is off the rose for Obama’s candidacy.

His trajectory has flattened a good bit and while no one doubts his mortality, he has lost a good bit of the iconic appeal that he showed early this year.

Maybe he wins a general election, maybe he doesn’t, but it is clear there are liabilities along with assets to the idea of his nomination.

As well as he has bonded with “Starbucks” Democrats, he has not done so well with white, “Lunch Bucket” Democrats. Obama’s appeal is a bit too exotic for their tastes.

And as much as the Republican brand has been damaged over the last eight years and as much as many voters have misgivings about Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain’s uncompromising support for the war, he is perceived as distinct enough from his tarnished party.

Plus, his record as a Vietnam veteran and history as a prisoner of war seems to give him a benefit of the doubt that offers him a much better chance of victory than his party has of, at a minimum, breaking even in the House and Senate races this fall.

The irony of this year’s political situation is that — despite the difficulty a party has in holding the White House for three consecutive terms — the Republicans still have a much better shot than that of scoring so much as a net gain of one seat in the House or Senate.

The Republican brand is weighing down the party’s congressional candidates, but McCain seems to be hurt so much less because of the independence that has rubbed his Republican congressional colleagues so raw over the last couple of decades.

It’s fascinating to think how implausible all of this would have seemed 18 months ago.

While it was not unthinkable that a Clinton nomination was inevitable, it is truly remarkable that she would be beaten by Obama in the way that it looks likely to happen.

Who would have thought that someone could launch a successful bid for a presidential nomination just two years out of a state legislature?

Who would have thought that so many experienced contenders for the Democratic nomination would have been discarded so cavalierly?

Who would have predicted that former President Clinton would become almost radioactive in the black community, his remarks during and after the South Carolina primary regarded by many, black and white, fairly or not, as having racist overtones.

Taken together with the precipitous fall, then Lazarus-like comeback of McCain’s nomination bid, it all seems a bit surreal.

If this campaign’s events were in a political novel, it would seem so far-fetched as to be laughable. But here we are.

May 1, 2008

· NC GOV: Senior Editor Jennifer Duffy looks at the North Carolina gubernatorial primaries: The national media may be fixated on Tuesday's Democratic presidential primary in North Carolina, but there are other contests on the ballot of equal importance to voters. One is the open-seat race for Governor where both parties are hosting contested primaries to select nominees to face off in the general election. Read more here.

· House Editor David Wasserman releases the latest House Rundowns for Tennessee and Texas.

· Check out the latest House and Senate At-A-Glances.

April 29, 2008

Hillary's Political Purgatory
By Charlie Cook
© National Journal Group Inc.
April 26, 2008

This column was originally featured in National Journal on April 26, 2008.

The good news for Hillary Rodham Clinton is that she’s winning a lot of battles. The bad news is that the war is pretty much lost. Sure, she won Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary by a strong 9 points in the face of being outspent on television ads by Barack Obama 2-to-1. She also won Ohio, Rhode Island, and at least the primary part of the bizarre “Texas two-step” primary-and-caucus combination on March 4. But today, she is 133 delegates behind Obama, 1,728 to 1,595, according to NBC News. At this point last week, she trailed by 136 delegates. Since then Clinton has scored a net gain of 10 delegates in Pennsylvania, according to NBC, but has lost a few more superdelegates, so she has made little headway.

April 25, 2008

· Take a look at our updated Electoral College outlook for 2008.

This column was originally featured on nationaljournal.com on April 22, 2008.

It’s no wonder supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., are wandering around and repeating over and over again, “why didn’t all this happen sooner?”

What is happening now is precisely what they needed to happen to Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

April 24, 2008

· Take a look at the breakdown in delegates between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, including our charts created in collaboration with NBC.

· House Editor David Wasserman releases the latest estimated pledged delegate count.

· House Editor David Wasserman explains what the GOP’s near miss in a heavily Republican district in northern Mississippi means for the party’s prospects of holding on to the seat in the May 13th runoff, and takes a look at what Pennsylvania primary results mean for races in November. Read his analysis here.

· Check out the latest House, Senate and Governors At-A-Glances.

April 23, 2008

This column was originally featured in National Journal on April 19, 2008.

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s address to an AFL-CIO group on Wednesday morning could easily have been mistaken for the speech of someone who would soon be the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee. Clinton was warmly received by the standing-room-only, mostly middle-aged, predominantly male crowd. She said all the right things in all the right ways. She projected the confidence of a winner taking a victory lap to see yet another of the party’s key constituencies.

April 22, 2008

· Check out the latest results of the Cook Political Report/RT Strategies poll conducted April 17-20, 2008. In the head-to-head matchups, Obama leads McCain 45 percent to 44 percent while McCain and Clinton are tied, 45 percent to 45 percent.

Also, don't miss the combined April 17-20 and March 6-9 polls. In the combined poll, McCain leads both Obama and Clinton by one percent, 45 percent to 44 percent against Obama and 46 percent to 45 percent against Clinton.

The topline and crosstabs are available here.

April 17, 2008

· House Editor David Wasserman examines the latest fundraising numbers from the first quarter of 2008 and offers several quick observations:

Recruitment studs or fundraising duds?: The louder the buzz, the higher the expectations. Plenty of this quarter’s entrants into congressional races posted impressive totals for the weeks and months they had to raise money. But some of the parties’ most highly touted recruits, like Bobby Bright (D-AL-02) and Lou Barletta (R-PA-11) underperformed, banking $46,484 and $154,470 respectively. Their next reports, which will reflect their first full quarter of fundraising, should tell us how serious these candidates are about building on their existing favorability and reaching for the crossover votes they will need to win.

New kids on the block: Businessman Keith Fimian (R-VA-11), tax attorney Bob Lord (D-AZ-03), and renewable energy executive Michael Skelly (D-TX-07) are far from household names in the districts they seek to represent, and prevailing political winds in their districts add varying degrees of difficulty to their challenges. Nonetheless, they have emerged as a few of the most prolific fundraisers in their parties. Just how far their campaign accounts will take them depends on their own ability to define themselves and the weaknesses of their opposition in the months to come.

Deficit incumbents: A handful of Republican incumbents posted less in cash on hand than their challengers at the end of the quarter. These are the kinds of members who turn headaches at NRCC Independent Expenditure headquarters into migraines. But for some, this is a more serious sign of danger than for others. An incumbent facing a cash deficit who has not yet been through a highly charged, attack-filled general election, such as Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI-07), is more likely to be at risk than one who has had the kitchen sink thrown at him and survived, such as Reps. Randy Kuhl (R-NY-29) or Bill Sali (R-ID-01).

With all first quarter FEC reports now in, be sure to check our latest updates to the 2008 Potentially Vulnerable Incumbents Chart, which plots “risk factors” for incumbents seeking reelection this year. Find the chart here.

· Check out the latest changes to the House At-A-Glance.

April 15, 2008

This column was originally featured in National Journal on April 12, 2008.

Not long ago, many observers were speculating that presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain would have trouble uniting his party because of the antipathy that much of the Republican establishment and its right wing had long had for the Arizona maverick. Those days are pretty much gone.

This column was originally featured on nationaljournal.com on April 8, 2008.

Should Republicans want to hold onto the presidency in 2008?

A good case can be made that the Republican Party would be a stronger, better party five years from today if it reconstituted itself now.

It sounds like a stupid question, and maybe it is. But one thing that has been true over the last couple of decades is that both parties have enormously strong self-destructive tendencies. If left to their own devices, they will do themselves in. To give one party the White House and majorities in the House and Senate is like a ticking time bomb; it's only a matter of time before it explodes and the party loses, and loses big.

April 10, 2008

· Ratings Changes:

LA-06- VACANT (Baker)- Toss Up to Lean Democratic

MS-01- VACANT (Wicker)- Solid Republican to Lean Republican

TX-22- Lampson- Lean Democratic to Toss Up

House Editor David Wasserman explains what runoff results mean for three competitive districts in the South. Races are moving Democrats' way in Louisiana and Mississippi, while Republicans have caught a rare break in Texas.

· Check out the latest House, Senate, and Governors At-A-Glances.

April 9, 2008

This column was originally featured on National Journal on April 5, 2008.

Conservatives have been surprisingly muted in their criticism of John McCain ever since The New York Times ran an article on February 21 raising questions about the close friendship between the maverick senator from Arizona and a much younger fe-male lobbyist. Maybe there is some truth to the adage "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Note: The number for each catergory is the total for both parties in that rating. In other words, the "Solid Dem" number includes not only the Democratic-held seats that are currently rated as Solid Democrat, but also any Republican-held seats that are currently rated as Solid Democrat. Numbers in parenthesis indicate cumulative numbers of seats to that point in the ratings.

* We include Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Bernard Sanders (I-VT) as Democrats