Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty at one time looked like a very good general election candidate...on paper. He set up a strong primary campaign organization in Iowa, was seen as a conservative, but effective governor of a liberal-leaning state, and was generally drama-free with blue-collar roots.
What has happened to cause his campaign to now be in guarded condition if not life support?
From my perspective, Pawlenty has several flaws/issues that are undermining his campaign.
1. He is not terribly well known or charismatic. Being "drama-free" can come across as boring or technocratic. A successful candidate needs some gravitas to energize supporters.
2. Michele Bachmann. She has energized social conservatives and has taken the momentum in the early state of Iowa where Pawlenty had hoped to springboard himself to the Republican nomination.
3. Poor early debate performance. Pawlenty hurt himself in the early going with last month's wishy-washy performance on the debate stage. He had a chance to go after Romney on healthcare and failed to do so. Minnesota nice did not serve him well.
These issues are creating some doubt over his long-term viability. This hurts him among donors, groups from whom early support is key, and creates the perception that he cannot win over the long haul.
A major test of Pawlenty's strength will be the Ames Iowa straw poll in August. He needs to do well to maintain his credibility going into the fall.
The good news for Pawlenty is that he can still be a credible alternative who may do well in a general election. Pragmatic primary voters faced with the prospects of a too conservative Bachman or a damaged Romney being the party nominee may well give "T-Paw" a second look.
Next week: second tier candidates Gingrich, Cain, and Huntsman - and why they have little chance of lasting. And remember, we still have to look at undeclared candidates Rick Perry and Sarah Palin!
Onwards!
The Prof
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Michele Bachmann - Early Take
Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann seems to have taken the number two spot among Republican primary voters in the early polling. Following her mid June announcement, Bachmann has been on a meteoric rise in native (until age 12) state Iowa and among many tea party adherents, Evangelical Christians, and social conservatives.
Pros: Ability to connect with party faithful, appeal in socially conservative Iowa and South Carolina (both early states), seen as outsider in contrast to mainstream Mitt Romney, loyalty of followers, female candidate in a white male dominated field, fund raising rapidly, support from conservative talk radio.
Cons: Extremely gaffe-prone, extreme conservatism may not play well outside of socially conservative states, lack of executive experience, not well-regarded in the House, reminds some of Sarah Palin, has made a number of statements in the past that some would consider to be out of the political mainstream.
Odds for the nomination: Bachmann really needs a win in Iowa and is placing a lot of effort in doing just that. Follow that with a strong showing in NH, wins in the deep South, and then slugging it out for the nomination. Her best chance is to make this a two-person race between her and Romney (with Huntsman splitting the moderate vote with Romney) and to count on tea party and an insurgent wave. However, my bet (with six months to go, very much out on a limb) is that she will fizzle in the end done in by numerous gaffes and her low chances of electability against President Obama.
However, I can certainly see her being on the VP short-list of a Romney or Pawlenty especially if there a need to unify the party.
Next Up - Tim Pawlenty.
Onwards!
The Prof
Pros: Ability to connect with party faithful, appeal in socially conservative Iowa and South Carolina (both early states), seen as outsider in contrast to mainstream Mitt Romney, loyalty of followers, female candidate in a white male dominated field, fund raising rapidly, support from conservative talk radio.
Cons: Extremely gaffe-prone, extreme conservatism may not play well outside of socially conservative states, lack of executive experience, not well-regarded in the House, reminds some of Sarah Palin, has made a number of statements in the past that some would consider to be out of the political mainstream.
Odds for the nomination: Bachmann really needs a win in Iowa and is placing a lot of effort in doing just that. Follow that with a strong showing in NH, wins in the deep South, and then slugging it out for the nomination. Her best chance is to make this a two-person race between her and Romney (with Huntsman splitting the moderate vote with Romney) and to count on tea party and an insurgent wave. However, my bet (with six months to go, very much out on a limb) is that she will fizzle in the end done in by numerous gaffes and her low chances of electability against President Obama.
However, I can certainly see her being on the VP short-list of a Romney or Pawlenty especially if there a need to unify the party.
Next Up - Tim Pawlenty.
Onwards!
The Prof
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Mitt Romney - early take
The Prof is ginned up on politics and ready to roll over the next year and a half!
Now that things are heating up, it is time to begin outlining my initial 2.5 cents on the presidential candidates vying to take on President Obama 16 months hence. My next several posts will focus on each of the major candidates running for the Republican nomination. First up - Willard "Mitt" Romney.
Mitt Romney - the former Massachusetts Governor continues to lead most early polls due to name recognition. It must be said that he has been spending the past three years of the "invisible primary" raising money, building an organization, and trying to secure support among key Republican constituencies. All of this is essential to running a legitimate national campaign.
Additionally, it is traditional among Republicans to nominate candidates when it is "their turn"; in fact in recent history the only Republican outsider to secure the party nomination was Barry Goldwater in 1964. However, recent polling suggests a lack of enthusiasm for him with many Republican voters wishing there was another candidate in the race. Could his support be a mile wide, but an inch deep...
Romney will have a target on his back as long as he is the perceived front runner. Expect a lot of fire directed toward him in upcoming debates.
Pros: General weakness of other Republican candidates, fairly well spoken, squeaky clean personal life and image, rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics, raising a lot of $$, field organization, experience from running in 2008, establishment candidate who is "next in line", not a rhetorical bomb thrower, has a house and is known in critical NH, relatively moderate stances...and yes, looks like a president!
Cons: Flip-flops on key issues, Romneycare in Massachusetts (really hurts him among core Republican primary voters), relatively dull style, big business background may not play well among small government tea partiers, socially moderate positions won't play well in Iowa and in the South, Mormonism may hurt in the South as well.
Odds for the nomination: At this early stage he is best positioned among the Republican candidates to win a grueling year-long campaign and primary battle...but time may show that he has feet of clay. He acquitted himself well in this month's debate in first in the nation primary New Hampshire. My initial take is that he is going to try to run a competent and gaffe-free campaign and simply outlast his opponents.
Next up - Michele Bachman...
Onwards!
The Prof
Now that things are heating up, it is time to begin outlining my initial 2.5 cents on the presidential candidates vying to take on President Obama 16 months hence. My next several posts will focus on each of the major candidates running for the Republican nomination. First up - Willard "Mitt" Romney.
Mitt Romney - the former Massachusetts Governor continues to lead most early polls due to name recognition. It must be said that he has been spending the past three years of the "invisible primary" raising money, building an organization, and trying to secure support among key Republican constituencies. All of this is essential to running a legitimate national campaign.
Additionally, it is traditional among Republicans to nominate candidates when it is "their turn"; in fact in recent history the only Republican outsider to secure the party nomination was Barry Goldwater in 1964. However, recent polling suggests a lack of enthusiasm for him with many Republican voters wishing there was another candidate in the race. Could his support be a mile wide, but an inch deep...
Romney will have a target on his back as long as he is the perceived front runner. Expect a lot of fire directed toward him in upcoming debates.
Pros: General weakness of other Republican candidates, fairly well spoken, squeaky clean personal life and image, rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics, raising a lot of $$, field organization, experience from running in 2008, establishment candidate who is "next in line", not a rhetorical bomb thrower, has a house and is known in critical NH, relatively moderate stances...and yes, looks like a president!
Cons: Flip-flops on key issues, Romneycare in Massachusetts (really hurts him among core Republican primary voters), relatively dull style, big business background may not play well among small government tea partiers, socially moderate positions won't play well in Iowa and in the South, Mormonism may hurt in the South as well.
Odds for the nomination: At this early stage he is best positioned among the Republican candidates to win a grueling year-long campaign and primary battle...but time may show that he has feet of clay. He acquitted himself well in this month's debate in first in the nation primary New Hampshire. My initial take is that he is going to try to run a competent and gaffe-free campaign and simply outlast his opponents.
Next up - Michele Bachman...
Onwards!
The Prof
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Political Ecumenicalism
Hi all.
A non-political post for today...
Nice to see a great example of political ecumenicalism today. With the tornadoes and resulting human disaster in Springfield and the other communities, politicians of both parties are putting aside their ideology and petty differences to focus on people who are truly hurting.
Hats off to Governor Patrick for taking charge in a calm and reassuring way. Kudos to Senators Brown and Kerry and local officials of all political stripes for helping folks who had their lives changed forever. It would be nice to see some similar goodwill during election season.
I will be getting back to presidential primary analysis in short order, but it is important to come together as Americans regardless of politics in times like this.
Onwards!
The Prof
A non-political post for today...
Nice to see a great example of political ecumenicalism today. With the tornadoes and resulting human disaster in Springfield and the other communities, politicians of both parties are putting aside their ideology and petty differences to focus on people who are truly hurting.
Hats off to Governor Patrick for taking charge in a calm and reassuring way. Kudos to Senators Brown and Kerry and local officials of all political stripes for helping folks who had their lives changed forever. It would be nice to see some similar goodwill during election season.
I will be getting back to presidential primary analysis in short order, but it is important to come together as Americans regardless of politics in times like this.
Onwards!
The Prof
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Senator Patrick??
Hi all - I am back from a far too long blogging hiatus...
I am going to open 2011 with a far-out, but plausible prediction - newly reelected Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick challenges Senator Scott Brown in 2012.
Below is my reasoning; hopefully in a coherent manner!
I am going to open 2011 with a far-out, but plausible prediction - newly reelected Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick challenges Senator Scott Brown in 2012.
Below is my reasoning; hopefully in a coherent manner!
- Governor Patrick can put together the best statewide "ground game" of any possible candidate - as evidenced by his successful reelection last November. This will also serve to give other possible Democratic contenders (especially a pair of congressmen named Capuano and Lynch) pause as they will have trouble establishing anything on this scale
- Patrick would have no trouble raising money for this race. Big advantage as Senator Brown has over $7 million banked and he will raise a lot more by next year.
- Patrick is not acting like a lamb duck governor who has pledged not to run for a third term. Quite the contrary, he is very active and engaged.
- The local press, notably the Boston Globe has been running a number of very positive pieces on the Governor over the past few weeks. Praise for the sake of praise or laying the groundwork for a future endorsement?
- Patrick's role model (or is it the other way around) President Obama will easily carry Massachusetts in 2012. Democratic enthusiasm and high urban turnout will benefit a Patrick candidacy
- Some on the far right are not happy about Senator Brown' Massachusetts brand of Republicanism. Does a conservative launch an independent candidacy in 2012 thus siphoning off 5% of voters who may have otherwise supported Brown?
- Vicki Kennedy is not running.
- Governor Patrick is an ambitious fellow as evidenced by his past campaigns. Is he really content to serve until 2014 and leave or is this his chance for national office...
Some or all of the above observations may be correct. That does not guarantee a Patrick run, but the conditions for him to give it a shot do exist. Massachusetts voters are fairly used at this point to having sitting governors aspire to other offices.
Even is Patrick does run, Brown remains generally popular and will be a favorite for reelection. But I think that Patrick has a very legitimate shot at this if he decides to jump in.
Stay tuned...
Onwards!
The Prof
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Post-Mortem on 2010 races
Professor Brad; M.E. Report and observations on the aftermath of the 2010 elections
The Political Pulse was correct on the vast majority of pre-election predictions.
The two MA races that I got wrong were Mary Z. for Auditor and Question 1 losing. Some of my percentages were off as I underestimated the strength of the Democrat's ground game (more on this below). Many of my Republican friends were objecting to my predictions, but having studied politics in Massachusetts for a looong time, I saw things trending otherwise.
On the US Senate side, I got most of the tossup races correct as well, with the exception of Nevada (looks like the polling underestimated Hispanic turnout for Reid)
The vaunted Democratic machine was caught napping in last January's special election, coupled with a most uninspiring candidate in Coakley. Scott Brown demonstrated that for a Republican to win (especially statewide) that they need to field almost the "perfect" candidate who can generate enthusiasm and draw out all possible Republican votes. In short, the Republicans enthusiasm this time around was not where it was in January and the Dems over-performed.
I had the fortune to attend MassInc's electoral wrap-up yesterday at Suffolk University. What was most interesting was the inside story of the Democrat's GOTV effort. In short, in the weeks leading up to the election nearly every registered Democrat in the state got a phone call and/or knock on the door urging them to vote. Additionally on election day itself, party organizers were checking to see who had and who had not voted and turning out folks in the afternoon who had not shown up in the morning., This was probably the best ground game that I have ever seen and it contributed to Patrick's seven point victory. Only the Suffolk poll saw this gap (Rasmussen had it a two point race). The Democrat's machine got voters out who never would have shown up without this urging.
Unfortunately for Baker and the Republicans, they just don't have the resources to turn out votes. Baker was nowhere near as inspiring as Brown and while Baker did win where he needed to, his wins were far less impressive than Brown's (averaging about 10 points below where Brown was in each community). Western Mass and the urban areas came out very strong for the democrats. The Republicans did win in areas where they needed to, but again not by the margins necessary to win a statewide race.
Another result of this was the Democrats capturing every other major office in the state. This is why I was wrong on Mary Z. (who did come within two points of Suzanne Bump). The strength of the Dems turnout swamped all Republican statewide and congressional candidates.
Kudos to Democratic Party Chair John Walsh for showing that the old-fashioned ground war beats the air war almost every time. Republicans need to hustle like that.
The Gender Gap was real and pronounced
MassInc's post-election polling showed a 24 point gender gap for Patrick among women and a
13 point gap for Baker among male voters. Female voters were also more likely to be optimistic about the Commonwealth's direction and Patrick's generally upbeat campaign likely appealed to these voters. Interestingly 50% of voters saw Massachusetts as on the "right track" so maybe the fact that we are slightly better off than much of the nation helped incumbent Democrats here.
Polling models varied and were often incorrect
Rasmussen who has had a previously impeccable track record seems to have slipped this cycle and overestimated Republican vote totals. Turnout models will need tweaking. Additionally as cell phones continue to replace home phones especially among younger (and more liberal) folks, this makes gathering a true stratified sample all the more challenging. Kudos to Suffolk for getting it right!
Question 3 drove Democratic intensity
Opposition to Question 3 brought the ire of unions, state employees, and progressives and helped "gin up" turnout buoyed by a massive "No on 3" ad campaign over the final weeks. Republicans would be wise to steer clear of over-reach on questions that can directly threaten the livelihood of those who can turn out many voters. A cut to 5% would have been most advisable as it would have passed and would not have awoken the twin sleeping giants of organized labor and public employees...
Tim Cahill hurt Baker, but can't be blamed for Baker's loss
Cahill's candidacy certainly forced Baker to spend money and resources to knock him out of the top tier which he was able to successfully do. However, the presence of Cahill and Jill Stein in all of the debates limited Baker's one on one match-up against Patrick and distracted him throughout. The Loscocco fiasco was handled VERY poorly by Baker's team and contributed to the notion that it was a backroom deal. This really undercut Baker's argument that he was a reformer.
Optimism trumps pessimism
Patrick's upbeat campaign contrasted with Baker's campaign that focused on what was wrong with the state. Brown demonstrated how an optimistic approach can work with the right message and Patrick accomplished the same thing.
Voter anger cannot push sub-par candidates to victory in most cases
The Republicans had a real shot at capturing one or two congressional seats, but lost in large part to less than stellar candidates. Quality candidates are a must to unseat an incumbent.
Bright spots for Republicans in Massachusetts
Tough to see at first glance, but...wining (depending on recounts) 16 new House seats in the State Legislature which double their numbers is certainly a victory and serves to build a grassroots organization to capture more offices down the line (yes - a farm team). Capturing two seats on the Governor's Council and the Sheriff's seat of Worcester County also were big wins for a party looking for any good news on Tuesday.
However they are now down to 4 (count 'em 4) Senators in the State Senate. Being down 36 to 4 is simply embarassing.
Notice that the Republicans continue to win on the North and South Shores and seem to really be establishing a real base in Worcester County. This may be the launching pad to some semblance of a two-party system in time.
And Finally...
Nationwide the Republicans swept over 60 seats to capture the House and picked up seven in the US Senate where the margin narrows to 53-47. The Tea Party had mixed results in terms of candidates it ran (Paul win in KY, Angle loses in NV). For the President, this was a real "shellacking" and it remains to be seen if he becomes Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton/Harry Truman in his run for re-election. More on this in my next post as we turn to the national results.
Only 456 days until the 2012 Iowa Caucuses...Onwards!
The Prof
The Political Pulse was correct on the vast majority of pre-election predictions.
The two MA races that I got wrong were Mary Z. for Auditor and Question 1 losing. Some of my percentages were off as I underestimated the strength of the Democrat's ground game (more on this below). Many of my Republican friends were objecting to my predictions, but having studied politics in Massachusetts for a looong time, I saw things trending otherwise.
On the US Senate side, I got most of the tossup races correct as well, with the exception of Nevada (looks like the polling underestimated Hispanic turnout for Reid)
I will grade myself a B+/A- on these predictions. Nice to grade oneself, my students must wish they could do the same!
Ground game beats air gameThe vaunted Democratic machine was caught napping in last January's special election, coupled with a most uninspiring candidate in Coakley. Scott Brown demonstrated that for a Republican to win (especially statewide) that they need to field almost the "perfect" candidate who can generate enthusiasm and draw out all possible Republican votes. In short, the Republicans enthusiasm this time around was not where it was in January and the Dems over-performed.
I had the fortune to attend MassInc's electoral wrap-up yesterday at Suffolk University. What was most interesting was the inside story of the Democrat's GOTV effort. In short, in the weeks leading up to the election nearly every registered Democrat in the state got a phone call and/or knock on the door urging them to vote. Additionally on election day itself, party organizers were checking to see who had and who had not voted and turning out folks in the afternoon who had not shown up in the morning., This was probably the best ground game that I have ever seen and it contributed to Patrick's seven point victory. Only the Suffolk poll saw this gap (Rasmussen had it a two point race). The Democrat's machine got voters out who never would have shown up without this urging.
Unfortunately for Baker and the Republicans, they just don't have the resources to turn out votes. Baker was nowhere near as inspiring as Brown and while Baker did win where he needed to, his wins were far less impressive than Brown's (averaging about 10 points below where Brown was in each community). Western Mass and the urban areas came out very strong for the democrats. The Republicans did win in areas where they needed to, but again not by the margins necessary to win a statewide race.
Another result of this was the Democrats capturing every other major office in the state. This is why I was wrong on Mary Z. (who did come within two points of Suzanne Bump). The strength of the Dems turnout swamped all Republican statewide and congressional candidates.
Kudos to Democratic Party Chair John Walsh for showing that the old-fashioned ground war beats the air war almost every time. Republicans need to hustle like that.
Limited split-ticket voting
Many of these new voters who the Democratic machine brought out voted for Patrick...and then for every other candidate with a "D" after their name. As stated before, this contributed to the losses by Mary Z. and Karyn Polito.
The Gender Gap was real and pronounced
MassInc's post-election polling showed a 24 point gender gap for Patrick among women and a
13 point gap for Baker among male voters. Female voters were also more likely to be optimistic about the Commonwealth's direction and Patrick's generally upbeat campaign likely appealed to these voters. Interestingly 50% of voters saw Massachusetts as on the "right track" so maybe the fact that we are slightly better off than much of the nation helped incumbent Democrats here.
Polling models varied and were often incorrect
Rasmussen who has had a previously impeccable track record seems to have slipped this cycle and overestimated Republican vote totals. Turnout models will need tweaking. Additionally as cell phones continue to replace home phones especially among younger (and more liberal) folks, this makes gathering a true stratified sample all the more challenging. Kudos to Suffolk for getting it right!
Question 3 drove Democratic intensity
Opposition to Question 3 brought the ire of unions, state employees, and progressives and helped "gin up" turnout buoyed by a massive "No on 3" ad campaign over the final weeks. Republicans would be wise to steer clear of over-reach on questions that can directly threaten the livelihood of those who can turn out many voters. A cut to 5% would have been most advisable as it would have passed and would not have awoken the twin sleeping giants of organized labor and public employees...
Tim Cahill hurt Baker, but can't be blamed for Baker's loss
Cahill's candidacy certainly forced Baker to spend money and resources to knock him out of the top tier which he was able to successfully do. However, the presence of Cahill and Jill Stein in all of the debates limited Baker's one on one match-up against Patrick and distracted him throughout. The Loscocco fiasco was handled VERY poorly by Baker's team and contributed to the notion that it was a backroom deal. This really undercut Baker's argument that he was a reformer.
Optimism trumps pessimism
Patrick's upbeat campaign contrasted with Baker's campaign that focused on what was wrong with the state. Brown demonstrated how an optimistic approach can work with the right message and Patrick accomplished the same thing.
Voter anger cannot push sub-par candidates to victory in most cases
The Republicans had a real shot at capturing one or two congressional seats, but lost in large part to less than stellar candidates. Quality candidates are a must to unseat an incumbent.
Bright spots for Republicans in Massachusetts
Tough to see at first glance, but...wining (depending on recounts) 16 new House seats in the State Legislature which double their numbers is certainly a victory and serves to build a grassroots organization to capture more offices down the line (yes - a farm team). Capturing two seats on the Governor's Council and the Sheriff's seat of Worcester County also were big wins for a party looking for any good news on Tuesday.
However they are now down to 4 (count 'em 4) Senators in the State Senate. Being down 36 to 4 is simply embarassing.
Notice that the Republicans continue to win on the North and South Shores and seem to really be establishing a real base in Worcester County. This may be the launching pad to some semblance of a two-party system in time.
And Finally...
Nationwide the Republicans swept over 60 seats to capture the House and picked up seven in the US Senate where the margin narrows to 53-47. The Tea Party had mixed results in terms of candidates it ran (Paul win in KY, Angle loses in NV). For the President, this was a real "shellacking" and it remains to be seen if he becomes Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton/Harry Truman in his run for re-election. More on this in my next post as we turn to the national results.
Only 456 days until the 2012 Iowa Caucuses...Onwards!
The Prof
Monday, November 1, 2010
Final Fearless Predictions
The count is down to precious hours - so time for The Prof to issue his final airtight predictions on the races in Massachusetts and a few nationwide for good measure...I may be dead on or end up with an omelet on my face Wednesday morning.
These are my best educated guesses. I wanted to flip a coin on a couple of these, but went with my gut and instinct.
Statewide Offices
Governor - Patrick
Patrick takes this in a late night squeaker. However, I am not terribly confident in my prediction as Baker seems to have the more enthusiastic supporters, but I simply don't see the same enthusiasm that Scott Brown built up in January. Remember that Brown only won by a few points with everything breaking his way. Massachusetts is still as Jon Keller has said, the Bluest State.
That being said, I believe that Baker (if he loses) could have taken this race, but a mostly sub-par campaign and Cahill bleeding anti-Patrick votes mark this as an opportunity missed.
Turnout matters most as I have often said. Watch the early returns from bellweather communities. If they are close we will be in a for a late evening.
Attorney General - Coakley
Coakley 61
McKenna 39
McKenna surprised many by getting on the ballot as a write-in, but he doesn't get more than the core Republican vote. Martha wins a number of ticket-splitters.
Treasurer - Grossman
Grossman 51
Polito 49
This race really is a toss-up and I debated the coin toss here. I think Grossman pulls this out due to again this being such a blue state with Polito's license plate controversy of last week tipping the race his way. However, I would not be shocked whatsoever if Polito pulls this out with strong support from Central Mass.
Auditor - Mary Z. Connaughton
Mary Z. 53
Bump 47
One bright spot for Republicans is this real chance to win one statewide office. Mary Z. has campaigned as an competent accountant and long-timepol Suzanne Bump has had several stumbles, especially the one about her principal (or was it her primary) residence.
Secretary of State - Galvin
Galvin 63
Campbell 37
Yawn...The Prince of Darkness (Galvin's nickname when he was in the State Legislature) gets elected yet again...
Congressional Districts
Dems likely to sweep all races...
3rd District
McGovern 56
Lamb 44
Jim McGovern is well-liked and machine-backed. Though much more liberal than the district, he fends off a challenge from newcomer Marty Lamb.
4th District
Frank 54
Beilat 46
Although Frank will have a much-closer race than has has since elected in 1982, having strong support in Newton, Brookline, and Fall River should be enough. But watch Sean Bielat to have a career in font of him as he has run a very spirited campaign and has thrown a real scare into the long-time incumbent.
5th District (Prof's home district)
Tsongas 55
Golnick 45
This is a textbook case in a vulnerable, yet well-financed incumbent winning in part due to a challenger with just too little financing and organization.
6th District (Prof''s old home district)
Tierney 53
Hudack 47
Closest race for John Tierney since 1996. If Hudack had not had so many "issues" the scandal-linked Tierney would have been ripe for the pickin'...this really was missed GOP opportunity. Kerry Healy or Bruce Tarr would have won.
10th District
Keating 48
Perry 46
Independents 6
This open seat was leaning toward Perry until old, but significant scandals from the 1990s were brought to the forefront. Keating is a relatively weak challenger, but may back into this seat due to female votes bleeding from Perry due to the nature of the strip-search incidents in his past. However, Perry does have a shot at winning this if turnout on the Cape is high and low in the Democratic stronghold of Quincy.
Ballot Questions
All three ballot questions go down. Typically many voter's default position is to vote no on ballot questions unless strongly convinced otherwise.
#1 on repealing the sales tax on alcohol loses 58-42
#2 on repealing Chapter 40B dealing with low-income housing fails 57-43.
#3 on rolling the state sales tax from 6.25% to 3% loses 54-46. This has generated the most interest and advertising. If the supporters of this question had not over-reached and rolled it back to 5%, it would have passed easily.
State Legislature
In the Statehouse, Republicans make modest gains in the House (5-10 net seats) and break even in the Senate. In other words - still a tiny minority.
And Finally - some national races
The Republicans (needing 39 seats) take the House, handily winning between 55 and 60 seats. This is not quite a Tsunami, but a very large wave none-the-less.
In the Senate the Democrats hold on to their majority - barely. Republicans almost run the table...some of the closely watched ones.
NV - Angle beats Reid by more than expected. The Tea Party is the real deal, now let them govern and see if it doesn't splinter. Governing is a whole different game than campaigning.
PA - Toomey beats Sestack, but may require a recount.
WA - This could be another recount in the making , but Murray barely holds on against Rossi.
FL - Hello Senator Rubio - a rising star in the GOP. Meeks comes in 3d place. Crist made no friends though all this and is unwelcome at all cocktail parties after Tuesday...
WI - Johnson beats Finegold; sometimes being a maverick, just ain't enough when there is a wave...
CA - Boxer holds on in true blue CA against Fiorina. This is an example of a bad challenger losing to a bad incumbent...bonus call- CA Governor: Jerry "Moonbeam :)" Brown win election as well - wasn't he the around in the 1870's...
WV - Governor Manchin created enough space between him and the President to barely prevail against Raese.
KY - The Tea Party wins again with Paul handily beating Conway.
DE - Coons beats O'Donnell where the Tea Party should have been more pragmatic and ended up sacrificing a gimme pickup on the alter of ideological purity. Is she a witch...now I want to go into the infamous Monty Python Routine - which I can recite verbatim!
We will see how I do in a few short hours...
Onwards!
The Prof
These are my best educated guesses. I wanted to flip a coin on a couple of these, but went with my gut and instinct.
Statewide Offices
Governor - Patrick
Patrick 48
Baker 46
Cahill 5
Stein 1
Patrick takes this in a late night squeaker. However, I am not terribly confident in my prediction as Baker seems to have the more enthusiastic supporters, but I simply don't see the same enthusiasm that Scott Brown built up in January. Remember that Brown only won by a few points with everything breaking his way. Massachusetts is still as Jon Keller has said, the Bluest State.
That being said, I believe that Baker (if he loses) could have taken this race, but a mostly sub-par campaign and Cahill bleeding anti-Patrick votes mark this as an opportunity missed.
Turnout matters most as I have often said. Watch the early returns from bellweather communities. If they are close we will be in a for a late evening.
Attorney General - Coakley
Coakley 61
McKenna 39
McKenna surprised many by getting on the ballot as a write-in, but he doesn't get more than the core Republican vote. Martha wins a number of ticket-splitters.
Treasurer - Grossman
Grossman 51
Polito 49
This race really is a toss-up and I debated the coin toss here. I think Grossman pulls this out due to again this being such a blue state with Polito's license plate controversy of last week tipping the race his way. However, I would not be shocked whatsoever if Polito pulls this out with strong support from Central Mass.
Auditor - Mary Z. Connaughton
Mary Z. 53
Bump 47
One bright spot for Republicans is this real chance to win one statewide office. Mary Z. has campaigned as an competent accountant and long-timepol Suzanne Bump has had several stumbles, especially the one about her principal (or was it her primary) residence.
Secretary of State - Galvin
Galvin 63
Campbell 37
Yawn...The Prince of Darkness (Galvin's nickname when he was in the State Legislature) gets elected yet again...
Congressional Districts
Dems likely to sweep all races...
3rd District
McGovern 56
Lamb 44
Jim McGovern is well-liked and machine-backed. Though much more liberal than the district, he fends off a challenge from newcomer Marty Lamb.
4th District
Frank 54
Beilat 46
Although Frank will have a much-closer race than has has since elected in 1982, having strong support in Newton, Brookline, and Fall River should be enough. But watch Sean Bielat to have a career in font of him as he has run a very spirited campaign and has thrown a real scare into the long-time incumbent.
5th District (Prof's home district)
Tsongas 55
Golnick 45
This is a textbook case in a vulnerable, yet well-financed incumbent winning in part due to a challenger with just too little financing and organization.
6th District (Prof''s old home district)
Tierney 53
Hudack 47
Closest race for John Tierney since 1996. If Hudack had not had so many "issues" the scandal-linked Tierney would have been ripe for the pickin'...this really was missed GOP opportunity. Kerry Healy or Bruce Tarr would have won.
10th District
Keating 48
Perry 46
Independents 6
This open seat was leaning toward Perry until old, but significant scandals from the 1990s were brought to the forefront. Keating is a relatively weak challenger, but may back into this seat due to female votes bleeding from Perry due to the nature of the strip-search incidents in his past. However, Perry does have a shot at winning this if turnout on the Cape is high and low in the Democratic stronghold of Quincy.
Ballot Questions
All three ballot questions go down. Typically many voter's default position is to vote no on ballot questions unless strongly convinced otherwise.
#1 on repealing the sales tax on alcohol loses 58-42
#2 on repealing Chapter 40B dealing with low-income housing fails 57-43.
#3 on rolling the state sales tax from 6.25% to 3% loses 54-46. This has generated the most interest and advertising. If the supporters of this question had not over-reached and rolled it back to 5%, it would have passed easily.
State Legislature
In the Statehouse, Republicans make modest gains in the House (5-10 net seats) and break even in the Senate. In other words - still a tiny minority.
And Finally - some national races
The Republicans (needing 39 seats) take the House, handily winning between 55 and 60 seats. This is not quite a Tsunami, but a very large wave none-the-less.
In the Senate the Democrats hold on to their majority - barely. Republicans almost run the table...some of the closely watched ones.
NV - Angle beats Reid by more than expected. The Tea Party is the real deal, now let them govern and see if it doesn't splinter. Governing is a whole different game than campaigning.
PA - Toomey beats Sestack, but may require a recount.
WA - This could be another recount in the making , but Murray barely holds on against Rossi.
FL - Hello Senator Rubio - a rising star in the GOP. Meeks comes in 3d place. Crist made no friends though all this and is unwelcome at all cocktail parties after Tuesday...
WI - Johnson beats Finegold; sometimes being a maverick, just ain't enough when there is a wave...
CA - Boxer holds on in true blue CA against Fiorina. This is an example of a bad challenger losing to a bad incumbent...bonus call- CA Governor: Jerry "Moonbeam :)" Brown win election as well - wasn't he the around in the 1870's...
WV - Governor Manchin created enough space between him and the President to barely prevail against Raese.
KY - The Tea Party wins again with Paul handily beating Conway.
DE - Coons beats O'Donnell where the Tea Party should have been more pragmatic and ended up sacrificing a gimme pickup on the alter of ideological purity. Is she a witch...now I want to go into the infamous Monty Python Routine - which I can recite verbatim!
We will see how I do in a few short hours...
Onwards!
The Prof
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)