Massachusetts Senate Race 2012

Finally time for an update and analysis of the Brown-Warren race in Massachusetts for the US Senate...

Overview

Scott Brown won a special election in January 2010 to fill the remainder of the term that late senator Edward Kennedy had secured in 2006.  As this term is now up, Brown is running to retain the seat for six additional years.

Readers of the Political Pulse will note that I covered the 2010 special election in some depth.  In short, Republican candidate Brown was able to surprise Democratic candidate Martha Coakley by running on Tea Party fueled enthusiasm, his "regular guy" persona, political moderation (essential for a Republican to win a statewide race in Massachusetts), and the utter ineptitude of the overconfident Coakley campaign.  It was a relatively close result with Brown emerging as a three point victor.

Brown has maintained strong favorability ratings over the past two years.  Under normal circumstances with the advantages of incumbency he should be a cinch for reelection...but, this is Massachusetts, the bluest of blue states!

Enter Elizabeth Warren

Former Harvard Professor and Obama Administration official Elizabeth Warren was urged last year by both state and national Democratic organizations to mount a run against Brown.

Coming from the progressive left wing of the Democratic Party, Warren takes many unabashedly liberal positions, especially on economic and consumer issues.  This resonates strongly with party activists and has helped her with fundraising and organization. Warren was easily able to secure the Democratic Party nomination at the party convention and thus avoid a primary election opponent.

Campaign thus far

Advertising

In an unique agreement, both Brown and Warren taken "The People's Pledge" to keep outside SuperPacs, party committees, and 527s from advertising in the race.  Candidate's that benefit from any third party advertisement to donate a sum equal to 50% of the value of that ad to a charity of the other candidate's choice.

Advertising was generally positive from both candidates until the past week.  Warren has been under some pressure to retool her advertising as perceptions are that her somewhat professorial manner is not connecting with the broader citizenry.The Warren campaign is now running ads showing endorsements from ordinary citizens extolling her support for the middle class.

Enormous sums of money are being spent on this race.  Both candidates have deep financial pockets and as control of the Senate may hinge on this seat

Polling

Polling has shown a close race with Brown holding a small lead in the most recent surveys.

• Big gender gap - Brown is leading among men, Warren is winning the female vote.
• Predictably, Republicans (all 12 of them) support Brown and most Democrats are behind Warren.  Brown is peeling off a slice of Democrats however.  the real story is the over 50% of voters who identify as Independent.  Brown has a lead in this group and that is providing him the 2-4 point lead in recent surveys.
• Bear in mind that all the polling is within the margin of error so statistically the race is a tie.  However Brown having even a small advantage makes a good headline for his campaign.

Brown's Strategy

• Portray moderate ideology, essential to win in Massachusetts.
• Keep running positive ads (featuring the truck) meeting with ordinary citizens.
• Highlight accomplishments and legislation; Brown's latest ad shows President Obama signing legislation reforming congressional insider trading that he initially proposed.
• Garner support from conservative and "lunch-bucket" Democrats.  He will be campaigning in Lowell, Worcester, Waltham, and South Boston.  Recent endorsements of urban Democrats (Former Boston Mayor Ray Flynn and former Worcester Mayor Konnie Lukes) helps here.
• Encourage ticket spitting - a Massachusetts tradition.  Brown will need a substantial number of Obama voters to cross over and vote for him in the Senate race.
• Perform well enough in the debates i.e. no gaffes or awkward moments.
• Keep referring to Warren as "Professor Warren".  Academic intellectuals do not score many points in the demographics that Brown is trying to reach.
• Drive the truck, it worked before. 

Warren's Strategy

• Appeal to the Democratic base, women, and minorities.
• Tie herself to President Obama (who remains popular in Mass) and the importance of Democrats retaining control of the US Senate. 
• Tie Brown to the national and southern-dominated GOP. Nationalizing the election may offset Brown's local popularity.
• She won't win Independents, but needs to keep Brown's margin down.
• Portray herself as fighting for ordinary folk and remind voters that Brown is a Wall Street Republican.
• Beat Brown badly in the televised debates.
• Try to show a softer and more folksy side.  She really needs to start connecting.  Being preachy does not resonate past her base.
• Avoid gaffes - the Cherokee Indian fiasco of the spring did her no favors.
• Appeal to the Democratic base, women, and minorities. (yes this needs repeating!)

Keys to victory on election night

• Brown needs to win big in Central Mass, Southeastern Mass, and the North Shore, and stay competitive in Middlesex County.  Outer cities such as Lowell, Fitchburg, and Worcester are critical.  If he can fight Warren to a draw in these areas he will win.
• Warren needs a huge turnout in urban areas, college towns (Amherst, Cambridge, Northampton), and for Obama to win big in the state overall so she can benefit from Obama's coattails. 

Early Prediction

It will be a very close race.  Warren by virtue of the "D" next to her name has a base of around 40%-45% just for showing up.  Much of this will rest on how many Obama voters split their tickets.  Brown does have an advantage in being the incumbent, personal popularity, and seems (so far) to have distanced himself enough from the national Republican Party to keep the support of many of the groups that propelled him to victory in January 2010.

If Romney crashes nationally, it will really boost Warren as dispirited Republicans may stay home.  The debates with Brown and how the overall presidential fall campaigns evolves are essential to her winning.

However, Warren has to change the overall dynamics of the race.  If it remains as it is, I think Brown ekes out a narrow victory.

Onwards!


The Prof

Post Convention Wrap-up Part 2

And the Democrats have just had their turn.  Now it begins...

The Democrats needed to fire up their base, motivate their constituent groups and appeal to the large group of voters who supported the president in 2008, but who are now wavering.  Was this sucessful?

Early post convention polling seems to suggest that it was.  From my perspective the Democrats were able to accomplish many of these goals and more importantly frame the election as a choice (which is good for Obama) versus a referendum on the past four years (which is good for Romney).

Was the base fired up?

Undoubtedly yes.  Unlike the Republicans who may respect, but who don't love their candidate, the party faithful in Charlotte seem to truly love President Obama and will invest an incredible amount of passion to reelect him.  Romney was predictably painted as an out of touch billionaire, but much of the convention was a full throated defense of the president and how he needed four more years to dig out of the mess he inherited.

Were party's constituents group motivated?

There was an amazing amount of red meat thrown to various activist groups from the abortion issue, to immigration, to gays, to minorities, and to unions.  This was not a convention (apart from the Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama addresses) designed to reach out to middle of the road voters.  This will be a "base election" and both parties are pulling out all the stops to fire up their voters and key groups.

The Big Dog...

Bill Clinton is perhaps the best natural politician that this nation has produced in the last generation if not century.  He gave a folksy address defending the president and lambasting the Republican's "extremism and obstructionism".  This was aimed at suburban college-educated voters who supported Obama in 2008, but who are somewhat loathe to do so again.  He also did Hillary Clinton a huge service - if Obama wins in 2012 and Hillary runs in 2016 there is a massive favor to call in.

Michelle Obama gave a very well received address.  She sought to humanize the rather chilly and aloof  impression that many have of the her husband.  This was aimed at female voters and certainly didn't hurt.

Curiously, the President's address ran more like his standard stump speech than the soaring rhetoric of 2008.  It was a solidly delivered "stay the course" speech, but after Mr. Clinton's address, a bit of a deflated ending to the convention.

However, not all was well...

There was a major embarrassment when the convention voted to reinstate language regarding Jerusalem being the capital of Israel and language invoking God back into the party platform. This was done by a 2/3 voice vote which clearly was adopted and rushed through without 2/3 (or even half) of delegates supporting it via a voice vote.  Additionally, as much of the convention highlighted positions and speechifying from rather far-left leaning speakers, there is risk of alienating the few swing voters who remain.

As with the Republican Convention, TV viewership was down from 2008.  As I stated before, there is case to be made that the three-day National Party Convention is becoming less meaningful.  The Democrats did benefit from going second and seem to have stepped on any convention "bounce" that Romney may have had.  In fact, early polling suggests that Obama is seeing a bounce of a few points.  We shall see if this is sustained over the next couple of weeks - especially in light of the very disappointing August jobs report which threatens to step on this bounce. 

A quick mention about the August jobs report - the unemployment rate did drop from 8.3% to 8.1%.  If the public looks at this statistic it is a positive for the Obama Administration.  But...the net number of individuals in the workforce declined sharply, thus lowering the rate due to discouraged people not looking for work. The Romney campaign is focusing on this piece of very negative data to argue that the recovery is slowing.  Both campaigns will be spinning this furiously over the next week.

Now it is truly on.  First debate is scheduled for October 3.  58 days to go!

Onwards!


The Prof

Post Convention Wrap-up Part 1

Well four days...excuse me Hurricane Issac, three days of free media and and speechifying are behind us and the 2012 Republican Convention is a wrap.  It is important to bear in mind that national party conventions are becoming less relevant with each cycle.  Before the proliferation of cable outlets and later political websites and Twitter, the conventions were an opportune way to roll out a presidential candidate and platform to the lions-share of Americans who had limited information. Additionally, they actually mattered in terms of determining the presidential nominee as recently as 1976.

But today with greater polarization, with the parties selecting their candidates through primaries, and with conventions now being choreographed with no suspense most voters have tuned out.  The political class and media cover them wall to wall, but how many votes can they actually swing?  This is not to say that they are obsolete as they do motivate the party faithful and for the party out of power, present an opportunity to introduces their nominee on a national stage.

Much like in a previous posting on the VP selection, the Hippocratic Oath to do no harm is the key here. Did the Republican Party accomplish what is wanted and needed to?  Let's look at a few of these questions:

Be diverse and inclusive and not the stereotypical party dominated by white southern males...

I think this was accomplished for the most part.  There were many speaker presenting a diverse party face to the public.  Condi Rice, Artur Davis, and several other African Americans had prime-time speaking roles. Hispanics were highlighted as well in Gov. Susan Martinez of New Mexico and FL Senator Marco Rubio.

Many Republican women were featured with Ann Romney giving a very well received speech (more on this in a minute).

However, the visuals of the audience show a party membership that is undeniably dominated by older whites (polling bears this out as well).  Also, there was one particularly ugly incident that could have been attributed to racism that resulted in a couple of delegates being ejected from the convention.

Was an effective case laid out for replacing President Obama?  How specific was the GOP in outlining alternate policies?

The strategy was twofold - red meat to motivate the party activists and an appeal to moderate voters to convince them that is is "OK" to fire the President.  What was interesting on that end was that there was a minimum of over the top gratuitous attacks on Obama.  Rather there was an outlining of how Obama's priorities and policies have not been beneficial to the nation.  Some of the argument involved a lot of truth stretching - a common occurrence at political conventions.  But I think it was effective overall. We will see what the polling shows in the next few days.

VP nominee Paul Ryan gave a particularly effective speech to the convention although some of the assertions he made have been challenged.  I will also take a moment here to say that Ryan has injected much-needed energy in the Romney campaign. 

Mitt Romney also highlighted his private sector expertise and didn't run from Bain Capital, in fact he embraced it.  The betting is that presenting Romney as a fix-it candidate will resonate with the relatively low number of persuadable voters.

There was an interesting lack of focus (Ric Santorum excepted) on social issues.  The betting is that highlighting the GOP's social conservatism will not help with women and swing voters.  Note that MO candidate Todd Akin was immediately shunned by the party after some bizarre remarks that would be toxic if they were not quickly repudiated.

Was Mitt Romney "humanized?"

Ann Romney's speech began the process of transforming the perception of Mitt Romney.  Humanizing him is very important.  The Obama campaign's negative ads regarding Bain Capital have been particularly effective and the strategy to counter this was to present Romney as a family man, not a Snidely Whiplash robber-baron.

Overall, I think that this worked.  The litany of speakers personalizing Romney wrapping up with his acceptances speech where he showed emotion contrasted with the public image that many may have had.  How much success with voters this had will be determined in the next few weeks.

Romney's acceptance speech was good which is about what he was aiming for.  He will never be ranked with the great orators, but he had to present himself as presidential,  This was accomplished.

Clint Eastwood - no comment! (OK, in hindsight this may have been an effective bit of impromptu theater, but I was truly cringing on my initial viewing of his 12 minute...address)

My overall take is that the convention succeeded in what it needed to do. The party faithful seemed pleased with how things went and there were no major hiccups or bad moments.  TV viewership was down considerably from 2008, so this cannot all be construed as positive.  But the party faithful were motivated and Romney was able to leave Tampa heading a unified and more importantly, motivated party.

Remember that political conventions typically produce a polling bounce of a few point is the week following.  With the polling showing a virtually tied race with very few undecideds, I think the bounce will be on the low side.

We will look at the Democrat's turn in North Carolina this week with an analysis next weekend.

Post party conventions and Labor Day - it's game on for the next eight weeks!

Onwards!

The Prof

Paul Ryan is the VP pick, quick reaction

As always, I fired up my twitter feed when I awoke this morning and saw that the mounting speculation in the last few days regarding Wisconsin Rep and Chair of the House Budget Committee Paul Ryan was indeed correct.  Time for a quick analysis.

This is what I posted three weeks ago about Paul Ryan's chances for selection. Yes, the same posting when I predicted that Bobby Jindahl would be the selection - more omelet on face please!

Paul Ryan - Representative from Wisconsin
Pros: Policy wonk, may help in WI, budget expertise
Cons: Lightening rod for Democrats over budget proposals, not well known
Likelihood: Medium

Time for a more detailed pro/con list...Romney truly went out of the box instead of a safe pick like Portman or Pawlenty. Bold decision by Romney, but would he do this if he felt comfortable in winning this November?

Pros

• Fires up the Republican base big time! This adds to the notion of this being and election about turning out base voters and true believers.  On fiscal issues, Ryan is a the real deal with Tea Party voters who will now have much more motivation to come out and work for Romney's election.
• See above - this solidifies Romney's conservative credentials and ought to quiet calls that he is too moderate or wishy-washy.
• Ryan is as passionate with his speaking style as Romney is, uh... boring.  Additionally he has a folksy Midwestern persona which may help with connecting with working class whites.
• Solid policy and intellectual chops.
• Ryan is a way to focus the economic differences with the Obama administration and adds credibility to domestic policy under a Romney administration being a complete departure from that of President Obama.
• WI is a swing state, will this be enough to swing it red this year?  Romney is betting that the Midwest goes his way, in fact it must if he is to win.  Ryan may help out by a point or two.
• Mormon-Catholic ticket - a first indeed...

Cons

• Ryan has proposed major reforms on the budget including a partial privatization of Medicare.  Target rich environment.  Ads showing vulnerable seniors are already being shot as I write...can he survive the third rail of politics? Democrats will try very hard to make this about Ryan and his "radical" policies that hurt the poor and vulnerable. 
• See above: Feeds into the storyline that Romney is a robber-baron and the reincarnation of Gordon Gecko. Obama's attack ads have been eroding his support among key groups, especially women. Expect the negative ads to continue and redouble.
• Ryan is 42, but looks 28.  Young and no strong foreign policy credentials - another line of attack.
• This makes Ryan part of the campaign - does it distract from the campaign strategy that this is a referendum on the president?
• Does this pick smack of worry (desperation) on Romney's part?   Going bold can be spun as desperation.

Pardon the football analogy, but the Prof is quite the New England Patriots fan. This is not the Hail Mary Pass (dropped and fumbled by Palin) of 2008, but certainly a tricky pass over the middle on 3rd and 8.  Into traffic.  Ryan better be able to pull moves like Wes Welker in the next 87 days.

Onwards!


The Prof

100 Days to go...

Time for a quick assessment of the presidential race with exactly 100 days until November 6, 2012. Please pardon my quoting of Donald Rumsfeld, but I think it is very appropriate.

"There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say there are things that, we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know, we don't know."

Things for watch for in the next few weeks...

The Polls: 

Disclaimer: Be aware that the worth of polls is not as meaningful in terms of a head to head race as they will be in October.  The campaigns although well underway, have not hit full stride yet and many potential swing voters have not formed a complete assessment of the race yet.  In other words - a lot can still change!

Polling is showing a national race that is basically tied, therefore...wait, we do not have a national vote for the presidency (remember it is 51 independent state elections that determine the outcome), so my main interest are the swing state polls.

What I am looking for are likely-voter poll models and consistency in the results of separate polling organizations.  Right now these generally show a small advantage for Team Obama, but Romney is withing striking distance in most swing states.  The majority of each campaign's time and resources will be expended on the 15 or so swing states.  In most of them, the shift of a few points either way will determine the November 6 outcome. 

The National Party Conventions:

In a month each party will have nearly a week of FREE media coverage.  During this week they hope to craft a carefully coordinated coronation (the four Cs) to highlight why their candidate is the only one who can save the nation and the opponent as the next coming of Sauron - please excuse the Tolkien reference, but I can't resist!

All of this is contingent upon there being no major candidate (or candidate staff) gaffes that the media will run with and distract from the party message.  Additionally, watch to see if Ron Paul's delegates (yes he is still lurking about) create any mischief for Romney in Tampa.

Romney's VP Selection:

See my previous post  - expect a selection in the next two weeks, probably after the conclusion of the Summer Olympics. I still think Jindal or Portman is most likely, but time will tell...

Other What Ifs...

• Candidate Gaffes - President Obama's "You didn't build that" and Mitt Romney's criticism of the UK on the eve of the Olympics are the gifts that keep on giving.  In the Age of Twitter, expect to see more of these.
• The Presidential Debates in the fall - probably the most important game changer/game breaker remaining.
• Congressional gridlock - the looming "debt cliff" may well impact voter perceptions of the parties - and probably not in a good way.
• The July Employment Report and other continuing economic indicators - the latest economic news is hurting the Administration.  If things continue to be weak, Obama's reelection becomes increasingly difficult. If they turn around, he will be the clear favorite.
• New policy/initiatives:  Does President Obama announce new major initiatives similar to the immigration and same sex marriage actions?
• Foreign Policy crisis:  Iran, Syria, European economic meltdown, pick your poison.

Look for this space to be updated on an increasing basis in the near future.  This may be a good time to peek in on the Massachusetts Senate race.

Onwards!

The Prof

VPstakes 2012 - do no harm

Just like the Hippocratic Oath - I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.

In the next few weeks, Republican candidate Mitt Romney will be making the first public executive decision as a presidential candidate with the VP selection. Saying that this is critical is a bit of an understatement.

Historically, the VP has been selected to foster party unity (Bush 1980), please a certain constituency (Johnson 1960), shake up the race (Palin 2008), adding experience where a candidate is lacking (Biden 2008), or regional appeal (Edwards 2004).

Of course the VP should be someone the president is comfortable with (depending on how involved in the administration the VP will ultimately be), be free of major scandals/gaffes/background issues (note that Thomas Eagleton was dropped from McGovern's ticket in 1972 for a prior history of psychiatric issues), and not alienate any key group that the candidate hopes to appeal to.

This year Romney can go with several individuals all with assets and liabilities. In no particular order...

Kelly Ayotte - Senator from NH:
Pros:  Female, loyal Romney supporter, tea party conservative, could help in NH
Cons:  Limited national experience,  uncomfortable speaker, may remind people of Palin
Likelihood: Low

Marco Rubio - Senator from Florida
Pros: Hispanic, tea party favorite, could help in FL, good personal story
Cons: Potential ethics issues, limited national experience, could overshadow Romney
Likelihood: High

Rob Portman - Senator from Ohio
Pros: Very experienced, could help in OH, Foreign Policy credentials, safe pick
Cons:  As boring as Romney, served in the Bush Administration
Likelihood: High 

Chris Christie - Governor of New Jersey
Pros: Tea Party favorite, passionate, appeal to independents
Cons:  Would definitely overshadow Romney, very gaffe-prone, won't help in NJ
Likelihood: Medium

Bobby Jindal - Governor of Louisiana
Pros: Indian-American, tea party favorite, policy wonk, good personal story
Cons: Boring speaking style, endorsed Rick Perry in primaries, allegedly involved in an exorcism when in college
Likelihood: High

Tim Pawlenty - Former Governor of Minnesota
Pros: Policy wonk, gets along with Romney, "Minnesota-nice", safe pick
Cons: Boring speaking style, criticized Romney when running last year, ran a terrible presidential campaign
Likelihood: High

Paul Ryan - Representative from Wisconsin
Pros: Policy wonk, may help in WI, budget expertise
Cons: Lightening rod for Democrats over budget proposals, not well known
Likelihood: Medium

Bob McDonnell - Governor of Virginia
Pros: Tea party favorite, could help bring in VA
Cons: Limited national experience,very conservative on social issues
Likelihood: Low to Medium

Long-shots: ...No, it won't be Condi Rice!
Nicki Haley - Governor of South Carolina
Susan Martinez - Governor of New Mexico
John Thune - Former Senator from South Dakota

Very long-shot: Jeb Bush, former Governor of Florida 

Decision Points for Romney:

• Does he stay safe but boring (Portman, Pawlenty) or go high risk/high reward? (Christie)
• Does he need to please the tea party wing of the GOP? (Rubio, Ayotte, Ryan)
• Need to appeal to specific voting groups? (Rubio, Ayotte, Jindal)

Romney is an analytical person by nature and background and not prone to make "Hail Mary" passes (like John McCain in 2008).   I think he will stay safe overall, but try to go slightly out on a limb as he needs to energize his campaign and create positive buzz with his selection.

Professor Brad's prediction (drum roll please!)
I think he goes with Bobby Jindal for the following reasons:

• He is experienced as a Governor and Congressman
• Rhodes Scholar background, has some academic chops
• Limited negatives compared to other contenders
• Generally viewed as a successful governor won't overshadow Romney, but has appeal as an Indian-American Catholic
• Will help solidify movement conservatives who are concerned about Romney being too moderate

Of course, if I am wrong...

Runner-ups: Portman (safe pick) Pawlenty (safe pick)
Long-shot: Rubio

All this being said, very few people foresaw Sarah Palin in 2008 or Dan Quayle in 1988.  We all will know in the next few weeks.

Onwards!

The Prof

The "Bain" of the Campaign...

Hi all,

Lots happening during the summer doldrums...

• Another poor jobs report - advantage Romney
• Supreme Court essentially upholds the Affordable Care Act - advantage both Obama and Romney
• Focus on Bain Capital - advantage Obama
• Condi Rice floated as potential VP - advantage Obama (but it won't happen)

If this election is about Mr. Obama's stewardship of the economy, he will be in serious trouble as the economy is usually THE driving issue of any presidential election.  The economic recovery has been unusually weak and more importantly, the public perception is that we remain mired in recession.

This being the case, if I was advising the president, he would be conducting the campaign exactly as he is. He has to make this a choice, not a referendum.  Since the middle of June several strategic decisions have been implemented to these ends.

• The executive order on allowing illegal immigrants meeting certain criteria to stay has bolstered the president's support among Hispanic voters and may help with turnout in essential states such as CO, NM, NV, and NC.

• Endorsing same-sex marriage helps with the liberal base and fundraising.

• The recent statement on allowing the tax rates on those earning over $250k to increase to 2001 levels is a clear shot at Romney and helps with the narrative that Romney is wealthy and out of touch. 

• And to top things off, the recent story that Romney was listed on Bain Capital's SEC documents after he left the company in 1999.  This also supports the assertion that Romney oversaw job outsourcing resulting from Bain's M&A activities.

All in all a good month for President Obama. The conversation is mainly about Romney and not on the tepid economic numbers.  One of the top rules in a campaign is to define your opponent.  Romney is in danger of being defined in the most unflattering of terms.

The president's team has been impressive in creating a picture of Romney morphing into Gordon Gecko.  There have been huge ad spends in swing states focused on Bain Capital's outsourcing of jobs.  This message may resonate among working class whites who otherwise may be Romney supporters.  It also undermines Romney's main argument - that he is a businessman and knows how to promote economic growth.  Romney is on defense and playing constant defense in a campaign means that you are not winning.

However, overall polling numbers remain close, although Romney's negatives are ticking up somewhat.  Several news organizations have concluded although Romney remained Bain CEO on paper, that he was not part of any management decisions and was focused on the 2002 Winter Olympics. That can be difficult to explain though and does not neatly fit into a 30 second ad.

This week Romney has (finally) got out there in the media to make his case.  He needs to make his case and shift focus back to the economy and soon. Additionally he needs to shape his own definition - waiting until the Republican Convention in six weeks may be too late.

The danger for the president is that he can be painted as a negative campaigner and trying to do anything possible to distract from the economy.  If Romney can get this message out, he may be able to parley the past several bad weeks into an advantage going forward.

Next post - VPOTUS (Vice President of the United States) picks and prediction.

Onwards!

The Prof