Hello folks, welcome to our special edition of Making
Sense with Steve Leser where we devote the show to coverage of and predictions
regarding Election 2014.
Well, here we are less than ten days to Election Day
2014. I think we have all been hearing for practically the last two years that
Democrats are going to have a bad day this Election Day, Republicans are going
to win all these additional seats and it’s going to be because of Obamacare or
Benghazi or some other trumped up issue by the GOP.
For the purposes of the show, I am going to concentrate
on the race for control of the US Senate since control for the senate has been
deemed to be up in the air and that has the potential to impact all of us the
most. I will talk about other aspects of the election later but my
concentration is going to be on the senate.
Let’s talk first of all about where we are now. The
senate of course has 100 members, 100 seats. Right now Democrats have 53 seats
and two independents caucus with the Democrats so for all intents and purposes,
the Democrats have 55 seats.
Republicans have the other 45 seats. For them to take
control, they would have to flip six seats. Five won’t do it because if the
count ends up 50-50, Democrats would retain control by the slimmest margins
because Vice President Joe Biden would cast the tying vote for control of the
senate.
Now right off the bat, a lot of people are asking me why
Republicans seem like they have a chance to take that many seats. They ask me,
doesn’t that say something about what people are thinking about President Obama
or the Democratic Party? That would be a reasonable question and Republicans
and conservative pundits are certainly spinning this election as a rebuke
of the President and Democrats.
Let me explain why what is going on with the Senate race
is not a negative statement on the President or the Democratic Party. As we all
know, senate terms are six years long. So the senate seats that are up for
election this year were last up for election in 2008. 2008 was a wave year for
Democrats.
President Obama won that election by a massive margin and carried a
lot of Democrats into the House and Senate on his coattails. Many of those
Democrats were elected in the South and swing states and in districts where normally
Democrats almost never win or have a very difficult time winning.
If we look at the senate races that are close this year
that will determine control of the senate, they are all in what we call either
red states or swing states.
Let’s start to get into those now.
There are ten states that will determine control of the
senate, they are Colorado, Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Kansas,
Arkansas, New Hampshire, Louisiana and Alaska. Three of those states are swing
states, Colorado, Iowa and New Hampshire. Seven of those states are red states,
North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisiana and Alaska.
So right off the bat, you can see that Democrats are
going to have an uphill battle with this election. Many political pundits noted
this, by the way, in the aftermath of the 2008 election, I remember several
pundits remarking that the Democrats would have a tough time defending a lot of
the house seats they won in two years and a lot of the senate seats they won in
six years. Political professionals expected this for the last six years, this
is not a surprise to folks who make their living in politics.
The fact that Democrats are contending for all ten of
these states and just about all of them are in the margin of error right now, I
would argue says something bad about the Republican party and how it is
perceived. In those seven red states, for instance, the Republican candidates
should be blowing the Democratic candidate out of the water, it shouldn’t be
close. The Republican candidates should be leading by ten to twenty percentage
points by now. They aren’t. In fact, if we examine an eleventh state, Virginia,
which has traditionally been a Red state and is now more of a swing state,
Democrat Mark Warner is up by double digits over former RNC Chair Ed Gillespie.
So, Republicans are not making new inroads into parts of
the country, we’re not seeing them ahead in places where Democrats should be
leading. We aren’t seeing anything that indicates they are winning over the
hearts and minds of American citizens.
In fact, the latest generic congressional poll of likely
voters has Republicans ahead by one point. And keep in mind, the likely voter
polls use a formula that takes into account that more Republicans vote in
midterm elections than Democrats. Polls of all registered voters shows that
more people are in favor of Democratic candidates this election than
Republicans. So if every registered voter went to the polls on November 4th,
the Democrats would win pretty handily.
The reason I am taking so much time to talk about this
before I even get into many of these races is so that you all understand the reason
why we are seeing what we are seeing. A lot of Conservative pundits are going
to play up the fact that Republicans will be gaining seats in the senate. That
is a given. Republicans will gain somewhere between four and eight seats. The
fact is that they will be gaining those seats almost exclusively in red states
that they should have had all along and if they don’t gain enough they will
still not control the senate. So let’s get into those ten states and I will
explain what I think is going to happen in alphabetical order, and just to
remind us all, without those ten states, the count is 45 Democrats and those
who caucus with Democrats, and 45 Republicans in the senate.
First up we have Alaska. In Alaska, incumbent Democrat
Senator Mark Begich is facing off against Republican and former Alaska Attorney
General Dan Sullivan. Here is exactly what I was talking about. We have a
Democratic incumbent in a very red state, a state where you wouldn’t normally
think we could get a Democrat elected facing off against a locally popular
Republican. And according to most of the polls right now, he is anywhere from
three to six points behind which is within the margin of error. As any
reputable pollster or polling aggregation group will tell you Alaska is a notoriously
hard state to poll. Polls have frequently been wrong there before and there are
polls showing all kinds of different outcomes. The Hellenthal and Associates
poll has Begich ahead by 10 points. CNN’s last poll has Sullivan ahead by 6
points. Making this race interesting is that the Republican Sullivan has had a
number of strange gaffes and misstatements during the campaign.
One of my favorite Dan Sullivan mistakes was back in May
as reported by the Huffington Posts Michael McAuliffe. Sullivan, in an
advertising spot that month, attacked Begich from atop the Dena'ina Civic and
Convention Center in Anchorage, saying that Alaskans wanted someone who
delivered real results. Unfortunately for Sullivan, the very center from which
he conducted the ad was built through Begich’s efforts and was dubbed Begich's
"crowning achievement" by local press during his days as mayor, when
he secured its construction.
Begich created an add mocking Sullivan’s ad and pointing
out how he had the center built and all of his other achievements. It’s hard to
tell where that race is going to end up, but I am not counting on it for the
Democrats in my predictions. I’m putting it in the Republican column only on
the basis of Alaska being a traditional red state, not on any belief regarding
who is ahead. I won’t be surprised if Begich pulls this one out.
So if Alaska is in the Republicans corner, we have 45
Democrats and 46 Republicans so far.
Next on the list is Arkansas. Of the ten close contests,
Arkansas looks like the most difficult one for the Democrat in the race,
incumbent senator Mark Pryor. The polls for the last month all show Republican
Tom Cotton ahead between three and nine percentage points but I will give this
note of caution regarding those polls. The only impartial polls over the last
few weeks have this a three point race. The polls that have a larger margin are
all conservative leaning polls. Three points is well within the margin of error
and if there is a substantive reason to think the polls may have some issues in
general, and I will talk more about those later, this race might in fact be
dead even. For now, I will have to count this one as being in the Republican
column.
That puts our race at 45 Democrats and 47 Republicans.
Next we have another race that looks like a tough one for
an incumbent Democrat, that’s Colorado with incumbent Democratic Senator Mark
Udall vs. Republican Cory Gardner. This
is one of the races that has been affected by the Koch brothers add blitz that
will reportedly pay for one in every ten ads that will air this election. I am
not sure any wealthy family not actually in politics has had the kind of effect
on an election that the Koch brothers will have on this one. The Koch brothers
along with Karl Rove stepped up their efforts to buy ads in late august through
the end of September and this has had a big effect on a number of races
including the one in Colorado. Democratic Senator Udall was leading in this
race by an average of around 5 points until the Republican ad blitz started.
Now, the Republican Gardner leads by an average of around three or four points
but in some polls by five to seven points. Still, most of those are still
within the margin of error. Again, I’ll have to count this one as being in the
Republican column, but the race is very close.
We’re now at 45 Democrats and 48 Republicans.
In Georgia, we have an open senate race between Democrat
Michelle Nunn, the daughter of former popular Georgia senator Sam Nunn, and the
Republican David Perdue. Georgia is a tough state for Democrats to win in,
despite famous parentage and Perdue led this race through the beginning of
October. Then a series of gaffes, culminating in Perdue saying how good it is
to outsource American jobs overseas and how proud he was of doing so, turned
the race around and Nunn now leads by a few points in most polls.
Nunn’s lead is in the margin of error but it’s hard to
imagine Perdue winning after voicing his unabashed support for outsourcing so I
am giving this one to Democrat Michelle Nunn.
Georgia in the Democratic column puts us at 46 Democrats
and 48 Republicans.
We will continue with the coverage of election 2014 right
after this…
Welcome back to Making Sense with Steve Leser and our
election 2014 predictions.
Alphabetically, that brings us to Iowa, but I am going to
save Iowa for last and you will see why when I get there.
On to Kansas, which is a fascinating race where the
Democrat has left the race in order to throw his support behind Independent
Greg Orman to try to prevent Republican Pat Roberts from winning.
Orman shown
some indication that he caucus with the Democrats if he wins. Orman was leading
handily throughout September, then early in October it looked like the
Republican ad blitz had turned the race around. Now, Orman seems to be opening
back up a lead.
This one looks like it is going for Orman.
That makes the race 47 Democrats or those who caucus with
them and 48 Republicans.
After Kansas we have Kentucky and how interesting is
Kentucky, which features incumbent and Senate Minority Leader Republican Mitch
McConnell in a race to save his seat at a time he should be relishing the
opportunity to take over the senate and perhaps become majority leader. The
problem for McConnell is that he is nationally unpopular and also unpopular in
his state. So this race is a contest between the natural fundamentals of the
state, which favor Republicans, versus the unpopularity of the Republican
candidate against a very likeable and capable Democratic candidate in Alison
Lundergan Grimes.
I find this race fascinating for so many reasons. The guy
who might lead the senate if Republicans take it over could instead be the
tipping point for Democrats by losing. Right now, McConnell is ahead in most
polls by one to four points but that is all within the margin of error. The
race could just as easily be tied or Grimes could be slightly ahead. For the
purposes of my prediction model, since the polls show an average for McConnell
of 2-3 points ahead I am putting this in the Republican column, but that does
not mean this is a done deal at all.
One of the things that may change the dynamics of the
Kentucky senate race is a new ad being run by groups in Kentucky that suggests
that McConnell used insider information from phone calls from the US Treasury
department to shuffle his investments. The McConnell campaign is desperately
trying to get local stations not to air the ad. We have to see how that shakes
out.
So by my calculations that makes the race for the senate
47 Democrats and 49 Republicans. So two more for the Republicans and they would
control the senate.
Next we have Louisiana where incumbent Democratic senator
Mary Landrieu faces Republican Bill Cassidy. Louisiana’s race is not at all
typical in that we have actually several candidates running and Landrieu and
Cassidy are just the front runners. If no one reaches 50%, and it doesn’t look
like anyone is close to that, the first two place finishers will face each
other in a runoff on December 6th. In the polls for November 4th, Landrieu
actually leads all other candidates. But polls for the runoff show her a couple
of points behind. Anything can happen between now and December 6th and Landrieu
has been a Houdini of sorts in the past being able to pull these races out of
her hat.
For our purposes, I am putting Louisiana in the
Republican column, even though counting out Mary Landrieu is not a smart bet in
my opinion. And since there will be a runoff, this race won’t be decided until
December.
But again, just for arguments sake, that gives us 47
Democrats and 50 Republicans.
So one more and Republicans would take control.
But next is New Hampshire. And in New Hampshire,
Democratic incumbent Jeanne Shaheen has led this entire race against Republican
carpet bagger Scott Brown who had a short tenure as Senator in Massachusetts.
There was an indication that toward the end of September and beginning of
October, Brown had made it a closer race than it had been, probably partially
due to the Republican ad blitz, but the latest polls show that Shaheen is
starting to open up a larger lead again. What’s worse for Brown is that polls
consistently show Shaheen with 49% or 50% of the vote of likely voters for the
last two months.
So I feel fairly confident that we can say that Senator
Jeanne Shaheen will be re-elected and we can add New Hampshire to the
Democratic column. It’s still within the margin of error, so in terms of the
need to get out the vote and the possibility that the polls are wrong and all
of those other issues, it’s not a done deal. But I am predicting that she will
be re-elected.
That gives us 48 Democrats and 50 Republicans so far.
Next is North Carolina where we have another Democratic
incumbent senator, Kay Hagan against Republican Thom Tillis who was the house
speaker of the North Carolina state legislature. Polling wise, this race has gone very similarly to New Hampshire. Senator
Hagan has led this race pretty much all along and had opened a larger lead at
the beginning of September before the Republican ad blitz hit and Tillis
narrowed the race considerably. But again, Senator Hagan seems to be pulling
away from Tillis. Again like New Hampshire, the race is still within the margin
of error so anything could happen here. But I believe Senator Hagan will pull
this out and the models at both Real Clear Politics and Five Thirty Eight show
she has greater than a 70% chance of winning.
So now we are at 49 Democrats and 50 Republicans.
We will continue with the coverage of election 2014 right
after this…
Welcome back to Making Sense with Steve Leser and our
election 2014 predictions.
We left off with nine of our ten close senate races
analyzed with my model saying that left us at 49 Democrats and 50 Republicans
after election day.
That brings us back to Iowa, which is an open contest
with no incumbent running between Democrat Bruce Braley and Republican Joni
Ernst.
I’ve saved Iowa for last because I believe the race in
Iowa is the tipping point state for control of the senate. The latest polls
show Republican Ernst up by about one point. If the Democrats hold the states
that they are now leading in and win Iowa, it will be 50-50 and the Democrats
will retain control of the Senate.
Republican Ernst may have just done something to change
the trajectory of the race against her. Like all candidates, she scheduled a
meeting with the editorial board of one of the most important local newspapers,
the Des Moines Register. Unlike all other candidates, however, she cancelled
the meeting and intends not to meet with them. She probably did this because,
as noted by Ben Jacobs of The Daily Beast, she has run one of the most gaffe
prone campaigns in history. Jacobs notes:
Ernst has endorsed nullification
of federal laws, warned of the United Nations evicting Iowa farmers from their
land, called President Obama “a dictator,” and claimed that the “cap and trade
law,” which never passed, is the federal regulation most undermining job
creation. These all got national attention and made national headlines.
Ernst had long been scheduled to
meet Thursday with the editorial board of The Des Moines Register, the biggest
and most influential paper in Iowa. The meeting would have included the paper’s
publisher, its editor, editorial board as well as various columnists and
reporters—all of whom would have been able to ask questions of Ernst. It would
all be recorded and live-streamed on the Internet as well. But then, Wednesday
night, her campaign suddenly said the candidate would not be able to attend and
that the meeting was canceled.
Now I think it’s pretty clear that the Ernst campaign
cancelled because they were afraid their candidate would say something dumb
during those interviews. In a race where polls suggested she was one or two
points up in a race that was getting really tight, they probably made a
calculated risk that the damage from publicly pulling out of the Des Moines Register
interview would be less than the damage from a bad gaffe, but that decision
says all kinds of bad things about Ernst.
Your candidate can’t pull it together enough to be sane
for a couple of hours?
According to the polls, all this has to do is hurt her by
a point or two to put Braley ahead. Braley may not need it since the race was
heading in his direction on its own.
A recent Quinnipiac poll shows that among people who have
already voted, Braley leads by around 21 percentage points. Now to be sure, I
have seen situations like this before where someone led in early voting before
Election Day and the other candidate ended up winning. That can and has
happened. But I don’t think it is going to happen this time.
I think Braley is going to pull this one out, and this is
one of the few places I disagree with fivethirtyeight.com and
realclearpolitics.com but to be sure, even both of those sites have this race
about as close as possible, showing Ernst only leading by a point.
If I’m right, the Senate will be 50 Democrats and those
who caucus with them, and 50 Republicans which with Vice President Joe Biden’s
tie breaking vote in favor of the Democrats, keeps the senate in Democratic
hands by the narrowest of margins.
Now, obviously, with no less than ten contests within the
margin of error in current polling, you cannot be sure of anything. Either
party could theoretically sweep all 10 or any combination could happen.
RealClearpolitics dot com is currently predicting 51 Republican Seats and 49
Democratic seats when it all shakes out, they have it the same as I do minus
Iowa. Five Thirty Eight Dot com is currently predicting 52 Republican Seats and
48 Democratic seats not based on specific state outcomes but on many thousands
of simulations of the entire election showing that count the most frequent
outcome.
The election could turn on a number of things. A major
national event in the last ten days could change things considerably. If the
assumptions polling agencies have made is off in terms of which voters will
show up at the polls, it would change things a lot, and when I say this I have
a couple of potential sampling errors that pollsters may be making including
the fact that the assumptions are that more Republicans will turn out
percentage wise than Democrats. All the polls you hear about at this point are
of likely voters. If you look at polls of registered voters, Democrats are
significantly ahead in all of what are now considered the close races. In other
words, if everyone who is registered to vote came out to vote, Democrats would
win handily. If more Democrats show up than is expected, Democrats are going to
have a great night.
If fewer Democrats come out than is expected, Democrats
are going to lose the senate big.
Speaking of analyzing who is going to come out to vote,
one thing that has come out in the last few weeks is a study by the National
Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials which, discussed in a
Voxxi.com article by Griselda Nevarez, predicts more Latinos will come out to
vote this year than in past midterm elections.
The report projects 7.8 million Latinos will cast ballots
in the November elections. That means the number of Latinos who come out to
vote this year could increase by nearly 19 percent over the last midterm
elections in 2010, when 6.6 million Latinos came out to vote.
The report also projects Latinos will make up about 8
percent of the nation’s voters. Furthermore, it predicts there will be more
than 28 million Latinos who are eligible to vote by the 2016 presidential
election, up from the current 25.5 million.
This could be significant in a number of races,
particularly Georgia, North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa. Latinos vote around
80% Democratic. A significant increase in the Latino vote would give Democrats
in those four states the win.
Also in terms of who comes out affecting the race we have
the Millenials. On October 9th, Politico ran a story talking to a Fusion poll
of Millenials that reports that young voters will likely be turning out in far
stronger numbers for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections. Forty-seven
percent of millennials say they are more likely to vote for the Democratic
candidates in the November elections, compared with 32 percent who say they are
more likely to vote for Republican candidates.
An increase in the Millenial vote would improve
Democratic chances across the board versus what we are now seeing in the polls
if the polling agencies have not accounted for it in their Likely voter models.
So that’s where we are with the senate. We have the GOP
about to gain seats because six years ago, these seats were won in a climate
where we had Barack Obama winning in a landslide that pulled a lot of senate
and house victories in places where Democrats usually don’t win. It’s that
simple.
I have a lot of folks asking me what the consequences
would be of Republicans winning the senate in 2014. To be honest, the effects
wouldn’t be that big. We already have divided government where it is very
difficult to get any bills passed. It would be biggest as a symbolic victory.
Most Presidents don’t get much done in the last two years of their second term.
I don’t think any Republican takeover would survive the 2016 election where I
expect Hillary Clinton to have a massive victory and again, as Obama did in
2008, carry in a lot of democrats in the House and Senate in on her coattails.
I’ve covered on this show how it is impossible for
Republicans to win enough states to, for instance, override a Presidential veto
on things like repealing Obamacare. Any Republican running for the House or
Senate on a promise to repeal Obamacare is running on a promise they cannot
keep.
I want to give you some quick updates on other parts of
election 2014. I know I spent a lot of time on the race for control of the
senate because I think that is going to be the biggest story of the election,
but there are some other important races. But first we have to go to break.
We will continue with the coverage of election 2014 right
after this…
Welcome back to Making Sense with Steve Leser and our
election 2014 predictions.
Earlier in the show I covered my predictions regarding
the senate races in election 2014.
Regarding Governor contests, that should be a bright spot
for Democrats this election as Democrats overall are expected to pick up two
states. I’m particularly focused on the Governor contests in Massachusetts,
Florida, Wisconsin and Texas.
Let’s start with Texas where we have an open seat being
vacated by Republican Rick Perry. Vying for the Governor’s mansion in Texas are
Democratic State Senator Wendy Davis and current Texas Attorney General Greg
Abbott.
As we all know, Texas is one of the reddest of red states
these days but a couple of things make this interesting. First is that analysis
of long term Demographics show that because of the increasing Latino vote,
Texas will become a blue state at some point in the next 5-20 years. It makes
sense from that standpoint for Democrats to keep challenging Republicans in
statewide races. The second reason Texas is interesting is Wendy Davis. Senator
Davis captured the imagination of not only Texas but the nation with her
filibuster against, as Wikipedia notes:
Texas Senate Bill 5, a proposal
to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, require abortion clinics to meet
the same standards that hospital-style surgical centers do, and mandate that a
doctor who performs abortions have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
Davis attempted to hold the
floor until midnight, when the Senate's special session ended, after which it
would no longer be able to vote on the measure. Following an 11-hour
filibuster—ending three hours short of midnight—Lieutenant Governor David
Dewhurst ruled that Davis had gone off topic, forcing a vote on whether the
filibuster could continue. Despite Republican efforts, parliamentary inquiries
from Leticia R. Van de Putte and others as well as raucous cheering and yelling
from the political activists gathered in the Capitol carried on through
midnight and the close of the special session. Following the deadline,
Republicans indicated that a vote had taken place and passed, while Democrats
declared that the vote had taken place after midnight, making it void. Dewhurst
later conceded that the bill was dead.
The next day, Governor Rick Perry called
for a second special session to allow for another attempt to pass the abortion
restrictions, as well as to address other issues. The bill was eventually
passed by both the House and the Senate in the July 2013 second special session
and the bill was signed by Gov. Rick Perry on July 18, 2013.
Wendy Davis’ filibuster
attracted national attention, including in The New York Times and The
Washington Post. National fundraising by
and speculation about a gubernatorial run for Davis also followed. She was encouraged to run by groups like
Battleground Texas and EMILY's List.
That brings us to where we are now. If this were a
Hollywood movie where the good guy comes out on top at the end, Davis would win
the race for Governor. Unfortunately, it looks like the Demographics in Texas
haven’t yet turned the state blue. Just about all of the polls of this race in
2014 show that Davis trails by double digits. Still it has been a fascinating
race and a game effort by Wendy Davis regardless of the outcome.
In Florida, we have a race between a current and a former
Governor. We have incumbent Republican Governor Rick Scott seeking re-election
against former Republican Governor now turned Democrat Charlie Crist. As if
that isn’t interesting enough, Floridians universally remember Charlie Crist’s
tenure in Governor fondly and are not happy with how Rick Scott has handled the
Governorship.
That contrast is one factor in the race, the other is that the Scott
campaign has tried to play up Crists’s switching of parties.
Complicating Scotts attempt to be re-elected is that he
is gaffe prone and has been during his time as governor and during the
campaign. His most famous gaffe or mistake, of course is fangate, where he
almost refused to come out to debate Charlie Crist on October 15th, because
Crist had a fan at his podium. Crist was alone by himself at his podium for 7
long televised minutes where the moderator even called out Scott for the
nonsense of not wanting to debate because of a fan.
I think that when Floridians go to the polls on November
4th, the race is going to be decided by Floridians remembering that they
thought Crist did a good job as governor and they do not like the job Scott has
done as Governor. It’s that simple. Crist had positive approval numbers
throughout his time as governor and Scott has had abysmal numbers during his
time as governor. This race should be that simple and in the end, when
Floridians have to make their final decisions, I think it is going to be that
simple.
Massachusetts is a contest for an open seat being vacated
by Democratic Governor Deval Patrick contested by Democrat Martha Coakley and
Republican Charlie Baker. I have to admit that as a Democrat, I was nervous
when I saw that Massachusetts Democrats had nominated Coakley in another statewide
race. If you recall, she is the Democrat who lost a Senate race in
Massachusetts to Scott Brown back in the 2010 special election. She was widely
criticized for not running a good campaign at the time.
I understand she is a fantastic person and has been an
excellent attorney general for Massachusetts, and I have no doubt she would be
a great Senator or Governor, but you have to be able to run a good enough
campaign to get the job. Again, we are seeing her have issues in that regard.
All the polls since the middle of October show Coakley behind and some by
significant margins. The good news for Coakley and Massachusetts Democrats is
that by all accounts, Coakley whipped Baker in their Tuesday October 21st
debate.
The problem for Coakley has been, and I got this from my
friends in Massachusetts, is that she is perceived as having no charisma at
all. The folks up there seem to agree with everything she says, but the way she
says it is off-putting compared with the charismatic guys she has been up
against in terms of Scott Brown in 2010 and Charlie Baker this year.
What I would say to Massachusetts voters is this, every
Republican you have elected to statewide office you have been extremely
disappointed with by the end of their first term and they have not been
re-elected. When Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, he was unable to
run for re-election his favorable rating was so low. Scott Brown was beaten
after one short special term as senator from Massachusetts. One of the more
tongue in cheek definitions of insanity is doing the same thing over and over
again and expecting a different outcome. That is what electing Baker would be,
insanity. Charlie Baker is proposing the same kinds of things in general as
Scott Brown and Mitt Romney, large tax cuts, increases in spending and no idea
how he is going to pay for any of it. The end result will be greatly expanding
deficits in Massachusetts like what happened in Kansas under Republican
Governor Brownback who is also incidentally in trouble this election. Like all
Republicans who propose tax cuts, Baker is hoping voters will think short term
having a dozen or so more dollars in their pockets per month for a few years
will make them forget that it comes at a cost of breaking the budget of the
state and ultimately require a large increase in taxes and a cut in state
services to deal with the shortfall.
Charisma is nice, but it doesn’t balance a budget and
doesn’t enact good policy. If Baker were coming up with brand new policies, I
would understand Massachusetts voters being taken by the charisma difference,
but Baker is spouting the same failed supply side economics Republicans have
been pushing for the last 35 years and the evidence is in that they do not
work. Policy success is not affected by charisma. If Baker is elected,
Massachusetts voters will have massive buyer’s remorse and regret their
decision long before the end of his first term.
Contrast that with Coakley who has a 15 year record of
success in public office where voters are happy with her performance. Massachusetts
voters, the decision of this race is one of those rare great opportunities in
life where you know the outcome in advance. You know you won’t be happy with
someone who enacts the kind of policies Baker will enact and you know that
Coakley is successful at the jobs to which you elect her. That’s the election,
if you are able to see it.
Finally we have the Wisconsin race for governer pitting
incumbent Republican Governor Scott Walker against Democrat Mary Burke. When
discussing the Massachusetts race I was talking about how we know that supply
side economics don’t work and what the end result of them will be.
Wisconsin is
yet another excellent example of this. Republican governor Walker has
implemented supply side policies of tax cuts and has increased spending in the
state and that will result this year in a 1.8 billion dollar shortfall in
Wisconsin’s budget, some thing Democratic challenger Burke has been hammering
on in her two debates with Walker and in campaign ads.
Walker has been trying to claim that his policies should
take credit for the addition of 110,000 jobs in his four years, but Burke has
countered that all states have done well in increasing employment under
President Obama, but Wisconsin has done the least well of pretty much any other
state in the country.
Of the last four polls in the state, two have it exactly
even, one has burke up by one point and one has Walker up by one point. One
thing that may affect the race is that Burke is perceived to have done better
than Walker in the two debates they had in October. Another is that there seems
to be some element of Walker fatigue in the state. It will be interesting to
see who pulls this race out. I’m betting Burke.
One last thing regarding election 2014, compared to the
coverage of the Senate races there isn’t much coverage of the House races. With
hundreds of races obviously there is not enough time for me to make a serious
dent in this program. I expect to see a small GOP increase in house seats in
the order of a 5 seat increase plus or minus 3 seats.
No comments:
Post a Comment