With just 18 days left until Election Day, and with early voting picking up all over the country, it can be said that the state of the presidential race is as hard to figure as it ever was. A paucity of big national polls with data drawn after the vice presidential and the second presidential debate has made it difficult to determine if the president got the boost (at least in Democratic enthusiasm, if not swing-voter allegiance) many analysts expected. The tracking polls have shown varying results, and the most influential, from Gallup, has shown a steady rise in support for Mitt Romney—an astonishing seven-point lead among likely voters as of yesterday—that has perhaps been complicated by the firm’s implementation of new sampling practices and a likely voter screen. Battleground-state polls are also varying significantly, but many have shown Romney gaining pretty steadily, and perhaps even taking the lead in Virginia and Florida (even as almost everyone concedes NC to him) while drawing near even in Wisconsin. Just this morning NBC/WSJ/Marist surveys from Iowa and Wisconsin (including some post-second-debate data) were released indicating that Obama had regained robust leads in those two states, but this particular polling combine has regularly given Obama better-than-average numbers.

In terms of the dynamics of the race, the second presidential debate showed an invigorated incumbent attacking Romney’s moderate credentials, while the challenger refined his “failed economy” rap and repeated it very often. Both candidates exhibited swing-state obsessions, particularly in an extended argument over energy policies that seemed to become a battle over which of them was the best bet for the fossil-fuel industries. Foreign policy made its first appearance as a major issue, though it’s unclear who got the better of the exchange over Libya; it’s difficult to imagine quite how an entire debate over foreign policy will play out next Tuesday in the final debate.  Both candidates appealed overtly to women, though again, it’s hard to determine who did better (unless Romney’s “binders of women” line migrates from the Twitterverse, where it’s everywhere, to broader venues). It’s important to remember, of course, that the final debate, strictly on foreign policy topics, is being held in just three days, so it may be very difficult to isolate reactions to individual debates.

Early voting estimates seem to indicate an Obama advantage in Iowa, Nevada, Wisconsin and perhaps Ohio, with a Romney advantage in Florida and North Carolina. A Supreme Court decision rebuffing Republican efforts to shut down Ohio voting the weekend before Election Day was very good news for Democrats, but Republican officials are managing to keep early voting hours limited.

It appears the campaigns will be roughly even in stretch-run paid advertising, despite earlier reports of a big pro-Romney advantage. But where the money is deployed is another subject, particularly with the standing of candidates in the battleground states so much in flux. And as always, assessment of GOTV efforts will be difficult to make before the November 6, though it’s assumed that Team Obama will have an advantage in most key states, but not as large as the one it enjoyed in 2008.

Down-ballot assessments haven’t changed a great deal in the last couple of weeks, though there is some Republican optimism that Romney’s improved performance could lift the entire ticket, particularly in battleground states. The one place that sort of effect could be measurably happening is in Wisconsin, where GOP Senate candidate Tommy Thompson, despite multiple major mistakes, seems to be again closing the gap with Democrat Tammy Baldwin. Observers will now be closely watching polls to see if Romney’s stronger numbers in Virginia and Florida will help George Allen break a long deadlock with Tim Kaine in the former and/or make Connie Mack competitive with Bill Nelson in the latter. Republicans desperately need a positive surprise to keep hopes of a Senate takeover alive.

Indeed, one of the more interesting subplots right now is the increased possibility that Romney could win without his party gaining control of the Senate. Most scenarios until recently, based on the early assumption that the Senate was an easy reach for the GOP, have figured otherwise. There was some debate back and forth as to whether Romney’s recent talk about “reaching out to Democrats” after the election disguised an implicit agreement with congressional Republicans to enact the Ryan Budget on a straight party-line vote using reconciliation procedures. That would become very difficult with a Democratic Senate, particularly one that will lose some of its most notable party heretics (e.g., Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson). Expect a lot more speculation in the next few days about the extent to which Republicans might actually allow a President Romney to depart from the many very specific promises he made during the primaries.

Wednesday night’s first presidential debate has thrown calculations about the presidential contest into some disarray, though it probably won’t be until after the weekend that sufficient public opinion surveys will have appeared to get a sense of whether Mitt Romney’s undisputed (if perhaps disputed in its extent or implications) win over the president will have any impact on the actual race, which has been remarkably stable for a very long time.

Political Scientist John Sides is one of the few to make a specific prediction: that Romney would likely enjoy a 1.25% “bump” in national polls, at least temporarily.  Some observers who had earlier thought Romney’s prospects for victory were evaporating viewed his debate performance as crucial in keeping donors from cutting their losses and focusing on downballot races.

In terms of the strategic impact of the first debate, the general view is that Romney sought and to some extent succeeded in repositioning himself to “the political center,” via his hedging on his earlier tax cut proposal, his passionate declaration of interest in public education and the protection of Medicare, his claims of possessing a viable alternative to Obamacare that would protect those with pre-existing conditions, and his assertion that he’d been more open to bipartisan cooperation than Obama.  It appears this tack by Romney threw the Obama campaign off-balance, contributing to a low-key and not terribly responsive performance by the president (who had allegedly decided against too many sharp attacks on his struggling opponent). Interestingly, after months and months of demands by conservatives that Romney run a sharply ideological “choice” campaign based on his running-mate’s budget, his very different tack in the debate drew virtually no criticism, presumably because conservatives were so delighted by Obama’s discomfiture and “defeat.”  The framing of the debate by moderator Jim Lehrer made it very difficult for Obama to bring up Romney’s vulnerabilities on cultural issues, though it’s surprising he didn’t find a way to bring up Mitt’s recently revealed remarks about “the 47%.” Continue reading “Election Watch: Muddy Political Landscape after Romney’s Debate Performance and New Jobs Report” →

The President’s modest but wide-ranging lead in most national and battleground state polls is no longer dismissible as a post-convention “bounce,” and is beginning to engender some serious concern in Republican circles. NBC’s First Read has a useful summary of that network’s own polling:

We’ve now released nine battleground state NBC/WSJ/Marist polls in the last three weeks, and what have we learned? President Obama is ahead of Mitt Romney in all nine, with his biggest leads being 7 and 8 points (in Ohio, New Hampshire, and Iowa) and his smallest edge at 2 points (in Nevada and North Carolina). Obama’s average percentage in these polls is 49.5% and Romney’s is 44% — which is consistent with the national polls (see below). Our state surveys also show a slight improvement in voters who believe that the nation is headed in the right direction. And they find Obama and Romney essentially tied on who would better handle the economy, while Obama mostly enjoys double-digit leads on foreign policy.

Republican reactions to these numbers have fallen into three categories. Some express no particular concerns, suggesting it remains a close race where some combination of heavy pro-Romney, anti-Obama advertising, better-than-expected debate performances, and a general realization of the incumbent’s “failure” could easily turn things around. Others are more concerned, and are offering various ideas for a Romney “comeback,” ranging from a harshly conservative comparative assault on the president (with loud-and-proud association of the ticket with the Ryan Budget and other provocative policies) to highly targeted voter appeals. And still others are attacking with considerable ferocity the accuracy of polls (other than those from the reliably pro-GOP Rasmussen firm), arguing either deliberate bias or skewed 2008-based samples, or both. Continue reading “Election Watch: Obama Keeps Edge With Swing State Voters” →

Twas another week when negative attention to comments by Mitt Romney combined with relatively strong poll showings by Barack Obama made observers wonder if the incumbent is still enjoying a post-convention “bounce,” is actually opening up a serious lead, or is fundamentally still in a very close race with the challenger.

As surely everyone has heard by now, a neglected videotape (unearthed and publicized by Mother Jones’ David Corn) of a May appearance by Romney at a Boca Raton fundraiser showed him embracing a Randian view of American society in which the 47% of households who don’t (currently) owe federal income taxes are locked into “dependence on government” and are sure Obama voters of no concern to the candidate and his virtuous coalition of productive folk. Aside from exposing Romney to Democratic criticism and media ridicule, the incident immediately set off an extended intramural debate among conservatives over the accuracy and political wisdom of his “47%” characterization (called, for example, “libertarian nonsense” by conservative Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson).

In terms of the state of the race, the consensus seems to be that Obama currently enjoys about a 4-point lead among likely voters, though the major dissenter, the Gallup Tracking Poll, which shows Obama’s “convention bounce” gone and the race tied, is unusually prestigious. Another consensus finding is that the “enthusiasm gap” between Republicans and Democrats has largely evaporated, which means Romney is not getting the polling “bump” long expected when pollsters started applying LV “screens” to the respondents. A heavy battery of battleground-state polls have been coming out this week, most providing good news for Obama (he’s led in all 21 post-convention polls of the ten closest battleground states that were conducted by traditional, phone-interview methodologies; robopolls have been somewhat less favorable), particularly in Virginia, Iowa and Colorado; Florida and (especially) North Carolina are dicier for the president. A closer national race, of course, would be reflected in closer battleground results, though the playing field is somewhat tilted to Obama so long as he looks strong in Virginia, Ohio and Iowa. Continue reading “Election Watch: Romney’s ’47 Percent’ Gaffe is Trouble for Campaign” →

The week after the conclusion of the two national political conventions has been lively, to say the least. Amid signs of a modest post-convention “bounce” for Obama, augmented by some favorable economic signs, the Romney campaign seems to be undergoing one of its periodic mini-crises, launching risky personal attacks on the president even as intraparty criticism reemerges about his campaign strategy and execution.

The Obama “bounce,” initially measured at around five points (after a one-to-two point bounce for Romney), seems to mainly involve renewed enthusiasm among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (as reflected in relatively small “gaps” between Obama’s standing in registered-voter and likely-voter polls, with the latter beginning to be deployed by most of the major polling firms). Aside from taking a small but significant lead in virtually all of the “horse-race” polls (and in polls of most battleground states), the president’s job approval rating in the much-watched Gallup tracking survey has broken the crucial 50% barrier. Moreover, the positive feelings emanating from the Democratic convention seems to have obscured any backlash to a tepid August jobs report. Subsequent positive market reactions to a Eurozone “rescue” plan and just today to the Federal Reserve Board’s announcement of a third—and this time, open-ended—round of “quantitative easing,” help boost a shaky but very real aura of economic optimism that could be critical for the incumbent.
Continue reading “Election Watch: Obama’s Post-Convention Bounce and Romney Presses on in Shrinking Battleground” →

Michelle Obama cleaned Mitt Romney’s clock last night. By recounting the sacrifices her family and her husband’s family made to give their children a better life, she put the lie to Republican claims that Democrats stand for entitlements and dependency.

Obama exemplifies the middle class values and aspirations that Republicans love to extol, but unlike them she understands the social context that makes personal success possible — supportive families and communities and public investments that give everyone a shot at opportunity. By emphasizing her own blue collar roots and work ethic, she made it clear she doesn’t need lectures from GOP trust fund babies about the threat moochers, free loaders and “takers” supposedly pose to U.S. prosperity.

Opportunity, responsibility, community – haven’t we heard Obama’s message somewhere before? In any case, it’s the right answer to the GOP’s chilly new brand of selfish, anti-social, and anything-but-compassionate conservatism.

Photo credit: Shutterstock

Today we’re going to take a look back at the Republican National Convention, and a look ahead at the Democratic confab.

Republicans entered their convention with multiple challenges: (1) introducing Paul Ryan; (2) reintroducing Mitt Romney; (3) showing some diversity in a party that’s in deep trouble with minority voters; (4) exhibiting excitement and enthusiasm; (5) tightening their negative case against Barack Obama; (6) presenting a plausible positive agenda related to the shortcomings in Obama’s performance they had identified; and (7) avoiding mistakes.

The general judgment (or mine, anyway) is that they did a reasonably good job with (1), (3) and (5); a minimally effective job with (2) and (4); and fell significantly short on (6) and (7). Some of these tasks involved serious tradeoffs: Ryan’s effective speech, and to a considerable extent Romney self-“humanization,” came at the direct expense of a positive presentation of a coherent agenda. You’d never know listening to Ryan that he was the author of a budget resolution that constitutes most of the GOP agenda; to the uninitiated, he came across as a nice, non-controversial young man who is most focused on protecting his mother’s Medicare benefits from Barack Obama. This image will obviously not bear a great deal of scrutiny. Despite a brisk recitation of his alleged 5-point “jobs plan,” Romney did not do much to connect his burnished autobiography to any policy specifics, particularly as related to economic recovery and jobs.  His speech may have been effectively reassuring to voters who have already decisively turned against the incumbent and simply want to be convinced the GOP nominee is not a robotic corporate executive, but didn’t exactly seal the deal otherwise. Continue reading “Election Watch: Look Back, Look Forward” →