Top Ten States

by: Mike Lux

Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 09:48


Cross-posted on Huffington Post

Although I am a big believer in the 50-state strategy and generally spreading the map, for many years now I have been consulting for some Democratic donors and progressive groups on how to maximize their political resources, so I have a tradition of creating a top 10 list of states for maximum investment in state parties, outside efforts, and campaigns in these states.  I factor in the following things to my ratings:

• Presidential race importance (I factor this in even in the off-years, but obviously it gets maximum rating points in a Presidential election year)
• Competitive Senate races
• Competitive House races
• Competitive Governor races
• Competitiveness in terms of control in state legislative chambers
• Whether Secretary of State and other election administration officials are friendly, whether they are on the ballot
• Strength of state party
• Strength of outside organizational efforts I am aware of
• Relative costs of campaigning in the state (weighting inexpensive states a little higher because of the bang-for-the-buck factor)
• Ballot initiatives/referenda on the ballot in the cycle

Here's my top 10 list for this year:  

Mike Lux :: Top Ten States
1. Ohio.  Like usual.  I think I've rated Ohio 1, 2, or 3 every cycle I've done this, and it's at the top again.  As much as Obama expands and jumbles the electoral map, Ohio remains at the heart of winning 270 votes.  Even if he picks up states Kerry didn't have like Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado, he could still fall short by losing Pennsylvania and/or Michigan.  But if he picks up Ohio and holds everything else, we've won.  If he picks up Ohio and just one or two other new states, we've won even if we lose Pennsylvania.  No matter how you cut it, Ohio is pretty damn important.

In addition to the Presidential, Ohio is the mother lode of potential for picking up new House seats; potentially as many as 5 or even 6 are in play.  And the balance in the legislative chambers is very much in play.  The good news is that with Strickland as Governor, the state party is stronger than it's been in a long time, maybe ever.  And Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is actually trying to make it easy for poor and black (African American?) people to vote, rather than hard like her predecessor Mr. Blackwell. Between those last two factors alone, Obama could add 150,000 votes to Kerry's total.

2. New Mexico.  Obviously, with a razor-tight Presidential race forecast, three open House seats, and an open Senate seat, this state has it all this year, politically. Add in the early jockeying for a Governor's race since everyone is assuming Bill Richardson will be a part of a new Obama administration, and you've got a lot of intense politics going on in NM.  If the Senate race was closer, given my bias for inexpensive states, I might even rate it higher than Ohio.

The good news is that our candidates on the Federal side of the ballot are pretty strong, and Hispanic voters are moving in the Democratic direction.  The bad news is that the state party and outside organizational efforts are pretty weak, and my sense is that the state party isn't one of the strongest in the country.

3. Colorado.  An intensely competitive Presidential state, one of the best shots at a state not won by Kerry; a very competitive Senate race; at least one close House race; and relatively close margins in the state legislature.  The Secretary of State here is awful, but the state party and outside group efforts are both extremely solid.

4. Minnesota.  A competitive Presidential, maybe even more so if Pawlenty ends up as McCain's running mate; the most important, high-profile Senate race in the country; at least one House seat very much in play; and a recent history of knockdown, drag out fights for control of the MN House. The good news is that MN has the best secretary of state in the country in Mark Ritchie, and some good outside organization efforts.

5. Pennsylvania.  As usual, PA will be hotly coveted in the Presidential race, but I rate it slightly lower than in many years because there is not Senate race in play, and because there aren't as many hot Congressional races-maybe only a couple compared to PA's usual half-dozen.  The State House, though, is incredibly closely divided, and will be a huge prize regarding redistricting.

The state party here is relatively weak, but I think outside efforts will be reasonably strong.  

6. Michigan. The Presidential race is going to be very competitive here; probably one of the closest margins in the country, and those electoral votes could definitely come in handy.  There are also at least a couple of interesting House races, and state legislative chambers are very much in play.

The state party here is strong, one of the best in the country, and outside efforts are likely to be pretty strong as well.  

7. Nevada.  No Senate seat, but the Presidential race is likely to be down to the wire here, and the Jon Porter/Dina Titus race is one of the most interesting in the country because Titus has the potential to be a real progressive leader.  The legislature is also closely divided.  

I add one other future-oriented item as to why I think NV is so important: Harry Reid's 2010 Senate race.  While we don't know for sure that Reid will be the Majority Leader next year, it's more likely than not, and when a top legislative leader is in electoral trouble, it makes the entire party more cautious (see Tom Daschle).  The more we can register voters and win victories this year, the stronger and more confident Reid goes into next year, and that's good for both him and the Democratic Party.

I put both outside efforts and the state party into the same category: solid but not spectacular.

8. New Hampshire.  With four electoral votes up for grabs, a swing Senate race, and at least one and maybe both House seats competitive (with strong progressive Carol Shea-Porter in need of help), I normally would have rated this higher.  The reason it slipped to #7 is that the Boston media market makes it incredibly expensive for such a small state, and Shaheen is a fairly conservative Democrat.  

The state party here is pretty solid, and outside efforts will be decent but not great.  Long term, it would be nice to solidify the big Democratic gains from the last couple of cycles, and make New England solidly blue.

9. Missouri.  This was the one working-class border state Obama won in the primaries, and his team is investing heavily there early, so the Presidential race here should be a barn burner.  There's also a really important Congressional race in the northwest corner of the state.  The open seat Governor race leans Democratic right now, but could tighten up.  The legislative chambers are reasonably closely divided.  Finally, it's important to keep Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, one of the best in the country, in office.  

I would rate both the state party and outside groups overall as solid but not outstanding.  

10. Virginia.   No legislative races on the ballot, and the Senate race looks like a lock for Mark Warner, but there's still reason to put Virginia in the top 10.  Its 13 electoral votes look to be in range for Obama, which would be a hugely important prize, and there are some very interesting Congressional races bubbling in northern Virginia.  Finally, I would add that continuing to move Virginia Democratic is a really important long-term goal.  

The state party here is pretty good, outside efforts more middling.

Some notes on the states that didn't make it:

• It is a rather big deal to leave perennial favorite Florida off the list. Who knows, a couple of months from now, it may be dead even in the polls (it is dead even in the polls now), and it would jump close to the top of my list.  But Obama is, at least for now, relatively weak with older voters, Jewish voters, white working-class voters,  Hispanic voters, and Southern whites. Um, isn't that mostly a description of Florida?  Throw in the delegate controversy fiasco, a weak state party, Republican election administration officials, weak outside organizations, state legislative chambers we have no way of winning back, and you'll understand my lack of enthusiasm here.  

• The Obama people are putting real resources in Florida, and there are a few potentially competitive House races (although the Democratic candidates are mostly pretty uninspiring in my view).  So I would understand if people want to target FL, but it is way too expensive for too little chance of doing good for me to rate it highly.  

• North Carolina is the state that missed the top 10 that came closest.  Obama is targeting it, a competitive Senate race, and at least a couple of competitive House races.  But it just missed the cut for me because it's an expensive state which is pretty uphill for Obama, and the Democratic candidates there are generally pretty conservative.

• You'll notice that my overwhelming focus is the Midwest and Rocky Mountain regions.  The South still seems mostly gone for us in spite of the Obama campaign targeting a few states there, and Democratic Senate and House candidates in that region obviously tend to be pretty conservative. I'm also feeling pretty confident that past swing states Oregon and Washington in the Northwest will go our way pretty easily because of the creative class love affair with Obama.

• Iowa has made my top 10 states list every cycle since I've been doing this, but I can't give my old home state the nod this time.  Usually, Iowa has some House races that are really competitive, but with Dems winning two seats in lean-Democratic districts long held by Republicans, that doesn't seem to be the case this time.  The legislative chambers have also been much closer in terms of partisan control in recent years, but seem fairly securely held by Dems this year.  And with Obama's great Iowa field of organization leftover from the caucuses, and no McCain presence to speak of, it seems more secure for us than in the last couple of tightly contested races.  

So what do y'all think? Any states I'm missing that ought to be on my list?  Any states you think I'm over-hyping?  I'd love to know.  


Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Top Ten States | 44 comments
VA over NH (4.00 / 1)
I would swap them.  Just based on EC numbers.  Also, the polling there is trending more and more Obama as the state's residual love of John McCain recedes.  Chris pointed out that McCain spent months there and had a campaign-based advantage.  He won't be spending nearly so much time there going forward, not for merely 4 votes.  


I agree. (0.00 / 0)
Virginia holds its state elections in odd-numbered years, so of course there are no legislative races on the ballot.  Virginia was host to the closest Senate race in all of 2006.  In 2007, Virginia managed to mirror 2006's national legislative election by expanding Democratic representation in both houses of the General Assembly, and also flipping control of its upper house.  This year, Virginia is host to two of the DCCC's "Red To Blue" campaign seats, two of their "Emerging Races" in addition to the virtually certain Senate race mentioned in the main diary.

This is an immensely exciting year for Virginia Democrats.


[ Parent ]
Ask Al Gore about those merely 4 votes (4.00 / 1)
He lost them - had he won them...

[ Parent ]
Hey, don't forget about North Carolina! (4.00 / 1)

Just kidding-- I sometimes come on here and say exactly what I did in the title about my home state, but this time I think you have it placed exactly where it belongs. Strong party, still too conservative, some encouraging races, overall good trends, worthy of investment-- but if you want to kick the GOP in the kidneys, there are certainly places where you can do that more effectively than NC this year.

I'm thrilled that Obama is placing significant resources here and see it as an investment in the future, but I sure as heck wouldn't want this to be one of the places to make a last stand-- the GOP doesn't have the high ground here anymore, but there sure are a lot of other places where we do.

The only nit I have to pick is Florida. Having not done as much analysis as you I'm just opining, but with the increase in non-Cubano Hispanics and second generation Cubanos, and the press's tendency to overstate O's weakness in the groups you mentioned, it seems to me that Florida is legitimately in play, and not just presidentially. We've got room to grow all over that state.

Florida is an absolute must-have for the GOP, more than Ohio is for us. We lose Ohio and it's really tough. They lose Florida and it's over. Unlike some states that have gotten close but teased us, we actually won Florida in 2000 with a less attractive candidate then we have now. This is where the GOP's kidneys are, and we should kick for all we're worth.


Florida (0.00 / 0)
You make a good argument. I do think FL is in play and should be targeted, at least early, by the Obama campaign. I just think it's too expensive and too uphill, and there's too little else politically going on that's really interesting, to put it in the top 10.

[ Parent ]
North Carolina is gonna be a huge barometer (0.00 / 0)
President, Governor, Senate, NC-8

Missouri - President, Governor, MO-6, 9

Virginia - President, Senate, VA-2, 5, 10, 11

New Mexico - President, Senate, NM-1, 2

Ohio - President, OH-1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 15, 16

Alaska - President, Senate, AK-AL

New Hampshire - President, Senate, NH-1

Indiana - President, Governor, IN-3, 4, 9

Florida - President, FL-8, 13, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25  

New Jersey - President, Senate, NJ-3, 4, 5, 7

Honorable mentions to New York (State Senate and NY-13, 25, 26, 29) and Michigan (President and MI-7, 9).


Don't forget VA-04 (4.00 / 1)
Incredible race, great candidate (Andrea Miller), in the nation's 2nd-most heavily African-American congressional district still represented by a Rep, running against a guy who's refusing to endorse John McCain.

Join the California Nurses Association and National Nurses Organizing Committee in the fight for guaranteed healthcare on the single-payer model at www.GuaranteedHealthcare.org/blog

[ Parent ]
Wisconsin (0.00 / 0)
Huge miss on Wisconsin.

• Presidential race importance

WI = must-win; Obama won big in primary, but McCain can definitely win here.  It's gotten early investment from Obama.

• Competitive Senate races

None this year.

• Competitive House races

One of the most competitive in the country, WI-08, where freshman (D) incumbent Steve Kagen is facing off against his previous opponent, former Speaker of the State Assembly (and radical right-winger) John Gard, in a district that probably has a PVI of R+3 or so.  This race also coincides with a number of competitive state leg races.

• Competitive Governor races

Not this year; like most states, we're off-year gubernatorial elections; however, our governor is a major Obama backer and is going all-out for him - I'd be willing to stake my savings on him going to DC if Obama wins.  

• Competitiveness in terms of control in state legislative chambers

Effing huge.  I could write diary upon diary about this.  We're three seats away from the majority in the state Assembly after taking the Senate majority in '06.  In 2004 and previous, we were down to as few as like 40% of the seats in both bodies.  There are 15+ Assembly seats that our governor and Russ Feingold won in their last re-elects that are GOP-held right now; about 15-20 seats that are about or greater than 50% (D) at the top of the ticket but are (R) in the Assembly right now.  We also have a chance to expand our majority in the Senate to super-majority status.  

Of note: we're not just electing a (D) majority in both houses, but a progressive one, where the new leadership would almost universally be progressives.  WI could become THE progressive legislative and policy breeding ground for the Upper Midwest and nationally.

• Whether Secretary of State and other election administration officials are friendly, whether they are on the ballot

Our 30-year veteran of the SecState office, Doug Lafollette (yes, distant relative of Bob La Follette) is friendly.  He's a mid-term elect though.  More importantly, WI has a non-partisan, unelected Government Accountaibilty Board with two parts, a State Elections side and a State Ethics side.  They oversee elections for the most part.

• Strength of state party

Pretty good, gotten a lot better in the last 4 years, growing a lot.  Could become a force.  Disclosure: I'm on the state party admin committee (like our executive committee) and chair the party's 2nd Congressional District unit.  

• Strength of outside organizational efforts I am aware of

Amazing, huge, and innovative.  One of a few states that are birthing their own state-based progressive movement infrastructure.  Again, I could diary for days on this.

• Relative costs of campaigning in the state (weighting inexpensive states a little higher because of the bang-for-the-buck factor)

Not high at all really.

• Ballot initiatives/referenda on the ballot in the cycle

More than a few.  Big ones?  Healthcare referendum in the swingy west-northwest part of the state; paid sick days referendum in Milwaukee county


WI (0.00 / 0)
You make a good case. I'm not quite as worried as you are about the 8th, as Gard is a self-destructive goof, and while it's certainly not a lock, I feel like Obama is in pretty decent shape there, so it missed my top 10. But you are 100% right about those leg chambers, a very big deal.  

[ Parent ]
Kagen v. Gard, Leg Races (0.00 / 0)
Gard may be a self-destructive goof (he is), but that district has been like kryptonite for freshman Dems.  Nobody has held it for as long as I've been alive.  That's because it's a majority GOP district.  Kagen is great, but the fundamentals there are tough.  But it will be a place of major investment for Democrats as well as Republicans.  What happens up and down the Fox River could be instructive of how the elections turn out nationally.  

I didn't mention before that this CD also is the home to at least 5 competitive state leg races.  A Senate race and four Assembly races.

That said, I held an organizing meeting tonight to get people activated in south-central Wisconsin to help win up and down the ballot, and people are fired up.  Also, ready to go.  

Even were I not from WI, I'd see this as a major battleground for progressives and Democrats across the board.  Opportunity to build an enduring political and electoral majority is huge.  


[ Parent ]
Redistricting (0.00 / 0)
You only mentioned it with regards to Pennsylvania, but I can imagine that it matters more in some places, which could move them up or down your list. I don't know which states matter, though, whether it be for state legislature or for Congress.

After all, John McCain initially moved to Arizona in anticipation of running in a new Congressional district springing up as a result of redistricting.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both


re-districting. (0.00 / 0)
One of the reasons I was so focused on state leg chambers is re-districting, it's important most places.

[ Parent ]
Sure (0.00 / 0)
But where are the most gains to be made?  New York is supposed to have state legislature districts that have kept the Republicans in control through gerrymandering, right?  I'd like to know if anyone has figured out a list of the states where Democrats are underperforming the most relative to their statewide support due to badly drawn district lines.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
As a Floridian (0.00 / 0)
I think there is a lingering resentment in the party over 2000.  I think this is part of the reason why the primary dispute was resolved the way it is.

I can find no other reason why Florida would not be in the top ten.  



I thought the OP was right (0.00 / 0)
"a weak state party, Republican election administration officials, weak outside organizations, state legislative chambers we have no way of winning back..."

Those all sound like good reasons to me.

Karl in Drexel Hill, PA


[ Parent ]
FL (0.00 / 0)
See my reply to Alteran above.

[ Parent ]
You're darn right about Mark Ritchie :) (4.00 / 1)


Georgia (0.00 / 0)
I wouldn't put it in the top 10 maybe, but I think Georgia may surprise people this year.  I live in Atlanta and we are all so enthused about Obama; turnout in November should be huge.  Meanwhile many Republicans will either stay home or vote for Bob Barr.  My 18-year-old daughter just graduated from high school and tells me everyone in her class who will be eligible to vote is planning to vote in November and they are all for Obama.  Imagine this replicated across all of the high schools and colleges in Atlanta...  Obama's GOTV machinery is already in place here from the primary and there are tons of volunteers signed up to register voters and do GOTV this fall.  At the very least, McCain is going to have to spend serious money here to win.

   


PA State Party is weak? (0.00 / 0)
As a proud PA Dem, I'd like to know what gives you the impression that the PA party is weak. There are some weak spots, for sure, but I think the tremendous victories of Bob Casey and Ed Rendell in '06, and that the majority of the in-state talent worked on Hillary's sizeable win in April, I don't think you can characterize the state party as being weak. Yes, the party has been weak in the past, but holding 2 of 3 statewide row offices, the governor's mansion, and electing democrats to 11 of 18 congressional districts, is all reflective state party that is getting stronger.


PA party (0.00 / 0)
I hope you are right, that's just not the sense I have right now. I do think they are better than they used to be.

[ Parent ]
Organizationally, (0.00 / 0)
yeah they are leaps and bounds ahead of where they used to be. I know that the DNC reps are pounding pavement pretty regularly, and the quarterly trailings the PA Dems offer at their regular meetings are becoming more well-attended. But, to some degree this is still an old-school party, and with that style come varied benefits and curses.

[ Parent ]
PA State Party is weak? (0.00 / 0)
As a proud PA Dem, I'd like to know what gives you the impression that the PA party is weak. There are some weak spots, for sure, but I think the tremendous victories of Bob Casey and Ed Rendell in '06, and that the majority of the in-state talent worked on Hillary's sizeable win in April, I don't think you can characterize the state party as being weak. Yes, the party has been weak in the past, but holding 2 of 3 statewide row offices, the governor's mansion, and electing democrats to 11 of 18 congressional districts, is all reflective state party that is getting stronger.


Sorry about (0.00 / 0)
double posting. Itchy trigger finger

[ Parent ]
As a PA resident .. (4.00 / 1)
it is weak in that it doesn't do more to help local races .. living in Chester County ... the County party stinks .. We had the county commissioners race last November .. the Republicans had all sorts of ads on TV ... the Democrats?  Nothing!!  Gerlach is very beatable .. and where is a good candidate? No where to be seen .. no one even knows who Roggio is around here .. and as far as Casey's victory .. did Casey even campaign?  He won because of family name and because Santorum was/is so hated ...  do we know that Pennachio(sp?) could have won against Santorum?  Was there ever any polls?

[ Parent ]
Ches. Co (0.00 / 0)
The Chester County Dems have their problems, I agree.

Gerlach is a sitting duck, and I've heard mixed things about Roggio as a candidate/campaign .. I've met Bob a few times, and I know he's serious about raising money and putting in the effort, but no campaign is perfect.

Pennachio .... well I think that case has more to do with the DSCC and Schumer than the PA Dems.

And here's an example of a good candidate that didn't get overwhelming party help: Joe Hoeffel ran hard and with enthusiasm against Arlen Specter, and lost because of lack of party support and enthusiasm. Same thing happened to Ron Klink.  


[ Parent ]
I never understood .. (0.00 / 0)
the Specter/Hoeffel race .. the unions and a lot of other people bailed on Hoeffel because of why? .. because Specter is a Philly guy? .. because he plays nice with the unions? .. I still don't get what the appeal about Specter is .. they don't call him "Scottish Haggis" and "Snarlin'" Arlen for nothing

P.S.  Are you from the Ches. Co area?


[ Parent ]
Specter was ready for him (0.00 / 0)
Many have said Specter had the "magic bullet" to take out Hoeffel and win.

[ Parent ]
Magic bullet named Ed (0.00 / 0)
I think the Gov couldn't do anything for Hoeffel because of how close he and Specter are. I think Specter gave him his first job out of law school, and they've been close ever since.

No, I'm not from Ches Co, I have some friends who are pretty plugged in there. I'm from NEPA and recently relocated to Philly. You?


[ Parent ]
Wisconsin (0.00 / 0)
Incredibly close in the last two Presidential contests.  Relatively inexpensive.  No Senate race, but a push by the GOP to take out one-term Rep. Kagen.  Big push by the Dems to flip the state Senate.

Minnesota? (4.00 / 1)
Mike says "the most important, high-profile Senate race in the country" -- I wish folks here would explain this. I work with Minnesotans, good progressives who loathe Coleman, and they just don't think Franken has it to run a campaign that will oust the incumbent. Too much material for attack ads, too sloppy (unpaid taxes), too casual. They can't see him making himself a plausible Senator.

We can hope my friends are wrong, but so far the polls agree. Can somebody here, preferably Minnesotan, make the case for how Franken wins? I want to hear it, but I haven't yet.

Can it happen here?


I'm a Minnesotan (4.00 / 1)
and Franken has yet to establish any real presence in this race.  There are some TV ads running, now, and they present a positive aspect of his campaign (as opposed to the "Norm is bad!" theme he had during the endorsement fight).

The problem is that Franken has let Coleman and the media define him.  They've played up his financial "oversights" and his log absence from MN to cast him as a slightly incompetent carpet-bagger.  He has done nothing to counter those characterizations.  Yes, he recently won the DFL endorsement, and the relative ease with which he did so SHOULD have given him a bounce, or some positive free-media exposure.  But, the convention and the pundits were all distracted by the "issue" of whether some of his previous satirical writings were "inappropriate", so he was never able to push the conversation towards anything substantive. He has compounded his problems by not confronting them quickly and head-on and that Kerryesque approach is not working.

I like Franken. I've given him cash. I support his policies. But I'm sorely disappointed at how he has campaigned (or not) against Coleman. I heard that MN will be getting piles of cash from the national parties (on both sides), I hope Franken can figure out how to use it effectively.  If he doesn't get it together soon, that is by the early July filing dead-line, it may prove too tempting a target for Ventura to sit out the race.  If he's in, Franken will have trouble capitalizing on the youth vote that Obama may pull out because that is Ventura's demographic, that's who made him governor.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Franken has to make his case... (4.00 / 1)
Jesse Ventura's previous career was playing a powerful character with no lack of confidence, and it's easy for voters to typecast the actor based on his character.  By contrast, Franken is well remembered for playing Stuart Smalley, the 12-step busybody whose own life was in perpetual shambles.  

Minnesota voters who don't listen to him on Air America radio are going to have to be persuaded that Al Franken the politician is savvy, competent, well-versed on the issues, and committed to Minnesota.  He's still got a long way to go on that.  

The case for "how Franken wins" is the same case that Patty Wetterling failed to make: persuading a majority of voters that he's not a special-interest or a niche candidate and that he'll be effective representation on a variety of issues.


[ Parent ]
Minnesota? (0.00 / 0)
I probably should just be happy since I'm from here but you are WAY over hyping it.

The presidential race is not remotely competitive. Pawlenty is pretty unpopular and wouldn't do much at all for the ticket. The only question for the MN House is if the Democrats will get a veto-proof majority. Also your way overhpying the Franken-Coleman race.

But I do agree. Mark Richie is super awesome.

At least move it down the list some.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power


But (0.00 / 0)
We could see Minnesota flip completely blue on the federal level. It's conceivable to me that Madia, Tinklenburg, AND Sarvi all win this fall, also helping put Franken over the top.


[ Parent ]
So (0.00 / 0)
It's a important race for the DCCC to target. That doesn't make it one of the most important overall. For example in Virgina there is 4 top House races. A important Senate race and a key presidential race.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

[ Parent ]
I was just saying (0.00 / 0)
the optics of an entire state going blue -- which both Minnesota and New Mexico have good shots of doing -- is pretty neat and would be pretty enormous, especially with a Senate race involved.

Hey, I live in Virginny -- so you don't need to convince me that things here are important! :) I actually think at the end of the day we have five or potentially even six House races that could be in play to go with the further deification of Mark Warner and the Presidential race in play.  


[ Parent ]
Have to agree. (0.00 / 0)
There is no way Minnesota votes for McCain even with Pawlenty on the ticket.  I expect Obama to get an easy victory here.

The only concern I have is if some of the protesters for the RNC convention get out of hand.  Minnesotans don't like aggressive, rude behavior which could turn off voters from Obama.


[ Parent ]
You'd have to ask yourself ... (4.00 / 1)
why would Democrats of any strip .. bother with Minneapolis/St. Paul this Sept.? .. and giving what we know about the Republicans .. what is to say that they won't have phony(aka fake) protesters there?

[ Parent ]
Why "bother" with MPLS/STP? (4.00 / 1)
Because its always fun to protest at Republican events and the world media will be in attendence.  The idea (as I understand it) is not so much trying to change the GOP policies by street protests, as it is to take advantage of their media concentration and disrupt the coverage to the extent that the "news" has to split coverage between the convention and the protest.  

There's also a bit of "truth-telling" (or counter-spin) to the action.  Clearly, McCain and his GOP minions are gonna be trying to put the best spin on every single issue raised at the convention, even if they have to lie through their teeth to do so.  If the protesters in the streets can provide some counter spin, that will be a good thing because it will undermine the GOP media machine.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Really? If the Senate race has been "over-hyped" (0.00 / 0)
Why isn't Coleman eating Franken's dust?

I agree that MN will likely go for Obama over McCain (even with Pawlenty as VP), but I'm not certain why you feel so complacent about Franken/Coleman.  


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Not complacent (0.00 / 0)
I just don't think it's quite as exiting a race as Mike does.

It's going to be a helluva tough race but I guess I don't see Franken as quite the progressive visionary that Mike does.

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power


[ Parent ]
Oregon (4.00 / 2)
The Merkeley-Smith race is key. All the more so as Merkeley comes out with strong statements on blogs railing against Telecom Immunity.

This has become, for me, one of the most important races we need to turn to a toss-up and win in November. We need to get Merkeley in this year.

Yes, Oregon will likely go Obama in the fall, but there's also a competitive race in OR-5. Lastly, while Obama will likely win by a larger margin than Kerry, it would be great to cement Oregon, along with CA and WA as the "solid blue" West Coast for the coming decades.

Personally, I'd rate it before NV.


Oregon is important on a state level too (0.00 / 0)
In addition to Smith-Merkeley, which is one of our few good chances this cycle to elect a real progressive Democrat, there are two more things going for Oregon that should show up in Mike's calculus.

First, Democrats control the 60-member state House of Representatives by only two votes.  It flipped in 2006 to much delight, but it's still not safe or where it should be.  Given the good a Democratic trifecta of House, Senate and Governorship can do, this is important to hold and build.

Second, the incumbent Secretary of State (Bill Bradbury) isn't running again, so it's key that Kate Brown (the Democratic nominee) win that seat.  Besides stewardship of elections in the only state in the union that's 100% vote-by-mail, Oregon's Secretary of State plays a role in redistricting, which will be vital for the continued success of Democrats in Oregon.


[ Parent ]
Ohio (4.00 / 1)
While I agree with you Mike that Ohio should be number one it isn't for the reasons you gave. Ohio is actually more of a defensive race than offense. For most of the Presidential contests since 1960, if we stop the Republicans in Ohio we win. So we should see winning here as critical. Its almost guaranteed if we stop them here. How we do it is key. Ive worked and lived in Ohio  most of my life and Obama is not an easy sell here. Despite what the polls may say, folks have not yet warmed up to Obama. Clinton won big here in the primaries and the Obama folks are just foolish if they think Ohioans will forget this. We went for Bill in 1992 and 1996 and would have voted for Gore had he let Bill spend more time here. Obamas strategy so far here in Ohio has been the same as it was in the Primary. Focus on the big urban areas, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus and forget the smaller cities and rural areas. Big mistake. Get the small cities and rural areas first then come back to the cities. The cities went for Obama in the primaries, so you already have them. McCain has been up on the air for months now and Obama is just getting up on the air and staffing up. The Obama folks have not begun to heal the wounds with  local party folks who backed the Clintons and they have a long way to go. On the Congressional races, it looks pretty good. The Economy is bad and folks are ready for a change. State House races look good too. Obama would be smart to work more closely with the Congressional campaigns and local races to build networks and gain support in the areas he needs to win.  

Top Ten States | 44 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox