skirttails (0.00 / 0)

It's clear that the dynamic this year is skirt-tails, not coat-tails. Palin obviously flipped AK for the R down-ticket, and she is improving their chances in southern races we thought we could contest. But the idea that Obama had coat-tails was always fantasy, he never showed any inclination to adapt his message to help local races, his largely dismantling the coordinated campaigns so that he had central control just made it official.

---

by: souvarine @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 19:41:55 PM UTC

link (0.00 / 0)

for this?:

he never showed any inclination to adapt his message to help local races, his largely dismantling the coordinated campaigns so that he had central control just made it official.

---

by: taylormattd @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 19:47:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

its just matt, attracking pumas (4.00 / 1)

---

by: aiko @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 19:58:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

sure (0.00 / 0)

Iowa
Colorado
Ohio is confusing

Overview from Ambinder and TAPPED

But you get a better sense from the field people who post here.  

---

by: souvarine @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 20:56:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow (4.00 / 1)

so that's your evidence that Obama

never showed any inclination to adapt his message to help local races, his largely dismantling the coordinated campaigns so that he had central control just made it official.

Perhaps you should read Open Left a little more:

So, in Ohio, it appears that the Obama campaign is actually expanding the Democratic downticket focus, rather than reducing it. These differing directions in Colorado, Iowa and Ohio make two things clear:

First, there is no uniformity in how coordinated campaigns are run. Different states appear to have different types of coordinated campaigns. This is not only the case in the current election, but also in the 2004 election as well. For example, I visited the coordinated campaign in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, in 2004, and local candidates definitely were involved in the process. However, that appears to be different than how the 2004 coordinated campaign operated in Ohio. These differences are probably based on differing negotiations between presidential state campaign directors and in-state Democratic politicians. A process like that would never be expected to be uniform.

Second, the degree to coordination between the presidential campaign and the downticket campaigns is probably a matter of perspective. Some may complain about the presidential campaign not helping out enough, while others might be surprised and delighted by the amount of help from the top of the ticket. Once again, this will probably vary from state to state, and from perspective to perspective.

Overall, it seems good to keep in mind that the process is not uniform, and it is based on negotiations that involve different people in every state. There is no uniform model for a coordinated campaign, and no uniform perspective on how one views the operation of any coordinated campaign. As such, it is probably a good idea to avoid blanket statements. For my part, that means I simply don't see enough evidence to argue that Obama is dropping the fifty-state strategy. And that is a good thing.

---

by: taylormattd @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 21:30:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Burner is indeed behind (0.00 / 0)

I've been a supporter of Darcy Burner since 2005, but I'm afraid she's getting close to losing her opportunity in this race.  In the last race in 2006 Burner hit then-freshman Reichert with generic ads saying he's a Republican like Bush, and he hit back with two themes  --  he's an independent thinker and Burner has no experience.  She fought back with ads saying she's a mother and from a family of military guys. Her approach didn't work at all, partly because Reichert had a ton of money from the Republicans placed on his side of that argument and partly because Burner didn't attack Reichert's independence theme by showing how he personally had supported a right-wing agenda. This time, in the 2008 rerun, Reichert has more credibility as an incumbent (putting out several hundred thousand dollars of glossy mailers at public expense, for example) and he has improved his appearance of independence by getting endorsements from the teachers (NEA) and others. Burner has been running ads saying she's a nice person, which nobody really doubts, but she's done nothing yet to knock a few points off of Reichert's popularity.  If there are no successful attacks on Reichert's credibility as an independent-minded incumbent who cares about middle-class matters such as education, there's no way he can lose.  It's possibly a bit harder now, because of the last two years in Congress without Hastert bringing up right-wing trash that Reichert can vote for, but there has to be an attack on Reichert's personal support for rightwing positions in Congress.  There's enough ticket-splitting in this district that Burner can't just ride on the hope that Democrats such as Obama win a majority in this district.

---

by: tyva @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 20:04:32 PM UTC

Can't put my finger on it… (0.00 / 0)

...but this whole "glue politics" angle is beginning to sound fishy. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's sounding a lot like sour grapes to me, and I'm wondering what if any impact this grumbling is having around the country.  

"This ain't for the underground. This here is for the sun." -Saul Williams

---

by: tru blu @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 20:41:02 PM UTC

I wrote about this a few weeks ago... (0.00 / 0)

...House/Senate Candidates advocating for split ticket voting with in their campaigns.

Every Democratic candidate seems to think that because the district leans (to whatever degree) to the opposite side that they can score more points by separating themselves from the Presidential Nominee than they can gain through unified action/support.

In some cases it is motivated by racial demographics/cultural perceptions, etc.  In some cases it is centered around one or more issues that the local candidate has found to be a "loser" in the district/region.  The truth is often that those issues are "losers" because no one presents the argument in favor...

I think its more likely that this behavior will be a double loser than help either the Presidential of the local campaign.  In many cases the local candidates undermine their own campaigns in the process of separating themselves from Obama/Biden (or Kerry/Edwards, Gore/nobody) they weaken their own positions and of course hurt themselves with their base.

Many of these candidates are long shots at best, some even calculating the "Obama tidal wave" into their chances of winning, but then actively advocating to some portion of the electorate to "split tickets".  Strategically they would be better off supporting Obama fully and trying to make sure Obama votes are their votes and vice versa, running up the totals and making the case for Democratic/Liberal policies in their district to offset some of the national media mythology/RNC-McCain ads.  They (House candidates in swing states) could be the most effective weapon to winning the White House.

Conviction is most important quality in a candidate, the Republican party has learned this and frequently demonstrates conviction even when it appears foolish.  Looking at their track record...it seems to work.  Split-ticket behavior is a decided lack of conviction.

---

by: mp @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 22:15:07 PM UTC

it's not surprising (0.00 / 0)

given that Obama's coalition lacks any clear goal.  

He hasn't had time to nurture a solid coalition organized around specific goals. And that's not his approach anyway--he prefers to try to be all things to all people, and shies away from anything resembling deep commitment to an issue. He's for whatever happens to be politically expedient at the moment.

That hinders his ability to create a lasting political alliance, since no one knows what he really stands for. How can a congressional candidate run on his coattails, when he offers nothing specific to run on, besides vague promises of hope and change?

This is not going to be a realigning election, it'll be a squeaker just like the last two. Because fundamentally, nothing new is going on.

---

by: limpidglass @ Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 23:30:14 PM UTC

The Palin Effect? And if so, is it real, or temporary? (0.00 / 0)

I can't help but wonder if Palin helped nudge a significant number of swing voters from either undecided to leaning slightly to McCain, or from leaning slightly to Obama to undecided, and that it was due to a number of factors that included race, gender, the urban/rural divide, culture, personality, and other identity-based non-issue factors.

I.e. they were open to voting for Obama, less because they were enthusiastic about him than because they had problems with McCain, yet they had problems with Obama too, because (to them) he's supposedly very liberal, a bit too aloof and self-absorbed, urban, inexperienced, unknown, etc.--and of course all those unmeantionable "Bradley Factor" things that many people keep to themselves. But Palin nudged them back towards McCain, because she is (or appears to be, to them) the very things that they didn't like about Obama, e.g. rural, folksy, unpretentious, conservative, etc. These people are not fundies or far-right, but in terms of self-identity they do identify with the right more than they do the left.

If so, is this permanent, or temporary, that will reverse once these voters start focusing on the real issues again, and realize that issues trump identity, and that Obama isn't THAT unacceptable in terms of identity (and is superior to McCain/Palin on the issues)?

I have no idea. I'm not a statistician or social scientist. But I'm guessing that people who are, might have some sense of how these voters are likely to vote, and what Obama could do to turn them around during these final 8 weeks. Are they going to go for identity over issues--yet again? Because clearly, if they preferred McCain on identity AND issues, they would have been firmly in his camp long ago. The remaining swing voters are, I'm guessing, those who are undecided on issues AND identity (which probably says a lot about them, most of it not good, but let's not go there now).

Man is this frustrating, dealing with these low-information, passive, reactive, shallow, gut-level "identity" voters.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton

---

by: kovie @ Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 00:29:11 AM UTC

The coat tails have been cut (0.00 / 0)

Quoting myself below....I was certain immediately that whether we win the presidential or not....the number of House and Senate seats we were going to get has been reduced. I have been agnostic whether Barack Obama had coatails or not before.

But given the Texas primary vote patterns, which was that the districts Hillary Clinton won had better down ticket results than the districts Obama won.  Obama voters were Obama voters...not Democratic party voters. I have long felt that George Bush was going to drive more voters to vote Democratic than having Barack Obama at the top of the ticket.

But now...the Republican base has woken up...like Rip Van Winkle....and they will stay awake.  They will go out, knock on doors and they will vote.  We are going to win fewer than expected House seats and probably fewer Senate seats.

Whether Obama bashes McCain or not will help the presidiential campaign, but not those Congressional races. The Republican base is proud, angry and motivated.  What would help those down ticket races, if, and only if,  Obama begins to present more of an aggressive image,  is identify himself as a Democrat so those down ticket candidates can gain votes from that.

Bush won florida by 300,000 votes  

Last I saw we only had a 100000+ increase in Dem registration over R.

Over at 538, Nate Silver has an interesting hypothesis which I think may pan out...to explain this time why 1. the Gallup LV voter screen may actually catching something real and 2. maybe the huge generic Dem advantage has been an artefact of the shame of right wing voters who refused to admit they are for Bush in this era of epic Republican failure. Sarah Palin has both energized them and made them proud again.  They are picking up the pollster's calls now. They were avoiding them before.

I think we have a fight on our hands.  They are going to activate their turnout machine, now they have enthusiastic recruits. It's not only going to affect the presidiential but downticket races as well.

by: debcoop @ Mon Sep 08, 2008 at 15:55

 

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

---

by: debcoop @ Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 03:31:23 AM UTC