There isn’t a candidate, a pollster, a pundit, a party official, or a fortune teller who can predict whether traditional local issues or national and international issues are going to be driving voter behavior in the upcoming November Congressional elections. “There hasn’t been an election with this degree of instability since perhaps 1980 with the Iran hostage situation, a stagnant economy, and runaway inflation, and an energy crisis,” said Bob Benenson, Editor of Congressional Quarterly Politics, in a recent interview.
Traditionally, mid-term elections are 90% local, 10% national, and X% who knows. People focus on local issues, ignoring most national and certainly international issues. Particularly when electing Representatives, voters usually take the attitude, “Congress is horrible, but my Congressperson is one of the good one,” which accounts for the overwhelming reelection rate for sitting Representatives. Not a single incumbent has lost a primary this year...yet. It’s slightly different in the Senate, but it’s still unusual to unseat a sitting Senator, although all eyes are on the Lieberman race in Connecticut.
According to some political observers, 2006 won’t be any different than mid-term elections in the past. Tom Donnelly, Jr., former Special Assistant for Legislative Affairs in the Reagan White House and a founding partner and principal of The Jefferson Group, said that candidates are still going to try to make the race about issues of importance in their local districts. However, even he admits that there’s a tremendous amount of uncertainty at this point.
Polling data to date has done little more than raise more questions. A June 1-4 Cook Political Report/RT Strategies poll found 61% of registered voters saying that America is on the wrong track with 45% of Americans strongly agreeing. Even 1/3 of Republicans agreed with that sentiment. Independents were 2/3 negative, and Democrats 81% negative.
Article Author: Mark Schannon
Crisis/risk/issues management and communications and PR consultant, free-lance writer, aspiring pundit and author. Blogcritics.org asst. ed, politics. Wanted to set world on fire, but bride won't let me play with matches, so I'm counting on upcoming, …
Article comments
1 - RJ Elliott
We won't know a damn thing about the 2006 elections until the mid-October polling results come in. A month in real-time is an eternity in political-time. Anything could happen between now and November.
2 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Mark,
Wasn't Bob Dole ultimately forced to sell condoms on TV? Couldn't you have picked somebody else from all the fine upstanding statemen featured on Amazon - like, maybe Boss Tweed?
3 - mschannon
Ruvy, don't be nasty. If you read DC newspapers, Scott Reed is one of the most quoted and respected commentators in town--he's also one of the most powerful lobbyists, but maybe I should leave the Dole stuff off.
RJ, that's the point of the whole series, On the Road to Election 2008. What's interesting, at least to some of us, is getting an early read, knowing full well--as I think I indicated--that anything could change. What we're developing is a kind of history so we can look back and see what folks thought might happen vs. what does.
The next installment is much more speculative--I wanted to make it one article, but it would have been too long.
4 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Mark,
I don't have any trouble with someone I never heard of - and I never heard of Scott Reed. I had to look to figure out what you were saying. But Dole got so pathetic after gettin his ass whipped in - what year did he run anyway, '96?
I mean Dole wasn't a bad sort, overcoming problems with his arm and all, and getting higher and higher in Nebraska politics. But that face on TV selling condoms? It hurt to see.
5 - mschannon
I thought it was the weirdest thing in the world. Blew my mind--and a lot of people. But he also gave all the money he got to charity.
Go figure. Republicans are all nuts...except those who are my friends.
In Decaf Veritas
6 - Nancy
Coming from a blue state w/Dems in both houses of congress, I have a hard time figuring what will happen also. Pollsters I tend to ignore, since I'm well aware numbers can be skewed in amazing ways to prove anything you want. Half the time they don't ask you anything germaine to what you're interested in, anyway, at least, whenever I've been polled. I suspect, people being the lazy slobs they are, that those who bother to vote this fall will vote for the devil they know (i.e. the incumbent), unless said incumbent is in such hot water legally that Christ himself couldn't bring him back to life. I suspect, from what I hear from lazy slobs around me, that people are currently so disenchanted with politicians of both stripes that turnouts are going to be record lows. The Dems are stupid not to realize they've been tarred with some of the same brush where corruption & connivance are concerned as their GOP collegues, in the itty-bitty minds of the public. I do remember reading somewhere a report that, while public approval of GOP congressmen was incredibly low, the ratings for Dems wasn't too much higher. Hard to tell, since those that do turn out to vote regardless tend to be either die-hard "It's My Civic Duty" types (like myself), or those who are following orders from their religious leaders (all those 700-club viewers). I HOPE enough people will turn out in order to turn the incumbent scoundrels out of office. Frankly, I'd like to see all of them given the heave-ho, and a new, up close & personal acquaintence with the unemployment line.
7 - mschannon
Nancy, I'm not a statistician but I have studied polling and done quite a lot in my career. You're right to be suspicious, but the good pollsters are amazing and there are some new methodologies that can uncover incredible information.
You're right about the Dems being tarred by the same corruption brush--they need to be careful. I think you'll find my next article--which I hope to have up in a day or two, a lot more interesting in terms of what may drive voter behavior--the reality is that is too early to know, but it's not too early to speculate and then look back and see who was right or wrong.
One of the critical questions is whether voters are going to be driven by the traditional local issues or the national/international ones--and the poll data just adds to the confusion...which is great fun if you're a political junkie.
In Decaf Veritas
8 - Jet in Columbus
Mark after all the blatant gerrymandering of congressional districts that the republicans have done in the last twelve years, arent they already playing with a stacked deck?
9 - mschannon
Well, blatant gerrymandering goes on all the time and sometimes Dems win and sometimes the GOP wins. Texas is probably the worst case in years, but thanks to Dubya's stooges on the Supreme Court, that'll stand.
Remember that literally 99% of Representatives get reelected and almost that many Senators. The question this year is whether local conditions are severe enough to cause voters to shift traditional patterns or--the next article--national and international concerns will cause a change in traditional voting patterns.
Few Democratic analysts think they'll take the House this year, but almost everyone thinks they'll probably pick up some seats. The real test is going to '08.
In Jameson Veritas
10 - gonzo marx
i've said it before, ya wanna stop the bullshit of gerrymandering...
simple...i'll show ya how
the Federal Election Commision takes over
after the Constitutionally mandated Census is taken and collated, the population data is fed into a computer program, along with city,county and state boundary data...
and the program draws the congressional Districts until the next Census
problem...fucking...solved
now Ask me a hard one....
heh
Excelsior?
11 - mschannon
Gonzo, Gonzo, Gonzo, you are soooooo naive.
It'd be easier getting a law passed declaring all narcotics legal and free than your solution.
Of course it would work...except for perhaps disenfranching minorities in some areas...but it's about as likely as me waking up tomorrow with a full head of hair.
There, want a tough one to tackle--take that one one.
In Rogaine Veritas
12 - gonzo marx
Mark me boyo...
did i say anything about Easy?
nope..i said, simple
how many times i gotta skewl yer n00bness about being very careful when it comes ta parsing my insane screeds?
as fer hair, geeez...too easy
either...
a) transplants, bite the bullet and get the barbie doll plugs implanted and allow the new follicles to grow in
b) various dermatological treatments are available that aid in a great number of follicle restoration endeavors
c) my favorite.... grow up and get over yer silly Vanity
For the Record: i'm 44 with a full head of hair past my shoulders and a short trimmed beard... when told i would look younger if i dyed the silver/white/grey i've always retorted with the comment "i fucking earned those white hairs, lived long enough for the grey ones and am damned proud of the silver... step off youngster"
you know i live ta Serve...
Excelsior?
13 - Jet in Columbus
I used to have a sign over my desk that read "If it makes sense-It's against company policy!" We all dream Gonzo...
14 - RJ Elliott
Just to be clear: I enjoyed reading your article, Mark. And I love this sort of prognosticating. Hell, I might do a few articles like this myself...
But, in the end, predictions about 435 House seats and 33 Senate seats made almost 4 months before the actual election are, in reality, going to be hopelessly off-base...
15 - Nancy
I just wish there was a way to impose congressional term limits, but they've managed to insulate themselves against that, haven't they? Bastard scum.
But yes, MS, I'm a political junkie, so I love this kind of speculation.
I did think it kind of amusing that some Republicans were almost as much taken aback by the SC letting the gerrymandering stand as the Dems were, simply because they were looking ahead to when it will be the Dems' turn to lock THEM out the same way. It will be interesting to see how the TX election will come out now that DeLay is being forced to run after all.
16 - mschannon
RJ, of course prognostications at this point are meaningless--that's why in the article on Congressional Quarterlies rankings, I made (as did the editor) a big deal of the fact that these weren't predictions.
There's a lot of reasons for doing this series, but the one that I think is the most fun is being able to look back and see what we thought might be important that turned out to be meaninless and vice versa. E.g., today is the big debate on Stem Cell resesearch, which is dividing the Republicans--will it play in Nov? In '08? Who knows. But fun to speculate.
NOW. I'd love you to join the "On the Road to E '08" team of "reporters"--not bloggers. I'm having a hard time recruiting people, and I can give you more info if you're interested. I can't put an e-mail on here, but if you go to my bio, then my blog, you can find my e-mail there & I'll be glad to give you more information.
Nancy--it's clear you're a political junkie--with a huge outrage factor that's most often justified. The best thing for Dems would be to have DeLay back in the house...that'd be poetic justice of the best kind.
In Decaf Veritas
17 - mschannon
Oh, Gonzo...I almost forgot. Plugs, my old aunt's fat ass! Do I look like a fire hydrant to you?
And don't think you can play word games w'me, lad. It's simple to be easy, but it's not so easy to be simple. Therefore, getting the law passed would surpass simplicity, which, by definition would make it extremely not easy.
Understand?
(If you do, esplain it to me...)
And I really don't want to hear about your long flowing tresses. Too early in the morning.
In Decaf Veritas