In what will be one of the most watched Governor’s races in the nation this election year, Republicans are in prime position to covert a Democrat-held seat.  Recent statistics from the Department of Labor show that Michigan holds the highest unemployment rate of any State in the country and voter discontent with the current economic conditions are hanging around the neck of current Democrat Governor Jennifer Granholm based on her approval ratings. 

With a clear picture of voters hungry for a solid economic recovery plan from each of the candidates, current Oakland County Sherriff Mike Bouchard released details of his “Economic Rebound Plan” that highlights positions for the current state government to make it easier for businesses to hire workers in Michigan. 

Independent polling for the Republican primary race in Michigan shows that “undecided” is the leader, leaving the door wide open for each candidate to demonstrate to the electorate that they are the right candidate to lead Michigan back to a path of recovery. 

A recent statewide survey showed that 55% of Michigan voters believe that ‘improving the economy/creating jobs’ is the most important issue that the State must solve.  With this issue being the single most important factor in how a voter will cast their vote, expect the other candidates in the race to follow Bouchard’s lead in releasing their individual economic plans.  The candidate who positions them self as the best person to lead Michigan out of economic turmoil will ultimately prevail in the GOP primary, as well as the general election in November. 

from the PRIsm Political Report:

 Texas Primary Results

Republicans and Democrats went to the polls yesterday to select their nominees for the fall races.  Gov. Rick Perry, running away with the race in the final laps of the campaign appears to have won renomination outright against US Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Wharton County GOP chair Debra Medina.  Perry captured 51.0% of the vote to Hutchison’s 30.4%.  Medina placed third with 18.6%.  Run-offs in Texas occur if no candidate receives 50% plus one vote.

 

The victory was huge for Perry, as he won nomination for a third full term as the Lone Star State’s chief executive.  He also finished George W. Bush’s final term as Governor, ascending to the top post from his post as Lt. Governor.  He is already the longest-serving Governor in the history of Texas, and will be a heavy favorite to win re-election in November in what is shaping up to be a strong Republican year in America’s second largest state. 

 

The results reflected a monumental collapse for Hutchison, who began the race early last year with a big lead over the Governor.  Her on again-off again resignation from the Senate, a lack of issues focus in her advertising, poorly delivered attacks on Perry for his failed Trans-Texas Corridor project, and highlighting her endorsements from liberal newspapers to one of the most conservative voting electorates in the country cumulatively proved to be a highly flawed campaign strategy, despite the presence of Bush advisor Karl Rove as one of her top consultants.  The endorsement of former President George H.W. Bush, ex-VP Dick Cheney, and most of the Republican congressional delegation also did little to help her. 

 

Perry successfully labeled Hutchison as a Washington insider who had lost touch with the people back home.  He lambasted her support of the Bush-Obama financial bail-out legislation, coining the nickname Kay “Bail-out” Hutchison.  Perry moved hard right, playing to the primary electorate, by claiming that President Obama was “punishing” Texas, and even mused that succession from the US might be a subject people would begin addressing if the federal government continued along its current path. 

 

The Governor now faces former Houston Mayor Bill White in the general election.  White easily won the Democratic nomination, notching 76.5% of the vote in a field of weak candidates.  It appears that under 5% of the registered voters will have participated in the Democratic primary when all of the votes are finalized.  White’s total vote of approximately 450,000, representing ¾ of the total Dem ballots cast, is still more than 250,000 votes under Perry’s total, and he had just half of the Republican vote.  Total turnout will break 15% — over 2 million voters — which is a very large number for a Texas primary.  In 2006, for example, combined total turnout was only 1.1 million.

 

Though Washington, DC was completely rejected in the Governor’s race, the members of the congressional delegation facing primary challenges all did very well.  For Republicans, Reps. Ralph Hall (57%), Kevin Brady (79%), Michael McCaul (82%), Mike Conaway (77%), Kay Granger (70%), Ron Paul (81%), Lamar Smith (81%), Kenny Marchant (84%), Michael Burgess (86%), John Carter (90%), and Pete Sessions (84%) all cruised to easy victories.

 

On the Democratic side, Reps. Ruben Hinojosa (85%), Sheila Jackson Lee (67%, though the vast majority of votes in this district remain uncounted), and Ciro Rodriguez (83%) likewise won comfortably. 

 

In races that could potentially become competitive in the general election, the 17^th district of Rep. Chet Edwards (D) and against Rodriguez in the 23^rd, run-offs will be held on April 13 to finally determine nominees in those two seats.  2008 nominee Rob Curnock (29%) and businessman Bill Flores (33%) will square-off for the right to face Edwards.  This race could quickly move into the toss-up category.  Former CIA officer Will Hurd (34%) and businessman Quico Canseco (32%) will duel in the Rodriguez seat.  The Congressman will be a decided favorite in the general election.

This week in a National Journal interview, political prognosticator Charlie Cook views Republicans, “…on a trajectory,” to winning back the House of Representatives.

Cook: I’ve spent the last couple of days talking to some of the brightest Democrats in the party that are not in the White House. And it’s very hard to come up with a scenario where Democrats don’t lose the House. It’s very hard. Are the seats there right this second? No. But we’re on a trajectory on the House turning over….

In Nevada Senate news, the PRIsm Political Report give this analysis on recent survey results for embattled Majority Leader Harry Reid:

Liberal Poll: Reid’s Worst Numbers

 

Research 2000, the Maryland-based national polling firm who surveys the electorate for liberal organizations and newspapers, just completed a Nevada poll that reveals disastrous results for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.  The survey, for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), was taken over February 9-10 and interviewed 600 likely Nevada voters.

 

While Reid has routinely trailed the two top Republican candidates, former state GOP chair Sue Lowden and ex-Secretary of State candidate Danny Tarkanian — son of the legendary University of Nevada at Las Vegas basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian — this new data, commissioned by a source group friendly to Reid, is revealing leads for both Lowden and Tarkanian are well into double-digits.

 

Against Lowden, Reid trails 39-53% and has a huge 36-60% deficit among male voters.  The former Republican chair, 1973 Miss America contestant, and casino owner enjoys a 46-42% advantage among females.  Lowden is attracting 88% support among Republicans when paired with the Majority Leader, 20% from Democrats, and leads the all-important Independent category 58-32%.  Tarkanian’s numbers are similar.  He tops Reid 54-40% in the overall vote count; has the same 60-36% whopping advantage among men; and leads with women 48-44%.  He gets 89% support from Republicans; 21% among Democrats; and Independents split 59-34% in his favor.

 

Not surprisingly, Reid’s best support group is African American voters, where he clears 73% against both Republicans.  He also does well with Obama voters, which certainly stands to reason.  Of the respondents claiming they voted for Mr. Obama in 2008, Reid keeps 56%, but even within this sub-group, a full third (32% for Tarkanian; 34% pledging to Lowden) are saying they will vote Republican for Senate. 

 

By a margin of 53-29%, the respondents believe President Obama and the Democrats in Washington have not delivered on their campaign promise to “change” America.  The healthcare numbers, in fact the purpose for which the PCCC sanctioned the poll, are quite disparate.  Overall, by a margin of 34-58%, the respondents oppose the healthcare bill that was before the Senate.  Conversely, the split is 56-38% in favor of the federal government offering the choice to buy into a government-administered health insurance plan that would compete with the private sector.  They also would look more favorably upon Reid if he could pass such a plan (34-15% more likely to support).

 

Though the Majority Leader’s numbers are poor, and reminiscent of former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine’s political position in early 2009 - a situation he never succeeded in reversing - there are some parts of the set-up equation that do play to his favor and don’t rule out a come back. 

Nevada has officially recognized the Tea Party as a statewide political entity.  This means the Tea Party has the right to field candidates for office and will likely nominate a U.S. Senate standard bearer.  If the race tightens, which is likely, the Nevada Tea Party’s candidate will presumably take votes away from the eventual Republican nominee, especially if it is Lowden, who many in the Tea Party movement term a “Republican in Name Only (RINO)”.  Secondly, Reid’s overwhelming ability to command campaign resources will certainly dwarf the Republican campaign dollar effort, but in a high profile race such as this, individual candidate and outside group spending becomes a bit less important.  Third, Nevada has been trending Democratic in the past few elections, meaning the state’s political and demographic trends are more beneficial to Reid and his party than the Republicans.

 

Another negative, however, concerns Reid’s own son.  Rory Reid is a Clark County (Las Vegas) Commissioner who is openly talking about running for Governor.  Though Republican incumbent Jim Gibbons is in deep political trouble, it is more likely that not he will be defeated in the GOP primary, assuming he even runs for re-election.  Any other Republican will be stronger against the Democrats, meaning the fact that both Harry and Rory Reid will be on the ballot could then become troublesome for both men.  Candidate filing closes on March 12^th, so the younger Reid has only several weeks to officially enter the race.  The Nevada primary is June 8^th. 

 

One of the things that I find most amazing about the Republican victories this cycle is that they have generally come in the least likely of places. Who would have thought just a year ago that the voters of Massachusetts would elect a REPUBLICAN to replace Teddy Kennedy!

Yesterday, Republicans once again won in Democratic territory—this time in the Empire State. The New York Republican Assembly Campaign Committee (RACC) successfully won three of the four special elections in the New York City area despite a massive snowstorm keeping people away from the polls. We at Wilson Research Strategies are extremely proud of RACC and congratulate them on their successes, especially Assemblyman-elect Dean Murray’s victory in the 3rd Assembly District, whose polling we conducted on behalf of RACC.

One month ago, there was a lot of talk about how Scott Brown’s nearly flawless campaign (compared to the disaster that was Martha Coakley’s) was the main reason why he won. I’m not saying this wasn’t the case, but I think a lot had to do with the fact that our base is finally motivated again. And just how motivated…that is a question that we need to answer sooner rather than later.

Wilson Research Strategies recently conducted an Optimal Republican Voting Strength (ORVS) analysis of New York for RACC. ORVS analysis is a way of creating partisan strength on the local district level based upon past success in statewide races. In all three of the seats that Republicans won or held yesterday, the Republican Voting Strength (RVS) was at least 49%.

You are probably wondering what this all means now. Let’s start with Assembly District 3, which encompasses the towns of Brookhaven and Patchogue in Suffolk County. Voter turnout was lower than expected, but in the end Dean Murray had a 186-vote lead over Democrat Lauren Thoden. The RVS in this district is 52.5%, which means that it is a winnable seat with a solid campaign and a motivated electorate. And that is exactly what happened here yesterday.

The other two Republican wins yesterday only provide further evidence that the winds are blowing in our favor right now. On the other side of Long Island, Republican Michael Montesano won Assembly District 15 with 70% of the vote over Michael Meng to keep the seat in Republican hands. Turnout was so low in this district that it wasn’t even monitored by officials according to Newsday, the local paper. This Nassau County District has a RVS of 58.3%, but the percentage of the vote that Montesano won, compared to that of his predecessor (60%) in 2008 further demonstrates how motivated our base is. And if this weren’t enough evidence, the biggest upset yesterday occurred in Westchester County’s 89th Assembly District (RVS 49.2%), where Republican Robert J. Castelli defeated Peter B. Harkham 55%-45%. This seat, which includes the towns of Bedford, New Castle, and White Plains, has not only been in Democratic hands for decades but in 2008 the Republicans didn’t even put up a candidate! And yesterday, we won it.

These three victories are something we should be proud of. They occurred because Republicans ran solid campaigns in tough seats and turned out the vote. But to win more seats like this, we need to continue getting our voters energized and then find a way to keep them excited for another eight months. And if we can do that, the sky may be our only limit in future elections to come.

This is my first blog post on our site, and I could not think of a more appropriate time to discuss my area of expertise in the WRS world—Pennsylvania Politics—than now. Yesterday, the state of Pennsylvania’s longest-serving Congressman (by two days, no less), John Murtha, passed away unexpectedly at the age of 77. While I am not a huge fan of the late Congressman (and his pork-barrel spending), his death—and the special election that it creates—further cements the Commonwealth’s role as the most exciting place for Republicans in 2010.

One of the reasons why I believe that Pennsylvania is the most exciting place is because we have an exciting (and winnable) race at every level of government all over the Commonwealth. First, former Congressman Pat Toomey is favored to win the U.S. Senate Seat that has belonged to former-RINO Arlen Specter for three decades now. Both the Franklin and Marshall and Rasmussen polls conducted last month have Toomey up by more than 8 points. On the Democratic side, Specter—newly endorsed by the PA Democratic establishment at their conference—holds a 17-point lead over Congressman Joe Sestak in the May primary. In Harrisburg, Jim Gerlach’s decision to leave the Governor’s race and focus instead on keeping his Congressional seat red helps furthers our chances of winning back the Governor’s mansion in November. We can only hope that the Democrats continue to beat themselves up in the primary enough to ensure Corbett’s win this fall.

On a more localized level, every corner of the state now has a competitive Congressional race on their hands. The Southeast houses three of the most competitive races in the nation, with Gerlach’s re-election battle in the 6th, the open seat created by Sestak’s Senate run in the 7th, and now former Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick’s bid for his old seat in the 8th. All of these seats, located squarely in the Philadelphia suburbs, will cost millions of dollars to win and can change on the drop of a hat. While whoever wins the May primaries will have a significant effect on the ultimate course of the race, as of now they are all winnable by Republicans in November. Driving up the Northeast Extension 100 miles, the 10th and 11th Districts—currently represented by Democrats Chris Carney and Paul Kanjorski, respectively—are once again top GOP targets. With Hazelton Mayor (and anti-illegal immigration candidate) Lou Barletta running against Kanjorski, we can only hope that the third time is the charm. The GOP also has several candidates exploring a run in the tenth, a seat in which Republicans held for more than forty years before Carney’s 2006 victory. In the Western part of the state, the GOP is still licking its wounds from its surprise loss in the 3rd District last cycle (Kathy Dahlkemper), and the 4th (Jason Altmire) and 12th (Murtha) are becoming more and more interesting every day with the addition of new candidates and, quite frankly, unexpected deaths.

Obviously, the first race to be decided will be the 12th, which should be filled through a special election sometime this spring. Governor Ed Rendell has hinted that that this election will coincide with the May 18th primaries; however, it remains to be seen who will actually run now that it is an open seat. Before Murtha’s death, there was a full primary on both sides of the aisle, with 2008 nominee William Russell looking to lead the GOP pack. Now everyone under the sun, including former Lieutenant Governor Mark Singel, has been mentioned as a possible candidate in this race. Today, the Cook Political Report moved the seat into the “toss-up� category. I personally believe that depending on who the candidates are, the Republican shift of the voting electorate in the district (as it was the only district nationwide that voted for Kerry in 2004 and McCain in 2008) and the current political climate make this seat one that Republicans have a solid chance of winning.

It is funny—eight years ago, the State Legislature redistricted Pennsylvania to make it more Republican. Today, Democrats hold 12 of the state’s 19 Congressional Districts. Maybe we will learn our lesson before gerrymandering the districts in 2012, but until then, Pennsylvanian Republicans can look forward to 2010 with optimism and excitement.

Our friends at the Prosper Group posted a great piece about their online strategy for Scott Brown.  We’ve re-posted it here with their permission:

Truck owner, Wrentham resident, and State Senator Scott Brown is now the giant-slaying US Senator representing the dark blue state of Massachusetts.  Much of that was accomplished because of a smart online campaign that helped fund his efforts, generate volunteers, and engage supporters.  As a quick overview, here’s what the Brown campaign did right online- from the start.

They understood that big “Mo� doesn’t come automatically.

The curse of Obama’s 2008 campaign (for online strategists) has come in the form of candidates and campaigns who think that a sharp website and a Facebook page should somehow automatically generate online momentum. In contrast, just as it did for Obama, it took Brown months of tireless campaigning with little result (both on and offline) to create the inertia needed to generate $12 million in donations, over 100,000 Facebook supporters, over 10,000 people enrolled in our “Call from Home� program, over 215,000 email subscribers and 7,529 text message subscribers.

The Brown campaign invested early by immediately putting someone in charge of new media. Serious time and money was invested in online efforts even when results seemed few and far between.  Many campaigns would have cut out this expense when it didn’t show immediate results.  The Brown campaign knew better and the rest is history. Consider, on December 1^st, 2.5 months after the campaign started, the campaign website had just 700 visitors.  But by the first of January, that number had begun to grow to over 3,000 and would eventually reach nearly 180,000 unique visitors on Election Day. Massachusetts residents were by far the most likely to visit the website- over 261,000 unique visitors were from Brown’s home state.

They respected the “web guyâ€� and didn’t stick him in the basement.

From the beginning Rob Willington, the campaign’s new media director, was put in a position of leadership.  He wasn’t relegated to a stuffy office in the corner of the campaign headquarters.  Instead, he was consulted on key campaign decisions and allowed to lead campaign initiatives online.

They understood that social media is called SOCIAL media for a reason.

While the campaign of Attorney General Martha Coakley used Twitter (and actually posted more Tweets), they were far less likely to be interactive.  Instead, Twitter was used to promote press releases and media hits.  Brown, on the other hand, used replies and other tools to actually engage voters online. It led to far more Twitter followers and far more voters who felt they were being engaged in conversation vs. being talked at.  The campaign’s Twitter following was also key to spreading the buzz of the campaign nationally.

Content is King, and they created a lot of it.

In order to keep people engaged, the Brown campaign created regular content- specifically making good use of online video.  Over 59 videos were used to supplement the messaging of the campaign.  They were often issued quickly after an event or an embarrassing comment by Coakley, including one where AG Coakley said that the extent of her foreign policy experience was that “she had a sister who lives overseas.�

They understood their audience.

Many candidates want to use up a lot of real estate on their website to explain issue positions or show off press releases.  The Brown campaign, however, understood that a campaign’s website is primarily visited by supporters and other friendly individuals.  This principle was only magnified due to it being a Special Election with a shortened timeline.  Therefore, the website design focused on interaction, highlighting web video front and center and dedicating the bottom half of the home page to a Twitter stream, links to social networking, and a plug to join the Brown Brigade, the campaign’s Ning network. As the campaign progressed, so did the website design. The Brown campaign added a tell-a-friend feature to educate supporters on how to vote absentee, encouraged contributions, created a call from home program, provided information about local Brown offices for phone banking, and even initiated a first-ever Voter Bomb.

Although many factors contributed to the election of Scott Brown, the importance of online strategy and social media cannot be ignored. We are proud to have been a part of the team as both a web and phone vendor, and a part of such a historic election.

One of the things I love about political campaigns is how fast they move. In the case of Scott Brown’s US Senate campaign, things could not have moved faster- or come together so unexpectedly (and so well).

The Prosper Group had been hired to develop the website for Scott Brown in September- back when the campaign was not flush with cash and needed something together quickly. We worked furiously over a single weekend and launched a website for Scott.

We first started recognizing an uptick in both traffic and fundraising soon after Christmas- perhaps connected with the Christmas Eve vote on health care. Online fundraising began to pick up dramatically and crested after we collected about $375,000 the day Scott first appeared on Fox News with Sean Hannity (January 8th).

In the meantime, the campaign had been promoting a microsite (aptly named www.redinvadesblue.com) talking about a “moneybomb� to take place on January 11^th. Originally, the hope was to raise perhaps $80,000 or so to help buy some additional radio advertising in the final days of the campaign. For a few weeks, individuals could visit the site and pledge certain amounts to contribute on that day. On the 8^th, we had just under 1,000 pledges that totaled around $79,000.

But now, with the campaign already raising over $300,000 in one day, we thought we could do better than $80,000. However, it was our contention at The Prosper Group that we couldn’t accomplish that without setting a public goal, which had been left out of the Red Invades Blue campaign to that point. We needed contributors to be able to join in on the excitement of reaching that goal together. The campaign leadership, however, had long felt that by alerting the Democrats to our online fundraising success, we might “wake them up� and encourage a barrage of negative attacks on Scott (which, of course, they eventually did with reckless abandon). This below the radar strategy had served the campaign very well.

On Sunday, January 10^th we had new ammunition to take to the campaign leadership- a Public Policy Polling survey that had Scott Brown up 1 point. Our case was that in essence “the cat was out of the bag� and nothing was going to stop the Coakley campaign from waking up now. Rob Willington, the campaign’s new media director, agreed. The proposal was to set the goal at $500,000, something we felt confident we could reach, but we thought $1,000,000 was within reach. Despite some hesitation from some other advisors, the campaign’s leadership agreed to let us set an audacious public goal and see if Brown’s online supporters would help us meet it.

We worked feverishly the night of the 10^th to build a splash page with a graphic of Massachusetts that donors would turn from blue to red by helping us reach our goal (see website). In addition, a video of Scott talking about the moneybomb was added.

We went live at midnight and started recording contributions at 12:01am on the 11^th. Just after 4:00pm we had already blown past $500,000 and had reset our goal to $750,000. By dinner time we had pushed past $750,000 and were trying to decide if we wanted to upgrade the goal to $1,000,000. Our decision was to see if our online supporters would call for it first. After all, this was their movement and we wanted it to be their goal as well. Several influential Twitter followers called on the campaign to move the goal post, so we announced the decision on Twitter at 6:30pm and reset our graphic for $1,000,000.

From the @scottbrownma Twitter feed:

I see a lot of people are pushing for $1M… I agree, let’s roll!#masen #41stVote #Victory6:29 PM Jan 11th from web

WOW, I see we hit our goal of $750K!!! #masen #41stVote6:27 PM Jan 11th from web

Brigadiers, We Are Going To $750K, let’s roll! http://bit.ly/4ScpOw#masen #tcot #41stVote4:00 PM Jan 11th from web

Senior Citizens are calling our office b/c they heard about “the bomb” but are not online & want their checks to count #masen3:43 PM Jan 11th from web

It appears Cape Cod is next on our map, let’s get to $500,000 before midnight! http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #masen #41stVote #tcot2:35 PM Jan 11th from web

I was just informed that we have raised $403,429.12 TODAY! You are incredible http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #masen #tcot #41stVote2:33 PM Jan 11th from web

Today we are trying to raise $500,000 to finish strong and win#masen please help us reach our goal http://bit.ly/4ScpOw #tcot9:35 AM Jan 11th from web

TODAY: our moneybomb to raise $500,000 today, will you help?http://bit.ly/6bY7bT #masen #41stVote #tcot (please RT&Blog)12:44 AM Jan 11th from web

By 7:00pm we started to see individuals giving multiple times to help reach the goal.  The excitement among our supporters was off the charts, and they were determined to succeed.  Incredibly, just a short three hours after we announced the new goal, the website showed a red Massachusetts once again.  The grassroots had spoken.

But, honestly, that wasn’t the best news to come out of the moneybomb. Due to the success of the moneybomb, the contributions kept coming and put us on par with the millions being dropped into the state by the DSCC and the SEIU. We raised another $1.3 million on the 12^th and had a day at $1.7 million in the same week.

In retrospect it appears to me that the moneybomb could not have come together any better. Any earlier and it may have been less successful or had the negative effect the campaign was worried about. Any later and it would have been too late to spend the money raised. I’m also fully convinced that without the public goal we set, the campaign may have raised just a few hundred thousand dollars and been unable to raise the money we needed in the final days to win. Setting a goal (and surpassing it) opened the floodgates to more support online as the moneybomb went viral.  The campaign’s motivated supporters spread the word and insisted we could win.  This was definitely “the people’s moneybomb.”

The Democrat’s nominee for US Senate started out this campaign with a 31 point lead.  What seemed destined to be a Massachusetts runaway turned into a disaster for national Democrats. 

Make no mistake: Martha Coakley was no slouch of a candidate.  She was elected with a whopping 73% of the vote to be the Commonwealth’s Attorney General and was a consensus favorite to hold “Ted Kennedy’s seat.”  But on the anniversary of President Barack Obama’s swearing in, she was burned by a years worth of policy from the Administration that is clearly out of touch with the American people.  A recent Quinnipiac study outlines the President’s ’approve/disapprove’ rating on key domestic policy initiatives:

While there is no Massachusetts exit poll data available, many public polls had now Senator-elect Scott Brown leading among independent voters by 52-40 margin.  This is a continuation of a trend that started in Virginia and New Jersey of Republican candidates winning among independents, suburban voters and seniors. 

Last night’s election results clearly show Republican candidates can win in the deepest of blue states running on the ECONOMY > JOBS > SPENDING platform.  Scott Brown’s campaign highlighted the importance of framing the debate on these key economic issues and proved for the second time in 10 weeks the success of Republican campaigns identifying with voters on what is quickly becoming the blueprint for winning over independent voters.

Anyone close, or far, from this campaign will have an opinion about what contributed to Scott Brown’s win tonight in Massachusetts.  The fact is that a number of things pushed voters to abandon their Democratic-leaning electoral history to elect the first Republican U.S. Senator from this state in more than 30 years.

First, the environment.  As I have mentioned over the past several months, voters are pissed off (pardon my bluntness).  They are angry at a government that is spending without consequence selling promises of better days ahead.  It has been my observation that voters are not accepting the amount of debt that the Democratic-led Congress is taking on in the name of economic stimulus without any measurable results.

Second, voters are offended at the entitlement argument.  They don’t like being told that something is already predetermined.  This is not “Kennedy’s seat,” nor is it a “Democratic seat.”  They especially hate when they are told that they don’t have a real voice in a decision they deserve to make.  This was the case tonight in Massachusetts.  Advertisements featuring various Kennedy family members were given thousands of gross rating points trying to convince voters that they dare not trade this seat to Republicans because of “temporary” frustrations regarding the country’s economic conditions.  But, these ads deepened the anger and were based on a set of falsehoods.  Kennedy faced several close races - most recently against Mitt Romney.   Senator Kennedy, while a true statesman, still didn’t attract the vote for a randomly nominated Democratic candidate based solely on his post-mortem endorsement.  This points to an electorate that is fatigued with a one-party system.  This also points to the natural ebb and flow of American politics.

Third, Coakley was outworked.  The Democratic machine thought that the only race they faced was the primary.  They didn’t think that a lowly state senator with minimal statewide name recognition would ever be competitive.  The failure of Coakley to campaign strongly until the last three weeks put them woefully behind.

Fourth, Brown was the man of the people.  Scott Brown campaigned in his truck, literally.  Until the last few weeks, the Brown campaign was a long-shot, small budget affair.  But, that didn’t stop them from working hard to push the message that Brown wasn’t the pre-ordained choice for this seat; instead, he was just another guy that, like them, worried about higher taxes, bills and the health and education of his children.  Independent voters ate this message up!  This is exactly what they wanted.

Finally, health care killed Coakley.  Everyone in Massachusetts has insurance coverage.  Scott Brown was able to convince many of these voters that a universal, federal government-run health care system would do nothing more than to tax them to pay for coverage of people in other states.  The recession helped drive home that message.

Brown’s win tonight is proof that voters are fed-up with the status quo.

from the PRIsm Political Report:

AZ-3: Shadegg Retirement Changes Governor’s Race

Two years ago, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ-3) surprised almost everyone in and out of Congress by announcing that he would not seek re-election in 2008.  An outpouring of support and his Republican congressional colleagues’ petition campaign convinced him to change his mind and run for one more term.  Yesterday, Mr. Shadegg announced that, in fact, this is his final term in the House and he will retire at the end of the current Congress. 

 

With a likely Republican congressional seat now wide open in the Valley of the Sun, GOP potential candidates in particular, are sizing up their next move.  A great deal of media speculation pertains to state Treasurer Dean Martin who just recently announced a Republican primary challenge to Gov. Jan Brewer.  Many believe he will now switch out of the gubernatorial race and immediately organize a new campaign for Congress.  Before being elected statewide, Martin represented a state Senate district wholly within Shadegg’s 3^rd CD.

 

The attention being paid to Martin may be misplaced, however.  In fact, the person more likely to swing out of the Governor’s race and into a federal campaign is actually Paradise Valley Mayor Vernon Parker.  According to sources intimately familiar with the Arizona political landscape, Martin is likely to stay in the Governor’s race for several reasons.  First, he has spent his whole career in state politics and has little desire to come to Washington.  Second, the timing of the Shadegg announcement may be somewhat politically driven as it comes directly on the heels of Martin formally declaring for Governor.  The Congressman’s longtime Arizona chief of staff, Sean Noble, is a potential candidate to replace his current boss and would view Martin as his toughest competitor, thus the Treasurer running for Governor benefits Noble and the Shadegg organization.  Third, Martin is in the best position of any Republican to deny Brewer the Republican nomination - remember, she ascended to the office when Janet Napolitano became Homeland Security Secretary so she has yet to be elected in her own right - so he is unlikely to abandon a campaign that he can conceivably win.

 

The crowded Governor’s race is a problem for both current challengers, Martin and Parker, in addition to self-funder with low name ID and several other minor candidates.  Arizona has a late primary (August 31^st) and no run-off, so it behooves both of the major candidates to isolate Brewer as much as possible.  As the sitting Governor, a crowded field requiring only a plurality of the vote favors Brewer despite her woeful job approval ratings.  Therefore, tacking to the congressional race makes the most political sense for Parker, who would clearly be a strong candidate in such a field.

  

The 3^rd district is fully contained within Maricopa County and contains some of the north Phoenix suburbs as well as the cities of Paradise Valley, Carefree, and Cave Creek.  The district is reliably Republican.  Favorite son presidential candidate John McCain scored 57% against President Obama in 2008; George W. Bush captured 58 and 55%, respectively, in his two presidential campaigns.  The seat was drawn to be safely Republican, but demographic changes in the Phoenix area have made the region slightly more competitive.  Shadegg’s 2008 win percentage dropped to 54-42%, and was just below 60% in 2006.  Previously, his elections finished closer to the 65% mark.  He becomes the 25^th current House member, and 14^th Republican, not to seek re-election.  Attorney Jon Hulburd, who claims to have already raised $300,000 for the race, has the inside track to the Democratic nomination.

Excuse the cliche’, but it is all too fitting for the Democrats current situation.  Longtime North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan announced that he will not run for re-election, and hours later breaking news indicated that Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd will not seek re-election to his seat. 

Last week, we examined in this post why incumbent Democrats were not running for re-election or switching to the Republican party.  As tough votes loom over the pending health care bill, many of them realize in swing districts (or states) that they will not be able to face the voters for supporting very unpopular legislation.  Not running for re-election frees them up to vote for unpopular bills with no direct repercussions from the voters. 

How many more ‘retirements’ will we see from House and Senate Democrats in the upcoming weeks?