With Republicans taking a historic 10 point lead in Gallup’s generic ballot, and new numbers giving a the GOP an advantage on nearly every issue, including a 11 point lead on the economy and a 5 point lead on jobs, it was another good week for Republicans. And the political prognosticators have taken note. Larry Sabato, now estimates that Republicans will pick up 47 seats in the House.

According to Sabato:

“Conditions have deteriorated badly for Democrats over the summer. The economy appears rotten, with little chance of a substantial comeback by November 2nd. Unemployment is very high, income growth sluggish, and public confidence quite low. To most voters–fair or not–it seems that President Obama has over-promised and under-delivered.”

While the Democrats can now add the pundit class to the list of subgroups they are currently losing, we are still 61 days out from Election Day and have a long way yet to go to make a GOP Majority a reality. While the polling data remains favorable and the Majority appears within our grasps, we still have work to do. We have had another good week. Now, we need to string together a few more.

Pundits are laughing at Biden’s latest quote about the upcoming election, but I think we should pay more attention to the idea behind it:

The reports of the death of the Democratic Party have been greatly exaggerated.  The day after the election there will be a Democratic majority in the House and a Democratic majority in the Senate. If it wasn’t illegal, I would make book on it.

Gallup points out that Republicans are much more enthusiastic, hold a 3-point lead on the generic ballot, and the Presidential approval rating is below 50%, all indicative of double-digit loses for Democrats in November.

While Biden may be overstating the Democrats’ strength, it is important that Republicans realize that this election is not yet “in the bag.”  Voters are clearly upset with Obama and Democrats, but recent polling suggests (pdf) that voters hold a very negative opinion of the Republican Party - worse than what they think about the Democratic Party.

Democratic Party
Positive   32%
Neutral  22%
Negative  44%

Republican Party
Positive  24%
Neutral  28%
Negative  46%

This means that voters aren’t going to be casting a vote for Republican candidates because they like the GOP.  Actually, swing and Independent voters will have to hold their nose to vote for a Republican.  The fact is that the GOP has done little to positively re-brand the Republican Party in a way that makes it attractive.  This makes our candidates just as vulnerable as the Democrats.  And we shouldn’t forget that no matter how many seats we win (or lose).

While many pundits think that the takeover of the US House is eminent, I am a bit more cautious.  We are seeing a lot of data that shows Republicans competitive in Dem-held seats.  But, with voters as upset with Republicans, we can’t take anything for granted.  We still have to run a superior race.  The seats that we are out-campaigned in, we will no doubt lose.

A new report released by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project tracks changes in our internet and social networking use over the past decade. Some of the most interesting stats:

If you didn’t know it already, the internet is catching on. While that isn’t news, sometimes it takes dramatic figures like the above to drive how the point that an online strategy is essential for winning campaigns in a world where 80% of adults use the internet and two-thirds have broadband in their home.

Data-wise it is a good week to be a Republican. Gallup reported a 7 point Republican lead in the generic ballot among registered voters, Obama has seen his job approval reach an all time low for him of 44%, and according to a Democratic pollster in targeted districts George W. Bush is 6 points more popular than Obama.

Perhaps the most encouraging bit of news, is that we are seeing the surge in Democratic Party identification that accompanied Obama presidential victory, begin to recede. Among all adults (a universe that is tends to be more favorable to Democrats), we are seeing a decline in Democrat party identification with those voters now identifying themselves as Independents.

The increase in Independents bodes well for Republicans, as the GOP continues to hold a large lead in the generic ballot among that group.

While things undoubtedly tighten as we get closer to Election Day, for 75 days out the data looks promising for Republicans.

New data indicates that broadcast channels are now among the best ways to reach seniors (50+).  This is a significant change from just ten years ago when broadcast stations were focused on how to attract and keep a much younger audience.

The conventional wisdom has been that voters hate Congress as a whole but like their own member of Congress. The thinking went that voter’s affinity for their own Congressman explained why incumbents are routinely sent back to an institution that, as a whole, voters disliked. However, data from the latest NBC/WSJ Survey, suggests that the “All politics is local” maxim might not be as true as it once was. According to the survey 46% of respondents reported that they would base their vote on their member’s position on national issues while 41% would base their vote on the member’s performance in the district. From the survey:

 

Interestingly, in the last NBC/WSJ survey before the 2006 election, voters were split 39-39 on national issues vs. local issues. That election saw the party out of power gain 31 seats. While, the gap between local and national issued narrowed from their July 2006 survey, the number of voters making their decision based on national issues was never this high this close to the election. Finally, the NBC/WSJ data shows that this is an electorate that very much set on how they plan to decide their vote in November, with the voters who report that either both national and local issues or neither national and local issues will decided their vote at an all time low of 11%.

All in all, this is good news for Republicans, with Congress’s approval rating perpetually in the garbage incumbents will not be able to rely as heavily on the goodwill that they have built and instead have to face the voters on the issues.

After Democrats showing (and trumpeting) a two week lead in the generic ballot, Republican’s have spent the last two ahead in Gallup’s generic ballot among registered voters. This move back to Republicans is in line with what other pollsters are showing—a consistent preference for Republicans.

 

More telling, it that Republicans continue to have a large lead among Independent voters (47%-33%). Republicans are also much more enthusiastic about voting than their Democratic counterparts.

The bottom line here: The environment continues to be favorable to Republicans and the shift in Gallup’s generic ballot numbers can be attributed to statistical noise, rather than a Democrat surge.

With redistricting right around the corner, control of state legislatures will be critically important. Governing and Politics has a great breakdown of the state legislative races. http://www.governing.com/blogs/politics/2010-state-legislatures.html

 

A recent report by the National Institute on Money in State Politics titled “The Efficacy of Self-Funding a Political Campaign” returned a not-at-all surprising conclusion: self-funders have trouble winning elections.

Putting aside the ideology of the organization (they seem to be left-of-center, or at least anti-business) and any methodological qualms I might have about the report, the fact that it matches with experience leads to an interesting question: why do self-funders seem to have such problems getting elected?

I’m sure there are many explanations, but one that interests me the most is this: donations aren’t merely donations, they are an act of commitment to a campaign that has important implications for both individual and group behavior. In short, a donor is an important asset to a campaign in ways that go well beyond just the dollar resources they provide–this is particularly true of small-dollar donors.

To understand this more, it is valuable to think about the concepts of investment and commitment.  While the neo-classic economists will tell us that sunk costs are irrelevant, the behavioral economists of the world know that they are incredibly relevant in terms of actual human decision-making. Since the investment of dollars into a candidate is such a sunk costs, we can expect a donor to be more committed and active on behalf of a candidate than a run-of-the-mine supportive voter.  This manifests itself in a variety of ways.

The first, and simplest, way this effect manifests in is votes. A donor is going to vote for the candidate to whom they have given unless something catastrophic happens.  The additional connection of a monetary investment in a candidate on top of whatever intellectual and emotional connection initially motivated that donation makes that donor much harder to drive away from the candidate they support.  Donors are the most reliable votes for their candidates when election day rolls around.

The second way this effect manifests is in turnout. Much like the “guaranteed vote” effect, a voter who has invested in a candidate is much more likely to actually show up and vote on election day than one who has no such investment and still needs to decide whether voting is worth the effort or not.

So donations are both a persuasion tool as the best possible inoculation against opponents’ messages and a turnout tool, and self-funders miss out on both of these.

These effects are most important in primary elections where base partisans (the kind that usually give to candidates) are up for grabs and may or may not turn out. Why do self-funders also struggle in general elections?

To answer this question we need to look at a pattern that exists in both primary and general elections–self-funders seem to suffer more from opponents’ attacks than do more traditional candidates.

I think that the reason for this lies in the effect that a candidate’s most committed supporters have as advocates within the social network context in which voter decisions are made.  There’s a lot to unbundle in that sentence, so I’ll try to explain in bullet points:

• Voters don’t make their decisions about who to support or even what campaign communications to believe in isolation as atomistic decision-makers receiving inputs and producing outputs. They make them in a context that includes discussions with spouses, parents, and peers and also includes discussions and commentaries partially or fully overheard in their networked daily lives.
• These social networks include what we can call “old” network environments (church, the workplace, the local bar, and the sideline at kids’ soccer matches) and “new” networks (online communities that may not have anything to do with politics but into which some political discussion will inevitably enter).
• Donors serve as advocates within these networks, encouraging others to believe positive information about the candidates they support, disbelieve negative information about their candidates, and believe negative information about opponents.

For the last year and a half, Democrats have spent the last year and a half pushing through a big government agenda, in defiance of public opinion. Healthcare reform, took more than a year of back room deals and arcane parliamentary procedures to ram through congress, and despite the passage of time still remains unpopular. According to a CBS News poll 49% oppose the law while only 36% favor it. The same survey shows that the majority of Americans think the Stimulus bill has had no impact on the economy or made things worse.

 

The end result of the Democrat’s agenda has been a staggering increase in debt, and an imperiled Democratic majority. Washington handicappers now project that Republicans are within striking distance of regaining the majority. The Cook Political Report is now projecting that Republicans pick up between 32-42 seats and The Rothenberg Political Report projects a GOP gain of 25-33 seats. The President’s own press secretary, thinks that Republicans have a shot at taking back the House.

 

So if you are a Washington Democrat what do you do? Well right now, it appears nothing with a side of blame Bush. Democrats have punted on the most basic of legislative functions—passing a budget. They have also put off big ticket items on their liberal wish, like cap and trade and card check. Now the danger for Republicans and the country is that they try to ram through their agenda in the closing days of their majority during a lame duck session of Congress.

Worse yet, Democrat leaders refuse to rule out this course of action, instead saying that it is a procedurally a long shot. This is a sign of just how little the Democrats understand the mood of the voters that their defense against accusation like this isn’t “we would never do that, if the voters speak, they speak” but instead “don’t worry, even though we’ll probably try, we can’t get anything through the Senate.” That kind of cynical calculation sums up why voters have lost trust in this Administration in record time.