Posted Feb 02, 2011 at 8:26 AM by Maurice Berger
An analysis by Politico suggests that the GOP may have an inherent advantage in the 2012 US Senate races, and may well be poised to take over from the Democrats: "Montana Rep. Denny Rehberg will challenge Democratic Sen. Jon Tester in
2012, giving Republicans their first-choice candidate for the race and
putting yet another incumbent in serious jeopardy. . . . [An] Opinion
Diagnostics survey of 400 likely Montana voters showed 49 percent
backing Rehberg compared to 43 percent for Tester and 8 percent
undecided . . . Rehberg’s announcement will mean
Republicans have high-profile, formally announced challengers in four
states where Democrats are up for reelection: Montana, Missouri (former
state Treasurer Sarah Steelman), Nebraska (state Attorney General Jon
Bruning) and Virginia (former Sen. George Allen). That’s not to mention
the open Senate seat in North Dakota, where Democratic Sen. Kent
Conrad’s retirement gives Republicans a strong pickup opportunity, and
Florida, where several solid candidates are circling the race against
Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson. Some of these candidates are facing
competitive primaries, but the big picture is this: Senate Republicans
have already put a sizable list of Democratic seats in play and they
only need to net four to hit the 51-seat mark."
Tagged: Election 2012, US Senate RACE CHART, US Congress, Republican Party, Democratic Party, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, Virginia
Posted Jan 19, 2010 at 10:11 AM by Maurice Berger
So-called "Blue Dog" Democrats--moderate Democratic Senators and congressmen in marginally conservative or Republican districts or states--are suffering because of the unpopularity of the health care bill now working its way through congress. A prime example, Sen. Ben Nelson who has campaigned hard to sell Nebraskans on his vote to support the bill: "Nelson, who once enjoyed some of
the highest job performance marks in the U.S. Senate, has now seen his
approval rating dip below 50 percent in Nebraska, according to The
World-Herald Poll. Nelson said the poll results come as no
surprise, especially since Nebraskans have been 'bombarded' with
millions of dollars in 'misleading advertisements.' He said he expects that people will come to appreciate the health care bill. In the survey, Nelson's job approval rating was 42 percent and his
disapproval rating was 48 percent. By comparison, Republican Sen. Mike
Johanns of Nebraska, who voted against the bill, had a 63 percent
job-approval rating."
Tagged: 2010, healthcare, health insurance, US Senate RACE CHART, Nebraska, Blue Dog Democrats
Posted Nov 19, 2008 at 9:47 AM by Maurice Berger
With the Associated Press calling Nebraska's Second Congressional District for Obama (the state and Maine are the only two not winner take all) and NBC calling Missouri for Obama, the tentative electoral count for the 2008 presidential cycle is 365 to 173. When the Missouri tally is made final by the state, PollTrack with enter the final on the Election Day Map and archive it (and the blog). we will continue to have updates on the election and its aftermath over the next month.
Tagged: Barack Obama, John McCain, PRESIDENT-ELECT Barack Obama, Missouri, Nebraska
Posted Oct 06, 2008 at 11:20 AM by Maurice Berger
Why did Sarah Palin make a surprise visit to Omaha, Nebraska yesterday? The state has been reliably Republican since 1940 (the only Democrat to win it since then was Lyndon Johnson, in his 1964 electoral landslide) The answer may lie in the way Nebraska apportions its five electoral votes. It is only one of two states (the other, Maine) that is not winner take all, aloting three of its electoral votes by congressional district. (Each state is allocated as many electors as it has Representatives and Senators
in the US Congress. Nebraska's two "Senate" votes go to the overall victor in the state.) Since Nebraska instituted this method in 1992, all of the congressional districts in the state, one of the most reliably red, have gone Republican. Could Palin's presence in Nebraska be a tactic to force Obama to spend money and resources in state he will not win. Or it could be that the Democrat is starting to poll well in the 2nd Congressional district, home to Omaha and other cities with significant blocs of Democratic and independent voters?
Tagged: Nebraska, Sarah Palin
Posted Sep 12, 2008 at 9:30 AM by Maurice Berger
PollTrack observes that the so-called 50-state strategy of the Obama campaign--the idea that the electoral map can be realigned to flip into the Democratic column traditional Republican strongholds such Alaska, the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, Georgia, and Virginia--may not be working. With the Republican party unified--and Sarah Palin firing up the party's most faithful voters--most of these states are now out of reach. Over the past week, McCain's numbers are improved dramatically in these states, in some cases tilting them into the "Safe" column (indeed all of the above states, save VA, where McCain has moved into a tiny lead, are growing redder). Is the Obama campaign squandering its resources in states it cannot win, thus diluting its power in states that have traditionally been close but winnable for the Democrats?
The good news for Obama--but one that brings the 50-state strategy into question--is that the candidate is holding his own in nearly all of the states that John Kerry won in 2004, leading in many by significant margins. Still, in order to reach the magic number of 270, Obama will need to pick off a few states that either are inevitably Republican (but have shifting demographics that favor the Democrats, like VA, which has gone red in every presidential cycle since 1964) or have a demographic that gives the Dems a fighting chance to flip the state (CO, NV, NM, FL). Will competing in states that are not winnable make it more difficult for the Obama campaign to pick off states that are?
Tagged: Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, Colorado, Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, 50-state strategy
