2006

How Serious is Meeks?

ArchPundit May 15, 2006 No Comments

Pretty damn serious.

The problem with getting true believers involved in the politics, they are actually true believers. Meeks believes the current system of public school finance is wrong and he’s going to try and do something about it.

What’s fascinating is the impact of him if he enters the race.

The Meeks poll has some more bad news for Gov. Rod Blagojevich, but also a rare spot of good news. The survey was taken April 25-30 by Washington, D.C.-based pollster Lester & Associates and has a margin of error of 3.9 percent.

According to the survey, Gov. Blagojevich’s “generic” re-election numbers are not that great. When asked whether he deserves re-election, just 36 percent agree, compared to 55 percent who want someone else. Nine percent didn’t know. Blagojevich’s job approval is 35 percent, with 45 percent disapproving and 20 percent not knowing. But even with those lousy numbers, for the first time since the primary Blagojevich is leading Judy Baar Topinka, 47-40.

When Meeks is tossed into the equation, Blagojevich leads with 41, Topinka has 34, Meeks has 12, and 13 percent are undecided. After several “push questions,” which were designed to test Meeks’ message of his religious affiliation, his opposition to gay marriage and abortion and his support of billions more in school funding, Blagojevich drops to 37 percent while Meeks and Topinka are tied at 25 percent each. Undecideds remain at 13 percent.

Wow.

More from Rich:

Meanwhile, Topinka’s own polling shows that Gov. Blagojevich has moved ahead of her. After four straight independent polls with Topinka leading, her latest poll reportedly shows Blagojevich with a 5-point advantage. The governor’s polling also reportedly shows him ahead.

The Blagojevich surge is undoubtedly the result of the governor’s television advertising campaign. The gov is spending over $500,000 a week, mostly on negative ads that attack Topinka for everything from not showing up for state investment board meetings to tying her to George Ryan’s budget deficits.

Many have questioned the spending, but I’ll defend it. Incumbents spend at different rates than challengers–especially in open seats. Both candidates are practically incumbents.

But why not now? Spending money in May makes a lot of sense. People actually watch television in May versus when previous early commercials appeared in June. By June most people are doing their summer routine and reaching them with political advertising is very hard.

Hitting Judy now makes sense as well. If she can be tied to the Georges (Ryan and Bush) the earlier the better. Voters aren’t paying close attention, but tying a candidate in a Blue State to a President who is floundering everywhere and a recently convicted former Governor gives voters a way to update their beliefs about the candidates without thinking hard. If, as many mass political psychylogy work suggests, people tend to add a mental tick to their mind as they gain new information, tying Judy to them right now can be done to get a head start of the fall campaign–and with enough money, it’s easy to do and still maintain a money advantage.

If the ads hadn’t worked now, they wouldn’t have worked in the fall either, but most evidence looks like it worked.

I’m still not sure what to make of Meeks taking as much if not more from Topinka, but it seems to suggest from the numbers, Blagojevich has a hard floor of around 37 with Topinka’s floor being far lower–a surprise to me.

If Topinka is losing a significant portion of her base in the form of religious conservatives and Meeks does get in, then running against Bush is not out of the question and the hard fight for suburban women will only intensify between her and Blagojevich.

For those who wonder why I think Blagojevich is so likely to be reelected in a two-way race (a three way is too complicated to sort out with the above information)–think Gray Davis. Davis makes Blagojevich look endearing and yet he won reelection. The Grand Jury’s are a big deal and I don’t dismiss them, but a high level indictment would have to come down by election day. The state grand jury could produce it, but the federal investigations are slow and will take time.

For all of the complaints about pay for play, if you are a statewide officeholder in Illinois, you’ve been involved in at least instances that look like it and to a cyncical public, that comes out as a wash.

More CMS

ArchPundit May 15, 2006 No Comments

CMS is either the root of corruption, or it is the root of incompetence.

The state alleges that DeFraties, a former deputy director in the state’s personnel bureau, and Casey, her assistant, allowed “special applications” of people with political sponsors to have “an advantage over other applicants for state jobs.” The special applicants could fax — rather than mail — job documents, thereby putting them ahead in line, the state’s complaint alleges.

“Further, ‘special applications’ that received a grade of less than ‘A’ were not entered into the database like other applicants’ grades, but were returned to the sponsor of the applicant with an explanation of the reasons why the applicant did not receive an ‘A,'” the complaint states. “The applicant was then permitted to ‘fix’ or ‘correct’ the deficiencies in the application, bring it into conformity with standards sufficient to receive an ‘A’ grade and resubmit it for grading.”

The alleged wrongdoing came to light when Donna Simmons, a consultant paid $107,450 by the administration, noticed it and reported it to DeFraties’ boss, former Central Management Services Department General Counsel Ed Wynn

Neither choice is very complimentary to the Administration.

Rich has much more with context.

If the administration is serious about cleaning up government, then Mr. Cini would be under a bus right now. The administration is kidding itself here or hiding something or perhaps both.

Forecasting Midterm Losses

ArchPundit May 12, 2006 No Comments

Charles Franklin takes his first stab and lays out some very detailed issues regarding the problems of estimating seat losses.

So what conclusion should we reach from presidential approval in the months leading to a midterm election? We have a very good basis for concluding that less approval means more seats lost. But the best estimates we can manage, given that we only have 14 elections with approval data, are so imprecise that their political implications are basically worthless. I’d bet a lot (ok, I don’t bet so that’s a cheap line) that the Republican party will lose seats in the House. And that the lower the President’s approval rating, the worse they will do. But to put any meaningful confidence around a single point prediction (say, -15 seats or more) requires much more work and a good deal more calculation than just looking at the history of approval and seat change.

A number of political scientists and a few economists have developed models to forecast election results. Those use more than just approval, and achieve forecasts somewhat more precise than what is possible with approval alone. I’ll be writing about those models, and estimating some of my own in the next few weeks. But keep your eye on the confidence interval. The uncertainty is larger than Democrats would like right now, and that’s the good news for Republicans.

Duckworth Pledges No Earmarks

ArchPundit May 12, 2006 No Comments

It’s a good stance for swing voters

Stuart Rothenberg took on the race: (paid subscription)

Finally, Democrats have been acting for months as if they already have Hyde?s Illinois open seat in their hip pocket. Their nominee, Tammy Duckworth, faces Republican state Sen. Peter Roskam, whom they portray as a prot?g? of Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and a conservative firebrand. Roskam worked briefly on Capitol Hill for DeLay (during the Congressman?s first term), as well as for Hyde.

Hyde?s open seat isn?t as Republican as you might think. Bush won it with 53 percent both when he first ran for the White House and four years later when he ran for re-election. Moreover, virtually all of the state legislators from the area are Republicans. But Democrats argue that the suburban Chicago district seems to be inching their way.

Republicans will not let even one of these districts slip away without a blood bath of a fight, and Democratic rhetoric about the Republican nominees in these four districts may not sell well among voters who actually have met the GOP candidates.

I?ve met three of the four Republican nominees in these districts ? all but Meier ? and, after hearing the Democrats describe Bachmann, Gard and Roskam as knuckle-dragging, fire-breathing, right-wing bomb throwers, I was more than a little surprised to find all three personable and reasonable-sounding.

I certainly understand why Democrats hate the Republican trio. All three are politically savvy, unapologetically conservative and results-oriented. In short, they?d likely be formidable adversaries on Capitol Hill.

But expectations are an important part of politics, and Democrats have spent so much time portraying Bachmann, Gard and Roskam as scary ideologues that when voters meet the Republicans, they may not only like them, they may also wonder about future Democratic charges and attacks. (Roskam was recently endorsed by local Teamsters and Operating Engineers unions.)

Of course, Democrats have various sorts of ammunition to use against each of the four Republicans, and if the Democratic tide is big enough, all four seats could turn Democratic. But Democratic strategists would be wise to treat the quartet of Republican nominees in these districts as serious, politically attractive candidates, not as crackpots.

This race is probably going to produce the most press releases with the word extreme in them from both sides. The point is important, Roskam is very conservative, but he comes off as very mild in person and it’s a point I’ve made a few times now.

Most important for Duckworth:

Duckworth is ramping up her November bid by replacing Joe Shafer with Jon Carson, who is charged with developing a more aggressive field organization

I don’t have any opinion on Shafer, but moving towards a more aggressive field operation is essential—the primary showed a very low turnout for a hotly contested race–reaching out to potential voters is essential.

And Remember Death is Not an Option

ArchPundit May 12, 2006 No Comments

Todd Stroger or Danny Davis

How’s the Messiah Danny?

That Sure is Some Turfwar There

ArchPundit May 12, 2006 No Comments

Foggo’s house searched by FBI

Press continues story that Porter Goss was about turf.