Races Democrats CAN Feel Optimistic About

 Go to any political website. Look in any politics section of the newspaper. Talk to any political analyst (including this one.) What do they tell you about the upcoming midterm election? They tell you that the Democrats will have a horrible night, they will lose the House, possibly lose 50 seats (that's the median for many projections now,) and almost lose the entire Senate. The Republicans also look to pick up numerous Gubernatorial races. Although I have seen people suggest that 2012 will be a good Democratic year, I am not looking too far ahead right now. Anyway, looking two years ahead in politics is like looking 200 years ahead into the future. Anyway, you probably see my diary title about Democrats having races to feel happy about. For the reasons I just listed about them losing the House and having a slim Senate majority, how can they be happy? Well, this post is about races where the Democrats can feel optimistic because although we ARE losing many seats, we are looking to pick up a few too. The Senate offers no pickup opportunities though except for Kentucky but most polls have shown Rand Paul (R) leading in the high single digits after Jack Conway's (D) ad criticizing Rand Paul's religion backfired. The Democrats are looking to pick up some Governorships and even a few House seats. I will start with the list of Governorships the Democrats have a strong chance at picking up, then I will go to the House seats:

California: Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) is retiring and former Governor Jerry Brown (D) is leading former eBay CEO Meg Whitman (R). Brown's campaigning in September and October was extremely skilled, making up for lost ground over the summer. He defeated Whitman in the debates. Then the housekeeper scandal surfaced and many voters viewed Whitman as mean while her strategy was to be friendly. Brown's closing arguments are even stronger, with an ad highlighting Whitman's similarities to Schwarzenegger and another ad saying how even Whitman admits Jerry Brown did well as Governor. A recent PPP poll showed Brown leading by nine points. That sounds right to me.

Connecticut: Jodi Rell (R) was one of the most popular Govenors in the nation but she is retiring. It is a Repulican year but Connecticut is still a Democratic state. Former Stamford mayor Dan Malloy (D) is leading against businessman Tom Foley (R). Malloy won a primary against rich Ned Lamont (D) who challenged Benedict Arnold Joe Lieberman (I) in the primary in 2006 but lost the Senate race to him. Foley is not a bad campaigner but most polls show Malloy with a 5-7 point lead.

Florida: Charlie Crist (I) left the Governorship and ran for Senate. Both races looked competitive at first but Republicans have the lead in the Senate race. They were not able to seal the deal for the Gubernatorial race though. State CFO Alex Sink (D) is locked in a battle with Rick Scott (R) who should be in jail for fraud in his former company's billing practices. Scott is outspending Sink and the Republican year are keeping this race very close but Scott's ethical problems prevent him from gaining a clear lead. Sink is also personally popular and she is popular in the Tallahassee area which has been trending Republican recently. The polling pattern is that the leader changes every week and the leader has a 3 point lead. Scott has a small lead of 2 points now. The question is will he hold the lead or will the Democrats pick up this Governorship?

Hawaii: Linda Lingle (R) proved that Republicans can be elected Governor in Hawaii and Lieutenant Governor Duke Aiona (R) needs to prove two Republican Governors can be elected consecutively. Unfortunately for him, the polling suggests that will not happen. Hawaii's 1st District Congressman Neil Abercrombie (D) is leading by eight points in most polls. It is a Republican year but Obama is still popular in Hawaii. He recently cut an ad for Abercrombie which seems to be working.

Minnesota: Tim Pawlenty (R) is retiring and may be a Presidential candidate in 2012. I do not expect him to win the nomination but anyway, this post is about the Governor's race. Former Senator and owner of Dayton Stores, Mark Dayton (D) is running for Governor against Tom Emmer (R). The Midwest is looking mostly bad for the Democrats but not in Minnesota. A recent poll showed Dayton leading by ten points. An independent candidate is on the ballot too though and independents can get high shares of the vote in Minnesota (Jesse Ventura (I) was Governor in the late 90's.) The independent may take more votes from Dayton than Emmer but Dayton should still win.

Vermont: Jim Douglas (R) was able to win easily despite Vermont's blue trend but Douglas is now retiring. Democrats should be holding a big lead in this race but instead, it is a close race between State Senator Peter Shumlin (D) and Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie (R). Dubie is a moderate and Vermont likes its moderate Republicans AND this is a Republican year. Vermont is still trending blue though and most polls show Shumlin leading by a few points. Therefore, Shumlin should win but it will be close.

Now onto the House:

AZ-03: John Shadegg (R) vacated his seat and now Ben Quayle (R) is running for it against John Hulburd (D). This seat leans Republican but Quayle ran into problems when he called Obama "the worst president in history," and ran an ad where he played with kids that were not his. The race leans toward Quayle at the moment but since he is a flawed candidate, Democrats have a shot here. Having Quayle lose would help make it a good election night for the Democrats.

CA-03: Democrats are not favored to win this race but they have a strong shot at it. Obama barely won this district in 2008 and Dan Lungren (R), the incumbent still won. Conventional wisdom says that any Republican incumbent who survived 2008 can win in 2010. This year, the Democrats have Ami Bera (D) who has consistently out raised Lungren and campaigned extremely hard. Although most polls show Lungren with a small lead, Bera could pull an upset.

DE-AL: Michael Castle (R) vacated his house seat to run for Senate (and he later lost to Christine O'Donnell.) With a popular Republican no longer holding the House seat, Democrats nominated a strong candidate in John Carney (D). All polls show Glen Urquhart (R) behind in low double digits so this will be an easy Democratic pickup.

IL-10: Even Kerry won this suburban district by 6 points so the Democrats keep trying to find someone to win here. It has been almost impossible for them to beat former incumbent Mark Kirk (R). Now that Kirk vacated his seat to run for Senate, Democrats have a great chance at winning. Dan Seals (D) is running against teabagger Bob Dold (R) and we know what suburban voters think of extremist teabaggers. Still, this is a Republican year so the race is close. I expect a Seals win here though.

LA-02: Joe Cao (R) won in a 75% Obama district where Obama is still popular against corrupt Bill Jefferson (D) who put illegal contributions in his freezer. Cao is in trouble now though because he is up against Cedric Richmond (D) who has no money in his freezer. Yes, this is a Republican year, yes Cao is moderate but this district is too Democratic to elect a Republican unless the Democrat is as corrupt as Jefferson.

WA-08: Dave Reichert (R) is in a district that leans Democratic. He won in 2006 and 2008 which were strong Democratic years. Therefore, it appeared that this year, he would win because it is a Republican year. Apparently, he believed that so he got caught napping as Suzan DelBane (D) got closer in the polls. Reichert lost the endorsement of some of the area's major newspapers which were crucial to his winning in 2006 and 2008. Reichert is campaigning now but this race is getting closer. It will be a better election night than expected if Democrats can win seats like this one.

Overall, the Democrats will get kicked on November 2nd but they still have pickup opportunities in the Governorships and even seven in the House. It is hard to ignore all the losses the Democrats will face but there will be bright spots!
Feel free to share your thoughts on these races.

The Big Tossups of the Cycle

 The 2010 election season as many pundits know is a year where almost every race is competitive for both Democrats and Republicans. The pundits like to say it is a Republican year with Democrats being the party in trouble? Am I disagreeing with that? No I am not and the Democrats will definitely get a big beating and have a poor chance of holding the House. They will probably hold the Senate but the question is will they lose 6 or 9 seats out of the 10 Republicans must win to control the Senate? Unlike 2000 where the political races came down to Florida and 2004 where they came down to Ohio, this election is more like 2008 where control of the Senate will not come down to one seat. The same is true for the control of the House and the majority of Governorships which Republicans will definitely gain. The object of this post though is to highlight those big tossup races to watch during election night for both the Senate and the Governorships. Although those races are crucial to deciding who controls the Senate, the Republicans will not gain the Senate even if they pick up all the tossups. If they can get races such as Washington and California into the tossup column though, they will have a shot at picking up the Senate though. Anyway, here are those important Senate and Gubernatorial tossups that will keep you up on election night:

Senate Pure Tossups (4 seats)

Colorado: At first, this race appeared to be in Ken Buck's (R) column. Buck is a teabagger who has extreme beliefs such as he is better than any opponent of his who wears high heels and that being gay is a choice. Does he really think people would choose to be gay when people keep denying them rights and bullying them in school? Anyway, Michael Bennett (D), the former Colorado Superintendent of Schools is getting closer in the polls with a Rasmussen poll showing Buck ahead by only 2 points. He is helped by a great ad "extremes" where he talks about Colorado's extreme mountains, extreme rivers and extremists. At the end, he says that some extremes are good but not Ken Buck. Also, the Democratic base in Colorado may be waking up too. Overall, it appears that the combination of the base coming home and moderate voters realizing how extreme Buck is are the factors tilting the race toward Bennett. How far will it tilt though?

Illinois: If any race is within one point or heads for a recount, it will be this one. Unlike Colorado, this race has not experienced a shift toward either party. This race has always been a tossup with two not so popular candidates. Mark Kirk (R) may be moderate AND he may be from the crucial suburban collar counties BUT he lied about his Vietnam war record and yesterday he lied about legislation he passed. State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulis (D) is running in a heavily Democratic state where Obama is still popular BUT his family's bank is running into problems, making him look poorly. In Illinois, Democrats need to turn out heavily Democratic Cook County with Chicago and some Democratic suburbs. Giannoulis is not inspiring so having Obama come and help him is exactly what he needs. This campaign is very nasty and closepin sellers will become rich when people buy closepins to hold their noses when they vote.

Nevada: This is yet another race full of noseholding. Harry Reid (D) as the Majority leader in the Senate is getting blamed for Nevada's poor economy even though he has passed numerous legislation helping Nevada including a bill that prevented massive teacher layoffs. At first, Reid was in trouble against rich Sue Lowden (R) but after she suggested you should trade healthcare benefits for hens and roosters, she lost the Republican primary. Sharron Angle (R) won the primary and she is equally (or worse) as strange as Lowden. Angle wants to eliminate social security, the right of people to drink liquor (I bet the casino unions and the casinos love her,) and she wants to eliminate the Department of Education. Of course, you may have heard about her recently saying that Hispanics look Asian. Harry Reid is taking advantage of Angle and running ads attacking her whenever he can. Reid is still in a dead heat with Angle even while Nevadans are familiar with her extreme views. Overall, I think Reid pulls it off by 2 points because of Nevada's strong Democratic Get Out The Vote (GOTV) operation and some Hispanics shifting to Reid after Angle's comment and an ad encouraging Hispanics not to vote.

Pennsylvania: If I had published this post on Tuesday, there is no way I would put this race on here. Most polls have showed fake moderate Pat Toomey (R) leading by 7 points...a few weeks ago. Former Admiral Joe Sestak (D) from the pivotal Philadelphia suburbs has been lying low. The polls have been narrowing ever so slowly but a new poll came out yesterday showing Sestak ahead. The poll is from PPP, a firm famous for getting the results of NJ Gov, MA Sen and the Maine anti gay rights initiative right on target (no pun intended, Target is in MN anyway.) Another poll came out today (not an internal for Sestak) from the Morning Call showing Sestak leading by three. This is similar to May when Sestak was trailing Arlen Specter (D) in the primary. Then Sestak came out of nowhere campaigning really hard. He won by eight points while pundits predicted a nailbiter. Sestak seems to be attempting a late surge again by slowly but surely running more ads until it explodes (which should be really soon.) Is Sestak ahead? Maybe he is ahead or maybe he is behind but it is certain this race is becoming closer. If the trend keeps up, more polls will show a close race and everyone else will view it as a Tossup.

Governor (2 races)

Florida: Although this race has been shifting, most of the time it has been close. State CFO Alex Sink (D) was always a shoo in for the Democratic nomination and I thought she would face Attorney General Bill McCollum (R). Rick Scott (R) leaped into the race though and playing on voter anger, won the Republican primary. Scott has money and is spending it while Sink does not have as much. She has been going negative against him which works until Scott starts spending again. Then he retakes the lead against her. Right now, Scott seems to be retrieving the lead again. He also shows how strong voter anger is right now because he is drawing support even though his company has been accused of fraud, the Government raided it and the company ended up paying 1.7 billion in settlements. Sink is highlighting Scott's past but will it work? Although the race always has about a 3 point lead for either candidate, this race will be very close. No, I am NOT looking at a 36 day hassle over yellow jacket...er butterfly ballots again but I am looking at a 2 point win by either candidate. It all depends on who can win the I-4 corridor with Tampa, Orlando and Daytona Beach.

Oregon: Democrats have recently been bragging about a pacific firewall which I am worried about now that Patti Murray (D) in Washington State is leading by 3 points and Barbara Boxer (D) in California is leading by only 5. Oregon though has always been a close race. In Oregon, John Kitzhaber (D), the former Governor of Oregon who won with 64% in 1998 wants his old job back. It looked like an easy win until May when polls showed basketball player Chris Dudley (R) (who is famous for breaking the record of missing 13 consecutive free throws) in a tight race. Dudley has raised twice as much money as Kitzhaber and not until Labor Day did Kitzhaber campaign actively. His hard work seems to be paying off though because a few polls have shown Kitzhaber is taking a small lead. Still, Dudley has the money and it is a Republican friendly year. Also, Oregon is the only state that votes entirely by mail and many voters have mailed in their ballots. In the last two weeks though, Kitzhaber has had the wind at his back and Oregon is trending Democratic so Kitzhaber will probably pull it out but barely.

Do you think these races are all tossups? Should I add more races? Who do you think will win these races anway? Please feel free to share your thoughts.

Senate Rankings: Who's Getting the Surge?

 Many pundits recently have been saying that there may be a Democratic surge. In the Gubernatorial races, there definitely is. In Ohio, Ted Strickland (D) was down by 8 points in most polls against John Kaisch (R) but most polls show Strickland down by about 2. In Illinois, Pat Quinn (D) was losing by 10 points to extremist conservative Bill Brady (R) who is anti abortion even in cases of rape. Quinn started airing ads highlighting Brady's extremist views in the Chicago suburbs, an area that shifted toward the Democrats in the 90's due to social issues. Now Quinn is down by only a few points. The shift is happening with seats in the Senate too.

 In New York, Kirstin Gillibrand (D) was appointed to Hillary's Senate seat. Joe DioGuardi (R) with money got the nomination over David Malpass (R). At first, polls showed a close race but Gillibrand now has a clear lead. By, the way, Kara DioGuardi is related to Joe, she is his daughter. In Connecticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (D) was expected to win easily against Linda McMahon (R) from WWE who is very rich. A week ago, polls showed the race tightened up with Blumenthal leading by only 6 points. Then a few new polls came out this week showing Blumenthal with a lead of about 12 points so this race is definitely heading back in his direction. This shift happened because he previously did not campaign strongly but he is now actively campaigning. In Washington, most polls show Patti Murray (D) with a lead over her challenger Dino Rossi (R). In California, the Democratic shift is also apparent. Barbara Boxer (D) is leading in most polls against the fired CEO of HP Carly Fiorina (R). Boxer is leading because she pulled a Karl Rove and used Fiorina's strength as a CEO as her weakness. Overall, most of the races where the Democrats are improving are races where the Democrats started campaigning.

Republicans also have their own surge in some races too. In Wisconsin, Russ Feingold (D) was expected to win reelection easily. Then Ron Johnson (R), another rich Republican won the primary and started spending his money. Feingold was never popular with the Democratic base because he often votes against pieces of Democratic legislation that are not liberal enough. In West Virginia, pundits expected Governor Joe Manchin (D) to easily hold the late Robert Byrd's Senate seat. Although Manchin is very popular, John Raese (R) has said that Manchin will be a rubber stamp for Obama and this strategy has caused Raese to obtain a small lead in the polls. Also, some polls are suggesting that Sharron Angle (R) who wants to eliminate social security, the Department of Education and the Department of Energy is surging too. I need to see a few more polls to confirm this though.

Overall, the Democratic surge seems to be in Democratic states while the Republican surge is in Republican and swing states. This suggests that the Democratic base is waking up now and they are entering the likely voter pool. An excited Democratic base will not save every seat of course but it will prevent Republicans from winning in Democratic states where Democrats outnumber Republicans. My current prediction for Senate pickups is a 7-9 seat gain for the Republicans. By the way, bolded races show races that might switch parties. Now off to the rankings:

Safe D (5 seats)

Delaware (Chris Coons) O' Donnell keeps getting crazier and less popular. A poll showed her down by 19 points.


Hawaii (Daniel Inoyue) He has been in Senate since 1962 and he is staying.

Maryland (Barbara Mikulski) No problem in this heavily Democratic state.

New York A(Charles Schumer) I do not think anyone can beat him.

Vermont (Patrick Leahy) Another easy Democratic hold.

Likely D (2 seats)
Connecticut (Richard Blumenthal) Linda McMahon (R) is spending like Meg Whitman but Blumenthal is leading in the polls.

New York B (Kristen Gillibrand) I strongly considered putting this seat in Solid D.
Lean D (2 seats)

California (Barbara Boxer) Fiorina is too conservative for California.

Washington (Patti Murray) She seems to have her lead back but will it stay?

Tossup (4 seats)

Illinois (Alexi Giannoulis) Can moderate Mark Kirk (R) beat Illinois's Democratic lean?

Nevada (Harry Reid) Wow Nevada, are you really considering electing social security and Department of Education hater Sharron Angle?

Pennsylvania (Joe Sestak) I know this race should be Lean R but polls show Sestak is getting closer now that he is running more ads.

West Virginia (Joe Manchin) John Raese (R) is running a strong race against Manchin but Manchin should pull it off if he campaigns hard.


Lean Republican (4 seats)

Colorado (Michael Bennett) Ken Buck (R) may be a big teabagger but he is leading.

Kentucky (Rand Paul) Jack Conway (D) is a strong candidate against extremist Rand Paul but Kentucky is too conservative.

New Hampshire (Kelly Ayotte) New Hampshire has been trending towards the Democrats recently but now it is shifting towards the Republicans.

Wisconsin (Russ Feingold) Wisconsin always seem to come home to its Democrats but Feingold was too independent for the base.



Likely Republican (9 seats)

Alaska (Joe Miller) Either Lisa Murkowski (R) will win with her write in or the extremist Miller will prevail.

Arizona (John McCain) Rodney Glassman (D) is another good candidate in a bad cycle.

Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln) The South keeps trending Republican and John Boozmen (R) should be Arkansas's next Senator.

Florida (Marco Rubio) With Charlie Crist (I) bleeding support to Meek (D), Rubio takes the lead.

Indiana (Brad Ellsworth) Ellsworth could have been a strong candidate and the NRA endorsement probably will not save him against Dan Coats (R)

Louisiana (David Vitter) Charlie Melancon (D) did well with the oil spill and Vitter saw D.C Madam but apparently, most Louisiana voters do not really care about family values.

Missouri (Roy Blunt) Robin Carnahan (D) is a good candidate but Obama's unpopularity here is bringing her down.

North Carolina (Richard Burr) No Senator has held this seat for more than one term since 1976. Elaine Marshall (D) cannot continue the tradition.

Ohio (Rob Portman) Lee Fisher (D) needs to go back to campaign school. Enough said.



Safe Republican: (8 seats)

Alabama (Richard Shelby) Was this race ever on your radar? It was not on mine.

Georgia (Johnny Isakson) Michael Thurmond (D) is a reasonable candidate in the wrong year.

Idaho (Mike Crapo) Not much to say here.

Kansas (Jerry Moran) Democrats can win here but definitely NOT this year.

North Dakota (John Hooeven) Democrats who are popular with constituents can win easily in North Dakota. So can Republicans.

Oklahoma (Tom Coburn) People talk about conservatives overrunning the Senate this year. This one is already in.

South Carolina (Jim DeMint) The Democrats nominated the worst candidate possible against the teabagger king.

South Dakota (John Thune) No challenge at all.


Do you agree or disagree with the rankings? Do you have any you want to share? Feel free to comment.

How will the housekeeper scandal affect Whitman?

 The California Governorship is one of those races where the leader keeps changing. In early 2009, former Governor Jerry Brown (D) led former ebay CEO Meg Whitman (R) by double digits. In late 2009 when she started spending her money in the primary, she strongly cut Brown's lead and the lead stayed that way throughout early 2010. Close to the June 8th primary though, Brown pulled ahead again by a few points. His lead of about 5 points stayed intact throughout most of the summer until August came along. I have frequently mentioned in other posts that August is a bad month for Democrats. This fact was no exception for Brown who saw Whitman's $104 million at that time work on voters. In early September, Whitman was leading but that was before Brown decided to campaign. Before September, Brown had barely campaigned. A month ago, I was seeing Brown become the next Phil Angelides (D) who ran against Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) in 2006. Angelides barely campaigned at all and lost by 17 points.

Fortunately, Brown realized he could not become the next Angelides so he began to campaign. He ran ads like a funny one with Meg Whitman's nose growing longer after he clearly showed how she lied. These ads helped him get a lead of 5 points and in the last week, the outlook is getting better and better for Brown. In a debate last week, Whitman appeared over rehearsed while Brown was personable but also knew his issues. Unless a candidate makes a major gaffe in a debate, bounces from debates do not last forever. I expected Brown to continue to have a five point lead. This was before the housekeeper Nicky Diaz Santiallo came onto the scene. Whitman was discovered firing her undocumented housekeeper who was like family for nine years. The news story is everywhere and if you are in California, I do not know how you have NOT heard about it. It makes Whitman hypocritical when she said people need to crack on illegal immigrants. The media is saying how dangerous the story is for Whitman because it will send Hispanics flying away from her. My question is, will it hurt her with everyone?

One group it will certainly hurt Whitman with is Hispanics. Before the scandal broke, Whitman was poised to make strong inroads among Hispanics. She has been courting this group and many polls showed Brown leading because he was pulling it close with whites and not because of margins among Hispanics. Whitman said she treated Santiallo like part of her family until Whitman learned that Santiallo was undocumented. Then Whitman fired her and tore herself away from Santiallo. Many Hispanics found Whitman unsympathetic and I know someone who told me "I have a Hispanic friend who generally votes Republican but after the housekeeper scandal, she is fully behind Brown." Now that Whitman lost her inroads among Hispanics, what normally Democratic group can Whitman win now? Winning middle class whites in the Central Valley/Inland Empire is not enough to win.

No one has mentioned this but the housekeeper scandal can give Whitman an opening with one group. She could pick up upper class white voters who may feel the same way she does with hiring undocumented immigrants. Many of them may have Hispanic housekeepers and worry that they could be undocumented. Also, upper class white voters may feel worried they will hire undocumented workers s so they understand how Whitman feels. Whitman cannot use this issue to make inroads among all white voters because many of the liberals will dislike Whitman's firing of Santiallo. The more moderate whites Whitman could try to pick up are the upper class white voters in the southern Bay Area, Santa Barbara and the LA coast south of Venice. Still, whatever gains Whitman makes among these voters will be offset by Hispanic losses. If Whitman wants to win though, she has to take control of the issue and try to appeal to upper class white moderates.

Another group that will be affected by the housekeeper scandal is the teabagger supporting middle class whites in Inland California. Some of them may hire housekeepers but most of the voters want undocumented immigrants to leave and they will be unable to help contribute to the economy and take jobs no one else wants in California. Some of those voters will see Whitman as not tough enough on Santiallo while many of the Hispanics will. The Inland conservatives may think that once Whitman knew Santiallo was illegal, Whitman should have called the Border Patrol in 2009 or in 2003 when her husband received the letter. Still, will this story sway voters because are the Inland conservatives going to vote for Brown? Now with Jill Armstrong, Whitman's ex-nanny backing up Santiallo, the story should stay for a longer time. With the story still dominating the headlines, it may convince those conservatives to leave the Governor's race blank. Whitman cannot win without the big conservative turnout in the Central Valley (for more info on where Whitman needs to win, check my post California Baselines )

Overall, the housekeeper scandal is definitely affecting Whitman with every demographic. More Hispanic voters dislike her, richer whites may understand her and the Inland conservatives are less enthusiastic about her. Still, many pundits are overestimating the damage of the story. Unless the story gets very large, the Inland conservatives will probably not sit out the election as a protest vote. Yes, the story will move Hispanics toward Brown but it might shift a few rich white voters who associate Brown with the unions and see identifying with Whitman on the immigration issue as the final reason to move toward her. Overall, this story definitely hurts Whitman but not as much as the pundits say, unless the story grows and stays.

Senate Rankings: Democrats Swap Washington for Wisconsin

 It has been a month since my last Senate rankings. Has the outlook improved for the Democrats? Yes and no. In early September, all eyes were on the "left coast" that supposedly would push out Patti Murray (D) Washington and Barbara Boxer (D) California. Recent polls though show that the candidates are back in the lead including an LA Times poll showing Boxer ahead by 8. In Washington, a CNN poll showed Murray leading by 9 and even Republican leaning pollsters such as Survey USA and Rasmussen showed Murray ahead. Also, Christine O'Donnell (R) surprised everyone in winning her primary in Delaware and she is challenging Chris Coons (D). Most polls show him leading by about 10 points and with new quotes coming out about her every week (like how she does not believe in evolution,) she is not likely to gain momentum among non extremist voters. Unfortunately for the Democrats, the Republicans are finding more opportunities outside of the West Coast. In Wisconsin, Russ Feingold (D) suddenly found himself 6 points below Ron Johnson (R) in a recent CNN poll. Feingold is known for voting against many Democratic bills because they are not liberal enough so he might be facing backlash from the base. Also in West Virginia, popular Governor Joe Manchin (D) is facing a tight race against John Raese (R) which shows how West Virginia voters are suddenly disliking their Governor because of the (D) next to his name.

In other bad news for Democrats, there were some races they thought would be closer but their hopes failed to materialize. In Indiana, Dan Coats (R) ran against Brad Ellsworth (D) who was a moderate rural candidate running against a former incumbent lobbyist. Unfortunately, Indiana was too Republican. In Missouri, Robin Carnahan (D) who was reelected with 61% of the vote to Missouri Treasurer ran against conservative Roy Blunt (R). Yes, the Roy Blunt who was the former Majority Whip. Many pundits thought once Carnahan started campaigning, voters would see how conservative Blunt was but Obama is unpopular in Missouri and Blunt is connecting Carnahan to Obama.

Also, I will be changing the formatting of the Senate Rankings. I used to list the races most likely to switch but now I will be saying whether a race is Safe D, Likely D, Lean D or Toss Up and vice versa. Also, look at the time, it is a month until election day. Therefore, I will be posting my updated Senate Rankings weekly because a week in October in politics is as long as a month. The candidate listed is the one running for the seat in the incumbent party. Also, the races bolded are ones the Republicans have a chance at stealing from the Democrats. Right now, the Republicans are looking at a 6-8 seat gain. Now here are the rankings:

Safe D (4 seats)
Hawaii (Daniel Inoyue) He has been in Senate since 1962 and he is staying.
Maryland (Barbara Mikulski) No problem in this heavily Democratic state.
New York A(Charles Schumer) I do not think anyone can beat him.
Vermont (Patrick Leahy) Another easy Democratic hold.

Likely D (2 seats)
Delaware (Chris Coons) Voters have not seen the worst of O'Donnell yet but Castle can steal votes from Coons if Castle writes in.
New York B (Kristen Gillibrand) Joe DiGuardi is tough but Gillibrand should win.

Lean D (4 seats)
California (Barbara Boxer) Fiorina is too conservative for California.
Connecticut (Mark Blumenthal) Linda McMahon (R) is spending like Meg Whitman but popular Blumenthal should pull off a win.
Washington (Patti Murray) She seems to have her lead back but will it stay?
West Virginia (Joe Manchin) John Raese (R) is running a strong race against Manchin but Manchin should pull it off if he campaigns hard.

Tossup (4 seats)
Colorado (Michael Bennett) Ken Buck (R) may be a conservative tea party member but he has a small lead.
Illinois (Alexi Giannoulis) Can moderate Mark Kirk (R) beat Illinois's Democratic lean?
Nevada (Harry Reid) Wow Nevada, are you really considering electing social security and Department of Education hater Sharron Angle?
Pennsylvania (Joe Sestak) I know this race should be Lean R but polls show Sestak is getting closer now that he is running more ads.

Lean Republican (5 seats)
Florida (Marco Rubio) With Charlie Crist (I) bleeding support to Meek (D), Rubio takes the lead.
Kentucky (Rand Paul) Jack Conway (D) is a strong candidate against extremist Rand Paul but Kentucky is too conservative.
Missouri (Roy Blunt) Robin Carnahan (D) is a good candidate but Obama's unpopularity here is bringing her down.
New Hampshire (Kelly Ayotte) New Hampshire has been trending towards the Democrats recently but now it is shifting towards the Republicans.
Wisconsin (Russ Feingold) Wisconsin always seem to come home to its Democrats but Feingold was too independent for the base.

Likely Republican (7 seats)
Alaska (Joe Miller) Either Lisa Murkowski (R) will win with her write in or the extremist Miller will prevail.
Arizona (John McCain) Rodney Glassman (D) is another good candidate in a bad cycle.
Arkansas (Blanche Lincoln) The South keeps trending Republican and John Boozmen (R) should be Arkansas's next Senator.
Indiana (Brad Ellsworth) Ellsworth could have been a strong candidate and the NRA endorsement probably will not save him against Dan Coats (R)
Louisiana (David Vitter) Charlie Melancon (D) did well with the oil spill and Vitter saw D.C Madam but it is not enough for Melancon.
North Carolina (Richard Burr) No Senator has held this seat for more than one term since 1976. Elaine Marshall (D) cannot continue the tradition.
Ohio (Rob Portman) Lee Fisher (D) needs to go back to campaign school. Enough said.

Safe Republican: (8 seats)
Alabama (Richard Shelby) Was this race ever on your radar? It was not on mine.
Georgia (Johnny Isakson) Michael Thurmond (D) is a reasonable candidate in the wrong year.
Idaho (Mike Crapo) Not much to say here.
Kansas (Jerry Moran) Democrats can win here but definitely NOT this year.
North Dakota (John Hooeven) Democrats who are popular with constituents can win easily in North Dakota. So can Republicans.
Oklahoma (Tom Coburn) People talk about conservatives overrunning the Senate this year. This one is already in.
South Carolina (Jim DeMint) The Democrats nominated the worst candidate possible against the teabagger king.
South Dakota (John Thune) No challenge at all.

Joe Sestak and Campaign Surges

 In mid May, the whole pundit world was shocked as the "powerhouse" Arlen Specter (D) was knocked out of his Senate seat in the primary. Specter had previously held that Senate seat since 1980 as a Republican until 2009 but he still had the backing of Governor Ed Rendell (D). The successful challenger to Specter was former Admiral Joe Sestak (D) who represented PA-7, a district in the Philadelphia suburbs. In Pennsylvania races, it is nearly impossible for any Democrat to win unless he/she wins in the Philadelphia suburbs. In the primary, Sestak did just that, winning by 8% statewide with large margins in the Philadelphia suburbs. Although Specter won in Philadelphia with Rendell's help, the support did not carry into the Philadelphia suburbs. Sestak crushed Specter there and Sestak also won west Pennsylvania where Specter was never popular. At first, Sestak was losing in the polls because he had barely campaigned. Then close to the election, he started an ad blitz including some ads attacking Specter's party switch. Sestak learned that negative ads do work. Michael Castle's (R) negative ad blitz in Delaware was not so sucessful but that's another story.  I watched Sestak's acceptance speech and noticed how energetic he was. I watched Specter's concession speech and noticed how he had none of Sestak's energy. Sestak now faces former Allentown Rep. Pat Toomey (R). Conventional wisdom suggests that Republicans are shifting to the right to motivate the teabaggers like John McCain (R) but Toomey is not one of those Republicans. He has become a moderate (at least until November 2nd at 8pm) and keeps "forgetting" to mention how friendly he is with the Club for Growth.

So is Sestak barnstorming Pennsylvania like he was before the primary? Is Sestak out there addressing crowds, running ads everywhere telling voters how Toomey is too conservative for Pennsylvania? No, Sestak is running almost no ads except for a few in the Philadelphia media market. Is Sestak low on cash? Not exactly, Sestak has some money. So why is Sestak not using it so he can erase Toomey's 7 point lead that recent polls are showing? The answer is that he is hoping for a late surge. Most pundits believe that once the election gets closer, he will launch an ad blitz which will give him momentum in the polls. If the surge is close enough to election day, the voters will cast their votes before Sestak loses his surge. Also, Toomey will not have much time to respond to Sestak's surge and Toomey will have already spent most of his money. Yes, a surge does seem to be a comeback option for Sestak. The surge worked for him in the primaries where he won by 8 points. The question is will the surge work for Sestak again?

This year is a year filled with upsets and surges. In Delaware on September 14th, Christine O'Donnell (R) received a money surge and won by 6 points when most pundits expected her to lose. This surge though came only a few days before the election before Castle had enough time to respond. The difference though is that the Delaware election was a primary where surges happen more often. In primaries, many voters look for information themselves but in a general election, candidates need to give information to voters. Also, surges can happen when a new candidate jumps on the scene and initially excites everyone. If the candidate has been around for awhile, most people will have an opinion of the candidate so a big surge might not happen. A good example of how late surges do not work in general elections. In the Massachusetts Senatorial election in January, Martha Coakley (D) did not campaign for a couple of weeks while Scott Brown (R) was out on the air campaigning. A week before the election, Coakley realized the election was close so she started campaigning immediately. Unfortunately, she could not surge and lost by 5 points. The reason is probably that since voters knew both candidates, they had already made up their minds. Brown had an earlier surge which lasted long enough which helped make Brown's support deep.

Sestak though is starting to campaign a bit. He is running some ads in the Philadelphia media market. With the Governor's race looking like a loss for the Democrats, Sestak cannot rely on coattails and he needs to increase Democratic turnout in Philadelphia which often votes heavily Democratic. Still, he cannot wait until the last minute for a surge. Early voting starts very soon in Pennsylvania. Although many early voters are strong supporters of one of the parties, some Independents will vote early too and if they vote for Toomey, Sestak's not so early surge will be to blame. He needs to start campaigning now instead of waiting until most voters have made up their minds.

California U.S House Rankings

 As Michael Barone put it, "Between 1995 and 2005, politics was trench warfare where each side tried to have stronger enthusiasm. Now we are in an open field." Barone is correct because of all the voter shifts right now. 1995 to 2005 were years with 50-50 divides (except for Clinton's win in 1996 where although he had 49% of the vote, he probably would have received a few more percentage points had Ross Perot not run.) The open field politics are clearly showing themselves now with the independents running to the Democrats in 2006 and 2008, giving Democrats a 15 seat Senate pickup, a 54 seat House pickup and the Presidency. Unfortunately, the open field politics did not stop when the Democrats had the independents. The Republicans are now gaining momentum and it is not just because of lethargic Democrats. Many independents are shifting and the anti status quo view is showing itself in primaries. Incumbents in both parties like Arlen Specter (D) in Pennsylvania and Bob Bennett (R) in Utah are losing their primaries. Republicans are looking to flip more than 40 house seats, taking the House from the Democrats.

One place you may expect to see all the upheaval is California. The statewide offices are definitely contested where fired HP CEO Carly Fiorina hopes to end Barbara Boxer's (D) hard work in the Senate. Also, Republicans are contesting the Lieutenant Governorship and the Attorney General spot. One place though in California where there is not much upheaval is the U.S House districts in California. There are a few slightly competitive races like CA-45 where Mary Bono (R) faces the openly gay Palm Springs mayor. In a Democratic year, the Democrats would have more opportunities. Most of the Democrats now are in safe districts so the Republicans cannot win those seats. An exception is CA-11 where Jerry McNerney (D) won in 2006 against corrupt corporate puppet Richard Pombo (R). The district is growing more Democratic but Republicans are seeing an opportunity in Mormon David Harmer (R) who ran unsucessfully in 2009 for CA-10 against John Garamendi (D). Here are the rankings:

32 Safe D
1 Likely D
0 Lean D
1 Tossup
2 Lean R
3 Likely R
14 Safe R

Link for map of California's congressional districts: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/findyourreps.xpd?state=CA


CA-1 Mike Thompson (D) Safe D
Great representative in a great district. What else can I say?

CA-2 Wally Herger (R) Likely R
Saying someone is a great American for calling himself, "A right wing terrorist," really goes against the tea party idea of respecting the country and the Constitution. Still, this district is too conservative and this is a Republican year.

CA-3 Dan Lungren (R) Lean R
Lungren won by 5 points last year so Democrats are now actively contesting this race. Although Democrats have a strong candidate, this is the wrong year and Obama did only win this district by 2 points. Although it is trending Democratic, if Lungren cannot be knocked off in a Democratic year, when can he lose?

CA-4 Tom McClintock (R) Solid R
Although he is a carpetbagger and extreme conservative, enough voters here do not mind.

CA-5 Doris Matsui (D) Safe D
One of the only safe places for Democrats in the Central Valley

CA-6 Lynn Woolsey (D) Safe D
My home district!

CA-7 George Miller (D) Safe D
Takes all the really Democratic areas in Contra Costa/Solano Counties.

CA-8 Nancy Pelosi (D) Safe D
No Republican wins here. The contest is the primary if Pelosi retires next year.

CA-9 Barbara Lee (D) Safe D
Most Democratic district in California and most liberal in the country.

CA-10 John Garamendi (D) Safe D
Won 53% of the vote in a 65% Obama district in 2009. David Harmer (R), the challenger from last year is not running here again. Garamendi should be fine.

CA-11 Jerry McNerney (D) Toss Up/Tilt Democratic
Democrats have been moving into this district from the Bay Area and they helped topple corrupt Richard Pombo (R) in 2006. McNerney won again by 10 points in 2008, not the best margin in a Democratic year. David Harmer (R) is now moving into the 11th to run there. This is the right year for Republicans and Harmer also lives in the San Ramon Valley, cutting away McNerney's advantage there. This is one of the races that will decide control of the House.

CA-12 Jackie Speier (D) Safe D
Great congresswoman in a great district.

CA-13 Pete Stark (D) Safe D
Not much else to say

CA-14 Anna Eshoo (D) Safe D
Eshoo is a great congresswoman and she is not leaving soon!

CA-15 Mike Honda (D) Safe D
Tom Campbell's (R) old district but its Republican tradition is gone.

CA-16 Zoe Lofgren (D) Safe D
Another easy win for the Democrats.

CA-17 Sam Farr (D) Safe D
The district with Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties is not changing hands.

CA-18 Dennis Cardoza (D) Likely D
This is Gary Condit's (D) old district. Condit is famous for having an affair in 2001. Cardoza has been safe the last few elections but Republicans found Mike Berryhill (R) from the Turlock Irrigation Board. Although this is a Republican year, the district's large Hispanic population makes this district too Democratic.

CA-19 OPEN George Radanovich (R) Solid R
There was a big primary here on the Republican side with corrupt former CA-11 congressman Richard Pombo (R) losing to Jeff Denham (R) from California's 12th State Senate district. Despite McCain only winning 52% of the vote here, it should be no contest in the general election.

CA-20 Jim Costa (D) Likely D
This is another district with a strong Republican challenger but due to its even larger Hispanic population than the 18th, Costa should win.

CA-21 Devin Nunes (R) Safe R
Pluarity Hispanic but still a safe Republican district.

CA-22 Kevin McCarthy (R) Safe R
Bakersfield's district and the most Republican district in California. No surprise.

CA-23 Lois Capps (D) Safe D
Capps is a great congresswoman in a great district. What can beat the California coast? Her district is safe.

CA-24 Elton Gallegy (R) Safe R
Once he retires, this district will have a big fight but for now, Gallegy has a hold on it.

CA-25 Buck McKeon (R) Safe R
Obama won 50% of the vote here but until McKeon retires, this district is staying Republican.

CA-26 David Dreier (R) Solid R
The district is trending Democratic quickly but Dreier is moderate and entrenched.

CA-27 Brad Sherman (D) Solid D
The San Fernando Valley used to be marginal but not anymore.

CA-28 Howard Berman (D) Solid D
Another heavily Democratic district

CA-29 Adam Schiff (D) Solid D
Pasadena used to be Republican but it is now Democratic.

CA-30 Henry Waxman (D) Solid D
Right in Westside LA, Waxman is not going anywhere.

CA-31 Xavier Beccara (D) Solid D
Solidly Democratic.

CA-32 Judy Chu (D) Solid D
Chu should worry about a Hispanic primary challenger but not a Republican.

CA-33 OPEN Diane Watson (D) Solid D
Karen Bass (D) should be elected here easily.

CA-34 Lucille Roybal Allard (D) Solid D
The first Hispanic congresswoman will have no trouble.

CA-35 Maxine Waters (D) Solid D
Waters may have ethical problems but this is one of the most Democratic districts in the country.

CA-36 Jane Harman (D) Safe D
Despite her moderate views, Harman's money will keep away any primary challenge.

CA-37 Laura Richardson (D) Safe D
No problems here for Richardson

CA-38 Grace Napolitano (D) Safe D
Another safe Democratic district.

CA-39 Linda Sanchez (D) Safe D
This district used to be marginal but it is now safely Democratic.

CA-40 Ed Royce (R) Safe R
Although McCain barely won here, Royce is still safe.

CA-41 Jerry Lewis (R) Safe R
Longtime Representative Lewis is going nowhere.

CA-42 Gary Miller (R) Safe R
The district may be competitive in the future but it is Republican now.

CA-43 Joe Baca (D) Safe D
If you were wondering why there are so many Republican districts are in the Inland Empire, it is because the Democrats are here.

CA-44 Ken Calvert (R) Likely R
Calvert's district with Riverside in it is trending Democratic with Obama winning by 2 points after a Kerry loss of 19 points in 2004. In 2008, Calvert was caught off guard and nearly lost to Bill Hedrick (D). Hedrick is back again but he has had problems raising money and Calvert is ready for a challenge. Also, this is the wrong year for Hedrick but in 2012, Democrats will have a better shot.

CA-45 Mary Bono Mack (R) Lean R
Mack was elected in 2002 after her husband Sonny Bono (R) passed away. She has kept a somewhat moderate voting record and has been reelected easily. Some factors are making it harder for her though because the district is trending Democratic quickly with areas like Palm Springs and Moreno Valley. The openly gay mayor of Palm Springs, Steve Pougnet is challenging her. Although he is a strong candidate, this is the wrong year.

CA-46 Dana Rohrabacher (R) Safe R
Another SoCal district trending Democratic but still strong for Rohrabacher.

CA-47 Loretta Sanchez (D) Likely D
Sanchez has been reelected easily in the past but she is facing Van Tran (R), a Vietnamese State Assemblyman. Although he is popular with the Vietnamese community, Sanchez is also popular with them and is expected to do well with the district's large Hispanic population. Although this is a Republican year and Bush won this district by one point, the district is still too Democratic for Van Tran.

CA-48 John Campbell (R) Safe R
Yes, Irvine is in this district but the rest of the district is Republican.

CA-49 Darrell Issa (R) Safe R
One of the more Republican district in SoCal.

CA-50 Brian Bilbray (R) Likely R
Francine Busby (D), two time challenger for this seat is running again. Bilbray (R) beat her in a 2006 special election 49%-46% and general election in a Democratic year 53%-43%. In this Republican year, it is even more difficult for Busby.

CA-51 Bob Filner (D) Safe D
So this is where many of the San Diego Democrats live.

CA-52 Duncan Hunter Jr. (R) Safe R
Yes, this is the son of Duncan Hunter (R) who was here since 1980.

CA-53 Susan Davis (D) Safe D
Davis beat Bilbray in 2000 but her district is too Democratic now for a successful Republican challenge.

Do you agree or disagree with the rankings? Do you have any rankings you want to share? Do you want more information? Please comment and share your thoughts.

Why Michael Castle IS the Next Lisa Murkowski

 You may have seen my recent post titled  Why Michael Castle is not the Next Lisa Murkowskiwhere I proceeded to talk about why Michael Castle (R) would win the Delaware Senatorial primary. Lisa Murkowski (R) was the establishment candidate in Alaska and Joe Miller (R) came from behind with Palin's endorsement to win. Castle has never lost an election in Delaware and he has held statewide office for 30 years including holding  Delaware's U.S House seat since 1992. He was running for Ted Kaufman's (D) open Senate seat. The Democratic candidate, Chris Coons (D) from Newcastle county is a strong candidate but was losing to Castle in the polls. Most pundits predicted Castle would just have a small primary against teabagger Christine O' Donnell (R) and then continue holding statewide office. Most pundits also believed that Delaware was too moderate. O' Donnell had already run statewide and lost to Joe Biden (D) in 2008 by about 30 points, losing every county including conservative Sussex County.  Even last Friday when Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint (R) and the Tea Party Express endorsed O' Donnell, most pundits predicted a Castle win. The PPP poll last Sunday showed O' Donnell ahead by 3, the only sign of the future results. PPP has a reputation for being nearly spot on in the primaries. Most Democrats are overjoyed with O' Donnell's 53%-47% win, not because they like her positions (she is extremely conservative.) Most polls show her losing to Coons and a recent Rasmussen poll showed her down by 11. Unless Coons makes a major gaffe or has a major scandal, this race is basically his to lose. Although it is pretty clear who will win, the question I will answer is why did all the tea party figures and organizations succeed in Delaware which is supposed to be a moderate state?

Surges happen often in politics. In the 2008 primary between Clinton and Obama, surges happened in almost every state. The pattern was that Clinton would lead until two weeks before the election when Obama tied the race. Then four days before the election, the tide would turn and Clinton would get the lead. This was due to voters who went to one candidate after a big momentum bounce but as the momentum faded, the voters shifted back to the original candidate. I have seen too many races this year that prove the coming home factor is not strong. For example, the establishment candidate in Kentucky Trey Grayson (R) was down in the polls and voters did not come home to him. For Castle, pundits thought it would be different because he is so entrenched in Delaware. They predicted voters would realize they were actually saying no to Castle so they change their minds quickly. O' Donnell's surge though happened four days before the election which was late enough before voters would realize they were voting against Castle. Besides the money from the teabaggers, O'Donnell also won over voters by portraying herself as an outsider so voters viewed her as the candidate who will "take our country back" instead of the candidate who will "take our country back to the extremists."

The second reason is that Delaware is a closed primary which means only Republicans can vote in it, instead of Independents and Democrats. Although most voters in the Republican primaries are Republicans, Independents can make a big difference often. When McCain ran for President in 2000, he stayed in the race for awhile because he attracted Independents in the Republican Primaries. In the 2008 Republican primaries, McCain's appeal to Independents gave him the early momentum which gave him the nomination. In Delaware, Castle was leading the polls against Coons because Castle appealed to Independents. If Castle had realized O'Donnell would be a formidable challenger, he could have run a campaign to get Independents to register as Republicans before the registration deadline. However, Castle did not and may have believed he would win because he has never lost an election before. Even if Delaware's Republicans were more moderate, he may have won which leads to the third reason he lost.

Delaware's Republicans are too conservative for Castle. Wait, Delaware is a Northeast State so the Republicans are supposed to be moderates, right? Although there are definitely are moderate Republicans in northeastern states like New Jersey and Connecticut, Delaware is a little different. Yes, Newcastle County (Wilmington) is basically a suburb of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia suburbs are known for moderate Republicans. Delaware though also is culturally a southern state outside of the Philadelphia suburbs. It is on the Delmarva peninsula which has very conservative whites and most of them are religious. The two southern counties in Delaware are Kent and Sussex Counties which are also fast growing. Sussex County is infamous for not letting a Jewish girl speak about her religion at her graduation speech. Although Newcastle County has about 62% of Delaware's population, Newcastle County is more Democratic than the rest of the state. Therefore, Newcastle County cast about half of the Republican primary votes last Tuesday. Even if the Republicans in southern Delaware were conservative, how did O'Donnell pick up enough votes in Newcastle County to prevent Castle's margin  there from carrying him to victory? In 2006 and 2008, Democrats made major gains in the Northeast with elected offices but also convinced many moderate Republicans to become Democrats because of Bush's unpopularity and the Republican image of extreme evangelical Christians. With many moderate Republicans gone, the Republican party has become more conservative. Yes, Castle had the votes to win but those voters could not vote in his primary.

Overall, Castle lost because this was a real surge, Independents could not cross over and the Republican party in Delaware has become too conservative. Many pundits have suggested that the Republican party was becoming more conservative because of all the Independents moving to the Democrats two years ago. This could explain why the Independents now are leaning more towards the Republicans because those voters are going back to their original voting habits. They just have not changed their registration yet. The Republican party needs to convince these voters to return to the Republican party or the Republicans will continue to nominate extremists candidates like Christine O'Donnell.

What do you think about the recent events in the Delaware Senate race? Please feel free to share your thoughts.

Why Michael Castle is not the Next Lisa Murkowski

 On August 24th in Alaska, pundits like me witnessed a large political upset. Everyone expected Lisa Murkowski (R) to beat back the primary challenge from lawyer Joe Miller (R) but instead he won by 51%-49%. Miller was not a high profile candidate challenging Murkowski but this is the year of the political upsets. In Utah, incumbent Bob Bennett (R) lost the primary for Senate and so did establishment candidate Trey Grayson (R) in Kentucky for Senate. Still, Murkowksi did not lose merely because she was a member of the establishment. Six years ago, Murkowski was not considered moderate but by today's standards, she is due to her pro choice views. This definitely affected her standing among voters. Then Palin came along and endorsed Miller. In past primaries, once Palin gives her endrosement, the candidate surges in the Republican primary. A classic example is when Palin endorsed Nikki Haley (R) who is running for South Carolina's Governorship. After that primary, Palin's endorsement seemed to not be the magic touch. In Georgia, her endorsed Gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel (R) lost to Nathan Deal (R). Still, her endorsement is powerful in Alaska, her home state. Also, the tea party pumped money into Alaska with a relatively cheap media market. The Palin factor, the tea party factor, the anti incumbent year and Murkowski's moderate views all together caused her to lose.

Some Republicans are hoping they can pull off another upset in Delaware. Ted Kaufman (D) is vacating his Senate seat so moderate and longtime U.S House member Michael Castle (R) is running for it. Castle is also a former Governor. Most polls show him beating Chris Coons (D) from New Castle County. Castle though is facing an obstacle that can potentially become big. Christine O'Donnell (R) is running far to the right of Castle in the primary. A Rasmussen poll shows Coons beating O'Donnell by 11 points so if she wins the primary, the Republicans lose a pickup chance. Recently, O'Donnell has been grabbing momentum. About a week ago, the tea party express decided to shift to Delaware to bring down Castle. Last Friday, O'Donnell picked up Palin's endorsement, tea party king Jim De Mint's endorsement and the NRA. Castle fits every definition of an incumbent and most pundits have said this is an anti incumbent year. Still, I think Castle will win for three important reasons:

    This is strong momentum for O'Donnell but is coming too late for her. In Alaska, Joe Miller had received Palin's endorsment much earlier than four days before the primary. In political races, momentum can change quickly but it takes time for it to change into actual votes. Most voters do not change their minds every time they see one positive news story about the opponent. If the endorsements had happened a week earlier, it will have given more voters time to change their minds and help O' Donnell. Many voters though have already made up their minds.

    Michael Castle and Lisa Murkowski were both incumbents but different kinds. Michael Castle has served in statewide office since 1981 when he became Lieutenant Governor. He has been reelected easily as a U.S House member. In 2008, he won 61% of the vote even as Delaware trends toward the left and voted 62% for Obama. Lisa Murkowski though served in statewide office since 2002 and her father Frank Murkowski (R) appointed her to the Senate seat. Many voters viewed this as nepotism and Murkowski won by only three points in 2004. She never truly connected with Alaska voters while Castle has never lost an election in Delaware. Yes Castle is a true incumbent but since he is so well known and liked, it may be too difficult for enough voters to say no to him.

   The final and most important reason is that Delaware's Republicans are different from Alaska's. Alaska is a state with many rural conservative Republicans who like teabaggers like Jim De Mint and Sarah Palin. Hunting is very prominent in Alaska too. Delaware though is a very different state. It is divided into New Castle County with Wilmington and Philadelphia suburbs. Sussex County which is rural and conservative and Kent County which is a mix of the two. Most of the state's votes are cast in New Castle County. Delaware is a state where the teabaggers are unpopular and Palin definitely made McCain lose some votes here in 2008. Delaware is not a big hunting state either. Republicans in Delaware are moderate and more urban, not like extremist conservatives. If O' Donnell wanted to win, she should have received Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie's (R) endorsement. He is popular in northeastern suburbs. Christie already endorsed Castle though. The endorsements may help O' Donnell in Sussex County but may hurt more in the Wilmington area where she needs votes.

Overall, the Delaware race does have some similarities to the Alaska primary because of the anti establishment candidate getting the endorsements from the teabaggers. The differences though are that the endorsements came too late, Castle is more popular and Delaware is a state where the teabaggers are just too extreme for most voters. Remember that even with the momentum in Alaska, Miller won by only two points.