Bachmann leads field of non-contenders

PPP polled Republican Primary voters about their preferences for who should run for the Senate against Amy Klobuchar, not surprisingly Michele Bachmann leads the field, a field with very few possible challengers.

Public Policy Polling (12/10 Republican Primary voters, no trend lines):

Michele Bachmann (R): 36
Tim Pawlenty: 20
Norm Coleman: 14
Chip Craavack: 7
Tom Emmer: 6
John Kline: 5
Laura Brod: 4
Eric Paulson: 2
Some else/not sure: 6
(MoE: ±5%)

First poll of 2012 Senate race; Nothing to see here

PPP polled the 2012 Minnesota Senate race and found Amy Klobuchar leading the five GOPers they tested her against and garnering over 50% of the vote against them all. Long story short, Amy Klobuchar will be very difficult to beat in 2012.

Here's the breakdown of the match-ups.

PPP (12/7, no trend lines):

Amy Klobuchar (D): 56
Michele Bachmann (R): 39
Undecided: 4

Amy Klobuchar (D): 54
Norm Coleman (R): 40
Undecided: 6

Amy Klobuchar (D): 56
Tom Emmer (R): 38
Undecided: 6

Amy Klobuchar (D): 53
Tim Pawlenty (R): 43
Undecided: 4

Amy Klobuchar (D): 52
Eric Paulson (R): 34
Undecided: 14
(MoE: ±3.2%)

The Swingers and 2010

Tim Walz and Eric Paulsen represent the two swing districts in Minnesota according to PVI, the 1^st and the 3^rd. They are both young for congress persons, Walz is 46 and Paulsen is 45, they are both relatively new to the house and while Paulsen has yet to face reelection, Walz breezed to victory in '08 with over 62% of the vote. What Walz has done in his district is what Paulsen appears to be trying to do in his, moderating himself from the parties activist base.

name	PVI	PVI v Ave	DW-N	DW-N v Ave	SILVER
WALZ	1	10	-0.278	0.07	-0.15
PAULSEN	0	-11	0.543	-0.09	0.14

In case you missed the post last week, DW-Nominate is a partisan scoring system ranging from (-1) to 1, with (-1) being very liberal and 1 being very conservative. PVI, partisan voting index is a measure of the partisan nature of a congressional district that I've formatted the same way as the DW-Nominate score, positive for a conservative leaning district, negative for liberal.

What you see when comparing Walz to Paulsen is just how similar they are among their respective party caucuses. They are both from districts that have almost no partisan tilt, far from the average of their party. Their DW-Nominate scores however are very close to the average member of their party, suggesting that they are more valuable to their party than the average legislator, which you can see by looking at their SILVER scores.

While taking out Eric Paulsen would be nice, if Tim Walz's success in the 1^st is any indication he will be hard to unseat, especially in a cycle that looks to be favorable to GOP candidates. In addition Paulsen got elected in a three way race with almost 50% in his first go and hasn't really done anything to change voters' perception of him since that time. Based on PVI however, the 3^rd is the most favorable district for democratic takeover of the three GOP held districts.

This brings up the question of who the easier target is for Democrats this November, Eric Paulsen or Michelle Bachmann. While Bachmann's district has a much more daunting +7 PVI, Bachmann herself only won reelection by 3 points against a candidate who was underfunded most of the race and only started gaining ground after Bachmann imploded on Hardball. Since that time Bachmann has further defined herself as the nuttiest of wing nuts, capable of saying just about anything.

So, we have a favorable district with a savvy candidate versus an unfavorable district with a loon, which race would you put resources into if you could only choose one?

2006 to 2008, Part 1: the House races

With the year ending and year end reviews pilling up I figure it's time to look at the aftermath of this years house races and see how things look going forward.

The races in the eight Minnesota congressional districts from the last two years can be roughly divided into 4 categories;

1 - Incumbents holding steady or strengthening their position: congressional districts 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8 in 2008, congressional districts 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 in 2006.

2 - Open seats - CD3 in 2008, CD5 and CD6 in 2006.

3 - That rare instance when an incumbent loses a reelection bid which happened in CD1 in 2006.

4 - Michelle Bachmann's district.

Leading up to November 4th there was some deal of expectation that one of Minnesota's traditionally red congressional districts, 3 or 6, would turn blue. In both instances the Republicans held their ground, but there is reason for optimism about our future chances.

First of all, every Democratic incumbent increased on their top line number from 2006 except for Betty McCollum, who declined from 70% to 69%. These are five safe seats for as long as the people sitting in them want to run. In CD2 Kline held steady at 57% which is essentially what he's done the last two years. This is also a safe seat, but the good news is that if and when Kline moves on the DFL should have a decent shot at it. If Sarvi, for example, had run against a generic Republican rather than a three-term incumbent, he could have made a race out of it.

CD3 was disappointing for a lot of DFL activists and that Media lost by a nearly double digit margin didn't help. Eric Paulson didn't hit 50%, he got 49%, but he was facing a well funded opponent and a third party candidate who took 10%. This is a Republican leaning district and although Paulson will likely face a strong challenge in 2010 unless he drinks the same bat-shit crazy juice as Bachmann, he should be favored to win reelection.

This brings us to CD6, home of Michelle Bachmann. There have been many electrons used trying to explain how it was that Michelle Bachmann won reelection even though she seemed to be trying to sabotage her own campaign. Look at the results as compared to 2006.

2008
Bachmann(R-inc) 46%
Tinklenberg(D) 43%
Anderson (I) 10%

2006
Bachmann(R) 50%
Wetterling(D) 42%
Binkowski (I) 7%

It was close in 2008 only because Bachmann made it close, but I think the right candidate could cause Bachmann trouble. She lost 4 points from 2006 to 2008 but the IP listed candidate picked up 3 points. Bachmann may have put the election into play, but Tinklenberg was unable convince a conservative district that he was an acceptable alternative. There were other factors that played a part, including the IP candidate getting 10%, when Tink had the IP endorsement and Tink leaving $500,000 in the bank, but this election was in play for one reason only, Michelle Bachman. For that reason I think this is the DFL's best shot at a pickup in the short term, but that may be a short lived gain.

Redistricting looms and Minnesota faces the likely lose of a house seat, who's seat specifically will be a very contentious issue when the map is redrawn after 2010, but CD6 looks like the easiest one to divide up seeing that it boarders all of the other CDs except CD1. Given that it might make more sense for the DFL to focus on CD3 again in 2010, rather than CD6.