Wiscoa-Iowa and Wisconsin are actually one Midwestern electoral megastate

Introduction

With the selection of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate, Wisconsin has changed from “leaning Democratic” to a pure “toss up” in this year’s Presidential election.  From January through August most polls in Wisconsin had President Obama up anywhere between three and eight points and his campaign felt strongly that they would carry the Badger State in November.  Now, however, it is clear that the fight to win the state’s ten valuable Electoral Votes will go down to the wire and those votes may well provide the difference in a close race. 

Iowa has been seen as more of a “toss up” all year with the President and Mitt Romney going back and forth, each leading by one to three points, statistically a tie.  For Romney, Iowa’s six Electoral Votes are vital.  If he wins Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia and Indiana along with Iowa that will give him a 276-262 Electoral College Victory, a very slim margin.   If you add Wisconsin and Iowa to the mix, however, Romney wins 286-252; a bit more of a cushion in which Romney could lose Virginia or North Carolina (but not Ohio) and still win the election.  While Iowa is a bit more red than Wisconsin the two states are electorally quite similar and I believe that where one goes the other will follow in November 2012 and the winner of both will be inaugurated President of the United States on January 20, 2013.

History

For over one hundred years Iowa and Wisconsin have (with the exception of four elections) followed each other when voting for President.  In 1924, Wisconsin voted for favorite son Robert LaFollette on the Progressive ticket while Iowa voted for Republican Calvin Coolidge.  Had LaFollete not run, Wisconsin almost certainly would have voted for Coolidge as well.  In 1940, Republican Wendell Willkie carried Iowa by 4.5% while Wisconsin chose Franklin Roosevelt by 2%.  In 1976, in a very close race between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, Ford carried Iowa by 1% while Carter carried Wisconsin by 2%.  In 2004, President George Bush carried Iowa by .7% (about 10,000 votes) while John Kerry carried Wisconsin by .4% (about 11,000) votes.  In 1988, while most of the rest of the country voted for George Herbert Walker Bush, Iowa and Wisconsin both bucked the trend by voting for Dukakis.  And, in 2000, in the closest Presidential race in a generation, Al Gore carried Iowa by .3% (about 4,000 votes) and Wisconsin by .2% (about 5,000 votes).  In 2000 and 2004 both states basically were tied, reflecting the basic outcome in the national election.  In 2008, Iowa voted for Barack Obama by 10% and Wisconsin was a complete blowout as the Democrat won the state by 14%, the biggest Presidential win in the Badger State since 1964. 

Quite simply, these states don’t disagree a lot.  They both elect conservatives and liberals; Iowa has sent the unreconstructed FDR throwback Tom Harkin to the Senate five times and, at the same time, voted for the conservative GOP Senator Chuck Grassley by overwhelming margins since 1980.  Republican Terry Branstad returned to the governor’s mansion in Des Moines after an absence of twelve years, during which liberal Democrats Tom Vilsack (now Barack Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture) and Chet Culver held the office. And, in Wisconsin in 2010, conservative Republican Ron Johnson beat the very liberal three-term Senator Russ Feingold and elected the now famous governor Scott Walker to succeed the very liberal two-term governor Jim Doyle.  Paul Ryan holds the congressional seat that Democrat Les Aspin (former Democratic Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and Bill Clinton’s first Secretary of Defense) held from 1971-1993.  Both states have overwhelming GOP majorities in their state assemblies (as a result of the 2010 elections) and a slim Democratic majority in their state senates.  Demographically, Wisconsin has a larger non-white population (about 14%) than Iowa (about 9%) but they haven’t been as effected by the large changes (especially in Hispanic growth) that have happened in other states in the last generation which has radically changed states like California, New Mexico and Nevada, and, to a lesser extent, their Midwestern neighbor, Illinois.  Democrats try to roll up large margins in Iowa cities like Cedar Rapids, and, to a lesser extent, Des Moines and Dubuque, while the Republicans do much better in the countryside, especially in the western part of the state.  In Wisconsin, Democrats rely on large majorities from the very liberal Dane County (Madison) and the largest county (Milwaukee), which offsets Republican advantages in the suburbs and exurbs in the populous southeastern part of the state. 

Strategic Implications

President Obama has been a frequent visitor to Iowa but not Wisconsin.  Up until early August he probably felt he didn’t have to spend too much time and money in the Badger State to win a small victory there.  Moreover, before the June recall, it is clear he wanted to stay away from what he thought would be a losing effort (and he was right). No Republican since Ronald Reagan has carried the state in a national election. Barack Obama can afford to lose Iowa with its six electoral votes, but he probably can’t lose Wisconsin and Iowa and the sixteen combined Electoral Votes.  If this was 2004 and George Bush had actually carried Wisconsin he wouldn’t have needed to win Ohio to carry the election.  Had Bush lost Ohio along with Wisconsin he would have lost the Electoral College 272-266.

Wisconsin Republicans are fired up after Scott Walker survived a recall election by 7% in June.  While Mitt Romney’s ground operation in many states lags behind President Obama’s, the Badger State GOP is convinced that they can maximize their turnout as they did in June (the special election’s turnout was extremely high) and carry the state for Romney.  While Mitt really can’t afford to lose Florida, Virginia and Ohio (assuming Indiana and North Carolina return to their conservative roots), the President probably can’t be reelected if he loses both Wisconsin and Iowa.  And I think it is quite likely that where one state goes another will follow.  Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will make several stops in the Wisconsin and Iowa, we’ll see if the President does the same.  

Romney's path to 270 electoral votes

Romney’s Path to 270: Which states he needs to turn from blue to red to win in November.  (This model assumes Obama will not win any states that he didn’t carry in 2008)

The five he must have: If he doesn’t win these he’s got almost no shot.  These states are listed from most likely to flip to least likely. 2008 red states are already figured into the EV total.

State                            Number of EVs         Total EVs

Indiana                        11                                191     

North Carolina            15                                206

Florida                        29                                235

Virginia                       13                                248

Ohio                           18                                266

If he wins the above five states he would only have to win one more to put him over the top.  I’ve put the states in order from most likely to flip from blue to red to least likely.

New Hampshire          4                                 270*

Iowa                           6                                 276

Colorado                    9                                 285

Wisconsin                   10                                295

Nevada                       6                                 301

Pennsylvania               20                                321

Minnesota                   10                                331

New Mexico               5                                 336

Michigan                     16                                351

Oregon                        7                                 358

New Jersey                 14                                372**

Maine                          4                                 376***

*Romney victory

**The only probable way New Jersey is in play is if Romney puts Chris Christie on the ticket.

***Maine splits its EVs so Romney may pick up just one but he could win up to four.

The rest of the blue states that were not mentioned are almost certainly out of reach for Mitt Romney.  If he did win some of them (Connecticut would be a good example) the election would be a complete blowout.  If Romney does get around 53% of the vote (which is about what Barack Obama got in 2008) I suspect he’ll get somewhere around 330 EVs.  In 2008 Obama got 365 EVs with 52.9% which should mean that Romney should have more EVs if he does receive 53%.  However, the big blue states (California, New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois) along with a bunch of the smaller ones will go to the President even in a blowout scenario so Romney’s EV total can’t reach much past 350.  In any event, Romney would be the winner and probably wouldn’t care as long as he won a decisive victory in which he carried a majority of the popular vote and a majority of the EVs, which would convince most voters of the legitimacy of his victory.

Sincerely,

The Snitch

Scott Walker will survive the recall

Scott Walker is poised to easily prevail in the Wisconsin recall this Tuesday. Not even the President would come to Wisconsin in the final days (he visited Minneapolis and Chicago last week but wouldn’t cross the border into the Badger State), which is a clear indicator that he thinks Tom Barrett will get hammered. If it was at all close, we would have seen the President come to rally the troops and get the mayor of Milwaukee over the top.

In 2010 Scott Walker beat Barrett by almost six percentage points and I suspect strongly that he’ll have about the same margin this time as well. In the end, Walker should win 53-47 and this will hopefully end this recall madness once and for all. If Barrett does win, it will ensure continued political war in Wisconsin. General elections will become less meaningful as anyone will pull out the recall card and try to bring a sitting legislator or governor down if they do anything at all controversial. No longer will recalls be used as a device for politicians who commit grievous errors or clearly break the law; they will be weapons for anyone who has an axe to grind.

In the end, what the unions really wanted was to intimidate anyone who would try to change their generous benefit packages. If they do win it will send a message to the rest of the country to beware of the power and influence of unions; especially governmental unions. However, many states are rapidly coming to the point where they simply cannot afford these generous packages and have taken steps to contain costs. Even heavily Democratic Rhode Island has recently made huge changes to their state pension system. Enacted over protests from unions, Rhode Island’s pension liability has been cut by half because legislators, the state’s treasurer and the governor bravely passed badly needed legislation. At the same time, states like California and Illinois continue to look into the abyss because they don’t have the willpower to enact pension reform in the face of massive union resistance.

A Tom Barrett loss on Tuesday will be terrible for Democrats for a number of reasons. One, they simply thought that a majority of Wisconsinites agreed with them and talked themselves into launching this recall effort. Second, the time and money spent on the recall cannot now be used to help reelect the President and elect a Democrat to the open US Senate seat up this year. Three, it energizes the Wisconsin (and national GOP) as Republicans realize that Scott Walker’s best defense was an aggressive offense and conservatives can prevail over vicious union and Democratic attacks. Fourth, it provides continued momentum for Mitt Romney as he continues to hit the President for his failed policies. Finally, it puts a state that voted for the President by fourteen points in play for Romney this fall. Quite simply, if Mitt carries the state, it will be nearly impossible for Obama to be reelected.
Respectfully,
The Snitch

The end of Dick Lugar's career in sight...

Richard Lugar has served Indiana in the United States Senate since 1977 and since then has really never had a close election. This year, however, State Treasurer Richard Mourdock has challenged him in the Republican primary and may knock him off in the May 8 contest. Mourdock has attacked Lugar from the right and has painted the 80 year old senior statesman as out of touch with Indiana. If Mourdock does win next Tuesday it will be yet another win for the Tea Party caucus against the establishment of the Republican Party. Most GOP members on Capitol Hill as well as popular governor Mitch Daniels support Lugar and he's able to draw on a large war chest to fight against an aggressive and fearless opponent. Lugar simply seems surprised that anyone would seriously challenge him and his feeling is certainly understandable. He's served in the Senate for 36 years and has coasted to reelection every time. Now, however, we've experienced three wave elections in a row (2006, 1008, 2010) and several GOP members are being judged on their conservative orthodoxy; especially in terms of their cooperation with President Obama. Lugar is a solid conservative but he has voted for the President's two Supreme Court nominees as well as the bank bailouts and a variety of smaller laws that drive Republicans up the wall. When you serve six terms in the Senate you're going to have a lot to pick on and Mourdock seizes every opportunity to show rank and file GOP voters what Lugar has been up to. Democrats have had success in the Hoosier State but Indiana is really at heart a conservative state; especially in a primary like this. Mourdock won reelection as Treasurer by 25 points in 2010 and is well known throughout Indiana and I believe he'll end up winning the May 8 contest. If he does lose Dick Lugar will be the latest in huge string of strong Democrats and Republicans that have lost in the last four contests. Respectfully, The Snitch

The "Pair of Sixes" Election

In 2004 two deeply flawed candidates, Republican George Bush and Democrat John Kerry fought a difficult and dirty campaign for the very few independent voters who hadn't already decided for whom to vote. Bush, hobbled by the Iraq War and unable to defend himself faced John Kerry, a rich, vain liberal who tried to portray himself as a Catholic Vietnam veteran who was a solid alternative to the bumbling Bush. In the end, Kerry's disconnected demeanor and his questionable record in Vietnam helped to sink him in a very close election that came down to 118,000 votes in Ohio. Bush's highly organized campaign was able to eke out a victory in which only three states switched from one party to another from 2000 to 2004. It was as if two men playing poker had a pair of sixes and the only reason Bush happened to win was that he had an Ace when Kerry had a Jack.

Had Bush not been tripped up in Iraq he probably would have won going away but he was lucky to draw such a weak challenger in Kerry-a lazy, disinterested Senator who in twenty years in the Senate never authored a major bill or had a leadership position in the Upper Chamber. The Democratic party's hatred of Bush over the outcome of the 2000 election combined with the decision to intervene in Iraq dominated their primary season and they could not wait to face a President they considered stupid and politically weak. Losing in November 2004 came as a real shock to many liberals who simply assumed that a majority of voters believed as they did. Bush's approval rating hovered right around 50% on Election Day 2004 and it translated to 51% of the vote-just enough to win.

In 2012 I believe a similar narrative is taking place but in the opposite direction. President Obama, a classic liberal is abhorred by the rank-and-file GOP who can't wait to throw him out in November and they can't understand why most people wouldn't agree with them. If the GOP could nominate a strong, energetic conservative the party's base could gather around the nominee and prepare for battle in the fall election. The problem for Republicans is that the probable GOP nominee will be Mitt Romney, a rich, disconnected politician from Massachusetts that 2/3 of conservatives have not supported to this point in the primary season. He's got the worst favorability rating of any major candidate in a national election of modern times. In short, he looks like the guy who sold you that lemon of a car that even now sits in your parking lot. He's basically tied with the President in national polls of likely voters and could win. I'll be curious to see if he picks a solid VP that would help him not only secure his base but make him more attractive national candidate. He may win, he may lose, but he's tragically flawed. I'll get into this more in the near future but we'll get to sit back and watch a President who can't run on his record drag the former Massachusetts governor through the mud in what will probably be one of the ugliest campaigns in American electoral history.

Respectfully,

The Snitch

The Senate Scorecard in April

If the election were today the GOP will pick up at least 5 seats, making the split 52-47 for the next Congress. Here's a breakdown:

GOP Takeovers
-Missouri
-Montana
-Nebraska
-Wisconsin (If Tommy Thompson is nominated)

Probable GOP Holds
-Massachusetts
-Nevada

Probable GOP Loss
-Maine

Possible GOP takeovers:
-Ohio (Josh Mandel should, in the end, beat the Democratic incumbent)
-Virginia (This is a death match between two former governors-who wins at the top of the ticket will probably help his party's Senate nominee)
-Florida (Connie Mack Jr. should beat Bill Nelson but the incumbent still has fight in him.
-North Dakota (An open seat with a popular former Democratic Attorney General running against a first-term GOP House member)
-New Mexico (Leaning Democratic but Republican Heather Wilson is now within the margin of error)

Probable Democratic Holds
-Michigan (Stabenow will probably keep the seat but this one could flip if the electorate moved strongly against the President)
-Minnesota
-Pennsylvania (A weak Democratic incumbent is probably going to get a pass on this as no strong GOP alternative has emerged)
-West Virginia
-Connecticut (If the GOP electorate insists on nominated Linda McMahon again instead of Chris Shays they'll have no shot at this seat)
-Maryland
-New Jersey
-Hawaii

No Shot for the GOP
-Delaware
-California
-Vermont
-Rhode Island
-New York
-California

Again the movement of 3-8 seats is probable for the GOP but I predict 5 will fall.

Respectfully,

The Snitch

Will Biden be dumped for Clinton?

If Obama's numbers continue to deteriorate don't be too surprised if he dumps his Vice-President for a much stronger candidate, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Biden does virtually nothing for the ticket and Clinton may bring more women aboard as well as Democrat-leaning blue collar voters who supported her in the 2008 Presidential campaign.

It is still very early and Obama may well keep his VP. If he dumps him it may send a signal to independents that he made a mistake in the first place by placing him on the ticket. In 1972 George McGovern looked foolish when he dumped Tom Eagleton for Sergeant Shriver and got hammered by Richard Nixon. McGovern almost certainly would have lost anyway but it hurt him with independents. Still, Obama may consider the gamble worth it if he feels his reelection is in doubt.

Most Republicans believe Mitt Romney will be the nominee and have reluctantly settled on the former Massachusetts governor It is clear that they will vote for him if he becomes the GOP standard bearer. Tomorrow's contests in Alabama and Mississippi will be very instructive as to the strength of Romney. He needs a southern state and I believe he'll win Mississippi by several points. If he does he'll be able to demostrate to the GOP rank and file that he should be the nominee. Let's wait and see.

Respectfully,

The Snitch