“There’s no real financial infrastructure under the [state] Republican Party, and I reckon building one will take a long time,” he said. And doing so will be “sort of like straightening out a train wreck.” — Carter Wrenn, NC Republican Consultant This is a very fragile time for North Carolina House Democrats and Republicans. They all
[More…]
“There’s no real financial infrastructure under the [state] Republican Party, and I reckon building one will take a long time,” he said. And doing so will be “sort of like straightening out a train wreck.” — Carter Wrenn, NC Republican Consultant
This is a very fragile time for North Carolina House Democrats and Republicans. They all know that to some extent their political fortunes this year are tied to the results of President Obama’s reform agenda, beginning with healthcare legislation. If he prevails, the value of his stock as a reform leader will rebound and the tarnished image of the Democratic Party will be polished up a bit. If he fails, all bets are off. Republicans will have a huge surge in momentum which will yield more investors making larger investments, an event that would be devastating for Democrats who have always been able to count on a financial advantage to win the close races.
I am persuaded that Obama is smart enough to come out of the healthcare reform debate with a win. He has to. His entire agenda is at stake. He will make whatever sacrifices are necessary to declare a victory, “… a victory for the uninsured and the underinsured who can’t afford care.”
The greater likelihood is that by the time the May primaries roll around, the healthcare debate will be old news. Obama will be directing his energies to the other problematic issues for Democrats by then: the economy, jobs, and big government spending. There will be an uptick in the job approval numbers for the President and the Congress, and most incumbents will win their primaries. There have only been two states with primaries thus far: Illinois and Texas. All incumbent members of congress seeking reelection won their races.
Continue reading »
Politics, Rain Dances and Comets Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of political races, just like timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance … or the return of a comet. President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for the White House reminds me of Halley’s Comet: a spectacular
[More…]
Politics, Rain Dances and Comets
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of political races, just like timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance … or the return of a comet.
President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for the White House reminds me of Halley’s Comet: a spectacular event, brilliant and inspiring, that comes along once every 76 years. Using his skills honed as an inner city community organizer in Chicago, he won the race with 7 million more popular votes than any candidate in the history of presidential politics, raising a staggering $782 million, and employing 6,000 staffers who managed an all-volunteer army of 13 million.
David Plouffe, President Obama’s campaign manager, revealed the campaign secrets in his book The Audacity to Win, published last month. He proudly tells the story of how their rag tag militia defeated the dream teams of both the Democratic and Republican parties with a once-in-a-lifetime-candidate, a single powerful message, and a web site used to organize and communicate with staff and volunteers … and raise money like it had never been raised before.
In September 2008 alone, the Obama campaign raised $150 million; $100 million of that had been raised online as a result of 10 fund-raising e-mails. “There were times when we were raising $250,000, $300,000, even $500,000 an hour.”1 Why did that matter here in North Carolina? “Every additional dime was being funneled into battleground states,” said Plouffe.
Halley’s Comet: a spectacular event, brilliant and inspiring, returns in 2061. That’s about when we will likely see another candidacy like that of Barack Obama in 2008. As to 2010, read on.
Throwing Long
Obama insisted on three things at the outset of his campaign. One was that he alone would establish the message and that it would not be negotiable; two, that his campaign would win with a grassroots organization targeting unconventional voters; three, that they would have the courage to take risks, a campaign quality that David Plouffe describes as “throwing long.”
The message from day one was change. “Change versus a broken status quo; people versus the special interests; a politics that would lift people and the country up; and a president who would not forget the middle-class.”2 The campaign strategy from day one was to gain the advantage over Hillary Clinton and her high-roller backed campaign of Manifest Destiny with a grassroots ground game funded by small contributors. It worked in Iowa; the first major electoral event of the presidential nominating process. Clinton snubbed Iowa while the Obama staff and volunteers pulled off an upset victory by getting their supporters to leave their homes on a frigid, February day and go to a caucus meeting to cast a vote for Obama.
Throughout the primary, the Obama campaign defied conventional wisdom by targeting those least likely to vote like younger white voters, independents, newly registered African-American voters, and African-American voters who had voted sporadically in the past. They invested heavily in early turnout of these non-habitual voters with radio ads and Internet ads pushing early voting; they sent e-mail and text messages to tens of thousands of North Carolinians urging early voting, called tens of thousands more and sent volunteers door-to-door to urge early voting.
Traces of the Strategic Design
On May 6, 2008, Primary Election Day exit polling here in North Carolina was so conclusive that the moment the polls closed the national networks declared Obama the winner over Clinton. Plouffe recalls the 14-point blowout in his book this way: “As the returns came in, we could see the traces of our strategy’s design: by registering over 100,000 new voters, producing strong turnout among African-Americans and young voters, and winning college-educated whites thanks to our stand against the gas tax, we made ourselves unbeatable in North Carolina.”3
The unconventional strategy of targeting atypical voters in unlikely places like North Carolina continued throughout the fall. Obama knew he could not defeat a Republican presidential nominee in the Old North State with TV ads, no matter how much money he spent. His only hope was a massive ground game, registering and turning out non-traditional voters.
When the dust settled and the numbers were tallied in North Carolina following the November elections, 967,804 new voters had been registered during the year, with nearly 8 in 10 registering either as Democrats or Unaffiliated, pushing our state to over 6 million registered voters for the first time ever. New African-American voters totaled over 304,708. New voters in the 18 to 24 year-old age group totaled 317,584.
The Obama campaign had 47 headquarters in our state, with over 400 paid staff in the twenty-something age group. These junior operatives were responsible for record early voting totaling 2.6 million (only 984,000 voted early in 2004), more voters than on Election Day. Seven out of 10 of the early voters were either Democrats (51%) or Unaffiliated (19%). African Americans comprised 28% of early voters, as compared to only 19% of the 2004 general election early vote.
Obama won North Carolina by defying conventional wisdom, by using a non-negotiable message of change and a grassroots organization. He won because he was willing to throw long.
The Honeymoon is Over; and You are Not Who I Married!
It has been said that marriage is when two become one, and then they spend the rest of their lives arguing about which one. The biggest difference between the magical Obama “marriage” of 2008 and the post-honeymoon relationship of 2010 is that now, after a year’s worth of leadership, his supporters are beginning to doubt his commitment to promises made at the altar.
The clearest example of a weakening Obama base can be seen in the low turnout of young adults in Virginia and New Jersey last year despite numerous pleas from the president during personal visits. Only 8% of the 18 to 24 year old voters turned out in New Jersey (17% in 2008), with only 10% turning out in Virginia (21% in 2008). Republicans won both governors’ races.
Obama won in 2008 in great part because of young and enthusiastic, anti-war idealists who worked tirelessly registering and turning out other young, enthusiastic, anti-war idealists. When those same voters opened their laptops yesterday to read the news, they were probably astounded by an AP story titled, Obama wants record $708 billion for wars next year.4 The article notes that the record amount will be used in Iraq and to expand the unpopular war in Afghanistan, and points out that the request will be a difficult sell to Democratic Party leaders in the Congress. Those young anti-war Obama idealists are less likely to retool for other Democrats in 2010.
The tables are now turned. They are now Obama’s wars; it’s now Obama’s economy. He gets the credit for the good and the bad, and it’s beginning to show in the national polls:
According to the Gallop polling organization January 13, 2010:5
- Obama’s job approval is 50%, down from a first-year high of 69%
- Only 40% of Americans approve of Obama’s handling of the economy (lowest ever)
- Only 37% of Americans approve of Obama’s handling of health care reform (lowest ever)
- Looking only at the all-important Independent voters, only 31% approve of Obama’s handling of the economy and of health care reform
- Conservatives outnumber both moderates and liberals for the first time since 2004
- Fewer than half of Americans call themselves Democrats (a first since 2005)
President Barack Obama’s campaign for the White House was a spectacular event, like Halley’s Comet, brilliant and inspiring, a game-changer in many North Carolina races in 2008. But as to whether it will drive our 2010 elections … ummmmmm, well, Halley’s Comet returns in 2061.
References
- The Audacity to Win, by David Plouffe, Campaign Manager for Obama for America, page 327.
- The Audacity to Win, page 32.
- The Audacity to Win, page 229.
- AP, January 13, 2010, by Anne Gearan and Anne Flaherty
- Gallup, January 13, 2010. See: www.gallup.com
“On Thursdays he flew from Jackson to New York City in his private jet to take care of business interests like Amerada Hess Oil and the New York Jets. He always made it back in time to feed the cows.”1 Congratulations to Tom Fetzer, former three-term mayor of Raleigh and newly-elected Chairman of the North
[More…]
“On Thursdays he flew from Jackson to New York City in his private jet to take care of business interests like Amerada Hess Oil and the New York Jets. He always made it back in time to feed the cows.”1
Congratulations to Tom Fetzer, former three-term mayor of Raleigh and newly-elected Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party, on the occasion of his marriage Saturday, October 17, 2009, to his sweetheart, Kate Spina, from Gadsden, Alabama. I was not invited. That’s important for you to know, because it points out that Tom and I are not close friends; ergo, there is no favoritism in this report. However, I do have a wedding gift for Tom: a transformative political lesson from a reclusive millionaire banker in Mississippi. Here is my gift:
Continue reading »
Labor Day marks the traditional kickoff of the 2009-2010 political racing season, with the victory lane winner earning the right to draw congressional and legislative districts for the next decade. Democrats start the race for partisan advantage in the pole position, the coveted front row, inside lane in motor sports. Democrats won the pole position
[More…]
Labor Day marks the traditional kickoff of the 2009-2010 political racing season, with the victory lane winner earning the right to draw congressional and legislative districts for the next decade. Democrats start the race for partisan advantage in the pole position, the coveted front row, inside lane in motor sports.
Democrats won the pole position by seizing all of North Carolina’s political power, including a majority in the state Senate and House, the congressional delegation, and the state Court of Appeals. Democrats own the keys to the governor’s mansion, and have an 8 to 2 advantage on the North Carolina Council of State. The only majority held by Republicans in state government is their 4 to 3 advantage on the “nonpartisan” (wink-wink) state Supreme Court. But does the pole position increase the odds of winning?
The greatest advantage of having almost all of the political power is that you get almost all of the political money. Money, most of which is contributed by the affluent, matters a whole lot in political racing. The candidate with the most money wins 87% of the time.
However, there is growing speculation that we are seeing a decline in the influence of affluence in American politics due to the Internet and the recession. Of the $745 million raised by Barack Obama in 2008, $500 million was raised on the Internet, with 6 million donations in increments of $100 or less. The have-nots contributed more than the haves.
The declining influence of affluence will also be apparent in the 2009-2010 election cycle because there are fewer contributors financially able to write big checks. Americans have reportedly lost $3 trillion in home equity and $7 trillion in shareholder wealth. We are seeing an additional 2.4 million new foreclosures this year, and unemployment is expected to reach 10% by year’s end.1 Don’t count on contributions from these folks.
The greatest disadvantage of having almost all of the political power is that you get almost all of the blame for everything bad that happens. As of the last week of August, Gallup’s national poll shows Obama’s job approval in a free fall since his January high of 69%, down to 50% at summer’s end.2 Two major concerns are driving the growing loss of confidence in the president: his handling of the economic crisis and healthcare reform.
According to mid-August Rasmussen Reports,3 more Americans trust Republicans on the healthcare issue than Democrats by 44% to 41%, with Democrats way down from their 10-point lead on the issue in June. This time a year ago, Democrats led Republicans on every major issue of the day except terrorism. Today, according to Rasmussen, voters prefer Republicans over Democrats on 8 out of the top 10 major issues of the day, including education and social security, issues in which Democrats have long enjoyed a public opinion advantage.
Further evidence that the Democrats may have a tough race ahead of them in 2010 is the fact that for the first time in two years, Republicans lead Democrats in the “generic congressional ballot,” with about 42% of Americans saying they are more likely to vote Republican in next year’s congressional elections and about 38% more likely to vote for the Democrat. This time a year ago, Democrats had a 10 point advantage over Republicans on the same generic congressional ballot.
Democrats in North Carolina are facing a litany of grievances that they will have to defend throughout the race, like their handling of the state budget crisis, which includes raising taxes by over $1 billion and making unpopular budget cuts like the loss of thousands of teachers and state employees and the closing of prisons, cuts that were deemed necessary by the same budget writers who approved a $25 million fishing pier. Can’t you hear that ad?
Democrats will also have to defend the out-of-control growth of high-paying administrative jobs in the UNC system, jobs characterized by system President Erskine Bowles as “an absolute embarrassment.” They are also facing voters angry about the misuse of political power, like Mary Easley’s $170,000 salary scandal that has led to the resignation of the Chancellor of NC State University, along with the provost and the chairman of the Board of Trustees. That scandal now includes allegations that State Auditor Beth Woods withheld an audit critical of Easley’s compensation package.
Former Governor Mike Easley, whose actions are under scrutiny by a federal grand jury, faces a growing list of allegations of a breach of the public trust that now include the mysterious disappearance of flight records in the hands of the North Carolina Highway Patrol. A federal grand jury has been gathering evidence for months. Surely indictments will follow.
This summer, we witnessed a spontaneous combustion among paycheck-to-paycheck voters at Town Hall meetings, voters shouting members of congress into a corner with in-your-face accusations of incompetence. Throughout the state and nation self-made challengers are stirring about, talking to family and friends and political insiders about exploiting this era of voter ire … an era in which voters are more likely to pull for the underdogs running on shoestring budgets and aided by unemployed volunteers using the Internet to organize and get out their messages … underdogs raising what money they can from many facing financial hardship but mad enough to write a small check to one of the little guys who will take a stand for have-nots.
Granted, the Democrats in North Carolina have the pole position at the Labor Day kickoff of the 2009-2010 political racing season. But, does the pole position increase the odds of winning? A recent study of the 2,102 NASCAR races held between 1949 and 2005, shows that “the marginal probability that the pole-sitter wins a race has been steadily declining over time.”4 Only 480 of the pole-sitters won those 2,102 races.
Pole-sitters beware.
References
- The Financial Forecast Center; http://forecasts.org/unemploy.htm
- Gallup Poll, 8/26/2009
- Rasmussen Poll, 8/13/2009
- The Value of the Pole: Evidence from NASCAR, Craig Depken, II, Department of Economics, Belk School of Business, UNC-Charlotte; May 2008
The 2009/2010 election cycle is heating up. Challengers throughout the state are beginning to move about, stewing over their potential for picking off an incumbent in next year’s congressional and legislative races. They sense that the national and state budget crises give them an opportunity to pounce on vulnerable prey. In the absence of sustained
[More…]
The 2009/2010 election cycle is heating up. Challengers throughout the state are beginning to move about, stewing over their potential for picking off an incumbent in next year’s congressional and legislative races. They sense that the national and state budget crises give them an opportunity to pounce on vulnerable prey.
In the absence of sustained economic recovery, next year’s political atmosphere will be dangerously unstable as competing groups and individuals maneuver to place the blame for our state and national ills on the opposition, while laying the better claim for a brighter future.
President Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” Why? According to Emanuel, “Crisis provides opportunities to do things you could not do before.”
The Obama administration is clearly using the national economic crisis to advance issues like health care reform and energy policy. The “never waste a crisis” strategy, coupled with the president’s residual positive public opinion despite his occasional gaffs, are yielding impressive legislative successes … granted in the Democratic dominated U.S. Congress. But are they playing right into the hands of the Republicans?
With every legislative success comes political risk. If a frightening economic crisis allows the president to sell the Democratic congress a frightening bailout and economic stimulus package, no doubt Republicans will have more than enough for their attack ads. If an unprecedented budget deficit in North Carolina forces politically risky tax increases and the elimination of important programs and services by the Democratic legislature and Democratic governor, no doubt Republican admeisters are drooling in anticipation.
Oh, but wait … I forgot the ads have to be aired … and that costs money … and North Carolina Republicans never seem to have enough of the faithful willing to write a check to amass a competitive war chest. Republicans can’t raise money because they are disorganized and don’t trust each other.
Republicans in North Carolina don’t trust each other because they are entrenched in uncompromising ideological factions … factions who couldn’t care less that a crisis offers the best opportunity to make political gains if those gains have to be paid for with compromise and collaboration … factions with a history of opting to be on the right side of issues rather than on the winning side of campaigns.
Back in the day, the Democrats were disorganized and politically incapacitated in much the same way as Republicans today. The faces of the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s were the left wing extremists … extremists who frightened Middle America much like right wingers do now. But then a group was formed by those around the country who were tired of losing campaigns … called the Democratic Leadership Council.
The Democratic Leadership Council argued that the party should shift from the radical left agenda and work to synthesize those views with the best from all political camps, including the political right. Under Democrats like U.S. President Bill Clinton and N.C. Governor Jim Hunt, conservative issues like welfare reform, getting tough on crime, and building more prisons were advocated with ardent political fervor.
Both parties did well in the 1990s, in great part because the country didn’t trust either party with all of the power. That’s what I see coming in 2010 … divided power. However, if history repeats itself in 2010, North Carolina Republicans will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of an opportunity crisis because they won’t work together.
There is another way for the GOP in the Ole North State … a way that synthesizes the best ideas from all Republicans; a way that provides a means for shared responsibilities among the leaders from all Republican camps.
There is another way … a way that reluctant financial backers, burned too many times by losing political investments, take even greater risks earlier on in the cycle; a way that accepts the reality that you can’t influence legislation if you don’t influence campaigns, and that hiring the best political advisors and recruiting the best possible candidates is the only way to have a reliable positive influence on the outcome of a campaign.
What is the other way? Collaborate.