Tag Archives: Mitt Romney

The Importance of Ohio

Ohio Congressional Districts

Since the 2000 presidential election, the state of Ohio has been front and center in determining the national political outcome. Despite having a Republican electoral history, the state voted twice for Bill Clinton before returning to support George W. Bush in both of his campaigns. In 2008, Ohio went 51-47 percent for candidate Barack Obama. Now four years later, it again becomes the quintessential political battleground. If Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney is to unseat President Obama, his path must travel through the Buckeye State.

Along with the presidential contest, Republicans are hoping to make the Ohio Senate race highly competitive and appear to be doing so. State Treasurer Josh Mandel (R), who has already raised over $10 million for the statewide campaign, is challenging first term incumbent Sen. Sherrod Brown (D). This race will be determined along the same lines as the presidential contest and it is plausible that the party winning at the top of the ticket will also sweep in its Senatorial candidate. House races are critically important here, too, with as many as four contests in play for the general election.

The economy will be the determining factor here, as poor financial conditions during the last decade is one reason Ohio’s population growth rate was so anemic during the last census period. The state increased its number of residents only 1.6 percent during that time, which caused it to lose two congressional districts. Along with New York, this is the most in the nation. The US population grew at a 9.7 percent clip during the commensurate period.

The Obama campaign hopes to capture the senior vote with its depiction of the Republican budget proposals as being bad for the elderly. Conversely, the GOP will attempt to coalesce small business owners around the President’s statement saying that individual entrepreneurs didn’t build their own enterprises. Obama will, as he did in 2008, build a coalition of minority voters and single women. Romney will attempt to convince regular church goers to support him en masse.

Assuming that each is successful with their strategic objectives and the aforementioned voter segments break down about evenly in Ohio, another issue could become a wild card – at least that’s what the Romney campaign hopes, as evidenced during the visit to the state last week.

It is the coal issue that could possibly become determinative in Ohio. Perhaps Mr. Obama’s biggest mistake of his presidency was pushing the Cap & Trade measure as his first major legislative initiative. His party suffered greatly at the 2010 ballot box in coal country, and Cap & Trade was a big reason for the Democrats’ poor performance.

When veteran Democratic congressmen Alan Mollohan (WV-1) and Rick Boucher (VA-9) supported the legislation, they were summarily removed from office and clearly because of their energy positions. Things got so bad for Mid-Atlantic Democrats that now-Sen. Joe Manchin actually resulted to taking a gun and shooting a copy of the Cap & Trade bill in one of his campaign ads. The question is, will this voter vitriol continue at the same fever pitch in 2012?

It may in Ohio. With eight public polls being conducted in the state since July 1, most falling within a 3.2 point range between the two candidates (the two extremes gave Obama an eight-point advantage; the other had Romney up two), it is probable that the end result will come down to just a handful of votes.

This is why the Romney campaign is turning their attention to coal, as illustrated by the candidate’s visit to an Ohio coal mine last week. Coal is responsible for generating 82 percent of Ohio’s electrical power and, despite being the seventh-largest state in America, the Buckeye’s rank fourth in coal usage and 10th in production.

It is clear Ohio voters will be hearing a great deal about energy issues throughout the remaining campaign weeks and a lot about each presidential candidate’s position on the various means of energy production. Because coal is such an integral part of the lives and economic well-being of Ohioans, Romney may have found an issue that creates a definitive contrast with Obama where the president has little maneuvering ability. Will this make the difference in Ohio? Time will soon tell.

With Ryan, the Battle Lines are Drawn

Rep. Paul Ryan

Mitt Romney’s selection of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI-1) as his vice-presidential nominee has drawn clear battle lines for the remainder of the presidential election campaign. With Ryan being best known for the “Ryan Budget” that passed the House last year and his attempts to restructure the federal budget platform, including entitlement programs, both sides will now focus on the country’s long-term economic direction and try to accuse the other of “destroying Medicare.” President Obama and the Democrats will continue their claim that the Ryan Budget ends Medicare “as we know it.” Republicans will counter that Obama and his congressional allies, by introducing and passing the Affordable Healthcare Act, voted to cut over $500 billion in the Medicare program. One thing is now certain: the voters will have a clear ideological choice to make in November.

Questions have arisen as to what now happens to Ryan’s congressional seat, since he is on the ballot today for renomination. Since Wisconsin law is silent on the subject of running nationally and simultaneously for Congress, and because there is no mechanism for removing a person from the Badger State ballot once they are nominated, Ryan’s name will appear for both the vice presidency and the 1st Congressional District. Should he win both elections, then the 1st CD would go to special election in early 2013 upon the congressman’s official resignation from the House.

Can a Weak McCaskill Hold Onto Missouri?

The Missouri Senate race is shaping up to be one of the most interesting in the country. With the Senate majority hanging in the balance, all of the closest election competitors in the 14 states where campaign action is most furious can legitimately lay claim to the argument that their own campaign can determine which party controls the body in the next Congress. The Show Me State of Missouri is certainly in this category, as first-term incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill, who may be the weakest of all Democrat candidates standing for re-election, fights for her political life.

Earlier this week, Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO-2) surprised many political pundits by defeating wealthy businessman John Brunner and former state treasurer Sarah Steelman 36-30-29 percent, to capture the Republican Senatorial nomination. Akin rode a strong wave at the end of the campaign, peaking at exactly the right time. After trailing for most of the race, he finished a step ahead of both Brunner and Steelman as the trio almost simultaneously crossed the political finish line.

Interestingly, Akin had help from an unlikely source. McCaskill and her Democratic allies pejoratively repeated their belief that Akin is the most conservative candidate in the Republican field, ironically a message that the congressman himself was also trying to sell to the GOP electorate. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) actually advertised in the Republican primary to that effect, saying Akin is too conservative for the state. It is clear the Democratic leadership and activist organizations, along with McCaskill herself, believe Akin to be the weakest candidate in the Republican field and desire him as their general election opponent. It remains to be seen if their analysis proves correct.

For several decades, Missouri was known as a political bellwether. Now, however, the state seems to be trending more Republican. After 14 statewide races between 2000 and 2008 that were decided by less than two percentage points, with each party winning seven times, John McCain’s razor-thin 2008 victory here and then-Rep. Roy Blunt’s big win in the 2010 Senate contest could be a Missouri realignment harbinger. In fact, in voting for McCain, the state failed to support the winning presidential candidate for only the second time since 1900.

With this backdrop, we enter the 2012 general election campaign. Since Team Obama does not have Missouri high on its target list, there may be less of a presidential presence here than in previous years. The state is a must-win for Republican Mitt Romney, so expect him to be more active here than President Obama. Outside groups are expected to play a major role, as a highly competitive Senate race in what is perceived to be a toss-up campaign will precipitate a great deal of action from many issue perspectives.

But it may be Akin who becomes the beneficiary of the greater outside group spending. McCaskill, who wrapped herself around candidate Barack Obama in 2008 appears to be running away from him in 2012, going so far as to say she won’t even attend the Democratic National Convention. While voting for all of the early Obama initiatives and now trying to create distance between herself and the party’s liberal wing, leftward activist groups may find other places to expend advocacy dollars.

Small business groups, church organizations steamed at the Obama Administration for the health care law that forces them into expenditures that conflict with many of their religious tenets, and the coal industry could become major players in this race, all on Akin’s behalf.

For example, the National Mining Association, through its Count on Coal program, is expected to be highly active in Missouri educating the constituency on the mineral’s importance to daily life. The state ranks sixth nationally in coal usage, as 81 percent of its electrical power is generated from the substance. Count on Coal is taking it to the Obama Administration for what the NMA believes are its destructive energy policies. Regardless of whether they actively enter the Senate race, McCaskill is likely to be put on the defensive and absorb political damage from the coal program’s aggressive contrast effort toward the Obama Administration.

Sen. McCaskill has been polling poorly against all general election configurations. Now that she has Rep. Akin as her November opponent, expect a hard-hitting campaign from both sides. The race is a toss-up, and has to be considered a must-win for the Republicans. It is clearly one of the most important Senate races of the year.

Colorado Crazy


A trio of national pollsters just descended upon the swing state of Colorado and produced wildly divergent presidential campaign results. During the period of July 31 – Aug. 6, three national survey research firms each conducted a separate study of likely Colorado general election voters.

Quinnipiac University (July 31 – Aug. 6) surveyed a sample cell of 1,463 likely voters and actually found Republican Mitt Romney to be leading President Obama 50-45 percent. Public Policy Polling (Aug. 2-5; 779 likely Colorado voters), also in the field during the same period, found the exact opposite result: Obama ahead 49-43 percent. Finally, on Aug. 6, Rasmussen Reports conducted a one-day survey of 500 likely Colorado voters and projected the two candidates to be tied at 47 percent apiece.

The differing results tell us several things. First, the fact that we see the President leading by six in one poll, trailing by five in another, and tied in a third likely tells us that the Colorado electorate is split very finely between the two men. Second, all three polls reveal a very high degree of commitment. Those not expressing a defined choice were only in single-digit percentiles for all three polls. Third, the data also suggests that this state, which typically splits its votes rather evenly between candidates of the two parties, is clearly in play for both presidential contenders. In 2008, then-Sen. Barack Obama carried Colorado over his colleague John McCain by a 54-45 percent margin but, today, it appears the 2012 result will be much closer.

Mass. Senate Race Still Up for Grabs

Brown | Warren

The widely watched Massachusetts U.S. Senate race continues to be one of the country’s top campaigns and, as polling released this past week reveals, the contest remains too close to call. It has grown ever tighter over the past four months.

Democratic hopeful Elizabeth Warren is challenging incumbent and first-term Sen. Scott Brown. The Commonwealth, normally considered bedrock blue in a political context, chose Brown in early 2010 during a hard-fought special election campaign after veteran Sen. Ted Kennedy (D) passed away. Brown became a national name after becoming the first elected Republican senator in Massachusetts since 1972.

According to a poll released this past Tuesday from the MassINC research group for WBUR, the Boston National Public Radio station, Warren was shown to be leading with 40 percent support, while Brown registered 38 percent. The study, taken during the July 19-22 period, had a sample size of 503 registered voters. While the survey projects Warren to a two-point advantage, the margin of error factor is 4.4 percent; therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the race remains a dead heat. In June, Public Policy Polling also released a survey putting the two in a virtual tie, with Sen. Brown running well among Independents.

Voters in Massachusetts appear to be warming to both Warren and Brown. This week’s poll reveals that Warren’s favorability rating stands at 47 percent, which is a 13-point jump from the last MassINC poll conducted in April. Brown’s positive index increased, too, reaching 50 percent, which is up from 46 percent as measured three months ago.

One category to watch here is the undecided vote. Historically in Massachusetts, the undecideds tend to move back toward their party’s incumbent as the election draws near. Should the undecided Democrats return to support Barack Obama over Mitt Romney in November, Warren could also benefit. If this current undecided model projection is correct, it will be Warren who has the greater room to grow, mostly because there are so many more Massachusetts Democrats than Republicans.

Sen. Brown is formerly a member of the Massachusetts State House of Representatives (1998-2004), and then the state Senate (2004-2010). He is also a practicing attorney and considered to be a moderate Republican, voting with his party approximately 80 percent of the time. Warren, a Harvard Law School professor, is considered to be an American bankruptcy law expert who provided oversight to the 2008 bailout program and oversaw the establishment of the Consumer Protection Financial Bureau.

Both candidates bring unique qualities to the race and, as polling has consistently indicated over a period of months, this battle appears to be too close to call. It is certainly a race to watch over the next 102 days.