Swing State Project has an excellent feature where they track independent expenditures in the Congressional races on a week-by-week basis. Independent expenditures are mainly outlays from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), but it also includes money from Political Action Committees (PACs) like the National Association of Realtors (NARPAC), the National Rifle Association (NRA), etc. Here’s something to chew on:
In the last week, Democratic congressional candidates have received $1,569,476 in independent expenditures, while Republican candidates have received $358,363. Over the course of the year, the disparity is even more shocking: Democrats $19,521,99, Republicans $7,073,119.
Everywhere you look, from Alabama to Kentucky to Idaho to Alaska, the Republicans are being outspent by huge margins. This is a total turn around from prior election seasons, where Republicans have consistently relied upon a huge cash advantage to win the media war and sell unpopular ideas to their constituents. Not this year. And that is why I don’t put a whole lot of stock in early polling of congressional races. Republicans usually do an excellent job of closing…meaning that they outperform the polls or close polling gaps in the last weeks of a campaign. Another term for this (aside from fraud and suppression) is ‘cash advantage’. Not this year.
Even without the sharp downturn in the global economy, the Democrats were set up through their own cash advantage, strong recruiting, massive voter registration efforts, and greater party identification and enthusiasm, to outperform the polls. If you add to this the disparity in open seats to defend, the strength of Obama at the top of the ticket (he will do much better than Kerry in many of the states he ultimately loses), and the global economic meltdown, the opportunities for congressional pickups can reach as high as seventy seats and include some marginal recruits and some underfunded candidates.
I didn’t predict the economic collapse, but I did predict everything else. I also predicted that, in the end, this election would tilt decisively one way or the other, and not end up as a narrowly decided red state/blue state split. All of my predictions along these lines are beginning to look more and more accurate. Didn’t I say, in May, that that the Democrats would wind up with 61 senate seats sans Lieberman? As of yesterday, Nate Silver has the Democrats picking up seven seats (for a total of 57, sans Lieberman) with 3-7 more seats in play. If Franken, Musgrove, and Martin win, we’re at sixty. If Lunsford wins, we’re at sixty-one. Keep an eye on Kleeb, Rice, Noriega, LaRocco, Tuke, Slattery, and even Conley. Don’t be surprised if one or two of them begin to close the polling margins with abandon. It’ll take a perfect storm, but beating 61 is not out of the question.
With such movement in the Senate, House, and presidential races, it does, indeed, look like we’re headed for my long predicted realignment. The questions are, can we keep up the momentum, and how will such a realignment change the political culture of our country?
