Electoral Math
Reality-Based^TM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot

More Cops in the Emerald City? | Home | A Brief List of Things That Will Not Happen

Expanding the Map

Currently, Democrats are on track to gain at least 3 seats in the Senate, and 12 or 13 in the House, with most forecasters predicting gains of 20-25 seats in the House; enough for control of the Speaker's gavel, but still needing the votes of most Blue Dog Democrats to get anything done. I've got nothing against the Blue Dogs, but this means that any sort of deficit reduction in expansion of health care beyond obvious fixes to the Medicare prescription drug benefit will be difficult if not impossible to pass. So, there is strong incentive for Democrats to aim for a more solid majority by gaining 30+ seats.

Charlie Cook argues (and netroots folks like Jonathan Singer agree) that Dems should put $500,000 apiece towards an additional 20 races beyond their current targeted 30 seats. Good advice; at this point, spending another $500,000 on direct mail or TV advertising in saturated media markets won't make much of a difference, but inspiring people to vote for Scott Kleeb or Larry Grant in areas where voters haven't been exposed to huge amounts of advertising will have a much larger impact.

I think the GOP's spending in districts like Indiana 3 was really an attempt to goad Democrats into expanding the field too thin. Expanding the contest to 50 races means that .Dems will only need to win half the seats that they challenge (the GOP has conceded around 10 seats already). It was a win-win spending for Republicans; if Democrats spread themselves too thin, they might win with only a small margin; if they don't take the bait, then a little bit early spending helped solidify the Republican district before the final stretch.

| | technorati

Home | Mail  | RSS

Last updated by Nicholas Beaudrot on 07:17 27 October 2006