Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Jim Doyle's Biggest Threat: The Greens or Mark Green?

Bookmark and Share

Despite voting democratic in the past five presidential elections and 13 of the past 15 U.S. Senate elections, Wisconsin is far from a safe 'blue' state for democratic candidates for governor—especially incumbent Jim Doyle. Democrats have not fared well in gubernatorial elections in the Badger state in recent years, garnering more than 46% of the vote only once in the seven such elections since 1978.

Doyle himself only narrowly won the state's open seat in 2002, beating Republican Scott McCallum by 3.7 points thanks in large part to the strong showing by Libertarian candidate Ed (brother of former governor Tommy) Thompson—who won 10.5% of the vote. Having a second, legitimate right of center candidate on the ballot in that election splintered the conservative vote, allowing Doyle to eke out a plurality vote victory.

This time around, however, the shoe is on the other foot. There is only one third party candidate on the ballot, and this time it comes from Doyle's left: Wisconsin Green Party candidate Nelson Eisman. If the race between Doyle and GOP challenger Mark Green is close (and it is—Doyle has failed to garner a level of support of 50% in any of 12 polls conducted by six pollsters since November 2005), Doyle will need to win over a majority of independent voters as well as protect his left-wing base.

If Eisman's candidacy gains any traction Doyle may be forced to continuously carve out his stance on hot-button referenda issues like bringing back the death penalty to Wisconsin and defining marriage. If Doyle doesn't back these referenda he risks losing votes from the public on issues that enjoy majority-status support. If he does back the amendments, his more liberal supporters might flock in greater number to Eisman.

In a race projected to be as close as the Doyle-Green matchup, a pull to the left on Doyle's candidacy by the Eisman campaign could signal big trouble for the sitting governor.

Previous post: Battle for the Statehouse: Minnesota's State Senate Races
Next post: Immigration: The Invisible Issue in the MN US Senate Race?

1 Comment


  • Listening to the We The People Governor's debate between Gov. Doyle and Rep. Green, Doyle comes off more articulate and Green less effective. I think one reason for this is that Green comes from Bush's Washington and therefore his constant talk of cutting taxes, and "bureacracy" and "leadership" sounds fishy - our nation's capital is perceived as a place of dishonesty corruption and incompetence, and the Democrats will probably win a lot of seats in these mid-term election because of that perception by many on all sides - including many Republicans.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting