Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Cable Television News Election Forecasts

Bookmark and Share

To whom are you turning to get your Election 2006 news? On cable television, the horserace coverage that dominated the summer season (e.g. the U.S. Senate races in Virginia and Connecticut) has, in recent weeks, been replaced by more generalized, sweeping coverage in which many hosts and pundits are making big-picture forecasts as to which political party will control Congress in January 2007.

Always entertaining, the tone of MSNBC's Chris Matthews' ("Hardball") coverage clearly anticipates a wholesale takeover of the Hill by the Democratic Party come November. Matthews frequently documents how the big errors made by Republicans during the past year (e.g. Jack Abramoff, Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley) are turning the tide towards the Democrats, while not spending much air time on corruption or ineptitude on the democratic side (e.g. William Jefferson). Matthews' fellow "Hardballer" guests (e.g. Howard Fineman, Chuck Todd) are not partisan hacks by any stretch, but do follow Matthews' lead in the tone of their analysis. Last night Matthews even went so far as to suggest the Arizona Senate seat (held by Republican Jon Kyl) may be in play (a seat viewed by the New York Times, Cook Political Report, and Roll call as "Safe Republican").

On Fox News, long-time political observers Mort Kondracke and Fred Barnes (also co-hosts of "The Beltway Boys") also both now officially predict a Democratic takeover of the US House—with Kondracke expecting a bigger victory than the more conservative Barnes. Unlike Matthews, both analysts frequently point out the difficulty in Democrats winning the Senate.

However, Fox's cable television news king Bill O'Reilly ("The O'Reilly Factor") has largely avoided political analysis of the US House and Senate races, bringing Newt Gingrich or Dick Morris on his program perhaps once a week to discuss the elections. O'Reilly, frequently reminding his viewers he is not a conservative or a republican but a "traditionalist," may be silent because he has not yet figured out how discussing a potential Democratic takeover fits into his program's tone (or with the message of his brand new book "Culture Warrior" in which he paints a war of traditionalists against 'secular progressives' - those who reside in the far left wing of the Democratic Party).

On CNN, it is unlikely Larry King will spend much time addressing politics (scandals aside) until a few days before the election, while Anderson Cooper's 360 program has split its time with his travels to Africa and the John Mark Carr tabloid developments. Wolf Blitzer's coverage of D.C. is extensive, but nearly always straight—you won't hear any predictions from him.

So, who do you trust on cable television to provide the best Election 2006 analysis this autumn?

Previous post: MN-02: Rowley Closes Gap
Next post: Religion and Minnesota Politics

2 Comments


  • Clearly, the best political coverage on television comes from PBS's Jim Lehrer. His program, The News Hour, is steadfastly the most balanced in its coverage, including both liberal and conservative views. He'll probably have David Brooks (The New York Times) giving the conservative view and syndicated columnist Mark Shields, who presents a liberal view. Both always give very insightful analyses. Both Brooks and Shields (not to be confused with Brooke Shields ... :-)) have been predicting a Democratic swing in the coming election. The News Hour with Jim Lehrer is the only program I know that will sit down to discuss a single topic for a full 10 minutes and that presents multiple viewpoints. I vote for Jim Lehrer.

  • look for the GOP to push hard on the fear factor in the next election cycle. they are counting on "BURKAPHOBIA" to swing the female vote their way.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Which States Have the Longest and Shortest Election Day Voting Hours?

    Residents in some North Dakota towns have less than half as many hours to cast their ballots as those in New York State.

    Political Crumbs

    No 100-Year Curse for Roberts

    Defeating his Tea Party primary challenger Milton Wolf with just 48.1 percent of the vote, Pat Roberts narrowly escaped becoming the first elected U.S. Senator from Kansas to lose a renomination bid in 100 years. The last - and so far only - elected U.S. Senator to lose a Kansas primary was one-term Republican Joseph Bristow in 1914. Bristow was defeated by former U.S. Senator Charles Curtis who went on to win three terms before becoming Herbert Hoover's running mate in 1928. Only one other U.S. Senator from the Sunflower State has lost a primary since the passage of the 17th Amendment: Sheila Frahm in 1996. Frahm was appointed to fill Bob Dole's seat earlier that year and finished 13.2 points behind Sam Brownback in the three-candidate primary field. Overall, incumbent senators from Kansas have won 29 times against two defeats in the direct vote era. (Curtis also lost a primary in 1912 to Walter Stubbs, one year before the nation moved to direct elections).


    The Second Time Around

    Former Republican Congressman Bob Beauprez became the seventh major party or second place gubernatorial candidate in Colorado to get a second chance at the office when he narrowly won his party's nomination last month. Two of the previous six candidates were successful. Democrat Alva Adams lost his first gubernatorial bid to Benjamin Eaton in 1884, but was victorious two years later against William Meyer. Democrat Charles Johnson placed third in 1894 behind Republican Albert McIntyre and Populist incumbent Governor David Waite but returned as the Fusion (Democrat/Populist) nominee in 1898 and defeated GOPer Henry Wolcott. Gubernatorial candidates who received a second chance but lost both general elections include Democrat Thomas Patterson (1888, 1914), Progressive Edward Costigan (1912, 1914), Republican Donald Brotzman (1954, 1956), and Republican David Strickland (1978, 1986).


    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