Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Upper Midwest US House Races Tighten in GOP Held Districts...But Is a Revolution Afoot?

Bookmark and Share

A recent spate of polls tracking US House races in the Upper Midwest reflect what is perceived by most political analysts to be a nation-wide trend: GOP-held districts that were secure in 2004 now seem to be competitive or near competitive.

The GOP leads the current Upper Midwest US House delegation by a 12-10 margin, breaking down thusly:

IA: GOP 4, DEM 1
MN: GOP 4, DFL 4
SD: GOP 0, DEM 1
WI: GOP 4, DEM 4

No publicly released poll to date has shown a single democrat-held seat to be in jeopardy of the 10 on the ballot in the Upper Midwest. However, polls have shown at least 4 of the 12 GOP districts to be in a dead heat:

IA-2: David Loebsack (D) 46% Jim Leach (15 term GOP incumbent) 44%
MN-1: Gil Gutknecht (6 term GOP incumbent) 47% Tim Walz (DFL) 43%
MN-6 (open): Patty Wetterling (DFL) 47% Michele Bachmann (R) 43%
WI-8 (open): Steve Kagen (D) 46% John Gard (R) 43%

(Note: The polls listed above were conducted by Constituent Dynamics. This firm does not have a long track record of polling US House races, but it is run by two well-known and credible pollsters (one a Republican and one a Democrat). The firm uses automated polling to conduct its surveys. )

Iowa's (open) 1st US District race was expected to be the Democrat's best shot at a pick-up, but an early October Reuters/Zogby poll showed Republican Mike Whalen opening up a 47-34 lead over Bruce Braley in a survey of likely voters.

As a result of all this polling, many analysts are now starting to mention 2006 in the same breath as 1994 (the year the Republicans picked up a startling net 54 seats from the democrats in the US House).

However, while there are some similaities to that election year (e.g. low approval ratings for a president of the same party as the party in control of the House), such talk is premature. First, this buzz is partially occurring in a self-generating environment (the Internet) whose landscape was infinitely smaller 12 years ago when Republicans shocked the country. In truth, Internet buzz often falls short of real-world action (e.g. the disappointing box office take of the much-hyped horror film Snakes On A Plane).

Secondly, analysts do not want to be caught with their pants down for a second time, so they are perhaps mentioning similarities to the Republican Revolution so as to not look so foolish in November IF the Democrats stage their own (successful) revolution.

Thirdly, due to redistricting, the odds of democratic pick-ups numbering 4 or 5 dozen are much lower than in 1994. Today Democrats are fighting for seats in foreign territories—red districts that voted for President George W. Bush in 2004. In 1994 several Republican pick-ups were in districts already won by Republican George H.W. Bush in his 1992 re-election campaign.

Beware the revolution? Perhaps. But also beware those exclaiming, "Beware the revolution."

Previous post: Split Ticket Voting Revisited
Next post: MN-02: Rowley Closes Gap

2 Comments


  • The MN-01 figures are off--it's Gutknecht 48%--Walz 47%, within the MOE.

  • > The MN-01 figures are off--it's Gutknecht 48%--Walz 47%, within the MOE.

    Actually, the numbers posted at Smart Politics are correct: Gutknecht 47%, Walz 43%. I've looked at the poll details for Constituent Dynamics, and the 48-47 numbers to which you refer include "leaners" after pressing respondents who originally reply "undecided" or "other." Those leaners are very unreliable, and we therefore normally only analyze the original vote preference or respondents. But, yes, bottom line, the race is quite close either way.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    No Free Passes: States With 2 Major Party Candidates in Every US House Race

    Indiana has now placed candidates from both major parties on the ballot in a nation-best 189 consecutive U.S. House races, with New Hampshire, Minnesota, Idaho, and Montana also north of 100 in a row.

    Political Crumbs

    Gubernatorial Highs and Lows

    Two sitting governors currently hold the record for the highest gubernatorial vote ever received in their respective states by a non-incumbent: Republican Matt Mead of Wyoming (65.7 percent in 2010) and outgoing GOPer Dave Heineman of Nebraska (73.4 percent in 2006). Republican Gary Herbert of Utah had not previously won a gubernatorial contest when he notched a state record 64.1 percent for his first victory in 2010, but was an incumbent at the time after ascending to the position in 2009 after the early departure of Jon Huntsman. Meanwhile, two sitting governors hold the record in their states for the lowest mark ever recorded by a winning gubernatorial candidate (incumbent or otherwise): independent-turned-Democrat Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island (36.1 percent in 2010) and Democrat Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (47.8 percent in 2013).


    An Idaho Six Pack

    Two-term Idaho Republican Governor Butch Otter only polled at 39 percent in a recent PPP survey of the state's 2014 race - just four points ahead of Democratic businessman A.J. Balukoff. Otter's low numbers reflect his own struggles as a candidate (witness his weak primary win against State Senator Russ Fulcher) combined with the opportunity for disgruntled Idahoans to cast their votes for one of four third party and independent candidates, who collectively received the support of 12 percent of likely voters: Libertarian John Bujak, the Constitution Party's Steve Pankey, and independents Jill Humble and Pro-Life (aka Marvin Richardson). The six candidate options in a gubernatorial race sets an all-time record in the Gem State across the 46 elections conducted since statehood. The previous high water mark of five candidates was reached in seven previous cycles: 1902, 1904, 1908, 1912, 1914, 1966, and 2010.


    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