Hey GOP: Don't Start Celebrating

By Alexander Chester

A Republican governor sweeps to power in Louisiana and a Democrat with name recognition struggles to win a Congressional election in Massachusetts. What happened to that Democratic shift from 2006? Is this a trend that should have the party worrying as we approach 2008?

Let's start with Louisiana, where Republicans try to blame Katrina on local officials, which included a Democratic mayor and governor, while Democrats try to nationalize the blame game, pinning it on the Bush administration. I don't think the fundamental consequence of Katrina is which party is to be blamed, but a more basic one: Thousands of Louisianans have yet to return to their homes. Most of these people are African-Americans and Democrats. The most significant political consequence of Katrina in Louisiana is that it will further shift the party to the GOP because it has flushed out many Democratic voters.

A state that went for Clinton in 1996 (52-40) and then for Bush in successive elections by increasing margins (2000: 53-45, 2004: 57-42) is not going to be in play in 2008 regardless of who the parties nominate. I think Katrina makes this more assured, but I don't think it has a large effect. The reality is that racial dividing lines have made the Deep South more monolithic over the last two decades, and that won't abate. This is also an argument against John Edwards in the primary campaign, because I don't think he'll have any better luck flipping the Deep South than Obama or Hillary (neither of whom have any shot at doing so whatsoever).

Where Democrats have a real shot in 2008 is on the border states, such as Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, and (maybe even) Oklahoma. Obviously this depends on who the candidates are. (And who the veep choices are; I think Mark Warner will bring Virginia, while Jim Webb -- a long shot VP nod for Obama -- could also help swing that state.) I don't see any significance in the recent Louisiana vote that should have any effect on any of this.

In Massachusetts, on the other hand, a lot of people are pointing towards the issue of illegal immigration as one that still holds sway among voters who might lean GOP. But I think there is at least an equal if not greater counterbalance of Hispanic voters who would vote for Democrats because of the issue, especially in swing states like Florida, Michigan, and New Mexico. My hunch -- and I haven't really done any research to bear this out -- is that in special elections the challenger is going to be more highly motivated, and so even though Tsongas outspent Ogonowski four to one, Ogonowski's campaign was probably more fired up. Also, this isn't exactly the bluest of Massachusetts' districts. Mitt Romney carried it outright and Deval Patrick eked by with just 51% of the fightin' fifth.

The GOP tried to make illegal immigration a huge issue nationwide in 2006, and they still lost in a landslide. I'm not too worried by the results of the Massachusetts election. If the GOP is going to win in 2008 -- and I don't think this is nearly as unlikely as many others do -- it's not because they can take solace in some kind of trends emerging from the recent elections in Louisiana and Massachusetts.

Posted by Jon Berkon on October 31, 2007 10:06 AM | Permalink