The Note: Reasoning Adroitly and Speciously . . .

B. Read the fine print on the national and state polls carefully. Who is being surveyed? Registered voters? Likely voters? Who does the pollster think a "likely voter" is? Will more Democrats or Republicans turn out to vote? Ask yourself: who is more likely to turn out: a committed conservative (who hates abortion, loves guns, and thinks Nancy Pelosi is an advanced scout for Hillary Clinton) or an independent who doesn't like the war in Iraq? (Michael Barone, thinking along these lines, crunches the numbers and suggests a bare Democratic majority is coming in the House -- but perhaps not one that will be clear on election night, or one that will necessarily produce a Speaker Pelosi. LINK

C. Read Jackie Calmes' Wall Street Journal story for a portrait of faithful Lori Viars and Jim Winters, Ohio Republican activists who do not want to let George W. Bush down. (and read it for a closing paragraph that will rally the anti-Old Media GOP base even more.) LINK

D. Dan Bartlett's clever stagecraft is creating impressions through devices such as this Wall Street Journal lede: "With few military options left to counter the violence across Iraq, top U.S. officials are shifting more of the onus onto Baghdad's beleagured political leaders to broker compromises they hope might stem the rising bloodshed." Not the "American troops heading home by the thousands" that Republican candidates had hoped and assumed they would see before Election Day, but better politically than the status quo.

E. As the Wall Street Journal hints this morning, the next two weeks are going to see major corporate spending by the pharmaceutical industry and other interests who have a Roveian sense of the stakes involved. Spending tens of millions of dollars now can potentially save these companies hundreds of millions -- maybe billions -- down the road.

F. As the Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times polls in key Senate races suggest, Republicans continue to have some white male/religious conservatives/rural mojo.

G. In the space of one Dana Milbank column, Charlie Cook goes from saying he would be "surprised" if Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) can "survive," to BlackBerrying that "Montana is closing more than thought . . . Burns might not be dead yet."

H. The Washington Post makes clear today that polls suggest -- counter to the CW -- that Democrats are in fact not necessarily more energized than Republicans.

"In the most recent poll, 29 percent of self-identified conservatives said they plan to vote for Democrats for the House, compared with 17 percent in 2004. Among white evangelical Protestants, 30 percent favor Democrats, compared with 25 percent two years ago. At the same time, Republicans report being as enthusiastic as Democrats about voting this year, belying the assumption that they might stay home."

And then there is what could happen in New Jersey today. If the state Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage, it might not dominate the network news and big papers for the next two weeks, but it will become a key part of the targeting message operation of the RNC and its allies in nearly every competitive race in the country. Even Blue states and districts have plenty of anti-gay-marriage voters.

The decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court is expected to be issued at 3:00 pm ET today. The decision is expected to be the last of Chief Justice Deborah T. Poritz's 10-year career, she is stepping down due to an age limit.

Page
Join the Discussion
You are using an outdated version of Internet Explorer. Please click here to upgrade your browser in order to comment.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
You Might Also Like...