MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Monday, April 21, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 55.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

Tommy vs Tammy

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby pjbogart » Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:11 pm

gozer wrote:looking at the county, local, and precinct-level maps in this race, i am wondering if sen-elect baldwin did more advertising, or maybe all of it for that race, in the duluth media market. am i correct in this hypothesis?


If your hypothesis is based upon the oddly blue counties on Lake Superior, then you're not correct. They're always blue. I'm not sure why that is... perhaps the Duluth media market has something to do with it, but it might be an area where environmentalism is also a matter of survival.

As to Russ's loss in 2010, I think it's probably a combination of things that people mentioned, but mostly it was just timing. Democrats are shitty at off-year elections, though 2006 was surprisingly good to them, and 2010 had a lot of Teaper energy that swept Feingold out along with a lot of other good public servants. I hope Democrats are wary of 2014 as a potential bloodbath again. African Americans in particular need to realize that the President can't get much done if he doesn't have a supporting cast.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6020
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Igor » Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:25 pm

- The presidential race drew big turnout.
- Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money.
- Thompson looked really old, even in his own ads.

Her next election will probably depend on:

- Her ability to get the vote out in a non-presidential year.
- How many votes she makes in the intervening years that would show her as out of step with a purple state.
- Who the Republicans nominate.

"Firsts" aside, she is not going to be Russ Feingold. I would bet on a boring Herb Kohl-type profile, except that there will be no question about how she will vote on any issue.
Igor
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1549
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:48 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Mad Howler » Wed Nov 07, 2012 11:56 pm

Igor wrote:- Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money.


When you say "Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money" did you mean she had nearly enough to reach parity rather than being outspent 6 to one? I have heard comments like yours thrown around, but I haven't been able to find a solid breakdown regarding the financing of this race. Given the pile of crap that hit my ears and arrived in my mailbox I suspect Tommy got the support he "needed". In the end I suspect the accounting will be tough given structural impediments. Do you have any data?
MH
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Igor » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:36 am

Mad Howler wrote:
Igor wrote:- Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money.


When you say "Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money" did you mean she had nearly enough to reach parity rather than being outspent 6 to one? I have heard comments like yours thrown around, but I haven't been able to find a solid breakdown regarding the financing of this race. Given the pile of crap that hit my ears and arrived in my mailbox I suspect Tommy got the support he "needed". In the end I suspect the accounting will be tough given structural impediments. Do you have any data?
MH


http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespend ... php?disp=R

Maybe 12% more, though the fact that she did not have a primary probably makes it more like 18 or 20. She did seem to have the money earlier, since it seems she was on TV before anyone.
Igor
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1549
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:48 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Mad Howler » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:06 am

Thanks
Mad Howler
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:36 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby fisticuffs » Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:57 am

- Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money.


and if we learned anything in the past two elections it's that having more money doesn't get you into office.
fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7738
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby snoqueen » Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:05 am

If your hypothesis is based upon the oddly blue counties on Lake Superior, then you're not correct. They're always blue. I'm not sure why that is... perhaps the Duluth media market has something to do with it, but it might be an area where environmentalism is also a matter of survival.


That area has been progressive since white settlement. It was settled by Finns and Scandinavians who came from societies with the same tradition, and it's the home to much of the historical cooperative movement in Wisconsin. I think the environmental concerns are a product not a cause, but they're great.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10946
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:24 am

fisticuffs wrote:
- Baldwin had a virtually unlimited supply of money.

and if we learned anything in the past two elections it's that having more money doesn't get you into office.

Here is the Cap Times take on that: Koch Brothers lose, but big money campaigns win in Wisconsin
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19159
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Huckleby » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:01 am

Stu Levitan wrote:Because he ran during the Tea Party Wave of '10 and she ran with Obama in '12. Dem candidate against RoJo in '16 had better hope Hillary is the nominee.


It appears a pattern has set in. REpublicans are just more dedicated voters than Democrats, and they dominate local elections and midterm elections. The Dems have cracked the code of the electoral college, they can bring out the numbers in the huge publicity and fury of presidential years. The Republicans may hold onto the House of Representatives for many years, and Dems could be favored for presidency in 2016 and beyond.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5459
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby rabble » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:03 am

I think you underestimate the Republican talent for gerrymandering.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Huckleby » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:07 am

fisticuffs wrote:and if we learned anything in the past two elections it's that having more money doesn't get you into office.


There are diminishing returns, but having enough money is essential, and negative advertising works best when there is some substance behind your smears.

Mitt Romney cleaned-out the opposition in the primaries with massive advantages of negative advertising, and he certainly had fat targets.

Obama would not have won the election if he did not have a lot money to damage Romney's image last spring and summer. The Obama superpacs were able to attack Romney during the late primaries, and his Republican competitors picked-up on the themes. Nice.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5459
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Huckleby » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:11 am

rabble wrote:I think you underestimate the Republican talent for gerrymandering.


sure, that has helped them. They get to gerrymander because they win a lot of governorships. Republicans are damn good at local level.

I think another reason that Republicans win governorships is that their positions on taxes really resonate. People hate local taxes, especially property taxes. At federal level, politicians have been able to borrow their way through.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5459
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby rabble » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:28 am

Huckleby wrote:
rabble wrote:I think you underestimate the Republican talent for gerrymandering.


sure, that has helped them. They get to gerrymander because they win a lot of governorships. Republicans are damn good at local level.

I think another reason that Republicans win governorships is that their positions on taxes really resonate. People hate local taxes, especially property taxes. At federal level, politicians have been able to borrow their way through.

So basically, what we've learned is that unethical, underhanded and flat out lying combined with buttloads of cash works better at the local level than national.
rabble
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby lukpac » Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:32 pm

Huckleby wrote:It appears a pattern has set in. REpublicans are just more dedicated voters than Democrats, and they dominate local elections and midterm elections.


That doesn't explain 2006, where Dems had a huge year.
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Tommy vs Tammy

Postby Huckleby » Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:45 pm

lukpac wrote:
Huckleby wrote:It appears a pattern has set in. REpublicans are just more dedicated voters than Democrats, and they dominate local elections and midterm elections.


That doesn't explain 2006, where Dems had a huge year.


ya, the out of power party has a good chance when things are f-ed up. I still expect on average that the Republicans can do better than Dems in relatively low turnout elections, and that's what midterms often are.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5459
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

cron
Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar