Should Georgia have been on our minds?

I am surprised that the Georgia senate race has not captured more national media attention. The incumbent in this race is Republican Saxby Chambliss, who faces Democratic challenger Jim Martin. There are two reasons why I'd expect this race to gain more attention. First, it is close. Right now, Real Clear Politics is giving Chambliss a three percent advantage . The recent history of the senate seat is the second reason why I'd expect this race to garner more attention.

Chambliss won the seat in 2002 from incumbent Democrat Max Cleland. During that race, Chambliss ran commercials like this one:


At the time, this advertisement was criticized by Republican senators Chuck Hagel and John McCain. Six years later, Chambliss is facing a challenge from his college fraternity brother Jim Martin (This human interest angle is actually another reason why I'd expect this race to gain national attention.). Though the candidates might be friends, that hasn't stopped Chambliss from running advertisments like this one:

This appears to be Chambliss' harshest and most personal attack on Martin. Otherwise, he has attacked Martin on taxes, and for being a Democrat.

Martin has kept his focus on the economy, sometimes tying Chambliss to the president's economic policies. Martin has also benefited from a series of advertisements that attack on Chambliss, courtesy of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee. The following DSCC advertisement attacks Chambliss for supporting a 23 percent national sales tax:

Kentucky Senate race

On first glance the Kentucky senate race does not seem very interesting. But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is actually facing a challenge in his re-election bid. Real Clear Politics gives him a slight advantage (3.6 percent), but the race remains a toss up. This tight competition has caused McConnell to spend a good deal of time on the campaign trail. In fact, he even skipped a debate last night to campaign in western Kentucky.

Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford is certainly not riding Obama's coattails. Real Clear Politics shows McCain leading by 12.4 percent in Kentucky. However, there does seem to be some dissatisfaction with Republicans there. Two years ago a five-term Republican congress woman was voted out. She is now trying to regain her former seat. The Louisville newspaper says she faces an "uphill battle," and one recent poll shows her trailing by 16 points.

Of course, this congressional district includes urbane Louisville. So one could simply dismiss it as Democrats consolidating power in metropolitan areas. If that were the case, then McConnell would not have too many worries. However, Republicans have also lost statewide elections in Kentucky. Clinton won the state twice. The Republican governor was recently voted out by a large margin. (See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/senate/ky/kentucky_senate-917.html.)

I think the last two presidential elections have led us to believe that Southern Democrats and Northern Republicans are creatures of the past. The Maine senate race has been discussed elsewhere on this blog, showing that moderate Republicans are still viable candidates in the north. I wonder if we are too quick to assign partisan labels to states based on the results of presidential elections.

MN: Coleman/Franken

It looks like Franken is now pulling ahead of Coleman in the Minnesota Senate race. An interesting indicator to look at is futures markets. In Iowa you can put money on who is likely to win an election. The futures markets have been more accurate in predicting outcomes than the best polls for a while. Here is an article that has Franken ahead in futures markets:
http://www.minnpost.com/politicalagenda/2008/10/13/3861/franken_rallies_coleman_tanks_in_iowa_futures_market
Real clear politics also has Franken with a 2 point lead in their average (well within the margin of error but officially making the race a toss-up).
The weighted model on www.fivethirtyeight.com is also leaning Frankin, giving him a 55% probability of winning the election. For those who don't know how these probabilities are figured you can read up on it here:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/03/frequently-asked-questions-last-revised.html
It basically goes like this: 538 gives polls a weighting based on the accuracy in previous elections, factors in a regression trend line, does a few other fancy whosits and whatsits, then uses this data to simulate the election 10,000 times and project a winner based on those simulations. According to this model Franken is now slightly more likely to win the election than he is to lose it.

And because we are interested in political advertising, here is an "ad battle":