Chase Higgins's blog

 There is a lot of confusion and misinformation that I am seeing about the Senate races that currently hang in the balance in the states of Minnesota, Alaska, and Georgia. The Democrats hold 57 Senate seats as of this writing, and were they to win all three of these contested races they would hit the magic number of 60. 

This of course can not be allowed to happen, and it is imperative that Republicans mobilize in full force in order to prevent these seats from turning to Democratic hands. All three are seats that are filled by incumbent Republicans, one who has now been conviced on several felonies, which complicates his bid for re-election.

Minnesota, could potentially be the closest and therefor most hotly contested race. As of this writing, because of corrupt vote counting, or fair vote counting, depending of course on your party, incumbent Norm Coleman leads by .007% of the vote, or just 206 ballots. Anything under .5% triggers a mandatory recount, which will begin on November 18th. Even before the recount, Franken has been gaining. On election night, Coleman led by more than 700 votes, but has lost ground quickly. It is interesting to note, the gains Franken has made outperforms how Democrats including Obama performed in Minnesota, which raises some eyebrows. I believe there is some peculiar vote counting going on, for this reason. This race will be decided by court battles and long hand recounts. In the end, I think Franken is in the stronger position, despite the current tally. I believe Coleman is in serious trouble, and has a good chance of losing his seat, in fact, I believe Franken will win it, and I call this seat for the Democrats. 

In Alaska, the race is very close as well. Incumbent Senator Ted Stevens leads by only 1.5% over Democratic challenger Mark Begich, a 3,257 vote lead. Stevens will most likely pull it out, despite his conviction and the close race. However, should he win, it is almost certain he will resign, which under Alaska law will trigger a special election. The only reason Mark Begich came close to defeating Stevens is because Stevens is seen as corrupt, a fresh non incumbent, young Republican would easily win a special election regardless of how strong a contender the Democrats throw at the race. Many think should this scenario come to pass, Sarah Palin is likely to run to fill the seat, she is immensely popular in Alaska and would win the seat easily. This seat is safe for Republicans, it is just unclear which Republican will be sitting in it when the dust settles. 

The last race is truly a toss up. Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss won the popular vote, but fell .2% short of the 50% mark needed to avoid a run off. Allen Buckley, the Libertarian candidate, siphoned 4% of the votes off, almost ensuring the Dec. 2nd runoff. Essentially, turnout is the key in this election. There is no presidential vote this time around, and this will work to make turnout very low, most likely below 45%. Whoever gets the most turnout wins, as the Libertarian is not a factor this time, come Dec. 2nd, one man will have a plurality of the vote. Traditionally, the Democrats get-out-the-vote machine is superior to that of the Republicans, and I am very worried about Chambliss' seat. There is no way to make a good prediction, but if I was forced to say who is in the better position, I would say Democrat Jim Martin. Again, this race is very close though, and it is the only one that will be decided by the voters. 

By my tally, the Senate balance of power looks like this. Currently, the Democrats have 57 seats, I predice they will win Coleman's seat in Minnesota, bringing them to 58. I predict a Republican will win the Alaska seat, but I have not the slightest clue who. This keeps the balance at 58. Should Martin win the Georgia seat, which is more likely I think then Chambliss winnning, then the balance shifts to 59, one vote shy of 60.

Of course, Democrats do not need 60 to get past a filibuster. With 59 votes, they can almost always pick off a moderate Republican to support the measure and ram legislation through. Effectively, the Democrats have a working majority in both houses, and they have a president in the White House who is more than willing to sign there legislation. Now, all that remains to be seen is how they will use, or abuse, this new power. 

The long awaited vice presedential debate will be held tomorrow at 9PM EDT. It will be arguably the most important vice presidential debate ever, and most analysts predict it will be the most widely watched vice presidential debate in history. A lot rides on this debate, and there is a lot to gain for the winner, and much to lose for the winner, regardless of who emerges the victor.

On paper, this debate should belong to Joe Biden. He has much debate experience, is well versed in foreign policy, and he is a Democrat, which in this election cycle is as good as gold. Sarah Palin is much less experienced, has less debate experience, and has never had a debate on a national scale. 

Sarah Palin does have some things on her side though, she is very likeable. Although her favorable ratings have been on the decline as of late, she is still viewed more favorably than Joe Biden, and she has a way of connecting with the average voter that Joe Biden will probably never achieve.

Both Joe Biden and Sarah Palin are no doubt training very hard for this debate. Both have their strategies worked up, and we even got a pick of the Biden strategy thanks to the Politico. Basically, they are telling Biden "for the love of God, please stop the gaffes". Predictably, on the Republican side, they are working furiously to load Sarah Palin up with information, everything from Supreme Court decisions to names of foreign ministers.

That is not to say Sarah Palin is not knowledgeable on these issues, it is merely to avoid getcha questions that will inevitibly come up in the debate, just as we have seen them come up in her interviews. No one is going to question Biden's knowledge in these areas, but there will be many, especially in the media, who will be much harder on Palin than on Biden.

It also does not help that the moderator of the debate, Gwen Ifill, is totally and completely in the tank for Barack Obama. She has a financial stake in the outcome of this election. Her book, called 'The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama' is set to be released on January 20th, 2009, which is inauguration day. Obviously, that book is going to attract a lot more sales if it is Barack Obama's inauguration day, and not John McCain's.

With a biased moderator, less experience, an extremely critical media, and a formidable opponent, it seems like the fix is in, right? Wrong. Despite the way it looks, Sarah Palin should do very well in this debate. Sarah Palin is a very good debater, just look on YouTube for the 2006 Alaskan gubernatorial debates. 

Joe Biden is going to be very nice in this debate, he will address her very formally, and downplay any mistakes she makes. This is because the Obama camp knows the media will tear her apart over any mistakes, regardless of how small. Sarah Palin on the other hand, has the opportunity to be very aggressive.

For example, she could look at Joe Biden, and very personally address him, and say "Joe, both of us have kids going to Iraq to fight in this war, and who do you really trust to be at the helm, John McCain, or Barack Obama?" After all the things Joe Biden has said during the primaries, Palin could pin him down with this question. A fumble by Biden on this question would be a knockout blow.

There is a good chance however, that both candidates will be relatively cautious. This will work for Palin as well. She has lower expectations coming into the debate, and if she holds her own against Biden, it will be perceived as her win. 

On the other hand though, if she performs poorly, it could be the final blow to McCain's campaign. It is something that should not be of too much concern though, Sarah Palin will perform well, and will leave voters very impressed.

The polls are trending towards Obama, the battleground states are starting to settle in his favor, and a growing number of pundits are predicting an Obama win. John McCain's prospects look grim. While he performed strong in the first debate, he just can not seem convince voters he is their man when it comes to the economy. 

Obama is now ahead in voter trust when it comes to the economy, and with the economy front and center at the moment, and likely for the rest of the campaign, he will likely remain ahead in the polls until election day. Holding the margins he does now, it would be an Obama landslide, with 300+ electoral votes in his column.

All is not lost for McCain though, he still has a crack at this thing. His campaign needs to switch gears though, and do it quickly. First, Sarah Palin must perform exceedingly well at the Vice Presidential debate on Thursday. Sarah Palin is very likeable and viewed favorably by voters, a gaffe free and positive debate will go a long way in reviving McCain's stumbling campaign. 

The second thing he needs to do is own this issue of the bailout. He should immediately begin criticising the taxpayer bailout, and while he is at it, he should also criticize president Bush, as it is his plan. McCain can make this issue work for him, he should emphasize how he supports loans and insurance for the companies, and not a blank check.

McCain also needs to sell this bill differently. He should begin emphasizing that this bill bails out Main Street, not Wall Street. This is because many of those small businesses on Main Street, are barrowing money from those banks on Wall Street so they can make payroll, and fund their day to day operations. 

Only 30% of Americans support the bailout, if McCain can show voters his vision for the bill, and prove to them that action is absolutely necessary, then he can make this bill more popular. He can then take a large chunk of due credit, and restore voter faith in his ability to run the economy. He better hurry though, only 35 days left.

In an unexpected move, the House has killed the bailout bill. Lawmakers on both sides are pointing fingers, and the narrow failure of 228 to 205 came as a shock to the stock market. As of this writing, the Dow is down more than 700 points, and the House is staying in session to desperately attempt to hammer out a new proposal. 

So what's next? The Democrats have the majorities needed to pass a bill, but they won't. They do not want to pass a bill without Republican support, in case the bill fails to rescue the system. This is because when the political backfire comes, they do not want to shoulder the blame all by themselves.

What is going to happen, is for the first time since the Republicans lost control of congress, they have the opportunity to set the agenda. The Republicans have an alternate proposal-the only alternate proposal-to rescue the economy. Their proposal, is to insure the companies, and provide them loans, not a bailout. 

Their theory is this will be able to protect the taxpayers, and will achieve the same result as the bailout. If the Democrats want a bi-partisan bill, then they have to go with the Republican alternative.

Republicans will deliver this alternative, and will most likely get the votes to pass it. Republicans will be able to get all the credit for the bill, and distance themselves from president Bush and his proposal all at the same time. 

The financial crisis could be an opportunity for the Republicans to get back on the good side of the American voter. All they need to do is present their plan, and explain to the taxpayer why they as Republicans, have their best interest in mind. 

Last night's debate went ahead as planned, despite McCain saying he would not show up without a financial rescue package being passed. McCain should be glad he showed up too, because he gave one of the strongest debate performances of his career. 

Unfortunately for McCain, Obama really kicked it up a notch in his performance. Obama was able to give declarative, very precise statements, without a lot of stuttering or pausing, something that had seemingly eluded him in the primaries and interviews. 

If you were to seperate the debate into two halves, then you would not be far off. The first forty minutes of the debate were on the economy, and the remaining time was dedicated to the topic of foreign policy. 

McCain really had a chance to take control of the debate on the economy. He could have pointed out how Obama supports a bailout with taxpayer money, and contrast that with his position, which is protecting the taxpayers by giving loans and insurance to the companies. Instead, McCain gave his stump speech, talking about earmark reform and government spending. 

McCain was able to take a very commanding lead in the foreign policy section. McCain really controlled the debate, and twice Obama asked Jim Lehrer if we could just "move on". Obama really held his own in this area though, and that is all he needed to do, to pass the commander in chief test.

Had this debate taken place in 2004, then maybe McCain's performance in the foreign policy half of the debate would have carried him into victory. However considering there has been no terrorist attacks lately, and the economy is front and center, the tied debate goes to Obama. 

Considering McCain's very respectable performance in the debate, Obama will most likely not see a very large bounce out of the debate. By Monday, the rolling poll averages will reflect the results of the debate, expect Obama to be up about six points in the daily tracking polls.

It has been a long time waiting, but tonight the first presedential debate is finally on. It was uncertain whether or not it would take place, with John McCain saying he would not attend unless progress was made on the bailout bill.

It is here now though, and with both Obama and McCain already on the ground in Oxford, the debate is going forward as planned. At the time of this writing, we are but five hours out from the event, which begins at 9PM EDT. 

In general, the person who wins the first presedential debate is on the fast track to the white house, should either candidate lose, he will have a hard time regaining lost ground to say the least. On paper, this debate belongs to McCain.

Unfortunately for McCain, it is not going to be that easy. With the way the financial situation has been shaping the campaign the last few days, the debate will inevitibly shift to the economy. This will help Obama in the debate, and could be his ticket to escape total debate disaster tonight.

Ideally, Obama will want to begin the debate on the economy, to put McCain on the defensive from the get go. Then when the debate goes to foreign policy, McCain will be playing catch up. Obama is not looking to win this debate, he is looking to neutralize it. The Obama campaign knows if the debate seems like a tie, it goes to the front runner, which of now is Obama. 

The end result is that neither candidate will likely emerge the clear winner. Despite McCain's debate experience, and Obama's charisma, both candidates are so strong in certain areas the debate will leave some scratching their heads.

Will there be plenty of fireworks in the debate tonight? You bet. Will either candidate be able to edge out this debate in their favor? Right now it is looking that the first debate will either not hurt either candidate, and help Obama, or hurt McCain, and help Obama. 

Despite the polls trending toward Obama as of late, he is still only three points ahead in the latest Rasmussen poll, and tied with McCain in the latest Gallup poll. By all accounts, the race is still neck and neck, but are the polls really hiding a lead for McCain?

There are two reasons to believe that McCain may actually be about 2 to 4 points ahead of Obama at this point in the race. One reason has been talked about quite a bit in this race, but the other, and arguably just as important reason, has been almost completely ignored. 

The first reason is the Bradley Effect. The Bradley Effect states that black politicians(and indeed other minority candidates) tend to do better in the polls than they do on election day. Many pollsters and pundits are saying that there is no Bradley Effect in play, because they did not see it in the primaries. 

This is not a good measure of the Bradley Effect for the general election. The reason there was no Bradley Effect in the primary, is because most of the voters that would have contributed to the Bradley Effect, never said they would vote for Obama. They said they would, and did, vote for Hillary Clinton. She acted as a lighting rod, eliminating almost completely any evidence of a Bradley Effect. 

Though the Bradley Effect will probably be at least a small factor, it should not sway the race any more than about 2 points. At this point in the race, a Bradley Effect would put McCain and Obama in a dead tie.

The second and more significant reason is the youth vote. This is because youth voters are notoriously unreliable on election day. This is not for lack of support of their candidate, it is that they do not show up to the polls on election day. 

This youth problem is a much bigger problem than the Bradley Effect. The "youth effect" could have up to a 3 to 5 point effect on the race in McCain's favor. Though not many pollsters are discussing this, it is a very real factor, and one the Obama campaign is discussing. 

At this point in the race, with these effects factored in, there is reason to believe McCain could be ahead as much as 3 points. At the very least, these effects have McCain and Obama tied at this point.

Will the Bradley Effect and the youth vote come into play and hurt Obama on election day? Only 40 more days until we know for sure.

In an unprecidented move, John McCain has suspended his presidential campaign, in order to return to Washington and help pass the $700 billion dollar bailout. Not only that, but he has asked Barack Obama to return the the senate with him, which would also mean suspending his own campaign. 

The politics of this move are fundamentally good, and on paper it seems like a good idea. By doing this, John McCain has put Barack Obama on the defensive. By doing this, John McCain is attempting to seize the economic issue right out from under Obama. 

Of course Obama would not like to suspend his campaign, no one would. However, Obama has only two choices in this matter. He can either suspend his campaign, and follow John McCain's lead, or he can continue campaigning. Both have consequences that are not good for Obama, and he must choose carefully.

If he follows McCain's lead and suspends his campaign, then it looks as if he is admitting that McCain's judgement on the issue is correct, which undermines his whole campaign's basis that Obama's superior judgement is a substitute for his experience. 

On the other hand, if he does not suspend his campaign, he may look as if he is not concerned with getting the bailout passed, and may loose his moral authority on the economy. He will look as if he does not care about rescuing the economy, so much as he cares about becoming the next president. McCain would of course seize on that, and a whole new round of claims of Obama only worrying about political expediency would surface. Like last time, these claims would be very effective.

As of this writing, the Obama campaign has issued no response to the news. Essentially, Obama is stuck between a rock and a hard place, and will need to make this decision carefully. The ball is in his court, and it will be very interesting to see how the Obama campaign responds to this very unconventional news. 

The Vice Presidential debate is less than two weeks away, and it will be an unconventional one for sure. There has been only one time when a women debated a man in the Vice Presidential debate, and that was Geraldine Ferraro, against George H.W. Bush. 

There is no doubt that both camps are studying the video to learn the do's and dont's of debate that involves a women. George H.W. Bush came off as condescending when debating Ferraro, and that is not because of what he said so much as how he delivered it.

Ferraro voiced displeasure in the debate, and accused Bush of patronizing her. This is because Bush's choice of words were what he would have said to a man, and not to a women. While the facts don't change just because you are debating a women, the perceptions of the audience definately do. 

Joe Biden has a tendency to come off negative and personal, and it could really work against him in the debate. I don't think Sarah Palin would bother to accuse him of patronizing her, she would most likely just fire back. This works for her, by showing she can keep her cool and still make her point, she makes herself look like the more collected candidate.

It is for this reason Biden has a disadvantage from the start. He will be on the defensive, being very careful to not come off as sexist, and will have to walk on eggshells when talking to her. This is not ideal for Biden, but it is a lot better than the alternative, which is looking a shovenist.

Regardless, there will be plenty of fireworks, and Biden is a very good debater. Most likely, no one will emerge a clear victor in this debate. Biden would be well advised to hold his tongue in regards to personal attacks, and stick very close to the issues.

Palin will come out swinging, and does have the potential to really shake Biden up, but his years of experience will most likely serve to keep the debate very close. All he has to do is avoid a gaffe, and he should come out with no damage. 

Palin may also be able to escape with no damage. If she can even hold her own against someone with so much experience doing debates, then that in itself should help the debate not appear one sided. The bottom line is both candidates should come out unscathed, making this a safe debate for both campaigns.

The timeless line of "the economy, stupid" seems to hold true today more than ever. John McCain is on the fast track to the presidency if he can assure voters he is their man when it comes to the economy. 

John McCain has recently switched to a very populist message on economic matters, supporting an increasing amount of government intervention in the economy. This is one thing that is really helping middle America level with his message. 

Recent trends seem to suggest that Americans prefer Democrats to Republicans on the economy when there are relatively small problems. When the problem becomes very large, as we see now, more people tend to support Republican policies. 

The theory behind this, is when the economy is in trouble, people support tax cuts and other Republican policies, to stimulate the eoconomy. McCain can drill Obama on his economic plan the next 46 days, and really make an impact in support. 

McCain needs to get economist after economist on TV, telling voters what Obama's economic plan means for them. He must stress Obama's increases in Capital Gains and Payroll taxes, if he really wants to lock this thing up. 

The so called independend Tax Research Center is really a liberal think tank, and it's claim that 4/5 homes will see a tax decrease is absurd. 1/3 of Americans are in the stock market, meaning at least 100 million people would see a tax increase if the Capital Gains tax goes up. Also, anyone who works would feel an increase in the Payroll tax. 

With the economy being the number one issue this election, it will come down to who voters think has the best economic plan. McCain does not need to go far to convince voters he is the one to trust when it comes to the economy. All he needs to do is change gears.