Go Clean Cold for Jeanne

Intriguing new poll results from the Concord Monitor which sees Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton winning their respective primaries, even though they both fare worse than the competition in the general election. It's an intriguing dynamic, and I'd like to see a poll that ads a question about how much weight voters are putting on "electability" and get a sense of how much cognitive dissonance there is out there.

That's all sort of old news, however. What I hadn't seen previously is that polls show former governor Jeanne Shaheen absolutely crushing John Sununu by a 56 to 34 percent margin. I froze my ass off knocking on doors and holding signs for Shaheen's failed 2002 Senate campaign against Sununu, so I'd certainly like to see that work retroactively vindicated. Even more to the point, given the big-picture trends, this is the kind of Senate seat that would probably be pretty safe in the hands of a Democratic incumbent, but might also be extremely hard to win in 2014 unless another massively unpopular Republican president is in office at that time.

The only problem for Democrats is that Shaheen hasn't decided to run and the people who are in the race don't poll nearly as well. Her record is, to me, totally uninspiring but they like her in New Hampshire so I hope she decides to run.

Comments

"It's an intriguing dynamic, and I'd like to see a poll that ads a question about how much weight voters are putting on "electability" and get a sense of how much cognitive dissonance there is out there."

Much as in 2004, electability concerns come into play very late in the primary process. Wait until the weather gets cold.

That's a concern for high information voters, and the good folks of NH aren't at that stage yet.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 5:26 PM

And Sununu's in trouble no matter who runs, though Shaheen would certainly be the surest bet.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 5:29 PM

"Her record is, to me, totally uninspiring"

LOL, was that part of your sales pitch in 2002?

Posted by The Animal | July 15, 2007 6:18 PM

As a life-long MA resident, it has been facinating to see "Live Free or Die" NH move from as-solid-as-it-gets GOP to more and more blue.

It has taken a long time, but the Southern/religious takeover of the GOP many, many years ago has really caused a revolt among all but the most hard core Republicans in this neck of the woods.

Posted by Andruw | July 15, 2007 6:18 PM

LOL, was that part of your sales pitch in 2002?

Shockingly, no! I touted her support of Bush's 2001 tax cuts, her opposition to a state income tax for New Hampshire, and other sundry bits of non-inspiringness.

Posted by Matthew Yglesias | July 15, 2007 6:32 PM

Considering the Shaheens rabid support for Hillary, (not to mention her tax cut vote), I'd much prefer to see Jeanne not run.

I'd rather see the Porter-Shea wing of the NH party step up. As stated, Sununu's in trouble in '08 no matter who runs. Why not nominate someone who'll actually be a good Dem? NH ain't Missouri or Nebraska.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 6:41 PM

Petey: C'mon, I'm admittedly more favorable to the Clinton's than most here (despite the fact I do think John Edwards is the one Dem that can't lose the general), but seriously...let's not put forth a sure winner in NH, a vote for Harry Reid, a pro-choice mostly-progressive...because of her "rabid" support for Hillary?

This isn't Joe Lieberman we're talking about.

Posted by Andruw | July 15, 2007 7:24 PM

It doesn't feel to me like there is a real race here yet. It's summer, and people are not particularly tuned in to politics. I hear some candidates from time to time on the morning NPR talk shows. But there are no commercials of note on TV, no glare of attention, no media horde, no frenzied daily back and forth, no real debate or intensity. It's mainly just a lot of genial barbecues and picnics, and an occasional speech. I'll know the primary is really coming when the pollsters and campaign workers start calling my house every night, and so far that hasn't happened. I think I've only been called twice so far. I also haven't even seen any of the the college kids with signs waving at cars on street corners. They will be omnipresent in a few months.

At some point, the people who are serious about winning have to actually run against the person they're trying to defeat. So far, the contenders are not doing that. They're raising money, and they're all sort of milling around at the starting gate, stretching their legs and running in place, waiting for someone to wave the flag. I have yet to see any evidence that Obama has started to spend any of that mountain of money he's supposedly raised.

Clinton's strategy is to try to turn the talk to the Republicans at every opportunity, pretend the nomination race is over, and hope every one believes her. The challengers are sort of letting her get away with that for now. But the race really hasn't started yet, and I don't think that honeymoon is going to last.

As late as Dec 17th, 2003, polling showed Dean at 45%, Kerry at 20% and Edwards with 2%. Just over a month later, Kerry won with 39%, Dean came in with 26% and Edwards had moved up to 12%. Even mid-December leaves enough time to make a big move, and we're still five months away from December

What is striking to me is how strongly antiwar New Hampshire has become. Sununu Jr. hasn't done much of anything to earn so much ire except be a Republican who is saddled with the detested war. Maybe a handful of the wingnuts don't like him now because he's an Arab-American, but I don't think that accounts for much.

I voted for Shaheen three times for governor, and once for the Senate, but I really couldn't tell you much about her. She is a genius of total inoffensiveness. Two moderate to be polarizing; too homespun to be cloying; too genuine to be an object of suspicion; too unpretentious to be resented; too gracious and amiable to be hated even by even her political enemies. However, she did strongly support the war resolution and the policy of regime change when she ran for the Senate in 2002. I wonder if her poll domination of Sununu will continue if the voters are reminded of that.

Posted by Dan Kervick | July 15, 2007 7:25 PM

Out of curiosity, Matt, where did you work? I only ask because I live in Hanover.
And Petey, first off, it's Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, not Porter-Shea, and considering as she's a one-termer who squeaked out a razor-thin victory, it's not a good example to use. And with all due respect, if you want this to be a Casey-Santorum rout instead of a Webb-Allen nailbiter, we have to nominate Shaheen. Katrina Swett is unelectable; despite being the wife of a well-known former congressman, she lost the 2002 House race by 20-odd points. Also, she endorsed Lieberman in the 2006 general, and her father's Tom Lantos, so I doubt you'd like her better than Shaheen. Steve Marchand's fine and has a decent tax reform proposal (raising the cap on the payroll tax and lowering the rate), but has no name recognition. Neither does my neighbor, Dartmouth prof and astronaut Jay Buckey. Really, Shaheen and Lynch are the only possibilities, and Lynch isn't interested.

Posted by Minipundit | July 15, 2007 7:27 PM

I suppose I'm with Andruw. My guess is that Shaheen will be a staunchly loyal Senate Democrat no matter which Democrat is president. She's not the type of person to stake out a maverick position.

Posted by Dan Kervick | July 15, 2007 7:31 PM

"but seriously...let's not put forth a sure winner in NH, a vote for Harry Reid, a pro-choice mostly-progressive...because of her "rabid" support for Hillary?"

I'm almost always in favor of nominating the furthest left candidate who can win. I'd guess that Sununu is vulnerable in '08 to almost anyone, so I'd prefer to nominate someone to the left of Shaheen. Were we talking about Missouri or Nebraska, I'd be a lot more sympathetic to nominating a more centrist candidate like Shaheen.

The Shaheens' rabid support for Hillary is not the deciding factor here for me, but it certainly factors into the equation.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 7:33 PM

"Steve Marchand's fine and has a decent tax reform proposal (raising the cap on the payroll tax and lowering the rate), but has no name recognition. Neither does my neighbor, Dartmouth prof and astronaut Jay Buckey."

I've got zero clue about the principles involved, and how they'd perform as candidates, but I don't think a lack of name recognition right now is a killer in the general election.

As stated, I think Sununu is going to be vulnerable no matter who we put up, so why not give the seat to a better Dem than Shaheen?

All that said, it certainly does seem that if Shaheen wants the nomination, it's hers. I'm just guessing that the future will be brighter if she chooses not to run.

"it's Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, not Porter-Shea"

No more will I accede to the male supremacy argument that the husbands name must come last. From this moment forth, I proclaim it to be Carol Porter-Shea and Hillary Clinton-Rodham.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 7:41 PM

More generally, I think 2008 is a rare opening to nominate proud progressives for federal office and have them win.

I think it's important to take advantage of this opportunity, not only to have a few more progressives in Washington, but also to move future conventional wisdom about the ability of attractive progressives to win elections.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 7:46 PM

I seem to remember reading that the other people simply aren't as well known as she is. That makes sense a lot of sense, if it's true, because she was governor. It'd be interesting to see what the results were if only people who knew of all the candidates were, but you could say that about every race. No matter, unless Sununu is so unpopular that in a general election, any Democrat would have a decent shot of winning, I'd say that it makes sense to go with Shaheen. Even if she is a little too moderate for some, with early polls like this, she makes the climb towards sixty a lot easier. We could divert a lot of money to another race, like Texas or Georgia, where even if we lose we might be competitive.

Posted by Brian | July 15, 2007 8:04 PM

"On the Democratic side, Clinton wins head-to-head match-ups with all of the poll-topping Republicans, but Obama outpaces her by a point in almost every case."

"even though they both fare worse than the competition in the general election."

Slightly odd conclusion.

Posted by rilkefan | July 15, 2007 8:08 PM

"Considering the Shaheens rabid support for Hillary, (not to mention her tax cut vote)..."

Which tax cut are you referring to?

Posted by Brian | July 15, 2007 8:09 PM

As stated, I think Sununu is going to be vulnerable no matter who we put up, so why not give the seat to a better Dem than Shaheen?

Petey: Because "vulnerable" is not the same thing as "doomed" -- so the best move is to go with the sure thing, provided the sure thing is acceptable. Sununu may be in trouble, but he isn't going to roll over.

Posted by Jasper | July 15, 2007 8:45 PM

"vulnerable" is not the same thing as "doomed" -- so the best move is to go with the sure thing, provided the sure thing is acceptable."

I'm really quite aware of the logic. And in many, many cases, I'm in full agreement with the logic. I thought Bob Casey was the right choice in PA in '06, for example.

I just happen to think '08 is a year where some of the normal rules won't apply, and that nominating a slate of ideologically progressive candidates wherever possible will pay strategic dividends down the line.

Frankly, I'd rather see a 2009 with 54 Dem Senators after a campaign with many proud progressive nominees than a 2009 with 55 Dem Senators who'd run on more centrist platforms. I think the next administration would be able to accomplish more under my preferred scenario.

All that said, if Shaheen runs, the nomination is likely hers. I'm not trying to agitate for candidates to take her on in the primaries. I'm just saying that in a happy strategic world, she wouldn't run, assuming one of the alternatives could creditably assume the mantle in her absence.

Posted by Petey | July 15, 2007 9:01 PM

All things considered, as a non-New Hampsherian, I like Marchand more than the non-Shaheen field just because of the propensity for young Senators to keep getting re-elected and re-elected. He could hold the seat for a good thirty years.

Posted by One of a billion Steves | July 15, 2007 9:21 PM

"even though they both fare worse than the competition in the general election."

Where are the numbers?

"On the Democratic side, Clinton wins head-to-head match-ups with all of the poll-topping Republicans, but Obama outpaces her by a point in almost every case."

The link says there is 1 point difference between Hillary and Obama in GOP matchups. With 5% margin that is a tie.

Posted by DonB | July 15, 2007 9:42 PM

H, I'm heading up the DraftShaheen committee in NH. Jeanne Shaheen would be a great senator! She has an outstanding record on civil rights, womens rights and the environment. For more info, go to our website, www.draftshaheen.com. For those of youi who don't know a lot about her record, it is worth the effort to learn more about the person who was able to get progressive legislation passed desite a Republican majority in the legislature.

Posted by Kathy Sullivan | July 16, 2007 6:12 AM

H, I'm heading up the DraftShaheen committee in NH. Jeanne Shaheen would be a great senator! She has an outstanding record on civil rights, womens rights and the environment. For more info, go to our website, www.draftshaheen.com. For those of youi who don't know a lot about her record, it is worth the effort to learn more about the person who was able to get progressive legislation passed desite a Republican majority in the legislature.

Posted by Kathy Sullivan | July 16, 2007 6:12 AM

Matt, I think you're leaving out a salient fact. If not for the fraudulent activity of the GOP it's quite possible Shaheen would have won the close 2002 election.

Posted by Barkeep49 | July 16, 2007 8:40 AM

Once people get to know Jay Buckey, he will be able to beat Sununu going away. Sununu doesn't break 50% against anyone, including, in some polls, an unknown phantom opponent. That's a big deal in the political prediction world. You won't find a more personable, genuine, and intelligent candidate then Jay Buckey.

Posted by Gavin | July 16, 2007 10:50 AM

I admit that I don't know much about Shaheen's record, but playing the numbers game with polling against Sununu seems premature to me at this point. I know Jay Buckey personally, and he's one of the most absurdly charismatic people I've ever met; assuming his broader political charisma matches his personal charisma (and in a state the size of NH the personal element is extra important) his lack of early name recognition will not be a problem, especially given the length of the primary campaign. Obviously if you decide you don't like his politics you should vote for/support somebody else, but I don't think electability will be an issue for him or that Shaheen needs to be drafted for the sake of electability.

Posted by Galen | July 16, 2007 2:01 PM