Indiana Wants Him

The NY Times has a scary front-page headline about Congressman Mike Pence, (R) of Indiana, but the story doesn't quite match up:

Star of the Right Loses His Base at the Border

By JASON DePARLE

MUNCIE, Ind. — He supports tax cuts and the war in Iraq. He opposes stem cell research and the Medicare drug plan. He is a master of his movement’s medium, talk radio. Jesus Christ is his personal savior and Ronald Reagan his political idol.

Conjure what might be called the perfect conservative, and chances are he would look a lot like Representative Mike Pence, the Indiana Republican who in just three terms has turned 100 House allies into a vanguard and himself into one of his party’s rising stars.

Or that was the case until this spring when he sought compromise in the rancorous immigration debate. His complicated plan would strengthen border security and send illegal immigrants home, but let most of them quickly return. Since then, Mr. Pence — named last year’s Man of the Year by the conservative weekly Human Events — has looked to some conservatives like this year’s Benedict Arnold. They say he has lent his conservative prestige to a form of liberal amnesty.

Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum called his plan “a sick joke.” Richard A. Viguerie, the direct-mail pioneer, threatened to punish politicians who supported it. Pat Buchanan, editor of The American Conservative, likened the betrayal to a scene from “The Godfather.”

Perpetually genial, prematurely gray, Mr. Pence, 47, said, “I was taken aback by the level of invective.”

Most of what follows is a puffer on Pence, but folks who soldier on to the last few paragraphs learn that not all of "the base" is lost:

The [immigration proposal], at best, faces an uphill fight when Congress reconvenes next week. But Tamar Jacoby, a fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute who sees promise in Mr. Pence’s approach, said that without him, “the issue would be dead.”

So his critics fear. Team America, a conservative political action committee, now has a feature on its Web site called “Pence Watch.” Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado, said the plan would encourage more illegal immigration and undermine cultural cohesion. But David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, credits Mr. Pence’s “courage to think outside the box.”

And at the Times Elcetion Guide Mr. Pence is still scored as a safe-seat Republican in Indiana's Sixth District (Let's see if this link works.)

Would that all House Reps had so lost their base.

SINCE YOU ASK:  Per the Times website, the Senate races look like this:  39 safe Dems, 8 leaning Dem, 2 undecided, 4 leaning Rep, and 47 safe Rep.

Dems need to get every Dem leaner, the two undecideds, and two Rep leaners to keep Dick Cheney out of the tie-breaker and control the Senate.  TradeSport gives them roughly a 21% chance of doing so.

Over in the House, the Times prognosticators see 189 safe Dem seats, 13 leaning Dem, 14 undecided, 27 leaning Rep, and 192 safe Rep.

Since 218 is the magic number, the Dems need their safe seats, their leaners, all 14 undecideds, and 2 seats currently leaning Rep.  Tradesports bettors make that a 53% probability.

Just for perspective, a Bloomberg story yesterday gave us a vocabulary lesson from "Dem insiders":

Democratic insiders, who months ago thought their chances of winning a majority in the House were no better than even, and that the Senate was a lost cause, have become far more optimistic. Now, they say, winning the House is a lock, and the Senate is within reach.

53% is "a lock"; 21% is "within reach".  Fine; let's call the Red Sox "a sure thing" to make the playoffs.

Comments

[Harold C. Hutchison]

Pence is safe, but many a self-appointed zampolit in the GOP and conservative movement willnow call him a RINO.

[JM Hanes]

Phyllis Schlafly, Pat Buchannan and... Richard A. Viguerie? A regular constellation.

[Jane]

The dems have it all wrapped up. Should "the lock" not manifest itself, we will hear the reason is the Diebold machines, and Halliburton perpetuated voter fraud. It's win/win for the moonbats.

[Al]

Agree with JM Haynes. If your sole evidence of Pence "losing his base" consists of opposition from Schlafly, Viguerie, Pat Buchanan, and something called Team America... you haven't exactly made your case.

[Bob]

Looks like CBS is up to their old http://stickynotes.squarespace.com/journal/2006/8/29/faux-katie.html>"fake but accurate" Fauxtography again!

Don't they ever learn!

[Charlie (Colorado)]

... and Bush's popularity is leaning up, and "generic Democrats" are losing ground. This might be the time to buy the short side of Democrats win House.

[Tom Ault]

It's going to be really hard for the Democrats to get more than 50 seats in the Senate, Looking at electionprojection.com, where they have been tracking the polls, incumbent approval and state partisianship numbers since the start of the 2006 election season, the following states have Republican senators up for re-election:

Arizona, Indiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and
Wyoming.

The states where the Democrats are currently competitive are Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, which only gives them a pick-up of five seats if they sweep them all. Once this low-hanging fruit is exhausted, the Democrats have to pick up either Tennessee or Virginia, since based on recent polls and incumbent approval, the remaining states are a lock for the Republicans. Their best chance is probably in Virginia, where Webb and Allen have been running close together in the polls, but even there its an uphill climb. And even then, the Democrats have to pick up all five competitive Senate seats without losing either Washington or Maryland, or losing Connecticut to Liebermann followed by his defection to the Republicans (unlikely but possisble).

The House is a bit different, simply because there's so little information. Right now, most people are speculating based on the general mood of the nation, but since representatives are elected by the people of their individual districts, the general mood of the nation doesn't necessarily translate into enough votes for the Democrats to take back the House. Depending on what information one uses and what wild-ass guesses one chooses to make, there are between 35-45 competitive House races. On the plus side for the Democrats, most of these are in districts held by Republicans. On the negative side, in order to achieve a majority in the House, the Democrats need to not only take all of the toss ups but a handful of the competitive races that favor Republicans without losing any of their own. The House is certainly more likely to change hands than the Senate, but it's hardly a "lock" for the Democrats.

Finally, there's still two months to go until the November elections, and neither side has really begun the campaign in earnest yet. No one's really going to start thinking about the election seriously until after Labor Day, and both sides have lots of money left to spend. The true chances that the Democrats have of taking the House or Senate probably won't be clear until the start of October.

[Birkel]

All your base are belong to the WaPo.

[cnj]

Kos is pessimistic about Dem's chances:

And for the record, I still don't think we'll win back either chamber. I've seen the GOP close the deal too many times before for me to get complacent and cocky. Nah. I think we'll win 7-14 seats in the House, 3-5 in the Senate.

Yeah, I know such pessimism is tough when the numbers, data, and current events give so much cause for optimism, but I was burned two cycles in a row. I'm not getting my hopes up.

[cnj]

Forgot the link:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/28/184621/559>Kos pessimistic

[Rick Ballard]

"and neither side has really begun the campaign in earnest yet."

While I agree with your general assessment, I disagree strongly with that particular statement. '06 has been likened in the Democrat press to '94 and the Democratss (and their press orgs) have been trying very hard to achieve a "change is needed" mood similiar to that which built over the course of '94. Unfortunately, they have been unable to get Commissar Clinton to switch sides and advocate nationalization of health care as a Republican plank, nor have they been able to agree to anything that might faintly resemble the Repuplican "Contract With America" which presented a unified party proposal for the examination of the electorate.

Instead the Democrats are focused on continuation of the Great Progg Purge of '06 in order to drive any and all remaining moderates from the party. The fact that the greatest success achieved by the Proggs to date seems to have been to guarantee Joe Lieberman's reelection doesn't seem to have fazed them at all.

Rahm Emanuel begging aid from George Soros is an accurate metaphor for the state of Democrat finances, which in term dictates the actual logistical status of the campaign.

The public portion of the campaign begins next week in earnest but the structure necessary to support the public campaign should have been completed not later than July 1st. The Democrats look like they're going to be ready to start campaigning in earnest around December 1st. The Times can run Pew generated, Soros funded wedge stories every day for the next two months but it will not help their party repair its own fractures.

[Dean Esmay]

Two months is a long time.

[patch]

It's going to be a New York City "Subway Series", this fall.

[patch]

Oh yeah,

My other prediction:

Republicans +10 pickup in the House.

Republicans +3 pickup in the Senate.

[Geek, Esq.]

One thing I remember from my time in DC was the observation that the only politicians who regularly win are those who always run like they're ten points behind.

Moral: Don't get cocky, kid.