The Meaning Behind CQ Race Ratings

Bob Benenson, editor of CQPolitics.com, is in his 11th campaign cycle of specialized election coverage, having started as a reporter for CQ in 1985, becoming deputy politics editor in 1993 and politics editor in 1998. His reporting staff covers the presidential election and House, Senate and gubernatorial elections in all 50 states.

This discussion is over, but please read the transcript below.

• Ken Sands, moderator: Welcome to today's live online discussion. Bob, I'd like to kick it off with a question from the moderator: What's your best estimate of the number of House and Senate seats the Democrats will pick up in next Tuesday's election?
• Bob Benenson:

  This calls for a boldly hedged response. In the Senate, CQ Politics now favors the Democrats to win five Republican-held seats, with four other GOP seats in the No Clear Favorite or tossup category and three others rated Leans Republican, meaning there are serious Democratic challenges there too. Over the past decade, close Senate elections have tended to break sharply to the party that has the most momentum. Bottom line -- it seems likely that the Democrats will gain in the area of seven Senate seats, and it could be higher... pushing them close to the nine-seat gain they need for a so-called filibuster proof majority of 60 seats.

  
  

  In the House, we now favor the Democrats to win 10 Republican seats while the same is true for the GOP in just one Democratic district. The Dems' potential for big gains -- which is strong -- depends on them winning a strong majority of the 27 races we have rated No Clear Favorite, 21 of which are for seats now held by the Republicans. Ballpark estimate: A 15-seat pickup seems conservative, and a gain of 20 or more is realistic.

   

  It looks like just that bad a year for the Republicans.

• Kevin from DC: Which Democratic held seats are most vulnerable in next week's election?
• Bob Benenson:

  That's easy in the Senate, where the Democrats have 12 seats up for election -- and only one, Mary L. Landrieu's seat in Louisiana, is facing a Republican challenge that is at all threatening. And even she has had a solid lead in late polls against state Treasurer John Kennedy, who switched from Democrat to Republican to make the race.

  In the House, clearly the most vulnerable Democratic seat is in south Florida's 16th District -- and that's because freshman Rep. Tim Mahoney got hit with a sex scandal a month before the election. Dems rated No Clear Favorite include Nancy Boyda of Kansas, Don Cazayoux of Louisiana, Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire, Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, Nick Lampson of Texas and an open seat in north Alabama.

• Eva from Idaho: Wondering if you are watching a huge surprise: Idaho's First CD, Democrat Walt Minnick leading incumbent Bill Sali - enormous news here.
• Bob Benenson: Yes, watching it closely. This Republican stronghold was a 68 percent Bush district four years ago. But freshman GOP Rep. Bill Sali has a personality even many fellow Republicans find abrasive, and Idaho, while still among the most stalwart Republican states, isn't completely immune from the national political tides. Add in a businessman Democratic candidate in Walt Minnick who ran for Senate in 1996 and is very well-funded, and you've got a competitive race -- teetering, in our minds, between tossup and No Clear Favorite -- in a district that should be a Republican lock.
• Julian from Philadelphia: How does CQ typically measure the effect of the top of the ticket on down-ballot races? Of course, one can just compare vote totals to determine if the presidential candidate is running ahead or behind the party's candidate in a Congressional district, but is there more to look at?
• Bob Benenson:

  The presidential vote by congressional district and state is one of the leading indicators we use at CQ Politics to determine whether a state is Democratic or Republican leaning. But in times of partisan turmoil such as has existed since 2006 and continues this year, it obviously is a far less certain guidepost than usual.

   

  In terms of analyzing the vote totals for a "coattails" effect after the elections, it is a very uncertain science. If Barack Obama wins a state and Democratic candidates down-ballot also do better than the norm, will it be a matter of Obama's popularity and organization lift all of the party's boats, or the party at large gaining ground across the political spectrum? You can trust this will be the subject of much discussion within the parties and among political scientists in the aftermath of these elections.

• Chris in Alexandria VA: Have there been ANY House races with a civil tone and little or no negative advertising?
• Bob Benenson: This is one question I couldn't pretend to answer with accuracy, since we are monitoring more than 100 competitive House races and the ads that come to our attention tend to be the most hell-fire negative ones. I can only hope that there actually are races in which the candidates AND the parties and other outside groups that intervene in the races are being civil to each other. If any readers out there have some examples to share, please do, but they deserve to be highlighted.
• Alan from the UK: Will Ted Stevens' conviction have a marked effect on other congressional races this year, or on the presidential race?
• Bob Benenson:

  It's a pretty good sign of the myriad of problems facing the Republican Party this year that Stevens -- the longest-serving Republican senator in history -- gets convicted a week before Election Day, and it's making only a ripple in the overall political waters.

   

  Had the GOP not already been on the defensive over the legacy of President Bush, the troubled economy, where we go in Iraq, and the echoes of other ethics controversies that hurt the party so badly in 2006, the Stevens' conviction might have been the political equivalent of an earthquake.

   

  Nonetheless, the fact that presidential nominee John McCain today called on Stevens -- who now looks likely to lose his re-election bid next week to Democratic Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich -- to resign his seat shows that the party is sensitive to the image problems caused by the senior senator's conviction on seven felony counts of failing to report lavish gifts from Alaska business interests.

• Eva from Idaho: Glad to hear it. "Abrasive" doesn't begin to describe Sali. Another interesting thing here: Obama has outraised McCain, even though the state will probably give McCain his best win. And Obama drew 15,000 people for a rally in Feb. of this year, shocking the Republicans.
• Bob Benenson:

  Eva, all the points you make are excellent. We've hesitated to move the race to tossup or even Leans Democratic mostly because the district's track record is SO incredibly Republican.

   

  But this gives me an opportunity to clarify what the "Leans Republican" rating means. It says that the Republican candidate has some edge -- in Sali's case, it is almost entirely the huge Republican base in Idaho's 1st District -- BUT that an upset by the Democratic candidate is clearly a plausible possibility.

   

  That said, we see this race in the gray area between leaning Republican and trending Democratic... and reserve the option to change our ratings right up until the morning of Election Day.

• Aaron from Watertown, WI: Tom Petri, my Congressman, who you have as Safe Republican, has pretty much built a 29-year career out of fattening up on zero opposition. He doesn't do much, but in six of his 13 re-election bids he's had no major-party opposition, and in four of those six he's been completely unopposed. If the Dems found him a credible opponent, would WI-6 be a possible flip opportunity in 2010?
• Bob Benenson:

  That is a great question and not just as it pertains to your district. There have been two major ingredients to the Democrats' congressional election success story over the 2006 and 2008 election cycles.

   

  First, it seems obvious they could not have gained so much so fast if the public hadn't become so disenchanted with the Republican Party. However, you can't win where you don't play.

   

  And -- as we discuss in our election overview published Monday in CQ Weekly and available for free on CQ Politics -- the Democrats had the good fortune of having a crew of smart and aggressive strategists (Howard Dean, Chuck Schumer, Rahm Emanuel, Chris Van Hollen) who came along at just the right time. And one of their signal achievements was "spreading the playing field" -- meaning recruiting and funding competitive challenger candidates in an increasing number of states and districts across the country, some of which their party hadn't seriously contested in years.

   

  That doesn't necessarily mean they'll find a strong candidate in Mr. Petri's district two years from now. But they will be poring over the presidential election results to see where Obama made serious gains over past Democratic presidential candidates, as they seek more targets of opportunity.

• Gracie from Northwest DC: How much of a factor do polls play in your ratings? Are there some pollsters you trust more than others? Which ones?
• Bob Benenson:

  Polls are a factor in our ratings, because they provide the only tangible measure of how a race stands at the moment. But even polls done with the best of expertise and methodology can be at least a bit off-base, so we also factor in a number of objective measures in determining how we think a race will end up: presidential vote by state or district, voters' long-term track record in other statewide and district elections, demographic factors (race, ethnicity, income, rural/suburban/urban) that factor into the results, etc.

   

  While there are polling outfits that have consistently strong reputations, such as Andrew Kohut's shop at the non-partisan Pew Center, I'll steer clear of whether there are polls that I favor more than others. There are so many polling firms anymore that part of the challenge we face in covering races is deciding who is having a good or bad year.

   

  In sympathy, pollsters do face unusual challenges this year, including the "cell phone only" problem (a growing number of people, especially younger folks, use only cell phones, which makes them harder for pollsters to reach) and the impact that the surge in newly registered and activated voters has on determining who is a "likely voter."

• Mitch from Maryland: Regardless of party, which incumbent is doing much better than you expected them to do, and which challenger is doing better?
• Bob Benenson:

  There are lots of House incumbents who are doing better than we expected -- many of them freshman elected to formerly GOP seats in 2006 -- because the Republicans unexpectedly failed to recruit strong candidates.

   

  So it would be easier to focus on the Senate. Arkansas Democrat Mark Pryor won his seat with 54 percent in 2002 -- and looked so strong this year that the GOP didn't even field a challenger. Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin survived four tough previous races against well-known Republicans... and is coasting this year against a political newcomer who has no money. South Dakota Democrat Tim Johnson won his race last time by a handful of votes, but his comeback from a near-fatal illness made him so popular that he is rated Safe Democrat.

   

  As for challengers, I'd have to mention state Sen. Kay Hagan, who got the nomination to challenge heavily favored North Carolina Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole only after five better-known Democrats turned down party entreaties to run. Hagan has emerged as a serious threat to beat Dole, a longtime Republican Party fixture.

• Mike from Virginia: If the elections in the House and Senate tend to follow your ratings, what impact will that have on the overall political leanings of the conferences? Will moderate groups like the Main Street Partnership and the Blue Dogs have more of an impact on their parties, or will we see even more influence by conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats?
• Bob Benenson:

  On the Democratic side, it depends on how the Democratic leadership decides to lead -- especially if Barack Obama wins and gives the party total control of the Washington policy-making machinery. There will be demands from the liberal wing of the party, in Congress and in the real world, to use that power to implement a strongly liberal agenda. But the history of elections is littered with the wreckage of seemingly dominant parties that overinterpreted an election victory as a "mandate": see the Democrats after Bill Clinton's election in 1992, the Republicans after the "Contract With America" election in 1994 and the Republicans again after they won the Senate in 2002 and consolidated power with President Bush in the White House.

   

  If the Democratic leadership presents this more as an "opportunity" than a mandate -- and tries to draw in centrist voters who aren't wholly bought into their policy views -- then groups like the conservative-leaning Blue Dogs could have a considerable role in shaping policy.

   

  On the Republican side, there clearly will be a battle for the soul of the party -- certainly if John McCain is defeated, but even if he pulls off what now would appear an upset victory, given how much of McCain's campaign has been about distancing himself from Bush and GOP orthodoxy in general.

   

  The House Republican conservatives who sought to block the financial "bailout" bill fired the first loud salvo from those who want the party to follow strictly conservative principles and abandon what they call "big government conservatism." But there will be strong pushback from the Main Street Partnership and other less-conservative Republicans who say the GOP's recent defeats mean they must reach more to the middle instead of the right.

• Jeff Lambert from Spokane: If Obama clinches the election in the East or Midwest, which local Congressional races in the West will be affected and how?
• Bob Benenson:

  Given how close the last two presidential elections were, it has been a long time since we've had to concern ourselves with this issue. We and others doing live reporting on Election Night will be looking at the results from the states with early poll closing times, and if Obama is highly competitive or winning in usual Republican strongholds such as Indiana and North Carolina, it is going to be seen as a clear indication that he is likely to win. And that conclusion would come with polls still open for hours in the western time zones.

   

  The parties and the campaign organizations in those later-closing states have to be aware of that possibility and must have their voter turnout operations primed to get people out even if the presidential race looks one-sided. It is, however, a very hard thing to do.

• Richard from Shreveport: What was the biggest surprise in any House race in all the years you've been watching. Like when you saw the results, you said, "Whoaaaa....Check engine light!"
• Bob Benenson: The reigning House upset of all time for me came in 1994 when Michael Patrick Flanagan, a virtually unknown and underfunded Republican, ousted scandal-plagued Democratic titan Dan Rostenkowski in a Chicago-based Illinois district that was one-sidely Democratic. Despite the incumbent's ethics problems, which would result in a conviction after he left office, everyone -- including Flanagan -- seemed shocked when the challenger won. Two years later, Flanagan lost the seat by a lopsided margin to Democrat Rod Blagojevich, who is now in his second term as Illinois governor.
• Chad from Madison, WI: What are the chances that Steve Kagen (D-WI, 8th) retains his seat against former state speaker Jon Gard?
• Bob Benenson: We rate this one as Leans Democratic... again, another indication that the political environment that Republicans hoped would improve over 2006 has not. This stretch of northeastern Wisconsin usually is a Republican stronghold, and Kagan has a rematch with the former state legislative leader he defeated narrowly last time. But the GOP's prospects just do not appear to have improved enough to reverse the 2006 outcome.
• Dr. John from Mississippi Gulf Coast: What is your read on the 1st Congressional District in MS., Childers vs. Davis? How do you see Musgrove vs. Wicker?
• Bob Benenson:

  The 1st District in northern Mississippi on paper is strongly Republican, so Democrat Travis Childers logically should have faced a tough race to hold the seat he won in a May special election to fill the vacancy caused when GOP Rep. Roger Wicker was appointed to the Senate. But Childers never seemed to lose momentum after that race -- and he faces a rematch with local mayor Greg Davis, whom he beat by 8 points just a half-year ago. Childers has worked hard in his short House tenure to burnish his image as a conservative Democrat.

   

  The Senate race -- for the final four years of the term won in 2006 by Republican Trent Lott, who resigned late last year to go lobbying -- is a tossup. Wicker benefits from the state's conservative Republican leanings, but has had only a year in office to get himself better known in the three-quarters of the state outside his 1st District base. Musgrove is a former governor who has some political baggage but is well-known statewide.

• Dave, Colorado: How do you see Colorado's 4th district race panning out? Do you see Musgrave hanging on?
• Bob Benenson:

  We just changed the race rating in Colorado's 4th District to Leans Democratic in our latest batch of rating changes (almost all showing stronger Democratic chances) published on CQ Politics today.

   

  Although the district in northern and eastern Colorado is conservative-leaning, Democrats criticized Musgrave for spending much of her time pursuing a socially conservative agenda -- especially opposition to same-sex marriage -- after arriving in the House in 2003.

   

  Although she adjusted and focused more strongly on local issues such as water supply and transportation, Musgrave got only 46 percent in a 3-way race in 2006 and won by just 3 points. And her Democratic opponent, Betsy Markey, is a businesswoman and former aide to Colorado Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar, and she is better connected politically and better funded than Musgrave's 2006 challenger.

• Bob from Evansville: How come your ratings do not show Idaho, Kansas and Nebraska as safe Republican as polls show these with substantial leads?
• Bob Benenson:

  I presume you're referring to the Senate races? Idaho actually is rated Safe Republican, with GOP Lt. Gov. Jim Risch viewed as virtually certain to beat Democratic ex-Rep. Larry LaRocco for the seat left open by the retirement of Republican Larry E. Craig.

   

  I concur that the Republican candidates in Kansas (Sen. Pat Roberts) and Nebraska (Mike Johanns, a former governor and former US Agriculture secretary) are strongly favored and that those races are bordering the Safe Republican candidates. The reason we have kept them in Republican Favored is that there are Democratic candidates running spirited campaigns in both states -- former Rep. Jim Slattery in Kansas and young rancher Scott Kleeb in Nebraska -- in a year when the overall partisan trend favors the Democratic Party. Republican Favored is defined as the GOP candidate having a strong advantage that makes him or her as almost-certain winner, but that an upset can't be completely ruled out.

   

  But if you ask if I think Roberts and Johanns will win, I won't hesitate to say yes.

• Ken Sands, moderator: Bob, one last question before we wrap up this discussion: It's perhaps unlikely at this point, but it's possible that the electoral count could end up at 269-269. Tell us what happens then.
• Bob Benenson:

  Well, it certainly means the Best Political Team on Television and the rest of us covering the endless 2005-08 election cycle can forget those R-and-R vacations.

   

  Seriously, though, if no candidate receives an electoral vote majority, the election is turned over to the U.S. House of Representatives. Each state casts one vote, meaning that the candidate of the party that has the majority of seats in each state's delegation is almost certain to get that state's vote. The Democrats currently hold an advantage in that area, and it could grow if the party made blockbuster gains across the nation next Tuesday.

   

  The only question that clouds that scenario is: would members from single-district states vote with their party... even if their states' voters favored the other party's nominee for president? For instance, Democrats are strongly favored to win House re-election in North Dakota and South Dakota, states where Republican McCain has at least a historical edge to win the presidential contest.