The Links (10/3/12): 2012 Debate Season

A couple of things to set the proper context for tonight's opening to debate season:

1) Tom Holbrook, indispensable as always, on the (limited) impact of debates over time.

1a) John Sides and Jon Bernstein also throw cold water on the idea of debates as game changing events in the campaign.

2) Emma Roller at NPR has another take.

[Eh, I'll side with the political scientist on this one.]

3) Alex Speigel had a nice story on question dodging in debates on Morning Edition this morning.

4) If you have the time before the debate tonight, the PBS documentary, Debating Our Destiny, is always a worthwhile view.

NOTE: FHQ will try to embed a Twitter conversation in a post for the debate this evening. I'll be most active over there, but will try to pull double duty and respond to any comments that may come up over here in response. If you are on Twitter either reply directly to one of my tweets and/or use the #fhqdebate hashtag to insure that your comment/response is included in the feed.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/2/12)

The Electoral College Map (10/1/12)

The Electoral College Map (9/30/12)

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

The Links (4/20/11): Miscellany

Newt's staffing up in Iowa.

Sorry Roy Moore. You're getting the Buddy Roemer treatment (No separate 2012 Candidates post). For the record, as of April 18, the former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice formed an exploratory committee. For president.

Pawlenty's message could connect in South Carolina.

Chris Christie may want to move the New Jersey primary to June, and there may be a few bills that have been introduced in the legislature, but the guy behind the 2007 move to February isn't high on the idea.

Florida may cast a shadow over the 2012 Republican nomination race, but it isn't "just like in 2008."

The Economist has their obligatory primary calendar examination up. [Yes, FHQ is just vain enough to mention that.]

Huntsman ascendant?

Recent Posts:

An April Primary in Georgia?

Washington State House Passes Senate Bill to Cancel 2012 Presidential Primary

Senate Version of Tennessee Primary Bill Passes Committee

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

The Links 3/8/11

Charlie Cook asks "next in line" or "no one's in line" for the GOP nomination.

Chris Cillizza has his own take on the "frontrunner-less" GOP field.

Whether a frontrunner emerges may determine whether Alabama is irrelevant in next year's primaries.

Ohio's still concerned about how redistricting might affect the March primary next year.

But that's not new.

Huckabee briefly passed Palin in Google searches last week. I don't know what it says about the metric that Kenya/Portman triggered more searches than Gingrich's "bobbled" announcement last Thursday. Huckabee's jump was the first past Palin since Bobby Jindal in the lead up to and aftermath of his State of the Union response in 2009.

Recent Posts:

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 28-March 6)

Bill to Tie Presidential Primary to Parties' Use Passes Washington State House

Louisiana Republican Sees Need to Move Presidential Primary Back

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

The Links (3/4/11) -- Calendar Edition

I must admit that in getting back in the swing of things with posting in 2011, I've gotten quite bogged down in the minutiae of the 2012 calendar at the expense of other and equally as relevant things (...at least relative to the 2012 presidential election). One of those is a series of posts I used to put out on a semi-regular basis that simply pointed FHQ readers to other matters that, while important, FHQ just didn't have the time to comment on in any great detail if at all. Part of the reason for this is that I do a lot of that linking through retweets on Twitter. But believe it or not, not everything gets tweeted in the first place. So let's resurrect "The Links".

No, today's edition doesn't stray too far from the calendar topic, but each link provides a different perspective on both the rules of delegate selection and the "craziness" of the evolution of the calendar itself. Incidentally enough (Modesty Alert!), each link also either mentions FHQ or quotes me. But as I said, there are some interesting talking points from some of the players on the ground nationally and in a series of states relevant to the calendar and that's something that should be shared. [Look, if you're coming here regularly, you probably get enough of me as it is.]

Molly Ball checks back in on how the calendar is progressing. (This is an update to a December post.)

Nathan Hurst and Marisa Schultz delve into the perspective from one of those non-compliant states, Michigan.

Beth Reinhard examines the impact of the new Republican delegate selection rules.

Recent Posts:

A Note on FHQ's 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar(s)

The 2012 Candidates: Newt's In (?)

Is There a Utah Problem for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

The Links (12/10/09)

1. John Thune has your gubernatorial presidential aspirations right here.

...in the Senate. The South Dakota senator is still FHQ's 2012 darkhorse of the moment. I still think 2016 is more likely, though. If Thune is anything, it's shrewd.

2. South Carolina Republicans are like Idaho Republicans: They want closed primaries in the presidential delegate selection races in the Palmetto state.

3. Local fare: Cal Cunningham's chances in North Carolina depend on DSCC investment.

...in his primary race against Elaine Marshall first (to even have a shot at Richard Burr).

4. State of Elections has another great redistricting reform post up. Read away.


Recent Posts:
PPP: 2012 Presidential Trial Heats (Dec. '09): Huckabee within 1 Point of Obama

Democrats and Republicans Unified on a March Primary Start? All Signs Point Toward Yes

Coakley, Brown Win Parties' Nods in MA Senate Specials

The Links (12/3/09)

1. Remember the Idaho Republican Party's complaint? Well, they are moving forward with their court case to close their primaries:

By January 15, the Republican Party will present a summary of the evidence it will be presenting at the upcoming trial. This will include a copy of the expert report by one of the party’s witnesses, Michael Munger, who is a professor of political science and an expert in political parties. Then, there will be another status conference on January 26 to set the details for the upcoming trial.

FHQ might try and pull some strings and get a hold of that report if possible.


2. What exactly happened to those Chris Daggett supporters on November 3? David Redlawsk (at the Eagleton Poll) has a go at explaining it.


3. The Democrats got their man in North Carolina to challenge Richard Burr. We'll see how that turns out. They thought they had their man in 2002 with Erskine Bowles. That didn't work out well in 2002.

...or 2004. But FHQ is on the ground here in the Old North state and has a vested interest in a competitive race.


4. Also, notice that State of Elections (the blog of the William and Mary Election Law Society) has been added to FHQ's blogroll. Welcome State of Elections.


Recent Posts:
Who Gains the Most if Huckabee's Out for 2012?

The Links (12/1/09)

Washington Post Poll: 2012 GOP Primary Race

The Links (12/1/09)

FHQ hasn't done a "The Links" post in quite a while, but there are few interesting things floating around in my neck of the virtual woods that I thought I'd share with FHQ readers.

1. From Florida:

"Florida voters will likely have the opportunity to inject some competition back into legislative races next November. Fair Districts Florida, a nonpartisan issue committee, is sponsoring two ballot measures that will establish fair and impartial standards for redrawing state and congressional district boundaries every decade."

That's all well and good except...

2. From New Jersey:
There has been a bill introduced in the New Jersey Assembly to require the governor to fill US Senate vacancies in the state's delegation with someone of the vacating senator's party (Frank Lautenberg, New Jerseyans are looking in your direction. Alternate question: Are New Jersey Democrats a little antsy about what Governor-elect Christie would do if confronted with that situation?). This is akin to the process that unfolded in Wyoming in 2007 following Sen. Craig Thomas' (R) death. Democratic governor, Dave Freudenthal, was required to choose someone from among three selected options put forth by the Republican Party in the Equality state.

3. Finally, FHQ is always tickled pink at how campaigns respond to new media, both for the entertaining pitfalls and masterful successes. This CQ piece on political ads on Hulu is fascinating, particularly for a campaign's ability to target particular audiences. That evolution has been something to take in.


Recent Posts:
Washington Post Poll: 2012 GOP Primary Race

Rasmussen 2012 Trial Heats (Nov. '09): Another Tie for Romney Against Obama

Happy Thanksgiving from FHQ

The Links (4/16/09): Data, Data Everywhere

Over the short course of the week that has been, there have been some nice sources of data released.

Pew has a great data set out now on the role of the internet in the 2008 campaign. Good to see that FHQ was one of the...

"Nearly one in five (18%) internet users posted their thoughts, comments or questions about the campaign on an online forum such as a blog or social networking site."

Open Secrets has now gone open source, opening up their rich data on money in campaigns. I've downloaded the 2008 expenditure data, but haven't had time to delve too deeply into it.

That goes for the new Cook Partisan Voting Index (PVI) numbers for the 111th Congress as well. I've got those numbers and the 110th as well and would like to do a more in-depth comparison of the changes than the folks at the Cook Report have provided. Not that there's anything wrong with that. What they don't give us in tabular form, they do provide in a nice map, though. And around here, maps remedy everything.

And to put my own (aided) contribution in, I've put together the daily Google Trends data for the top ten GOP candidates for 2012 (FHQ's Elite Eight plus Bobby Jindal and Ron Paul). I'll have something up regarding this data sooner than the others, but they all give us some data to look at in the meantime; data I'll be able to revisit at some point.

Thanks to DocJess over at DemConWatch for the Cook PVI link.


Recent Posts:
Now Obama's Fighting Climate Change Reform?

2008 GOP Candidate Emergence, Part 3

GOP Going the Caucus Route in Oklahoma in 2012?

The Links (3/18/09): ANES Edition

There has been no shortage of blog posts by political scientists using the newly released American National Election Study since the latest wave went public a little more than a week ago.

Below are a handful of good examples:

John Sides over at The Monkey Cage has a look at respondents' campaign donations
during the 2008 campaign (and over time since 1952). The percentage contributing to political campaigns rose to the highest level witnessed since 1976. However, that didn't hold (for all groups) once the sample was grouped according to income.

Tom Holbrook used the NES to examine just how far behind the eight ball John McCain was in 2008 because of the economy. The answer? Very much behind it. Respondents judging the economy to have been somewhat or much worse off than it was a year prior reached an all-time high (1980-2008). That the "much worse" crowd totalled two-thirds of the sample indicates just how much ground McCain had to make up with that Republican brand in tow. [The same basic pattern holds when party identification is controlled for as well. ...even among Strong Republicans. Nearly half of those in that group found the economy to be much worse off.]

The question I had for Tom (and you can read the exchange we had in the comments via the link to the post above) was whether there were any differences in the economic evaluations based on when the interview was conducted. There was an almost two week period on the front end of the interviewing window that preceded the Lehman Brothers collapse/McCain suspension of his campaign. Were views during that period any less negative than they were after that new broke (and until election day)? Sadly (surprisingly?), the NES doesn't provide an "interview date" variable in the data. However, the separate panel data set (that interviewed and re-interviewed respondents throughout the campaign) did not find any significant differences from the summer to the fall. They were slightly more negative later, but not surprisingly so. In other words, opinions on the economy were already cemented prior to the Lehman news.

Finally, John Sides also tried his hand at whether racial prejudice had any impact on presidential vote totals (1972-2008). In 2008, Obama's total would have risen by one percentage point among white voters if those white voters who had a "less favorable view of blacks, relative to whites, were magically transformed into someone with equivalent views of blacks and whites." So, not that much.

Interesting stuff that will only multiply as the data gets into more people's hands.


Recent Posts:
More on 2008 Candidate Visits

2008 Presidential Candidate Visits by State and Party

Should Indiana Frontload in 2012? (Part Two)

The Links (9/17/08): Debate Edition

If you're like me, you've been waiting on the next big thing in this presidential campaign: the debates. Well, we're a little over a week away from the first debate between John McCain and Barack Obama on Friday, September 26.

If you want a look back at debates past, PBS has an updated version of their documentary, Debating Our Destiny, up on their site. This is a condensed version of the original that packs the televised debates between 1960 1976 and 1996 into the first twenty or so minutes before giving a more in-depth treatment to the debates from the last two cycles. These include not only clips of the debates but interviews with the candidates themselves. Good stuff.

Also, as I alluded to in my comment in a previous post, there is a difference in the formats from four years ago to now. Here is the break down from the Commission on Presidential Debates:

First presidential debate:
Friday, September 26
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS

Vice presidential debate:
Thursday, October 2
Washington University in St. Louis, MO

Second presidential debate:
Tuesday, October 7
Belmont University, Nashville, TN

Third presidential debate:
Wednesday, October 15
Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

But those are only the locations. The first, third and vice presidential debates will be sit-down discussions at a table with the moderator. The second debate will be a town hall event. None of those formats break terribly far from the previous model of presidential debates, but the fact that the first (domestic) (foreign policy*) and final (foreign policy) (domestic) debates will be divided into 8 ten minute issue segments is a different approach. One additional quirk is the effort between the Commission and MySpace (MyDebates.org) to allow for online streaming of the debates as well internet questions to be submitted for use in the town hall debate. Sadly, this will not include video questions from snowmen describing the downside of global warming. Democracy has its limits, I suppose.

As a wrap up to convention season, Tom Holbrook has a comparison of the his predictions for this year's conventions and the actual bumps they produced. FHQ will be back later in the day with its own examination of the changes on the state level.

One last and unrelated thing: If you are in search of something to do with a few spare seconds, check out the Sarah Palin Baby Name Generator. And if you have a few more spare seconds post your new names here. Tell 'em Stag Tonnage Palin sent you. (H/t to Enik Rising for the link.)

*It is sad that the Commission actually in charge of putting these debates on doesn't have this information readily available. However the University of Mississippi, where the first debate is being held, confirms that the focus that night will be on foreign policy issues. Thanks to reader, Erik Redin, for the scoop. Now I want some answers. How long after Obama clinched the nomination was this decision made? How long did it take for it to be realized that the location of one of the most visible demonstrations of college admissions segregation would not, perhaps, be the best venue for a debate on domestic issues? And why did this news not see the light of day. As recently as August 6, when the Commission announced its selections for debate moderators, Ole Miss was under the impression that the debate was still on domestic issues. This is strange. I have a couple of potential contacts at Ole Miss. I'll see what I can find out.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (9/17/08)

The Electoral College Map (9/16/08)

The Electoral College Map (9/15/08)

The Links (8/30/08): Sarah Palin/GOP Convention Edition

Who is Sarah Palin? The race is on to find out.

Chris Cillizza at The Fix weighs in as do the folks over at The Caucus.

The Caucus also describes the battle to define the Alaska governor...by both parties.

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight provides a glimpse into the early polling being done on McCain's VP selection and the breakdown among men and women is surprising.

Here's the speech from her first appearance with McCain following the announcement.

----
With the Republican convention set to kick off on Monday -- weather permitting -- the talk has shifted from the bounce the Democrats got or may have gotten to projections of how well the GOP will do in the polls after their own gathering.


Recent Posts:
More Thoughts on Penalties to Prevent Frontloading

If Taking Away Delegates Won't Stop Frontloading, What Will?

Who's McCain Going to Pick? Why, Sarah Palin, of course.

The Links (8/27/08)

Hey, political scientists like to have their egos stroked too. Below, Karl Rove weighs in on Hillary Clinton's convention speech and discusses convention bounces, citing Tom Holbrook along the way.




Hat tip to Melissa for the heads up.

UPDATE: And Kayla sends us a video from ABC showing some anecdotal evidence of speech effects from Clinton's address last night. Now a question: Were the delegates more easily swayed than swing voters/Hillary supporters not in the hall last night? On the one hand, they are loyal to Clinton, but as a result are they more likely to follow the New York senator's wishes than folks who, while they supported her, may not be as likely to go along with her on this one?


Recent Posts:
Some Good One-Liners Tonight at the Democratic Convention

An August Look at the Barr/Nader Effect in 2008

The Pre-Convention Swoon Revisited

The Links (8/21/08): National Party Convention Bounces

Earlier in the week I posted a link to Thomas Holbrook's impressions of national convention bounces. He now has a projection up for how much of a bump we may see Obama gain from the Democratic convention next week.

Now Larry Sabato has his own look into the history of the bounce up on his site.


Recent Posts:
Blog Note

Back to the Future: The February Frontloading Experiment is Over

The Electoral College Map (8/20/08)

The Links for 5/19/08: Kentucky, Oregon, Electoral College Ties and More

Three cheers for Nevada! At least the Democrats in the Silver state were able to hold a state convention over the weekend and count all the votes in a timely manner (...and avoid Ron Paul supporters shutting things down). Obama ended up amassing 14 delegates to the national convention in Denver to Clinton's 11. In the other states FHQ was tracking over the weekend, well, there wasn't that much to track. In the void, the media reports (or lack thereof in the case of Colorado and Washington) seemed to fall back on the idea that the first step determined the allocation of delegates in those states. At least that was how the reporting on Kansas' state convention went (11 delegates were supposed to be at stake in the state convention phase of the Kansas delegate selection plan.). The focus there was on the lt. governor being named an add-on superdelegate (...and that he was backing Obama). Washington received nary a mention and the focus of the Colorado coverage was the senatorial nomination of Mark Udall.

There was news to be had, though. You just had to dig a bit. There was mention of the Colorado Democrats releasing their numbers sometime today in a live blog of Saturday's proceedings over at PolitickerCO. In Washington, information was tougher to come by. With 51 delegates on the line you wouldn't think so though. Enthusiasm seemed high at the 3rd District caucus and Obama emerged with a 4-2 delegate edge from the 8th, according to one participant. [I'll keep tabs on both situations as well as Kansas' throughout the day and post the results when they become available.]

In other news, there are actually a couple of contests occurring tomorrow. Maybe you've heard. Obama drew a huge crowd in Oregon yesterday and holds a slight lead over Clinton in the polls there. The one thing that could hamper his chances is the fact that new voters (a group that favors the Illinois senator) received two ballots (one partisan and one non-partisan). If both are mailed in, only the non-partisan one counts. That could hurt Obama's numbers on the margins. This has gotten a fair amount of media coverage locally in Oregon, so the word may have gotten out. The possibility is still out there, though. Also, CQ Politics has a look at the race in Kentucky up this morning and gives the advantage to Clinton. No surprise there, but the piece does provide a detailed examination of the race in each of the Bluegrass state's congressional districts. A tie is the best they see Obama doing in any of the six districts.

Speaking of ties, FiveThirtyEight.com has an interesting look at the potential for an electoral college tie between McCain and Obama in the fall. Beyond that, they go into the rules that would kick in should that tie occur and who would stand to gain from that. Given the shape of things on the congressional level now, the incoming House would give Obama the edge in a such a scenario. I've mentioned this before, but I'll do so again: If you haven't checked this site out yet, please go by and do so. Excellent analysis.


Recent Posts:
Nevada Final Tally: 45% of the Vote, 56% of the Delegates

Obama in the Red States: What Mississippi's 1st District Means

Will Obama's Seeming Inevitability Help Him as the Caucus Process Draws to a Close?

Links for April 3

I have mentioned some of these links before, but they are worth bringing back to the top.

1) Superdelegates: Why do 796 individual Google searches to find out who is supporting Clinton or Obama when the work has already been done for you? 2008 Democratic Convention Watch has been updating the list of committed superdelegates throughout this campaign. If you want a more graphical representation of the data be sure to check out the superdelegate map on Google Maps and/or the superdelegate layer for Google Earth. [Big thanks to superdelegates.org for the links.]

2) Electoral College: In response to the recent rash of electoral college maps that have appeared on FHQ comparing Obama and Clinton's chances against McCain, we received a link to fivethirtyeight.com. Just a solid, solid site doing a lot of the same things the maps here have done, and in some cases better.

3) 2008 Election Data: If you haven't checked out Tom Holbrook's site, be sure and stop by for a look. He provides some nice analysis of the voting behavior trends witnessed during this cycle and what that may mean as the nomination phase continues.

It's Official: Debates are No Substitute for Actual Contests

The consensus emerging today (and even last night as I came to the realization when MSNBC's online feed of the debate forced me to call it a night earlier than I had expected) is that last night's debate did little to change the course of the race for the Democratic nomination. Clinton did what folks who are not the frontrunner do: she attacked. Obama, on the other hand, filled the frontrunner role and played it safe, hovering above the attacks being levied against him. The movement toward Obama in the polls (via Real Clear Politics) in both Ohio and Texas back up that role assignment. In Texas the polls show a tie, if not a small Obama lead. Ohio's numbers show that what was once a double digit lead is now down to about six points. If that continues, then Tuesday night could provide some drama, especially after last night proved that a debate can only somewhat fill the void left by the absence of real contests. If only New Jersey has not switched primary dates a second time.

I'll keep it light for the rest of the post. There are some interesting links that have popped up recently that may be of some interest to the group.

1) If you have Google Earth installed on your PC, Mac or Linux box (Hey, the 1% of the population that uses Linux counts too!), be sure to check out the superdelegates layer that has been developed. Yes, the same thing is available on Google Maps, but you can't beat the animation that comes with Google Earth. Most of this can be linked to through Superdelegates.org (The .kml file that is necessary to run the script in GEarth there if you click on, "view the info on Google Maps and Google Earth" here or on that page.). The Monkey Cage (moderated by several of the faculty at George Washington University) has a link to the GMaps version.

2) It is a good day for The Monkey Cage here at FHQ. They also have a post linking to Thomas Holbrook's (of Do Campaigns Matter? fame) new Election08Data blog. There's some good stuff there already.

3) And while we're at it, and since they linked to my post on the Texas primary/caucus last week, here's the link to Election Updates, which lists Michael Alvarez, Paul Gronke, Thad Hall, Robert Krimmer and Melissa Slemin as contributors.