Democrats on the ground here are increasingly confident they will pick-up two state Senate seats, but are warning that winning the third necessary for a takeover is a tenuous prospect.
Despite hype from some in the party apparatus about a "six for six" sweep Tuesday, the more realistic scenario is winning two or three seats, according to those involved in the ground game.
The most stark word of caution is included in a private memo obtained by POLITICO from the Democratic-leaning We Are Wisconsin group to its donors.
"In our final days, we remain cautiously optimistic about our chances to take back the Senate. But predictions of victory at this point are beyond premature – they’re dangerous," wrote We Are Wisconsin field director Kristen Crowell in an Aug. 3 memo obviously designed to lower expectations.
"While we have solid research suggesting there are races where we might secure a second and third potential pick-up, none of these of these races except 32 should be considered safe pick-ups (and even there we face challenges to get the ball over the goal line), and we are dealing with an unprecedented electorate that is very difficult to forecast," she continues.
After outlining the odds Democrats face in going up against the "unlimited resources" of "corporate interests, she warns the the predictions of three wins in bank are overblown.
I have no idea what will happen tomorrow, but I do know this: If the Dems don't win at least three senate seats they have lost... and lost big.
"But," one might ask, "why is that? Even if the Democrats do not take control of the Wisconsin state senate just getting close might force the Republicans to work with them a little bit."
No it won't. The things is, none of the seats tomorrow were last won by the Republicans in 2010 when conditions were just right for the GOP nationwide. They were all last contested in 2008, an election that was a mighty good one for Democrats nationwide. Wisconsin Democrats are attempting to make the case that Gov. Walker's term to date has been so unpopular the effect in the state will be greater than the positive effect the Obama candidacy had for Democratic candidates in 2008. Any way you slice it it is a ballsy argument.
However, because it is so ballsy "close but no cigar" won't cut it. Walker and Co. are much more likely to shrug their shoulders and say "That's all you got?" and continue on their desired course. Only putting an actual speed bump in the state senate will actually slow them down.
As for "the odds Democrats face in going up against the 'unlimited resources' of 'corporate interests'", all I can say is that isn't how it looks on the ground here in the Moore v. Harsdorf race. The Moore campaign has been much, much more visible in television advertising, direct mailings, and canvassing. Moore forces have knocked on our door five times in the last three weeks, while I've not seen any Harsdorf people. Moore mailings have outnumbered Harsdorf 10 or 12 to one. If the Harsdorf campaign has access to "unlimited resources" they have a funny way of showing it.
In any event, the political scientist in me is looking forward to seeing what happens tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment