Dodd, Burr Have Dangerously Bad Poll Numbers
Roll Call looks at three Senators whose weak poll numbers usually spell big-time trouble for incumbents—Jim Bunning (R-KY), Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Richard Burr (R-NC).
The Bunning situation is clearly sui generis, so I’ll leave it one side. I think a flaw in the article is that it treats the Burr and Dodd situations as basically similar when they’re actually extremely different. Dodd is basically a case of a politician coming under a cloud of unpopularity for idiosyncratic reasons. It seems that if Dodd were to bow out of the race and be replaced by Richard Blumenthal or any other reasonable Democrat, that the Democrat would be very strongly favored. Consequently, Dodd’s strategy is to play up the idea of Chris Dodd Generic Democrat. Legislatively, he’s aiming to be an ally of the popular president Barack Obama and emphasize his likely opponent’s support for the failed and unpopular agenda of George W. Bush.
The Burr situation is rather different. He seems to be a more unusual case of a politician who was elected at a time when being an orthodox conservative was a great political strategy in his state, now running for re-election at a time when it’s not clear that that’s true anymore. Suddenly it seems that North Carolina has a Democratic governor, one Democratic US Senator, and was carried by a Democrat in the presidential election, and its incumbent conservative Republican Senator Richard Burr is polling poorly. It’s potentially a state that’s just transforming its demographics and political culture under Burr’s feet. And he doesn’t seem to be trying to adapt. He’s not trying to position himself as a moderate by selectively supporting some element of the Obama agenda. He’s just charging ahead on the assumption that North Carolina will swiftly return to its conservative roots.
And maybe it will. But it seems like a risk.
28 Responses to “Dodd, Burr Have Dangerously Bad Poll Numbers”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
If a generic Democrat would do significantly better than Chris Dodd, why not run a primary challenge against him? Keeping the seat is much more important than Dodd’s own political fortunes, and he has been a mediocre Senator at best.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:00 am
Josh G:
I’ll go out on a limb here and say that, short of some swift and clearly not unending increase in poll numbers by some reasonable date, Chris Dodd will not be running for reelection in 2010. Whether it’s through something reasonable or something strong-armed, I highly doubt the Democrats are going to give up what should be a safe Senate seat, particularly since they have a probably small but still decent chance of getting to 67 seats overall. As Matt pointed out, there are other Democrats who could take his spot and win easily, and this only makes his exit seem all the more likely.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:06 am
I suspect Burr’s problem is that he doesn’t feel like he can survive without the unqualified support of the GOP base and national elites. And he may be right, in which case he is kinda screwed.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:08 am
Yeah, isn’t Burr pretty much “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t”?
Its a crappy time to be an R incumbent anywhere except the deep south.
Which is just fine with me!
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:14 am
Actually, I have a strong suspicion that Burr is operating on principle, without regard to his chances for re-election. He represented the congressional district in which I worked some years ago and, although I disagreed with him on almost every issue, I was impressed by his knowledge of issues, his lack of pretension, and his focus on constituents.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:16 am
“Yeah, isn’t Burr pretty much “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t”?”
If he continues on the path that he seems to be on, which is mindless opposition with a little hysteria mixed in, then yes he is. But is that really necessary? Think of all the more respectable conservative bloggers, like Greg Mankiw and Tyler Cowen, who seem to disagree with a lot of Obama’s agenda. If you take a few of their suggestions and offer them up in a reasonable manner, then you have the sort of platform that could appeal to both the diehards and the independents and moderates. In other words, it’s possible to be both strongly against Obama but responsible and levelheaded at the same time.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:28 am
Actually, I have a strong suspicion that Burr is operating on principle, without regard to his chances for re-election.
As has been said on previous threads, Burr is the classic business-friendly, somewhat-socially-conservative NC Republican. He’s not temperamentally suited to do the grandstanding batshittery of a DeMint.
As has also been said on previous threads, the political establishment NC is Democratic.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:33 am
How is Lieberman not included in this list? He’s got to be hated more than Dodd at this point.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:44 am
Lieberman is not on the list because he’s not up for re-election until 2012.
As for Dodd. I’m not from CT or the east coast so I don’t get what’s going on here. Seems like not to long ago he was a relatively popular presidential candidate type who just had no chance of breaking though the Hillary/Obama juggernaut. What happened? How has he fallen so far?
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:57 am
Brian J,
Mankiw and Cowen don’t represent the GOP base. Meanwhile, the GOP leadership has decided not to follow the path you suggest (which I think is a dumb move, but there you go). So while I agree that the path you suggest has potential, I’m not sure it works for someone like Burr (meaning someone with very little in the way of an independent brand or independent powerbase) when the party base and party leadership are both opposed to you trying it.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Dodd is basically a case of a politician coming under a cloud of unpopularity for idiosyncratic reasons.
Dodd and Schumer have consistently opposed regulation of the financial sector. Dodd tried to change his tune after everything fell apart, but it was too late. In fact, I think this was what really has hurt him. He has alienated the financial sector, and his change of heart is not believable to the voters.
Schumer, on the other hand, is still unrepentant.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Think of all the more respectable conservative bloggers, like Greg Mankiw and Tyler Cowen, who seem to disagree with a lot of Obama’s agenda. If you take a few of their suggestions and offer them up in a reasonable manner, then you have the sort of platform that could appeal to both the diehards and the independents and moderates.
In what university is Mankiw respectable? He is regularly ridiculed as an ideological hack by the financially conservative economics bloggers.
Cowen may sound reasonable, but he was consistently wrong in the run-up to the economic meltdown and there is no reason to believe that he has become more competent since then.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Err, I meant universe, not university.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Too bad about Dodd’s poll numbers, because he turns out to have been ahead of the curve WTR torture and the MCA, FISA, telco immunity, etc.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
There isn’t anything about Dodd’s corrupt nature which is idiosyncratic in the U.S. Senate. The idiosyncrasy only lies with the fact that his corruption is tied to the worst financial panic in decades, which results in his unpopularity. The shame is that the citizens of the United States are extremely tolerant that their Senators and members of the House are very frequently crooks, as long as they share the loot sufficiently.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
What’s the situation with Bunning that is so sui generis? I’m not up on KY politics…
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Interesting discussion. About Burr, I’d add that the banking industry is a big player in North Carolina politics too, and a big contributor to Burr in particular I believe.
Even though I’m an NC voter, Burr is kind of a cipher to me. Burr beating Erskine Bowles in ‘04, with the help of Dubya’s coattails, seemed a case of an attractive, competent, bland spokesmodel type defeating a guy with smarts and substance but who was awkward on the stump and on TV.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I don’t think the reasons are particularly idiosyncratic. The generally hostile environment for politicians who are cozy with financial interests will be a headache for Chuck Schumer and for Barney Frank as well, even if that’s not apparent right now. The idiosyncratic part is that Dodd got hit with a lot of oppo early on.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Bunning is not right in the head, even by Kentucky standards.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:49 pm
a guy with smarts and substance but who was awkward on the stump and on TV.
Bowles’ ads were awful. The image he projected through the campaign was awful. And then, on the eve of the ‘04 election, he showed up for a pep rally alongside the local House candidate and was fantastic. I was left thinking: where was this guy throughout campaign season?
But Burr knows the history of his seat: no-one holding it has been re-elected since Sam Ervin.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Dodd is unpopular because his corruption has been revealed. Countrywide, Fannie & Freddie, his caving and lying about the AIG bonuses – everyone has seen what he is about now.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Sadly, I suspect Bunning is the most likely of the three to be reelected.
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Just going to add that Burr, despite his numerous ideological failings, is a reasonably responsive Senator. I recall writing his office about net neutrality and actually hearing back, unlike Dole, whose office completely ignored me.
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:20 pm
The shame is that the citizens of the United States are extremely tolerant that their Senators and members of the House are very frequently crooks
Will, the nature of corruption under normal circumstances is such that the politicians are skimming a little bit off of the public to give a lot of largess to the small number of benefactors they have. The public is usually affected so marginally that they don’t notice, and as long as times are good, they don’t really care. This is one of the few instances where corruption caused a large direct hit to the wallets and well-being of voters, so they’re understandably more upset than normal.
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
How on earth is moving your family to another state so you can run for president idiosyncratic?
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Yeah, that’s pretty accurate, Tyro, although I’d add that the non-stop stealing has a cumulative effect which helps produce, or increases the magnitude of, the crashes which eventually anger the public.
April 24th, 2009 at 11:53 am
If the current AG in NC goes up against Burr, I think it could get very interesting. Generic democrat, with Obama’s support, would very easily win. However, Cooper has a history with the Duke lacrosse mess. I have not lived in Durham since that time, so I do not know the prevailing sentiment in the African American community. However, if they choose to stay home in some form of protest vote, then Cooper’s chances are significantly minimized. When you couple that with an off cycle election, Cooper will need Obama physically in parts of NC to make it happen.
April 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Dodd is in trouble because of corruption. He is following in the footsteps of his father. As for the notion that NC is “Suddenly Democratic.” NC has been Democratic on the state level for years. In fact since 1889 or there abouts there have only been 2 Republican Governors. Hence all the corruption at the state level. Burr has a target on his back due to the defeat of Dole last cycle. Dole lost because she did not make a case of why we should reelect her. I am sad to say that every time I saw her she talked about what she did as Transportation Secretary 30 years ago. In addition, the labor unions poured millions of dollars into the state as we are one of the right to work states. To all this one must add the effects of the Obama campaign. NC had a late primary and the Obama folks flooded the state for it. They remained after the primary and kept working. By the time election day rolled around the election was lost. The Democrat labor unions will be pouring loads of money into the state in an attempt to defeat Burr. However, Burr has several advantages: 1. He is an excellent campaign and has a good story to tell and he will tell it. 2. Obama is not on the ticket.