As I noted previously (scroll down), Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Report named (subscription required) Rob Simmons one of the "10 Most Endangered House Incumbents" in Roll Call, The Cook Political Report called the race a toss up, and the Washington Post called the race one of the five races that will determine control of the House.
Add to that positive fundraising results and dismal approval ratings for the President, and we have ourselves a race!
First, the fundraising. Courtney has reported that he outraised Rep. Simmons in the first quarter of '06, $274,688.77 to $222,500 (est.). From Courtney's website:
Courtney's campaign has now raised $806,645.63 since it began last March. This total is over three times Courtney's fundraising at this point in the 2002 cycle, and nearly equal to the amount 2004 candidate Jim Sullivan raised on his October 2004 filing.
Simmons will be facing a much better funded opponent than he has seen in the last two cycles. Expect both the DNC/DSCC and the RNC/RSCC to dump cash into this race in the coming months.
Simmons will also be struggling under the weight of President Bush's staggering job approval ratings in CT. As Courtney noted yesterday, CT-2 had the largest margin of victory for Kerry over Bush in '04 that is represented by a Republican congressman (54%-44%). From that natural disadvantage, Simmons will also have to contend with the President's numbers: 27/69 in CT and 26/71 in CT excluding Fairfield, Hartford, and New Haven Counties (Approve/Disapprove).
And don't believe for a second that Joe Courtney will miss the opportunity to try to take advantage of this landscape. At numerous times yesterday he referred to Simmons as an "enabler" of the Republican agenda and noted his unwillingness to vote independently of the wishes of President and the Republican Party. Courtney also argued that the most important vote for a House member is the first vote: the vote to decide the House leadership; the vote that sets the agenda. Expect Courtney to paint Simmons' vote as one that fostered the "culture of corruption" symbolized by Tom DeLay, Denny Hastert, and John Boehner.
Joe Courtney previewed the main points that he will be making on the stump this fall. If you live in CT-2, you will be hearing about:
1. Medicare Prescription Drug Plan - Simmons voted in favor.
2. Energy Policy - Simmons voted for the plan, which includes a floating LNG platform off the coast of his district.
3. The war in Iraq - I think we have already discussed this issue enough on this blog; suffice it to say, you will be hearing about it again.
Courtney is an engaging speaker and the crowd at the law school was receptive to his speech. He seems to have honed his message to the three points mentioned above and delivers each complete with withering contrast between himself and Rob Simmons.
Joe Courtney has put together all of the pieces of an effective upset: resonant message, cash on hand, favorable demographics, and an unpopular President in the party of the incumbent. The deciding factor may be how much of anti-Republican tide is present in the fall.
UPDATE: Sources:
Rothenberg, Stuart, "RothenbergÂ’s 10 Most Endangered House Incumbents", Roll Call, 2/16/06.
Michak, Don, "2nd District race seen as a toss-up", Journal-Inquirer, 2/11/06.
Cillizza, Chris, "The 2006 Horse Race", The Fix, The Washington Post, 2/6/06.
No Author, "Campaign 2006: Key Races", The Washington Post, 2/6/06.
"Courtney Outraises Simmons", Courtney Campaign Press Release, Undated (4/06).
CT 2004 Presidential Election Results By Congressional District, Connecticut Secretary of State.
Results of SurveyUSA News Poll #8798.
"Simmons Plays Shell Game with Long Island Sound", Courtney Campaign Press Release, Undated (4/05).
Roll Call Vote #669.
Roll Call Vote #145.
8 comments:
I hope that Joe Courtney is allowed to run on his own record and accomplishments. I find Joe to be one of the finest people that I have met in politics. He is a excellent candidate and a better person.
Whats Courtney Going to do when Simmons Endorses Lieberman Too.
Everyone Knows Lieberman is Freindlier with Shays and Simmons than he is with Farrell and Courtney and Both Those Republicans will get enough cover from Joe on the war to win their seats.
It's just sad to watch these Ct house races take advice from the same Washington DC consultants who've lost every election since 1992.
Courtney rated a visit from Bill Clinton in 2002, maybe we'll see more Democratic big shots coming to 2nd District population centers like Enfield (maybe!) and New London. I'm still not particularly excited about him, but we'll see if he does better this time than last. He had a lousy situation to deal with in 2002.
Then again, Simmons is not to be underestimated. I wouldn't for a second turn my back on a guy who can give a speech, pose for photos and drive himself to the hospital while choking on a four-inch piece of steak. Scary. He's like a cyborg or something.
I really don't care what Courtney thinks of Lieberman.
Mr. Reality -
I am confused as to what you are responding to -
No where did I argue that Simmons is bad because his money comes from out of state or that Rob Simmons is a bad guy.
Also, would you care to back up the claim that Joe Courtney is "anti-defense"?
Finally, I wonder if CT voters are smart enough to realize that, even though Bush's name is not on the ballot, one candidate has ideas that are in line with his and one candidate doesn't. I bet they are that smart; you seem to be saying they aren't.
Mr. Reality -
You are right that, as of April 20th, Joe Courtney's positions on Medicare, Energy, and Iraq are not that defined. Considering that, aside from the denizens of this site, no one will pay attention until after the summer, I am not all that shocked (or put out).
That said, how does an argument that Courtney has not defined his positions make it that Joe Courtney is anti-defense?
Or that George Bush's approval ratings will be a factor in the election?
Or that that says anything about PAC money (or that anyone else in this thread even brought up PAC money)?
I am missing the connection.
Also, and just for the record, a D after someone's name does not make them "anti-defense". Neither does disagreeing with this administration on the military. Speaking of providing evidence, this:
As to your second point, a liberal saying they are pro defense is like a consevrative saying they are pro-union...they just don't match up. So it would take a lot of convincing.
is not evidence. Pot, meet kettle.
D_R -
This jumped out at me:
And the fact is, despite what D's may cry, Irag is not a resonating issue in this campaign. There is no outrage from John Q public aside from the lefties.
The SUSA poll (linked above) doesn't show reasons why Bush's approval is so low in CT.
The new Fox poll (900 Registered voters nationwide) did a follow up question to get the reason behind the approval/disapproval. Here are the results:
The overall approval/disapproval rating was 33/57 (the lowest approval to date for the Fox News poll).
Of the 57% who disapprove, the largest block was those who disapprove of his handling of Iraq (48%). If you are keeping score at home, that would be 27.36% of registered voters who based their disapproval. Would that it were 27% of America that were "lefties".
Incidently, Bush's approval rating among Republicans is down 18 points since this time last year, and is under 70% for the first time (all according to the accompanying article). Unfortunately, the reasons for approval/disapproval is not broken down by party identification and does not include trendlines.
Neither here nor there, but check out question 10 about immigration (in the new Fox News poll). Talk about wording a question to determine your results!
Post a Comment