E. J. Dionne, Jr.’s March 7 WaPo column “The Democrats’ Real Problem” puts some needed perspective on all the hand-ringing about the Democrats’ supposed lack of a coherent message:

The stories about the Democrats are by no means flatly false — Democrats don’t yet have a fully worked-out alternative program — but they are based on a false premise, and they underestimate what I’ll call the positive power of negative thinking.
The false premise is that oppositions win midterm elections by offering a clear program, such as the Republicans’ 1994 Contract With America. I’ve been testing this idea with such architects of the 1994 “Republican revolution” as former representative Vin Weber and Tony Blankley, who was Newt Gingrich’s top communications adviser and now edits the Washington Times editorial page.
Both said the main contribution of the contract was to give inexperienced Republican candidates something to say once the political tide started moving the GOP’s way. But both insisted that it was disaffection with Bill Clinton, not the contract, that created the Republicans’ opportunity — something Bob Dole said at the time.

Dionne offers Dems a reality check worth considering:

The Democrats’ real problem is that they have failed to show how their critique of the Republican status quo is the essential first step toward the alternative program they will owe the voters in the presidential year of 2008…the shortcoming of Democratic leaders is not that they don’t have a program but that they have not yet convinced opinion makers that fighting bad policies is actually constructive — and that, between presidential elections, keeping matters from getting worse is sometimes the most positive alternative on offer.

Dems will do fine in ’06 and ’08, if we make it clear that the Democratic Party stands for competence and honesty in government, peace, human rights and economic progress for working people — in stark contrast to the GOP’s deepening Iraq quagmire and lengthening record of corruption and incompetence.

EDM contributor Alan Abramowitz has a must-read op-ed in the Sunday WaPo, “What’s Behind Those Poll Numbers?” Abramowitz argues that Bush’s tanking approval numbers can be attributed to “a growing perception that he simply isn’t competent.” Abramowitz argues further that,

Competence is not a partisan issue. Last week’s polls found that somewhere between 34 and 40 percent of Americans approved of Bush’s job performance. That is discouraging enough. But for Bush and his political advisers what may be more disturbing is the fact that his approval rating among Republicans had fallen to 72 percent, 10 to 15 percentage points lower than the president’s previous level of support from his party’s voters. It’s a sign that even supporters are beginning to question Bush’s effectiveness.

Abramowitz cites the Administration’s history of bungled crises-management, including the Harriet Miers disaster and other examples of poor leadership, especially the Ports deal, which he sees as a major turn for the worse:

While escalating violence in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, the investigation into the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame and Hurricane Katrina damaged the president’s standing among Democrats and independents, his support from his fellow Republicans remained largely intact — until the ports deal was announced.
…, the takeover is just plain unpopular — with Republicans and independents as well as Democrats. According to last week’s CBS News poll, 58 percent of Republicans along with 71 percent of independents and 78 percent of Democrats oppose the takeover.
Even more significantly, the way the port takeover was handled reinforced a growing impression among the public that nobody is really in charge in the Bush White House. How could the president not even have been consulted on an issue directly involving national security, Bush’s strong suit in the minds of most Americans and especially most Republicans?

Abramowitz believes Bush’s image of incompetence could be contagious for GOP congressional candidates in the November elections:

Unlike the president, congressional Republicans have to face the voters this November. Even though most represent safe Republican districts, only six Senate seats and 16 House seats would have to change hands to give Democrats control of Congress, and there is growing concern among Republicans that they could lose their grip on both chambers if the midterm election turns into a referendum on a president with approval ratings in the thirties or worse.

Abramowitz makes a compelling case that competence could be the pivotal issue in upcoming elections, and his article is highly recommended to Democratic strategists at all levels.

Democratic candidates are firming up their chances to win a majority of governorships in November, reports Dan Balz in the Washington Post. Balz quotes Democratic Governors Association Chairman and Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson:

…we could go from 22 Democratic governors to 27 or 28 after the ’06 elections…The real reform and the real action in the Democratic Party is with governorships. It’s a good omen for strengthening the Democratic Party for ’08

Balz also provides a short, but informative survey of the politics of the Governors’ races 8 months out, and offers this interesting observation:

The gubernatorial landscape tramples conventional notions of an America rigidly divided into red and blue. In the 19 Bush-won states with contests, Democrats hold seven of the governorships. In the 17 states won by Sen. John F. Kerry (D) with gubernatorial elections this year, Republicans hold 10 of the governorships.
Some of the most popular and politically secure Democratic governors facing reelection this year preside over states won by Bush in 2004. They include Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry and Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal. The same is true for many Republican governors in states won by Kerry, among them Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle and Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas.

SurveyUSA reports a slight edge for Dems in current approval ratings for the 50 governors — an average 54 percent for the 22 Democratic governors, compared to 52 percent for the 28 Republican governors.
With 36 governorships at stake, the November election may have a pivotal impact on the ’08 presidential races by giving the Dems “tangible organizational advantages,” explains Balz. Governors have leverage in the redistricting process, as well as staff support and publicity resources unavailable to other candidates. As Robert Tanner observes in his recent Associated Press article on upcoming Governor’s races:

…there’s no question that governors have an impact on national politics. Four of the last five presidents had previous experience running a state, and governors can help presidential campaigns by marshaling big organizations and getting out the vote.

by EDM Staff
Apropos of the post below, Dems need to insure that as many Katrina evacuees as possible are registered to vote in time for the November elections. No doubt some evacuees are reluctant to register in new states where they now live for a number of reasons, such as uncertainty about their residence in the near future. But there are a significant number of votes at stake here. For example, FEMA estimates that there are 34,575 evacuee households now residing in Georgia — and growing quite rapidly. It’s not hard to envision 50,000 or so potentially eligible voters associated with these households, a significant number for any state. Nor is it too much of a stretch assume that many, if not most of them are angry about the Administration’s weak leadership on their behalf.
No doubt there will be GOP shenanigans aplenty in the months ahead to prevent these potential voters from getting registered, and the states have a range of different residency and registration requirements (see this link for a state by state comparison). Hopefully, Democratic party leaders in affected southern states are already planning strategies to get as many of these potential voters as possible registered. Not a few important races, including the governorship of Georgia, could depend on it.

by Pete Ross
If we Dems ever want to see southern states colored blue on morning after election maps, the time to raise some serious hell about the botched Katrina “recovery” is now.
Consider the new Associated Press poll conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs 2/13-16 (toplines here) on Katrina recovery: For openers, Americans would prefer that Katrina recovery be “a higher priority for government spending” than the war in Iraq by a margin of 64 to 31 percent. Asked “How confident are you that the money appropriated for recovery from Katrina is being spent wisely,” 37 percent responded “not too confident” and another 29 percent chose “not confident at all.”
Talk about national security, only 15 percent of respondents said they were “very confident” about the government’s ability to handle major disasters in the future, with 28 percent “not too confident” and 24 percent “not at all confident.” And talk about ‘Portgate’ as a national security issue, consider that the Port of South Louisiana (New Orleans) handles more tonnage than New York City — only 3 ports in the world handle more.
A reporter friend, himself a lifelong southerner, who recently visited the Gulf rim, was stunned by the number of “destitute people” he saw who were still struggling to survive along the highways of southern Mississippi and Louisiana. The people who live on the Gulf Coast and those who have evacuated are pissed in a huge way, and they will most assuredly take their discontent to the polls, wherever they are, on election day. What we don’t want is them — and other southerners — saying they have not been impressed with the Democrats’ response to the Administration’s disasterous handling of the recovery effort. It would serve the DCCC and DNC well to crank up the volume on this issue to the point where it is crystal clear which party is ready to provide energetic leadership to restore and revitalize Gulf communities.

by Pete Ross
When President Bush said the U.S. was “addicted to oil” in his state of the union address, many thought it was just a cheap applause line with no follow-up. But yesterday Bush visited a leading producer of hybrid car batteries and energy-saving technology for buildings to preach the gospel of energy independence. (see this article in today’s WaPo for a wrap-up) Later in the day, he visited a solar energy plant in Michigan and today he speaks at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory — clear signals that his party intends to improve its standing with voters who are concerned about rising gas and heating oil prices, our dependency on mideast oil and environmental pollution.
Environmentalists can’t be blamed for scoffing at the notion of Bush as champion of energy independence, given Bush’s and Cheney’s long history as errand boys for big oil. But Democrats should not dismiss the possibility that Bush’s p.r. initiatives may have the desired effect, which is to persuade enough voters that the G.O.P is becomming more supportive of energy independence in order to reduce Democratic victories in the November elections.
A look at recent polls goes a long way to explaining Bush’s new-found concern about energy independence. For example, a survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted 2/1-5, indicates that 55 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush’s handling of energy policy, with 30 percent approving. Asked if America is “addicted to oil,” 85 percent of the respondents agreed and 86 percent supported tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars, truck and SUV’s. The poll also indicated that 68 percent of Americans want a greater investment in developing mass rail and bus transit systems.
Because Bush and the Republicans have refused to support stricter CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards or a significant investment in mass transit development, Dems are in good position to call the GOP’s bluff. Most Democrats have a solid record of support of these two reforms and this difference should be strongly highlighted in every congressional campaign.
In the months ahead, Democratic candidates should emphasize how the Administration and Republican congressional majority have blocked CAFE reforms and mass transit investment at every opportunity. With this commitment, Bush’s p.r. intitiative will backfire and Dems will gain a sharper edge in November.

The Democrats are making gains among senior citizens as a result of confusion and rising discontent over the new prescription drug rules, reports Robin Toner in “Drug Plan’s Start May Imperil G.O.P.’s Grip on Older Voters” in The New York Times.
Discontent over prescription drug polices could have a decisive effect in races in which senior voters are critical, such as the U.S. Senate contest in Pennsylvania. In House races, Toner says “Among the fewer than three dozen House districts considered competitive, the over-60 vote will be critical in states like Florida and New Mexico.”
As Ruy Teixeira explained in his December 21 piece “Seniors, the Prescription Drug Benefit and the 2006 Election,” voters age 60 and older have become highly critical of the job performance of both the President and congress — and these voters turn out at even higher rates in midterm elections.
Toner quotes GOP pollster Glen Bolger’s observation that confusion over the drug benefit has “taken the key swing vote that’s been trending the Republicans’ way and put it at risk for the next election.”
A range of problems are driving senior concerns about the new plan, according to Toner:

…including low-income people who fell between the cracks in the transition; the difficulties reported by many pharmacists in determining eligibility; and the general struggle of millions of retirees faced with a choice among 40 or more private drug plans, with different rules, lists of covered drugs and premiums.”

Toner cites a new Kaiser Family Foundation poll, indicating that “retirees were almost twice as likely to say they viewed the benefit unfavorably (45 percent) as favorably (23 percent)” and a recent New York Times/CBS News Poll showing that “most did not expect the law to lower drug costs over the next few years.” In addition, a recent CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll reveals that only 20 percent of seniors believe the new plan is working.
Smart Dems have taken a common sense approach to addressing the issue. Toner quotes Florida State Senator Ron Klein, who is running for congress against Rep. Clay Shaw:

“These Medicare prescription drug costs, on top of the other issues, are weighing pretty heavily on people with fixed incomes…Let’s start thinking about the consumer side, instead of figuring out how to prop up the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.”

Toner notes that Democrats are pushing reforms to improve the benefit, including extending the sign-up deadline, empowering Medicare to negotiate prices directly with drug companies and more vigorously regulating private drug plans. Dems will publicize their reforms at a series of nearly 100 forums that will be held across the U.S. in the coming months

Most pundits seem to agree that the GOP will retain control of the U.S. Senate after the November elections. But the latest SurveyUSA roundup of approval ratings for all U.S. Senators suggests the GOP hammerlock may be loosening. When the 100 Senators’ are ranked according to their most recent approval ratings, 13 of the 16 Senators with approval ratings below 50 percent are Republicans. Granted, not all of the 13 are up for re-election this year, but the approval rankings may indicate that change is afoot.

by EDM Staff
My DD‘s Chris Bowers concludes his 4-parter on Democratic prospects for winning the 15 seats needed for a House majority on an optimistic note:

While I believe the thirty districts I have already mentioned are indeed the best chances Democrats have for pickups, there are of course other districts that could fall our way given a new extraordinary event, such as a major scandal, an unexpected retirement, or a particularly strong campaign. There also still remains the outside possibility of a major national landslide, especially given our good very good “macro” situation. We have good recruitment, while Republicans are not. This will allow Democrats to stretch Republican defenses much thinner than they did in 2002 or 2004 even if our national poll lead shrinks. Democrats are also doing well in terms of money, both at the individual candidate level and in terms of the DCCC closing the cash on hand gap with the NRCC. Democrats also hold the generic advantage in 2006, which will help keep their poll numbers high.

If there is a landslide or “an extraordinary event,” Bowers sees another 25 House seats that could go Democratic. Bowers’ 4-parter is the best horse-race wrap-up so far, and outclasses anything in print. Readers comments on individual races published with his series are perceptive as well.
Mark Gersh and New Donkey Ed Kilgore add some insights into upcoming House races in their Blueprint Magazine piece “Target Rich: Democrats Have a Slew of Vulnerable House Republicans in Their Sights for the 2006 Midterm Elections.” WaPo‘s Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza have a recent article “Handfull of Races May Tip Control of Congress” estimating 25-40 openly competitive house races, but also noting that “in 2004 just 32 congressional districts were won with less than 55 percent fo the vote.”
The list of 65+ vulnerable GOP-held districts compiled from the aforementioned articles is encouraging. But it might be even more helpful to know which issues are most important in these districts.

MyDD is running a forum centered on the ideas in a new book of interest to EDM readers, Get This Party Started: How Progressives Can Fight Back and Win, an anthology edited by Matthew R. Kerbel and featuring essays by Anna Greenberg, E. J. Dionne, George Lakoff, Howard Dean, John Podesta, Amy Sullivan and EDM contributor Alan I. Abramowitz, among others. This week features MyDD’s Chris Bowers on “Blogging for Political Change” and next Thursday, (Feb. 2) Abramowitz, the Alben W. Barkley Professor of Political Science at Emory University and author of Voice of the People: Elections and Voting in the United States, will discuss his essay “Explaining Bush’s Victory in 2004 (It’s Terrorism, Stupid).”