South Dakota House Race

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is reducing its commitment to the Herseth-Sandlin campaign from $500,000 to $350,000, according to Bob Mercer. There are a number of ways to interpret this. One is that it has little or nothing to do with how the race is shaping up here. It's just a reflection of Democratic difficulties nationally. From Charlie Cook at the Cook Report:

Frighteningly for Democrats, this past week's Federal Election Commission reports show that five GOP-affiliated outside groups have laid down a combined $17.9 million in 50 Democratic-held House seats, more than making up for the vaunted cash edge the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has enjoyed over the National Republican Congressional Committee all cycle.

As Cook reads it, Democrats failed to spend enough in September and are now playing catch up. Perhaps this, along with the unusually high number of vulnerable incumbents, means that the DCCC just doesn't have any more money to give the HS campaign.

By contrast, it might be that they view HS is more comfortable than she appears, and don't think she needs as much help as previously projected. That possibility was suggested by Mercer today.

A Republican friend recently told me he had seen results by a respected Republican-oriented pollster who's NOT working the U.S. House of Representatives race in South Dakota — and the pollster had Democratic U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin leading Republican challenger Kristi Noem by a margin of 5 percentage points, just outside the margin of error, in the early October survey. If that information was accurately relayed to me, it might explain why the Democratic congressional campaign organization has downgraded Herseth Sandlin's promised $500,000 of aid to $350,000 — because she doesn't need it.

That is certainly possible, but it doesn't square well with the latest fundraising reports. From the Politico:

South Dakota Republican Kristi Noem raised twice as much money as Democratic Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin in the past three months, promising one of the most expensive House races in South Dakota in the past decade.

Noem raised $1.1 million during July, August and September, bringing her total haul to over $1.6 million this cycle. Herseth Sandlin raised close to $550,000, and has also raised more than $1.6 million.

Noem's haul eliminates the hefty financial advantage that observers expected Herseth Sandlin to enjoy. She has more money to spend in the final three weeks of the campaign, $770,000 to Herseth Sandlin's $500,000.

Consider that in light of voter registration numbers in South Dakota, also from Bob Mercer, and discussed in detail by my colleague Professor Schaff.

Here are the voter registration numbers as of Oct. 1. Republican registration was 235,906. That was a gain of 880 during September. Democratic registration was 193,304. That was a gain of 335 during September. Independent registration was 83,799. That was an increase of 822.

There is also the fact that the DCCC is pulling money out of races all over the country in which Jeff Zeleny of the New York Times calls "triage."

As Republicans made new investments in at least 10 races across the country, including two Democratic seats here in eastern Ohio, Democratic leaders took steps to pull out of some races entirely or significantly cut their financial commitment in several districts that the party won in the last two election cycles.

It just seems unlikely that the Democrats would be pulling money out from under Herseth-Sandlin if she was in fact five points ahead.

Comments

[Bill Fleming]

KB, if Noem keeps putting out garbage like this NRA flyer, she will defeat herself.
Talk about incompetent dishonesty. The message she's sending here is "I will deceive
and mislead you any chance I get if it will help me politically."

Not the best way to spend your donors' dough. Her campaign thus far has been
a model of incompetency.

http://madvilletimes.blogspot.com/2010/10/noem-misrepresents-nra-endorsement-of.html

[KB]

I have seen the flyer, and I largely agree with you about it. It is nonetheless a manifestation of a problem that HS cannot easily escape. Our at large Representative has presented herself as a faux Republican. She is an "independent mind". Okay. Independent of whom? The Democratic Party, as she keeps reminding us. But if being "not a Democrat" is what HS thinks the voters want, and it clearly is, wouldn't they be just as well served by electing a Republican?

[Bill Fleming]

Not a Democrat ≠ Republican. I doubt they would be as "well served," KB.
I don't get the impression that "service" is part of the Noem agenda.

[KB]

Bill: in fact, "not democrat" = Republican or close enough for government work.

[Bill Fleming]

I don't know, KB there are a lot of Independents out there.
Plus, Democrats far outnumber Republicans nationally,
last I checked. (And in SD vice versa).

I'm having a hard time buying your equivalency theory.
Maybe math just isn't your strong suit.

(I know for a fact it's not mine.
I'm an art and word kinda guy ;^)

[KB]

Bill: we are clearly both "word kinda guys", though I can't draw so much as stick man.

Democrats do still outnumber Republicans nationally but not in South Dakota, which is where it counts for the above race. On the other hand, conservatives now make up a larger share of likely voters than either moderates or liberals. The latter is a distant third. As for independents, they make up a large share of the voters, but almost no share of viable candidates. Hence, not-Democrat does effectively mean Republican, and vice verse. I don't think it takes a math whiz to see this.

[Bill Fleming]

Ok, KB, I see that you are talking about voting perhaps more than ideology, so I'll concede the point, but only to a degree. Ovbiously, since Dems DO get elected in SD from time to time, not-Democrat sometimes = Republican. This has most certainly been the case in SHS's past elections and will almost certainly be the case to some degree in this one as well.

Next set of equations for you:
not-a-Republican≠Liberal (at least in SHS's case).
Conservative≠Republican (at least as far as some Tea Party people are concerned)