Finally, we get to the district everyone’s been waiting for: CD3, home of retiring moderate GOP Congressman Jim Ramstad. The district has been in Republican hands for 50 years, but now is considered one of the Democrats’ best opportunities to pick up a seat.
The 3rd District just barely leans Republican, with a Cook Partisan Voting Index of R+1. I showed in an earlier set of maps how CD3 has slowly been turning more liberal. The voting map (below, left) shows that the district is split geographically: suburbs close to the central city have become quite liberal, while townships and exurbs at the edge of Hennepin County have remained solidly Republican.
That doesn’t tell the whole story, though. Ultimately, almost the entire district is a toss-up when it comes to the Congressional race because voters in the 3rd are very willing to split tickets. Volatility is a measure of variation across races. Precincts with high volatility are those that see a lot of ticket-splitters. As the volatility map (below, right) shows, almost every precinct has a volatility higher than the state median. That means anything can happen. However, I would say that Madia, as an Iraq War veteran and a former Republican, has a much better chance of reaching out to swing voters than Paulsen, the ideological former Majority Leader for the MNGOP.
Low turnout could become a problem for either candidate, but the turnout map (below, left) show it is probably a bigger liability for Madia. The inner-suburban districts where he is strongest have very low turnouts. In fact, in many precincts that had a Democratic vote of over 60 percent, low turnout has meant that 35 percent or fewer of eligible voters actually voted Democratic (below, right). These precincts are particularly important for Madia because most of them have low volatility. They’re unlikely to vote for Paulsen.
The strategy for Madia in this campaign should have two components.
- Win over volatile Republican precincts. Because there are so many potential ticket-splitters in the district, Madia can neutralize Paulsen’s advantage in Republican precincts with his fantastic story and command of the issues.
- Turn out the base. There are a ton of party-line Democratic votes available in places like Bloomington and Brooklyn Park. These voters need to be turned out in droves on election day, to ensure the widest possible margin for Madia. If he has kept the vote in the western precincts relatively close, the eastern precincts will carry the day.
It will be interesting to see how the moderates vote. I think we have alot of people in the 3rd who tend to like voting for a split ticket. They are skeptical of having Obama and Pelosi and Reid call the shots, but they are similarly skeptical of McCain and Boehner and McConnell. Drives campaign strategists nuts, but people like the healthy tension of a split ticket.
As a person who is strong supporter of splitting a ticket as an advocate of voting for the best person regardless of party affiliation that Madia is the far more attractive candidate. If for no other reason that he seems far less beholden to his party than Paulsen. Winning the endorsement against the establishment candidate Bonoff gives him an appeal that goes beyond specific policy stances.
KH, Paulsen sure seems like “The Annointed One.” Open seat, with the winner likely to keep it as long as they do a good job, and NO ONE competed for the GOP endorsement?
There’s a difference - Madia took on the establishment; Paulsen is the establishment.
Kerosene Hat,
I realize the conventional wisdom around here is that Terri Bonoff is somehow an “estbalishment” figure, but nobody ever seems to say why. How is it that a female Democrat elected in a special election just 3 years ago in a heavily Republican area is viewed as “politics as usual”? Sen. Bonoff has worked awfully hard in her short 3 years in the Senate in order to gain what prominence she has.
I’d respectfully suggest that we all keep in mind that just because someone has worked hard to establish themselves doesn’t necessarily equate them to “the establishment”. Should we forget this, I fear that we as Democrats would develop a reflexive sort of resentment against all winning/successful public figures.
Does Erik Paulsen have a position on Iraq yet?
well, Barack, if you go to Paulsen’s Website, and enter “Iraq” into the search field in the upper left, you still get:
No items contained the text “iraq”.
In other words, Barack - not “no”, but “(cheney) NO.”
On the other hand, no suprise there….
TPT,
Try re-reading my post. It was pro Madia. Poorly written I will agree but trying to say that Madia looks like the more independent candidate.
KH, I got it the first time, and I was agreeing. Poorly written, I agree, but: I’ve been readin’ a whole buncha Bushisms lately, and it’s rubbin’ off.
I bet Erick Paulson doesn’t want to FIGHT in Iraq. I’d bet my life on it.
Madia should continue to articulate his positions the way he has…clearly, consistently, and well thought out! On the energy front I thought it was odd Paulsen would have a Friday press conference at a gas station, and Madia had his yesterday at QBP, one of the most energy efficient business’s in Minnesota and a LEED certified business at that….but then it’s not that surprising, since Madia wants to eliminate the Big Oil Tax Breaks and Paulsen wants to continue them (he’s accepted Big Oil $ from Exxon Mobil and others..Madia won’t take any). In addition, Paulsen wants the voters to think he is for renewables when as recently as April of this year he voted against the Midwest Regional Cap & Trade Program. This bill supported regional greenhouse gas reductions…it seems as if he’s trying to pander to uninformed voters and make himself look like a moderate…HE’S NOT!