Why Democrats and Jon Ossoff Have a Shot at a Georgia Upset
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn MARCH 29, 2017
But at this point, it wouldn’t be shocking if Mr. Ossoff got the 50 percent necessary to avoid a runoff in June.
The idea of a competitive race here would have come as a surprise to many just a few months ago. Mr. Price won re-election with a healthy 62 percent of the vote, which observers have held up as a stronger indicator of the district’s partisanship than Mr. Trump’s performance. Democrats also have a poor track record in special elections.
But Mr. Trump’s weak performance last November was a sign that this race could be competitive.
In congressional elections since 2004 without an incumbent, the results of the previous two presidential elections have been much more important than the results of the last congressional election in predicting the results of a race. In fact, the presidential results have had eight times the predictive weight.
Moreover, the most recent presidential election has had nearly three times the predictive weight of the preceding one — a warning sign for the Republicans in a district where Mr. Romney did well but Mr. Trump did relatively poorly.
Mr. Price’s 62 percent of the vote in November was not an indicator that this was a safely Republican district. There are plenty of Republicans who do as well while representing competitive or even Democratic-leaning districts. My hometown representative, Dave Reichert, a Republican in Washington State, won 60 percent in a district won by both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. There are many other examples.
Mr. Price’s vote share could be construed as a sign that the district was safely Republican if he were considered to be a particularly weak incumbent. But he was a longtime member of Congress — like Mr. Reichert — and a powerful one: a committee chair considered impressive enough to become a cabinet member.
National political conditions are worse for the Republicans than they were in 2014 or 2016. Republicans now hold the presidency and the Congress, with Mr. Trump’s approval rating around 40 percent. On paper, these are the sort of conditions that tend to build up to so-called wave elections, like the ones that swept the Republicans out of power in 2006 and back into power in the House in 2010.
Put it all together, and it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the race ought to be competitive. Based on factors that tend to predict which districts are likeliest to be competitive, like recent election results and the national environmental conditions, Republicans might be favored to win by only about five points in this race.
This is a very uncertain estimate in a number of respects. If the last two presidential elections are given equal weight, then the Republican might be favored to win by nine or 10 points.
But above all, the estimates are uncertain because special elections are hard to forecast. There’s a wider range of possibilities when turnout is low, when there isn’t a national race and when parties have less time to recruit candidates.
The Upshot
Get the best of The Upshot’s news, analysis and graphics about politics, policy and everyday life.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.
This Georgia race is emerging as a great example.
When the seat opened up, it was reasonable to assume that a special election would work to the advantage of Republicans. The Democrats didn’t have a candidate. And in recent years, Republicans have excelled in special elections because they’ve done well among the older and reliable voters who dominate low-turnout elections.
Instead, everything has been breaking toward the Democrats — and it probably wouldn’t have happened without a special election.
Start with the money. Mr. Ossoff, a documentary filmmaker and former congressional staffer, has benefited from timing. He was basically the only Democrat seeking federal office at a moment when Democratic energy was surging and when progressives were looking to “do something.”
Mr. Ossoff probably would not have raised nearly as much money if he’d been competing for attention with 434 other races. His fund-raising tally is better than that of 96 percent of the congressional challengers who raised more than $100,000 in 2016, and there’s still time for him to move up the list.
Instead, it’s the Republicans who are struggling to coalesce. They have 11 candidates on the ballot, with none emerging as the obvious favorite, although former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, the businessman Bob Gray and state senator Judson Hill are considered among the strongest contenders. Whoever advances to a runoff (assuming anyone does) will have only two months to coalesce support and raise funds with the benefit of party unity.
Low turnout could work to the Democrats’ advantage, too. The enthusiasm that brought millions of Democrats to the streets and millions of dollars into Mr. Ossoff’s campaign account might just translate into an unlikely and possibly big turnout edge.
View image on Twitter
Follow
Christopher Gorham
✔@ChrisGorham
No joke. Call 678-636-9551 and @Alyssa_Milano and I WILL PICK YOU UP and take you to early vote! Now. @ossoff#Georgia6th
For comparison, just 23 percent of voters in the district in the 2016 general election had most recently participated in a Democratic primary, compared with 46 percent in a Republican primary.
The huge Republican field probably helps the early Democratic turnout edge: Republican voters are less likely to know at this stage whom they’re going to vote for. But the Democrats also enjoy a similar 45-to-21-point edge among the larger group of voters who have requested but not yet returned absentee ballots.
These sorts of lopsided turnout advantages aren’t sustainable in a high-turnout presidential election or even a midterm. But in a low turnout election like this, it doesn’t take much to generate a meaningful turnout edge.
All these factors might be enough to get Mr. Ossoff over the top, but these are also reasons the result might not say much about Democratic or Republican fortunes next year and beyond.
Democrats can’t count on huge fund-raising, a split Republican field and a low turnout for future victories.
But a strong Democratic turnout in Georgia’s Sixth would certainly raise the possibility that the party can cure its enthusiasm gap in the midterms. And if the Democratic turnout stays anything like what it is so far, it will be fair to start wondering whether Mr. Ossoff will win the election outright, with no need for a runoff. Weird things happen in special elections.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/...eorgia-district-dominated-by-republicans.html
Nate Cohn @Nate_Cohn MARCH 29, 2017
But at this point, it wouldn’t be shocking if Mr. Ossoff got the 50 percent necessary to avoid a runoff in June.
The idea of a competitive race here would have come as a surprise to many just a few months ago. Mr. Price won re-election with a healthy 62 percent of the vote, which observers have held up as a stronger indicator of the district’s partisanship than Mr. Trump’s performance. Democrats also have a poor track record in special elections.
But Mr. Trump’s weak performance last November was a sign that this race could be competitive.
In congressional elections since 2004 without an incumbent, the results of the previous two presidential elections have been much more important than the results of the last congressional election in predicting the results of a race. In fact, the presidential results have had eight times the predictive weight.
Moreover, the most recent presidential election has had nearly three times the predictive weight of the preceding one — a warning sign for the Republicans in a district where Mr. Romney did well but Mr. Trump did relatively poorly.
Mr. Price’s 62 percent of the vote in November was not an indicator that this was a safely Republican district. There are plenty of Republicans who do as well while representing competitive or even Democratic-leaning districts. My hometown representative, Dave Reichert, a Republican in Washington State, won 60 percent in a district won by both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. There are many other examples.
Mr. Price’s vote share could be construed as a sign that the district was safely Republican if he were considered to be a particularly weak incumbent. But he was a longtime member of Congress — like Mr. Reichert — and a powerful one: a committee chair considered impressive enough to become a cabinet member.
National political conditions are worse for the Republicans than they were in 2014 or 2016. Republicans now hold the presidency and the Congress, with Mr. Trump’s approval rating around 40 percent. On paper, these are the sort of conditions that tend to build up to so-called wave elections, like the ones that swept the Republicans out of power in 2006 and back into power in the House in 2010.
Put it all together, and it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the race ought to be competitive. Based on factors that tend to predict which districts are likeliest to be competitive, like recent election results and the national environmental conditions, Republicans might be favored to win by only about five points in this race.
This is a very uncertain estimate in a number of respects. If the last two presidential elections are given equal weight, then the Republican might be favored to win by nine or 10 points.
But above all, the estimates are uncertain because special elections are hard to forecast. There’s a wider range of possibilities when turnout is low, when there isn’t a national race and when parties have less time to recruit candidates.
The Upshot
Get the best of The Upshot’s news, analysis and graphics about politics, policy and everyday life.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.
This Georgia race is emerging as a great example.
When the seat opened up, it was reasonable to assume that a special election would work to the advantage of Republicans. The Democrats didn’t have a candidate. And in recent years, Republicans have excelled in special elections because they’ve done well among the older and reliable voters who dominate low-turnout elections.
Instead, everything has been breaking toward the Democrats — and it probably wouldn’t have happened without a special election.
Start with the money. Mr. Ossoff, a documentary filmmaker and former congressional staffer, has benefited from timing. He was basically the only Democrat seeking federal office at a moment when Democratic energy was surging and when progressives were looking to “do something.”
Mr. Ossoff probably would not have raised nearly as much money if he’d been competing for attention with 434 other races. His fund-raising tally is better than that of 96 percent of the congressional challengers who raised more than $100,000 in 2016, and there’s still time for him to move up the list.
Instead, it’s the Republicans who are struggling to coalesce. They have 11 candidates on the ballot, with none emerging as the obvious favorite, although former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, the businessman Bob Gray and state senator Judson Hill are considered among the strongest contenders. Whoever advances to a runoff (assuming anyone does) will have only two months to coalesce support and raise funds with the benefit of party unity.
Low turnout could work to the Democrats’ advantage, too. The enthusiasm that brought millions of Democrats to the streets and millions of dollars into Mr. Ossoff’s campaign account might just translate into an unlikely and possibly big turnout edge.
View image on Twitter
Follow
Christopher Gorham ✔@ChrisGorham
No joke. Call 678-636-9551 and @Alyssa_Milano and I WILL PICK YOU UP and take you to early vote! Now. @ossoff#Georgia6th
For comparison, just 23 percent of voters in the district in the 2016 general election had most recently participated in a Democratic primary, compared with 46 percent in a Republican primary.
The huge Republican field probably helps the early Democratic turnout edge: Republican voters are less likely to know at this stage whom they’re going to vote for. But the Democrats also enjoy a similar 45-to-21-point edge among the larger group of voters who have requested but not yet returned absentee ballots.
These sorts of lopsided turnout advantages aren’t sustainable in a high-turnout presidential election or even a midterm. But in a low turnout election like this, it doesn’t take much to generate a meaningful turnout edge.
All these factors might be enough to get Mr. Ossoff over the top, but these are also reasons the result might not say much about Democratic or Republican fortunes next year and beyond.
Democrats can’t count on huge fund-raising, a split Republican field and a low turnout for future victories.
But a strong Democratic turnout in Georgia’s Sixth would certainly raise the possibility that the party can cure its enthusiasm gap in the midterms. And if the Democratic turnout stays anything like what it is so far, it will be fair to start wondering whether Mr. Ossoff will win the election outright, with no need for a runoff. Weird things happen in special elections.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/...eorgia-district-dominated-by-republicans.html
