SENATE: MISSISSIPPI
Primaries occurred in eight states on Tuesday, seven of those were Senate races. By far the most interesting race was in Mississippi where long time incumbent Republican Sen. Thad Cochran faced a grueling challenge from the Tea Party-backed activist and state Senator Chris McDaniel.
As you surely know by now, neither secured the necessary 50 percent to avoid a runoff, but McDaniel was slightly ahead of Cochran. The fight will now stretch until June 24th—three more weeks of a race that has already cost outside groups over 8 million dollars.
The question I immediately had after learning the results was, "will the outside groups backing Cochran stick around?"
American Crossroads announced on Wednesday that they would be backing out of the race.
Jennifer Duffy at the Cook Political Report writes:
[Crossroads] communications director Paul Lindsay gave us this statement: "Other than Alaska, we have completed our work on Senate primaries this cycle and are now focused on general elections. With the Chamber, the NRSC, and a local Super PAC already backing Cochran, this is not our fight."
Crossroads’ absence in the run-off denies Cochran’s campaign a major source of outside spending, but not everyone is staying on the sidelines and Cochran will have plenty of support. Rob Collins, the executive director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has said that the committee will "fully support" Cochran in the run-off. The NRSC’s first priority is always to support incumbent. Rob Engstrom, the national political director for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce tweeted this earlier today, "The @USChamber will stand by Senator Cochran (@ThadforMS)." There is also a Super PAC dedicated to Cochran that spent heavily in the primary and can be expected to continue to do so in the run-off. […]
Still, Cochran does face a real challenge in the run-off. Turnout will be lower and more conservative in the run-off, which does not favor the six-term incumbent. And, there is every chance that the race may get uglier than the primary was. McDaniel starts the run-off campaign with some momentum, putting Cochran in the unfamiliar position of playing defense.
It seems harsh, abandoning your guy when the fight is getting really tough, but it’s also smart.
Mississippi is a solidly red state and has a strong partisan tilt—it may have been worth the fight initially (and the cost of that fight was budgeted for); it’s not now. Republican’s money is better spent in the general election in places they need to win to take back control of the Senate—places such as Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, and the primary in Alaska.
Crossroads is wise to cut their losses here, maybe more should follow suit. Elections are largely about strategy, and it’s not smart to pour money into a race that is going to be a safe win for your party.
SENATE: IOWA
Joni Ernst was an underdog in a crowded field until one distinctive ad. On Tuesday, she won the Republican primary with 53 percent of the vote, surpassing the necessary 35 percent to avoid a state convention, and while her democratic challenger Rep. Bruce Braley is "up about five points" in some polls, election analysts are taking her seriously.
On the other side of news, there is this from the Des Moines Register:
Democrat Bruce Braley has created a stir for comparing his GOP rival to a chick.
Braley, a U.S. Senate candidate, released a negative ad on Wednesday, the day after Republican Joni Ernst won the five-way race for her party's nomination.
In the 30-second TV ad, called "Peep," Braley shows footage of a chick and criticizes Ernst. The ad says she's campaigning as a budget cutter, but when she "had the chance to do something in Iowa, we didn't hear a peep. In the state Senate, Ernst never sponsored a bill to cut pork. Never wrote one measure to slash spending."
Iowa politics watcher Timothy Hagle, a University of Iowa political science professor, tweeted Wednesday: "Imagine if a GOP candidate had used a 'chick' in an ad against a female opponent."
Is the ad sexist? Yes. It is subtle sexism. If Republicans ran this ad, Democrats would be irate, but maybe this isn’t a watershed moment—in fact, we all know it’s not. It makes you roll your eyes, but less than we did when President Obama called a reporter "sweetie." It’s a bit patronizing and obnoxious, but not the stuff that ruins careers.
However, the criticism coming out of the Republican camp that Braley is "tone deaf, elitist, and offensive" has legs, because it’s part of a broader narrative that has been attached to Braley since he was caught on tape mocking the farming background of Sen. Chuck Grassley.
This ad may be seen as offensive to some because it has sexist connotations, but it is also an ad in which he’s using farming undertones to discredit her. He does not have a farming background, and some may interpret that as mocking hers. Anything Braley does that seems to remotely mock the farming background of candidates emboldens Republicans’ current argument.
The big slip up already happened, tacking little ones to it never helps.
Either way this ad and the swiftness in which it was released shows that Democrats are worried about the challenge from Ernst, something that’s also been pointed out by the Washington Post.
SENATE: LOUISANA
Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu cannot catch a break from the administration on energy issues.
Earlier this week the EPA announced a proposed rule, which requires power plants to "cut U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions 30 percent by 2030 from levels seen in 2005."
This is significant and likely negative for many red state Democrats, but it’s particularly damaging for Landrieu. This is now the second energy decision in the past three months in which the administration has decided to do something that is opposed by the majority of Louisianans. It’s consequently the third time Landrieu has been unable to come through on an energy issue.
First, she failed to force the administration to make a decision on the pipeline, and then she failed to get a bill through the Senate to "immediately greenlight" it.
This time, Landrieu has publicly said there wasn’t much she could do to stop the EPA rules.
The Hill reports:
And while Landrieu slammed the administration for its new proposal calling for 30 percent cuts in carbon dioxide emissions from the nation's existing power plants by 2030, she admitted the standards are out of her jurisdiction.
"Most of that jurisdiction is in the [Environment and Public Works Committee] not the Energy Committee," Landrieu told reporters when asked if she'd use her perch on Senate Energy to push back against the rules. […]
Landrieu has been a vocal critic of the administration's energy policy on coal and on Keystone XL, but the new rules may create added pressure for her to deliver. She told the Hill that she plans to continue to have hearings on the "importance of America being an energy secure, independent nation."
The conservative group America Rising has already attacked her on this point, and it’s a valid criticism.
Landrieu hasn’t merely told her constituents she can influence energy issues; she’s based her entire campaign on it. The steady roll of three consecutive months failing to prove she can impact the administration is quickly undermining that narrative.