“Whither Foleygate?” ?!?

This question was mostly prompted by a piece by The Carpetbagger Report’s Steve Benen over at Midterm Madness: FOLEYGATE AS GOP SCAPEGOAT. Benen writes, “There can be little doubt that the scandal surrounding disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) has dominated the political landscape for the last 10 days, but is it an election-changing controversy? If the GOP loses control of Congress next month, will Foleygate deserve the blame for the Republicans' downfall? Probably not.”

Now, Benen and Carpetbagger Report is a favorite of the Roundup’s and his piece here is more nuanced than just “Foleygate doesn’t matter at all,” so the Roundup urges you to read it. But while the Roundup will refrain from calling Benen an idiot, it does have a slight bone to pick with him.

Benen makes note of several recent polls that show that Foleygate is not weighing negatively on voters’ minds. One is the October 5 Pew Research Center survey that concludes that Iraq is still the main issue and that, “The Foley story has not significantly affected the midterm race: In interviewing conducted before news of the scandal surfaced, Democrats led by 51%-38% among registered voters; in the days after Foley resigned, the Democratic advantage was unchanged (50%-37%). Similarly, the scandal's impact on opinions of GOP congressional leaders ­ and the Republican Party's image for honest and ethical governance has been fairly limited.”

Then there’s a McClatchy piece from last Friday in which Margaret Talev and Eric Black write, “Polls indicate that the scandal, triggered by the publication of sexually explicit messages that former Florida Republican Rep. Mark Foley sent to ex-pages, hasn't created a voter backlash against Republicans nationally.”

Also last week NPR ran a segment about finding anecdotal evidence from a group of voters that “the Foley scandal so far has absolutely no impact on their votes in November.”

And of course yesterday the Roundup made note of and incredibly bravely took a jab at this NY Times piece, Evangelicals Blame Foley, Not Republican Party.

Case closed huh?

Not so fast. The thing with polls is that different ones sometimes reach different conclusions. In fact at the end of his piece, Benen himself cites a Newsweek poll showing Bush’s slipping numbers as evidence that Iraq is voters’ main concern these days. The Roundup doesn’t doubt that Iraq remains the number 1 issue on voters’ minds, but here’s the first graf of the Newsweek article about said poll: “The drip-drip-drip of scandal surrounding the former Congressman from Florida, which became a deluge this week, now threatens to sink Republican hopes of keeping control of Congress, says the NEWSWEEK poll out today.”

Want more… a lot more?

USAToday: Poll: Dems gain big lead: “A Capitol Hill sex scandal has reinforced public doubts about Republican leadership and pushed Democrats to a huge lead in the race for control of Congress four weeks before Election Day, the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows.”

CNN: Poll: About half think Hastert should resign: “The poll also found that Americans are generally dissatisfied with how the GOP handled the Foley matter. Seventeen percent of those polled said it was handled appropriately, while 75 percent said Republicans took inappropriate steps.”

WaPo: Poll Shows Strong Shift Of Support to Democrats: “The Foley scandal, while not a dominant voting issue for many, nonetheless has contributed to dissatisfaction with the majority party's performance, the survey found.”

NY Times: the headline says it all – Foley Hurting Congress’s Image, Poll Shows

CBS: Poll: GOP Put Politics Over Safety (Okay, this might be the same CBS News/New York Times poll as the one cited just above. Anyway, CBS writes, “An overwhelming majority of Americans think House Republican leaders put their own political interests ahead of the safety of congressional pages in their handling of the Mark Foley scandal, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll.”)

Even more confusing, sometimes the same poll can be interpreted different ways. WaPo takes that Pew Research poll and writes up a piece entitled GOP's Hold on Evangelicals Weakening, with the lede, “Lynn Sunde, an evangelical Christian, is considering what for her is a radical step. Come November, she may vote for a Democrat for Congress.” But wait, what about that NY Times piece…

So yeah, polls can sometimes achieve quite the opposite of their intent and muddle the picture. The Roundup’s argument here is not that Foley alone will certainly drive the Democrats to victory. That would be dumb to argue, just as dumb as arguing that Foleygate won’t be a factor at all. How about we agree that it will play a part, as ABC writes: “The Mark Foley scandal, while it hasn't helped, is a distant concern, with many doubting that the Democrats would've handled it any better. The scandal's likeliest impact is that it forces the Republicans off the anti-terrorism message that remains their best push back against the broad discontent with the war in Iraq. The scandal has erased the minor gains the Republicans showed around the 9/11 anniversary.”

Maybe this is just the Roundup’s own naïve optimism (as it has readily admitted, it loves Foleygate, can’t get enough of it, so forth), but it tends to think Foley will play a fairly significant role. Just look at the Reynolds race. Bam, right there. His race has been undeniably transformed by Foleygate – according to both the media and yes, polls. Now, the Roundup doesn't know exactly how critical a single NRCC chairman is to coordinating campaign efforts and allotting money and the sort. If Reynolds calls in sick one day some other guy can probably handle the office tasks. But when you consider that the guy in charge of ensuring GOP wins is now losing his own race, how can there not be any trickle down negative consequences from that? Even if long-time party line voters are saying in certain surveys or articles that Foley won't change how they plan to vote, just consider how many undecideds will be affected by the negative ads, by the money now coming into certain Democratic candidates, just by the general GOP malaise in the air.

And in other Foleygate news

Roll Call has an update (sub. req.) on the legal challenge the state GOP is weighing regarding the placement of signs at polling stations to inform voters that votes for Mark Foley will count for his unnamed-on-the-ballot replacement, state Representative Joe Negron (R). “The state association for county election supervisors said placing such notices in absentee ballots would be illegal. Another ruling from the association on posting signs inside polling places is expected this week. Both Republican and Democratic elections supervisors were quoted in local newspapers as saying posting notices in voting booths could violate the ban on electioneering within 100 feet of a polling place."

Brace Yourself…
Take it or leave it, but Politics1’s Ron Gunzberger has some interesting gossip about the coming few weeks: “Several of the Dem and gay political blogs are publishing not-so-veiled references to imminent pre-election ‘outings’ of closeted Republicans in Congress. The rumor mill has it that 1-3 House members (including a very senior House member) and one Rocky Mountain region Senator will be outed between now and Election Day. Another persistent rumor coming from inside the Beltway is that another Congressman -- this one being a straight Republican -- will be named for engaging in actions similar to Foley, but involving female pages. Also, I understand from direct conversations a newspaper reporter is ‘close’ to having detailed info and names to out a prominent Southern GOP candidate for Governor -- but the reporter is unsure whether or not he'll be able to line everything up to get it all verified and printed before the end of this month. It looks to be a very bumpy final month for a bunch of politicos!”

Naming a straight Republican to create a heterosexual Foleygate? Anyone have any thoughts on what that would accomplish? Consider the notion that Christian conservatives see this as a gay scandal, one isolated from overall GOP values and maybe even reinforcing their reasons to vote Republican. While another Republican scandal, whatever it might be, would clearly only further damage the GOP, would a hetero one be more damaging than a homosexual one?

Hastert Watch: Sure, Whatever, Makes Perfect Sense to Me

Given the nature of the Foley scandal so far, is anyone even that surprised that Speaker Dennis Hastert decided to meet for half an hour on Tuesday with Christian evangelist K.A. Paul – a man who reportedly claimed another minister's leper colony as his own and videotaped the lepers for a promotional video; a man who, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, believes voters should oust congressional Republican leaders because U.S. foreign policy is delaying the second coming of Jesus Christ; a man whom The New Republic once described as a “spiritual adviser to the scum of the earth”? Anyone given pause by this? Man, Foleygate is the best.

In other Hastert news, The Hill spots a trend: Democratic challengers to vulnerable GOP incumbents have taken the offensive in calling for Hastert’s head and posing pointed questions about Hastert to their Republican opponents. Meanwhile, Democratic incumbents facing close races have remained relatively silent about Hastert.

NY-26: Reynolds Under Fire from Double Barrel Attack Ad Action

Here comes the flood…

One from challenger Jack Davis (D): NY-26: New Dem Ad To Reynolds: "Isn't It Wrong To Do Nothing?"

And one from the 527 group Majority Action: NY-26: Spooky New Ad Blisters Tom Reynolds

Surely more to come.

GOP Spending Recap

Election Central was all over the money numbers yesterday:

OH-SEN: NRSC Dumps Over $1,000,000 More Into Negative Ads Against Brown

NRCC Says It'll Spend 90% Of Ad Budget On Negative Ads

NRCC Dumps Over $1.7 Million More Into House Races

From Monday, October 9:

NRCC Sinks Over $300,000 Into House Races Across Country

And from Saturday, October 7:

NRCC Sinks $7.8 Million In One Day Into 30 Races

And for some Democrat numbers, from Thursday, October 5:

DCCC Pumps $3.8 Million Into House Races

And here’s something curious about recent GOP spending habits: AP reports, “In an unusual move, the Republican National Committee is investing heavily in television advertising in Senate races in Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri in what officials describe as a firewall strategy designed to limit Democratic gains in the Nov. 7 elections and maintain the GOP majority.”

Republican officials “said the decision has caused friction with officials at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which historically has been the only party entity to run commercials on behalf of its candidates.” Midterm Madness has more on what exactly this move means. Steve Benen figures, “As for Ken Mehlman going around NRSC Chair Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.), the move suggests a certain lack of confidence from the party establishment in the senator's midterm strategy.”

Huh, wonder why Republicans appear to be scrambling like that…

CQ Republican Slide Update

Today’s race-rating changes:

NJ-05: from Safe Republican to Republican Favored

OH-06: from No Clear Favorite to Democrat Favored

OH-02: from Safe Republican to Republican Favored

The Republican Slide – it’s electric! Boogie woogie woogie.

Hotline articulates the tie between the money numbers and the GOP slide: “Competitive races are popping up in some very surprising places. … For the next 28 days, the NRCC will have to play Whack-A-Mole -- shoring up these newly vulnerable seats. But with plenty of top-tier Republican incumbents still needing cash, that may be an increasingly tough task.”

VA-SEN: A Little More Monday Night Debate Reaction

CQ weighs in with their take on Monday’s George Allen vs. Jim Webb debate. And for an extended recap of the media’s reaction to the debate, DebateScoop gives us Allen vs. Webb Debate Roundup - Media Edition.

DebateScoop also takes a closer look at a big issue that was not brought up at any time in Monday night’s debate: recent revelations of Allen's failure to make certain financial disclosures. Check it out – Allen vs. Webb Debate -- The Other Elephant in the Room? And The Plank’s Jason Zengerle adds a funny note about Allen’s stock options: “Lost in all the hubbub over George Allen's failure to disclose his Xybernaut stock options are the details of what, exactly, the high-tech company was about. From the looks of this 2001 Space Daily article, Xybernaut was about sending a man to Mars. Maybe if Allen loses his Senate seat, he'll have a second act.”

NJ-SEN: Behind the Scenes of the “Political Smear” the Roundup Linked to Yesterday

Remember the one last little thing linked to at the end of yesterday’s Roundup about Tom Kean, Jr. (R) turning his back on a mother with a son in Iraq? Well the Midterm Roundup is shocked and horrified to inform its readers that this video was in fact a political smear orchestrated by the Menendez campaign, as broken down and deconstructed by WCBS-TV (tip o’ the hat to Political Wire). Actually wait. Is the Roundup being sarcastic? It doesn’t even know anymore. In fact the Roundup is just kind of confused – by both the original video and the WCBS report. Before reading on, the Roundup advises that you watch both videos just linked to (they’re short, promise), or you won’t really know what it’s talking about. Or, if you don’t care, then just skip to the end (the Roundup hastens to inform you that no breaking news nor possibly anything of any redeeming quality whatsoever will be found in the following rant; skipping to the end may very well be advisable).

OK, so the Kos YouTube video (sorry, but BTW, is the Roundup the only one who can no longer watch or even think about YouTube without $1.65 billion and Steve Chen’s Look-at-me-I’m-a-billionaire-and-I’m-laughing-silly grin blaring across its consciousness? The Roundup is seriously afraid that this might just compromise its ability to fully enjoy YouTube ever again, which enjoyment, sadly, was once totally unrestrained and unadulterated (Late Update: OK, yup, that should do it. Thanks to this video – a message from Chad and Steve – the Roundup is no longer afraid of losing its ability to enjoy YouTube; it has lost its ability to enjoy YouTube.)) shows this woman who says she has a son in Iraq desperately trying to get Kean to answer her questions as Kean turns away and a staffer steps in. The WCBS exposé aims to present the whole thing as a cold, calculating, unethical campaign tactic.

Now look, maybe it was an orchestrated smear job. Certainly wouldn’t put it past Menendez or this race as a whole. But here’s what WCBS does: they start the piece by showing a bunch of Menendez supporters outside holding signs and shouting as Kean enters the CBS building for the October 8 debate, and the narrator says, “It began with a campaign dirty trick – Republican Senate candidate Tom Kean, Jr. forced to run a gauntlet of Bob Menendez supporters when he arrived at CBS 2 Saturday to tape a campaign debate.” This is called “Step 1” of the political smear. Step 2 plays out during the debate itself, when Menendez displays the shameless craftiness of actually attacking Kean for failing to adequately address the question of intensifying civil war in Iraq. Step 3 involves the actual mother of the soldier in Iraq who confronts Kean after the debate, referred to as “the set-up: sneaking Jo Ann Sohl, the mother of a soldier serving in Iraq, into a post-debate press conference to confront Tom Kean.” Step 4 is the tracker filming the confrontation (a calm verbal one), which as we all know from S.R. Sidarth and a summer of watching You1.65billionTube videos is a common campaign practice. Step 5 is the press release the Menendez campaign issues about the confrontation, step 6 is the video itself being released on the Internet, and step 7 is when the group Military Families Speak Out (WCBS kind of gets the name wrong) holds a press conference the following Monday to condemn Kean’s Iraq question dodging – labeled by WCBS as “the payoff.” The segment wraps up back in the studio with a newswoman perfunctorily tossing out brief opposing statements from Kean and Menendez spokespeople.

Again, Menendez is not exactly a blinding beacon of ethical conduct, we probably all realize by now. The Roundup is not necessarily defending Menendez and Kohl here. Was this event coordinated? Probably. After all the Menendez campaign invited Sohl to the debate and very likely helped her get into the post-debate pressroom to confront Kean.

The Roundup’s problem with this is the way CBS presents it. The segment shows Kean to be this hapless victim of some abominable smear tactic. Is it unethical for political supporters to rally outside a studio building with some signs? Is it unethical for Menendez to press Kean on the question of Iraq during a debate? Was Kean not given ample opportunity to answer? Was Sohl violent or unhinged when she approached Kean? Did the tracker force Kean to turn his back on the woman once she approached him? And is the Military Families Speak Out group not allowed to voice its disappointment with Kean, who after all reportedly has not yet answered the question of whether he would send his children to fight in Iraq (which Menendez has answered (no))? If Kean had simply looked at Sohl and spoken to her the Menendez camp wouldn’t have much of a video on its hands.

Bah. Clearly the Roundup has spent too much space on this, but it is annoyed. Surely there are plenty of ways that both Menendez and Kean have proven they deserve each other and deserve as dirty and negative a race as theirs has been so far. Everything the Roundup read back when the June primaries occurred said that this race would be one of the ugliest in the country, and the 2 men have lived up to these predictions quite admirably.

But who is WCBS to take it upon itself to so intrepidly expose to us ignorant voters what’s “really going on here”? Isn’t it the Kean campaign’s job to call whatever happened on Saturday a Menendez “dirty trick” and WCBS’ job to report the Kean campaign’s allegations? Here, like this: Kean camp outraged by guerrilla video (the Bergen Record, which includes in its report a more complete context for the actions of Kohl, who is a member of Military Families Speak Out, and a response from the Menendez campaign). See how the Record very carefully attributes the outrage to Kean and does not place its own judgment on the story? Believe that’s referred to as “reporting.” Or like this: Military family group's beef with Kean continues (the AP, which reports the Kean camp’s description of the allegedly orchestrated tactic as “appalling” and “sad,” and also reports the other stuff – that Kean has in fact failed to fully answer the Military Families group’s questions and in addition that “Kean spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker on Monday also did not answer the same questions about military service when they were posed by The Associated Press.”)

Meanwhile WCBS appears to have just decided to do Kean’s work for him, and for that the Midterm Roundup has no choice but to Rou-, Rou-… yes ROUNDLY DENOUNCE WCBS for its unqualified parroting of the Kean campaign line. OK, done now.

IYI (If You’re Interested)

NY-20: Upstate Race for a Seat in Congress Turns Nasty (NYT)

NATIONWIDE: Dems hunt for drop-off voters (The Hill)

NATIONWIDE: Democrats veer to the right in fight for House (Wash Times)