SOUTH BY SOUTHWEST — We're roughly three weeks away from Election Day, and control of the U.S. Senate is coming down to a few key races where the polling margins remain small. POLITICO's Election Forecast has four Senate seats in the toss-up category: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia and Nevada. At the moment, Sens. Raphael Warnock of Georgia and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada appear to be the most imperiled Democratic incumbents. If Democrats can hold those two seats, they are likely to retain control of the Senate. Warnock maintains a small advantage over Republican Herschel Walker while Cortez Masto trails ever so slightly against Republican Adam Laxalt, according to polling averages. To understand the pivotal nature of these two states this year and break down the two Senate races, Nightly spoke with POLITICO's Senior Campaigns and Elections Editor Steven Shepard . Why are these two races so important to control of the Senate and what are some similarities and differences between them that you see? At its core, the battle to control the Senate is a numbers game. Republicans need to net one seat and get to 51 in order to flip the majority, and the two most vulnerable Democratic incumbents are clearly Sens. Raphael Warnock and Catherine Cortez Masto. If Republicans hold all of their vulnerable seats, they only need to flip one Democratic seat. But if they lose Pennsylvania, they need two seats — and Georgia and Nevada are their best bets. These are two of our toss-up races, but the most obvious difference is — for now — Cortez Masto trails Republican Adam Laxalt in the polling average, while Warnock leads embattled GOP challenger Herschel Walker. Exactly how much spending can we expect to see between these two races? Is there a significant spending gap between the parties and affiliated PACs? Are there different messages in, say, Laxalt vs. Walker ads, or Cortez Masto vs. Warnock ads? The numbers are staggering. We just got the candidates' financial reports for the third quarter over the weekend. From July 1-Sept. 30 alone, the four candidates combined to spend more than $70 million — and that doesn't count the outside groups, which are set to combine for roughly $100 million in Georgia and just a little less than that in Nevada, when all is said and done. While Warnock and Cortez Masto have more money than their opponents, GOP outside groups have spent big to close the gap. Republicans' ads have an overwhelming focus: inflation, namely tying the spike in prices to legislation passed by the Democratic Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden. The Mitch McConnell-linked Senate Leadership Fund is currently hitting Warnock for "enabling Joe Biden and crushing Georgians, voting for trillions in reckless spending, causing inflation and higher prices." And in Nevada, their latest ad says Cortez Masto "rubber-stamped" Biden's "reckless spending, triggering record inflation and sky-high prices." The Democratic messages do differ between the states, but that's mostly because of Walker's unique vulnerabilities. Warnock's most recent ad featured Republican voters talking about why they can't support Walker, citing his "lies," "bizarre statements" and "history of violence." The latest ad from Democrats' top super PAC in Nevada, meanwhile, tries to spin high gas prices around on Laxalt, calling him "Big Oil's best buddy." Some recent polling suggests that the inflation message may be breaking through , cutting into Democrats' leads or widening deficits from over the summer. Is it correct to say that message has had more success in the Nevada Senate race than in Georgia, where Warnock's small lead has remained steady? Or are there other factors at play? To the extent that the inflation argument is working better for Republicans in Nevada than Georgia — and, to be clear, the polling is clear that inflation is the dominant issue most everywhere — it might be because the spike in prices is greater in Nevada than in Georgia. I also want to mention the longer-term political trends in each state: Georgia went from Romney +8, to Trump +5, to Biden +0 over the past three presidential elections. Its demographics — a sizable Black population and lots of well-educated white voters — point to why it's been trending leftward. Nevada, by contrast, went from Obama +7, to Clinton +2, to Biden +3. It's not moving as quickly to the right as Georgia is moving left, but Nevada's demographics (more working-class voters and a larger Latino population) mean Republicans have opportunities to grow even though GOP presidential candidates have lost four consecutive elections there. And in the last three weeks, what should we be looking for that might move the needle in either of these important races? Well, it won't be debates. Last Friday's meeting between Warnock and Walker was their only one on the books, and there's no debate planned in Nevada whatsoever (the two candidates combined to commit to five debates, though there was no overlap). In Georgia, I'm most interested in seeing where views of Walker land after all of these negative ads and Walker's well-documented checkered past. Can he get swing voters and moderate Republicans to pull the lever for him? In Nevada, the final three weeks will put Democrats' once-vaunted turnout machine in the state to the test. Outside of Dems' 2014 flop, the party has a history of getting its voters to the polls and pulling out close races. But this year, Republicans have momentum, and there are questions about whether Democrats have their act together . Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com . Or contact tonight's author at cmchugh@politico.com or on Twitter at @calder_mchugh .
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment