Kay Hagan needs a really good Get Out The Vote effort to hold onto her seat.
More than a year ago, she assured me her campaign would build on the formidable GOTV machine built by Obama in 2008. That seems to be happening.
But the GOP has put a lot of resources into catching up with the Democrats in terms of technology. While I'm sure the Democrats have not been standing still, closing tech gaps -- or even leap-frogging them, as the Democrats did between 2000 and 2008 -- is very doable.
And the best GOTV tech won't overcome a lack of enthusiasm.
Here's where Hagan has an advantage some of her Senatorial peers may lack. North Carolina progressives are highly pissed off at the GOP regime in Raleigh. They're looking for reasons to love the moderate Hagan.
She's already running against Raleigh, which is smart.
You know what would be smarter? To run against Raleigh's obstructionist strategy on healthcare.
ACA is yours in this race no matter what, Kay. Owning it is good politics, and good GOTV fodder for the liberal wing of your party.
Or she could attempt to use the ACA as a cudgel against Thom Tillis. Perhaps in an attempt to cause political damage to Tillis she could falsely claim that Tillis supports the ACA.
What am I saying ... she already did.
Flailing.
Posted by: NitWitCharmer | Apr 22, 2014 at 07:35 PM
Brannon is doing the same cudgel thing to Tillis.
There was a Daily Show (iirc) segment that showed Romney's GOP rivals making the same arguments against him that Obama later used. Hagan is no doubt hoping for a long tough GOP run-off campaign in which Tillis takes serious abuse, spends heavily, and is forced rightward.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Apr 22, 2014 at 09:20 PM
Ed Cone's specialty is putting lipstick on the pig, and declaring that everything will work out OK for the good guys if they double down on their disasters.
Posted by: Bob Grenier | Apr 22, 2014 at 10:22 PM
After seeing this, I went to Hagan's campaign site to see what she is saying about Obamacare. Nothing.
An algorithm that assumes this moderate corporatist has some kind of organic base is flawed. Hagan is in trouble not because she might not reach her base, but because she has no base to ping. Her hopes rest with the Republican being too far to the right (in reality or perception).
Posted by: King William | Apr 25, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Yep. See my recent milk carton post.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Apr 25, 2014 at 02:46 PM
Her hopes rest on painting the American virtue of dissent as unAmerican and the ACA's unAmerican nature as palatable despite its lack of American "DNA".
We already hear this meme from Reid and other Democrats who attempt to conflate limited government sensibilities with a limited America or they would have the uneducated believe ... unAmericanism. Never mind that limited government is an American virtue hard written in the Constitution and that Democrats are themselves unAmerican for working against the American virtue of small government/big citizen.
Posted by: NitWitCharmer | Apr 26, 2014 at 11:29 AM
Not to repeat myself too often, but the point I've been trying to make is that her hope is convincing North Carolinians that the ACA is working OK and that repair is a much superior option to repeal.
Posted by: Ed Cone | Apr 26, 2014 at 11:33 AM
So the ACA is "working", but in need of "repair".
The ACA seems to be redefining the term working.
Not much on which Hagan may hang a campaign. Nothing at all really.
Posted by: NitWitCharmer | Apr 26, 2014 at 02:04 PM
I don't think it is in need of repair. The ACA is actually rather simple in conception, with three main elements (community rating, individual mandate, premium subsidies), and so far all three are working pretty well. No doubt some tweaks will be needed, but I think all Ed was saying was that repair is a more responsible option at this point than repeal.
As for Hagan's campaign, perhaps you're right. I haven't seen anyone here predict a Hagan victory, just opine that she has no choice but to employ a strongly pro-ACA campaign strategy. Maybe it won't work.
Posted by: Andrew Brod | Apr 26, 2014 at 08:31 PM
Andrew, define "working pretty well."
We're hearing a lot about the 7.5 million people who signed up. What does that actually mean? Are people actually paying for their insurance now? Did these people have insurance before? How many actually had their policies cancelled by the new regs in the ACA? How many are in that magic young adult demo?
Even if all of the answers above are affirmative to the ACA (as I'm sure you can find/massage/tweak it to fit your narrative) how do we really know it's working? How much evidence is in yet? How much money are people saving? Is it the $2500 that Mr. Obama promised? Are people able to keep their doctor (PERIOD) like Mr. Obama promised?
And I'll save you some time; I do not "want Obamacare to fail" (quote unquote). I do not "want to go back to the way things were before."
I'm just looking for some reality among the three B's that are guiding the ACA proponents; said three B's being "balloons, bunting and bullshit."
Posted by: John | Apr 28, 2014 at 08:49 PM