(Also cross-posted at dKos and MyDD. Recs appreciated. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

I need to admit something: I love the horse race.  I try in so many ways to resist.  I try to resist the media’s love of incumbency and jockeying for position.  I love to see people talking issues, I mean really talking issues.  It’s one of the reasons that I love Debra Bowen.  She knows the issues, and isn’t afraid to talk about some of the very real problems in election reform. But try as I may, I still love me a good horse-race story.

I track House Forecasts and the polls relentlessly.  How much do I love Chris Bowers’ House Forecast? Well, let’s just say…too much.  So, I was very intrigued when I saw On Oct. 6 that the Cook Political Report changed the CA-11 race from likely Republican to lean Republican.  That’s a real indicator of the nervousness by those within the beltway.  The NRCC has dumped about half a million bucks into the race, and almost $300K in a 6-week period…for a very strong fundraiser.  Heck, Pombo had to bring W to town to get some more cash.

There have been no truly independent polls in this race.  I would really love to see one, but they just don’t exist.  However, we do have two polls an internal McNerney poll by Lake Partners, that puts him within the margin (Pombo 41-McNerney 40), and a Defenders of Wildlife poll by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner that showed McNerney actually leading by 48 percent to 46 percent.  There are at least two other polls out there, but the problem is that they are internal Pombo/NRCC polls that they won’t release.  Why? Well, can you think of any other good reason than the fact that they just aren’t that good of numbers?

Now, this race is still a very challenging race, but the possibility of a Dem landslide could be bad news for Richard Pombo.  But don’t ask Lisa Vorderbrueggen, the political editor of the CoCo Times.  You see, she thinks this race as something of a joke:

So far, the polls haven’t prompted Rothenberg and other top analysts to increase their rankings of this race, which sits a “likely Republican,” one step more competitive than outright safe.

Congressional Quarterly is the exception, which moved the race last week up one additional competitive level to “leans Republican.”

But instead of polls, its writer cited the nearly $500,000 the National Republican Congressional Committee has spent in recent weeks on anti-McNerney advertisements.

Does the cash dump mean the polls are true?Maybe. On the other hand, it could be a GOP message to the Democratic Party, which hasn’t spent a dime on McNerney, that it won’t roll over in this district.
Strategy translation: Get out your checkbook, Democrats, because this ain’t gonna be cheap. (CoCoTimes 10/08/06)

Well, I do agree with the “this ain’t going to be cheap part.” It’s why jsw ran his matching contribution campaign.  California politics is never cheap (A reason to support Prop 89 for state politics??).  But did you see something here…hmmm…oh yeah, her whole premise: “the polls haven’t prompted Rothenberg and other top analysts to increase their rankings of this race”.

Hmm, well, she does throw the recent CQ Upgrade, but she missed something didn’t she? Oh yeah, Charlie Cook, one of, if not the most, widely read forecasts upgraded CA-11 from a Likely Republican to a Leans Republican.

Now, I don’t know if Ms. Vorderbrueggen just missed the Cook upgrade.  I mean it is very hard to find.  You know, you had to type that long URL into your browser (cookpolitical.com) or you know, type Cook political into Google.  All very challenging.  It’s unclear whether she is ill-informed, deliberately deceptive, or just lazy.  I suppose it could be a combination of all of the above, but I’m just betting it’s the lazy thing.  Political editors are busy people and may not have time to actually double check their facts.  It may be that simple, but it’s rather unfortunate.

And I think it should also be pointed out that the NRCC cash dump is very related to polls.  The NRCC is cash-strapped; they are fighting a battle on 50 fronts.  They aren’t going to be dumping half a million bucks into a non-race after $25K in polling data.  No, they respond to polling data, just like everybody else.  To suggest otherwise is just naive. 

Finally, Ms. Vorderbrueggen cites Stuart Rothenberg as saying:

But as national political analyst Stuart Rothenberg points out in a recent blog post, Democratic pollsters are pushing a lot of polls that show second- and third-tier candidates performing surprisingly well.

“If most of these challengers win, the Democrats will gain 30 or 40 House seats,” he wrote. “Obviously, that’s unlikely. Extremely unlikely.”

Oh really?  I beg to differ Stewie.  How about the Fox News Poll predicting a possible 50 seat pickup.  Now, I think given gerrymandering (btw, an example of the Republicans changing the rules, rather than fighting by the ones we did in the past), it will be hard to gain as many as the Republican did in 1994 (54), but I think the Foley scandal goes to the heart of the new conservative movement.  If they stay at home, is a 30 seat pickup is not “extremely unlikely.”

Two anti-eminent domain leaders, Mayor Charles Antos of Seal Beach and Mayor Don Webb of Newport Beach, have spoke out against Prop 90. 

Antos – like many city officials – believes that if the statewide Proposition 90 passes in November, it will spell the end of local control over land-use issues. So he helped rush through the ban in hopes of dodging a lesser-known element of Prop. 90, which is primarily touted for protecting property owners from cities abusing the use of eminent domain to take land.
“It would be a nightmare for the cities,” Antos says of passage of the initiative.
{snip}
But Prop. 90’s effort to extend property rights beyond the issue of eminent domain has attracted opposition from unexpected quarters – beyond council members like Antos and Webb.
The California Taxpayers’ Association, which typically tries to restrict government’s reach, opposes Prop. 90. Even the Republican leader of the state Senate, Irvine’s Dick Ackerman, opposes it.
“I think you can put my property-rights record up against anyone’s, but this goes too far,” said Ackerman. “Sometimes down zoning can be abused, but sometimes it’s needed.”(OC Register 10/9/06)

Republicans are bailing faster than rats from the Titanic.  Why? Oh didn’t you read the article?  It’s just bad policy.  As Ackerman said, sometimes we need downzoning.  To give up control of our land-use policy is just a bad idea.

How does a former Republican legislator (Stan Statham) end up as a moderator for the gubenatorial debate?  From Bob Salladay:

Statham, a former Republican lawmaker, seemed to be cranky … about Angelides. He didn’t show Schwarzenegger the same disdain.

Stan Statham was a GOP Assemblyman from Redding who fought a “quixotic quest” to split the state into 2 or 3 states in the early 90s.  This is the guy that ends up moderating our (apparently) one and only debate this election year? Huh?