- Candidates Look to Make Family Legacies in Congress
- Cruz's Struggle: This Man Loves to Argue
- DSCC Topped $5 Million in March
- NRSC Raised $4.9 Million in March
- NRCC Outraises DCCC in March, Is Now Debt-Free
Stuart Rothenberg is editor and publisher of the Rothenberg Political Report, a nonpartisan, nonideological political newsletter covering U.S. House, Senate and gubernatorial campaigns. He is also a twice-a-week columnist for Roll Call. His column covers campaigns, elections, presidential politics and current political developments.
He holds a B.A. from Colby College (Waterville, Maine) and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Connecticut. He has taught at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, Pennsylvania) and at the Catholic University of America (Washington, D.C.).
A frequent soundbite, Stu has appeared on Meet the Press, This Week, Face the Nation, the NewsHour, Nightline and many other television programs. He is often quoted in the nation's major media, and his op-eds have appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and other newspapers.
Stu served during the 2008 and 2010 election cycles as an analyst for the NewsHour on PBS. During the 2006 cycle, he was a political analyst for CBS News. Prior to that, he was a political analyst for CNN for over a decade, including election nights from 1992 through 2004. He has also done on-air analysis for the Voice of America.
He is married, has two children and lives in Potomac, Md.
We’ve just seen Round One in what amounts to a political heavyweight championship fight between Democrats and Republicans. Get ready for the next 11 rounds.
As the end of the year approaches, it’s difficult not to see the two parties heading in very different directions.
Wow, what a political cycle. It was filled with twists, turns and surprises.
My last column included awards for a number of 2012 campaign and candidate categories, including the luckiest candidate and the biggest upset. But those only scratched the surface in an election year during which candidate quality mattered a great deal. Part II of my guide of the best and worst of the 2012 election cycle features some usual and a few more unusual categories.
As another election year draws to a close, it’s time again for me to pick the cycle’s winners and losers, my most and least favorite candidates, and those who distinguished themselves by skill or by old-fashioned dumb luck.
The tendency to begin analyzing the next election cycle even before the votes have been counted in the last one shows no indication of abating, unfortunately.
Anyone who hoped that Democrats and Republicans could find a quick way to avoid the upcoming fiscal cliff should by now know that we are heading for another of those buzzer-beater endings — if Congress and the White House beat the buzzer at all.
Just two years ago, Republicans seemed likely to have a chance at 60 Senate seats following the 2014 elections. But things certainly changed after Democrats won 25 of the 33 seats up this year.
Today’s question: What do the following people have in common: actors Alec Baldwin and Robert Redford, former Green Bay Packers quarterback Bart Starr and former New York Rangers goalie Mike Richter?
I’ll admit that I get a little defensive about the coverage of House races.
While most members of the national media have focused on President Barack Obama’s narrow popular vote/substantial electoral vote victory, the far more stunning results occurred in the Senate.
Almost inevitably, both sides overreact. Some losers see the sky falling, while too many winners (and their press people) draw exaggerated conclusions about their brilliance and about the voters’ messages.
Tuesday’s results were not unexpected, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t send shock waves through the political establishment.
If there is one thing that you can probably bet on, it is that the winners and losers in today’s balloting will draw the wrong conclusions from the outcome.
As Election Day approached in 2006, 2008 and 2010, I was reasonably confident about the kind of an election we would have, even if I wasn’t sure about the exact outcome. Four years ago at this time, for example, we all had a pretty good idea who the next president would be.
The unemployment rate is still 7.8 percent, and the gross domestic product is growing at a sluggish 2 percent. Young people graduating college can’t find jobs and are living in their parents’ houses. Economies in Europe and Asia are weakening, suggesting additional problems in the year ahead for the U.S. economy.
With less than two weeks to go until the elections, the presidential race continues to revert to the norm, a development that can only worry the president and his top strategists.
One year ago, Republicans had every reason to believe that they were poised to net at least four Senate seats in November and gain control of the chamber in the next Congress. A month ago, on the other hand, Democrats had reason to be confident that even if they lost a seat or two, their party would more likely than not retain control of the Senate in the next Congress.
I usually draw a blank when people ask me to offer a possible upset or two. After all, I’d rather not be surprised on election night, though there are almost always a couple of unexpected outcomes.
It is three weeks before Election Day and a handful of incumbents are already seeing the writing on the wall. They won’t be coming back to Congress. It’s time to look for other gainful employment or merely enjoy the quiet pleasures of forced retirement.
The surprise about Mitt Romney’s recent move to the middle isn’t that it occurred but that it took so long.
Each cycle, my goal as a handicapper is to identify Congressional races where the result will mean a partisan takeover, not merely where the outcome will be close.
A few months ago, I expected this Friday to be a crucial day in the presidential race. After all, it would be the day when September's unemployment and new jobs numbers would be released, right in the heart of the contest.
Conservative thinker William Kristol and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee usually don't see things the same way, but they seem to agree that the House of Representatives is "in play."
Looking for clues about November? If so, you might keep your eyes on a handful of House incumbents seeking re-election. Their fate could tell you a great deal about the mood of the voters, the ability of candidates to separate themselves from the top of the ticket and the importance of individual candidates and campaigns.