Yesterday, The Washington Post threw a curveball into Georgia’s 12th congressional district.
For weeks, the paper’s Election Lab forecasting has projected Rick Allen would ultimately unseat Democratic Rep. John Barrow. Most recently, it gave him a 53 percent chance of victory over Barrow, long a white whale for GOPers across the country. Yet, now they are saying that Barrow has a 74 percent chance of victory. It amounts to a net change of 54 percent in terms of the odds, and most are scratching their heads at the reversal.
As you would expect, Barrow’s camp is touting the change as proof of its momentum heading into the homestretch. Both a fundraising missive and press release were quickly issued following the forecast. The question many unaffiliated with either campaign have, though, is why the sudden shift?
Despite drawing lukewarm attention from most media outlets, Barrow v. Allen has turned into one of the most expensive House races this cycle. It was earlier this month that Cook Political Report shifted its bracketing from “Leans Democratic” to “Tossup.” The National Republican Congressional Committee has steadily upped its investment in the race, too. Its first ad reservation in the district was marked for $800,000; that figure has steadily increased and is now hovering near $2 million. A week ago today American Future Fund, a group with GOP leanings, announced it was putting nearly $1 million behind a TV spot ripping Barrow’s track record of getting things done in Congress.
The only public polling of the race, too, has indicated a close contest. It showed Allen trailing Barrow by just 2 points, 44-42 percent. When narrowed to those familiar with both candidates, constituting 74 percent of respondents, Allen actually led by a 4-point margin of 46-42.
The caveat is that it was an internal poll from Allen’s campaign. But, it is also the survey available publicly and, with Election Day two weeks away, there’s no indication that either candidate has solidified an insurmountable lead.
The only discernible reasoning behind the Post’s change in prediction would be Barrow’s fundraising haul in the third quarter. He raked in over $682,000 and entered October with $1.5 million on hand. Allen had roughly $118,000 in his campaign coffers. Despite how it looks on paper, it’s partially negated by three things. First, the outside support that’s coming to the GOPer’s aid through Election Day. Second, pro-Allen forces were handily outspent in September, too, so this is not a per say new development. Third, despite the second point, the one public poll released showed a close race and the NRCC has steadily upped its overall investment.
Additionally, there’s already a deluge of ads pouring into the district. Between forces supporting or opposing Barrow, and close contests for Senate and governor, one has to wonder how much more TV time Barrow’s campaign account could manage to snatch up before Election Day, further making the cash on hand disparity less crucial.
Beyond the factors at work in the campaign itself, the district’s Republican bent cannot be ignored. It re-elected Barrow, yes, but also gave Mitt Romney a double-digit edge over President Obama. The numbers just don’t vouch for Barrow having a high ceiling of support; the 54 percent he claimed in 2012 is likely the largest percentage he’ll ever pull from the district so long as there’s a viable Republican running. For comparison, had the current district been in place during the last midterm cycle it would have given 58 percent of its vote to a GOP candidate.
Ranking an incumbent as a slight favorite is logical, especially one with the penchant for survival that’s given Barrow a national reputation. Most contend that’s why Roll Call recently bumped Barrow off its 10 most vulnerable list. But given the knowledge we have of the campaign and the district itself, such a massive change of heart is head-scratching, to say the least.
