Michele Bachmann and the Tom Reynolds Corrollary

Last night, we got out first public poll for the MN-06 House race since Congresswoman Michele Bachmann's comments on MSNBC caused a national firestorm. Survey-USA is reporting:

Michele Bachmann 44
Elwin Tinklenberg 47

That Bachmann is down at this point should come as no surprise. This story has been all over the national media for most of this week, and while I do not live in Minnesota, I imagine that it has been getting a lot of coverage there too. It has taken its toll on the first-term rep, so she finds herself down.

I won't spend any time looking at the cross-tabs because, for once, they are largely irrelevant. The issue in this race is pretty simple at this point. If this story can stay hot and fresh in the district, Bachmann will lose. If Bachmann can find a way to turn the page to another issue, or the conservative district just lets it slide away, she can comeback and win. In an R+6 district, that's possible. The fact is that Democrats should not just yet put this one in the win-column for election night. If they need any reason for that, they should look at the example of Tom Reynolds and what I call the Tom Reynolds Corrollary.

Reynolds, the current congressman from New York's 26th District was the head of the NRCC during the 2005-06 cycle, and when the Mark Foley story broke, he was implicated in the scandal because he had known about Foley's behavior. In the immediate firestorm, Reynolds fell behind to his opponent, Jack Davis, and he looked cooked. However, as the election got closer, the Foley story slowly lost relevance, and Reynolds was able to regain his footing. Come election day, he scapped by 52-48.

From this, I have just created the Tom Reynolds Corrollary. What the Corrollary states is that if a scandal hits a politician very close to election time, and the incumbent thereby falls behind, his ability to survive will depend solely on whether the scandal is able to disappear from voter's minds before that fateful Tuesday. Obviously, this will depend on many factors including the type of scandal, how close it comes before the election, the dynamics of the district, the strength of the incumbent's opponent, and other factors.

Now, there are many differences between Reynolds and Bachmann which do not fall in Bachmann's favor. First, the Foley scandal broke in September, giving Reynolds more time to recover. Here, Bachmann's comments have caused a firestorm just two weeks out. Second, while Bachmann's opponent is mostly average, Reynolds had a deeply flawed opponent in Davis who ran a very bad campaign (really, no campaign at all), allowing Reynolds to recover. Third, the NRCC has already announced it will abandon Bachmann (after all, her problems are entirely her own doing, and she is only a freshman while longtime congressmen are being abandoned). Furthermore, Bachmann's opponent raised over $500,000 in two days, and the DCCC has said it will spend one million dollars in the district. Reynolds never faced these financial odds. Fourth, while the Foley scandal touched Reynolds because he knew about Foley's behavior, the ownership of Bachmann;s problem is her's and her's alone considering the words came directly out of her own mouth. She can't push it off on anyone.

Anyway, all I am trying to say is that I wouldn't declare Bachmann absolutely done just yet. When the Foley scandal exploded, I thought for sure that Tom Reynolds would be part of the collateral damage. However, I concede that Bachmann faces much longer odds this close to November 4, and she is likely finished. If there are any more polls in the next week showing her still down, perhaps by more, then there will be no recovery. But if she can make this is a tie or so in the same period, she may be able to satisfy the Tom Reynolds Corrollary. I doubt it, but we'll see.

Update: a Minnesota public radio poll is reporting a 45-43 lead for Tinklenberg. Yup, the Democrat now has a narrow advantage. Let's see if it holds.