RNC Spending, Guns, and Democrats

Stu Rothenberg is up with a good report today on CNN. Rothernberg points out the RNC's increased spending in mainly rural areas and smaller markets in Colorado, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, postulating that the national GOP is trying to flip wavering conservative Democrats in these areas away from supporting Barack Obama and other down-ticket Democrats. Here is the good part of the article:

The ad, which is part of the RNC's Independent Expenditure campaign that has been run by OnMessage Inc., a Republican media, polling and strategy firm, raises an issue that some strategists believe has mistakenly been underplayed by the McCain campaign.

"If Barack Obama becomes president, your Second Amendment right to defend yourself could be in danger. In fact, in Illinois, Obama voted to prosecute law-abiding citizens who used a gun to defend themselves or their families," says a narrator in the RNC spot.

"Obama supports local governments to ban guns," the radio ad continues. "Obama wants to license and register gun owners. Obama opposes judges who protect our Second Amendment right."

The spot's message surely will resonate with conservative Republicans and could help with turnout among those partisans. But the major target audience appears to be conservative Democrats, many of whom have leaned toward Obama recently because of economic fears and uncertainty but surely are closer to the GOP's positions on cultural issues.

Interestingly, the ad also could help GOP candidates for the House and Senate, since they too are losing those same conservative Democratic voters. You can bet that it's no coincidence the ad is airing in North Carolina, which has both a Senate and a gubernatorial race as well as a hot House contest, and Missouri, with a race for governor and two key House contests.

This is an interesting view of a storyline that I had not really taken notice of. It makes total sense that the RNC would try one last-ditch surge of ads to peel off conservative Democrats in key areas that might be ready to pull the lever for Obama. Furthermore, in terms of preserving threatened House and Senate seats in red areas, the campaign move comes as a bonus. Indeed, let's check out close down-ballot races in the states listed above:

CO-Senate
CO-04
MO-Governor
MO-06/09
MT-Governor
NC-Senate
NC-08
OH-01/02/15/16
PA-03/10/11
VA-02/11
WV-02

Spending to influence some of these races makes a lot of sense. The Colorado Senate race is done, but the Fourth District contest is both in a rural area, and there is a slight chance for a GOP comeback (barely). Similarly, Missouri's governor's race is over, but the contest in the Ninth District in the northeastern slice of the state is now close. I still do not get Montana's spending, since if McCain loses it, he will get blown out nationally anyway, and the governor's race there has never been tight. Both races in the Tarheel State are still winnable for the GOP, OH-02 is a non-urban district (mostly, as it falls just east of Cincinnati), PA-03/10/11 are in areas with many conservative Democrats, VA-02 is in a military district, and finally, much of West Virginia is rural.

Spending in a lot of these areas makes sense in order to preserve some threatened GOP seats. I agree with Stu that the Obama-will-take-away guns angle is one the GOP really has not brandished much this cycle, and it is a touchy issue which has motivated conservatives voters against Democrats before.

The RNC is therefore trying to have its cake and it eat it to by using a message that might both undermine Obama's inroads in areas that are generally shut-out to national Democratic nominees, and also could keep some promising Democratic prospects down-ballot at bay. With many of the above such races tight, this strategy might bear fruit.