A Deeper Analysis of Maryland

Yesterday, I posted my (sort-of) final predictions for the election. The most left-field pick I made was in the Maryland Senate race between Congressman Ben Cardin (D), and Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele (R), who are running to replace the retiring Paul Sarbanes (D). Bucking the conventional wisdom, I am predicting that Steele will win, preserving Republican control of the Senate (if only barely).

Why buck the conventional wisdom in this race? First, the CW is largely built on polling data, the pseudo-incumbency advantage held by the same-party candidate for a seat long held by one person, and the general anti-Republican atmosphere that is pervasive this election. But look more closely at the polling data (thanks to Real Clear Politics, the best source of polling data on the web). Since October 30, 4 major polls have been released:

10/30 - Baltimore Sun - Cardin +6
10/31 - Rasmussen - Cardin +5
11/02 - Survey USA - Tie
11/03 - Mason-Dixon - Cardin +3

The tie is the statistical anomaly, and with multiple respected polling outfits suggesting Cardin has a slim (and closing) lead, I have to concede that Cardin is probably "ahead," whatever that means divorced from the actual counting of ballots.

However, Cardin has stumbled when it comes to courting black voters in Maryland, a critical constituency. For instance, for whatever reason (and there are some legitimate excuses circulating) Cardin did not appear at an NAACP event/debate on October 26, which angered those present and let Michael Steele, get significantly more attention and praise than could be expected for a Republican candidate.

The Washington Post offers a simple, and inadequate, explanation for why Cardin might be in trouble, buried in a story about trouble for the GOP: "unpredictable votes by African Americans could undo predictions in Maryland . . . where GOP nominee Michael S. Steele, who is black, is running against Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin (D), who is white." To be fair to the Post, the statement was attributed to Brian Nick, a spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee - but it's clearly in line with the reasoning of the Post, which does not comment elsewhere.

But this is simplistic and frankly a little insulting. It suggests that African-American support for Steele is built on the simplest and least useful premise of "he's black, we're black, we're voting for him." Now, undoubtedly this is true in some cases. However, black voters are not a monolithic, simplistic cabal anymore than are white voters, or aged voters, or any other group of voters. I believe that Steele will peel off votes from Cardin amongst African-Americans because Cardin has neglected this fairly vital portion of his base. Ask any politician - it's a reality that keeping contact with the base, keeping people feeling like you are attentive to their needs and concerns, is essential. The majority of African-Americans who vote for Steele, or don't vote at all, won't be doing so simply because Steele is black - they'll be doing so because they don't feel Cardin is going to be an effective advocate for them.

So, I am essentially making an educated guess that the pollsters aren't adequately covering this aspect of the Maryland race, and that it won't really surface until the returns are counted on Tuesday night. I'm picking Steele because I think enough black voters will either vote for him, or not vote in the race at all, to erode Cardin's numbers to the point that Steele can get the win. Republicans, who have little chance to gain seats elsewhere, had best hope that I'm right.