online.wsj.com
Click to view image: 'The speaker whistles toward the political graveyar'

An amusingly pointless story in the New York Times inform us that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is "one of the most resolute" politicians. Actually, "oblivious" would be a better choice of adjective. "We're not losing," Pelosi tells reporter Mark Leibovich, though Leibovich makes clear she knows better, or should: "By all accounts, Ms. Pelosi has been engaged in district-by-district assessments of races."

"It is hard to find anyone who claims to have heard Ms. Pelosi entertain doubts about winning," Leibovich continues. "Whether that is denial, superstition, insight or spin is a subject of some debate." It might be nice if the Times had devoted a portion of his 1,200-word piece to answering that question, but maybe there is no answer. The story ends fittingly: "As she held her smile, she appeared to stifle a yawn." Which is more than we were able to do after reading this article.

We kid the Times, but it does provide actual insight about the election, albeit only on its website. The recent acquisition of Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com makes for a striking contrast with the paper's uneven news reporting and dreadful op-ed columnists. Yesterday Silver provided a fascinating analysis of the House elections--though, as we shall see, he leaves out one crucial datum that makes clear just how much trouble Pelosi's Democrats are in:

Currently, the folks at Cook Political consider a total of 87 House races to be either toss-ups or to merely "lean" toward one or the other party. This is an unprecedented number in recent history. At a comparable point in the past six election cycles--that is, with about 25 days to go until the election--Cook Political had put the number of highly competitive races at between 34 and 56; this year's figure is roughly twice as high.

The highest number of competitive seats was 56 in 1998, the year of Bill Clinton's impeachment, when expected Republican gains did not materialize. In the big Democratic years of 2006 and 2008, 52 and 54 seats, respectively, were listed as competitive. The low point was 2004, when Republicans made modest gains, and only 34 seats were competitive.

Silver corroborates the trend by listing a series of other measures--polling, fund-raising, the presence of candidates from both parties, and Silver's own predictive algorithm--by which this year features many more competitive House elections than in the past. And Silver actually understates the Cook numbers, which list 92, not 87, House races as either "leaning" or "toss-up."

Of these, only 14 are open seats, so that 78 incumbents are in serious jeopardy. Now, if you talk to a Democratic partisan, chances are at some point he'll characterize the public mood as "anti-incumbent." But this turns out to be a dodge.

To see why, consider what Silver doesn't mention: the partisan breakdown of the competitive seats: Two Republican seats are listed as leaning Democratic, two as toss-up, and three as lean Republican. The Democratic numbers: 17 lean Republican, 38 toss-up, 30 lean Democratic.

It gets even worse for Democrats when we take uncompetitive races into account. Whereas Cook lists five open Democratic seats as likely Republican, no Republican-held seats are likely Democratic. This brings the total number of seats in play to 97: 90 Democratic, 7 Republican.

Of course, things could move back in the Democrats' direction between now and Election Day. Then again, they could also move even further toward the GOP. Leans could become toss-ups, likelies could become leans, solids could become likelies.

But there's more room for movement in the Republican direction. Of the 179 Republican seats (including a vacant one in Indiana), Cook lists 162 as solid. Of the 255 Democratic seats, Cook lists 146 as solid. Among the solid Democrats are some who have been tagged as possible upsets.

As we reported in The Wall Street Journal, challenger Sean Bielat has Massachusetts' Barney Frank worried enough to bring the popular Democratic president (no, not him--Bill Clinton) to his district for a campaign appearance. Democratic operatives tell Politico "there's increasing concern" that Arizona's Raul Grijalva could be vulnerable. A poll shows GOP nominee Ruth McClung in a dead heat with Grijalva, who has "called for an economic boycott of his own state." The Detroit Free Press cites a poll finding that Rep. John Dingell trails Republican Rob Steele by four points. Dingell arrived in Congress 12 days after Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white man.

CNN.com reports on the Democrats' efforts to make a virtue of necessity:

Rep. Chris Van Hollen--the Democrat tasked with maintaining control of the House--says it is a sign of his party's strength that several Democrats are touting their opposition to President Obama ahead of the midterm elections.

"We're proud of the fact that we have an ideologically diverse caucus. We have a whole range of different political viewers [sic]. What they're talking about is their independence on certain issues," Van Hollen, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told CNN's Candy Crowley on State of The Union.

In response, National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Paul Lindsay tells the network, "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that vulnerable Democrats are unsuccessfully attempting to distance themselves from their party's job-killing agenda." Although Arizona's Ruth McClung actually is a rocket scientist.

And it might be hard for incumbents to distance themselves from Obama when, as Politico reports, the president will be "on the road or beaming from the Internet most days from now until Nov. 2, as he tries to turn out his base supporters and convince skeptical independents of the importance of keeping Democrats in control of Congress." This quote is priceless:

"He has a spectacular God-given gift of communication," says Democratic strategist Paul Begala, a former aide to Bill Clinton. "I just want him to use it to communicate to the American people what Republicans stand for."

How's that going? CNN reports on its latest poll: "By 47 to 45 percent, Americans say Obama is a better president than George W. Bush. But that two point margin is down from a 23 point advantage one year ago." Bush has kept pretty quiet since leaving office, so this improvement in the former president's relative standing has to be laid mostly to the current president.

In fairness to Obama, though, his standing would probably be much worse if he weren't such a spectacular communicator. Then again, it'd surely be better if he hadn't pursued such ruinous policies.

By JAMES TARANTO
Click to view image: 'The speaker whistles toward the political graveyar'
Click to view image: 'The speaker whistles toward the political graveyar'