Analysis: 2010 To Be Referendum On Obama

Two years ago, Democrat Bobby Bright, then the mayor of Montgomery, Ala., wouldn't even admit who he was supporting in the presidential election. Now he's one of 49 Democrats who represent House districts that Republican John McCain won.

Republican challengers in those districts are anxious for a national referendum on President Obama's agenda, and the White House seems to want the same thing -- a "nationalized" mid-term election campaign to recapture the enthusiasm Democrats had in 2008.

"The goal looking forward to 2010 -- when we will in fact have a broad national election for Congress -- is to motivate those independent voters who voted for us last time but stayed home this time," senior White House adviser David Axelrod told Fox News last week.

The White House plans to nationalize the 2010 elections on its own terms by putting the president front and center in order to minimize the party's losses, Axelrod explained to NBC's "First Read." The plan is to use the 2002 elections -- when Republicans gained eight House seats and two Senate seats in President George W. Bush's first midterm elections -- as a blueprint.

The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were a significant factor in boosting Bush's standing and nationalizing the subsequent 2002 elections.

Bush's 67 percent job approval rating (according to an Oct. 30, 2002, to Nov. 3, 2002, ABC News/Washington Post poll) and a positive round of redistricting contributed to Republican gains in the House. Obama's latest approval rating in the Gallup Poll was 51 percent.

Another difference between 2010 and 2002: the redistricting component will be lacking.

Some Democrats want the turnout benefits that a national election may bring without any of the backlash.

"We need to localize, not nationalize," said one Democratic consultant who has a philosophical difference with Axelrod but declined to go on the record speaking against the White House.

Democrats had tremendous success nationalizing the past two elections by running against Bush and the "culture of corruption." Now as the party in power, some Democratic strategists believe the party needs to take a different approach by running a series of local elections, framing them as a choice between two candidates, and systematically disqualifying the Republican challengers with their financial advantage.

Meanwhile, Republicans are ready and waiting for a national fight.

"Super," National Republican Senatorial Committee Executive Director Rob Jesmer said about Axelrod's plan. "I can't possibly imagine nationalizing the election helps (Sen. Blanche) Lincoln, Michael) Bennet, (Rep. Paul W.) Hodes, or Robin) Carnahan," Jesmer added, talking about four of the most competitive Senate contests in the country in Arkansas, Colorado, New Hampshire and Missouri.

Missouri, for example, is a state that Obama narrowly lost; some strategists see the Democrats' best option as making the race a choice between Carnahan, the secretary of state, and Republican Roy Blunt, the former House minority whip, instead of a referendum on Obama.

Other Democratic strategists are on board with a national strategy, or resigned to the fact that next year's elections will be a referendum on Obama regardless of whether they want it to be.

"There is a degree to which we all live under the Democratic brand -- as defined by President Obama -- and 2009 taught us that the smartest political move is to accept, if not embrace, that fact," said Democratic Governors Association Executive Director Nathan Daschle.

"Ultimately, [the 2010 elections] will be about what we've been able to do," said former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Executive Director John Lapp, who is now a media consultant and agrees with Axelrod's strategy.

"Republicans left a horrible mess," Lapp said. "Together, we've either been able to work through problems or we haven't."

"By next November, Democrats will have made progress addressing the two biggest challenges America faces: the economy and health care," Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Communications Director Eric Schultz predicted.

But there is obviously no guarantee that the president, party or the agenda will be popular with voters, and it's unclear if Democrats can transfer Obama's appeal to other candidates and create a national election in their favor, even if they want to.