A recent TV ad by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee questions U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole's effectiveness and support for President Bush.

What it says: Two men are sitting on rocking chairs in front of an old country store. "I'm telling you, Liddy Dole is 93." "93?" "Yep, she ranks 93rd in effectiveness." "After 40 years in Washington?" "After 40 years in Washington, Dole is 93rd in effectiveness, right near the bottom." "I've read she's 92." "Didn't I just tell you she's 93?" "No, 92 percent of the time she votes with Bush." "What's happened to the Liddy Dole I knew?" "She's just not a go-getter, like you and me." A narrator then adds: "The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."

The background: Dole has worked in Washington in the late 1960s, serving on the Federal Trade Commission, U.S. Secretrary of Transportation under President Reagan and U.S. Secretary of Labor under President George H.W. Bush.

In 2002, she was elected U.S. senator from North Carolina.

In her first year in office, Dole voted with President Bush 98 percent of the time, according to an annual study of Senate votes tied to a clear presidential position done by Washington-based news service Congressional Quarterly.

Over the next four years, Dole's support of Bush declined to 85 percent, but her five-year average of support is 91.6 percent.

An annual study conducted since 2005 by the Congressional data service Knowlegis ranks members of Congress on their effectiveness.

After scoring in the middle of the pack the first two years, Dole's rating plummeted to 93rd when Republicans became the minority in the Senate in 2007.

Her rating was also low due to fewer mentions in the news media and service on less powerful committees on banking and armed services.

Dole's campaign notes that those committees are important to North Carolina, home to a number of banks and military bases.

"I've seen hundreds of senators come and go," argued her husband Bob at a recent event. "In both parties, I've seen good senators and I know how they work. You have a work horse and a show horse, and Elizabeth's in the work horse category."

As a side note, the ad subtly implies that Dole is in her 90s. She is actually 72.

Is the ad accurate? Yes, except for the implication about her age. 

There have been five presidential spoilers in N.C. in the last century.

Since 1908, third-party candidates in the presidential race have earned enough votes to affect the race between the Republican and the Democrat on the ballot in 1912, 1968, 1980, 1992 and 1996.

In the first two cases, the third-party candidate came in second.

George Wallace was the most successful, earning 31.3 percent of the state vote in the 1968 race as the nominee of the segregationist American Independent Party. The winner, Republican Richard Nixon, won 39.5 percent, while Democrat Hubert Humphrey came in third with 29.2 percent.

The next most successful was former president Teddy Roosevelt, who ran on the Progressive or "Bull Moose" Party in 1912, earning 28.4 percent. Democrat Woodrow Wilson won the state with 59.2 percent, while Republican incumbent William Howard Taft came in third with 12 percent.

In the other races, the third-party candidates came in third, but got more votes than the margin of difference between the Democratic and Republican candidates.

In 1992, Texas businessman Ross Perot earned 13.7 percent of the vote, far more than the 0.79 percent margin that incumbent George H.W. Bush beat Bill Clinton by in North Carolina, despite losing the national race.

Four years later, Perot was roughly half as popular — picking up just 6.7 percent — but he still drew more votes than the 4.7 percent difference between winner Bob Dole and Clinton.

And in 1980, Independent candidate John Anderson won 2.9 percent, slightly more than the 2.1 percent difference between winner Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter.

Over the past century, North Carolina has rarely been a battleground.

Since 1908, the average margin of victory in the presidential race here has been 18 percentage points, and the median has been 12.4 points.

The closest race out of those 25 elections was Bill Clinton's challenge to incumbent President George H.W. Bush in 1992. As a Southern governor running on the economy, Clinton campaigned heavily in the state, but he was helped by a strong third-party showing by Ross Perot.

Bush only won by 0.79 percentage points, beating Clinton 43.4 to 42.7 percent. (Perot got 13.9 percent of the vote, the third-best showing for a third-party candidate in North Carolina after George Wallace in 1968 and Teddy Roosevelt in 1912.)

The next closest race was 1956, when Democrat Adlai Stevenson edged Dwight Eisenhower by 1.32 percentage points despite losing the national election.

In third place was Ronald Reagan's 2.12 point win over Jimmy Carter in 1980. In fourth place, John Kennedy's 4.22 point win over Richard Nixon in 1960. And in fifth place, Bob Dole's 4.69 point win over Clinton in 1996 despite losing the national election.

Otherwise, North Carolina was reliably Democratic from 1908 to 1964, and reliably Republican from 1968 to 2004 (with the exception of Carter's post-Watergate win in 1976.)

North Carolina could be in play, analysts say.

The general election matchup between Barack Obama and John McCain is the biggest chance in years that the state could actually be competitive.

North Carolina has not gone for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1976. The last time it was close was 1992, when George H.W. Bush narrowly carried the state over Bill Clinton. Even with John Edwards as a running mate, the John Kerry campaign did not make a serious effort here.

One recent poll showed McCain with a 43-40 lead over Obama in North Carolina.

Still, there is a history here of gifted black candidates doing well in a Democratic primary but losing in the general election, notably former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt's unsuccessful races against U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms in 1990 and 1996. (N&O)

An adviser to Barack Obama says North Carolina was a swing state in 1992.

In a conference call this afternoon, N.C. State grad Robert Gibbs pointed out that Bill Clinton came within a percentage point of winning the state that year.

According to the State Board of Elections, George H.W. Bush won 43.4 percent, while Clinton won 42.7 percent that year. That's a difference of eight-tenths of one percent.

Of course, Clinton was helped by the fact that independent candidate Ross Perot won 13.7 percent. (Another third-party candidate, Andre Marrou, picked up a negligible two-tenths of one percent.)

The Clinton campaign heavily targeted North Carolina that year, campaigning in Charlotte, Kinston, Greensboro, Raleigh and Chapel Hill and spending substantial money here. Afterward, advisers said North Carolina was one of their biggest disappointments.

In 1996, the state did not swing, however. Republican Bob Dole won 48.7 percent, while Clinton trailed at 44 percent, and Perot picked up just 6.7 percent.

North Carolina voters have warm feelings about Bush and Clinton - as in former presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

A new survey by the N.C. Center for Voter Education found that the former presidents get higher ratings in North Carolina than the current President Bush or Sen. Hillary Clinton, the New York Democrat who hopes to be the next president.

The center argues that the difference represents "the crucial swing voters" who will determine which party's presidential candidate will win in North Carolina in 2008.

“North Carolina is a state where Democrats have always outnumbered Republicans, but where conservative Democrats often break with their party when voting for national leaders,” said Chris Heagarty, the group's executive director.

“A large number of the self-identified moderates and independent voters who helped elect both President Bush 41 and 43 are unhappy with the current administration and don’t support the president. However, they don’t necessarily support Sen. Clinton, either.”

Former President George H.W. Bush thanked Billy Graham for sharing the gospel with his family.

At the Billy Graham Library dedication this afternoon, Bush called Graham "America's pastor," and noted his "profound impact" ministering to "four generations of my family."

He said his mother called the summer day Graham read to her from the Bible at her cottage "one of the most glorious experiences in her life," and the night Graham spent with him at the White House on the eve of Desert Storm "stands out above the others."

"Just as President Lincoln had observed, I found myself driven to my knees in prayer ... by the conviction that I had nowhere else to turn," he said.

He also said that Graham guided their daughter Doro and son, President George W. Bush, in "their own spiritual journey."

"Billy, as a very proud father in your own right, you can understand that great family pride that is in my heart and in Barbara's as we watch our son serving this nation with honor," he said, to sustained applause.

A fuller account of his remarks on Desert Storm after the jump.

   Comments (0)