With Paul Ryan, Romney brings Wisconsin into play. But it's no sure bet.

Adding Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to the GOP ticket makes that state competitive, but it's no guarantee that Romney-Ryan will win it. A closer race in Wisconsin, though, will force Team Obama to spend time and money there.

Shannon Stapleton/Reuters
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (r.) shakes hands with vice president running mate Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin during a campaign event in Waukesha, Wisconsin August 12.

There's a lot of Republican star power in Wisconsin these days – Rep. Paul Ryan, a congressman from the Badger State, on the GOP ticket; Gov. Scott Walker, a recall-election survivor; and Reince Priebus, chairman of the national party. But even that may not be enough to put Wisconsin in the MItt Romney column come the November election.

What Congressman Ryan's new status as running mate probably will do, though, is make the race for Wisconsin a lot more competitive for the Republicans than it has been so far, say political analysts. 

“It’s not enough for a slam dunk. It just means Wisconsin is competitive," says Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. "You can reasonably put it into the column of swing states.” 

Even before Saturday, when Mr. Romney announced his pick for vice president, Ryan was known nationally as the intellectual center of his party for his work as chairman of the House Budget Committee and his budget plan to cut federal spending for Medicare, the health-care program for seniors, and Medicaid, the program for the poor.

However, Ryan is a less visible player on the local scene. He has never held statewide office, and his congressional district represents one-eighth of the state. Romney picked him mainly for his economic and fiscal agenda, not so much for his constituent connections, says Mordecai Lee, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee.

“[Ryan has] never been politically tested statewide – his influence is not geographical, it’s ideological – and that’s what’s what made him a national figure,” Mr. Lee says. “He could just as well be the congressman from Timbuktu.”

A Republican candidate for president has not won Wisconsin since 1984, and polls show that Romney is so far not positioned to change that record. Romney’s favorable rating in Wisconsin is 36 percent, unmoved since July, according to a Marquette University Law School poll released last week. His unfavorable rating this month, meanwhile, jumped six points to 48 percent.

In comparison, President Obama’s favorable rating among Wisconsin voters rose two points in August to 54 percent, according to the poll.

Governor Walker said Sunday on “Meet the Press” that, to win Wisconsin in November, Romney needs to appeal to voters outside the safety zone of his party.

“For a Republican to win [in Wisconsin], you not only have to secure your base, you have to reach out to independent swing voters," Walker said. "In our state, what we saw in my election two months ago, what they want more than anything is people to tell them the truth who are courageous and [who] are willing to take on tough decisions.” 

Having Ryan on the ticket will boost Romney’s polling in Wisconsin, and his Midwest background and Irish-Catholic heritage will resonate throughout the crucial battleground region of the upper Midwest, says Mr. Sabato. But Ryan’s greatest impact might be in forcing the Obama camp to defend a state it might have thought was in the bag.

“Obama now cannot afford to take Wisconsin for granted, and that means he’s going to have to spend money and time there that he preferred to spend elsewhere,” says Sabato. “It means the millions that would have been allocated to other swing states are now going to be allocated to Wisconsin.”

If the Romney-Ryan campaign does not win Wisconsin or Michigan, Romney’s home state, it will make history as only the second ticket since 1824 in which both the presidential and vice-presidential nominee failed to win his home state, he says. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.