Swing State Project

« WV, KY & FEC: Some Filing Deadline Notes | Main | KY-04: Ken Lucas Is In! »

Sunday, January 29, 2006

Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?

Posted by DavidNYC

Let's hear it.

Posted at 11:59 PM in Open Threads | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2114

Comments

The WI-08 race. I'm biased since I'm from Wisconsin but this is the type of race that we need to win if were gonna take back the House. The guy who should win our primary is Jamie Wall. The first Rhodes Scholar from WI since Feingold, he's smart, articulate and he's exactly the type of guy who can win in a soft GOP district.

Posted by: safi at January 29, 2006 12:30 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Draft Creigh Deeds!!! for US Senate- Virginia.

I really wish this guy would run for senate. He just came off a state-wide race where he was greatly out spent by his rival, and still won 50% of the vote. I.E. people like him and his message. He has an election machine ready to go, and now his name is widely known statewide.
With the money that comes with a Senate race he would be sure to reach every house in the state. He is a good man and very popular in his state senate district (dominated by republicans.) He would wipe up Senator Allen, who is not nearly as popular as most people out of state seem to think.
Allen is a one term Senator who has never expressed an original idea. He has a very meager record on legislation. He rates very low on all of the most important issues to Virginia voters. He is a party hack, serving a minority of Virginians. Most people actually don't like him. The support he does get comes mainly from name recognition, and voter apathy.
Bring in a strong pragmatic candidate like Deeds and the race would belong to Deeds.
Deeds needs to be convinced to run because he is tired from the recent race. Email him at

There are no strong progressive candidates in the Senate race yet. We need Creigh!!!

Posted by: thegools at January 29, 2006 01:58 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Creigh Deeds email can be found on his Senate Website (see below) Or google "Creigh Deeds Senate" http://sov.state.va.us/SenatorDB.nsf/0/e51dc0c59c09cfcc85256b37004e2c7b?OpenDocument

Posted by: thegools at January 29, 2006 02:05 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm interested in the PA governor's race. Lynn Swann appears to have created a lot of excitement, and in a recent poll was found to be about even with Rendell. I wonder what the poll numbers will look like when he's forced to talk about his views on a number of issues, particularly his pro-life position. It seems like this could become a powerful issue in PA with the balance on the Supreme Court about to change.

Posted by: berwyn at January 29, 2006 10:14 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Jeebus Christmas, is Cindy Sheehan seriously going to run against Feinstein for Senate??

Posted by: desi at January 29, 2006 02:11 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

if she does she is going to get crushed

Posted by: yomoma2424 at January 29, 2006 02:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Desi: You are kidding me, no? Oh man, you're not.

Posted by: DavidNYC at January 29, 2006 04:39 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

David,
I don't even want to say out loud what I think about it, you know? [Sheehan]

Posted by: desi at January 29, 2006 04:52 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

My only fear is that if Sheehan runs, we wind up with another iteration of "the netroots" vs. "the establishment," ala Hackett-Brown, Cegelis-Duckworth, etc. Only the gripers this time will have even less justification. As a result, I expect the number of Sheehan adherents to be smaller than, say, the number of Hackett supporters - and, perhaps ironically, it will mean even more toxic nastiness. (There's nothing like a cornered minority when it comes to escalating infighting.)

All I can say is, I hope she doesn't run.

Posted by: DavidNYC at January 29, 2006 04:59 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Sheehan seems to be a less viable candidate then Cegelis or Hackett. Feinstein is a liberal lion, nothing like a Joe Lieberman (who we need to fight in a primary). I am not sure what Sheehan is thinking when she talks about running for the Senate, especially since she would be a one issue candidate.

Posted by: DFLer22 at January 29, 2006 05:33 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I maintained before and after the threat from Shelley Moore Capito that Robert Byrd will face his first real challenge for re-election this fall in West Virginia. I can't remember the guy's name, but a wealthy businessman just entered the race on the Republican side and is expected to have a self-financing campaign. I was nervous about Byrd even with the prospect of token opposition. At this point, I think he has a serious battle on his hands, despite the conventional wisdom that he'll win by his usual lofty margin. I hope the Dems don't get too cocky about this race, because one mistake by the mistake-prone Byrd (or God forbid, a health issue arising) is likely to put this seat in GOP hands.

Posted by: Mark at January 29, 2006 07:26 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mark: The challenger is John Raese.

Posted by: DavidNYC at January 29, 2006 07:54 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm interested in NV-03. It just got competitive with the entry of Tessa Hafen into the race to challenge Jon Porter. The Las Vegas Gleaner has background and Steve Sebelius has a post up predicting how Porter will attack Hafen.

Posted by: Sarah R Carter at January 29, 2006 09:00 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Hm two races first KY-04 got my fingers crossed that Lucas jumps in. And the second is the Ohio-Senate race i'm interested to see if Hackett has gotten any traction on Congressman Establishment Brown.

Posted by: D in FL. at January 29, 2006 10:56 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

D, as for the Hackett-Brown race its so difficult to poll primary races because they are based almost exclusively on turnout

Posted by: safi at January 29, 2006 11:31 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Don't know how Paul Hackett's doing, but he did beef up his campaign staff with a heavy-hitter of OH politics, Dale Butland--he was John Glenn's chief of staff and has managed a lot of successful OH campaigns.

http://www.hackettforohio.com/newsroom/90/hackett-adds-dale-butland-to-campaign-team

That's a good sign that this campaign has a real shot.

Posted by: HellofaSandwich at January 29, 2006 11:49 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I harp and I harp and I harp on it, but the Minneota gubernatorial race has got a new poll from Rasmussen - Tim Pawlenty is ahead of Mike Hatch head-to-head 47-44, and ahead of Steve Kelley 42-36, but with 18% undecided. The huge margin of undecideds is, in my mind, an advantage for Kelley, especially if/when he gets the DFL endorsement and his name-recognition goes up. Pawlenty still can't get out of the low 40s against anyone but Hatch, and Kelley recently did very well in the Stonewall DFL endorsement.

Posted by: JelloAbode at January 30, 2006 08:24 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

My gut tells me Hackett has an excellent chance and he's not some distant long shot, even though this is what the party insiders and Brown people may be trying to put out. What I am finding is that the people I know who are longtime party activists are wild about Brown whereas the regular progressive voters I know are overwhelmingly for Hackett, even in a few cases that have surprised me. Don't think this one isn't going to be a real race.

Posted by: Ansatasia P at January 30, 2006 12:38 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

JelloAbode, the DFL now has a big problem on its hands in unseating Pawlenty. This problem's name is Peter Hutchinson, Independence Party candidate. Before listening to this guy, I largely dismissed his candidacy as the last stand of a dying third party in an era where Americans have returned to a two-party mindset. Seeing him on the evening news the day of his candidacy announcement forced me to reassess that assumption. This guy is articulate, appealing and left-of-center. He'll take virtually no votes from Pawlenty, but likely thousands from the Democratic nominee....and since Tim Penny got 16% for the IP in 2002, Hutchinson will get to participate in the debates as well. This is a huge problem.

Unless Hutchinson flames out, I can't envision a scenario where Pawlenty can get beaten. As the Republican Party chair said when asked about all the opponents Pawlenty faced from DFLer Roger Moe, the IP's Tim Pawlenty, and Green Party's Ken Pentel: "The field is crowded with liberals, and that's exactly the way we like it." Looks like Minnesota's leftist and center-left pols can't resist cannibalizing each other yet again.

Posted by: Mark at January 30, 2006 03:40 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I keep saying that all these races should go into a runoff if no body gets 50.1%.

Posted by: D in FL. at January 30, 2006 04:02 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I think the netroots need to re-evaluate the Arizona races, especially AZ-05 and J.D. Hayworth. Recent polls show that a majority of District 5 voters don't believe Hayworth is telling the truth about his connections with DeLay and Abramoff. I think there is definitely some anti-GOP resentment we can use.

Now, I challenge anyone who says Hayworth's district is too red. District 5 is home of Arizona State University, all of Tempe (probably one of the most liberal cities in Arizona), south Scottsdale, and the Salt River Indian Community. These are Democratic hotspots. Sure, the GOP has more registered voters, but it's the independents that matter the most.

I think the netroots should really get behind Larry King's campaign. As always, we should aim to win, but be realistic at the same time. Let's make Hayworth vs. King the Hackett vs. Schmidt of 2006!

Posted by: FoxRingo at January 30, 2006 06:27 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Something I haven't heard mentioned here in quite some time (i.e. if anyone has information, I'd be interested) is the situation in Bill Jefferson's New Orleans-based district. It seems like a foregone conclusion that he's going to be indicted for bribery. I strongly feel he is someone we need to cut loose now. Set aside the changing post-Katrina demographics of Louisiana, and set aside the fall campaign issue of "culture of corruption" -- it looks like the man is guilty, and he needs to go. Certainly give the Congressman his day in court, but the nano-second after he is indicted, the House and Party leadership need to make it clear we are looking elsewhere for a candidate for this fall. My question is if anyone knows who else is lining up on our side here, and what the prospects look like?

Posted by: IndianaProgressive at January 30, 2006 08:10 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mark,

With all due respect, I think most left-of-center voters remember 2002 and the effect Tim Penny had. The problem then was that Moe's campaign completely ignored the effect Penny would have, especially in the 1st CD. This year, whoever the primary winner is will not be so silly as to ignore the third-party effect. They will have to convince voters that a third-party vote is a vote thrown away in favor of an incumbent who most certainly does not represent their values or interests. That's one thing the DFL can do.

On Hutchinson's side, you're right, he is left of center. But he also has to lay down the arrogance that's feeding his drive right now and realize that he will not win and he will hand the election to Pawlenty on a silver platter. That's something he can do.

If one of these two things happens successfully, Hutchinson will not be a problem, especially if Sue Jeffers gets some traction with the Taxpayers' League types on the other side.

Posted by: JelloAbode at January 31, 2006 08:34 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

peter hutchinson is NOT a liberal or "left of center." he favors expanding the sales tax to clothing and further reducing the income tax. cutting the income tax is a big part of the reason that property taxes have had to go up so much. and i, too have about had it with former DFLers running as independents and pulling votes away from DFLers almost exclusively. its annoying-there just typical baby boomers, "me, me, me" its annoying !!!!

Posted by: jcb at January 31, 2006 10:27 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

JelloAbode, I have a different take on Moe's 2002 strategy. I think he OVERESTIMATED Penny's ultimate performance. Moe's strategy seemed to be to count on solid victories in Minneapolis, St. Paul and his northern Minnesota base, while ceding the rest of the state, believing Pawlenty and Penny would divide them and leave Moe with 35% of the vote. Living in southern Minnesota, I didn't see a single Roger Moe television ad, so I don't think he had any interest in making a concerted effort to win votes in Penny's stomping grounds. The polls for most of the election cycle partially validated this strategy as it was a very close three-year race. But Moe's house of cards crumbled when Pawlenty shined in the televised debates and Penny fumbled his way to a unexpectedly distant third-place showing.

After listening to Hutchinson, I fear his presence in the debates could follow the model of Jesse Ventura's candidacy more than Penny's, making rather than breaking his candidacy.

As for Sue Jeffers, I suspect her candidacy will primarily draw from those whose main issue is thwarting smoking bans. And since most smokers are working-class, I submit she's also more likely to draw the traditional DFL base (albeit in small numbers) more so than Taxpayer's League ideologues who are very unlikely to abandon Pawlenty.

Posted by: Mark at January 31, 2006 02:20 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Like safi, I'm interested in WI08. However, I think Wall will be a better candidate with a little age and experience. Right now, I like the outsider, a doctor named Steve Kagen. Unlike the other two candidates, Kagen is not part of the political establishment. He's got the money to fund a successful campaign and refreshingly new ideas. Check him out.

I'm also interested in NC08 (love the number 8). There's a vet named Tim Dunn who is the favorite Dem, but the candidate I like is a little known Larry Kissell. Kissell lost his textile job to NAFTA and had to be retrained as a high school social studies teacher. Great profile to run against Robin Hayes, heir to a textile fortune and caster the deciding vote for CAFTA.

Posted by: millstone at January 31, 2006 06:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm very interested in the AZ C8 race. With the Repub incumbent retiring, there has been all sorts of activity and there are now 7 people running from the Democratic wing. Interestingly 4 of the 7 are women. There's a grass roots candidate that has caught my eye -- Francine Shacter -- and is the candidate I like best. Down to earth, hard working, hard core progressive a la Wellstone. Check her out.

Posted by: sotto voce at January 31, 2006 07:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

One thing is for sure on the Pawlenty/Jeffers side - the Taxpayers' League and their ilk are not happy with Pawlenty. The larger issue in my mind is whether the DFL can really consider those working-classers our base anymore. With falling union memberships and a serious lack of leadership from the larger unions, it's becoming less and less likely that a DFL candidate will be able to attract working-class, socially conservative voters - take a brief look at the South and its long-term Presidential trends. Our bread and butter will be the corresponding shift-voters - traditionally Republican-voting, middle and upper-middle class voters in the suburbs who are beginning to understand that taxes aren't evil and are willing to pay for good schools, safe roads, and social justice.

Wow, that turned into a campaign speech pretty quickly. Sorry. The long and the short is, I think Jeffers will be stealing votes from Pawlenty.

Posted by: JelloAbode at January 31, 2006 08:48 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Jello, Minnesota's working class is a far cry from Oklahoma's with or without a union. From St. Paul to Grand Rapids to Austin to Granite Falls, Minnesota's blue-collar voters remain a vital voting bloc for the DFL. The worst mistake the Dems can make is the DLC road of trying to swap blue-collars for upwardly-mobile suburbanites. It's been a losing strategy nationally and I don't think we should count on it working here in Minnesota either, particularly if compromising our core values is a requirement.

Posted by: Mark at January 31, 2006 09:12 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Compromise of core values is not a requirement. But where have the biggest inroads for the DFL occurred in the past two elections? Not in St. Louis County...not in the southwest corner....how about Edina? Plymouth? The 3rd CD?

These are the places where cities are growing, and if the DFL doesn't show these growing cities that their values are our values, we risk losing them to the opposition. I'm confident that the 3rd CD will be the key to state-wide races across Minnesota, and it won't be because we went with a crappy DLC triangulation strategy - it will be because we work hard and make inroads and grassroots connections where they need to be made.

Posted by: JelloAbode at January 31, 2006 09:25 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment