Sunday, April 30, 2006
PA-07: Loony Weldon Thinks CIA Is Out To Get Him
Posted by DavidNYCCurt Weldon's batshittery knows no bounds. Last year, he claimed that the CIA was out to get him because he published a report critical of the agency. Now, his conspiracy theory (as they always do) has cast a wider net. Joe Sestak, you see, is just the latest minion to rappel out of a black helicopter:
Veteran Rep. Curt Weldon has a proclivity for calling out shady government doings that have him in mind as a principal target. A year ago, for example, after the No. 2 Republican on the House Armed Services Committee published “Countdown to Terror,” a frontal assault on the CIA’s track record before Sept. 11, he claimed that Clinton administration veterans with ties to the agency were out to get him.So it’s not surprising that as Weldon girds for the most difficult re-election bid during his two decades representing the Philadelphia suburbs, his campaign is alleging that the CIA is probably abetting the opposition. Last month, his campaign manager Michael Puppio Jr. announced that Weldon’s expected Democratic opponent, Joe Sestak, a former Navy vice admiral, had taken campaign contributions from Mary McCarthy, the CIA operative recently fired for allegedly leaking secret information to the media. McCarthy, who was specifically accused of being a source for The Washington Post’s Pulitzer Prize-winning story on secret CIA prisons overseas, has denied that charge through her lawyer.
The media also has raised suspicions in the Weldon camp. The reporter on the Post article, Dana Priest, wrote a piece last year about Weldon’s book that the congressman viewed as critical.
It’s just a question of following the money, says Puppio. “What’s a CIA analyst doing giving money to a partisan political candidate?” he asks. “I’m not sure she violated any laws, but then when that analyst is alleged to have leaked information to a reporter who in turn is extremely critical of Curt Weldon, that raises some big questions.”
That last quote from Puppio, the campaign manager, is vintage conspiracist nuttery. No conspiracy is too attenuated, too poorly supported by the evidence, and too downright stupid for a bonafide conspiracy theorist. This reminds me of Ross Perot's lunatic assertion that GOP operatives were planning to disrupt his daughter's wedding, forcing him to drop out of the presidential race in 1992. Ross & Curt should hang out - they're both equally nuts and seem to share the same worldview, which shouldn't surprise anyone.
Posted at 03:32 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Pennsylvania | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCI just had my first final exam, which was actually a mock trial for my patent law trial practice class. (We won. Woohoo!) Anyhow, this means that campaigns and elections are the furthest thing from my mind right now. What about you?
Posted at 02:04 PM in Open Threads | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 28, 2006
NY-20: Sweeney Blutarsky
Posted by DavidNYCI was ready to let this one be a one-day story, but this picture cracked me up too much:
Thanks to reader AW!
P.S. To those who question the wisdom of harping on a story like this, let me just say that I very much wish that the tradmed were interested in talking about serious policy matters. But they aren't, and all the wishing in the world won't change that. However, they will lap up stupid stories that supposedly reflect on a person's "character" or "honesty" or "genuineness," etc. (Just think about all the crap they hurled at Al Gore, none of it substantive.) We have to take what we can get, and what Sweeney gave us was a chance to force him to endure least one embarrassing news cycle where he had to go off-message - and over 100 articles on the story, thanks to the AP picking it up.
Posted at 08:58 PM in 2006 Elections - House, New York | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
NY-29: Internal Poll Shows Very Tight Race
Posted by DavidNYCEric Massa just released an internal poll (sub. only) with some very positive results (likely voters, no trendlines):
Massa: 40
Kuhl: 43
(MoE: ±4.4%)
What's more, the Roll Call story says that Massa is "not well known to most voters" (they didn't specify exact numbers), while Kuhl has an astounding 33-50 approval rating. Bush, meanwhile, struggles along at 31-69 in the district. Considering Kuhl's beyond-pathetic first-quarter fundraising (only $82K - Massa raised more), I think he's definitely vulnerable. You should definitely consider voting for Massa in Barbara Boxer's poll.
One tangentially related point I'd like to make: If you are a campaign, and you've done an internal poll, and the numbers look good, and you want to make them public, please, please e-mail your polling memo (or summary) to bloggers, and please please post it on your website as well.
It's just silly that the subscription-only Roll Call (which most people don't have access to) is the source for this poll, and it's even sillier that the Massa people don't have this up on their website. I am not saying this because I think bloggers are Teh Awesome and campaigns should suck up to us. I'm saying this because, outside of the few Capitol Hill uber-insider publications (Roll Call, The Hill, Hotline, Cook, Rothenberg), blogs are the only arm of the media which really cares about this kind of stuff.
A campaign releasing an internal poll might get an article or two in the local tradmed if they're lucky. Maybe not even that much. But bloggers love this kind of stuff. You'll get a lot more exposure if you make your polls accessible to us. What's more, if you do it right, you might net a few more donations or signups on your website. (Campaigns should put donation links on every page.) As they say, help us help you.
Posted at 03:41 PM in 2006 Elections - House, New York | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
FL-Sen: My Spidey Sense Is Tingling
Posted by DavidNYCThe other day, ye olde blogger DavidNYC said this:
Ten days left in the legislative session, but nineteen until the filing deadline. Something about Bense's phrasing - the fact that he allegedly refuses to look further than ten days into the future - makes me think he really is serious about jumping in.
Yesterday, ye olde Gouverneur of Florida said this:
Once again undercutting U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris, Gov. Jeb Bush said on Wednesday that House Speaker Allan Bense ``would be a great United States senator.''
Tingle, tingle.
(Thanks to Political Wire via McJoan.)
Posted at 03:03 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 27, 2006
NY-20: Sweeney Up In Smoke
Posted by DavidNYCOh man. Yet another entry in the "Too Good To Be True" Dept. Only, this one is 100% bonafide certified genuine. I can hardly believe my own fingers as I type this, but Rep. John Sweeney looks to have gotten tanked at a freakin' FRAT PARTY:
From the Concordiensis, the student newspaper at Union College, we have the full details:
Congressman John Sweeney, a Republican from the 20th district of New York State, appeared at a registered party at Alpha Delta Phi on Friday, April 22nd. The Congressman came from Geppetto's bar and was described by witness as being inquisitive and engaging, while also acting openly intoxicated.
No word yet if Bluto Blutarsky put in an appearance. But in the back corner, we can clearly see Tommy Chong, Jr. hard at work.
At first, I thought I heard the sound of a hundred slides dropping back into their bongs, and then I thought I heard kegs being whacked on the side to see if they've been kicked. But I finally realized what it was: It's the sound of nails being driven in to John Sweeney's coffin.
UPDATE: Just saw this: Rahm says the DCCC is going to help out Kirsten Gillibrand. Talk about a good day for Team Blue in NY-20!
Posted at 06:11 PM in 2006 Elections - House, New York | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
VA-Sen: Holy Moly
Posted by DavidNYCPolitical Wire received an advance copy of a New Republic profile of Sen. George Allen (R-VA) in which author Ryan Lizza finds many of Allen's high school classmates surprised that he's considering running for president because of the racist tendencies he displayed as a teenager. They say he "plastered the school with confederate flags" and drove a red Mustang with a confederate flag on the front. Then Lizza got a copy of Allen's high school yearbook:I stared closely at Allen’s smirk in his photo, weighing whether his old classmates were just out to destroy him. And then I noticed something on his collar. It’s hard to make out, but then it becomes obvious. Seventeen-year-old George Allen is wearing a Confederate flag pin.When confronted with this evidence, Allen sent an email through an aide with this explanation: "When I was in high school in California, I generally bucked authority and the rebel flag was just a way to express that attitude.”
Wow. Just wow. And Allen can't even offer the meager excuse that he was "embracing his heritage" or anything like that - he grew up in California, his dad is from Detroit, and his mother is from Tunisia. If there is any justice in this world, Allen's aspirations for higher office would completely vanish today. Since I'm not that optimistic, I can at least hope that Jim Webb crushes him come November.
Posted at 12:43 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
RI-Sen: Matt Brown Dropping Out?
Posted by DavidNYCA blog called Rhode Island's Future is reporting that Matt Brown will drop out of the senate race today. Can anyone confirm this? Brown's having a press conference at 3:30pm, so I gather we'll know soon.
UPDATE: Brown has indeed dropped out. He did the right thing and immediately endorsed fellow Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse. I think this was probably the right move for Brown - he was struggling for cash. And it's also probably a net-positive for the Democrats, as RI has a very late primary. Whitehouse does still have some token opposition, but now he can spend most of his time focusing on the general.
Posted at 03:08 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CQ Politics Changes Ratings on Six House Races
Posted by DavidNYCAnd they're all good news for us:
Indiana’s 8th District (Incumbent — Republican John Hostettler): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to No Clear Favorite from Leans Republican.Iowa’s 2nd District (Incumbent — Republican Jim Leach): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to Republican Favored from Safe Republican.
Kentucky’s 2nd District (Incumbent — Republican Ron Lewis): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to Republican Favored from Safe Republican.
New York’s 19th District (Incumbent — Republican Sue W. Kelly): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to Republican Favored from Safe Republican.
New York’s 25th District (Incumbent — Republican James T. Walsh): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to Republican Favored from Safe Republican.
West Virginia’s 2nd District (Incumbent — Republican Shelley Moore Capito): CQPolitics.com is changing its rating to Republican Favored from Safe Republican.
Of course, only the first race here is a toss-up, and "Republican Favored" is still a pretty big mountain to climb. But that fact that all of these are shifting toward us at once - and none, apparently, in the opposite direction - is an encouraging sign.
Posted at 02:54 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
AZ-Sen: Finally, Some Good News for Pederson (D)
Posted by DavidNYCASU & KAET-TV have a new poll out on the Arizona senate race (registered voters, Oct. 2005 in parens):
Pederson: 31 (28)
Kyl: 42 (50)
Undecided: 27 (22)
(MoE: ±5%)
Just about every poll had shown terribly disappointing results for Jim Pederson, so this one is a nice change of pace. Of course, one marginally decent poll does not a victory make. Pederson is still down eleven points; the trendlines are terribly old; and most of his improvement came in the form of Kyl dropping. Still, seeing Kyl under 50 - especially this far under 50 - is a good sign. I'll wait to see some other polls before I even think about getting excited.
(Via Midterm Madness.)
Posted at 01:52 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Blogads Survey Results
Posted by DavidNYCA while back, I asked you to participate in the Blogads Reader Survey. Almost thirty of you were kind enough to do so and to list the Swing State Project as your referring blog. While that's not a huge sample size, it's enough to get the gist of what the readership of this site is like. Click here for the SSP-specific results. One thing that jumped out at me: 8 of 29 respondents are students - perhaps like attracts like!
The full Blogads survey (covering all political blogs) is here, and a descriptive summary is here. Thanks again for participating!
Posted at 12:52 PM in Site News | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Boxer's PAC Wants to Know Whom to Support
Posted by DavidNYCSen. Barbara Boxer is doing exactly what every safe, flush incumbent should be doing: She's putting her resources to work to help raise money for those who need it. What I like is that Boxer isn't simply having her PAC make a donation (which would be capped at $5K), but rather she's asking her community of supporters to contribute as well. The best part is, she's asking for our vote. You get to pick ONE House incumbent and ONE House challenger. And man, it's a tough choice! First, the incumbents:
Rep. John Salazar (CO-3)
Rep. Jim Marshall (GA-8)
Rep. John Barrow (GA-12)
Rep. Leonard Boswell (IA-3)
Rep. Melissa Bean (IL-8)
Rep. Charlie Melancon (LA-3)
Rep. John Spratt (SC-5)
Rep. Stephanie Herseth (SD-AL)
Rep. Chet Edwards (TX-17)
Rep. Rick Larsen (WA-2)
Hard to pick on this list. I'd say Boswell probably needs the cash most, perhaps followed by Jim Marshall. In terms of pure vulnerability, I feel like Edwards is most at-risk. Herseth, meanwhile, has a total nobody for a challenger. Now for the challengers:
Harry Mitchell (AZ-5)
Francine Busby (CA-50)
Joe Courtney (CT-2)
Diane Farrell (CT-4)
Ron Klein (FL-22)
Tammy Duckworth (IL-6)
Brad Ellsworth (IN-8)
Baron Hill (IN-9)
Heath Shuler (NC-11)
Patsy Madrid (NM-1)
Eric Massa (NY-29)
Charlie Wilson (OH-6)
Lois Murphy (PA-6)
Joe Sestak (PA-7)
Nick Lampson (TX-22)
Peter Welch (VT-AL)
This list obviously has most of the excellent races and is also tough to choose from. However, I'm gonna use a somewhat different metric here, which is one you've seen me use before: Marginal effect. That is, where are our dollars likely to go the farthest? For races where challengers have already raised a million dollars, clearly we can have less of an effect. In "cheaper" races, by contrast, we can have a much greater impact.
I think the lowest-dollar races on this list is Eric Massa in NY-29 - he's raised in the low six-figures. Most of these challengers have actually already raised over a million dollars (Lampson's raised over two). Those who haven't include Harry Mitchell (who got a late start), Joe Sestak (same), Joe Courtney, Heath Shuler, Brad Ellsworth and Peter Welch. Charlie Wilson hasn't, either, but with his primary situation still totally up in the air, I can't advise voting for him. And I'm not sure about Baron Hill - I can't seem to find his totals on the FEC site. Of course, Francine Busby ($1.5M so far), unlike the rest of these folks, faces her next election in little over a month (not counting any primaries).
I think it'd be pretty hard to choose wrong on this list - almost all of these people are good candidates. And regardless of how much they've got in the bank, I'm sure every campaign would appreciate some more help. So go vote.
Posted at 11:26 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
N.O.-Mayor: Forman Endorses Landrieu
Posted by DavidNYCAs expected, Ron Forman, who finished in third place in Saturday's election for New Orleans mayor, endorsed Mitch Landrieu, who came in second. (There's a run-off between the top two finishers in May.) Forman pulled in 17% and Landrieu 29%, so just simple addition would appear to put Landrieu in the driver's seat, seeing as incumbent Ray Nagin took only 38% in the first round. Obviously, things are never quite that simple, and I don't have an insight as to how the remaining 16% of the vote will get split up. Any thoughts?
Posted at 10:11 AM in 2006 Elections, Louisiana | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
FL-Sen: Will Bense Jump In?
Posted by DavidNYCEvery month or so, for the past half year, the Florida GOP has sworn up and down that the Republican senate nomination belongs to Kathy Harris alone. Whenever someone suggests that maybe this isn't such a great idea, they get smacked down. But now with Harris at levels not seen since the USS Maine sank to the bottom of the ocean, the tide may be turning.
Florida State House Speaker Alan Bense has long been a possible alternative to Harris. The St. Petersburg Times blog notes some rumblings from his quarter:
[Bense] called the idea of a challenge against the better-known Harris intriguing "because all my life I've loved a good challenge.""I'm thinking about it," Bense said when asked what he tells members who quiz him about his plans. "I'm thinking about it but I'm focused on what I'm doing now."
With 19 days until the Senate candidate qualifying deadline, Bense would not directly say whether he would consider taking on Harris in the primary. "I really don't want to focus on that," he said. "We've got 10 days to go in the session."
Elaborating on his much-talked-about comment of last Friday when he said there was a "50-50" chance, Bense said he meant 50-50 "that I might do something else down the road. It wasn't the Senate race." (Bense is widely rumored to be on a long list of potential lieutenant governor candidates).
Ten days left in the legislative session, but nineteen until the filing deadline. Something about Bense's phrasing - the fact that he allegedly refuses to look further than ten days into the future - makes me think he really is serious about jumping in. If he does, our biggest risk is that Harris drops out. But if there's a competitive primary, that might not be such a bad thing, considering that Florida's primary is not until Sept. 5th.
Posted at 09:33 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, April 24, 2006
Save the Internet
Posted by DavidNYCJust do it. This is too important not to. McJoan has everything you need here.
Posted at 08:40 PM in Netroots | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Crunch Time
Posted by DavidNYCSorry about the slow posting - I'm in my last week of law school classes, ever! While I consider that to be excellent good news, it also means that it's final exam crunch time. I'll try to toss up some updates now and again, but you'll have to forgive me in advance for any paucity in posting over the next few weeks.
For now, please feel free to chatter away about anything and everything in this thread.
Posted at 03:17 PM in Site News | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCToday is my birthday, so I'm taking the day off. It's all you.
UPDATE: In yesterday's mayoral election in New Orleans, incumbent Ray Nagin took 38%, while Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu (brother of Sen. Mary Landrieu) took 29%, forcing a run-off on May 20th. Turnout was about a third. I don't have a dog in this fight, but hey, an election is an election.
Posted at 11:31 AM in Open Threads | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 21, 2006
DNC 50-State Canvas Is Next Weekend
Posted by DavidNYCWe here in the blogosphere spend a lot of time typing, talking, surfing, debating. But the real battles are won and lost when we get out of our chairs and pound the pavement. That's why next weekend's 50-state DNC canvas is so important.
There are over 900 events scheduled nationwide. If you haven't yet signed up, just click the link, type in your ZIP code, find an event and follow the sign-up instructions - super-easy. You will have fun, do good things and meet great people. This is what being an activist is all about.
Posted at 02:58 PM in Activism | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Lieberman Now in Negative Territory Among "Liberals"
Posted by DavidNYCVia LamontBlog, something rather non-trivial:
Self-indentified "liberals" now oppose Lieberman by a 49-46 margin - and as you can see, the current spread represents just the latest point in a pretty clear trend. As LamontBlog notes - and as I've argued before - self-ID'ing liberals are the closest stand-in you are likely to find for "likely Democratic primary voters."
Because I had to deal with so many frustrating misunderstandings when I first made this observation, let me say the following: No, it's not a perfect stand-in for Dem primary voters; no, not all primary voters are self-ID'ing liberals; yes, the composition of voters in the primary is going to be hard to predict because of the unusual forces at work here; and no, a narrow disapproval rating does not mean Joe Lieberman is going to lose.
In fact, pretty much no matter what happens between now and August, barring Lieberman dropping out, the odds are very much against Lamont. As you all probably know, sitting senators almost never, ever lose in primary challenges. The few examples in the past thirty years all involved odd-ball circumstances, none of which obtain here. Nonetheless, this new SUSA poll is still good news for Ned. And just to show you we're not the loony left, Lieberman's support has taken a sizable recent hit among "moderates" and "independents" as well, especially among the latter.
One other detail: I believe that CT has a closed primary system - ie, you can only vote in your own party's primary. Some people have suggested that Republican Joe-lovers (and they are legion) might switch parties just to cast a vote for him in the primary. Fortunately, the GOP primary just became competitive, as Alan Schlesinger joined Paul Streitz in seeking the Republican nomination. I don't know how much of a draw this race will be, but at least there are two GOPers who dislike Joe enough to want to run against him.
UPDATE: The more I think about it, the more significant this is in my mind. Look again at Lieberman's performance among indies. Notice anything? It stands at 53-41 - a point worse than his approval among Dems! And Joe didn't just "take a hit" (as I say above) with independents - he utterly cratered in the last month. He was at 63-29, a 34-point spread. Since then, he dropped a whopping 22 points to just +12 - his fall with Dems was only from +21 to +13. I'm not sure what bearing this might have on the primary, but the numbers are pretty stunning in my mind.
Posted at 12:27 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 20, 2006
RI-Sen: Sierra Club Endorsing Chafee (R)
Posted by DavidNYCI'm sure you've already seen this elsewhere on the Internets today: The Sierra Club is endorsing Lincoln Chafee, the Republican Senator from Rhode Island.
I have one very, very simple response to this: My goal in life is to elect and support Democrats. My corrollary goal, naturally, is to oppose Republicans and boot them from office. Barring the most extraordinary of circumstances, if your goal ever involves electing or supporting Republicans, I will never support you. I don't care what your rationale for bipartisanship is - it's one I will never share.
The Sierra Club can do what it likes. If they think supporting Chafee is the bees' knees, they can be my guest. They are, of course, incredibly and totally wrong. But I have no interest in debating them on their own terms. They're engaged in a different project than I am. If they care, I can tell them that I'll never give them money if they continue to support Republicans. But they probably don't - I think they've come to the cynical conclusion that they're apt to rake in more dollars if they appear bi- or non-partisan.
Anyhow, let me draw on a little bit of history which I think is instructive. When many American Jews felt that the most prominent pro-Israel organizations in this country were too right-leaning, what did they do? They went out and founded the New Israel Fund, a much more progressive group which today plays an important role in American-Israeli affairs. People committed to environmental activism and the election of Democrats would do well to heed this lesson. The Sierra Club may one day find itself with a serious rival if it insists on being this out-of-step with reality.
Posted at 11:09 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
2006 Attorneys General Races
Posted by DavidNYCOnce upon a time, party labels didn't matter all that much in state Attorneys General races - it really just came down to "your sheriff vs. my sheriff." This, however, has changed a lot starting in the 1990s. Nowadays, we can expect Republican AGs to be toadies to power, while Dem AGs vigorously fight on behalf of regular folks. This stark difference is all the more important given how egregiously federal agencies have abdicated their enforcement duties. To illustrate this point another way, you need look no further than the trailblazing career of Eliot Spitzer - a guy we could use a few more of.
And where will we get more Spitzers? The Democratic Attorney General's Association has provided us with a very handy map of this year's races where the AG spot is up for grabs:
Note that five posts on the map are controlled either by the governor or the legislature. Dems are safe in NH & WY, while Lingle is safe in HI. Murkowski, however, is vulnerable in Alaska, while Dem control of the legislature in Maine seems to be dicey.
As to specific races, I have to confess I don't know a whole lot about what's going on outside of NY. Here in the Empire State, Republicans had hoped that DA Janeane Pirro would be a better fit for the AG race, after her embarrassing departure from the Senate race. Turns out, a knave is a knave - Pirro is getting swamped by both front-runners for the Dem nomination, Andrew Cuomo and Mark Green.
There are so many other races to keep track of that I just haven't yet found room in my brain to add the AGs. But if you know anything about your local AG race, please tell us what's going on in comments.
Posted at 01:39 PM in 2006 Elections - State | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
NV-Sen: LV Mayor Oscar Goodman (D) Won't Run
Posted by DavidNYCFrom the Las Vegas Review-Journal, via Sarah R. Carter:
Mayor Oscar Goodman said he will not seek the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate, ending years of speculation among political insiders about the popular mayor's future."I love Las Vegas, I love being mayor of Las Vegas," Goodman said in an interview Wednesday with the Review-Journal. "I have a lot on my plate, I want to see it come to fruition, and I can only do that at home."
Sarah notes:
This means that Carter is the only Democrat who is likely to run. The filing deadline is May 19, and no other Democrats have expressed interest.
I like Jack Carter, but unfortunately, this seat is an exceptionally tough nut to crack - and not just because John Ensign is swamping Carter in the polls. In small states, the major players from opposing parties can often have too-cozy relationships. This was the case for many years with Joe Biden and William Roth in Delaware, for example - and it seems like it's happening in NV, too. All I can say is that I hope I'm wrong about this.
Posted at 09:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Nevada | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
NE-01: Some More Thoughts on Moul
Posted by DavidNYCReader J., a former Nebraskan who's worked for Maxine Moul in the past, writes in with some good local color on the unexpectedly competitive race in NE-01:
The district is demographically split between rural and urban with Lincoln as the urban base. In the past Dems suffered two ailments, first they weren’t able to cross over between the two demographics, either the candidates represented the urban portion and were trounced in the ruralarea - or they came from the rural area and didn’t get the turnout push they needed in Lincoln. Second, until 2004 the area was represented by a well respected, moderate, entrenched incumbent Rep. Doug Bereuter. Rep. Bereuter had a virtual lock on the district for 26 years.
That lock is gone. Maxine is the real deal for the following reasons:
• She was born and raised in the rural area of the district.
• She has lived in Lincoln for approximately 15 years and is extremely well known in that community.
• As LTG she made economic development in rural NE her priority and regularly toured the rural areas in support of community economic development.
• She resigned as LTG to take the cabinet level post of Economic Development Director (in NE this position is probably as or more visible than the LTG) where she again put a special emphasis on rural development.
• She is very well liked and respected by the business community throughout the state and I would be surprised if she doesn’t receive significant crossover support.
• Recent Democrats such Ben Nelson, Bob Kerry and Jim Exon have all won this district as part of statewide campaigns.
On the opposition research side:
• Fortenberry is not a Nebraskan, he was born and raised in LA and educated in DC (I believe) He’s only live in NE for around 10 years.
• He won the Republican primary because the club for growth entered the race and clobbered the two moderates (one truly moderate, the other sort of moderate) with negative ads. Bloodied, the the two moderates split what remained of that vote and he snuck through with the conservative base and helping of misled moderates.
In the general Fortenberry rode Bush’s coattails to a 54% victory, but underperformed Bush in the district. The Dem Sen. Matt Conneally (a rural member of the Unicameral) performed well (around 43%) but failed to mobilize the urban constituency and what he did accomplish was offset by Fortenberry being identifed as the "Lincoln candidate" (he served a term on the predominately democratic city council) see above demographic reference.
This year Sen. Nelson will be the draw and he can be expected to perform well in the district, his approval is somewhere in the 60-70% range. Moreover, Bush’s statewide approval has dropped significantly (approx 8-10% since May of last year) since 2004. Finally Maxine's identification with both the rural and urban constiuency should blunt Fortenberrys abilty to identify as the "Lincoln candidate" and still perfom well in the rural areas.
In the end this seat may be the stealth seat of the cycle. The key for Maxine is to generate enough money to both organize effectively (the district is fairly huge) and compete with the outside media buys that’ll likely hit once groups outside NE (eg, Club for Growth) see the numbers tighten. It’s unlikely that Maxine will be able to rely on similar national groups (association could have a negative impact), so she’ll need to be able to stand on her own. With all that said, media in NE is affordable comapared to the rest of the country with a likely emphasis on radio (fall campaigns equal farmers in the field with radios).
Meanwhile, commenter HistoryChickInNebraska has some color on Scott Kleeb, running in the open seat in NE-03. I should point out, though, that this is the sixth-most conservative district in the country, by PVI.
Posted at 02:38 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Nebraska | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Chuck Todd: Dems Solid on Second-Tier Races
Posted by DavidNYCI really wish the National Journal would provide permalinks to Chuck Todd's columns, but anyway:
What's making handicapping the House so difficult this cycle is that the Democrats have done a better job at recruiting tier-two targets (the surfers ready to ride a wave) than tier-one targets (the recruits who can navigate even the choppiest of waters). God, we love beating a good metaphor into the ground... but we digress.We've been somewhat critical of the Democrats' efforts to enlist a bunch of top-tier targets. And to be fair, there is still time to find some big-time targets in states with late filing deadlines, like New York. But this year's Democratic tier-one target list for the House isn't as expansive as one might suspect judging from the GOP's anemic national numbers.
But it may not matter, as the national polls show. What we're impressed with in the House Democratic recruitment is the number of tier-two targets.
In our current list of the top 50 House races, we've had a hard time ranking slots 20 through 50 because of the relative success of the Democrats' tier-two recruiting.
From Ohio-15 and Arizona-05 to Pennsylvania-07 and Florida-08, the number of solid second-tier Democratic targets is growing.
And this tier-two area is exactly where the netroots is making - or at least, striving to make - a difference. Sure, we could jump on the Ron Klein bandwagon, but the marginal effect we can have on a race where the challenger's already raised $2 million is pretty limited. However, for a Sestak, a Massa, a Kilroy, and so forth, we can have a pretty good impact.
Of course, this is also why our "winning percentage" will always remain low. For our clueless detractors, that's somehow evidence of bad judgment or weakness. But smart people like Chuck Todd understand that expanding the playing field is also an important goal. Moreover, the netroots will never be responsible for recruiting and funding top-tier challengers. Supporting second-tier candidates plays to our strengths.
That said, I want to re-iterate something that Todd notes in his column. Almost all of these second-tier people will only win if there's a major wave this year. While some signs point to such a wave (eg, the national polls Todd mentions), others indicate the opposite (eg, Dem performance in CA-50). We may have done a good job recruiting on the second-tier, but don't get excited unless a wave really materializes.
Posted at 12:16 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
TX-28: Ciro's FEC Report Will Be Amended
Posted by DavidNYCI'm told that Ciro's FEC report may have contained quite a few mistakes - to such an extent that Ciro actually has campaign debt, not any kind of surplus. I expect to see an amended report soon.
One thing that is in the current report is a $4200 donation to ActBlue. Ciro promised that, if there was no run-off, he'd donate the totals from his final online push to ActBlue, which deserves far more credit than it gets for making online fundraising simple and cheap. Ciro was true to his word, and helped ActBlue out after all the help they gave him. Kudos to Ciro for that.
Posted at 07:19 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CA-50: Loser Roach Still Running Radio Ads
Posted by DavidNYCMost people shut down their campaign operations when they lose an election. But not millionaire self-funder Eric Roach:
Businessman Eric Roach may have narrowly lost the 50th District congressional special election, but he hasn't stopped running radio spots. One that will begin on several stations today thanks his supporters and urges them to “stay engaged.”The ad is sure to fuel more speculation about whether Roach will challenge Congressman-turned-lobbyist Brian Bilbray in June's primary election, which is the same day as the 50th District runoff. Stan Devereux, Roach's communications director, said Roach would make the decision within a few weeks.
“It was important for Eric to thank the supporters and volunteers who worked hard to elect a conservative to Congress,” Devereux said. “And I'm sure they will be waiting to hear Eric's decision.”
I explained the craziness surrounding the possible June 6th primary in this earlier post. As far as a Roach challenge goes, my fingers are crossed, knock wood, don't walk under any ladders, and all of that!
Posted at 05:14 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
House 2006: Challengers Outraising Incumbents
Posted by DavidNYCContinuing with the theme of my earlier post - and aided by numerous commenters - here are some Democratic challengers who out-raised Republican incumbents in the first quarter (alphabetically by district):
CT-02
Courtney (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $275K/$674K
Simmons (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $222K/$894KCT-04
Farrell (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $515K/$832K
Shays (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $354K/$1.1MFL-16
Mahoney (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $173K/$303K
Foley (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $154K/$2.4MMN-01
Walz (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $127K/$124K
Gutknecht (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $105K/$680KNE-01
Moul (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $210K/$179K
Fortenberry (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $85K/$416KNH-01
Craig (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $157K/$151K
Bradley (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $104K/$339KNH-02
Hodes (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $146K/$232K
Bass (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $102K/$301KNY-29
Massa (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $93K/$121K
Kuhl (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $82K/$440KPA-06
Lois Murphy (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $499K/$982K
Gerlach (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $266K/$1.2MPA-08
Patrick Murphy (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $251K/$327K
Fitzpatrick (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $234K/$1.3MWA-08
Burner (D) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $334K/$357K
Reichert (R, inc.) 1Q Raised/Cash-on-Hand: $268K/$725K
A bunch more came awfully close, like Sestak (PA-07), Madrid (NM-01) and Gillibrand (NY-20). Great work in CT, the Philly 'burbs and New Hampshire. Already, the no-brainer Northeast Strategy shows its worth. However, a strong cautionary note: As you can see, every last one of these challengers trails in cash-on-hand, including many by large margins. One strong fundraising quarter won't be enough to unseat these incumbents - nothing less than non-stop hard work from now until November will cut it.
There is one race on this list that I'd actually like to comment on specifically, NY-29. I can't say I am terribly impressed with Massa's numbers - they're alright, but not great. However, I've got to believe that media is cheap in the Southern Tier, so perhaps it doesn't take a lot of cash to raise name rec. And in fairness to Massa, he doesn't have quite the access to national sources of money the way a bunch of other names here do.
But the real amazing figure is Kuhl's showing - a mere eighty-two grand? Eight-two grand? For a potentially endangered freshman incumbent? That's beyond pathetic. But what makes it even more embarrassing is that Bush visited the district during the quarter, specifically at Kuhl's request! I can only hope that Karl Rove is mighty pissed right now, seeing as he wasted Bush's time on such an obvious slacker.
Anyhow, got any more like this?
(FEC filings available here.)
UPDATE: I just added two more races to this list, WA-08 and NE-01. The latter is definitely something of a surprise - I'm guessing that Fortenberry just isn't taking this race seriously, even though Maxine Moul is a former Lt. Gov.
Posted at 05:00 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
TX-28: Ciro Rodriguez Still Has $330K Cash-on-Hand
Posted by DavidNYC[UPDATE: It appears this post was based on a flawed campaign finance report. See here for more information.]
Yeah, the title is not a mis-print. Evidently, Ciro thought it would be wiser to save all that money for a run-off, which of course never happened. Is it 20-20 hindsight to carp about this now? I'm not sure. What I can tell you, though, is that Cuellar spent $1.1M on the race. Ciro spent a mere $422K. The campaign had to know it was being badly outspent.
A fair response here might be to say, What good would a run-off have been if Ciro had been flat broke? To that I can only observe that Ciro was doing far better in fundraising in the final weeks before the election. From 2/16 on, he raised $282K - Cuellar raised only $150K. If Ciro had held Cuellar to under 50%, I think that he (Ciro) would have continued his strong fundraising.
If anything, we knew (or should have known) that what Ciro really needed was more time, and a run-off would have given him some, whether he was broke or flush. You can't, as they say, take it with you. At least that $330K can now wind up in the hands of other deserving Democrats. Indeed, I daresay it had better.
(Hat tip: House Race Hotline.)
Posted at 03:47 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, April 17, 2006
NH-02: Hodes (D) Outraises Incumbent Bass
Posted by DavidNYCMan, I love it when this kind of thing happens, on multiple levels. Just the other day, I suggested that Paul Hodes, the Democrat running in New Hampshire's second Congressional District, might be someone to keep an eye on. Well, Paul did us all a solid by out-raising the incumbent, Charlie Bass, in the most recent quarter. So I get to look smart and we have another competitive race on the radar:
NH-02
Hodes (D) 1Q Raised: $146K
Bass (R, inc.) 1Q Raised: $102KHodes Cash-on-Hand: $232K
Bass Cash-on-Hand: $301K
Hodes beat Bass by almost 50%. Not too shabby. Even in the CoH department, Bass doesn't exactly have a huge lead - and if the fundraising trends continue, that gap will vanish shortly.
Now, to be forthright, Hodes did get spanked last time around, losing to Bass 58-38. As it happens, though, that's exactly one point better than Francine Busby's tally the first time she ran for CA-50 - and Busby might very well win this time. Melissa Bean, meanwhile, improved nine points between 2002 and 2004, in a much more conservative district. My point is that a first run against an incumbent can serve as a sort of trial, a way to hone your skills and strategies, a way to probe for weaknesses. Smart challengers use those lessons the second time out, and from what I can tell, Paul Hodes is no slacker. And the word on the ground is that he's running a much better, more tightly-managed campaign than last time.
Moreover, there's the macro situation. I don't mean national polls showing Bush and Congress in the dumpster - I think people read too much into those. Rather, I'm talking about what's happened in New Hampshire over the past two decades. It's one of the few states you can confidently say has trended blue. A state that almost always voted Republican, New Hampshire voted for Clinton twice in the 90s. Then, in 2000, the Gore + Nader vote exceeded the Bush vote. In case there was any doubt about the direction of this trend (perhaps, you think, it's not fair to lump the Nader vote in with the Gore vote), NH was the only state in the nation to switch from Bush in 2000 to Kerry in 2004.
It's certainly true that this trend is lagging on the Congressional front. But I don't expect it to lag much longer. New Hampshire is a growing state - indeed, in the first half of the decade, it grew faster than the nation as a whole. Many of these migrants are from more liberal states, particular Massachusetts. But it actually turns out that newcomers from all regions (PDF) are less Republican than native-born New Hampshirites (scroll down to page 13). The state is changing, and there's no avoiding it.
Let me put things another way: In the 90s, NH-02 had a PVI of D+1.0. It's now up to D+2.7. The state's other CD has also followed suit, going from R+1.6 to an almost dead-even R+0.1. What's happening here is an inverse of what happened in the South to members of our party. Republicans who once were right at home in their districts are now being left behind by demographics. It's not just that Charlie Bass represents a Dem-leaning CD - it's that he's getting more out-of-step with his constituents every passing year. According to CQ, Bass voted with the Republicans 87% of the time in 2005. NH-02 is not that conservative.
And perhaps that all points to why he did so abysmally this quarter in fundraising. Whenever an incumbent rakes in so little cash, and especially when he gets beat by a challenger, you've got to ask yourself: Is his heart really in it? Does he really want to stay in office? NRCC Chair Tom Reynolds has been putting vise-like pressure on his caucus-members not to retire. But for a guy like Bass - whose re-election campaigns will only get harder and harder each cycle - party loyalty may not trump personal convenience. Certainly if Bass's fundraising continues to lag, people will start asking if he's going to quit, and he's gonna have to answer `em.
In the meantime, Paul Hodes can keep kicking ass.
P.S. If you know of any other races where the challenger outraised the incumbent this past quarter, please post `em in comments.
Posted at 12:27 PM in 2006 Elections - House, New Hampshire | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, April 15, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCYou know the drill. Let's hear it.
Posted at 01:25 PM in Open Threads | Comments (32) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 14, 2006
Quarterly Fundraising Reports Open Thread
Posted by DavidNYCBecause the quarterly deadline (the 15th) falls on a Saturday, campaigns actually have to get their reports in to the FEC today. That means that many campaigns (mostly those which feel they've done well) will be releasing their numbers to the public today. For the rest, we'll have to wait until the FEC cranks out the official tallies next week. What numbers have you seen so far, both for House and Senate candidates? Please post `em in comments, with links where available. Here are a few I've seen:
CT-05: Chris Murphy
1Q Raised: $335,000
Cash-on-Hand: $650,000
(Incumbent Nancy Johnson raised $449K and has $2.47M cash-on-hand, which is a ton.)NY-20: Kirsten Gillibrand
1Q Raised: $345,000
(Incumbent John Sweeney raised $368,000.)TN-Sen: Harold Ford
1Q Raised: $1.5M
Cash-on-Hand: $2.2M
(Opponent Bob Corker raised $770K but has $4.4M cash-on-hand. There are two other GOPers running as well.)CT-04: Diane Farrell
1Q Raised: $515K (wow!)
Cash-on-hand: $832K
(Incumbent Chris Shays raised $372K, the second quarter in a row he's raised less than Farrell. He has $1.1M cash-on-hand.)
I'll add more to the list as we come across them.
UPDATE: I'm most interested in R-incumbent or R-open seats, and at-risk D seats. Some more:
AZ-08: Patty Weiss
1Q Raised: $183K
(This is a very crowded primary for Jim Kolbe's open seat.)IL-08: Melissa Bean
1Q Raised: $536K
Cash-on-hand: $1.75M (that's a lot)
(Opponent David McSweeney, a wealthy self-funder, only has $147K cash-on-hand and owes vendors $400K from his primary race.)SD-AL: Stephanie Herseth
1Q Raised: $128K
Cash-on-hand: $631K
(Opponent Bruce Whalen will not file an FEC report this quarter. That means he hasn't even raised or spent $5,000! Thought you might like that one.)
Today's House Race Hotline was an invaluable resource for compiling this update.
Posted at 02:27 PM in 2006 Elections, Fundraising | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 13, 2006
House 2006: Where Our Targets Are (For Starters)
Posted by DavidNYCThis is going to be a brief companion piece to my entry the other day on Dem-held, R-voting seats. Here, conversely, I'll talk about GOP-held, Dem-voting seats. Unfortunately, there are a lot fewer of these (25) than the reverse (of which there are 41):
| State | CD | Member | PVI |
|---|---|---|---|
| CT | 2 | Simmons | D+7.6 |
| IA | 2 | Leach | D+6.9 |
| DE | AL | Castle | D+6.5 |
| CT | 4 | Shays | D+5.4 |
| IA | 1 | Nussle | D+4.8 |
| NJ | 2 | Lobiondo | D+4.0 |
| CT | 5 | Johnson | D+3.7 |
| FL | 22 | Shaw | D+3.6 |
| IL | 10 | Kirk | D+3.6 |
| PA | 7 | Weldon | D+3.6 |
| NY | 25 | Walsh | D+3.4 |
| PA | 8 | Fitzpatrick | D+3.4 |
| NJ | 3 | Saxton | D+3.3 |
| NH | 2 | Bass | D+2.7 |
| NM | 1 | Wilson | D+2.4 |
| KY | 3 | Northup | D+2.4 |
| WA | 8 | Reichert | D+2.3 |
| CO | 7 | Beauprez | D+2.3 |
| PA | 6 | Gerlach | D+2.2 |
| NY | 3 | King | D+2.1 |
| PA | 15 | Dent | D+1.6 |
| FL | 10 | Young | D+1.1 |
| NV | 3 | Porter | D+1.0 |
| NY | 13 | Fossella | D+0.8 |
| IA | 4 | Latham | D+0.4 |
Note: Districts where members' names are in italics were won by Bush in 2004 (though they still retain a D+ PVI).
Despite the fact that it's much shorter than its GOP counterpart, many of our hottest targets are on this list: Rob Simmons in CT-02; Chris Shays in CT-04; Jim Nussle's open seat in IA-01; Clay Shaw in FL-22; Heather Wilson in NM-01; Bob Beauprez's open seat in CO-07 and Jim Gerlach in PA-06. Thanks in part to strong fundraising, a number of other races on this list have lately heated up, including Joe Sestak vs. Curt Weldon, our newest favorite nutter, in PA-07; Patrick Murphy vs. Mike Fitzpatrick in PA-08; and Darcy Burner vs. Dave Reichert. And a few more competitive contenders might yet emerge, such as Paul Hodes in NH-02, Tessa Hafen in NV-03 and Chris Murphy in CT-05.
Chris Bowers - who today approvingly writes of a "northeast strategy" - notes, however, that a number of these seats are going untargeted. Some of these districts are home to super-popular, seriously entrenched incumbents, like Mike Castle in DE-AL or Jim Leach in IA-02. As far as the other seats go, I really don't believe it's for lack of effort on the part of Rahm Emanuel or local leaders. Dick Gephardt promised everyone the moon every cycle for a decade. After ten years of failing to recapture the majority, I can understand why top-drawer potential candidates would be gun-shy. I mean, do you really think we don't have a candidate in 50-50 PA-15 for lack of trying?
But Chris is right - these are races we need to be pounding. It just makes too much sense not to go after Dem-leaning districts. Some of these districts might not be worth pursuing until certain incumbents retire, but otherwise, this group of seats (over half of which are in the northeast) should be prime targets. Guys like LoBiondo and Walsh should definitely be in our crosshairs.
A far wiser man than I told me that if the Dems have a good year this year (something I'm not yet convinced of), we'll have a much easier time recruiting in 2008. I think that's probably right. And then we can really let `er rip.
P.S. Just a quick aside: Many solid Dem targets, including a few bona fide top-tier races, are not on this list. I hope to get to those in a later post, but for now, I'll just note that Democrats are clearly better at making inroads into Republican territory than vice-versa, as this post and its companion demonstrate.
Posted at 09:01 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Incumbents With No Major-Party Opposition
Posted by DavidNYCRepublicans (7)• Spencer Bachus, Alabama 6
• K. Michael Conaway, Texas 11
• Charlie Dent, Pennsylvania 15
• Jim Leach, Iowa 2
• Gary G. Miller, California 42
• Charles W. “Chip” Pickering Jr., Mississippi 3
• Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania 9Democrats (20)
• Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 1
• Xavier Becerra, California 31
• Earl Blumenauer, Oregon 3
• Robert A. Brady, Pennsylvania 1
• G.K. Butterfield, North Carolina 1
• Jim Costa, California 20
• Robert E. “Bud” Cramer, Alabama 5
• Henry Cuellar, Texas 28
• Artur Davis, Alabama 7
• Lloyd Doggett, Texas 25
• Mike Doyle, Pennsylvania 14
• Charlie Gonzales, Texas 20
• Al Green, Texas 9
• Juanita Millender-McDonald, California 32
• George Miller, California 7
• Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 10
• Silvestre Reyes, Texas 16
• Hilda L. Solis, California 32
• Maxine Waters, California 35
• Diane Watson, California 33
Filing deadlines have closed in all of these states. Howver, some of the names on this list are present due to a technicality (eg, a ballot access snafu in IA-02 has caused a temporary delay, but we will indeed have a Dem running there). In a few others (eg, PA-15), it's still possible to get a candidate on the ballot via alternate means, and that may yet happen.
Also, beware of this bit of information:
The list of unopposed House members almost certainly will increase in the coming weeks, following filing deadlines in Virginia this Friday, Georgia on April 28 and Florida on May 12. These states in 2004 produced a combined total of 20 House winners who had no major-party opponent.
Florida was a particular embarrassment in 2004, with 9 out of 25 CDs going totally unopposed. Things like this happen when you have a too-cozy relationship between the major parties. Hopefully history won't repeat itself this year when the rosters for these three big states come due.
Posted at 07:20 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CA-50: Republicans Fracturing?
Posted by DavidNYCEven before Brian Bilbray appeared to clinch a narrow victory Tuesday over 13 other Republican rivals to run against Democrat Francine Busby in eight short weeks to replace disgraced former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, supporters called on the field to "unite" behind Bilbray's candidacy.But a day later, it appeared that unity could be slow in coming.
Eric Roach, Bilbray's nearest Republican rival, said Wednesday through campaign managers that he might ask for a recount of votes cast in the sprawling 50th District ---- a move that would delay Republican solidarity in the weeks of campaigning left before June 6.
If the final tally is especially close - as I'm sure it will be - Roach might even challenge Bilbray in the Republican primary in June. Wait, did I just say "Republican primary?" I must be crazy, right? Actually, no - it's not me who's crazy. It's the California electoral system.
Turns out there are actually two ballots in the June 6th run-off. One is the special "general" election ballot - Busby vs. (as of right now) Bilbray. Whoever wins that becomes a member of Congress immediately. However, it's a brief tenure - there's another general election in November. The candidates on that ballot will be determined by the second of the two June 6th ballots, which constitutes a primary election for the November general election. Confusing, I know.
But the bottom line is this: Bilbray, say, could conceivably beat Busby in June but lose to Roach on the same day. Or vice-versa, if Roach emerges victorious after a recount of Tuesday's vote. Even if something that absurd doesn't come to pass, the very possibility of the GOP duking it out once again warms the cockles of my heart - and it would undoubtedly make Francine Busby's life much easier.
P.S. Stuart O'Neill has a hugely important post up at Political Dogfight about the enormous importance of absentee ballots. In states with generous absentee ballot provisions, this is now where battles are lost and won. A huge percentage of the voter "turnout" on Tuesday actually came in the form of absentee ballots. Please read Stuart's post, because it has wide application - far beyond just Busby's race.
Posted at 05:31 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
CA-50: Post Mortem
Posted by DavidNYCWe all know the results of last night's election. This of course means we have a run-off scheduled for June 6th. I'd love to do a full post-mortem right now, and I definitely have plenty of thoughts. Unfortunately, I'm in the middle of preparing for our Passover seder tonight so I just don't have the time. However, I am sure all the usual suspects (MyDD, Kos, Hotline, CQ, etc.) have a lot to say, so go check `em out.
And to everyone observing the holiday tonight, chag sameach.
Posted at 02:48 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
CA-50: Election Results Open Thread
Posted by DavidNYCPolls close in just a few minutes. However, as is usually the case, we probably won't have results for a while - perhaps not for an hour-and-a-half.
Results: SD County | SD Union Tribune | North Country Times
Christine Pelosi will be updating live from Busby HQ at Trail Mix. And Chris Bowers has promised to follow the results into the wee hours, if necessary, over at MyDD. As for me, I'll obviously be keeping a close eye, but tonight won't be a repeat performance of the Tracy-and-David tag-team duo for TX-28 - there's only so many frenetic "live bloggings" one can do in a lifetime.
UPDATE: Gah! Hard to resist the siren lure of live blogging. Results for early voting are in, showing Busby with 42% and Bilbray and Roach neck-and-neck at 14%. These might be the only results we see for a while. But if Busby is to reach 50%, she seriously has her work cut out for her. So far, 64,715 ballots have been cast. There are 360K RVs in the district, so that's an 18% turnout. I've put together a chart which shows how much of the remaining votes Busby would need, depending upon possible election-day turnouts:
If 20% turnout, 119% of election-day vote (ie, impossible)
If 25%, 70%
If 30%, 62%
If 35%, 58%
If 40%, 56%
You may want to check my math, but I think that's what it looks like. By way of comparison, Steve Young won only 25% of the early vote but won 35% of the election-day vote in the CA-48 special run-off. So large spreads are indeed possible, but, as you may recall, the configuration of that election was very unusual and rather different from what we've got today.
UPDATE: I'm headed to bed. This race seems likely headed for a run-off. But even if Busby were to win tonight, she'd still face another election in November. So please consider helping her out - she'll need it no matter what happens tonight.
Posted at 11:10 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
TX Runoff Results
Posted by DavidNYCWith everyone (rightly) focused on CA-50, you might have forgotten that Texas held a run-off primary election today for a few races. A couple of these were somewhat interesting, and both bring good news.
In TX-Sen, Barbara Ann Radnofsky beat perpetual candidate Gene Kelly for the Dem nomination. Though Radnofsky has, charitably, a mega-super-uphill fight on her hands against incumbent Kay Bailey Hutchison, she's at least a serious candidate and will make Hutchison sweat a bit. (Kelley is 80 years old and refuses to make public appearances. His main claim to fame is that he has the same name as the famous - and dead - dancer.)
Also, in TX-10, Fighting Dem Ted Ankrum beat Paul Foreman. This district went 62-38 for Bush, so obviously we have to be realistic here. Nonetheless, I think Ankrum, like Radnofsky, probably stands a decent chance of forcing Michael McCaul to get off his duff and spend some time campaigning.
Several other state races also had run-offs. You can get complete results here.
Posted at 11:08 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CA-50: Open Thread
Posted by DavidNYCToday's the day.
• SUSA just released a new poll putting Busby at 47%. An outright victory could just happen, but the pessimist (realist?) in me thinks a finish in the 40s is more likely.• Chris Bowers has a detailed post here, titled "What To Look For In CA-50 Tonight." He explores his predictions and the shape of the GOP field.
• Polls close at 8pm Pacific (11pm Eastern). Sign On San Diego, the official site of the SD Union Tribune, says it will carry live results, but they haven't posted a specific link yet. If you know of any other sites which will carry live results, please post them in comments.
Please use this thread to discuss any and everything pertaining to today's election. Go Francine!
UPDATE: SD County official election returns site is here. (Thanks to Predictor.)
Posted at 02:39 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, April 10, 2006
House 2006: Where Their Targets Are
Posted by DavidNYCOne factor you always look at when targeting House races are the simple demographics - in particular, what's the partisan breakdown on the presidential level? Naturally, your inclination is to go after districts where there's a mismatch - ie, where the Congressperson is of one party, but his/her district voted for the other party for president.
What does it look like on our side? Forty-one Democratic members of the House sit in districts which were actually won by George Bush in 2004. Here they are:
| State | CD | Member | PVI |
|---|---|---|---|
| TX | 17 | Edwards | R+17.7 |
| UT | 2 | Matheson | R+16.9 |
| MS | 4 | Taylor | R+16.3 |
| ND | AL | Pomeroy | R+13.1 |
| MO | 4 | Skelton | R+10.8 |
| SD | AL | Herseth | R+10 |
| VA | 9 | Boucher | R+7 |
| KY | 6 | Chandler | R+6.6 |
| PA | 17 | Holden | R+6.6 |
| AL | 5 | Cramer | R+6.4 |
| WV | 1 | Mollohan | R+5.7 |
| SC | 5 | Spratt | R+5.6 |
| CO | 3 | Salazar | R+5.6 |
| MN | 7 | Peterson | R+5.6 |
| IL | 8 | Bean | R+5.2 |
| OK | 2 | Boren | R+4.9 |
| LA | 3 | Melancon | R+4.8 |
| KS | 3 | Moore | R+4.2 |
| TN | 6 | Gordon | R+3.8 |
| TN | 4 | Davis | R+3.2 |
| NC | 7 | McIntyre | R+2.8 |
| GA | 3 | Marshall | R+2.7 |
| NC | 2 | Etheridge | R+2.7 |
| MI | 1 | Stupak | R+2.4 |
| FL | 2 | Boyd | R+2.2 |
| TX | 15 | Hinojosa | R+1.4 |
| GA | 2 | Bishop | R+1.1 |
| TX | 27 | Ortiz | R+1.1 |
| AR | 2 | Snyder | R+0.1 |
| TN | 8 | Tanner | D+0.1 |
| WV | 3 | Rahall | D+0.3 |
| WA | 3 | Baird | D+0.3 |
| OH | 6 | Strickland | D+0.4 |
| AR | 4 | Ross | D+0.5 |
| AR | 1 | Berry | D+0.5 |
| OR | 5 | Hooley | D+0.5 |
| TX | 28 | Cuellar | D+0.6 |
| IA | 3 | Boswell | D+1.4 |
| NY | 1 | Bishop | D+3.3 |
| CA | 18 | Cardoza | D+3.4 |
| CA | 47 | Sanchez | D+4.7 |
You'll notice that the bottom twelve seats have D+ PVIs. Recall that the PVI combines the last two presidential election results and compares them to the national average. In these twelve districts, this means that Bush won the district, but did so by less than his national average and/or that Bush made a considerable improvement on his 2000 showing. In any event, quite a few of these districts - including those with R+ PVIs - went only very narrowly for Bush.
Regardless, this is the list where you'd expect to find the GOPs top targets, especially at the top of the list. But surprisingly few of these people are under any kind of serious attack. Here are some names that stand out, one way or another:
TX-17: Chet Edwards (who represents the 21st most-conservative district in the nation, amazingly) does have a spirited challenge from an Iraq War vet - but Van Taylor has no prior political experience, and Edwards has incredibly good relations with the veteran community. I'm sweating this one out, but this race still favors Edwards.ND-AL: Earl Pomeroy just dodged a (fairly lazy) bullet when the ND GOP decided to nominate a political unknown instead of an experienced state legislator. Hey, if they wanna shoot themselves in the foot, I won't stop `em.
SD-AL: Stephanie Herseth similarly faces a weak challenger.
SC-05: The GOP is making a very serious effort here, raising tons of money for one-term state Rep. Ralph Norman. But an internal poll by John Spratt's campaign showed him totally cruising. If Spratt was able to hang on in 1994, when everything went against us, why does the GOP think it can knock him off now, when everything is against them?
IL-08: Melissa Bean is, of course, a freshman who improbably knocked off a zillion-year incumbent last time out. She faces a rich self-funder, and she's probably among our most vulnerable reps.
LA-03: Ah, the mystery district. No one is quite sure what happened to LA-03's demos after the devastation of Katrina. This big unknown is what keeps me up at night, considering that Charlie Melancon, a freshman, won by just 600 votes in 2004. A friend experienced in Louisiana politics assures me that things look good for us here, but I'm still nervous.
GA-08: This is the former GA-03 (Georgia Republicans, worshipping at the altar of St. DeLay, also did their own mid-decade redistricting). The new district supposedly gave Bush 61% of the vote, up from 56%. Jim Marshall faces a strong challenge from a well-funded former Congressman, Mac Collins. That said, Marshall won the seat by just one percent in 2002, only to win a rematch two years later by 26 points. Collins will need more than redistricting to carry him over the top.
GA-12: Not on this list, but could be. (See explanation immediately above.) It went for Kerry 53-46, but might narrowly be a Bush district now. John Barrow (along with Bean) was one of only two Dems to beat GOP incumbents last time out, and he's facing a rematch from the guy he beat, one-termet Max Burns. This race, however, does not present the same kind of challenge that GA-08 does.
IA-03: Leonard Boswell has not been in good health of late, sadly. Bos has a pretty strong challenger, Iowa Senate Co-President Jeff Lamberti. But Bos is leading in the money race (so far), and as you can see, the district is still lean-Dem.
As far is this list goes, that's it. What I mean is that I haven't even heard a whisper of a serious challenge to anyone else on that list - and even some of the names I did mention aren't facing real opposition. Moreover, look how Republican a lot of these districts are! Jim Matheson, Dan Boren, Ben Chandler - they're just letting these guys walk. The only other places I'm aware of that the GOP is seriously contest are the open seats in OH-06 and VT-AL.
Now, don't get me wrong here: I am absolutely, absolutely not counseling complacency, or suggesting we've got this one in the bag, or anything like that at all. We have tons of work cut out for us. Rather, I'm pointing out the simple fact that the GOP has forty-one prime targets and is only mustering a serious assault against a handful of them. This just empirically confirms something we've probably all felt to be true for a while: The GOP is very much on the defensive this year. And that gives us a lot of opportunities to expand the playing field.
Posted at 04:24 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (33) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, April 09, 2006
CT-Sen: What Is Joe Thinking?
Posted by DavidNYCFriends, I know we've been down this path before. But it's not my fault Joe Lieberman keeps making me play whack-a-mole. Amazingly, Joe - in his clearest statement to date - has held open the idea of running as an independent if he were to lose the Democratic primary:
I hope there's not a primary. I'm confident if there is one, I'll win it, but I'm not gonna rule out any other option for now....
Kids, if Joe loses the Dem primary, he just can't, can't re-file as an independent. Let me 'splain once again:
[I]ndependent candidates have to submit petitions by August 9th, 2006. It just so happens that the Connecticut primary is on August 8th. In other words, if Joe loses the primary, in order to run as an independent in the general, he'd have to file petitions the very next day.This is all but a literal impossibility. Joe would have to collect petitions while still running in the Dem primary. Can you imagine such a spectacle? It would be beyond unheard of for a sitting senator to do such a thing. The only real way Lieberman could run as an indie would be if he abandoned the Democratic Party (save your jokes) well in advance of the primary. Otherwise, he's just talking smack. If he loses the primary, he's done, finished, tostada del dia.
Let me tell you this: If Lieberman starts collecting petitions to run as an indy candidate, all hell will break loose. Somehow, though, I very much doubt anything like that would ever come to pass.
Posted at 09:58 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
House News Roundup
Posted by DavidNYCJust a few things that have caught my attention:
• The Sacramento Bee editorial board tells Rep. John Doolittle - who's been paying his wife a 15% cut of all campaign funds received - that he must "end this unacceptable practice". They nail him really good on his claims that this scam has been approved by the FEC (it hasn't) and that "everyone does it" (the only other person who does is Rep. John Sweeney of NY-20). It's really delightful to see such a clear-minded editorial which doesn't fall for any B.S. spin.
• Speaking of Sweeney, I have a contest for you: Go find his campaign website. No, not his official House website. His campaign site. Take as long as you want. Still looking? I'll wait. Okay, okay - you can stop now. It was a trick question: John Sweeney has no campaign website. For a Republican candidate in a contested race, in a year like this, and in New York, no less, that's pretty amazing. A campaign flack says he'll have one "soon". With all the rumors swirling about Sweeney dropping out due to ill health, that doesn't exactly present an image of vigor and a desire to fight this one through to the end.
• And some news on Sweeney's challenger, Kirsten Gillibrand: She's actually announced her 1Q totals early, and she hauled in an impressive $345,000. That's quite a lot, especially for a challenger, and especially when you consider that Sweeney's only raised $368K in the same time-frame. For an incumbent - on the all-powerful Approriations Committee, no less - to pull in only $20K more than a challenger is weak, weak.
• As far as other House challengers who've announced their fundraising totals early, you may have alread seen that Joe Sestak has raised a monster $420,000, compared to Curt Weldon's $450K.
Do you know of any other campaigns which have released early fundraising figures? If so, please post `em in comments.
Posted at 08:55 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCI've got Busby, Busby on my mind. And you?
UPDATE: MoveOn is organizing virtual phonebanking for Busby. This is always an excellent, fun way for out-of-district folks to get involved. MoveOn figures it should only take an hour to make 15 calls (which is all they're asking for). Click here to participate.
UPDATE: Another update, this time from Brandon Hall, Busby's campaign manager, in an e-mail:
Overwhelming turnout today. The district is buzzing with Busby supporters.We've already had over 300 volunteers show up for door knocking and phone banking. That's almost 100 more volunteers than had signed up. We're rushing to print more doorhangers, because at this rate we'll run out on Monday - which means we'll have dropped 52,000 doorhangers by then.
Posted at 01:58 PM in Open Threads | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CA-50: New Datamar Poll
Posted by DavidNYCDatamar (PDF) has a new poll out on CA-50 ("high-propensity" registered voters, March 22-24 in parens):
Francine Busby (D): 39 (36)
Eric Roach (R): 17.5 (11.2)
Brian Bilbray (R): 16.4 (11.7)
Howard Kaloogian: 9.5 (10.6)
Bill Morrow: 6.8 (4.8)
Alan Uke: 4.3 (3)
Other: 6.3 (18)
(MoE: ±3.03%)
A few important things:
1) Datamar uses an automated call system. Some times this methodology works well (SurveyUSA) and sometimes it doesn't (Rasmussen). The verdict is still out on Datamar.
2) The sample is skewed very Republican: 55R-33D-9I. Voter registration in the district is 44R-30D. The district voted 55-44 for Bush. What's more, with half of all absentee ballots sent in, the current breakdown so far is 46R-37D-14I. (I have those numbers directly from the campaign.) So basically, I ain't buyin' a 22-point GOP advantage.
3) Perhaps most importantly, the NRCC would not parachute in with an emergency $360,000 ad buy if they thought Busby was going to get 39% on Tuesday. The only reason to hit the panic button this early is if you think Busby can wrap it all up with 50% in round one. The guys at the NRCC aren't idiots - remember how they bailed Jean Schmidt's ass out at the last minute? This time, though, we've got a stronger candidate, a former Congressman in jail and the national wind at our backs.
Francine's campaign is now all about GOTV. If you're anywhere near the San Diego area at all, please consider volunteering. We may just have a chance to drive a serious nail into the GOP coffin right here.
UPDATE: Chris makes a good observation. When you multiply candidate preference (as expressed in the SUSA and Datamar polls) by the partisan breakdown of the absentee ballots, Busby clocks in at 44%. However (and this is a big however), Republicans generally seem to do better at turning out the early vote. This happened in both the CA-48 special and the TX-28 primary. (Okay, technically Cuellar wasn't a Republican. But I still think the analogy holds.) So Busby may indeed get closer to 50%. Bowers is thinking 47%, but I'm not making any predictions.
Posted at 12:21 AM in 2006 Elections - House | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 07, 2006
PA-07: Cook Report: "Weldon More Vulnerable Than Ever This Year"
Posted by DavidNYCAmy Walter, Senior Editor for House races at the Cook Political Report, writes about PA-07 in her column today, titled "New Races On The Radar." It's subscription-only, so I'll just quote a few excerpts - but you're gonna like what she has to say. This is the theme of her piece:
When it comes to incumbent retention, party strategists on both sides admit that what worries them most are not the incumbents who have been targeted year after year (think Republican Anne Northup or Democrat Dennis Moore), but incumbents who have not been tested in years. These folks tend to be overconfident and underestimate potential threats, are not as sensitive to the changing demographics of their districts, and are often out-of-touch with modern campaign technology (one insider told the story of a longtime incumbent who had his fundraising contacts on note cards). Examples include former GOP Rep. George Gekas who lost re-election for an 11th term in 2002 and Democrat David Minge who lost his re-election bid in 2000.
Walter identifies Curt Weldon (along with Republican JD Hayworth in AZ-05 and Democrat Allan Mollohan in WV-01) as one such untested incumbent:
Rep. Curt Weldon is getting his first significant contest since winning this seat in 1986....
Republicans concede that the underlying political environment and Weldon's lack of experience in a competitive campaign environment are liabilities for the Republican congressman. While there is no doubt that Weldon is readying himself for a tough fight - he told The Hill newspaper that he is going to unleash the "Army of Curt" - his rusty campaign skills have already been revealed. Weldon's zeal to define his opponent went over the top in early April.
Army of Curt - LOL. Goofy and crazy as he may be, Weldon won't be a pushover:
Yet, labeling Weldon's voting record as out of touch with these suburban voters isn't going to be easy. According to the National Journal vote ratings, Weldon's voting record was pretty evenly divided between liberal and conservative. His composite voting score was 57 percent conservative and 43 percent liberal - not much different from the other two Republican Reps. in the Philadelphia suburbs, Mike Fitzpatrick and Jim Gerlach. CQ pegs his party unity score at 85 percent....
Given the ugly numbers for President Bush nationally, it's not too much to believe that Weldon is more vulnerable than ever this year. But to knock off a well-known, well-liked, and entrenched incumbent like Weldon, Democrats need more than just a good political environment. Sestak also needs to prove to be a strong and well-funded candidate with an effective message who can break through the clutter of the crowded (and expensive) Philadelphia media market.
I think Sestak has the potential to be exactly that guy. And I think "rusty" Weldon could be in for a bit of surprise this campaign season. Remember, Sestak's now on the netroots page, so please consider contributing or volunteering.
Posted at 09:35 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Pennsylvania | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
PA-07: Curt Weldon Sells Access via His Daughter
Posted by DavidNYCWhat is it with Republicans setting up their inexperienced family members with lucrative gigs in the GOP money machine? First we learned that Reps. Doolittle and Sweeney let their wives - who had no consulting experience - skim off the top and collect a percentage of all funds raised for their campaigns. Now it turns out that Curt Weldon's daughter (also neophyte) has earned scads of money as a lobbyist by helping her clients to "develop relationships" with none other than her father.
TPM Muckraker gets credit for pointing us to this LA Times story from 2004 which lays out all the sordid details:
Karen Weldon, an inexperienced 29-year-old lobbyist from suburban Philadelphia, seemed an unlikely choice for clients seeking global public relations services.Yet her tiny firm was selected last year for a plum $240,000 contract to promote the good works of a wealthy Serbian family that had been linked to accused war criminal Slobodan Milosevic.
Despite a lack of professional credentials, she had one notable asset — her father, U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.), who is a leading voice in Washington on former Eastern Bloc affairs.
...
Karen Weldon said her father "developed a rapport" with the Karics and introduced her to them. But her firm, Solutions North America Inc., won the consulting contract on its merits, she said. Her father declined to answer questions for this article.
The congressman also has gone to bat for at least two of Solutions' other clients, both struggling Russian companies.
Together, the three contracts are worth almost $1 million a year to her firm for services that have included joining her father on congressional trips and in meetings with clients.
Nice work, if you can get it. This whole charade may technically be kosher, but as is often the case, the real crime is that it's legal in the first place. As they say, there oughta be a law. If you wanna make that happen, support Joe Sestak.
P.S. Sestak's been added to the combined netroots-wide ActBlue page. He's very much worthy of our support. He's running in a lean-Dem district (D+3.6, the seventh-most Dem CD held by a Republican), he's shown himself to be a strong fundraiser, and - as should be clear to everyone by now - he's taking on a seriously crazy mouth-breathing wingnut. If there is indeed a Democratic wave this year, one place the Republican dominoes will surely fall is in the Democratic-leaning suburbs of Philly - ie, exactly where Sestak is running. Bowers has more here.
Posted at 03:14 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Pennsylvania | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 06, 2006
TX-22: Lampson Supports Special Election, Perry Doesn't
Posted by DavidNYCMan, did I read this one wrong. So it turns out that Nick Lampson is in favor of a quickie special election (on May 13th), while Gov. Rick Perry opposes one.
In retrospect, this makes sense: Lampson has been building up name recognition and a big warchest. If a special election took place a month from now, any Republican opponents would be seriously lacking in both. By waiting until November, the GOP can rally around a single candidate and get him - whoever he is - up to cruising speed.
And of course, the answer is that there won't be a special, because Perry holds all the cards. He's under no legal obligation to call one - as I noted previously, it's entirely discretionary. In media-whore parlance, I've flip-flopped on the issue, but, in real life, I've simply admitted I was wrong. I now see the virtue of Lampson's position - not to mention the fact that TX-22 will have to go without representation for the better part of a year under Perry's plan.
Posted at 07:56 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MD-Sen: Can Steele Actually Draw Black Votes?
Posted by DavidNYCAn internal document prepared by a top Democratic strategist warns that a majority of African American voters in Maryland are open to supporting Republican Senate candidate Michael S. Steele and advises the party not to wait to "knock Steele down."The 37-page report says a sizable segment of likely black voters -- as much as 44 percent -- would readily abandon their historic Democratic allegiances "after hearing Steele's messaging."
"Governor Ehrlich and [Lt. Gov.] Michael Steele have a clear ability to break through the Democratic stronghold among African American voters in Maryland," says the March 27 report by Cornell Belcher, polling consultant for the Democratic National Committee, which bases its findings on a survey of 489 black voters in Maryland conducted last month.
Versus:
If the findings of the poll are correct, they paint a somewhat different vision of the black electorate from what has been commonly understood to this point, said David Bositis, a senior research associate at the D.C.-based Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Bositis said nothing in his research suggests that an African American Republican will be able to grab a significant segment of the black vote.The DNC survey finds that 22 percent of black voters support Steele when matched against a "generic" Democrat.
"There's just no way it's that high," Bositis said, noting that Steele's performance among black voters in the 2002 election did not approach that number. "If he was that much of a draw then it's doubtful he would only have received 13 percent of the black vote."
I don't want to believe only that which I'd like to believe, hence I remain vigilant about Steele's chances among the African American community. However - and this is a big however - the internal DNC poll sounds like a classic message-testing poll. We all know that those kinds of polls, with their captive audiences listening to a candidate's entire messaging package, don't reflect how politics works. Few voters will ever seriously tune in to a single message of Steele's, let alone the entire kit-n-kaboodle. Message-testing polls are great for precisely that - testing a message, not taking the temperature of the electorate.
Of course, when Cornell Belcher says we shouldn't wait to knock Steele down... well obviously, on that front, I couldn't agree more. And it shouldn't be too hard:
A message that resonated with black voters identified Steele as "George W. Bush's hand-picked candidate," the survey found. It's a message Democrats have tried to exploit. Even as Walker discussed the findings, he pointed to a photograph hanging in his office -- it shows Steele and Bush arm in arm.The poll finds that only 8 percent of black voters in Maryland approve of the president's performance. And it signals that early support Steele has received from Bush and his advisers will rub black voters the wrong way.
Now that's a simple message that's easy to push and easy for voters to take home.
Posted at 12:59 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
PA-07: Curt Weldon a Moonie Cultist
Posted by DavidNYCWhen I got an e-mail yesterday from Admiral Joe Sestak's campaign about Curt Weldon's depraved attack on Sestak's four-year-old, cancer-stricken daughter, I wanted to throw things. What kind of disturbed, twisted nutbag could stoop so low? Well, as community member Predictor reminds us in the comments, this kind of nutbag:
Weldon spoke at the coronation of Sun Myung Moon "as humanity's Savior, Messiah, Returning Lord and True Parent", on March 23, 2004. His office originally vehemently denied his attendance, then when he was revealed to be a co-chair organizer of the event claimed that he had intended to attend but could not because of a scheduling conflict; then when a photo surfaced of him speaking at the event while standing next to a lifesize photo of him pinning a Unification Church medal on Moammar Al Qadhafi, stated that he had left immediately after the speech and had no knowledge of what else went on.
That whole Moon coronation thing seriously, seriously creeped me out. I mean, it was really beyond insane. Get this:
• It was freakin' coronation for cryin' out loud! Since when do we have coronations in this country, except at Burger King?• It was in a Senate office building! The United States Senate! Hell, Art. I, Sec. 9 of the Constitution even forbids Congress to grant "titles of nobility." I realize this was not some kind of legislative act, but jeez.
• Rev. Moon declared himself to be the Messiah?!? Look, man, I don't know about you, but in my religion, worshipping false gods is a serious no-no. Oh wait, Weldon's a Christian. So that means the Ten Commandments apply to him, too. Weldon even voted for something called the "Ten Commandments Defense Act," a bill to let states display the decalogue in government buildings. And man, even I know that Christianity accepts Jesus as the Messiah, not Rev. Sun Myung Moon.
• And Moon himself? How could any serious person ever be associated with someone so sick? This is a man who has called gays "dirty, dung-eating dogs," declared that "the Jews" killed Jesus, and thinks that "Satan is clinging to our sexual organs." How is it acceptable for politicians to even get near this freak?
Personally, I think the whole Rev. Moon story is just too weird for the media. Crazy tax felon billionaire with delusions of being the Messiah publishes major DC paper, holds Washington power-players in his thrall? That's the plain n' simple truth, and yet because it's so bizarre, I just think the traditional media has no interest in touching it. If they ran honest stories about Moon, I think ordinary folks would assume they were made up.
Of course, that doesn't excuse the media turning a blind eye to this savage cult - and it certainly doesn't get sicko Curt Weldon off the hook for being a Moon lackey. As noted above, Weldon denied attening Moon's "coronation," but only later fessed up when photos emerged - including a photo of another photo of Weldon pinning a medal on that well-known American hero, Col. Muammar Qadafi.
Busted, you sonofabitch. Now how about apologizing to Joe Sestak and his daughter?
UPDATE: Another photo of Weldon giving a plaque (or as Monty Burns would style it, "the plague") of some sort to Qadafi. I gotta say again, what the hell? What American - let alone what American politician - would want to be within 100 feet of a terrorist-supporting dictator like Qadafi? This is so topsy-turvy that even I can hardly believe it.
Posted at 11:16 AM in 2006 Elections - House, Pennsylvania | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-02: Schmidt Lied on Resume
Posted by DavidNYCFrom the Cleveland Plain Dealer's politics blog:
The Ohio Elections Commission will determine whether U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt intentionally lied on her political resume last year to help herself get elected to Congress....
At issue is Schmidt's claim that she has two academic degrees from the University of Cincinnati when in fact she only has one. Her campaign has offered various explanations for the mix-up.
A small panel of Commission members on Wednesday reviewed a complaint against Schmidt from a McEwen supporter filed just two days ago and decided there is probable cause for the full commission to consider the matter.
More details here. I expect nothing less from good ole Schmitty. (Remember this little footnote to the whole Murtha flap?) Fortunately, we'll still have Mean Jean to kick around for at least a little while to come - a new SUSA poll showed her leading primary challenger Bob McEwen by 55-30. Let's not kid ourselves: Like Katherine Harris, we're much better off having her around than not.
(Thanks to Walt for the CPD story.)
Posted at 10:59 AM in 2006 Elections - House, Ohio | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Open Thread
Posted by DavidNYCSchool, school, school. Anyone wanna help me with this Markman brief I have to write for my patent trial practice class? Didn't think so. So go chat about campaigns instead.
Posted at 03:39 PM in Open Threads | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Shhh!
Posted by DavidNYCThis is pretty funny. Lieberman's plodding build-up to his oh-so-obvious non-joke at the end is just brutal. The crickets are more than appropriate.
Posted at 12:00 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
TX-22: Any Special Election is Illegitimate
Posted by DavidNYCSpecial elections ought to be held in special circumstances: If a candidate falls seriously ill, dies, or retires for a good reason early in an election cycle. When an incumbent uses legal loopholes to bail on his constituents late in the game, that most certainly does not qualify as an appropriate special circumstance.
Fortunately, Texas law recognizes that not all vacancies are created equal. The governor may choose whether or not to call a special election - holding one is not mandatory. Gov. Rick Perry must now exercise his discretion wisely and refuse to squander taxpayers' dollars on such a wasteful exercise. To do otherwise would be to blatantly serve the naked partisan purpose of forcing Nick Lampson, the Democrat, through two elections - and possibly three, since a special might require a run-off - in just a few months time.
Of course, I'm not naive - Perry will do whatever his Republican overlords tell him to do. Therefore, if he does call a special election, I think all Democrats - including Lampson - should boycott it completely. Don't run in it, don't vote in it, don't even talk about it. If the TX GOP wants to waste time and money on a special election, then we shouldn't accord the "winner" any legitimacy whatsoever. The real election - as it has been all along - is still in November, regardless of what the Texas Republicans try to do.
I realize this is a potentially radical and controversial path to take. But it's certainly far less radical than everything Tom DeLay has done to undermine democracy in Texas. Regardless of what DeLay does now, there only needs to be one election to determine who represents TX-22 in Congress, and that election will take place on November 7th, 2006 - and not a day earlier.
Posted at 06:55 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
TX-22: Bugman Bugs Out
Posted by DavidNYCThat, of course, should have been my original title last night. Anyhow, some more legal analysis on how DeLay might be replaced, from Rick Hasen:
With news that Tom DeLay is withdrawing from his House reelection contest, the question is what happens now in his race. It appears that the following is the applicable Texas law (putting aside any caselaw that might affect interpretation of these chapters):Under Texas Election code section 1.005(7), DeLay was running in a 'General election for state and county officers' [, which] means the general election at which officers of the federal, state, and county governments are elected." Section 145.031 et. seq. set forth the rules for "a candidate who is a political party's nominee in the general election for state and county officers except a candidate for president or vice-president of the United States." DeLay is the party's nominee in a general election for state and county officers and he's not a candidate for president or vice president, so these rules apply.
Under 145.032, DeLay can withdraw because it is more than 74 days before election day. If he withdraws, under section 145.035, his name is omitted from the ballot. Under section 145.036, the political party's executive committee can only fill a vacancy under limited circumstances (such as catastrophic illness), none of which seem to apply to DeLay. So this route does not look like it would work for DeLay.
Instead, reports suggest he will move from Texas, thereby becoming ineligible to serve. (See section 145.003 on declaration of ineligibility.) If he is "ineligible" rather than "withdraws," section 145.036 gives the party the right to name a candidate to fill the vacancy.
There are also rumors that the governor could call a special election. Under 204.021, "An unexpired term in the office of United States representative may be filled only by a special election in the same manner as provided by Chapter 203 for the legislature, except that Section 203.013 does not apply." (203.013 sets forth a timetable for the election.) Chapter 203 sets forth the requirement of a special election, the requirement of a majority vote (meaning a runoff will be necessary if no candidate gets a majority of the vote), etc. But this would only apply to the unexpired term. There's this provision that appears to allow a replacement to run for the full term, but only if the vacancy occurs after the general election. So even if the governor calls a special election that chooses someone to serve out the rest of DeLay's current term, that does not appear to affect the nomination rules for the upcoming general election.
Slinking off to Virginia, tail tucked between legs, utterly defeated. The true Tom DeLay reveals himself.
(Tip to Adam B.)
Posted at 09:00 AM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, April 03, 2006
TX-22: DeLay Retiring!
Posted by DavidNYCCommenters at DailyKos are saying that CNN & MSNBC are reporting that Tom DeLay is retiring. Can anyone confirm?
UPDATE: The banner on CNN confirms it. Now, to brass tacks. Can DeLay be replaced? At first blush, the answer looks like "no." Here's why I say that. The one part of the Texas Election Code which covers replacement can be found here. There's just one problem: I don't think it's applicable to House races. That's because §145.036 is governed by §145.031, which says:
APPLICABILITY OF SUBCHAPTER. This subchapter applies to a candidate who is a political party's nominee in the general election for state and county officers except a candidate for president or vice-president of the United States.
A House seat would qualify as a "district" office, not a "state" or "county" office. Now, another section of the code, §145.091, does purport to cover all other races:
APPLICABILITY OF SUBCHAPTER. This subchapter applies to a candidate in a general or special election, except the general election for state and county officers.
However, this section of the code, while it permits for withdrawals, contains absolutely no provision for replacements. Yet I'm still baffled, because a number of the sub-sections that fall under the sway of 145.031 (which purportedly only applies to "state and county officers") specifically mention "district offices." This is the full definition of "district office":
"District office" means an office of the federal or state government that is not voted on statewide.
So maybe 145.031 applies only to state district offices? (There is no definition of "state office" in the definitions section of the election code.) That would mean that 145.091 governs federal district offices - a very strange way to do things. No matter what, this is all totally cockamamie. And it just goes to show you that when Republicans holler for judges to "apply the law as it's written," half the time you're left asking, "Well, what the hell does the law even say in the first place?"
So the real question is, did DeLay pull a Gallegly? I find that hard to believe. Then again, DeLay is accused of violating Texas election law, so maybe he's not too familiar with it. Somehow I doubt that Nick Lampson just waltzed into a freebie in TX-22, but who knows? I'm sure we'll know more as the night unfolds.
UPDATE: I think PantsB in comments just clarified everything. There is a specific definition for "general election for state and county officers," and it's a wee bit unexpected:
"General election for state and county officers" means the general election at which officers of the federal, state, and county governments are elected. (Emphasis added.)
So somehow, the phrase "state and county" includes "federal." Weird. Well, that would mean that §145.036 would definitely apply to DeLay, and a replacement can indeed be made.
Posted at 10:24 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Texas | Comments (35) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Lowering Expectations
Posted by DavidNYCLamont will need the votes of at least 241 (15 percent) of those delegates [to the statewide nominating convention] or signatures from 14,000 (2 percent) of the state's 700,000 registered Democrats to force an Aug. 8 primary against Lieberman. Signatures must be collected by June 5.Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith conceded that a primary against Lamont is likely inevitable.
"We think it won't be a problem for him to get 15 percent of the delegates," Smith said. "He's been working at this for several months, and he's been bragging about his grass-roots army."
Wow, Lamont has been at this all the way since the end of January! Poor Joe's only had eighteen years to get his act together. It almost goes without saying that Lieberman is nakedly trying to lower expectations here. Expected in politics, but pretty sad for an incumbent Senator.
Also, mocking the grassroots? Not a smart move. Every time they rile us up, it just makes us want to work that much harder for Lamont. Lieberman would be wise to present a smaller target and not give the grassroots/netroots more fodder. The fact that his campaign manager doesn't seem to realize this, though, is a good sign for Lamont.
(Via DailyKos.)
Posted at 10:12 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Congrats to Mark Nickolas & the BluegrassReport
Posted by DavidNYCCongratulations to Mark Nickolas for winning the 2005 Koufax Award for Best State/Local Blog. Mark, author of the Kentucky-oriented BluegrassReport, shares the award with next-door neighbors Tennessee Guerilla Women. Great work, Mark!
Posted at 09:25 PM in Netroots | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
ND-AL: That Was Quick
Posted by DavidNYCJust last week, I fretted a bit about ND-AL, thanks to a post at CQ Politics. The local GOP was backing state Rep. Duane DeKrey and touting him as a top-tier challenger. Turns out, not so much:
North Dakota Republicans picked Mechtel, a rural Cass County resident who has never sought political office, on Sunday as their candidate to run against U.S. Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. Mechtel defeated state Rep. Duane DeKrey, R-Pettibone, by 15 votes, 270 to 255.
Pretty amazing that an experienced politician with establishment backing would get whooped at a party convention by a soybean farmer, but there you have it. Mechtel apparently ran a clever, charismatic mini-campaign to get the GOP nod, but he's a total newcomer who doesn't even appear in the FEC databases yet. I'm thinking Pomeroy ought to be just fine this year.
And, in a related but out-of-left-field aside, incidents like this suggest that Ned Lamont might be able to accomplish some interesting things at the CT Dem convention.
(Thanks to Predictor.)
Posted at 04:43 PM in 2006 Elections - House, North Dakota | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
The First Quarter's Not Over Yet in IN, NC & OH
Posted by DavidNYCOrdinarily, the FEC's first quarterly deadline is March 31st. This means that your quarterly report is due April 15th. However, the deadline is extended in three states which have primaries soon, on May 2nd: Indiana, North Carolina and Ohio. Campaigns in those states have to submit special "pre-primary" reports on April 20th. If the first quarter deadline weren't extended, you'd have to submit back-to-back reports on the 15th and 20th - wouldn't make much sense. So the FEC allows you to consolidate both filings, which means you get to report donations received through April 12th.
This means that if you want to help boost the quarterly numbers for any campaigns in these three states, you still have some time. I can think of a number of competitive federal races: IN-02, IN-08, and IN-09; NC-11; OH-06, OH-13, OH-15, OH-18, and OH-Sen. I'm sure folks here might even suggest another race or two. And, as always, ActBlue is probably the easiest way to contribute.
Posted at 01:51 PM in 2006 Elections | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCHave at it.
UPDATE: I have no idea how she can possibly hang on. Do you? As DHinMI observed to me, Ed Rollins is ditching Kathy Harris but sticking with batshit crazy KT McFarland. How pathetic is that for Harris?
Posted at 02:03 PM in Open Threads | Comments (36) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati