Does anybody in Michigan actually know who Cherry is?

He was elected as a ticket with Granholm correct? Then his name rec can't be very high. Sure, it will clearly be a tough hold but these numbers aren't anything to be fearful of.  

---

by: conspiracy @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 18:54:33 PM UTC

Granholm

I believe she was down close to double-digits even by late summer of 2006.  She won by like 15 points, despite approvals in the 40's.  I'd still give any Dem a slight edge in Michigan these days.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 19:46:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sounds Like a Throw the Bums Out Mentality

And if that's the case, I don't know if nominating the House Speaker is much better than nominating the Lt. Gov. Party interests might be better served by nominating someone who can run against Lansing.

---

by: armand @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 20:57:44 PM UTC

Throw out the bums yes

But it's going to take A LOT of convincing by the GOP to get voters to go against their self-interest and elect regressive corporate republicans back into power in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 21:21:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A few things

When I saw the poll, I had a few thoughts.

1. Don't necessarily trust the pollster. They're a Republican firm, and of the 21 polls conducted in September 2008, the Market Resource Group poll was one of only two that showed McCain leading Obama. It was still within the margin of error, so it could have been statistical noise, but my gut says that MRG might lean Republican.

That said, Grebner at Michigan Liberal seems to trust them some, so we can't just throw away the poll out of partisanship.

2. John Cherry isn't especially well-known yet. Besides occasional speaking gigs when the governor couldn't make it, he kept a pretty low profile before last year. He's been trying to boost his name ID, and we should have a better idea about that some time later this year.

3. As noted by others, Granholm was down big against Dick DeVos in 2006, and came back to win by 14. It's a Democratic state overall, we just like to make our Democrats work for it.

Really, I think the problem in Michigan is with the Granholm brand rather than the Democratic brand, and Cherry needs to demonstrate that he'd do things differently than Granholm-- bolder, more progressive action. He's got the connections to lock up the primary before it starts (or close to it), regardless of what Andy Dillon has in mind, so it's all about convincing Democratic voters that he's worth getting excited about and convincing independents that he's offering something different than what we've had since 2002.

Unfortunately, for all of the many good things that Jennifer Granholm has done, she hasn't come across as effective. She's been a solid, moderate Democratic governor at a time when I think the state has needed something more. It's Cherry's job (or whomever we nominate) to show that Democrats can still offer something more.

The thing is, having seen John Cherry a few times, he just doesn't seem like that great of a campaigner. I hope so, because besides Andy Dillon (who, right now, strikes me as a non-starter), we don't really have anyone else who's viable.

---

by: Fitzy @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 21:11:30 PM UTC

I should also note

I've been out of the state a lot lately, and I'm far from an expert to start with, so I'd defer to other Michigan SSPers for a better analysis. In other words, I'm saying that I've got no idea what I'm talking about.

But if I had to guess, I'd say that we end up with a Patterson vs. Cherry race, and that they start off even (and with an enormous number of undecideds).

---

by: Fitzy @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 21:14:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What's wrong with Andy Dillion?

n/t

---

by: fitchfan28 @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 21:19:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nothing, really

But where Cherry has an excuse for being fairly invisible-- he can't (and shouldn't) overshadow his boss-- the Speaker of the House has the stage to demonstrate that he's a leader. I just don't feel like Dillon's done that, or at least hasn't been able to communicate it.

With Cherry lining up behind-the-scenes support and endorsements left and right, Dillon has to do something to get himself noticed and overcome the institutional support that Cherry has. But so far, that hasn't happened.

I don't know. Maybe I'm just feeling disappointed by everyone right now. Hopefully that'll change.

---

by: Fitzy @ Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 22:05:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually better than expected

This is really much better than I figure Cherry would be. And if Cox is the best polling candidate on the GOP side, then this looks really good. Cox looked formidable 6 years ago when he considered taking on Granholm, but Devos elbowed him out of the way with his enormous bank account and forced him to settle for relection as AG. Since then he has made a number of missteps, including his handling of the Mayorial situation in Detroit.

Cherry's not my first choice, but if he is the horse we Michigan Dems pick to ride in 2010, I now feel MUCH LESS concerned that it will be a ride to the glue factory.

---

by: Egalitare @ Fri Mar 20, 2009 at 14:34:02 PM UTC

I can't believe it took me this long

to realize the pun in the title.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Sun Mar 22, 2009 at 07:37:35 AM UTC

This isn't that bad...

There're a couple things to keep in mind.

1) This is a Governor's race. Governor's races go to the smaller party all the time. Many state have have or recently had Governor's from the wrong part -- off the top of my head I can think of MA, CT, NY, CA, WY, OK, and KS.

2) The Democratic brand in Michigan is fine. Granholm herself won four years ago. A few months back Dems won the State House, the Congressional Delegation, all statewide boards, got more votes for State Senate, Presidential Electors, and unseated the Chief Justice of Michigan's Supreme Court.

The last one is really huge. Justices for the Supreme Court are nominated by their parties, but are listed on the non-partisan section of the ballot. To beat Cliff Taylor we had to drill his name into the heads of half the voters in the state, convince them he sucked, and do it well enough that they'd remember to vote for Supreme Court.

3) Nobody knows who Tom Cherry is. Including me, a genuine state politics junky. He's boring. He's bald. Some suburb likes the family so much they gave his State Senate seat to his wife. Don't know which suburb, or which County.

4) Given 1), and 3) it's not surprising John Cherry's down by 5 to known politicians. It's actually pretty heartening.

5) The dudes who did this poll forgot a very important player. Bart Stupak represents more than 30 of Michigan's counties House. He's a proven vote-getter in rural areas (biggest city represented: Marquette population 19,000), and he usually wins by 30 points.

I'd be more interested to see how he's doing vs. Cox than see a Hoekstra vs. Cherry matchup.

---

by: Detroit Skeptic @ Sun Mar 22, 2009 at 21:26:47 PM UTC

Cherry

I think Cherry lives in Kildee's solidly Dem district (which includes Flint & Saginaw). Dont know how much thatd help or hurt him statewide, if any.

---

by: HarrisCountyBrian @ Sun Mar 22, 2009 at 22:09:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So that's where he's from.

I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.

Statewide Flint wont be an issue for either side. It's too small for the local-boy-done good thing to have an effect on the overall vote. It's also too small to be in some  of Michigan's nasty regional battles.

Western Michigan has some baggage. Nobody hates the Dutch, but they have a reputation for being far-right in a state that just ain't.

Detroit proper is the biggest problem statewide. It's the big city that makes all the rural folks nervous, it's 90% black, and it happens to have a very nasty rivalry with it's across-the-street neighbors in Oakland County (and Macomb, to a lesser extent). 8 Mile did not exaggerate the polarization in the Detroit area one bit.

---

by: Detroit Skeptic @ Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 14:16:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me suggest that

if he had hailed from Ann Arbor that would be almost as problematic as Detroit, as much of the state wants to pretend that we have established a "People's Republic."

---

by: Egalitare @ Wed Mar 25, 2009 at 11:11:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

But aren't Granholm's approvals in the gutter right now?

Or maybe not quite that bad.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 06:31:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup...

But AFAIK they ain't much worse than they were in 2006 when she got re-elected.

---

by: Detroit Skeptic @ Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 14:07:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ya

They were in the 40's when she got re-elected in 2006 by when ended up a landslide victory.  Michigan has like a >12% unemployment rate.  I'd be ticked at everyone too if I lived there.  But in the end the voters seem to know that things would only be worse with a corporate repub as Governor than a progressive.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Mar 23, 2009 at 15:23:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]