Google Ads


Site Stats

OK-Gov: Watts Won't Run

by: Crisitunity

Fri May 22, 2009 at 1:54 PM EDT


There's been a flurry of polling of the Oklahoma Governor's race lately, showing former Representative (and CFL great) J.C. Watts beating the Democrats in the general, and at least competitive with retiring Rep. (and former Lt. Gov.) Mary Fallin in the GOP primary. Well, today, Watts made clear that he wouldn't be running in 2010.
"I have observed with great interest and pride the progress my state is making under the bold and innovative leadership of the state legislature. Nothing would give me greater joy and satisfaction than to go work with these leaders to grow and prosper Oklahoma," Watts said in a statement. "However, my current business and contractual obligations create hurdles that I cannot overcome at this time."

Watts had recently made statements that left him sounding skeptical about being able to raise the funds, but this is still a bit surprising in view of solid polls. This leaves Fallin an easier path to the nomination. She isn't unopposed, though; state Sen. Randy Brogdon is in the race, and will be the really, really conservative in the primary, as opposed to Fallin's merely really conservative.

And there's one last wild card... Sen. Tom Coburn, who has sounded non-commital about running for another Senate term and has occasionally been the subject of gubernatorial speculation; Coburn will reportedly announce his plans on June 1. The Dems, for their part, face a contested primary between Lt. Gov. Jari Askins and AG Drew Edmondson.  
Crisitunity :: OK-Gov: Watts Won't Run
Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

OK-Gov: Watts Won't Run | 55 comments
And suddenly
I find myself hoping that Tom Coburn seeks re-election.

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26
There's no telling what Coburn will do.
There's no sense in trying to figure out the logic of a crazy person, and since most of us around here are relatively sane, let's just accept we won't know until he does something.

That said, let's hope Coburn just retires, if, for no other reason, to get him out of the Senate.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

[ Parent ]
Just nuts. Coburn seems to put secret holds
 on seemingly every other piece of business.
This is a total guess, but it seems to me that he does as many holds as all the other Senators combined.

Having him out of the Senate would be a HUGE gift just for that.

[ Parent ]
Yikes. And I just read that Coburn
snuck a provison into the new Credit Card Bill that "allows people to bring loaded guns into national parks", and it turns out The White House is a national park. Link
Please retire Tom! There are a lot of babies out there that need delivering.
(And what does that have to do with credit cards anyway?)
[ Parent ]
Speaking of Fallin and OK-05
We should really put up a strong challenge to this CD. Fallin was probably too tough to beat in '06, but in '08, this district was Obama's best, and the only one that shifted from Gore to Obama in the entire state. This seems to be the only bright spot in what is a state that has steadily drifted away from us.
Won't matter
if we somehow win this district in 2010, this district will be heavily gerrymandered in 2012.
[ Parent ]
This is a long term district though
It is OK City and it's suburbs. As OKC grows and becomes more urban, it will naturally become more Democratic. By the middle of the next decade it should be approaching 50/50 in party ID. I know Oklahoma County has several democrats representing it at a county level.

We'll pick this one up soon enough. And the Tulsa district (I forgot the CD#) probably 4-6 years afterwards.

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

[ Parent ]
If the Repubs are smart
they will split the OKC district in two, so the Dems won't pick it up.

If we win it in 2010, they will certainly.  If we don't win it in 2010, they may leave it alone.

[ Parent ]
Not everyone thinks like you
or me for that matter at times and I'd say its better governance not to split up major cities to screw them out of proper representation.
[ Parent ]
scratch that
I dont mean to include myself in that, the sentence changed from what I initially intended on writing.  I dont favor that and do think its good governance.

However, I'd support splitting up major cities if it isn't done to harm their representation and more so to harm other districts overall Republican voting strength.  MN only has three D-PVI disticts and if the GOP ever got a hold of redistricting, that'd be probably two by combining Minneapolis and St. Paul.  It's crap that in close years MN is still blue but technically should have a 5/3 GOP delegation.  I'm certainly for correcting that as need be.

[ Parent ]
.
Tulsa is in OK-01.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
F Dan Boren
http://www.washblade.com/thela...

You're picture should NOT be the one featured in a news article about defining marriage in DC to one woman and one man.  I dont care if you're from a conservative district, you knows this shit isnt going to pass anyway so why bother.

Seriously, I'd rather have Coburn.  Boren will be a COMPLETE waste of money and will stab us in the back every chance he gets to be able to keep a seat in Oklahoma because that is what he'd have to do.  Not worth it.  It really isnt.  Name one vote he'd help us out with in a pinch, what situation would we need him for when we'd be losing 10-15 Dems on a vote and not him?  Nope, sometimes we gotta know our limits and a Dem Senator in Oklahoma is something unsustainable and not worth our money.  That is really one of the few states I would say dont even bother, we shouldnt have a Dem from that state anyway so why spend our money.  ID, UT if not Matheson, WY special circumstance with whats her face and I think that's it.  It's only four states but those four are states I wouldn't ever bother for a Senate race.  

I know there are tons of Dems on the local level, yeah the state house and senate are both gone now so dont forget that.  We just aren't supposed to win in Oklahoma and if we do, it isnt worth it and that'd be proven by Boren.  I dont think either him or Henry would win anyway so this all moot, heh.

I would too
but I would want Boren to run for the Senate, suck up a lot of Repub money to defend the seat, and lose narrowly.  It would also give us something slightly better in House too.

If Boren needs to support FMA and anti-choice measures, fine.  (You may not agree).  But he better be a down the line economic populist if he does that.  There is no excuse for being Repub down the line.  A Democrat from Wyoming would probably be the opposite (support pro-choice and pro-gay measures, conservative on economics and environment).

[ Parent ]
"We" are broader than you
"Seriously, I'd rather have Coburn."

The absurdity of saying something like that is beyond words.

There is not one single molecule of negative in Boren running for Senator, and something utterly unimportant doesn't change that.

[ Parent ]
There are plenty of negatives
blowing a bunch of money on a race we have no business winning in the first place.  Its unsustainable and isnt worth it vote wise.  Forcing the GOP to spend is great but we have to spend too ya know.

Coburn does do all of those holds which gets to be annoying but that is certainly a lot less damaging than having a Senator who WILL come out against at EVERY every chance he gets and will do the rounds on all the shows.  Why the hell should we fund someone who we will know is going to be worthless in the Senate?  This gives the GOP way too much ammunition in that their crap can be seen as bi-partisan and it gives them a talking point, even if their own caucus is rebelling! or whatever.  No thanks, I'd rather keep the political enemy as the GOP instead of having to fight people within our caucus even more so.  It's a big tent party but you get to a part where you think, well wtf just go be Republican and quit holding us back.  It's fine that he's in the House, that isn't a big enough platform, being a US Senator most certainly is.

Besides, if Boren was even going to run, I doubt he would've done this type of legislation, he certainly wouldnt want to announce his Senate run and the DSCC and national activists to come to know him as the guy who tried to define marriage in DC, so moot again maybe.  He'll enjoy a long career in the House, trying to block Obama at every turn.

[ Parent ]
Unsustainable?
Really, that's just silly.  First, it's a six year term.  Lots can happen in that time.  Second, a Boren has already been a Senator from Oklahoma.

Boren running would not be as good as Henry, but it would be the purest win of all the possible seats.  His House seat should be held, and the Repubs will have a very tough race in what is arguably their best state.  Think of the headlines of that.

If you are so full of bile you can't welcome someone who agrees with you 40% of the time, then join the Club for Growth.  And if you want to support a guy who wants to execute docors, then that is where you probably belong.

A conservative state needs and deserves a conservative senator.  I'll take a conservative though who doesn't want to execute doctors.

[ Parent ]
No way I'm going to support a candidate
who's actively working against my civil rights. If he runs, he'll do it without my support.  
[ Parent ]
That's different
than saying "I'd rather have Coburn".  That's nutjob talk.  You don't have to actively support someone you don't agree with, but saying you'd prefer someone who agrees wit you 0% of the time versus someone who agrees with you 45% is crazy.

Don't lift a finger to support him, but don't get involved in this crazy talk.

[ Parent ]
Well now wait a minute, let's think this out a little more.
Do we want someone who can do a whole bunch of damage in the majority? Or someone effectively neutered in the minority?  Now, granted, Coburn has been extremely effective in the minority, perhaps more so than he was in the majority, so him being out of Congress would be the most desirable thing, but someone like Boren could do a whole bunch of damage to a progressive agenda, as many Democrats are doing so now.  Perhaps the ideal here would be for Coburn to retire and a less effective Republican to take his place.  After all, we're past the point we're we have to support ALL Democrats.  We can now afford to be a little more selective in who we care to see in Washington.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
get real
Boren could do virtually no "damage" in the majority.

Coburn can and does do damage.  There is no risk of Boren doing that, short of him getting thrown out of the caucus, in which case he would still be btter than Coburn.

This is the Swing State Project.  The idea should be here to have the agenda of this country decided with attempts by the right wing of the Democrats to water stuff down, not the left wing of the Republicans.  Give me Boren, Bright and Minnick, and Susan Collins stops running the country.  True on some issues she would be better than Boren, but on virtually no issues would Coburn be better.

And most important, a Boren candidacy would be a complete freebie.  Money Republicans should be spending in Ohio would be dumped into the reddest state in the country.  The humiliation of the Reps losing the OK seat would also be pretty fun to watch.

Of course, Henry is nearly infinitely better, but who cares?  

Our ideal situations, our most important recruits, are the strongest possible candidates in the reddest states where we don't have to give up anything.  A term-limited Governor or a lame House member that we can do better than (Carson for example) are perfect candidates in general, even if in specific this guy is a dick 55% of the time.

[ Parent ]
Oh I'm very real, else I couldn't type on this keyboard.
But that aside, I think we're past the point, for now at least, where we have to worry about electing more Ben Nelson's and Blanche Lincolns.  Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having them in the caucus to the extent that they're useful, and Democrats like Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor, etc. have proven very useful in increasing our caucus in the past.  But now we're seeing groups like Evan Bayhs "centrists" and the Blue Dogs in the House prove the biggest obsticles to President Obama's agenda and to progressive government.  Cramdown is a great example of that, and EFCA too, and a number of that fold, Bill Nelson among them, have come out against the public plan option for healthcare reform.  My thinking is, if we're electing these Democrats and we still don't get a good agenda through, what's the point?  Now, I never said I wanted Coburn to win, I said I thought the best situation was for another, less potent Republican to win over Dan Boren.  If Brad Henry ran, I'd gladly support him, but it's all about advancing an agenda.  Otherwise politics is just a game, and I think we're dealing with things far too important to consider it a game.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
I'm glad your defeatism isn't catching
Not only are we not "past the point" of electing moderates in red and marginal districts, we have barely started.

As for the biggest obstacle comment, seriously, the whole concept of "swing district" alludes you?

Jim deMint has a 30 member caucus plan you could adopt.

More Democrats, and then better Democrats.  New York and Pennsylvania are where to look in 2010 for better Democrats.  OK is where to look for a non-extremist, non-lunatic, and then hope the state moderates to be more like Arkansas over the next decade.

[ Parent ]
Lol, your painting me as a caricature.
Again, I have no problem electing moderates and even conservatives from swing states, though I'd always like us to go with the most liberal option possible.

That said, I notice your just pulling out talking points instead of refuting the substance of the point.  Right now, Blue Dogs and Bayh's so called centrists are proving the biggest obsticals in getting a good agenda through, that's just a hard fact.  So please, refrain from childish snark and let's discuss this like adults.

As I said, I could very easily support Brad Henry for Senate.  I'm very happy with Travis Childers, Jim Webb, Mark Begich, Baron Hill and asorted other "moderates" so long as they're useful in advancing a good agenda.  The one's I'm not happy with are folks like Bayh, Boren, Cooper, Lincoln, Ben Nelson etc. that make a point of getting in the way.  With our current majorities, I don't see a point in supporting someone like Boren, especially when better Democrats in New Hampshire, Missouri, Ohio, and Kentucky (and possibly others) can cement a fillibuster proof majority.

Oh, and FYI, since you mentioned New York, I'm supporting Gillibrand there.  Sure you still want to use that broad brush?

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

[ Parent ]
"are proving the biggest obsticals in getting a good agenda through, that's just a hard fact"
That total poppycock.  Jeezus.
[ Parent ]
You link to a diary you wrote on dailykos as proof that the assertion is wrong?
[ Parent ]
That's tommy's signature. I have links in my sig too.


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Ah.
[ Parent ]
Collins and Snowe
Yes, it is the Senate and not the House but Collins and Snowe have higher Progresssive Punch scores than Walt Minnick this session but lower than the others.

Some Democrats actively speak out against the agenda of the President and most of the party.  I agree we are better off without those few.  And they are few.  Bright, Minnick or Gene taylor don't fall in that category.  

[ Parent ]
A party that can't tolerate dissent
is a shitty party.  See rnc.org for one example.
[ Parent ]
None of us are saying that we shouldn't have dissent or a discussion.
But dissent has to come as an opposing argument on what's good as a country, not as knee jerk opposition or loyalty to campaign contributers.  If you're a moderate, or a conservative, that's fine and your welcome in the party, but you have to remember that progressives are a part of the party too and we're pushing an agenda of our own.  If we can reach a good compromise that's fine, but a number of us are not going to sacrifice what we believe is a way forward for the country and its people on the alter of party gains because this isn't a game of chess, it's something important that real people are affected by.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Okay dissent, good
Which version of dissent do you think Boren will give:

A) "I personally disagree"

or

B) "The Democratic leadership is wrong and is leading our party down a path form which our nation may never recover"

Cause one is very cool to espouse within the party and even encouraged by those if they really do disagree. The other pressures other members to vote against progressive legislation by creating a media shit storm that dominates the knee jerk discussion in their home states.

So very simple question, which is Boren likely to say? A or B?

Follow up, after espousing that view do you believe it would encourage or discourage other members to behave in ways that are more reluctant to support the platform pushed by the party leadership?

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

[ Parent ]
On what planet
Can Boren cause a shitstorm?

Seriously, this is so wonky.  99.99% of the American public does not give one shit what shit Boren says.

And in any case, B is totally fine.  How could you possibly object to that?

[ Parent ]
You're missing the point.
It's less about what he says and more about what he does.  Boren will be just one more bad vote against things like cramdown and repealing the Bush tax cuts.  Obama has enough Democrats working against his agenda, he doesn't need one more inside the tent.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
It's not being a conservative
It's that Boren has a tendency to act like Lieberman did in 2004-2006 and publicly talk in a negative matter about other members of the party and leadership. Ben Nelson is there 45% of the time this session, but he does not go around saying "Dems are wrong on so many issues that I disagree with." I think it would be extremely likely that Dan Boren would actively work against the agenda in a PR aspect rather than just vote against it.

This is why I am against Boren running for higher office and do not want him in the Senate.

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

[ Parent ]
Boren, Lieberman, Nelson
Nice observation of an important intangible of DINOs who love to undercut fellow Dems in the media (Boren, Lieberman), verses those who merely vote conservative but don't go out of their way much to further knock Dems in the press (Nelson).

BTW, is it my imagination, or has Lieberman pretty much STFU'd so far this year?  (and that after his full-throated campaigning for McCain and anti-Obama last fall).

[ Parent ]
That's an important thing the apologetics don't realize
Some of these guys also hurt us from a PR perspective.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Who freaking cares?
Cry and take your ball home because he says what he thinks?

The trivial nonsense people care about is mindboggling.  If he votes the same as Nelson, and bitches and whines about it every hour of the day, caring about that is bizarre.

In a Blue state, you primary him.  In a Red state, you prefer that to the worse alternative of the most far right, most disruptive senator in Congress.

[ Parent ]
'Democrats divided'
Remember Zell Miller? Remember how despite his clear insanity, he was treated as a respectable figure? How it was assumed that he was right and that rural southerners had no place in the Democratic Party?

That hurt us in 2004.

Boren would just keep doing this. And the facts that he represents very few Democrats, that he's a Democrat by heredity not by ideology, that he'd never be with us in the clinch, that he'd go ground scooping up cash then turn around and spit on his supporters, all those are reasons he doesn't deserve our support.

Maybe he's slightly better to Coburn. He's less disruptive. But at best he's worth exactly nothing and at worst he undermines the Democratic Party. That's worth agitating against. Because I'd rather see Tom Coburn in a Senate seat than a generation of Chamber of Commerce-funded Boren-Clones in every remotely conservative open seat.

Branding matters, and Boren just takes a massive dump on the Democratic brand.

[ Parent ]
Im not saying I wouldnt welcome them
I'm saying I wouldnt bother trying to get them elected in the first place.

And it is totally unsustainable, look at PA-6.  Unsustainable seat for the GOP to maintain.  Sure its only ever 6 years but if he wins, then we have to spend a ton of money protecting his ass over being able to pick up other seats since incumbents get the help first.

Oklahoma is a seat we shouldnt have anyway so I'm against blowing millions of dollars on it for a guy who comes out, full center, against gay marriage.  Keep that shit to yourself and vote against when it appropriate, but being the main face on an AP article only makes me think he'll be a huge thorn in our side rather than a cooperative member of the caucus.

He'll be used as a tool for bipartisanship and will be a detriment, showing up on the Sunday news shows bitching about both sides, no.  It's one thing not to be liberal, it's another not to be a team player.

[ Parent ]
and to contrast myself
from the way you describe me, I'd be for Bright running for Senate and spending money there.
[ Parent ]
Boggle
And that makes sense how?

A Boren senate seat would not only be sustainable, but it would be generational sustainable.  All history demonstrates that, from both sides of the aisle.  Grassley is getting a pass this year in a Blue state. Freudenthal could cruise to another term.

I never said you or any progressive should spend money on Boren.  I said these rants that Coburn is better than Boren are ridiculous.  Senator Boren and Senator Bright and Senator Minnick would be great to have around.

The big fight in 2010 in getting Senators who will vote for cloture (at least sometimes), even if they oppose a confirmation or legislation and get all over TV about it.  getting something done to fix this screwed up country is the priority, not a fear of getting criticized Sunday mornings.

[ Parent ]
Bright isnt being a pain in the ass
that's why.

And for rather having Coburn, its for the reasons above all summed up with the main emphasis on the PR available to the GOP with a Dem always willing to be on their side.

[ Parent ]
Always?
Again, on what freaking planet is this imaginary stuff going on?

Boren voted for the stimulus.  On Planet Imaginary, did Coburn?

He may be the third worst Democrat in America (ahead of DiFi and Beshear), but he is far better than Coburn, and (sadly) well to the left of the midpoint of his state.

[ Parent ]
I didnt see Bright featured in an AP article
with his picture front and center about the stimulus package.

I like the way Englishlefty framed it, Boren is damaging to the Democratic Brand.  Bright just votes and shuts up.  Boren is pandering.

[ Parent ]
So, on what planet is Boren "always" on their side?
I think it will take about a million times the effect of Boren in that article to "damage" the Democratic brand.  I'm sorry you think the brand is so fragile.

In fact, the fact that (except for some Club for Growth like extremists) the Democrats tolerate dissent is what currently sets them truly apart from the Republicans.

Boren is a douche, that doesn't make him "worse" than Coburn.  That kind of talk is silly in the extreme.

It's oversimplified, but Susan Collins caused the pandemic stuff removed from the stimulus.  I don't know Boren's stand on the issue, but there is certainly a good chance he would have supported such a provision, in which case pandering to Collins would not have been necessary.  That's what we need in the Senate, more blue dogs from red states, some of whom will vote with the majority some of the time.  They dont all have to, and they can take turns making asses of the themselves on TV, but if we had Senator Boren (and Minnick and Bright and Fruedenthal and Matheson, etc) we would have a better country, even if they oppose some agenda items, and even if sometimes the remaining Rep moderates are needed when the Dogs balk.

[ Parent ]
now
that is a legit point if I ever saw one.  I think you just won your case.

Still hate Boren and wont donate a dime to the DSCC if they were to support him, I'd just donate to candidates as I see fit.  No thanks on homophobes who take a stand, keep that shit to yourself and mind your business please.

[ Parent ]
I agree
Fuck Boren

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Dad
Given Boren's district, we shouldn't be shocked. However, I still find it quite surprising considering all those rumors about his dad.
[ Parent ]
What rumors?
[ Parent ]
Here's a link
http://www.apfn.net/MESSAGEBOA...
although I warn you that it's clearly Dirty Republican filth and I doubt that it's true at all.  Take this quote, for example.
As a legislator in the late 60s, Boren had a bad habit of mashing his body up against teen-age page boys in the Capitol elevators.


16, Male, MI-01
[ Parent ]
Is it just me
Or are most of these sons more conservative than their dads? Bayh, Boren even Begich? Beau Biden we are watching!
[ Parent ]
Maybe it has something to do with the letter B!

[ Parent ]
Jerry Brown?


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Nah
Mark Pryor is more conservative than his dad. Chris Dodd is arguably more liberal than his dad. I think you could argue Teddy is the most liberal of the three Kennedy brothers but Patrick is kinda conservative sometimes.
[ Parent ]
Or maybe not
Dubya and Jeb are more nutty than their old man!
[ Parent ]
OK-Gov: Watts Won't Run | 55 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox