Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 2/26

by: Crisitunity

Fri Feb 26, 2010 at 4:04 PM EST


AZ-Sen: It's getting to the point where the real question is, is there any key establishment Republican left who hasn't endorsed John McCain in his GOP primary duel with J.D. Hayworth. Apparently, the specter of teabagger revolt over snubbing Hayworth isn't too intimidating to anybody. Today, it was Minnesota governor and likely presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty who gave McCain the thumbs-up.

CA-Sen: There was a Senate component to that poll of Republican primary voters by M4 Strategies on behalf of the Small Business Action Committee, too. They find ex-Rep. Tom Campbell in the lead at 32, with Carly Fiorina following at 19 and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore at 11.

FL-Sen: You've probably already seen these rumors, but in case you hadn't, Jack Furnari, a conservative activist and a regular contributor to the Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel's political blog, says that multiple sources have told him that Charlie Crist is preparing to cast off his scarlet "R" and run for the Senate as an indie. Crist's communications director, however, says this is a "patently false rumor."

KY-Sen: Rand Paul is already making a strong push for the finish line in the May 18 Senate GOP primary. He's begun reserving $332K in airtime for the weeks before the primary. So far, the moneybomb-propelled Paul has already spent $291K on TV ads while Trey Grayson is just getting started, with a $17K buy, which may explain some of the disparity between the two in the polls right now.

NC-Sen: Lots of numbers out of North Carolina to look at this morning. Most notably, Rasmussen looks at the general election, finding Richard Burr with a sizable edge over both Democratic challengers; Burr leads SoS Elaine Marshall 50-34 and leads ex-state Sen. Cal Cunningham 51-29. Civitas doesn't have general election numbers, but looks at the Democratic primary, where they find a whole lotta undecideds: Marshall leads Cunningham 14-4, with Cunningham actually being outpaced by attorney Kenneth Lewis at 5. (PPP, who polled the primary last week, seems to have pushed leaners harder, with Marshall at a whopping 29, followed by Cunningham at 12 and 5 for Lewis.) Finally, Elon (pdf) doesn't have any head-to-heads at all, but has some approval numbers: Richard Burr is generates a whole lot of indifference, with favorables that work out to 30/23, with 29 for "don't know" and 19 for "neither favorable/unfavorable" (which is interesting -- I'd like to see more pollsters include "meh" as an option). Burr also has an ominous 24% re-elect (with a 51% "time for someone new"). Elaine Marshall's favorables are at 19/8.

WI-Sen: Republican real estate developer Terrence Wall, thanks to his own money, is the most imposing candidate currently in the race against Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, and he has his own internal poll out courtesy of POS. It suggests that Feingold shouldn't take his re-election campaign for granted even if Tommy Thompson doesn't make a surprise re-entry into the political arena; Feingold leads Wall by a 46-39 margin.

AR-Gov: Looks like the Republicans have found someone willing to take one for the team and run against Democratic incumbent Gov. Mike Beebe, who usually polls as the nation's most popular governor. Former state Sen. Jim Keet says he's "90% certain" he'll run. Keet (who's a personal friend of Beebe) offers a rationale for his candidacy that seems in line with his chances of winning: "If we don't have candidates that are willing to stand up despite the odds in both parties, then we'll never have the best possible government. It's good to have competing views and candidates on both sides of the aisle."

MD-Gov: Rasmussen takes its first look at the Governor's race in Maryland, where incumbent Dem Martin O'Malley may face a rematch with ex-Gov. Bob Ehrlich (who hasn't declared anything, but is starting to act candidate-ish). Their results are right in line with most other pollsters, who've seen an O'Malley lead in the high single-digits over Ehrlich; Rasmussen says it's 49-43.

NH-Gov: With a late entry, it looks like the Republicans are getting an uprgrade in their race against Democratic Gov. John Lynch, another incumbent considered mostly unassailable. The state's former health and human services commissioner, and loser of the 2002 and 2008 NH-01 GOP primaries, John Stephen, says he'll give it a whack. (Ex-Rep. Jeb Bradley, who won both those primaries, is chairing Stephen's campaign.) Social conservative activist Karen Testerman is probably the best-known GOPer in the race so far.

SD-Gov: Rasmussen had good news for Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin yesterday, and they have some more positive data for the Dems, this time in the gubernatorial race. State Sen. minority leader Scott Heidepriem actually leads against two out of three Republican opponents; he leads state Sen. majority leader Dave Knudson 34-31, and teabagging state Sen. Gordon Howie 37-29. Unfortunately, Heidepriem trails the Republican field's most likely frontrunner, Lt. Governor Dennis Daugaard, 41-32.

TX-Gov: It looks like the DGA is seeing the same polls that we're seeing. Feeling bullish on ex-Houston mayor Bill White's chances in the gubernatorial race, they've pumped $500K into White's campaign. White, at $5.4 million, already has doubled up on cash against his likely opponent, incumbent GOP Gov. Rick Perry (who's at $2.5 million, and may get further drained if he doesn't avoid a runoff in his primary).

FL-25: A name recognition poll of possible Republican replacements for Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (by Republican pollster Hill Research) seems to give a name rec edge to potential candidate state Sen. Alex Diaz de la Portilla, with 39/9 favorables. State Rep. David Rivera, who's already made his candidacy official, is a bit less known, at 24/5. The best-known person polled is Miami-Dade Co. Commissioner Joe Martinez (at 34/17), who hasn't really expressed much interest yet.

KS-04: SurveyUSA has another poll in Kansas, where there's a competitive GOP primary in three different open House seats. Today, they focused on the Wichita-based 4th. I'm wondering if businessman Wink Hartman has been advertising while everyone else has been silent, because that's the only explanation I can think of for his big lead. Hartman is at 36, beating all his insider opponents: state Sen. Dick Kelsey is at 11, with state Sen. Jean Schodorf and former RNC committeeman Mike Pompeo both at 10. (Either that, or people think they're voting for Wink Martindale.)

NY-15: With Rep. Charlie Rangel having been on the wrong end of an Ethics Committee ruling yesterday, names are starting to trickle in from fellow House members who want him to put down his Ways and Means gavel. Paul Hodes (running for Senate in NH) was the loudest, along with Bobby Bright and Gene Taylor. Newly-elected Mike Quigley is the only safe-seat Dem to chime in, at least so far.

PA-12: One more big development in the "race" in the 12th, where candidates are jostling to get picked by committee to run in the May 18 special election. Former Lt. Governor Mark Singel suddenly pulled his name out of consideration, which may suggest that there's a lot of insider movement toward John Murtha's former district director, Mark Critz. Singel threw his support to Critz, who previously got the endorsements of two other possible candidates, Joyce Murtha and moneybags businessman Mark Pasquerilla. With Westmoreland Co. Commissioner Tom Cesaro also withdrawing his name, it looks like it's heading down to a choice between Critz and former state Treasurer Barbara Hafer for the Dem nomination. (Hafer, in fact, is now saying she's likely to run in the primary for Nov. even if she doesn't get the special election nod.)

RI-01: It looks like the fight for the Democratic nomination in the open seat in the 1st is going to be a mostly two-way fight between Providence mayor David Cicciline and former state party chair William Lynch. Two other Dems who had a shot at making the race interesting, long-ago ex-Rep. Robert Weygand and investment banker Nicholas Pell (grandson of Sen. Claiborne Pell), have said no.

SC-02: No lie: GOP loudmouth Joe Wilson is actually getting a primary challenge. Businessman Joe Grimaud, who lost the 2001 special election primary to Wilson, said he'll try again in 2010. Grimaud, who can self-fund, said he's sympathetic to the teabaggers but admits there isn't much ideological daylight between him and Wilson.

GA-LG: It's a family affair: Carol Porter, the wife of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dubose Porter, declared her candidacy for the Democratic Lt. Governor nomination. Considering that Dubose Porter is polling only in the single digits in the gubernatorial primary, though, it doesn't seem like a husband-and-wife team in charge is that likely regardless of how Carol Porter does.

TX-Board of Educ.: Josh Goodman points out how the real drama in next Tuesday's primary election won't be the gubernatorial primary but rather the Republican fights for a number of seats on the Texas Board of Education between moderates and conservatives. Social conservatives are close to a majority on the board, but it sounds like moderates may be able to pick up a few seats, swinging the board (crucial for the tenor of school textbooks not just in Texas but nationwide, given how many students are in Texas) away from its love of creationism.

Redistricting: Illinois may be following the lead of a number of other states in trying to make the redistricting process a bit less partisan. Legislative Democrats are pushing a plan to have maps drawn by a special master appointed by two Supreme Court justices in case the legislature deadlocks on maps. The current plan, believe it or not, lets one party (if there's a deadlock) have the final say on redistricting based on which party's name gets drawn at random. Republicans (who can probably see they aren't going to control either chamber of the legislature any time soon) would like to go further than that, all the way to an independent redistricting commission.

Votes: National Journal has released its annual vote ratings on who's most liberal and most conservative, based on key votes. In the House, most liberal is a tie between Rush Holt, Gwen Moore, John Olver, Linda Sanchez, Jan Schakowsky, Louise Slaughter, Mel Watt, and Henry Waxman, while most conservative is a tie between Trent Franks, Doug Lamborn, Randy Neugebauer, Pete Olson, John Shadegg, and Mac Thornberry. (Worst Dem honors go to Bobby Bright, to the right of 11 Republicans.) In the Senate, Sherrod Brown, Roland Burris, Ben Cardin, Jack Reed, and Sheldon Whitehouse share liberal honors, while Jim Inhofe stands alone in crazy-town. And here's why Evan Bayh won't be missed: he earns the Senate's worst Dem nod, worse than Joe Lieberman and Olympia Snowe while tied with his own freakin' colleague Richard freakin' Lugar. (DW-Nominate scores for 2009, more comprehensive although much less user-friendly, also came out a few weeks ago.)

Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 2/26
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
What are Hayworth's real chances of winning the primary in AZ?
He seems to have conservative credentials, but I was lurking redstate yesterday and they don't really seem too on board with him for some reason.


20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

They don't like him because he's a "birther"
I don't think Hayworth has any chance at all, to tell you the truth. He's not getting support from anyone besides the Minutemen.  

[ Parent ]
Yeah, but he is polling infinitely better than Simcox ever did
and he is also an ex-Representative, not some crazy loon who really only has one position on anything (Immigration) and framed his entire campaign on it.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

[ Parent ]
Polling better, but not well enough to beat McCain
Particularly with no support from the usual suspects (ie DeMint, RedState). McCain has done a pretty good job of protecting his right flank - at the expense of his overall credibility, in my opinion.  

[ Parent ]
And, it's worth noting:
Hayworth was an ex-Representative who, before he lost in 2006, was viewed as the strongest Republican in Arizona.  A poll in 2006 showed him leading even Joe Arpaio in a Gubernatorial primary and in a dead heat with Napolitano.  Had he gone that route, he might be planning a Presidential run right now, rather than running as the crazy teabagger alternative to McCain.

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...

[ Parent ]
Joe Wilson is a RINO
n/t

you think he wasn't insulting *enough* to the President?
seriously, according to progressive punch, he's ranked 413 out of 433.  why does he deserve RINO status?

[ Parent ]
Obviously
It's because he isn't tied for 433 (or 432, as it would be, mathematically).

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

[ Parent ]
I wonder if the TN senators
Are setting themseles up for some teabagging. In the next congress of existing GOP members only Snowe, Collins, Lugar and Murkowski will be more "liberal" than Corker and Lamar!

Well, add
Brown, probably Castle, maybe Crist if he bails on the Rs, and hopefully not Kirk. And I don't know how Hoeven will respond to GOP whipping, but he may be on the sane side of things.

[ Parent ]
True
But doesn't change the fact they have been slightly accomodating in such a red state. If the boot was on the other foot say members from New Jersey, the netroots would be up in arms.

[ Parent ]
Those rankings are weird
Somehow, Maxine Waters, who is about as crazy liberal as they get in Congress, was rated a few spots less liberal than Dennis Moore of KS-03. (both were in the 140s)  Ummmm....unlikely.

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

[ Parent ]
I guess they don' differentiate
The reasons for voting a certain way. Look at Feingold.

[ Parent ]
And Russ Feingold
Is apparently to the right of Blanche Lincoln, Jim Webb & Lieberman? Someone should alert the good people of Wisconsin that they apparently elected a DINO, not a liberal....

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

[ Parent ]
Feingold has never been a progressive
He's just a loose cannon.

[ Parent ]
Russ Feingold is 55th?
I find that hard to believe.

[ Parent ]
Those rankings are preposterous
Bernie Sanders, the only avowed Socialist in the Senate, isn't among the 10 most liberal?

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
But has he voted no from the left
A few times? I would guess he has. They are obviously using voting against the party as a "conservative" vote by default.

[ Parent ]
Feingold has voted with the GOP
Many, many times recently.

[ Parent ]
He's always been a budget hawk


[ Parent ]
Like Bill Proxmire, n/t


[ Parent ]
Proxmire was much more conservative
in his general outlook than Feingold is. For example, I remember him being an enemy of New York. Sure, he claimed it was a waste of money to save New York. Pardon us New Yorkers for ascribing it to animus, much like the Republicans who claim it's a waste of money to help the unemployed, the poor, etc.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
There was next to nothing "conservative" about Proxmire
Opposing bad uses of money is progressive, not conservative.

[ Parent ]
I felt the same way about NYC at the time
even though I was just a kid, loved McGovern, and followed every bit of the Nixon impeachment saga in as much detail as Larry Finklestein (ref Dharma and Greg).

If we had let NYC fail, we might not have had to deal with recent banks being "too big to fail"... We would better understand the consequences of large scale failures, instead of fearing them (based on the unknown) as we do now.


[ Parent ]
Letting the largest city in the Union go literally bankrupt
on principle is not what I call "progressive." And New Yorkers who remember that time don't forgive Proxmire for it, though he's dead now. And that's all I plan on saying about it, because I don't want to engage in a fight about this. So I'll just add one more point: Where you stand depends on where you sit, and it's precisely because Proxmire was in Wisconsin that the bankruptcy of New York City was theoretical to him, but not to us.

As for the larger point that Proxmire was merely opposed to wasteful spending, not everything that appeared in his "Golden Fleece Awards" was actually worthless. He ridiculed some basic scientific research, such as studies on the chemistry of sexual attraction, on the basis that we knew everything we needed to know about that, due to "common sense." So while I think almost everyone is opposed to spending they consider wasteful, I perceived a tendency toward toward anti-intellectualism in Proxmire's fiscal conservatism, and I don't think that's "progressive," either.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
A lesson should have been learned back then
Bailouts are not just conservative, they are reactionary.  Bad policies are forgiven to simply maintain the status quo.

The progressive position then and now is to let failures fail, learn lessons from it, and act differently.  Proxmire's position was progressive and not recognizing that has led us to do the same sort of actions over an over, and more importantly, more foolishly each time, with bailing out these gambling investors the even worse than previous bailouts.

And, it's important from a SSP perspective it is important to recognize real progressive philosophies like Proxmire and often feingold compared to the reactionary-conservative ideas of the corporate Democrats who value maintaining the screwed up status quo over any real changes.


[ Parent ]
Oh come on
Letting "failures fail" and pretending that that will solve all the problems ignores one crucial detail, which is that the poor and working class always, without fail, are the ones who ultimately feel the brunt of a collapsing system.

Saying that the "progressive position" would've been to let the banks fail is a joke, and it ignores all those who would be crushed by it (not that there shouldn't be fundamental changes to the system, just recognizing that letting the whole thing collapse can't be a solution if you give a damn about the poor and working class).

I'm a progressive who was both sick to my stomach about the fact that these bailouts had to happen, but who nonetheless supported them because the alternative would've been a disaster. That isn't corporatism, that's giving a damn about the poor and working class.

That's my only word on this, as it is way off topic for SSP.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Not according to history, older and current
"which is that the poor and working class always, without fail, are the ones who ultimately feel the brunt of a collapsing system."

Absolutely backwards.  Bailing out the system allows those in power to not only keep power, but a ongoing practice of bailouts allows the powerful (and also the inept) to grasp for more and more power, without fear of ruin.

Who feels the brunt os AIG getting money and actting the same?  Responsible working class people.  Likewise with many types of mortgage bailouts.  Who benefits gamblers who lost.  Who loses?  Responsible working Americans who are priced out of homes arbitraily kept overpriced by bailouts.

This is a SSP issue at least tangentially because the Feingold ranking is totally deceptive.  From an electoral standpoint true progressives like Proxmire and to a lesser extent Feingold appeal to a broader spectrum of voters because they believe in progress and sensible change, not maintaining the status quo at all costs.

California could concievably "need" to be bailed out next, and it would be tragic if it happened because then the same horrible policies and partisan don-nothingism would continue on and on and on...

The government cheese corporate liberals are far less progressive than those political figures who want us to actually address problems, not put them off for the grandkids.


[ Parent ]
California should be required to balance its budget
And if that's in exchange for a Federal bailout, that's fine. The bailout of New York City was tied to a requirement for every subsequent city budget to meet specific standards of fiscal soundness. That was change we could believe in, to take an anachronistic slogan.

The basic political problem in California is the requirement for a 2/3 majority on every budget, and that problem may be solved in an upcoming referendum, but the reliance on borrowing must end. The people, however, will continue to need assistance, regardless of where it comes from. And California, as the nation's largest state by far in population, deserves a bailout every bit as much if not more than any other state.

Now, as for fiscal conservatism being progressive, have you looked into who made common cause on that with Proxmire? A lot of Republicans, or vice versa. Did that make them "true progressives," or just fiscal conservatives? Don't get me wrong; fiscal conservatives - true fiscal conservatives - have a useful role to play, and I agree with many of their opinions in times of plenty. But that doesn't make them progressive. To be progressive, people have to stand for more than merely avoiding spending they consider wasteful.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
People can agree for different reasons
but in general there is nothing about fiscal conservatism that is "un-progressive".

And in some cases obviously fiscal conservatism is clearly progressive, as trading off a future thing to maintain a current thing isn't going to normally be "progress".


[ Parent ]
Sacrificing an entire city on the basis of "principle"
is like destroying a village to "save" it.

It's one thing to let a bank fail. It's another thing to fail 8 million people. And I think I'd better restrain myself from discussing this further, because I react very angrily to your take on this, which I consider callous and anti-popular.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
We'd be electorally better off in non-urban areas
if the D congress in '74 (or was it '75?) did let NYC go under.

And what if NYC did go under at that time - the State and the Feds would have had to take over a number of city services. Yes, there may have been additional pain, but I suspect support within the city for a more appropriate level of taxation would have grown.

And in those years, Ds had real standing in rural states all over America. Anyone remember Frank Church? Gale McGee? Walter Huddleston? Frank Moss? David Boren?

Anyone know how many D Senators presently come from these states?

For years after the NYC bailout, it became increasingly difficult to convince rural voters that Ds cared about them. But I can't prove that one caused the other.


[ Parent ]
Are you aware of how highly we are taxed in New York?
Are you also aware that New York City sends way more to Albany and Washington in taxes than we get back in services? Which is why we have such very high municipal income and sales taxes. If we want to have any kind of decent sanitation system, Fire Department, Police Department, schools, etc., we need to pay for them ourselves. The idea that people Upstate and in smaller-population states that get way more in Federal aid than they contribute in taxes have, that they are subsidizing the "underserving" poor (or, for that matter, rich) people in big cities like New York influences politics and elections - which makes it at least tangentially relevant to this site - but that doesn't make it more accurate.

You also seem to be unaware that the State did in fact essentially take over supervision of the City's budget. I think you should do some research, so that you understand the history better. Start here, and read about the Financial Control Board.

Have a good night.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
Yeah
People don't understand how nearly all rural areas must (almost by necessity) be subsidized by urban areas in order to even maintain viability. It's made all the worse by a political system that favors rural areas over urban ones.

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!


[ Parent ]
Many red-state conservatives have been saying the same thing about California.
They say they don't mind seeing us go belly-up and in fact would welcome it, of course completely ignoring the fact that we subsidize them. (If I was a conservative, I would say: "you ["lazy Alabamans"] should pull yourselves up by your own bootstraps and provide your own tax dollars, not leach off of us hardworking Californians who get back 78 cents for every dollar we send to Washington".)

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
Supervision is different from actual delivery
And that made all the difference in the world w/r/t political perception.

Far too often, factors that affect elections differ from actual facts on the ground.

NYC and the rest of the state are somewhat interdependent. If NYC could have actually survived on its own revenues during the near-bankruptcy time, there would have been more talk about secession. But a lot was more heavily set on a state basis (e.g. utilities) which would have made a split more difficult.

And yes, we as progressives lose when we focus too much on cities. The US electoral system does have a rural bias. Heck, the Presidential party nomination process also has a rural bias, which President Obama understood and used to his advantage.


[ Parent ]
Did you read the article I linked?
The Financial Control Board had veto power over city budgets.

There have always been Americans who have hated New York City, whether because of its perceived immorality, wealth, influence, or perceived arrogance, or for some other reason (it's too Jewish for some people, for example). It's not an accident that most of them today are Republicans, because nowadays, it's the Republican Party that exemplifies the attitude of "I've got mine; screw you," as witnessed, for example, in the health care debate and the current hold by Senator Bunning on an extension of benefits for the unemployed. No doubt, some people resent a "bailout" for people who've lost their jobs, too. Those people aren't progressives.

I have to say, though, I doubt how much such attitudes drive election results nowadays. The Republicans campaigned against "San Francisco Values" for the last couple of cycles, because Nancy Pelosi represents SF, and that slogan didn't prevent the Republicans from losing more and more seats in both Houses.

Like it or not, the Democratic Party is largely the party of the cities and suburbs. And as far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing for its political future, as rural areas become a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. It is possible that when Salt Lake City becomes a high enough percentage of the population of Utah, even that state will start to elect Democratic Senators. We shall have to wait and watch.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
What can be said for NYC can also be said for California.
Many people (read: Republicans) who have hated California because of "liberalism, welfare, political correctness, etc." conveniently overlook the tax dollars they get from those "lazy liberals".

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
Yes, exactly
I suppose some of the Republicans in California also resent San Francisco and LA? Or is it not that simple?

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
Yes, they do. nt


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)


[ Parent ]
It appears that you did not read the first sentence of my previous statement
Perception is not reality. But perception makes all the difference in politics.

I believe it is possible to dislike certain cities and still be a progressive. I am one of those people. That may mean I am intellectually inconsistent.

But I believe that such perceptions drive political voting behavior.

I believe true progressive change means understanding - and addressing the real challenges facing rural areas.

Are you familiar with any of the Senators that I cited? Many were excellent progressives, from areas that are now thought of as deep red.  


[ Parent ]
Former senators
Anyone remember Frank Church? Gale McGee? Walter Huddleston? Frank Moss? David Boren?

Frank Church was a strong liberal. David Boren was pretty conservative for a Democrat, though of course way to the left of the current extreme right-wing Republican senators from Oklahoma. I am not familiar with the others. Your political definitions are different from mine.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
Danged, I was thinking Fred Harris
Boren was from a later OK generation....

[ Parent ]
Feingold
Sometimes he votes against a bill because its not liberal/progressive enough for him.  He's a tame Senate version of Kucinich.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

[ Parent ]
Rangel
We meed to get Charlie out of Congress.  We need to prove to people that you can bring money back to your district and be an advocate for sensible earmarks and funding without being corrupt.  I suggest we all consider either giving money to this Morgan fellow running against Charlie or else find someone to run against him with some serious chops.

I regret not doing more to back Cedric Richmond in LA-2 when he could have defeated Jefferson.  Peter Visclosky needed a serious primary opponent as do probably both of the West Virginia Dems.  Does anyone agree or am I just shooting my mouth off?  

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2


I strongly agree
Rangel used to be my congressman when I was living with my parents, and he still represents my parents' district. We all liked him until it became clear he was corrupt. I recommended for my parents to vote for his Republican opponent in 2008, for that reason, but they declined. Since then, things have gotten worse and worse, and my parents have come around to my opinion about him. He needs to be drummed out of Congress. And what I'd like to know is how his primary challenge is shaping up. When was the last poll done?

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
I agree. We need a better candidate though
We need a heavyweight to primary Rangel. Same goes for Visclosky and a few other ethically-challenged Dems. It would help if the activists and the netroots went after guys Rangel and Jefferson.

[ Parent ]
Illinois
Being a stickler for compact districts and independent redistricting, I still do wonder if this is a state that we could really gerrymander to our advantage.  It seems like we've got all this safe territory in and around Chicago that we could easily spread out into seats like IL-13, IL-6, and IL-10 (if necessary).  Turn some of those D+30 or more seats into D+15 or D+20 and spread those democratic votes around to force out Roskam, Biggert, and maybe Dold if he gets by Seals.

Illinois is one of those states where the Democrats should arguably have a bigger share than 12-7.  California and Michigan are two other states that come to mind, and luckily, we should be able to gerrymander California with a gubernatorial win, and at least undo the R gerrymander in Michigan (with a small chance at an all-out D gerrymander there too)

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13


Eh, I can understand independent redistricting
but compact districts are total bs.  Why not approve of the argument of having districts of all the same size?  Compact districts is simply being for having maps that look pretty and sometimes pretty maps dont do the populace justice in their voting habits.

[ Parent ]
Hang on a second
Compactness in drawing congressional districts is BS?  Really?  You mean you would rather divide up common communities and draw ridiculous shapes that put together distant cities and towns that in a lot of cases have nothing in common?

I agree that in some cases, you have to adjust district lines a bit to include communities of interest that might not be adjacent to one another, but I just don't understand the reason for not attempting to draw clean geographically sensible districts.  Look at Florida.  Look at North Carolina.  Heck, look at Pennsylvania.  All three of those maps are completely hideous in design and could easily be improved by keeping nearby cities and towns within the same districts (ie: Jacksonville and Tampa/St Pete in FL, Charlotte & Research triangle areas in NC)

Andrew, you've got some strong opinions on politics, but at least we are on common ground when it comes to independent re-districting.  Every state should have it.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13


[ Parent ]
Compact districts
Because Democrats tend to be concentrated in the cities, while Republicans are spread out outside them, if you give too much weight to compactness you end up with a bunch of, say, 60% Republican districts and a smaller number of, say, 75% Democratic districts that contain the urban areas. So your congressional delegation ends up being more Republican than the population.

Of course we already do something similar to create majority-minority districts, which also tilts the House toward Republicans.


[ Parent ]
Honestly
The reason it's hard in Illinois is largely VRA based.  Rush and Davis' districts are stuck, as is IL-04. IL-03 is the one that needs to be changed either to be MORE Democratic to get a progressive or less so because they elect conservative Dems anyway.  I suppose you could start by shifting Schakowsky and Quigley west and domino the rest that way, too.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01

[ Parent ]
The VRA
I understand the reason for the VRA, but I'm really starting to think it's (ironically, given Af-Am's steadfast Dem support) really hurting Democrats by concentrating their strength too much.

If there was no VRA, you could probably do what abgin's winning map for the New York redistricting contest did--spread out urban votes with a rainbow pattern of districts, but this time emanating from Chicago.

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.


[ Parent ]
It's actually not that hard
The Chicago VRA districts are right now incredibly overpacked; they have far more than the 50% minority necessary. When I made an Illinois map, I could flatten all of DuPage County with CD4 and the districts to the north, while maintaining VRA. Then you can neutralize Will and areas south with CD1 and CD2.

[ Parent ]
CA. Speaking of redistricting:
Thus the experiment begins. This is the result of Proposition 11 in 2008.
Tens of thousands apply for state redistricting panel
More than 30,000 people applied by last Tuesday's deadline for the 14 seats on a citizen commission that will redo the state's allegedly gerrymandered district lines in time for the 2012 elections.
... the commission will take state population information from the 2010 federal census and draw 80 Assembly, 40 state Senate and four Board of Equalization districts that ensure fair representation for voters and competitive campaigns for candidates.
Remember that this does not apply to the Congress redistricting.
It will be interesting to see if this citizens commission can agree on something, or if they'll be deadlocked and it all goes into court anyway.

How many do you guys think will go on to complete the supplemental application?
Which includes a few essay questions and asks for three letters of recommendation.

My guess is about a thousand or so.


[ Parent ]
Not if I can help it
I'm one of the 30,000 (!) applicants--they just sent out the second-round applications this week.

The little wrinkle about needing 3 Dems, 3 Rs, and 3 independents to all agree was actually something I was not aware of...it makes sense, but for some reason I thought it was majority voting. That could make agreement really tough if the Republicans are all teabagging crazies. I'm hopeful they won't be....

And apparently, while the pool of applicants skewed heavily white and male, there's still hope I can grab a "youth" seat: "Fewer than one of every three applicants was 45 years old or younger."  

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.


[ Parent ]
As I suspected, Fiorina and DeVore are splitting conservatives, giving Campbell the upper-hand


For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast

Is Campbell still winning the demonic sheep vote?
What about the lizard people?

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

[ Parent ]
According to the Census
Lizard people aren't a huge part of the electorate outside of Minnesota, and their turnout falls off in non-presidential years. Most polls I've seen have them making up 1% of the Republican primary vote. With a MoE that high, it's hard to tell where their true preferences lie. Only they know...

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/


[ Parent ]
California Republican idiots Issue #1
eMeg goes on the attack! She's airing attack ads against Poizner, and its only late February! Someone should of told her its best not to attack too early so your disapproval ratings don't skyrocket that much.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...

And Tom Campbell is being accused of being an anti-Semite because he accepted a donation from a Pro Palestinian/Anti-Isreal professor like 10 years ago.

http://www.politico.com/news/s...


19, Male, Independent, CA-12


Dumb
You've got a giant lead, rolling in cash, no one really knows who the hell Poizner is and you attack him? With a cheap 15 second ad? When the guy's rich as hell and can and will fight back and can now rightly say that you started it.

That is so dumb on so many levels.

Maybe not Carly FAILorina levels of dumb, but dumb nonetheless.

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.


[ Parent ]
I'm
guessing Whitman is trying to undercut Poizner's credibility among conservatives that hold sway in the GOP primary. Poizner's been moving to the right on economic issues, saying that Reagan's failed economic ideas will somehow work in California. His speech at CPAC was filled with right wing talking points such as bashing Unions, Obama, Pelosi, big government, etc.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
This is exactly what Westly did
and destroyed not just his campaign, but his whole political career... and (overstating it a bit) California too.

[ Parent ]
Why Do People Still Note the National Journal Rankings?
At this point they are just a magazine marketing tool, like person of the year or sexiest man alive. They are based on a sub-set of votes selected by the magazine, while the DW-Nominate scores are based on more complete data. If better data is out there, and it is, what's up with catering to the National Journal's attempt to define the conversation with their inferior data?


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

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox