NV-Sen, I want to know what's happening IN NEVADA......

This isn't a criticism of anyone, but rather a reflection of my curiosity and angst regarding how much of this drip, drip, drip against Angle is being felt in-state.

We've learned that what happens in the Beltway sometimes stays in the Beltway, and never reaches Vegas or anywhere else.  Just ask Richard Blumenthal how much a controversy picked apart in the national media matters to the Connecticut general electorate.

I know Reid is on the air, and supposedly it's a big buy with his attack ad on Angle.  I know Jon Ralston has hammered Angle pretty good.  And I know a local Fox channel news reporter hammered Angle's Fox & Friends interview.

But otherwise, does anyone know what's happening in Nevada itself?  How much of this stuff is penetrating local news or otherwise reaching average voters?

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 19:57:05 PM UTC

It can't be good

Blumenthal really had one thing happen that, ultimately, the New York Times screwed up on and his Republican opponent decided to be cute and take total credit for the ad (thank you very much, Linda McMahon) and ultimately Blumenthal had the ability to absorb some damage given his record and positive approval ratings.

Plus, I suspect the way that Cornyn has been acting towards Angle tells us a lot about the way it's being taken in Nevada (or at least how the NRSC sees it, and they've probably had polling done on it to be sure). I wouldn't necessarily take what Scott Brown and Olympia Snowe do too seriously, just because they would probably distance themselves from whichever candidate Nevada Republicans would've nominated anyways given the states they have to run in.

Politics and Other Random Topics

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

---

by: DGM @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 20:33:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just Checked the Vegas Paper

And found this as the lead story http://www.lvrj.com/news/angle...

As it's based on a "get to know" session with R senators, it doesn't really hit Angle, But this bit suggests some of the issues to come

But several conservative Republican senators indicated they are not on board with Angle when it comes to privatizing Social Security and eliminating the Department of Energy, two of her more controversial stances.

"Some candidates from time to time, perhaps attempting to show a sense of anger, outrage or whatever, express what I would characterize as very extreme views that do not have much basis in either practicality or what is going to occur in the evolution of our country," Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., told Politico in a story the paper posted to its website.

And I see nothing about Yucca Mountain, perhaps the big local issue w/r/t what a good NV Senator can do.

---

by: tietack @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:31:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The LVRJ is hard right, like the Washington Times, so I discount it......

I think it's a much more prominent paper locally than the Washington Times in Greater D.C., but still it's right-wing bias is known.  They won't publish anything to hurt Angle that they can avoid publishing, but neither will they really help her since the material against her is hard to defend and their bias is largely known.  Jon Ralston works for the rival Las Vegas Sun and rags on the LVRJ very openly.

Thanks for the data point, it's something.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:36:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Appreciate the perspective on the LVRJ

Here's a bit linked from Ralston's latest from the Vegas Sun.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/new...

IMO, it's more worrisome w/r/t Reid's chances than the aforementioned LVRJ article.

But judging by what is wafting back from the much-hyped Ms.-Angle-Goes-to-Washington trip, she is submitting to a makeover that, if not Capraesque, is at least Scott Brown-like (indeed, she has some of the Massachusetts Miracle's handlers). And if she can feint toward the middle on issues that might have alienated her from independent voters - or at least massage them in a non-L. Ron Hubbard way - Reid, despite his Angle Marginalization Plan, may be the one consigned to the fringe.

snip

During an interview on "Fox and Friends" that could induce diabetic comas in those so susceptible, Angle decried as "nonsense" that she wanted to get rid of Social Security. And instead of using the word "privatize," she said she wanted to "personalize" the program.

---

by: tietack @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:45:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The difference is that Brown has a moderate record

We've already seen Reid use Angle's own words, on video, against her. That will continue. I think the "feint toward the middle" will be parried expertly.

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

---

by: Pan @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:52:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree, Angle can't really disown a well-reported record. She can flip-flop but...

...Reid can just keep saying she wants to abolish social security, show her video clips and writings saying just that, and it sticks no matter what she says.  Reid can do that on everything.  That's the problem with having a record like Angle's, she can never credibly say Reid is distorting anything.

This is where Reid has an advantage that Jack Conway doesn't in KY-Sen.  Rand Paul flip-flopped perhaps successfully on the Civil Rights Act, simply because Conway had no money to buy ads to hammer him on it.  Conway couldn't just go on the air and say Paul is whacked and opposes the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act and would allow whites-only lunch counters.  I think even in conservative culturally Southern Kentucky you can use that material, as it puts Paul into yesteryear in a way that makes even too many white voters shudder.  But there was no money to do that, so all Conway got to show for it was a few news cycles unfavorable to Paul, and it just doesn't stick as much as it would if Conway himself could be on TV with it.

Scott Brown never had to flip-flop on anything.  He didn't have anything as crazy as Angle's or Paul's crap to walk away from.  And his handlers now working for Angle are really going to have to earn their money!

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:23:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I actually don't think Brown's "handlers"

are working for Angle.  His web people are, so they aren't political strategists.

It's an open question whether Brown's strategy would play well in Nevada.  It's a completely different enviornment than Massachusetts.  Just as liberals believe that the South is completely different from the rest of the country, a conservative like me believes the Northeast is completely different from the rest of the country.

---

by: General Hospital @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:27:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey, this liberal believes

California is WAY different from the rest of the country!

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

---

by: californianintexas @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:49:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What "strategy" are you talking about?????? There are no similarities...

...between Brown's situation and Angle's.  They are not in the same ballpark on ideology, policy, or temperament.

And Brown's strategy required being able to sneak up on a sleeping Coakley, it was a real-life example of the tortoise and the hare parable.  In fact, it fit the parable exactly, with Coakley's winter break perfectly paralleling the hare taking a nice nap as Brown, the tortoise crawled past her methodically and quietly.

Reid, in contrast, is on the air and very aware.  He'll never stop driving forward and pushing back Angle.  It will be a constant onslaught, and he has the money to switch gears on a dime when adjustments are needed.  Angle is busily trying to raise money to compete and quiet for awhile.  She'll compete, she has a plausible path to victory, but there's nothing Brown did that she can use.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:57:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Nevada Angle

   I think it is damn hard to figure out what is going on even if you live here.  Ask ten different people and you might get ten different answers. I wonder when the next reliable poll will take place?  If there is an increase of undecided folk there might be some "buyer's remorse" going on. But as always it depends on Clark Co. Thanks, Rollo Weems
 PS. We had an interesting time in our usual coffee group in Winnemucca.  The topic was "The Oath Keepers vrs. The Oaf Keepers".

http://thewrongangle.com/

Rollo "Rob" Weems

---

by: RolloWeems @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:20:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Voters already were moving from Republican to undecided pre-primary......

Both Mason-Dixon and DailyKos/Research 2000 showed tightening from the start of the year up to the primary, almost entirely from people moving from the Republican candidates to undecided or none-of-the-above or minor candidates.

Now, not all the polling was apples-to-apples.  Mason-Dixon and R2K both changed their topline from two-way trial heats to multiple choice trial heats, and of course that diluted the anti-Reid vote.  But we have a situation this November where I think most observers on both sides now expect exactly that kind of dilution to happen, with neither Reid nor Angle getting close to 50%.

And even an apples-to-apples comparison, where it was possible, shows a trend from the Republicans toward undecided/none/other.

A political report today, maybe in Politico but I can't remember for sure, said, after noting the Reid people dismiss the Rasmussen poll showing Angle up 11, that when a reporter asked Reid if his internals showed him beating Angle, Reid said, "What do you think?", before nodding with a smile and walking away.  Dangerous to read too much, or even anything, into that, but I bet Reid's internal polling does, indeed, show a better situation than we know.  And I'm not surprised if internal RNC or NRSC polling shows the same, which is why Republicans are admitting they might not win this one after all.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:46:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Internal Polling?

It might as well be a farce considering that Reid won't even release the results.  You don't think he'd release the results if he was within 5?  And even then, I'd be skeptical considering it's internal polling.

Trey Greyson was claiming on the last day that he was still tied with Paul.  Tarkanian claimed the same thing as well.

---

by: General Hospital @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:24:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why

doesn't Angle release internals then? Or the national Republicans have surely been polling this race. The only poll showing Angle doing well recently is a stinking Rasmussen.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:42:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup, it cuts both ways. That national Republicans are worried reveals...

...that their internal polling probably showed her performing worse against Reid than Lowden or Tarkanian.  Maybe that meant she still led narrowly, maybe it was tied, or maybe she was down, but if she polled about the same as the others, the Republicans wouldn't be nearly as concerned.  And they're obviously concerned.

I think they probably didn't reign in Rand Paul from the start because they saw him polling well against either Conway or Mongiardo.  But then he got himself into trouble, and they realized it could slip away fast, and they put the clamps down on him.  They got Angle sequestered right away, but I doubt it was based entirely on projection from the Paul experience, they probably had polling that showed her needing some help.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 03:01:38 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

She did

To the Senate Republicans yesterday. She's up double digits supposedly.  

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 05:29:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Private polling almost always is superior to public polling, and is rarely released......

It's a myth among some political junkies that "if your internal polling is good, you release it."

That's not true.  Very seldom are internals publicly released, even when good in a close race.

You release your internals only if you think you'll get a specific benefit from releasing them.  Usually it's done when you think your campaign isn't being taken seriously enough or is being actively dismissed, and you've got problems with donors and/or voters as a result.  But if the money is flowing and your candidacy is polling well, whether or not under the radar, and there's no public bashing of your campaign that threatens progress, you just keep your numbers to yourself.

This is also why a campaign sometimes will release numbers long after a poll is done.  I think just today one SSP digest tidbit reported on a poll performed in March by some campaign?  The campaign released it recently probably because the data is stale enough that the opponent can't do much with it, and they otherwise gained a little needed attention by releasing the numbers.

And regading what campaigns and candidates say publicly about their internals, they mislead and sometimes lie.  Most often I think they usually mislead by running a message-testing poll that shows great numbers after the message-testing questions were posed.  They probably poll the horse race before those questions, too, and then compared the pre-and-post horse race numbers for measuring a message's effectiveness.  So Tarkanian probably polled the horse race after asking, "if you knew Angle/Lowden eats babies for breakfast, would that make you more likely or less likely to vote for her?"  Then he released that skewed number as showing a "tie," and taken literally that's true, but of course he's misleading.

So is Reid misleading or lying?  Maybe.  But somehow I doubt it.  The CW changed without him having to open his mouth, no one is saying Reid can't win, and the reporting suggests people on both sides of the Senate aisle practically expect him to survive.  Rasmussen isn't taken seriously among most political reporters, and their extreme outliers and wildly erratic numbers are hurting their reputation even more among the media.  Mason-Dixon showed Angle up only 3 pre-primary, and while it's a respected outfit, they've laid plenty of eggs in recent cycles.  It's in Presidential elections in battleground states where there are a ton of polls that the outliers are revealed, and M-D had their fair share of them.  So all things considered, it wouldn't surprise me if Reid's internals have him up a couple......especially if he's polled very recently, since his ads went up.  He's virtually unchallenged on the air, with American Crossroads making only a modest one-week ad buy for their hit on Reid, and a clean energy advocacy group countering with a pro-Reid ad.  And no one is defending Angle......except Ensign, and that's not good for her.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:49:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for you comments on polls

  You helped clear the air a bit on this subject,thanks. At
times in the past few years I have been called and subjected to various polling questions.  The most interesting but frustrating ones were when after I hung up I was left wondering how this supposed poll could have been of any value considering the questions asked.  Was it a push poll or just an incompetent poll?  Or was it a poll on a single issue or topic wrapped in a smoke screen of irrelevant trash?  
 Among the snake handlers and militia members with flintlocks I suspect they will never vote for Reid under any circumstance, but they might stay home.  I wonder about using LV in a poll instead of rolling the dice with RVs. I would be tempted to use the latter.  Thanks again, Rollo Weems.
   

Rollo "Rob" Weems

---

by: RolloWeems @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 09:01:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

They poll me

ask who I would vote for if the election were today, and then I give my answer (a particular candidate or undecided). Then, they tell me a series of things, especially concentrating on either putting the candidate who hired them in a good light or putting his/her main opponent in a bad light. I never let those things change my opinion, and if the stuff about the opponent strikes me as really scurrilous, I object and end the phone call. There is just hardly any way something a pollster tells me would cause me to change my views of a candidate; I'd want a more disinterested source for information.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 09:06:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Most respondents are like you (and me), but enough aren't to move numbers on the margins......

Close elections are won and lost on marginal movements, and if only 5 or 10 out of every 100 respondents flips on candidate choice based on message-test questioning, that's helpful to a campaign.  And even if a particular messaging falls flat in a poll and numbers don't budge, that still tells a campaign something useful.

If you're talking about the kind of scenario I hypothesized regarding Tarkanian, a very reasonable Angle/Lowden/Tarkanian breakdown of 33-23-23 can become 28-28-28 with some message-testing.  So he can claim a "tie" without having to lie outright, just mislead.

Another trick of the trade is to configure a favorable turnout model, and forcing favorable results that way.  Rasmussen is the one public pollster who obviously does this, even though he won't admit it.  Remember, he's getting results that make him personally happy as an evangelical conservative Republican, when no one else is producing results so favorable to his own politics...that's no accident.  And Rasmussen isn't unique, he didn't invent anything.  Campaigns can do the same.

The difference, though, is that campaigns don't construct a phony poll, they instead are trying to construct a path to victory.  If there's no path to victory with the most likely turnout model, then figure out what turnout model can produce a victory, and then configure the campaign plan to make that turnout model a reality.  If sounds unrealistic, that's because it usually is......except when it's not......see Obama 2008 in Indiana, North Carolina, Omaha, Virginia.  That's what the campaign did, they either couldn't win at all, or at least couldn't come close enough to 50-50 odds for their liking, under normal turnout distribution by various demographics.  So they  

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 10:24:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Clicked "post" prematurely......

My last sentence:  So they made a turnout model happen that allowed them to win in a bunch of places a Democratic Presidential nominee isn't supposed to win.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 10:25:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Angle defends Scientology yesterday in Washington

As I predicted she stood up for the evil, paramilitary cult with the usual arguments of fools. I feel sorry for the guys who are going to try and work with this mope.  She is stubborn, just like that chicken woman Sue Lowden.  It is not part of the personal makeup of this kind of wingnut to admit mistakes.  That is something only weak liberals do. Rollo Weems.

http://www.salon.com/news/poli...

Rollo "Rob" Weems

---

by: RolloWeems @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 10:53:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hope Reid's and the DSCC's oppo research people are tracking all this......

Every little thing like this is a gold mine for attacking her later.

I don't think there's anyone who accepts scientology as a valid form of spirituality.  It's widely acknowledged as a cult.  There are other religions that are commonly ridiculed or mocked by a lot of people, but that you can't mock or ridicule in public discourse without being viewed as a religious bigot.  But scientology is not in that category; instead, scientology is to religion as the LaRouchies are to politics, entitled to constitutional rights but devoid of any respect.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 13:20:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It goes beyond respect, it is criminal fraud and abuse.

  Scientology is steeped in criminality.  It practices fraud, extortion, human rights abuses and blackmail for starters.  I know a woman, a former member of their paramilitary Sea Org, who fell afoul of the leader of Scientology so she was sent, swooped up in fact in the middle of the night, to a compound in the desert and made to run around a pole in the hot sun until she collapsed.  This was done day after day, week after week.  She was fed slop that a pig wouldn't want and yelled and screamed at for hours on end and was allowed little sleep. When she was broken enough to no longer be a threat, in their minds at least, they let her out.  Meeting her was a great motivation to oppose this evil and degraded cult.  But there are dozens of stories on the net of people just like her.
 So it goes beyond being a farce, these people are deadly dangerous.  Nobody of any party should be elected that has had dealings with them.  
  The latest thing I heard is that a volunteer advisor, one who has been with Angle for a while, told a group of Angle devotees was that the reason she helped out Scientology was that, "she felt sorry for them since nobody else would help them out."  Ah, feel the spin! Rollo Weems

Rollo "Rob" Weems

---

by: RolloWeems @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 15:39:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tony Wilt won HD-26, not HD-15

https://www.voterinfo.sbe.virg...

---

by: Kendall @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 20:37:35 PM UTC

Full NPR Poll

http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2...

Lots of interesting stuff, including which districts were picked and what was deemed Tier 1 v. Tier 2 seats. Also, I found interesting was the "messaging" part at the end of the survey. Exec Summary: If you are in Tier 2, a good campaign will really help. If you are in Tier 1, pray that your district doesn't care about national issues.

---

by: tallsy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 20:43:44 PM UTC

Inouye now 2nd longest serving Senator ever.

http://www.kitv.com/news/23913...

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 20:44:28 PM UTC

Bravo Senator

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:06:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here's a question for the Democrats on this blog

Where are the pro-life Democrats on the internet?  A good portion of the party agrees with us on abortion and yet they are nowhere to be found in the blogosphere.  I think the absence skews a lot of the left's thinking about politics.

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more of a push to get Meeks to drop out of the race.

---

by: General Hospital @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:02:40 PM UTC

I guess the answer would be

It isn't a priority for them. It certainly isn't a priority for the whole electorate. I wish Republicans would run on social issues this year. So no, it doesn't skew our thinking at all.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:09:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmmm....

A good portion of the party agrees with us on abortion

Can you back that up with polling? I am fairly sure that the vast majority of Democrats are pro-choice and pro-lifers are not very common except in the south. We have at least one pro life dem though. On this blog we focus on horse race politics and social issues really don't affect elections much anymore. I wish Republicans would run in them, I'm sure that would play well with the unemployed who want to hear talk of job creation.

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more of a push to get Meeks to drop out of the race.  

For crying out loud it is Meek not Meeks. Sorry I find that slightly annoying. By no means do I speak for everyone on this blog but I am supporting Crist.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:13:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here is the data

http://www.gallup.com/poll/128...

Around a third of your party is "pro-life" and I doubt it's all African-American Democrats (which is the explanation offered by some...that the pro-life numbers are skewed because blacks consider themselves pro-life).

The reason why I bring it up is because so many people in the liberal blogosphere believe that you can win just by pointing out your opponent is pro-life.  I've always viewed the argument as one-sided from the left: pro-life Democrats will always vote for the Democrat anyway because their economic and foreign policy liberalism is more important but pro-choice Republicans will vote for the Democrat because the pro-choice Republicans' beliefs on social issues trump their fiscal and foreign policy conservatism.  That's the sense I get from reading the liberal blogosphere.  I think it's wrong and it skews the way many liberals analyze politics.

I'm not the only one making the Meeks/Meek mistake.  The fact that people are making the mistake is one of the reasons why he's screwed, though he may end up being Rubio's best friend if he wins the primary.

---

by: General Hospital @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:44:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't get that sense at all

I mean how many pro-choice Republicans do you see online? The internet right is very pro-life, the internet left is very pro-choice. Actually, both sides are more extreme on most issues than the vast majority of the electorate. Anyway, I don't really think this is the appropriate venue for this kind of discussion.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:52:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, the "pro-choice" right

is very active in my opinion on the internet, if not in real life.

In fact, I'd argue they are very well represented and perhaps overrepresented in the blogosphere.

Just think about this place.  Will you run across a real pro-life Democrat (conservative on social issues, liberal on other issues) on this blog or 538?

I suspect you do come across pro-choice Republicans on the internet with some regularity, even if they are not representative of what Republicans.

My personal opinion is that white pro-life Democrats are more willing to vote for Republicans than pro-choice Republicans are willing to vote for any Democrat.  That's why you get districts like PA-12 that are close on the presidential level despite the fact that there is a dramatic registration advantage.

---

by: General Hospital @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:06:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My final word on this

I've come across several pro-life Democrats online. I don't really frequent the conservative blogosphere so maybe you have a point there I don't know. In the final analysis I remain of the opinion that most people don't base their vote on this issue.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:13:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pro-Choice Republican

As a pro-choice Republican, I think the abortion issue just does not drive me to the polls like fiscal or national security issues.  

My view on the subject matter is actually kind of odd.  I am pro-choice, but find Roe v. Wade to be wrong from a constitutional perspective.  It is fundamentally a political decision that should be made by the political branches at the state level.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:26:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I respect your view on Roe v. Wade

I studied the case in a course called The Supreme Court and the Constitution, and while I think it was a wise and correctly-decided decision, one can make quite a logical argument that there was insufficient Constitutional basis for the Supreme Court to set legal guidelines for abortion on a nationwide basis. I only have a problem with people who think that, therefore, Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

Some decisions that were open to very legitimate question on Constitutional grounds at the time, such as FDR-era rulings on what constitutes "Interstate Commerce" and is therefore properly subject to Federal regulation, are not only settled law now but so intertwined into the fabric of daily life in this country that overturning them because the procedure was not ideal (e.g., it would have been better for there to have been Constitutional amendments during the FDR years, a position with which I agree, at least in theory) would really wreak havoc.

I think that's also true, though in an even more personal sense, with Roe v. Wade, and to the limited extent concern about the future of that Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion drives the votes of pro-choicers at all, it really isn't because of views on proper Constitutional legal procedures at the Supreme Court, but how overturning the ruling would wreak havoc with people's lives.

I'd end, though, by saying that opponents of Supreme Court rulings tend to be more motivated by opposition than proponents are by protecting the rulings. I think that's been clear for a long time, and is part of the reason why Congress has voted in favor of making it harder and more expensive for women to get access to abortions ever since 1976.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 08:36:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is exactly my view as well

---

by: MIJunkie @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:46:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are pro-life Democrats on DailyKos

though they are a small minority, they do speak up at times.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 08:22:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The poll was based on self-identification

Lots of people call themselves "pro-life," but when you question them, actually don't favor banning abortion, and are therefore pro-choice by definition, but don't identify themselves as such. If you asked Americans "Do you support making abortion illegal," you would get much different results.

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

---

by: Pan @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:56:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here

I consider myself pro-life.

There are plenty of pro-life Democrats out there, but as you said, they're not too active online. Why not? I have no idea.

Check this out:

http://www.democratsforlife.org/

---

by: RuralDem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:22:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Interesting...are you liberal on economic

and foreign policy issues?

If you ran Mark Critz in every single district, I don't see how you guys would lose an election.

---

by: General Hospital @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:44:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No

I consider myself moderate on economic issues and conservative on foreign policy.

Critz is a good candidate, though I'm not familiar with his foreign policy views.

I'd like for the party to nominate more Gene Taylor/Jim Marshall type of candidates, but, I don't see it happening.

---

by: RuralDem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:10:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Critz type Democrats

I am the exact opposite of the Critz types.  I cannot stand the economic populism mixed with the social conservatism.

It is probably because I grew up in southwestern Pennsylvania and associate it with generally incompetent governance where as I associate moderate Republicans where I live now in southeastern Pennsylvania with competent governance at the local level.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:31:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Competent governance...

You must not live in Philly LOL.

---

by: rdw72777 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:58:13 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Um, no

in my home state, Rhode Island, a pro-choice Republican (Chafee) beat a pro-life Democrat (Weygand) in the 2000 Senate race, by double digits.

There really is no one-size-fits-all ideology.

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/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 09:31:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Two Things

1. Abortion may not be high on their priority of issues to consider when they vote. This is a bit of a truism in the sense that if you're a single-issue pro-lifer you're effectively, in most places at least, a Republican anyway.

2. I imagine people who are conservative on sociocultural issues but at the same time skeptical of giving unregulated business a free hand in environmental, labor relations, and governance matters are probably underrepresented on online fora for a variety of reasons; they likely skew non-white and poor compared to the rest of the population, and probably with a lower than average level of formalized education.  

36, M, Democrat, MD-03

---

by: Answer Guy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:44:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bingo

I suspect pro-life Democrats are underrepresented online while pro-choice Republicans like myself are overrepresented simply because of socioeconomic factors.  Pro-choice Republicans I suspect are substantially wealthier and more educated than pro-life Democrats, which equates to greater internet access and political involvement.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:33:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm pro-life AND pro-choice :P

Now if we boil down the issue, I don't believe that life begins at conception, and last time I checked we celebrate Jesus's birthday.  On the other hand, I'm bugged at how much pro-life activists make a fuss about abortion, but neglect many other issues involved in preserving or safeguarding lives that indisputably already exist.

I really don't like this issue, from either side, because it has basically become a political football that comes up every so often just to generally get people angry.  Because this is not a clearly right-or-wrong issue (as much as many people would like to believe), and the only thing that bringing up this issue causes is lots of angry, shouting people.  On both sides.  It's not getting anywhere, and frankly, it's a waste of time that could be better spent working on far more important issues.

I believe we Democrats, on average, don't care about this issue as much because it doesn't matter all that much anyway.  One of my arguments for supporting a conservative Democrat in a red district rather than dissing him/her is that he/she may vote conservatively but will rarely saber-rattle about these sorts of flamebait issues.  Especially since such a Democrat would have to be very focused on showing their work for their constituency, and would want to deliver real results.  As people here have noted, if voters wanted a wingnut they could get a more pure wingnut as a Republican than as a Democrat.  We have to convince them that having a Democrat is better for their district, rather than trying to out-nut the Republican.

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

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:16:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Free advice to politicians: Don't date porn stars

Openly-gay (!) Republican state Sen. Paul Koering must've been out of his frickin' mind (or incredibly lonely or naive or both) when he invited gay porn "actor" Brandon Wilde out for a romantic dinner in Brainerd, Minnesota.

Koering was unapologetic: 'I don't see anything wrong with going out with him. Do I think that being a porn star is the best thing? No. But that's his choice. I think he's a nice guy.'"

Fair enough. But appearances aren't the (only) reason politicians shouldn't date porn stars... probably the main one is that porn stars generally say and do whatever the hell they want and don't give a damn what people think. Wilde's take on the date:

"I think he wanted to get in my pants, truthfully. And he was pretty flirty. But it was just dinner. We both were checking out the waiter though. It was fun."

Hmmm, a homely 45-year-old, newishly-out politician and a nubile 20-year-old gay porn star...naw, Brandon, I'm sure he wasn't trying to get into your pants at all. Another reason not to date them is that porn stars also might reveal your nefarious plans to gay up the state:

"He told me he wants to be President one day! But first, he needs to win his re-election. He said once he was re-elected he'd work on gay rights issues and NOH8 stuff, you know? He said he'd make it so gay marriage was legal in Minnesota."

Koering denies expressing that to Wilde: "I don't remember telling him any of that. I don't support gay marriage. My job is to support my constituents, and that's not something they want."

Poor Koering, he's still a newbie to gay dating by many standards and being a politician makes it tough...and being a Republican makes it even tougher. But one date and suddenly your re-election prospects are seriously complicated. Well, I'm sure Koering learned his lesson...

Koering did confirm that he and Wilde discussed Wilde's porn career over dinner, and while he doesn't approve of his line of work, Koering would still like a second date. "I did ask him if he wanted to go to dinner again."

D'oh.

The safe-for-work Towleroad link is below:
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/...

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

---

by: arealmlc @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:19:09 PM UTC

wow

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:33:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Guess Kissinger was right

Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

---

by: TXObserver @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:28:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How else can you explain

A big fat boring guy like Al Gore landing a milf like Laurie David.

---

by: InRepublican @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:18:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If this were dKos

I'd hydrate you for that.

---

by: emilysdad @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:53:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Be careful

I've enjoyed your contributions, but this is libelous trolling, or a very ill-advised joke. If you make another remark like this, I think the moderators will probably expel you from the site, and I really don't want that to happen. I've particularly appreciated your previous posts on Indiana politics.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 08:21:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

wtf

There was nothing more out of line about that comment than lots of other posts here everyday.  This alleged affair is all over the news.

---

by: tommypaine @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 09:28:52 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Is it any more substantiated than

the alleged affairs supposedly involving Nikki Haley? As far as I know, the allegations have been denied by all concerned.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 10:03:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It wasn't my intent to troll

Also, I'm familiar with libel, and under NYT v Sullivan, libel against a public figure can't be demonstrated without actual malice (which isn't present here). It's not as though a politician cheating on their wife is something new or unbelievable. Even John McCain had an affair.

---

by: InRepublican @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 10:39:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

While care is appropriate here

I found your comment less distasteful than the implied erotic fantasies some here seem to have about a few female politicos.

And the moderators seem to tolerate those comments.

---

by: tietack @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 13:32:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sure he did

but while he had at least one affair - the one with his current wife, while he was married to his first wife - the New York Times ran a story during the campaign that spread gossip about another alleged affair there doesn't seem to have been much basis for accusing him of, and that was rather sleazy at best.

I have read and studied NYT v. Sullivan, and I recognize the high standard the Supreme Court has set for prosecutions and convictions for libel. That doesn't mean I have to take their legal standard as my personal rule against spreading false witness. So I ask you, do you have a reason beyond "lots of people have affairs" to believe this accusation against Gore? To clarify, it surely wouldn't shock me if the story were true, but unless there's more to this than gossip, I don't think we should give it credence.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 21:06:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So what!

Who Sen. Koering choose to date is really not anyone's business. He is a grown man who has the right to see whoever he likes.

The fact that we are gossiping about it here and snickering at him for his choices is kind of sad.


Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...

---

by: izengabe @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 17:45:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Do

you not think it is hypocritical that he is dating a gay porn star but anti-gay? If the porn star is telling the truth then he is lying to his constituents about gay marriage as well. He is free to date whoever he likes but if he is going to act like a nice family values guy then he should live what he preaches.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 19:07:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Its not really hypocritical

He admits to being gay, and his stated opposition to gay marriage is based on what he believes his constituents want.

20, male, independent, WI-07.

---

by: Nhoj @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 19:50:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who he chooses to date

...isn't our business, you're right about that. I get your point--it was a little mean for me to speculate that he must be really lonely to do something like that in the first place. And if they'd just gone on a date, it would completely be a non-story.

But he chose to date a guy who went and immediately blabbed to the media that Koering is secretly holding positions he publicly disavows, wants to be President, will work for gay rights as soon as he's re-elected, etc., then it's at least a minor story.

Which is why I tried to focus on why it's bad to date porn stars not from a moral/ethical angle, but from a bad politics angle.

The fact that Koering wants to go out with him again, despite all this, is to me the most questionable part. Going out with a porn star once and getting burned is one thing, but repeatedly sticking your hand in the fire calls your judgment into question.

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

---

by: arealmlc @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 20:36:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Polling two different planets

Obama approval in Ras-o-World = 42-57
Obama approval on Earth (Gallup) = 49-43
Difference = 21%

I've only been following politics closely for about 5 years.  Can someone tell me if there has ever been a time when polling was this fucked up?

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:51:01 PM UTC

Gallup is also inconsistent

With itself. Have you seen the latest generic ballot numbers?

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:54:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't necessarily say

That Gallup is Earth.  They did have the congressional democrats down 5 last week, only to be up 5 this week.  They've had some very wide swings in their statistical trends lately.

That being said, I've never believed anything showing Obama's approval more than +5 or -5 since the beginning of the calendar year.  Rasmussen has consistently been way off on just about everything.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 21:59:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Last week?

Not really.

Gallup Generic Ballot (6/7-13/10)
Republican 49
Democrat 44

USA Today/Gallup Generic Ballot (6/11-13/10)
Democrat 48
Republican 43  

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:00:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There's a difference between Gallup and Gallup/USA Today

Gallup/USA today is more of a monthly pollster while Gallup arrives at their generic ballot numbers though their daily polling.

---

by: General Hospital @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:11:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I know that

But they still conduct and put their name to both so deserve the scrutiny.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:18:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One more data point: AP/GfK

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37...

In addition, people want Democrats to win control of Congress by a 46 percent to 39 percent margin. That is the second straight month in which Democrats have held a delicate advantage on that question since April, when 44 percent preferred Republicans and 41 percent picked Democrats.

pdf - http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/...

Though as the paragraph suggests, the question is worded a bit indirectly.

---

by: tietack @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:14:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thomas for GOP-Prez 2012!!!

God that would be great...so much dirt...a free SCOTUS seat...and who knows? Maybe he'd run as a Libertarian and absolutely screw the GOP nominee.

http://www.tampabay.com/opinio...

---

by: ID Panhandle Dem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:42:53 PM UTC

Onion worthy

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:44:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

CA-Sen: Bizarre new poll has Whitman, Fiorina up 4,6

http://www.ccadvertising.com/s...

Ridiculously large sample - over 4,000 people interviewed - with a ludicrous voter model of 44R/34D/22I and 56M/44F. A lot of the internals seem contradictory, too - 44% are "supporters" of the Tea Party movement, and yet only 30% of the same are pro-life.

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:43:30 PM UTC

Also Onion worthy

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:47:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lol

they must of polled Orange County and the parts of California where there are more cows than people.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:48:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

California 44R/34D?!

Garbage.  Thanks for playing.  Next.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:48:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here are some demographics that are even funnier......

The poll is 56% male, 44% female.  I think only Alaska might be in that ballpark.

And the poll is 44% over 50 years of age, 56% under 50.  California is younger than that, no matter the turnout model.

I don't think places like Oklahoma or Arkansas or Kentucky have demographics that bad for us, let alone California!

Needless to say, this survey was purely for public relations purposes, not to produce an honest survey.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:59:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ha!

I'm sure 44% of Californians identify themselves as supporters of the Tea Party. Even with such a ridiculously skewed turnout model, the GOP candidates only end up ahead by the low single digits. That's a hoot!

---

by: NCDem @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:58:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Did they only poll Bakersfield?

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

---

by: californianintexas @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:42:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

NY-24 - Hanna contribution to Independence Party under investigation

Interesting backdrop on the question of Richard Hanna and the Independence Party line in NY-24 -- currently there is an Oneida County DA investigation into the Oneida County Independence Party finances - and a check that Hanna's campaign wrote to the committee 2 weeks before the 2008 election.

http://www.uticaod.com/latestn...

While it doesn't sound like a huge scandal, it does tie what sounds like some suspect local party funding issues into Hanna's campaign - never a good thing for a candidate.  

---

by: terje @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 22:59:35 PM UTC

New video from the Reid campaign

This one hitting Angle for absconding to DC.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!

---

by: LookingOver @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:14:42 PM UTC

Damn librul media!

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Jun 16, 2010 at 23:16:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's airing on tv?

It's a minute and a half!

---

by: Andrew @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:09:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, this one's just a web video......

Only the social security/Medicare/Scientology ad is airing on TV.  While I haven't seen points/dollar amount, I read a blurb that suggested it's a big buy.  Nevada is cheap, a big buy doesn't cost much.

Meanwhile, btw, the American Crossroads attack ad against Reid, which I thought was pretty good, airs for only a week and spends just over $120K, not a big hit.  I don't think it will make that big a dent.  And Clean Power or whatever they're called are airing an independent expenditure ad to offset it, praising Reid.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:02:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Racist, Sexist, SC Republicans willingly to support Dem to keep Indian-Ameircan woman from becoming Gov

http://www.politico.com/news/s...
This article pisses me off so much. I can't believe SC Republicans are willing to support a Democrat to keep an Indian-American female reformist from becoming Gov.
Question: If Jake Knots and/or Andre Bauer endorsed Sheheen, would that hurt you impression of him?  

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:20:07 AM UTC

The South

Can we bring General Sherman back from the dead?

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:23:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Now there's the kind of Republican I sorely miss!

Male, 23, DC-At Large

---

by: JFM110 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:39:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No

Unless he recruits racists and such he can't prevent who supports him.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:23:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There's

hope yet for Nikki Haley:

Some observers believe the state GOP establishment's resistance to Haley could play into her hands, resonating with voters who are in an anti-incumbent mood and sick of Columbia's politics as usual. "It just looks like the good ol' boys rallying around each other. She could take that one and knock it out of the park, too," says Chris Cooper, a national Democratic strategist and South Carolina native.

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

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:58:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think that's exactly what will happen

She's a pretty stellar candidate if I may say so myself.  

---

by: Andrew @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:11:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let's just say that if the Democrats

ran someone against Nikki who had the military credentials of Wesley Clark, the race would be a total toss-up.

There's actually nothing in the article that is race-based or gender-based. It surprises me that the state's business community is against her.  The criticism leveled in that Politico article is completely fair.

For the record, i really like Haley but she is being way overhyped by some on our side and some Democrats.  I recognize that having a minority face is good but it doesn't mean that they should be exempt from reasonable criticism.

---

by: General Hospital @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:17:22 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree, the Politico piece was 100% fair and revealed new information, rare for Politico......

I'm being a little hard on Politico maybe, but often they spin a story that's more yarn than reporting in its perspective.  Notions that GOP women are doing uncommonly well, or that black Republican candidates are doing uncommonly well, have been poorly informed themes on Politico.  I get the feeling that under the pressure of deadlines and needing to constantly produce huge amounts of content, they just brainstorm story ideas and pursue them hastily without too much filtering of what's worthy and what's a mistake.

But this story was a good one, reflecting real reporting.  What would be even better would have been more reporting o the history of conflict between the GOP legislature and Haley/Sanford, what exactly underlies or causes it.  Is it pure personality conflict?  Substantive disagreements on politics or policy?  It's never been clear to me.

But that story makes clear there are very substantive reasons for these people opposing Haley, and it has "post-racial" written all over it, even though South Carolina as a state is as far removed as possible from being post-
racial.

And frankly, one thing I've learned in life is that if one person has a hard time getting along with a whole bunch of other people, it's usually the one person's fault.  So I'm left wondering if maybe, just maybe, Haley is just a difficult personality and a horse's ass?

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:09:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think this race will be a tossup

by October.  There are many white Republicans and independents who won't vote for a reform/outsider Indian-American woman.  I think she could be one or the other (anti-establishment or Indian-American woman) and win easily, but both is going to make this thing close.

---

by: NewMex9999 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:03:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disagree

This is where you guys needed a Webb/Knowles/Clark type candidate.  Unless I'm wrong, Shaheen doesn't fit that profile.

---

by: General Hospital @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:07:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Or a Mark Critz

Our party, especially younger candidates like Haley, would have challenges against these types of opponents.

---

by: General Hospital @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:08:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree that a candidate like Webb or Clark

would have been better.  But Sheheen seems energetic and fairly charismatic, and is pretty conservative.  As long as Sheheen can convince South Carolina disenchanted Repubs and independents that he's competent and not some wild-eyed liberal, he has a chance against Haley.  If the Chamber of Commerce backs him, it will go a long way to positioning himself as a competent moderate conservative against a Sanfordite.

---

by: NewMex9999 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:33:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Neither did Jim Hodges (aka Elmer Fudd) and he won ...

... all that is necessary is that the GOP be divided and the alternative not be a Jane Fonda type.

Sheheen can win it, but it won't be easy.  

---

by: vicupstate @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 12:24:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Haley is Sanford in a skirt, which explains the disdain...

... Sanford has been an unmitigated disaster.  He has accomplished virtually nothing in 8 years except to make an embarassment of himself and the state.  He and the legislature have complete and total contempt for each other. I bet at least 90% of his vetoes have been overridden in his 8 years.  The Legislature is where the real power in this state is.  But the Governor can and has been, a pain in their collective ass.  

The time Sanford brought in two defecating pigs into the statehouse as a jab at the legislature, ended what little bit of civility existed betwen the two previously.

The Chamber of Commerce crowd has been 'waiting out' Sanford for awhile, and is not about to 'extend the lease' another four or eight years.  

The religion thing is really just a means to an end to bring her down.  That is really only pushed in the blogosphere and Jake Knotts though, publicly at least.  

However, she is the hot 'flavor of the month' for now, so she should win the runoff easily.  But I fully expect Sheheen's coffers to fill with establishment and GOP 'regulars' money.  The Alvin Greene impact on Sheheen concerns me far more than the lost opportunity to tie up DeMint for the fall.

 

---

by: vicupstate @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 03:19:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm

not wrong by saying the legislature would of impeached Sanford during the Argentinian tail scandal without hesitation if it was not for the fact that Andre Bauer would of ascended to the governor's office right?

Btw, why is Bauer just as hated as Sanford?

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:13:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

From what I have heard

he has the maturity of a frat boy and is an all around asshole.  He was also likely behind the spreading of the rumors about the affairs by Haley.

He barely got reelected in 2006.  

---

by: NewMex9999 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:34:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well let's see..

**Drove over 100 mph on interstate and didn't get a ticket.

**Crashed a plane he was flying

**Was pulled over by Hiway Patrol, and the officer had to pull his gun because Bauer exited the car hurriedly and started charging back to the patrolman.  

Sanford wasn't going to be impeached because of Bauer and because sanford was not going to go down alone.

---

by: vicupstate @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 12:23:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If that's why they're opposing her

that would be terrible, but the article gives at least 3 substantive, non-racist reasons for opposing her.

What I would ask you is why you're calling an ideological protegee of Mark Sanford a "reformist." Wouldn't she just be continuing his policies?

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 08:18:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Poll on PPP blog

Can anyone else not see the poll for where PPP will poll this weekend?  

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:43:29 AM UTC

No

I could not vote, Jensen said in the comments that it was down but PA and TX were leading by large margins. I hope he gets it back up because I would like to vote.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 00:59:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

MO-08: Emerson Clearly Worried

Fresh off his making the Red-to-Blue list, Tommy Sowers has come under attack from incumbent JoAnn Emerson... but since it's hard to attack a former Special Forces Major with two Bronze Stars for anything real or consequential.... she went right for the mud. And not just any mud: gay-baiting. She had a political operative associate of her former husband basically imply in a letter to the editor that Sowers is gay. Like, really imply...

That earned her a rather sharp rebuke from the publisher of the district's most influential newspaper:
http://www.semissourian.com/st...

Also, it's a phenomenally dumb attack. As much as I wish he played for my team, Tommy Sowers is not gay. Like, not even a little. He's an Army Green Beret with a truck and a hunting dog and a gun rack and occasionally wears ill-fitting clothes and likes some godawful country music. Anyone who meets him is going to figure this out in 5 seconds.

Oh--and for the record, guess where he met his appropriately-hot wife? That would be Iraq, where he was deployed...twice. In conclusion, eat a bag of dicks, Rep. Emerson.  

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

---

by: arealmlc @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:22:50 AM UTC

There goes another good election year name...

Goodbye Gooch

25, Male, CT-01 (home), Perth-Wellington riding (sometimes)

---

by: WalterSobchak @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:23:48 AM UTC

IA-GOV

Rasmussen finds Branstad getting a bounce and his largest ever lead against Culver (57-31), according to a one-day poll on June 14. The last Rasmussen poll in late April had Branstad ahead of Culver 53-38.

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood's PAC in Iowa endorsed Culver today.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 01:32:36 AM UTC

There's no "bounce," just Rasmussen behaving erratically as they always do......

For a long time I treated Rasmussen with respect, in spite of their Republican lean, because they were mostly on target and didn't deviate too much from the totality of polling.

But this cycle they've jumped so many sharks that I don't consider their polling valid, even when good for a Democrat (like the recent MI-Gov poll which irrationally showed movement in favor of Dems when nothing's happened to move numbers there in either direction), without corroboration from someone else credible.

This latest IA-Gov poll is just another shark jumped.  Culver's not down 57-31.  I'd bet both my balls that Branstad's own internal polling has never showed a lead that big.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:14:19 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Simmons Running Secret CT-Sen Campaign?

http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:27:05 AM UTC

Will we see a Connecticut For Simmons Party?

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

---

by: californianintexas @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 02:51:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why

doesn't he just run under the Connecticut for Lieberman Party? I bet LIEberman would love that.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:42:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not really

Lieberman likes McMahon, not Simmons. She supported him in 2006.

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 05:29:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No. He is still on the GOP ballot for the Aug Primary.

If he wants to run all he has to do is reactivate his campaign and tell people to vote for him.

Wait a second. He doesnt even need to do that. Since his name is already on the ballot all GOP voters in CT would have to do is vote for him and he would be the GOP nominee.

Simmons could raise no money, do no campaigning, hold no rallies, have no website and could hold up in his father's house and do nothing to further his candidacy and still win the primary if voters in CT just vote for him over McMahon.

I mean this campaign strategy worked in SC why not try it in CT.


Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...

---

by: izengabe @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 18:47:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He's not first on the ballot though

He's second or third, depending on whether Schiff gets on.

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

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 22:08:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ughh…

The NYT has decided to rehash on Blumenthal again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06...

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

---

by: hoosierdem @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 04:54:46 AM UTC

NYT

is trying to desperately salvage their credibility after publishing the McMahon campaign's opposition research exploded in their face.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 06:06:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

NY-20

Scott Murphy got the Independence party line in NY-20 for the 2010 GE.  Should help a little, though I''m of the thinking he was okay anyways.  Every little bit helps

---

by: rdw72777 @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 05:10:31 AM UTC

It matters, it was the difference against Tedisco......

If I recall correctly, Murphy's votes on the Independence line, and his votes on the Working Families Party line, each separately outnumbered his margin over Tedisco.  So both endorsements were crucial.

There are always surprises in a wave year, some of them being incumbents surviving when no one thought they could, and others being incumbents who lose when no one thought they would.  Murphy and plenty of others are in the 2nd category and need whatever extra help they can get to avoid being surprised.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 13:26:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Didn't he vote against the HCR bill?

What is the WFP doing about this?  Are they just not endorsing, or are they going to spoil this with a candidate?

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

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Thu Jun 17, 2010 at 22:08:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Murphy was a no-to-yes flip: no on House bill, yes on Senate bill, and...

...yes on reconciliation fixes.

Bottom line:  he was a yes when it mattered most.

I haven't been able to find whether WFP has endorsed Murphy or not for this November, but their ultimatum on health care doesn't apply to him since he voted yes.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

---

by: DCCyclone @ Fri Jun 18, 2010 at 02:00:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]