Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 11/17

by: Crisitunity

Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 5:09 PM EST


• NV-Sen: By far the most interesting news of what's been a very slow news day is that John Ensign appears to be running again, at least according to one of his spokespersons. While he's been acting like he'd run again (and he was probably encouraged by that recent PPP poll showing him leading Dean Heller in a GOP primary), it's still a little surprising, given the disrepair his fundraising operation has fallen into, and the pile of ethics and potentially criminal investigations he'll have to navigate next year. (H/t sebby123.)

• FL-Sen: Can't a man publish an op-ed in a major in-state newspaper without people thinking he's running for a higher office? Well, apparently not, based on reaction to a column written by Rep. Connie Mack IV in the Orlando Sentinel that took Bill Nelson to task over extension of Bush-era tax cuts. Beltway code-talkers are interpreting this as the first salvo of a likely Senate race.

• WV-Sen, WV-Gov, WV-02: GOP Rep. Shelly Moore Capito is sounding studiously noncommital about her plans for 2012. A challenge to newly-elected (in a special election) Sen. Joe Manchin? "I'm not ruling it out..." but also "I have given no thought to it..." (other than, by definition, the amount of thought needed in order to decide not to rule it out). She also didn't rule out running for Governor in 2012, although she did pretty explicitly rule out running for Governor if the legislature decides they should have a fast odd-numbered-year special election to replace Manchin in 2011. A Manchin/Capito match would be between two super-popular politicians: a Blankenship (the pollster, not the coal company) survey just found Manchin with 80% approvals and Capito at 77%.

• AL-02: Bobby Bright popped up today to criticize the Dems' decision to retain Nancy Pelosi as leader, but he also offered some vague "never say never" sentiments about a return engagement for his seat, saying he wouldn't rule it out in 2012.

• IN-06: With Mike Pence looking likelier that he's up and out of the House after this term -- although whether he's running for Governor or President is unclear -- Roll Call names some potential replacements. One is a blast from the past: ex-Rep. David McIntosh, who represented an earlier iteration of this district (then IN-02) from 1994 to 2000, when he lost the Governor's race. Other names include Wayne Co. Sheriff Matt Strittmatter, former state Rep. Luke Messer (whom you might remember from narrowly losing the IN-05 primary to Dan Burton this year), and rich guy Don Bates (who finished 4th in the IN-Sen primary this year, and has also been rumored for a Richard Lugar primary challenge).

• LA-SoS: Here's an interesting career pivot: soon-to-be-ex. Rep. Joe Cao is considering a run for Louisiana Secretary of State. He'd face a primary against Tom Schedler, a Republican who will be acting SoS for the next year (current SoS Jay Dardenne is about to be sworn in as Lt. Governor) and will be running for a permanent slot next year. (H/t GOPVOTER.)
Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 11/17
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

SSP Daily Digest: 11/17 | 226 comments
Louisiana notes
1) everybody faces everybody in an open primary
2) the next election will be in October 2011 for both the full term and the unexpired term
Great move by House Dems
It's funny
but pretty disingenuous. Healthcare for fed govt employees (like me) is provided by private companies and subsidized by their employer, just like everybody else's insurance. It just so happens that in this case their employer happens to be the federal govt.

That said, what Harris did was clearly dumb. And how does he not receive healthcare being a doctor? Or a State Senator? He apparently also has never heard of COBRA. Definitely not the best way for a freshman to start off his term.  

[ Parent ]
The standards are a lot better than private employers though
My parents were postal workers for over 20 years and trust me, I'd trade my current health benefits for federal benefits any day of the week.

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 ]
I, too, am a fed, and yes it's the best in the country. But we have a bad guy on our side...
...in Dan Lipinski, who voted against HCR after he ran for his dad's seat so that he could get good healthcare for his own health problems.

I always wish he'd get primaried to death, but the party establishment in his district is on his side because his dad was Bill Lipinski.

This is a safe Democratic district that deserves a better Democrat.

But Harris is, indeed, a much bigger dick.

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

[ Parent ]
I predict that IL will offer 4-5 open likely D seats
and MD will offer 1. These are the places where progressive activists can make their mark on the House.  
[ Parent ]
How is it disingenuous?


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Of course Ensign will run again...
But like soon-to-be-ex-Governor Jim Gibbons, he's a walking political corpse. And just like Gibbons, the GOP establishment is scrambling to find someone to primary Ensign. And believe it or not, it may not be as easy as originally thought. If Dean Heller decides to stay in The House, enjoy his comfy safe seat, and bask in the glow of having so much juice with soon-to-be-Speaker John Boehner, then the Nevada GOP has VERY limited options as to how to save the seat from falling right into Shelley Berkley's hands.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)
My read on Boehner's support for Heller
is that Boehner is helping raise Heller's profile to bolster a bid for the Senate.
[ Parent ]
Don't Reid and Ensign have some sort of secret...
non-agression pact of some sort?  If Ensign makes it out the primary and Reid's machine stays out of the race, Ensign should have a very good shot at re-election.
[ Parent ]
Reid can't stop presidential turnout
If Ensign survives the primary, we'll nail him in the general.

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 ]
No, but presidential turnout...
Doesn't always change the situation down-ballot. In 2008, there was massive "Obama under-voting" (where people voted for Obama, then essentially left the rest of the ballot blank) that made Dina Titus' NV-03 win that much more difficult and totally undermined Jill Derby in NV-02. I have my doubts as to how much effort the Obama campaign will put into Congressional races in 2012, so there's no guarantee all the Obama voters will keep voting for D's all the way down the ballot.

And perhaps even more potent than that, here in Nevada there are essentially two real king/queen makers: gaming and mining. If they like a candidate, they'll go all out to ensure he/she wins. They helped Harry Reid, but they won't help some other Democrat (like Dina Titus) who doesn't have Reid's blessing and is running against an establishment Republican they're in favor with (like Dean Heller).

As I said earlier, Reid probably won't hesitate one bit to "release the krakens" for Shelley Berkley against John Ensign. But if Heller survives the primary, it won't be easy.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
I don't see why not.
There is a risk that Democrats lose their majority in 2012. This is one of the few pick up opportunities.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Because Nevada politics...
Is much more complicated.

Unlike Arizona, where John McCain and Raul Grijalva will never cooperate on anything, or California, where Barbara Boxer and Kevin McCarthy simply can't stand each other, Nevada's Congresscritters have a history of having relationships that range from cordial to codependent to downright incestuous.

Dems would have had a much easier time claiming the Senate majority in 2006 if Nevada were really in play, but Reid did nothing as Jack Carter made a complete fool out of himself and ran of the most embarrassingly amateurish campaigns Nevada Democrats have ever endured.

Again, Reid will help in any general election campaign against Ensign, who's now seen as damaged goods. But with Heller, it's much more complicated. Our biggest hope at this point is that Heller either stays in The House to enjoy the new power John Boehner is giving him, or he gets teabagged in the GOP primary by Ensign and/or Sharron Angle.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
I think Heller is not as strong as Ensign was in 2006
Until little time before the scandals, J Ensign was considered as a candidate able for run for President. Heller is far of this.

I think Heller can be teabagged, his first election for the house prove it just with S Angle in the game. I think she need some other before, but she will be the third in the game (Ensign, someone competitive and Angle) and more if D Heller is the second. And then, she has a lot of chance of win the primary again. She has not fear of run every year and she has not fear of lose (like C O'Donnell and others).

Even J Ensign would be able of run to the right of D Heller if he is primaried (like J Gibbons) but a three way primary would be the war again, and I think we will see that.

Before the race begin, I think it is more likely B Kroliki primary J Ensign than D Heller.

This race must be competitive, Nevada is not Louisiana.

[ Parent ]
I don't think NV-02 2008 is totally valid
True Obama did better than other Dems had done in the past, but he still lost it (and, as I acknowledged before, Heller is geniunely a strong candidate, and isn't in Las Vegas where Reid's machine is for the most part).

It's true that Reid's nonparticipation made it difficult for Titus, but she did win in 2008 and only barely lost in 2010.

I definitely defer to your understanding of Nevada politics, but sometimes the demographic tide is too strong for the normal machine to prevent.

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 ]
By less than 100 votes...
And Jill Derby benefitted from plenty of crossover support in 2006. And Obama's operation was even more powerful in Reno, where he actually won in the Caucuses. Derby wasn't interested in running while tied to Obama, so the Obama operation did its own thing as Derby's campaign fell apart.

And btw, Obama and Reid are VERY close, so Obama won't be supporting or opposing anyone here in Nevada unless Reid approves.

Again, Democrats' best hope is for Heller to either stay out of the race or lose in the GOP primary. And right now, it's quite possible Heller may stay out of the race.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
from experience working in 08
I can say that the Obama organization focuses very little on down ballot races.  They were a total pain in the ass to coordinate the state party's efforts with theirs as they had one single focus, get Obama elected.
[ Parent ]
Why was that?


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
when I volunteered for Obama in Lake County
there was one time where we also had to campaign for Jill Long Thompson and Pete Visclosky. I think most of the times it was only Obama though.

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 ]
Non-aggression pacts were
made to be broken.  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Yes, broken by Republicans.
Look at Daschle.
[ Parent ]
Here's hoping Harry is
smart enough to break this one.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
I think Ensign broke it this year
He got former Rep. Barbara Vucanovich to endorse Angle by saying that it's imperative that Reid is beaten.  Other than that, though, he's been very low key, so who knows.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
They did, but Ensign broke it...
This year by pushing so hard for Angle. The new non-aggression pact worth watching is between Reid and Dean Heller. If Heller jumps in and succeeds in defeating Ensign in the primary, Reid will stay out. Otherwise, his machine will probably soon be at Shelley Berkley's disposal.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)
[ Parent ]
If Obama's winning the state by double digits again, I can't imagine Reid could stop it
Now Heller's a really strong candidate so he could overcome that, but Harry Reid isn't a magician, he couldn't stop a ridiculously unpopular Jon Ensign from losing if Obama's driving turnout.

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 ]
And he won't stop Ensign for losing...
Again, their pact is history. Reid will probably give his blessing to Shelley to run and his juice will be at her disposal.

But if Heller makes it past the primary, whatever "Obama-mentum" that exists in the 2012 cycle may not be enough to stop the full Nevada establishment from anointing Heller.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
Maybe Reid should use his machine
To help Ensign win the primary. That would certainly be honoring the non-aggression pact

Some Dude, 19, Democrat, NH-02 (residence), MA-08 (college)
[ Parent ]
Nah. He'll stay out of that primary...
But if Shelley Berkley decides to run for Senate, he'll make sure to clear the Dem field for her. She volunteered on his very first Assembly campaign in 1968 and was one of his closest and most steadfast allies in this last Senate campaign in 2010, so the two are very close and I have a good feeling Reid will go "all in" for Shelley if she indeed throws her signature red pumps in the ring.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)
[ Parent ]
NV
Berkley doesn't seem like the best candidate.  Wouldn't Miller be better?

29/D/Male/NY-01
[ Parent ]
atdleft...
I cannot wait for your and Ralston's insights into this race. Just like the useful nuggets received during the Angle/Reid battle, the 2012 battle will be interesting as hell!

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...
[ Parent ]
NY-25
Buerkle up by 642 votes with about a quarter of Onondaga Co. (where Maffei won by 8% on election day) absentees counted, still no Wayne Co. absentees counted (where Buerkle crushed on election day), judge ordered Wayne Co. to continue recanvass and count on Sat.

22, Male, Conservative Republican, anti-teabag, NY-8
A return engagement for Bobby Bright wouldn't do any good
That district is going to be made even more Republican than it is now by packing the Black voters in Montgomery into the 7th district and he can't win without those votes.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
They can't pack black voters anymore
just to create heavier AA representation (I think Georgia v. Ashcroft took care of that). Indeed, doing so would imply you are making it less likely for a black pol to win in a white plurality district.

But in the end, it really depends on how aggressive Holder's DOJ is in helping make sure black majority districts don't become islands a Southern sea of white districts. Though, seeing how weak this administration is in everything, I won't be surpised if they cower like the passive cowards they are.  

Indepedent/Lean D. Dude.
All 5s (now TX-5; frmly VA-5 and CA-5)  

[ Parent ]
i think they'll cower
Obama would just get painted as favoring black people more than white by having an aggressive DOJ.
[ Parent ]
Bobby Bright is a weapon
Actually, I think a lot of Montgomery's black population is in AL-03, isn't it? The problem for Republicans is that there are 3 heavily-black areas in Alabama: urban Birmingham, urban Montgomery and the mostly-rural Black Belt. You can really only fit two of those three into a majority-black district (the 7th), population-wise. You could split one, but that could draw a VRA challenge.

The threat of Bobby Bright is the best thing going for AL Democrats because in next-door AL-03 is weak sauce Republican Mike Rogers, who barely survived a challenge from [admittedly well-funded] Some Dude Josh Segall in 2008. Martha Roby, a freshman, will be weak in 2012, too. Both districts share Montgomery, Bright's base where he was a popular mayor, so he could theoretically run fairly well in either one.

The geography makes it tough: the heavily Republican districts that could absorb Democrats are to the north and west of AL-03, but that's also where the most heavily Republican areas of AL-03 are. So that can't help much. AL-01's Bonner could give up some Republican areas to help Roby, but that would shift his district into the Black Belt, and AL-01 is already significantly more D-leaning than AL-02. Bonner is popular enough to handle it, but in an open seat, a Democrat has a shot if the PVI needle moves any more to the left. So they could up dummymandering themselves in any number of ways.

The bottom line is that it's hard to draw safe Republican seats when you have a Democrat who can win a R+16 district.

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

[ Parent ]
I like that way of looking at it
"Bobby Bright is a weapon".

Oh yeah.

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

[ Parent ]
2012 will likely not be a good election
for Democrats, especially Southern conservatives, downticket.   No use worrying about what doesn't have a real chance of happening, i.e. Bright even coming close if he does run in '12.
[ Parent ]
Um...
Bobby Bright and Gene Taylor lost by 2 to 3% this year.

If Taylor had started campaigning earlier, he would have won. He "literally" slept through October. Bright? If black turnout had been only several percent higher, he would have eeked out a narrow victory. Both are capable of winning their districts again. I don't think Bright tries again though.

And there are very few Congressmen who are Southern White Conservative Democrats left. I guess the State Legislature...

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

[ Parent ]
Bright just win the low black tournout

I think this come from his comments about Obama.

I think no-one of them will win again.

If the conservadems "hate" Obama, the blacks will not support someone what "hate" Obama.

[ Parent ]
Who is that "someone"?
There is not (realistically) anyone, but conservadems and Republicans there. Do you think that Republican candidate there will "love Obama" more?
[ Parent ]
I mean

a candidate what critizice Obama openly.

Maybe Bobby Bright or other like him.

Sure the republican will be worse, but if the two candidates are enough bad, you can see like some black people get in home and vote not.

Do you have the opposite case in AR-02 this year.

[ Parent ]
That's true
But in AR-02  people had choice, and the very clear one. And they made their choice very clear too. In districts like AL-02 "progressives" like Elliott have no chance from very beginning, so the choice you have there is, usually, between rather conservative (and frequently critical of party leadership and President, but - sometimes still supportive) Democrat and absolutely "uncooperating" Republican. It's much more subtle then in AR-02, but, nevertheless, no less clear. For blacks - too.
[ Parent ]
yeah but Bright won under the perfect storm of 08
I really doubt he'll be able to win again unless it's another giant wave year for the Dems.
[ Parent ]
VA-Sen
PPP has Jim Webb leading George Allen 49-45.  In a matchup between Tim Kaine and Allen, Kaine leads 50-44
Webb needs to use this as reason to run again.


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I like those numbers
I would like to see Webb stay in the senate. Kaine can make a bid for his old job in 2013 if he would like.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
Wow maybe Webb isn't as DOA as thought
Registered voters though (which makes sense two years out). I wonder how well he would do with the 2010 electorate
[ Parent ]
Probably get crushed
Fortunately, presidential years have vastly higher turnout, and Obama has one of the best GOTV operations ever.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
"One of the"?
What presidential candidate has ever had a better machine than Obama?

Some Dude, 19, Democrat, NH-02 (residence), MA-08 (college)
[ Parent ]
Nixon? (72' of course)
possibly Reagan, LBJ, FDR. Really Obama was on par with them but  he didn't build a lasting coalition like FDR or Reagan
[ Parent ]
I think it's too early
to say that Obama's coalition was not as lasting as FDR's or Reagan's. Only time will tell if it will last as long. But one electoral defeat does not mean that his coalition fell apart and won't last.

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
True
but Obama doesn't have some earth shattering event to ride a coalition on. FDR had World War 2 and the New Deal to build a decades long coalition, Reagan had the south abandoning Democrats in droves over the civil rights act and the Vietnam war. Obama, well nothing right now.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
In 1982,
most people would not have expected Reagan to hang on through the next election, let alone form a lasting coalition. I don't mean to suggest that Obama is creating a formidable coalition now, just that it's too early to know for sure.
[ Parent ]
The recession of 08-09?
Plus HCR, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the huge size of the nat'l debt? those seem like pretty significant events to me. And if he passes a meaningful immigration reform bill he can probably tie hispanic voters into the democratic coalition for the next few decades (this was not always a certain thing; bush got 40% of the hispanic vote in '04). And as the % of the population that is hispanic continues to grow, that will become more and more important, possibly shifting Texas and Arizona to purple or even blue states in the next decade, together accounting for almost as many electoral votes as Florida and Ohio combined. IMO he still has enough opportunities to create a lasting coalition, but only time will tell, as my last post said. A lot of these "earth shattering events", especially the debt and Afghanistan, could go for him or against him.

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
Comparing those times to today
is a joke.  They did not have the 24-hour news media, a buitn elect-a-conservative news network, the Internet and bloggers...I could go on but you get the picture.

Americans now have ADHD and expect instant gratification.

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
Who said he was DOA?
I think everybody agrees Webb is vulnerable but that is something very different. I think more people are concerned he may retire. And I think these latest PPP polls are their hybrid model which is closer to LV than RV.
[ Parent ]
I did.
I think this is too optimistic for Webb and I still think he will pass on reelection, but I'd be glad if a Dem holds the seat and Webb is not anywhere as bad as those fake blue dog moles.  

Indepedent/Lean D. Dude.
All 5s (now TX-5; frmly VA-5 and CA-5)  
[ Parent ]
DOA suggests Blance Lincoln/Rick Santorum
Even if this is too favorable it is a tie at worst. But yeah he may well retire.
[ Parent ]
Maybe not
The 2012 turnout will probably very similarly resemble RV's, with OFA and a functioning RNC. The biggest potential difference is a change in independents, once campaigns begin.  
[ Parent ]
Functioning?
Isn't the RNC over 15 million in debt?  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Yeah, but if they lose Steele, it won't matter
They can easily make that up, and if they get somebody competent to head it up, they could be a force to be reckoned with again.  
[ Parent ]
It should be
Functioning in 2012, with Steele likely gone.  
[ Parent ]
15 million isn't that much for a party committee to make up
The RNC raised $170 mil in the 2010 cycle, and that was with Steele's inept fundraising leadership. In 2006, the last midterm before steele, they raised $246 mil. And that number gets even higher in presidential years.

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
I think Connie Mack's running for a position in House leadership
Albeit the lowest notch on the totem pole (policy chair or something like that). If he wins that, would it be fair to assume his interest in a Senate bid would go down?

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
He dropped out today
Right before the vote. He must have known he was going to lose.

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

[ Parent ]
Yuck
Tom Price is policy chair for the GOP then. Not sure how much influence he actually has on policy formulations, but I sure as hell wouldn't want him determining the content of legislation.

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
[ Parent ]
What's the deal with Price?
I don't know him well at all.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Just your garden variety far right Georgia Republican
I swear, with Tom Price, Phil Gingery, Paul Broun, and Lynn Westmoreland, they've managed to put together a pretty solid group of nuts.

Tom Price is chairman of the Republican Study Committee and just another far right religious whacko. You might remember him from Mike Stark's video when he literally sprinted away after being asked about his take on Obama's citizenship.

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)

[ Parent ]
CA-AG: So, the SOS updated its numbers again
and it looked like the following counties have FULLY reported all of their unprocessed ballots today:

Alameda (went for Harris 67-25)

Tuolumne (went for Cooley 58-31)

Yuba (Went for Cooley 58-30)

Still have about 671,594 unprocessed

Top 3 counties with unprocessed ballots (according to SOS unprocessed ballot PDF, which I have heard lags sometimes) are:

Los Angeles (went for Harris 53-40): 93,590

San Deigo (went for Cooley 53-39): 71,970 (unchanged from Saturday according to SOS and SD Registrar of voters.  ROV site says they will update results today at 5 PM PST)

Orange: (went for Cooley 60-31) 54,316 (also unchanged since saturday, looks like they will also update at 5 PM PST according to ROV site)

Harris, according to the SOS, is ahead of Cooley by 30,646 votes.

I personally think its over for Cooley, he probably sees the writing on the wall, and may conceed as early as Friday

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

San Diego only has 35,000 ballots left.
So says their Register of voters.

And Harris actually won the last batch of votes (15,000, counted yesterday).

I also suspect Orange has more than the SoS website says.

Twitter.com/Taniel

[ Parent ]
I think I am going to stop relying on the SOS unprocessed count
Why does that lag so much?

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)
[ Parent ]
SOS
relies on counties self reporting.  I looked at the site, and the last date of each county reporting was noted.  Some of the dates were a week in the past

Joe Cooper
[ Parent ]
NC-Gov
If Pat McCrory doesn't run, who would run for the Reps? Same for Dems if Perdue retires?  
Iowa House and Senate
I am still disappointed we lost so many state legislative seats. I listed the Democrats from the last legislature and the next one here, grouped by Congressional district. We lost a lot of seats that are in Braley's, Loebsack's and Boswell's districts. I know it was a bad year for Democrats in lots of states' legislative races, but I still feel like we should have been able to save more of those incumbents.
61
Today, Republican's officially picked up their 61st seat with Bean conceding, was John Boehnor's 61st birthday, and he became the 61st Speaker of the House.  
HA. What an interesting coincidence. n/t


Indepedent/Lean D. Dude.
All 5s (now TX-5; frmly VA-5 and CA-5)  
[ Parent ]
Wait, except he isn't Speaker yet
but 2 out of 3 is not bad.  

Indepedent/Lean D. Dude.
All 5s (now TX-5; frmly VA-5 and CA-5)  
[ Parent ]
But he was
Officially elected Speaker today.
[ Parent ]
Congrats.
I'm still feeling down about Dina losing, but you won. So enjoy your win.

And hey, I may be happy with Boehner myself, at least for a moment on something/anything, if he gives Dean Heller plenty of power and keeps him in The House all for himself. ;-)

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
Winning isn't that great
Because then you have to worry about us fucking up. Atleast if ya'll were in total control and things got worse, we could blame it on ya'll and use it to our advantage. Now, we share the blame.  
[ Parent ]
Or the accolades...
If the economy improves. That's what happened in 1996. President Clinton won reelection... And while Dems took back a few seats in Congress, Republicans kept control of both houses.

While I suspect a big Obama comeback will do immense good in helping Dems keep The Senate and perhaps win back many House seats in 2012, at this point I honestly think retaking control of The House will be a real uphill battle. Especially if the economy rebounds in the next couple years, both sides will be jockeying to take full credit.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

[ Parent ]
Actually, that's a bit inaccurate
Democrats picked up a bunch of seats in 1996, it's just that the Republicans were able to mitigate it by picking up several seats of their own (largely in southern or Republican-leaning areas).

I don't think the Republicans were able to take the credit, it just happened that the Republicans were able to mitigate what should have been enough for us to take back the House.

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 ]
User DGM is right
Furthermore, in '96, while Ds actually won the overall popular vote, if Wikipedia is to be believed. It just wasn't enough to overcome the 40 seat margin Rs had in '94.

I'm guessing that Ds will have to have a 2-6% margin in the overall House popular vote to retake the House in '12, depending on what will happen in redistricting, incumbency effects, etc.  

[ Parent ]
I agree...
I think that the newly elected Republicans are awful enough that we'll easily get back up to 210 in 2012, but getting to 218 is a bit harder unless Obama wins by a nice margin.
[ Parent ]
you guys just did exactly that for 2010
Time to start governing with us now!  Should be a real shit show with tea-baggers wanting the GOP to halt the government and politicians wanting to do their job and make government run.
[ Parent ]
Boner
was officially elected to be the GOPs nominee for Speaker, in early January 2011

Joe Cooper
[ Parent ]
And
1954 was the last time the Giants won the World Series, and the last time someone was elected to the US Senate as a write-in until 2010.
[ Parent ]
heh
And like the Giants, the 1954 write-in winner was on the east coast and the 2010 winner on the west coast.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
Oh
boy that Giants parade the day after the election was a great way to get my mind off what happened the previous night. Though on the train ride into SF I saw plenty of copies of the Chronicle with "BROWN IN, PELOSI OUT" in big bolded letters on the front page. But yes talk about irony.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
And it's probably going to take me
61 bottles of bourbon to deal with all the stuff the upcoming Congress is going to do :)
[ Parent ]
61
Transpose it and you get the exact number of net gains for Democrats in the House come 2012. Spooky.
[ Parent ]
I think the number to be transposed
will be the final House gain for Republicans this year. :)
[ Parent ]
I can revise my bourbon intake upward as necessary!!

[ Parent ]
It's not "Congress," it's just the House, and anything they do that's crazy will die there......
They have leverage on tax cuts because Obama and Senate Dems will feel pressure to pass some kind of tax cut extension, and we might end up with all cuts extended for a couple years.

And spending bills will have to get done, so there will compromises there, but the House won't get what they really want and will find themselves pissing off their own teabagger base.  I suspect Boehner and Cantor will not go the shutdown route, they know that's dynamite blowing off their own heads if they do that.

Beyond that, nothing else will get done.  Not immigration, not global warming (my pet peeve, it's not "climate change," it's man-made global warming), not anything to shrink government like the House wants.

It's a big deal that Republicans have only the House.  That's a lot more limiting that post-election media coverage has acknowledged.

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

[ Parent ]
Yawn
I'm more interested in who will be the 61st President.
[ Parent ]
Something just occurred to me
We know that Jim DeMint spent all of 2010 endorsing Tea Party candidates, and the assumption has been that he's angling to become Republican Leader when McConnell's done. But has anyone considered the possibility that he might want to run for President in 2012? He's certainly young enough and has a national profile, plus he's in South Carolina (one of the first primary states). I don't know if he's made any indication at all that he's looking to go national, but neither has Thune or Daniels, from what I gather, and there's speculation surrounding both of them. Do we have any public statements or anything from him that completely rules out any sort of thoughts of a presidential bid, or is this just based on Beltway knowledge of the situation?

Some Dude, 19, Democrat, NH-02 (residence), MA-08 (college)
He already said a definite no
Several times.
[ Parent ]
DeMint won't do it himself...
But without a doubt, he's in a prime position to be the GOP's king/queen maker in 2012. Indeed he is from South Carolina, one of the early caucus states, so the candidates will have to kiss his ring and curry his favor. I suspect Palin and Gingrich are probably in the best position to win him over at this point, as they're "tea party true believers" on the same page as he.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)
[ Parent ]
He
endorsed Romney in 2008 but his endorsement didn't mean squat since Romney bypassed South Carolina and headed to Nevada after getting thoroughly spanked in New Hampshire by McCain. But yes, his opinion is going to weigh heavily on the primary electorate down there this time. (No one is going to seek Lindsey Graham's endorsement though...)

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
If Rubio runs, DeMint will back him
I doubt it'll be in 2012, but DeMint already said something to the effect of "in two years, nobody will remember who Jim DeMint is, and Marco Rubio will be President."
[ Parent ]
Love the optimism
on Rubio when he has not taken one vote or even been sworn into the Senate. Silly Republicans think that one Latino captures them the "Latino" vote.    

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...
[ Parent ]
My pessimism regarding Sen.-elect Rubio...
I do think he'll be president someday, provided he follows his mentor's lead (Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, co-dean of the Florida congressional delegation) on LGBT issues, which are going to be a real loser for the Republican Party by 2016 or 2020. I don't see him realistically making a go of it in 2012, because the presidential campaign will literally be underway by the time he's sworn in as a U.S. senator.

I get the same feeling watching Sen.-elect Rubio that I got watching an Illinois state senator named Barack Obama in 2004. He's good, he's clever, and he's something new, and enough members of his party are smart enough to recognize that.

I'm not the only liberal I know who thinks so, either.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
He scares the hell out of me...
I can only hope that the GOP voters are too racist to nominate him for president.

If he does run in 2016, we do have a bit of an ace up our sleeve, too.  We can run a female candidate.  That will certainly upset the apple cart a bit, won't it?

[ Parent ]
I've got a sneaking suspicion the Democrats
will place a woman on the ticket in 2012, and not just if things look questionable. After all, why not try to set up nicely for 2012?

I'm sure I will mention this prediction a lot, mostly because I am curious to see how far off in the gamma quadrant I am, but the scenario I envision is Democrats wanting to strengthen/expand their position with women, specifically white women, so they place a young woman from a swing state on the ticket. Who is this person? Gabrielle Giffords. She is reasonably attractive, her husband is active military and also an astronaut, she's a Blue Dog who nevertheless supported the president's agenda, and she could probably put Arizona into play, if not lock it up. I could see a situation where the Democrats have her do nothing but talk about eduction, the environment, and veteran's affairs up until election day, focusing on women-friendly venues like "The View" (I don't mean that as a joke; not that many people watch it, but I am sure it's mostly women who do, and it's probably a pretty easy way to reach a certain type of female candidate). And if she's as terrific as everyone says she is, she could rekindle the sort of starry-eyed romance that people had with Obama in 2008.

I also envision a scenario where her selection is essentially kept a secret until the convention. It goes something like this: after Biden shocks the world by announcing on Tuesday night that he's not running, he tells us that the new name will be revealed Thursday night, if only to create a frenzy and absolutely dominate the coverage up until the moment her selection is announced. There are probably several logistical and legal reasons why this wouldn't happen, but man, if he did, it'd be some sweet political theater.

Of course, if she challenges Kyl for the Senate in 2012, then this isn't going to happen. But if she doesn't...

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
The 2012 ticket will be Obama-Biden, that is settled
The only way that changes is due to incapacitation or death of either one.

All this game-playing that's fun here, playing with candidates as if they're chess pieces, is not how real life works.  In real life the ticket stays the same because that's what the President wants.  The VP choice is based on governance, not electoral gamesmanship.  And Obama is not going to trade out someone who is a great asset to the Administration, as Biden is.

And even electorally, there's no benefit to trading out Biden for anyone else.  The VP pick as a factor is way overstated in voting behavior.

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

[ Parent ]
uhhh, the VP is almost 100% for gamesmanship
Biden wasn't picked because he'd be a good president if need be, he was picked to make Obama look wise by picking the seasoned political veteran with foreign affairs cred.
[ Parent ]
uhhh, no it isn't and wasn't. Yes Biden was picked for his resume, because...
...he'd be a capable number 2 and complement Obama.  No it wasn't not about his ability to take over the top job, but it was about what Biden would add to an Obama Presidency.  No doubt his electoral effect, too, was a major factor, and it was determined he'd be an asset, but it was well-reported after the pick that Obama was looking primarily for a capable number 2.

And that's why the VP pick usually is made, to add something to the Administration if a ticket wins.  Quayle was an exception, and there were others, but usually the VP pick is a seasoned pol with little independent electoral pull.

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

[ Parent ]
How is it settled?
That is what the administration is saying now, but I don't doubt that the political office of the White House has thought up situations where they'd need to replace Biden. And it's not as if any formal paperwork has been filed, is it?

I think the vice presidential pick can make a difference, but only on the margins. Parties have to have an "in" with a certain group or state already to produce noticeably swings in any demographic. I wouldn't expect adding a black conservative to the ticket to really help Republicans with most black voters, for instance. The only people it would help with would be conservatives, in that it might conceivably get them even more excited. But the Democrats already have one such advantage with women, so I could see adding a woman to the ticket helping, and since Arizona looks to be trending blue, however slowly, maybe someone like Giffords could push it over the edge.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
And what's your basis for assuming they've thought up alternative scenarios?......
It sounds like you're just presuming that.

But it's actually untrue.

When Bob Woodward recently claimed the Administration was contemplating having Biden and Hillary trade places, he later had to backpeddle and admit he learned that from an old Hillary advisor, it might have been Mark Penn, and not from anyone in the Administration!  It was very embarrassing for Woodward.  But one tidbit of reporting that came out of that was Marc Ambinder reporting that the Administration never considered anything but Obama-Biden for 2012.

Again this kind of stuff is fun speculation for political junkies and the political media, but no Presidents don't think about switching VPs for questionable electoral gain.  And there's zero evidence Obama has considered any such thing...and there's actual reporting that he has not considered any such thing.

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

[ Parent ]
Rubio
The natural Presidential 8 year turnover gives him a good chance in 2016.

He really shouldn't run in 2012, as much as I dislike it, the odds of beating Obama are quite a bit less than 50:50.

[ Parent ]
Ah yeah, that natural presidential 8 year turnover
like the one in 1988.

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 ]
That's pretty much the only exception, isn't it?
Take a look at the rest of the post WWII Presidents.
[ Parent ]
"post-WWII" is too long for a trendline
after all, we did just have an election in which Missouri (bellwether since 1956) chose the wrong candidate, while Virginia and Indiana went blue for the first time since 1964. Politics is not what it used to be.

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 ]
yes and no
You are taking the statement too literally.

All I am saying is that eventually the White House switches hands. For several reasons, 2012 is unlikely to be one of those years.

[ Parent ]
yes, eventually the White House switches hands
but there is no timer on it.

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 ]
You forget
that nobody knows who Rubio is because he hasn't been introduced on the national stage yet. He hasn't had a moment like Obama had where he gave his inspirational speech at the 2004 convention, which likely cemented a positive first impression of Obama for a lot of people. That's certainly not the end of the world, not by any stretch, but he's going into the Senate without that, unlike Obama, but like Obama, having to make tough votes. Let's see how well he holds up during this earmark spat.

I don't know much about him, but I'm willing to grant that he's probably a talented politician. Yet, before we anoint him president, why not see what he does? I'm curious to see if he does anything other than offer tax cuts and regulation changes as an answer to, well, everything concerning jobs. His issues page leads me to believe he'll be like every other Republican in that regard, considering you could probably take what he said and slap some other person's name on it and barely be able to tell the difference.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
This is what I am saying...
basically you cannot anoint him president. He has a tricky path in the senate to get his very right leaning party to like him and to also appeal to others.  His party does not support:

gay marriage or civil unions, ending DADT, abortion rights, immigration reform (remember he changed his position several times on the AZ law), the Dream Act, etc.  These are some tough votes for a person to take and then try to position himself as a moderate in a general.

Don't let the Tea Party fool you; they still care about social issues.  It had nothing to do with the deficit or they would have carpet bombed Bush.  Now the party is so conservative, they do not have the internal battles about them any longer.

I remember this discussion in other quarters about another young Republican "superstar" named Bobby Jindal.  Now, who really thinks of him that way now?  I think that you have a short window to be in any national office before you become "old" news(that is if you are trading on your newness as a factor).  

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
Presidential elections aren't won on issues
They're won on personalities. It's sad, but it's true. Obama won because he was inspiring and could present himself as all things to all people. Bush won because he was someone Middle America could relate to and see themselves having a beer with. Clinton's flaws made him human, and he seemed more "with it" than Perot or Bush. Bush I won because he was distinctly NOT Dukakis. Reagan won because he was the Great Communicator.

Rubio has the personality. He has the charisma (unlike Jindal), he has one of the best family narratives I've ever heard. He knocked off a sitting, extremely popular governor in the primary and then the general after starting 30+ points down. He cultivated a national fundraising base among excited conservatives and independents, and he is going to be relentlessly promoted by the GOP as the face of the New Republican Party. Anyone who says he doesn't have or won't have the national exposure Obama had (what voters) really watches the Democratic National Convention, anyway?) are mistaken.

Rubio doesn't mean that everything is going to change immediately, but Democrats underestimate him at their own peril. Take it from a Republican who did so about Obama (some guy who'd been in the Senate two years when he decided to run).

[ Parent ]
Personality helps,
but I don't think it can override the fundamentals. If it looks like the Republicans have a good shot to win in any given year, Rubio's personality and background might help him, but they aren't magic.

Also, why is it such a shock that he beat Crist by running to his right in a Republican primary?

As far his exposure, he doesn't have it on a national level yet. I'd be willing to bet that a majority of the country has no idea who he is, or if they do, they don't know much about him. There's simply no denying that he hasn't had the sort of exposure that Obama had after his 2004 speech. And no, not that many people watch those things--supposedly, about nine million people saw Obama speak. But it was watched by enough people that he started become talked about him a way that made him a rising presence in national politics.

Again, I'm not saying that he will never have what Obama had, but he doesn't have it now. He hasn't given anything remotely similar to what Obama gave as a speech in anything resembling a similar platform. And now he's going into the Senate without having made the initial great first impression that Obama made to a national audience. It's not really a strike against him, but it's a weaker position than Obama was in at the time.

I'm not saying we should under estimate him. If he's half as good as people say he is, he should be watched like a hawk. I'm sure the Republicans kept an eye on Obama; I hope the Democrats do the same to Rubio. I'm simply stating that rather than cower in fear and assume that he's going to rise no matter what, we should watch him closely and be prepared to knock him down if necessary.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
If Rubio was as inspiring as you think he is
He would have won a majority of the vote in Florida. He didn't. You can make excuses for that all you want, but the fact of the matter is that he has yet to show the same ability to have a widespread appeal in the same way Obama did very early in his career. You think you guys can just put a charismatic minority up and all of a sudden he becomes a superstar. That's not actually how it works.

Also, this:

//He knocked off a sitting, extremely popular governor in the primary and then the general after starting 30+ points down. He cultivated a national fundraising base among excited conservatives and independents, and he is going to be relentlessly promoted by the GOP as the face of the New Republican Party. //

With a few moderations, can be used to describe a lot of Tea Party candidates.  

Some Dude, 19, Democrat, NH-02 (residence), MA-08 (college)

[ Parent ]
I do not believe
that Dems should underestimate any nominee.  Also, I don't get why the Dems putting forth and getting elected a minority has the Republicans running around setting their hair on fire trying to find their own conservative "Obama."  Today, I heard the Republican Gov's assoc talking about how they must become diverse and showcasing their minority ranks.  

Here is where I rant and feel free to skip this part:
Yet, they still will not fundamentally change the position of the party that minorities must totally agree with their world view and must assimilate so that we do not keep the part of our culture that makes us diverse and unique.  I think that it is cool that I get to learn about Diwali from my Indian friend. Why can't Bobby Jindal and Gov Haley use their real names?  Why did they change religions? they are still Americans.  That is why AAs make fun of black conservatives; it is like they have sold their souls.

We cannot call ourselves AA or Indian American etc.  Why not? In Europe, I say that I am American because the black part is evident.

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
I find this amusing
when it seems to me-and I grew up in Louisiana so maybe I am off-but Republicans at their core really do not believe in diversity.

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...
[ Parent ]
Costa's lead up to 2422
McIntosh is definitely running in IN-06
He's been waiting for Pence to move on for a while. I would be surprised if he lost the primary.
Has Pence made anything official yet?
I know he stepped down from leadership, but did he ever declare his 2012 intentions? I wonder if there's a chance he forgoes a run for President or governor and just runs for the House seat again.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08
[ Parent ]
Pence might
as well run for GOP presidential nominee in 2012 b/c every other Republican is running as well.  

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...
[ Parent ]
I doubt it
He wants to be President. Mike Pence is a smart man. He knows he would have a much better chance in 2016 or 2020 as Gov. Pence.  
[ Parent ]
I think he has not chance without this

[ Parent ]
Interesting stat
2010 was the 4th consecutive election for Senate Class 3 that Democrats failed to end-up with a net gain.

Our classes are indeed quite uneven
And they're up again at the Presidential election after next. . .

[ Parent ]
Well, at least we can look forward to six years from now
I find it very difficult to imagine us losing seats the next time around. God willing, it'll be an avalanche of epic proportions.

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
[ Parent ]
Hopefully
to make up for losses we will no doubt face in 2012 and 2014.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Yeah...
Honestly speaking, I think it's more likely than not that the Senate will flip sometime during the next two cycles. Hopefully we'll end up with a repetition of the Clinton years where he did well in '96 and '98 after getting whipped in '94. But if we make through 2014 with our majority in tact, we could very well go for a filibuster proof majority in in 2016, circumstances permitting.  

19, male, Dem, CT-04 (home) PA-02 (college and registered)
[ Parent ]
I think we can hold the majority in 2012
if we plays things right; Nelson's probably gone, there are a couple of others in play, conversely Massachusetts and Nevada are prime targets (and Maine, if Snowe gets teabagged).

2014, though, uphill (though we're helped that quite a few of the noobs from 2008 are in blue states).

[ Parent ]
Never undestimate
the Democrats' ability to fuck things up, but I'd much rather have the 2014 Senate races to work with than the 2012 Senate Races. Aside from Begich, Pryor, Bauchus, Landreiu, and Johnson, who strikes you as particularly vulnerable? Franken? I could see that, but why are Hagan, Udall, and the other Udall any worse off than, say, Tester or McCaskill?

The thing that bothers me about 2014 is the potentially lack of competitive seats. Aside from McConnell, Chambliss, Collins, Cornyn, and Graham, who is even remotely vulnerable? I'd be surprised if any of the ones I just mentioned are vulnerable to begin with.

This is yet another reason why, as hard as it might be, I want the Democrats to mount strong campaigns in Tennessee  Texas, Arizona, and probably even Mississippi in 2012. As unlikely as are chances may be, they look to be somewhat better than those in 2014.
 

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Last para
Absolutely. I'd like to see a diary or something on who might be recruited in those states. Unlikely wins yes but try they must. Especially since a couple incumbents could concievably go down in primaries.
[ Parent ]
Local news: John "Boner" elected speaker
I love hearing people try to pronounce his name and saying it boner.  
Correction:
He is Speaker Designate at this point. He won't be formally elected Speaker until January.  
[ Parent ]
Right.
Bob Livingston knows the difference.
[ Parent ]
Did anyone notice Mark Warner's approval ratings?
27% of McCain supporters, 19% of conservatives, a 74% approval rating among moderates, wow... 54/32 overall

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26
He did win all but 4 counties
[ Parent ]
Virginia
really did well during Warner's tenure as governor. Especially since he was handed a mess after Gilmore's tenure and 9/11. They would of reelected him governor in a landslide if they could in 2005.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Right now...
I see a matchup between Sen. Warner and Sen.-elect Rubio as fairly likely in 2016. In fact, I've got a better idea of who has an inside track to the presidential general election in 2016 than who is likely to be the Republican nominee in 2012.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native
[ Parent ]
To be perfectly honest with you
I think Hillary is going to run in 2016.
[ Parent ]
I think it's obvious
that is were it is heading. She has repaired her image to a great extent. That seems to be the next logical step.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
That would be a good one, really...
It would help bring seniors back into the fold.  Senior women love her and would fight for her.  She'd get a big boost in the midterms if elected.
[ Parent ]
In my view
she may be the only person standing between us and an Alito clone in Anthony Kennedy's seat.  
[ Parent ]
She'll Be 69
I realize there's the Reagan model, that seems rather late to begin a career as president.
[ Parent ]
If she is in good health
then I don't see the problem. John McCain had a history of health problems. It may not be fair, but it didn't help his age perception. Plus the fact he had Palin.  

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
Given comparative life expectancies
That's equivalent to 63 in white male years....
[ Parent ]
I think age is becoming a little less of an issue
People are living longer and healthier than they were in 1980, when a 69-year old was elected President. She'd be 3 years younger than McCain was when he ran, and although his age didn't help him, it didn't cost him the race. If Clinton is healthy and coming off two successful terms as SoS, or one term as SoS and four years of actively touring the country for speaking engagements, her age won't be an issue in the 2016 primaries.

It may, however, hurt her if Rubio or someone else in their 40's is the Republican nominee (similar to Obama-McCain.) That would actually set up a really interesting battle for voters under 50. The 30-45 set has been generally R-leaning and would probably favor Rubio. However, the "millenials" who keyed Obama's win would be inching into that category by 2016, and it will be interesting to see if they remain part of the Democratic coalition or redden with age. Finally, there's the 18-29 demographic, which has been reliably Democratic recently, but may be gettable for Rubio in a 2016 matchup vs. Clinton: a Republican who could be their father against a Democrat who could be their grandmother and was in the White House when some of them were born.

Yeah, Hillary/Rubio would be lots of fun. Talk about a clash of the titans. This is the stuff we daydream about in the post-election season.

20, CD MA-03/NH-01/MA-08

[ Parent ]
Hold on there...
Rubio's not a titan yet! I realize Republicans have high hopes for him, but let's let him earn his keep first. ;-)
[ Parent ]
IF Senator Warner keeps insisting on....
...gutitng social security, he'll be lucky to win the Virginia primary.

Even if he stops being Evan Bayh's concern troll replacement, I don't think he has much national appeal.  Much like Bayh, the locals love him, but the rest of the country says, "Meh."

Not impressed with Warner at all... He's dull, goofy looking, and now is lecturing the Democratic base on how they should be more Republican.  That's not a recipe for success.

I know Virginians love him.  I don't know why.  He is not an appealing national candidate.

[ Parent ]
30 years ago
he would have been a Rockefeller Republican. That's fine, but I don't think he makes a good standard bearer for the Democratic party.  
[ Parent ]
30 years ago
Warner was on Chris Dodd's staff.
[ Parent ]
"Evan Bayh's concern troll replacement"
I laughed. And maybe got a little scared.  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Gutting Social Security?
I don't think Warner has called for gutting Social Security, we need to stop using that card to try to win elections.    Warner is a reformer, a game changer.  We need to be the party of the reform.  Let the the other bastards be the party of abolishing programs.

We can't keep going back to the same playbook and frankly the same lies.  

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

23, Democrat, IA-2

[ Parent ]
Lies?
He's talking about cutting benefits.  So is Obama.

WE'RE becoming the party of abolishing programs.  That's not a good mix at all...

[ Parent ]
It's not
entirely clear how much of a fix the program will actually need. Small changes in immigration numbers can mean big things for Social Security. Dean Baker said that if the Census projections are accurate, about 30 percent of the projected shortfall goes away. But regardless, the current assumptions project a small rise and then a leveling out of the costs.

Anyway, the fixes to Social Security will include some combination of tax increases, benefit cuts, and changes to the retirement age. That's it. There's virtually nothing else involved. It's quite a contrast from health care, where there's really no easy answer and differing schools of thought on exactly what the problems are.

I'm not sure what specific people, like Warner, are proposing, but if I am not mistaken, Bowles and Simpson's deficit commission recommended raising the retirement age by one year at least four or five decades down the line. That's hardly the end of the world.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Their age recomendations weren't the problem..
They would reduce the COLA index severely and cut benefits for all but the poorest recipients, thereby making it into a welfare program.  You know what typically happens to welfare programs... they don't last long.  The reason why SS has lasted so long is that when everyone pays in, everyone gets a pay out.  Simpson and Bowles would make Social Security into Medicaid/Welfare and that would essentially end the country's love affair with the program.  It would eventually disappear as so few people would be eligible for benefits.

It is truly a roadmap for the elimination of the program.

Anyways, new NBC poll out saying that 70% of Americans don't want social security messed with.  I have a hard time believing that they would be forgiving to Democrats after the health care debacle.  It's electoral suicide for Dems to lead on this debate.  The GOP wants to cut, let them try and the Dems can be the saviors of the programs.  That's how Clinton won re-election.  Follow the same path.  Don't get sucked in.  People don't want this.

[ Parent ]
I wasn't defending
Simpson and Bowles. I merely mentioned their commission because it was the only recent and prominent example of changing the retirement age that I knew of.

Anyway, without getting into a discussion of Social Security, I think it is safe to say that I am on your side. That might not be obvious from what I said above, but trust me, I am a pretty big believer in the program.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
I think we are all on the same side...
Even Moderate IA Dem... :-)

Electorally, speaking, it's pretty dangerous to mess with this stuff during an economic downturn and after a major health care reform package was just passed.  NBC news just came out with a poll that had pretty much 3/4s of the population hating almost every aspect of the deficit commission proposal.

Who would vote for any of that after getting shellacked a few weeks ago?  Seriously!  Why would any Dem be promoting any of that right now...  bad timing to say the least.  

[ Parent ]
I'm not
one to recommend following the advice of Michael Moore, but in an almost offhand way on the season finale of Bill Maher's show, he said we should be having a jobs commission instead of a deficit commission. On that one, I think he's right.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Respectfully disagree
Listen, I don't think Democrats are serious about SS reform and I do think we will need to cut benefits for future retirees unless we cut the defense budget.  The program is only solvent for another thirty six years.  Mark Warner is an honest, anti-class warfare Democrat and that bothers some people, but to imply he wants to gut Social Security, that's not true in my view.

We keep using the same scare tactics about SS when we know they don't have the votes to do anything dangerous with it, we need real ideas instead of running back to the same bullshit.

Obama has cut next to nothing in the overall budget so to say we are abolishing programs, that's untrue.  Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson put together some interesting proposals that both the left and right hate which they means they might be on to something.

If you want to continue this policy discussion we can trade e-mails or something, but I never understood the criticism of Bayh, Warner, etc. unless you are talking trade issues.  
If you want to
 

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

23, Democrat, IA-2

[ Parent ]
I didn't have an issue with Warner until last week...
He's treading into dangerous waters, though.  

As for not having the votes to do anything dangerous, do not count on that.  Social security has very few friends on the hill.  Folks from both sides have wanted to gut it for decades.  Everyone seems very determined to do so.  I would not assume that nothing will be done.  Social Security is a prime target and is in significant danger the next few years.

I'm not sure what the right's issue with the Simpson report would be.  The rich get a massive tax cut as part of the deal and pretty much all domestic spending is gutted.  Not particularly progressive at all.  They should be jumping up and down at the proposal. Given their muted criticism, they seem to approve.

[ Parent ]
As a Democrat...
I don't understand this extremely violent reaction against raising the retirement age two years.  We have to start being fiscally disciplined, because the implications of the national debt are scary.  It's foolish to pretend it will go away.  I understand that Medicare is much more fiscally disastrous than Social Security, but we have to make cuts somewhere.  

And honestly, it's rather foolish to rely solely on Social Security for retirement.  If you aren't saving up throughout your working career and planning for retirement, things are going to be really sticky.  It's really difficult to live solely off of Social Security.  Moreover, they have said that people who would be severely impacted by this (the people who are in strenuous jobs who can't work extra time) would be exempted.

[ Parent ]
Social Security still makes up the bulk...
...of retirement income for most americans, even those with fat 401K's and nice pensions.  The old fashioned pensions are gone for younger workers, and 401K's will never really provide you with enough income to live on... the IRS doesn't let you put enough  money into it to make it a standalone replacement.  Even if one did, it is not a secure investment.  How many people lost their retirement savings in 2008?

Raising the retirement age IS a big deal.  How many 65 year olds are employable?  Very few... Making people work longer is a recipe for disaster since folks that age are not employable.  They would be forced to draw down their retirement savings early, which would end up being a real hardship!

Social Security is not in crisis... an adjustment to the cap is all that is necessary.  Draconian measures are not.

Sure, Medicare needs to be cut, but try doing it!  look what happened to senior voters this year.  Electorally speaking, these cuts are killers.  Let the GOP own them.

BTW, the best way to reduce the debt is to end our very expensive foreign wars--a solution that no one seems to want to consider.

[ Parent ]
You're right, but also wrong.
At the risk of going too far into the policy arena, you are right that cuts have to come from somewhere (or, on the same note, taxes will have to be increased). But Social Security simply isn't the biggest problem the federal government faces, not by a long shot. Health care costs are. Virtually nobody who is credible would claim anything to the contrary. I could say more, but check out the link below. As it says, nothing else matters, except in political terms.

What's even more depressing is that the solutions to the problems Social Security face are straightforward: benefits need to be changed and so does the funding source. (You can include changing the retirement age in the former, to make it even simpler.) It's a pretty big difference from the health care debate, where there's a lot of conflicting evidence. So basically, we could fix what ails Social Security pretty easily if wanted to. No, not everyone would be happy, but the solutions aren't elusive. We know what they will include. We just aren't making any choices.

http://theincidentaleconomist....

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Not so
The right are very upset with the Simpson report because it treats capital gains income as if it were regular income and raising the tax rate associated with it.  It only lowers the corporate tax rate on the big guys to twenty six percent.

A  failed Congressional candidate here in Iowa, Marianette Miller Meeks said the Simpson/Bowles report continued the war on jobs in America.  It could all be a matter of perception, but I like the fact that both sides are upset with the report.

You might be right about no friends of SS on the hill, but I doubt.  We Democrats keep trying to use it to win elections.  We need to sit down and tell the truth.  It is like when I kept hearing Democrats talk about how they voted for Paygo, but they knew darn well they didn't enforce it.

We need new ideas when it comes to issues and not to be afraid to tackle the tough ones.  

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

23, Democrat, IA-2

[ Parent ]
Speaking of lies

Look, folks at 25 or 30 years old today aren't going to get Social Security at 65 or 67. We're going to have to raise the retirement age slowly, in a slow way that doesn't affect folks 50, 55. But this is just math. We've got to do some of these things.

That is a lie.  Courtesy of Mark Warner.

[ Parent ]
While moderators here ask us to avoid pure issue discussions
I think it's safe to say that Daniel Patrick Moynihan did not suffer electorally when he co-sponsored the proposal to raise the retirement age back in '83.

And AFAIK it's not like Warner is going as far as Moynihan did in '98.

[ Parent ]
Different situation...
Back then there was a Republican president ready to essentially abolish the program.  Now, there is a Democratic president ready to abolish the program.

Considering how seniors freaked out over benign cuts in Medicare, can you imagine how they will react to very real cuts in their social security as well?

Let the GOP gut the program.  Democrats don't need to be aiding and abetting.

[ Parent ]
Trying to keep this in terms of electoral calculus
(and non-Presidential electoral calculus)

We need to keep the younger suburbanites away from the Tea Party, and I believe such discussions are a way to do so.

After reading the related DK diary on the topic, I see no evidence that Warner is talking about anything more than raising the retirement age.

While that causes me heartburn, that is not "gutting the system," unlike the partial privatization proposed by Moynihan back in '98. Warner's proposal is at the same level of change as Moynihan's back in '83.

I wish users NewMex9999 and Ryan_In_Delco were still around, they could explain it better than I, w/r/t the voters we lost in '10. But they're no longer around because they got too caught up in pure issue discussions --

And that's a serious danger of having this discussion here at SSP.

[ Parent ]
Raising the reitrement age is a beneift cut...
...and a pretty significant one.

Improving the economic outlook will help keep the younger suburbanites away from the tea party.  Forcing them to retire later and repeating zombie lies about social security isn't going to endear them to our side.  

There, I kept it electoral... The suburban losses were caused by a multitude of factors, the biggest one being the GOP's disappearance on social issues.

But, that is for a different time...

[ Parent ]
Who is talking
about raising the retirement age for people that are about to retire beyond to what is already going to increase to?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
It would hit people in their 40's now...
That's prime suburban voting territory...
[ Parent ]
What would hit people in their forties?
Again, the only reason I am mentioning the deficit commission is that it's the only really high-profile organization calling for an increase in the retirement age right now, but the change in the retirement age that Simpson and Bowles call for is for it to go from 67 to 68 by 2050. When, exactly, isn't clear, but nobody is calling for an immediate increase in the retirement age, or at least nobody prominent.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
The Simpson and Bowles plan...
...is actually pretty reasonable on retirement age.  It's the other stuff they aren't.

As for others, the new speaker of the house is on record saying he wants to raise the retirement age to 70.

[ Parent ]
The deficit commission,
from what I could tell, didn't focus nearly enough on the biggest driver of government spending in the future--health care costs--so it's almost absurd to call it a deficit commission.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
It's also prime age for people who don't believe
that they'll ever see a dime of their social security.

Ref http://www.gallup.com/poll/141...

76% of 18-34s don't believe it.
66% of 35-54s don't believe it.

Even though there are other well-known solutions, I'm not sure something other than raising the retirement age has electoral credibility among this demographic.

If there's a way to kill ourselves among younger and middle aged voters, it's by putting our heads in the sand on Social Security.

[ Parent ]
Because they've been lied to
by people who want to privatize social security and those who just want to cut spending.  With average historical growth, the fund will be able to pay out full benefits for another 75 years.  The 2037 figure is based on lower than average growth rates.  Even with the current weak economy, we're growing by 2%.  

And if a shortfall in payouts does develop, that can be addressed by lifting or raising the FICA tax cap.  It should not be done by cutting benefits (the cat food solution) or raising the retirement age (the work until you drop solution).  As Paul Krugman as noted, although people, on average, are living longer, those that aren't tend to be low income.  And those are the people who need social security the most.

[ Parent ]
Unfortunately, that lie is embedded in the popular psyche
And as such, it's one thing that Rs can use to break younger voters away from us.

(your substantive facts are correct)

[ Parent ]
Raising the retirement age only futhers their scepticism...
"Yeah, by the time I retire, I'll have to be 90 before I get any benefits"

It doesn't help address the problem you mentioned... it only makes it worse.

[ Parent ]
While I'm against raising the retirement age
A rise of 2 years in 30 is not as extreme as you suggest. In fact, it's slower than current increases in life expectancies.

It addresses our "head in the sand" problem among those under 50 -- except for those who always panic and look at the worst case scenarios.

In addition, the "third rail" thing AFAIK applies to seniors. And seniors are primarily Rs, -- now --.

[ Parent ]
What's this about
gutting Social Security and being more like a Republican?

I don't think anyone would ever confuse Mark Warner for Bernie Sanders, but my impression of him is that he's a solid moderate Democrat. How am I so wrong in this impression?

I don't know if the base would like him, but his background screams national candidate. He's a wildly successful governor from a swing state with an appealing background and nice looking family. If he wasn't needed to take the Senate seat in 2008, he could have very well been on the ticket with Obama. I could easily see him making a run for the presidency in 2016 or 2020.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
HIs resume is very good....
No one doubts that, but in person, he's doesn't have the rock star qualities that make him an inspiring candidate.  His convention speech was absolutely awful... I know, so was Bill Clinton's in 1988, but have not been impressed with him at all.

Warner is playing with fire touching the third rail of social security.  The Democratic base is very touchy at the moment and if he keeps pushing right wing solutions, he will lose favor with primary voters necessary to vault him to the national stage.  Democratic primary voters are less willing to settle than they were before.  What works for him in Virginia will not work for him in a presidential primary.

[ Parent ]
What right wing solutions
is he advocating?

I agree that he gave an awful convention speech. I remember thinking how bland he was--and yet, he was still better than Sebelius, who almost looked like she was sleeping. I don't know if he can be successful as a campaigner, but his background alone will make people mention him as a national candidate.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Who will be the Democratic candidate?

[ Parent ]
I'm willing to take that bet......
No one has any idea at all who has "the inside track" for 2016.  Rubio is less a sure thing than was Hillary in 2008, and she was a sure thing until the night of the Iowa Caucuses.

I'll tell you this, if the GOP nominates a broadly appealing establishment conservative in 2012, for example Thune but there are others, and the guy performs respectably but still loses to Obama, then that guy (and it will be a guy, because Palin is the only female 2012 prospect and she's a disaster with no future) very likely is the instant frontrunner for 2016.

Every Republican waiting until 2016 to run for President, whether Jindal or Rubio or whoever else, really needs the 2012 nominee to be a disaster.  A 2012 nominee who wins, or at least runs a good campaign and comes reasonably close, will be the 2016 nominee, or at least the frontrunner.

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

[ Parent ]
I'm skeptical of that.
Renomination after a loss is pretty rare in modern politics, and if he lets the evil socialist Obama win a second term, even if its close, he'll be the target of a backlash.
[ Parent ]
You make a good point, but renomination after a loss happens all the time downballot......
And people are routinely successful on 2nd or 3rd cracks at it.

And on the Presidential level primary losers come back and win nomination on a successive try.  Not to mention Thomas Dewey and Richard Nixon won later nominations after initial general election defeats, although those admittedly are now dated.

There won't be any backlash against the 2012 nominee if the nominee is personally well-liked and finishes reasonably close, at least as close as McCain, in an environment where Obama's job approvals are clearly in the 50s.

You still do make a good point that losing ultimately leaves a bad taste in the mouths of losing partisans, and they don't like to go back to a loser at the Presidential level.  So that could be a factor, even a decisive one.

But if I'm Jindal or Rubio or someone else looking at 2016 for a possible Prez run, I'm certainly worried about a nominee who even in defeat looks good in 2012.

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

[ Parent ]
Yeah, it happens downballot
particularly at the level where voter familiarity with the candidates is much lesser.  But at the saturation-level coverage of the presidential race, I think a retry would get bogged down in "but he already failed once" stories and recrimination.

Admittedly, I think a lot of Democrats were for giving Gore another shot, but that was a special case since he was widely viewed to have had his rightful victory outright stolen from him.

[ Parent ]
It's possible...
... but that's a lot of "ifs" right there - "if the nominee is personally well-liked and finishes reasonably close, at least as close as McCain, in an environment where Obama's job approvals are clearly in the 50s."

The other thing to keep in mind is that the modern media gaze is fairly cruel. Though presidential elections are in many ways driven by fundamentals, anybody who loses is instantly beaten up as a "loser" or "incompetent," etc.

I'd say it'll only happen if the Republican manages to outperform expectations - like if Obama is over 50% in approvals and leads the race for most of the time but in the end the Republican nearly closes that gap and Obama only barely wins.  

[ Parent ]
In my tummy,
for whatever that is worth, I still believe that it will be Romney.  If a good number of "movement conservatives" run for the 2012 nomination, Romney can get the remaining votes to win the nomination.  

Even though is oily as heck, he is disciplined (almost too much).  But there is something about him as well that just does not appeal to people.  Are there many feverent Romney supporters that did not work for him?  Who are they?

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
Romney on paper should get it, but his 2008 implosion makes him unlikely......
He was the clear frontrunner in IA and NH and a slight frontrunner nationally, even after Thanksgiving 2007.  And he run a textbook-perfect campaign.  And yet he then just fell apart almost everywhere.

For whatever reason, probably for Romney's duplicity on ideology and issues (I'm skeptical his Mormon faith is a major factor), GOP voters just didn't go for Romney.

And now he's got the Romneycare problem, which no one cared about before.  He really can't defend it; he tries to say it's distinct from Obamacare, but it's not, and there's certainly no way to sell it to GOP primary voters when Romney's GOP rivals will hammer him on it and say it's the same.

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

[ Parent ]
I can see him getting the nomination
I just don't see him winning the Presidency.

It depends on whether Obama becomes Clinton or Carter. If he's heading towards Clinton, Romney will lose the general, and if he is heading towards Carter, there is zero chance of Romney winning a primary.

[ Parent ]
Why for Republicans are
those the only two models for a Democratic prez?  No one tried to make Bush this or that president Republican president.
Why is there a need for Republicans to know (even as far back as when Obama was elected) to classify him and know whether he was Clinton or Carter?

It is just weird. Why can't he just be Obama?

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
That's not true, really
Bush II has and has been a mix of Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman for quite some time.

It has nothing to do with policy. It merely has to do with whether he's worth trying to beat or not.

[ Parent ]
Why do you compare
W to former Democratic presidents? Are you trying to disown him just a little? ;-)
[ Parent ]
Funny that
the people that say Bush was "Democrat-lite" supported him wholeheartedly in 2004 without a second-thought, and denounced critics as "un-American". If these people were really concerned about spending, then maybe they shouldn't have gotten all gooey-eyed over Bush and tried taking him out when they had the chance. But they destroyed their credibility on being spending-cutters. And that is one of many reasons why I, though I am becoming a bit more center/center-right on economic policy, still refuse to back Republicans.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
Well said! n/t

[ Parent ]
Because the parallels are there?
Why were liberals calling the Obama coalition the new Reagan coalition?

The Democrats were a different party then.

[ Parent ]
And for the record
It's not even my comparison. W himself was using it in his first term.
[ Parent ]
although I might add
It's not just Republicans.

I heard enough Obama to Kennedy comparisons back 2 years ago.

Course, John Kennedy didn't really have that long or impactful of a Presidency in my opinion.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, no kidding
Obama's Clinton. No, he's Carter.

Or maybe he's LBJ! Or, maybe, Truman! Or, no FDR! Or Woodrow Wilson! Hell, maybe he's Grover Cleveland! (Obama 2016!)

[ Parent ]
Gee
A President who gets hammered in his first midterm election...I wonder why people bring up Bill Clinton.

Why does it bother you so much?

[ Parent ]
It doesn't bother me...
... it's just that it's sort of silly for everybody to keep claiming as if Obama is either Clinton or Carter. You can draw parallels to virtually all other Democratic presidents of the past 100 years.

My only objection is that history may rhyme but it doesn't exactly repeat itself. Obama's presidency will have similarities to both Carter's and Clinton's, but it'll also be different. That's all.  

[ Parent ]
The irony about Romney '08...
... was that part of the reason he wasn't able to regain traction was the perception that he'd be a disaster in November and that McCain was Republicans' only shot.

Yes, honestly, McCain ran such a poor and erratic campaign that he blew basically all the goodwill he had. I can't imagine that Romney would have done any worse. And he might have actually done slightly better.  

[ Parent ]
I'm interested, or maybe fascinated, to
see how he handles this situation. I worry, though, that he tries to claim it is somehow different or starts implying that he was mostly for it except for the mandate or something--basically, anything that makes him look like he supports health care reform even if he doesn't like what happened under his watch in Massachusetts. Why do I worry about that? Because he's such a shameless panderer and our press is so willing to treat his likely outrageously dishonest statements with false equivalency that he could move past the issue.

The other choice is to simply disown it and try to present a forward-looking plan. He'd have nothing else to run on, so he'd had to talk a pretty good speculative game about what tax cuts would do and how great school vouchers would be, but that's not that hard to do.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
12 remaining McCain-district Democrats.
OK-02 - Boren - 66-34 McCain
AR-04 - Ross - 58-39 McCain
UT-02 - Matheson - 57-39 McCain
WV-03 - Rahall - 56-42 McCain
KY-06 - Chandler - 55-43 McCain
PA-04 - Altmire - 55-44 McCain
AZ-08 - Giffords - 52-46 McCain
NC-11 - Shuler - 52-47 McCain
NC-07 - McIntyre - 52-47 McCain
PA-17 - Holden - 51-48 McCain
MN-07 - Peterson - 50-47 McCain
PA-12 - Critz - 50-49 McCain

Say what you want about these folks.  They are amazing politicians for surviving this cycle.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

Yes
There is at least one common features in them: all are considered at least "somewhat conservative" by Democratic standards (another proof that candidates must be tailored to district preferences, and not to some ideological "purity scale") and almost all (except Giffords) are socially moderate or conservative too...
[ Parent ]
US Pres...
I saw an article that Donald Trump is considering running for president.  My gut instinct is that he would be a terrible candidate (ala ICarly, Emeg, Linda McMahon).  I don't think self-funding a presidential bid is possible, especially when Obama is likely to spend another 500 million.  What do you guys think of a Trump bid?
He'd never survive a GOP primary
I mean, in what early primary state could Donald Trump possibly prevail? As for a general election, I think Trump would probably put South Carolina, Georgia, and Missouri back into play for Obama. There'd be little GOP enthusiasm at all, which, again, is why he'd never survive the party primary in the first place. If he ran as an Indie, I think he'd bomb too.  

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
[ Parent ]
I hope he runs as
an Indie and talks nothing but tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. If he does that, and the economy isn't in a depression, I think Obama's reelection is all but guaranteed.

By the way, I think all of the states you just mentioned will be in play regardless in 2012.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Donald Trump is a joke...
Did you see his comments to ABC?  See link below...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/georg...

He is so full of himself.  Hasn't he run lots of businesses into the ground? I do predict one thing; he will succeed in uniting Dems and Reps because he would be universally hated.

41 African-American Female DC
Taxation but no representation...

[ Parent ]
Didn't he support Obama in 2008?
Good luck with that in a Republican primary.
[ Parent ]
no
he supported Hillary a lot though
[ Parent ]
I'm sure I saw him late on
Saying how bad McCain and the GOP in general were and he hoped Obama would win.
[ Parent ]
well
[ Parent ]
Thanks
Dunno who I was thinking of then.
[ Parent ]
IIRC, he supported Clinton and Giuliani in the primaries
And endorsed McCain in the general.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
[ Parent ]
Egostical, sexist, homophobic douchebag who would never get anywhere near the White House.

[ Parent ]
But
It sure as hell would be fun to watch.  
[ Parent ]
NV-03, NV-04: Redistricting is coming!
Call me clairvoyant. I expected this all along.

• Several of the Legislature's top leaders, even though they haven't confirmed the speculation, are said to be considering a congressional run in 2012. They are incoming Assembly Speaker John Oceguera, D-Las Vegas; Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, D-North Las Vegas; and Assistant Senate Minority Leader Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas. That doesn't even take into account lower-ranking lawmakers facing a term-limit ouster from the Legislature, as well as a couple of dozen outside politicians who also have designs on a seat.

• The congressional incumbents will all be fighting to preserve the most valuable elements of their districts: Republican Rep.-elect Joe Heck will want to expand his GOP base in Nevada's split 3rd Congressional District. Rep. Shelley Berkley will want to preserve her solid Democratic base in the 1st Congressional District, and Republican Rep. Dean Heller will be working to stave off efforts to fill his district with more Democrats. [...]

The biggest problem may be that the decision won't be made in a vacuum. The 4th Congressional District will probably become entangled in endgame negotiations over closing the budget and, more importantly, redrawing state legislative lines. [...]

The political forces may also hold blatant gerrymandering at bay. Although Democrats have control of the Legislature, they don't have enough votes to override a veto by the incoming Republican governor.

"The dirty little secret here is that both Democrats and Republicans benefit from a two and two map," Republican operative Ryan Erwin said. "But does anybody actually admit that in this big game of chess?"

Ryan Erwin is no dummy. He's probably one of the smartest GOP consultants in the state. (That's probably why he stayed as far away from Sharrrrrrrrrrrrrron as possible.) He knows what he's talking about when he says "The 2 by 2 Map" is what we'll most likely get:

- NV-01 most likely remain a heavily Democratic district, but will perhaps be more West Side based, which will be perfect for either Shelley Berkley staying put (she lives near Summerlin) or Steven Horsford running to succeed her as she runs for Senate (his district is West Las Vegas based).

- NV-02 will still be Washoe centric with enough rurals to keep it Red for either Dean Heller staying put or another prominent northern Republican running to succeed him should he run for Senate. (However, the $14 million question here is whether Bill Raggio will allow the teabaggers to make it Sharrrrrrrrrrrron friendly.)

- NV-03 will likely be a more reddish shade of purple, which fits Joe Heck just fine. It will probably span from the richest and most conservative parts of Henderson (Heck lives in the uber-exclusive Roma Hills subdivision) to the most GOP friendly Southwest and Northwest exurbs to the GOP dominant Boulder City and Clark rurals. The only thing up in the air here is whether they'll have to draw any of Nye or Lincoln into this district. Heck will want a cozy, safe district, but The Legislature also doesn't want to risk putting NV-02 in play.

- And finally, NV-04 will likely sport a bright shade of Blue... The only big question here is whether it will have John Oceguera's, Barbara Buckley's, or perhaps someone else's name written all over it. Again, all clues are telling me this will be an East Side based district, since Shelley is based on The West Side and Heck won't want any Democratic heavy East Side precincts in his new NV-03. What will be interesting to see if any West Side precincts are added (if so, call her Congresswoman Buckley) or if any Henderson/Silverado Ranch precincts are added (if so, call him Congressman Oceguera), and/or if some wild cards are added. (Newly minted State Senator Ruben Kihuen is a fast rising Latino star among Nevada Democrats and is quite ambitious. But then again, soon-to-be-ex-Congresswoman Dina Titus keeps making noise... Perhaps she won't fade quickly into the sunset as many establishment Dems were hoping?)

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

you can't have 3 districts entirely in Clark
one of those 3 is gonna wind up close to Elko.
[ Parent ]
SSP Daily Digest: 11/17 | 226 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

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

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

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

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

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