Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 1/24

by: Crisitunity

Mon Jan 24, 2011 at 3:26 PM EST


CT-Sen, CT-Gov: OK, we can probably scratch Republican ex-Ambassador and rich guy Tom Foley from the list of likely Republican candidates for Joe Lieberman's Senate seat, if only by virtue of the fact that he's rhetorically moving himself up to the front of the line for the 2014 gubernatorial race (which would be a rematch against Dan Malloy). He says he'll keep intact his political operation from last time, where he lost narrowly. Meanwhile, I can't see this ever becoming reality, but a little wish-listing can't hurt: Connecticut liberals are already starting a draft movement to get the newly-available Keith Olbermann to think about running for the Senate seat.

MI-Sen: The idea of Saul Anuzis (the state's former GOP party chair, and recent RNC election loser) stepping out from behind the curtain and running for Senate still seems a little odd, but it sounds like he's moving that way, dropping more public statements of interest and apparently polling the field now too. Meanwhile, this isn't really Senate related unless Debbie Stabenow mysteriously decided to retire and a Dem replacement was needed (and even then it probably isn't a good idea, considering how unpopular she became), but ex-Gov. Jennifer Granholm says she's permanently done with politics and moving on to academia with a new position at UC-Berkeley's school of public policy.

MO-Sen: Ed Martin (whose main claim to fame is that he lost in MO-03 last year) has been doing everything he can to stay in the public eye, and it seems there's a method to his madness: he seems to be moving more decisively toward a Senate run. That seems a likely route toward getting flattened by someone known statewide like Jim Talent or Sarah Steelman, but he probably figures he has a couple advantages: one, if Talent doesn't run, Martin would be the only GOP primary candidate from the state's largest media market (St. Louis), and two, Martin is tight with the state's tea party grassroots, and while the Beltway astroturf types like the Club for Growth are big on Steelman, the actual teabagger boots on the ground have a lot of antipathy toward Steelman and are looking elsewhere.

NJ-Sen: There are lots of politicians who are able to get away with having one penis reference in their names, but it seems like too much to overcome for someone with two penis references in his name. At any rate, New York Jets owner Woody Johnson is considering the race, although insiders concede he isn't likely to go for it. Johnson has been a major Republican donor for years, and, as of yesterday, has some more time on his hands to consider the race.

NV-Sen: More signs that John Ensign is moving full speed ahead on running for re-election: he's convened a meeting of his re-election steering committee for Feb. 1. The invitation for the meeting (to be held at the NRSC) comes from his main fundraisers (indicating that, yes, he still has fundraisers working for him).

VA-Sen: I suppose George Allen making it official that he's running for Senate is big news, but we've known this for a week; it's gotten so meta that there have been leaks about upcoming leaks about his candidacy. At any rate, he actually sent out his official e-mail announcement to supporters today and unveiled a new fully operational website for his Senate campaign. Jim Webb's folks simply say that Webb's decision about whether or not to run for another term will happen sometime "this quarter."

KY-Gov: When Jefferson Co. Clerk Bobbie Holsclaw started making noises about running for the GOP nomination in Kentucky, I assumed she was trying to leverage her way into getting the field cleared for her for a lower statewide office, but it looks like she's actually following through on her long shot gubernatorial bid, which pits her in the primary against establishment fave David Williams and tea party-backed businessman Phil Moffett. Filing deadlines in Kentucky are tomorrow, so the field looks pretty set. (Dem incumbent Steve Beshear has only some token opposition in the Dem primary, and I'm not making this up: scrap metal dealer Otis Hensley.)

MS-Gov: Even if SoS Delbert Hosemann doesn't follow through on rumored plans to run for Governor, we'll still have at least one candidate with a name that seems to have emerged straight from a Faulkner novel: Pearl River County Supervisor Hudson Holliday. He officially joined the field in the GOP primary, where he seems like he'll be the third wheel against Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant and businessman Dave Dennis.

NH-Gov: We already have a poll out of the Republican primary field in the 2012 gubernatorial race, from a never-heard-of-'em-before firm called Strategic National. It looks like Ovide Lamontagne, if he's interested, may get a second whack at the governorship (remember he was the 1996 candidate, before falling off the map for a long time before re-emerging to almost win the 2010 GOP Senate primary); he leads the field at 37, with losing '10 candidate John Stephen at 14, state Sen. and ex-Rep. Jeb Bradley at 13, and Manchester mayor Ted Gatsas at 4.

CT-05: Here are a few more Republican names that have bubbled up, that might get into the field in the now-open seat in the 5th, beyond the obvious re-run from state Sen. Jim Sam Caligiuri. Both the losers in the 2010 primary are also likely to run again, ex-Rob Simmons aide Justin Bernier and rich guy Mark Greenberg. State Sen. Andrew Roraback is also saying he's interested, while another state Sen., Rob Kane, is sounding pretty lukewarm about it.

MI-09: Ex-state Rep. Rocky Raczkowski says he's planning on a rematch against Rep. Gary Peters, after losing narrowly in 2010. However, Raczkowski openly realizes he has some potential problems there (that go beyond his own weaknesses as a candidate): Peters may not have a district left to run in, either. With Michigan losing a seat, Republicans controlling the process, the bulk of the state's depopulation happening in the Detroit area, and the probable need to keep having two Detroit-area VRA seats, Peters is the likeliest target. (On the other hand, Peters could find himself drawn into a seat stretching across Detroit's northern suburbs with Sandy Levin, which might prompt the elderly Levin to retire, and that seat probably would be much more Dem-friendly than Peters' old seat.)

NY-25: This strikes us as a disappointing move, given that he defended his progressive voting record pretty strongly during his campaign (although, unfortunately, most strongly in his concession statement): ex-Rep. Dan Maffei has taken a position with post-partisan centrist group Third Way. (Although, if nothing else, it points to the paucity of truly left-leaning think tanks and non-profits where Dems can park themselves and stay engaged within the Beltway for several years; there's no shortage of Heritages and Catos on the right, but this may have been the best option Maffei could find.) No indication on whether Maffei intends to make a 2012 rematch (although he'll probably want to wait to see whether the 25th winds up being the upstate district that gets chopped).

UT-02: This may give a clue to the GOP's plans for redistricting (where their choices are to create four GOP seats in what may risk being a dummymander, or to decide to tolerate Jim Matheson's continued existence and create a Dem vote sink for him to strengthen their other districts). Incoming state GOP chair Thomas Wright has two goals for the cycle: raise $1 million, and beat "that rascal Jim Matheson." (At least he didn't call him a scalawag or a mugwump. Them's fightin' words.)

CT-St. Leg.: There's a total of nine special elections pending in the upcoming months in both houses of Connecticut's legislature, all of which are seats that were previously held by Democrats (with eight of them heading off to join the Malloy administration and one of them heading to jail). To my eye (looking at the very helpful map provided by the Hartford Courant), these all look like they're in Dem-friendly areas (with the possible exceptions of HD-36 and HD-101?), but Republicans are hopeful they can make some gains somewhere.

PA-St. Sen.: The fields have been picked (by the party committees in Berks County) for the upcoming special election to replace Michael O'Pake in the light-blue SD-11. Dems, as expected, picked former Berks County Commissioner Judy Schwank, while the GOP picked Berks County Register of Wills Larry Medaglia. (Interestingly, PA-06 loser Manan Trivedi was one of the other names considered for the Dems.) The Mar. 25 election theoretically will be a big test of whether the state GOP has any more continued momentum in SE Pennsylvania suburbs after their gains in November, although there are rumors of polling showing the locally-well-known Schwank leading in the 20-point realm against all potential opponents.

State parties: One of the big stories over the weekend was that assorted tea partiers won three of the four state GOP chair races that were being contested. Maybe the most attention-getting one, because of '12 presidential implications, was the victory of Jack Kimball (who lost the '10 gubernatorial primary to John Stephen) over the Sununu dynasty's handpicked choice, Juliana Bergeron, in New Hampshire. However, the win of talk radio host Kirby Wilbur over incumbent Luke Esser in Washington also has substantial implications, inasmuch as former state Sen. Esser was a key ally of Rob McKenna (they both hail from suburban Bellevue and are among the last remnants of the state's moderate establishment tradition), and this may presage increased willpower on the right to mount a strong primary challenge to McKenna in the '12 gubernatorial race, despite the near-certainty that McKenna is the only Republican capable of winning the general election. Arizona also elected Tom Morrissey (against the wishes of both John McCain and Jon Kyl!). Oregon was the only state to buck the trend, electing Allen Alley (a moderate who lost the '10 gubernatorial primary, although he actually got most of the tea party support in that primary against the also-moderate-but-vapid Chris Dudley, geriatric John Lim, and laughable Bill Sizemore, and still seemed to have some goodwill reserves among that set).

Voter suppression: With Wisconsin and Minnesota's Republican-held legislatures moving to maintain their power (by making it more difficult for Democrats to vote for Democrats, by imposing strict voter ID laws), the floodgates seem to be opening, indicating that the GOP's main priority isn't jobs but fighting the nonexistent rising tide of alleged voter fraud. Similar legislation is now emerging in legislatures in Texas, Kansas, and Iowa. It's also becoming clearer that a voter ID law is just one step in the process in Wisconsin where the ultimate goal is elimination of Wisconsin's fairly unique (and Dem-friendly) quirk of allowing same-day registration.

Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 1/24
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Anuzis is Probably Trying to Replicate Spencer Abraham's...
...move from MI GOP chair to US Senate. But Abraham only got there because he ran for an open seat against a lackluster Dem--I know as well as anyone, since it was the first full-time campaign on which I worked--in 1994, when it was damn hard for any Republican to lose.  

Abraham was a lackluster Senator, but he was at least able to raise a ton of money from Arab-Americans across the country. I doubt Anuzis could tap a similar network of Lithuanians. 2012 won't be like 1994. And Stabenow is a tough candidate who will raise a gazillion bucks.  


Re: NJ-Sen
Yet another reason for me to hate the Jets.

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

As a guy from South Jersey....
I was glad when they got defeated.  Now this bolsters it.

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


[ Parent ]
The question is how the Utah GOP will beat Rep. Matheson
Is it Rep. Matheson personally, or a Democrat representing part of Utah in general?

Is Matheson planning to run for Senate?

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


CT-05
The GOP nominee in 2010 was Sam Caligiuri, not Jim.

Olbermann noooooo
Why would that be a wish?  We have Chris Murphy.

I have nothing against olbermann, but come on
I don't really think he should be an opportunist and just run for the senate seat in CT.  I'm a fan of Chris Murphy, and think he would make a fantastic senator.

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

[ Parent ]
Because some on the
left want to take a safe senate seat and make it a tough race just so we can have a jim Demint of the left in the senate.  

TX-13,22,Dem

[ Parent ]
Demint=extremist because of ignorance and stupidity
Olbermann=extremist because he actually reads stuff

Such large differences.  Even while I doubt he'd be as extreme in rhetoric if he were a Senator, the damage is done.  He has his niche of being the less polite liberal on MSNBC and that's that.  Murphy, Murphy!  


[ Parent ]
Plus
Chris Murphy said in announcement video:

...reducing our deficit means bringing these wars to an end.

I mean compared to LIEberman who said on Morning Joe he doesn't regret going to war in Iraq and said he would do it all over again...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12


[ Parent ]
Franken did win in MN
Which he did win by 22 points, as opposed to MN, which he only won by 10.  I find it extremely unlikely that even if Olbermann were to win the primary (which is even more unlikely because I doubt he will even get into the race) that he would have too much trouble in CT during a presidential year.

Olbermann would have a cash advantage though, and a lot of people on the activist left love him.  I've seen weirder things happen.

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


[ Parent ]
Typo
Meant to say Obama won MN by 10 points, and won CT by 22.

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

[ Parent ]
There's still no reason for it
Chris Murphy is a good, young, progressive candidate, tossing him aside for someone just as left only because he made hearts flutter on TV is really stupid.

Plus I know people who work at MSNBC. Olbermann is no hero.  


[ Parent ]
Olbermann = Franken
For Olbermann to win you would need a perfect storm for Democrats like Franken had in 2008. I don't see that happening.  Why take a seat you should be favored to win and turn it into at best a tossup?

"Where free Unions and collective bargaining is forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan

[ Parent ]
Plus
Olbermann doesn't strike me as the type that could get along with much of the people in the senate. At least Franken is proving he's more of a progressive workhorse than a bomb thrower in the senate. Olbermann is closer to DeMint in my opinion.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
What if Olbermann ran for CT-05?
Obviously he'd be worse than your run-of-the-mill Democrat, and Murphy's district is more conservative than the state as a whole, but it's also a low key enough race that he might be able to squeeze through, especially with Obama and Murphy leading the ticket. I mean, Ben Quayle somehow found a way to get elected this year

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

[ Parent ]
Olbermann has a Senate-sized ego.
I doubt very much that there would be room for it in a chamber of 435. Also, becoming the new Alan Grayson (including his impending 2014 landslide defeat by Random Guy With A Pulse) probably holds little appeal for him.  

[ Parent ]
CT-05
Is exactly the sort of high-income suburban district that began turning against Democrats the moment GWB was out of office, as witnessed by elections in Northern Virginia, Long Island, suburban Philly, etc. George Bush also only lost the seat by around 700 votes in 2004.

With any candidate weaker than Chris Murphy it would have easily gone GOP last year, and I don't think you can assume that even if Obama repeated his 2008 showing, Olbermann would not have serious trouble against a moderate GOP legislator. And Olbermann would be a particularly bad pick given his economic views, as this is Hedge Fund central.

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent


[ Parent ]
Which districts
on Long Island are you referring 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 ]
Olbermann - travel?
IIRC, one of the main reasons Olbermann cited for leaving ESPN is that he disliked travel.  I believe with MSNBC he was able to stay in one spot.  So if this dislike remains, I doubt he could handle being Senator with its, at minimum, frequent travel between DC and the home state as well as other business building, diplomatic, and other travel generally expected of our senators.

[ Parent ]
CT and UT
For those CT state leg. races, you have it about right. CT-36 voted 57-43 Gore in 2000, CT-101 voted 50-49 Bush, and the rest were at least 62% Gore districts.

The Utah thing is getting embarrassing. I know it's wishful thinking to have a Dem district there, but there's no way that carving an R+20 state into four R districts could ever be a "dummymander." Creating even a single remotely competitive district, let alone a D-leaning one, would be horrific political malpractice--many many times worse than creating an R vote sink in MA, which I've never heard any discussion of here or anywhere.  


Can you even
make a D+ district in the state. I think the best you can get is maybe R+6

TX-13,22,Dem

[ Parent ]
While it wouldn't have a positive D PVI
President Obama did (barely) win Salt Lake County (along with neighboring Summit county), and it has a population of over 1 M. So Matheson would probably be favored in a district that is mostly made up of that county.

[ Parent ]
Why does Utah need a Democratic vote sink?
The state voted for McCain with 62% of the vote. I don't see what is so difficult about creating four safe Republican districts from that.

because many view splitting SLC four ways as a disservice from the government
But alas, this isn't Good Government Project, it's Swing State Project.  The Republicans would be stupid not to.  

[ Parent ]
Because statewide R performance

is dropping around 1% per year.  Coincidently, so is the percentage of self-identifying Mormons iirc.

[ Parent ]
I agree, I've made this point several times here
Even if targeting Matheson has only a small chance of working, the chance that the weakening of other seats from ultra-safe GOP to super-safe GOP will elect a Democrat is even lower. The only reason to give him a fairly Democratic seat is in the hopes that it will cause him to a lose a primary.

[ Parent ]
Turnout and demographics
This Pollster post form Brendan Nyhan got me thinking.  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

So basically the president's weekly approval rating from Gallup released today (50-42) shows strong correlation with the 2008 result in terms of demographics. In particular it got me thinking about turnout and the usual refrain that the electorate next year will be far less white than it was last year. Well, I wanted to look at the numbers and game it out a little.

The 2010 midterm electorate by race was 77,11,8,2,2 (White, African-American, Latino, Asian, Other).

In comparison to 2008 this was a change from 74,13,9,2,3.

So assuming the latter as a better baseline for 2012 I wondered what the racial breakdown had been for the previous few presidential years - I was surprised at the  uniform nature of change despite Republicans doing progressively better in the middle two cycles:

1996 83-10-5-1-1
2000 81-10-7-2-1
2004 77-11-8-2-2
2008 74-13-9-2-3

My question then is does anybody think something like 72-14-10-2-3 is an unreasonable assumption for next year?

(Some totals do not add to 100% due to rounding.)


I doubt
that AA representation will go up to 14, but maybe Latino representation will go up to 11, especially if the GOP is as nativist in this Congress as they have been in the past.

[ Parent ]
I was basing AA share in part
On the PPP poll saying they are most excited about the election. But in whatever combination, granted, more likely Latino voters, I don't think it a stretch to suggest black and brown will total more than the 22% of three years ago.

[ Parent ]
I think that's reasonable

but wouldn't be surprised at 71-13-11-2-3.

The black population proportion of the country has held steady at 14% for 150 years.  But outmarriage and the way Latino population growth has been increasing the total are starting to tell a little bit now.


[ Parent ]
I've always been well aware of the 1996-2008 trend you just discovered, and yes 2012 will...
...see more uptick in the nonwhite vote share.  It would be hard for that not to happen.  The only way it wouldn't happen would be for Obama to be mired in unpopularity, in which case the turnout model would be the least of his problems.

This is all a function of simple population change.  Every year's crop of 18-year old American citizens has a very slightly lower percentage of white people, and a very slightly higher percentage of nonwhites, than the previous year's crop.

Given that Obama has already bounced back so fast after the midterms, and my expectation that the economy will keep improving even if not rapidly, unpopularity is not going to be a problem for him.

I do expect to see a short-term stalling in the growth of the nonwhite vote, but that will come in 2016.  That's because we're almost certainly not going to have a black Presidential nominee, meaning the black vote simply won't be as energized.  Can't blame 'em, the first-ever black President is a big deal to get a lot of people voting who otherwise never will vote in an election.  The black population has been mostly stagnant as a percentage of the total, so that's not there as a driver in vote share growth.  There will be continued Latino uptick in 2016, but the black vote decline compared to 2008/2012 will offset it, and I bet the nonwhite vote share in 2012 and 2016 are the same.  If there's still an uptick in 2016 over 2012, that's extremely ominous for Republicans.  There is a widespread assumption that the old pattern will hold of the out-party having an advantage in a Presidential after 2 terms of the same guy, but demographic shift offsets that; it's been only in blowouts like '72 and '84 that a Repubican can count on topping 60% of the white vote, which is what they need nowadays after decades of embracing racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotry.

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


[ Parent ]
Pretty soon
It will get to the point where they need 60% of whites just to be competitive. If trends continue.

[ Parent ]
I'm not as optimistic
that black voters will stay as loyal to Democrats.  There's a whiff of 'realignment' in the air.  Obama principally is keeping a lot of empowered-feeling but decidedly centrist or nonliberal black voters and activists with the Party.  But if chatter on places like DKos (though that's something of an outlier) is some indicator the relationship seems to be becoming more provisional.  If Obama loses in November '12 or late in any second term it seems to me there's going to be a very unpleasant period.  

The doors of the Republican Party are quietly opening to black politicians and voters.  The GOP may not be about the broad common interests of black Americans, such as are still felt to exist.  But Republicans represent interests and policies a proportion of black voters seem to be warming to and an organization in which middle class black politicians can now make a career.

Examples would be Michael Steele, Herman Cain (Presidential candidate via the Tea Party and no Alan Keyes), Tim Scott, Allan West, iirc two black Georgia state House Reps who switched Republican about a month ago.  J.C. Watts and Clarence Thomas also still exist.  These may not be great careers, yet, or a party that is morally terribly respectable.  But it's a real advance for black Americans that the doors of both major parties are open to them.

The people mentioned could well be enough, a critical mass, to begin a snowball phenomenon: they get decent public exposure, draw in a chunk of black voters, internal GOP resistance drops because they're deemed useful and helpful and their votes are needed; more black politicians join them, more black voters follow, etc.  It would reform the GOP in certain ways and would also force black Democratic establishments to reform.

Black voters and politicians are perhaps the last major ethnic or other bloc to not ideologically 'realign' yet.  The bad news is that it was probably inevitable.  The good news is that it probably increases black political power overall.  And there will be no more major realignments for the Democratic Party to suffer through.


[ Parent ]
I really think you're exaggerating things
Yes, there are some upper class black people who vote Republican. And yes, there are a very small number of blacks in the Republican party.  But I don't think that there will be a snow ball effect.  Black people still know which party has their interests in mind.  It should be noted that the NAACP did NOT endorse Clarence Thomas for the SCOTUS, because they knew that he was a white man inside.  While some black people are breaking into the upper middle class, the community as a whole is still doing much worse than the general population socio-economically.  Unemployment rates in the black community are double or triple those in the white community.  They know that the Republican party does not have their interests in mind, and I don't think that two or three black Republicans is going to change that.

[ Parent ]
the younger black people I know
either dont vote, are strong Democrats, or say they are independent but end up as reliable Dem votes.  There's going to eventually be slipping, I mean it seems almost bound to happen.  But with Obama around and if he ends up with a legacy, it won't be on his watch, even post-presidential.

[ Parent ]
I just wonder
what the new normal will end up being. In 2004, in California, for instance, Bush did better than a lot of Republicans ever seen to do with black voters, receiving...18 percent of the vote. In 2006, in Maryland, Michael Steele, after spending a lot of time making a big deal about how Democrats take the black vote for granted and focusing on that one county in Maryland that has a lot of wealthy black votes (Prince George, I think), did better than a lot of Republicans usually do, receiving...25 percent of the vote.

It's going to go up and down slightly, but unless the Republicans regularly start receiving 20 percent of the black vote, which they show no signs of doing, it's not going to be a big deal numerically speaking. And even then, it's only going to make a difference in a right race.  

"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 ]
While I disagree with some of the spin
in this National Review article, the essence is right http://old.nationalreview.com/...

First, a bit of history

After leaning Republican following the Civil War, blacks first swung to the Democrats with the advent of the New Deal. However, Eisenhower got 39 percent of the vote in 1956.  Richard Nixon received 32 percent of the black vote in 1960. The Republican share of the black vote in 1964? Six percent. A Republican presidential candidate hasn't gotten above 15 percent since then.

Next, the cause of the shift of the black vote --

However, Goldwater's own 1962 statement, that - electorally - Republicans should "go hunting where the ducks are," a de facto rejection of the idea that Republicans should support the Civil Rights Act or even compete for the black vote, helped create an earthquake whose aftershocks resounded for three decades.

If Rs were to actually attend NAACP conventions -- and support some form of affirmative action, I think wealthier African americans would start drifting back to the R party.


[ Parent ]
They DO attend NAACP conventions, and it doesn't matter......
"Wealthy" people, whether black or white or anything else, are a very small percentage of the electorate.  And a smaller percentage of blacks than white are wealthy, by any standard.

And affirmative action is overhyped as an issue of importance to black voters, just as immigration is overhyped as an issue for Hispanic voters.  Where these issues make a difference in real politics is in Republicans' and conservatives' use of them as dog whistles to attract white voters.  People of color recognize dog whistles, so that attacking affirmative action or immigration is correctly viewed as appeals to racism and xenophobia.

But as substantive issues in their own right, they are a lot less important than the same bread-and-butter issues white voters care about.  The difference is in ideology:  people of color are simply far more pro-government than white voters, and therein lies the rub that divides 55ish% of whites from 75ish% of nonwhites.  And that explains why black voters and other people of color vote Democratic.

The GOP can't overcome that with NAACP appearances, or token support of affirmative action, or a token few black candidates whose electoral strength comes entirely from white voters.

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


[ Parent ]
I can only hope
that Republicans will eventually face the turnabout of their 40 years of dog whistles.  

[ Parent ]
In the last cycle, only one GOP Presidential candidate attended the NAACP convention
Tom Tancredo....

ref http://www.boston.com/news/pol...  


[ Parent ]
Wow
You learn something new every day.

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


[ Parent ]
There was
some sort of event organized by Jeb Bush and Carlos Gutierrez so that the Republicans could discuss issues relating to the Hispanic community or something, and only one potential candidate, Tim Pawlenty, expressed interest in going. That's absolutely astonishing, considering how pivotal that block of voters will end up being.  

"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 ]
Maybe they already do.
After all, the Republicans still usually get about ten percent of the vote nationwide. It wouldn't surprise me to find a sizable portion of the wealthiest Republicans in that ten percent.

Of course, not all people vote based on financial factors. It's certainly possible that as long as the Democrats don't go nuts, wealthier black voters will stick with the party because, as wealthier individuals, they are also more cosmopolitan (i.e. not anti-science) and are very wary of those who are.

As for your suggestion about the Republicans supporting some form of affirmative action, things like that might do the trick. But I could just as easily say that if the Democrats abandoned their pro-choice stances, they'd make huge inroads with more conservative voters in the South. The thing is, tje chances of that happening don't seem particularly great, at least in the next ten to 20 years.

The Republicans will eventually change, and not just because all parties do over time. They will need to, or they will cease to exist.  

"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 Colin Powell approach would work
pro-Affirmative Action, pro-"American Dream" w/r/t small business.

I agree with you at least in part -- I don't see any way that it'll happen for at least a decade. But if they were to do so, I think it would restore the R portion of the African American vote to the 30s.  


[ Parent ]
We agree
that it is unlikely to happen, but I'm curious, what is this agenda you speak of and how would it appeal to different constituencies?  

"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 ]
Think Jack Kemp
Perhaps he was the best expression of R free market ideals towards improving conditions in urban neighborhoods -- the concept known as "enterprise zones".

[ Parent ]
I would
looooooooooooooove to sit in with one of those meetings where this idea is discussed amongst the Republicans of today. Don't get me wrong: I'd almost certainly be willing support it. I just doubt they would.  

"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 ]
Pro-life isn't exactly popular outside of the south though
Pennsylvania and Ohio are the only places outside of the triditional southern/mormon coalition that you hear about being part of the pro-life coalition and even there polls say only 40-45% of the population is.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

[ Parent ]
That may be true,
but the point--that the only way the Republicans will attract more black voters for some time is by changing some parts of their platform--still stands.  

"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 ]
Those were
2 county councilors or something like that, not House reps.  But they switched because it was in vogue after Barnes lost (one of them was very close to the Barnes campaign).

Michael Steele was fail as Senate candidate and more so as RNC Chairman and made few inroads.  Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas have been very conservative for all of their long adult loves(it was no mid-life change of heart).  Tim Scott said that he wishes to just be Rep. (I think I read that in an interview with Time) and not be some kind of figurehead for something bigger.  Allen West is, well, a disgraced ex-officer.

The only one in that list who has worked hard to make inroads is J.C. Watts, who once spoke to Time about how the GOP has hurt their chances on making inroads with SB1070 and may have cost them their future fortitude if they don't shape up.

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


[ Parent ]
I mean "lives", not "loves"


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


[ Parent ]
The doors
have always been open, but they haven't been used.

No offense, but that list of examples is pretty pathetic. It's a list of has beens, nobodies, and newcomers. If this is a whiff of realignment, I'm Rafael Nadal.

My guess? It's more an example of Republican recruitment efforts and ambitious personalities than anything else. The smart people in the party know that the country isn't getting any whiter, so they looked for non-white people to not seem like a party of almost entirely white people. They found them, of course, but in the end, it painted a picture of reality that is pretty distorted--as if Democrats had a sudden upsurge in evangelical legislators all over the Deep South or something, for instance.

I don't doubt that what you are describing could happen, but I don't see it happening any time soon. For one thing, even if blacks become more centrist than liberal or more independent than Democratic, where are they supposed to find a home? The Republicans show no sign of become more moderate--if anything, they seem to be going in the opposite direction.  

"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 ]
As long as the GOP retains its Southern Strategy...
There is no chance for "realignment".  Republicans are not opening doors for black voters in any way, shape or form.  Conservatives still blame minorities for everything, and I doubt that changes anytime soon.  In fact the entire 2010 GOP campaign was about race--how Obama was "taking things away from white people and giving them to minorities."  Black voters aren't stupid--they know what the GOP thinks of them.  In fact, they are the smartest voting demographic in the country.

There is no whiff of "realignment" in the air in regards to black voters.  If you're smelling that, you need to see a neurologist for olfactory hallucinations.  


[ Parent ]
Baystater, that's just silly......
There is no whiff of realignment in the air.  Black voters are not supporting the likes of Tim Scott or Allen West or any other black Republicans.  Herman Cain is a familiar figure in Georgia and black voters don't support him.

The Obama Presidency has locked black voters firmly into the Democratic column more strongly than ever before, and they were voting 90ish% Democratic before.  Obama trumps all else for the next couple generations in black political culture.  And you think the likes of Scott, West, and Cain overcome this?

There is no more openness toward minorities in the GOP than before, and people of color aren't deluded into thinking otherwise.  They had J.C. Watts and Gary Franks in Congress at the same time in the 90s, and black voters were unmoved and actually helped eject Franks in favor of a white Democrat.

I don't know where you get this crap, but it's laughable.  It sounds like the kind of stuff Republican consultants peddle in their columns...the same consultants whose nonwhite acquaintances are limited to the token few nonwhite Republicans they happen to know.

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


[ Parent ]
Oh how we forget Hillary
I do expect to see a short-term stalling in the growth of the nonwhite vote, but that will come in 2016.

It's a big if, but if she does run, non-white voter turn-out should maintain and I doubt a single viable 2016 candidate can claim that, either.


[ Parent ]
Black vote very unlikely to show up as strong for Hillary......
The exit polling showed black vote share at census-plus-one in 2008, and I expect it will be about the same next year.

That won't hold for Hillary.  Hell, it might not hold even for another black nominee!  Obama as the first black President motivated black Americans to vote who have never voted for anything.  Some of them will stay in the active electorate, but a significant share simply won't.

And I don't doubt the overall nonwhite vote will "maintain" for Hillary or any other Democrat.  What I said is that the growth with stall for one cycle as black turnout drops back to offset continued the growth of Hispanic and, to a lesser extent, Asian vote shares.

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


[ Parent ]
Asian-Americans
Here's a question - DC, you might be particularly qualified to answer it. I understand why black and latino voters go Democrat, and I think DC is absolutely right on target when he says that they aren't necessarily voting on affirmative action or immigration. I think the socioeconomic status of the majority of both groups, combined with dog whistles, explains their voting behavior.

But Asian-American voters also tend to vote very Democrat. And there, I'm a little bit more mystified. They have higher socioeconomic status than white voters, for the most part. What is it they respond to in the Dem message? Or is it just they perceive Republicans as the party of white voters, regardless of their policies?  


[ Parent ]
Several factors......
First, the thing about "Asian" voters that gets unnoticed is that the composition of "Asians" has changed dramatically over the past generation.  South Asians, mostly Indians but also from India's neighboring states, are now about one-third of the "Asian" electorate, up from a negligible percentage when I became of voting age in the 80s.  And South Asians break Democratic about 75-25, which is much more strongly Democratic than East Asians.  So that bends the curve toward Democrats as South Asians increase in Asian vote share.  South Asians are more Democratic than others partly due to race and religion, the latter a big factor since such a tiny percentage of us are Christians; the overwhelming majority of us are Hindu, and Muslims greatly outnumber Christians.

Second, younger Asians are more Democratic than older Asians, partly due to greater sensitivity toward racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotry in the Republican Party, and partly due to the experience of the Clinton/Bush years.  Clinton was successful and Bush wasn't, that's a powerful experience to grow up with.  I can speak to that, having grown up in the Carter/Reagan years with the opposite experience, and as a result having started myself as a center-right voter before switching and becoming a Democrat in 1989.  And for me, race and religion were big initial factors in my moving left.  Only much later did I grow increasingly sympathetic to unions and the underprivileged.  Of course that's just me, but ultimately my observation is that for Asians generally, the formative political observations of early life are key right now.

Keep in mind that culture has become far more powerful politically than economics for the entire electorate.  Poorer whites have moved right.  Jews remain left.  And Asians have moved left the same way as Jews.  This is because there has been, indeed, a culture war to redefine what is an "American" and what is "America."  And the Democratic Party has been on the side of multiracial religious pluralism, while the GOP has been on the side of white Christian dominance.  Acceptance of gays and other cultural divisions also play strongly in this.  It's ultiamtely all about culture:  Democrats stand for change, Republicans oppose change.  No one thinks of their politics in those terms, but actual voting behavior reveals this as the actual fault line.



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


[ Parent ]
A lot of what you're saying rings true
Though I don't know too much about it.  I would caution, however, against confusing amount of change with magnitude.  Poor whites may have moved right, and no Democrat has won a majority of the white vote since LBJ, but AFAIK low-income whites remain more Democratic than high-income whites, overall, and economic factors loom large in voting--the Democrats won the under-100k-a-year crowd in the CNN house exit polls in 2010 (though not low-income whites).  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

[ Parent ]
I can answer part of the question
Asia is a big continent -- so the question has to be split in part by region and national origin.

For some Asian immigrant groups who've been here longer, especially from China and Japan, there were plenty of "Jim Crow" equivalent laws in the Western US.

Even though Japanese Americans were interred under a Democratic President -- and the "apology" was signed by Reagan, there's a gratitude towards what Ds have done since WWII. They've identified with the struggle for civil rights. Their loyalty to Ds is once again enhanced by the close association of Michelle Malkin with the R party.

Korean Americans are somewhat more complex -- there's a split between those who act like older Cuban Americans, i.e. anti-communist R loyalists v. Kennedy followers, and people who appreciate the D push for human rights overseas. (Ted Kennedy was close friends with the Korean version of Nelson Mandela, Kim Dae Jung.)

In addition, the close association of the Democratic party with high-tech friendly policies aligns well with the education-first focus of these groups.


[ Parent ]
Koreans are also very religious as a group
Korea, to a greater extent than any other country in East Asia, is very affected by Christianity, so you get a few religious maniacs who side with the Pat Robertson part of the Republican Party. I think Chinese- and Japanese-Americans might have a fair number of Christians among their ranks, but Christians are very rare in Japan and I don't think I've ever met a Christian from China.

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 ]
Yeah we have several Korean churches here in Bloomington
and most of my Korean friends are Christian. None of the Chinese, Taiwanese, or Japanese people I know are Christian.

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've met quite a few Chinese-American Christians
and I remember reading an article about Prop 8 and how lots of Chinese-Americans voted for it because their churches told them to, as many Chinese immigrants join Chinese churches for the community and end up soaking up the religious influence.

I feel like at some point I may have also met Japanese- and Taiwanese-Americans who were Christian, at least in theory. But Asian people of our generation are Democratic to a large degree, and supportive of gay rights to an even larger degree (as opposed to the population at large, which, at least until recently, was far more Democratic than it was supportive of marriage equality).

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 ]
The funny thing is
to a large degree they are all Athiest. I believe one of my Taiwanese friends is a semi Budhist and that only happened after the Dalai Lama visited Bloomington the last time. I think it mostly has to do with the area we live in. Many of my white friends are atheist/agnostic as well.

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, most Chinese and Japanese people
in Asia are atheists, either in theory or in practice (most Japanese people are technically Buddhist I guess, but the concept of having a religion that you must abide by is not as strong here as in America). I'm almost positive that Christianity is much more popular among Americans of Asian descent than actual Asians. Given Bobby Jindal's conversion to Christianity, I wonder if that's true for South Asians too--probably not, since Bobby Jindal definitely does not represent the average Indian-American, but just curious.

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 ]
I think you may be confusing
the spiritual without a deity -- with atheism. But that's a guess, as I'm not an expert in comparative religions.

[ Parent ]
Well I guess I should say they are not
spiritual either.

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 ]
Well, Japanese people have lots of customs rooted in religion
just as Americans put flowers on graves (not sure if that's actually rooted in religion, just an example of a shared cultural custom), but I get the feeling that such practices in Japan have become less associated with religion as time has gone on.

Japan is conservative in many ways, but it's quite a contrast from the type of conservatism you find in, say, the South.

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 ]
Bingo
I find these excerpt from the wikipedia religion articles in Japan, China, and Korea to be credible, w/r/t spirituality among east Asians.

Most Japanese people do not exclusively identify themselves as adherents of a single religion; rather, they incorporate elements of various religions

The Chinese religions are family-oriented and do not demand the exclusive adherence of members. Some scholars doubt the use of the term "religion" in reference to Buddhism and Taoism, and suggest "cultural practices" or "thought systems" as more appropriate names

there are few if any meaningful distinctions between believers and nonbelievers in Buddhism and Confucianism, which comprise more of a set of ethical values than a religion. The cultural impact of these movements is far more widespread than the number of formal adherents suggests


[ Parent ]
Religion cuts both ways
Religion -- and Christianity in particular -- in some authoritarian parts of Asia has been a organizing point for human rights activists -- loosely, like how black churches in the US south were and still are an organizing point for civil rights marches.

As for religion with Koreans, Kim Dae Jung's Catholicism helped bind him to Ted Kennedy, perhaps a key relationship in how and why south Korea was able to turn away from authoritarianism.

As for religion in China, remember why Jon Huntsman learned Mandarin.

(FWIW, I am personally agnostic.)


[ Parent ]
Well, I'm pretty sure Jon Huntsman was in Taiwan, not China
Taiwan is closer to the US than China so it stands to reason that it would have more Christians, although probably not that many.

Btw, Christianity in Korea adds a very socially conservative flavor to the society there. Japan and China are conservative and lots of people would be horrified if their kids were gay, but for someone like me who already fails to conform to society to begin with, it's probably not a big deal. Korea has the whole conformity thing going on but I think it's just more anti-homosexuality in general.

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 ]
To the governments of both Taiwan and China
There's no difference (still). Taiwan is just a province of China, and has been since the end of WWII.

In all three societies, the "nail that sticks up" does "get hammered down". Your comment about voting being determined in church (or whatever other collective clubs exist) for some east Asian groups is credible.


[ Parent ]
Thanks everyone!
Very insightful responses  

[ Parent ]
I'd be more
interested in seeing what happens on the state level. A few points in one of those percentages could turn a win to a loss in Florida or Ohio and a loss to a victory in Georgia, but it makes little difference if the voting habits change in Mississippi, Alabama, or New York.  

"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 ]
NJ-Senate
When you say that Woody Johnson is "considering" running for the NJ Senate, do you mean he is thinking long and hard about the race?  :-p

PPP poll picks
Arizona
Colorado
Connecticut  
Nebraska
New Hampshire  
New Mexico  
South Carolina

http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

Thought North Dakota may have been an option. I voted for CT but any would be of interest.


Personally picked CT
I hope they do primary numbers, I'm fairly confident this will be a safe Dem seat, but you can never be too sure.

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

[ Parent ]
They can't poll ND or IN
Both states have laws restricting robopolling, so to poll there you need a live caller who asks the voter if they would like to be surveyed and then transfers them to the recorded robopoll. Rasmussen spends the extra money to hire live operators for these states, but Tom Jensen has said he does not feel it is worth the investment.

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

[ Parent ]
I knew about IN but not ND
Thanks.

[ Parent ]
Let's see
I picked NE, but in retrospect, I wish I chose AZ.  And they don't allow vote changes anymore, either.

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


[ Parent ]
Well I picked AZ but now wish I picked NE, so that's even now
I didnt read that they completely ruled out asking about Giffords.  It's crass, but I dont give a shit, I wanted to see the numbers.

[ Parent ]
Picked Arizona
I wanna see opinions on Giffords post-massacre. I also want to see what would happen if she ran for Senate if (knocking on wood) she gets better

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

[ Parent ]
Won't happen
Jensen explicitly says they will not ask Giffords questions if AZ wins.

[ Parent ]
Yep.
I would have voted for AZ had they included Giffords. I voted for Connecticut.  

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

[ Parent ]
I suggested
Indiana, North Dakota, Nebraska, Georgia, Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee for both the presidential races and senate races where that applies. Of course, I forgot that Indiana and North Dakota were the states that had that rule.

Tennessee, in particular, seems interesting, because it has a senate seat, although not a likely competitive one, and it has some demographic traits that might make it interesting at a presidential level, like a fairly high black population. But at the same time, it didn't see much of an impact from that in 2008, so it also might be a good indication of what Obama's floor is in the state.  

"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 ]
TN is part of the appalachian south though
it's the one region that has consistently been trending away from us.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

[ Parent ]
I'd say that is already gone as far as it will go.
2010 made it quick, so it wouldn't be slow and agonizing.  Luckily, Dems have gained opportunities elsewhere to make up for the ones lost (CO, VA, and maybe NC).

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


[ Parent ]
For the last
few years at the national level, yes. But its Republicanism seems to be more moderate than that of neighboring states. As recently as 2006, Harold Ford came very close to being elected senator, and Phil Bresden won the biggest victory of any candidate in the history of the state when he ran for reelection. Maybe that was the final high before the long-lasting low, but it has some regions that are experiencing fairly quick growth. I wouldn't write it off just yet.  

"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 don't so much write it off as
much as I don't really expect it to happen but hope it will. Maybe they can find a good candidate to run in 12 but both Cooper and Cohen have the urban tag and state dems seem to be in retreat.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

[ Parent ]
I went AZ
See what the presidential race looks like without the favorite-son effect. I also want to see them test Kyl and possible other Reeps against Napolitano.  

41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
True
They won't poll Giffords for a while, but it would be nice to see Kyl's re-elect numbers.

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


[ Parent ]
Would be nice to see Kyl versus Napolitano
And maybe Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon. Hell, throw in Jeff Flake and John Shadegg too.

[ Parent ]
I'm not Jewish, but OY VEY:
CT-Sen: I have no problem with celebrities running for office. They have as much of a right to do it as anybody else. But Chris Matthews for Senate in Pennsylvania? John Mellencamp for Governor of Indiana? Gary Sinise for President of the United States? This is getting out of hand. Let's collect ourselves for a moment.

Okay...now, I have nothing against him. I may not always agree with his choices, but I like him a lot and respect what he did in giving the left more of a backbone. But my guess is, he's better suited to influencing the debate outside the Beltway and probably outside of government altogether. Besides, why in the world would anybody want Keith Olbermann as a candidate when there are plenty of great candidates already in the state? It's not like Wyoming where there's basically one guy who might run.

MO-Sen: Come on, Teabaggers, make this easy for Sen. McCaskill.

VA-Sen: Let's not collectively piss ourselves about this race. It not be easy to keep the seat, but it's not an uphill battle like it is in Nebraska. Aside from some possible issues with fund raising* and his alleged disinterest in the daily grind of constituent services, what's made everyone convinced that Webb will not run? I can't take seriously any idea that he might be Sec. of Defense until it actually happens.

State Parties plus AZ-Sen: What are the chances that Kyl will not retire but end up being Teabagged?

Voter ID Laws: If there's no way to beat this back, the only solution I see is to devote an extensive amount of resources to getting every last voter registered as soon as it becomes worthwhile to do so. I know a lot of the low hanging fruit has already been picked, but in a lot of the swing states, there's still some solid room for growth. It'd be nice to throw this crap back in the faces of the Republicans.



"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?


Kyl teabagged?
That's hard to imagine! On what basis would they do that?

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


[ Parent ]
I have no idea.
Why would they try to Teabag Barrasso in Wyoming?

I'm not saying it would happen or will succeed if it does happen, only that it wouldn't surprise me if it does occur. After all, it's not clear whether Kyl has always spit at Democrats as he has passed them in the Senate chambers. A true Republican would at least do 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 ]
T-Paw in the running for galactic emperor
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo...

The guy is really confident he's destine to be president, love it.


What a ridiculous video.
I guess Pawlenty's folks are getting tired of him being called boring and the like.

Also, "settling the West wasn't easy"? Not the imagery I'd use in a speech of any sort...  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09


[ Parent ]
What are you talking about?
Are you forgetting Custer's last stand?  Committing mass genocide is very difficult :-P

[ Parent ]
MO-Sen: Ann Wagner seriously considering run
http://www.politico.com/blogs/...

Her persona is a dead ringer for Liddy Dole. The GOP base will adore her, but I'm not sure she'll have much pull with moderates.

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


I know this doesn't matter
but I find her appearance creepy.  So, this may lead to a bruising primary between her, Steelman, and maybe Martin?  Would that be good for McCaskill?  I thought that the GOP run-off would have been good for Barnes, but I was proven wrong on that.

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


[ Parent ]
I don't think it hurt him, Barnes couldn't have won in 2010
I don't see how a runoff doesn't help her, especially when they try to out-teabag each other. Assuming of course, McCaskill doesn't go dark during the runoff like Mccain did in the extended 08 primaries and use the time productively.  

[ Parent ]
Is "the base"
and the Tea Party the same thing in Missouri?  

"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 ]
Ballots
are printed. Two million ballots printed without Rahm's name on them. It's over.
http://politicallyillustrated....

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

to paraphrase a christmas story
"In the aftermath, Rahm wove a tapestry of obscenities that as far as we know is still hanging in space over Lake Michigan."  

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.

[ Parent ]
There is still the appeal to the state Supreme Court
from this article.
http://politicalticker.blogs.c...

If the appellate court decision is overturned by the state Supreme Court "we will have an election and do what we need to do to comply," Neal said.

Election officials estimate it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars for the ballot printing.

so there is still a chance that the state Supreme Court would overturn the appellate court and order new ballots be printed in time. Overseas and military ballots have already gone out with Emanuel's name on them.  


[ Parent ]
AZ-08: Kelly Sent Invitations to '12 Campaign Kick-off day before shooting
http://www.politico.com/news/s...
Sounds like he may still run against her. What a dick.  

I wonder if anyone believes Jesse Kelly's denials
If I were Jesse Kelly, I'd stay out of the public eye for a full year.

(Though the intent of your note is clear from the context, I feel like I need to remember to include first names to avoid confusion with Mark Kelly, Gabby's husband.)


[ Parent ]
Ah yes
I keep forgetting they have the same last name.  

[ Parent ]
I wonder what would have happened
if she had taken her husband's last name and we had a Judy/Betty Tom Chu or Mark/John Warner situation. (then again, at least Gabrielle and Jesse are different genders, even if some people might mistake Jesse for Jessie.)

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 ]
WV-Sen
Manchin approval rating is 52-32, leads Capito 50-41.

http://publicpolicypolling.blo...


CT-Sen: Murphy internals have him up 19 over McMahon
Chicago-Mayor: Planned Parenthood for Moseley Braun

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

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

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox