Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 1/28

by: Crisitunity

Fri Jan 28, 2011 at 3:57 PM EST


CT-Sen: The Chris Murphy/Susan Bysiewicz primary still could turn into a chaotic battle royale, based on this week's indications. Rep. Joe Courtney is "leaning toward" the run (although that's not Courtney's own words, just another insider's interpretation), and says he'll have a decision soon. Ted Kennedy Jr. also doesn't have anything official to say, but he does seem to be stepping up his appearances around the state, including one in Bridgeport next week. One Dem we can probably rule out, though, is former state Treasurer and former Hartford deputy mayor Frank Borges, who disputed reports that he was looking into the race. Here's also one other Republican who might make the race who seems to have access to big fundraising pools, although it seems like he'd be starting in a big name rec hole against, say, Linda McMahon: state Sen. L. Scott Frantz, who represents wealthy Greenwich in the state's southwestern tip.

MI-Sen: After sounding pretty thoroughly disinterested in his few public comments about the possibility of a Michigan Senate race, ex-Rep. and 2010 gubernatorial primary loser Peter Hoekstra is now publicly expressing some interest. He says that he's "considering it" and will make a decision in a few months. There's also a poll out of the GOP primary from GOP pollster Strategic National (no word on whose behalf the poll was taken) showing Hoekstra well in the lead, which may be prompting him to get more interested: he's at 33, with Terry Lynn Land at 15 and Saul Anuzis at all of 1, with 50% still undecided.

ND-Sen: Rep. Rick Berg has been mentioned often as a potential GOP candidate for the open seat being vacated by Kent Conrad, and chatter seems to indicate the local party seems to have him at the top of the list in terms of someone to unite behind to avoid a divisive primary. Moving from the House to the Senate after only one term is still a pretty unusual move (although it may be less momentous in an at-large state). (In fact, here's a trivia question for you all, for which I don't know the answer: who was the last person to successfully jump to the Senate after only one term in the House? I can't even think of a one-termer getting his party's nomination since 1994, when Dem Sam Coppersmith ran and lost an open seat race in Arizona to Jon Kyl.) There's one other name bubbling up to add to the list of the ten-or-more Republicans already listed as possible candidates: Fargo-area state Sen. Tony Grindberg.

NE-Sen: You might remember that the mysterious GOP dark money group American Future Fund ran some radio ads in North Dakota last month and Kent Conrad was announcing his retirement within a few weeks after that? Not that there's likely a causal relationship there, but maybe they're feeling like lightning might strike twice, and now they're running a similar ad against Ben Nelson in Nebraska.

TX-Sen: San Antonio mayor Julian Castro had already given some vague statements of not intending to run for the Democratic nomination for the open Senate seat, but put a finer point on that today by announcing that he's kicking off his campaign for a second term as mayor. One Republican who has expressed some interest in the race but doesn't seem likely to run is Rep. Mike McCaul from TX-10; the likelier scenario, at least according to one expert, is that McCaul plans to run for state Attorney General in 2014, which will probably be vacated by current occupant Greg Abbott moving up to the Lt. Governor slot, presuming that David Dewhurst either becomes Senator or doesn't run again in '14.

UT-Sen: You thought that Hasselbeck vs. Cromartie Twitter fight was exciting? That's got nothing on a good social media smackdown between rival right-wing astroturfers Club for Growth and Tea Party Express. In the wake of TPX head Sal Russo's comments yesterday praising Orrin Hatch, CfG just dissed TPX, saying they seem "to like Hatch's record in support of TARP, earmarks..." Roll Call has more on the Club's plans to go aggressively after Hatch. Russo also seems like he's getting undercut by his fellow TPX leader, Amy Kremer, who says that Hatch isn't off the hook yet and will be under their microscope for the cycle.

VA-Sen: Jamie Radtke, the only person in the race so far offering a challenge from the right to presumed GOP frontrunner George Allen, let everyone know yesterday where she'd stand, putting in an appearance at the initial unveiling of the Senate Tea Party caucus (and its four members... or five if you count Pat Toomey, who was willing to speak to them but not join). Other interesting reading regarding Virginia is this profile of Jim Webb which doesn't offer many surprises but is a good overview of his ambivalence about the Senate race is pretty much in keeping with everything else about him. And buried in another boilerplate article is a pretty sharp smack at Allen from a fellow GOPer and the last person to successfully pivot from getting bounced out of the Senate to winning a later race (in 1988), Slade Gorton. Gorton says Allen, to win, will first need to apologize to voters, saying "I don't see anything from him about how he screwed up, even though he did."

LA-Gov: See you later, Al Ater. After some semi-encouraging statements about a possible candidacy, the Democratic former Secretary of State now says he won't run for Governor this year. That still leaves the Dems without any sort of candidate to go against Bobby Jindal, with the clock definitely starting to tick louder.

WV-Gov: Don't get too comfortable with the idea of a primary to pick the gubernatorial candidates in West Virginia (tentatively set for June 20); the legislature still has to enact that and there are some grumblings that it might not happen because of the expense involved, which would mean party conventions instead. That could give a boost to one of the less-known Democratic candidates who have stronger relations to organized labor, like House speaker Rick Thompson or treasurer John Perdue. The article also mentions a few other Republicans whose names are emerging in the race, most notably Putnam Co. Prosecutor Mark Sorasia (who'll be participating in an upcoming candidate forum), also mentioning former state Sen. Steve Harrison and state Del. Troy Andes.

CT-05: The dance cards in the 5th district are definitely filling up. On the Democratic side, Audrey Blondin is saying that she'll run; she's a former Selectwoman from Litchfield, a member of the state party committee, and briefly ran for SoS in 2005. Also considering the Democratic primary is J. Paul Vance, the former leader of the Waterbury board of aldermen and a narrow loser to Michael Jarjura in the 2009 Dem mayoral primary. On the Republican side, Mike Clark is in; he's Farmington town council chair but he's best known for leading the FBI team that took down corrupt Gov. John Rowland, and was on Tom Foley's LG short-list. Several other possible names on the Republican field that are mentioned include state Sen. Kevin Witkos, Torrington mayor Ryan Bingham, and one possible heavyweight in the field (and the guy who actually was Foley's running mate), Danbury mayor Mark Boughton.

FL-25: Freshman Rep. David Rivera seems to be in a world of trouble, with an entirely new angle on his corruption arising courtesy of an AP investigation: he paid himself nearly $60K in "unexplained" campaign reimbursements during his eight years in the state legislature. Between that and the already mounting investigation by Florida authorities and the FEC into potential payoffs from a dog track, there's apparently growing discontent with him behind the scenes in Republican leadership, who may be feeling pressure to make an example out of him as part of their "drain the swamp" promises (although Ethics Committee rules prevent them from using that vehicle, since they can't take up matters that are already under criminal investigation). Rumors persist that both parties are already sounding out candidates for a potential special election. He isn't getting much public support from John Boehner, whose only on-the-record comments are that he's taking a wait-and-see attitude on how things unfold.

WI-01: Is this just a bit of monkeying around with Paul Ryan now that he's temporarily a celebrity, or are Dems seriously thinking about making a target out of him now that he's more notorious? (He's in what's currently an R+2 district, certainly within reach in a Dem-friendly year with a good candidate, and leads veteran House Republicans in terms of ideological out-of-whackness with his district lean... though that may have changed with the newest crop of teabaggers) At any rate, mailers are being sent out to voters in his district, having a bit of sport with his Medicare-voucherization proposals.

Chicago mayor: We Ask America is out with another poll of the Chicago mayoral race (taken during the brief period when it looked like Rahm Emanuel might have been off the ballot). It looks like, as speculated, the whole debacle may have actually increased sympathy for Emanuel (with 72% of respondents saying his name should stay on the ballot), as this is the first poll to show him over the magic 50% mark that would help him avoid a runoff. He's at 52, with Gerry Chico at 14, Carol Mosely Braun at 11, and Miguel del Valle at 4. It also provides support for the theory that Chico, not Mosely Braun, would have been the chief beneficiary if Emanuel had gotten kicked off, as Chico led a Rahm-free option at 33, with Mosely Braun at 17 and del Valle at 7 (with 38 undecided).

Nassau Co. Exec: This may pretty much spell doom for any future political efforts by Republican Nassau Co. Exec Ed Mangano, who was elected in a narrow upset over Tom Suozzi in 2009. Mangano has, since then, closely stuck to the teabagger/underpants gnome playbook of governance (step 1: cut taxes; step 2: ???; step 3: profit!), and lo and behold, found his county government insolvent. The state government has been forced to step in and seize control of the finance in the county on Long Island, one of the nation's wealthiest.

Redistricting: I can't see this going anywhere legislatively even if Dems still held the majority (and I'm not sure it would pass constitutional muster anyway), but Heath Shuler and Jim Cooper are introducing legislation in the House that would switch every state away from partisan redistricting to requiring use of a five-person bipartisan commission. (They're picking up the flag from fellow Blue Dog John Tanner, for whom this was a personal hobby horse for many years until he recently left the House, but they may also have some personal stake in wanting this to succeed, seeing as how they suddenly find themselves in states where the Republicans now control the trifecta.) Also, the public rumblings of worry from prominent Republicans about how the GOP isn't financially or mentally prepared for this round of redistricting (something that seems dramatically out of character for them) seem to keep coming, this time from Ed Gillespie.

Voting: Montana seems to be taking a cue from its nearby neighbors Oregon and Washington, and moving toward a vote-by-mail system. The measure cleared the House and will soon move to the state Senate. Despite the fact that the GOP controls that chamber and this was a Democratic bill, there was enough Republican support to move it forward. (Studies have shown that vote-by-mail tends to noticeably increase participation by traditionally-Democratic constituencies that ordinarily aren't very likely voters.)

Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 1/28
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Trivia
Sam Brownback went from the House (elected '94) to Senate (elected '96), he didn't even fill out his full term since the Senate race was a special election he moved to the upper house in November of '96.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


Ah, yes
That sounds right.

[ Parent ]
Geez
I should've read the comments in yesterday's digest. People were not only already talking about this same story there, but asking each other this same trivia question too (and I would have already known the answer). One of the reasons you gotta love SSP.

[ Parent ]
Trivia Question - Sam Brownback
Moved up to the senate in '96 after his '94 election to the house. (Though that might not even count because it was a special election and he didn't serve a full House term.) If you restrict it to those that served a full term, the winner is  a tie between J. Glenn Beall Jr. (R-MD) and Lowell Weicker.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

Mistake
I forgot about James Abourezk (D-SD), who was elected one cycle after Weicker and Beall.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
...and
Rod Grams in 1994. I should really be more thorough on my research before I go digging way back into history.

Moderate Libertarian Republican, MA-8 (college) / MD-7 (hometown)

[ Parent ]
Not quite the same situation
But George "Macaca" Allen was elected to the House in a November 1991 special election. His district was then immediately wiped out in redistricting. Rather than running against a GOP colleague in the primary, he did not run for a full term in 1992 but instead ran for Governor in 1993 and won.

[ Parent ]
Rod Grams
Former Senator Rod Grams (R-MN) was elected after one term in the House.  Grams defeated incumbent Dem Gerry Sikorski in MN-6 in 1992, then turned around and ran for the seat being vacated by retiring Senator Dave Durenberger in 1994.

damn, everyone beat me :(


[ Parent ]
Me
as well.  

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

[ Parent ]
I don't get your point on NE-Sen
Kent Conrad said that the ads made him almost want to run again.

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


I agree their baiting
is just as likely to encourage incumbents to run again as it is to frighten them, but perhaps the people running the ads decided "we ran smear ads, Dorgan retired, if we run more, maybe more incumbents will retire." Not the soundest logic, but I see where they're coming from and, from their vantage point, it's probably worth a shot.  

NY-01/NY-19

[ Parent ]
What would you expect him to say?
"Yea those guys scared me half to death, I'm outa here!".

I'm sure they had almost no effect, but that sure won't stop American Future Fund (whoever the hell they are) from taking credit for Conrad's retirement - and ditto that for Nelson is he changes his mind about running again.

When I used to do issue advertising we'd always put a few dollars on random members so if they did vote our way we could take credit for their "change in heart" even if we only spent $200.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


[ Parent ]
Well, who cares?
They get high off of their self-adulation, but what does that do for them?  Zilch.  It's self-deception on their part.

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


[ Parent ]
Fundraising BABY!!!
Seriously, so many of these groups are little more than a front for direct mail fundraisers, the ad buys and media hits they get in response to them drive fundraising and allows a small cadre of consultants to make some nice cash withough doing much work.  

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


[ Parent ]
They would get funding anyway
That's the magic thing about dark money groups.  Very few small donors give to it and the big money donors would use the group to further their cause anyway and I doubt they are dumb enough to think they scared off Conrad.

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


[ Parent ]
Perhaps
I think that is true for the big spenders like American Crossroads, but this looks like a smaller operation.

We'll probably never find out who this group really is, but there are dozens of these little informal consultant groups that band together to milk the direct mail circuit. Most of them do real work for campaigns or associatios, but they have these things on the side to tide them over in off years.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


[ Parent ]
Also
I don't think Conrad is as strong as we thought.  If he ran, he would be hit on the head for the Countrywide Insurance mess he is in with Dodd.  I just hope the Dems there pull out their best and don't cede it like last time.

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


[ Parent ]
Even ignoring the fact
that the Countrywide situation made everyone aware that he has a multi-million dollar Delaware beach house. Talk about "going Washington!"

[ Parent ]
Conrad's change of heart came when he...
...changed his mind about heading the Agriculture committee and went back to budget.  He wanted to fixate on his last shot to gut social security instead of campaigning, and this happened well before any ads ran against him.

[ Parent ]
That's a stretch
Unless of course you have a ESP-quality pipeline into Conrad's mind.

[ Parent ]
I'm using his own words...
...as reported on NPR a week or so ago.  I'm sorry I do not have a link or a direct quote, but that was the jist of the reporting:  Conrad wanted to focus exclusively on the budget and didn't want to be distracted by campaigning.

Considering that a few months ago, he suggested that Senators cut short their political careers to pass an unpopular budget that trims the deficit, it seems that he's putting his money where his mouth is.


[ Parent ]
There a serious difference between
Conrad wanted to focus exclusively on the budget

(which I can believe)

and

He wanted to fixate on his last shot to gut social security

(which lacks credibility)

I suspect you (or a reporter) at best misinterpreted something.  


[ Parent ]
One question
What could this mean:
"the public rumblings of worry from prominent Republicans about how the GOP isn't financially or mentally prepared for this round of redistricting (something that seems dramatically out of character for them) seem to keep coming, this time from Ed Gillespie. "

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


No funding for research
Outside groups usually raise the cash to fund the research needed to support the legislators doing the map drawing and also provide the legal defense research needed to defend them in court.

The GOP did a great job funding and supporting legislative candidates in '10, but seem to have dropped the ball on actually taking advantage of this breakthrough.

"Earnestness is stupidity sent to college"
P. J. O'Rourke


[ Parent ]
PLEASE PLEASE
I've been posting here that Dems NEED to take on Paul Ryan. He's super duper conservative in a not-so-conservative district. Plus, Obama won the district.

NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan

Les Aspin
It's basically the same district that Les Aspin (Clinton's first Defense Secretary) held for over 20 years.

[ Parent ]
This is a common misconception
During the 2000 redistricting cycle, they basically shored up all incumbents.  In the case of Ryan's district, they did this by detaching mostly Democratic Beloit and adding it to Tammy Baldwin's district, and then giving Ryan some heavily Republican suburbs of Milwaukee that were previously part of what is now Gwen Moore's district.  

And who knows what will happen for 2012--the district will obviously not be the same.  


[ Parent ]
Rivera's story gets more and more twisted.
What will happen next?

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


Smart for Democrats to go after Ryan
His district is quite marginal and Republicans had no problem going after people Democratic chairmen like Jim Oberstar and David Obey in districts more Democratic than WI-01 is Republican.  

TPX is calling it open season on Hatch now
has it even been 24 hours?

NY-01/NY-19

David Brock's third-party spending group closer to reality.
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

Sadly, we need to do this to compete evenly.

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


OT: Egypt
Anyone know of any polling data for that country?

I wonder if any premises can be derived for say a potential election between say Mubarak (or son) and Elbaradei, or perhaps between Elbaradei and whomever is leading the Muslim Brotherhood there.


How could there be polling data?
Elections in Egypt are a sham.

[ Parent ]
There's the Pew polling data w/r/t US favorability
http://pewglobal.org/2010/06/1...

Which includes data from Egypt (and a few other surprising countries, e.g. Kenya, Nigeria)

But that's not enough. I was hoping I missed something.


[ Parent ]
The sense I get...
Is that ElBaradei is probably the most popular figure in Egypt today. I think he'd be a heavy favorite in elections, assuming he wants the job on more than an interim basis. He would certainly crush President Mubarak or Gamal Mubarak (who has fled the country) in any free and fair election.

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

[ Parent ]
No offense, but is your sense just American wishfulness?......
I'm reminded of the Iranian election which so many American political commentators and junkies tried to pick apart, and in the end I was left not feeling like anyone commenting here really had any clue whether what's-his-name Holocaust denier won due to fraud or won for real without needing fraud.  It's convenient to look at things through the lens of Americans and of Iranian dissidents, but none of us in America really knows jack.

So I look at the cheering of ElBaradei much the same.

Oh, and how convenient that so many American conservatives are suddenly pro-demonstrators and pro-ElBaradei when the demonstrators include so many anti-American Muslims, and ElBaradei was on their very long enemies' list.

Would a fall of Mubarek's government actually be good for anyone?  Is he any worse than was the Shah of Iran, and the demonstrators any better?

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


[ Parent ]
I'm actually basing that off of Al Jazeera's reporting
It's true there seem to be a few different factions among the demonstrators, including anti-American radicals, but the overall tone seems to be a desire for Egyptians to elect a new government. Al Jazeera and its sources seem to think ElBaradei is all but certain to take over the transition if and when one is needed (in the event President Mubarak abdicates office), and ElBaradei is a secularist and a republican.

FWIW, Nate Silver took apart the numbers on that Iranian election and concluded it was a virtual certainty electoral fraud put Crazy President Ahmadinejad over the top, IIRC.

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


[ Parent ]
What you shared just begs more skepticism on both Egypt and Iran......
Regarding Al-Jazeera and Egypt, I read something just today or yesterday that said Al-Jazeera has spent its existence pushing a narrative that is hostile to the authoritarian regimes of the Middle East.  Now, what I read itself might be complete bullshit for all I know...I've learned the past decade or so to not necessarily accept "reporting" at face value, either in analysis or even in statement of facts.  And that can include what someone else says about Al Jazeera when I don't otherwise have any corroborating information.  But at the least given that Al Jazeera itself is a news organization that might or might not be accurate in its reporting and analysis, I'm not sure I should accept what they say at face value.

And regarding Nate Silver, "what it's worth" on his Iran analysis is less than nothing.  He's a great number-cruncher, but his analysis is no better than the quality of the numbers he can find to crunch.  His 2010 election model was dead wrong in predicting defeat for Harry Reid and Michael Bennet, since the polling data on those races and other inputs Silver used failed him.  The quality of data Americans have available on the Iranian election makes Rasmussen look like the gold standard.

This all just confirms my skepticism of Americans drawing conclusions or forming opinions of what's going on in Egypt now.  All we have are tea leaves, and we read into them what we want to read.

Let's just admit that we have our biases shaped by the western experience, and more precisely, the western moral narrative on governance where there is an evil ruler with a black hat and a peasant uprising wearing the proverbial white hat.  The story of the American revolution is told as just that myth, and we want to see that everywhere else, too.  So we saw it in Iran, now we see it in Egypt.  But we really don't know jack about what's going on there.  Yes Mubarek is essentially a dictator and there is no real political democracy there.  But the populations of countries like Egypt and Iran aren't necessarily demanding western-style representative democracy.  We imagine that, but we don't know that.  That's sure not what the Iranian revolution empowered in the 70s.

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


[ Parent ]
At some point, there has to be a conversion
from the current semi-Dictatorship.

Mubarak and sons is an unstable situation in Egypt. Now that his sons are gone, perhaps Hosni knows it too.

I'd think that the longer we wait, the higher the risk of an Iran '79 situation. If my reading of history is correct, it's now also similar to Castro just after Batista -- where we still had a chance to keep Cuba non-aligned.

Similar questions may have to be answered in the next year or so in other countries in the Arab world. Will others "fall" like those in Eastern Europe in the late '80s? What happens if/when such protests move to Saudi Arabia?

That's one reason why I asked for polling data, before realizing (as I noted on the weekend open thread) that I already had some. And while --very-- thin, I think it's promising that the Egyptian populace has moved away from the most radical Islam. At least that's a chance to keep things somewhat secular, perhaps at least to the level of the current ruling party in Turkey (AK?)

I'm not sure that ElBaradei is the permanent answer, he's certainly no Mandela. Nevertheless, I suspect he could lead a transition to another more stable kind of state.

Don't know whether that would be "democratic," say with Wafd, the Muslim Brotherhood, and more radical elements forming 3 or more parties. Perhaps it would be some "benign" military-led government (so far, the protesters seem to be welcoming Army involvement).

But to preserve the long-term stability not only of Egypt, but of a number of other countries in the area, we've gotta try.


[ Parent ]
I am fairly sure
that the Shuler/Cooper redistricting bill would pass Constitutional muster.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Art I, § 4

I argued that the Democrats should have federalized Congressional redistricting last session. Nobody seemed to be interested in that, though.  


I always stood for 50 Independent comissions
as well as for "jungle primaries" in all 50 states. But both political parties are too confident, that it's them, who is a real majority (and for a long time to come), to make this idea real..

[ Parent ]
Vote by mail, WI-01
Vote by mail: Vote by mail was already the norm in several of the more populated counties in Montana, particularly Missoula. I'm not surprised that it went statewide, and that some in the GOP are supporting it. It's quite popular. The question is when it starts catching on in some of the other, more conservative states nearby - Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah spring to mind. Kind of surprised it hasn't caught on in Nevada, yet - Clark County seems like a natural constituency for VBM.

Maybe if enough of the western states adopt VBM it'll finally catch on further East. We can only hope. It's one of the things about the Western political process that I've really missed since moving back East.

WI-01: Dems totally need to target Ryan. I've been kind of perplexed why they didn't go after him in 2006 or 2008. Of course, it might be a moot point if Kohl retires - allegedly, Ryan is #1 in line for the GOP to run for that seat. Either way, WI-01 should be on any "take back the house" checklist, esp. in a Presidential year.

The only better thing than beating Ryan would be beating Ryan AND Eric Cantor, whose re-elect number has been steadily shrinking, even in 2010. I'd laugh if the VA GOP redistricted Tom Perriello into VA-07 and he ended up winning.  


I doubt Ryan will give up the Budget Committee chairmanship to run for the Senate.
He's got a position with some power, and winning a Senate election in Wisconsin is at best a 50/50 prospect for a Republican.

There's no way VA-07 is going to be made less Republican. I can see them splitting Albemarle between VA-05 and VA-06, but there's no way the Republicans would do anything to damage the Majority Leader's chances of re-election.


[ Parent ]
It all depends on his ambition
If he wants to be President, he has to run for Senate (or less likely Gov) at some point.

If he sends a message he isn't going to run for the Senate, he has a safe seat with the GOP redistricting.


[ Parent ]
Redistricting
I would tend to think that he stays put.  He has too much power in the House and it would be risky going for the Senate.  I mean it is at best a 50/50 chance.  
I think redistricting can potentially be huge.  Here is a potential redistricting which would place him in a district (Blue) where the McCain percentage would be somewhere in the mid-50s, which given the year and his performance in the state, would more likely be a floor.  This can also help out Petri's district by giving some parts of Ozaukee and Washington county. While I am sure Senenbrenner would not be happy with this, his home in Menomonee Falls is still there (NE Waukesha county) and it contains so many Republican areas that I cannot see Democrats in Milwaukee and the North Shore causing that much of a problem.  Photobucket

[ Parent ]
From a swing state perspective
The area is a gerrymandering paradise.  The 6th and 1st could both get more Democratic, or more Republican.

Given the GOP has control now, the question is whether they make the 1st safer for any Republican, or leave it be as it is safe for Ryan (but not Reps generically) and shore up the 6th for Petri's retirement whenever, or to slough off some GOP area to the 8th or 3rd.

Lots of potential here for a GOP gain, or a GOP dummymander.


[ Parent ]
with the GOP
you are only allowed to be a chairperson for a certain number of years.  SIx seems to be ringing a bell, but dont quote me on that.

[ Parent ]
It is
six at the head of a committee. Since he was ranking member in the 111th and chairman now he can only be the top republican committee during the next congress unless he receives a waiver. It is not unheard of since Pete King has been at the head of Homeland since 2005 and David Drier had been the head of Rules since 1999

TX-13,22,Dem

[ Parent ]
It would pass to Scott Garrett in 2015
Whether Republicans control the House at that point or not. There's surprisingly little seniority on the GOP Budget roster. More than half of the members are freshmen and only three were elected to Congress before 2002: Ryan and Simpson (both 1998) as well as Calvert (1992.)

Ryan would likely move into Republican leadership after 2014, as I assume Boehner, McCarthy and Cantor will also be rotated around. Or he may run for President or Senate in 2016.

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


[ Parent ]
Ryan's not running.
He's been the WI GOP's first choice in every race since 2004. 2004-SEN, 06-Gov and SEN, 2010-Gov and SEN he's had the right of first refusal in each of those races and turned it down. I do think Ryan wants a WH job, but I think he sees his route as being a VP pick or a cabinet secretary.

JB Van Hollen, the state's AG, will almost definitely be the GOP nominee regardless of whether Kohl runs or not. Because after this year his next possible run at higher office wouldn't be until 2018 and he doesn't have to leave the AG's office to do it.


[ Parent ]
what about Sen. Cantwell?
she served one term in the House, lost her seat in 1994 and came by and won against Senator Slade Gorton in 2000.  

Cantwell's
case is different. She spent 6 years at Real Player before being lobbied to run against Gorton.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

[ Parent ]
Huntman may actually go through with it

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

How would this work? would he seriously start attacking his former boss? Though if he wins the nomination, it could be the most civil campaign in history, with neither side really hammering each other.
(though it would be kind of boring if that happens)


President Obama is the definition of civil.
He remained civil throughout the presidential election.  

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 might argue he wasn't so affable during the primaries, though
As far as Huntsman goes, again, I think he's just positioning himself for a conservative's VP slot. Romney vacuums the moderate vote, and if Romney winds up faltering, I think it goes Pawlenty, Giuliani, Huntsman, in that order, who benefit (that is, presuming all of these guys actually run). The only significant thing Huntsman might do is siphon-off enough of the Mormon vote in Nevada for that not to be a complete runaway for Romney.

FWIW, I currently think the following nine candidates will actually run:

John Bolton
Herman Cain
Newt Gingrich
Mike Huckabee
Ron Johnson
Tim Pawlenty
Buddy Roemer
Mitt Romney
Rick Santorum

Palin passes, meaning Giuliani bows out. Paul runs for U.S. Senate, perhaps Bachmann, too. (Though, Palin not running probably ups the incentive for Bachmann to consider it.) Huntsman and Pataki want to be the next Vice President, but they don't have the balls to mount presidential runs.

Johnson and Roemer are the Kucinich and Gravel of the 2012 primaries and never actually drop out. Bolton drops out pre-Iowa and endorses Romney. Iowa goes Huckabee, Romney, and Cain/Gingrich/Santorum in a tie for third. Gingrich drops out, backs Romney. Romney destroys in New Hampshire, Nevada. Buh bye, Pawlenty, who ties for third in NH with Cain. He backs Romney. Huckabee wins South Carolina by double-digits, Romney second, Santorum third. Cain drops out. Super Tuesday time and Santorum fizzles out. He drops out, backs Huckabee. The primaries keep a-chuggin' and, eventually, Romney wins by prevailing in Pennsylvania and Ohio. He's damaged goods, though, and he loses to Obama by a slightly smaller margin than McCain (let's say 6%).

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


[ Parent ]
If that were the list
it would almost be a logical cinch that Bachman should run.  Nine dicks, she could be the only woman, and the tea party is significantly powered by women who dress up in outfits.  She would have a significant niche of voters all to herself.

I'm not saying she would win, but really, if she could handpick her opponents, that group of nine would be it.


[ Parent ]
12
Ron Johnson?  I highly doubt he runs.

You forgot Trump who is likely to run.  I don't think Huckabee runs, but I doubt Palin does either.  If neither of them do, It really opens things up for Newt.  If Romney has to take on Newt head on, I can't see him winning.

29/D/Male/NY-01


[ Parent ]
Ron Johnson from Wisconsin?
Has there been some development that I have yet to hear about?

Or are you referring to Gary Johnson of New Mexico?  

"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 ]
Yes, sorry...Gary Johnson
And, no, I don't think Donald Trump will actually run. Perhaps he envisions himself as the next Steve Forbes, in which case he'll eventually come to learn that Steven Forbes was a disaster in the political scene.

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

[ Parent ]
Maybe
it's me, but I am not sure what the big deal is. He's got a team of people he's used in the past, or so the article implies, and they are ready to jump if he says to jump in the future. So what does that mean? The article doesn't describe any particular action, at all, on the part of these people.

And that Newsweek article? As I said in another post, it doesn't seem to base the implications on anything other than the fact that Huntsman said he might run for something in the future and he winked at the reporter.


"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 Huntsman would not have chance in a republican primary

Just cause of be part of Obama's administration. If Obama is the evil for many teabaggers, Huntsman can be someone like Judas.

I think he can up in the Obama's administration, but I think his career as elected republican is done.


[ Parent ]
Huntsman supports civil unions
that alone probably makes the hard-right Mormon crowd in Utah foam at the mouth.

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 a big
part of the reason why the talk of him running in 2012 is way off.

It's also a reason why I think he might become a Democrat in the future, although as someone said yesterday, perhaps becoming an Independent would be better.  

"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 ]
Huh? Why would he switch parties? He's completely conservative......
Huntsman openly supported a referendum or a bill, can't remember which, that outlawed civil unions in Utah.  Yes he later flip-flopped, supposedly after his own adult children persuaded him to be more accepting of gays, but that's after the fact.

Beyond that, he's conservative on everything.  That he's Obama's China ambassador is of no partisan significance because both major parties support the exact same China policy and have done so ever since Nixon flipped U.S. policy in favor of Red China.

His flip-flop on civil unions is the only issue where he's not a down-the-line conservative.  Yes his working for Obama hurts him in primaries, perhaps fatally merely by itself.  But it's not a basis to switch parties.

Some Democrats have really let themselves become hoodwinked to believe that some right-winger departing from orthodoxy on civil unions or abortion rights or any other single or very small number of issues somehow is less than conservative.  Just because you don't pass teabaggger snuff doesn't make you a Democrat.  Let's not lower our standards that much.

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


[ Parent ]
There was also this...
http://www.deseretnews.com/mob...

I think he's conservative, but he's not a culture warrior. I don't see him campaigning on social issues.

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


[ Parent ]
I don't think
Some Democrats have really let themselves become hoodwinked to believe that some right-winger departing from orthodoxy on civil unions or abortion rights or any other single or very small number of issues somehow is less than conservative.

I don't think that's the argument being made at all.  The argument I've seen concerning Huntsman's chances in a Republican primary is that there is absolutely no way he gets through.  There are are some non-negotiables for Republicans, these days, and even being open to civil unions is one of those.  It doesn't matter if he's conservative on everything else to them.  


[ Parent ]
Yeah, I don't think he leaves the Rs just because of that
but it certainly damages him. Especially given that Mormons dominate Republican primaries in Utah the same way that African-Americans do Democratic primaries in Alabama or Mississippi.

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 ]
Except
if you're Artur Davis.

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


[ Parent ]
I'm sure AAs dominated that primary
they just knew Davis was an asshole.

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
I was just tired and didn't think that comment through.

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


[ Parent ]
Nobody can say with any certainty what will happen,
but considering that Bob Bennett was booted out of office when he wasn't even close to being a moderate, let alone a liberal, you have to wonder whether a guy who, like I said above, wants to make government work and who worked for the Great Muslim Socialist Communist Anti-American Obama would get anywhere in a Republican primary. He could run as an Independent, sure, but perhaps the better solution is to simply run as a Democrat (if he ran as an Independent, why would he caucus with the Republicans?) and then be left alone and secure lots of advantages because he's a Democrat from Utah, of all things.

If he's for national executive ambitions, I am not sure what happens, but if he wants to be involved in national politics at a legislative level, the better step might be to switch parties.  

"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 ]
Look at the comment to which I responded......
If you think Huntsman might someday switch parties, then it means you think he's not really conservative.  That's why people switch from R to D when they do, because they're not conservative.

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

[ Parent ]
the funny thing is...
Mainstream Republicans and Tea Partiers are united in their desire for Chris Christie to run, and his immigration, civil unions, and even his abortion ("I'm pro-life but I'm not going to shove it down people's throats...") positions are on the liberal side of the field.  He really seems to be Guiliani II, and yet Conservatives love him for some reason.

[ Parent ]
It's probably
because they are practicing the same sort of cognitive dissonance that others practice when it comes to politics (i.e. "He's downplaying his opposition to abortion because it's New Jersey," or something similar). I also wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people just didn't know his stances on this issues. After all, his reputation for being "tough" doesn't have much of anything to do with his position on abortion.  

"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 doubt
that he's a conservative guy. He's not a Lowell Wicker or John Chafee-style Republican. But he supposedly welcomed stimulus money, said that if his party doesn't focus on things like the environment they will lose younger voters, and increased education spending. And he did change his mind on civil unions.

Again, he's no liberal. He's probably not even a moderate. But it does look like he's serious about making government work, even if he wants it to be a lot smaller than a lot of Democrats. Considering that a huge number of Republicans were prepared to vote against things like the START Treaty if there was a chance to sink it just, well, just because, I'm not prepared to turn away serious people.

I don't think we would be lowering our standards to accept him as a Democrat in Utah. I'm not sure I'd like him as our party's nominee for president. I'd probably say no under almost any circumstances, in fact (not that I'd think he'd win a primary, anyway). But it's Utah, for Christ's sake, and I'd rather be the big party than the small to 50+1 party that drives out anyone that doesn't fall into line on every vote. So in the hypothetical I described, I'd welcome him with open arms.  

"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 ]
hes to left of the average Utah
republican might not be so different from your average national republican tho.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

[ Parent ]
Perhaps.
Like I said, I'm talking about his focus as an elected official from Utah, not 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 ]
I think he IS a moderate, honestly
Compared to today's Republicans, he's an avowed centrist, and he's admitted as much.

No, he's no John Chafee, but I'm certain he would have voted for DADT repeal and New START ratification, and I think he would have been a key player in hammering out a climate bill. And I think he would probably name a very bipartisan Cabinet if he were elected to the presidency, and I expect he will be president if he can get that Republican nomination in 2016 or 2020.

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


[ Parent ]
"Compared to" is the problem, we shouldn't allow them to define on THEIR terms......
Just because they keep moving farther to the right, doesn't mean someone who was a garden variety conservative before should be viewed as a "moderate" now.

No one called Ronald Reagan a "moderate" even though he raised taxes first on payroll for social security, then on income as part of the '86 reform, and even invented the now-hated alternative minimum tax.  No one called him a "moderate" even though he granted "amnesty" to "illegal immigrants," signed the original START treaty with the Soviets, picked a pro-choice center-right swing justice as the first-ever woman on the U.S. Supreme Court, and whatever else I can't even think of right now that surely would piss off today's teabaggers.

Huntsman certainly is no further to the left than Reagan.

Departing only occasionally from one's party's own orthodoxy isn't enough to claim legitimately one is a "moderate."

And if he runs for President, people here who think he's a moderate will change their tune fast, as he campaigns and makes clear where he stands on issue after issue, contrasting himself to whatever people here want to call "moderate."

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


[ Parent ]
I don't want to play a huge
guessing game about his positions, since there isn't a huge record of them. So I am simply going to say that he's changed his mind on something fairly big for a Republican from Utah and hasn't shown the hostility to even talking about the environment that most Republicans have shown, but also that he's interested in making government work, even if he wants to make it smaller than a lot of people. This almost certainly doesn't him a moderate, either on his own or in comparison to others. But considering it's hard to get people from that party to do anything but act like children, it's a sharp contrast.

I don't think he'd run for president as a Democrat, because he wouldn't survive a primary. I'm also not sure he'd run as a Republican, because once again, I'm not sure he'd survive a primary. I'm not even sure he'd survive as a Republican running for the Senate in Utah, although this is more of a guess than anything else. So, perhaps he could run as a Democrat for the Senate. He'd be the leader of the party from that state, and assuming his personal brand and the effects of incumbency stayed strong, he'd be able to camp out in that seat for as long as he likes. He'd get to have an influence on national affairs and have a fairly large influence, seeing as how he's a Democrat from Utah.

Once again, I don't this situation is particularly likely, but it seems likelier than running for president right now.  

"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 ]
Bleh. The Grammar Nazi
in me is appalled at the constant use of the same words in such a small number of sentences.


"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 ]
Right of center, like Ronald Reagan, maybe
At least that's the gist I get from his wikipedia page

Besides the political stuff, this is certainly attractive:

Huntsman is also a self-proclaimed fan of the progressive rock genre and on July 30, 2007, attended a concert by progressive metal band Dream Theater. Later that day, Huntsman signed a proclamation creating "Dream Theater Day" on that date for the state of Utah.

I could definitely see him wining the R nomination if Democratic control of the White House continues to '20 or '24.

But a truly bipartisan cabinet? Not a chance. When has a President had more than 2 members of the opposite party in his cabinet?


[ Parent ]
ND-Sen
I'd love to see a Berg vs. Grindberg primary. Grindberg would grind Berg.

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/


ba-dum TSSH!
http://instantrimshot.com/

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

[ Parent ]
The Teabagger/Underpants Gnome Playbook of Governance
Step 1: cut taxes and government's doing just about anything
Step 2: ???
Step 3: profit!

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

Except
I think in Nassau County, he didn't even cut services.

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 ]
Well, cutting services is unpopular...
Can't it all just be pain in funny money?

[ Parent ]
With present dire state of Democratic party in Louisiana
i don't expect any serious candidate to run against Jindal (barring big scandal or something like that). No one will want to get at most 30-35% and ruin his chances for the future. More likely Democrats will concentrate on one of the lower state offices (SoS?) and try to win at as a possible stepping stone fot 2015 elections (i don't take into account AG and Caldwell, both because of his age and conservatism, making him, may be, more conservative then Jindal himself)


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