Monday, October 30, 2006
Monday Independent Expenditure Round-Up
Posted by James L.Lots of goodies to be found in Monday night's independent expenditure filings. Here are some highlights:
• The NRCC is playing it safe: they're going up on the air to defend Rick Renzi (AZ-01), Doug Lamborn (CO-05), Mark Souder (IN-03), Ron Lewis (KY-02), and Gil Gutknecht (MN-01). The defense of Souder is especially surprising, given the rock-ribbed Republican nature of the district, but an internal poll that they also paid for today might explain why. In total, they've spent nearly $125k defending Souder, with that figure increasing dramatically soon once the ad time is booked in the next day or so. When the NRCC has to put up precious dollars defending their hold on James Dobson's home turf, you know that we've done a good job expanding the playing field.
• Aside from their top-tier targets, the DCCC is stepping up to the plate with advertisements in NH-02 both in support of Paul Hodes and against Charile Bass, and in NY-25 with ads supporting Democratic challenger Dan Maffei. More ads are on the way against incumbents Cathy McMorris in WA-05 and Lewis in KY-02.
• MoveOn.org is launching a sneak attack on the suddenly vulnerable Republican Rep. Melissa Hart (PA-04) with a $240,000 ad buy and another $167,000 on attack ads and mailings against Thelma Drake (VA-02).
(Edit--I originally titled this diary "Tuesday Independent Expenditure Round-Up". I guess it's one of those weeks where I'm wishing we could just get on with it!)
Posted at 11:42 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
NRCC/NRSC Target List Leaked?
Posted by James L.Chris Bowers has managed to score a stunning leak from the GOP: a seemingly full list (although it looks about a week out of date) of seats that the NRSC and NRCC are defending and targeting this cycle, complete with internal "rankings" of the likelihood of these seats changing hands.
The preliminary findings: they've written off Conrad Burns and Michael Steele in the Senate, and Graf, Sekula-Gibs, Padgett and Sherwood in the House, while also identifying 2 other Senate seats and 10 other House seats as leaning towards Democratic control.
Check it out; it's well worth a look. One of the most eye-opening things is that the NRCC is listing OH-02 as a toss-up (a race that the DCCC has yet to intervene in, although the NRCC mysteriously lists it as a race with DCCC ads, according to Bowers' chart).
Update: On second thought, doesn't this thing seem like it's a pile of bullshit? The DCCC is NOT running ads against Walsh, Schmidt, Bass, Porter, or Schmidt, contrary to what this list is telling you. There is no way the NRCC could be that sloppy.
Posted at 05:45 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, October 20, 2006
MO-Sen: Michael J. Fox's Powerful Message
Posted by James L.It's not difficult to imagine the political fatigue of Missourians after months of negative ads cluttering the airwaves, but it's hard not to find a message like this resonant.
You can help Claire here.
Posted at 06:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, October 19, 2006
House and Senate Races Round-up: Cash, Ratings Changes, Polls & More!
Posted by James L.So much news has been buzzing around this week, and boy, has it ever been difficult to restrain myself and study for my midterms while the walls of Fortress GOP come tumbling down. But now that I have a little spare time, let's take a look at recent developments:
• MT-Sen: Harry Reid has promised Jon Tester a seat on the Appropriations Committee should he defeat Conrad Burns this November. Tester has promised to make sure that Montana gets its fair share of earmarks, while at the same time ensuring that the process receives "full public scrutiny". Seems like it could be a tough balancing act for most unprincipled politicians, but something about Jon Tester feels different. This development should help boost his argument that Montana has nothing to lose by embracing change this year.
• Party committee fundraising receipts are in for the month of September: the DCCC raised $14.4m and entered October with $36m cash-on-hand. The DSCC raised $13.6m and had $23m CoH as the month began. The DNC raised $5.6m in September (with an additional $1m coming in during the last two days, reportedly) and entered October with $8.6m CoH. The DNC has taken out a loan in the ballpark of $5m to $10m to help aid the DSCC's efforts to run the table in the Senate (a very wise strategy), and also expects to spend $25m on "election day activities".
Meanwhile, the NRCC raised $12m in September, and ended the month with $40m CoH. The NRSC raised an underwhelming $5.1m and trailed the DSCC in CoH as well, with $12m in the bank. The RNC had a formidable $26m CoH, and they plan to push a large chunk of that money into shoring up their Senate seats (a job that the NRSC is haplessly underperforming at).
The DCCC has made some noises about taking out a large loan and pumping money into 2nd tier districts, but their most recent expenditure--$12 million--has mostly been funneled to top-tier targets. The clock is ticking on the chance to expand the battlefield. In 2004, the DCCC took out a loan to help fund for its defense of redistricted incumbents in Texas (a largely futile task, save for the defense of Chet Edwards), and I see no reason not to turn the tables around and launch a salvo deep into 2nd and 3rd tier territory. I'm sure that the DCCC has more planned--a lot more--but the exact scope is not yet clear.
• Ratings changes galore! Charlie Cook (10/18):
ID-Gov (OPEN): Likely Republican to Lean Republican
RI-Gov (Carcieri): Lean Republican to Toss Up
TX-Gov (Perry): Solid Republican to Likely RepublicanHOUSE RATINGS CHANGE:
AZ-01 (Renzi): Solid Republican to Likely Republican
CA-50 (Bilbray): Solid Republican to Likely Republican
ID-01 (Open): Likely Republican to Lean Republican
KS-02 (Ryun): Solid Republican to Likely Republican
MN-01 (Gutknecht): Likely Republican to Lean Republican
CQ Politics (in the last 7 days):
WA-08 (Reichert): Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite
PA-04 (Hart): Republican Favored to Leans Republican
NE-03 (OPEN): Safe Republican to Republican Favored
MN-01 (Gutknecht): Republican Favored to Leans Republican
PA-07 (Weldon): Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite to Leans Democratic
ID-01 (OPEN): Safe Republican to Republican Favored
CO-Gov (OPEN): No Clear Favorite to Leans Democratic
RI-Sen (Chafee): No Clear Favorite to Leans Democratic
NM-01 (Wilson): Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite
OH-15 (Pryce): Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite
NC-11 (Taylor): Leans Republican to No Clear Favorite
MA-Gov (Open): No Clear Favorite to Democrat Favored
• NY-26: From the seemingly Bad News Dept., SUSA has a new poll showing Tom Reynolds back on top of Jack Davis, by a 49-46 margin. That's still pretty hairy, and SUSA notes that a phone disruption actually caused this poll to undersample a crucial Democratic area that favored Davis by 11 points, indicating that this race is even tighter than these numbers suggest. I'd wait for another poll (which SUSA promises shortly) before making too many assumptions. But one assumption that would be unhealthy for us to make is that Tom Reynolds' political career is over.
• KY-03: From the Great News Dept., SUSA has another poll showing Democratic challenger John Yarmuth running neck-and-neck with entrenched Republican incumbent Anne Northup (likely voters, 9/29 results in parens):
John Yarmuth (D): 48 (44)
Anne Northup (R-Inc.): 47 (50)
MoE: ±4.3%
Lots of people wrote Yarmuth off, including me, given Northup's solid cred as a battle-tested, effective campaigner. It looks like we could end up with a big egg on our faces, though. (One guy who never did, however, is the Bluegrass Report's Mark Nickolas.) From a distance, Northup's campaign doesn't seem to be engaging Yarmuth effectively, and the Democratic lean of Louisville is putting her at serious risk this year. Northup still has an insane amount of resources to spend on apocalyptic TV ads, and it might help her seal the deal. Or it may not. If you're in the area, Get Out The Vote. This election is about picking up as much low-hanging fruit as possible--it's about base motivation. The Republicans appear to be ready for the challenge. How about the Democrats? It's up to you to write that story.
Posted at 05:48 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, October 16, 2006
CT-Sen: Schlesinger (R) Hits it Out of the Park
Posted by James L.Or, at least, that's what I've been hearing about today's three-way debate between Ned Lamont, Joe Lieberman and Republican stalwart Alan Schlesinger. I was in class, but all of the post-debate reports I've read have said that Schlesinger projected intelligent, principled conservative ideas, genuine emotion, and spirit. If I were Joe Lieberman, I'd start getting nervous about chunks of Republicans returning home to vote for the principled conservative of this race: Alan Schlesinger.
Posted at 03:40 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, October 09, 2006
Gallup: Democrats Have a 23-Point Lead
Posted by James L.Four weeks before congressional elections, a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows Democrats hold a 23-point lead over GOP candidates. That's double the lead Republicans had a month before they seized control of Congress in 1994.President Bush's approval rating was 37%, down from 44% in a Sept. 15-17 poll. The approval rating for Congress was 24%, down 5 points from last month.
The plummeting GOP ratings in the poll of 1,007 adults, taken Friday through Sunday, come after a series of dismal developments for the party. They include high levels of violence in Iraq; a National Intelligence Estimate that contradicted upbeat administration statements on Iraq; a new Bob Woodward book about internal White House disagreements over Iraq policy, and the Sept. 29 resignation of GOP Rep. Mark Foley hours after reports that he exchanged sexually explicit instant messages with teenage House pages.
Last month's poll showed a bounce for Bush and Republicans following the fifth anniversary of 9/11 and a party-wide focus on terrorism. "Not only is it gone, but the Democrats have momentum," Democratic strategist Anita Dunn said.
She called the Foley scandal "the absolute crystallization for people of everything they dislike about Washington and the congressional Republicans."
Last month, Gallup had Democrats and Republicans tied at 48% each among likely voters. There are lots of caveats about generic ballot polls--namely, the pesky tendency for voters to voice their party preference, and yet remain reluctant to actually fire their incumbent Representative at the polls. Still, 23 points is full-scale disaster territory. Even the much-vaunted GOP turnout operation can't stop that kind of bleeding.
Posted at 04:26 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
CT-Sen: Cutest Ad Ever
Posted by James L.Ain't nobody who can do it like Hillsman can.
Posted at 11:06 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, September 29, 2006
VA-Sen: Say Hello to Spitgate
Posted by James L.First it was Macacagate. Then it was Deerheadgate, and, uh, Rugbygate. The slow drip of questions surrounding George Allen's racist past have turned into an all-out deluge this week with witness after witness stepping out of the woodwork and revealing more incidents of Allen's legacy of racism.
But forget about all that stuff for a moment. Lost in the shuffle of these explosive revelations is another one of Allen's nasty habits that speaks volumes to his character: George Allen likes to spit on women's feet. It sounds ridiculous, I know, but bear with me and say hello to Spitgate.
First, check out this Dailykos diary posted by a former writer for a Southwest Virginia newspaper to set the mood (emphasis added):
Mr. Allen visited our town to announce a major contract for the local defense plant. I was there because my editor had sent me. [...]Governor Allen rode up in a big recreational vehicle. He looked so tall as he came out of the house-on-wheels. He was wearing a nice suit and his hair was neatly combed. He smiled and worked his way into the platoon of defense workers, who seemed to be all men. I looked around and realized I was the only female standing on the pavement in the sunshine. How about that?
I listened to what the governor was saying. My editor had told me Mr. Allen would talk about jobs and how wonderful this new defense contract was. I listened carefully, but the governor did not say a word about jobs. Instead, he made a few jokes with the workers, then he pulled a small, flat can from his jacket pocket. He asked if anybody else "dipped." One of the workers said yes, he dipped, but not the same brand, and all the men laughed.
Mr. Allen used his fingers to pinch out a clump of the finely chopped tobacco; he mashed it into his mouth and grinned, licking his lips. His bottom lip pooched out where he had lodged the tobacco. The other men chuckled like they were having a grand time.
Then the governor walked toward a building with some men who were not part of the platoon of workers. These other men were clearly Important; they wore suits. One of the suits had already told me I was not allowed to go into the building because a defense plant has Secrets.
I followed along as the governor walked, waiting to hear him say something about jobs. The situation began to look as if I would have to return to the newspaper office without hearing him say anything about "our fine workers." I didn't understand; I had to ask a question.
I stepped near the governor and smiled, told him my name and that I wrote for the local newspaper. Then I asked him a softball question, what some reporters call a "set-up."
"Does Southwest Virginia need these jobs?" I asked.
He stopped and looked straight at me. He had to look down at me, because he stood so tall in those cowboy boots. I thought I spotted a twinkle in his eye, and for a moment, I suspected he might give a humorous, light-hearted answer. Then he leaned forward and looked all the way down at the pavement. I figured he was planning a perfectly crafted answer to my question. I put pen to paper, ready to take it down. His lips puckered as if he might speak.
Then, the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia gathered up a glob of tobacco-laced saliva. He used his lips to squirt it out, as if he had practiced. The spit landed just at the tip of my shoe. He grinned, but didn't say a word. Then he walked into the building.
Rude, boorish, and completely disgusting, to be sure, but it's just a weird isolated story, right? Wrong. You don't have to dig deep to find numerous eerily similar stories on Allen's behavior around women when he's got a nasty gob of tobacco in his mouth. In fact, when I first read that diary, my mind was jarred as I recalled a story that Sarah Carter, the daughter of Nevada Senatorial candidate Jack Carter and granddaughter of President Jimmy Carter, shared in a July DailyKos comment:
My husband’s family lives in Virginia. Several years ago, his little sister went with a friend to a parade where George Allen was making an appearance, and her friend’s Mom got a chance to speak to Allen. While they were talking, he was chewing tobacco. He spit on the ground and a fleck of brown spittle landed on my sister-in-law’s shoe. She was horrified.So now you know: George Allen spits on little girls.
Sarah
Seeing a pattern emerge yet? No? Well, here's some more, courtesy of the New Republic's Ryan Lizza:
It's credible enthusiasm given that, this afternoon, Allen resembles a froufrou version of Toby Keith. He is wearing a blue button-down shirt and brown pants accented with a fat brass belt buckle that says virginia in stylized, countrified letters. And, of course, he's wearing the cowboy boots. They are black, broken in, and vaguely reptilian. From his back pocket, he removes a tin of Copenhagen--"the brand of choice for adult consumers who identify with its rugged, individual and uncompromising image," according to the company--and taps a fat wad of the tobacco between his lip and gum using an impressive one-handed maneuver. As the scrum breaks up, Allen turns away and spits a long brown streak of saliva into the dirt, just missing one of his constituents, a carefully put-together, blonde, ponytailed woman approaching the senator for an autograph. She stops in her tracks and stares with disgust at the bubbly tobacco juice that almost landed on her feet. Without missing a beat, Allen's communications director, John Reid, reassures her: "That's just authenticity!".
"Authenticity," John, or just another one of George Allen's disturbing personal habits? Or just another one of his ways of demeaning people?
No, I'm not done yet. There's yet another story of Allen's salivary dark arts, this time from the letters section of the Bristol Herald Courier. The original page seems to be scrubbed, but luckily Google's cache caught it for posterity:
I was not surprised by Sen. Allen’s crude remarks aimed at a Democratic campaign worker. Several years ago, while I was engaged in research at the Dickenson County courthouse, I heard that then-Gov. Allen was on his way to a groundbreaking for the new Red Onion prison. A friend and I drove up to the site, not realizing until we arrived that it was a Republican-only event.Allen was escorted by a politician who, noting our presence, made some comment to him and pointed at us. We stood with a small semi-circle of onlookers waiting to shake Allen’s hand, but he deliberately skipped the two of us and continued shaking hands with others in the line.
He made a few remarks to the crowd and then stood with his back to us, turning once to aim a jet of tobacco spit directly at our feet. Although he had never met us before, he made us well aware of his sentiments. A small incident, yes, but very revealing of his attitude. He did not intend to treat Democrats with the slightest common courtesy.
So there you have it. Four separate stories of people stepping forward with George Allen's saliva on their shoes. The consensus is pretty clear: George Allen gets his kicks by spitting on or at people. Coincidentally, all of them have been women.
Posted at 01:03 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, September 28, 2006
MT-Sen: Conrad Burns Continues to Enjoy Taste of Own Feet
Posted by DavidNYCOh man. Conrad Burns must surely have the worst case of pedontophilia (aka "foot-in-mouth disease") known to man. He just can't shut up and stop making inappropriate remarks:
Republican Sen. Conrad Burns, who has gotten into hot water before for comments seen as disparaging various groups, joshingly remarked Thursday on the number of Italian-Americans at the Federal Aviation Administration.The Montana senator, facing a tough re-election fight against Democrat Jon Tester, was heading an aviation subcommittee hearing of the Commerce Committee when two FAA officials, Michael Cirillo and Nicholas Sabatini, introduced themselves as witnesses.
"I'm wondering if that's all they're hiring," Burns said of the federal agency.
Jebus. Burns is lucky the WaPo is covering for him, because these remarks are pretty awful. ("Joshingly" remarked? Man is that stilted.) Just imagine if he had said something similar about two black men or two Jews. This really is an addiction for Burns, though:
Also during Thursday's hearing, Burns asked witness Matt Andersson, senior aviation consultant for CRA International, about the spelling of his name. Andersson said it's the Swedish spelling."Oh, ja," Burns replied in a mock Swedish accent.
Republicans will tell us, as they always do, that we can't take a joke - in fact, that's the line Burnsie's flack is already taking. But if Conrad wants to keep making inappropriate statements in public settings, that only makes our job easier.
(Hat tip.)
Posted at 08:57 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
CT-Sen: PFAW Endorses Lamont
Posted by DavidNYCThe People for the American Way just endorsed Ned Lamont. They sum up the case for him - and against Joe Lieberman - with devastating brevity:
“Ned Lamont strongly backs public schools, while Joe Lieberman has voted for vouchers,” Collins said. “Ned Lamont fully supports privacy rights, while Joe Lieberman said legislative intervention was appropriate in the Terry Schiavo case. Joe Lieberman voted to confirm John Roberts to the Supreme Court and voted against a filibuster of the Samuel Alito nomination; Ned Lamont would forcefully oppose far-right nominees. And on other issues, from church-state separation to marriage equality to demonstrating a willingness to stand up to President Bush, Ned Lamont is clearly the better choice.”
It's heartening to see a progressive interest group understand the importance of caucus unity. I'm sure it must be tempting for many organizations to endorse "independent" Joe Lieberman to prove their foolish "non-partisan" credentials, so I'm glad to see that PFAW did not take the bait.
Ned Lamont, netroots candidate!
Posted at 03:56 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, September 23, 2006
HI-Sen, HI-02 Primary Results Open Thread (Akaka Wins!)
Posted by James L.It's primary day in Hawaii today. I'm not sure when results will be posted, but it looks like the polls will close around midnight eastern, and presumably results will be posted at the Hawaii Office of Elections website (thanks, Predictor).
I'm weirdly nervous about Akaka-Case given the anti-incumbent sentiment this year (Lieberman, Schwarz, McKinney, Wynn, & Chafee all knocked off or having received close calls) but hopefully Daniel K. will pull through today. I'd be seriously depressed if we'd have to deal with Ed Case in the Senate representing a state that doesn't require his brand of rightward-skewing "centrism" in order to be viable in a general election.
Discuss predictions, results, and thoughts here.
Update: Bumping this one up. The Honolulu Advertiser has a results page up... but this page looks like the best one to follow.
Update (II): It's an Akaka victory, 55-45. Normally I'd say that that's a hairy margin of victory for a incumbent senator, but this primary could have been much, much nastier. Kudos to Case for not going the Lieberman route.
Posted at 10:26 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Hawaii | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Pick a Patriot, Any Patriot...
Posted by James L.Russ Feingold's Progressive Patriots PAC is having another round of voting in its Pick a Progressive Patriot competition, this time for Senate challengers. More than just a $5,000 PAC donation, the winner will get a fundraising appeal by Feingold and his PAC. There are lots of good choices here who could use the scratch: Brown, Tester, McCaskill, Lamont, Carter, Webb... I don't know how you'll be able to make your mind. But once you do, vote here.
Posted at 05:57 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Fundraising | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
AZ-Sen: Pederson (D) Gains Ground on Kyl... But Why?
Posted by James L.Riddle me this...
SUSA has a new poll on the Arizona senate race showing some pretty surprising mo' for Democratic challenger Jim "Uncle Moneybags" Pederson (likely voters, July in parens):
Jim Pederson (D): 43 (40)
Jon Kyl (R): 48 (52)
MoE: ± 4.3%
So how, exactly, does a race that's only been competitive in the fantasy world of Zogby Interactive, with an incumbent Senator whose approval rating has been trending upward in the last few months (admittedly, 53% isn't stellar, but it's fairly solid), and a challenger who's been swamping the airwaves with TV ads for over five months to little noticeable effect in the polls, suddenly tighten to a five-point margin?
I'll be damned if I know. But I won't complain if this isn't an outlier:
Kyl gets 81% of Republican votes. Pederson gets 79% of Democrat votes. Independents break 5:3 for Pederson. Kyl leads by 13 points among White voters. Pederson leads by 16 points among Hispanic voters, who make up 16% of the Arizona electorate in SurveyUSA's turnout model.
Those are some rock-solid indie numbers for Pederson. In July, Pederson trailed Kyl by 10 points among independents. Why the sudden and dramatic conversion?
As an aside, Kerry edged Bush by 13 points among Latino voters in Arizona in 2004, which was a nine point improvement for Bush over 2000, according to CNN's exit polls. I'd like to think and hope that Pederson can post some better numbers from this community against a reactionary like Kyl. The long-term success of the Democratic Party may hinge on maintaining and solidifying a strong political association in this emerging voter bloc.
Update: The Phoenix Business Journal offers a hypothesis:
That spread is tighter than most previous polls and comes after a barrage of advertisements by Pederson faulting Kyl for failure to support a minimum wage hike and for being too cozy with oil and pharmaceutical companies.
A few weeks ago, I heard that the DSCC had earmarked something in the ballpark of $1.6m for this race. At the time, I thought that move was crazy, but if this poll is accurate (check out the comments section for some healthy skepticism), maybe it isn't such a bad idea after all.
Posted at 10:45 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, September 17, 2006
HI-Sen: Akaka Leading Case by 13
Posted by James L.The Honolulu Advertiser has a new poll out showing incumbent Democratic Senator Daniel K. Akaka leading his Liberesque conservative Democrat primary opponent, Rep. Ed Case, by a pretty comfortable margin over a week a way from the Sept. 23 election:
Daniel Akaka (D-Inc.): 51
Ed Case (D): 38
Undecided: 11
MoE: ±4%
Depending on how those undecideds will break, Akaka is looking pretty good on the 23rd. Thank God.
Posted at 01:55 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Hawaii | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
VA-Sen: Help Support the Most Effective Ad of the Year (and New SUSA Poll)
Posted by James L.I just want to reiterate what's been said by Markos and Stoller. This ad by VoteVets PAC is by far the most brilliant and effective ad I've seen this cycle:
Truly chilling. VoteVets has already gone up on the air in Virginia to help defeat George Allen, but they'd like to expand their air war to other states with vulnerable incumbent Republican senators up for re-election who voted against proper body armor. If you have the means, please consider donating to VoteVets PAC. If you contribute directly via their website, you'll get a chance to vote for the next senator who'll receive their own version of this ad aired against them. I can't tell you how thrilled I am to have an ad this crystal clear and effective on our side this year, but we need to expand this battle beyond Virginia. So if you've got any Big Money friends who are itching to help the Democrats take back the Senate this year, tell them to cut a $5,000 check to VoteVets PAC. It could be the most effective political investment you'll make this year. VoteVets is the real deal, too; just check out their list of advisors: Gen. Wesley Clark, Paul Hackett, Bob Kerrey, Leslie Gelb, etc.
And we'll need effective ads like this one by VoteVets in order to counter right-wing hysteria messages like this one.
UPDATE: Via the Political Wire, SurveyUSA has a new poll out today showing Allen edging Webb 48-45, with a 4.6% MoE. This is the exact same result as a poll done by SUSA three weeks ago, during the height of the macaca controversy, showing that Allen's racist gaffe has not been erased from the minds of voters (and given that Allen apologized again for the incident today, he knows he's in trouble).
Posted at 04:30 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
CT-Sen, TN-Sen: New SUSA Polls
Posted by James L.SUSA just released two new Senate polls today, one on the Tennessee Senate race (likely voters):
Harold Ford, Jr. (D): 48
Bob Corker (R): 45
MoE: ±4%
To the best of my knowledge, this is the first SurveyUSA poll of the Tennessee Senate race, so I don't have any trendlines for you, but this confirms the general tightening of the race shown in the (far less reliable) Rasmussen and Zogby Interactive polls, as well as Ford's own internals. Like I've said before, Democrats have a silver bullet that they can use against Corker--namely, the fact that he's completely unfit to hold public office after his abysmal record on providing emergency services as mayor of Chattanooga came to the fore. The Ford campaign and the DSCC should drive this theme hard, because America can ill-afford someone as irresponsible and reckless as Bob Corker in the Senate.
The second poll is far less heartening, but unsurprising:
Ned Lamont (D): 38
Joe Lieberman (Con. for Lie.): 51
Alan Schlesinger (R): 7
MoE: ±4%
Lamont allowed Lieberman to shape the post-primary narrative by taking a week off for a family vacation. While I'm sure Ned was exhausted, I'm afraid that this wasn't a tactically smart move. Ned has some catching up to do. Here's some key data:
Lieberman leads 6:1 among Republicans, 3:2 among Independents. Lamont leads 3:2 among Democrats. 83% of the Democrats who voted for Lieberman in the 08/08/06 Democratic Primary, which Lamont won by 4 points, stick with Lieberman as an Independent in the General Election. 16% of Democrats who voted for Lieberman in the Primary switch to Lamont in the General. 17% of Republicans support the Republican Party's nominee, Schlesinger.
It's been suggested on DailyKos and elsewhere that Ned should offer Schlesinger the chance to debate. At this point, why not? Anything to build up Schlesinger's profile and raise awareness of his conservative stances in order to shave off some support for Lieberman from his right flank would go a long way towards helping Lamont right now. I'm sure Schlesinger would jump at the chance (he needs all the free media he can get), and Lamont could bill it as a "major parties debate" separate from the three-way debates with Lieberman that should come later.
Posted at 06:59 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut, Tennessee | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, September 11, 2006
PA-Sen: Finally, Casey Shows Some Teeth
Posted by James L.You remember that saucy book by Rick Santorum? It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good? It was filled with such pearls of wisdom like this one:
Santorum questions whether both parents really need to work:In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might confess that both of them really don't need to, or at least may not need to work as much as they do. And for some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home. [Pg. 94]
It's filled with tons of wingnutty shit, like saying that it's inappropriate for unwed mothers with low levels of eduction to go back to college in order to better their job prospects. And holding it against mothers of any kind to hold a job outside their home in order to support their family. And calling public schools "weird". And supporting Social Security privatization.
Really, his whole book was filled with about two dozen negative ads waiting to be written. I've been waiting for Democratic challenger Bob Casey to release a few, but I guess he felt he didn't need to so far (and, when you've been 10 to 20 points ahead in the polls for months, maybe he had a point). However, in the last few weeks, Santorum's thrown a significant amount of resources into an effective barrage of TV advertising across the state, and the insiders are buzzing about a rumoured Casey internal poll showing Santorum trailing by only three points. It could very well be a b.s. story, but somehow, I wouldn't be surprised if it were true--especially now that I see Casey baring some fangs. A visit to the DSCC's website shows a new attack ad on Santorum prominently on the page, and it goes right for the jugular, attacking Santorum for criticizing working moms for earning the necessary incomes in order to put food on the table for their families. Bob Casey has the ad up on his website here, but the tech genius responsible for the website did a horrendous cropping job with it, so I'd recommend the DSCC version instead.
I'm not sure what kind of excuses Santorum will throw up for his shameless attacks on working families, but who knows, maybe he'll get his kids to defend himself again.
Update: Thanks to Mike at the DSCC, we now have the ad up on YouTube:
Again, good stuff. Casey is starting to hit where he needs to hit.
Posted at 01:22 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, September 10, 2006
NV-Sen: Jack Carter Hospitalized, Jimmy Steps In
Posted by James L.First off, our thoughts go out to Jack Carter, who was hospitalized on Thursday for complications from colitis. Thankfully, Jack's doctor says that he's responding well to treatment. Let's wish Jack a speedy recovery so he can go back to pounding the pavement in the Nevada Senate race this fall.
That said, the Carter For Nevada campaign couldn't have found a better substitute for Jack at his recent campaign events:
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA -- The 39th President of the United States, Jimmy Carter, delighted the crowd as a surprise guest speaker this afternoon at the Fiestas Patrias (Mexican Independence Day Festival) at Freedom Park in Las Vegas.President Carter and former First Lady Rosalynn Carter arrived in Las Vegas this morning to visit their son at Summerlin Hospital, where he is recovering from complications from severe colitis. However, by midday, Jack Carter – the Democratic nominee for United States Senator – was responding well enough to treatment that his father felt comfortable leaving his bedside to speak on Jack’s behalf.
The President – accompanied by his grandson, Jason Carter -- addressed the crowd in Spanish, urging those who haven’t already done so to register and then to vote in this fall’s election. He directed members of the largely-Hispanic audience to a tent at the festival at which they could conveniently register.
Later, President Carter told reporters that his son’s campaign is not deterred by his illness, and that Jack is eager to resume campaigning. The President said, “The campaign is well organized.” He added that he is upbeat about his son’s chances in the November 7th election.
"Jack’s opponent has been among the most subservient members of the United States Senate," President Carter said, pointing to John Ensign’s voting record, which is in nearly-total support of Bush administration policies.
How cool is that? Anyway, please put Jack Carter and his family in your thoughts this week. Get well soon, Jack!
Posted at 09:43 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Nevada | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
VA-Sen: Mason-Dixon Has Webb Within Four
Posted by James L.Mason-Dixon, one of the best in the biz, confirms what we've been seeing in the recent SurveyUSA and Rasmussen polls (with Zogby Interactive being just a little too optimistic for Webb)--Webb has the big mo' (likely voters, July in parens):
Jim Webb (D): 42 (32)
George Felix Allen, Jr. (R): 46 (48)
Undecided: 12 (20)
MoE: ±4%
Here's the Macaca Effect at work:
While most voters said the “macaca” comment did little to change their minds about the race, Allen’s unfavorable rating increased from 23 percent to 31 percent between July and September. The percentage of undecided voters dropped from 20 percent to 12 percent, with Webb the apparent beneficiary of that shift. Webb’s support among black voters increased from 39 percent to 73 percent.“It’s pretty easy to draw a straight line from that to the 'macaca,’ ” said Brad Coker, the managing director of the Mason-Dixon poll.
[...]
Allen has a 9-point lead over Webb in Southwest and Southside Virginia and greater margins in the Shenandoah Valley and the Richmond area. But Webb holds a 13-point lead in vote-rich Northern Virginia, an area that was critical to the 2005 victory of Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine.
If Webb can energize the NoVA vote, Allen is in for a world of pain in November. The best part about these numbers is that they were taken before Webb got on the air in any meaningful way. Webb's first TV ads start tomorrow, I believe, and, as MyDD notes, Schumer has hooked up Webb with Tim Kaine's ad guy. Webb is still a relative unknown quantity in Virginia; as his fundraising and airtime escalates, the chances of this race tightening, or even shifting to Webb are much greater.
The recipe for victory is here. All we need is for Webb and the DSCC to step up and make sure it happens.
Posted at 12:53 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
CT-Sen: It's a Trap!
Posted by DavidNYCTurns out old Admiral Ackbar was right.
"It's a trap!"
From the LieberBlog (no link, find it yourselves):
Democratic deliberationIs this the Lamont campaign's idea of civil discourse?
[Some snarky comment.](Posted in our comments by LiebermanForLieberman at 1:23 pm on 09.06.06 - )
So predictable, those Con-for-Lie folks.
Posted at 06:52 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Gallup Releases Eight New Gov & Sen Polls
Posted by DavidNYCAnd fortunately for us, TPM Cafe has handily collected them in one place:
| Race | Dem | GOP |
|---|---|---|
| MN-GOV | Hatch (D) 44% | Pawlenty (R) 43% |
| PA-GOV | Rendell (D) 57% | Swann (R) 35% |
| OH-GOV | Strickland (D) 52% | Blackwell (R) 36% |
| PA-SEN | Casey (D) 56% | Santorum (R) 38% |
| OH-SEN | Brown (D) 46% | DeWine (R) 40% |
| MT-SEN | Tester (D) 48% | Burns (R) 45% |
| MO-SEN | Talent (R) 50% | McCaskill (D) 44% |
| MN-SEN | Klobuchar (D) 50% | Kennedy (R) 40% |
In fact, it looks like TPM Cafe's Election Central is pretty serious about rounding up all manner of polls, so this may be a good resource to bookmark.
Posted at 01:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2006 Elections - State | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
TN-Sen: Ford's Silver Bullet
Posted by James L.I haven't blogged much about the Tennessee Senate race so far this cycle, mostly due to the fact that I've never viewed it as particularly competitive--or even potentially competitive. Harold Ford, Jr. has been on the air with an ever-changing array of (impressive) campaign commercials for a long time, and yet his polling numbers remained flatlined in the low 40s (at best) against his potential Republican opponents during the primary. That's starting to change now that Tennessee Republicans have selected former Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker in a nasty three-way primary. Fragments of the conservative Republican base in Tennessee have been less than enthused over a nominee who was on record as a supporter of abortion rights in his first run for the Senate in 1994 (he's since changed his tune), but discontent among the conservative base in Tennessee is not what's making me feel optimistic about Ford's chances this November. Instead, it's Bob Corker's absolutely galling record of incompetence as mayor of Chattanooga. DailyKos diarist and Ford booster R o o k has more here and here. But if you want the 30 second Sparknotes version, just watch this:
In 2001, when Bob Corker took office, understaffing of Chattanooga's 911 emergency repsonse center was already a problem, with 8.8% of 911 calls going unanswered. Over his tenure, that rate steadily increased, hitting 14.9% in 2004 (Corker's last full year as mayor). In 2005, the year in question for the DSCC's ad, unanswered calls hit 16.9%, or 31,000. Now, Corker's campaign is raising an absolutely ridiculous defense, saying that blaming Corker for the gross shortcomings of 2005 is "misleading" because Corker's term expired four months into that year. Well, excuse me, Bob, it was your failures as mayor that caused the 911 emergency response rate to drop during your term and beyond. From the Chattanooga Times Free Press (03/30/06):
A retired Chattanooga police chief said former Mayor Bob Corker thwarted efforts to improve 911 operations by refusing to fund more communications positions."I asked for communications officers in every budget, especially under the Corker administration, and each time it was denied," former police Chief Jimmie Dotson said this week from Houston, Texas, where he now lives. "(We) spent many, many, many hours battling the Corker administration asking for communications officers."
Not only that, but Corker's budgetary irresponsibilites as mayor actually resulted in fewer 911 operators on shift at any given time:
In March 2004, Lt. Tara Pedigo wrote in a Chattanooga Police Department internal memo that there was not "sufficient" staffing to prevent unanswered or abandoned emergency phone calls.Eight months later, Lt. Pedigo, who since has retired, announced that minimum staffing levels would be lowered, as she had been instructed to cut back on overtime within the communications division, according to a document.
There are some things that a mayor just has to do. Ensuring a properly staffed and managed emergency response system is one of them. Under Bob Corker, a bad 911 system in Chattanooga got even worse, and the lives and saftey of thousands of Tennesseans was put at risk. To be blunt, the buck stops with Bob. If he can't ensure life-or-death services to his constituents as mayor, he has no business being in the United States Senate, let alone any public office, anywhere.
Ford has now been handed an absolutely potent line of attack to make against Corker, and the NRSC is scrambling to get this ad off the air with the threat of completely frivolous lawsuits against the TV stations airing the DSCC commercial. National Republicans have been saying for months that their incumbents are safe because they will employ their strength on "local issues" to survive low approval ratings for President Bush and his Republican Congress. If they want to play that game, fine. With Bob Corker's appalling record on local issues now on the ballot, Harold Ford has an excellent opportunity to prove that Democrats can play the local game and win.
If I were Ford, I would ride the issue of Bob Corker's reckless incompetence relentlessly until November 7.
Posted at 06:52 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Tennessee | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Avoid the Noid
Posted by DavidNYCJoe Lieberman's new blog is supposedly going live tomorrow - but given their success with matters technical, I'll take the over on this one. Anyhow, as soon as I heard about this bold new venture from Joementum, I figured it had to be a set-up, some kind of rope-a-dope. Atrios has already explained why, so I'll let him take it:
It's basically going to be a trap to entice people to say mean things about the Last Honest Man so they can go whine to the press about how mean everyone is unlike Stay the Course Joe. I give it about 36 hours until they send out a press release along those lines. I don't know why they're obsessed with pointing out how nobody likes Joe, but it seems to be their campaign strategy for some reason.
Exactly right. So please, please don't feed the trolls. Or, as Domino's Pizza used to say back in the 80s, Avoid the Noid. There are a thousand other blogs where we can spend our time - we don't need to take the bait and wallow in the inevitable muck of the LieberBlog. Just stay away. You'll be much happier that way. I promise.
Posted at 12:16 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, September 01, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman Respected Primaries... Six Years Ago
Posted by James L.Via CT Bob:
From an appearance on CNN'S Larry King on October 31, 2000, immediately before the 2000 election. Hat tip to UptownNYChick on FDL.Larry asked Joe about the fact that he was running for Senate reelection and VP simultaneously. Here's the transcript:
KING: Any second thoughts on staying on the ballot in Connecticut for the Senate?LIEBERMAN: No, it's over. I did what the folks in the Connecticut Democratic Party who nominated me asked me to do. I will abide by the decision of the people of Connecticut.
So what's changed in the past six years that has made you lose respect for the people of Connecticut, Joe?
Meanwhile, SSP alumnus Tim Tagaris at the Official Lamont blog shares a giddy Fox News clip about Joe Lieberman's ass-headed campaign that's attempting to boost GOP incumbents statewide:
My favorite part: Lieberman whispering in Republican Congressman Chris Shays' ear to hold off from slipping him the tongue in front of the cameras. Gross.
Meanwhile, populist progressive Democrat Ned Lamont continues to show why he's a party builder by sending out a fundraising appeal for CT-05 Democratic challenger Chris Murphy.
Posted at 03:33 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, August 31, 2006
VA-Sen: Webb's Son Deployed to Iraq Early
Posted by James L.From a campaign e-mail:
I wanted to send a note to you today, as a supporter of Jim's campaign and someone who cares about the direction of this country. As many of you know, Jim's son Jimmy, an infantry Lance Corporal in the Marine Corps, has been scheduled to be deployed to Iraq for a number of months. In the last few days, Jimmy learned he would be deploying next week. While Labor Day is the traditional kickoff to the Election and Jim already made many commitments to do events throughout the state, including events with Governor Tim Kaine and Governor Mark Warner, we hope you understand at this time that Jim wants to have time with his son. He will be taking Jimmy back to Camp Lejeune on Monday and will spend time with him and his unit before their deployment.Jim wishes to emphasize that he is not unlike the thousands of parents and families who are sending their children and loved ones to war but that it is important to him that he has some private moments with his son before he deploys. Regardless of the political aspects of this war and your feelings towards it, it's important we keep our thoughts and prayers with the soldiers we are sending into harm's way.
Thank you for your understanding and continued support.
Let's all put Jim Webb and his family in our thoughts this week.
On the web: Jim Webb for Senate
Posted at 07:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
RI-Sen: Laffey 51, Chafee 34
Posted by James L.So says a new Rhode Island College poll (likely Republican primary voters; June in parens):
Lincoln Chafee (R-Inc.): 34 (36)
Steve Laffey (R-Club For Growth): 51 (39)
MoE: ±5.1%
Whoa. Now, I've been hearing a lot of whispers that Chafee has been running a surprisingly poor campaign, including a completely uninspired debate performance, but still, this poll comes as something of a shock. This isn't my favorite kind of poll for two reasons: 1) that MoE is just too darn high, and 2) it doesn't attempt to identify independent voters who will cast ballots in the Republican primary. There's no way for us to tell how many of these indies will turn out, and whom for.
Check out this money quote, though:
"Since early summer, Senator Chafee has been unable to expand his base of support from roughly one third of the likely Republican primary voters. The Lieberman phenomenon, where a partisan base closes ranks around the 'true partisan' candidate, seems to be at work in Rhode Island, as it was on the Democratic side in Connecticut. Laffey's efforts to link Chafee with the extremely unpopular President Bush also appear to be paying off," said Profughi.
Confounding. Laffey is somehow tying Chafee--the only Republican Senator who was consistently against the Iraq War from the very start--to Bush, and it's working. Not only that, it's working to sour the Republican base on Chafee. Damn, I guess Bush's 76% disapproval rating in Rhode Island cuts pretty deeply into the insignificant base of registered Republicans there, too.
As you may know, Swing State is collectively rooting for Club For Growth's Steve Laffey to crush Chafee in the primary. If you still don't know why, just refer back to these poll numbers to give yourself a better idea as to why a Laffey candidacy will be a windfall for Democratic nominee Sheldon Whitehouse (as well as the DSCC, who can afford to channel money elsewhere should Laffey win).
Posted at 03:27 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
VA-Sen: Here Comes the Cavalry
Posted by James L.From the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
With three polls showing the U.S. Senate race close after George Allen's alleged racial remark, national Democrats yesterday pledged dollars to Jim Webb.The latest survey, by Zogby International, gives Webb, once a long shot, a statistically insignificant lead over the Republican incumbent, who has been sidetracked for two weeks for addressing a Webb volunteer staff member of Indian descent as "macaca."
Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said his group -- the political arm of the Senate Democratic Conference -- will donate an unspecified amount to Webb.
Schumer earlier this summer was noncommittal about directing cash and services to Webb.
"We think this is a neck-and-neck race," Schumer told report- ers when asked about the impact of the Allen controversy. "We plan to provide Jim Webb with the kinds of resources he needs to win."
Schumer's promise comes amid a dramatic shift in the Virginia contest, one triggered by Allen's oral blunder, which apparently has cost his re-election effort momentum and threatens to derail his presidential ambitions in 2008.
Webb has badly trailed Allen in fund raising. After the June primary, he had $424,245 in cash to $6.6 million for Allen. Webb said yesterday in Norfolk that he has collected $2 million since winning the nomination.
"We think we have a very good chance of winning in Virginia," said Schumer.
In related news, Webb's netroots coordinator, Lowell Feld, has a Dailykos diary up highlighting some big names headlining upcoming fundraisers for Webb: 1) fellow authors Stephen King and John Grisham in Charlottsville on Sept. 24 and 2) Gov. Mark Warner on Sept. 21 in Old Town Alexandria. However, he doesn't give any specifics on the upcoming President Clinton fundraiser for Webb.
Let's hope this late push is enough. The last thing I want to see is the DSCC kicking itself over waiting this one out too long.
Posted at 01:04 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
CT-Sen: ARG Shows a Tight Race
Posted by James L.Great news for Netroots candidate Ned Lamont: a new American Research Group poll shows Lamont and Lieberman neck-and-neck in the general election, contrasting with the latest QPoll that showed Lieberman up 53-41. From the ARG (August 17-21, likely voters, no trendlines):
Ned Lamont (D): 42
Joe Lieberman (I): 44
Alan "Gold" Schlesinger (R): 3
Undecided: 11
(MoE: ±3.5%)
ARG shows Ned's favorability rating at 47-34, and Lieberman's at 56-41. More interestingly, Lamont is picking up 18% of Republican voters (to Lieberman's 57%), while Lieberman's edge among independent voters is only 10 points (48-38)--not a daunting edge at this stage of the game.
Word on the street says that these numbers closely mirror the latest Rasmussen poll, which also shows a narrow two-point lead for Lieberman. Not that I put much stock in Rasmussen, but two nearly identical polls can't be discounted completely. If anything is clear right now, it's that the Connecticut Senate race is still well within reach for Lamont, and Lieberman's much-vaunted general election invincibility is nothing more than a myth.
Support Ned Lamont and the Netroots candidates today.
Posted at 11:16 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, August 18, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman Hires Democrat Slayer
Posted by James L.From the Hotline:
Joe Lieberman's indie CT SEN campaign sent out a release to announce the hiring of two new consultants: media/direct mail consultant Josh Isay and pollster Neil Newhouse. Isay mostly works with Dems, with his most prominent former employer being Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), the current DSCC chair...The more curious hiring, of course, is Newhouse, a partner in one of the most prestigious Republican polling firms in the country, Public Opinion Strategies. On the merits, Newhouse is a great hire as he and his firm have one of the best reputations in the business, both with their clients and with the media, including us. But what makes the hiring curious is that Newhouse is a Republican and has a slew of clients who will likely raise the ire of Democrats, particularly activist Democrats.
This cycle, Newhouse's most notable client is PA Sen. Rick Santorum. (Subscribers, click here of The Hotline's consultant scorecard.) The Lieberman release, of course, makes no mention of Santorum, but does note Newhouse's client relationship with the very popular GOP CT Gov. Jodi Rell. Newhouse is also the chief pollster for one of the Democrats' top House targets, CT 02 GOP Rep. Rob Simmons.
In '04, the firm worked for the biggest Dem killer of the cycle, John Thune, who knocked off Tom Daschle. And in '02, the firm's biggest name client? None other than a Bush, Jeb Bush, that is, in FL.
Unbelievable. For a full list of Public Opinion Strategies' clients, see here. You'll instantly notice that there are no Democratic clients to be found. What you will find is a laundry list that includes some of the most odious Republicans of our times: Sen. Saxby Chambliss (the guy who smeared triple-amputee Max Cleland as Bin Laden enabler), creaky old bigot Sen. Jim Bunning, and of course, Sen. Rick Santorum and Sen. John Thune (the Daschle slayer).
The most troubling bit about the news may rest in the fact that Newhouse's other Connecticut client is Rep. Rob Simmons, who is a top target of the DCCC and Joe Courtney. Lieberman is now essentially using Republican tools, Republican capital, and Republican consultants to mobilize the same Republican voters that Courtney and the other Democratic challengers need to de-energize in order to win. The pure gall of this move is disgusting, and it paints a sharp picture that Lieberman is for himself and himself only. He doesn't care about electing three new Democrats to the House--he's more than willing to toss them overboard if it means he can work the Republican field and win.
I wonder how Lieberman's Senate Democratic colleagues feel now that they know that Lieberman is paying the same guy who ended the political careers of Tom Daschle and Max Cleland. I wonder if they feel as good about letting Lieberman keep his seniority and committee assignments.
Posted at 04:19 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
WA-08: And So Do We
Posted by James L.Here's the first sign that Ned Lamont's media campaign is gaining notice and respect from other political ad firms: check out Netroots candidate Darcy Burner's first tv ad (60 seconds, WMV). Wait for the end and try not to do a spit take.
Posted at 03:12 AM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut, Washington | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, August 17, 2006
CT-Sen: Q-Poll Shows Lieberman Up Twelve
Posted by DavidNYCQuinnipiac's latest (likely voters w/leaners, no trendlines):
Lamont (D): 41
Lieberman (I): 53
Schlesinger (R): 4
(MoE: ±3%)
Quite clearly, Lieberman is the GOP candidate at this point - at least, from the perspective of Republican voters. Even the pollster agrees:
"Sen. Lieberman's support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing. It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats. As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran Senator will be hard to beat," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D.
But note this: Among registered voters (as opposed to likely voters), Lieberman's lead is similar (49-38). Yet just a month ago, it was 51-27. That's some serious shrinkage. The good news for Lamont: 32% of respondents still hadn't heard of him at the time the survey was conduct, so he has more room to grow.
The bad news: His favorable-unfavorable rating stands at 23-27. You never like seeing a challenger in negative territory. Meanwhile, Joe's is 43-28. But that's actually not especially good news for Lieberman: At the start of the year, he was at 53-14 - he's been sliding downward ever since. The question is, does he have much further to go? Or will CT Republicans and right-leaning indies prop him up from this point forward? If the latter (and I worry that might be the case), then Lamont has to be able to up his favorables in order to win - again - this fall.
Posted at 02:13 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Earth to Biden
Posted by James L.From a Hardball interview with Joe Biden:
Asked where he stands on the CT SEN race: "Well, I stand for the Democratic candidate. Joe is my good friend. I told Joe when I went up there campaigning for them, I want to lead the Democratic Party. I've got to abide by the Democratic Party's ruling."Asked if he will take "any active role" in getting a Dem elected in CT: "Yes, but I'm not going to take an active role by being against Joe. I'm not going to take an active role by discouraging any of Joe's friends. I'm going to take an active role in trying to elect the Democrat" (MSBNC, 8/16).
You are not taking an "active role in trying to elect the Democrat" if you do not do all in your power to discourage Joe Lieberman and his Republican lobbyist "friends" from running a kamikaze race against the Democratic nominee. Plain. And. Simple.
If Biden can't be serious about standing up strongly for good Democrats nationwide, he can't be trusted as Presidential material.
Posted at 11:06 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
VA-Sen: Webb Snags the Big Dog
Posted by James L.From the Richmond-Times Dispatch:
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Jim Webb has snared the big guy -- former President Bill Clinton -- to help him raise money for his Senate race.A spokeswoman said the time and place for Clinton's visit have yet to be worked out.
Webb is running against U.S. Sen. George Allen, a Republican, who ended the June 30 fundraising period with a $6 million edge over Webb.
But Webb just completed what his aides say was a successful fundraising trip to Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles.
Money, so far, has been Webb's biggest hurdle that he has yet to clear. A visit from the Big Dog will not only rake in a significant dollar sum for Webb's campaign, but it will also send the signal to national donors that Webb may well be worth the investment. Furthermore--and we saw this attempted by Joe Lieberman a few weeks ago--a Clinton visit will hopefully help boost Jim Webb's appeal among African-Americans (a group that Webb's primary opponent, Harris Miller, sought to carve away from his camp). Now that Sen. Allen is knee-deep in macaca, you've got to believe that minority communities all across Virginia are shopping around for someone a bit more respectable.
Posted at 09:03 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
PA-Sen: Tightening
Posted by James L.Lordy, I sure do hope that this is an outlier (Quinnipiac, June in parens):
Bob Casey (D): 47 (52)
Rick Santorum (R-Inc.): 40 (34)
Undecided: 11 (12)
MoE: ±3.1%
In a three-way general election match-up that includes "Green" Party candidate Carl Romanelli, the lead is ever so slightly narrower:
Bob Casey (D): 48
Rick Santorum (R-Inc.): 42
Carl Romanelli (Green): 5
Undecided: 5
I'll say this delicately: if Bob Casey allows Rick Santorum, one of the creepiest and most off-the-wall members of the Senate, to somehow dig his way out of his political tomb, then Casey will prove himself to be one of the most incompetent and disastrous challengers of the 2006 cycle. Casey has a reputation for being the sleepy Mr. Rogers of Pennsylvania politics; he's going to have to learn to go for the kill and not let Santorum get away with inoculating himself with warm 'n' fuzzy TV ads. Remember Santorum's recent book in which he sung the virtues of "conservative family values", including making sure that women stay barefoot in the kitchen? This guy's entire career is just one big negative ad waiting to write itself. If Bob Casey thinks he can casually stroll to victory based on a year's worth of very favorable poll results, he may be in for a rude awakening.
Fortunately, Casey's still got a very fertile field to play in: 49% of Pennsylvania voters believe that Santorum doesn't deserve to be re-elected. That's insanely bad for an incumbent. But if Casey lets what could have been a blowout turn into a nailbiter, we're going to see a lot more resources and manpower spent on shoring up his campaign that could have been directed elsewhere by the DSCC. Still, we should wait to see if this trend is verified by other polling outfits before we get ahead of ourselves. If one thing can be said about this race, it's that there's never been a shortage of polls on it.
Posted at 10:51 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, August 11, 2006
MO-Sen: 15/100
Posted by RBHIn the state of Missouri in the 2004 Presidential elections, 14 counties (and St. Louis City) cast 68% of the votes, and the 100 smaller counties cast 32% of the votes. In the top 15 counties, John Kerry led 51-48. In the lower 100 counties, George W. Bush blew Kerry out of the water by a 64-35 margin.
Here's a map of the "top 15" counties (all in yellow):
There's probably not a lot of explanation needed here. The highlighted county in the Southwest is where Joplin is located. That's close to Greene County (Springfield). The five highlighted counties in the west is the KC area with Buchanan County (St. Joseph) on top of that. The two highlighted counties in the middle are Boone (Columbia) and Cole (Jefferson City). The highlighted counties in the east is the St. Louis area (but you knew that, I'd hope). The highlighted county in the southeast is Cape Giraudeau County, birthplace of Rush Limbaugh.
Now, why I decide to mention 15/100? Because Claire McCaskill's campaign is working to improve her standing in counties similar to the ones indicated on the map in sky blue.
In the 2004 Gubernatorial election, we find a big split in the results in the 15 larger counties and the other 100 counties.
Top 15: 53/46 McCaskill, Lower 100: 61/38 Blunt. Overall, Blunt won by almost 81K votes (a 51/48 margin).
In the Lt. Governor's race between Bekki Cook and Peter Kinder, the split was narrower.
Top 15: 52/45 Cook, Lower 100: 56/41 Kinder. The overall result there: Kinder wins by almost 14K votes (a very narrow 49-48 margin)
And in the Secretary of State's race between Robin Carnahan and Catherine Hanaway
Top 15: 55/43 Carnahan, Lower 100: 54/43 Hanaway. Overall, Carnahan won by a 51/46 margin.
So, it's nowhere close to fishing in a dry pond. There's enough people in the small towns of Missouri who are willing to vote for Democrats to win elections. Although it takes a lot of good fortune for Democrats to break 60% in state election. Jay Nixon beats unknown opponents with around 60%. Claire McCaskill beat an unknown Republican with 59.95%.
I'll say this in the best way possible, if you held an election between a mannequin running as a Republican and a Democrat, in some parts of Missouri, a majority of people would vote for the mannequin.
Here's a map to demonstrate that theory (McCaskill v. Hanson, 2002):
From 1900 to 2004, 5 Missouri counties never gave a majority or plurality to a Democrat. Those 5 (for reference) are Douglas, Gasconade, Putnam, Stone, and Taney. Four of those counties went to Hanson in that election. Granted, by pretty small margins.
I was inspired to write a bit about the Senate election and targeting rural areas from an e-mail sent by the Talent campaign. Here's the relevant paragraph, with my own notes on it.
We're encouraged by the fact that Claire McCaskill's rural makeover tour clearly isn't fooling Missourians.
Well, when your party is having a lot of bad days, sometimes it doesn't take much to encourage you.
In fact, McCaskill barely managed to get 80 percent of the vote versus a virtually unknown opponent.
In the 2002 Democratic primary, Jean Carnahan got 83% against an unknown opponent. In the 2000 Democratic primary, Mel Carnahan got 78% against an unknown opponent. In Missouri Democratic primaries, it seems to be an unofficial tradition for Missouri Democratic voters to cast votes for obscure people.
Her results were particularly poor in rural Missouri: in 19 counties her unknown opponent garnered 30 percent of the Democrat vote or better.
I'll note that in the Democratic primaries in those 19 counties, 30K votes we cast.
Also, in 13 of those counties, that unknown Democrat recieved more votes than Jim Talent recieved in his primary. That's not a sign of any special doom for Talent, considering the number of local elections in those counties, but it's not exactly the best line of derision. The Republican primary wasn't a ghost town, Talent got more votes than McCaskill, and both primaries had over 300K votes (with the Democratic primary having around 20K more votes).
If I wanted, I could probably go into more depth about how local primaries are held in a lot of those counties (such as the ones in dark blue on the second map) and how that caused 80% of voters to pick the Democratic primary.
In these areas and others, Republicans and Democrats alike have recognized that Claire McCaskill doesn't believe in the common sense, conservative values of the heartland.
Conservative Values? So how come Jim Talent's record veered to the middle in time for the election year? and how come Jim Talent's running from his party? From what I can tell, Talent will use the twelve letter C word, but not the ten letter R word. After all, he doesn't want to remind people of Bush and Matt Blunt.
When it comes to a rural strategy in Missouri. It's worth it. Considering the typical closeness of Missouri elections, it's smart to make sure that you don't get walloped in large parts of the states. It's also smart because the "other 100 counties" are not hostile to Democrats. They don't vote for Democrats these days, but that's not a permanent thing. It takes the right approach and enough timing to defy and destroy the Republican-created images of Democratic candidates. Sure, Democrats may not win in those counties, but it'll make it easier for them to win in the entire state.
Posted at 02:26 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
CT-Sen: Don't Forget What Jake Javits Did
Posted by DavidNYCVia Political Wire, Ken Rudin makes the following observation:
For the record, 24 senators have been denied renomination in the past half-century; only one, Jacob Javits (R-NY), attempted to keep his seat in November, and he didn't come close.
Javits lost to Al D'Amato in the Republican primary in 1980. Old, sick, suffering from ALS (aka Lou Gehrig's disease) and badly out of step with the increasingly conservative GOP, Javits was handily dispatched (56-44) by the upstart D'Amato, who was as much a nobody then as Lamont was in January. Javits went on to get crushed in a three-way race in November, running on the now-defunct Liberal Party's line.
But that only tells half the story. Take a look at the results for the senatorial general election in New York in 1980:
Al D'Amato (R): 44.88%
Liz Holtzman (D): 43.54%
Jacob Javits (L-inc.): 11.05%
There is pretty much no question that Jake Javits played the spoiler for Elizabeth Holtzman here. Though he was indeed a member of the GOP, Javits was also a member of that dying (and now fully dead) breed: The liberal Rockefeller Republican. While the ostensibly left-wing Liberal Party had a long history of betrayal which included giving its line to decided non-liberals like Rudy Giuliani, most of the people who actually pulled the Liberal lever would have otherwise ordinarily been voting for Democrats.
In other words, if Javits hadn't run in November, most of his votes would have gone to Holtzman. And as you can see from the percentages alone, that would have pretty much guaranteed victory for the Democrats. If you have any reason to doubt that, spend a few minutes perusing the Lexis archives. You'll see that Democrats - not Republicans - were pleading with Javits to drop out.
Now, all that said, I absolutely don't think that Joe Lieberman could throw the election to Republican Alan Schlesinger, who by all accounts is, charitably, a C-list bum. But he could still screw us by complicating things for CT's three Democratic House challengers. For one thing, the Republican incumbents can simply endorse Lieberman and look like "centrists." For another, he turns what should be a cakewalk election for Lamont into a relatively serious contest, drawing money, time and resources away from other races (including, again, our three House pickup opportunities). I'm sure you can think of other sorts of unpleasantness likely to flow from an indy Joe run.
My point, ultimately, is that, like Jake Javits, Joe Lieberman could and probably will wind up hurting the Democratic Party in the fall if he continues his third-party bid. Of course, Jake Javits was a Republican and owed us nothing. Lieberman, if he has even a shred of dignity left, will drop out for the greater good.
Posted at 06:58 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Schumer and Reid Back Lamont
Posted by DavidNYCJoe's row just got a lot tougher to hoe. Statement by Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer (via e-mail):
“The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken and chosen Ned Lamont as their nominee. Both we and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) fully support Mr. Lamont’s candidacy. Congratulations to Ned on his victory and on a race well run.“Joe Lieberman has been an effective Democratic Senator for Connecticut and for America. But the perception was that he was too close to George Bush and this election was, in many respects, a referendum on the President more than anything else. The results bode well for Democratic victories in November and our efforts to take the country in a new direction.”
The language in the second paragraph echoes Rahm's combative rhetoric from last night, albeit in much more muted form. The more I think about it, though, the smarter I think it is, both what Rahm said and what Chuck and Harry are saying here. The GOP can make big ugly noises about how Lieberman's loss means the Dems "aren't serious about national security." Yawn.
But individual Republicans know that they have to run away from Bush this year. The fact that even a Democrat could lose for being too close to Bush must scare the pants off of them. Rahm & Co. are smartly blunting the GOP's predictable line of attack, and rank-and-file Republicans must realize there is a lot of truth to what they're saying.
UPDATE: As I expected, Howard Dean also just came out for Lamont. Schumer, Reid, Rahm, Dean - getting those four to agree on anything is pretty amazing.
Posted at 10:40 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (9) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
My Tuesday Primary Review
Posted by RBHClearly we know about the biggest news of the night. Despite all the advantages of incumbency, Joe Lieberman was unable to win the primary tonight. Lawmakers who had either supported Lieberman or had stayed neutral are also turning their support to Ned Lamont. Including Evan Bayh and Hillary, and more people will likely speak up soon.
When it comes to the effects of a Lieberman candidacy in November. I still think that people overrate his chances in November. Money just doesn't come out of nowhere. And Lieberman will need money in order to help himself out in November. While Ned Lamont would need some help to get himself on solid ground, he'll also get a lot of things which he did not have for today.
Joe Lieberman's main source of new money will likely come from people who are donors to Republican candidates. The Republicans will be the ones supporting Lieberman, and money that could have went to Shays, Johnson, or Simmons, will be going to Lieberman. That's only a subtle favor, not any sort of big victory for the Democratic candidates running in those districts.
But I'd rather armwrestle Hulk Hogan than get into a money war with the Republicans. There's legitimate reason for concern when it comes to the Democratic challengers in all the purple districts.
I would certainly hope that Joe Lieberman rethinks his plan to run as an Independent, but I'm not expecting a change in his plans for September and October. I would also hope that those people who gave money to Joe Lieberman and who disapprove of his independent candidacy would ask for a refund or return of their contribution.
As for the other races, here are the highlights:
Colorado: Jeff Crank and Doug Lamborn are the frontrunners in CO-05. The winner faces Jay Fawcett. Ed Perlmutter defeats Peggy Lamm in CO-07.
Georgia: Hank Johnson defeats Cynthia McKinney in GA-04. Expect Cynthia to release the official list of people "to blame for Johnson winning" soon, odds are that "Republicans" will top that list. Ha Ha.
Michigan: Joe Schwarz loses to Tim Walberg. Mike Bouchard looks like the winner in the Republican Senate primary. Knollenberg wins 69-31.
Missouri: Lots of Democrats voted, Lots of Republicans voted, but there weren't a lot of close federal races. Over 80% of precincts are in. Akin rolls over Parker (87-13). No word on who'll face Akin, but the frontrunners are Charles Karam and George Weber. Alan Conner, who spent $246K to try and win the MO-04 nomination, lost by 22 points to Jim Noland, who hasn't filed with the FEC, and who has lost three straight elections to Ike Skelton. Noland's wife suing Conner was probably not helpful to Conner's campaign. This should tell you that there's some things that money can't buy. Sara Jo Shettles and Duane Burghard were both uncontested in their primaries to face Sam Graves and Kenny Hulshof. They also outpolled their opponents. Although in the case of MO-09, that's not exactly a feat of strength, but it's a pretty good sign. And yes, I just gave the longest writeup to my own state. I have the keyboard here, after all.
Any night where three incumbents go down is a night of pretty big activity. It should be a sign that being an incumbent in November is not going to be a pleasant thing.
That's my analysis of the night's events. I'm sure that one of the regulars (who isn't on vacation) will have something to say as well.
Posted at 01:43 AM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Michigan, Missouri | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Love Child
Posted by DavidNYCRahm wastes no time in harshing on Joe:
“This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the leader of the Democratic House Congressional campaign. “This is not about the war. It’s blind loyalty to Bush.”
Calling an ex-Democrat sitting senator George Bush's "love child" is the tradmed equivalent of dropping an f-bomb. Rahm doesn't want Joe messing up our chances of taking up to three CT House seats from the GOP. He wants Joe to be forgotten like a bad hangover. With Hillary reportedly throwing down in favor of Lamont, Lieberman is going to find himself almost friendless by the end of the week. He may yet soldier on, but it's going to be very tough going indeed.
Posted at 01:15 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, August 07, 2006
CO, CT, GA, MI, MO: Tuesday Primary Election Preview
Posted by RBHHere's the rundown of the elections which will likely produce news tomorrow.
Starting off first in Colorado where the biggest races are the Republican Primary in the 5th District and the Democratic Primary in the 7th District.
In the 5th district race, the winning Republican will likely face Jay Fawcett (who is the frontrunner in his primary). From a short combing though Google News, we find that Doug Lamborn has the Club for Growth supporters with him, Hefley supporters are apparently supporting Crank. Basically the entire primary could end with the winner recieving a very low percentage of the vote, under 40%, maybe under 35%. But right now, the winner is anybody's guess. I should note that Anderson (who is running as pro-choice, which means "pro-choice compared to other Republicans), Bremer (Paul Bremer's brother), and Rayburn (retired Air Force General) are all wildcards and they could get a surprising number of votes.
In the 7th district, the favorite to face Rick O'Donnell appears to be Ed Perlmutter. Ed has had a pretty solid lead in SurveyUSA polls over Peggy Lamm. But then again in an election like this, surprises will occur.
Moving on to Connecticut.
The big race is between Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont. It appears to be a pretty big deal. Basically the results could go either way, although Lamont is going into the election with a 6 point lead in the latest Quinnipac poll. I'm pretty sure that this race will be the top attraction, and also the one race which does not require a long explanation.
In Georgia, the big election is between Cynthia McKinney and Hank Johnson in the 4th district. McKinney had a plurality last time, but for this election, it could go either way.
In Michigan, the biggest race will be in MI-07 between Congressman Joe Schwarz and Tim Walberg. Schwarz is under fire from the right in this campaign and could be on the way out of Congress. The likely Democratic nominee is Sharon Renier. In other races, I'm expecting Keith Mike Bouchard to win the Republican Senate primary and I wouldn't be stunned if Patricia Godchaux got around 1/3rd of the vote in her primary against Congressman Joe Knollenberg.
In Missouri, no major races will occur in the primaries. The closest primary race will probably be in MO-02 between Akin and Sherman Parker, and that's probably not due to be close at all. Claire McCaskill and Jim Talent are expected to cruise over their unknown opponents.
So, on this election day, there's one more question: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted at 11:48 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Colorado, Connecticut, Democrats, Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Netroots, Republicans | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, August 05, 2006
CT-Sen: Sad
Posted by DavidNYCOh man, this is just sad:
Joe Lieberman, to sullen youth wearing headphones in the lobby of the New London (Conn.) Senior Center: "So, what are you hearing?"Sullen youth: [pause] "Rap."
Joe: "Ah. [chuckle] That's what I do a lot. I rap."
Sullen youth: [silence]
Joe: [turns toward reporters, gives thumbs-up, heads for the door to find older people]
[scene]
You sure do, Joe. You sure do.
Posted at 04:09 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, August 04, 2006
TN-Sen: Corker (R) Wins, Will Challenge Ford
Posted by DavidNYCThe results of last night's TN-Sen GOP primary (thanks, Craig):
Bob Corker: 48
Ed Bryant: 34
Van Hilleary: 17
So former Chattanooga mayor Bob Corker earns the right to take on Democrat Harold Ford for the Tennessee senate race. Any thoughts on what this means for Ford?
Posted at 03:18 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Tennessee | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, August 03, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont Widens Lead in New Q-Poll
Posted by DavidNYCQuinnipiac's newest poll (likely voters, July 20 in parens):
Lamont: 54 (51)
Lieberman: 41 (47)
Undecided: 5 (2)
(MoE: ±3.3%)
You can feel the Nedmentum, but what really matters is whether Quinnipiac's likely primary voter model is up to snuff. As people have often noted, predicting turnout in a weird mid-summer primary is tough business. Remember all those polls which showed Busby leading in CA-50, which was a similarly unusual election?
I've heard a rumor that Quinnipiac might try to squeeze in yet one more poll between now and election day, but that would involve weekend polling, which as you may know is considered less reliable than weekday polling. I'm also not sure it would even add much to our understanding at this point.
The bottom line is that it would be a mistake for Lamont or any of his supporters to act like this thing is already won. A lot can happen in five days. (Again, remember Busby's "you don't need papers to vote" gaffe?) Quinnipiac could be wrong. Joe could find a way to turn it around. What's more, the bigger the victory, the greater the pressure there will be on Lieberman to drop his indie bid. If he loses 51-49, he can make a good whiner's case. But if he gets thumped, then only the worst bitter-enders will continue to support him.
So let's win, and win big.
P.S. If you are in the area, please consider heading up to CT for a day to help out. Everything you need is here.
Posted at 11:06 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
MO-Sen: No Shame
Posted by DavidNYCI always thought that the only people who don't experience any shame are very little children and sociopaths. Well, you can add Republican operatives to the list. Check this out:
It began with a Missouri Republican Party press release accusing Democrat Claire McCaskill of failing to file a routine campaign finance report on time.The release included an Internet link to a July 28 letter from the Federal Election Commission to McCaskill saying she "may have failed to file" the pre-primary finance report. Missouri GOP spokesman Paul Sloca said the FEC letter exposed McCaskill's "incompetence and her willful disregard for the law."
Sounds like a pretty typical political ploy. But, since we're dealing with the GOP here, it's no surprise that this is all bullshit:
Adrianne Marsh, spokeswoman for the McCaskill campaign, said Berridge's records show she sent the report on July 24, as required, and produced a certified receipt to prove it. Marsh said the filing may have been lost in the mail, but the campaign is working it out with FEC officials.
Of course, since the Post Office is obviously a liberal institution (socialist, even, what with that "universal service" requirement), certified receipts can't be trusted. But this story is actually a whole lot worse than typical Republican mendacity:
McCaskill's campaign denounced the Republican statement as inaccurate - and unprofessional, in light of the death Saturday of Melissa Berridge, the campaign's compliance director.Berridge, 38, of St. Louis, was among six skydivers who died Saturday in the crash near the eastern Missouri town of Sullivan.
The GOP attacks a dead woman who of course cannot speak for herself. That is as base as it gets. And when called on it, what is their response?
Marsh called on the Republican Party and incumbent Sen. Jim Talent - McCaskill's opponent - to issue "an immediate apology to Melissa's family and retract their insensitive release."Sloca declined.
"It's unfortunate that Claire McCaskill has turned this into an issue about the unfortunate death of a staffer to hide from her incompetence," he said.
Like I said, these people have no shame, none at all. Melissa's brother James writes in a comment at FiredUp Missouri that all his family is seeking is a simple apology, and yet the GOP can't even bring itself to offer one. I hope Claire McCaskill beats the stuffing out of Jim Talent, for all our sakes, and especially to honor the memory of Melissa Berridge.
(Hat tip: BriVT.)
Posted at 11:21 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
MT-Sen: Deeper and Deeper
Posted by DavidNYCI always knew Conrad Burns hated working people. I just didn't realize his hatred ran this deep:
The report contained an account by Gabe Templeton, one of the Augusta Hot Shots, describing what happened to him and fellow team members Jeff Cleek and Jude Waerig. It said the three men were sitting in the Billings airport waiting for their flight when Burns approached them with an outstretched hand and asked if they were firefighters."I shook his hand and replied yes," Templeton wrote. "He shook my hand introduced himself and then replied, 'What a piss poor job' we were doing. I replied, 'Have a nice day.' The senator mentioned that we were 'wasting a lot of money and creating a cottage industry.' He also told us that we needed to listen more to the ranchers. I replied that 'we are pretty low on the totem pole.' Then he walked off."
Just like the Bush administration prefers to blame rank-and-file soldiers for command failures, Conrad Burns likes to castigate hard-working firefighters when his beef is about policies drawn up in air-conditioned conference rooms. To me, that represents a deep sickness of the soul - to attack the people on the very bottom of the totem pole for the failings of their higher-ups. But, of course, if you already view those people with contempt, then it's easy to treat them like dirt. I'm sure Burns is equally odious toward the people who clean out his office at night or prepare his coffee in the morning. You can tell a lot about a person from the way he treats others - and in Burns' case, none of it is good.
Anyhow, I'm still asking: Will Sen. George Allen defend the August Hotshots (based in Virginia) from Connie Burns' outrageous attack?
Posted at 02:44 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, July 31, 2006
CT-Sen: Crunch Time
Posted by James L.So Lieberman's going to hire 4,000 paid field workers by August 8th. Holy crap. Do you realize that the only way Lieberman could have a bigger field organization is to hire every registered voter in Connecticut?
Kidding aside, that's a huge freakin' ground game that Lieberman's assembled at the 23rd hour. The only way we're going to combat this is through grassroots engagement. Fortunately, the Lamont campaign has a great tool that I hope you've all signed up for: the Family, Frends and Neighbors program. You can look up any registered voter in the state and send them a personalized postcard encouraging them to lend their votes to Ned on August 8. It's exceptionally quick and painless. You probably know someone from Connecticut, or at least know someone who knows someone who does (my girlfriend sent cards to eight of her friends on the weekend using this tool, for example). It's important to make as many personalized contacts as possible, and to get the word out beyond our blog bubble, so invite your friends to look up their family, friends and neighbors and get them on board the good ship Lamont. I cannot emphasize enough how important this is: you have until Thursday to use this tool.
What are you waiting for? Spread the word!
Posted at 10:43 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, July 28, 2006
MN-Sen: You Can't Hide From CQ
Posted by DavidNYCSo Republican Mark Kennedy has his first ad up on TV, which suggests to me that this long-dormant race is about to heat up. Especially with recent polling tilting toward Democrat Amy Klobuchar to a startling degree, Kennedy can't afford to remain quiet any longer. And with the GOP about as appealing as a twenty-pound goiter these days, it's no surprise that Kennedy is touting his "independence."
But as Pat Kessler of WCCO is quick to point out, you cannot hide from CQ. In fact, it's easier to fight City Hall or make a horse drink water than it is to hide from Congressional Quarterly's presidential support rankings. And Mark Kennedy is no exception:
2005: 87%
2004: 97%
2003: 97%
2002: 97%
2001: 86%
What do these numbers refer to? Well, every time the president takes a "clear position" on a piece of legislation, CQ tracks whether legislators vote for or against it. So over the first five years of his House career, Mark Kennedy voted for George Bush's preferred position 93% of the time.
Kennedy can squawk about his vaunted "independence" as much as he likes. But as the famous line from the Princess Bride goes, I do not think that word means what he thinks it means.
Posted at 03:30 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Minnesota | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, July 27, 2006
MT-Sen: Burns Attacks Firefighters, Face-to-Face!
Posted by DavidNYCWhat an unbelievable ingrate! Conrad Burns had the gall - the unthinkable gall - to approach a bunch of undoubtedly weary firefighters at Billings Airport last weekend and tell them, right up to their faces, that they had done a "poor job" fighting wildfires in Montana. Amazing! These firefighters had trekked all the way from Virginia to help Montana put out a 92,000-acre forest fire. And instead of thanking these hard-working souls, Conrad Burns went out of his way to insult them. I suppose he's lucky he didn't wind up with a fat lip - most first responders are not exactly known for taking kindly to gross insults.
Of course, I expect nothing less from Burns: He's the ultimate privileged, entitled, out-of-touch fop who has no appreciation or understanding of how hard ordinary people work. It's one thing to, say, criticize Forest Service policy. But to attack the very firefighters who just helped your own home state? That's like dissing the ambulance driver who takes you to the hospital. Unreal.
Oh, and no word yet from Sen. George Allen (R-VA) as to whether he plans on defending these hard-working Virginia firefighters - or, in the alternative, whether he wishes he were born in Montana.
Posted at 10:06 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, July 24, 2006
MN-Sen: Klobuchar Still Leads Kennedy
Posted by RBHIn a followup to the poll putting Amy Klobuchar up by 19 points, a DSCC poll puts the margin at 16 points.
Amy Klobuchar (D): 50
Mark Kennedy (R): 34
Undecided: 15
(MoE: TBD)
(i'm sure the MOE will be mentioned soon enough, but I haven't seen it yet)
But after the talk from the Kennedy camp that the 19 point margin was proof of "liberalmediabias," I'm sure that they're relieved to hear that the margin is just "very wide" instead of "extremely wide".
MN Publius notes this point about the Minnesota polling in general:
The GOP and the right wingers are going to scream bloody murder over these numbers and their coming from the DSCC. But it is important to remember that this poll was conducted by Bennett, Petts & Blumenthal who only make money as long as they're accurate. It is not in the DSCC's, or any other political orginization or candidate for that matter, interest to collect inaccurate data. Polls are used for formulating strategy and if those polls are wrong, the strategy will be flawed.
Respondants in this survey also prefered "A Senator who challenges Bush" over "A Senator who does what Bush says" by a 61/32 margin.
I sense the best case scenario for Minnesota involves the state becoming "The Land of 10,000 polls showing Amy Klobuchar with a wide lead" around October.
Posted at 03:21 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Minnesota | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, July 20, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont Surges Ahead of Lieberman
Posted by James L.Just a quick update before I start my work day. The latest Quinnipiac poll on the Connecticut Democratic primary is out, and it looks very ugly for Lieberman (likely voters, June in parens):
Ned Lamont (D): 51 (40)
Joe Lieberman (D-Inc): 47 (55)
MoE: ±3.8%
Lamont has made major gains over the past month, and Lieberman is in a steady free-fall. It's really quite breathtaking. However, in a 3-way match-up this November, Lieberman still holds the edge, but Lamont is shifting upward:
Ned Lamont (D): 27 (18)
Joe Lieberman (I): 51 (56)
Alan Schlesinger (R): 9 (8)
MoE: ±2%
Given Lamont's major surge, I find it increasingly unlikely that Lieberman's last-minute ground organization can deliver the votes he needs to win the primary. Lieberman has brought on some big guns to get him organized on the ground, but he should have been doing this three months ago, not three weeks before primary day. He'll throw everything he's got against Lamont, but this trend is ugly.
Update: If anyone's going to save Lieberman, it's probably going to be this guy.
Posted at 10:54 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (26) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Senate '06: Stem Cell Roll Call
Posted by James L.So, the Senate voted in favor of the embryonic stem cell research bill by a veto-vulnerable 63-37 margin.
Here's a list of the nay votes, with Senators up for re-election this year in bold:
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Coleman (R-MN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagel (R-NE)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Martinez (R-FL)
McConnell (R-KY)
Nelson (D-NE)
Roberts (R-KS)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Of all the top-tier targeted Democratic races, only Sen. Chafee (R-RI) voted in favor the bill. With a veto more than likely, Democratic challengers now have one more salient attack to make in these key states. Even "second tier" races, like those of Jim Pederson's in Arizona and Jack Carter's in Nevada, should be made much more interesting if these guys launch an effective attack.
UPDATE: You can read Jack Carter's statement here. It really hits all the right notes.
You can read the Jim Webb campaign's statement here. Jim Pederson has a petition up on the issue. It's good to see some rapid response on this. Now how about the rest?
Posted at 06:20 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, July 14, 2006
CT-Sen: Wes Clark's Take
Posted by James L.From a liveblogging session on Dailykos:
I am a proud member of the Democratic Party, and I believe it is our party's responsibility to support the will of the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut. I personally look forward to supporting the candidate CT voters elect as the Democratic nominee. Though, as an aside, I must say I find it ironic that Senator Lieberman is now planning a potential run as an independent after he continually questioned my loyalty to the Democratic Party during the 2004 presidential primary.
Oh, snap, General! I love it.
(Thanks to My Left Nutmeg.)
Posted at 07:09 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, July 10, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont's Ads Just Get Better and Better
Posted by James L.I've made a decision to prioritize my limited blogging time away from the CT-Sen race--it's not my ideal preference (I wish I could get paid to sit around and blog all day), but since the primary is already well-covered by the likes of DailyKos, MyDD, LamontBlog, and My Left Nutmeg, I figure there's no shortage of commentary and news out there for all you Nedheads. But that's not to say I won't share some thoughts on the race if I feel I can. Today I'd like to share with you not a thought, but a campaign ad--the latest by the brilliant outsider ad consultant Bill Hillsman (of Wellstone/Ventura/Nader fame), who's proving he's worth every penny:
Hilarious, brilliant, refreshing. Stuffy ol' Lieberman and his merry gang of inside-the-beltway ad consultants couldn't come up with an ad this funny no matter how many focus groups they screened it for.
Posted at 04:52 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-Sen: Hackett Endorses Brown
Posted by James L.It's about 5 months later than I would have liked to see, but hey, at least the hatchet is buried:
U.S. Rep. Sherrod Brown will finally win the endorsement today of his former Democratic rival for U.S. Senate, Mr. Brown's campaign said late yesterday.Mr. Brown, a Democrat from Avon who faces incumbent Republican Mike DeWine this fall, is scheduled to receive the endorsement of primary election opponent Paul Hackett at a "unity rally" in Cincinnati, the Brown campaign said. Mr. Hackett could not be reached for comment.
(Hat-tip to pontificator.)
Posted at 01:23 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, July 06, 2006
HI-Sen: Akaka on Shaky Ground
Posted by James L.I know, I know. It's really hard not to think about the explosive events surrounding the Lamont/Lieberman battle this week. But we shouldn't forget about the other Democratic Senatorial primary battle happening a few thousand miles to the west between Hawai'i Senator Daniel Akaka and Rep. Ed Case. Case is interesting--in many ways, he's kind of like a bizarro Ned Lamont. His bid for Governor in 2002 drew support from a deep reservoir of discontent with the atrophied Hawai'i Democratic Party, while the old guard watched him with an unfriendly eye. While he lost a close primary, he won election to the House on Nov. 30, 2002 in a special election following the death of Congresswoman Patsy Mink. However, in Congress, Case has left a mediocre-to-disappointing record, ranking as 164th in the Democratic caucus on progressive issues. Akaka, meanwhile, is ranked 12th in the Senate. I'm not in favor of litmus tests or ideological rigidity, but replacing an anti-war incumbent with someone who boasts about how he would have voted for the Iraq War Resolution (had he been in Congress at the time) is borderline insane. If Akaka is knocked out on the Sept. 23 Democratic primary, we may be finding ourselves taking one step back for the step forward that we may get with Ned Lamont.
Can Akaka be beaten? Yes, it's not undoable. For starters, Akaka has acquired a something of a reputation for not getting much accomplished in the Senate compared to his colleague Sen. Daniel Inouye. Akaka's failure to move his keynote Native Hawai'ian federal recognition bill past a procedural vote for the fourth consecutive Congress only weakens his argument that Hawai'ians should preserve his all-important seniority in the Senate.
Still, Case has campaigned mostly to ensure that Akaka's seat is held by a younger, healthier Democrat with more gas in the tank, so to speak. And, given that Akaka is all of 81 years old, the message has gained a bit of traction: a recent Honolulu Advertiser poll (likely Democratic primary voters), while showing Akaka with a respectable 64% approval rating, nevertheless shows a tight race:
Daniel Akaka (D-Inc.): 51
Ed Case (D): 40
Undecided: 9
MoE: ±5.3%
I don't like that MoE, but I don't see any reason to doubt these results. Case has run one statewide campaign before, and two half-statewide campaigns (as Hawai'i only has two congressional districts, half the state, at least, is fairly accustomed to voting for him); he's already a serious threat. I wonder when folks like Ken Salazar and Ben Nelson will fly down to help out Akaka.
(I woulda had this one up earlier but I was at the Neko Case show tonight.)
Posted at 01:29 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Hawaii | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
CT-Sen: Devious Timing
Posted by James L.So egomaniac Joe Lieberman decides to gather petitions for his increasingly likely independent bid for Senate this November while the Swing State Project was on vacation.
Coincidence? I think not. I think he knows that People Power will destroy him.
(All kidding aside, I think Lieberman stands a good chance of being 2006's Jacob Javits if he loses the primary.)
Posted at 04:53 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, June 30, 2006
VA-Sen: Senator Dude Ranch
Posted by James L.Steve Jarding of the Jim Webb for Senate campaign cracks me up:
Jarding also took issue with [Allen campaign manager Dick] Wadhams’ attempt to attack Webb as a “Hollywood movie producer” for Webb’s role in the film “Rules of Engagement.”“What part of ‘Rules of Engagement’ did George Felix Allen Jr. and his insensitive mouthpiece Dick Wadhams not respect – military service? Patriotism? Honor? Valor? We know that George Felix Allen Jr. spent much of the Vietnam War years on a dude ranch in Nevada and chose not to serve, but his continued silence as his key staff dismiss military personnel and their patriotism is beginning to shine a very unfavorable light on Senator Dude Ranch,” Jarding said.
If nothing else, this is gonna be one of the most amusing races to watch this cycle. Heh. "Senator Dude Ranch".
Posted at 11:47 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Late Night Poll Round-up: MA-Gov, VA-Sen, GA-Gov, Pew and Gallup
Posted by James L.MA-Gov: Buzz candidate and former Clinton Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Deval Patrick is now pulling significantly ahead of Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly in the Democratic primary for Governor, while businessman Chris Gabrieli (who has pumped $2.5 million into a hefty TV ad campaign) is threatening to leave Reilly in third place if this trend continues (likely voters, May in parens).
Deval Patrick (D): 31 (20)
Tom Reilly (D): 25 (35)
Chris Gabrieli (D): 22 (15)
MoE: ±4%
Obviously a big part of Patrick's bounce has to do with snagging the MA Democratic Party endorsement at the recent state convention, but Patrick is also pushing himself as a fresh face in a state full of tired, entrenched incumbents. In a hypothetical general election match-up, however, all three candidates lead Republican Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey by wide margins.
Massachusetts has been reluctant to give the Democrats full control of every lever of power in the state, hence the lack of a Democrat in the Governor's mansion since Dukakis. But after seeing Romney veto bills in favor of embryonic stem cell research and emergency contraception (both vetoes were overridden by the MA legislature) in order to prove his conservative cred for a possible '08 White House bid, it seems like the good people of Massachusetts are tired of their Governors playing petty political games with the veto button. It will be a pleasure to watch Deval Patrick's campaign in the weeks and months ahead.
VA-Sen (SUSA, likely voters, no trendlines):
Jim Webb (D): 37
George Felix Allen, Jr. (R): 56
Gail Parker (I): 2
MoE: ±4.3%
It's not too surprising, given that Webb just came off a nasty primary that he won by just a few points, and that Allen has already been saturating tthe airwaves with TV ads. Given that Webb has a lot of ground to cover, including introducing himself via TV and radio (his campaign only aired a few radio spots during the final days of the primary due to funding constraints), there's clearly potential for him to make this race a lot tighter, given the proper funding.
GA-Gov: Oh right, there's a race here. (Strategic Vision [R], likely voters, May in parens)
Mark Taylor (D): 44 (39)
Sonny Perdue (R-Inc.): 50 (51)Cathy Cox (D): 40 (42)
Sonny Perdue (R-Inc.): 53 (50)
MoE: ±3%
Strategic Vision is a Republican polling firm, and I'm not terribly comfortable in treating their work on the same par as SUSA or Gallup. Still, as far as the Georgia Governor's race is concerned, the pickin's is slim. The same poll shows Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor edging Secretary of State Cathy Cox by 46-42, a significant swing from last month's 42-47 margin in Cox's favor. I'm not sure why Taylor has caught a break this month, as I have not been following this race closely, but even the locals are scratching their heads.
Finally, two new polls by Gallup and Pew seem to contradict certain theories bouncing around the blogosphere that Democrats are weary and dispirited, and won't turn up at the polls this November.
First, from Gallup:
Americans are paying unusually close attention to the congressional elections in November, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds. They are more inclined to deliver significant gains to Democrats than in any year since Republicans won control of the House and Senate in 1994.Those surveyed are more concerned about national issues than local ones — a situation that favors Democrats hoping to tap discontent over the Iraq war and gasoline prices — and prefer Democrats over Republicans on handling every major issue except terrorism.
President Bush looms as a significant drag: 40% of Americans say they are less likely to vote for a candidate who supports Bush. A fifth say they are more likely.
[...]
• Democrats are particularly engaged: 56% say they are "more enthusiastic about voting than usual," the highest level recorded since the question was first asked in 1994. Among Republicans, 43% say they are more enthusiastic than usual.
• Americans are increasingly likely to identify themselves as Democrats. Including those who "lean" to one party or the other, 55% call themselves Democrats; 38%, Republicans. That's the biggest edge for Democrats since 1998. By 54%-38%, the registered voters surveyed say they'd vote for a Democratic congressional candidate over a Republican one if the election were held today.
Et cetera. And this comes from a Democratic base that STILL isn't particularly enamored with congressional Democrats.
And, from Pew Research, more of the same:
With less than five months to go before Election Day, Democrats hold two distinct advantages in the midterm campaign that they have not enjoyed for some time. First, Americans continue to say they favor the Democratic candidate in their district, by a 51% to 39% margin. Second, the level of enthusiasm about voting among Democrats is unusually high, and is atypically low among Republicans. In fact, Democrats now hold a voter enthusiasm advantage that is the mirror image of the GOP's edge in voter zeal leading up to the 1994 midterm election. [emphasis added][...]
The heightened Democratic enthusiasm is particularly notable among liberal Democrats, 53% of whom are more interested in voting this year than usual. The partisan gap in enthusiasm is even visible among independents - those who lean Democratic are considerably more eager to vote than those who lean Republican. Overall, 47% of voters who plan to vote Democratic this fall say they are more enthusiastic about voting than usual, compared with just 30% of voters who plan to vote Republican.
The higher level of enthusiasm among Democratic voters is linked to two underlying attitudes: anger at the president and optimism about Democrats chances in the fall. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of those who plan to vote for the Democratic candidate in their district think of their vote this fall as a vote against George W. Bush. These anti-Bush voters are significantly more motivated to vote - 52% say they are more eager to vote this year than usual, compared with 39% among those who say Bush is not a factor in their vote.
There's tons of juicy data and analysis to pore over in both the Gallup and Pew studies. But I'm going to leave the rest up to you night owls.
Posted at 01:51 AM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Georgia, Massachusetts, Virginia | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Tuesday Poll Round-Up: RI-Sen, RI-Gov, TX-Gov, TX-21
Posted by James L.Lots of polls lately to share. First off, there's some good news from Rhode Island, where Democrats are gaining momentum:
RI-Sen (Brown Univesity Poll, registered voters, February in parens):
Sheldon Whitehouse (D): 38 (35)
Lincoln Chafee (R-Inc.): 37 (40)
Undecided/Decline to answer: 25 (26)
MoE: ±3.5%Sheldon Whitehouse (D): 55 (44)
Steve Laffey (R): 25 (29)
Undecided: 20 (27)
MoE: ±3.5%
RI-Gov (Brown, Feb. in parens):
Charles Fogarty (D): 39 (35)
Don Carcieri (R-Inc.): 44 (46)
MoE: ±3.5%
The same poll shows President Bush with a dismal 20% approval rating, and a mediocre 51% for Senator Chafee. Whitehouse is really making a race of this one, and don't believe any spin you may hear that this is an unwinnable race if Laffey doesn't knock off Chafee in the Republican primary.
And some noise from Texas:
TX-Gov (SUSA, likely voters, May in parens):
Chris Bell (D): 20 (18)
Rick Perry (R-Inc.): 35 (41)
Kinky Friedman (I): 21 (16)
Carole Keeton Strayhorn (I): 19 (20)
MoE: ±4.2%
Perry is clearly weak, but this is just such a clusterfuck of a race. Troublingly, Chris Bell is only getting 44% of the Democratic vote and losing broad swaths of white liberals to Kinky Friedman's quirky indie bid. I understand the position of a Texas Democrat who's reluctant to rally around the Bell campaign after seeing hopeless defeat after defeat at the statewide level for a decade, but with the field this fractured, a consolidated Democratic base could be a threat to Perry.
TX-21: The John Courage campaign writes in to share some weak numbers on Congressman Lamar Smith (one of Tom DeLay's biggest allies in Texas):
In a poll conducted by Lake Research Partners of 500 likely general election voters June 18-21, 2006, only 31% said that they would vote to re-elect Lamar Smith. (MoE +-4.4%)This is an anemic number for an incumbent, as that number should on average be closer to 45-55%. The voters want change, and we've got a man of the people that is a teacher and a veteran who wants to be their representative.
Smith has a weak 49% personal favorability rating in this lean Republican district, and there's clearly room for Courage to mount a vigorous campaign against him.
Posted at 12:02 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, 2006 Elections - State, Rhode Island, Texas | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman's Kamikaze Assault on the Democratic Party
Posted by James L.Today, the Senate is debating the merits of two competing Democratic resolutions for troop withdrawal--one hardline proposal by John Kerry to remove all U.S. forces by July 2007, and, of course, a much more moderate (read: tepid) amendment by Sens. Levin and Reed. (My favorite description of the latter proposal comes from the always-scathing, always-awesome Las Vegas Gleaner: "a proposal to sort of begin thinking about maybe at least phasing out by the end of this year, or something like that.")
This situation puts Lieberman in a bind:
If the Connecticut Democrat goes along with his fellow party members' plan to urge the Bush administration to begin redeploying troops by the end of the year, it could look like he's flip-flopping on his stay-the-course stance just six weeks before his primary with Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont.But if he votes against the measure, he's likely to be one of only a handful of Democrats siding with virtually all the Senate's Republicans - thus giving Lamont and anti-war Democrats fresh ammunition for attacking him.
So what did he end up doing? Duck out of the chamber? Keep his head low and quietly vote one way or the other? Nope. Instead, he rallied around the Republican flag and actually led the charge against both proposals:
Kerry and Feingold - the authors of one amendment - were forced to cut short their speeches at the request of the Sen. Warner who is managing debate for the Republicans. Warner then immediately yielded time to Sen. Lieberman to speak. Yes, Lieberman opened up debate for the Republicans. He opposed both amendments, even the exceedingly moderate Levin amendment, which is co-sponsored by Senators Biden, Clinton, Feinstein, Obama, and Salazar. At the end of his speech, Sen. Warner slobbered all over Joe, basically reading a love letter to him on the floor of the senate, in thanks for his help in killing these Democratic amendments. Santorum, the next speaker up, also fawned over Lieberman.
Yes, Lieberman probably won't be the only Democrat to vote against these resolutions. Whatever. But will you see any other Democrat leap at the chance to lead the charge for the Senate Republicans by taking over their debating duties? Lieberman's been so good at talking like a Republican that now he's accepted their position as Senate spokesman.
You've got to wonder whether Lieberman has the worst political instincts in the world, or whether he just has a deathwish in the Democratic primary (where his support is dropping like a stone) so he can rise like Lazarus as an Independent.
Posted at 07:38 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
AZ-Sen: Kyl Maintains a Comfortable Lead
Posted by James L.From a local Arizona State University/KAET poll (registered voters, April in parens):
Jim Pederson (D): 29 (31)
John Kyl (R): 43 (42)
MoE: ±5%
Now, I have issues with a sample size of only 384 voters for a poll like this, but given what looked like a major boost of momentum for Jim Pederson's campaign last month on the heels of his latest ad campaign, numbers like these have got to be frustrating. Still, even if this poll isn't an outlier, a 43% re-elect is shaky ground for any incumbent Senator. There's still plenty of time for this race to tighten up, but I hope it happens sooner rather than later.
PS: If you're looking for a reason to doubt generic congressional ballot polls, it should be this:
Finally, more voters in heavily Republican Arizona now say they would prefer to see the Democratic rather than the Republican party control Congress after the elections this November. Forty-five percent said they would like to see the Democrats control Congress, 39 percent prefer the Republicans and 16 percent were not sure which party they would prefer.
Funny how, when push comes to shove, that same 45% who would prefer Democratic control of Congress can't completely bring themselves to voicing support for Pederson. However, the silver lining is that, with some persuasion, the Pederson campaign has an opportunity to convince these Democratic leaners to, you know, actually vote for a Democrat.
Posted at 12:06 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
MT-Sen: Conrad Burns is Out of His Mind
Posted by James L.Burns, in fact, started his speech Saturday by noting the immediate intensity of the general election campaign after the June 6 primary."June 6 of this year is as good as June 6, 1944, D-day," he said. "We launched another attack."
No need to rub your eyes. Conrad Burns just compared Jon Tester and the Montana Democrats to Nazis. (Hat tip to Left in the West)
(PS: Sorry of the lack of postings lately--between the Stanley Cup Finals, work, and studying for the LSAT, I'm starting to feel as swamped as DavidNYC!)
Posted at 06:54 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, June 19, 2006
Why Can't California Be More Like Montana?
Posted by DavidNYCMontana:
Montana Democrats Barnstorm for UnityAfter what could have turned into a divisive primary election, Montana Democrats rallied in four cities Friday to show that the state the party is united behind Jon Tester in what promises to be a no-holds-barred U.S. Senate race against Republican incumbent Conrad Burns this fall.
California:
Tension Builds Between L.A. Mayor, AngelidesTension between Antonio Villaraigosa and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Phil Angelides surfaced Friday as the Los Angeles mayor declined to say whether he backed his own party's candidate to unseat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
It looks to me like Dems in Cali are living up an old credo: They never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. All I can say is, someone better bash a few heads in over on the left coast before Angelides and Villaraigosa give the media any more fodder for one of their favorite evergreens, "Dems in Disarray." Maybe we should send Brian Schweitzer over there to whoop some ass.
Posted at 03:29 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2006 Elections - State, California, Montana | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, June 17, 2006
NJ-Sen: Tom Kean, Jr. is a Lightweight and a Coward
Posted by James L.Scott Shields has a great diary up on Dailykos that I thought spoke volumes about the kind of guy we're facing in the New Jersey Senate race this year--namely, a lightweight and a coward. It's a great diary that I encourage you to read, but my favorite part is Shields' description of Kean's (dis)-ability to handle a forceful counter-attack by Bob Menendez to recent Republican smears at a NJ Association of Counties meeting:
What was Kean's response to the speech? Well, even though he was supposed to be sitting on the stage with Senator Menendez, he chickened out and waited outside until the Senator was done speaking. He then went up to the podium and delivered the same canned speech he'd been planning all along, with absolutely no response to the Senator's comments. After Kean, Jr. spoke, reporters tried to get him on the record. No such luck. As Josh Gohlke of the Bergen Record put it, Kean and his crew "stampeded down a carpeted hallway and into an elevator."Several reporters managed to keep up, blurting out questions the candidate was determined not to answer.Did he care to respond to Democratic candidate Robert Menendez's scathing speech just a few minutes earlier in the same ballroom? Was he, as Menendez charged, a lightweight armed only with empty attacks?
The Kean contingent stampeded down a carpeted hallway and into an elevator. The reporters and questions squeezed into it with them. Kean kept repeating a few slogans."I'm proud of both my record and my vision for the future of the country," Kean reiterated, this time with finality, as everyone spilled back out of the elevator and he hurried off. "Thank you very much!"
After talking for a few minutes, the reporters realized they had entered and exited the elevator on the same floor. So ended a strange episode in a campaign that is reaching impressive levels of absurdity, given that it's only June.
Stunts like hiding in an elevator say a lot about your character, Tom. And the worst thing you could have done is show your cowardice to members of the press. It's stories like these, as well as the results from this week's latest Quinnipiac poll, that have me breathing a little easier on this race (registered voters, April in parens):
Robert Menendez (D): 43 (40)
Tom Kean, Jr. (R): 36 (34)
Undecided: 17 (20)
The only way that the GOP can win this race is if they trick voters into thinking that the Kean brand is one of feel-good moderation, as exemplified by former Gov. Tom Kean, Sr. I think that we can feel a little bit more assured that Bob Menendez isn't the type of guy to play the kind of softball that would let the Republicans get away with this sort of nonsense.
Posted at 05:58 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont-Lieberman vs. Toomey-Specter, Revisited
Posted by DavidNYCA while back, I compared Ned Lamont's primary challenge against Joe Lieberman to Rep. Pat Toomey's somewhat similar challenge to Sen. Arlen Specter in the PA-Sen GOP primary two years ago. Now, the two races are by no means identical, but they do, as Mark Twain might say, rhyme. (For a full account of the differences, please read the older post.)
That rhyme got a bit more distinct last week, as Quinnipiac released a new poll on CT-Sen. Quinnipiac also surveyed PA-Sen in 2004, so we have some nicely comparable polls. Anyhow, check this out:
63 days before CT-Sen primary
Lieberman: 55
Lamont: 4023 days before PA-Sen primary
Specter: 52
Toomey: 37
Now ain't that somethin'. Both incumbents show identical leads of 15 points among likely primary voters. And as you know, Toomey came within two points of winning - different weather that day, and Arlen Specter is prematurely retired. On the flip-side, as you may also know, most of the key differences between PA-Sen and CT-Sen relate to the fact that Toomey was in a stronger position than Lamont is.
But look at the linked lines in that blockquote. The CT-Sen poll concluded 63 days before the primary - a full two months. The comparable PA-Sen poll was taken just three weeks before the primary there. If Pat Toomey, with all his advantages over Lamont, could close a 15 point gap in just 23 days, then it's starting to look quite plausible that Ned Lamont could close a 15-point gap in 63 days.
Again, the odds still favor Lieberman - the odds almost always favor the incumbent. But these Q-Poll results show us that at least we've got a serious race on our hands.
Posted at 12:50 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Virginia Primary Results
Posted by James L.VA-SEN: 41.66% 56.22% 59.43% 65.29% 73.53% 85.14% 92.38% of Precincts Reporting
Harris Miller (D):26,831 (52.60%)40,916 (49.18%)43,641 (48.58%)48,025 (47.68%)52,148 (47.73%)59,266 (47.08%)63,354 (46.75%)
Jim Webb (D):24,179 (47.40%)42,276 (50.82%)46,185 (51.42%)52,703 (52.32%)57,117 (52.27%)66,606 (52.92%)72,165 (53.25%)
It looks like it's gonna be Webb. It's Jim Webb. Kudos to the VA netroots and the Jim Webb campaign for winning this one despite being heavily outspent.
Posted at 07:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Lamont Scores Labor Support; Lieberman Laying Groundwork For Indy Bid?
Posted by James L.From AFT Connecticut:
AFT Connecticut, the state’s second largest AFL-CIO union representing more than 26,000 professionals, including healthcare, higher education, and public employees, has endorsed Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate in Connecticut.
The full text is available for AFT.org registered users, but DailyKos diarist pavlov dog has the full text, if you wish to see it.
This is great news for Lamont. Just a few weeks ago, before the party convention in which Lamont won a surprising 33% of the vote, Labor in Connecticut was a great deal less commital:
Observers predict that the convention will endorse Lieberman while giving Lamont, a Greenwich businessman who's challenging Lieberman from the left, enough votes to force a primary in August. Even after the convention, though, you can expect most unions to stay on the sidelines.About a dozen unions, mostly smallish locals, have endorsed the the three-term incumbent. But Lieberman's in-your-face support for an unpopular war and an unpopular president has turned many working people against him, especially union activists.
At the same time, labor Democrats are more interested in unseating a Republican governor and three Republican members of Congress than in replacing a generally pro-labor Democrat Lieberman's lifetime AFL-CIO voting record is 84 percentwith a kinder, gentler Dem.
AFT-CT's endorsement of Lamont is another great sign of just how much traction he's getting as of late.
UPDATE: Why am I not surprised? Taegan Goddard's Political Wire has the inside scoop:
Political Wire has learned that key allies of Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) are making contingency plans for the three-term senator to run as an independent in this fall's U.S. Senate race in Connecticut. Lieberman faces a challenge in the Democratic primary from businessman Ned Lamont.
Posted at 04:45 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-Sen: New SUSA Poll Shows Brown Leading By 9 Points
Posted by James L.For the life of me, I can't figure out why the OH-Sen polling is all over the place. Just when you think DeWine has a powerful lead, another firm comes out with a poll showing Brown on top, sometimes by equally powerful margins. And vice versa. Over, and over, and over again. Stop the insanity! What, pray tell, could possibly be swinging this race back and forth so much?
Anyway, here's the latest take from SUSA (likely voters, no trendlines):
Sherrod Brown (D): 48
Mike DeWine (R): 39
(MoE: ±4.4%)
As far as I can tell, this is the first Survey USA poll on the race. Conventional wisdom says that one should disregard the wild fluctuations of these polls until a clear trend one way or the other is seen. Until then, I'm going to still consider this a tight one.
Posted at 02:09 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, June 10, 2006
CT-Sen: Major Movement For Ned Lamont
Posted by James L.Just in case you missed it (after all, a lot of the major blogs are more focused on some kind of weird comicon that I wasn't invited to), Quinnipiac released a poll this week that's showing some huge movement for Ned Lamont against Joe Lieberman.
Among registered Democrats (May 2 in parens):
Ned Lamont (D): 32 (19)
Joe Lieberman (D-Inc.): 57 (65)
(MoE: ±3.6%)
Among likely primary voters (no trendlines, includes leaners):
Ned Lamont (D): 40
Joe Lieberman (D-Inc.): 55
(MoE: ±4.5%)
The numbers really speak for themselves. Lamont's strong performance at the recent state party convention gave his campaign a huge lift in terms of credibility and coverage, and CT Democrats are increasingly viewing Lamont as a viable alternative (you can even sense it in the tone of the local news coverage, as seen in the YouTube clip linked above). The best part is that Ned only has room to grow: a full 73% of Democrats in the state haven't heard enough about him to form much of an opinion. From my point of view (and from Josh Marshall's, apparently), the more you hear about Lamont, the more you like the guy as a person, and as a Senatorial candidate.
However, Lieberman's got a ripcord ready, if he chooses to pull it before facing the primary. As an Independent candidate in a three-way match-up between Republican Alan Schlesinger and Ned Lamont, Lieberman has a huge edge (registered voters, May 2 in parens):
Ned Lamont (D): 18 (13)
Alan Schlesinger (R): 8 (10)
Joe Lieberman (I): 56 (56)
(MoE: ±2.1%)
All hell would break loose if Lieberman were to do this, with the state Democratic Party and the DSCC being forced to make some difficult choices, but that doesn't matter to Joe. As of today, he's still keeping his options open, caring more about self-preservation than supporting his own party.
Frankly, I never expected Lamont, a guy who began this campaign with zero name recognition, running against a third-term Senator with a deep history in state and national politics, to hit this level of support, especially not this early. If Lamont can do this well with a full three quarters of the Connecticut electorate not knowing enough about him to form an opinion, then he's got a fighting chance--not only in the primary, but in a potential three-way free-for-all in November.
Posted at 02:05 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Tester Wins
Posted by James L.Wow. What a fantastic showing of broad support for Jon Tester tonight. From longshot to upstart to competitor to steamroller, Jon Tester has, without a doubt, scored an absolutely stunning victory in Montana tonight. On Dec. 31, 2004, when Swing State Project dropped his name for the first time, few could foresee that Tester, an organic farmer from Big Sandy, could absolutely wallop one of the most popular and well-funded Democrats in the state, Auditor John Morrison, and do so without slingling mud, without creating an intra-party rift, or without a massive warchest. Jon Tester accomplished what he did today by getting people to genuinely like him, which is a damn rare thing in politics these days. And that's exactly how he's going to convince Montana voters that he should be the next Senator from Montana.
The rebirth of the Democratic Party begins in Big Sky Country.
Posted at 12:54 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
MT-Sen: Tester Edges Morrison in Billings
Posted by James L.From the Tester Time blog:
9:05 p.m. MT
Results from Yellowstone County:
Tester 2349, Morrison 2207
This is huge. Recall what Matt Singer wrote about Billings, the population capital of Yellowstone County yesterday:
he Ohio of Montana, Billings is the swing city that often decides the winner of the general election, but it's relatively low primary turnout and its swing status makes it slightly less important in the primary election. County Commissioner Bill Kennedy, the only D on the Commission, is Morrison's treasurer (reportedly, he's got his eye on the Auditor's office is Morrison somehow pulls this thing off). Kennedy and Morrison have been working this town hard and it's been an admitted weak spot for Tester's campaign.
This is Tester at his weakest, folks. He's going to win this thing.
Posted at 11:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
California and Montana Predictions Open Thread
Posted by James L.Polls close in under a half hour in these two states Montana, so take a breath and hit me with your best shot. Of course, like Stoller, I'm not going to make any predictions (though I do have a few things rumbling around in my gut besides the stuffed peppers I'm digesting). I don't want to slant your guesses, but the NRCC is sounding pretty confident, according to the Hotline:
NRCC Chair Tom Reynolds (NY) said earlier today that, based on an analysis of absentee returns in CA 50, ex-Rep. Brian Bilbray (R) held about a 10K vote lead. Reynolds added, however, that he wouldn’t make any predictions at this early stage.
Posted at 09:32 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, California, Montana | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
New Mexico, South Dakota Results Open Thread
Posted by James L.Hmm, okay, how about this: given everything else going on, I don't care what happens in New Mexico tonight. But if anyone's dying to discuss who the GOP nominee to take on Sen. Bingaman is this year, feel free to liveblog that baby in the comments. Anyway...
SD-Gov, 18.12% 67.99% Precincts Reporting:
Jack Billion (D):5,455 (64.78)16,616 (61.44)
Dennis Wiese (D):2,966 (35.22)10,430 (38.56)
The AP's calling it for Billion.
Posted at 09:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2006 Elections - State, New Mexico, South Dakota | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MT-Sen: Optimism in the Tester Camp
Posted by James L.Matt Singer of Left in the West gives a personal anecdote on why the Tester camp is feeling upbeat today:
Yesterday, after spending the day at work, I reviewed historical turnout numbers. I spoke with a friend about the size of the two paid media operations. I felt like vomiting. I was terrified, terrified because despite how things felt like they were going, I’ve seen too many victories slip away.That was before I hit the phones.
Understand this, I’m calling Yellowstone County. The most prominent Democratic official in Yellowstone County hasn’t just endorsed John Morrison. He’s serving as his treasurer and has been working hard for him. This is supposed to be among our worst territories.
Twenty calls in and I can’t find anyone voting against us. A friend of mine running another phone bank across town calls, excited. He’s talked to twenty people. He’s got 19 Tester supporters and one person voting for Morrison.
The numbers start piling up. By the end of the night, our phone bank has talked to 150 live ones and left hundreds more messages. Tester supporters outnumber Morrison supporters 4-to-1. If you give Tester the “undecided” voters who have said they lean our way and give Morrison the rest of the undecided voters, we’re up 5-to-2. The margins are unreal. And our people are excited.
We call it a night at 8:45. I talk to a friend on the other side of the state. His calls are going the same way, overwhelmingly favoring Tester.
I hear from someone who knows a Morrison volunteer. Her list in Helena struck out. People are even telling the Morrison campaign that they are voting for Tester.
Meanwhile, our volunteers in Helena can’t find Morrison supporters and our folks in Great Falls are getting positive feedback from across the state.
Honestly, this is my third cycle in Montana politics. I’ve made a lot of calls over the years. I’ve never literally felt like I was witnessing the ground shift under my feet the way it has felt here in recent weeks.
One week ago, calling on the same batch of lists we called on last night, our support-to-oppose ratio was 1:1 or maybe 3:2. Every night it has improved. We’re now talking close to 5:1.
The big question on everyone's mind is whether Tester's late surge will be enough to counter the apparent organizational advantages of Morrison's campaign (which started earlier, and with better funding throughout), not to mention Morrison's broader name recognition. I'm still expecting this one to be tight tonight, but stories like this one are great to hear.
Posted at 12:22 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, June 05, 2006
RI-Sen: Chafee and Laffey in a Dead Heat?
Posted by James L.The Providence Journal reported new polling numbers released by the far-right Club For Growth last week on Cranston Mayor Stephen Laffey's primary challenge to vacillating Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee (May 21-24, likely voters, no trendlines):
Lincoln Chafee: 45.7
Stephen Laffey: 44.3
(MoE: ±5.66%)
At a sample size of 300 "very likely" Republican primary voters, and a Margin of Error of 5.66%, that's a pretty crappy poll to begin with, nevermind the fact that it was commissioned and released by the Laffey-boosting Club For Growth (a PAC with a habit of supporting some of the most unpleasantly extreme elements of the Republican Party). So take it for what it's worth.
Posted at 07:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, June 03, 2006
MT-Sen: Getting Out the Vote in Big Sky Country
Posted by James L.If San Diego is a little too far out of reach, and you live in--or within driving distance of--Montana, Andy Tweeten of Montanans For Tester writes in to get the word out on how you can help Jon Tester get out the vote in the last few days before the primary:
Volunteers in Montana can contact us at (406) 454-2006, (406) 449-0117 or info@testerforsenate.com to help out. We have activities happening across the state that we'd be happy to direct people to--including literature drops, phone banks, and visibilities.Unfortunately, we do not have capacity to do GOTV phone calls from out of state.
Tester has been getting a remarkable surge of momentum in the last week--racking up big endorsements, including a few from several former staff members of his opponent, MT State Auditor John Morrison. If you have the means, the campaign would greatly appreciate any effort you can make to ensure that Jon Tester comes out on top this Tuesday and keeps this race competitive against the vulnerable Conrad Burns.
Posted at 01:03 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, May 29, 2006
The Week Ahead in California and Montana
Posted by James L.We have a number of hot races to look forward to next Tuesday, June 6 in California, and my neighbor state Montana. Here's a run-down on what to watch:
CA-50: Busby's all-out battle to steal this open seat from the Republicans will be, without a doubt, the premier event of the night--and the Republicans are on edge:
Staffers from the National Republican Congressional Committee are quietly telling GOP House members to prepare for a possible loss in the June 6 special election to fill the seat of Randy "Duke" Cunningham, now in prison for taking bribes. The Southern California district is heavily Republican, but some GOP insiders believe that Democrat Francine Busby will defeat former GOP Rep. Brian Bilbray and go on to win a full term in November. More alarming some worry that a Bilbray defeat could signal the GOP's loss of control of the House. The NRCC has already pumped $3.1 million into the race. "It is becoming more and more likely," says one GOP strategist, "that Bilbray will squeak out a victory." But another longtime Republican operative isn't so sure. "This is a district we should never lose," he says. "It's the stink of Cunningham, and the Bush problem."
CA-42: If you live in the 42nd district of California (see a map here) or know anyone who does, and you'd like to have the chance to get a Democrat on the ballot this November, you'll have to write in the name of Mark Hull-Richter on the ballot. House Race guru BENAWU has the lowdown. Hull-Richter is gonna need to come up with 2641 write-in votes. That's a huge hill to climb, but it's worth a shot. Afterall, under-the-radar write-in campaigns allowed Democrats to field candidates in previously uncontested races in PA-09 & PA-15.
CA-36: Anti-war activist Marcy Winograd is challenging Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. From the L.A. Times:
In sum, Winograd casts her opponent as a Bush Democrat who was too slow to challenge the president on the war, one who moved left only when challenged in the campaign. Winograd could only have been delighted when restless House liberals complained of the same thing in the early jockeying for position in next year's Congress, lobbying to have Harman replaced as the party's voice on the Intelligence Committee.I'm not sure if Winograd has the necessary organization to pull of an upset, but her primary challenge has at least forced Harman to prove her progressive bona fides.
CA-11: Netroots favorite and '04 nominee Jerry McNerney vs. DCCC-favored Steve Filson. The winner will take on scandalized Republican Richard Pombo (he himself is facing a primary challenge from Pete McCloskey, a 78 year-old former Congressman who authored the Endangered Species Act). I don't have a dog in this race.
CA-06: In many ways this is the opposite of CA-36. Incumbent Rep. Diane Lynn Woolsey is one of the most liberal members of Congress, and her challenge is coming from the right:
Democratic Rep. Lynn Woolsey faces a challenge from Assembly member Joe Nation -- her first significant primary contest in more than a decade for the district representing Marin and much of Sonoma counties. Woolsey, elected in 1992, prides herself as being one of the House's most liberal members, attacking the war in Iraq, promoting alternative energy sources, and fighting cuts in health and education spending. Nation, a popular local politician and former economics professor, pitches himself as more moderate and pro-business. He touts his work in the Legislature to push for alternative fuels and his opposition to building a new Death Row at San Quentin Prison in Marin.
MT-Sen: Another huge one to watch. Likeable progressive Jon Tester has got his mojo working and the perceived front-runner, state Auditor John Morrison, has seen his fundraising dip and some of his support shift to the Tester camp in the wake of an extramarital/conflict of interest scandal. Both are still polling ahead of the uber-corrupt Conrad Burns, but it's Tester that has the buzz in this last final stretch. Will it be enough to clinch the nomination? This one will be a nail-biter.
Anything I missed? Consider this a CA and MT-Sen open thread. Have at it.
P.S.: Obviously, I left out the contentious Angelides-Westly battle for the Democratic Nomination for Governor against Schwarzeneggar. The mud-slinging is pretty off-putting in this race, and I'm not inclined to blog much about it other than I hope that the battle will be one more factor to help energize Democratic turn-out in CA-50. But Angelides and Westly fans are more than welcome to duke it out in the comments section.
Posted at 05:18 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, California, Montana | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
New SUSA Senate Approval Polls
Posted by James L.Enjoy. Highlights: Jim Talent (R-MO) is in the negatives for the first time, as is John Kyl (R-AZ). Santorum's prognosis looks pretty grim, too.
Posted at 06:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Polls | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, May 19, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont Is On the Ballot
Posted by DavidNYCLooks like Nostradamus Lieberman was right: As of this moment, Tim Tagaris is reporting that Ned Lamont has the votes of 497 convention delegates, while Lieberman has 1014. Lamont only needed 15%, but he now has 33%, which is exacly in the range Lieberman predicted Lamont would get. Such powers of prognostication!
Of course, this means I was wrong, way wrong - but I'll gladly be wrong like this from now until November. So congrats to Ned Lamont and his entire team!
Posted at 08:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, May 18, 2006
AZ-Sen: Jim Pederson Cuts Kyl Lead From 29 to 7
Posted by RBHA new survey from Behavior Research Center/Rocky Mountain Poll (voters, January in parens):
Pederson (D): 33 (26)
Kyl (R): 40 (55)
Undecided: 27 (19)
(MoE: ±4%)
KPHO is reporting this. Expect this to show up in Arizona papers tomorrow, with all sorts of quotes from both sides.
Basically, my reading of this poll is that it's a mix between a nosedive for Kyl and Republicans and Pederson's ad campaign. January 2006 was when Bush was in the low 40s, before the DPW situation, and before various other situations which have hurt the Republicans.
Pederson leads Kyl amongst Independents, 31-19, a massive shift from a 43-25 Kyl advantage in the January poll.
This could be a slight radar blip, but the candidate with momentum isn't hard to identify. A lot of people are fleeing from Kyl and the Republicans when it comes to 2006.
UPDATE (DavidNYC): So it turns out there is some solid support from another poll to back up these results. Take a look at this graphic. Kyl's disapproval among Dems has shot up like a bottle rocket. In the last month alone, he blasted from -12 to -34. Dems are coming home to Pederson. (Credit to Matt.)
Posted at 08:06 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Democratic Party Convention Starts Tomorrow
Posted by DavidNYCConnecticut's state Democratic convention begins tomorrow. The main event is candidate selection, which is done by a vote of the delegates. If any candidate gets 15% or more, s/he wins at automatic spot on the August primary ballot. Unsurprisingly, Joe Lieberman is trying to play the expectations game, making ridiculous, grandiose predictions that Ned Lamont will take 30% or or move of the delegates. To its credit, the Hartford Courant is aware of the shtick Joe is trying to pull, but I wouldn't be surprised if other tradmed outfits fall for this pathetically transparent gambit.
While it would be terrific if Lamont got 15%, and extraordinary if he did hit 30%, we need to be realistic here. Lieberman has been an institution in CT politics for decades. There is a tremendous amount of pressure to support him. Anyone interested in a future in Connecticut politics has to realize that if they back Lamont and Lamont loses, they'll be pariahs for as long as Lieberman is alive. Backing Joe is the safe move. Remember, we're talking about Democrats here - these are not the people who are usually inclined to ever take risks.
But there's also some very good news: Getting 15% doesn't matter. Not only does it not matter, it might even be salutary if Lamont doesn't hit that mark. No, I didn't just get fitted for rose-colored contact lenses. Here's why: Lamont has been working hard to get on the ballot via an alternate route: gathering signatures from 15,000 of the state's Democrats. It's an expensive and difficult process, but well worth it.
When you have to petition to get on the ballot, that does two things for you. First, you're forced to ramp up your field operation early. That means you've got a bigger volunteer base, more experienced campaign workers, and a field team that runs like a proverbial well-oiled machine months ahead of schedule. Second, you get the names of tons and tons of supporters. The law requires 15K sigs, but because of the inevitable challenges and invalid names, you generally want about twice that. And psychological research shows that the mere act of getting people to sign a statement of support (which is what a petition is) makes it much more likely that they'll continue in that support at a later time.
Successfully petitioning to get on the ballot would also be a nice feather in Lamont's cap because it would be the first time any major-party statewide candidate has done that in CT. Connecticut used to not have a petition process at all - you had to get 15% at a convention or you were out of luck. That system was recently ruled unconstitutional, so Lamont could make a little bit of history here.
As I've often said, the odds on Ned beating Joe in the primary are still long. But whether it's by delegates or petitions, as long as the tradmed doesn't get suckered by Joseph Isadore's gamesmanship, Lamont will indeed be on the ballot.
Posted at 02:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Local Boy Makes Good
Posted by DavidNYCJust as the Swing State Project welcomes two new bloggers on board, one of our top alums fires up a new blog himself. Tim Tagaris is now, among other things, running the official Lamont for Senate blog. They've got all kinds of multimedia over there, including Ned's ads and his special campaign video. There's also a really good blogroll of sites covering this race, including a couple I had not yet heard of. Definitely adding this one to my RSS feeds. No comments, though - guess they don't trust us punks in the blogosphere.
UPDATE: Check this out!
A growing cast of prominent activists is backing Mr. Lamont. ... Tim Tagaris, recently the Democratic National Committee's Internet outreach coordinator, has become director of Internet operations for the Lamont campaign.
Tim Tagaris, prominent activist - and yes, folks, that's the New York Times talkin'.
Posted at 01:49 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
FL-Sen: Bense Not Running
Posted by DavidNYCWell whaddya know. Alan Bense just said today that he will NOT run for FL-Sen. I think I oughta stay out of the predictions business! Anyhow, I can certainly understand why Bense isn't interested. It's a seriously uphill fight, and he's got little name rec. All I can say now is, go Kathy Harris!
Posted at 02:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
FL-Sen: Friday's the Deadline
Posted by DavidNYCFriday is the deadline for Alan Bense to file for the Florida senate race. With talk like this coming from Gov. Jeb, it's just gotta happen, right?
Even if Bense does jump in, though, he's got a tough row to hoe. The CW says he'll need $20 million to have a shot in a big state like Florida. Sounds about right to me. And since Harris doesn't seem likely to drop out, he'll need to beat her and Bill Belson. Florida's got a very late primary (Sept. 5th), making that dual task even harder. Good luck with that.
Posted at 02:55 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, May 04, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman Swamping Lamont in New Q-Poll
Posted by DavidNYCQuinnipiac finally has a new poll out on the Dem primary in Connecticut (registered voters, Feb. in parens):
Lamont: 19 (13)
Lieberman: 65 (68)
Undecided: 14 (17)
(MoE: ±4.3%)
That's pretty terrible for Lamont. I had been hoping he might crack 30%, but he inched up only 6 points. His name rec barely budged either, going from 93% D/K to 90%.
We're now a little over three months out from the primary. The only spot of hope I can offer is that in mid-February of 2004 (about seventy days before that year's PA-Sen GOP primary), Pat Toomey had a D/K of 79% according to Quinnipiac. (They didn't ask a Toomey-Specter head-to-head that month.) And Toomey, of course, came within a hair's breadth of unseating Arlen Specter.
As always, my usual loud-and-clear disclaimer about the distinctions between these two races applies. I'd say they are coming into even sharper contrast now. The big guns are (perhaps somewhat slowly) lining up behind Lieberman - Dodd's been firing away for a while now, and Harry Reid has gotten Lieberman's back as well. This is exactly what the GOP establishment did for Specter. Ted Kennedy may be next. And maybe even Hillary Clinton, too. While I'm sure Bill can't stand Lieberman, Hillary's all about proving her centrist cred these days.
And on the other side, no one's lined up with millions for Lamont like the Club for Growth did for Toomey, and no one will, in part because no one can.
I'm also aware that Rasmussen recently had a poll out which showed a much more favorable result for Lamont, with Lieberman ahead 51-31. I don't have much faith in Rasmussen, and I would counsel against embracing it just because it shows prettier numbers. However, the folks at the LamontBlog raise a very good point: Rasmussen polled "likely primary voters," while Quinnipiac talked to registered Democrats. In that light, the big spread between the two surveys is plausible. And if Rasmussen's likely voter methodology can be trusted, well then it makes a lot more sense than just asking RVs. Of course, predicting likely voters is one of the toughest tasks in all poll-dom.
One additional detail of note: Swing State Project alum (and now-former DNCer) Tim Tagaris is going to work on the Lamont campaign, doing netroots & grassroots outreach. Tim is easily the most qualified person there is for a job like this. I'm not a blog triumphalist, but if Lamont is to win, it'll happen from the ground up. And Tim is exactly the right person to help make this happen.
Posted at 10:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Todd on the Senate
Posted by DavidNYCChuck Todd says he thinks the Senate is more likely to flip control than the House, acknowledging that this is a minority view. While I'm inclined to disagree, his argument is worth mulling over. He does point out that, since the direct election of senators began, the House has never flipped without the Senate flipping, too. Interesting, but I'd be wary of falling prey to Hirdt's Law (because something hasn't happened in the past, it won't happen in the future).
Todd also has his new Senate race rankings out, available here. He thinks Brown's departure from RI-Sen is actually a net positive for Linc Chaffee (because Dems might now cast votes for Linc in the GOP primary), but I'm not sure I'm buying that - or the claim that "Brown's exit seems to have given Chafee a small perception lift." This strikes me as a little too much like talking about a baseball player's "intangibles," which as anyone who's ready Moneyball knows, is a load of B.S.
Chuck also thinks that a win by Pete Ricketts in the NE-Sen GOP primary would is the "nightmare scenario" for Ben Nelson. This isn't a race I've been following closely - can anyone tell me what Todd is talking about here? I wasn't aware that anyone considered Nelson vulnerable, despite Nebraska's redness.
One thing you can do on Todd's ranking page is offer your own rankings, in the left-hand column. Go for it.
Posted at 04:40 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 28, 2006
FL-Sen: My Spidey Sense Is Tingling
Posted by DavidNYCThe other day, ye olde blogger DavidNYC said this:
Ten days left in the legislative session, but nineteen until the filing deadline. Something about Bense's phrasing - the fact that he allegedly refuses to look further than ten days into the future - makes me think he really is serious about jumping in.
Yesterday, ye olde Gouverneur of Florida said this:
Once again undercutting U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris, Gov. Jeb Bush said on Wednesday that House Speaker Allan Bense ``would be a great United States senator.''
Tingle, tingle.
(Thanks to Political Wire via McJoan.)
Posted at 03:03 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 27, 2006
VA-Sen: Holy Moly
Posted by DavidNYCPolitical Wire received an advance copy of a New Republic profile of Sen. George Allen (R-VA) in which author Ryan Lizza finds many of Allen's high school classmates surprised that he's considering running for president because of the racist tendencies he displayed as a teenager. They say he "plastered the school with confederate flags" and drove a red Mustang with a confederate flag on the front. Then Lizza got a copy of Allen's high school yearbook:I stared closely at Allen’s smirk in his photo, weighing whether his old classmates were just out to destroy him. And then I noticed something on his collar. It’s hard to make out, but then it becomes obvious. Seventeen-year-old George Allen is wearing a Confederate flag pin.When confronted with this evidence, Allen sent an email through an aide with this explanation: "When I was in high school in California, I generally bucked authority and the rebel flag was just a way to express that attitude.”
Wow. Just wow. And Allen can't even offer the meager excuse that he was "embracing his heritage" or anything like that - he grew up in California, his dad is from Detroit, and his mother is from Tunisia. If there is any justice in this world, Allen's aspirations for higher office would completely vanish today. Since I'm not that optimistic, I can at least hope that Jim Webb crushes him come November.
Posted at 12:43 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
RI-Sen: Matt Brown Dropping Out?
Posted by DavidNYCA blog called Rhode Island's Future is reporting that Matt Brown will drop out of the senate race today. Can anyone confirm this? Brown's having a press conference at 3:30pm, so I gather we'll know soon.
UPDATE: Brown has indeed dropped out. He did the right thing and immediately endorsed fellow Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse. I think this was probably the right move for Brown - he was struggling for cash. And it's also probably a net-positive for the Democrats, as RI has a very late primary. Whitehouse does still have some token opposition, but now he can spend most of his time focusing on the general.
Posted at 03:08 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
AZ-Sen: Finally, Some Good News for Pederson (D)
Posted by DavidNYCASU & KAET-TV have a new poll out on the Arizona senate race (registered voters, Oct. 2005 in parens):
Pederson: 31 (28)
Kyl: 42 (50)
Undecided: 27 (22)
(MoE: ±5%)
Just about every poll had shown terribly disappointing results for Jim Pederson, so this one is a nice change of pace. Of course, one marginally decent poll does not a victory make. Pederson is still down eleven points; the trendlines are terribly old; and most of his improvement came in the form of Kyl dropping. Still, seeing Kyl under 50 - especially this far under 50 - is a good sign. I'll wait to see some other polls before I even think about getting excited.
(Via Midterm Madness.)
Posted at 01:52 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
FL-Sen: Will Bense Jump In?
Posted by DavidNYCEvery month or so, for the past half year, the Florida GOP has sworn up and down that the Republican senate nomination belongs to Kathy Harris alone. Whenever someone suggests that maybe this isn't such a great idea, they get smacked down. But now with Harris at levels not seen since the USS Maine sank to the bottom of the ocean, the tide may be turning.
Florida State House Speaker Alan Bense has long been a possible alternative to Harris. The St. Petersburg Times blog notes some rumblings from his quarter:
[Bense] called the idea of a challenge against the better-known Harris intriguing "because all my life I've loved a good challenge.""I'm thinking about it," Bense said when asked what he tells members who quiz him about his plans. "I'm thinking about it but I'm focused on what I'm doing now."
With 19 days until the Senate candidate qualifying deadline, Bense would not directly say whether he would consider taking on Harris in the primary. "I really don't want to focus on that," he said. "We've got 10 days to go in the session."
Elaborating on his much-talked-about comment of last Friday when he said there was a "50-50" chance, Bense said he meant 50-50 "that I might do something else down the road. It wasn't the Senate race." (Bense is widely rumored to be on a long list of potential lieutenant governor candidates).
Ten days left in the legislative session, but nineteen until the filing deadline. Something about Bense's phrasing - the fact that he allegedly refuses to look further than ten days into the future - makes me think he really is serious about jumping in. If he does, our biggest risk is that Harris drops out. But if there's a competitive primary, that might not be such a bad thing, considering that Florida's primary is not until Sept. 5th.
Posted at 09:33 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, April 21, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman Now in Negative Territory Among "Liberals"
Posted by DavidNYCVia LamontBlog, something rather non-trivial:
Self-indentified "liberals" now oppose Lieberman by a 49-46 margin - and as you can see, the current spread represents just the latest point in a pretty clear trend. As LamontBlog notes - and as I've argued before - self-ID'ing liberals are the closest stand-in you are likely to find for "likely Democratic primary voters."
Because I had to deal with so many frustrating misunderstandings when I first made this observation, let me say the following: No, it's not a perfect stand-in for Dem primary voters; no, not all primary voters are self-ID'ing liberals; yes, the composition of voters in the primary is going to be hard to predict because of the unusual forces at work here; and no, a narrow disapproval rating does not mean Joe Lieberman is going to lose.
In fact, pretty much no matter what happens between now and August, barring Lieberman dropping out, the odds are very much against Lamont. As you all probably know, sitting senators almost never, ever lose in primary challenges. The few examples in the past thirty years all involved odd-ball circumstances, none of which obtain here. Nonetheless, this new SUSA poll is still good news for Ned. And just to show you we're not the loony left, Lieberman's support has taken a sizable recent hit among "moderates" and "independents" as well, especially among the latter.
One other detail: I believe that CT has a closed primary system - ie, you can only vote in your own party's primary. Some people have suggested that Republican Joe-lovers (and they are legion) might switch parties just to cast a vote for him in the primary. Fortunately, the GOP primary just became competitive, as Alan Schlesinger joined Paul Streitz in seeking the Republican nomination. I don't know how much of a draw this race will be, but at least there are two GOPers who dislike Joe enough to want to run against him.
UPDATE: The more I think about it, the more significant this is in my mind. Look again at Lieberman's performance among indies. Notice anything? It stands at 53-41 - a point worse than his approval among Dems! And Joe didn't just "take a hit" (as I say above) with independents - he utterly cratered in the last month. He was at 63-29, a 34-point spread. Since then, he dropped a whopping 22 points to just +12 - his fall with Dems was only from +21 to +13. I'm not sure what bearing this might have on the primary, but the numbers are pretty stunning in my mind.
Posted at 12:27 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 20, 2006
RI-Sen: Sierra Club Endorsing Chafee (R)
Posted by DavidNYCI'm sure you've already seen this elsewhere on the Internets today: The Sierra Club is endorsing Lincoln Chafee, the Republican Senator from Rhode Island.
I have one very, very simple response to this: My goal in life is to elect and support Democrats. My corrollary goal, naturally, is to oppose Republicans and boot them from office. Barring the most extraordinary of circumstances, if your goal ever involves electing or supporting Republicans, I will never support you. I don't care what your rationale for bipartisanship is - it's one I will never share.
The Sierra Club can do what it likes. If they think supporting Chafee is the bees' knees, they can be my guest. They are, of course, incredibly and totally wrong. But I have no interest in debating them on their own terms. They're engaged in a different project than I am. If they care, I can tell them that I'll never give them money if they continue to support Republicans. But they probably don't - I think they've come to the cynical conclusion that they're apt to rake in more dollars if they appear bi- or non-partisan.
Anyhow, let me draw on a little bit of history which I think is instructive. When many American Jews felt that the most prominent pro-Israel organizations in this country were too right-leaning, what did they do? They went out and founded the New Israel Fund, a much more progressive group which today plays an important role in American-Israeli affairs. People committed to environmental activism and the election of Democrats would do well to heed this lesson. The Sierra Club may one day find itself with a serious rival if it insists on being this out-of-step with reality.
Posted at 11:09 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
NV-Sen: LV Mayor Oscar Goodman (D) Won't Run
Posted by DavidNYCFrom the Las Vegas Review-Journal, via Sarah R. Carter:
Mayor Oscar Goodman said he will not seek the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate, ending years of speculation among political insiders about the popular mayor's future."I love Las Vegas, I love being mayor of Las Vegas," Goodman said in an interview Wednesday with the Review-Journal. "I have a lot on my plate, I want to see it come to fruition, and I can only do that at home."
Sarah notes:
This means that Carter is the only Democrat who is likely to run. The filing deadline is May 19, and no other Democrats have expressed interest.
I like Jack Carter, but unfortunately, this seat is an exceptionally tough nut to crack - and not just because John Ensign is swamping Carter in the polls. In small states, the major players from opposing parties can often have too-cozy relationships. This was the case for many years with Joe Biden and William Roth in Delaware, for example - and it seems like it's happening in NV, too. All I can say is that I hope I'm wrong about this.
Posted at 09:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Nevada | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, April 09, 2006
CT-Sen: What Is Joe Thinking?
Posted by DavidNYCFriends, I know we've been down this path before. But it's not my fault Joe Lieberman keeps making me play whack-a-mole. Amazingly, Joe - in his clearest statement to date - has held open the idea of running as an independent if he were to lose the Democratic primary:
I hope there's not a primary. I'm confident if there is one, I'll win it, but I'm not gonna rule out any other option for now....
Kids, if Joe loses the Dem primary, he just can't, can't re-file as an independent. Let me 'splain once again:
[I]ndependent candidates have to submit petitions by August 9th, 2006. It just so happens that the Connecticut primary is on August 8th. In other words, if Joe loses the primary, in order to run as an independent in the general, he'd have to file petitions the very next day.This is all but a literal impossibility. Joe would have to collect petitions while still running in the Dem primary. Can you imagine such a spectacle? It would be beyond unheard of for a sitting senator to do such a thing. The only real way Lieberman could run as an indie would be if he abandoned the Democratic Party (save your jokes) well in advance of the primary. Otherwise, he's just talking smack. If he loses the primary, he's done, finished, tostada del dia.
Let me tell you this: If Lieberman starts collecting petitions to run as an indy candidate, all hell will break loose. Somehow, though, I very much doubt anything like that would ever come to pass.
Posted at 09:58 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, April 06, 2006
MD-Sen: Can Steele Actually Draw Black Votes?
Posted by DavidNYCAn internal document prepared by a top Democratic strategist warns that a majority of African American voters in Maryland are open to supporting Republican Senate candidate Michael S. Steele and advises the party not to wait to "knock Steele down."The 37-page report says a sizable segment of likely black voters -- as much as 44 percent -- would readily abandon their historic Democratic allegiances "after hearing Steele's messaging."
"Governor Ehrlich and [Lt. Gov.] Michael Steele have a clear ability to break through the Democratic stronghold among African American voters in Maryland," says the March 27 report by Cornell Belcher, polling consultant for the Democratic National Committee, which bases its findings on a survey of 489 black voters in Maryland conducted last month.
Versus:
If the findings of the poll are correct, they paint a somewhat different vision of the black electorate from what has been commonly understood to this point, said David Bositis, a senior research associate at the D.C.-based Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Bositis said nothing in his research suggests that an African American Republican will be able to grab a significant segment of the black vote.The DNC survey finds that 22 percent of black voters support Steele when matched against a "generic" Democrat.
"There's just no way it's that high," Bositis said, noting that Steele's performance among black voters in the 2002 election did not approach that number. "If he was that much of a draw then it's doubtful he would only have received 13 percent of the black vote."
I don't want to believe only that which I'd like to believe, hence I remain vigilant about Steele's chances among the African American community. However - and this is a big however - the internal DNC poll sounds like a classic message-testing poll. We all know that those kinds of polls, with their captive audiences listening to a candidate's entire messaging package, don't reflect how politics works. Few voters will ever seriously tune in to a single message of Steele's, let alone the entire kit-n-kaboodle. Message-testing polls are great for precisely that - testing a message, not taking the temperature of the electorate.
Of course, when Cornell Belcher says we shouldn't wait to knock Steele down... well obviously, on that front, I couldn't agree more. And it shouldn't be too hard:
A message that resonated with black voters identified Steele as "George W. Bush's hand-picked candidate," the survey found. It's a message Democrats have tried to exploit. Even as Walker discussed the findings, he pointed to a photograph hanging in his office -- it shows Steele and Bush arm in arm.The poll finds that only 8 percent of black voters in Maryland approve of the president's performance. And it signals that early support Steele has received from Bush and his advisers will rub black voters the wrong way.
Now that's a simple message that's easy to push and easy for voters to take home.
Posted at 12:59 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
CT-Sen: Shhh!
Posted by DavidNYCThis is pretty funny. Lieberman's plodding build-up to his oh-so-obvious non-joke at the end is just brutal. The crickets are more than appropriate.
Posted at 12:00 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, April 03, 2006
CT-Sen: Lowering Expectations
Posted by DavidNYCLamont will need the votes of at least 241 (15 percent) of those delegates [to the statewide nominating convention] or signatures from 14,000 (2 percent) of the state's 700,000 registered Democrats to force an Aug. 8 primary against Lieberman. Signatures must be collected by June 5.Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith conceded that a primary against Lamont is likely inevitable.
"We think it won't be a problem for him to get 15 percent of the delegates," Smith said. "He's been working at this for several months, and he's been bragging about his grass-roots army."
Wow, Lamont has been at this all the way since the end of January! Poor Joe's only had eighteen years to get his act together. It almost goes without saying that Lieberman is nakedly trying to lower expectations here. Expected in politics, but pretty sad for an incumbent Senator.
Also, mocking the grassroots? Not a smart move. Every time they rile us up, it just makes us want to work that much harder for Lamont. Lieberman would be wise to present a smaller target and not give the grassroots/netroots more fodder. The fact that his campaign manager doesn't seem to realize this, though, is a good sign for Lamont.
(Via DailyKos.)
Posted at 10:12 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, March 25, 2006
NY-Sen: Hillary's Newest Opponent: Stark Raving Nuts
Posted by DavidNYCMan, I just could not resist this. The New York GOP is having an awful, awful year. They have no serious candidates for either Governor or Senator. They are trailing badly in the Attorney General's race. Their dwindling House delegation is also in weak shape, with one recent retirement and several vulnerable incumbents. Their former stronghold of Nassau county has been completely taken over by the Dems. And even their one-time leader, the odious Al D'Amato, is backing Eliot Spitzer in all but name.
If this isn't rock-bottom, what is? I truly, truly did not think it could get worse for the NY GOP. But guess what, sports fans? It just did:
A Republican challenger to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is bizarrely claiming that the former first lady has been spying in her bedroom window and flying helicopters over her house in the Hamptons, witnesses told The Post yesterday.Former Reagan-era Pentagon official Kathleen "KT" McFarland stunned a crowd of Suffolk County Republicans on Thursday by saying:
"Hillary Clinton is really worried about me, and is so worried, in fact, that she had helicopters flying over my house in Southampton today taking pictures," according to a prominent GOP activist who was at the event.
"She wasn't joking, she was very, very serious, and she also claimed that Clinton's people were taking pictures across the street from her house in Manhattan, taking pictures from an apartment across the street from her bedroom," added the eyewitness, who is not involved in the Senate race.
Wow. This is just too, too good. (And, in case you don't click the link, several non-anonymous sources also confirmed McFarland's remarks.) At this point, I'm actually feeling sorry for McFarland and the Republicans, so I thought I might offer them some helpful information, in the form of this chart:
Hope this helps! Have a nice day!
(Post story thanks to SusanG. Graphic from One World Government resistance manual courtesy Field Commander Plutonium Page.)
Posted at 01:44 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New York | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Montana: The Field Is Set
Posted by DavidNYCToday was the filing deadline in Montana. You can see all the Senate and House candidates listed here. Bob Keenan did indeed file to challenge Burns. (as promised). Meanwhile, Denny Rehberg did not jump into the senate race - he filed to run for his House seat once more.
In other words, we probably wound up with the best of all possible scenarios, or close to it. Burns now faces a decidedly non-trivial primary challenge, which is awesome. If Burns wins, he's wasted money and gotten even more bloodied than he already is. If Burns loses, well, Keenan is no Racicot or Rehberg. (Those were the two names which whooped our two guys in the latest Rasmussen poll.) I'm sure Keenan doesn't have comparable name recognition. Speaking of which, Matt Singer speculates that Keenan is simply trying to up his name rec for an eventual run against Brian Schweitzer. Good luck with that, buddy.
The only person who loses out here is Monica Lindeen, who still has to face Rehberg in November. It's a tough fight, but Rehberg's got his own Abramoff problems. If the Montana press stays on this story as aggressively as it has vis-a-vis Conran Burns, Rehberg is going to have some serious troubles.
UPDATE: When a perfect 100 really just ain't too good.
Posted at 07:57 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
MT-Sen: Keenan to Challenge Burns
Posted by DavidNYCSo Bob Keenan will indeed challenge Conrad Burns for the MT-Sen GOP nod. Tomorrow is Montana's filing deadline, so we'll see how things finally shake out. (Denny Rehberg is still the question mark.) I think that Burns is definitely in this for the long haul, though, and Keenan's move may wind up being a gift from heaven. If you're about to bail, you don't send forth your minions to say stuff like this:
"Conrad Burns has voted to lower taxes; Bob Keenan has a record of voting" to increase taxes, Jason Klindt said.
Let the games begin!
Posted at 06:21 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
NJ-Sen: Counting the Cars on the New Jersey Turnpike...
Posted by DavidNYCThey've all gone to look for a Thomas Kean...
In the biggest campaign fund-raiser yet on behalf of State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr., Vice President Dick Cheney traveled to New Jersey on Monday and praised Mr. Kean as someone with "the experience, the values and the vision to be a superb United States senator."But there was one problem: Mr. Kean was a no-show.
Actually, Mr. Kean did show up at the event, which was held at the offices of the IDT Corporation in downtown Newark. But he did not make it until 6:15, roughly 15 minutes after Mr. Cheney's motorcade had left.
...
For his part, Mr. Kean said he had been in Trenton all day, voting on important bills, because "I would not miss votes in order to make a political event." As soon as the Senate wrapped up, around 4 p.m., he traveled north "as quickly as I could." But instead of taking the New Jersey Turnpike, like any regular commuter between Trenton and Newark, he and his driver chose Route 1, which is usually crawling with bumper-to-bumper traffic at that hour.
Mr. Kean said he did so because there were delays on the Turnpike in the morning. But at 6 p.m., there were no reported delays between Exit 7A, not far from Trenton, and the George Washington Bridge, according to the Turnpike's Web site.
This is like Briscoe and Curtis busting a shabby alibi on Law & Order. Too good, just too good. I have nothing else to add.
Posted at 09:11 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, March 17, 2006
MT-Sen: All Hell About to Break Loose?
Posted by DavidNYCWow. This whole race might be on the verge of getting a lot more interesting. The top Republican in the MT state Senate, Bob Keenan, says he's mulling a challenge to Conrad Burns in the primary. Keenan can't run again because of term limits, and he said he won't seek a state House seat as an alternative. When a prominent Republican considers challenging a sitting senator of his own party in a primary, that means said senator is even weaker than you might have imagined.
But things may actually be even crazier still, if you can believe it. Matt Singer noticed this unusual detail:
Speaking of Burns’ race, does anyone find it odd that Rehberg still hasn’t filed for the House seat? With Burns’ seat in a free-for-all and both Max and Brian looking solid for ‘08, Rehberg just may decide that it’s time to cash in his chips. Given that the D.C. establishment reportedly doesn’t want Burns in this race and that they are likely to pick Dennis the Menace over Bob Keenan, it looks like Montana’s Congressman may be weighing the merits of picking a fight with the man he got into office.
Interesting catch indeed. I doubt that anyone is this clever, but maybe this is just a brilliant ploy by Keenan - goad Rehberg into challenging Burns, and then run for Rehberg's seat. Regardless, if Rehberg jumps in against Burns, then we'd really wind up with a sweet deal: Burnsie staying in, Burnsie getting wounded in a primary - or even losing, and an open seat in MT-AL to boot. We might just hit the trifecta!
Posted at 01:25 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, March 16, 2006
WY-Sen: Kempthorne Tapped for Interior
Posted by DavidNYCSo it looks like Dick Kempthorne will replace Gail Norton as Secretary of the Interior.
Yes, Kempthorne is the Republican Governor of Idaho, but I've prefaced the title of this post with WY-Sen. It's not a mistake. As several commenters pointed out in an earlier thread, Wyoming Senator Craig Thomas was rumored for this job as well. If he had been tapped, that would have created a potentially interesting open seat in WY. But with Kempthorne getting the nod, nothing changes. He was term-limited out of running for ID-Gov again. CQ has some color on that race if you are curious (they rate the race Safe Republican).
Posted at 05:23 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Wyoming | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Dropout News Roundup
Posted by DavidNYCThere are two media events going on today in races swirling with confusion. One is taking place as we speak: Elton Gallegly is conducting a press conference right here in DC. We should hopefully get press reports back soon.
The other takes place at 9 o'clock tonight, when Kathy Harris seeks the warm, lickspittle embrace of Sean Hannity to announce her future plans. The rumour du jour is that she will resign from the House to focus only on her Senate race. Personally, I wonder why more people don't do this - after all, it's not like she gets to keep her House seat if she loses the Senate race. But doing so might also require a special election (something I haven't looked into yet).
In other dropout-related news, Markos points to this short note at the Hotline blog which says that Conrad Burns just hired a political director - not the sort of move someone on the verge of dropping out tends to make.
UPDATE: Gallegly will indeed run again. I still say he bails shortly after winning, forcing a special election. We should be ready for that eventuality. What Dems in the area might make strong candidates?
UPDATE: Harris is staying in, too. Haven't heard anything about her resigning from the House, though.
Posted at 04:20 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, California, Florida, Montana | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
TN-Sen: Ford Slips Against Three GOPers
Posted by DavidNYCA new poll from Rasmussen (likely voters, January in parens):
Ford: 36 (40)
Bryant: 45 (42)Ford: 35 (37)
Hilleary: 43 (43)Ford: 35 (40)
Corker: 39 (42)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
The usually terse Rasmussen provides a few internals, but doesn't offer much of an explanation for Ford's slippage. As for myself, I keep vacillating on whether I think TN-Sen will turn into a legit pickup opportunity this year. Obviously, a poll like this makes you lean "no," but just a month ago, the same survey tilted toward "yes." What do you think?
Posted at 09:15 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Tennessee | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, March 06, 2006
FL-Sen: Time to Start a Dead Pool
Posted by DavidNYCGo read this post on Kathy Harris over at Kos. Then come back here and tell me it isn't time to start a political dead pool. But I'm not in the least bit happy at this development - I've long been rooting for this kind of thing not to happen. If Harris goes, someone with a lot less baggage (like FL state House Speaker) Alan Bense will jump in. Florida's filing deadline isn't until May 12th, so a lot could happen before then.
Posted at 11:40 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
RI-Sen: Chafee Pulls Spectacular Double Blunder
Posted by DavidNYCSo Lincoln Chafee and his erstwhile primary challenger, Steve Laffey, are having a pissing contest over who supports Israel more, better, louder, etc. It's nothing more than a crass attempt to pander to Jewish voters, as though Jews will reflexively support whomever is most hawkish. Hint: 75% of Jews voted for Kerry. This ploy's not gonna work. Moreover, there are only some 16,000 Jews in RI - barely 1.5% of the population. So why bother? Well, Laffey's shilling for right-wing PAC money, and Chafee is trying to deny it to him. But along the way, Linc went a-blundering.
Indeed, check out this exceptional double blunder on Chafee's part. Trying to bolster his pro-Israel credentials, Chaffe apparently made the following remark:
Linc Chafee says the Christian right, increasingly active in Republican politics, also has a strong, Biblically inspired interest in Israel.
Whoa there! It's almost hard to unpack the enormous gaffes here. Let me try:
• Blunder #1: My good buddies in the GOP - those right-wing Christian fundamentalists - are super-mega-pro-Israel. Judge me based on the company I keep!
Wow. For a guy whose entire political career rests on pretending he's some kind of moderate, this is an outrageously glaring admission to make. We always knew that Chafee was in thrall to the far right. Now he's gone and admitted it.
• Blunder #2: Hey, Jewish voters! I know you'll like my stance on Israel because I'm good friends with Christian fundamentalists. Remember them, those guys who want to use Jews as kindling for their rapturous end-times fantasies?
Seems obvious to me, but Linc seemed to forget that fundamentalist "support" for Israel is perhaps Exhibit #1 when it comes to explaining why the modern GOP can never - and will never - tap the Jewish vote.
So congrats, Linc. In just one sentence, you managed to put the lie to your claims of being a moderate, and you helped turn off Jewish voters to your campaign. Good work! The DNC oughta put you on payroll.
Posted at 10:18 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, February 23, 2006
MO-Sen: Talent Flip-Flops on Stem Cells
Posted by DavidNYCAs I've written in the past, I ordinarily hate the phrase "flip-flop" - it's gotta be okay to change your mind about things. But sometimes, a change in position is so starkly craven, so basely political that it deserves to be labelled a flip-flop. And here, friends, is one of them:
Sen. Jim Talent attempted an election-year pirouette Friday on stem-cell research, an issue that has split the Missouri Republican Party.Talent withdrew his four-year support of federal legislation that would ban human cloning, including what opponents call embryonic therapeutic cloning that most researchers see as key to early stem-cell study. Talent’s pro-life supporters adamantly oppose the technique.
I've written about this issue before, mainly in the context of a pro-stem cell MO ballot measure - one which Talent's opponent, Claire McCaskill, supports, and which he has refused to give a firm answer on. Talent still won't say whether he supports or opposes the initiative, but his flip-flop on Sen. Sam Brownback's anti-stem cell legislation is already causing plenty of ire:
The pro-life movement also is confused by Talent’s rationale for pulling his support for Brownback’s bill.Talent said he was concerned that the bill’s wording would inadvertently ban altered nuclear transfer research that did not involve the cloning of human embryos.
Nonsense, said Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, whose group helped Brownback write the bill.
“This doesn’t make any sense to us,” Doerflinger said. “The Brownback bill … clearly allows research other than cloning human embryos. … I think this man is very confused.”
...
“There’s been a lot of support for Jim Talent from the pro-life community,” said Larry Weber, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference. “Today he stepped off that platform. At this point, it’s essentially vacant with respect to the U.S. Senate election. His candidacy gave pro-life voters something they could gravitate towards. Unfortunately, it’s just not there any more.”
The business community is also pissed at Talent, for precisely the opposite reasons - his wishy-washiness is hurting the prospects of the state's bio-industries. That's a pretty rare feat for a Republican to be able to pull off: Piss off the conservative religious base AND the Chamber of Commerce in one fell swoop. I think this issue is going to keep hurting him all election-season long, especially as moneyed interests visibly crank up their support for the ballot initiative.
Posted at 02:40 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
FL-Sen: Second Finance Director Bails on Harris
Posted by DavidNYCKathy Harris' second finance director quits - and just when things were looking up:
Just as her wobbly campaign for the Senate appeared to be steadying itself, Katherine Harris lost her finance director.Mike Miller, a veteran Republican fundraiser, resigned Friday. He is the second finance director to leave the Harris campaign since she started running to unseat Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, but Miller said his departure is purely for personal reasons.
Personal reasons - or was he pushed out?
In December, Harris hired Anne Dunsmore and her California company, Capital Campaigns, to lead a national fundraising effort."We're thankful for all Mike has done, but Anne is setting up her own team, her own structure," said campaign spokeswoman Morgan Dobbs, who, like Miller, downplayed his departure.
Now that's interesting. In fact, I think I'm seeing a pattern here. In MD-Sen, the national boys march in and instantly cause turmoil, leading to the departure of several local hands. Is the same thing going on here? What I'm sensing is that as the DC-based GOP leadership grows more and more nervous about its election prospects this year, it marches in the infamous "outside consultants" into races which are looking bad. It's a sign of desperation, and it also hasn't been working out very well.
In any event, it's pretty sad-sack that Harris has to hire someone from out-of-state to run her anemic fundraising operation. It certainly opens her up to the easy charge that ordinary Floridians don't want to donate to her. Meanwhile, Bill Nelson has raised the third-most ($7.5M) of anyone seeking election to the Senate, behind only Clinton and Santorum. Plus, he's got $8M cash-on-hand, while Harris has just $1M.
Posted at 02:17 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
MD-Sen: Cardin Chalks Up 14-Point Lead Over Steele
Posted by DavidNYCA new poll from Rasmussen warms the cockles of my heart (likely voters, January in parens):
Cardin: 49 (40)
Steele: 35 (45)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
Rasmussen believes the January poll was an outlier because the November results (49-41 Cardin) are much more in line with these. (To believe all three polls are accurate would imply a level of volatility in this race that's just not borne out by other available evidence.)
Oh, and by a 73-11 margin, Maryland voters reject Say Anything Steele's comparison of stem cell research to the horrors of the Holocaust. For once, I'm not surprised - in a good way.
Posted at 08:22 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
PA-Sen: Santorum's Ethics Mire
Posted by DavidNYCWe all knew how much of a joke it was when Bill Frist tapped Dick Santorum to be the GOP's "ethics point man." It almost seemed like a perverse set-up job at the time - Li'l Ricky was sure to crash and burn on the ethics front. And indeed, that fate has come to pass:
SEN. RICK SANTORUM and his wife received a $500,000, five-year mortgage for their Leesburg, Va., home from a small, private Philadelphia bank run by a major campaign donor - even though its stated policy is to make loans only to its "affluent" investors, which the senator is not.Good-government experts said the mortgage from The Philadelphia Trust Co. raises serious questions about Santorum's conduct at a time when he is the Senate GOP's point man on ethics reform. They said it would be a violation of the Senate's ethics rules if Santorum received something a regular citizen could not get.
A campaign spokeswoman for Santorum, who is seeking re-election, said the couple's mortgage interest rate was "market-driven," but she refused to offer specifics, as did officials from Philadelphia Trust.
Reminds me of a great episode of Law & Order where a wealthy family bribes a judge by pressuring their bank to offer him a low-interest loan available only to the uber-rich. But wait, there's more:
• A political-action committee chaired by Santorum, America's Foundation, spends less money on direct aid to GOP candidates - its stated purpose - and more on expenditures than similar PACs. And its expenditure reports are littered with scores of unorthodox expenses for a political committee, with charges at coffee and ice cream shops and fast-food joints as well as supermarkets and a home-hardware store.For example, America's Foundation made 66 charges at Starbucks Coffee, almost all in the senator's hometown of Leesburg, Va., and 94 charges at another D.C.-area vendor, HMSHost Corp. Virginia Davis, the campaign spokeswoman, defended all the charges as campaign-related, saying the senator prefers to meet political aides in coffee shops rather than on Senate property.
• A little-publicized charity founded by Santorum in 2001, the Operation Good Neighbor Foundation, is not registered in Pennsylvania, even though the majority of its fundraising and spending takes place here.
What's more, three years of public tax returns show the charity spent just 35.9 percent of the nearly $1 million it raised during that time on charity grants, well below the 75 percent threshold recommended by experts. The group's Web site says it has distributed a total of $474,000 to groups, many faith-based, that fight social ills and urban poverty.
The part about the charity really steams me. So many charities in this country are near-scams, spending most of what they raise on expenses, rather than directing their contributions to the people and groups who really need the money. I'm hardly surprised that someone like Santorum is engaged in that kind of activity, but it still infuriates me.
Fact is, though, wittingly or not, Bill Frist shone a bright spotlight on Santorum's own ethical record, and it's an ugly, ugly sight. I seriously hope DC Democrats can make some hay out of this one, because this particular story is not just about one senator's misdeeds. The storyline here is that the Republican tasked with cleaning up ethics practices himself is an unethical scoundrel. That's definitely man-bites-dog - or should I say, man-on-dog?
Posted at 03:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MD-Sen: The Wheels on the Bus Fall Off, Off, Off
Posted by DavidNYCYet another key staffer bails as Say Anything Steele's campaign comes apart at the hinges:
In a matter of weeks, Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele lost his campaign manager, offended an audience of Jewish leaders by comparing stem cell research to Nazi experimentation and then confounded a conservative talk show audience by saying he actually supports embryonic research.Yesterday came more turmoil, as the Republican with the best chance of winning a U.S. Senate seat from Maryland in two decades lost his communications director, Leonardo Alcivar, who resigned.
The public signs of disarray have exposed what campaign insiders confirmed yesterday are even deeper internal problems, stemming from a rift between Steele's longtime loyalists and the professional consultants who trooped to Annapolis to run his first big-league campaign.
As I suggested a few days ago, bringing in the big boys from DC wasn't likely to work. I had no idea it would get this bad this quickly, though:
The lieutenant governor's longtime supporters said yesterday that they have tried to fend off a national GOP "consultant culture" that espouses a cookie-cutter approach ill-suited for Maryland, a state dominated by Democratic voters.National advisers, however, described Steele loyalists as rigid and unsophisticated about the needs of a campaign of that scale. They said a parochial approach being counseled by Steele aides was destined to fail in a media-driven race that has drawn national attention and could cost more than $10 million before it's done.
And yes, there is justice in this world:
The professional staffers argued that, had Steele been better prepared to face unanticipated questions, he might have avoided the kind of lengthy, stream-of-consciousness reply that left him equating the research to Holocaust experimentation.Those closely monitoring the race said the resulting firestorm has left some Marylanders, and some national Republicans who have considered pouring cash into his Senate bid, reexamining whether Steele is ready for the race.
Ah, I could spend all day quote bits of this article. Go read the whole thing, and watch an allegedly top-tier Republican campaign crumble to dust before your very eyes.
Posted at 03:01 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, February 17, 2006
Indiana: One Big Problem
Posted by DavidNYCEven though Indiana's a very red state, we actually have several competitive House races brewing here. One, in Indiana's 9th CD, features a comeback by former Rep. Baron Hill, who lost by just a handful of votes in 2004. It's one of the most competitive and most-watched House races in the nation. There are also good matchups in IN-02 (Joe Donnelly) and IN-08 (Brad Ellsworth).
Unfortunately, we have a big gaping hole - right at the top of the ballot. Reader Christopher elaborates in comments:
The other somewhat sombre note on the 50-state strategy is that Indiana's filing deadline is today, and no one appears to have filed for the Senate race.Lugar, of course, is unbeatable... barring the unforeseen. But this is February and the election isn't until November. The unforeseen occasionally happens - witness the Carnahan/Ashcroft Missouri race. With no dog at all in the race, Democrats will be unable to exploit any unexpected opportunity that might crop up later in the year.
I wish they had worked harder to twist an arm and get *somebody* signed up for the ballot. Roehmer. Hamilton. Poor old Jill Long. Kathy Davis. Joe Kernan. Graham Richards. Jonathan Weinzapfel. *Some*body.
Running as Senate cannon fodder in Indiana is no fun, but it can have its rewards - people forget, but that's how Baron Hill got his seat in Congress. He let the state party put him up against a GOP Senate incumbent, went down in flames... but then he had the name recognition to win a House seat in the next cycle.
It's a shame to see a blank that close to the top of a ballot.
Indeed. And with the filing deadline today, it looks like this big black hole is going to be unavoidable. This makes us look quite bad, and leaves Lugar free to waltz through the 2006 cycle without so much as having to put out a press release. Sigh.
UPDATE: I want to add that I think the Dems this year have done a pretty darn good recruitment job throughout the country. We have competitive races in several red states, which would not have happened without candidates like Claire McCaskill taking the plunge. That said, though, I'd rather have a candidate in Indiana than not have one.
Posted at 01:34 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Indiana | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, February 16, 2006
MD-Sen: Steele's Campaign Manager Quits
Posted by DavidNYCCampaign manager Graham M. Shafer made a quiet exit earlier this month, citing family obligations, a campaign spokesman confirmed yesterday. His departure highlighted a growing tug within the Steele campaign between the candidate's Washington advisers and his coterie of longtime loyalists from Maryland, of which Shafer was one.
That internal struggle intensified last week, sources said, as Steele sought to minimize damage caused when he equated stem cell research to the experiments Nazi doctors conducted on Jews during World War II while speaking to a Baltimore Jewish group.As criticism of the remark had Steele hustling to issue profuse apologies, national GOP officials were clashing with Steele's longtime advisers on how to handle the crisis, said three well-placed sources, all of whom spoke on the condition that they not be named because they were divulging internal campaign deliberations.
Nothing like having the big boys from DC come in and try to bail Say Anything Steele's ass out. After national GOP figures lambasted Coretta Scott King's mourners and lectured them on how they ought to behave, do guys like Ken Mehlman have any realistic chance whatsoever at convincing black voters to go Republican? That seems to be the Steele campaign's entire strategy. Good luck with that one.
Posted at 12:27 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
VT-Sen: GOP Astroturf Blog Uncovered
Posted by DavidNYCIn my Blogger Spotlight interview, I made the following observation:
Q: How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?A: In the traditional media, you have outlets like the New York Times and outlets like the New York Post. One is reputable, the other isn't, and everyone's figured out which is which by now. The same is true of the blogging world: You have Times-style blogs and Post-style blogs. Most bloggers try to verify what they post; some peddle in rumor. Most blogs are run by honest folks; some are run by paid shills.
My biggest concern, though, is that the traditional media will fail to distinguish between the two. I think we saw this happen in 2004 in South Dakota, where bloggers who were on campaign payrolls were wrongly treated as independent sources. When a story appears to originate in the blogosphere, traditional media reporters need to ask, "Is the source reputable? Is it a Times or a Post?" And if you can't answer in the affirmative, then pass on the story. This isn't always an easy question to answer, but one good place to start is the list of past winners of the Koufax Awards.
Who knew the next astroturf Republican blog would be discovered so quickly? Kudos to Peter Freyne of Seven Days, "Vemont's Alternative Webweekly," for sleuthing this one out (and to Kagro X for bringing it to our attention).
Posted at 06:10 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Vermont | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-Sen: I Didn't Say What I Said
Posted by DavidNYCYou might have been a bit confused if you read this AP story from yesterday:
“Hackett would have probably won this seat,” [DavidNYC], one of three founders of the liberal Web site SwingStateProject.com, contended in a blog posting Tuesday. “It's much harder for me to envision the 'northeastern Ohio liberal' Sherrod Brown breaking the 49-percent barrier, particularly with DeWine moving to the center.”
As it turns out, the quote in question belongs to SSP community member & regular commenter Mark. And actually, this is not a case of a lazy reporter failing to understand the difference between posts and comments.
I contacted the author (David Hammer) and he explained what happened. I had written the comment just above Mark's, which makes it plausibly look like the text below my name belonged to me, as opposed to the text above my name. Forgiveable, and no lasting harm done. (Though Mark, I'm sorry you missed your chance to have your name in lights!)
Anyhow, for the record, I don't agree with what was attributed to me. :) I think Sherrod is the stronger candidate - but that is the subject for another post.
P.S. I'm the sole founder of the SSP - you have only me to blame for this site!
Posted at 05:33 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
FL-Sen: Harris Makes Up Ground
Posted by DavidNYCA new poll from Rasmussen (likely voters, Jan. in parens):
Nelson: 49 (54)
Harris: 40 (31)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
Now, that's a monster leap. Harris went from being down 23 points to being down just 9 in one month. Rasmussen's explanation is that the GOP has stopped trying to push Harris from the race and that big-timers (like Jeb) are backing her. But man, that's just way too much inside baseball - who even pays attention to that kind of crap (except us) this far out? I refuse to believe this kind of thing is responsible for a 14-point swing. (The one bit of bright news is that Nelson leads among independents, 64-18.)
When you have situations like this, you're always left with the same question: Which poll was out of whack? Without a third month's worth of data, we can't know. (I'm pretty sure the January poll was Rasmussen's first on FL-Sen.) If this newest poll is accurate, though, then this worries me. Nelson is still the favorite, but I was hoping we wouldn't have a serious fight on our hands here.
Posted at 02:45 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-Sen: Hackett Out
Posted by DavidNYCSo Paul Hackett's out of the Ohio Senate race, and he's not running for OH-02, either. I agree with Adam B at DailyKos: Sherrod Brown better win this.
I also hope Hackett's supporters can get behind Sherrod, too. I was a big Dean supporter during the primaries, and when he lost, I was seriously bummed. But I took a week, got over it, and then got right behind John Kerry. Like I said in a post just below, we're all on the same team here, and we've all got to work together to beat Mike DeWine.
Posted at 12:25 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (31) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, February 13, 2006
MD-Sen: "Say Anything" Steele
Posted by DavidNYC"Say Anything" Steele. That's my new nickname for MD Republican Senate candidate Michael Steele, and I hope it sticks.
In the midst of my fury over his remarks comparing Holocaust victims to stem cell research, I spouted the following about Say Anything Steele.:
You think nothing through, you say anything for political gain, you have no sense of right and wrong and decency.
In his latest comments, [Steele] said, "I support embryonic stem cell research," a position that seemed to be at odds with his previous remarks.
Unbelievable. I was right on all counts. How could a man who thinks that stem cell research is the kin of Dr. Mengele's experiments actually support such a thing? That's the "think nothing through" part. But obviously, he doesn't actually feel that way if he now supports stem cell research. That's the "say anything for political gain" part. And either way you slice it, he triggers the "no sense of right and wrong and decency" part, too.
However, I just want to make one thing clear: My outrage at Steele's remarks had nothing to do with his personal views on stem cell research. If he wants to oppose it, that's his perogative. And if he wants to delusionally believe it's anything like the horrors of the Holocaust, he's free to think that, too.
My anger was directed at the fact that he was telling others what they ought to believe - that Jews ("of all folks") ought to think the way he does precisely because so many of us have such close links to the Holocaust. That being touched by the Holocaust ought to mean you want to foreshorten the lives of those who might be saved by stem cell research. That is what disgusted me. The notion that he could presume to speak for people like my father - and attribute such callous, hateful views to them - was beyond outrageous.
Of course, now that stem cell research is hunky-dory in Say Anything Steele's world, I guess we can chuck all that out the window. What a pathetic hack.
Posted at 02:50 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MT-Sen: Poll Has Morrison Leading, Tester Tied with Burns
Posted by DavidNYCA new poll from Rasmussen (likely voters, Jan. in parens):
Tester: 46 (45)
Burns: 46 (45)Morrison: 50 (43)
Burns 43 (46)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
Two strong months in a row for both Dems, with Morrison picking up some more steam recently. Bottom line is that either man could beat Burns. (It wasn't too long ago when things looked like this.) Of course, I'm not saying this is any kind of foregone conclusion - Burns has a lot of money, and much of the year remains. All I'm saying is that both Tester and Morrison could beat him.
The issue, really, is who wins the primary. Right now, Morrison is probably the favorite, by virtue of his higher name rec and better fundraising. We still haven't seen any independent polls on the primary, though. (I don't understand why Rasmussen can't tack that question on to his survey.)
As everyone who reads this site well knows, I'm supporting Tester. But I'll get behind whoever wins the Dem nomination. I mention this because supporters of both candidates need to be considerate of the other side - if Tester wins, he'll need to cultivate Morrison supporters and vice-versa. We're all on the same team here - let's not lose sight of that.
Posted at 02:35 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
OH-Sen: Rahm Urges Hackett to Drop Out, Run for OH-02
Posted by DavidNYCWhoa man, this could get ugly:
National Democrats are turning up the pressure on Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, openly asking him to leave his campaign for U.S. Senate and take a second shot at a Cincinnati-area House seat that he nearly won last summer.Democrats have privately suggested for some time that Hackett, who has a national Internet following but faces the more experienced Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, in a Senate primary, would be better off running again for the House seat held by GOP Rep. Jean Schmidt. Democrats acknowledge their chances of winning a district that voted 64 percent for President Bush in 2004 are slim without Hackett.
"This isn't talking behind the scenes; I'm saying it publicly. ... I'm petitioning Paul Hackett to run for Congress," Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Sunday.
The Ohio filing deadline is just three days away, so this is a hell of a time for Rahm to start talking about this openly. Personally, I don't really think this is about getting Hackett to run for Congress. OH-02 is a total booby prize, especially if Jean Schmidt isn't the Republican nominee. I think this is Rahm trying to damage Hackett by making him look like the "undesired" candidate, the guy who lacks institutional support.
Of course, I could be wrong - it's possible that Hackett could completely switch gears over the next couple of days. (The filing requirements in Ohio are pretty minimal.) After all Jeanine Pirro did something similar in NY. Then again, Pirro had Pataki pushing her, and Rahm is not the Democratic Governor of Ohio. (Though in some ways, Rahm might be more powerful, given that he's a serious party power-broker, and Pataki is a lame-duck presidential wannabe.)
If Hackett does indeed run for OH-02, and if Schmidt is still the nominee, then we might, possibly might have a fight on our hands. However, I just want to point out two recent examples which align with this scenario. In 2004, Ben Chandler in KY and Stephanie Herseth in SD both won special elections to the House and then both faced quick rematches that November. Herseth won her special 51-49 and the rematch 53-46. Chandler was 55-43, then 59-40. In fact, Herseth's opponent was the same both times. This is a small sample size, but it is not reassuring. The power of incumbency - however brief - can be strong indeed.
(Thanks to desi.)
Posted at 01:56 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, February 10, 2006
VA-Sen: Webb's Website is Up
Posted by DavidNYCGet ready for a season of non-stop bad Webb/web puns: James Webb's, uh, website is up. It's a start, but I think they need to start using Media Mezcla's Campaign Engine. All the cool sites are using it!
Posted at 10:37 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MD-Sen: Fuck You, Michael Steele
Posted by DavidNYCI'm not sure I've ever used profanity in the title of a post here, but I am beyond outraged right now. Beyond outraged. This is what Republican Maryland Senate candidate Michael Steele said about stem cell research to the board of the Baltimore Jewish Council:
"You of all folks know what happens when people decide they want to experiment on human beings, when they want to take your life and use it as a tool."
You goddamn motherfucking sonofabitch. You dirty, filthy, rotten scumbag. That you would dare, DARE make this comparison tells me that you are a warped, crippled, self-hating human being. You think nothing through, you say anything for political gain, you have no sense of right and wrong and decency.
Let me put it another way. My father is a Holocaust survivor. My fiancee has Type I diabetes. Do you think for a fucking SECOND that my dad doesn't want to see stem cells used to cure the love of my life?
Of course not, you fucking asshole. You don't know what my father - "of all folks" - knows, but I'll tell you. He hates to see life cut short. His father was murdered - murdered! - when my dad was just 11 years old. He'd hate more than anything if my bride-to-be was taken from me prematurely because of illness - especially if something could have been done to prevent it. You not only fail to understand that, but you presume the opposite.
A rabbi once told me something very interesting. In Jewish tradition, if you harm someone, only that person can forgive you. Not a rabbi, not God, not someone else - only the person you've wronged. Michael Steele, you've desecrated the memory of people who can no longer speak. Only they may forgive you. But I don't expect you'll ever be able to ask them for forgiveness, because I don't believe you'll be joining them up in Heaven.
Posted at 04:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
VA-Sen: Webb is In!
Posted by DavidNYCOh man, this is exciting news:
Former Navy Secretary James H. Webb Jr. said yesterday that he will file papers this week to seek the Democratic nomination to run for the U.S. Senate this year.Webb, who lives in Arlington County, would join Harris N. Miller, a Fairfax County computer executive, in seeking the party's nomination.
The nominee will oppose U.S. Sen. George Allen, a Republican who is seeking a second six-year term in the Senate. Allen is a strong favorite.
Webb, who was secretary of the Navy under Republican President Ronald Reagan, resigned in protest of cutbacks in the Navy fleet. He has been a strong critic of the war in Iraq, saying that the Bush administration has never developed an exit strategy.
As I've said repeatedly, I think Webb will make a great candidate with a compelling storyline (former Reagan official turns Dem). As you may also know, Webb is a graduate of Annapolis - perhaps he'll put in a surprise appearance at tomorrow's Band of Brothers event in DC. I'm not hinting - just hoping!
(Thanks to Jambon.)
Posted at 01:08 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont Creates Candidate Committee
Posted by DavidNYCNed Lamont's campaign is heating up, at least a little bit:
Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont moved closer Monday toward a challenge of U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman as he created a candidate committee, named a campaign manager and began searching for a headquarters."It is a significant step forward," said Tom Swan, who is managing what he says is still an exploratory campaign. "I am happy that Ned asked me to play a role within this campaign."
Swan, a liberal activist and longtime critic of Lieberman, took a leave of absence Monday from his job as executive director of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group so that he can work full time for Lamont.
The citizen group's political director, John Murphy, also will be joining the Lamont campaign.
So he's got a committee, and some staff (who sound experienced). That's a good start. However, note this:
Lamont has said that he will not move beyond an exploratory campaign until at least 1,000 volunteers sign up on his campaign website, nedlamont.com.
Still hasn't reached 1,000. Maybe I'm basing this too much on personal experiece, but I still really feel like 1,000 names is not a lot. When I was running New York for Dean three years ago, we had over a thousand local e-mail addresses in just a couple of months - and we weren't promoted on the million-visitors-a-day DailyKos, nor did we have our URL mentioned in newspaper articles. I would have expected Lamont to get 1K inside a week - but maybe I'm being unrealistic. Bottom line is, though, he'll get his 1,000 before too long.
Posted at 10:18 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, February 03, 2006
VA-Sen: Wait - Webb's Not Out!
Posted by DavidNYCA few days ago, I passed along an item from Raising Kaine which said that James Webb was out of the running for VA-Sen. But wait, not so fast!
As you all know, earlier this week I reported that James Webb had decided not to run for U.S. Senate from Virginia this year. This was based on direct contact with Webb, and was information that was rock solid at the time. However, times change. Today, I met with James Webb for 3 hours, along with my colleagues Josh Chernila and Lee Diamond, and I am authorized to say the following on Webb’s behalf: “Webb is definitely not out. Stay tuned for an announcement next week.”
This is good news. As I've said in the past, I think Webb is the most attractive candidate we can offer for this race. If you agree with me, you can head over to his website and send a brief friendly note encouraging him to run. You can also fill out the Draft James Webb petition.
(Hat tip to thegools.)
P.S. Speaking of VA-Sen, this man seriously wants to be president?
Indeed, here is what Senator George Allen of Virginia, who is considering a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, said when asked his opinion of the Bernanke nomination."For what?"
Told that Mr. Bernanke was up for the Fed chairman's job, Mr. Allen hedged a little, said he had not been focused on it, and wondered aloud when the hearings would be. Told that the Senate Banking Committee hearings had concluded in November, the senator responded: "You mean I missed them all? I paid no attention to them."
We always knew you were a lightweight, Sen. Allen. Thanks for the extra evidence.
(Thanks to HoosADem.)
Posted at 11:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Hotline's Senate Fundraising Roundup
Posted by DavidNYCThe excellent Hotline blog has a fundraising roundup for all Senate candidates. They also note a few highlights as well. The subscription-only version of Hotline also has a bunch of House numbers, but hopefully the good souls will publish that to the (free) blog soon, too.
Posted at 03:10 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
MT-Sen: Morrison Swamps Tester, Burns Way Ahead of Both
Posted by DavidNYCBad news, Tester fans:
Tester 4Q Fundraising: $89K
Morrison 4Q Fundraising: $407K
Burns 4Q Fundraising: $814KTester Cash-on-Hand: $167K
Morrison Cash-on-Hand: $753K
Burns Cash-on-Hand: $3.4M
Morrison raised almost 5x as much as Tester, and Burns almost 10x as much. Tester really has got to turn things around, and soon. You can help him by going here.
P.S. Markos rounds up fundraising numbers from a whole bunch of top-tier Senate races. The numbers don't look great for us.
Posted at 03:19 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Lamont is Looking for CTers
Posted by DavidNYCNed Lamont says he'll run against Joe Lieberman if and when he gets 1,000 CT residents to sign up on his website. According to Markos, he's gotten 300 so far, plus another thou from outside the state. Considering that Lamont's website has been pimped on the front page of DailyKos multiple times since Saturday, those numbers don't strike me as terribly strong. I mean, the guy's not asking for contributions - just name, e-mail and ZIP. Then again, CT is a small state, and Lamont is (apparently) limiting himself purely to people who are in the thick of online activism. Nonetheless, I expect he'll hit his millennium mark soon enough.
Posted at 12:57 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
VA-Sen: Is James Webb Out?
Posted by DavidNYCLowell at Raising Kaine is reporting that James Webb won't take on George Allen in VA-Sen this year. I have no reason to doubt the folks at RK, but I haven't been able to find an official confirmation from Webb. If true, though, then this is bad news indeed. James Webb is an exciting guy to me - I just can't say the same about Harris Miller, who is a Herb Kohl at best.
Posted at 11:19 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, January 29, 2006
WV, KY & FEC: Some Filing Deadline Notes
Posted by DavidNYC• WV's deadline was yesterday - 1/28. Two additional Dems have filed to run against Shelley Moore Capito. One, Mark Hunt, gave the Raelian cult half a million bucks to try to clone his son. The other, Richie Robb, just switched from the GOP - in fact, when you Google him, the first result is a campaign site which calls him a "Republican with Results." I'm sticking with Mike Callaghan on this one.
• WV's two Democratic reps, Alan Mollohan and Nick Rahall will have GOP challengers, but I'm not sure how serious either effort is. Sen. Robert Byrd also has a challenger, wealthy businessman John Raese, whom some people seem to think presents a credible foe. However, Raese is legally a resident of Florida and has also lost two statewide races before.
• Kentucky's filing deadline is Tuesday the 31st. The KY Secretary of State has a very good website, including a page which lists all candidates who have filed in a nice, clean, readable format. Mark Nickolas is hinting that Ken Lucas will file on Monday - if he doesn't, we may not have a candidate in KY-04. On the flip-side, no Republicans have filed to run against the popular Ben Chandler in KY-06. If Chandler is unopposed, that would be quite a statement - Bush won the district by 17 points. I personally think Chandler should consider taking on Fletcher again in 2007.
• The FEC filing deadline is also the 31st. The fourth quarter in an off-year is typically slow (winter holidays and all), but campaigns which did well will probably release some preliminary figures tomorrow or Tuesday (ie, before they are obligated to do so). In any event, the FEC will be cranking out the official figures before long.
Posted at 04:29 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Kentucky, West Virginia | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, January 27, 2006
NY-Sen: Cox Out; Spencer, Seemingly, In
Posted by DavidNYCNo one, it seems, wants to take on Hillary Clinton. With Jeanine Pirro vanishing into the ether, the NY GOP turned (once again) to Ed Cox, most famous for being the son-in-law of Dick Nixon. Cox, who actually had either the sense or grace to bow out when Pataki endorsed Pirro, decided it wasn't worth bowing back in. So they're down to a guy named John Spencer, who I always thought was a recently-deceased star on West Wing. Turns out, he's also a former mayor of Yonkers.
Not that you needed any confirmation, but this race is going to be seriously dull. A few people have noted that HRC is fundraising gold for the right - her name alone in direct-mail solicitations increases the return rate dramatically (or so it's said). Without even a semi-serious challenger for Clinton, she'll be able to fly under the radar for much of the campaign season, so it'll be that much more difficult to milk her name for some good old fashioned hate-bucks. Of course, she's still a celebrity and will get more coverage than most candidates, but this campaign probably won't produce many sparks of the sort which can light a fire under the anti-Hillary base.
Of course, they'll probably just make shit up anyhow.
Posted at 01:45 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New York | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, January 26, 2006
NJ-Sen: Menendez Slips Slightly in New Q-Poll
Posted by DavidNYCFrom Quinnipiac (registered voters, Dec. in parens):
Menendez: 38 (44)
Kean: 36 (38)
Undecided: 22 (16)
(MoE: ±3.2%)
Both men have almost identical favorability ratings, with the most salient fact that 64% of respondents say they don't know enough about either guy to express an opinion. My thinking is that as name rec grows for both men, a natural advantage has to accure to Menendez. George Bush just hit his lowest approval rating ever in NJ (36-59). It would be an amazing feat if Kean could avoid being tainted by the GOP's overall poor rep in the state.
Posted at 10:17 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
AZ-Sen: Kyl Swamping Pederson
Posted by DavidNYCMan, I am not liking this new BRC/Rocky Mountain poll (just plain "voters," Oct. in parens):
Pederson: 26 (30)
Kyl: 55 (54)
Undecided: 19 (16)
(MoE: ±4.2%)
Pederson is supposed to be a great candidate: He's got money, and as chair of the AZ Dems, he's got all the connections you could imagine. Moreover, Kyl is the ultimate super duper conservative wingnut. According to CQ (PDF), Kyl voted with the GOP majority 98% of the time in 2005 - the second-highest rate in the GOP caucus. I've got to believe he's out-of-step with much of Arizona.
And yet Pederson can't seem to gain any traction, at least (twice now) according to this poll. (The Zogby results are clearly from bizarro-world.) If we can't link (and thus hurt) Kyl with the failed Bush administration, whom can we do it with? I'm certainly not writing Pederson off - it's still quite early. We have a lot of good pickup opportunities, and I had hoped that AZ would be one of them. Anything's possible, but for now, I remain pessimistic.
Posted at 10:00 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Arizona | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Sunday, January 22, 2006
MO-Sen: McCaskill Leads Talent
Posted by DavidNYCA new poll from Research 2000 (likely voters, no trendlines):
McCaskill: 47
Talent: 44
Undecided: 9
(MoE: ±3.5%)
The partisan split is just about equal (around 80% of Republicans and Democrats support their party's candidate). The real issue is that independents favor McCaskill by a considerable margin, 50-41. Given McCaskill's consistently strong poll showings, Talent is probably right at the top of the second tier of vulnerable GOP incumbents. The 4Q fundraising numbers will be of especial interest in this race.
Research 2000 also tested MO-Gov, and showed Democratic AG Jay Nixon leading Republican incumbent Matt Blunt, 51-43. Unfortunately, Blunt is not up for re-election until 2008, so any poll here is just way too early. But Blunt, like his father (possibly Majority Leader Roy Blunt), is tainted by corruption and may face a desultory several years as governor (much like Ernie Fletcher in neighboring Kentucky).
(Thanks to hilltopper.)
Posted at 10:01 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, January 20, 2006
MN-Sen: Wetterling to Make Annoucement Today - Is She Dropping Out?
Posted by DavidNYCMN's Patty Wetterling is going to make some sort of announcement today about her candidacy for US Senate. I think you only make candidacy announcements in two situations: To tell people that you're running or to tell people that you're dropping out. What I don't get is why she'd scheduled it for a Friday afternoon. If she's gonna drop out and endorse rival Amy Klobuchar, that's newsworthy. And if she's gonna instead run for Congress in MN-06 again, that's also newsworthy. So why try burying the story?
Anyhow, the announcement is schedule for 2pm local time, so it's not for a bit. But the AP is already claiming they know that she'll drop out. Since Wetterling's opponent in 2004 (Mark Kennedy) is now also running for Senate, a race again in MN-06 is particularly attractive because it's now an open seat. The district did go for Bush by 57-42, but Wetterling out-performed that (losing 54-46). She could definitely win this time around. (Though I'll note that there's already a Dem candidate running, Elwyn Tinklenberg.)
In any event, we'll know soon enough.
UPDATE: So Wetterling has indeed dropped out. She endorsed Klobuchar, but refused to discuss possible future plans. Options include MN-06, Lt. Gov. or Secretary of State. Some commenters think the current candidate in MN-06 (Tinklenberg) is strong and that Wetterling ought to run for another office.
Posted at 01:22 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Minnesota | Comments (17) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
HI-Sen: Rep. Case to Challenge Sen. Akaka in Primary
Posted by DavidNYCIn some very unusual news, Democratic Rep. Ed Case (HI-02) has announced that he'll challenge incumbent Sen. Daniel Akaka in a primary. While I don't know nearly as much about Hawaiian politics as I do about New York's, this move strikes me as a pointless Tom Suozzi gesture. Akaka is one of the most popular senators around, and HI's even-more-beloved Sen. Daniel Inouye is rallying around him, as is the rest of the Dem establishment:
Inouye and Abercrombie both said they would stand behind Akaka, which could isolate Case within the party."I intend to continue to give Senator Akaka my support," Inouye said in a statement. "I hope Congressman Case will reconsider his decision to challenge Senator Akaka, and will instead seek re-election to the U.S. House of Representatives. Also, I have been advised that Senator Akaka has the full support of the leadership of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee."
I think Case has literally zero chance of knocking off Akaka. In the past two-and-a-half decades, only three incumbent senators have lost primaries, and all were under freakish circumstances. And unlike Toomey-Specter, Akaka-Case hardly presents the kind of ideological and stylistic rifts that could even give Case the slightest toehold.
Moreover, Akaka's won his last two elections with over 70% of the vote. (In a primary challenge in 2000, he came away with 91%.) If Case hopes to hang his hat on the issue of Akaka's age, good luck. Akaka's no addled Jacob Javits - and do you think he even looks close to his age? Man, I hope I look that good when I'm an octogenarian!
Inouye is counselling patience, but I doubt Case will listen any more than Suozzi did. As I did with Suozzi, I predict this futile run will really damage Case's future in Hawaiian politics.
As far as Case's seat goes, I think Dems should be able to hold it. The district (probably the slightly more Democratic of Hawaii's two seats) went for Kerry by 56-44, and Case won his last election by over 30%. Simply because it's an open seat, it'll be more competitive than it would otherwise be, but I'm pretty confident. (And I'm not really sure the HI GOP has all that much of a bench.) One friend who is knowledgeable about the HI political scene tells me he wants to see State Sen. Colleen Hanabusa take the seat. (She came in third in a special election in HI-02 in 2003.) Who do you like to replace Case?
Posted at 12:49 PM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Hawaii | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, January 19, 2006
CT-Sen: Debating the Wisdom of a Primary Challenge
Posted by DavidNYCIn discussing whether we should support or oppose a primary challenge to Lieberman, there are tons of issues at play. Allocation of resources is far from the only one. Matt Stoller thoughtfully analyzes all the reprecussions we might see if Ned Lamont mounts a challenge to Lieberman, and especially what kind of fallout is likely if the blogosphere (or much of it, anyway) gets behind Lamont. I encourage you to read it in full.
Posted at 12:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
CT-Sen: Lamont-Lieberman vs. Toomey-Specter
Posted by DavidNYCOver at DailyKos, Adam B raises an interesting comparison. But first, a little background. In 2004, conservative PA Rep. Pat Toomey challenged incumbent Republican Senator Arlen Specter for the GOP nomination. Toomey came remarkably close, losing by just 51-49, or 17,000 votes out of over one million cast. If the wind had puffed ever so slightly more in Toomey's direction, he would have pulled off the remarkable feat of knocking out a sitting Senator in a primary.
There are, of course, a lot of differences between Toomey-Specter and Lamont-Lieberman. We can pore over those at length in due time. But if you accept for the moment that we can legitimately compare the two matchups, I wanted to toss some more numbers at you.
The CT primary is around six-and-a-half months from now - Aug. 9th. In October of 2003, also about 6 to 7 months out from the PA primary, Quinnipiac (the same pollster I referred to below) did a poll on the senate race in that state. This time, I just want to look at Dem voters in CT and GOP voters in PA (forget about tags like "liberal" or "conservative").
Job Approval
Specter among Republicans: 57-30
Lieberman among Democrats: 55-29Favorability (favorable-unfavorable-mixed)
Specter among Republicans: 49-18-25
Lieberman among Democrats: 50-15-28
Six months out, Specter was looking pretty comfortable. But as Adam notes, the race tightened considerably in a very short amount of time, and Specter came within a hair's breadth of an early retirement. Lieberman's numbers are virtually identical.
Now, on to those differences. The most obvious is that Toomey had held political office, whereas Lamont is a newcomer. Toomey also had big money from the Club for Growth and the grassroots. However, Lamont himself is wealthy and has allegedly promised to spend over a million dollars of his own on the race. Plus, MoveOn and perhaps DFA might get behind him, too. Moreover, the entire top-tier GOP establishment (including Bush, Cheney, Santorum and Rove) showed up in PA to bail Arlen's sorry ass. Will Clinton, Kerry, Gore (hah) and Dean (double-hah) do the same for Joe?
Now, we can definitely debate the wisdom of whether Lamont should take on Lieberman. I'm fairly torn, but I'm personally leaning toward "yes." However, I doubt we'll come to any kind of resolution, or shed more light on the subject. I'd wager that we're all very familiar with all the pros and cons - which is why I'm more interested in discussing what's likely to happen, not whether it should happen. And on that score, I definitely think Lieberman is beatable.
Posted at 06:38 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
CT-Sen: Is Lieberman Beatable?
Posted by DavidNYCLet me start by saying I am not trying to debate the issue of whether Joe Lieberman should be challenged by a Dem or an independent. Rather, I'd like to discuss the mechanics of such a challenge - what it would look like, and whether it might succeed.
To that end, I don't think former Gov. Lowell Weicker can beat Lieberman as an independent. Quinnipiac recently released a poll showing Lieberman beating Weicker in a direct head-to-head (with no Republican) by 65-21. I doubt that Weicker could overcome such a huge gap, especially since his favorability rating is negative - he garners only 19% positive and 32% negative. Pretty harsh.
However, I think a primary challenge could succeed. Lieberman gets pretty good job approval from Dems (55-29), while Republican approval of him is a good bit higher (68-20). And his favorability rating among Dems is good as well (50-15). But those numbers only tell part of the story.
By a 52-39 margin, Dems say Lieberman should once again be the senatorial nominee. That's not exactly terrific. But it gets even more interesting. Self-identified liberals - who strike me as being more representative of primary voters than just self-identified Dems - are tied on the question. Forty-seven percent say Lieberman should be re-nominated; forty-seven percent say "someone else."
This is the pivot-point for Ned Lamont. He would only need to move that 47% number just a wee bit in order to dethrone Lieberman. For Lieberman to avoid that fate, he'd either have to tone down his attacks on fellow Democrats or try to put daylight between himself and Bush on the Iraq war issue. It's not clear to me that he could do that successfully, given how stubbornly he's refused to change his ways over the past five years. In other words, I think Lamont would have a chance.
Posted at 02:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (4) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
CT-Sen: Lieberman Needs to Brush Up on Connecticut Election Law
Posted by DavidNYCIn a recent interview with a local CT newspaper, the Waterbury Republican-American, Joe Lieberman related the following:
He then added, in response to a question, that if he were to lose a primary he would still seek re-election."I intend to be on the ballot in November," he declared.
There's only one problem here. Dear Joseph needs to study up on Title 9 of the Connecticut Code, specifically § 9-453i:
Submission to town clerk or Secretary of the State.(a) Each page of a nominating petition proposing a candidate for an office to be filled at a regular election shall be submitted to the appropriate town clerk or to the Secretary of the State not later than four o'clock p.m. on the ninetieth day preceding the day of the regular election.
This means that independent candidates have to submit petitions by August 9th, 2006. It just so happens that the Connecticut primary is on August 8th. In other words, if Joe loses the primary, in order to run as an independent in the general, he'd have to file petitions the very next day.
This is all but a literal impossibility. Joe would have to collect petitions while still running in the Dem primary. Can you imagine such a spectacle? It would be beyond unheard of for a sitting senator to do such a thing. The only real way Lieberman could run as an indie would be if he abandoned the Democratic Party (save your jokes) well in advance of the primary. Otherwise, he's just talking smack. If he loses the primary, he's done, finished, tostada del dia.
Posted at 04:44 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
NJ-Sen: Kean Leads, but Huge Undecideds
Posted by DavidNYCSometimes, I think pollsters feel pressure to present "clean" data - they word questions in such a way as to produce definite answers, and push leaners when they waver. This makes poll results easier to analyze, but probably skews the picture. In real life, for non-political junkies, many people don't make up their minds a year in advance, and so it is with Fairleigh Dickinson's latest poll (registered voters, no trendlines):
Menendez: 25
Kean: 36
Undecided: 37
(MoE: ±4%)
Though their overall name rec is similar, Kean's favorability is a good bit better than Menendez's (41-12 vs. 33-17). Kean has the advantage of bearing his father's name - but don't forget that Menendez will soon have the advantage of being an incumbent senator. That 37% undecided could get split up a lot of ways. My gut tells me that ultimately Menendez will prevail due to the favorable partisan split in NJ, but I think this race is going to be tougher than we'd like. I think New Jersey is sort of like the New York Mets: Sometimes the Mets put together decent teams and win a few, but they always make you sweat. Same with Jersey.
P.S. PoliticsNJ is reporting that Frank Pallone won't challenge Menendez. I don't know if PoliticsNJ is a reliable source, but hopefully we'll see an official confirm of that soon. Also, Corzine will soon decide whether to call a special election to fill Menendez's House seat, or just wait until the regular June primary/November general. This is a super-Dem district, so I imagine the real action will be at primary time.
Posted at 03:39 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MS-Sen: Lott to Run Again
Posted by DavidNYCUnfortunately, MS Sen. Trent Lott has decided to seek a fourth term this fall. I presume that neither of the top-tier Dem names that have been floated (former AG Mike Moore and Rep. Gene Taylor) will try running against Lott. If there is a silver lining, it is because Lott (ever since he was stripped of his leadership post) has become a GOP troublemaker, a thorn in the side of the party establishment. If he returns to the Senate, he'll still be throwing the occasional monkey-wrench into his own side's plans - and he might even really make things ugly by running for majority leader again.
Posted at 02:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Mississippi | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, January 16, 2006
MS-Sen: Lott to Announce Plans Tuesday
Posted by DavidNYCTrent Lott has allegedly been considering retiring from the Senate, after his family home was destroyed in Hurricane Katrina. Via reader jcb, it looks like he's finally set to make an announcement one way or the other:
BLITZER: We're almost out of time, but a couple questions to both of you. There's word out there that you may be leaving, retiring from the U.S. Senate, making an announcement even in the next few days. Is that true?LOTT: I spent the Christmas holidays in my state visiting with the people that I love the most, my relatives, my neighbors, people on the Mississippi Gulf Coast that were devastated by Katrina.
It's been a complicated decision because of all that we've been through in the last year. But my heart is with the people there and I'm going to do everything I can to be helpful to them as long as it's necessary. And I have that capability.
But, any announcement on that, I plan to begin with announcements in my hometown of Pascagoula, Mississippi on the Mississippi Gulf coast Tuesday and then in Jackson later on in the day.
BLITZER: So, you'll make an announcement one way or another whether you're going to seek re-election or retire?
LOTT: That's right.
As jcb observes, why the hell make announcements in multiple cities unless you're barnstorming with an eye on November? I suppose it could be some kind of farewell tour - hit his hometown, then the state capital. But I think jcb is probably right. So here's the question: If Lott does indeed stay in, would former Democratic AG Mike Moore still consider running against him? Lott is one of the most popular senators in the country, so that (plus MS's unfavorable demographics) would probably militate against such a decision.
Posted at 12:34 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Mississippi | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, January 14, 2006
NJ-Sen: Andrews Won't Challenge Menendez
Posted by DavidNYCRep. Rob Andrews has said he won't challenge Rep. (and soon-to-be Sen.) Bob Menendez in a primary this year. Tom Suozzi could learn a thing or two from Andrews:
"The idea of engaging in a primary that would drain resources away from our Democratic Party, that would distract us from taking on the fight we ought to be taking on in the fall, is the wrong thing to do," Mr. Andrews said in a news conference at the State House.
No word yet from Rep. Frank Pallone, but I'd guess he'll decline to challenge as well.
Posted at 04:19 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
MT-Sen: Tester Tied with Burns, Morrison Close
Posted by DavidNYCFrom Rasmussen (likely voters, Sept. in parens):
Tester: 45 (38)
Burns: 45 (51)Morrison: 43 (39)
Burns: 46 (51)
(MoE: ±4.5%)
That's a lot of movement, and fantastic news for our side. Burns' cash advantage no longer seems to be helping him, and I can only conclude that the harsh negative fallout from his entanglements with Abramoff is hurting him. Just the other day, Burns had to embarassingly insist that he wasn't going to drop out of the race. He sounded a lot like Janeane Pirro to me - in other words, I wasn't buying his shtick that he was stickin'.
Burns clearly should bail - just think of how much more money he could make (and how many fewer constituents he'd have to worry about) if he took a sweet lobbying job. Doesn't he want to be comfortable in his retirement, and take care of his kids and grandkids? The issue, though, is of course whether he will retire. And here's the thing: If the GOP can't pull a Torricelli on Santorum - hell, if they can't even pull a Gillooly on Katherine Harris - then I don't see how Burns can be pushed aside. The Republican Party is leaderless at the top - Frist is crippled, Liddy Dole is incompetent. I think GOP Senate candidates are just gonna do their own thing from now until November.
Anyhow, as I say, this poll is tremendous for our side, and especially for Tester - Morrison supporters have often said he won't have enough money to compete, but that's clearly not hurting him. I'd love to see an independent poll of the primary matchup, but for now, why not send some coin Tester's way? In the eyes of the traditional media, this poll officially marks this race as a top-tier pickup opportunity, and Tester deserves our help.
Posted at 01:02 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, January 05, 2006
PA-Sen: Santorum to Head GOP Ethics Batallion? Don't Make Me Laugh
Posted by DavidNYCSo Bill Frist has tapped Dick Santorum to, as CREW puts it, "head the ethics charge in the Senate" on behalf of the GOP. Of course, this is the ultimate joke, given Santorum's disgraceful ethics record:
• Sen. Santorum runs the K Street project, created by conservative activist Grover Norquist and former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX), in which he ensures that all top lobbying and trade association jobs are filled by Republicans.• Two days before Sen. Santorum introduced a bill that would benefit private national weather companies at the expense of the National Weather Service, the Senator's political action committee, America's Foundation, received a $2,000 donation from the chief executive officer of AccuWeather, Inc., a leading weather data provider located in State College, PA.
• Working to undermine public confidence in the National Weather Service, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina Sen. Santorum stated in an interview with a local Philadelphia radio station that the National Weather Service failed to predict the storm's fury and that its warnings were "not sufficient." In fact, the early warnings about Hurricane Katrina issued by the National Weather Service were praised for their accuracy by news organizations such as Associated Press, NBC News and The New York Times.
• Since the 2001-2002 school year, at least three of Sen. Santorum's children have attended a Pennsylvania cyber charter school in Penn Hills, PA, costing local taxpayers about $67,000, despite the fact that the Senator and his family spend most of the year in Virginia.
It's actually number three (in concert with number two) which really gets me steamed. These guys are so removed from the reality-based community that they'll spew outright lies just to benefit lobbyists and screw taxpayers. Yes, our tax money pays for the National Weather Service, but Santorum's bill would prevent the NWS from releasing its information to the public! Imagine how much worse Katrina would have been without the rock-solid NWS.
Fact is, though, Frist only has some 50-odd guys and gals to pick from, and each one is lousier than the next when it comes to governmental ethics. If Frist is saying that Dick Santorum is the best he can do, that is saying a hell of a lot about the modern GOP. And anything which increases Santorum's profile on ethics only drives a few more nails into his already tightly-sealed political coffin.
Posted at 03:06 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
VA-Sen: Allen Takes a Page from the Burns Playbook
Posted by DavidNYCGeorge Allen then:
In 2000, Sen. George Allen hammered Chuck Robb for accepting campaign contributions in 1994 from a controversial donor tied to Bill Clinton and Al Gore. His campaign manager even chided Robb for not pushing for a federal prosecutor to look into the issue: "It's obvious to us why Chuck Robb won't get involved," said LaCivita. "He's just as guilty as Al Gore." ["Robb Trumpets His Role in Fighting Drugs, Crime," Richmond Times-Dispatch, June 24, 2000.]
George Allen now:
When asked about the $3,000 the senator received from Abramoff and friends, Allen’s spokesman told the Virginian-Pilot yesterday that, "[Allen] will neither refund nor donate to charity a $1,000 gift received from Abramoff during Allen’s 2000 Senate campaign. The money was spent long ago and the campaign account closed, said David Snepp, Allen’s press secretary, so 'the money does not exist to give it back.'"
Of course, the last time a Republican Senator started claiming that he couldn't pay back Abramoff money, he changed his tune in just a matter of days. And in Conrad Burns' case, we were talking about $150 large. George Allen can certainly cough up a meager $1,000, so I'd expect an embarrassing flip-flop sometime soon.
P.S. This whole "the money's been spent" notion seems to be just another part of the Republican War on Analogy. In other words, according to the GOP, if you don't literally have the exact same dollars you were once given, you can't return money. Of course, that's the same as someone saying he can't pay his taxes this year because he's already spent his whole salary.
(Hat tip to the DSCC.)
Posted at 01:26 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
VA-Sen: Harris Miller (D) in Against Allen
Posted by DavidNYCAs mentioned yesterday, via Raising Kaine. From WTOP:
The year is only three days old, but already the political season is heating up in Virginia. WTOP Radio has learned Harris Miller will challenge Republican incumbent George Allen in November.Miller, an activist in Fairfax County, will formally announce his candidacy next week. He describes himself as "a shorter, and poorer version of [Governor] Mark Warner."
The 54-year-old McLean resident is currently the President of the Information Technology Association of America. He wants to see more done by the Federal government.
I'm sure Mark Warner really appreciates the mention of his wealth (a topic, like George Bush and his Connecticut roots, he assiduously avoids). Miller apparently does have money, though, and his biggest virtue appears to be his willingness to self-fund. Anyhow, I wish Miller the best, though I'd still like to see Webb jump into the race.
Posted at 10:43 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, January 03, 2006
VA-Sen: Draft James Webb
Posted by DavidNYCRight now, there are no Dem candidates running against Republican George Allen in this year's VA senate race. Even if Mark Warner were to run (and he won't), it would be a seriously uphill battle - which explains our recruitment difficulties. But there's one possible name in the mix who I'm holding out hope for: former Secretary of the Navy James Webb. And since you're nobody until somebody tries to draft you, the obligatory Draft James Webb website has sprung into existence.
As you may know, Webb was Navy Secretary under Reagan. Switching from working in a Republican administration to running as a Democratic senate candidate is a compelling storyline. It's something the media might latch on to. As much as we hate him, Zell Miller got a lot of play in 2004 because he switched sides. I also think Webb's background would play well in Virginia, with its numerous military bases (plus the Pentagon) - he's a decorated veteran and the first Annapolis grad to become SecNavy. He's also been a cogent critic of the war in Iraq.
An early poll by Rasmussen puts Allen way ahead. Raising Kaine thinks that lobbyist Harris Miller will jump into the race, but his name was not among those polled by Rasmussen. Like I say, I have no illusions about how tough this race would be. But I think Webb's willingness to speak his mind and buck his original party roots could make this one interesting.
Posted at 01:48 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Virginia | Comments (6) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Friday, December 30, 2005
MT-Sen: Schweitzer on Tester: "Best Senate Prez Ever"
Posted by DavidNYCA little bit of feel-good as we wrap up the year. MT Gov. Brian Schweitzer declares Jon Tester "the greatest President of the Senate in the history of Montana" at a meeting on educational spending. Political puffery? Sure. But Schweitzer didn't have to say anything about Tester at all, so I'll take it. Enjoy the video clip here.
If I don't post any more until after Jan. 1, have a Happy New Year!
Posted at 02:21 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, December 26, 2005
MS-Sen: Why Are Mississippi Republicans Panicking?
Posted by DavidNYCSince Hurricane Katrina blew away Trent Lott's home, there's been a lot of talk of a potential retirement. While I figured an open seat in Mississippi could potentially be interesting, especially if a guy like Rep. Gene Taylor (MS-04) ran, I doubted the state would seriously be "in play." (It's worth noting that Democrat Taylor regularly wins by enormous margins in a district Bush carried 68-31 over Kerry.)
But according to Bob Novak's double-super-secret on-background non-for-attribution reporting, a tight race might indeed be possible - though not, apparently, with Taylor as the Dem nominee:
Mississippi, one of the reddest of the red Republican states, has not even been on the game board of the Washington analysis forecasting the 2006 Senate outcome. But in Mississippi, prominent Republicans are worried sick. They believe Lott will probably retire. If so, they expect the new senator will be a Democrat, former State Attorney General Mike Moore. Republican politicians in Mississippi believe Rep. Chip Pickering, the likely Republican nominee if Lott does not run, cannot defeat Moore....
Mississippi Republicans are so anxious about a Lott-less election next year partly because Democrat Moore is a better known, more appealing figure in the state than Republican Pickering. The state's big African-American minority continues to increase, and politically potent trial lawyers will be unrestrained on behalf of Moore. Finally, the performance by the Republican-controlled national government in coping with Katrina is no asset for Republican candidates in Mississippi.
Of course, this is the kind of lazy "reporting" that is so easy to hate (and deservedly so). Novak channels "Mississippi Republicans," "prominent Republicans," and "Republican politicians" but doesn't even bother to provide a single lousy anonymous quote. Moreover, this kind of anecdotal "evidence" (as it were) would barely pass muster as fodder for serious political analysis on most blogs. So why bother discussing it here?
For one reason and one reason only: The chatter effect. If any Republicans in high places are even pretending to be worried about a Lott retirement, that's big news. Even if they're playing a game of Brer Rabbit, you still have to wonder why they would feel threatened enough to engage in such a ruse. It's not like they can seriously rope-a-dope us into blowing resources on a race here.
Even more compelling is the news that Ken Mehlman and Kay Bailey Hutchison are allegedly "pleading" with Lott to run again. It seems pretty crazy to me that the GOP has to even fret about this seat for one nanosecond. I mean, even in 1994 (the strongest Republican year in recent times), Ted Kennedy won by 17% (over Mitt Romney, in fact). Were any Dems seriously worried about Kennedy's re-election prospects that year?
I want to see Trent Lott retire just because he so thoroughly disgusts me. If we wind up with a competitive race, that's just gravy. It's one to keep an eye on.
(Via jorndorff.)
P.S. Didn't even realize this was already being talked about in the comments below! RBH takes an in-depth look at how the House races might play out if Pickering (or Rep. Roger Wicker) were to run for Lott's seat.
UPDATE: I realize belatedly that the comparison to Kennedy is entirely unfair, since he was an incumbent. Nonetheless, I still maintain that it's very surprising to see the GOP worrying about this seat at all.
Posted at 02:55 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Mississippi | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MT-Sen: As Dem Name Rec Moves Up, Burns Slips
Posted by DavidNYCAh, joy! I love it when independent outfits poll my favorites races. Today, we've got a poll on MT-Sen from Mason-Dixon, and it's good news for Dems ("active" voters, May in parens):
Morrison (D): 40 (34)
Burns (R): 46 (49)
Undecided: 14 (17)Tester (D): 35 (26)
Burns (R): 49 (50)
Undecided: 16 (24)
(MoE: ±4%)
Morrison went from -15 to -6; Tester went from -24 to -14. That's some definite slippage for Burns. Here's the interesting thing: Since the last poll way back in May, Morrison's DK moved down five points, and his total in the head-to-head moved up six. Meanwhile, Tester's DK moved down nine points and his head-to-head score moved up nine. Pretty tight correlation indeed.
If there's any causation (and surely there must be some), then both Dems are in good shape heading into 2006, but especially Tester. Why? His DKs are twice Morrison's - 52% vs. 26%. In other words, Tester has a lot of room to grow. He pulls 35% in a head-to-head with Burns while Morrison gets just 5% more than that, despite being far more well-known.
But obviously, Jon Tester needs help to make that happen - it's never automatic. I know that this is a tough time of year to do fundraising, and that many people have probably already spent plenty of money on gift-giving and charitable giving. But if you do have some scratch left over and are looking for a worthy cause, I strongly encourage you to give to Jon Tester. (Act Blue appears to be down right now, but you can use this link instead if it revives later.) The trendlines of this poll are a solid reason to get behind him.
Posted at 01:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, December 19, 2005
NJ-Sen: Menendez Leads in Early Poll
Posted by DavidNYCLast week, Quinnipiac released the first post-Menendez poll on the New Jersey senate race (registered voters, no trendlines):
Menendez: 44
Kean: 38
Undecided: 16
(MoE: ±3.7)
I'm glad to see Menendez with a lead, and I think this seat will ultimately stay in our hands. But I also think New Jersey is going to give us some serious agita, just like it did at times during the governor's race this year and the presidential race last year. (Remember, Gore won NJ by 16 points, but Kerry won by less than 7.)
Fortunately, this isn't a case where one guy has a lead due only to outsized name recognition. For Menendez, he gets 56% on "haven't heard enough to form an opinion," while Kean clocks in at 61%. (Their favorable-unfavorable ratings are pretty much the same.) Once these guys are both at 90+% name reco, Menendez will naturally have the advantage of running in a blue state. For Kean to win, he'll have to put some distance between his favorables and Menendez's unfavorables.
Unfortunately, some grumbly whiners in New Jersey's Democratic congressional delegation might just make Tom Kean's job a lot easier. A nasty Dem primary could be just what the GOP ordered, if it cranks up the eventual winner's unfavorables. (And it will.) I judge the value of primaries on a case-by-case basis - I'm not reflexively pro- or anti-primary (I think that would be silly). But in this case, I come down decidedly against having a primary.
I hope common sense prevails - that these eager passed-over beavers bide their time, that Lautenberg is convinced to re-retire, that we save our Battle Royale primary for 2008. It's a little hard to read the tea-leaves right now, though. Sixty-seven percent of Dems approve of Corzine's choice. But when asked if Menendez should run for a full term, only 38% say yes, while 25% say no and 37% are unsure. Right now, Menendez has a 31-3 approval rating among Dems. If he can keep his approval numbers so positive among members of his own party, then I would hazard that most of those 37% DK will move into the "yes" category as Menendez becomes more well-known.
Posted at 02:46 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, December 16, 2005
MT-Sen: Burns to Return Money, Missoulian Says "Don't Run Again"
Posted by DavidNYCScore one for the Hotline blog. From the Helena Independent Record:
U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., will return the estimated $150,000 in campaign donations he has received from indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, his co-workers and tribal clients.
Nevermind the absurd turnabout from just two days ago:
"There's nothing to return, the money has been spent," [Burns spokesman James] Pendleton said.
Of course it was there to return - Burns had over $700K cash-on-hand. That's gotta sting! But even worse for old man Burns is this editorial from the Missoulian:
Montanans in general and the GOP in particular will be best served if he doesn't run for a fourth term and, instead, orchestrates a dignified passing of the baton.
Of course, if Burns does decided not to run again, that would probably make life more difficult for Democrats, since the MT GOP can probably find a stronger (or at least, not as ethically compromised) candidate. However, what this kind of talk does in the short term is make it harder and harder for Burns to raise money. If the media starts to fret that Burns is not a viable candidate, it might wind up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Posted at 12:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, December 15, 2005
MT-Sen: If Burnsie Retires...
Posted by DavidNYCFirst, Hotline speculated that Connie Burnsie might be holding on to his Abramoff-tainted cash because he's going to step down. I didn't think that theory made much sense - sure, ol' Conrad could find some way to launder his cash-on-hand for his own personal use, but $130Gs seems like chump change for a guy who would make tons more as a lobbyist.
Now, Hotline claims he's gonna give the money back. I'll be watching that one closely to see just how good Hotline's sources are.
But back to the general idea of Burns retiring. I don't see that as being outside the realm of possibility at all - especially if prosecutors' guns wind up trained on him. And after all, he's about to turn 71. So what happens if he bails? You're gonna like this:
13-25-202. Vacancy in office of United States senator.(1) If a vacancy occurs in the office of United States senator, an election to fill the vacancy shall be held at the next general election. If the election is invalid or not held at that time, the election to fill the vacancy shall be held at the next succeeding general election.
(2) The governor may make a temporary appointment to fill the vacancy until the election.
As is the practice in many if not most states, the governor - in this case Democrat Brian Schweitzer - gets to appoint a replacement. Now that sure would be interesting. Whom would he pick? Would he tap Jon Tester or John Morrison, the two top candidates already running to replace Burns? Does anyone know what kind of relationship he has with either man? Or would Schweitzer seek to avoid controversy and name a "caretaker" for the duration? What are your thoughts?
Posted at 09:34 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
MO-Sen: Talent Waffling on Stem Cells
Posted by DavidNYCToday, I took my Food & Drug Law final. Appropriately enough, via Jim Hacking, we even have a story related to that subject. It's a little update on the MO stem cell ballot measure - and, chiefly, what unpopular Republican Sen. Jim Talent is doing to avoid giving a firm answer on the subject:
Missouri Sen. Jim Talent was in Kansas City Tuesday and spoke about stem cell research."I've always had an open mind on continuing to evaluate my position, because the technology is changing. Almost every week we see an announcement which reveals something some new about cloning," said Talent, a Republican.
Talk about leaving himself some wiggle room. But so much for keeping an open mind: Talent is actually co-sponsoring a bill in the Senate which would criminalize therapeutic cloning, also known as SCNT. What's truly awesome to behold is this insane waffling:
"Do you think SCNT ought to be permitted in Missouri?" Mahoney asked."I think, again, it depends on whether or not it's human cloning, depends on what it produces," Talent said.
"Is SCNT, in your mind, human cloning?" Mahoney asked.
"If it results in the cloning of a human embryo, I think we have to say, yeah, it's cloning," Talent said.
Talent's own starring bill outlaws SCNT! And yet he can't answer a direct question about whether it ought to be allowed in his home state. What, does he think the text of the bill says, "It shall be unlawful to perform human cloning in every state except Missouri?" If Talent imagines he can pirouette his way through the general election on stem cells, he'll be about as successful as John Kerry was in avoiding the subject of the war in Iraq.
Posted at 03:30 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | Comments (3) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
SUSA 50-State Senate Poll
Posted by DavidNYCYargh. Freakin' eight-hour take-"home" (ie, take straight to the library) federal white collar crime final. What a freakin' misery. Anyhow, to cheer myself up, I took a look at these numbers from SUSA's newly-released 50-state senators poll, sorted by approval rating:
63. Chaffee: 54% approval/38% disapproval
75. Talent: 51/39
82. Ensign: 49/33
82. Frist (open seat): 49/42
88. DeWine: 47/42
88. Santorum: 47/43
91. Kyl: 46/39
95. Burns: 45/41
These, of course, are our top take-over targets. Unfortunately, a number of our weakest seats (eg, Florida, Michigan) don't rate all that highly either. But overall, the chart looks a lot worse for the GOP than it does for us right now.
Posted at 07:36 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate | Comments (6) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Monday, December 12, 2005
RI-Sen: Club for Growth Endorses Laffey
Posted by DavidNYCOur goal of taking back the Senate just got that much easier: The Club for Growth has endorsed conservative Cranston, RI Mayor Steve Laffey over incumbent Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee in the RI senate race. If you'll recall, the Club for Growth came just one percentage point away from derailing Arlen Specter in a primary last year - Specter won by just 51-49. And the man Specter faced, former Rep. Pat Toomey, is now the head of the CFG.
Oh, this should be good.
Posted at 12:22 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Rhode Island | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Saturday, December 10, 2005
OH-Sen: Reading Past the Headlines
Posted by DavidNYCSometimes when I write blog post headlines, I try to be pithy. Most of the time, I just try to be descriptive. But all of the time, if you try to glean some wider meaning from just a headline - whether it's a post written by me or any blogger - you're making a serious mistake. So I gritted my teeth when I read this paragraph from a new piece in In These Times on the Ohio senate race:
Blog opinion on the race is by no means uniform. Many support Brown, but it’s a strange feature of the blogosphere that a newcomer to politics like Hackett is widely considered a known quantity, while Brown, who’s spent his entire adult life in public office, is a mystery. One skeptical blogger on the Web site Swing State Project summed up his reservations with a post titled: “Who is Sherrod Brown?” (Emphasis added.)
Christopher Hayes, the author of this story, has unfortunately revealed that he didn't bother to read past the headline of the post in question. Not only did I recant much of my original point with an update posted at the very top of the entry within a few hours of the initial posting, even during the first go-round I made it amply clear that I was discussing a single, very narrow issue:
I know that Brown has other merits, and I know that name recognition is only one piece of the puzzle. A lot of people more knowledgeable than I have said that Brown has a tremendous organization in Ohio, and has connections throughout the political strata. I haven't yet seen proof of these claims, but I will also grant that this poll does nothing to undermine them, either. It is limited to one question and one question only - namely, how well-known is Sherrod Brown amongst the general public?...
Again I say, this poll does not speak to any other issues. I stress this point because I don't want this post to be misunderstood. I am making a very narrow argument here: On name recognition alone, I don't think Brown supporters can make any kind of strong claims that their guy has the edge. But again, I welcome any refutation of this argument.
The boldface in both of those paragraphs was in the original. Could it be any clearer that the headline, "Who is Sherrod Brown?" did not "sum up my reservations" at all? Next time, Mr. Hayes, please don't read so selectively.
P.S. As to the merits of this old argument, I don't think name recognition matters very much anymore in this race. Both Hackett and Brown are polling equally well against DeWine, and their name rec numbers are pretty close (Brown is 7 points ahead of Hackett).
Posted at 03:42 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, December 08, 2005
NJ-Sen: Don't Do It, Rob
Posted by DavidNYCOh man. No sooner than Jon Corzine announces (or pre-announces) his selection of Bob Menendez to succeed him in the Senate, we get this:
Democratic Rep. Rob Andrews of Camden County, who also lobbied actively for the appointment, has said he would run for the Senate regardless of Corzine's decision.
Dude... come on. I mean, I'm often in favor of primaries, but this is not the place or the time. Running against Menendez will necessarily turn into a nasty mud fight. To do so, Andrews would have to say Menendez isn't a worthy candidate - and by extension, Corzine was wrong to pick him. It would get real ugly real fast.
Apparently, Andrews is worried that Frank Lautenberg will seek re-election in 2008. Now, I love Frank, but in fairness, he's gonna be 84 in 2008. While I have no problem supporting an octogenarian senator in a place like West Virginia, where we have a thin-to-non-existent bench, 2008 really will be the time for Lautenberg to step aside and let some of the young turks move up in the world.
Of course, consider the source of the Lautenberg rumor: Andrews himself. This could just be a bit of excuse-making. Regardless, it would make a hell of a lot more sense to challenge Lautenberg in a primary a few years from now. I wouldn't enjoy seeing that kind of fight, either (with inevitable attacks on Lautenberg for being too old - man, I pray I look that good when I'm in my 80s!), but I'd rather defer it a couple of years.
While I said yesterday that Menendez wasn't my first choice, I think that now is the time for some party unity - to accept Corzine's decision and get behind Menendez for what will probably be a bruising fight against Bill McKay Tom Kean. If Andrews gets into the race, there's almost no way I'd be able to support him.
UPDATE: On reconsideration, I think my assessment of WV's Dem bench was unfair. Still, on balance, I'm more willing to risk an open seat in NJ than an open seat in WV if it offers a rising star a chance to move up in the world.
Posted at 03:10 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
NJ-Sen: Menendez Looks Set to Replace Corzine
Posted by DavidNYCSo Rep. Bob Menendez (NJ-13) will apparently replace Jon Corzine as New Jersey's... I guess he now becomes the junior senator, though Corzine was the senior senator. (Somehow, it seems wrong for anyone to be "senior" to Frank Lautenberg.) I personally was rooting for Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12). Ah well. On the bright side, Menendez has an enormous warchest already - $4 million and counting - which he'll need for the election campaign that pretty much starts right now.
His opponent is state Sen. Tom Kean, Jr., son of the popular former governor and 9/11 Commission chairman. This reminds me of a line from the Robert Redford movie "The Candidate." Redford plays Bill McKay, Democratic candidate for Senate in California. In an ominous voice, an election-day sound truck bellows, "What has Bill McKay done for California? Not much... but his father was governor." Life imitates art: Tom Kean hasn't done much for New Jersey either. But, you know, his father was governor.
In case you were worried, Menendez's district went for Kerry 69-31. Holding Holt's district would have been dicier, as it went for Kerry by just 54-46. Menendez, by the way, will become the third Hispanic member of the Senate, along with Ken Salazar (D-CO) and Mel Martinez (R-FL). Like Martinez, Menendez is Cuban-American.
Just a note: This hasn't been officially confirmed yet. I wonder if this could wind up like when the New York Post reported that John Kerry had tapped Dick Gephardt to be his running mate. That would be a hell of a thing!
Posted at 04:30 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, December 02, 2005
MT-Sen: Which Is It, Connie?
Posted by DavidNYCConnie Burns (R-The Simpsons) is increasingly under fire for his involvement with the Abramoff web of scandals. His defense now is one we've commonly seen in the post-Enron era: I was asleep at the switch. Just one little problem with trying to make that claim:
"Senator Burns is not hands-on in the donations to his campaign; he doesn't know about them until he sees the quarterly reports.'' - J.P. Pendleton, Burns spokesman. [Bloomberg News, 12/2/05]Burns sent an extensive solicitation recently asking supporters to max out in their contributions to him before the next reporting period, which closes March 31. "By sending your $10,000 political action committee check or your $4,000 individual check today, you help discourage challengers, making the difference between playing defense and playing offense," he wrote. [Roll Call, 3/10/05]
Yet another captain trying to disclaim responsibility for his ship - but in this case, the record plainly indicates otherwise. Why am I not surprised?
Posted at 03:00 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
MD-Sen: Dubya's Anemic Fundraising for Steele
Posted by DavidNYCMichael's new best friend George came for a visit. Most of Michael's other friends didn't like George very much, but George promised Michael he'd make him rich.
George told Michael how rich he'd made some of George's other buddies:
Bush Raised $1.4 Millionfor Kyl This Week. On Monday, Bush raised more than $1.4 million at a Phoenix fundraiser for Jon Kyl. [East Valley Tribune, 11/29/05]Bush Raised $1.7 Million For Santorum and PA GOP at a Luncheon of Tea Sandwiches, Quiche and Crab. President Bush raised $1.7 million for Santorum and the state Republican Party in an appearance at a private fund-raiser that attracted about 1,000 people to a Bryn Mawr estate. While Santorum supporters mixed with the President and sampled tea sandwiches, quiche and crab, about 200 demonstrators lined Montgomery Avenue, several blocks away. [Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/15/05]
Bush Raised $1.5 Million for Talent. In June, President Bush raised $1.5 million for Jim Talent at an event in St. Louis. [Missourinet, 6/27/05]
But unfortunately for Michael, George's promise didn't quite pan out this time:
Bush Raised $500K for Steele. [Baltimore Sun, 11/30/05]
Oh well. Better luck next time, Michael!
(Hat tip to the great guys at the DSCC.)
Posted at 10:33 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
PA-Sen: McCain, Santorum, Third-Party Ads, and the Moment of Truth
Posted by DavidNYCFirst, the table-setter:
Arizona Sen. John McCain will attend fund-raisers this week in Pennsylvania for fellow Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, a Santorum spokeswoman said Sunday.
Second, the dirty business:
Nearly $1 million from hidden sources is pouring into Pennsylvania to buy television ads supporting U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum.The money is flowing through a Virginia-based organization called Americans for Job Security, a Republican-leaning, anti-tax group that says its money comes from 500 individuals, corporations, business groups and other sources.
It refuses to identify any of them, or the amounts they have donated. (Emphasis added.)
Third, the record:
The need to reform the avalanche of soft money in our political system is evident in every competitive race in this country where parties, business and labor, and ideological groups on all sides are spending hundreds of millions of unlimited, and in some cases, unreported dollars to influence federal elections. (Emphasis added.)- John McCain
Fourth, the inevitable intransigence:
Making an appearance yesterday in Northeast Philadelphia, Santorum refused to tell a Daily News reporter whether he believes the group should identify its financial backers. (Emphasis added.)
And finally, the moment of truth. Will Sen. McCain stand up for what he claims to believe in and call on "Americans for Job Security" to disclose their donors - or call on Santorum to reject their help? Or will he willingly play the hypocrite and stick his neck out for a candidate who relies on shady, secretive organizations for political support?
John McCain, we're all watching to see what kind of man you are. Do you have the courage of your convictions? Or will you sacrifice your principles for expediency? Either way, we'll remember your choice here.
Posted at 04:47 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MD-Sen: Keep On Huggin'
Posted by DavidNYCMD Lt. Gov. and US Senate hopeful Michael Steele shows who his number one buddy is:
Marylanders, don't forget it.
(Pic thanks to jorndorff.)
Posted at 03:20 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
NY-Sen: Bruno Kneecaps Pirro
Posted by DavidNYCOh, this is good - well, good and bad. Read on:
Jeanine F. Pirro's bid to unseat Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton suffered an embarrassing setback on Tuesday when the State Legislature's most powerful Republican said she should call the whole thing off and run for state attorney general instead.The remarks by the official, Joseph L. Bruno, the majority leader of the State Senate, forced out into the open simmering concerns about Ms. Pirro's candidacy, which has been beset by gaffes and fund-raising difficulties. And it heightened the sense that the state Republican Party is nervous about its future and riven by squabbles as its de facto leader, Gov. George E. Pataki, prepares to step down at the end of next year.
Mr. Bruno said that Ms. Pirro, who was elected Westchester district attorney three times, would be a better fit as a candidate for attorney general. "I have said from the beginning, and I know a lot of my colleagues, and people within the party, share the thought, that she would make a great attorney general," Mr. Bruno told reporters. "By background, by her experience, by her prosecutorial record. And I hope that before this procedure gets too much further, that Jeanine Pirro would reconsider and run for A.G."
Wow. That must feel like a punch to the gut for Pirro. The fact is, though, that Bruno is right - Pirro would make a great AG candidate for her party. She has the right background for it, and her association with the Republican Party would be less of an issue just by the nature of the office. (It doesn't matter what the AG thinks about the Iraq war or Social Security.) And the Dem AG hopefuls aren't nearly as strong as the top-tier Gov and Sen candidates. If Pirro heeds this bit of advice, then the most powerful AG's office in the nation is in peril of being shut down.
Of course, it would be a deeply humiliating climb-down for Pirro, and I doubt she'll do it precisely because Bruno has suggested it. If Bruno really cared about Pirro and the AG race, he wouldn't have blathered to reporters. He would have arranged a private meeting with Pirro herself. But Bruno probably has neither the clout nor the established goodwill to engage in that kind of backroom politicking anymore. Rather, this outburst was simply a bit of far-sighted ass-covering. By distancing himself so openly from Pirro, he's trying to insulate himself from her inevitable spectacular failure.
What precisely Bruno is protecting is beyond my understanding, though. The New York Republican Party has been circling the drain for some time now. An old guy like Bruno (he's in his mid-70s) ought to be considering retirement and a cushy sinecure.
Posted at 11:19 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New York | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Bush Pimping for Ehrlich and Steele in MD
Posted by DavidNYCMaryland is a very blue state. It's a challenge for any Republican to win there statewide. And yet two if its most prominent Republicans, Gov. Bob Ehrlich and Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, are apparently sucking up to George Bush without hesitation. Dubya is coming to town for some fundraising events (not that it's very far from home), and I wonder how well that'll play during the general election campaign.
Someone, though, needs to explain this bit to me:
Bush's stop at a $125-a-plate fundraising luncheon at M&T Bank Stadium - attendees who contribute $5,000 get a photograph with Bush - will drum up early campaign cash for Steele.
$5,000? That's more than the maximum, even for a couple (who can give $2,100 each or $4,200 combined). What's going on here?
These kinds of visits can't be dismissed, though. Bush is still an incredibly powerful fundraiser - he just raked in $1.4M for Jon Kyl last night in Arizona, a state record. Doubtless this visit will bolster Steele and Ehrlich financially. But that's all the more reason why Dems have to turn this lemonade back into lemons, by roping President Albatross as tightly around their opponents' necks as possible.
Posted at 02:37 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2006 Elections - State, Maryland | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, November 28, 2005
FL-Sen: No One Wants to Work for Harris
Posted by DavidNYCFrom the Herald Tribune of SW Florida:
In just under three years, U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris has had four chiefs of staff, four district directors and four press secretaries.Harris has had to replace key people on her staff every nine months, a rate of staff turnover that far exceeds most of those in Congress.
On average, members of Congress hold onto their high-level staff for four to five years.
Turnover isn't limited to Harris' congressional office, either. As she prepares to run against Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson, Harris has been hampered by turnover on her campaign staff. Her campaign manager quit last week, after just a few months on the job and not long after she lost a pollster and a campaign finance director earlier this year.
Here's the thing that I'm just not getting: Katherine Harris is not stronger than the Florida GOP or the national GOP. I mean, that goes without saying. So why the hell is she still in the race? She obviously sucks, her poll numbers are weaker than Ken Mehlman's chin, and her staff is fleeing even faster than the entire roster of the Florida Marlins.
Like the team itself, Harris may soon be on her way out. At least, that's the only prediction that makes any sense to me. On the flipside, there is one nagging detail which may ensure her presence on the ballot through next November: the Bush clan's veneration of loyalty at all costs. Competence, accuracy, skillfulness, wisdom - none of these virtues matter to Team Bush - only loyalty does. And again, it goes without saying that George Bush has every reason to remain fiercely loyal to Katherine Harris, just as she was loyal to him.
If I'm right and they do "pull a Torricelli" on Harris, then Bill Nelson better be prepared for a much more serious fight against a much more formidable opponent.
Posted at 11:24 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Monday, November 21, 2005
MT-Sen: State Dems Target Burns on Corruption
Posted by DavidNYCFirst, I'm glad to see the Montana Democratic Party is once again opening fire on kleptocrat Conrad Burns on the airwaves. And second, I'm delighted that they are once again making corruption Issue #1. Oh, and they zing him for his retrograde sexist remarks, too. The script of the ad, via Hotline On Call:
"Almost 200,000 women work in Montana. But local newspapers report that Senator Burns told a working mother concerned about losing her job to outsourcing that she could just stay home with the kids.""Burns doesn't get that staying at home won't pay the bills."
"And what is Burns up to?"
"He's taken thousands from Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, now indicted for fraud and conspiracy."
"Tell Burns to work for Montana's working families, not indicted lobbyists."
"The Montana Democratic Party is responsible for the content of this ad."
This is the second round of ads to hammer Burns on his Abramoff connection. I hope the MT Dems keep it up. And if anyone has a link to an actual video of this ad, it'd be great if you could post it in comments.
Posted at 06:18 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
UT-Sen: Hatch Re-Elects Under Water
Posted by DavidNYCI promise that this headline is not a mistake. As we all know, Utah is one of the last states in the nation where George Bush maintains anything approaching decent approval ratings (59-38 at last count) - hardly shocking, considering it went for Bush 72-26 (his single largest state margin).
So you'll understand my surprise - and I'll understand yours - at these poll numbers from the Deseret Morning News. Yep, Orrin Hatch still manages to pull in a nifty 67-25 approval rating according to the DMN, whose numbers are in line with SUSA's. But look at those re-elects:
Re-Elect Hatch: 45
Someone New: 48
(MoE: ±5%
And even 33% of Republicans want to see Hatch gone. I'm not saying that Hatch is going to lose, or even that he's seriously endangered, but there is something quite unusual about seeing a very senior and still-popular incumbent with underwater re-elect marks. As the DMN notes:
Historically, such polls of popular Utah politicians find that more than 50 percent of their constituents want them to be re-elected.
Now that doesn't surprise me. What this poll tells me is simply that there is a potentially very strong anti-incumbent wind a-brewin'. It won't be enough to knock down Orrin Hatch, but it'll leave a lot of weaker GOP politicians flat on their behinds.
I'd be remiss in not mentioning the fact that Hatch does have a bold challenger - one Pete Ashdown, an ISP owner. I gotta give anyone willing to run under such circumstances a lot of credit. And I also want to give him and his supports a tiny reed of hope. In 1988, Democrat Jim Sasser won re-election to the Senate in Tennessee by a whopping 65-35 margin. Six years later, during the Republican landslide of 1994, he lost by an astounding 56-42 to Bill Frist (yes, that Bill Frist). That's a turnaround of 44 points, in case you're counting.
I wouldn't read too much into this, though. As I've said before, I don't think 2006 won't be a replay of 1994 in reverse. And Utah is emphatically not Tennessee - the vote for Frist was part of a much broader, decades-long shift in the South away from the Dems and toward the GOP. Utah is, if anything, become more conservative, not less so. But Ashdown is still doing the right thing - even if he pins down Old Man Hatch for just a single weekend, that's a quarter mil Orrin isn't raising for one of his colleagues.
Posted at 11:14 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Utah | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, November 18, 2005
NJ-Sen: Kean (R) Sees Democratic Gains in... SYRIA?
Posted by DavidNYCI am seldom in the business of giving Republican politicians the benefit of the doubt. But two things are giving me a little pause when examining this alleged remark by NJ senate hopeful Tom Kean, Jr.:
Kean said he sees democratic gains in Syria and Lebanon as evidence of the United States’ ability to help foster freedom in the region. (Emphasis added.)
The first, of course, is that it's not a direct quote. The second, though, is that it is so mind-bogglingly... man, "wrong" doesn't even come close to describing this remark. Insane, is more like it? Democratic gains in SYRIA? Is he KIDDING?
Does Tom Kean mean this Syria? Or perhaps this Syria? Maybe he means this Syria:
Officially, Syria is a republic. In reality, however, it is an authoritarian regime that exhibits only the forms of a democratic system. Although citizens ostensibly vote for the President and members of Parliament, they do not have the right to change their government. The late President Hafiz Al-Asad was confirmed by unopposed referenda five times. His son, Bashar Al-Asad, also was confirmed by an unopposed referendum in July 2000. (Emphasis added.)
No, I've got it. He's referring to this episode in recent Syrian history:
The Damascus Spring was a period of intense political and social debate in Syria which started after the death of President Hafiz al-Asad in June 2000 and continued to some degree until autumn 2001, when most of the activities associated with it were suppressed by the government. (Emphasis added.)
Maybe he's talking about the Syria where stories like this - from earlier this month are the norm:
It was early in the morning as Anwar al-Bouni drove to the court in Damascus where he works as a human rights lawyer. He had just spent 10 days in hiding, afraid that the regime was trying to frame him in a criminal case to silence his outspoken views. He barely noticed the two motorbikes next to him.When he slowed to make a turn, the second bike pulled up and the pillion passenger kicked at Bouni's door. He stopped the car. "What happened? What's the matter?" he said. The man jumped off the bike, opened the door and began punching and kicking Bouni.
"He didn't say anything. He just beat me on my head, my nose, my mouth. He hit me, he kicked me and then when people started to gather around us, he got on the bike and drove off," said Bouni, sitting in his apartment chain smoking, and sipping black coffee. He was bruised and badly shaken, but escaped serious injury.
The incident was a crude reminder of the perils of criticism in Syria's closed society. During decades of dictatorship all opposition movements have been firmly repressed. There are few who dare to publicly condemn the regime. Bouni is one of them and now he is too scared to go back to work. Others have been forced into exile or sent to jail.
Maybe the Hunterdon Review got it wrong. Maybe Kean said Lebanon but not Syria. He's gonna wanna issue a clarification either way. But if he did mean Syria, then not only is he crazy, but he's also off the reservation - just this week, Condi Rice was smacking Syria upside the head for its recalcitrance on democratic reform.
This remark is on par with Gerald Ford saying "There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe" in his second debate with Jimmy Carter in 1976. I'll be curious to see how the Kean camp handles it. They can blame it on the reporters, but even so, it still counts as a serious verbal screwup.
Posted at 02:22 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, New Jersey | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, November 17, 2005
OH-Sen: Rasmussen Polls Hackett v. DeWine
Posted by DavidNYCRasmussen releases a new poll on Paul Hackett vs. Mike DeWine. And it looks really bad for DeWine (likely voters, no trendlines):
Hackett: 42
DeWine: 41
Other: 5
Undecided: 12
(MoE: ±4.5%)
It had looked like Rasmussen was including the actual number of undecideds in their little data box (they did for a few recent polls), but here, I'm just inferring the d/k number.
Anyhow, I know what you're thinking - 42-41 is basically a tie. How can I say that this is bad news for DeWine? Simple: Name recognition. DeWine's favorability rating is 48-38; Hackett is just 33-29 - 38% don't know enough to form an opinion of Hackett yet, vs. just 14% who say the same about DeWine. It's not good to be tied with a guy who's unknown to a third of the state. As Hackett's name rec grows, it seems only likely that he'll put some daylight between himself and DeWine.
I find one thing a bit troubling: Hackett's unfavorables seem pretty high for a guy who's never held elective office and still isn't that widely known. I'm wondering why that should be. Could his oft-replayed remarks about Bush during the special election have engendered some deep hatred among hard-core Republicans, who heard Rush Limbaugh denigrate our armed forces by slurring Hackett as a "staff puke" on AM radio? I dunno - it's just one hypothesis.
Also, I don't know why Rasmussen didn't poll Sherrod Brown vs. DeWine, though I did send an e-mail to Scott Rasmussen asking about the omission. If I get a reply, I'll let you know.
Posted at 12:28 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
FL-Sen: About That Senate Race...
Posted by DavidNYCIn case you were wondering why the Florida GOP is so desperate to replace Kathy Harris, wonder no more. Quinnipiac poll (registered voters, late Aug. in parens):
Nelson: 55 (57)
Harris: 31 (33)
Undecided: 12 (9)
(MoE: ±3.4%)
Couple of things. If Harris does fall on her sword, I think we might have a fight on our hands. Nelson's re-elect is only 37-33 (but obviously with a huge bunch of undecideds, 29%). And on partisanship scores, Nelson does well at 83-7 among Dems, but Harris trails badly at just 63-22 among Republicans. A more likeable GOP candidate would definitely improve on those numbers, and in a state where the edge goes narrowly to the Republicans, that would really tighten this race up.
On the flipside, Harris clearly has some kind of hardcore fanatic base of support. A hypothetical matchup between her and Rep. Mark Foley shows Harris leading 46-29. Quinnipiac didn't poll on Bense, but I think Harris could win a three-way or a head-to-head with Bense as well. We can't relax about this race, and we cerainly can't even get a little bit comfortable until after the candidate filing deadline. And even then, the FL GOP might try to pull a Torricelli. But if it's Nelson v. Harris 'til the bitter end, then we should be alright.
UPDATE: Whoa, check this out: Harris' campaign manager just quit. Maybe Harris will be next to quite. (Via Political Wire.)
Posted at 01:48 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, November 14, 2005
FL-Sen: Possible Republican Primary?
Posted by DavidNYCVia Political Wire:
Florida House Speaker Allan Bense (R) "is back on the political radar screen as a potential primary foe for Republican Katherine Harris,” according to the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. After “rejecting overtures from” Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) and Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), Bense has “rekindled speculation that he may still be interested.”“First, Bense put out a press release stating his support of the nomination of Samuel Alito Jr. for the U.S. Supreme Court, something he didn't do for either of the two previous court nominations. Then last week, Bense refused to tell Tallahassee reporters that he definitely won't run when asked about the race.”
Everyone knows that the FL GOP doesn't want Harris to run - her negatives are terrible, and she'll almost certainly lose to incumbent Democrat Bill Nelson. Since Harris has refused to step aside, if Bense gets in, I'd predict a nasty primary fight. Even if Bense wins a hypothetical primary, he'll be bruised.
Posted at 09:40 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Florida | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MO-Sen: McCaskill (D) Leads Talent (R), 47-45
Posted by DavidNYCI think the Missouri senate race can show you just how important having a top-notch candidate can be. Rasmussen again has the goods today (likely voters, early Sept. in parens):
McCaskill: 47 (46)
Talent: 45 (46)
Other: 2 (2)
Undecided: 6 (6)
MoE: ±4.5%
Thanks the maker for the globe-trotting Chuck Schumer and his ability to recruit strong challengers. As you may recall, Chuck followed McCaskill to London and wooed her over dinner. I don't always agree with Schumer's stances, but man, I sure as hell respect how hard he works. Majority Leader Reid was always an extreme longshot, but Schumer's done his very best to close that gap. This will be a hard-fought race until the very end, but I think McCaskill can pull it off.
P.S. Scott Rasmussen: Thanks for starting to include the actual number of undecideds in your data boxes. Very helpful!
Posted at 06:13 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Missouri | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Santorum Challenging Casey to Debate?
Posted by DavidNYCThis is pretty funny. We've officially moved into Bizarro World. According to Hotline On Call, incumbent Senator Dick Santorum has sent a letter to his challenger Bob Casey, Jr. asking Casey to debate Li'l Dicky.
In any normal universe, it's the challenger who clamors to debate the incumbent - and usually the incumbent gives said challenger the back of his hand. But here, Sen. Man-on-Dog is so desperate to improve his public image, he's gotta beg Casey for some free air-time. Since we're in Bizarro World, I assume we'll also see Santorum start to distance himself from George Bush. Oh wait... he already has!
Through the looking glass, indeed. Soon enough, though, we'll wake the Red King and Rick Santorum will disappear like the bad dream we know he is.
P.S. Dick Santorum named World's Worst Person by Keith Olbermann (our next Edward R. Murrow?) - video clip here!
Posted at 03:50 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Pennsylvania | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
WA-Sen: Comfortable Lead for Cantwell
Posted by DavidNYCFreshman Sen. Maria Cantwell is often thought to be one of the more endangered