• UT-Sen: With the possibility of a serious primary challenge to Sen. Bob Bennett looming, SSP is adding this contest to our "Races to Watch" list. (D)
• TX-10: A spokesman for Michael McCaul claims he's running for re-election to his House seat; earlier McCaul said he might run for TX AG, but this situation still bears watching. Dem Jack McDonald apparently plans to run no matter what McCaul decides. (D)
• PA-Sen: Peg Luksik, a pro-life activist who has made several unsuccessful runs for governor (both in the GOP primary in 1990 and on the Constitution Party line in 1998, when she pulled in 10% of the vote in the general), is planning to run in the Republican primary against both Arlen Specter and Pat Toomey. This may actually be good news for Specter, because a split between the religious fundamentalists and free-market fundamentalists in the primary could let Specter sneak through.
• SC-01: The lackadaiscal Henry Brown, fresh off of barely beating Linda Ketner last year, is facing a primary challenge from a young go-getter with a prominent (if laughable) family name: Carroll "Tumpy" Campbell III. (His father was SC governor in the 1990s.) Many in the local GOP are worried about the safety of the seat in Brown's idle hands, and this early announcement may be done with the hope of goading Brown into retirement.
• IN-05: More primary drama in another solidly Republican district. Dan Burton suddenly looked vulnerable after winning his primary by only 7% against former Marion County coroner John McGoff last year. McGoff's back for a re-run, and now three other GOPers are swarming the race: state rep. Mike Murphy, former state GOP chair Luke Messer, and former 7th district candidate Brose McVey. Marion County prosecutor Carl Brizzi also says he plans to run if Burton retires, although he seems likelier to retire in 2012.
• NRCC: Seeing as how there may be a lot of major GOP primaries in 2010, the NRCC has announced that it may get involved in primaries this cycle, a departure from Tom Cole's self-destructive hands-off policy last time. The NRCC has also privately signaled that they may let flawed or insufficently aggressive incumbents get picked off in the primaries rather than have to prop them up in the general.
• FL-12: The GOP and Dems already have front-runners for the nominations in the open seat race (to be vacated by Adam Putnam), GOP state representative Dennis Ross and Democratic Polk County elections supervisor Lori Edwards. But Doug Tudor, who held Putnam under 60% last year without DCCC help, is coming back for another bite at the apple. State senator Paula Dockery is also considering jumping in on the GOP side.
• Caucuses: Meow! (Or woof?) The Blue Dogs are suddenly sounding catty, miffed at seeing their position as the go-to caucus for watering down progressive legislation usurped by the New Democrats in the wake of the mortgage modification bill.
• TX-10: Democrats have lined up a solid candidate in TX-10, where Larry Joe Doherty came within 10 points of Mike McCaul last year. Jack McDonald, CEO of Austin high-tech firm Perficient, has started an exploratory committee. This fast-growing, Dem-trending district may also be an open seat in 2010, as McCaul considers a bid for Texas AG.
• CA-48: It looks like GOP Rep. John Campbell is about to receive a stronger-than-expected Democratic challenge in 2010. Beth Krom, the former mayor of Irvine and a current city councilor, has made a formal announcement of her candidacy on her campaign website. A traditionally red district, Obama edged out a slight victory over McCain here in 2008, pulling 49% of the vote. (Hat-tip to Gus Ayer, friend of SSP) (J)
• NV-Sen: Here's one that slipped through the cracks last week: ex-Rep. Jon Porter, who'd be the GOP's best option against Harry Reid, is staying in Washington and becoming 'director of public policy' at a lobbying shop. Not that this closes him out from running, but it diminshes the likelihood.
• FL-Sen: Rep. Kendrick Meek has been racking up money ($90,000 at a recent Bill Clinton-headlined fundraiser) and endorsements (Florida's SEIU chapter and United Teachers of Dade) while primary opponent state senator Dan Gelber is preoccupied with the legislative session.
• DCCC: In a big behind-the-scenes move, DCCC executive director (and Pelosi ally) Brian Wolff has left the D-Trip to become senior VP for external affairs at the Edison Electric Institute, a utility-owned trade and lobbying group that has previously given significantly more money to Republicans. (UPDATE: The DCCC's new executive director will be Jon Vogel, who previously led the DCCC's independent expenditures arm.)
• WA-08: Here's an interesting take from American Prospect on what went wrong with Darcy Burner's rematch against Dave Reichert, written by Eli Sanders, the former politics reporter for the Stranger (Seattle's alt-weekly). I'm not sure I agree with the final analysis (they say it was mostly a matter of tone) but it's thought-provoking.
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), who won a third term in November in a race that was closer than many Republicans would have liked, is expected to create an exploratory committee for a possible run for state attorney general in 2010, two Texas media outlets reported Thursday evening.
The current attorney general, Greg Abbott (R), is contemplating running for lieutenant governor next year - or for Senate if Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) resigns early to pursue a gubernatorial bid.
This might be the most exciting House open seat news so far this cycle. McCaul won with just 54% of the vote in November, and 55% two years earlier. This district always looked more competitive than its (old) PVI of R+13, in large part due to an ongoing demographic sea change - in particular, Hispanic growth here has been through the roof.
I'd also be willing to bet that Bush's numbers were inflated here due to a home state effect - and that Obama did better than Kerry's 38%. The real question is whether there is something "wrong" with McCaul that's kept his numbers down - and, consequently, would we be better off running against him or with an open seat? I'll note that the DCCC didn't spend a dime on this district, but first-time candidate Larry Joe Doherty did raise an impressive $1.2 million in his losing bid.
If McCaul bails, Doherty could conceivably run again, as could international affairs consultant Dan Grant, who ran in the primary against Doherty in 2008. My question to you: Are there any other strong candidate who might be tempted to run if there's an open seat?
Research 2000 for Daily Kos (10/20-22, likely voters):
Larry Joe Doherty (D): 42
Mike McCaul (R): 46
(MoE: ±5%)
Texas is a long-term project for the Democrats, and districts like TX-10 are leading the way: it's one of the fastest-growing districts in the country, and most of the growth is non-white. If this poll is any indication, though, we might be on the verge of seeing some good results right away.
Mike McCaul was already publicly sweating the early voting patterns in Harris and Travis Counties (this R+13 district stretches wormlike across hundreds of miles to link Houston and Austin suburbs). This poll can't be helping him feel any better, as it's slightly better than recent Doherty internals. Between McCaul never having faced a full-on challenge before, Doherty's money and name recognition (he's a former TV judge), changes in the district, and the size of the Dem wave (McCain leads only 48-41 in the district, down from Bush's 62-38 edge), here's one more upset waiting to happen.
Goodwin Simon Victoria Research for Larry Joe Doherty (9/28-30, likely voters, 5/27-31 in parens):
Larry Joe Doherty (D): 38 (34)
Mike McCaul (R-inc): 43 (43)
(MoE: ±4.9%)
Here's a key finding that might help explain McCaul's sagging numbers: his name recognition is only at 59%. That's pretty bad for an incumbent running for his third term.
While this is an R+13 district, the numbers are trending in the Democratic direction (Gore won only 34% of the vote here, but Kerry kicked it up a notch to 38% in 2004). We wrote about this district as a possible pick-up opportunity way back in June 2007, so it's nice to see Democrat Larry Joe Doherty making a race of this.
In the last couple days, there have been several posts across the blogosphere citing what various candidates running for Congress have said on FISA and retroactive immunity for the telecoms. But so far, it's been all over the map. I'll try to corral all their statements into this diary, so you can see who the "good guys" are.
First, let's start off with the current House and Senate members who voted against this bill. They do deserve credit, as it's their jobs on the line.
Follow me below the fold to see the dozens of Democratic challengers who are standing up for the Constitution, and are against this FISA bill and retroactive immunity.
Larry Joe Doherty (D): 34
Mike McCaul (R-inc): 43
(n=400)
On the generic ballot, the the GOP has a mere four-point advantage over the Democrats in this R+13 district, with a 45-41 congressional preference. The fact that McCaul is actually underperforming the GOP's generic strength here is eye-opening.
But that's not McCaul's only measure of weakness in the poll. A full 47% of respondents don't even recognize his name, and his job rating is a stunningly mediocre 28% positive, 29% negative (and 42% unsure). What's more, a massive 70% of voters rate President Bush's job performance negatively, and 69% of the district's voters think the country is seriously on the wrong track. All of this gives a big opening for a well-funded Democratic challenger like Larry Joe Doherty to exploit.
SSP first noted this race back in June 2007, when we made the case that the Democratic trend of the district and McCaul's mediocre performance in the 2006 elections might put this one in play. We've had this district on our list of races to watch for a while, and we upgraded our rating of this race from Safe Republican to Likely Republican last week after an independent poll was released showing Doherty trailing McCaul by six points.
Larry Joe Doherty (D): 46
Michael McCaul (R-inc): 52
(MoE: ±4.3%)
While this district does have a PVI or R+13, it's been trending in the right direction: Al Gore won 34% of its vote in 2000, while John Kerry won 38% four years later. The real eye-opener came in 2006, when McCaul's performance sagged dramatically against an underfunded challenger:
Mike McCaul (R): 55
Ted Ankrum (D): 41
Michael Badnarik (L): 4
This time, McCaul is up against a fairly well-funded challenger, lawyer and local TV celebrity Larry Joe Doherty.
We've had our eye on this race for a while, but this is the first poll we've seen that actually suggests McCaul could be in trouble. In fact, it's the first poll of any kind that we've seen of this race. The same survey shows Sen. Cornyn leading Rick Noriega by 54-44, and McCain leading Obama by 55-41 in the district.
Historically, turnout in this district doesn't include large numbers of Latinos or African-Americans. In this poll, both groups went with Doherty, Latinos by 2-1 and African-Americans by 7-1. If Obama at the top of the ticket increases African-American general election turnout as he has in the primary, and these additional voters follow through on the down-ballot races, Doherty could close the gap even further. Increased Latino turnout in the primary was mainly a reflection of Clinton's popularity, but there is a possibility that Noriega could also increase Latino turnout for the general, further benefiting Doherty.
In 2004, George Bush took 62% of the vote in Texas' 10th Congressional District. In 2006, Michael McCaul was held to 55% by a poorly funded Democrat and a relatively well funded Libertarian. My own polling a week before the election found 7% undecided, but the challengers had no funds to close the deal and undecided stayed with the incumbent. As a disclaimer, and an illustration of the funding issue, I did $90 in robocalls for the challenger, Ted Ankrum, in the closing days.
For the 2008 race, in polling on June 2, 528 likely voters gave McCaul a 5.4% lead over Democratic challenger Larry Joe Doherty. McCaul received 51.7% to Doherty's 46.3%, with 2.0% undecided.
TX-10 is described as a 'barbell district' due to having a large chunk of the district in Travis County (Austin), a large chunk in Harris County (Houston) and a thin strip of highway frontage in between. In 2006, Harris went 71-26 for McCaul and Travis went 56-38 for Ankrum. In this poll, McCaul takes Harris 63-33 and Doherty takes Travis by the same 63-33. Travis is the slightly larger end of the TX-10 barbell, but the 'bar' in between went 70-30 for McCaul, resulting in a McCaul lead.
Of note, I also polled Obama-McCain and Cornyn-Noriega in this district and found those races to be more favorable to the other Republicans than they are to McCaul. Cornyn leads Noriega 54-44 and McCain leads Obama 55-41. Statewide, my past results have been more in line with Baselice than SurveyUSA or Rasmussen on these races, but I do not have current statewide numbers to report.
Historically, turnout in this district doesn't include large numbers of Latinos or African-Americans. In this poll, both groups went with Doherty, Latinos by 2-1 and African-Americans by 7-1. If Obama at the top of the ticket increases African-American general election turnout as he has in the primary, and these additional voters follow through on the down-ballot races, Doherty could close the gap even further. Increased Latino turnout in the primary was mainly a reflection of Clinton's popularity, but there is a possibility that Noriega could also increase Latino turnout for the general, further benefitting Doherty.
There is no significant gender gap in these results, but age is a factor. Voters under 40 go with the Democrat in each race. Voters from 40-59 go with the Republican by small margins. Voters over 60 go Republican in all cases, but margin is much larger in races for President and Senator.
528 likely voters polled 6/2/2008, margin of error 4.3%
I am proud to have received the enthusiastic endorsement of the Texas AFL-CIO and other Labor groups representing more than 230,000 working men and women across the state.
Every progressive movement in our nation's modern history has come about because of Organized Labor's courage and steadfast refusal to take its eye off the ball -- protecting the health and well-being of the great American middle class.
