Partyka is no threat to Kosmas

Especially considering he is to Kosmas's right.  I'd be shocked if he takes 30% of the primary vote.  A lot of Dems are angry at Kosmas for her anti-HCR vote in FL-24 (myself included), but she isn't going to lose a primary to a right-winger.  I expect she will vote for the final HCR bill anyway.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 14:59:53 PM CST

SC 04 Bob Inglis

You're right. He is definitely going to be teabagged to death next year.

Tragic way to go, I'll say. Charlie Crist looks like he wants to come along, too.

21, NY-02

---

by: lidem89 @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:03:11 PM CST

YouTube search ...

... Bob Inglis and Town Hall meeting.  He's had to deal with as much of that crap as anyone in Congress.  He's obviously struggling to not piss this group of lunatics off any further, but still look like he's at least somewhat grounded in reality.

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:24:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Rep. Walter Jones

That is one guy I am VERY surprised has been barely mentioed by the teabaggers as a target.  You'd think he would be an obvious target for some of his positions/votes.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:27:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The wingnuts tried in '08, lost 40-60

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

For the first time since his initial run for Congress, he faced substantive primary opposition in Onslow County commissioner Joe McLaughlin. However, on May 6, 2008, he defeated poorly funded McLaughlin by a 60% to 40% margin and was nominated for another term.

Jones brings home the bacon, and is more pro-environment than the standard R, ref this bit from the Sierra Club - https://secure2.convio.net/sie...

Without Jones, I don't think Hatteras Island would have been rejoined so quickly after being split by Hurricane Isabel back in '03.  

---

by: tietack @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:40:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Back in the late 90s

when I was living in South Carolina, Inglis was the darling of the rightwing Republicans there.  Can't believe he isn't pure enough for them anymore.

---

by: skaje @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:39:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

He was the darling of the religious right

but Inglis has taken on the race baiting of the GOP several times, opposing the Confederate flag and hiring black staffers.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:45:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Out of curiousity

Would you not like it if Inglis switched parties and ran as a Democrat?

I know that won't happen, but obviously I don't get your position of disliking southerners with a D after their names who if nothing else are just more decent human beings than the teabagger alternative.

---

by: tommypaine @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:30:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Do you really want to know the answer

or do you just get personal satisfaction at throwing barbs at my face?

I respect Inglis a lot more than I do half of the worthless DINO congressman in the South.  But he would not be appropriate as a Democrat.  He's well within the mainstream of the Republican party.

Just being a "more decent human being" than a teabagger doesn't make you a good Democrat, IMO.  That is a very low standard.  And some DINOs like Parker Griffith, are no better human beings than a teabagger.  

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:36:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What I wonder

is whether there should be a separate category of "Representatives who choose to associate themselves with the Democratic Party but are on their own in terms of funding." I certainly believe that the country is better off if Inglis wins reelection than if he's defeated by an all-around extremist, and it certainly would please me if he chose to become a Democrat, whereupon he might moderate his views further. But I definitely buy the argument that, with limited resources, the DCCC should concentrate on funding races of better Democrats more than people who have "D" after their names but vote with the party at a 40% clip.

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:46:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Party switchers always shift their views

Nate did a good analysis of just that over at 538 awhile back.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:08:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, he did

and I read it.

Party switchers almost always switch their views substantially, though not quite always. And that being the case, it might make MORE sense to support someone like Inglis, if he chose to switch to the Democratic Party (very unlikely) than some of the current Democrats who are far to the right in the party.

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:28:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There is no implication that 40% "identify as Dem"

need to get extra resources.  That is a false argument.  If the DCCC was pouring 20 million into an R+20 district to get the most conservative Dem in Congres elected, that would be poor judgement, but is not what has happened.  If Inglis flipped, moderated to a 40% level, I could see giving him some help largely because he is symbolic of how out of touch the extremist republicans are, but I'm not going to donate blood to him.

The money thing generally works in our favor though.  When the republicans have to spend money to displace a 40% guy, that is money they aren't spending going after Steve Kagen, or Dina Titus, or John Hall.  Cool.

---

by: tommypaine @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:45:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Where did I say they need MORE resources?

The point is, resources are finite, so it makes some sense for the party to consider where its resources are most efficiently spent, in service of its core ideologies (whatever those are, and I have to admit they're way more subject to debate in a right-wing, corporate direction than I would like, which I guess is the deeper point).

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:31:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Resources are not finite

unless you mean the entire world's wealth.

Good candidates produce more resources.  People who would have bought a new pool table will contribute to Obama instead, but they would happily play pool with Gore as the candidate.

And again, sure I'd rather see money go to John Hall than Inglis if he changes parties, but resources are not finite.  If Inglis gets not a dime from the national party, then it is a pure win.  If he gets a small amount, but raises $x,000,000 on his own causing the CfG to spend $y,000,000 on his wingnut opponent, wonderful.

All these 40%/blue dog races are not equal.

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:17:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't get it

Of COURSE resources are finite! Democratic Party organizations make decisions based on what they believe are the chances a candidate can win, for example, which sometimes causes them to make mistakes, as in the case of Hedrick in 2008 and Kissell in 2006 (I'm down on Kissell at the moment, but that's beside the point). My suggestion is that it can make sense to make decisions based on the degree of value a candidate has to the party, too.

As for good candidates being able to raise more funds, that's great but involves their individual campaigns, and mostly not the DCCC, etc.

Am I missing something here? If you say "all [x or y] races are not equal," aren't you making a judgment about where organizations like the DCCC should spend more of their money?

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:32:57 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The genius of Dean

is that he expanded DNC resources to properly fund a 50-state strategy.

Of course resources are finite, But needs are not infinite either, which makes contributions by secure incumbents most important.

---

by: tietack @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 10:05:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

C'mon

Resources are finite only in the context of the entire wealth of the country.  Resources are not the SAME depending on the candidates.  The resources available for one set of candidates is completely different than for another set of candidates.

If one single extremely popular, extremely wealthy candidate runs in a competitive district, that could mean there is more money for other candidates, and more money overall.  The pool of money for great candidates will almost always be bigger than the pool for crap candidates.  It does not follow that just because you give Peter a dollar that means one dollar must be taken from Paul.  Because Peter is running you may have $10 more overall, and Paul even might get $2 more.

"If you say "all [x or y] races are not equal," aren't you making a judgment about where organizations like the DCCC should spend more of their money?"

Obviously.  Some races are more important than others. How can you dispute that?

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 17:23:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yep

And Grayson is a good example.  Grayson has plenty of money to keep funding his own elections for as long as he wants to.  In fact one of the reasons I didn't donate to him in 2008 was because I knew that fact.  However he is getting boatloads of liberal activist cash now that he has become a strong voice for the left.  Quite honestly that cash would better be invested in other vulnerable Dems who cannot self-fund.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:17:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't see where we disagree on any of this

n/t

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 22:08:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If I wanted to barb you, you'd know, chill out

But again your philosophy is hard to comprehend.  You would rather have a bad human being teabagger in office than Inglis, and have a national doalogue based on polarization.

The implication is even more difficult to understand.  If you would not want Inglis to run as a Democrat, you don't want his votes.  

I want current "mainstream republicans" to vote for Obama in 2012.  And I want the furthest left person possible representing any R+ district.

---

by: tommypaine @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:39:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I want his vote because the GOP is too radical

not because the Dems are more moderate.  Basically I want mainstream conservatives to vote Obama because Palin is an extremist kook, not because Obama is a moderate.

I'm more interested in painting the GOP as kooks in the short term, and to do so, you actually need a good number of them to be elected officials.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:21:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Suggestion - JSmith, put some of what you say in a diary

I would not be surprised if there are things about what you're thinking that we're all missing.

All we're seeing are directed snippets of what you're thinking, instead of a whole picture. So we hear a lot about what you think w/r/t certain candidates, which may not be a coherent whole.

Perhaps it could be put into a context, such as your strategy for how you think Elaine Marshall can best beat Richard Burr (NC-Sen).

While I suspect that you'll still get flak, I also suspect that you'll also get more understanding of the direction you're hoping for our D party.

---

by: tietack @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:42:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the suggestion

I'll do that when I have time to draft a diary, probably sometime around Christmas.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:44:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Im excited to read it

There is a lot of strategy involved in this.  And it is already clear from the polls Kos does that the South is way outside of the mainstream of America in their opinion of Obama and tea-bagger, deathers, birthers, etc. thinking.

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 15:16:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just guessing, but I think JSmith is looking for national contrasts

and if I understand correctly, he believes Ds do better on a macro level with Rs radicalized nationally.

My problem with such is that I want the Rs to be an alternative that doesn't sink the country - as the US does sometimes go into the "throw the bums out" mood, independent of the opposition being voted in.

Imagine what would happen in 2012 in a Obama-Palin (or Huckabee) general election if (for reasons unknown) say China, Taiwan, south Korea, etc. quietly converted some huge portion of their US Dollar foreign reserves to Euros that summer.

The US economy would sink / inflation would explode - until the dollar finds a new equilibrium, and President Obama wouldn't be able to call the Chinese on it as a public declaration would make things worse. We could easily end up with a President Palin (or Huckabee), Speaker Pence, and a Republican Congress.

A more moderate R party would reduce the damage of such a change. We're having a difficult enough time slowing the damage from 8 years of W.

---

by: tietack @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:23:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You are quite right that's how I feel

but it goes further, the GOP is not going to moderate (they are already quite far to the right even if they nominate an establishment figure like Romney) until they lose several elections badly.  History tells us this, it took several landslides for the GOP to finally make peace with the New Deal, and it took several landslides for the Dems to move to the center after Reagan.

I too would like a moderate GOP at some point.  But I believe that the path there is for the GOP to take beating after beating and then realize that right-wing candidates won't work, and the way to give them those beatings is for them go far right in the short term.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:48:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I think the core flaw in your philosophy is this...

there are already enough high profile, nutcase, lunatic, hating high profile GOP folks.

Replacing Inglis or Bright with some frothing maniac would be noticed by... basically no one.

Your goal of the GOP voices already exists (counting Limbaugh and Beck).  Changing in 15 of out blue dogs for 15 extremist backbenchers would effect nothing at all -- with the exception of an avowed racist or secessionist or gas chamber advocate.  But that won't happen.  

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:28:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I think you're right about this

n/t

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:36:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I disagree

If Joe Wilson's outburst on the floor of the house showed us anything, it's that the media always has time to give coverage to a raving madman.

I mean, Bill Posey's a first termer, and there's been some media coverage of his birther bill too. So craziness always breaks through. Nobody would supplant the high kings (or queens, in Palin and Bachmann's cases) in this category, but the more voices there are in Congress there are parroting the nutcase line, the less people are going to think the Republican party stands for anything else.  

---

by: Bob Bobson @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 10:23:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Posey is someone we need to be targetting

Obama only lost 48-51.

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 15:27:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Blew our shot in 2008

Had we gotten the person we wanred for the race (I believe a Dem county commissioner or something) we could well have beaten Posey in 2008 when it was an open seat.  Too late now.  I imagine repubs will want to make FL-15 at least a bit more favorable for Posey in 2012.  Registration and demographics are in our favor in that district long-term.  

One possibility for republicans would taking some of Kosmas's (FL-24) more republican territory in Orange County and giving it to FL-15.  They may well need to concede the 24th anyway if Kosmas survives, which seems probable.  

If they somehow manage to hold the FL Governorship and attempt to stretch the map too thin by targetting Kosmas and Grayson for defeat they will almost certainly end up with a dummymander similar to Pennsylvania 2002.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 15:50:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Wilson's outburst proves my point

It's not like they don't have plenty of mouthy guys already.... though he certainly does not rise to the level of "raving madman".

We have almost a perfect storm now.  They have a leadership of loudmouths, and when the more sane guys speak up they get shouted down.  We don't want them ALL to be hysterical.  We want to see the loudmouth leadership consistently send the message that "we don't want reasonable, even slightly moderate conservatives in our party."

Inglis getting a teabag challenge is much better than a teabager holding Inglis seat.  And it is also much better because they will be spending their resources on fighting each other.

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 17:31:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What I want to see

is a GOP Party whose newsmakers are Southern, rural, racist, and crazy.  I want people like Joe Wilson and Jim DeMint to be the core of the GOP, so much so, that reasonable people outside the South (including independents, moderate Repubs, and even sane conservatives) have an instinctive feel that they don't have a place in the  GOP.

That gut feeling is important.  It is why someone who was as conservative as Ronald Reagan was able to win election and reelection in the first place, many working class Democrats and independents had the gut feeling that the Democratic Party was a party that supported or condoned poor minorities, sympathizers of criminals, hippies, those who promoted "San Francisco values", and Communist sympathizers.  

---

by: JSmith @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 21:29:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

On this

Imagine what would happen in 2012 in a Obama-Palin (or Huckabee) general election if (for reasons unknown) say China, Taiwan, south Korea, etc. quietly converted some huge portion of their US Dollar foreign reserves to Euros that summer.

I don't think China, Korea, etc would find it in their interest to have to deal with warmonger nutcases like Sarah Palin.  Just for that reason alone, they would probably withhold such a move until after the election.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:51:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just the fact that we're dependent on their largesse

means that what they choose to do is outside of our control.

The economic part of Clancy's "Debt of Honor" scenario may be instructive here. The basic premise is of someone (or some nation) willing to lose a lot of money in pursuit of some larger goal.

If China especially wants to appeal to Third World countries as allies, it is in their interest to have someone as reactionary as possible in the US White House. If they're willing to lose some money, it may be worth the cost in order to gain allies all over the globe.

(The unknown is whether Korea, Japan, maybe Saudi Arabia would be willing to buy dollars under that scenario to counteract such actions.)

It's sort of analogous to your thought on swing voters w/r/t R wingnuts. Many swing nations would be more open to the appeal of a China in reaction to a Palin administration.

---

by: tietack @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 23:10:24 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sanford charged with 37 ethics violations.

http://www.thestate.com/local/...

Check out the 2010 California races and help us take back Red California!

27, Indy, Female, TX-03

---

by: californianintexas @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:05:12 PM CST

Oops, just now noticed it was in the digest. nm

Check out the 2010 California races and help us take back Red California!

27, Indy, Female, TX-03

---

by: californianintexas @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:07:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sanford

I really do hope they impeach him; it's yet another example of state legislatures' ineptitude that South Carolina's is waffling on impeaching when such an action has bipartisan support. Hopefully the ethics panel's charges will move the process along.

On a related note, this is pretty interesting:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2004/rpt...

---

by: NJCentrist @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:24:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's the difference between parties

More often than not Democrats do the right thing.  In Illinois the legislature quickly impeached and removed Blago from office.  In New York Spitzer quickly resigned.  In LA-02 the voters kicked Jefferson to the curb (thankfully) before he was sent to a long prison term.

Meanwhile republicans do next to nothing, and even embrace people like Sanford, Vitter and Ensign.  Heck they even gave Vitter a standing ovation upon his return to the Senate after his hooker revelations.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:12:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well, except if they're gay

See: Larry Craig

---

by: xcave @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:23:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And Mark Foley!

Check out the 2010 California races and help us take back Red California!

27, Indy, Female, TX-03

---

by: californianintexas @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:26:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Even with Craig

They sorta just tried to ignore it for awhile.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:28:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

NY-Sen: Gillibrand has a 25/51 approval rating

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/w...

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:11:36 PM CST

Last SUSA poll I can find

Had her at 41/42 on Sept 30.  I can't imagine they have fallen THAT much in under three months.

http://www.surveyusa.com/clien...

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:13:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No it's not

unless you're counting the 39% who say fair as disapproving.

It's 3% Excellent, 22% Good, 39% Fair, 12% Poor, 24% unsure

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:15:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

So you're saying Gillibrand has a 64% approval then?

When I see the words excellent/good/fair/poor, I think A/B/C/F. Typically, I don't think of a "C" as a seal of approval. Perhaps it's closer to neutral than negative, but either way, Gillibrand's got a lot of work to do.

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:20:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm saying she doesn't have a 51% disapproval rating

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:26:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ozone is right, "fair" is NOT "disapprove," which brings up...

...a pet peeve of mine in polling, the use of "fair" as an option.  It really is worthless because it doesn't tell you anything.

The only time I've found "fair" useful in a poll has been when a similar approve/disapprove is asked for job approval, and/or favorable/unfavorable on general opinion of an officeholder.  In that instance, you get a pretty good picture of how many "fair" respondents approve and how many disapprove.  What you consistently see in those few examples where this mix of questions is asked is that a majority of "fair" respondents actually disapprove, but a large minority actually approve.  And all these people's opinions are iffy, they are easily persuaded.

I hate it when the media assume "fair" means BAD.  It doesn't.  It's a Rorscach test.  Which is why it's a terrible choice to offer in a poll.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:16:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm still jut not worried about this so much

The crosstabs point to a lot of likely Democrats who just don't know her yet. It's fixable.  

---

by: andgarden @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:29:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Also

Top ofthe ballot is likely to have Schumer for Senate and Cuomo for Governor.  That has to help Gillibrand.  It would take a LOT of ballot-splitting for her to lose.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:36:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yup

---

by: andgarden @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:51:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Schumer

The same poll has him at just 54-42 which seems a little low.

---

by: conspiracy @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:06:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

If you consider "Fair" to be npart of the disapproval

And I do not.  

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:12:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Pollster does

But fair enough. Maybe they should just ask "approve, disapprove or undecided".

---

by: conspiracy @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:19:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes

Most accurate way of doing it is Strongly Approve/Approve/Disapprove/Strongly Disapprove.  "Fair" can be assumed to be a weak approval or weak disapproval.  Hard to determine.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:24:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Great point, and one badly overlooked by political media......

Top-of-the-ticket matters.  It will take great personal dislike/disapproval of Gillibrand to get people to split their tickets against her.  And that just doesn't exist.

Not to mention that Pataki and Giuliani are simply not acting like would-be candidates.

Gillibrand is going to win easily.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:18:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is terribly faulty logic

Take a look at this...

1994 New York Senatorial Race:
Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D) - 55%
Bernadette Castro (R) - 42%

1994 New York Gubernatorial Race:
George Pataki (R) - 49%
Mario Cuomo (D) - 46%

1998 New York Senatorial Race:
Charles Schumer (D) - 55%
Alfonose D'Amato (R) - 44%

1998 New York Gubernatorial Race:
George Pataki (R) - 54%
Peter Vallone (D) - 33%

So yeah, clearly New Yorkers always vote on a strict party line. Oh, wait...

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:27:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

So?

There's no one on the ballot as unpopular as Cuomo and there's no Republican incumbent running against an unkonown Democrat.

Schumer and Cuomo will win landslides, 60%+, that alone will drag Gillibrand over the finish line.  

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:31:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'll certainly give you Schumer and Cuomo...

Hell, the GOP may as well not even run a candidate against Schumer. But, even if ignore the Marist poll and instead put more faith into the SurveyUSA poll, that puts Gillibrand at around a 40% approval rating which is exactly what Cuomo had in October '94.

I firmly believe if Giuliani were to run back to the center, he could garner 20-25% of Dems. If he ran as nutty FOX News '08 Rudy, he'd probably only garner 10-15%, in which case Gillibrand wins.

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:41:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

her "poor" rating is in the teens

Cuomos was over 50% in poor ratings, big difference between unknown and unliked.

New York's default position is Democrat, a Democrat who has a lot of no opinions usually will get those votes.

Similarly, a Republican in Texas with a 40% disapproval rating and a 13% poor rating is favored to win election.

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:02:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

New York is turned solid blue since then

Republicans have lost every single statewide office, the state senate (formerly thought to be impossible for dems to takeover) and the state congressional delegation has gone from 19D/10R in 2002 to 27D/2R today.  That is a major realignment.  Sure republicans could fare better if 2010 is a favorable year for them, but I wouldn't count on it.  Guiliani made countless extreme-right statements during the 2008 Presidential contest and no longer has even the apperance of being a moderate republican.  He's damaged goods.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:33:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

andyroo, those examples don't apply next year because...

...1994 was a horrific year for Democrats everywhere and Cuomo was just pulled underwater by the tidal wave, and in 1998 Pataki was an incumbent running for reelection, a totally different dynamic.

This year you've got Gillibrand as an incumbent with the popular incumbent Schumer and a popular open seat (unless Paterson, God forbid, is it) gubernatorial nominee.  In that scenario, you have to dislike Gillibrand personally to split the ticket only against her.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 12:31:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

FL - 12

I live in Polk County and got a call on this poll.  

This 46 - 42 is within the Margin of Error AND it was AFTER all the negative issues about Ross were brought up.  I can't imagine how bad she was down BEFORE all the negatives on Ross.  

Not many people know who she is.  She has been relatively quiet, not attended anything, not raised money, done nothing.  I think this is her final grasp for DC to pay attention to her, but I think they will see right through it.  I mean, if she were tied before negative questions about Ross, that would be one thing, but having received a call on this poll, to be tied AFTER all the negatives, she is really down BIG!

And my fellow Dems know that is true.  Obama lost this district by almost 10,000 votes.

---

by: FRiley4florida @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:16:33 PM CST

It's a hard race to win

But it's possible.  McCain won with 51% in FL-12.  Hardly a landslide.  But ya, the republic party dominates at the state and local level.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 15:23:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Where do you see that?

Edwards' campaign says that the cited poll results came before positive and negatives were tested.

I also live in this district and she is definitely known. Keep in mind, she was elected to the Supervisor of Elections position, as well as elected to the state House in the past.

And Obama losing the district by only 10,000 votes shows how close the district has become today. With the large influx of Puerto Ricans in the north, this district could swing even more towards the Democrats in 2010. I am not sure if Edwards will win given the mood heading into 2010, but if she had run in 2008, she certainly could have won.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz...

---

by: Progressive America @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:59:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

"Where did you see that" was answered...

...in Friley's comment itself.  He was a respondent in this poll and is telling us firsthand the question ordering!

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:20:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not at all

I do not infer that.

---

by: Progressive America @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:57:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's not an inference, it's explicit......

"I got a call on this poll."  Dude, he was polled.  It's no inference.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 12:32:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes

but he does not say the order in which he was polled. If the campaign is saying there is a different order than some random new user on a blog, I think I will believe the campaign.

---

by: Progressive America @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 17:29:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

New poster

The guy making the claim has exactly one post ever on this website.  Who knows if he's telling the truth or is a troll.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:14:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

SEIU Ads for Michaud?

That seems odd.  Is there a reason to think he'll have a race in '10?

---

by: zac @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:33:57 PM CST

I agree

I scratched my head at that one too.  Everyone on that list except Michaud has at least a reasonable chance at a competitive chance.  As far as I know he doesn't have a legit challenger.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 16:38:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Potentially a primary challenger

There isn't really a need for an anti-choicer in New England.  As I said before, unless Michaud is basically a progressive hero on everything else, like say Alan Grayson, or really stands up for the populist/progressive values, like say Marcy Kaptur, he should face a primary.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:15:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Aside from abortion, Michaud is a loyal Democrat

He seems to fit the district well; while it's a solidly Dem district now, it could be vulnerable in a particularly bad year (it only went for Kerry by 6 and Gore by 3).

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 18:00:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Would a pro-choice challenger

here be any less of a loyal Dem?  Probably not.  For me to accept a pro-life Dem in New England, the Dem would have to be exceptional on other issues, either taking leadership on progressive issues or being a real fighter for the working class.

For example, Marcy Kaptur.  I hate her position on choice, but she has been such a strong fighter for the working class that even a victorious primary would result in potentially obtaining someone much more pro-corporate.  Basically, he/she should be so good that it would be too risky to get rid of the incumbent.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 18:43:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There's plenty of other anti-choice Dems in New England

Steve Lynch (MA-9), Richard Neal (MA-2) and James Langevin (RI-2) all come to mind.  There may be others as well.

28, Unenrolled, MA-08

---

by: Marcus @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 08:03:52 AM CST

[ Parent ]

His district was the very anti-gay marriage one

I'll bet it has a much higher than New England average of anti-choice voters.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 18:20:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's in the top 3 most conservative

New England House districts.  Pretty rural, with Bangor and Augusta more large-ish towns than real cities.  And yes, the Southern Baptists have send people to organize and run churches in rural Maine, with substantial success.

Michaud is careful for good reason.  The Boston area mid sized high tech company economy, with its Ruy&Texeira-described Democratic voter demographic, has spread its way out to Portland but not beyond.

---

by: Baystater @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:24:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Funny thing is

Current Governor Baldacci represented ME-02 before Michaud.  And Baldacci signed the gay marriage bill that the voters overturned.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:39:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

And before Baldacci

Olympia Snowe was the ME-02 rep.  She is much more pro-choice than Michaud.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:41:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oh I know

and before Snowe, Bill Cohen and before Cohen, Bill Hathaway, all of whom were pro-choice.

Even Michaud's Republican opponent in 2002 was pro-choice.

This is likely one of those district where, until recently, Republicans were more liberal than Democrats. What seperated them all this time was labor...the labor voters went Democratic, the anti-labor folks went Republican, but on socially issues there was much crossover (lots of pro-labor social conservatives and anti-labor social liberals)

The only reason the district even voted Democratic since 1994 was because of a grand coalition consisting of liberal Democrats down in Mount Desert Island/Bar Harbor and socially conservative pro-labor Democrats up in Aroostook County.  

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:56:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's kind of like MA-09 in 2001

Stephen Lynch was the pro-labor but socially conservative choice, while Jo Ann Sprague was pro-choice and some gay rights but was otherwise a typical Republican.

20, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:10:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

MA-09 is a lot like ME-02

That's the other New England district I was thinking of during this thread.

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:34:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's a socially conservative district though

ME-02 includes places like Lewiston, Brewster, and Aroostok County, populated by socially conservative Catholics and French Canadians, who vote Democrat on economic issues and issues like the war, but are strongly pro-life.

I wouldn't be surprised if most people in ME-02 oppose abortion...because the pro-choice numbers in ME-01 are probably way lopsided.  

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:34:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I highly doubt that

and there is no question IMO, that a pro-choice liberal Democrat could easily win ME-2.  I grant you that it may be difficult for a pro-choice liberal to beat Michaud in the primary because Michaud has strong labor support, and even pro-choice union supporters would probably stick with Michaud.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:27:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

a pro-choice Dem could win an open seat

Baldacci did...but not in a primary. Michaud has very strong support in Northern Maine...the only people who don't seem to like him are Republicans and the progressives down on the coast, who may vote for a primary challenger, but it wouldn't be enough to beat him, and it would risk losing the French Canadians up north to a more economically liberal, socially conservative Olympia Snowe-esque Republican.

---

by: DTOzone @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:51:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good observations n/t

---

by: NJCentrist @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:31:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Michaud joined the Out of Iraq caucus in like 2006,

and was voting against the first Democratic war supplemental in early 07 from the left.  I remember him being posted as a bad guy on one of the orange or blue blogs and then commenters having to point out that he voted against the bill from the left, not the right.  That's pretty impressive coming out of ME-02, I think.

---

by: texas dem @ Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 14:14:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

To be honest I don't like the purity votes either

For example, Dennis Kucinich should be primaried for voting against the Dem war supplemental, ENDA, cap and trade, and health care reform.  It doesn't matter a hill of beans to me what the rationale for such a pathetic voting record is.  

I think Michaud also joined Kucinich in voting against ENDA because it didn't include transgendered people, not a stellar record IMO.

---

by: JSmith @ Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 14:27:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Kucinich is in a league all on his own

I mean he votes down stuff even some of the worst offending Blue Dogs vote for. Nobody on the left of the party is as consistently obtuse as Dennis. Even Kos doesn't like him which says everything.

---

by: conspiracy @ Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 14:39:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I disagree with the post above comparing Hoffman to Christine Jennings

Hoffman is down by about 3,000 in what was a fairly conducted election.

Christine Jennings lost by 369 votes, where there were a rediculous number of undervotes and many charges of election fraud.

Christine Jennings most likely won her race while Doug Hoffman definately lost his race.  

---

by: jmartin4s @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 17:10:48 PM CST

agreed

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 15:47:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree as well.

And Jennings really probably won.  Hoffman didn't, not matter how much the paranoid schizophrenics on the right scream about ACORN or whatever they're saying is out to get them today.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 16:23:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No she did not "probably win"

Nor did she win by a thin margin.  She easily won that election.  The FL-13 race in 2006 was the most fraudalent election I've ever seen.  That race made elections in Zimbabwe or Afghanistan look fair and honest by comparison.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 18:13:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Florida

Where the Jeb Bush machine has made a mockery of Democracy.

18, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 08:53:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

MA-Sen

I don't think any endorsement, short of Ted Kennedy's ghost, will save Michael Capuano. If he wins it will probably be a result of bad press for Coakley, either one or two big things or a bunch of small things. If he has dirt on her he should release it in a week or so, maybe even sooner.

20, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 19:28:25 PM CST

It would be a major upset

Coakley has led by over 20% in every poll, plus I think she'd make a much better senator that Capuano.

---

by: jmartin4s @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:39:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Interesting News

So Schwarzenegger chose Abel Maldonado for Lieutenant Governor to replace Garamendi. This is really good news because even though Maldonado is a Republican, he is very moderate and sided with the Democrats on the budget in the State Senate. Maldonado should lose the primary to some teabagger McClintock Republican who thinks Maldonado is too moderate and stirs up voter's fears about Maldonado's Hispanic background. If Maldonado wins the primary, I will be worried about beating him.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/...

P.S His district is on the Central Coast and voted 59% for Obama. We should definitely pick it up.


for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

---

by: Alibguy @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:10:43 PM CST

Sounds about right

Probably just Arnold paying the guy back for putting his neck on the line and supporting the budget.  Two questions.

1. How moderate is Maldonado?  Any chance he'd just switch parties and run for Lt Gov as a Dem?
2. Is there any clear favorite for the Lt Gov Dem primary?

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:15:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

He is probably too conservative

to win a Democratic primary.  

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:31:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No clear Dem frontrunner

LA Councilwoman Janice Hahn and State Senator Dean Florez Fresno) are running.  Hahn may have a slight edge in name ID with her LA base, but neither of these candidates has any substantial statewide following.

http://www.presstelegram.com/c...

---

by: DCal @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:36:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Abel Maldonado is an opportunistic jerk

  and while he may be more moderate than his brother Cain*, he is what used to be considered a mainstream Republican. There is no way in hell that he would win a Democratic primary in California. He will also have trouble winning the GOP primary because he voted for a budget that had some taxes in it and also he is a Latino which doesn't help in the party of Rich Anglo Dudes.

  There are two main candidates in the Democratic primary that I am aware of. Dean Florez is a Senator from the Central Valley, an agbiz moderate Dem and Janice Hahn is a Los Angeles City Councilmember who is the daughter of legendary L.A. County Supervisor Kenny Hahn and sister of not-so-legendary former Mayor James Hahn. Janice is a more likeable politician than her brother and has done a good job on the Council. The Hahns have always had strong support in the L.A. Black community and among the labor movement. I think early polling shows Hahn ahead. She has the advantage of being known in CA's largest city, being a woman and not being a state legislator. I would like to see more than one woman on our statewide slate (SoS Debra Bowen is the other) and I am an Angeleno so I lean towards Hahn.

  *weak biblical joke

52, male, disgruntled Democrat, CA-28

---

by: Zack from the SFV @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 00:00:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I've kept an eye on Maldonado

for a while.  He's smart, he chased off Republican primary opponents by running off to the right after getting elected to that seat.  And yes, was an utter jerk.  The district has trended Democratic pretty fast, though, and he's quick to adapt.

If/when Jerry Brown wins, he'd be smart to get Maldonado some appointment in state government and then lure him across the aisle if possible.

---

by: Baystater @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:44:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Furthermore, if we pick up Maldonado's seat

and the seat that Denham is vacating, we'll have a 2/3 majority in the Senate.

---

by: JSmith @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:31:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Finally...

Once Jerry Brown is elected and Democrats get a strong majority in the state legislature, no more big gridlock!

for more election analysis, visit  http://frogandturtle.blogspot....

---

by: Alibguy @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:02:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ballot initiative

I think Dems are trying to get an initiative on the CA ballot in 2010 that would do away with the ridiculous 2/3rds majority needed on budget issues and replace it with a more democratic majority rules.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:15:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Easily the most important state-level change

that would benefit the whole country too.

Unless California's put-off-until-next-year-budget is addressed in some coherent way (Democrat OR Republican) it will collapse in a few years and drag the rest of the country with it, and there is no reason for that because the economy of the state is sound.

---

by: tommypaine @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:52:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

with 12.5% unemployment and a drought hurting agriculture

  I wouldn't call the Golden State's economy sound right now. The two thirds requirement is the source of much of our governmental dysfunction, and we need to fix it. (Current polling shows we have lots of work to do on this to get it to pass.)

 Picking up a Senate seat we need to get to 2/3 in 2010 would make it worthwhile to have Maldo stinking up the LtGuv office for a year. Also it will be fun to watch him get Scozzafavaed in the GOP primary next year.

52, male, disgruntled Democrat, CA-28

---

by: Zack from the SFV @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 00:09:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I was very excited to here this

When I'm not in New Orleans for school I live in this district (the small Santa Clara County part of it).  I'm definitly working hard to turn it blue- first competitive contest in my area in a long time!

20, male, CA-15 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)

Actively supporting Charlie Melancon and Cedric Richmond

---

by: Darth Jeff @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:41:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Deval Patrick is very unpopular

Is his wife somehow so popular that her endorsement is a positive?

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:42:25 PM CST

Remember

We're talking about Democratic primary voters here, not the electorate as a whole.

---

by: xcave @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 20:57:04 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm remembering that

And are Deval Patrick or his wife popular among Democrats in Massachusetts?

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:02:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Deval isn't

Do't know about his wife but I recall seeing a poll recently that showed him right around 50% among Dems.  That is horrible.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:18:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I cant tell you that as a Massachusetts democrat

Deval Patrick and anyone having anything to do with Deval Patrick (except for Tim Murray), is hated. If someon decideds to challenge Deval in the primary, I would gladly vote for the opponent. I'm actually considering leaving that slot (along with Stephen Lynch's slot) blank when I vote in the general election next year. In terms of the senate primary, I think Diane Patrick's endorsement will do more harm then good for Capuano. However, that is just my opinion and I'm a major Coakley supporter.

---

by: jmartin4s @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 22:21:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I haven't looked at the polling crosstabs

but chances are high that a large proportion of the remaining Undecideds in the primary are black voters, mostly in Boston.  I think that would amount to the Patricks asking mostly black voters to vote for Capuano.

I think Coakley is the right person and has the best upward growth potential.  Capuano was a great city politician, he's fine in the House.  But he's not a Massachusetts Senator.  He's just in no way ever going to be a sachem among sagamores as Kennedy was among New England's eleven other senators, which is also a defect Kerry has.  It's a class thing at several levels.  (And yes, there was a documented powerful squaw-sachem among the Wampanoags, before anyone asks.)

I don't like how Coakley's numbers have stalled at ~44%.  But Pagliuca's vanity run and Khazei are taking away enough from Capuano that it will probably be enough.  

---

by: Baystater @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:29:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

First of all I agree with you about Coakley completely

However, the reason Coakley is having trouble hitting 50% is because of Pagliuca and his attempt to buy a senate seat with his constant television and radio ads that never seem to go away. In September when Khazie and Pagliuca were not getting much support Coakley was at 47% and would probably be in the high 50s if Pags wasn't in the race. Here's are Coakley's percentages by region.
Worcestor/Western MA 40%
North East 42%
Suffolk 56%
SE/Cape 47%
Now for the undecideds
Worcestor/Western MA 25%
North East 19%
Suffolk 14%
SE/Cape 19%
So most of the undecideds are from Worcestor/Western Mass not Boston. The Worcestor could go either way but the western mass will likely go towards Coakley because she is originally from their and has a secure footing their.
By the way, these crosstabs are from the suffolk poll. I'm ignoring the Boston Globe poll completely because it was done by UNH and they have a horrible record for accuracy. (Remember Carol Shea Porter 2006)

---

by: jmartin4s @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 08:05:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

IIRC

Capuano's district contains Mattapan, Roxbury, and most of Dorchester. Honestly if he doesn't already have the name recognition to walk away with blacks in Boston his already small chances are nonexistent. I really don't see how he wins without a large margin in his district.

20, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)

---

by: sapelcovits @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 08:18:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Even if Patrick had John Lynch-like numbers

I don't think his endorsement would be that big of a deal, much less that of his wife. I mean Ted Kennedy of all people couldn't lift Obama to victory in the Massachusetts primary.

20, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)

---

by: sapelcovits @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:04:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

BREAKING: Arnold to appoint Abel Maldonado for Lt. Gov.

Let's get on the road to 2/3 in the California State Senate by picking up this seat plus SD-12 next year!

http://www.sacbee.com/latest/s...

Check out the 2010 California races and help us take back Red California!

27, Indy, Female, TX-03

---

by: californianintexas @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:09:47 PM CST

Wonderful

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

---

by: xcave @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 21:47:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

OH-02

Book Withdraws from Race; Krikorian will Fight Schmidt for Seat

I haven't seen this news here, so unless I missed it, I'm the first to post this information. (I suspect I missed it.)

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

---

by: Pan @ Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 23:39:50 PM CST

Isn't Krikorian some dude

  who ran as an independent last time? Can I assume that Vic Wulsin is not running this time? I sure would like to see Mean Jean beaten, but don't know whether this is a good or bad development.

52, male, disgruntled Democrat, CA-28

---

by: Zack from the SFV @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 00:15:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes

Isn't Krikorian some dude who ran as an independent last time?

I don't know if it's good or bad, either. Any input from more knowledgeable folks?

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 00:35:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

He advertises himself as a conservative

Over on DKos the Ohio folks are saying he's pretty much a DINO and they won't give him their time or money.

---

by: Baystater @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:32:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

That's understandable

But a conservative Democrat would be a lot better than Jean Schmidt.

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:35:17 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Meh

Schmidt is a drain on the RNCC's resources. As long as she's in that seat, she's not going to be safe.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 07:08:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

True

I'm not saying I'd root hard for someone right of center running on the Democratic line, but I think you'd have to agree that my statement is objectively true. Taking two candidates in isolation, the sane conservative, running as a Democrat, is superior to the extremist.

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 07:16:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

NV-02

From CQ Politics:

Ken McKenna of Reno, Nev. announced Friday he was running for Nevada's 2nd District seat, the Reno Gazette-Journal reported.

McKenna, a personal injury and criminal defense attorney, made a name for himself in the 1990s by representing a Nevada family whose son committed suicide in 1985 after listening to a Judas Priest album. The civil suit was ultimately unsuccessful.

I remember that asinine suit. But anyway...

CQ rates the race Likely Republican.

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

---

by: Pan @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 01:02:48 AM CST

I'd vote for Heller over an asshat like that anyday

Suing a band, what an complete asshat.

---

by: tommypaine @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 03:33:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Republican Purity Test

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MS...

I can hear Mark Kirk and Mike Castle crying already.

20, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)

---

by: sapelcovits @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 01:43:14 AM CST

Interesting - Rs will support candidates that are up to 20% "impure"

And that sounds more flexible than some of what we hear from our purists.

---

by: tietack @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 10:02:40 AM CST

[ Parent ]

The Reagan Rule

He used to say that if you voted with him 80% of the time, that was the baseline for loyalty.  More is better, of course, but...

29, male, Democratic, CO-01

---

by: Tiger in BlueDenver @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 11:51:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I seriously wonder today

whether Ronald Reagan would meet that threshold.  Reagan was extreme right-wing by the standards of the 1970s, but compared to the teabaggers he looks downright moderate.

---

by: JSmith @ Tue Nov 24, 2009 at 21:31:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Are you kidding me?

Reagan would never survive in today's GOP.  He had no problem callign for tax hikes when it was called for.  Just mentioning raising taxes today is suicide for any GOP politician.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:18:23 AM CST

[ Parent ]

NJ-03 - Runyan

San Diego Chargers just signed Jon Runyan.  He has a one year contract so it looks like he will have another job on the other side of the country next fall.

---

by: jonah in nyc @ Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 08:39:39 AM CST