PA-15

Not bad results.  Dent being at 45% offers hope, although he still has to be concerned the favorite.  PA-15 would be in the third tier of possible takeovers after DE and LA-2, and IL-10 and FL-25.

---

by: Paleo @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 12:25:29 PM UTC

the PA-15 poll result and your conclusion

are consistent with where my rankings are.  I've got PA-15 at Lean Republican at the moment, and although I would've liked to see a single digit race here, 12 points in an environment like this isn't bad.  If things turn around a little bit and if Callahan campaigns well, this could very well be a win.  

Those other seats you mentioned, I have IL-10 and FL-25 at Toss Up, and DE-1 and LA-2 are Likely Democrat.  At present, three of those four are democratic pickups, only FL-25 isn't.  PA-6 and CA-3 are my other two Dem pickups at the moment, although I'm starting to sour on PA-6 because of how ugly the democratic primary is turning out to be/the fact that Gerlach was never really punished by the voters for his "I'm in, I'm out, no I'm back in" charade.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:28:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree on your ratings

---

by: Paleo @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:13:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

good post BUT

i think FL-25 is a solid shot for the good guys thanks to having a great candidate

---

by: primaryarlen @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:34:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm optimistic about FL-25 too

I think we have a superior candidate, and I also believe this district has become less Republican in recent years.  I'm keeping this race as a Tossup merely because the Republicans (at this time) have the wind blowing on their backs.  

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:42:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Does Garcia have a campaign website yet?

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 15:58:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here are my rankings.

1. LA-02 - Cao - Abortion = slavery not a good platform in this 60+% AA district.
2. DE-AL - OPEN (Castle) - Good polling for Carney but unknown Republicans in the race have $$$.
3. IL-10 - OPEN (Kirk) - Seals has We Ask America polling lead and more $$$ than Dold.
4. PA-06 - Gerlach - Pike has huge $$$ advantage if he gets through the primary.
5. WA-08 - Reichert - Delbene has $$$ advantage.
6. CA-03 - Lungren - Bera has $$$ advantage.
7. FL-25 - OPEN (Diaz-Balart) - Good internal poll but Rivera has massive $700K head start in fundraising.
8. PA-15 - Dent - Decent poll yesterday and Callahan has slightly more CoH than Dent.
9. NE-02 - Terry - White fundraising strong, though Terry's is slightly better.
10. FL-12 - OPEN (Putnam) - Dusty internal had Edwards ahead, but her fundraising is terrible.
11. KS-04 - OPEN (Tiahrt) - 25-to-1 CoH advantage for Goyle is hard to ignore.
12. SC-02 - Wilson - Both candidates have monster fundraising from "You lie!" incident.
13. MN-06 - Bachmann - PPP showed big Bachmann leads, and her fundraising is incredible.
14. CA-45 - Bono-Mack - Strong fundraising from Pougnet, but Bono-Mack's is better.
15. CA-44 - Hedrick - Unfortunate fundraising for Hedrick.
16. AZ-03 - OPEN (Shadegg) - Hulburd fundraising strong, but Quayle's is better.
17. OH-12 - Tiberi - Tiberi has 3-1 CoH edge.
18. AL-05 - Griffith - Dem Raby is actually raising some decent money, but Griffith has a 2-1 CoH advantage.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:56:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's pretty good, but 2 quibbles and a 3rd point as a comment......

I would STRONGLY move up FL-25 to 4th, and PA-15 to 5th.  And I would keep CA-03 in 6th, but move down PA-06 to 7th, and WA-08 to 8th.

And honestly, I think everything below the Top 8 is compeltely out of reach this November, even if political environment improves for Democrats.  Indeed, in the current environment, I'd say only the Top 3 flip, with no chance on the others.

I'd move up FL-25 because the one released DCCC poll, the seat's purpling trend, Garcia's strong 2008 performance, and the fact it's an open seat now all combine to make it a better pickup opportunity than anything outside the Top 3.

I'd say Dent and Gerlach are in similar circumstances left to their own devices, but the Democrat challenging Dent has a clear primary field and is a proven vote-getter as a small city Mayor.  That makes Callahan considerably stronger than either Trivedi or Pike in PA-06.

I'd put CA-03 above PA-06 simply because Gerlach survived when he KNEW he was in trouble in 2006, and in another strong Democratic year in 2008 when Roggio was supposed to be more of a token, and he's probably better steeled psychologically for a close race than Lungren.  Lungren got a bit of a scare last time, but he might be more inclined to take reelection for granted after just one scare and now having a strong year for his party.  Now, I know it gets pretty dicey pretending to get inside these people's heads, but hell, that's part of the game of projecting what will happen, since guessing how "prepared" someone is necessary to the guesswork.

I really don't like our chances against Reichert with what on paper is a carbon copy of what we tried and failed with in back-to-back Democratic wave years.  I don't care how much money Delbene has, the "female ex-Microsoft exec who has never been elected to anything in her life" approach is too stale for a 3rd straight go.

If only the anti-Bachmann forces in MN-06 united and cleared the field for a single candidate, that would be a great opportunity for a pickup.  I don't care what PPP said, there are a clear majority of voters in that district who DISlike Bachmann personally, and offering a single well-funded and temperamentally and ideologically moderate alternative would make that race a tossup.  But having someone on the "Independence Party" line combined with a contested primary just kills us there.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 15:57:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think there is a good chance WA 08 will flip.

Internal polling already has Reichert behind by a few points. HCR was favored in the 8th and Reichert's "no" vote in the fall hurt him. He'd be in worse shape now if he hadn't been in the hospital for the final vote.

Delbene has recruited an experienced campaign staff and she is no novice. She's been active in political affairs and managed other's Democratic races. She is also a powerful speaker and fierce campaigner.

Reichert had to be talked into running again. In November he was telling friends in law enforcement that he wanted to retire.

---

by: quiller @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 16:17:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK, you have me intrigued, but back it up on polling.....

What internal polling have you seen?  I've seen nothing released in public, and I look for stuff voraciously.  I'd love to know what poll both shows Reichert down and has HCR a net positive in a suburban swing district--it's the rare place that fits that description that we've successfully made the sale on HCR (a problem for which we can thank the Democratic circular firing squad from the Halls of Congress all the way down to the comment threads of DailyKos).

If Reichert is tired of Congress and almost retired, we can only hope that he pulls a Hostetler and fails to wage as vigorous a campaign as he has in the past.  But somehow I'm not counting on it.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:26:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

AZ-Sen Poll

Two weeks for 315 responses? Is the Behavior Research Center just some guy making phone calls in his free time and publishing his results? That's ridiculous.

---

by: Fitzy @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 12:58:05 PM UTC

And it took 2 weeks! I can knock on more doors in a week! (nm)

nm

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 15:59:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

California's Response Rate is not too bad

 We are at 71% while the country as a whole is at 72%. Texas should be more worried because it is at 69%.

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

17, CA-06,  

---

by: Alibguy @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:05:40 PM UTC

Census

Obama, as a black man, could never get away with halting immigration raids during Census time.  Totally necessary, but he would've been skewered.

Sucks for them, and Latinos overall.  But lucky for MN, and it'll be more fun just redistricting Bachmann out of her district without necessarily needing to.  She does lives all the way on the southeastern edge compared to her NW base so she almost needs to be screwed with regardless as there will probably be a need for another more solidly suburban seat like MN-3 due to population growth.   :)  (And that's a giant shit-eating grin.)

---

by: Andrew @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:38:08 PM UTC

2000

Was the end of Clinton's term. It's a bit easier to stop those raids as lame-duck president than as a first-termer. I am sure the Republicans would race-bait the decision a bit... but I think it's more about timing than anything else.  

---

by: IowaCityDem @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:51:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also

Clinton might have felt like he needed to smooth things over a bit with Latino voters following the Elian Gonzalez fiasco.

26, white male, TX-24, liberal-leaning independent

---

by: TDDVandy @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 16:42:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't know if race baiting has anything to with it

Would any first term Dem president halt immigrations if they wanted to run for reelection in 2012? Anybody would get skewered for it.

---

by: Jfindl1 @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:53:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

halt immigration raids

typo sorry

---

by: Jfindl1 @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 15:27:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Obama is President

I admit I'm probably naive on some level, but it seems to me, the racists are overwhelmingly his opponents and make up much of the Tea Partier crazy ranters. Besides, there's probably a way to do this without any big proclamation.

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

---

by: Pan @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 16:59:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tea Party Makeup - mostly wealthier, more educated, anti-Palin

Not the typical stereotype of a "racist"

ref http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04...

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

snip

Most describe the amount they paid in taxes this year as "fair." Most send their children to public schools. A plurality do not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president, and, despite their push for smaller government, they think that Social Security and Medicare are worth the cost to taxpayers.

---

by: tietack @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 17:45:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is off-topic, but.

Rather than look at the demographics and assert that the TPers aren't racist? Instead, you can look directly at their attitudes about race:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...

And -- as you may or may not know -- white attitudes about Social Security and Medicare, as opposed to other portions of the safety net, are differently racially coded than they are for other ethnicities.

---

by: boojumsnark @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 18:03:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do think it is on topic

As the "tea party" in general is of uncertain strength - and I believe has the potential to grow by taking in the working class component of the Democratic coalition.

In my experience, higher standards apply today in any public assertions of "racism", applied to a person or a group.

What you cite are excellent statistics. I live and die by statistics. But statistics for many in the current political environment are another word for "lies".
I cited the NY Times poll to show that the Tea Partiers aren't the kind of people many believe are in that grouping.

Any assertion from our D candidates that people in such groups are "racist" better have solid proof behind them.
And any such assertion must be carefully crafted to not antagonize the working class part of the D coalition that is so shaky at the moment.

Otherwise, such candidates will face the fate that seems to be coming for UK PM Gordon Brown, after his assertion that Grandmother Duffy is bigoted. (barring a recovery in this afternoon's debate).  

---

by: tietack @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:06:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If you don't think many of the Tea Partiers are racists

you aren't paying attention to their signs and the words they speak, write, and scream.

I never said they were all racists, but many of them clearly are racists.

And lost in this subthread is my main point: That confirmed racists are overwhelmingly already anti-Obama, regardless of whether he calls a moratorium on immigration raids for the duration of the census or doesn't.

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

---

by: Pan @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 08:51:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If you've ever marched in a left-wing rally

(and I have marched in my share,) you'll note that Marxists, etc. join such marches. That doesn't make all leftists = Marxists. In fact, very few leftists go to such extremes.

While I certainly prefer Marxists over racists, Marxists turn me off too.

If you'll read my notes carefully, you'll see that I don't deny racism within the Tea Party. But I don't accuse them of being racists either.

Just as Progressive leaders deny association with such Marxists, tea party leaders are beginning to do the same, ref http://www.google.com/hostedne...

If they succeed, and I think they may, they will become a more dangerous political force.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 13:57:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're confused again

Where did I ever say that all Tea Partiers are racists? I specifically denied that. But I think the results of the opinion polls that demonstrate the greater prevalence of racist attitudes among Tea Party members and sympathizers, relative to the general population, are unsurprising.

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

---

by: Pan @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 15:16:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It appears that you're ignoring the point that I'm making

w/r/t Tea Party leaders trying to shun the racist elements who are trying to latch onto their movement.

I think it's important to analyze their movement rationally, as they may become an important political force in US elections, starting this year.

The attempt to refocus the discussion on hypothetical accusations against you, I, or anyone else, IMO, does not advance the discussion.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 15:23:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I

don't think so. From all I can tell they really seem to be dying down a bit. I remember personally seeing a hand made sign that said "Send the N word back to the cotton field". I first saw it there in the morning and several hours later I returned and he was still sitting there with his sign. It seems to me that someone would have told him to get rid of it if you ask me.  I'm by no means saying all Tea Party folks are racists, but if you look at polling good majorities are.  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 20:41:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hope you're right

If in fact their fervor is "dying down," it would be at least the end of the beginning of a mad period in our history.

As for the polling, the only racially-related polling I've seen w/r/t teabaggers suggest only that they're more inclined towards racially questionable attitudes than the general population.

I haven't seen anything that suggests that "good majorities" of teabaggers are actual racists, as you suggest.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 23:09:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I do think it is on topic

As the "tea party" in general is of uncertain strength - and I believe has the potential to grow by taking in the working class component of the Democratic coalition.

In my experience, higher standards apply today in any public assertions of "racism", applied to a person or a group.

What you cite are excellent statistics. I live and die by statistics. But statistics for many in the current political environment are another word for "lies".
I cited the NY Times poll to show that the Tea Partiers aren't the kind of people many believe are in that grouping.

Any assertion from our D candidates that people in such groups are "racist" better have solid proof behind them.
And any such assertion must be carefully crafted to not antagonize the working class part of the D coalition that is so shaky at the moment.

Otherwise, such candidates will face the fate that seems to be coming for UK PM Gordon Brown, after his assertion that Grandmother Duffy is bigoted. (barring a recovery in this afternoon's debate).  

---

by: tietack @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:06:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Great point

Same as anything there is truth to both sides. Some of these anti-immigration people are pure racists but the bulk certainly have valid issues with general policy. The key is the show Hispanics that the Democratic party is on their side without alienating everybody else. Still, the people most upset are likely to be conservative Republicans anyway and GOP rhetoric always makes it difficult for them to win on this. I only see upside for Obama and Dems here if they play it right.

---

by: conspiracy @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:24:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Disagree, "tea parties" do NOT appeal to white working class Democrats......

It lacks a sense of American political history to think that there's somehow a risk that white working class Democrats could be attracted to the teabaggers.

We already lost in the previous decades almost all the working class whites we're going to lose to conservative ideology and Republican candidates.  We lost probably a majority of them in the 1980 Reagan landslide, and they've never returned in Presidential elections.  We lost most of the rest of the "losable" working class whites in 1994, and they've never really returned.

The working class whites who remain persuadable to us are not going to influenced by a bunch of rabble-rousing screamers now.  These voters already have reconciled their conservative cultural views with the Democratic Party by deciding their priorities for what government should and shouldn't do are still more consistent with us than with Team Red.  That doesn't mean they don't and won't vote Republican sometimes, and maybe even half the time, but it does mean they're going to be persuaded by more rational considerations than the stupid teabaggers.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:35:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If what you say about working class whites were true

I suggest:

Then candidate Barack Obama would never have gone bowling.

Bill Clinton would never have accepted the name "Bubba," especially after Oxford.

We wouldn't have nearly as many congressmen in the Midwest.

The Democratic party would be a party almost universally for "free trade," as that is more in line with an internationalist foreign policy.

And what is the point of progressivism in economics, if not to help the working class?

---

by: tietack @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 23:05:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think you read what DCCyclone wrote closely enough

All he said was that we've already lost the working class white voters that we were going to lose via Reagan's landslide victory and the 1994 debacle, not that we've lost the entire white, working class vote (far from it, in fact).

This whole thing reminds me of an article I read not too long ago which argues strongly that many of the economic policies taken by the two parties should be seen strongly through a racial perspective (think about that the next time you hear someone complain about "welfare" and "mooching off the government").

As an aside (and not to say that you've said anything about it), but it amuses me when people talk about working class voters and minority voters and operate under the presumption that there is no overlap (hell, minorities are way overrepresented in the working class, but tell that to any commentator...)

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 00:35:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

One thing I appreciate about this site

is the depth of the discussion. However,  I recognize that people's time is limited, and people (myself included) leave things out, or perhaps just implied.

With that stated, I think I did recognize what DCCyclone said, and counted, because I believe that such voters aren't lost, just swingy. If we had lost them permanently, I don't think we would have won the Presidency in '92, '96, or '08, much less retained many of the Midwestern seats with lots of white working class voters.

However, assuming we all have other jobs, responsibilities, etc., I wouldn't be surprised one bit if I missed something, or if DCCylone left something unstated. He's an excellent intelligent poster.

One of the Nixonian things w/r/t the working class was to drive a wedge - between white and minority voters, thus cutting into the former Rooseveltian Democratic coalition.  

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 01:55:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Let me clarify: first, DGM is right on my major point. Second, my finer point is...

...that among working class white voters who don't consistently vote Republican, there are two blocs.  One is the bloc of regular Democratic voters who include both cultural conservatives and cultural liberals (there are plenty of white working class cultural liberals, more than are acknowledged in what in our country of 130 million voters is an otherwise necessarily reductionist discussion of voters).  The 2nd is the bloc of white working class swing voters who are culturally conservative but economically liberal (even if they don't use the word "liberal"), or in some cases actually the other way around (*those* white working class voters, too, really do exist!).

My conclusion regarding those 2 groups is that they are not* persuaded these tea party whackjobs.  The swing voters among them might very well vote Republican this fall and they certainly did so in 1994.  But they have much more rational reasons that stem largely from the scary economy (and people are definitely a lot more scared in this recession than they were in the 1992-93 recession during which I graduated from law school and struggled to land job interviews, let alone an actual job which I was lucky to eventually get).  They secondarily might be worried about the huge federal deficits and debt, about the tortured process of the health care legislation, and about how the substance of the health care bill will affect them (which they're confused about).  But these are organic concerns that a lion's share of the electorate has formed independent of any right-wing activism.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 03:40:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bottom line: I hope you're right

But I think that gets to the core of the battle of perceptions. I think the tea partiers can drive a wedge in working class D voters in two ways, based on economic concerns.

1) Affirmative action. If it is perceived as a threat to working class jobs, livelivhoods, opportunities for advancement, it could bring up bitterness among some in the working class. Undoubtably it has driven some to the Rs on a somewhat more permanent basis. But I think there are many who are not so fearful.

2) Immigration. If it is perceived as a threat to working class jobs, etc. Well, I've seen it raise fears among working class Ds. When the fears get down to a baser "Maslov hierarchy of needs" level, then tea partier loudness on immigration becomes appealing to working class Ds who've seen many colleagues lose their jobs to "furiners".

In our favor, I think working class Ds don't panic so easy. As long as D leaders can provide assurance that such issues are being addressed, if economic conditions don't become significantly worse -

and if those of us who consider ourselves "more educated" don't turn them off with our arrogance... There are just so many "educated" Ds who seem so anxious to prove Nixon right, about the arrogance of the Ivy League eastern establishment (e.g. Michael Dukakis).

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 04:47:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Affirmative action is a non-issue, immigration isn't a tea party-based issue......

Geez, affirmative action hasn't been an issue in American political news since the 90s.  No offense, but I don't know where you came up with that one or why you dusted it off.

Immigration is a present-day issue, but it's not one the teabaggers have focused on, not that they won't throw the full force of their xenophobia into the mix if it becomes a hot issue.

But ultimately I think you're misguided to think there's any area where teabaggers have any influence with white working class swing voters.  They just don't.

The teabaggers are nothing more than the conservative base of the Republican Party.  They're the same people who've been around forever, not in any way, shape, or form a new force in politics.

I think focusing on their political influence is as misguided as, say, crediting anti-war protests with turning public opinion against the War in Iraq.  The Iraq War became unpopular because of the false pretenses of the invasion and the disastrous mire for years afterward, and while liberal demonstrations gave a voice and visibility to the opposition, it didn't turn public opinion.  The war itself did that.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 15:21:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

To repeat, I hope you're right

But the direction of the Tea Party is currently uncertain w/r/t such issues.

As for affirmative action, it's still a significant issue - look at the discussion w/r/t Grutter (2003, sometime after the '90s), w/r/t the kinds of questions R Senators are being told to ask the next Supreme Court nominee.

OTOH, I think it's quite possible that they'll practice their own form of affirmative action by bringing non-white faces to the fore of their movement. For example, I wouldn't be shocked to see J.C. Watts come back in a Tea Party form.

W/r/t immigration, there is a dispute on where the Tea Party will go, ref http://www.examiner.com/x-1749... .

The question therein is whether the Tea Party will stay focused on pure economic issues, or will they go further.

Again, it is possible that you're right, but I see otherwise. It is uncertain in large part because the Tea Party is relatively new. In any case, it should be carefully monitored.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 15:47:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I still think you're overanalyzing and overcrediting the teabaggers......

They're not an organization, even though some of them try to make it that.  They're not even remotely "new," they're a loose-knit collaboration of the same emotionally-charged right-wing activists who've always been around.  Their "internal divisions" are merely the long-existing fault lines within the Republican base.  They're not going to have a "direction" to go in because they're not organized in a way to direct anything.  And I don't think there's any "dispute" on their "direction" on immigration, it's a given that the lion's share of them want much tighter border control, more aggressive deportation, and no "amnesty."  And they'll be largely quiet on the topic only as long as there's no real legislative push in Congress (which there won't be, notwithstanding Harry Reid's misguided theatrics).  I don't care what an Examiner article has to say about it, I think that's just missing the forest from the trees.  The "forest" is that these are all different flavors of right-wingers with completely predictable right-wing politics.

Did you see that they've even protested and opposed the Senate Democrats' financial industry reform bill?  They're mad at Bob Corker for not toeing the GOP line!  So even on an issue where some conservatives split off, the teabaggers' most visible play is to oppose the Dems.

Dude, the "Tea Party" is just a new flavor of "Diet Coke," a slightly different formula for the same product.

Oh, and regarding "bringing non-white faces to the fore of their movement," they've already been practicing that.  Numerous teabag rallies have put a token black speaker or black musician in front of the mike, and the white teabaggers brag about it.  One DailyKos diarist, a black man who took his kids to the Mall for a picnic one Saturday a few weeks ago without knowing there would be a teabag rally there, reported seeing a black speaker at the mike not long before or after a bunch of the same white teabaggers in the audience saw a Presidential motorcade drive by on Constitution Avenue and started chanting, "Go back to Kenya!"

And all this, too, is just the same Republican politics as always.  Their token black or other non-white teabag rally speakers and performers are just mini-me versions of Michael Steele and J.C. Watts and Lynn Swann.

These teabaggers get worked up about whatever happens to be in the news at the moment, and their ability to mobilize, and to get news coverage, is directly calibrated to the volume and scale of rantings of Congressional Republicans and the persuadability of public opinion.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 16:31:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One legitimate question - will they be a "going concern"

in the sense of a business that survives its first year(s). It is true that the "teabaggers" have been around for maybe just over a year.

So I think the question you imply in your first sentence is most on point. If you were to ask if they are a going concern, I'd have to say "I don't know, it's too early to tell."

If they are co-opted, then they do become no different from other Republican politics, as you suggest.

OTOH, I do believe that the teabaggers might eventually supplant the Republican Party in some form, from the inside or the outside. But that would take a decision, I think, to ignore or at least downplay purely social issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

Can they make that leap? I don't know. But I have seen signs that at least some of them are trying to do so, note the so called "Contract from America" ref http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...

None of the 10 points listed relates to any standard "social issue" associated with today's Republicans. It avoids issues like abortion, marriage, religion, etc.

If those 10 points stick and become a true Tea Party manifesto, I think we'll need to watch out.

Excellent discussion, thank you.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 23:29:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I found this article

In the NYT that tied Tea-Baggers to originalists.  It's a great read and makes sense.  Although here's what I cant quite decide.

1.  Is it that there are two types of tea-baggers?  My high school was in the tea-bagging country of MN and the people there were certainly more highly educated and made more money.  So maybe there are two types, those who live in the exurbs and those in the rural South.

2. They are really a mixture of both.  Higher income, decently educated, but yet still originalists and have an extremely similar ideology to that different set of demographics.

I love reading Redstate.  When Obama really pisses them off and I know there will be a thread with over 100 comments, I get so excited.  They are such a strange and complicated bunch.  Erick Erickson advocating to fill out your census, saying that birthers ruined CPAC, him getting yelled at in the comments by those who disagree.  They are incredibly hard to pin down, probably because they have no real cohesion as a group and are simply a bunch of pissed off conservative white people, with varying degrees of intensity.

---

by: Andrew @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 20:04:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Teabaggers are nothing more than Republican base voters......

These are simply a collection of people who regularly vote for Republicans, nothing more.  The only thing bonding them together is they're angry, as partisans thrown completely out of power easily become.  They include libertarian Republicans and across-the-board right-wingers, they include loyal GOPers and wingnuts who refuse to identify with the Party because they complain the Party isn't conservative enough(!).  But they're people who voted for Bush twice, and then for McCain.  They come from the same pool of nearly 60 million people who voted for McCain, not any of the nearly 70 million who voted for Obama.

I think as political junkies it's easy to overanalyze these people.  They're just the most emotional (and most racist and most xenophobic) part of the conservative base.  Nothing more.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Fri Apr 30, 2010 at 15:26:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Quinnipiac OH - Good #'s for Dems

OH - SEN:
Fisher (D): 40
Portman (R): 37

Brunner (D): 40
Portman (R): 36

http://politicalwire.com/archi...

OH - GOV
Ted Strickland (D-Inc): 44
Kasich (R): 38

http://politicalwire.com/archi...

---

by: bennytoothpick @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:41:11 PM UTC

If we can win ultimate swing state OH

both the senatorial and gubernatorial, we shouldnt do too bad in statewide elections.

I think we're screwed regardless in House races.  We've overreached quite a bit in a number of districts with our big wave years and that wave will need to recede at some point.

---

by: Andrew @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 16:30:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If your looking for something to laugh about today...

check out New Mexico Defamation Suit. It's awesome.

Check it out - http://nmdefamationsuit.com/

One of the best posts - http://nmdefamationsuit.com/po...

Re: Steve Pearce

"Were there concerns about his, uh, intellect? Sure," Rizzo said. "But you show me a retard who bats .380, and I'll show you a retard with a pro contract."

---

by: nrimmer @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:41:59 PM UTC

Well, we of New Mexico are very easy to make fun of

It's one of the few things we take some level of pride in (the other thing, of course, being the Chili :D)

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

---

by: DGM @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 13:46:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Even better for a laugh, OR-Gov: Rasmussen shows Dudley tied w/Kitzhaber & Bradbury......

Here's the link:

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

This in spite of the same poll's own crosstabs showing Kitzhaber with 58-34 favorability (Dudley at 46-25 even though in reality I doubt anyone outside the Republican base has an opinion of him); Obama with 59-40 job approval; 49-40 support for HCR, 50-46 opposed to repeal, and 48-43 opposed to lawsuit to enjoin it; and a surprisingly good 48-51 job approval for Kulongoski (that's negative-3, but he's been unpopular for YEARS and won his 2 elections with a 49% plurality in 2002 and just 51% 4 years later in a strong Democratic year).

Really, Rasmussen is a complete joke.  Their polling has regressed to where it was in 2000, when they at one point had Bush beating Gore in Maryland.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 19:48:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

CALL ME CRAZY

for this view BUT how can any poll that is taken over TWO WEEKS that ONLY has 315 responses be taken as serious?

---

by: primaryarlen @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 14:23:41 PM UTC

40 days until the Iowa primary

Absentee voting begins today, and Iowa's awesome Secretary of State Mike Mauro has rolled out a new online tool for people to track their absentee ballots.

Most of the primary action in Iowa is on the Republican side, but we do have some primaries in statehouse districts as well as a three-way primary to face Grassley and a two-way primary to face Steve King (IA-05).

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 16:09:10 PM UTC

I wish RI had something like that!

in 2008 I got really paranoid that my absentee ballot wasn't going to make it from Chicago. And this year will be even worse since I'm voting from Japan...

21, dude, RI-01 (registered) IL-01 (college)
please help Japan. click "donate funds" in upper right and then "Japan Earthquake and Pacific Tsunami." http://www.redcross.org/

---

by: sapelcovits @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 18:02:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

GA-08: Austin Scott drops out of GOV race will challenge Marshall

Austin Scott (R-Tifton) a state representative running a long-shot bid for Governor today dropped out of that race to run for Congress against Jim Marshall (D-08). There are already other Republicans in the race and even if Scott makes it out of the primary he is from the south part of the district (which stretches from ATL suburbs to nearly the FL state line) which will make it difficult for him to compete in the major population center around Macon (Bibb County) where Marshall was mayor before becoming Congressman. Overall I think Marshall will be ok, winning 55-45 or so, considering his previous tough campaigns and his conservatism.  

---

by: fitchfan28 @ Thu Apr 29, 2010 at 18:45:09 PM UTC