With due respect Crisitunity

I don't think the "pet" comment is really going to affect Coons one way or another, especially not in a blue state like Delaware.

It's like saying so-and-so votes with Nancy Pelosi 97% of the time (stupid anti-Heinrich ads), they don't resonate and they're ultimately a waste of money for whoever spends them.

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:14:10 PM UTC

For real

When you read the quote, he's not calling Coons his pet in the sense that Coons will be a loyal, unwavering Reid booster. It's like saying something is somebody's pet cause or pet project. Coons is his "favorite candidate."

It was lame, but unsurprising to me that this turned into a story on The Hill's Web site with the headline: "Reid calls Coons his 'pet.'"

When you weigh this non-story against all the crazy shit Christine O'Donnell has said/done, it becomes even less relevant.

---

by: NCDem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:18:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

AZ-08 Ad

Gabrielle Giffords is out with a new ad , slamming Kelly for supporting the not-so "fair" tax while supporting the elimination of all corporate taxes. I know they have video of Kelly actually stating that corporations shouldn't have to pay taxes, so I'm a little disappointed that they didn't use that. Maybe they're saving it for another ad.

NWOTSOTB, but I've seeing her ads a lot on Tucson tv, so she's definitely putting her money where he mouth is.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.

---

by: Nico @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:14:30 PM UTC

Whoops

Forgot to close my html tag.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.

---

by: Nico @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:15:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nate's updated his House Forcast

Don't know if anyone noticed, but I didn't see this noted in my SSP search:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.n...

Over the course of 100,000 simulations of our forecast model, Republicans finished with an average 223.4 House seats - down incrementally from 225.3 last week - and Democrats with 211.6 seats. Republican odds of winning the chamber dipped slightly from 67 percent to 63 percent.

That's 45 seats, if memory serves.

This is based on a generic R poll lead of 7.5%, which would correspond to an R gain of 55 seats by the Sabato model (linked from the 538 article) -- which matches the Gallup model here http://www.gallup.com/poll/124... .

So Nate's model is including factors such as local polls, as well as Cook/CQ/Rothenberg/Sabato, which suggests actual D candidates outperforming (or Rs underperforming) the generic ballot.

---

by: tietack @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:16:28 PM UTC

The pollster.com average

Is Republican 45.2%, Democrat 41.6% as of today.  That's about 1/2 the average lead that Silver is attributing for.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:35:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A 4 point R lead probably means we retain the House

Under the Sabato model, Rs would get 223
Under the Gallup model, Ds would get 218

Nate's essentially subtracting 10Rs from each model, so at a 4 point R lead, Ds would get between 222-228 seats.

Of course, there's a variance of +/- 11 seats in at least the Gallup model (I can't find it for the Sabato model).

---

by: tietack @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:52:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

that aint outa reach!

---

by: Jolpaj @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:36:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gallup's generic ballot tracking poll

now has Dems up by 1 point, passing the GOP.
http://politicalwire.com/archi...
Silver's 7.5% factor should be inching down somewhat next forecast run.

Getting closer to election day, he says his model will give less weight to the generic ballot and more to local polls & local experts. So its influence will gradually be waning.

---

by: homerun @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:39:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gallup really has wide swings

in their generic ballot.  They've been D+6, R+5, R+10, Even, R+5, D+1 in the last six weeks I believe.  

At least Rasmussen's number hasn't changed from the previous week.  That's in it's own way an even better barometer that the environment is at least marginally improving, since you know Scotty Rass wants to show as big an R lead as he can without looking biased.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:19:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

your observation re Ras's numbers not changing

jogged this memory: IIRC the tip off of R2K's fabricating fraud was their constant numbers and not showing normal random polling variations.
I'm not implying anything, just noting FWIW.

---

by: homerun @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:35:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Exactly -- random variation is more statistically sound

though it provides heartburn to those who watch such numbers from week to week.

---

by: tietack @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 00:25:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, it was just the opposite

The telltale sign of R2K's fraud was that its approval numbers virtually ALWAYS moved by a point or two every week, while almost never remaining constant week to week. A truly random sample would show no movement almost as often as not (absent major events).

Needless to say, this doesn't impugn Gallup's numbers in any way; they're pretty much the most transparent and well-documented pollster out there.

---

by: MIJunkie @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:34:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

In other Wisconsin news

bad news for Democrats in the Governor race and Senate races

http://www.dailykos.com/pollin...

---

by: trhawk @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:17:45 PM UTC

PPP has Feingold approval at 40-52

while Rasmussen had it at 51-46 last week.  Top lines not far apart though.  

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:22:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

YIKES!

Feingold needs to get it together ASAP or he'll get a fork stuck in his political career very soon.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:22:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have a couple of problems with PPP's poll

It's pretty clear that they way undersampled younger voters and that they have a really conservative electorate for a state like Wisconsin (PPP shows only 7% of the electorate being 18-29, in 2006 that number was 17%, and there was a competitive gubernatorial primary).

I can buy Feingold being down, but he isn't down double-digits.

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:25:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My thoughts exactly

Including what you mentioned above, I thought the composition of 31% Dem, 36% Rep, and 33% Indy was strange.  Even in this environment, I can't see the Republicans having a 5% lead.

Feingold is down, but I think he's only down 5-7% at most.  I think he has enough time to win this election, but it's going to be a close race...closer than I want.

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:33:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Party ID doesn't really concern me

It's such a hard thing to figure out (especially in a state like Wisconsin that doesn't have formal party ID) that it becomes a bit of a waste of time to worry about.

It's the other demographic things that raise a red flag for me though.

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:45:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right

I get what you are saying, especially when it can be explained better by the other demographic data.  Party identification can be very blurred and confusing in states like Wisconsin.  At first glance, I couldn't understand how the Republicans had a 5 point edge in that poll.  But the more I think about it, the answer can probably be attributed to the other demographic data that we've already discussed.

I went back to look at the original polling link, but it appears to have been taken off the Daily Kos site.  What gives?

40, male, Democrat, NC-04

---

by: Tarheeman1993 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:58:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's annoying stupid DKos, but back to the party ID question

The real problem with trying to adjust party ID is with Independents. Think about this, let's assume you know you have a sample that has too many Democrats in it (for the sake of argument, let's assume it's known). It's all well and good to say "well, readjust for what it should be" but if the reason you have too many Democrats is because people who might self-identify as Independents are actually calling themselves Democrats for this sample; then it would mean you not only have "too many Democrats" but have an Independent sample that is "too Republican-leaning" that is it's excluding a lot of Democratic leaners.

If that's the case, then the top-line is correct, and if you readjust the sample with the same breakdown, you'd get a top-line that is too Republican, even as the party ID is "accurate".

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:07:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really?

Only 7% 18-29 yo voters? OK, that IS ridiculous. Maybe I was hyperventilating a little too much over this PPP poll?

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:11:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Odd Demos

Anyone else notice Johnson and Walker taking 33% of the AA vote? That alone seems somewhat generous, on top of the undersampling of young voters. I'd say this is till a solid 5-6 point Johnson lead however at this point.  

---

by: UpstateNYer @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:53:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That link is not working now

---

by: Davidsfr @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:06:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Umm....

Upon further research this tweet about 9 am today...

http://twitter.com/markos/stat...

Would indiacte that these numbers were not supposed to come out until tomorrow.  That would explain why google news shows absolutely no results on this poll.

---

by: trhawk @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:27:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It was there

I don't know if it was an accident or not.  See below for the numbers.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:29:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Link isn't working for me

and I can't find this poll on Kos or PPP right now.  

Anybody got another link?

---

by: tommypaine @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:23:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I bet they took it down

because there were some glitches in the data.

Johnson was up 52-41 on Feingold.

Walker was up 50-41 on Barrett.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:26:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Correction needed w/r/t American Crossroads ($14.5M NOT $1.45M)

Citizens United is really going to make it hard to maintain a democracy in the months/years to come if the Koch brothers et. al. can just throw around $millions without a second's thought (since they will get repaid a hundredfold by their legislative republican voters in the legislature).

---

by: Ajax the Greater @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:24:28 PM UTC

Citizens United

did not affect how American Crossroads raises money, or how the Koch brothers spend money.  

---

by: trhawk @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:34:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well

Citizens United made it possible for American Crossroads to raise all of its money from a handful of right wing billionaires. Sure Karl Rove could of dialed up dozens of lobbyists and gotten that money, Citzens United made it easier to tap some deep pockets in large amounts and frequently.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:19:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, it didn't

American Crossroads is a 527 organization; they were already able to raise unlimited amounts of money from donors. The only way that Citizens United changed things was to allow AC to make ads that explicitly advocates for or opposes a candidate, instead of having to use the code words under the "issue advocacy" umbrella.

Honestly, Citizens United has thus far helped Dems far more than Republicans. It loosened expenditure rules on unions, which aren't really accountable to anybody, and thus pumped more money into Dem campaigns. Corporations, by contrast, will be held accountable for their political views by their customers (as we saw in the Target case), and thus will be less likely to engage in explicit political advocacy. They're unlikely to spend large sums of money for fear of alienating the right or left in doing so.

---

by: MIJunkie @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:44:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Interesting take

I still think it's shit policy and should not have occurred though.  Will this little fact disincentivize dems to make it a campaign issue.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)

---

by: daman09 @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:23:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Some good news. Latest Gallup Generic Ballot Poll has Dems 46%, GOP 45%

Still Registered Voters.

Rasmussen has the GOP +10 among Likely Voters.

---

by: Kendall @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:42:41 PM UTC

Sweet!

Slow, but steady improvement... very good!

---

by: LordMike @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:36:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, both are screwy...

But I'll take the Gallup #s as some nice good news today (even if I don't put much stock in it any more).

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:12:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

KS-Gov & Downballot

Those are actually pretty good numbers for Holland--as people start paying attention, votes shift to Democrats... as it should be in Kansas. :)  Things are looking better downballot, too, with AG Six, SoS Biggs & Treas. McKinney all up significantly, though still trailing. Six & McKinney both significantly outraised their opponents, so they should be able to get their numbers up even higher when ads start.

This poll's crosstabs seem credible this time...which is odd for SUSA, no?  

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

---

by: arealmlc @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:46:09 PM UTC

Crosstabs seem more credible

but they still are weighting the poll at 57% Republican and only 14% independent. I will eat my hat if the turnout on November 2 in Kansas is 57% Republicans and only 14% independent. The independent voter group in Kansas is larger than Democrats, and is growing faster than Republicans. Crosstabs show Six and McKinney are leading among independents and Biggs is only slightly behind.

If you study the Six crosstabs, it's not too hard to see how Six could win if he's leading among women, old people, moderates, independents, getting almost 1/4 of Republicans, and dominating with Democrats. It seems like he's only 11% behind in the top line because of the way SUSA is weighting the poll (57% Republican, 14% independent). The thing that jumps out at me the most is Schmidt leading 46-44 in southeast Kansas. Southeast KS is Schmidt's home turf, if he's only ahead by 2% down there, he's in trouble. I think Six will win northeast Kansas despite what this poll says. And I think Six will do fairly well for a Democrat in western Kansas because he has been out there a lot. He will do well in the Great Bend/Larned/Hays area.

In general, I think the down-ballot races in Kansas this year are more important than some might think because the Democratic candidates we are fielding are good candidates who can build a profile and maybe set up a run for Governor or Senate in future years. I'm thinking of Biggs, Six, and McKinney especially. If Holland and Kultala lose, they go back to the Senate. If Biggs, Six, and McKinney lose, where do they go? They are out of office.

Of all of them I think Six has the best chance to win, followed by McKinney, then Biggs, then Holland.

I predict there will be further tightening in the polls as we get closer to November 2. As you said, voters will start paying attention to the candidates and not just the party label. I'm excited about the candidates we have.

---

by: FreeStateDem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:27:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

57% Republican!

They project the electorate at 57% R, 27% D & 14% Unaffiliated (indie)?!?  Good catch, FreeState. Current registration is: 43.5% R, 27% D and 28.6% U....   I'd guess something along the lines of 47% R, 28% D & 25% U for 2010  ... especially because Republicans either have the federal races locked up (Senate, KS-1, KS-2) or have totally uninspiring candidates (the Yoder Odor & that jackass Pompeo).

I agree with your rankings of who is likeliest to win: Six, McKinney, Biggs & Holland in that order. Ultimately, I think Six will win: the memory of Kline is still too fresh for most voters. Plus, it turns out Six is a fundraising machine and a skilled campaigner. McKinney might win, too: he's got a strong political base in south-central KS, his opponent is basically Some Dude, and McKinney's outraised him something like 10-to-1. I'm worried about Biggs. Kobach is well-funded, telegenic and smart (and totally fucking evil). And Biggs is such a pushover as a candidate, hopefully he learned his lessons from the Phill Kline debacle.

As for what happens if they lose? Biggs should be banished from politics forever. As for the others, hey, we need good candidates for the State Senate in 2012 (Lisa Johnston, btw, should totally run).  

Kansan by birth, Californian by choice, and Gay by the grace of God.

---

by: arealmlc @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 13:22:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I recall a period

about a month out in '06 and '08 when races generally tightened, and discussion that this was a normal phenomenon as undecideds came home in the patterns of their underlying affiliation. Wonder if that generally is seen as an across the board bump for the party behind nationally, or a tightening irrespective of who is ahead in a race.

---

by: Jolpaj @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:48:20 PM UTC

Divergence

Nate had a post (on the old site) that historically it helps Republicans in Red States and Democrats in Blue states.

---

by: tallsy @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:16:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

even if they're not incumbents?

---

by: Jolpaj @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:18:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes

It was during Coakley/Brown. So it was a wide range of races.

---

by: tallsy @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:30:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's why many of us here

feel IL-Sen will be in our column by a squeaker.

---

by: Andrew @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:51:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The intensity gap this year may negate that effect

Opposite of '06 & '08.
Tho I agree Giannoulias will win IL-Sen; IL is too blue. (I sure hope they've got Blago muzzled and out-of-sight for the next 44 days. He's just so toxic there.)

---

by: homerun @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:18:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Senate

Now, with Washington slipping away, and maybe California as well, and Delaware gone, do the Republicans have any remaining path to a Senate majority?  

I'll be generous and put Feingold in the same category as Sestak for now, though I think we still need more polling on that contest to be sure.

R's sure to win:
North Dakota
Arkansas
Indiana

R's ahead:
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin

Races virtually tied:
Illinois
Colorado
Nevada

D's ahead:
Washington
California
Connecticut

It seems to me that the Republicans will not only need to run the table in the 3 toss-ups, but will need to pull the next 3 seats out of their ass too.  West Virginia is the only other seat that could possibly become competitive, and I think Rass has his finger on that one.  Delaware is cooked.  

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:52:46 PM UTC

Agree with exception of Indiana

I think there's some chance of turning around Indiana, but North Dakota and Arkansas are lost.

---

by: Zeitgeist9000 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:27:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I still think we could win IN

Ellsworth just needs to run the correct ad campaign

---

by: Andrew @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:52:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'd add Ohio

to the "R's Ahead" list.

---

by: emilysdad @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:57:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not a D held seat nm

nm

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:30:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OK

Didn't catch that!

---

by: emilysdad @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:21:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't see a path

We blew it by nominating too many bad candidates.

RIght now I see ND, AR, IN, PA, WI being picked up, and CO, NV, CA, and IL as Tossup/Tilt D.  But I'm really not seeing us winning NV and CA, and CO and IL are going to be tougher than what the CW says.  

38, male, conservative Republican, TX-3 currently (IL-13)

---

by: BearFanTX @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:05:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed for the most part...

Except that at this point, I have WA, CA, & NV as "Leans D" and CO & IL as "Tossup/Tilts D". WI definitely gets moved to "Tossup/Tilts R" for now, and I'll wait for more news from here before I move it further. PA also goes here for now, as there seems to be conflicting chatter from there on whether Sestak can catch up to Toomey. And while NH "Leans R" for now, I now consider it the Dems' best pickup opportunity and I may move it up to "Tossup" territory depending on what new data shows. ND, AR, & IN are pretty much lost causes at this point for Dems, and DE may soon be the same for the GOP.

Yes, Virginia, there ARE progressives in Nevada!
24, gay male, Democrat, NV-03 (or 04?)

---

by: atdleft @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:18:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not sure I agree with you regarding NH and PA

I think we're more likely to win New Hampshire right now than Pennsylvania (even though I'm sour on both of them). Basically, if New Hampshire is Leans R then so is Pennsylvania (at least in my book).

Everything else, I agree with you on, I think the Republicans pick up 4-6 seats (ND, AR, IN definitely, probably PA and one of WI, IL, CO; the Democrats still have opportunities in NH, KY, AK, and possibly (though much less likely) FL).

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:27:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh and technically the Republicans could still win Nevada

But I'm definitely in agreement with you that Reid's going into to this favored.

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:27:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think NV will always be within 5%

and that's how Election Night will show as well.  But as long as Reid has more votes, winning by 1% is the same as 38%.  That's what I figure anyway for this race.

---

by: Andrew @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:54:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree that Hodes a better bet for the moment than Sestak. Things change over time, that's normal, and...

...Hodes clearly has closed somewhat on Ayotte, while Sestak has lost some ground to Toomey.

Sometimes you can see around the corner at what's coming, such as Fisher's dramatic fade against Portman which was forecast in the fatal fundraising and cash-on-hand gap combined with reporting on Fisher's poor overall campaign.

But NH-Sen and PA-Sen are hard to predict going forward, so it's not clear Hodes will be in better shape than Sestak a month from now, even though it's the case now.  It really depends on the quality of their respective campaigns, both of which have generated some disgruntlement at times.

I refuse to give up on either one for good until at least the 2nd week of October, when we're less than a month out.  If neither is pulling closer to a dead heat by then, then we're in trouble.

I do suspect in the end Hodes will have a better shot because nothing else in the state is dragging him down, contrary to PA where the Gov race and much else is going South for Dems.  NH has turned against us, but not as strongly as the rust belt/farm belt.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:35:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

NH is a different breed

but the NE is destined to be solid for the Dem column eventually.  I certainly dont want to give up on NH at all either as the numbers seem weak enough.

Ive really given up on anything the House, I could see barely keeping it to losing it completely, but I still want to keep high hopes on the Senate.  We can run stellar campaigns in the end game with CO and PA keep the losses to ND, AR, and IN (which has major potential), we'll be in fine shape.  

Sestak needs to start building a narrative now because I have a feeling GE voters need a longer time for it become a "thing" versus primary voters who usually just need a few minor things to make them sway one way or the other.  CO, just paint Buck as a crazy stupid ass who mocks women.  IN paint him as a DC lobbyist dbag who doesnt even like living in Indiana.  This is very winnable, the ad wars just need to make it happen.  -2 in the Senate would be a giant win for the Democrats, even if we lost the House.

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:12:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Alonzo Mourning

I hope Alonzo runs for office one day, he truly believes in giving back.  

Please donate to amcharities.org to help build more after school centers in the Miami area.  

23, Democrat, IA-2

---

by: ModerateIADem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 20:57:50 PM UTC

CO-Sen: Wanna know why Buck opposes repealing DADT?

It's because he wants the military to be "as homogeneous as possible."  What a fail whale.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo...

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

---

by: LookingOver @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:11:27 PM UTC

ND-AL - Pomeroy internal claims 2 point lead.

Says the Pomeroy was also up 2-3 in May and July internals.  

http://www.inforum.com/event/a...

Not an overly confidence-inspiring result, but it's better than the Rasmussen version.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:22:16 PM UTC

DCCC Pulling Out

Tells the tale.  

---

by: tallsy @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:31:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not that I'm optimistic

but a little too much has been made of the D's scaling back some ad buys.  Seems to me that the pullbacks were all in districts where the Dem candidates have big financial advantages and can fend for themselves.  The pullbacks were probably due to a combination of that, and undoubtedly also that some or all of the races weren't going well.  But it is not necessarily a sign that the Democrats are down by apocalyptic margins in those districts.  Just a sign that the DCCC thinks the money is better spent trying to move the numbers in other districts where the Dem candidates are (1) not as financially secure and/or (2) more competitive.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:46:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pullbacks no.

But as I said in another post, when they say "we've left him staffers" is like when the doctor tells you that you can eat anything you want.

---

by: tallsy @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:12:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I doubt the DCCC thinks the seat is a goner

It's the case that Pomeroy really does have a lot of money and North Dakota is really cheap so that $1.6M that he has is going to go pretty damn far.

I could easily see Pomeroy lose the race, but that's a far cry from thinking the DCCC sees him as being toast.

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:15:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Plus, North Dakota is the type of state where oversaturation can be a problem

It's dirt-cheap to advertise there and Pomeroy has $1.6M in the bank (Berg has $750K for the record)

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 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:12:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Issue with Magellan's LA-Sen poll

They have Melancon winning Dems only 51-34.  There's no doubt Louisiana's full of a lot of DINOs and very conservative Dems, but that number is pretty strange.  Even as Obama was losing Louisiana in a landslide he still won Democrats 75%-24%.  Melancon's definitely down but I feel its closer to a ten point race than an 18 point one.  

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

---

by: Darth Jeff @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:23:50 PM UTC

Athough in their defense, Magellan is very good about releasing crosstabs

They have them even broken up into Congressional District, which is pretty cool.

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

---

by: Darth Jeff @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:28:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

IA-Gov

Terry Branstad keeps throwing up false numbers in his campaign ads, no matter how many times he is fact-checked. And Branstad's whole argument against Culver's I-JOBS infrastructure bonding program is hypocritical, because he also praises NJ Gov Christie, who has bonded for more in one year than Culver has in four. Also, New Jersey's debt load was way higher than Iowa's to begin with.

Last Tuesday was the first Culver/Branstad debate (two more to come in October). Selzer is polling soon for the DM Register, possibly this week or next week. We'll get some indication of whether the race is tightening.

I didn't care for the first couple of ads Culver ran after Labor Day, but he's got a decent hard-hitting one up now:

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:25:25 PM UTC

forgot to mention

that early voting in Iowa starts on September 23. The Secretary of State's office is updating the figures on absentee ballot requests every weekday. As of today, 56,725 ballots have been requested by Iowans: 34,318 by Democrats, 12,710 by Republicans, 9,664 by independents, and 33 by people with some other party affiliation.

Many of the state House and Senate candidates have been getting supporters to fill out absentee ballot request forms over the summer, but it's impossible to know from these numbers whether most of the independents were contacted by Republican or Democratic campaigns.

About 1.05 million Iowans voted in November 2006. Many people expect turnout to be similar this year, with about a third of the votes cast early.

---

by: desmoinesdem @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:30:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think there may be a huge gender gap

in Colorado.  I generally hate it when the Democrats attack some of our candidates for "being anti-women", but in the case of Ken Buck, there may be a grain of truth to it.

38, male, conservative Republican, TX-3 currently (IL-13)

---

by: BearFanTX @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 21:58:13 PM UTC

Jane Norton and her high heeled shoes

agree with you.

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:24:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

FL-Sen, CO-Sen Debates?

Didn't the candidates for FL-Sen and CO-Sen recently have debates?

I didn't see them.  Could someone tell me how well each candidate came off, and how did Florida and Colorado voters react to the debates?

---

by: Inkan1969 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:06:16 PM UTC

DCCC

releases internals in AR-1, DE-AL, FL-25, GA-08

AR-1

Chad Causey (D): 46%
Rick Crawford (R): 44%

MoE: +/- 4.9%

http://dccc.org/newsroom/entry...

DE-AL

John Carney (D): 50%
Glen Urquhart (R): 38%

MoE +/- 4.9%

http://dccc.org/newsroom/entry...

FL-25

Joe Garcia (D): 40%
David Rivera (R): 33%

MoE +/- 4.9%

http://dccc.org/newsroom/entry...

GA-8

Jim Marshall (D): 48%
Austin Scott (R): 36%

MoE +/- 4.9%

http://dccc.org/newsroom/entry...

19, Male, Independent, CA-12

---

by: ehstronghold @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 22:25:35 PM UTC

Nate Silver now considers Cao more likely to be re-elected than not (53/47)

GOPVoter and Darth Jeff (and anyone else from Lousisana that I may have forgotten), what is going on down there? Is Cao running a great campaign, or do people in the district have serious reservations about Richmond? Much as I like Cao, I had written off his chances of ever winning re-election a long time ago.

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

---

by: MassGOP @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:04:04 PM UTC

Cao does have a lot of local goodwill from many constituents, which makes this more competitive than a lot of people think

First my disclaimer: I'm going to be volunteering for Richmond on Saturday.  

I think Richmond is the favorite still, but this race isn't in the bag for Dems.  A big reason why is Cao's been around a lot locally.  There's this story from about a week ago of how Cao helped clear blight in New Orleans (still a big problem here) and got stunk by fire ants 15 times.  http://www.nola.com/politics/i...

Richmond should win: he has a good base of local support and is running a good campaign.  Plus Obama endorsing him recently should help a bit in a district as blue as this.  But too many people underestimating Cao could produce a big surprise.  

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

---

by: Darth Jeff @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:35:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the report and caution, but I can't swallow Nate's numbers on this one at all......

A black Democrat running in a majority black district that voted 75% for Obama is going to reelect a non-black one-term Republican who voted mostly with the GOP?

I'll be surprised if it's even a single-digit race.  I'll be surprised if Richmond wins by less than 20.

The reality is on election day in virtually any election roughly 90% of black voters will vote for a white or other non-black Democrat over a non-black Republican.  If the Democrat is black and the Republican is not, that's assured.  If just half the voters are black, Richmond certainly wins.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:46:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Neither can I, but a Cao win isn't as unresonable as people think

Not really sure where Nate's getting his stuff though, or Cook who has it as a toss-up.  I'd say conservatively it's lean D.    

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

---

by: Darth Jeff @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:01:54 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's just a quirk of Cook's own incumbent rule

It took him forever to move AR-Sen to Leans Republican and I remember him keeping OH-Sen and PA-Sen back in 2006 toss-up until pretty close to the election even as multiple polls showed Brown and Casey beating Santorum and DeWine by double digits (I think Casey's numbers were getting pretty close to 20 at the time too).

It's really rare that he moves an incumbent who hasn't had any scandals to anything more than Toss-up and even then he gets really weird.

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 @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:58:16 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I just personally think

these people are living and dying by their electoral models than factoring in common sense.  Chao is a goner; black turn-out would need to drop in ridiculous fashion for Chao to win.

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:43:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yup, your comment is 100% correct. But it's Cao, not Chao. (nm)

nm

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:46:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I normally get that right :(

---

by: Andrew @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:31:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think he lost his chances of winning

In the last two weeks. Ron Austin, a self-funding, independent black candidate dropped out. Obama endorsed Richmond. Cao is reaching voters and is well liked, but those teo factors make it much more difficult.  

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:02:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

PPP teases a competitive WV-Sen

http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 23:54:33 PM UTC

I just did some very speculative

back of the envelope math based on what PPP tweeted, and I'd say they have the race about dead even, possibly a small lead for Raese.  Fuckers.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 00:21:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Shocking

I am shocked.  This might be a case where personal popularity does not save a candidate.  It is interesting that the implosion has entered Appalachia though.  I had assumed this implosion had its boundaries at the Ohio River and Mason Dixon Line, but maybe that is not the case.  

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 00:25:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well I'm being very speculative.

What I know:

1. 59% approve of Manchin.
2. 54%-37% favor a Republican Congress.
3. Raese wins 57%-29% among those who approve of Manchin and favor a Republican Congress.

What I assume:

1. 22% approve of Manchin and favor a Republican Congress (difference between 59% and 37%), and Raese gets 66% of those (the equivalent of 57-29).
2. All 37% who favor a Democratic Congress approve of Manchin, and Manchin gets 100% of those.
3. 32% disapprove of Manchin, all of them favor a Republican Congress, and Raese gets 100% of those.

From that, I get Raese 46.5%, Manchin 44.5%.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 00:56:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No undecideds?

I would think that there would be some undecideds in that "conflicted" group...  After all, they are supposedly "conflicted"...

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:37:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I get something close, both candidates within MOE

don't know about a full two point lead for Raese, but not impossible. Very strange for PPP to be getting less dem friendly results in both WI and WV.

---

by: Davidsfr @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:33:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's the keep Manchin in the Mansion vote

We talked about this in earlier threads a few weeks ago. By voting for Rease those voters who approve of Manchin and favor a Republican congress can get the best of both worlds.

They get to keep Manchin as Governor doing the job they approve of him doing (and avoid the succession nightmare that could ensue if there is a Governor's vacancy in WV) and get a Republican vote in congress for them its a win win.

It's these 22% of voters that could cost Manchin the election. Manchin needs to make a persuasive argument to them as to why he needs to change jobs. If he cant these voters will be the ones who cost him the election.

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...

---

by: izengabe @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:49:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rasmussen just today has Manchin up 50-43, a teeny better from previous 50-45 lead, so...

...I'm not sweating it too much yet.  Even if PPP shows a dead heat, I feel pretty good about Manchin.

I do recall Ben Nelson losing to Hagel in 1996, even though Nelson was a hugely popular sitting Gov, but I vaguely recall Nelson had made a pledge to serve out his gubernatorial term that he was breaking by running that year, and that hurt him.

Manchin could be upset, but I bet he wins.  He BADLY wants this seat and has wanted to be a Senator for a very long time.  He won't hold back.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:42:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Personally, I've long thought it was stupid...

... for Manchin and the WV Dems to reverse their initial decision to let the seat stay with an appointee until 2012.

I figure the reason was that Manchin figured the seat would be harder to capture in 2012 with Obama leading the ticket, but it still doesn't make a lot of sense. For one thing, if Manchin wins, he'll STILL have to run with Obama in 2012, and by that point he'll have two years of difficult Congressional votes to defend.

Plus, in 2012, voters who want to vote against Obama can do that by voting against Obama, rather than vote against a Democratic Senate candidate. This year, if they want to "send a message," Manchin will be the vessel for their frustrations.  

---

by: liberalpragmatist @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:35:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree...

I couldn't understand why he was so hell bent on running for that seat now... He would have been much better off in a presidential year.

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:36:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Again

let me state that it is irrelevant whether it was the best move politically he pretty much had to do it legally. He is just following the law. Also this is WV what makes you think a Presidential year is better? That is a moot point though as he had to do it legally.  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:45:24 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

They changed the law...

Specifically so he could run this year...  Manchin was the cheerleader for that change...  This is what he wanted, so he got it!

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:49:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not

really, it was the SoS choice wasn't it? Are there any election lawyers here? My sister is lawyer and she agreed with me that the legal course of action would be to have an election this year. Granted she is not that into politics but I trust her all the same.  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:58:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The SoS initially ruled that the appointment...

...would be until 2012.  Then he begged to have the law changed, and the right wing concern trolls did, too, and Manchin got on his conservadem high horse and sauntered in to save the day for the righties...

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:04:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're right

Manchin got spooked at the prospect of the right-wing echo chamber going after him, and caved.  It was unnecessary and politically stupid.  But maybed that "cherished" chamber of commmerce endorsement will save his sorry ass.

---

by: Paleo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 09:53:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

No. Manchin did what what was in his best political interest

He saw a free shot at the Senate seat in a short campaign and jumped on it. Having the election this year was in Manchin's best political interest.

By having it this year he could crowd out any opponent from challenging him in a Dem primary, keep a short general election, use his current popularity to his advantage, not have a problem with whoever is the interim senator and not have to worry what could happen over 2 years to screw things up for him.

Besides if he loses the Senate race this year Manchin stays Governor and can always run again for this seat in 2012.

Fight global warming & help disaster relief efforts by raising money for Music for Relief when you search the web! Click here for more info:
http://searchmfr.swagbucks.com...

---

by: izengabe @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:24:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What happened to your rural theory

I thought rural areas were immune from the "implosion."  I guess you'll have to modify your concern trollism.

---

by: Paleo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:09:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Never applied it to Senate races

I have never really applied the theory to Senate races with the exception of Ohio and Pennsylvania.  I think it is very hard to apply such a divide in Senate races as most states have rural and suburban areas.  This even applies to West Virginia.

The evidence is pointing towards a rural/urban and/or Great Lakes-Mid-Atlantic/everywhere else divide though in terms of the House seems to be getting stronger.  I wonder why the DCCC is not releasing polls from suburban districts like PA-7 and OH-15 while they are releasing lots of rural and southern polls.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:25:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

2 polls came out from OH-15 in the last 2 weeks

One from We Ask America had Stivers ahead 46-42.  I can't remember who the other poll was from but Stivers was up by 5 in that one, so it's right on the borderline between Toss Up and Lean R, I lean toward the former because WAA polls are pretty much Republican internals.  

PA-7 though, I haven't seen any polls from there in quite a while.  

23, Male, Democrat, OH-13

---

by: StephenCLE @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:16:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Party polls

I saw the OH-15 polls, but I was referring to the lack of internals.  The pattern of releasing internals is interesting.    I am surprised the Dems have not dumped anything to refute the GOP poll released in MI-9 for example.  

Speaking of Michigan, I wonder if the DNC will pull out of Michigan at a certain point to try to save Ohio or Pennsylvania where more seats are at play.  It would be ironic considering McCain pulled out of Michigan only 2 years ago.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:26:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Party polls

I saw the OH-15 polls, but I was referring to the lack of internals.  The pattern of releasing internals is interesting.    I am surprised the Dems have not dumped anything to refute the GOP poll released in MI-9 for example.  

Speaking of Michigan, I wonder if the DNC will pull out of Michigan at a certain point to try to save Ohio or Pennsylvania where more seats are at play.  It would be ironic considering McCain pulled out of Michigan only 2 years ago.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:26:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wouldn't panic just yet..

Sometimes, PPP comes out with a scary tweet only to see it not be so scary in the end, and vice versa (a reassuring tweet that sounds very bad in the end).

Manchin will do everything he can to win this, I'm sure, but it will probably be closer than we want.

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:26:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah, I remember the "Coakley is closing" tweet

nt

---

by: liberalpragmatist @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:36:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, when they polled Brown ahead...

The preview was that the race was "losable", but still in OK shape.  Everyone assumed that meant that Coakley was up by 6 or so. Instead she was down 1.  That was a reassuring preview that went bad.

Then there were some previews which sounded terrible, but the final results were much better than previewed.

I'm hoping this is the latter category.  Lately, Jensen has been pretty upfront if upcoming news isn't good for us.  He's not saying that specifically here... only indicating that the GOP'er has more support than expected.

I hope...

---

by: LordMike @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:48:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is why I hate it when he teases polls

It's honestly not fun imagining what goodies he has in store this cycle given how bad the climate is for Dems :/

---

by: isentrope @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 05:13:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Have you not seen a trend

in internal polling released? There's nothing from PA-7, PA-6, Murphy is in a dead heat, PA-3, OH-01, OH-15, MI-07, MI-09...


28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:53:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow

If Manchin goes down, does he take Oliverio and Rahall with him? And is the opposite true--if Manchin pulls it off, do Dems hold both seats?

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

---

by: MassGOP @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:06:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rahall?

If Manchin loses then Oliverio is probably toast. But Rahall? Manchin would have to lose by double digits and Rahall would have to run a crappy very gaffe prone campaign to lose. I mean the disgraced corrupt ex judge who came in third place just barely ahead of a perennial candidate who eked by the R primary with 70% of Republicans preferring someone else. It would have to be a god awful night for Rahall to lose.  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:22:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Between perennial candidate and eked put the word "and he only" and take out "who"

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:25:03 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Cook has it only at Lean D

And the corrupt judge guy released a poll a while ago that had him within 42-36. Stranger things have happened.

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

---

by: MassGOP @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:31:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I

am a big Cook fan and respect him but this should be at likely D. I am not a big fan of internals, especially Republicans. The EX judge is very corrupt FYI. This is the thing he judicial career is best known for. (courtesy of wikipedia)

Massey Energy Company controversy
In November 2007, Maynard voted with the majority in a 3-2 decision to reverse a $76 million judgment against Massey Energy Company. The judgment ($55 million plus interest) had been awarded by a Boone County jury to Harman Mining, a West Virginia coal company owned by Hugh M. Caperton. After the Supreme Court reversed the judgment, Caperton's attorneys learned that Maynard had vacationed in the French Rivera with Don Blankenship the CEO, chairman, and president of Massey Energy.[2] Bruce Stanley, a Pittsburgh lawyer representing Caperton, said "It is beyond the realm of human comprehension that any judge could claim any semblance of impartiality when, before casting the deciding vote in a $76 million case, he accompanies the CEO of the litigant on a luxurious trip to the French Riviera."

On January 19, 2008, following intense public scrutiny, Maynard disqualified himself from the Massey appeal. The acting chief justice appointed Circuit Judge Don Cookman to sit on the court for Caperton's rehearing petition. On January 23, 2008, the Court voted 5-0 to rehear Caperton's appeal.[3]

Tell me how that is going to play in a year were Massey is probably not the most popular thing. Weirder things have happened but  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:40:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oops Let me continue

I seriously doubt he wins this year. Do not forget he had his behind handed to him in 2008.  

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

---

by: hoosierdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:43:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wasted opportunity

WV-3 should be likely Democratic.  Considering the mining disaster and this candidate's association with the miner, I would not be shocked if he did just as bad as he did in 2008.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:07:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Doubt it

I wish PPP would do a district by district breakdown of a state like West Virginia.  It would be probative to see where Manchin is getting and losing support.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:29:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

WV-03 has got to be the trouble area

This is one of the fastest-reddening areas in the entire country--it voted for Gore by 4 (D+4), flipped and went for Bush by 7 (R+4), and then went for McCain by 14 (R+20.) It's a horrible district for Obama and one of the most effective places to run an "anti-Washington Democrats" ad.

I could see Manchin winning the 1st and 2nd by small to medium margins and getting pummeled in the 3rd.  

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

---

by: MassGOP @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:08:01 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I remember

on primary night Rahall got more votes than the third place Republican!

28, Liberal Democrat, CA-26

---

by: TheGradyDem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:11:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hm?

Rahall received 44K votes in the primary; the third place Republican received 4K.

There is a Democratic super-duper-ultra majority in terms of partisan registration and I'm sure in terms of mayors, state legislators, county execs, etc. in WV-03. But it's not a Democratic district at the Presidential level anymore, and the next step in the transition is usually in federal races. I don't know if there are any pictures of Manchin with Obama, but this is the kind of district where those images could be toxic.

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

---

by: MassGOP @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:18:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

And?

Isnt that how it supposed to happen? Wouldn't it be really bad if he didnt, considering this is a district with a very high Dem registration advantage, and that he was running unopposed, while there were a ton of Republicans?  

---

by: GOPVOTER @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:36:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Reid: Gillibrand is "hottest" member of the Senate

http://www.politico.com/blogs/...

DioGuardi has no reason to touch this, but I could totally see Angle harp on it (that is, if a video clip emerges).

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:20:30 AM UTC

He is right about that

She is the hottest member of congress, either house.

---

by: Davidsfr @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 03:38:38 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't know about the House women,

but for the current 17 woman Senators, yeah it's not even that close. But Kirsten's also the youngest woman by several years so that helps, too.
I just found there's a Wikipedia page about them.
Women in the United States Senate (trivia: of the 38 woman who've been Senators, 13 were appointed and of those 7 were appointed to succeed their deceased husbands.)

---

by: homerun @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:04:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm partial to Maria Cantwell

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

---

by: andyroo312 @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:24:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Angle

I am sure Angle will say something.  Knowing how she is, she will likely make a statement that makes herself sound sexist.

Reid is a lucky man is all I can say.  He is going to win this in spite of himself.

23, male, center-right cynical Republican, PA-7

---

by: Ryan_in_DelCo @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 04:17:29 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

cq

is joining other handicappers.
moved to lean r: markey, halvorsen, vanhaaften/bucshon, bass/kuster, kosmas, kratovil.  dreihaus, kilroy, chet edwards :(, fincher/herron.  
i agree with all of these for sure.

surprisingly, it appears the d-trip pulled out of AZ for the other reason: triage

to tossup: kirkpatrick, harry mitchell (both surprises to me), jim marshall (another surprise), john hall, steve kagen (somewhat surprising), and...chris carney? really? that would be sad.  

lungren also, surprisingly, was moved to tossup.  

18, Dem, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college, next year). social libertarian, economic liberal, fiscal conservative.   Everybody should put age and CD here. :)

---

by: jncca @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 05:01:39 AM UTC

About half of those make sense the rest of

the moves sound silly. I don't see any negative change on the ground in CO-04 or IL-11. In NH-02 the primary was just completed so that may be jumping the gun as Kuster is a fresh face while Bass has lost before. FL-24 if anything is moving the other way with the weekly revelations of Adams insanity. MD-01 was always uphill but I don't see any reason why the race should be upgraded for the republicans now that they nominated the one person that managed to lose such a red district. Edwards is probably a fair move since the district is so heavily republican. Arizona doesn't make much sense. Maybe Mitchell but it should'nt be seen as a negative as he should have been toss up from the start. Marshall is safe. Kagen needs to keep his gaurd up as things don't look to good in the statewide races in WI (even if Feingold-Barret win they probably will lose the 8th). Carney makes no sense after the scandal that just broke on the GOP nominee. Hall makes sense for some reason he doesn't seem to have the same magic as the upstate dems. CA-03 doesn't make much sense either as I don't think the Dems will do nearly as well at the top of the ballot as they did in 08 but if a California house republican were to go down my guess is it would be Lungren. So overall I don't see the justification for a lot of those moves they seem like excuses to make the election more exciting heh.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

---

by: D in FL @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 07:50:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

OH1/15 IN-08 and TN-08

probably should have been at lean republican earlier this year.

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

---

by: D in FL @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 07:52:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think the handicappers' ratings changes are delayed. I know that overall...

...it seemed apparent we were on track to lose the House, and handicappers openly said so, LONG BEFORE those same handicappers like Cook and Rothenberg changed enough of their race ratings to formally raise the projected GOP gains to 40-plus.

Whenever ratings are changed, I bet whatever movement there was happened a month or so earlier.  I think handicappers wait to see if movement sticks or is ephemeral.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:30:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good point.

I guess I don't see there relevance since they seem to be so conservative in there estamates that they hold back from changing there ratings to the point where they are no longer valid.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  

---

by: D in FL @ Wed Sep 22, 2010 at 00:32:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sounds pretty realistic to me

I've had most of the Lean R ones as write-offs for a while now.

Marshall isn't a surprise, nor is Mitchell. Both represent Republican-leaning districts and have strong challengers. Kagen's challenger seems pretty weak, but he's a staunch liberal in a Republican-leaning district, and the Democrats are collapsing in Wisconsin, so it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Don't know what has changed to make Lungren more vulnerable.  

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 11:52:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The ONLY

thing that would justify moving CA-03 in this environment would be that Bera busted out a poll showing himself in the lead.  That would be exciting indeed.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm excited about this one and have been for a long time because Cillizza and Sahd had it in their Top 40 rankings...

...of seats likely to switch.

Indeed, handicappers generally have listed CA-03 as a better bet for us than FL-25, which seems to have a lot of public information suggesting a tossup but the campaign analysts won't call it that.

Meanwhile, CA-03 goes unmentioned on SSP because it's flying so far under the radar except for what I see the handicappers doing.

That it's a tossup now is exciting.  I've waited many, many years for an Indian-American Democrat to get elected to Congress, and we have the most good candidates ever running this year.  Unfortunately it's the worst possible year and they're all running in tough districts, so I've figured all along we're likely to come up empty yet again, and I haven't given any of them any money.  But if CA-03 keeps looking good, I might throw some dough Bera's way.

I think there's an outside but plausible chance we actually pick up SIX seats on election night, with the Big 4 joined by FL-25 and CA-03.  That would be awesome and would really help keep the House margin very close, even if we lose the majority.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:35:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Unbelievable that

we haven't had an Indian-American Dem in Congress.  It will happen.  Most Indian-Americans are Dems AFAIK, and there are three well-funded Dem nominees in LA-03, KS-04, and CA-03.  Why did they have to pick such tough districts?

Incidentally, Chuck Todd had this race very high in his top 64 House races, in the 30's IIRC.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

---

by: spiderdem @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:53:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually, there HAS been one, but he was 50(!) years ago.....

Dalip Singh Saund represented the district in California now mostly covered by Ken Calvert.  Saund was elected in 1956 and was reelected twice before a debilitating stroke ended his career.

For Indian-American Democratic candidates, 1994 was a breakout year, with 3 serious ones, but none did well.  Since then there have been steady streams of Indian-American Democrats running for Congress in varying degrees of seriousness.  There have been a few Republicans, too, but not nearly as many.

Yes most Indian-Americans are Democrats, and in fact we vote Democratic by roughly a 3-to-1 margin; more one-sidedly Democratic than Hispanics, less so than black voters.  There are some minor variances among South Asians more broadly, with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis voting roughly 80% Democratic compared to the 75% for Indians.  But it's a small difference.  For party registration, surveys have shown less than 10% of Indian-Americans are actually registered Republicans, with around half registered as Democrats and the rest as independents.

As far as what districts Indian-American Democrats have "picked," they're just running where they live.  We're by-and-large an affluent group of suburban-dwellars, so that explains a lot.  Those of us who live or have lived in strongly Democratic urban areas live there only while young and single; once making money and married and having kids, we're out in the 'burbs.  And you don't run for Congress when you're young and single, you just build your life.  So that explains the "where."

Honestly in the Indian-American Democratic community Bera has had a little less buzz than Trivedi and Goyle, partly due to geography.  California is its own animal politically, whether you're Indian or not.  Being closer to D.C. Trivedi and Goyle have traveled here and met with the East Coast Indian-American players more.  But Bera has raised cash real well and is the best bet to win.  I still don't write off Goyle's chances thanks to his having lucked out on the Republicans' choice of a nominee, and Trivedi is awesome but is just running against a very wily incumbent in a bad year.  I'm hopeful for Bera, but ultimately I want any one of these people to pull it out.

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

---

by: DCCyclone @ Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 13:49:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]