Google Ads


Site Stats

AZ-Sen: Kyl to Announce Retirement

by: James L.

Thu Feb 10, 2011 at 10:26 AM EST


From the Politico:

Sen. Jon Kyl will announce his plans to retire at a press conference in Arizona later today, a source confirms to POLITICO.

Kyl's retirement could make this into a competitive race, depending on who pulls the trigger for Team Blue. (Kyl's own numbers were fairly strong against a number of high-profile Dems.) More as we get it.

UPDATE: 6th CD GOP Rep. Jeff Flake is very likely to enter the race in the coming days. The Politico has some comments from a few other possibilities, including Brock Landers himself:

Former Rep. John Shadegg told POLITICO he was "very surprised" at the news and called Kyl's retirement "a loss for Arizona and a loss for the nation."

"I hope that the rumors are wrong. I hope Jon Kyl is running again," he said, declining to discuss his interest in the seat.

Reached on his cell phone, first-term Rep. Ben Quayle said he had no comment on Kyl's plans, accused the reporter of calling the wrong number and then hung up.

In a text message, former Rep. J.D.  Hayworth wrote, "stay tuned."

ANOTHER UPDATE: Real Clear Politics reports that Janet Napolitano (Democratic ex-Gov. and current DHS Sec.) has been calling around about the race. It also mentions the possibility of GOP Gov. Jan Brewer, who's termed-out and can't run again in 2014... and since every other Rep. in the state has been mentioned, Trent Franks too. Via the Twitter, there's word of two more guys who've been hitting the phones: Democratic Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon, and Republican Maricopa Co. Sheriff Joe Arpaio (the repellent Arpaio, who's in his 70s, seems to threaten to run statewide every two years and then not do it, though).
James L. :: AZ-Sen: Kyl to Announce Retirement
Tags: , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

AZ-Sen: Kyl to Announce Retirement | 237 comments
Giffords would have won. :-(


28, gay guy, Democrat, CA-08
she still can

[ Parent ]
IDK about now
But there'll be a gov race in 2014 and McCain will probably retire in 2016. My dream is that she runs for and wins either of those and then runs for prez in 2020, assuming a republican succeeds Obama, and Giffords wins and becomes the first female president.

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
I'm still hoping for a President Clinton in 2017. Don't say Republican victory!
Maybe a President Giffords in 2025. I really wouldn't mind that! :)

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
No idea what 2016'll look like
I'm just going off the fact that generally after 8 years of one part controlling the WH the other party more often than not takes over. Of course I'd love 16 (or 24, with Giffords) years of Democratic control, but that's probably not going to happen (guess we can dream, right?).

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
At the very least
She would have been a strong candidate, possibly the strongest one that the Democrats could come up with.  
Well, with Giffords in present condition - i see no
really good Democratic candidates. A lot of those able to win 40-45% of vote, but no more. It's still very much mad about "illegal immigration" Arizona....
I think Goddard did a respectable job in 2010
That is if you factor in the environment and the state, I'd like to see him run for senate.

20, Male, Democrat, CA-44 (home) CA-12 (college)
[ Parent ]
Slightly over 40, if i remember correctly.
Not very impressed
[ Parent ]
Yeah, considering...
how horrendous Governor Brewer's performance was during that campaign, even given that it was 2010, Goddard's showing was not impressive at all.

20, GOP, NH-02
[ Parent ]
Wave election, & worse in AZ than elsewhere b/c of immigration issue, so no strike against Goddard......
He's still strong.  PPP already polled AZ post-election and found him with strong favorables, and very competitive and perhaps even beating all comers in open (as opposed to vs. Kyl) AZ-Sen race.

You can often write off a bad year.

The key is Obama contesting the state and getting nonwhite and other Dem-leaning turnout up.  And of course a big piece of the puzzle in Obama deciding to contest the state is the strength or weakness of the GOP nominee.

We need a strong candidate to declare early no matter what, but Goddard is strong and can win.

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

[ Parent ]
May be
As i like to say - "we shall see"...
[ Parent ]
Of course...
Goddard couldn't have been expected to WIN, or even to come close, but Brewer was so bad. SO BAD. Embarrassingly horrendous.

Even in a year like 2010 in an environment like Arizona, perhaps the worst possible environment for a Democrat, candidate quality has some impact. Jan Brewer came across as fundamentally inept and unfit to govern the state... the fact that Goddard failed to gain any traction or capitalize on her mistakes should give AZ Dems pause about his ability to win against a better candidate (because almost anyone the GOP can put up in Arizona will be superior to Brewer), even in a considerably better environment.

20, GOP, NH-02

[ Parent ]
Your take on the race is incorrect, because...
...your view of Brewer is not what most Arizona voters believe about her.  Brewer's own favorables and job approvals were good in the final months before the election.  She was doing poorly before the immigration enforcement law signing, but that changed everything overnight, and voters viewed her well.

So no, this wasn't a bad Democratic candidate who couldn't beat a vulnerable incumbent.  Brewer simply was no longer vulnerable by the summer.  Goddard was a popular candidate who ran a good campaign, but ran into a buzz saw against a popular incumbent in a good year for the incumbent's party.

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

[ Parent ]
The circumstance defenses are fair, I'd say
Goddard started out with a 10 point lead over Brewer, per PPP. This shrank to a 3 point lead in April 2010, post-SB70, when Brewer defined herself as more than just an little-known caretaker in the shadow of the (then) popular Napolitano. Between Brewer's use of the immigration issue and the national sentiment, she took the lead and Goddard never recovered, but the fact that he led at first shows that he has some strength.

I'd point out that Brewer's poll lead (again per PPP) actually widened after her disasterous debate performance and subsequent refusal to debate again. It could perhaps be a point against Goddard that he failed to capitalize on that at all. though personally, I'd again put down to blind voter sentiment and the lack of an audience for such debates, and give the benefit of the doubt to Goddard. Same as Bill White in Texas- he might of had it the year had been better.

[ Parent ]
I don't doubt
that she came across that way to a lot of people outside the state, but I'm sure you could say that a lot about candidates. What matters is how the people inside the state feel about her.

Take a look at the polling presented from the link below. Perhaps it presents a skewed view of the race, since it mostly uses Rasmussen, but in April, Brewer took a lead that she never lost. I'm not sure why that is--although I wouldn't be surprised if SB 1070 provided some additional momentum--but perhaps the fundamentals that would determine the race started becoming more ingrained.

I agree that Goddard probably should have done better, but he was fighting an extreme uphill battle. In 2008, the electorate was 36 percent conservative, but un 2010, it was 46 percent. Goddard won liberals decisively, obviously, but also moderates pretty significantly as well, getting 59 percent to Brewer's 38 percent. But he only received 11 percent of conservatives.

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

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Brewer pulled the old Thatcher or John Howard trick
She could not win an election that was about her or her performance That . What she could do was make the election a referendum on something else, namely not so much immigration law as the right of the people of Arizona to do something about illegal immigration regardless of what that something was.

Obama, by letting Holder sue the state before the law even went into effect, and others, including one of the state's most prominent democrats calling for a boycott, turned the thing into a Khaki election, where regardless of your views of the issue at stake, or opinions of Obama or Democrats otherwise, you had to send them a message. In such an environment, no one could have done much better, and its a miracle the Democrats saved more than Ed Pastor's seat in the house.

Really the state was a few thousand votes from going 7-1 GOP at the federal level for a state Obama only narrowly lost last time.  That is not typical. It may, however be typical for as long as Obama is in office to an extent given the handling of immigration issue there, though an improving economy may fix it.

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent

[ Parent ]
You are one of two people
that keeps bringing up the lawsuit. Is there some sort of huge issue with the lawsuit in the state itself, giving conservatives something to rally around, that won't go away?

Also, your claim that a few thousand votes could have made the state go 7-1 for the Republicans is a little misleading. That could describe any number of races in any number of states in any number of years, for one thing, and when not many people vote, the margin of victory is usually small in a close race.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
The way the issue of Illegal Immigration
Works is visceral and emotional. There are rational basis for people's views, but the issue comes down to a view of fairness and rights. For the Law's proponents, it is about punishing "cheaters" generally, but even more important it is about the "people's" right to do so. For individuals like that, leaders are supposed to protect them. They are Americans, the illegal immigrants are criminals and outsiders.

By filing suit against the law before it even went into effect, rather than say waiting for Hispanic US citizens to be stopped and harassed and allowing them to sue, Obama abdicated his responsibility as their President to take their side against foreigners. Worse than that, he placed himself on the side of the "enemy" and accused them of being wrong,
and went to court to punish them.

This is sounds abstract but I am trying to express the thought process here that ends with Obama not being a "liberal", or bad President, but a "traitor".

At this point the political issue is not about what happens to illegal aliens, but about the "people's rights" and Obama and the Democrats were on the wrong side of that clash. Furthermore, the clash prevents any proper discussion about the merits of the law itself, because once the federal lawsuit was filed, the law itself no longer mattered as much as the right of Arizona to pass it. Is this total? No, but the narrative at the state level is absolutely toxic for Democrats, which makes it hard to get their views heard because they are not part of the discussion.

26 Right-leaning, Euro-Conservative, Anti-Tea Party Independent

[ Parent ]
I kind of understand
where you are coming from. I mean, it seems a little...well, extreme, but I get how extreme the reactions to this issue can be, but I am not entirely sure why Democrats don't get to be part of the discussion.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Janet N
Janet Napolitano was re-elected in 2006 with nearly 63% of the vote.
She is not nearly popular NOW
if i am correct last time i saw her ratings they was about 40-55.
[ Parent ]
J-Nap
I think Napolitano's stock has fallen in AZ since her move to DC; she was unimpressive in a hypothetical matchup with Kyl in recent polling. I'd certainly be interested to see her numbers in an open seat race, though. I've always been interested in Phil Gordon's potential, but his favorables were looking lousy in that one poll.


29, Male, Dem, NY-20  
[ Parent ]
Pretty Sure
that the whole naked body scan and/or pat down/violation thing has completely alienated her with anyone that has been through TSA recently, not to mention the awful press it has been getting
[ Parent ]
Detroit
hurt her too. Napolitano is damaged goods. But she would of been damaged goods anyway if she served the last two years of her term because the economy went into the shitter in Arizona. Brewer just lucked out with SB 1070 and the climate.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Time to review the most recent PPP poll analysis
http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

Only Goddard and Kirkpatrick have positive favorables among prominently mentioned Ds. Napolitano has over 50% negative.

An open seat in a Presidential year is a real race
It depends on how well Obama does here. If he can add two or three points to his total, that leaves the Democratic Senate nomination in a position where they don't have to outperform him by a huge percentage.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
agree somewhat
I agree that it should be competitive in any case, but the state still leans red even in a presidential year.

The Dems have a number of people (starting with Goddard) who could beat a fringe Reep but would be underdogs against a mainstreamer. It really depends on what the Reeps do. If they clear the field for Jeff Flake or John Shadegg they would likely be favored, but Arizona Republicans don't clear the field. Check out these 2010 primary results.

http://www.azsos.gov/election/...

The primaries in districts 1, 3, and 5 were all free-for-alls, and only Schweikert (barely) got as much as a third of the vote in any of them. In district 8 it was less chaotic, but they sent up the infamous Jesse Kelly who of course proceeded to lose the general. Even incumbents seldom get a free ride: Flake got less that 2/3 of the vote in his primary against a who-dat, and McCain got less than 60% in his.

If the R primary is Flake or Shadegg (or someone like Ken Bennett or Brenda Burns) alone against a crew of tea partiers, the mainstreamer probably wins and would probably be a slight favorite in the general. But I think it's more likely that you get a very fractious primary where the angriest candidate wins. This is setting up to be a replay of Nevada or Colorado in 2010.

41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
Why do I get the feeling
he would not have done this had Giffords not been shot.  
No idea.
Rumors of his retirement were stoked by his lackluster Q4 fundraising, which was well before the Tuscon shootings.
[ Parent ]
He
was probably leaning towards retirement but...with Giffords out of the picture probably pushed Kyl over the edge. I'm not suggesting he wanted Giffords to be shot, but it definitely must of influenced his thinking.

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
i agree with spiker
I can find no way that this comment makes any reasonable sense.  Are you saying that his retirement was swayed by a strong challenger being removed from contention?  Wouldn't that make him more likely to run?  That the party only let him go because there's no apparent strong challenger now so an open seat will be better defended?  That'd give too much credit to the Republican leadership's ability to prevent someone from living their life.  
[ Parent ]
uh yeah
Are you saying that his retirement was swayed by a strong challenger being removed from contention?

Of course. Parties push candidates to run again all the time, with mixed success, if they fear a strong candidate will run and win an open seat.  

[ Parent ]
and also
it would have been unlikely that Giffords ran at all if it wasn't an open seat.
[ Parent ]
What does that have to do with it?
Wouldn't he be more likely to retire if a strong candidate like Giffords was running against him, rather than in rehabilitation and incapable or running? Or are you suggesting that he's now afraid for his life because Giffords was shot? I don't get the point.
[ Parent ]
AZ
Its possible Giffords recovers quick enough and makes a run.  Probably too wishful thinking there though.

I would be happy with Goddard.  I would have said Phil Gordon, he seems to have really good bipartisan credentials and McCain would likely not campaign against him, but PPP showed the people that do know him don't like him.  So much for that.

29/D/Male/NY-01

I remember a lot of people
on DKos calling him DINO))))
[ Parent ]
Who isn't a DINO to them?

[ Parent ]
Yeah, i agree)))

[ Parent ]
Warranted?
For the record, I don't like the phrase "DINO" when used to attack those who are ideologically moderate, as Dems need to be a broad tent, especially in swingy/red areas. Ditto for the "RINO hunters" on the GOP side.  But with Gordon, it's perhaps half-way warranted, given that he actually endorsed McCain for president. Joining a party doesn't neccesarily demand supporting it on all issues, but it does involve at least supporting its electoral success.
[ Parent ]
Then half of Democratic
Southern legislators were DINO's then (exaggereate, but not by much)
[ Parent ]
Only half?
Most of those guys were extemely damaging to the Democratic brand.
[ Parent ]
When I read your comments (in general)
I feel more pessimistic for the future of SSP, post-merger.
[ Parent ]
There was a time
when we didn't have a single Republican, or they at least didn't make themselves known, and the moderates were a heavy minority.  We did just fine then, had the same level of discussion, and I didn't have to read people bash my ideology on a constant basis.

Oh how I can't wait to move!  And for Christ sake, go read the paper today because you will see them go ape shit crazy on how the GOP cant control their caucus.  It doesn't look good, regardless of partisanship.

[ Parent ]
I don't know where you're coming from on this

I can't think of any occasions recently where the prevailing ideology here (that is, orthodox Democratic liberalism, something I'm to the left of) has been 'bashed' without the offending poster never being heard from again.

I don't know where this siege mentality is coming from on both sides, for and against the merger. Seems like some here can't wait to see the non-Democrats made to walk the plank, and others are terrified of unwashed hordes of Cossacks Kossacks(Look, look, I made a history joke) invading SSP's semi-neutral territory.

OT anyways... I'll save it for the weekly open thread... 



Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
tietack's comment is in the borders

I would understand if someone take offense.
[ Parent ]
You are so proud of it?
I am not a R$epublican, but slightly left-of-center Indie. But if this will become a second present Daily Kos with (regrettably) a lot of "wild-eyed leftist nuts", who doesn't know anything besides their ideological cliches (just as their "soul brothers" on RedState) - i will not write anything here. BTW - so far i feel rather comfortable on RRH.
[ Parent ]
But
if all that you want is an "echo chamber" (without any dissent, no Republicans, no Indies - what a pleasure)))) - you may get it. After considerable (may be - the best) part of writers here leaves)))
[ Parent ]
So many here are horribly over-stating their importance to this community
as moderates, Republicans, independents, Independents, etc.  We discuss horse-race politics, which while it does deal with very partisan matters, requires absolutely zero partisanship to discuss.  It's math, it's marketing, it's communications.

And trust me, back when we had zero out Republicans, we had plenty of debates.

[ Parent ]
Ideology doesn't really come into it
Most posters are partisans we just seem to be a more realistic bunch whatever our personal beliefs.
[ Parent ]
Andrew, I respect you greatly
One thing that discourages me is people who state their case -- with constant hyperbole -- and don't even to provide backup data.

(In my experience, you usually do back up your assertions with good data, and I appreciate that.)

Every time I see data-free hyperbole, my first instinct is to throw up my hands. That was the frustration that I was expressing in the comments here.

In a data-driven debate, I think it's important to have different perspectives.

While data does not have a partisan bias, the interpretation of data (e.g. statistical blip v. trend) frequently does. I therefore believe it's important to have people of different political perspectives, to help check each other's sense of reality.

[ Parent ]
What tietack said n/t


"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
Dear Pan
I clarified the "one liberal blogsphere, two systems" thing in my draft diary.

Since the changes were in response to your input, I am interested in your reaction, ref http://www.swingstateproject.c...  

[ Parent ]
I think it's a lot better
I still think it would be good to state explicitly that you are not implying that DailyKos is similar to a Communist dictatorship.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
Fair enough, willco, ty and nm.

[ Parent ]
I share Andrew's perspective on this for one simple reason......
Republicans here have been growing in number and have increasingly engaged in smack talk.

The moderators here acknowledged explicitly this week that the recent increased smack talk by GOPers was one motivation to help the more polite GOP regulars here start RRH, to help divert the smack-talkers.

And frankly I can deal with Kossacks a lot easier than I can deal with right-wing smack.

Ultimately I think people here who are worried about the move are understating the significance of the new DK/Elections having its own separate home page from DailyKos.  It might seem like a small thing, but it's not.  A separate home page means you avoid the people who are only casually interested in campaigns.  Yes it's possible for uninformed demogogues to take over if the current community doesn't move over there in sufficient numbers, but I think that's a very unlikely outcome.  And the moderators here will work hard at making sure that doesn't happen, because David in particular has a self-interest in keeping the community much like it is here.

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

[ Parent ]
Why?
Becuase we want Democrats who are respectful to the party platform and leadership?  'Cos we want then to stop publicly endorsing Republican policies and damaging Democratic ones?  They may think that they are helping their re-election case, but all they do is drag down the Democratic brand and their re-election hopes down with them.

Just think of how many blue dogs could have saved their seats had they not spent all their time bashing the party their belong to and stymieing such efforts as extending unemployment insurance and reducing the size of the stimulus,.  Making the economy worse did not help their re-election bids one bit.

They will never learn. Look at Schuler's outrageous antics as of late.  Does he really think he's helping himself out here?  Maybe he is, but he's not helping his fellow blue dogs who have to fight against a sinking brand that Schuler's throwing an anvil into.

Please note that I'm not opposed to conservative Demcorats.  On the contrary, I welcome their input.  Most conservadems are respectful to the party platform and the leadership bring much to the table.  Unfortunately, a few bad apples spoil the bunch.

Those bad apples make it impossible for a Democratic majority to actually do anything, which, in turn, makes them even more vulnerable at election time 'cos no one likes a do-nothing congress.  It's a vicious cycle that must be stopped next time around.

[ Parent ]
Undoubtedly so
Look at Schuler's outrageous antics as of late.  Does he really think he's helping himself out here?


"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
Oh, imagine if the swing/conservative Dems
hadn't ruined the bailout and the stimulus for us.  Those pieces of legislation saved the economy and here comes our own Congresscritters to argue against common sense.
[ Parent ]
These guys represent their constituents
And that's absolutely fine by me. I see no damage inflicted - they simply do they duties reflecting viewsof  their voters. I will not demand anything else from MY congressman
[ Parent ]
Well many times they are defending to keep their own seat or office

As example, I need some explanation about the way what is using Budy Caldwell for defend his voters, because I see not the benefit for many people what vote him...
[ Parent ]
Caldwell always was a conservative
He still is. Conservatives are much more welcome in Republican party then in Democratic these years. So - i see no surprises and need no more explanations. He could get reelected as a conservative Democrat, but in resent day Louisiana it's much more convenient to run as a Republican. He betrayed none of his principles - he ran as rather conservative Democrat in 2007 and behave in office accordingly. So - what complains???
[ Parent ]
A lot of Obama democrats ad their vote to Caldwell majority

I need some explanation for understand the way he work for them, because I understand not. And at the same time I see some damage for the democratic brand, like LordMike tell.

Caldwell is one example, they are more.

[ Parent ]
Democrats, who voted for Caldwell
knew perfectly well that he is a conservative. They simply had a choice between conservative Democrat and even more conservative Republican, and choose first (may be as "lesser evil"). So far Caldwell did nothing contrary to what he promised during campaign: he promised to be "Conservative Louisiana's Democrat", and though he is formally a Republican now - nothing has changed into his approach to issues (party label notwithstanding). Essentially he is the same Caldwell as in 2007..
[ Parent ]
He switched parties strictly for political reasons
Not that it really matters, but it clearly is political opportunism. Why weren't any of these types switching when Democrats had more control in Southern states? Because they weren't going to give up their power to be in the minority. His switch had nothing to do with constituents.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
Of course. Everyone (among politicians) loves power.
And that's absolutely normal for politicain/ His switch was caused by following reasons:

1. It's much easierto get elected as a Republican in Louisiana
2. Most of his constituents moves to Republican party as well, so his switch reflects that

But by doing s he betrayed no one and nothing. I remember an ultraconservative Republican (Gabbard) in Hawaii who switched to Democrats exactly by the same reasons. He is stil both a conservative and Democratic state Senator. So - both parties are not "pure" in this respect, and i will not blame specifically either of them....

[ Parent ]
not everyone switch party

You seems to give the reason to Caldwell but is not right with the people what vote for him (many Obama democrats in the mix). Surely many of the voters what give him the office of LA-AG would not vote for him if they suspect he would switch.

[ Parent ]
They would
An alternative in 2007 was much more conservative Republican, so they really had nowhere else to go.
[ Parent ]
Foti (D) vs Caldwell (D)

Surely I would vote for Foti before than for a future party switcher if I would know it before. Foti then was the democratic incumbent.
[ Parent ]
Just be glad you don't live in Louisiana and call it a day......
There are some places in America where liberals who care about politics would be absolutely miserable, and Louisiana is one of those places.

You wouldn't want to be a Republican in New England or Maryland or California or Hawaii, or a Democrat in a number of states in the South and interior West.

I can barely stand Virginia politics, but the state having moved from red in the 90s to purple the past decade, and a growing nonwhite population to push it further left in the future, are the saving graces for me.

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

[ Parent ]
mm sometimes I live in the wrong place, and like you tell is a little sad

But well, when you have the hope of a change like you are living in Virginia, it can be nice.
[ Parent ]
Foti was a crook
who would easily lost to Republican candidate. That was a reason he had rather strong opponents at all: without that he would be rather easily reelected, but as it was - he had no chances
[ Parent ]
Sure you are a democrat? You would be the first democrat what defend a democrat switching to republican

Even I would vote for the republican before than for a future party switcher if I know it before.

I would care not about the electability of Foti or some other. A party switch cause of have better chance of be reelected is a bad political corruption.

What would be the difference between Caldwell and a republican? no-one. And we would have not the demage for the brand.

[ Parent ]
Absolutely no and have no such intentions..
I am Indie, who is not obliged to vote lockstep for any party and any candiddate. And firmly intend to stay that way. Because i am very slightly left of center in my views - i vote more frequently for Democratic candidates now, but i supported and continue to support Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, sometimes - Greens, and, of course - Indies. My role model in politics is a Republican, though he wouldn't be  popular in his own party these days.. And so on. I am big fan of moderate Republicans for example, so i am almost assuredly will root for Snowe if she wins primary in Maine. I was absolutely for Jodi Rell in Connecticut.. But i very dislike, for example, Jim DeMint and Sarah Palin, and would never vote for them.

So - i am very committed Indie, who desides whom to support in each race on basis of candidates in that race, who generally dislikes both parties as they are, and for whom there is only one final criteria in choosing candidates to support - his own research and own views. In race for Louisiana AG i would be for Caldwell both in 2007 and now.

I hope i answered your question..

[ Parent ]
In addition - i am very much a pragmatist.
Seeing for example the an extremely dire state of Democratic party in Louisiana (aggravating at least since 2007, and with no signs of improvement in sight)i am more surprised to see at least some rather conservative (in some cases - very conservative and more conservative then at least some Republicans there) Democrats still staying Democratic when they could be easily reelected as Republicans. For example - Jim Fannin and Billy Chandler. Both are conservative old-school Democrats (who would fit nicely in Republican majority caucus) from Northern Louisiana, where national Democratic brand (except in black areas) is very unpopular, and  their districts went easily not only for McCain and Jindal, but for Kennedy over Landrieu as well. But elections in Louisiana are in November, so they still hve time "to change colors"...
[ Parent ]
They do plenty of damage to the Democrats
and they'd do the exact same amount of damage to the Republicans if they acted the same way in their caucus.
[ Parent ]
If their constituents vote
to reelect them and happy with their representation - that's all i care about. And i don't care - whether they vote "Democratic way" or "Republican way" as long as they vote "constituent's way"...
[ Parent ]
mm you care about his future voters but care not about the voters what give him his current office.

This is not right.
[ Parent ]
oh christ
if we all went with the "constituents" way then absolutely nothing would get done.  I need to find the exact poll but when it comes to "average Americans", I always will remember that a 1/3rd of Americans believe there should be a third party.  Okay. then form one and let's be done with it!  

Voters do no believe in a reality of politics, they believe in a perception because they are lazy.  They will not take the time to find out truths so whichever truth is more perpetuated and in a more believable manner wins, period.  And because of this perception belief, I could honesty careless about "what the constituency wants."  It's about time our politicians realize their job is to work for the best of the country instead of their constituents, because sometimes we are dumb.  And, in this day and age of politics, you could literally almost convince a said constituency of anything with enough money so going with "majority rule" gets less and less important intellectually.  There is only one reason why politicians run tv ads and that's because they work.

[ Parent ]
They damage the brand...
...when they go on national TV grandstanding and badmouthing the party, it's leadership, and it's policies.  You want to be "independent"? That's fine.  Keep the badmouthing at home, then.
[ Parent ]
I don't care about brand at all
I care about constituents only. They seem to be of the same opinion as i am)))
[ Parent ]
Well, since they trew out most of the blue dogs...
Brand name does seem to matter.  Brand quality is how Apple can manage to jack the prices of their stuff through the roof, while Microsoft has to give stuff away.

The blue dogs got swept away 'cos the D brand suffered as a whole (which is why so many southern Dems are switching parties as well).  The obnoxiousness of the Blue Dogs tarnished the brand which helped drag them down to defeat.

As Charlie Cook said, macro factors were a bigger deal than micro factors.  So, conservadem parochial shortsightedness only served to alienate them from their constituents.

[ Parent ]
What worked in the past is no longer operable it seems
Polarization being the reason. Though in a less Republican year I still suspect many Blue Dogs would have won. It really was carnage across the board.
[ Parent ]
ABSOLUTELY disagree
Blue Dogs were thrown out not because their politics and approaches were extremely unpopular among the people (in fact - i am sure it was at least as popular nationwide as "regular democratic policy") but because their districts were infinitely more difficult to hold then those, say, of members of CPC. Nancy Pelosi is very unpopular nationwide, and obviously unelectable for anything, but her present district, but she can't be defeated in that district. Not so with Childers, Kratovil and others, whose politics were not less reasonable then Pelosi's, but who didn't had a luxury of having such district as she has. So, Blue Dogs were victims of very tarnished (nationwide) Democratic brand - here i agree. But it was not tarnished by them
[ Parent ]
Yup. Look at losses by southern D incumbents
Losses:

Edwards
Ortiz
Childers
Taylor
Bright
Boyd
Kosmas
Marshall
Spratt
Boucher
Pereillio

How many of these southern D incumbents were "annoying" to the base? Well, some might say all of them -- but if I remember right, none of them really spoke out against the D leadership. Perhaps Allan Boyd, but he had to tack left in his primary, and lost 54/42.

But none of these defeated southern D reps were seriously annoying, especially when compared to the survivor blue dogs:

Boren
Ross
Barrow
Schuler
Kissell
McIntyre

In other words, the Ds in the south who were "obnoxious" to progressive causes survived.

What I dislike about this subthread is comments like "Blue dogs lost because of brand" does not have any data.

Would such an assertion be thought of as gospel, post merger?  

[ Parent ]
Here i fully agree
Yes, say, Bright or Childers voted against vast majority of Obama's program. But they did it in nonoffensive way (usually even without citing opposition from their constituents, which was strong). Bright simply couldn't repeat his 2008 performance in wave 2010, though he ran one of the strongest (IMHO - strongest) race among Democratic incmbents. Childers wasn't weak either, but in addition to wave year he had much stronger (possibly - strongest possible) opponent in 2010 (contrary to 2008)

So, it was not a repuditation of Blue Dogs. It was strong repuditation of national Democratic programs in Blue Dog's districts, which was reflected in Blue Dog's fate. I repeat - as unpopular as Nancy Pelosi was - she was unbeatable under any circumstances in her district. Feel the difference..

[ Parent ]
But, WHY was the brand tarnished?
I'm glad you agree that the brand was tarnished, but you ignore the reasons why.  The blue dogs watered down the stimulus, making it less effective, and making it seem like it "failed".  the blue dogs stalled and prolonged the health care vote, allowing the opposition to frame it as "socialism".  The blue dogs prevented unemployment extensions which would have helped blue dogs in the midwest at the very least.  The blue dogs halped make Nancy Pelosi unpopular by trashing her at every instance.  No one respects somone who trashes their boss in public.

The blue dogs created a self fulfilling prophecy in losing.  They helped create and amplify the anti-democratic atmosphere that contributed to their losses.  Even if the most obnoxious ones managed to survive with such tactics, they damaged the brand so badly, that their fellow brethren suffered significantly as a result.

[ Parent ]
Again - disagree STRONGLY.
Very strongly, if we go into details. Generally - Blue Dog's approach was my approach as well: i had and still have grave doubts against large parts of stimulus and health care bills and absolutely not sure how i would vote on them if i would be a congressman. And i repeat - i constder myself slightly left-of-center, though with fiscal conservayive streak. And coming from Russia i agree that HCR bill had some semblance of socialist medicine as well (and i am, naturally for such origin - fiercely anti-socialist and even more - anti-communists: we suffered under them way too long). The stimulus, HCR AND Nancy were unpopular in Blue Dog's districts from the very beginning so "trashing" simply reflected (once again) the mood of their constituents. And (it's easy for me as Indie) applaude them for putting interests of their constituents first and party interests - second..

So, probably, we will disagree a lot in the future))). I, personally, intenseky dislike "party robots" (of any party) and very much like "mavericks". So - i have a lot of sympathies both for Blue Dogs and few remaining moderate Republicans, and very little - for "true believers" (both Democratic and Republican)))

[ Parent ]
I am sympathatic to your anti-communist ties...
I understand them better than you think, however Russia is suffering quite badly under a "free market rules all, the rich control everything" approach at the moment as well.  Do not equate Soviet communism with European "socialism"--they are very different beasts.

The stimulus wasn't really popular anywhere 'cos no one likes spending, but it would have been made more acceptable had it been big enough to make a positive impression.  By watering it down, all the conservadems did was make it more unpopular by making it less effective.  They thought that weakening it would help them, but it did the reverse--it made it impossible to sell.

The health care bill was definitely weak, and conservadems stripped out the popular provisions in the bills that would have gone over well with the public.  Sure they made it less "socialistic" (i.e. less effective), but they were accused of being communists by the right regardless (even though the final bill was Bob Dole's 1990's health care bill), so you might as well go all in with a better, stronger bill that would have been more popular instead of weakening a non-socialist bill that would be attacked as communism no matter who wrote it (i.e. Bob Dole).

Successful policy leads to successful politics in every district, including blue dog districts.  Just look at social security and Medicare--do you think those "socialist" programs are unpopular in conservative districts?

Conservadems aren't seeing the forest for the trees.  If the national party is successful, the success helps them even in conservative districts because of a better brand.  If they stymie the success of the party, they make more trouble for themselves no matter how "independent" they seem.

Republicans see the forest for the trees.  Even Republicans in liberal districts tow the party line on every important vote and do not make waves.  They know that being effective and disciplined helps their more vulnerable members, while having individual members vasilate and obstruct only weakens their electoral position.  The strategy that I'm arguing for isn't some lefty pinko idea.  It's taken solely from the right, who have been very successful at getting "moderates" re-elected even though those moderates' voting records are hard right on every important issue.

Republicans understand winning strategy.  Conservadems don't.  If they don't change their self-defeating strategies, they will fall into the dustbin of history.

[ Parent ]
As i said before - we will disagree a lot and frequently)))
And as i frequently say - "we shall see")))
[ Parent ]
The only brand that mattered in November was the party label
Republicans beat Democrats in traditionally GOP and swing districts. In most cases ideology, tactics and campaigning didn't matter. Yes, Tom Perriello did better than Glenn Nye and that means something. But in the final analysis they both lost and that is what counts.
[ Parent ]
I think Pereillio is the exception
Was just looking at http://elections.nytimes.com/2...

perhaps the other somewhat progressive Ds who survived are Brad Miller and David Price -- but the political demographics of their districts are somewhat uncharacteristic of other non-VRA parts of the south.

[ Parent ]
Again - agree fully
The drop in Democratic percentage between 2008 and 2010 was almost universal, at least - in vast majority of districts. But if that drop, say, in slightly Democratic Rick Larsen's district led to very narrow win (51%) for him in 2010 against very solid (62%) win of 2008 (but still a win), for majority of Blue Dogs (many - narrowly elected in 2008 in districts, which must not elect Democrats at all under circumstances even remotely resembling "normal") that meant difference between rather narrow victory and (in most cases) - rather solid defeat.
[ Parent ]
I made this comparison to a former prof the other day, which she loved
That the Blue Dogs are like the tea party when it comes to political effects and outcomes.  Both are on the fringe of their party in ideology and from 2009-2010 we saw the Blue Dogs dictate the messaging and now we'll see if the tea-party will do the same for the House.  And, people want to look to the other end of the Dem political spectrum for their tea party-like group.  Nope, they are the Green Party already and not part of the Dem base like the Blue Dogs (yellow dogs) were.  The very, very liberal members of Congress have near universal cave-in abilities.  Not the Blue Dogs, and neither does the tea party.  (Both being based in the South is the kicker, and is something I haven't gotten to contemplate yet.)

And I can say this because I look at it from a political, horse race perspective.  Zero policy preference needed to say that.

[ Parent ]
Home-state senator
I cut him some slack for that.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
ALAN GRAYSON!!!!!11!!!1!!!


NY-14, DC-AL (college) Distraught Mets fan
[ Parent ]
Grayson was a nut.
Democratic Michelle Bachmann... Glad that he lost (rare case for me)
[ Parent ]
I don't think
he was nearly as bad as Bachmann. I'm sure a lot of Republicans don't like his views, but a lot of people, here at least, seemed to have more problems with his attitude and style rather than his ideology.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I think that
Grayson was worse. That Taliban Dan commercial was worse than any ad Bachman ran. Also she is not that smart Grayson should no better  

TX-13,22,Dem
[ Parent ]
But that's exactly
what I just said: people have a problem with his style and attitude, not with his views. That's perfectly fine, but they are two different types of concerns.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I dunno
I prefer someone who lies to win versus someone who just lies non-stop for shits and giggles.  I can at least guess what the former would do.  Granted, you still have to question the intellectual level of both because who on the Grayson campaign would think they'd get away with that?  Shirley Sherrod, hello?!

Speaking of which, I never did my shout out in the Daily Digest this is pertinent to for whichever mod remembered my favorite Bachmann quote.  That would be of her saying there was a plan to divide Iraq in three and give a piece to Iran for a terrorist training ground.  I mean wtf.....  She's lucky she pulled that shit in March 2007 because if it had been closer to the anti-American witch hunt, she absolutely would have lost.  That quote was worth about a month of press here locally.

[ Parent ]
Joe Wilson
The better comparison would be Grayson to Wilson. I don't think either man is truly mentally unstable, whereas I feel Bachmann suffers from legitimate mental illness. Both Wilson and Grayson are loudmouth douchebags, and I too am glad that Grayson lost last November. Thin the heard of the weak, since we were going to lose the House regardless.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
yeah
The Dem equivalent of Bachmann is Cynthia McKinney, not Grayson. I don't think that Bachmann is clinically mentally ill, though. Her paranoia doesn't appear to extend beyond politics to her everyday life.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
I dunno.
She is not dumb, as she graduated from some pretty decent schools. But I am always leery when someone says that dod spoke directly to them, and told them to be a politician. I am skeptical of anyone that truly believes that they and god sat down and had a conversation, where god said "You know Michele, what I want you to do is become a politician, and do it in the most hateful, partisan way possible. I want you to use my name to condemn those that look, talk, believe, or live differently than you." That just seems very Son-of-Sam to me. I am not trying to make light of mental illness, as I have immediate family members that have struggled with schizophrenia. But anytime someone honestly believed, and professes to hear voices telling them to do something, I can't help but wonder if there is swelling in the cerebral cortex.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
no, wrong wrong on her schools
I made this same mistake for far too long in defending her," well she has a law degree so she can't be that bad".  Yeah, from that freak school Pat Roberts runs.

I do give her the benefit of the doubt on the voices as I'd hope they are metaphorical god voices.  But I'm sure you've seen the video of her speaking to some mega-church in the suburbs where she said god has told her to be with her husband, go to law school, told her to obey her husband who told her to go into tax law, and told her to run for Congress.  Maybe I just wasn't a Christian long enough because I didn't hear shit.  ;)  

[ Parent ]
William and Mary
She has a degree from there. And that is a very good college. Yes, she went to that weird fucking school for her JD, but she does have a Masters from W&M. You can't be dumb and have any kind of degree from there.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
I've met plenty of stupid people
with PhD's, including from really reputable schools like Columbia. Going through the motions required to get a degree is not the same as being smart, and it can depend a lot on who's on your committee, what your relationship with Administration is, etc.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  
[ Parent ]
Were they stupid at what they got their PhD in or in general?
As a PhD student at a reputable school, I could believe either, but I am wondering.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
Bachmann V. McKinney
That is a very good comparison.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
RE "her paranoia doesn't appear to extend beyond politics"
I would ask some of her many ex-staffers about that. I think they would tell you that Bachmann accuses many close to her of betrayal and that her shrieking accusations have motivated more that one hasty resignation.
[ Parent ]
Her former chief of staff had this to say
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo...

"While she passes the conservative test, my opinion from my association with her is she's not going to be an electable candidate for us," said Carey. "And even if she were elected I don't believe she would be ready for the position of the president of the United States."

She's had a few chiefs of staff. There is clearly some reason why she's run through so many.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.

[ Parent ]
Gordon, i mean))

[ Parent ]
I don't see how Giffords would have run even without the tragedy
Giffords ran against a nutjob in kelly and still barely won.  I heard from voters in the district that would have stayed home if she was running against anyone sane.  She is a good candidate but the dem brand in the state was terrible.  Brewer won 54-42 percent after a debate meltdown.   Brewer had as bad a debate as you could ever have and still won easily.  Arizona was gone for the dems with Obama as president suing the state before the shooting.

If she had run against a Paton she would have lost by a decent margin.  Mitchell lost by 9 percent because he wasn't running against kelly.  All the internal polling showed Paton as the stronger candidate than Kelly.

It defies logic that a dem would have won statewide while the president of their own party is suing the state.

If you look at Napalitano's numbers they are 40 percent approval and 55 percent disapproval.

The state was gone for dems with Obama suing the state.

Her district even before the shooting was going to be more protected given the growth in southern arizona.

I don't see how she would have given up a safer seat to run an impossible campaign.

If anything the shooting has made it possible for a dem to win as the tone in arizona is now different and instead of the issue of obama suing the state and a dem rep saying arizona should be boycotted their is sympathy for giffords and the tone is different.

Before the shooting a dem had no chance to win this seat.  So saying that giffords would have won the seat in 2012 if it wasn't for the shooting is unrealistic.  The dem brand in arizona was terrible during the 2010 election.  A nutjob almost beat Grijavla in a safe dem seat.

Remember if she had run and lost she would have been out of congress it isn't like running for president as a senator and keeping your job.   I don't see any way she would have given up her seat to run in arizona with obama suing the state and an almost imposssible campaign.

If you look at the congressional campaign numbers in arizona across the state the 2010 election was a blowout.    

2010 was an anomaly
It's big mistake to look at it as anything other than just a midterm anomaly which doesn't represent real trends. It's interesting you signed up just to make a long post lecturing about how unrealistic posters are here.

24, male, African-American, CA-24, Democrat. Chair of the SSP Black Caucus.
[ Parent ]
It's not an anomaly when the prsident of your party is suing your state
Nationwide I agree 2012 will be much better for the dems with a bigger turnout and the economy improving.

But to think a dem would have won arizona with the issue before the shooting of obama suing the state defies logic.

Yes 2010 was an anomaly nationwide but Arizona was trending besides demographics as bad a state for the dems with Obama suing the state.

Without the shooting the issue would have been obama suing the state.   That wouldn't have exactly had dems running to campaign in 2012.

Look at Colorado dems did much better in 2010 than Arizona.  They would the governor's race easily.

Why because Obama wasn't suing arizona and the dem brand wasn't toxic like arizona.

As bad as 2010 was it was more an arizona thing than an anomaly.

[ Parent ]
You're making the common and silly mistake of waging the last campaign......
It doesn't matter what happened in 2010.  The electorate has already dramatically shifted back into "neutral."  Obama has rebounded, including in AZ where he's still a little underwater but not by a lot...on election day last year it was a lot.

This will be a competitive and very winnable race for us next year if we have a competent candidate.  And yes Giffords would have been that if she wasn't shot, but there are others, too.

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

[ Parent ]
This seems mostly right...
plus just being a Tucson politician is a major handicap with 2/3 of the state living in Maricopa and Pinal. Giffords would've been a potential contender statewide someday if she had not been shot - now she has the biggest boom-bust/nothing in between potential of any politician in the history of the republic.

I like Napolitano to come back and work her magic. If Arizonans can just make a little money they really don't care about anything else and will just vote the best media campaign.

[ Parent ]
I don't get this comment.
How does her recovery hurt her? If anything, it helps her, because she won't have to take any votes.

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Smart Pols like Giffords pick their spots to run
She ran in a good dem year in 2006.  I see McCain retiring in 2016.  You would have the open governor's race in 2014.

I just don't see at her young age that she would have run in arizona statewide in 2012 with the president suing the state and with so many options down the road at a better time for a dem to win.

Smart pols run with the wind at their back not with the wind in their face.  Look at the dems clamoring to run in 2008 instead of 2004.

probably
If Giffords had not been shot I think she would have been the strongest Dem candidate, and would have had a chance against any opponent. 2012 would not have been as bad for Dems in AZ as 2010 in any case, as the economy won't be quite as bad and the immigration issue would have cooled off at least somewhat. Still, I agree that it might not have been the best time to move. Over time I think the state is likely to trend blue as the rest of the southwest has.

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
We Are One-Third of the Way There
A few things:

1. As my subject line suggests, we are one-third of the way there, meaning that one of the three seats currently held by Republicans that would be genuinely good pick up opportunities should the incumbent retire or get knocked off just saw its incumbent do just that. It's unclear what will happen in Indiana and Maine, but this is a piece of genuinely good news, because while probably start out as the underdogs unless Giffords is the nominee (more on this below), a big part of the problem in taking the seat just went away. (You could also say the same about Texas, but even someone as optimistic about that as I am would be nuts to say Arizona isn't a better option for the Democrats than Texas is.)

2. I am not sure what to think about who the Democratic nominee will be. My guess is, if it's Giffords, the race starts off as tossup at the absolute worst. I'm not sure who might run on the Republican side, but I doubt there's anyone who is strong enough to beat back the sympathy she will have going for her. But will she be the nominee? I have absolutely no idea, because I don't know what her condition will be like, but I can almost guarantee that if she's recovered, the nomination is hers if she wants it. As cynical and insensitive as this sounds, I am dying to see polling on this.

As for who else might run, in this race, as well as many others, I wouldn't be so hung up on the candidate as long as he or she didn't have some sort of overwhelmingly negative attributes.

3. I also think this all but guarantees Obama contests Arizona. It's probably the one state that he didn't target as seriously as Virginia or Ohio in 2008 that he would have targeted in 2012 anyway, and with an open Senate seat, what reason is there not to? Why not give a push to a candidate who can keep or expand the majority? Some have said it's harder than it seems because of the immigration issue, but even if that is the case, it's still worth putting significant resources in until it's clear it's not making any difference, if it ever comes to that.

4. What are the chances a Teabagger gets the nomination? Kyl was supposedly liked by the Tea Party crowd, but now that this is an open seat, I have to think the chances of someone from that end winning are significantly improved. And if a current office holder like Gosar or Schweikert who may not be heavily associated with that part of the base (if that is the case; I am not sure) has to go up against a Teabagger, would that hurt him in the general as much as it might in another state?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

hmm
1. I agree.

2. I think Giffords would be a strong favorite to win the seat outright if she can demonstrate that she has no significant mental impairment. To do this, she would probably have to perform well in a debate, whether by talking or by typing her answers out if her speech is impaired. I would not want to see her polled yet except for maybe on favorable/unfavorable, because (a) it isn't at all clear what sort of shape she will be in a year from now and (b) we are still only a few weeks removed from a news cycle where she was the dominant story.

3. I agree. I think it was already in their interests to contest AZ because it will likely have several competitive House races and because a serious presidential campaign would likely help the disorganized state Dems get their act together. Now it's even more so.

4. I think it's very likely that a fringe candidate wins the R primary. As I mentioned above most of their primaries in 2010 were free-for-alls, and they don't have a great track record of picking the most electable people.

41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
You have no idea
how happy I was to read your comments about how Republicans don't clear the field in Arizona. But I wonder, will they start doing it now?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I think the more politically interesting race
will be a potentially very divisive Republican primary.  I wonder if someone like Congressman Jeff Flake wants to run -- he's much more moderate/libertarian than people like Jan Brewer and certainly JD Hayworth.  It really could be a "mainstream conservative vs "'bagger-type" primary.
Flake, interestingly, has
the most "conservative" voting record in the last Congress by DW-Nominate http://voteview.com/HOUSE_SORT...

I put "conservative" in quotes because it's a bit of a misnomer, even though it's often the shorthand people use.

What it really means is that he's got an extreme voting record.  As Wiki says, "Flake is often among a handful of Republicans casting 'no' votes on bills most of his party supports."  And when he does that, he's usually not voting with the Democrats, so that puts him at the extreme end of the DW-Nominate spectrum.

Obviously, he's not an extreme conservative in an orthodox ideological sense, at least not on every issue--he wants to end the Cuban embargo and voted for DADT repeal.  It goes to show you that while something like DW-Nominate is a useful tool, you have to keep in mind what it's measuring.  (Also, issues where Flake is not a down-the-line conservative probably come up for fewer votes than other issues).

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

[ Parent ]
Flake, interestingly, has
the most "conservative" voting record in the last Congress by DW-Nominate http://voteview.com/HOUSE_SORT...

I put "conservative" in quotes because it's a bit of a misnomer, even though it's often the shorthand people use.

What it really means is that he's got an extreme voting record.  As Wiki says, "Flake is often among a handful of Republicans casting 'no' votes on bills most of his party supports."  And when he does that, he's usually not voting with the Democrats, so that puts him at the extreme end of the DW-Nominate spectrum.

Obviously, he's not an extreme conservative in an orthodox ideological sense, at least not on every issue--he wants to end the Cuban embargo and voted for DADT repeal.  It goes to show you that while something like DW-Nominate is a useful tool, you have to keep in mind what it's measuring.  (Also, issues where Flake is not a down-the-line conservative probably come up for fewer votes than other issues).

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

[ Parent ]
Ok, I don't know why that happened but I apologize(nt)


25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
Why I Like Flake, At Least Among Republicans
He's arguably the most principled member on that side of the aisle. And while a believer, he's not a nut. Naturally that might make it harder for him to win a primary.
[ Parent ]
Flake
is basically Ron Paul-lite.  He votes against a ton of stuff favored by his own party, is generally considered far-right, yet on social issues demonstrates a more moderate outlook.  He's an interesting one.

Looking forward to the Democrats putting up a real fight here.  Arizona WILL be competitive presidentially.

[ Parent ]
What makes you so sure of that?
I mean, I believe they will definitely invest resources in the state, but I was wondering if you had any particular knowledge.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
No unique knowledge
simply observing that in 2008, the most popular politician of Arizona ran for president and only carried his state by 9%.  Homestate advantages are typically worth at least 5%, sometimes more.  It's logical to assume that Obama starts off competitive in Arizona if he is doing well nationwide, which he is.
[ Parent ]
So
So, the real question is who jumps in for the GOP?  Will it be someone from the house seat or someone else?  Of course, there is the danger that someone to far on the fringe gets the nod and gives an opening to the Dems.
I agree that without GG, the Dems do not have an obvious candidate.  I would try to recruit an ambitious young and charismatic Hispanic candidate.  They probably wouldn't win, but it would get some extra turnout for Obama and other down ticket Dems.
For the GOP, I'm hoping for Flake as he's one of the most libertarian-leaning members in the house.  I don't dislike Shadegg because he's good on spending (my key issue), but he would be number two.

43 - Male - GOP/Libertarian - FL 22
Also
who will Jim DeMint back down here? Jeff Flake would be a good candidate, except for the fact that he supports comprehensive immigration reform I believe?

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
Flake's libertarianism could probably give something of an opening for a more orthodox (read: authoritarian) Republican
Not Shadegg, though. And Hayworth's a joke... maybe Chris Simcox?

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Kind of hoping Ben Quayle runs


Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
I'd rather JD Hayworth run...
if he can be beat. I think he's a turd of human being and has a loathsome personality, so I'd love to see him get his ass handed to him in race.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Nah
McCain's scorched earth campaign against Hayworth eliminated him as a candidate to take seriously for the foreseeable future.  

19, Male, Independent, CA-12
[ Parent ]
What specifically did he do to
hurt Hayworth so badly?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
He dug up those infomercials Hayworth made a couple years back
Basically they were these early morning TV things of the "How To Get Free Money From The Government" type. A lot of other things in there too, like whacking Hayworth with his ties to Jack Abramoff, but I think the infomercials were what sank him.  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Oh, right.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
At this point, I don't think Hayworth makes it out of a primary
Too bad of a candidate.  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Agreed
I think we're probably going to need something like that to happen to win this seat.  I'd put him as one of the most likely people to have a "macaca"-type moment.

26, Male, Democrat, VA-08
[ Parent ]
Yeah
I guess I'm just being selfish, though. I just want him to run so he can make more ridiculous ads like the "Barack Obama is the worst president in history" one. He was just so hilariously grim!

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
He told the reporter he got the wrong number and hung up
What a dick.  What the hell is wrong with that guy?  How is your father a politician (even that politician) and you're that much of an amateur?  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
To partially quote Ann Richards
"He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Actually the reporter did call the wrong number....
This correction appeared in Politico @ 3:13 PM:  An earlier version of this story reported that Rep. Ben Quayle refused to comment and hung up on this reporter.  A spokesman with Quayle's office said the cell phone number that was called no longer belongs to the congressman and that he did not speak to a POLITICO reporter Thursday.


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...
[ Parent ]
Other possible candidates
1. Felecia Rotellini, the former AG candidate, only lost by 5, the narrowest statewide loss I believe.

2. On the "young hispanic candidate" idea, fun underproportioned representation facts: Did you know there seems to be only one Hispanic member of the Phoenix City Council?  And he's only half Hispanic: Michael Nowakowski.  Phoenix seems to be 41.5% Hispanic/Latino, and there are 8 city council seats.

3. Out of the 90 members of the Arizona Legislature, only 11 are in the Latino Caucus: http://www.azlcf.com/Latino%20...  That's 12%, vs. 30% of the population of Arizona (well, 30% of the population of Arizona is Hispanic, but I would guess the two groups pretty much overlap in Arizona).


25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

Also, does Arizona have
Any Hispanic/Latino mayors of a city of significant size?  I don't want to/know how to make presumptions about a person's ethnic background from their picture and name, but go here(http://www.usmayors.org/meetmayors/mayorsatglance.asp), search for "Arizona", and tell me if I'm missing anyone.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
To answer my own question
Using the Arizona Legislature Latino Caucus' list of Latino elected officials, by far the largest city with a Latino mayor is Avondale, Arizona, which has a population of about 81,000.  The mayor is Marie Lopez Rogers: http://www.ci.avondale.az.us/i...  She has six grandchildren, so she might fail the "young" part of the criteria.  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
If she were a little young
Marie Lopez Rogers could make an interesting candidate. Avondale is majority-Hispanic, but it's also largely middle class with a sizable white minority, so it's pretty swing. 54% Obama I believe. That's more conservative territory than any Democrat in the state Senate represents.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
I remember hearing
that white Republicans took out several Latino Democrats in the legislature last year, casualties of the escalating fervor over SB 170.
[ Parent ]
Rebecca Rios
State Senate whip, lost her State Sen seat in 2010, but sounds like she wants to run for it again, but she could also maybe go for Kyl's seat.

http://findarticles.com/p/news...

[ Parent ]
Other potential Dems?
Just to recap the Dem Senate field from 2010:

Rodney Glassman, thirtysomething Tucson Councilman and 2010 nominee, got slaughtered by McCain (60-35), though that was technically better than 2004 (76-20!). Still, probably a non-starter.

Cathy Eden, 2010 Senate primary candidate (polled second after Glassman). Educator, former legislator, state agency director under both Dem and GOP Governors. Age 61 (here's her page from 2010: http://www.edenforaz.com/#/).

John Dougherty, Phoenix Times journalist. Investigated Arpaio and broke the Keating Five story. Polled 3rd behind Eden

Randy Perez. Civil rights and labor lawyer/activist, polled 4th in the primary.

There were no challengers to Goddard in gube primary, and there's no other recent statewide officers other than Goddard and Napolitano. State Sen. Kyrsten Sinema has drawn some "rising star" press, but barely Senate age and doesn't sound like an AZ statewide candidate (liberal, openly bisexual). Wonder if there's anyone more electable among the Dem legislators?

Without Giffords, Eden and maybe Dougherty sound interesting, but Goddard or Kirkpatrick would be better.

On the GOP side, let's hope for JD Hayworth! That "stay tuned" sounds promising to me.

Amazingly enough
Four of Arizona's 9 Senate Democrats are openly LGBT: Paula Aboud, Jack Jackson, Robert Meza, and Kyrsten Sinema.  Of the remaining 5, 3 represent Phoenix and 2 represent Tucson (in fact, only Jackson represents a district outside of them, and he represents the reservations I believe).  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
Giuliano
And of course Neil Giuliano was mayor of Tempe for a decade. There'd seem to be LGBT possibilities.
[ Parent ]
Uh, no.
Glassman is terrible and anyone who lost to Glassman is by that metric even worse. Glassman lost a very contentious election for Democratic Party Chairman last month and is, I think, after two losses in three months pretty much dead politically.

18- Hamburg, Germany (non-US-citizen)
[ Parent ]
As I've said before, I think, at least for the time being, only a candidate who SUPPORTS SB 1070 can win in Arizona
If Quayle or Hayworth wins the nomination, you might well see a single-digit race, but, even then, I suspect it'll be an uphill climb for the Democrat. I don't think Giffords would've prevailed here, and, though Goddard seems like a terrific guy, he's on the side of an issue where the vast majority of Arizonans are on the other side. If Jeff Flake wins the nomination, I would expect at least a 15% win from him.

For daily political commentary, visit me at http://polibeast.blogspot.com/ and http://twitter.com/polibeast
Don't know if I agree with your thoughts on SB 1070
But I do agree that this race is probably off the table if Flake's the R nominee.  

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Flake
Opposes SB 1070
[ Parent ]
Why do you say that?
Why can't someone support immigration reform, even very tough reforms that would make a lot of moderates and liberals unhappy, while opposing SB1070?

Also, why is Flake so popular?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Honestly
I'm not even convinced that Flake is as popular on the ground here as the blogosphere makes him out to be. Question number one is: How many people outside of the East Valley even know who he is?

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
Jeff Flake is the most popular politician in Arizona
If he is the nominee, no Democratic candidate -- that includes Napolitano, Goddard, Rotellini, Paul Newman, or a healthy Giffords -- will come within 10 points.

The only thing Flake can't guarantee that he can do is win a Republican primary against an entrenched incumbent, say John McCain.  That's the only reason he hasn't done this before.  If he'd run for Governor in 2006 against Napolitano, I'm pretty sure he would have won.

Sorry, but I'm Tekzilla on this one.  Unless Flake loses in the primary, this seat is off the table.

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...

AZ
Funny enough, I don't think this is off the table if Flake runs.  He has some out there positions in relation to the Republican Party (His Libertarian side), so they may become a problem.

29/D/Male/NY-01
[ Parent ]
Flake
I think he would be the strongest R candidate, and would be favored to beat any Dem except a fully-recovered Giffords. AZ has a lot of vaguely libertarian independents, and Flake cleans up with them. His problem would be in the primary. The militant reactionary nationalist wing of the tea party (i.e., most of it) doesn't like him because he isn't hostile toward gays or Mexicans. He ran up a bigger margin in the primary than in the general in 2010.  

41, Ind, CA-05
[ Parent ]
Cool
[ Parent ]
AZ Dem Party Source: Giffords should have "right of first refusal"
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo...

who knows if the source is even a significant insider, but it could turn out that the field won't develop until Giffords is given a bit of time to make a recovery... waiting until summer seems reasonable.  I wouldn't be surprised that the party insiders have viewed Giffords as their best shot at AZ-SEN for some time.

Anyone know when the filing deadline is?
I'm sure it isn't for a very long time and Giffords is doing better than anyone could have expected.
[ Parent ]
It's June 1.
There's more than enough time for her to get better and jump in, I think.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Still I think we should go on without her for now
and let her rest for the time being.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
[ Parent ]
Oh, of course.
If I were in the Arizona Democratic party and/or Patty Murray, I'd simply want confirmation there will be sufficient resources at the candidate's disposal, ideally Obama contesting the state before anything else, at least at this point.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Obama contesting the state, and strong challenges in 01, 03, and 05, along with good defence in 04, 07, and 08
And heck, why not just run good candidates everywhere?  Even if they're running hopelessly against strong incumbents they can still stay positive and work mostly on turnout.

Gosar the Rogue Ophthalmologist ought to get a good opponent, as should Ben Quayle for obvious reasons.  And we should definitely have someone strong going for the fifth; if no one else, it seems that people's objections to Mitchell are only about his performance in a horrible election year, and someone's praised him for fighting till the bitter end.  And we need someone in place to take the sixth if Flake wants his promotion.

Which just leaves Pastor, Grijalva, and Giffords to run strong campaigns themselves, and then we get a decent person to run a turnout-boosting campaign against Franks.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
GOP Whip
wgo do you think will be the next whip?  I know Lamar!'s been trying to work his way up the latter, but he's been thwarted at ever attempt.  Might Thune, if he decides not to run for president try to be the whip?  OFC after seeing what happened to daschle and McGovern, he could decide not to attempt to go national, or figure Daschle and McGovern's problems had more to do with SD's conservative nature than entering ntl politics.  

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.
Lamar Alexander is the logical choice.


Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I can see DeMint going for it
especially if it's him vs. Lamar!. The reactionary block of the Republican Senate caucus would likely back him, since there's a perception that Lamar! isn't a doctrinaire conservative.
[ Parent ]
PPP: GOP honeymoon over.
Generic ballot at 45 Dem/41 GOP and approval of Boehner slightly underwater.

http://publicpolicypolling.blo...

That was fast.

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

I was going to post this on the DD, but...
the power is going out here in 45 minutes from 3 to 6 so they can do maintenance.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Also....
You gotta check out the comments under that link.  There's this one commenter who is going crazy and thinks 2012 will be a 2012 GOP wave year and that Obama will lose in a landslide.  I frankly want to know how much paint he huffed as a kid.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
I love it when the PPP guys
respond to the comments and tell the nutty ones, calmly, why they are so wrong.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Ah, Cristian Liberty is back
I was wondering where he/she/it went! CL used to be a frequent troll on the PPP blog, but then for a while that stopped. I guess he/she/it went to hibernate for the winter or something. I missed those crazy troll comments.

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
I think this indicates
we are in for another unstable election. PPP just mentioned that if an election were held today Democrats could take back the house.

19, Self Appointed Chair of the SSP Gay Caucus (I claimed it first :p), male, Dem, IN-09 (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09)
[ Parent ]
That was silly for PPP guys to say, they still take their own numbers too seriously......
Good pollster, no question, but PPP needs to learn to analyze their own polls with a little more discretion.

That Congressional ballot test result is a little hard to believe, frankly.  Nothing has happened to make Republicans more unpopular the past month or two.  The stuff they're struggling with recently is not anything ordinary voters pay attention to.  Nothing has happened to move numbers against Boehner's gang.

Don't get me wrong, I'm persuadable on this if other polling corroborates PPP, but for now PPP is a definite outlier.

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

[ Parent ]
The anti-choice
obsession may be resonating, especially when it comes to redefining rape. I doubt that went over well with most women and indies.
[ Parent ]
The real reason why Kyl is retiring?
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-...

Retiring Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) openly said Thursday that he would consider serving as the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2012, if asked by the eventual GOP nominee.

(h/t RRH / MassGOP aka BostonPatriot)

Don't think so.
He could stay in the Senate and be selected VP just as easily.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Yea
That's hat Biden did. He even ran and won reelection in Delaware.

26 White Male. Born and raised in MN-8, currently living in MN-5.

"A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything."

[ Parent ]
Here's my first thoughts
1)If Flake runs, I think he is the extremely heavy favorite (9 to 1 or so). I see him as the toughest person for us to beat.
2)If Hayworth or Quayle wins the GOP nomination, I think this is anywhere from a tossup to maybe lean D. I think Quayle has a snowball's chance in hell of making it in the primary, and Hayworth doesn't have much more.
3)There's no obvious Tea Party candidate here. Flake's libertarianism fits well with some but not all of the Tea Party, Hayworth has a following among them but he is very damaged, Brewer could pick up the anti-immigration crowd but I'm not sure how Tea Partiers would choose if they had to choose between her and Hayworth or Flake.
4)Again I think Flake is the strong favorite to win the GOP primary. If I had to rate the GOP primary crowd I would say Flake 1st, Brewer 2nd, (big gap) Hayworth 3rd, Shadegg 4th, (big gap) Quayle 5th.
5)I think a potential GOP wild card could be Vernon Parker, former mayor of Paradise Valley and Joe Arpaio's endorsed candidate to succeed Shadegg in the 3rd last year.
6)Goddard is by far the Dem's best candidate for this at the moment, but I think we might have a better shot if we could get a strong pro-SB1070 candidate.

Male, VA-08
I get that immigration
is still going to be a big issue in the state for a long time to come, but why can't the Democrat come out against it but still be seen as sufficiently not too liberal? When people go so far to the right as they did with SB 1070, they cede the rest of the spectrum to others. Giffords can easily tack to the right on this if she wants to and probably still retain all of her liberal base. The same could probably be said for any Democrat.

Interestingly enough, in the exit polls from this past year, only 13 percent of people in Arizona in the Goddard-Brewer race named immigration as the most important issue facing the country today, even as the majority of the population seemed supportive of Arizona's law.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

[ Parent ]
Bingo
Eventually pandering to the lowest common denominator on immigration is going to bite Republicans in the ass, even if they've scored some cheap gains for now. Gabby came up with the exact right balance; rallying hard against the federal government's neglect of the border (and she's right; these issues are based in tangible problems) while still giving a wink to the liberal base.  

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
The reason I think being for SB1070 could help a Dem
Is that it gives you a clear, easy way to differentiate yourself from the national democratic party, which you need to do to win statewide in AZ. If you are a Democrat in AZ and you have to find one place to take a stand against the national party, I think it is on SB 1070. Nico, I know you have great knowledge of Arizona politics, certainly better than my own, but I think the best way for a Dem to position themselves in the middle here is to maybe support SB 1070 and a path to citizenship or the DREAM Act or something. I think just rallying against how the federal gov't is not doing enough is not enough for some voters, who want a clear example of when you go against the Democratic party on immigration.  

Male, VA-08
[ Parent ]
I don't know
I think SB 1070 could be a good place to draw the line, and use that as a point of contrast between show-boating Republicans flippantly breaking the law and Democrats who (theoretically) are just as fed up with the poor job the federal government has done on this issue for years, but instead present pragmatic, tangible and legal solutions to the problem that work with the feds. I think if done right that can be a clear enough distinction that you don't have to tie up your fate as a candidate with a law that is pretty clearly on borrowed judicial time. Now we just need those solutions...

Plus embracing SB 1070 would cause Hispanics to just stop voting period. Hispanics who did show up voted extremely Democratic and helped Dems keep things together as well as they did.

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

[ Parent ]
But why can't they oppose SB1070
and still propose tougher reforms than national Democrats might? Or are you advocating that Democrats say they support SB1070 while proposing changes to it that drastically alter what it can do? If not, then what is the point of saying someone should support it but also try to support the DREAM Act?

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Actually
Trent Franks would be the obvious Tea Party candidate if he ran.  He was Tea Party before Tea Party was cool.  Plus, he has incentive to run, because his district is slowly bluing and he might lose it in a decade or so (on the other hand, McCain might retire by then, so he might just wait).

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...
[ Parent ]
A few ideas
1. Jeff Flake would probably be the strongest Republican candidate, but at the same time it's very easy to see him folding like a cheap suit. I cannot stress enough how difficult his life will be in the primary given his past support for comprehensive immigration reform. If he makes it out of that, I disagree that the general will be a walk in the park--he's a "libertarian," but he's much more passionate about economic libertarianism than any issues that could actually pick up swing or Democratic voters.

2. If I never see Rodney Glassman's name mentioned on this forum again, I will be a happy man. Given his egomania, though, I could see him trying to parlay his crushing loss at for AZ Democratic Party chair into another Senate campaign.

3. Speaking of the AZ Democratic Party chair, how about Andrei Cherney?

4. Felecia Rotellini really wants to be AG and hasn't show any interest in doing anything else. She only lost by 3-points, though, btw.

5. Napolitano's name is mud in Arizona right now, but hey, everybody loves a comeback story, right?

6. I think Goddard's lost one too many statewide races to deserve the right of first (or second or third) refusal. He's somewhere between tier one and tier two.

7. I think that Giffords does deserve the right of first refusal. I wonder if Tucson v. Phoenix melodrama would get in the way of that. She knows how to do something almost no other Democrat in Arizona has figured out how to do, which is run a competent grassroots campaign. Given the goodwill out there towards her, the grassroots will really flourish.

8. Please don't bother dredging up names from the state legislature to run, especially from the Dems. There's all of 9 Democratic State Senators at this point and they're all too liberal. Defeated Pinal County Senator Rebecca Rios was probably the only person who could have had a chance at a viable run, but as mentioned above she lost by like 10 points out of nowhere to some dude, so her star has faded.

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

Your eighth point
Means that the Indiana and Arizona Democratic parties have something in common that I didn't previously realize!

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
Basically
As far as the State Senate goes, we have 4 Dems in inner-city Phoenix, 3 from Tucson, 1 from Tempe (ASU) and 1 from NEAZ (Navajo Rez & Flagstaff). Only 2 are in majority white districts! Voters dumped a suburban Tucson Senate Seat previously held by Democrats in 2008 and three rural Senators (who all happened to be Hispanic, interestingly enough) in 2010.

The situation in the State House is vaguely better, in that we actually have two (two!) state Reps. from slightly less obvious places, one from a wealthy, sorta-suburban part of Phoenix where we should be winning elections anyway but usually aren't so let's count it, and one from Yuma County who's only still there because she somehow managed to run unopposed last time. We've shed a ton of suburban and rural state Reps over the last two elections.

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

[ Parent ]
The Indiana State Senate isn't any better
There's 13 Dem senators left in a 50 member chamber, and of them only two, arguably three are from rural or semi-rural areas. The rest are all from Indianapolis, Bloomington, the Lake County region, and some of the smaller Indiana cities. The State House is only 60-40... but it's still pretty bad...

Independent Socialist & Chair of SSP Cranky Indianian Hoosier Caucus, IN-09
[ Parent ]
I am pretty
confidant that State Senator Steve Pearce will run. He will stake out the hard right tea party group in the primary.  

TX-13,22,Dem
[ Parent ]
what is it with steve pearces
being so conservative?  rep pearce, state sen pearce, they seem to love their tea.

Top ten signs you're an SSPer #1: your favorite song is "Panic At Tedisco" and no one understands what you mean.
[ Parent ]
Alternatively
He might run for Flake's seat. Either way, he's a ways up there in the years, and also has such a strong anti-Washington bit that he might not be interested in having anything to do with the institution, even if his only goal is to take it down a few notches.

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
And it's Russell Pearce


22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
I'm an optimist
So my comment will be this will be all Giffords once she recovers and she reluctantly joins the race because she can't go to the supermarket anymore without getting harassed non-stop about running.  And the healthcare industry has taught us how easy it is to create a phony groundswell of opinion.  Someone probably just needs to create some sort of Draft Gabby movement and it'll snowball.
Giffords was planning to run
http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

When is the filing deadline?

June 1


22, male, VA-10
[ Parent ]
...of 2012, not this year, obviously! (nm)
nm

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10
[ Parent ]
AZ
For me, the AZ wishlist would look like this...

1. Gabby
2. Phil Gordon
3. Napalitano
4. Goddard


29/D/Male/NY-01

According to PPP
Gordon and Napolitano are horribly unpopular.  And Gordon is a big time DINO.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
Gordon
Lots of people don't know him though. And not being a mainstream Dem could help in Arizona. My understanding is much of the DINO stuff is based on him supporting McCain but the state is far more conservative than Connecticut. He does oppose the immigration law incidentally.
[ Parent ]
19-37 is pretty diabolical
although there are a lot of uncommitteds there.  I was surprised when I saw that number.  I assumed like many that he would be a pretty electable statewide candidate.  That number is so bad it makes me doubt him.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11
[ Parent ]
I was also surprised
The number gave me pause certainly. But I don't think it is insurmountable. Close to half the electorate don't have an opinion. Split those favorably with a decent campaign and he would have a chance.
[ Parent ]
"Gordon is a big time DINO"
He does a lot of DINO-esque showboating, but he's gotten some rather progressive things done as mayor of Phoenix (which isn't nearly as liberal a city as many people take it to be, mostly because it's annexed so much territory that in most other states would be independent suburbs, but I'll save the rant about Arizona's bizarre municipal incorporation and annexation laws for another day), such as greatly expanding public transit options, focusing on urban development in older neighborhoods and confronting Arpaio over some of his more flippant abuses of power.

His record on SB 1070 is rather awkward, though. He made a lot of huff about opposing it, but unlike the Republican (!) mayor of Tucson Bob Walkup and the generally underwhelming mayor of Flagstaff Sara Presler, didn't make any effort to do anything about it (both the cities of Tucson and Flagstaff ended up suing the state of SB 1070). So basically, he pissed off supporters of SB 1070 for showboating against it, but didn't win any fans among opponents because he didn't actually try to do anything about it.

I guess it would be really cool if he spent less time showboating?

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

[ Parent ]
Don't count Giffords out
She was considering it: http://voices.washingtonpost.c...

And I do agree with this source from the state party: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo...

The filing deadline isn't until June 1, 2012. Giffords could get a credible campaign off the ground if she launches in July or even waits until the fall.

22, male, VA-10

That would be literally the greatest political comeback in history
It would put President Nixon's famous rebound to shame.

And it's entirely possible at the moment, although the way her office and her husband respond to this news will be telling.

20, center-left independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native

[ Parent ]
Gabrielle Giffords
should definitely have the right of first refusal.  I honestly think she would have a great shot at winning, especially if Obama contests Arizona and does well there.  


23, Male, Democrat, OH-13
Here's the link to the FB page to draft giffords btw
http://tinyurl.com/4lzt3nm

22, male, VA-10
[ Parent ]
premature
Even the doctors and other specialists working with her don't know what her timetable for recovery is going to be. She'll be going through more hell over the next several months and I don't think it's a good idea for people to push her to do something before she's ready.

When she sets foot on the House floor again, "draft Giffords" talk may be appropriate.  

41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
Democrats
need to look for a white suburban candidate with lots of moderate appeal to run for this seat. I'm sure someone with more knowledge of the AZ knows a few State reps that fit these qualities. Running a progressive Latino would be a mistake.  
As Nico pointed out
Their names are Eric Meyer and Lynne Pancrazi.  They're the only Democrats to represent a district not completely represented by Democrats (Arizona has two Reps and one Sen for each district).

Six more: Paula Aboud, David Schapira, Ed Ableser, Ben Arredondo, Steve Farley, and Bruce Wheeler--represent majority-white districts in either the Senate (the first two) or the House (the other four).  I don't know how suburban they are, though--one district is "Tucson North" and the other district is from Phoenix to Tempe.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

[ Parent ]
My bad
Schapira, Ableser, and Arredondo represent District 17, which is outside of Phoenix, and consists of most of Tempe plus a little of Scottsdale.  Tempe isn't exactly a typical suburb.

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)
[ Parent ]
Aboud, Farley and Wheeler
Represent Midtown Tucson. I've never heard the area they represent referred to as "Tucson-North" but I guess technically speaking they represent the Northern half of the city limits. North Tucson typically refers to the Northern suburbs. Anyway, district 28 is basically the largest hub of "white liberals" in the state, and it voted for Obama more strongly than a lot of the majority Hispanic districts. All three are too liberal to win statewide, though Farley could make a good candidate in AZ-08 if Giffords runs for Senate/retires.

In any event, I don't see any serious candidate emerging from the legislature except for maybe Schapira. Since he represents the most conservative legislative district (and I'm using that term very loosely, 56% for Obama). He'd make a better congressional candidate, though.

Eric Meyer passed on an opportunity to run for State Senate and last cycle, and if he's not willing to role the dice on that I can't imagine that he could be courted for the US Senate. Maybe we could get him to look at AZ-03 if that moves a notch to the left. Lynne Pancrazi is probably going to bet the farm and run for State Senate, if anything; State Rep. from Yuma doesn't really scream next US Senator, though I guess moms in tennis shoes have done weirder things before.

Point is, our farm team is underwhelming.

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

[ Parent ]
Good to know
I was going off of Wikipedia's entry on the state senate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...  Anyway, the point was not to seriously propose any of these people as Senate candidates, but more just to see what would happen if you were to scan for people with the characteristics you might want in a Senate candidate.  

Of course, outside elected officials, there's the question of how to go about finding a Ron Johnson/Paul Wellstone type of non-elected official.  Even Wellstone had run for state auditor, though.  

25, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-12(now)

[ Parent ]
So why hasn't anyone...
mentioned the person who ran against Kyl last time, Jim Pedersen?
Age perhaps?
He is 68, and would be nearly 70 at the start of the next term.

I get the impression that he ran only because the D bench was even thinner that year.

[ Parent ]
There should be more celebrating.
 Jon Kyl is leaving the Senate!  Hurray!

Kyl has become one of my least favorite senators in the last few years.

24, Male, GA-05

Yeah.
His flipflopping on START made him quite a pill.  Which is why I was so happy when it was ratified.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
First and foremost, good riddance to bad rubbish
Most possible GOP replacements would be preferable to Kyl, so this is a win regardless.

But Arizona is now a clear pickup opportunity.  As still somehow common these days, most commenst above completely ignore the near certainty the GOP primary will be a massive clusterfuck of idiocy and rage.  Just look at the comment by Hayworth... it sounds like the clueless dude will actually run!  (And, he would lose to most anyone.)

The GOP candidate will be weakened by the primary, and a very weak candidate may win.

Harry Mitchell?
Any opinions on whether he's a good candidate to run?

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01
Ehhhh
He lost pretty badly in a district more Democratic than the state as a whole. Still though, unlike Kirkpatrick (who I can't believe is getting any buzz about this race given that she was such an aloof representative and did so little campaigning last time), he fought it out passionately till the bitter end.
He's also actually older than Jon Kyl (70 vs. 68), though most of the candidates really getting hyped are in their 60s so that may not be a deal breaker.  

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
How little campaigning did she do?
I don't mean to harp on this, but I continue to be amazed by the fact that so many people were caught napping. It's one thing if Ron Paul or Barbara Lee didn't campaign particularly hard, since the outcomes were never really in question, but for everyone else?  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Rotellini may run
I stand corrected.

She would probably be my second choice after Giffords given her smart, passionate campaign last time. I think she just wants to get her name in the papers though; again she seems very focused on the 2014 AG race.

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

She sounds good.
I just hope that she doesn't burn out.

Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo!
So little time, so much to know!
[ Parent ]
Jeff Flake on SB1070
I haven't read the latest comments, but when I last read them, when they totalled 150 or so, I don't think I saw anyone bring up Jeff Flake's position on SB1070. Why is this?

From what I can tell, he's not openly against the law in the same way Raul Grijalva was. He seems to be more in tune with what Gabby Giffords thinks: that the federal government needs to get its act together. Granted, I just looked it up, so it's possible I missed something, but he doesn't seem like he supports it. And if that's the case, why won't this hurt him? I don't think anyone would confuse him for an immigration dove, of course.


"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?

I think that's more or less where it is
The position is flimsy enough that he could twist it to his purposes.

But no seriously you guys immigration is a big fucking problem for Flake in the Republican primary. Arizona has got to be one of the worst states in the nation to take the immigration positions he's taken and then try to run in a Republican primary.

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

[ Parent ]
Yeah
Also a huge opening for a challenger or challengers to twist it to their purposes.
[ Parent ]
Which just makes you wonder,
why is he damn popular, if that's the case, in the state as a whole if his position is kind of at odds with the public's views?

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
Flake
He does well with swing voters and perhaps with Dems. He has more problems with his own party's base voters.

http://www.azsos.gov/election/...

He got 69.5% of the two-party vote in the general election but just 64.6% of the vote in the primary against a single opponent.

Trent Franks was the state's other incumbent Reep and represents a similarly deep-red district, and in contrast he got 67.6% in the general and 80.9% in the primary against a single opponent.

As far as I know all of their opponents were pretty generic who-dats. I think Flake's primary opponent was a tea partier, but I don't know about Franks'.


41, Ind, CA-05

[ Parent ]
I don't think that really answered my
question.  

"I have never deliberately given anybody hell. I just tell the truth on the opposition-and they think it's hell."--President Harry Truman. President Obama, are you listening?
[ Parent ]
I think we could beat Flake.
Its a longshot but not impossible its way to early to know what the stage will look like in 12.  

CO-02 (college)/FL-15 (home).  
AZ-Sen: Kyl to Announce Retirement | 237 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox