Skip to main content

View Diary: Daily Kos Elections Live Digest: 2/5 (380 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  As to NV-03 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atdnext, MichaelNY

    Is Bilbray-Kohn running in 2014 wise as it's a midterm year when Dem turnout will be lower?

    "Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game." -Voltaire

    by KingofSpades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:47:43 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  2014 and 2016 (9+ / 0-)

      If Bilbray loses respectably in 2014 it could put her in a good position to win in 2016 as she would gain experience campaigning in the district and build her donor base. Losing once isn't a career killer. Ami Bera, Joe Garcia, and Ann Kuster all turned respectable losses in 2010 into wins in 2012.

      SSP poster. 43, new CA-6, -0.25/-3.90

      by sacman701 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 09:34:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, losing historically... (4+ / 0-)

        Has been at least a "scarlet letter" on candidates here, especially Democrats. There's a reason why we don't talk about the political future of Jim Bilbray (NV-01 incumbent until losing to John Ensign in 1994), Tessa Hafen (2006 NV-03 Dem nominee),  John Oceguera (2012 NV-03 Dem nominee), and Shelley Berkley (2012 NV-Sen Dem nominee). When I saw Shelley at a Planned Parenthood event last week, she signaled absolutely no interest in running for elected office ever again.

        So far, Harry Reid and Dina Titus seem to be the only Nevada Democrats that have broken past the "one & done" curse.

        I'm sure this is something Erin Bilbray will keep in mind going forward. If she runs, she will want to run to win.

        •  Oceguera and Berkley were just awful candidates (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SaoMagnifico, BeloitDem, MichaelNY

          (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

          by TrueBlueDem on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:05:40 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'll give you Johnny O... (4+ / 0-)

            He gave it his best try, but that was far from enough. At recent Dem Party meetings, virtually no one has even mentioned his name. Johnny Who?

            Shelley, OTOH, has been a very skilled politician here. And she came far closer to winning than any pundit had initially expected in 2011, when Brian Sandoval coronated Dean Heller as the new Junior Senator. Her campaign just fumbled in handling "Kidney-gate", and she simply wasn't prepared for the kind of hostility she ultimately faced up north.

            But because she was on the wrong side of the 46/45 divide last November, her political career is likely over. Northerners just don't like her, and she's been pushed aside down here in Vegasland to make room for the return of Dina Titus & the arrival of Steven Horsford.

            •  It wasn't just that (8+ / 0-)

              She only won Clark County by 9% while Obama was easily carrying it by 14. Had she just done slightly better at retaining his voters there she would have won, regardless of her poor performance up north. As someone who had been a long time officeholder in the most populous part of the state, she should have been able to do better than she did there (though without seeing precinct data I don't know if she excelled in her old district or not).

              The question though in determining whether Berkeley was "awful" in retrospect, is could Ross Miller or Catherine Cortez Masto have won? It seems pretty clear to me that they would have, but it seems that Miller has his sights on succeeding Sandoval when he's termed out and I have no idea what Cortez Masto is waiting for.

              •  Speaking of the two of them (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                bumiputera, MichaelNY

                have you heard anything on the ground about what Miller and Cortez Masto will do this cycle since they're term limited in their current positions?

              •  That's actually the same margin... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                That Harry Reid won Clark by in 1998 in his epic race against John Ensign. The difference there was that Reid only lost Washoe by about 5%. So Shelley was in the range (in Clark) needed by Dems to win statewide.

                Still, you can argue she could have maxed out her Clark numbers a little more. It didn't help that OFA didn't always prod their GOTV volunteers to push for Shelley along with Obama. And perhaps Shelley didn't explain enough how she would have helped further Obama's agenda.

                All we know for sure is that Shelley did what Catherine & Ross refused to do. She ran against "The Anointed One", and she only barely missed. In regards to Catherine's and Ross' respective political futures, one may very well run for Senate in 2018 while the other runs for Governor. In the mean time, they'll probably play musical chairs with the other statewide Constitutional Officers next year to bide their time.

                •  Can you explain more about the OFA side? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, The Caped Composer

                  Here in Wisconsin, OFA and DPW were joined at the hip (at least by mid-September) and both Obama and Baldwin were ID'ed at every door and phone call.
                  Additionally whenever there was a big name (Obama, Biden, Clinton), Tammy was also there.

                  Social Democrat, WI-05

                  by glame on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:48:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  How Shelley Got The Nod (3+ / 0-)

                  Let's be accurate when we describe the history of the race, atdnext. I know you're a fan of hers, but it's not accurate to describe Berkley's candidacy in the way you have.

                  Shelley jumped in pretty darn early, with the full backing of the state party and Reid and the whole shebang. It wasn't like Nevada Democrats were casting about for a candidate, or the entire Democratic bench was quivering with fear of Dean Heller, and they were about to run "None of the Above" and hope for the best. This wasn't the case--Shelley jumped in early and scared off any/all major competitors. Which is fine. Contested primaries are only rarely a positive for the candidates involved in them.

                  But Shelley wasn't doing anyone a solid by jumping in the race--in hindsight, of course, a statewide candidate might've been better. The bottom line is that Shelley was running because she wanted to run. She was an A-List candidate (at least on paper) and she earned the right to make a race of it, but she didn't do it to benefit the Democratic Party. She did to benefit the political career of Shelley Berkley.

                  I will just emphasize once again that I respect and admire her, and have nothing against her, and wish she won. I just take issue with the fact that she wasn't a white knight riding to the rescue of Nevada Democrats, and want to point out that she was (more or less) handed the nomination on a silver platter.

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

                  by arealmc on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 06:23:10 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  There was a lot of skepticism of Berkley early on (4+ / 0-)

              at least here at DKE. She reeked of "big city back-room politician" as she had several "look bad" storylines in her Congressional career. I know there was nobody better willing to join the race, but running 8 points behind Obama is all on her.

              (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

              by TrueBlueDem on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:30:18 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  What she... (5+ / 0-)

      & other party leaders are hoping for is a different kind of midterm. That's why they're already doing "test runs" in this year's Las Vegas/Henderson/North Las Vegas municipal election. They want to keep that machine well oiled for next year.

      And perhaps if President Obama remains popular while Brian Sandoval at least declines to produce any coattails for Republicans here, the overall environment won't be so scary for Nevada Democrats.

    •  NV-03 is a must-have district for a majority (7+ / 0-)

      and while 2014 will almost certainly not be 2006 redux, it could be another Tilt-D year if the economy heats up.

      (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

      by TrueBlueDem on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:08:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site