Skip to main content

It was a day that was long on close races, but short on surprises.

The first "Super" primary day of the 2010 cycle is now in the books, with three states (Indiana, North Carolina, and Ohio) setting their starting lineups for the general election. In the three Senate races, the results went pretty much according to form. In the House races, there were a couple of minor surprises, but the favorites in those races generally came through, as well.

INDIANA

U.S. Senate--Republican Primary--100% of Precincts Reporting
Dan Coats 217,056 (39%)
Marlin Stutzman 160,929 (29%)
John Hostettler 124,383 (23%)
Others 47,880 (9%)

It will be (assuming the Democratic selection is the foregone conclusion that everyone expects) Democrat Brad Ellsworth defending this seat against former GOP U.S. Senator and Lobbyist Dan Coats. While this was a victory for the establishment candidate, it is worth noting that the two "insurgent" candidates combined for the majority of the votes. There can be little question that Stutzman and Hostettler split the conservative vote, allowing Coats to limp to the line with 39%. He begins the general, however, as a prohibitive favorite, given that polling in the Hoosier State has consistently shown in 2010 that the state is closer to the deep red of 2004 than the purplish hues it adopted in 2008.

Downballot, there was an eyeraising near-miss for a GOP incumbent, but it wasn't necessarily the one everyone thought would feel the pressure. Despite a late poll showing him in grave danger, Mark Souder (IN-03) had a surprisingly smooth path to re-election, defeating businessman Bob Thomas by a 48-34 margin. Meanwhile, Dan Burton (IN-05) got the sweat of a lifetime in a multi-candidate field that was expected to buttress him. The expectation was that the split anti-incumbent vote would be salvation for Burton, who won his 2008 primary with just 52% of the vote. This time around? He garnered just 30% of the vote. And, as expected, the multi-candidate field saved him, as his meager showing was still two points better than runner-up Luke Messer. Meanwhile, the closest primary of the night was in the southern tier of the state (IN-09), where former Congressman Mike Sodrel came in THIRD in his comeback attempt. With just 2300 votes separating first through third, Todd Young emerged victorious with 34% of the vote. He will take on Baron Hill, who enjoys his first Sodrel-free general election since 2000.

NORTH CAROLINA

U.S. Senate--Democratic Primary--100% of Precincts Reporting
Elaine Marshall 155,006 (36%)
Cal Cunningham 116,309 (27%)
Kenneth Lewis 72,580 (17%)

Vulnerable GOP freshman Senator Richard Burr will have to wait for this one to go into overtime before he can focus on the general election. Per North Carolina electoral law, the Democratic primary heads to a runoff, as no candidate exceeded the 40% threshold. Marshall leads after round one by nine points. A quick glance of the best counties for third-place finisher Kenneth Lewis doesn't tell us a whole heck of a lot: some of them were excellent counties for Marshall, while others were places where Cunningham more than held his own. The local pollsters at PPP surveyed those supporting the also-rans at the beginning of the week, and found that they favored Marshall by a pretty decisive margin (51-27). There are still plenty of undecideds for Cunningham to mine, however. Plus, he gets another seven weeks (there is an enormous gap between primary and runoff in the Tar Heel State) to make his case.

Several races are headed to runoff on the House level, including quite possibly both of the targeted Democratic incumbents in the state (at present, the GOP frontrunner in Heath Shuler's 11th district is teetering right on the brink of 40%). The big story of the night was the fairly underwhelming performances of both Larry Kissell (NC-08) and Heath Shuler (NC-11) in their Democratic primaries. In a sign perhaps that the base is less than pleased with their fealty to party values, neither man was able to top 63% of the vote.

OHIO

U.S. Senate--Democratic Primary--100% of Precincts Reporting
Lee Fisher 367,631 (55%)
Jennifer Brunner 295,577 (45%)

In the final analysis, the results of this competitive primary fell somewhere between the polling of the early part of the race (which showed a tight single-digit affair) and the polling of the final week (which showed a rapidly widening Fisher lead). When all was said and done, Fisher posted a ten-point win. Brunner ran extremely strong in the Cincinnati metro area, carrying Hamilton, Butler, Warren, and Clermont counties comfortably. Fisher countered with big leads in most of the populous counties elsewhere, including Cleveland's Cuyahoga County, Akron's Summit County, Canton's Stark County, and Dayton's Montgomery County.

Downballot, the race of the night happened in the GOP primary to challenge sophomore Zack Space (OH-18), where a recount is almost certain with a margin of just 159 votes between runner-up Fred Dailey and the current leader, establishment pick Bob Gibbs. Meanwhile, in the Democratic battle for the right to face the notorious Jean Schmidt (OH-02), reality show contestant and marketing executive Surya Yalamanchili held on for a 41-38 victory over '08 Independent candidate David Krikorian. Finally, the most heartbroken man in politics might be former Ashland County Commissioner Matt Miller (OH-16). After narrowly losing to incumbent Ralph Regula in 2006, and in an open seat contest against GOP establishment pick Kirk Schuring in 2008, Miller was foiled yet again, losing by a 49-40 margin against another insider's pick, businessman Jim Renacci.

Next up on the campaign trail: Nebraska and West Virginia next week (where the headline is a potentially perilous Democratic primary for longtime WV-01 incumbent Alan Mollohan). Most eyes in campaign junkie-dom, however, are on the 18th of May, where two big special elections for the House will be competing for attention alongside a quartet of big time primary states: Arkansas, Kentucky, Oregon, and Pennsylvania.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:16 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  NC-SEN (9+ / 0-)

    So 37% of the state didn't vote for Marshall or Cunningham, and Cal would need ... at least 62% of them to break his way to win?  Seems rather unlikely, and much a waste of time and resources.

    I think about what differentiates this from Obama-Clinton in 2008, and it's obvious: (a) Cunningham has nothing culturally to "prove" by lasting until the end of the runoff in the way Clinton did, (b) Marshall has been thoroughly tested in this environment, and (c) there were no concerns about Obama's ability to be fully funded for the general election.

    Cunningham may need to take some time to rethink this, but he ought to bow out.

    •  Tell that to the DSCC ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Scarce

      Cunningham may need to take some time to rethink this, but he ought to bow out.

      as such ... fat chance he's gonna bow out now .. why would he if the DSCC will bankroll him

      •  the best test for his "electability" ... (3+ / 0-)

        ... is getting elected, and 73% of NC Dems preferred someone else.

        •  But by that argument... (0+ / 0-)

          64% of NC Dems didn't want Marshall.  Either way, you're dealing with a supermajority that didn't want them.  Let's face it, both of them put up anemic numbers; hers were just a little better.  She didn't even need 50% to avoid a runoff, just 40%, and couldn't accomplish it.  Will she win the runoff?  Sure, most likely.  But she's not exactly inspiring confidence right now against an incumbent who should be on shakier ground, even in this national environment.

          •  well, she persuaded more than anyone ... (3+ / 0-)

            ... and in a multicandidate, regionally-divided field, 40% isn't always possible.  It almost certainly won't be here in PA-GOV, but we don't have a runoff system.  

            •  That system is looking more and more flawed. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The Nose

              Just look at the clusterfuck that is HI-01, where the two Democrats (including Lieberman ally DINO Ed Case) are splitting the Dem vote, and the Republican could waltz into office with just barely over a third of the vote!

              Just imagine a 10-way race (hey some primaries in Ohio yesterday had 8 people, so it's not outside the realm of possibility) where each person has their own constituency that will support them.  Without some kind of runoff system in place, you could theoretically have someone WIN outright with only 11% of the vote.  At what point do we simply have to say, no, I'm sorry, 11% is not enough for someone to actually win an election, be it primary or general?

              Multi-candidate primaries with no runoff system (or even worse, the jungle primary in HI-01) are just begging for trouble.  Now I don't know if North Carolina's 40% is the correct threshold, but at least all the candidates knew what the target percentage was, instead of just getting "more" votes than the others.

              At least with PA-Gov, if the trends are to be believed, Onorato may just break the 40% anyway, at least indicating a decent enough chunk of support in the Democratic Party.

              BTW, that tavern in Pittsburgh we went to before Bill Clinton's keynote last summer actually printed an anti-Onorato message on our check.  Is that legal??

    •  I wouldn't be so sure about that IN assumption... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Purdue219

      Polling here is a funny thing. President Obama consistently polled behind McCain before beating him here in 2008.

      The keys to winning here are message and exposure. Ellsworth is very well known in a key part of the state, and Dan Coats isn't exactly the type of GOP candidate that blows up the skirts of conservatives in Indiana.

      The key to this election will be turnout. If we can get out the vote in college towns and in Gary/Indianapolis, we have a shot. But it will be a fight just like 2008 was.

    •  Sorry Adam...that wasn't directed at you... (0+ / 0-)

      I had a momentary brain lapse :)

    •  Cunningham is basically freerolling at this point (0+ / 0-)

      ..with nothing to lose. He gets a do-over in a race that he only originally got 27% with a near 50-50 chance of winning on his second chance.

      How sweet is that?

      Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

      by Scarce on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:03:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  what makes it 50-50? (0+ / 0-)

        And how much money did the candidates save for this probability?

        •  Near 50-50 (0+ / 0-)

          Even if he only has a 35% chance that's still better than the 0% if Marshall had gotten the 40% she needed last night to avoid the run-off.

          So while Dems might prefer a concession it makes no sense for Cunningham personally as he probably has a year invested or more already. To him what's another month or so.

          Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

          by Scarce on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:43:44 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sure. There's a question ... (0+ / 0-)

            ... as to what else he could be offered in exchange for stepping down beyond the joys of altruism.

          •  He did it before (0+ / 0-)

            Cunningham enjoyed palpable enthusiasm from Democratic leaders and grass roots in my area when he was considering whether to run (he took a long time to consider). Then it looked like the DSCC money people were going to back a different candidate who had significant name recognition and Cunningham announced that he had decided not to run. Then the other guy decided not to run and Cunningham got the DSCC support. That maybe--no--yes is one of several reasons I voted for Marshall.
            My state (NC) is red just beneath the surface and my county is red on the surface and to the bone. Despite low favorability scores, I think Burr is likely to win. Marshall is not telegenic and her TV ad was amateurish. Cunningham is charismatic and telegenic but he counts too much on the the Iraq vet claim. Southerners have already proved that they will happily vote for a chickenhawk over a patriot as long as the chickenhawk's on their side in the culture war (SaxbyChambliss anyone?). Whoever wins the runoff, they will only get money from me if they do one thing: bloody Burr's nose during the campaign. If they try to be Republican-lite or post-partisan, they'll get nothing from me.
            Also, I hope Ken Lewis will run for office again. I think he could have a bright future.

  •  Chili won in OH-02? (11+ / 0-)

    Well knock me over with a feather. I was sure we'd get stuck with the execrable Krikorian, who was leading when I went to bed last night.

    Surya Yalamanchili may not beat Mean Jean Shmidt but at least the race will be a whole lot more interesting.

    Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

    by Scarce on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:26:25 AM PDT

  •  Enthusiasm Gap. (10+ / 0-)

    Manifest by the fact that minutes later, I'm still typing what may be the second comment here, and, ugh:

    In primaries in NC, IN and OH, Dems turned out at far lower rates than they have in previous comparable elections.

    Just 663K OH voters cast ballots in the competitive primary between LG Lee Fisher (D) and Sec/State Jennifer Brunner (D). That number is lower than the 872K voters who turned out in '06, when neither Gov. Ted Strickland (D) nor Sen. Sherrod Brown (D) faced primary opponents.

    Only 425K voters turned out to pick a nominee against Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC). The 14.4% turnout was smaller than the 444K voters -- or 18% of all registered Dem voters -- who turned out in '04, when Gov. Mike Easley (D) faced only a gadfly candidate in his bid to be renominated for a second term.

    And in IN, just 204K Hoosiers voted for Dem House candidates, far fewer than the 357K who turned out in '02 and the 304K who turned out in '06.

    By contrast, GOP turnout was up almost across the board. 373K people voted in Burr's uncompetitive primary, nearly 9% higher than the 343K who voted in the equally non-competitive primary in '04. Turnout in House races in IN rose 14.6% from '06, fueled by the competitive Senate primary, which attracted 550K voters. And 728K voters cast ballots for a GOP Sec/State nominee in Ohio, the highest-ranking statewide election with a primary; in '06, just 444K voters cast ballots in that race.

    •  The North Carolina numbers were really sad. (7+ / 0-)

      Burr isn't a popular incumbent, yet the GOP turned out for him despite having no opponent.

      Not good news.

    •  I noticed that (0+ / 0-)

      I was looking at the numbers in Ohio, realizing that the only contested statewide race is on the Democratic side. Yet, the teabaggers seem to have turned out in droves. Terrible sign.

    •  In more bad news... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam B, arbiter, pademocrat

      while some jumped on me for reporting bad news on the national mood when it comes to the Arizona immigration law (again, the 22% that haven't heard about it by now aren't going to matter: almost all of them DON'T VOTE anyway), now comes the CBS/NYT poll showing the same thing.

      A majority of the people polled, 57 percent, said the federal government should determine the laws addressing illegal immigration. But 51 percent said the Arizona law was "about right" in its approach to the problem. Thirty-six percent said it went too far and 9 percent said it did not go far enough.

      So not only does the 51% number match what Gallup had, but an additional 9% want it to go even further.

      And the level of ignorance about reality is very, very sobering.

      Three quarters said that, over all, illegal immigrants were a drain on the economy because they did not all pay taxes but used public services like hospitals and schools. Nearly 2 in 10 said the immigrants strengthened the economy by providing low-cost labor and buying goods and services, a chief argument among many of their advocates.

      "I do think the federal government should deal with it, because illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes and don’t contribute to our government," said Deborah Adams, 53, a Democrat from Ephrata, Pa., and a paramedic who called the Arizona law a "necessary evil."

      "They take jobs from American citizens who need to work and pay into Social Security," Ms. Adams said.

      In fact, many illegal immigrants do pay taxes into the Social Security system, but never see a return on their contributions.

      What is more or less the position on DailyKos on what immigrants (legal and illegal) do for our economy is supported by less than 20% of the American people.  Think about that, folks.  We have a LOT of people to convince and show the facts to.  Not just a majority, not even just a supermajority, but a whopping 75% of Americans WRONGLY think illegal immigrants don't pay any taxes!  There is a HUGE disconnect between what Americans think on immigration, and the TRUTH.

      And frankly, right now, the traditional media is NOT educating them on the truth.  And if anyone thinks Obama can just mention how they do pay taxes on a daily basis, and then have a majority of the people then believe it to actually be true, you're delusional.  With an educated electorate, maybe.  But as Bill Maher says, the American people as a whole are pretty stupid.


      And even if we tackle immigration reform and get something passed into law, after seeing the stagnant enthusiasm numbers even after the health care bill became law, I'm now much more skeptical the enthusiasm numbers will go our way even with immigration reform.  And given how bad the numbers look right now, all it takes is a little race-baiting from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, and just watch support for ANY immigration reform bill plummet into the 30s.

      •  this... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BruinKid

        What is more or less the position on DailyKos on what immigrants (legal and illegal) do for our economy is supported by less than 20% of the American people.  Think about that, folks.  We have a LOT of people to convince and show the facts to.  Not just a majority, not even just a supermajority, but a whopping 75% of Americans WRONGLY think illegal immigrants don't pay any taxes!  There is a HUGE disconnect between what Americans think on immigration, and the TRUTH.

        And your observations on the role of the traditional media in indoctrinating/propagandizing the American people are both sadly true.

        We have decades of education and work ahead of us.

        Grab a shovel, folks.

      •  I don't support immigration reform (0+ / 0-)

        Most Americans perceive it as an issue of fairness. Why should those who came here illegally be allowed to stay?

        •  There's a difference... (0+ / 0-)

          between a "get out of jail free" card, and setting a standard fine to pay in return for a guilty plea.  I've broken the law and been caught a number of times, including driving over the speed limit and forgetting to renew my car insurance, but the government didn't take away my car.

    •  NC comparison to 2004 is a little odd (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew

      There was a heated NC-Sen primary that year and a presidential primary.  Easley's race was a minor story.

  •  IN-09 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BruinKid, pademocrat, stunzeed

    Hill's challenge (promoted here by some due to his "Blue Dog" moniker despite his clear record) was less robust than in 2006 (a motivate Dem base year), when Clearwater (a Bloomington native) snatched up 40% of Monroe Co.

    Sodrel again may have been a blessing.  Despite his deep pockets, he's milquetoast and the district knows it.

    Todd Young is like crazy right-wing.  So Baron should have a strong case for indy voters.  The key is gonna be traditional Dem turnout.  Hopefully OFA can reignite the large student and new voter base of 2008 in Monroe to show up for a Midterm.  Getting 10-15% of those new voters would boost a huge margin for Hill in Monroe to weather a good part of the anti-incumbency fever elsewhere.

    "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." - Charles Darwin

    by ViralDem on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:31:24 AM PDT

    •  It's mixed news for Hill (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pademocrat, ViralDem

      Young raised an okay amount of money for the primary but can't self-fund like Sodrel.  He's to the right off Sodrel which is saying a lot.

      On the other hand, I think a lot of people here dislike both Sodrel and Hill and thought Hill was the lesser of two evils in 2006/2008.

      •  Constiuent services (0+ / 0-)

        They matter, and Hill has them.  They were non-existent from 04-06, and Hill did alot to improve them in his second stint.  Its seemed to really endear him to many constituents, particularly when I believe IN-09 tends to be a bit older in age than most congressional districts.

        I feel like has a much stronger base now than he had from 98-02.  Local businesses support him.  He's brought stimulus money to the district.  The Dem base of Monroe is much more behind him - particularly after his support for Obama and his strong votes in this last session.

        "If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." - Charles Darwin

        by ViralDem on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:52:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  IN-05 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Purdue219

    My Democratic ballot was anemic.  Hardly any Dem primaries.  I voted for Nasser Hanna, but he lost to Tim Crawford (ex-Repub), who as far as I can tell didn't even campaign.  On pure speculation, my guess is that residents in my red district voted for the "white-sounding" name.  On a lighter note, the voters in my school district voted for a tax increase to bolster grade school funding.

    I was disturbed by the allowance of political signs and people camped out outside the megachurch where I voted.  It didn't seem legal, but there they were, so I guess it was.  The volunteers on the inside were very helpful and pleasant, even after I asked for a Dem ballot.

    That's Enough Asshattery

    by stunzeed on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:38:15 AM PDT

  •  I really wanted Souder to lose... (0+ / 0-)

    just because the business candidate was a hardcore reaganite-myth robot who would have been very beatable in the general.

    "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." -Dr. King

    by proseandpromise on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:39:52 AM PDT

  •  How Quickly Will Keith Olbermann be Blamed (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mph2005, greatdarkspot, pademocrat

    for David Krikorian's defeat? ;D

    "The essence of life is how well you can B.S. yourself." Keith Olbermann, 4.19.10

    by CityLightsLover on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:41:35 AM PDT

  •  Teabaggers sent Republicans a bit of a scare (0+ / 0-)

    Kristi Risk lost by about 200 votes in IN-08 to the RNC backed guy Larry Bucshon.

    Here we are now Entertain us I feel stupid and contagious

    by Scarce on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:43:31 AM PDT

  •  One bit of good news in the North Carolina (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    highacidity

    Senatorial primaries.

    Total Democrats casting a vote for Senatorial Candidates:  425,942

    Total Republicans casting a vote for Senatorial Candidates:  373,815

    The Republican base didn't turn out even as much as the Democratic base did.

    In a progressive country change is constant; change is inevitable.

    by funluvn1 on Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:56:14 AM PDT

  •  A Disappointed 'teabagger' (0+ / 0-)

    Tea Party member disappointed by primary turnout

    Posted on May 4, 2010 at 6:49 PM

    MaryLou Richardson, a proud Tea Party member, said she was disappointed that so few people turned out to vote in Tuesday's primary election.

    "What is the difference between an al Qaida terrorist and a misguided American terrorist?" "The planes they fly!"

    by jimstaro on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:00:34 AM PDT

    •  Teabaggers should be happy with low turnout. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      emilysdad

      Probably the only chance they have of sneaking in candidates.

      I would think angry folks are far more likely to go out and vote, so teabaggers probably have a much higher turnout rate than regular folks, so the fewer normal folks that vote, the more influence teabaggers have.

      I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. - Oliver Cromwell

      by Ezekial 23 20 on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:10:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I Think You Missed the Point (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Nose

        Check the turnouts around the country, hardly a massive 'teabagger' movement, as it's already a known how much of a minority they are!

        This woman didn't talk to but only a few and they claim to be a big movement here like elsewhere!

        "What is the difference between an al Qaida terrorist and a misguided American terrorist?" "The planes they fly!"

        by jimstaro on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:26:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Well, at least we know the cost of a vote in Ohio (0+ / 0-)

    Fisher beat Brunner by 72054 votes, and outspent her roughly 4-1, at $3,048,990 to Brunner's $795,684.

    If his extra $2,253,306 netted him 72054 votes, he only had to spend a bit over $31 a vote for his margin of victory.

    I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. - Oliver Cromwell

    by Ezekial 23 20 on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:06:00 AM PDT

  •  Regarding OH-16 (0+ / 0-)

    Matt Miller would have had a better shot at winning had it not been for the Tea Party.

    They threw up a Jerome Corsi-hanger-on, and he pulled 8 percent of the vote.

    Miller is kinda shady, so it's a good thing he did lose, but the fact that Jim Renacci and his back-taxes issue is good news for the current Rep, John Boccieri (D).

    But the better news is that in this area, which has a Republican lean to it and a set of assclowns who like to hype the Tea Party in the local newspapers, they still only managed to get 8 percent of Republicans to vote for them.

    This, despite the Teabaggers' signs all saying "USMC Vet for Congress, Tea Party Endorsed".  

    Nothing to see here, move along

    by Jeff Seemann on Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:09:25 AM PDT

  •  WV-01: Mollohan will win (0+ / 0-)

    Oliverio is a joke, and every Democrat in West Virginia knows it. The only Democrats supporting Oliverio are those "Democrats" who voted for Bob Dole in 1996.

  •  People really need to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose

    VOTE IN THE FUCKING PRIMARY.

    We could have had Candidate Elaine Marshall, and now we have a runoff instead.

    Nancy Shakir (NC-08) was actually beating No-Health-Care-Larry Kissell in Mecklenburg Co. last I checked last night, but that didn't translate to the whole district.  Still, she was pulling in close to 40%!!! And turnout was so low that if we'd really wanted to send a progressive message to the Blue Dogs we could have turned it.

    But noooo.  Bitch and don't vote, see what it gets us.

  •  Coats is not the prohibative favorite (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    arbiter

    Both the Gun Owners of America and the NRA have come out against Coats candidacy announced (prior to Tuesday's results). The NRA went so far as do a mailing stating that they will be supporting the Democratic nominee for this seat if Coats gets the GOP nomination due to Coats record on gun control. There will not be the same level of grass-roots support in the center-right libertarian segment of the voting population in Coats corner, which the GOP usually counts on.

    Just ask yourself when was the last time the NRA announced they were preemptively going to ally with an as-yet determined Democratic candidate vs. a s specific GOP candidate should the GOP candidate get the nomination?

    I think the conventional wisdom on this one, as is often the case, is not matching up to reality.

    cheers,

    Mitch Gore

    Pass substantive financial reform now.

    by Lestatdelc on Wed May 05, 2010 at 10:22:28 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site