Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest banner
To receive the Daily Kos Elections Morning Digest via email each weekday, sign up here.

Senate:

MA-Sen: This is priceless:

"The leaders will bring forward (Ryan's) budget, and I will vote for it, and it will fail," [Sen. Scott] Brown told local business leaders gathered at Black Swan Country Club in Georgetown for the chamber's annual meeting. "Then, the president will bring forward his budget, and it will fail. It will be great fodder for the commercials."

But Brown staffers, wary of political fallout from his comments, were quick to follow up on his remarks, clarifying that the senator has yet to decide how he will vote on the matter. They said Brown meant to say he would vote "on" the bill, but not necessarily "for" it. (Emphasis added)

I guess it depends on what your definition of "on" is!

NE-Sen: State Sen. Deb Fischer sounds like she's very close to entering the GOP primary for the right to take on Sen. Ben Nelson. I'm not sure what Fischer's niche is, but even this limited formula seems awfully liberal for someone hoping to win a Republican Senate nomination: "The priorities of limited government, Fischer said, are public infrastructure, public education, public safety and 'taking care of those who truly can't take care of themselves.'"

UT-Sen: Ex-Rep. and anti-immigration zealot Tom Tancredo is soliciting donations for Rep. Jason Chaffetz, aimed at supporting a possible Chaffetz challenge to "pro-Amnesty RINO" Orrin Hatch. If Chaffetz is going to make this his signature issue, I wonder if he might not also be considering a run against fellow Republican Gov. Gary Herbert, who has raised teabagger ire over his support for a guest-worker program.

WI-Sen: A short roundup of Wisconsin Senate news: ex-Rep. Steve Kagen (D) says he is giving the race "serious consideration" but doesn't have a timetable for making a decision… ex-Rep. Mark Neumann (R) bought some "neumannforsenate" domain names… ex-Gov. Tommy Thompson lost a straw poll at the state's annual GOP convention to state Sen. Ted Kanavas (click the link for full results)… meanwhile, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, of all people, put out a statement trying to tout Thompson's conservative credentials. I don't think it's going to work.

Gubernatorial:

KY-Gov: Dem Gov. Steve Beshear rolled out a list of endorsements from 70 Republicans, the most prominent of whom is probably ex-Lt. Gov. Steve Pence — though Pence has been supporting Beshear for a while (and even co-hosted a fundraiser for him last year). Meanwhile, various local teabagger groups are fuming about David Williams' victory in the GOP primary, and are threatening to endorse third party candidates, stay home, or even support Beshear! (They're also pissed at Rand Paul for not doing anything to help Phil Moffett.)

NC-Gov: PPP's latest poll seems to be the first bit of good news for Gov. Bev Perdue in a while. She's trailing Republican Pat McCrory 46-39 — but that's an improvement from last month's 11-point gap, and the first time since January she's been this close. Tom's writeup is worth reading, since he paints a more complex picture than the usual "Perdue is doomed" narrative.

ND-Gov: Former state Sen. (now radio host) Joel Heitkamp says his sister Heidi, herself a former state AG, is running for governor, but it's important to read the full quote: "She hasn't announced it yet, she hasn't told me it yet. I don't know that she's decided yet. But I know her well enough to know she's running for governor." Heitkamp ran for governor once before, losing to now-Sen. John Hoeven in 2000 by a 55-45 margin.

House:

CO-03, CO-04: In an interview with the Denver Post, Steny Hoyer indicated that two Colorado legislators — state Senate President Brandon Shaffer and Rep. Sal Pace — are likely to take on Republican freshmen Cory Gardner and Scott Tipton respectively. Hoyer also mentioned the name of Perry Haney, a wealthy doctor who could also run against Tipton.

ND-AL: The Club for Growth is going to have to find someone else to stop Rick Berg: Public Service Commissioner Brian Kalk, who initially insisted he'd persist with his Senate campaign, instead decided to drop down to seek Berg's House seat instead. That leaves Berg all alone on the path to the GOP nomination to fill Kent Conrad's seat (for now).

NY-03: Oh noes! Loudmouth GOP Rep. Pete King says the "odd are very much against" him making a presidential run. Too bad! But King adds, "if something's out there, I won't stand in the way." So gracious!

OR-01: An internal poll for Brad Avakian from the Benenson Strategy Group shows David Wu's re-elects at a surprisingly good 36-42. Avakian's pollster, Pete Brodnitz, is quite candid in acknowledging that "if additional candidates enter the race it will likely benefit Wu by dividing the voters opposed to his reelection." Of course, Brodnitz is saying this to discourage others from joining the field — but frankly he's right. Wu can definitely win with around 40% of the vote, and in fact he leads 45-24 in an initial ballot test against Avakian. (As you'd expect, Avakian comes out ahead after profiles are read.) The memo seems most directly aimed at state Sen. Suzanne Bonamici, who is the only other potential candidate named, but several other Democrats have openly talked about getting in.

OR-05: Ordinarily, news of a politician's divorce wouldn't make it into the Daily Digest, but this one stands out on account of some unusual political trivia. Sophomore Rep. Kurt Schrader and his wife Martha Schrader (who has also held political office, including her husband's old state Senate seat) are going their separate ways — which makes Kurt the fifth straight congressmember to divorce while holding Oregon's 5th CD. This must be a cursed seat, because that's every single person who has occupied this seat since it was created thirty years ago. (Credit to Nathan Gonzales for the great catch.)

RI-01: A Fleming & Associates poll for WPRI shows freshman Rep. David Cicilline (D) losing by a 46-33 margin against former State Police chief Brendan Doherty, who formally announced a challenge last week. Cicilline also loses to 2010 GOP challenger John Loughlin by 47-35 in a hypothetical rematch. (Note the small sample size, though.) Cicilline's favorable rating is an awful 33-57, thanks to months of headlines (like this one) about his mismanagement of Providence's finances when he was mayor. If I were an ambitious Democrat in the Ocean State, I'd be thinking about a primary challenge.

WA-10, WA-??: Greg Giroux (aka FEC Kenobi) spots a couple of interesting filings from former state Rep. Denny Heck, who lost a tough race to GOPer Jaime Herrera Beutler in WA-03 last year. Widely expected to run again this cycle, Heck indeed just filed a candidacy statement with the FEC for the state's new 10th CD. But later the same day, he file amended paperwork which contained the plainest appreciation of the Schrödinger's Seat problem I've yet seen:

The committee has filed an amended Statement of Organization and the candidate has filed an amended Statement of Candidacy, both indicating no congressional district. These filings will be amended at a later date to indicate a congressional district.

Other Races:

AZ-St. Sen.: The recall of state Sen. Russell Pearce (author of Arizona's notorious immigration law known as SB1070) may get delayed until 2012 because the state's elections director gave incorrect information to the recall's organizer about when petitions had to be filed.

KY-AG: In a move that can only be described as highly logical, Vulcan ambassador Republican AG nominee Todd P'Pool says he has no plans to co-ordinate his campaign with the rest of the GOP statewide slate, now that the primary has settled things. Like I say, it makes sense: the gubernatorial nominee (David Williams) is much-hated, and the putative Secretary of State nominee (a more-or-less Some Dude with the perfect Some Dude name of Bill Johnson) is an unknown teabagger.

Speaking of Johnson, his primary opponent Hilda Legg says she'll ask for a recanvass, which will take place on Thursday. But with Legg trailing by over 1,000 votes, I don't see how the outcome will change, making her request most illogical.

MN Ballot: The Republican-held state legislature approved a constitutional amendment that will go before voters in November 2012 to outlaw same-sex marriage. A recent poll showed Minnesotans opposing the amendment by a 55-39 margin.

Ohio SB5: The organizers behind the drive to place Ohio's anti-union SB5 bill on the ballot this November say they've collected some 214,000 signatures so far. They have until June 30 to gather 231K and say that so far about 60% are valid (which strikes me as a pretty good rate). If current rates hold, then the drive is ahead of pace.

Grab Bag:

Dark Money: Democrats are asking the FEC for an advisory opinion on a questionable new Republican Super PAC (called, confusingly, "the Republican Super PAC") that GOP money guy James Bopp is trying to create. You can read about the PAC itself here.

Redistricting Roundup:

Alabama: Just a day after passing one congressional map, the state legislature's special redistricting committee quickly moved on to a new plan, with a few differences. You can see what the new map looks like here (PDF).

Illinois: We all enjoy the theater, but here's some cartography that's not quite kabuki: Illinois Dems have released their state House of Representatives map, to divide the state into 118 HDs. Given the Senate map released last week and that HDs are "nested" two per SD, we've already gotten some idea of how aggressive the map is. In particular, the Dems are connecting Springfield and Decatur in a downstate district, which has some Republicans protesting. Also noteworthy is the reduction in majority-African-American districts and corresponding increase in Hispanic-majority districts, given the demographic trends in the state. Best of all? House GOP leader Tom Cross' take that the maps seem "very punitive to the Republicans." (jeffmd)

Mississippi: Gov. Haley Barbour says he won't call a special session of the legislature to hammer out the unfinished business of state-level redistricting. That means elections will go forward this November under the old lines, with a possible repeat set of elections next year under new maps, per a court's ruling (which may be appealed).

Nebraska: The Republican redistricting plan to make the 2nd CD redder passed the full legislature on partisan lines, though from what I understand it must be voted on three times before going to the governor. I have to imagine that Gov. Dave Heineman, also a Republican, will sign whatever the legislature sends him.

Texas: The state House and Senate each approved the other body's new maps on Saturday, but check out this awesome "TURN YOUR KEY, SIR" paranoia:

The House and Senate had planned simultaneous passage of their respective redistricting bills Saturday morning with the doors of both chambers open so the two presiding officers could see each other gavel their approval of the bills.

Neither chamber wanted to be first to approve the other's redistricting plan, because a redistricting bill could be held hostage to negotiations on other legislation.

Even more interesting is the increasing possibility that the legislature may not finish congressional redistricting by the time the session ends on May 30. Texas only has one legislative session every two years (in odd-numbered years only), lasting a maximum of 140 days. The governor can call special sessions, but for whatever reason (one observer thinks it's a lack of interest) Rick Perry isn't expected to do so, at least for redistricting alone. However, Perry might call a special session to deal with other issues, like the budget, and then tack on remapping to such a session. Alternately, the lege might finish the job very hastily (as we saw in Missouri) to get this one off their plates. Still, it's a far cry from the massive sturm und drang the last time Texas went through this process. I'm sure, after all, you remember a little guy named Tom DeLay....



This diary is brought to you by Daily Kos Elections, an official Daily Kos sub-site. Please read our Mission Statement. Our focus is on electoral politics rather than policy. Welcome aboard!


Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:00 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  Minnesota Constitutional Amendment (7+ / 0-)

    if opposition remains strong we can use it as a real millstone to sink Republicans in the State Legislature, as well as a boost in the congressional and presidential races.

    23, Solid Liberal Democrat, DKE Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college); Swingnut

    by HoosierD42 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:16:47 AM PDT

    •  You don't even know the half of it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Christopher Walker

      The GOP plans on sending us at the least a Photo ID amendment and a 60% legislature vote required to raised taxes amendment with there being several other amendments not personally endorsed by the House speaker also circulating.  And an abortion-related amendment hasn't been proposed but I'm sure it's coming as the Senate President's husband is president of Minnesotans Concerned for Fetuses or some nonsense like that.  While she, the Senate Pres, introduced a bill to ban stem-research ban thus screwing over what is arguably the biotech capital of the world.

      So the GOP have already given 50%+1 to progressives by targeting the LGBT community, people of color, the elderly, college students, and suburbanite soccer moms withan abortion amendment who will already vote heavily against the gay marriage amendment*.  And the tax thing, well, this is MN, we more closely resemble Sweden and Norway when it comes to tax policy than the United States.  Every DFLer will vote that shit down and maybe even Independents.

      *There were four GOP'ers who voted against the amendment in the state House and one represents a mostly suburban seat.  He was quoted in the paper saying, "My district is probably against this thing 70% and I dont always have to follow my party."  His district voted 55%-44% for McCain and is probably one of the most Republican/conservative suburban seats in the metro.  However, these people live on a giant lake 15-20 miles west of the central business district for the 16th largest metro area in the country; they are extremely educated, very wealthy and very prepared to vote this down by a large margin.

      If he predicts 70-30 (which I'd say is an exaggeration and it'd be between 55%-60% "No") in a district so conservative and contains large swaths of undeveloped areas, then in the 50k+ pop. suburb, it should be even more of a blow-out.  And the GOP/conservatives absolutely cannot win statewide without these suburbs, it's impossible.  The gay marriage amendment will do well in Greater MN, which will counter the suburbs at least somewhat.  However, with there being so many amendments, it'll be so much easier to get DFLers to vote straight "No" on all of them.

      •  Republicans misinterpret voters yet again. (0+ / 0-)

        They weren't put into power because voters want Minnesota to become this crazy right-wing utopia, but because voters were unhappy with the DFL. I love how these are all ballot initiatives- the only thing they can do without Dayton's approval...

        I love your perfectly accurate description of Lake Minnetonka, but we have to remember that not all Republicans in MN are like that. Unfortunately, there are lot of state reps from Bachmannland who were representing their constituents by voting in favor of the amendment. Those people are why I'm thanking my lucky stars it wasn't on the ballot in 2010, as progressive as we are.

        •  Just wondering (0+ / 0-)

          Do you think the amendment will fail? I know that the twin cities core is very liberal but what about the rural parts of the state and the Iron Range? To fail, the amendment should not do well in the suburbs in Washington and Dakota Counties. Also, I was looking at the Wisconsin results in 2006 for the gay marriage law and besides Madison, the anti gay marriage people did well in the rest of the state.

          •  Depends on the campaign (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            55-39 lead right is Obama-Palin territory.  If the gay activists of this state hire politicos rather than fellow activists, then we stand a much better than even shot.

            I personally think the Iron Range will be surprising on this thing.  They aren't in favor of gay marriage, they are strongly pro-life, but that doesn't mean they want that shit written into their state constitution.

          •  We've had six years to progress since then (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            also, in Minnesota, if you cast a ballot for another race but skip the amendment, it counts as a no vote.

            21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

            by sapelcovits on Tue May 24, 2011 at 07:15:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  That is what makes the Lake Minnetonka (0+ / 0-)

          comparison even better; they are even more conservative than the other suburbs.  (I can't wait to see Minnetonka and Edina.  Now they actually have potential to vote it down 70-30.

          With the exurbs (and all of central MN, really) is the only region that is worth pretty much ignoring and letting them be their uber conservative selves.  And 2012 really is the perfect year for them to try this complete overreach.  It is comforting watching them scramble to get as many of these passed as possible because it means they know their days are numbered, every cycle, every time.

  •  Nothing on Krishnamoorthi in IL-08? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, drobertson

    He announced his candidacy (as a Democrat) this weekend.

    Also, I'm a fan of the guy, I went to school with his kids - but those are some seriously lackluster numbers for Commissioner Avakian in OR-01. I almost wonder if this polling memo release will backfire and the likes of Bonamici or Deckert will see a chance for them to get in here. Then again, it's really, really tough to judge the veracity of internal polls made public, because it's always done to push some sort of narrative, not necessary to accurately portray the state of the race.

    Shaffer in CO-03 looks like a really solid recruit. Great work by the DCCC in lining that one up.

    And Sen. Scott Brown just officially flip-flopped by announcing he will not vote for Rep. Ryan's budget proposal of DOOOOOOOOM.

    Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

    by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:56:18 AM PDT

  •  UT-Sen: (0+ / 0-)

    Is there anyone, at all, that could take on Chaffetz besides Matheson? SSPers will remember notpjorourke saying how Republicans in the state were worried that Matheson would crush Chaffetz if he were to run statewide, but is that really the case? I suppose he probably is the best candidate, but is there anyone else? We certainly won't get a Chris Murphy-style candidate, but if a Democrat from Utah did little besides vote for our leadership and end obstruction, it'd be worth having one there. I don't know how expensive it is exactly to compete in the state, but it can't be that pricey.

    •  Rep. Matheson's not that bad (7+ / 0-)

      Yeah, he breaks with the party a lot, but he's rarely a flaming asshole about it, and I don't see him being any more unreliable a vote than Sen. Manchin at the worst. Beats Sen. Hatch, or Rep. Chaffetz, for that matter.

      As to your question about alternatives, there's always our rampant speculation as to what Jon Huntsman, Jr., thinks he's doing by embracing same-sex civil unions, climate change science, and dovish foreign policy as a Republican candidate for president.

      Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

      by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:04:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The only candidate that would come close (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SaoMagnifico, tietack

      is Matheson. And even then, a Matheson/Chaffetz matchup would be a tossup at best.

      •  But that's a huge, huge (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoosierD42, tietack

        shift towards us. I figure that Obama's winning a blowout nationwide, people like Sherrod Brown and Tim Kaine are in Lean D races at worse, which means that we can marshal the resources necessary to drag someone like Matheson over the finish line.

        •  Is Matheson even interested in the Senate? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack

          I thought he wanted to be Governor like his daddy more.

          23, Solid Liberal Democrat, DKE Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college); Swingnut

          by HoosierD42 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:04:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack

          Worth noting, though, that one of the Obama campaign advisers said today that they're expecting a close election unless the Republicans nominate Palin or Gingrich. But I don't see how any of the Republicans aside from Palin really generate enthusiasm and big-bucks fundraising at the same time in the general election. Romney is well-connected but loathed by the conservative base; Rep. Paul or Herman Cain would whip up a lot of Tea Party fervor but Wall Street and K Street would probably just sit the election out.

          Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

          by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:08:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Where was this said? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DCCyclone, Christopher Walker

            I'm not sure we'd see a blowout forming until well into 2012, short of some unexpectedly good economic news (i.e. 500,000 jobs created each month for months on end), if only because the craziness of some of these people isn't that obvious to everyone.

            On that note, check out this article from The New Republic on Pawlenty's chances at getting the nomination. It describes how he is caught between a rock and a hard place trying to place catch up with Romney, specifically in regards to fund raising, and I think a lot of applies to the general if he's the nominee. I think there's a fairly big chance he's wounded at the beginning because he's so far behind in the fund raising game, even if he does get a nice boost from online donations once he's nominated. If that is the case, it'll be harder for him to align his campaign with the rest of the party apparatus, given the head start Obama will have had and the work he did last time, or so I suspect anyway. Even if the bump is larger than we might imagine, he can't make up for lost time, making building any campaign infrastructure more expensive, if not impossible. And that's before we get into his general underwhelming personality.

          •  Romney (0+ / 0-)

            would actually probably be a better fundraiser than Palin. A lot of wall street republicans are scared shitless of her.

      •  You honestly believe that? (0+ / 0-)

        I'd put a Chaffetz-Matheson Senate matchup at Likely R with the end results being something along the lines of 57-43% Chaffetz.  There is no way they're electing a Dem to the United States Senate, not even against a nutter.  We're better off having him run for re-election unless his seat gets turned even redder.

        •  I said "a tossup at best" (0+ / 0-)

          It would require a lot of stars to align for Matheson to actually win.

        •  The chances (4+ / 0-)

          that Utah will elect a Democratic Senator are about as high as the chances that Massachusetts will elect a Republican Senator.

          http://mypolitikal.com/

          by Inoljt on Mon May 23, 2011 at 01:57:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I would argue far less likely (0+ / 0-)

            MA is D+12, UT is R+20. Massachusetts has a recent history of GOP gubernatorial wins. Utah has nothing comparable from what I recall.

          •  No it's not (0+ / 0-)

            Massachusetts has shown time and again that they will elect republicans statewide, though less frequently in recent years.  They're practically owned the MA Governorship for two decades or so.  

            When was the last time any Dem at all won statewide in Utah?  I think a Matheson family member ran for the Governorship a few elections ago, many thought it would be competitive and in the end he lost in a landslide.

        •  It's not that far-fetched (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SaoMagnifico

          A poll from January showed Matheson only trailing Hatch by 48-41.  Substitute Chaffetz for Hatch and that's probably another couple of points for Matheson.  Chaffetz would still likely win, but Matheson could definitely make it a race.  It would take a tremendous GOTV in Salt Lake City, a lot of money, and possibly a cross-over endorsement from someone like Bob Bennett, Chris Cannon, or maybe even Orrin Hatch himself.  Chaffetz was a campaign manager and chief of staff for Huntsman, so his endorsement would be unlikely.  It would require all of the dominoes to fall our way, but I guess it's still possible.

          •  You do realize half of Utah are Republicans? (0+ / 0-)

            If the GOP nominee garners merely 80 percent of the party vote, it's over.

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

            by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:31:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Fischer doesn't sound very Repub. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, xcave

    At least not for Nebraska.

    She should switch parties and go after Nelson.

    Ideology is an excuse to ignore common sense.

    by Bush Bites on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:05:45 AM PDT

    •  How do we know she's a Republican? (0+ / 0-)

      The unicameral legislature is officially nonpartisan. Just because she makes noises about fiscal conservatism doesn't mean a thing in terms of her party affiliation in a state as red as Nebraska.

      Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

      by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:18:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "Official" (6+ / 0-)

        Is where it ends. the state parties still nominate candidates and everyone knows who's the Republican and who's the Democrat. It's Nonpartisan in Name Only (NIÑO, haha)

        23, Solid Liberal Democrat, DKE Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college); Swingnut

        by HoosierD42 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:55:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Still... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack, jncca, drobertson

          It makes it relatively easy for Fischer to run in the Democratic primary, if she decides that would be a more plausible path to the Senate.

          I'd probably support a lump of silly putty in the Nebraska Democratic Senate primary against Sen. Ben Nelson. It's not that I hate him, although I kind of do - it's that he's about as electable as Vladimir Lenin's corpse.

          Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

          by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:04:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  When is the last time we (0+ / 0-)

            had polling on that race? I'm curious to see what the latest numbers look like.

            •  I don't remember (0+ / 0-)

              I seem to recall Sen. Ben Nelson's numbers were in the mid-30s, as were his reelects, even against opponents with low name recognition.

              Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

              by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:14:01 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The last one I remember (0+ / 0-)

                had him losing to Bruning by about ten but edging out others.

                I ask because, while it'll certainly be hard for him to be reelected, it might not be that hard. It's still a long time before the election, and while I don't have my finger on the pulse of Nebraska politics, it wouldn't surprise me to see his numbers higher than they've been. A lot of people might be wrong in writing him off so soon.

                •  Is February recent enough? (0+ / 0-)

                  PPP

                  Nelson trails Attorney General Jon Bruning 50-39 in a hypothetical contest and Treasurer Don Stenberg by a 45-41 margin.
                  [...]
                  He's up 42-35 on state Senator Deb Fischer and 42-33 against conservative activist Pat Flynn.

                  -7.75 -4.67

                  "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

                  There are no Christians in foxholes.

                  by Odysseus on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:06:15 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No, that's not recent enough. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Odysseus

                    A lot has changed since then. If nothing else, I wonder how the Ryan plan would factor into the race. I suspect that if the climate for Democrats isn't awful and Nelson isn't loathed, Bruning or someone else could lose just by supporting that plan. It's also possible that he could lose the primary to a Teabagger who supports it, at which point Nelson would probably be the favorite.

          •  Funny! I would like to see a D NE primary poll (0+ / 0-)

            Lenin's corpse v.Ben Nelson

            "I hope; therefore, I can live."
            For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

            by tietack on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:19:29 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Nah (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DCCyclone

            HoosierD42 is right - "Nonpartisan In Name Only" is almost saying too much. Almost every article I've read about the legislature (which has been quite a few recently, since I've been following the redistricting news closely) simply refers to Democrats and Republicans in the legislature. They almost never even bother with the "officially nonpartisan in nature" preamble. No one even tries to pretend it's nonpartisan.

            Political Director, Daily Kos

            by David Nir on Mon May 23, 2011 at 08:01:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Good news from Colorado (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, DCCyclone, xcave, drobertson

    Both Tipton and Gardner need new jobs.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:22:54 AM PDT

  •  Scott Brown translation; (5+ / 0-)

    "I will attempt to crush the American public under the heel of my boot but I will slip on a banana peel and fail and then everyone will continue to love me because...well just because". This is what passes for clever strategy in our political system.

    •  Seriously, he came off as a massive (0+ / 0-)

      asshole in that comment. Putting that in an ad alone should be enough to push a competent Democratic candidate over the finishline in November, when Obama is winning the state by 62-64% (I don't think Romney has any chance of winning the nomination).

      Truth becomes fiction when the fiction's true; Reality becomes illusion where the unreal's real. -Cao Xueqin

      by ArkDem14 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 09:28:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've never watched "Dancing with The Stars" (0+ / 0-)

    since I prefer something a bit more graceful and a bit less frenzied, like this: (Go in to about 2:30)

    But I did tune in to see DeLay shake his bootie. I managed to watch for about thirty seconds, then turned it off.

    Didn't want to lose my dinner.

    Freedom has two enemies: Those who want to control everyone around them...and those who feel no need to control themselves.

    by Sirenus on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:47:40 AM PDT

  •  There is something unwittingly revealing (0+ / 0-)

    about the substance of Texas legislative outcomes in the fact that Texas has legislative sessions only in "odd" years.

    How perfectly fitting.

    The community of fools might be small if it were not such an accomplished proselytizer.

    by ZedMont on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:47:43 AM PDT

  •  Illinois' state House map is nothing short of bold (9+ / 0-)

    It puts a quarter of the Republican members in the same districts. I can't imagine what they've planned for the congressional map.

    25, Male, CA-24, DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

    by DrPhillips on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:49:16 AM PDT

  •  Scott Brown is smarter than we give him (0+ / 0-)

    - Credit for. This was a brilliant way of framing an issue in a Blue State that he won.

    •  Not brilliant at all. (16+ / 0-)

      It's the worst kind of dumbassery, actually. Trying to pretend that you didn't say what you clearly just said? In the internet age no less? This is a pretty bad gaffe and the more is talked about it the stupider Brown and his staff look.

      23, Solid Liberal Democrat, DKE Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college); Swingnut

      by HoosierD42 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:56:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yup, this hurts, but he's playing it smart now... (7+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TofG, itskevin, Bharat, dc1000, wwmiv, jncca, drobertson

        ...by voting "no."  Damage having been done, his route to mitigation is a "no" vote.

        This is not the same as Dean Heller's situation because Heller actually cast a "yes" vote in the House.  Brown hasn't voted yet, and having flip-flopped verbally is not the same, and not nearly as damaging, as flip-flopping on actual votes.

        So Brown still helps himself by voting "no."

        That said, there's still fodder here to use against him.  It's just not as effective anymore.

        43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:07:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Take the example of the other MA Senator, John (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ArkDem14

        Kerry, who said in the 2004 campaign:

        "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

        Brown just made the same mistake.

        •  Nah (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin, Bharat, DCCyclone, dc1000, sulthernao

          Kerry actually voted for cloture. Brown just said he would.

          •  Yep, there's a big difference (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            tietack, dc1000, sulthernao

            I still think Brown is vulnerable and in fact, I'd still bet on the Dems to win this. But, Brown is being very smart by voting no on Ryan. He's going to be much harder to beat now, especially since the Ryan plan is looking like the number one thing Dems will beat Republicans over the head with in 2012.

            As far as "flip-flopping", I'll go even further than DCCyclone above. I'll say his vote against Ryan totally mitigates his saying he would vote for it. There's a lot of wishful thinking going on here about his statement. This is the first thing that's actually made me worry a little bit about our chances against Brown. It's a smart play to vote against Ryan.

            •  A good ad (5+ / 0-)

              would make light of the fact that he supported the bill in question, and only when it became too much of an albatross, he denied it. His first instinct was to vote for it. That has too mean something.

              19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

              by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:03:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I wish, but Brown can say that he listened to (0+ / 0-)

                his constituents on the issue, before finally voting against the Ryan plan.

                "I hope; therefore, I can live."
                For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

                by tietack on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:07:10 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes, but there is still the (0+ / 0-)

                  argument that he was going to vote for the bill in the first place and that it took his constituency to say no was a bad thing. It could show how out of touch he is.

                  19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

                  by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:09:37 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  But how can you really make that argument (0+ / 0-)

                    He says he meant to say "on" not "for." He voted against the bill. How can anyone pretend to read his mind? And like tietack says, he "listened" to his constituents - what any good Senator would do. It's not like Kerry, where he did actually vote.

                    I'm not saying you're wrong that he changed his mind about voting for it. I just don't think this is as effective attack as you (and David, for that matter), think it is.

                    •  It's obvious (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      ndrwmls10, KingofSpades

                      he was intending to vote FOR the Ryan proposal. He wouldn't have let that hang out there for a full week, plus, without correcting the record.

                      But you're right that he mitigates the damage by voting against the plan now, and making a pretty good statement in opposition - politically speaking. But there's no question this is an unforced error on his part, and will affect the way some voters see him, if only slightly.

                      I think the big question among some voters who had been favorable to him could become: Can I trust him? What will he do when he doesn't have to answer to voters again for another 6 years?

                      •  An unforced minor error, IMHO (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        itskevin, Inoljt

                        Don't get me wrong: there are plenty of reasons I think Brown is vulnerable, and I think he's more conservative than many realize - you're right that he probably did intend to vote for the Ryan plan before he realized the backlash against it. But this vote proves he's got some political savvy, and that at this point he's more focused on the general election than a tea party challenge.

                    •  You dont need to read his mind (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      itskevin, KingofSpades

                      He said he supported the plan and then denied it.  Turn the question into, is Brown only going to listen to us every time he's up for re-election or can we can count on him to do the right thing every time?

                      This is also really easy to turn against Brown in a very effective campaign ad and voters aren't going to think that deeply into the whole thing.  Particularly since it'll have happened a year and a half ago; how the hell will they remember exactly how that all transpired.  What they'll see is the attack ad showing him saying he's vote for it and then look like a politician in a negative connotation as he back-pedals as fast as possible.  Then the voter will think, oh yeah I remember that, I guess it was kind of douchey and makes me wonder how he'll vote on other issues if he can barely get this easy one right.

                      Not rocket science, just political science.

                      •  You and I will have to disagree on this one (0+ / 0-)

                        He didn't vote for it, and then against it. He will only have voted against it. That's what will count. He'll be able to counteract any criticism by pointing to his vote.

                        I agree, it's not rocket science, just political science, but in this case to Brown's favor. Or, let me put it another way, can you cite an example where a politician said something, but voted another way, and what the politcian said was used against them to prove they are a flip-flop? Don't say Kerry, because he voted two different ways.

  •  RE: KY-Gov (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArkDem14

    From the Tea Party link:

    Sims’ made public her dislike for Williams throughout the primary. But she took it to a new level recently online by coining an acronym that is quickly becoming a battle cry for many Moffett supporters: “P.U.M.A. or Party Unity My A**.”

    uhh...

    "Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian."

    by xcave on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:01:00 AM PDT

  •  RI-01 (0+ / 0-)

    Any chance David Segal gives it another go in the Democratic primary? I've always really liked him.

    "Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian."

    by xcave on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:07:35 AM PDT

    •  I honestly don't think he would win (0+ / 0-)

      Even in the primary he might not necessarily win, and if he did win the primary he might require some financial assistance. It's not that he wouldn't win (pretty much any Democrat without Cicilline's baggage could win) but he might be a bit too hippie for the district.

      21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

      by sapelcovits on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:08:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I remember him overperforming (0+ / 0-)

        in the primary in 2010. IIRC, he finished ahead of William Lynch, who was supposed to be the other big gun in the primary other than Cicilline. I understand that Segal's very liberal, but he also appears to be a pretty adept politician. And he's still in his low 30's!

        "Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian."

        by xcave on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:00:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Also, have you *been* to Providence? (0+ / 0-)

          Pretty hard to be too hippie for that place. This is where Brown is, remember?

          "Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian."

          by xcave on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:12:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  ...Have I been to Providence? (4+ / 0-)

            Well, if you count living there for all of my life sans college, I guess the answer is yes. And while your characterization is correct if we're talking about College Hill and Fox Point, hippie doesn't really play well with the Joe Sixpacks of neighborhoods like Elmhurst and Wanskuck. (Not to mention there's much more to this district than Providence.)

            Also, one thing I should point out is that Cicilline lost a lot of protest votes from blue-collar Democrats over his bad relations with organized labor. Remember, Hillary Clinton asked him to stay away from her rally (he had endorsed her) because the firefighter's union threatened to picket. Some of Segal's votes last time around may have been from the ABC (Anybody But Cicilline) bloc.

            21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

            by sapelcovits on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:22:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

            Let's not make this a "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy here.

            23, Solid Liberal Democrat, DKE Gay Caucus Majority Whip, IN-02 (home), IN-03 (birth), SC-03 (early childhood), IN-09 (college); Swingnut

            by HoosierD42 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:36:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  His problem isn't liberal per se (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Caped Composer

          it's just coming across as kind of a hippie. I remember reading a story about him and I think he lives in some shoddy apartment in Fox Point (a very young, Brown-influenced neighborhood). Contrast this with someone like my state senator, Rhoda Perry, who is basically liberal across the board but doesn't have the whole "I'm just chillin in the apartment with mah roommates brah!" thing going on. I don't know, that's just the vibe I get from Segal, and while I'm not personally opposed to it I don't know if it's a good fit for the district.

          21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

          by sapelcovits on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:14:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Cicilline (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Has an Italian last name and his dad was a defense attorney for the mafia.  That probably helped him in some hippie-skeptical Providence neighborhoods, no?  Who else can replicate that kind of advantage?

            Anywhere, here's a local (right in the URL!) journalist floating a primary challenge.  Nature does abhor a vacuum: http://www.golocalprov.com/...

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

            by Xenocrypt on Tue May 24, 2011 at 04:25:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Cicilline (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Christopher Walker, MichaelNY

              Well, he's also half-Jewish and gay, although those things are less of a big deal than they used to be in the working-class neighborhoods. But his biggest problem in the end is his record on labor. The unions hate that man with a burning passion. Without his name rec advantage and a split field, he could have lost in the primary in 2010.

              21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

              by sapelcovits on Tue May 24, 2011 at 07:12:35 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  OR-01 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    James Allen, ArkDem14, geoneb

    Res ipsa loquitor.

  •  About NY-26 Green candidate, sort of: It would be (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    interesting if there was a proportional rpresentation in Congress somewhat like Germany. In a few years you could have a 20% teabagger and 10% plus Green Congress. Now that would be fun, especially since someone with the political acumen of a nancy Pelosi would probably do quite well.

  •  Thoughts GOP Prez nomination (11+ / 0-)

    Not long ago, here either or on SSP, I commented that my most recent thinking was that the more GOPers get in, the better for us.  They would be fractured and have a long drawn-out fight that wouldn't resolve itself easily or quickly.

    But, I'm realizing that with a lot of these jokers deciding not to run, I'm often happy and emotionally find it something to celebrate.  I didn't feel that way about Trump or Huckabee, they are guys who I wanted to run and I was disappointed that they didn't.  They would throw monkey wrenches into the whole thing.  But Thune, Barbour, and Daniels, even though I disregard Daniels' chances at the nomination and disregard virtually all of them vs. Obama, still are serious players who the GOP intelligentsia obviously view as a step up from Romney and Pawlenty.

    It's apparent that GOP morale has sunk to its lowest point yet in the Presidential race.  (As an aside, if Hochul wins tomorrow, this will be a helluva bad week for the Republicans.)  And that can be only a good thing for us.

    I think we're reaching a point where the Repubs are stuck with someone they don't want.  Pawlenty is the closest thing they'll have, and really the only thing they could have, to overcoming that problem.  I hope they don't reallize it too soon.

    The real key now is whether the GOP intelligentsia decide to quickly unify around Pawlenty, or stay sidelined for several more months.  The longer they stay sidelnied, or if they fracture across several candidates, the more it hurts Pawlenty, and the entire GOP.

    For Romney's part, it seems virtually a given they won't unify around Romney unless and until they accept he's already become the presumptive nominee.  Republicans just don't want him, and won't join him unless and until they're truly stuck with him.

    And I'm increasingly convinced Romney cannot beat Obama.  Not that I ever thought otherwise, but the fact that the GOP from top to bottom give him such deep resistance makes it impossible to see Romney actually winning next November.  He's truly McCain 2.0, a nominee no one really wants.

    43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

    by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:24:03 AM PDT

    •  The one major drawback to this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SaoMagnifico, TofG

      that I can see right now is that if someone like Christie or even more Rick Perry were to jump in, he might do so at a point where morale is so low, they like him for raising it, despite some other reservations. It'll be like starting a new job and thinking it's much better than the old one because the first few days of the new one went better than the last few days of the old one.

    •  The Ghost of Mitch Daniels (5+ / 0-)

      Nate Silver had a great point this morning - it might be more harmful for Pawlenty, Romney, Huntsman, et. al., to be compared to what could have been from a Daniels campaign - because a campaign that isn't there doesn't get bad poll or fundraising numbers and can't make gaffes.

      We may be seeing the rise of a Republican enthusiasm gap on the presidential level - which could make 2012 more like 2008 than 2010.  

      Republican, MI-09, Member of the DKE Engineering Caucus, SSP: Bort

      by Bart Ender on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:49:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I had this cold shiver up my spine yesterday (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin

      Where I wondered to myself if the GOP establishment could somehow find a way to force Huntsman on the party. Is it possible? I'm not sure. But then again, John McCain was utterly left for dead earlier in the campaign but the establishment found a way to ensure his victory. McCain was pretty unacceptable to the teabaggers, but if no one is funding them, then the teabaggers are rendered very weak. (See JD Hayworth primary last year.)

      Political Director, Daily Kos

      by David Nir on Mon May 23, 2011 at 08:16:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why would they do that? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        itskevin, Odysseus

        When he has so many issues with the base wouldn't they just go with Romney? He polls the strongest and only really has one major problem, granted a big one.

      •  More broadly ... (0+ / 0-)

        Would the party establishment have the ability to force the last relatively sane conservative standing (let's say Huntsman, Pawlenty, or Romney), if lightning struck and it looked like a wack-job like Cain or Bachmann was going to win the nomination.  Talk about a pass-the-popcorn, uncork the bubbly, fire up the cigar moment of must-see TV!

      •  I don't see it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        itskevin, DCCyclone

        McCain already had a strong base of support in the party and among Independents and was leading in the national polls between late 2006 and early 2007, IIRC. Huntsman isn't really all that well-known, so the work would be much harder, particularly in a Republican electorate that usually votes for what they know.

        "Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the human race, has been labeled Utopian."

        by xcave on Mon May 23, 2011 at 09:33:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You too? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Caped Composer

        It is definitely a legitimate concern.  Huntsman is following the McCain path at this point-concentrating all resources in New Hampshire.  He's also going to court the Bushies now that Daniels is out.  So, he may be able to pick up some support.  The GOP is not going to give up without a fight, and Huntsman may be their great white hope.

        My only question is what does he bring to the table.  "Hi, I'm Jon Huntsman.  I'm just like Mjitt Romney, only slightly less douchey."  Let's hope the GOP voters don't buy it.

        GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

        by LordMike on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:40:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In theory I see where you are coming from (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin, DCCyclone

          But when you break it down I don't think there is a comparison. McCain was household name in 2008. He was able to save his candidacy in NH because he won there in 2000 despite his problems with the base. I have a hard time seeing Huntsman do that with arguably even more problems and no residual support from a previous run.

        •  He's their great white hope? (0+ / 0-)

          I assume you are talking about the general election. What makes him so threatening? Is it anything besides him actually being sane instead of possibly unstable and not being Obama if the economy is struggling too much?

      •  No "establishment ensured" McCain's win (7+ / 0-)

        There was no establishment movement to make McCain the nominee.  Sure he had some of them on his side, but nothing remotely close to a consensus.  On the contrary, they abandoned him and left him for dead, viewing his bid as quixotic from summer 2007 up until sometime in December when his polling in NH improved.

        McCain threaded a needle completely on his own gumption.

        Another commenter below rightly explained why Huntsman is no comparison.  McCain had a strong national foundation, Huntsman is the opposite extreme as a complete newbie.

        Huntsman really is obliterated by Romney, he has all the same fundamental problems and none of Romney's advantages.

        Frankly I think it's a 2-man race between Romney and Pawlenty, with Romney the clear leader, but both extraordinarily weak with a real opening for a right-winger.  Huntsman is not that right-winger.  It's hard to see anyone who is.  But there is an opening for one of the crazies to stake out the hard-right ground and scoop up the nomination in an upset.  And Palin, amazingly, if she ran, actually might be able to pull it off in spite of herself, simply because she has a fan base of some size and could crowd out other crazies and by default completely monopolize some blocs in their party.

        43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:52:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting analysis (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ArkDem14, itskevin, DCCyclone

      I tend to agree that all of this is leading to a Pawlenty nomination.  Romney looks good on paper, but it just seems like the majority of the GOP just doesn't like him.  Unless one of the wackos catches fine, Pawlenty is in a good position.

      Of course, here in Indiana we're breathing a sigh of relief that Mitch did not jump in.  You're right that more reasonable people like him and Thune and Huckabee are taking a pass at this -- they don't want to jump into what's become someting akin to a blooper reel from the Gong Show.

      •  I'm thinking (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ArkDem14

        that this is going to lead up to a Goldwater type nomination by the Republicans this year.  None of the establishment candidates are the next in line for them.  So I think they will nominate someone from the far right and use this as a movement election.  They'll lose, but fire up their base for the Congressional elections.  

        www.trublupolitics.com

        by DavidatTruBlu on Mon May 23, 2011 at 08:35:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Possible (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack, itskevin, Odysseus

          But personally, I still think it'll be Romney. They always go next-in-line, he polls the best, he will likely have the most money, he has strength in NH, Pawlenty is dull and Huntsman has too many disqualifiers - working for Obama, complaining the stimulus wasn't big enough, support for cap and trade and for civil unions. In a funny way I wonder if Romneycare actually helps Mitt in that so much focus is on it they ignore his other flip-flops.

          •  Agreed, I don't see a '64-style nominee ahead (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TofG, Odysseus

            I also suspect Romney winds up prevailing, perhaps via a stunning Iowa upset which all but shuts the primaries down from the get-go, and he runs a competent, passionless, dry campaign which entirely banks on the economy and Obama's approval failing to improve. My hunch is Romney probably loses by around Bush-Kerry numbers, but he could, under the right circumstances, win ala Clinton/Bush, should the economic scene indeed not improve. I think Pawlenty's probably the more intriguing nominee, but I dunno if he's any more competent, really.

            I really don't, however, think Bachmann, Gingrich or Palin wins the nomination. I definitely think it's either Romney or Pawlenty.

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

            by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:56:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Pawlenty has to win Iowa (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tietack, TofG, DCCyclone

        We all know that. And he has a shot because he is a social conservative. But beyond that I'm not seeing it. I think he will have the same problem as Huckabee - lack of money and too many transgressions on economic issues in his past.

        •  Even if Pawlenty wins Iowa (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin

          (as I think you're suggesting)

          I'm not convinced that Pawlenty will have the money to compete through the primary season.

          "I hope; therefore, I can live."
          For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

          by tietack on Mon May 23, 2011 at 09:04:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

            •  if he can raise $30M this year (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DCCyclone, itskevin

              he'll be in a good position. Ayers knows how to stretch a budget and think about how little McCain raised through 07 - he had to accept matching funds he was so poor

            •  Agree, but money has been sidelined & now... (4+ / 0-)

              ...will be coming off the sideline.  The question is, how much and how fast, and to whom?

              We'll know a lot about Pawlenty's viability at the end of June or in early July.  If he's not able to take advantage of all these people passing on a run, and sponge up a lot of that money for himself these last 5 weeks before the end of Q2, then he will prove weaker than even I imagined.

              Romney, for his part, is only very barely "next in line."  Again, he's McCain 2.0:  the nominee no one really wants.  Except he's actually a regression from McCain, because McCain truly had a cadre of sincere admirers.  Romney does not.  He's purely a pragmatic pick as the result of the process of elimination.  It's a big problem for him that even if he's the nominee, neither the GOP intellgentsia nor the rank-and-file will be truly behind him.

              Some people in this digest have compared Romney to Kerry, but really he's worse than that.  Kerry was a plain vanilla liberal Democrat, with no fan club but also no intraparty opposition.  Romney has no fan club like Kerry, but Romney does have strong intraparty opposition.  That he's so thoroughly unwanted by his own party is going to be fatal vs. Obama.

              43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:19:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Kerry had intraparty opposition (0+ / 0-)

                The whole antiwar contigent of the party was against him.

                •  That was an illusion (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  NMLib

                  Dean was the only serious anti-war candidate and imploded immediately.  All other top-tier players, Kerry and Edwards and Gephardt, voted for or otherwise supported the war.

                  Yes Democratic voters broadly were anti-Dem, but it was Dean, not Kerry, who was unique in his war posture.

                  43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:55:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  It's a big change that the GOP intelligentsia (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DCCyclone

                (and establishment) don't want Romney this time. Back in '08, he had ample establishment support. Weren't both Jeb and Daddy Bush supporters of his?

                The switch probably comes down to health care reform, plain and simple: What the GOP once considered a smart, conservative idea is now an affront to the Constitution and everything our founding fathers held dear.

                I'm not sure if these establishment backers have actually internalized the party's bombastic criticisms of the Affordable Care Act (i.e. they believe what they've been saying for the past two years) - or if they're simply acknowledging a political reality that Romney will have an uphill climb, now that the ground has shifted under his feet.

        •  Perhaps (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          drachaCRO, ArkDem14, DCCyclone

          You're right that if he stumbles in any in Iowa, it's game over.  Maybe the problem is that for every candidate they have, it is difficult to see an easy path to the nomination.  Maybe it will be Romney, but damn it seems like everyone dislikes him.  I just can'd see a lunatic like Cain or Bachmann winning the nomination -- but the craziness of the GOP has suprised me before.

          •  They hated McCain (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LtNOWIS

            He still got the nomination. And I'm not sure if there is the same antipathy there for Romney. Money will play a large factor. Unless Mitt is upended in NH I forsee that being key to his nomination by Super Tuesday against however emerges as his main challenger, maybe Pawlenty after an Iowa win, maybe one of the longshots catching fire after some surprise showings.

            •  i agree about McCain/Romney (0+ / 0-)

              McCain had positions that were anathema to the GOP primary voters, but by 2008, he was familiar and his negative positions were familar and not so grating.

              Romney is in the same position in 2012.  He has the same advantages that most "next-in-line" candidates have in GOP primaries...more advanced organization, more name rec and more money.  Pawlenty is a favorite of prognosticators since he is seen as someone with very few negatives, but does he really have any positives that will allow him to push past Romney?

            •  I don't think Romney gets more than 35% in NH (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DCCyclone

              It might be enough for him to win the state, but it won't be an improvement on his 08 performance and will just serve to highlight his electoral weakness

              •  Oh, I think Romney's capable of more than that (0+ / 0-)

                The religious right candidates (Bachmann, Palin, Santorum, Cain) won't muster a shred of traction in NH - at best, they'll combine for about a fourth of the primary vote. Gingrich will bomb, too, and Huntsman's likely supporters are probably already in the Romney camp. Pawlenty might well surge in NH via an Iowa win, but he'll need to have reached the Top 3 before that if he hopes to catch Romney. I actually think the real dark horse in NH - don't laugh - would be Giuliani. The polls which have bothered to test him typically find Giuliani polling 2nd or 3rd to Romney there. If Romney implodes, Pawlenty rights a right-wing campaign and Huntsman has no money, Giuliani could sweep in and stack his chips on the center-right there.

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

                by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:02:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  There is more hatred toward Romney than McCain (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              itskevin, dc1000, NMLib, Inoljt, askew

              Romney draws far more intraparty antipathy than McCain ever did.  He's got the well-earned flip-flop image that McCain didn't have.  And while McCain seemingly imploded due to immigration, that was not as potent as health care reform is today.  Romney is in very deep trouble there, because unlike immigration reform which went nowhere, Romney signed a bill into law that is anathema to his party, and Obama based much of the federal law on Romney's plan.  So the hostility is much more intense.

              There was a significant bloc of Republicans who sincerely admired McCain.  There is no such bloc for Romney.  If he's the nominee, it's because he's just what's left, even though no one is happy about it.

              43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:25:50 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not so sure about that (0+ / 0-)

                The establishment was behind Romeny in 2008. I well remember watching Hannity blast away at McCain on any number of issues while claiming Romney had seen the light and was a true conservative. He had tactic support from the Bush family. Immigration not as important as health care? Open for debate I think.

                •  Indeed, conservatives loved Romney in 2008 (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  drobertson, LordMike

                  He was viewed as the most plausible right-wing alternative to the "liberal" Giuliani and "unpredictable" McCain. Ann Coulter even endorsed him.

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

                  by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 01:11:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That was an illusion (0+ / 0-)

                    Romney was hammered as a disingenuous flip-flopper, and it stuck.  Yes there were some conservatives in the noise machine who backed him, but they were unrepresentative of most conservatives, which the early caucus and primary results proved.  Romney was the runaway frontrunner in the first 2 states and fell apart, illustrating that he wasn't really the conservative choice at all.

                    43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                    by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:58:05 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  i simply don't agree (0+ / 0-)

                mccain's carefully cultivated "maverick" image was created by him poking conservatives in his party on a variety of subjects - immigration and finance reform in particular.  they hated him for that.  he won the nomination because he denied his previous positions and he was a good soldier supporting bush in 2004.

                even though romney's bill in MA is something that GOP primary voters don't like, he has not antagonized or lectured them for it.  he has assiduously courted them.  he was a good soldier for mccain in '08, and he is more familiar than all the other guys.

                i'm from MN and i hate pawlenty deeply, but i can see why he has been having trouble energizing anybody.

                •  Romney pisses them off more than McCain (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  SaoMagnifico

                  It doesn't matter if Romney has never been as ascerbic as McCain had been.  That's not good enough to make him "less hated."  All that matters is that Romney has flip-flopped on everything imaginable for purely politically expedient motives.  Rank-and-file and intelligentsia alike hate him for that far more than they ever hated McCain.  

                  McCain, for his part, was always more conservative than Romney.  His surrender on immigration reform was his only policy reversal, and it was one the base demanded.  He never did back down on campaign finance reform.

                  And again, McCain had a genuine following in the Republican Party, a base of loyal admirers.  Romney has no such thing.

                  43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:44:06 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  I think Pawlenty may have just (6+ / 0-)

          strangled his campaign in the cradle.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

          "He called for a phasing out — albeit gradual — of federal ethanol subsidies, a move long considered a political death wish in a state with such a large agricultural community.

          But, Pawlenty didn’t stop there. In his speech he detailed how he will travel this week to Florida — one of the oldest (by age) states in the country — to call for fundamental reform of Medicare and Social Security, to Washington to take on alleged largess in the federal government and to New York to make clear the era of bailouts of the financial industry is over."

          •  Is there an R that will take advantage of that? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DCCyclone

            I'd like to see it, but am not sure.

            "I hope; therefore, I can live."
            For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

            by tietack on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:08:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Rudy! (0+ / 0-)

              No, seriously, I could see Giuliani AGAIN veer to a Florida-based strategy, though, this time, he paints himself as the sole Republican to oppose Ryan's Medicare proposals. He chills with all of the walking corpses downstate and hopes their support, this time, carries the day.

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

              by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 01:14:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Newt is pro-ethanol, but... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              ...he's probably no longer viable.  I say "probably" because there now is this big void on the hard right that dislikes Romney and hasn't yet taken Pawlenty seriously, so there's an outside chance Newt can fill it.  It's bizarre, by all rights Newt should be complete toast, but Republican voters accepted so many deep flaws from their candidates in 2010 that it's hard to predict anymore what they'll do.

              I think more broadly, ethanol is an open question.  I don't know what others will say or do.  Maybe it really is less toxic than it used to be, and maybe belt-tightening has Iowa wingnuts ready to accept an end to ethanol subsidies.  I don't know if that's the case, but it's possible.

              But no one in Florida is going to accept cuts to social security and Medicare.  TPaw is in deep trouble there if he goes forward with that message.

              43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

              by DCCyclone on Tue May 24, 2011 at 06:32:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  He's trying to get credit (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            itskevin, Bharat

            From the press for political courage for saying stuff that the press regards as courageous and rare but which everyone says all the time anyway.  He is ignoring the first rule of politics, which is, to quote Jimmy Carter, "fuck the press."  No one will give a damn that Pawlenty got some fawning column space (if, in fact, he does) in a week, let alone in a month or a year.

            Still, I doubt it'll strangle his campaign either, but his affection for self-dramatization is deeply annoying to this political junkie.  Still, a vanishingly small percentage of the country will notice enough to care, and those that do notice--activists and campaign workers and rank-and-rile politicos--probably still won't care.
             

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

            by Xenocrypt on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:13:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  So, his goal is to get no one to vote for him then (0+ / 0-)

            I guess. The no ethnaol stand is going to hurt him in Iowa, which is must win state. Also, I'd be surprised if that was his stand while he was governor of Minnesota. There is plenty of farmers in southern Minnesota who are benefiting from ethanol subsidies.

            President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

            by askew on Mon May 23, 2011 at 02:35:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Pawlenty's just endorsing Grassley's legislation? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            itskevin, jncca, SaoMagnifico

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

            So much for the uproar: the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association welcomed Pawlenty's support, noting that the industry is already united behind Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley's legislation to draw down and reform the current ethanol incentive.

            "I hope; therefore, I can live."
            For SSP users, see my Tips for Swingnuts diary

            by tietack on Mon May 23, 2011 at 02:46:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  He's committing suicide, maybe not in Iowa but... (0+ / 0-)

            ...nationally.

            Maybe he can run against ethanol subsidies and get away with it in one state in a divided field where everyone else has more not to like than Pawlenty.

            But ethanol combined with all the other stuff taken together just hands easy 30-second attack ads to opponents.  If the GOP field for whatever reason doesn't think they can use it, Obama and allies certainly can.  The big one, most fatal, is "fundamental reform" of Medicare and social security.  We call that CUTS, or even ABOLISHMENT, and let TPaw argue otherwise which frankly he really can't.

            43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 06:38:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Hahahaha (0+ / 0-)

            Republicans are shooting their own feet off all over the place these days.

            Cut ethanol subsidies. Yeah. It's a position I agree with, FWIW, but Pawlenty's must-win state is Iowa, and Iowa is addicted to those subsidies like a heroin junkie to the needle.

            Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

            by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:07:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Well Huckabee won Iowa (0+ / 0-)

          so he can have the same problems as him.  And I think T-Paw can definitely win IA with who is the likely crop of candidates.  He's a pretty typical Upper Midwestern conservative and can appeal well there.

      •  I've always claimed Pawlenty's gonna win (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone

        for these reasons: http://www.pculpa.com/...

  •  ND gov (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArkDem14, Odysseus

    Maybe Heitkamp will have a better chance this time around.

    Last time she ran she got breast cancer so towards the end of the campaign she was in full cemo and had lost her hair and looked sick.

  •  KY -AG - P'Pool (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    I do genealogy and P'Pool would likely be descended from the PettyPool/Pettypool family of Colonial Southern Virginia.  I have seen the abbreviation P'Pool used by that family before.

    Just in case it turns out he isn't a Vulcan that is, lol.

    "My name's Dr. Multimillionaire and I kicked your ass." --Rep. Steve Kagen D-WI to Karl Rove

    by walja on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:20:21 AM PDT

  •  WI-Voter Suppression (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    walja, KingofSpades

    Did anybody see the video of its passage? It was disgusting, especially the snarling, gum chewing Senate President Ellis. What is it about Wisconsin that produces horrendous Republicans.

    19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

    by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:35:25 AM PDT

  •  Wi. recall - Game On! (7+ / 0-)

    The state elections board has certified July 12th as the date for the recall election for Republicans Senators Randy Hopper, Luther Olson, and Dan Kapanke.

    In Kapanke's case 21, 776 signatures were certified of 15,588 that were needed to recall Kapanke.  Info on final signature numbers for Olson and Hopper was trailing the data for Kapanke for unknown reasons.

    Decisions on the recall of 3 remaining Republicans (Darling, Harsdorf, and Cowles) and the 3 targeted Democrats (Hansen, Holperin, & Wirch) are pending.

    "My name's Dr. Multimillionaire and I kicked your ass." --Rep. Steve Kagen D-WI to Karl Rove

    by walja on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:38:19 AM PDT

    •  Although the other three are likely (3+ / 0-)

      to go through because the arguments the Republicans used were all the same, from this article:http://www.jsonline.com/...

      "By ordering the Kapanke recall election, the Government Accountability Board has signaled it will do the same for recall elections for the other five Republicans because attorneys made the same arguments in all those efforts."

      So the real fireworks will be against the Democratic senators, particularly Hansen, because the Republican just filed based on procedural technicalities, but the Democrats filed with problems of the actual signatures and they way they were collected. But there is also a good chance to invalidate Holperin.  If the GAB will just invalidate Hansen, though, it would increase our chances of taking the Senate because then only Holperin would be vulnerable and even he has a good chance of benefiting from a potentially nasty Tea Party vs establishment primary.

      All Wisconsin, All the Time

      by glame on Mon May 23, 2011 at 10:55:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ND-gov (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus, Xenocrypt

    I don't see where heidicamp or pomelroy if he decides to run could have a wedge to win in ND.  the governor may be new, but ND has the lowest unemployment in the country, if he's been enacting crazy scott walker/dennis daugaard legislation, it hasn't made the news and there's been no talk of patterson style incompetence.  unless there's a scandal, or he decides not to run, i just don't see it.

  •  Joe Biden in 2016? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone

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

    by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:02:44 AM PDT

    •  I love him, but no. (4+ / 0-)

      His time has passed. He made it to the Vice-Presidency, he should be happy with that.

      19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

      by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:04:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't agree (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        itskevin, NMLib, askew, sulthernao

        If Obama is popular, Biden can win.

        Biden has really upped his game as VP.  He's become much more disciplined, his rhetoric is much more on-message and gaffe-free than ever before in his political career.  And his stature has skyrocketed, as happens when you're VP.

        Of course, letting slip his 2016 interest at that fundraiser itself was a gaffe.  But at least one that leaked from a private event, and not one on camara.

        If he lends himself to handling, then Biden could very well run and win in 2016.  He'll have all the advantages of stature and service under a well-liked President, but also he's different enough from Obama in personal profile to offer change.

        43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:31:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was making more of a personal statement. (4+ / 0-)

          Like I said, he is a great guy and a great VP. I just don't see him being the next President. Besides the fact that he'll be 74 in 2016.

          19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

          by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:35:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think Biden could win...the nomination (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TofG

          There is a case to be made, I suppose, that Biden would pull a Walter Mondale and bank on establishment support to muster the nomination. Problem is, if Clinton also runs, that splinters the rank-and-file and provides an opening to a progressive outsider.

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

          by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 01:16:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Biden? Clinton? (7+ / 0-)

            Ugh! If we're running old-timers in 2016 instead of talented new blood, we've got serious problems on our hands. If we want to be the viable party of the future, we gotta stop reaching back to the 20th Century. And, frankly, we've got plenty of talent waiting in the wings right now (the names Schweitzer and Gillibrand both come to mind) . . .

            28, chick, solid progressive, NY-14 currently, FL-22 native, went to school in IL-01.

            by The Caped Composer on Mon May 23, 2011 at 04:36:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Hillary isn't running, period. (0+ / 0-)

            She's burned out and done.  She wants a calmer life in her golden years.  She says so all the time.

            Again, if Obama is reasonably popular toward his end, I can easily see Biden getting elected President.  The demographics will be only that much more daunting for Republicans, the nonwhite vote easily will be 30% or more by 2016.  At some point this is going to make it very difficult for Republicans even under what used to be favorable circumstances.

            43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:04:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't see the vice president winning the nom (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sulthernao, Christopher Walker

              He was an also-ran in his previous runs for president, and I think Vice President Quayle has disintegrated the myth of the sitting vice president walking to his party's nomination.

              Vice President Biden will be 74 in 2016, he's well liked but not really taken all that seriously, and Democrats like Sens. Warner and Gillibrand and Govs. Cuomo, Schweitzer, Malloy, and O'Malley will sure have something to say about it.

              Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

              by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:11:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  i think it's more (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DCCyclone, sulthernao

                like G HW Bush. i've always considered obama the democratic reagan:

                  -replaced unpopular incumbent
                  -poor economy
                  -looking to win re-election handily
                  -willing to compromise, but still liberal/conservative
                  -very popular with the base, but with appeal to centrists

                Biden is Bush 41

                18, D, CA-14 (home) CA-09 (college next year). Economic liberal, social libertarian, fiscal conservative. Put your age and CD here :) -.5.38, -3.23

                by jncca on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:13:57 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yup, Biden is Bush 41, not Quayle (0+ / 0-)

                  Biden is broadly respected.  Quayle was not.  And being the VP for 8 years has given Biden the stature he lacked in 2008.  Further, he actually was one of the heavyweights in 1988, but the pseudo-plagiarism attack sunk him.

                  43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:27:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  With all due respect... (0+ / 0-)

                  That doesn't make Vice President Biden anything. He's a punchline on late-night shows and he's overshadowed by a lot of lower-ranking people in Washington. He's a nice guy, but I don't see him clearing the field, and against a younger, more dynamic, knowledgeable candidate (and Sen. Gillibrand and Gov. O'Malley both come to mind here immediately), he's going to look old, silly, and a bit slow.

                  Let's be serious here. If he were elected and served two terms, as we want any Democratic president to do, he would be over 82 years old by the time he left office.

                  Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

                  by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:44:08 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  There have been no Shermanesque statements (0+ / 0-)

              from her. I think she'll be in it, and that the nomination will be hers if she wants it.

              •  She's said "absolutely not"... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DCCyclone, sulthernao, NMLib

                Multiple times and continues to express exasperation about even being asked. That seems Shermanesque to me.

                Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

                by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:40:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yup, she's clear as a bell she won't run. (nm) (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  SaoMagnifico, NMLib

                  nm

                  43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

                  by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:51:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I think it was something like (0+ / 0-)

                  "absolutely not interested," which, given her role as SoS, is what I'd expect her to say, even if she does have hope of running in the future.

                  My money's on a run. And I think she'd be formidable!

                  •  I'm sorry, but to me... (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    NMLib, DCCyclone, askew

                    It sounds a lot like you're saying, "She said no. I think that means yes!"

                    Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

                    by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 09:04:44 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Then why agree to be SoS in the first place? (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    DCCyclone

                    It really is a horrible place to launch a presidential run from, if she had really wanted to run again, she probably would have stayed in the Senate or run for governor of New York, as SoS she simply loses out on too many political contacts, and frankly makes it a lot more awkward to run, even after leaving the administration after a year.

                    Politics and more Handle name DGM on Swing State Project

                    by NMLib on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:59:23 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  She won't be SoS after 2013 n/t (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY
                      •  So? (0+ / 0-)

                        It's still an awkward position to try to run from, as unlike pretty much every other candidate who is going to run, she's not in any position to curry favor either with the primary electorate or with politicians in a position to help her among the electorate.

                        Even if she's out of Obama's administration in 2013, the fact that she'd have to building those connections almost immediately to have any chance (unlike, say, Joe Biden who would have already been building them behind the scenes since the start of the Obama administration) makes it even harder for her to run.

                        And speaking of Joe Biden, if he runs, he probably takes a lot of Obama's people with him and while he won't get the explicit backing of Obama (presidents stay neutral in competitive primaries), and Biden plays well to the types of people Hillary Clinton would need to win.

                        Politics and more Handle name DGM on Swing State Project

                        by NMLib on Tue May 24, 2011 at 11:10:13 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I dont' think (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          MichaelNY

                          she will have any problem building up connections from her last Presidential run.  She's been SoS, not in hiding.

                          If you don't think those same people loyal to Clinton will flock to her again, you're crazy.  Believe me, if she wants to be President, Joe Biden is not going to stop from trying.  And if it's true that they end up splitting votes, then you have nothing to worry about -- we'll see a fresh face running in 2016.

                          •  Another Clinton run (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            MichaelNY

                            would probably be the fastest campaign ramp-up in history.

                            And unlike NMLib, I think it would work to her advantage NOT to have an elected or government office at the time. It would enable her to focus full-time on building the campaign - and she wouldn't need to take any tough votes that could be used against her. She'd also be able to create at least a shadow of a distance between herself and the president, which could be helpful if there's any controversy swirling around him when 2016 rolls around.

                            I really didn't mean to touch off a big debate in the comments here. I just believe that she may run in spite of her suggestions to the contrary. If that's "no means yes," according to some comments above, then so be it. It wouldn't be the first time someone in politics has seemed to change their minds.

                            The announcement could go like this: "I had every intention of retiring when I left the SoS post last year, but after hearing from so many voters and former supporters, I've decided there's too much at stake NOT to run, including the protection of many of President Obama's signature achievements. Health care, in particular, is of utmost importance to me, and I'd like to do everything I can to make sure the system works - for everyone."

                            And then she'd be off to the races!

                •  the fact that you (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  itskevin

                  recced Caped Composer's "no more old timers" post I think shows you're more anti-Clinton than anything else, which is why you are so adamant that she is not running.

                  The facts are that she always wanted to be president and likely still does.  There is a very simple explanation to her saying multiple times she will not run.  Because any hint of it would be a distraction and would prevent her from doing her job the best she can.  The media would go crazy with it.

                  Remember when Obama's numbers were sagging and people started hinting at a challenge from Hillary in a primary?  There was nothing to suggest she would ever do anything like that, nor were there any rumors floating around about it.  Now imagine if she actually didn't rule out running for election again.  It would be a shit storm of media attention.

                  But here is the bottom line.  She loves campaigning.  She loves meeting and listening to people.  She loves politics in general.  And she's a natural politician.  Nothing will convince me 100% that she is not running until the 2016 Democratic field is set.

                  It makes sense for her to leave her job as Secretary of State in Obama's second term,  take some time off, get refreshed...allow rumors to swirl about her candidacy, and then announce her intentions to run for President.

                  I understand the need for someone new, but I also want to keep a Democrat in the White House.  The Republican field will be strong and I don't think we could nominate a stronger candidate than Clinton.

        •  Biden would be a helluva President (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DCCyclone

          I have nothing to back this up, but I would imagine that if the Presidential ticket was turned around (Biden-Pres, Obama-VP), Biden would win NC by 5%.  Biden's persona resonates well with North Carolinians.  That being said, Obama-Biden has a good chance of winning NC again.

      •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

        I don't see it under almost any circumstances. Well, there is one but I'm not even going there.

    •  We'll see... (0+ / 0-)

      Independent Socialist (-6.62, -4.05) and Vice-Chair of DKE Cranky Hoosier Caucus, IN-09

      by Bob R Bobson on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:22:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  People shouldn't be surprised by this (0+ / 0-)

      He's run for president twice now, so its not like he doesn't want it.

      For all the talk about Hillary Clinton running, I always found it amusing that no one talked about Biden running seriously, even though he's arguably in a much better position to get the nomination.

      Politics and more Handle name DGM on Swing State Project

      by NMLib on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:31:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  More data points (0+ / 0-)

    On rural population: In 2010, the CNN exit poll broke down as follows:

    -Big Cities 11%
    -Smaller Cities 20%
    -Suburbs 49%
    -Small towns 7%
    -Rural 13%

    Given how they classify the first two as urban and the last two as rural, that's about exactly what it was in 2008 too.

    Also, here is an interesting look by county, which is not my preferred unit.  And here is a cache of a census factfinder table on the question, from 2000:

    -39% lived in a central place in an urbanized area
    -29% lived in a non-central place in an urbanized area
    -8.1% lived in a central place in an urban cluster
    -2.6% lived in a non-central place in an urban cluster
    -1.5% lived in a rural place of 2,500 or more
    -1.8% lived in a rural place of 1,000 to 2,499
    -1.4% lived in a rural place of less than 1,000
    -16.4% lived in a rural place that was not a place(?)

    So, with the apples-to-orange comparison, you can see the suburbanization effect, maybe: 31% lived in cities in 2010/2008 (so it's not about turnout, oddly) compared to 39% in 2000.  16.4% lived in "pure rural" in 2000, and maybe that's now 13% in 2010.  

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

    by Xenocrypt on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:08:07 PM PDT

  •  Biden 2016? (0+ / 0-)

    Strange, but health permitting he could be impressive: http://www.politico.com/...

  •  Tommy Thompson's fav. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, jj32, drobertson

    in Wisconsin is 42/42, according to PPP.

    19, Chairman DKE Gay Caucus, male, Dem, (College IN-09) (Raised IL-03, IL-09) Tammy Baldwin for Senate!

    by ndrwmls10 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 12:24:45 PM PDT

  •  speaking of Nebraska, could the winner-takes-all (0+ / 0-)

    their EV's change still possible for them to enact this cycle?

    I suppose they still have most of next year to try to do that.

  •  Looks like Murkowski's a "no" on Ryan budget (7+ / 0-)

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

    Among this, DREAM Act and DADT repeal, she's looking more Democrat than upwards of half a dozen Democrats.

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

    by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 01:26:23 PM PDT

  •  could GA-7 be in play in 2012 ? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG

    isn't this district already going in the blue direction b/c of demographic changes ??  if so, Woodall didn't seem to help himself with this:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

  •  Funny (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, TofG

    Rick Perry didn't mind calling 3 Special Sessions to deal solely with a non-required mid-decade redistricting scheme. But now that they actually have to redistrict suddenly it's not a high enough priority for a Special Session?

  •  NY-23 (6+ / 0-)

    Big grain of salt but Davis released a poll with Hochul at 44, Davis 27, and Corwin 17(!!!). I can buy the Hochul number but I don't see Davis doing this well.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/...

    Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9. Was hoosierdem on SSP, but that username was already taken here :(

    by drhoosierdem on Mon May 23, 2011 at 03:48:30 PM PDT

  •  Are (0+ / 0-)

    you guys giving babka tomorrow?

    Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9. Was hoosierdem on SSP, but that username was already taken here :(

    by drhoosierdem on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:29:43 PM PDT

  •  NH-Pres: Romney up 23 over Ron Paul (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG

    http://content.usatoday.com/...

    With Giuliani, Gingrich tied for third.

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

    by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 05:32:25 PM PDT

    •  I'd been thinking Ron Paul (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TofG

      would end up at 2nd place soon enough.  Gingrich is imploding and Palin won't run.

    •  Meaningless, as key number is... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, Bharat, NMLib

      ...87% say they have "no idea" who they'll vote for!

      This when alternatives are "definitely decided" and "leaning" toward someone.  Those categories combined only 13%, and definites only 4%.  But that only 9% will even claim to be "leaning" toward someone tells you how soft Romney's support really is.  He could implode instantaneously the second one or more other candidates gain popular momentum in the state.

      43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:25:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        itskevin

        If Giuliani gets in and Huntsman gains traction, I think that hurts Romney badly.

        A lot of pundits are starting to predict Pawlenty looks like the likely nominee. Maybe I'll think so if he crests above single digits in any poll. I think he has a huge problem with his unimpressive fundraising and relative lack of charisma.

        Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

        by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:47:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Romney-slayers not revealed until month out (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin

          That's what happened last time, even as late as Thanksgiving 2007, Romney was the runaway frontrunner in both Iowa and NH.  This with both states voting in early January, 5-6 weeks later.  Only in December did Huckabee and McCain make their respective moves upward in polling in those states.

          In a weak field, especially with so many unknowns, voters keep their powder dry until very late.

          So if Pawlenty is lingering in the single-digits in Iowa even as late as Christmas, I still won't be surprised if he wins the caucuses in early February (assuming no change in the calendar).

          That 87% is what makes the whole thing so unpredictable.  It's easy to look at Romney as the runaway frontrunner in NH yet again, but he's in the exact same boat as last time.  It's stunning to me that even given the option of just saying they "lean" toward a candidate, not even having "decided," still 87% choose "I have no idea."  That means Romney's support truly is nothing more than name rec.

          43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:57:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  AND Romney's still at 32% (0+ / 0-)

        He should've have built on his 08 support by now if he was really the frontrunner

  •  Scott Brown getting hit from the Right (4+ / 0-)

    on his Ryan budget half-twist back-flip.

    Jennifer Rubin:

    Maybe a primary challenge would sharpen Brown’s thinking on the subject. Ryan’s retort to New Gingrich on “Meet the Press” yesterday is equally applicable to Brown’s lame assault, “I have no problems with somebody who’s offering alternative solutions to fix this problem. I have problems with people who aren’t offering any solutions, who are just playing politics.” I tend to think Massachusetts voters will agree.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

    Joe Walsh:

    "Respectfully, Scott Brown ought to be ashamed of himself," said Walsh on the program, according to The Hill. "This is the defining moment of this generation. We have got to be bold. We know these entitlements have to be reformed to be saved. He knows that."
    Walsh said on Monday night, "Any Republican that doesn’t vote for this or doesn’t support this is purely being guided by political reasons."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    And Harry Reid, for good measure:

    “Another prominent Republican, one who serves in this body, has been all over the map as well,” Reid continued, in a reference to Brown. “First he said — in his words — ‘Thank God’ for the Republican plan to kill Medicare. Then he said he was undecided. Now he says he opposes it. We’ll tune in tomorrow to see if he changes his mind again.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

  •  Peter King says Giuliani very likely to run in '12 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, sulthernao, Bharat

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

    by andyroo312 on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:27:14 PM PDT

  •  DNC goes after GOP for opposing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, itskevin, sulthernao

    the resuce of the American auto industry.

    Web ad.

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

    by KingofSpades on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:35:26 PM PDT

  •  If anyone cares (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Xenocrypt

    the Providence Journal has an interactive map of RI's house and senate districts, showing which are above target and which are below.

    Ironically, my house district is dramatically below target, while my senate district is significantly above. Could just be the way the districts were drawn, though.

    21, male, RI-01 (voting)/IL-01 (college), hopeless Swingnut

    by sapelcovits on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:47:49 PM PDT

  •  I got polled tonight for VA SD-31 Dem primary! (4+ / 0-)

    I failed to write down or remember the name of the polling company, but it had to be one of the two announced Democratic candidates who commissioned the poll.  They are Arlington County Supervisor Barbara Favola, and Army Lt. Col. Jaime Areizaga-Soto.  The questions started with voting intention for the primary (which is in August), and went on to favorables and trial heats; favorable descriptions of each candidate and follow-up favorables and trial heat; and finally unfavorable descriptions of each candidate followed by favorables and trial heat.

    I've mentioned before that for whatever reason(s), I get polled all the time.  And I've been polled even more in my 3 years in Virginia than I was in D.C. before that.

    43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

    by DCCyclone on Mon May 23, 2011 at 07:49:05 PM PDT

    •  Interesting (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone

      Favola's campaign seems to be DOA, but of course that's mostly from the poisoned information I get from Lowell and NLS, who have a huge grudge against her.

      •  I feel the same, but one objective tidbit... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        ...is that Favola did part ways with her campaign manager.  Favola tried to say it was just a "bad fit."  That's a red flag to me about Favola.

        But yeah, Lowell Feld and Ben Tribbett have their own narrow perspective on politics along with some other activists in their circle, and it's not a particularly clear-headed or thoughtful perspective.

        43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Tue May 24, 2011 at 06:40:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  KY-Gov: Beshear out with 1st ad. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bob R Bobson, itskevin

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

    by KingofSpades on Mon May 23, 2011 at 08:29:52 PM PDT

  •  WTF, Cynthia McKinney!!? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jncca, sulthernao, askew

    She's appearing on Libyan state TV (pro-Gaddafi, of course) and lambasts the US for their actions against Gaddafi.  I knew she was out of her gourd for a while, but this absolutely confirms it.

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

    by KingofSpades on Mon May 23, 2011 at 09:02:20 PM PDT

  •  Potential twist in Massachusetts (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, tietack, itskevin

    The New York Times is reporting that unnamed Democratic Party officials are trying to draw Elizabeth Warren into the race for Sen. Scott Brown's seat. Story here.

    In response to a question about whether she would enter the race, a spokeswoman for the agency, Jen Howard, said Monday, “Elizabeth Warren is 100 percent focused on building the new consumer agency.”

    If she chose to run — party officials say she is intrigued but far from decided — she would emerge as the most high-profile contender among those currently in the mix.

    I think Warren's entry would automatically draw national attention on the part of progressive activists to this race. And while progressive activists don't swing elections, they can change the narrative, which has hereto been about lack of Democratic enthusiasm to tackle Brown.

    Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

    by SaoMagnifico on Mon May 23, 2011 at 11:22:18 PM PDT

    •  Color me still skeptical (0+ / 0-)

      I'm curious who in the party establishment wants her.  Up to now I've assumed she's been pushed as a candidate simply by some in the netroots and other liberal activist circles.

      I still don't see her appeal.  Besides the fact she has zero name recognition even among most Democrats, let alone the general electorate, I don't see that a policy wonk who I've never seen on TV would have any uncommon appeal to ordinary primary voters.  Frankly I'd put her a notch below Setti Warren in stature and personal appeal.  Warren looked great in his video, and he's actually a popular elected official.

      Beyond on this, having to draft a candidate like Warren in a state like Massachusetts of all places speaks poorly of our chances there.  There are 10(!) Congressmen and the state is losing a U.S. House seat in reapportionment.  And Democrats dominate all other elected offices.  And with all that, there's a push to draft an academic/bureaucrat to run for U.S. Senate?

      43, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and a boy, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Tue May 24, 2011 at 07:13:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Same objections here (0+ / 0-)

        But don't you think a Warren vs. Warren primary could be fun?

        Seriously, though. The House members need to stop acting like dicks. First, someone needs to tell them to stop talking about how great Scott Brown is. Secondly, they're all screwed if John Kerry doesn't become SecState. I'm starting to hope he doesn't, just so they all look like idiots.

        Independent Socialist (-6.62, -4.05) and Vice-Chair of DKE Cranky Hoosier Caucus, IN-09

        by Bob R Bobson on Tue May 24, 2011 at 07:49:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed, Warren's a non-starter in a general (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack

          Imagine if fellow uncharismatic policy wonk Robert Reich was the D nominee in the 2002 gubernatorial race. That's how Warren would fare here, esp. since Romney '02 was about as formidable as Brown '12. It's hard to see how anyone, besides true progressives, would support Warren over Brown.

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

          by andyroo312 on Tue May 24, 2011 at 07:54:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Deckert is out in OR-01 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tietack

    Commissioner Avakian catches a break as the Oregon Business Association president rules out a bid. Story here.

    Independent, Auckland Central resident, MD-05 voter, OR-01 native, Swingnut for life, and keeper of the DKE glossary.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue May 24, 2011 at 02:50:53 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site