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.


MA-Sen: Rep. Mike Capuano, who ran in the special election in 2009 and had flirted with a second bid this year, announced late last week that he will not, in the end, join the Democratic Senate field. Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren engaged in her first bit of public campaigning yesterday, headlining a big union Labor Day breakfast hosted by the Greater Boston Labor Council.

MI-Sen: Is Pete Hoekstra tapped out on Michigan endorsements? Or, put another way, do Republican primary voters in the Wolverine State care about support from guys like Steve King (Iowa), Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania), and John Kasich (the right honorable d-bag of Ohio)? If they do, then Hoekstra is golden!

PA-Sen: Veteran Republican Rep. Tim Murphy says he will not challenge Sen. Bob Casey for Senate next year. Murphy's name had long been on a list of GOP congressmen who hadn't formally ruled out a run but never seemed likely to actually engage. I think there are probably one or two more guys we're still waiting to hear from (like Charlie Dent and Jim Gerlach), but I seriously doubt their decisions will be different from Murphy's.


LA-Gov: Democratic state Sen. Rob Marionneaux, the only potential candidate of any standing, says he won't challenge Gov. Bobby Jindal this fall. This comes on the heels of a Louisiana state Republican Party poll (taken by Southern Media and Opinion Research) showing Gov. Bobby Jindal taking 59% in a hypothetical all-party jungle primary, to Marionneaux's 8%. (Teacher Tara Hollis, the only announced Democrat, is at 6%.) The filing period runs from Sept. 6-8, but it seems doubtful that we'll land anyone of note.

WV-Gov: The RGA tries to go all Jungle Boogie on Earl Ray Tomblin with this new ad.


CA-30: In response to Howard Berman's recent all-star endorsement parade (Jerry Brown, Dianne Feinstein, etc.), Brad Sherman shot back with a "statement of support" from none other than Bill Clinton. While not quite an endorsement, Sherman insists that the Big Dog "provided the quote this summer 'well aware of the redistricting possibilities.'"

CA-44: Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has endorsed Janice Hahn in the new 44th, where she faces two other Democrats: fellow Rep. Laura Richardson and state Sen. Isadore Hall. Hahn also received the backing of Jim Dear, the mayor of Carson, which her press release describes as one of the largest cities in the district.

FL-22: Erm, so, am I wrong to think that these Lois Frankel quotes don't exactly make her sound so great as a candidate? Frankel, you'll recall, is the former West Palm Beach Mayor and one of two Democrats running for the honor of taking on the Great Lunatic Hope, Allen West (the other is CPA Patrick Murphy — aka "no not that" Patrick Murphy). Anyhow, this is what I'm talking about:

Since joining the race, Frankel has refused to say whether she would have supported “Obamacare” telling WFLX when asked in an interview, “I can’t answer that question right now because as a Congresswoman you have to take the people’s pulse.” She also demurred when given the chance to offer support for the stimulus bill the President pushed through Congress telling WPTV television viewers, “there were a number of stimulus bills… instead of looking back look forward.”

And perhaps most frustrating to anti-war Democrats was her interview with liberal south Florida radio host Nicole Sandler where she refused to say whether we should withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan or whether she supported US involvement in Libya telling the host, “I have the luxury of not having to weigh in right now” and “the world is so complicated and so chaotic… it’s hard to keep up each day with various rioting revolutions throughout the region.”

IL-02: This is seriously surprising (to me, at least): Former one-term Rep. Debbie Halvorson, who served in the old 11th CD, has filed paperwork with the FEC to explore a run in the new 2nd District, which is currently inhabited by Jesse Jackson, Jr. Thanks to redistricting, which sent Jackson's district flying far out into the Chicago suburbs, Halvorson's home town of Crete is now taken in by IL-02. If she gets in, that would set up an extremely unlikely clash in the primary: The 2nd CD has a voting-age population that is 54% black (PDF), which means the Democratic electorate is only likely to be even more heavily African-American. That wouldn't seem to bode well for Halvorson's chances, but she's already busy dinging JJJ, saying "He lives in D.C.. He doesn’t come home on weekends. His kids go to school in D.C."

IL-14: No surprise, but Rep. Randy Hultgren confirmed he'll seek re-election in the new 14th CD. The real question is whether fellow Republican Rep. Joe Walsh decides to make a go of it there as well. Hultgren would appear to have a small edge, since about 40% of the old 14th is in the new 14th, while only about 30% of the old 8th got moved into the new 14th, according to our population distribution analysis at Daily Kos Elections.

NV-02: FEC reports were due late last week in the Nevada special election, and they show Democrat Kate Marshall outraising Republican Mark Amodei. Marshall took in $449K and has $187K on hand, while Amodei $398K and has $172K left. However, Marshall has been absolutely swamped by outside spending, $850,000 to nuthin'. The Hotline also notes that as of Thursday, "Republican registered voters had a 7,600 voter turnout edge" in early voting. They also link to Mark Amodei's newest ad, which is not brilliant but decently clever, pairing out-of-context platitudes by Marshall with identical phrases uttered by unpopular (in NV-02) national Democrats.

NY-09: In response to a Bob Turner internal showing the race tied, the DCCC put out a poll that has David Weprin ahead by a 47-39 margin. Turner has a 40-26 favorability rating while Weprin is at 35-24. The poll (from Global Strategy Group) was in the field for two days (8/30-31), overlapping with the one-day Turner poll, and had a sample size of 400.

NY-19: As we saw last week, state Sen. Greg Ball is busy ripping into fellow Republican Rep. Nan Hayworth over her insistence that budget cuts accompany disaster aid, even for her hard-hit district. Ball, as I mentioned, briefly ran for the 19th CD seat in 2009 but dropped out about a month after Hayworth got into the race. I had to wonder if his attacks on his one-time opponent presaged a primary challenge, so I asked a Ball staffer if the senator was considering another run for Congress. Ball's chief of staff Jim Coleman didn't rule it out, saying only: "We're just focused on turning on power and helping our citizens with this disaster." PolitickerNY's David Freedlander adds: "Rumors have been flying in local political circles there that Ball will mount another run, but he recently told The Politicker that he has not even thought about running for Congress."

TX-23: State Rep. Pete Gallego announced late last week that he'd enter the Democratic field in the race to unseat first-term GOP Rep. Quico Canseco. Gallego joins ex-Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, the man Canseco beat last year to win the seat, and John Bustamante, a San Antonio attorney whose father Albert Bustamante represented TX-23 from 1985 to 1993, before losing to Republican Henry Bonilla and then winding up in jail on bribery charges. (The younger Bustamante actually entered the race last month.) Another local lawyer, Manuel Pelaez, dropped out earlier this week, even though he'd only been in the contest since August.

TX-27: Nueces County Democratic Party Chairwoman Rose Meza Harrison says she will challenge GOP freshman Blake Farenthold, which I believe makes her the first candidate to do so. Nueces County (pop. 340K) is home to Corpus Christi and anchors the southern end of the re-drawn 27th CD.

Other Races:

CA Sup. Ct.: Good (if expected) news: Goodwin Liu, nominated by Gov. Jerry Brown to fill an unexpected vacancy last month, was confirmed as the newest member of the California Supreme Court. Unfortunately, he'll face a retention election soon; my understanding is that he'll do so at the next general election (i.e., Nov. 2012), though the linked article says Liu wouldn't be on the ballot until the next gubernatorial race (which wouldn't be until 2014).

Grab Bag:

NH GOP: After all that lunacy, in which New Hampshire's insurgent teabagger Republican chair Jack Kimball said the RGA offered his state party $100,000 if he'd step down… well, Kimball stepped down. No word on whether a check is in the mail.

NY Election Law: Whoa. Did you know that the excerpt below is an actual New York state statute?

§ 6201.2 Use of Public Opinion Polls

No candidate, political party or committee shall attempt to promote the success or defeat of a candidate by directly or indirectly disclosing or causing to be disclosed the results of a poll relating to a candidate for such an office or position, unless within 48 hours after such disclosure, they provide the following information concerning the poll to the board or officer with whom statements or copies of statements of campaign receipts and expenditures are required to be filed by the candidate to whom such poll relates:

a. The name of the person, party or organization that contracted for or who commissioned the poll and/or paid for it.

b. The name and address of the organization that conducted the poll.

c. The numerical size of the total poll sample, the geographic area covered by the poll and any special characteristics of the population included in the poll sample.

d. The exact wording of the questions asked in the poll and the sequence of such questions.

e. The method of polling–whether by personal interview, telephone, mail or other.

f. The time period during which the poll was conducted.

g. The number of persons in the poll sample: the number contacted who responded to each specific poll question; the number of persons contacted who did not so respond.

j. The results of the poll.

I'm very skeptical that this law is even constitutional under the First Amendment, but I'm even more skeptical that anyone has ever bothered complying with it. I mean, do you think there's a musty archive filled with polling questionnaires sitting in some must Board of Elections sub-basement up in Albany? It would be a polling geek's dream come true, but surely it can't exist, right?

WATN?: Well, this is just depressing. If you want to read about what Howard Dean's been up to since his term as DNC chair ended, click the link. You won't be thrilled.

Redistricting Roundup:

ME Redistricting: While Maine formally requires a two-thirds majority to pass a congressional redistricting plan, that rule is found in statutory law, not the state constitution. That means the Republicans, who control the legislature, can try to bypass it — something they've begun threatening to do. I guess you have to file this under the "Good for the Goose" Dept., since apparently Democrats have been known to find their way around the supermajority requirement in other situations in the past, back when they were in the majority. While Senate Majority Leader Jonathan Courtney claims he doesn't think this will happen, I'd actually be somewhat surprised if it didn't. Why wouldn't the GOP use this power if it could?

UT Redistricting: GOP Gov. Gary Herbert just called a legislative special session to handle redistricting for October 3. The session is expected to last "several days," and amusingly (for Utah), lawmakers are hoping they can "finish before sundown Friday (Yom Kippur)."

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 05:01 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

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

  •  Southfield Mayor and 2010 Lt. Governor candidate (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, blueonyx

    Brenda Lawrence will primary Hansen Clarke.

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

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 05:04:14 AM PDT

    •  Lawrence (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      This is why I thought it was a bad idea for Clarke to switch districts.  Of the people who mentioned running in the district, Brenda Lawrence is definitely the strongest challenger.  She's from Detroit but represents a city in Oakland county.  If she does well in Oakland county and picks a small portion of the Detroit vote, Clarke may be in trouble.      

  •  WI-Sen: As expect the (8+ / 0-)

    Victory Fund has endorsed the 8 hour old Tammy Baldwin Senate campaign.

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

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 05:05:18 AM PDT

  •  TX-36 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Odysseus

    Dentist Brian Babin (R) is considering a run. He's a Some Dude but he lost to Jim Turner for Congress in 1996 and 1998 (before the DeLaymander did him in).

    21, male, RI-01 (voting) IL-01 (college), working in MA-08 for the summer, hopeless Swingnut

    by sapelcovits on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 05:19:00 AM PDT

  •  WI-Sen: Shameless plugging (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TofG, MichaelNY, Ellid, itskevin, supercereal

    I've written the only diary on Tammy Baldwin's run. I'm trying to get it back onto the recommended list.

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

    by ndrwmls10 on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 05:33:15 AM PDT

  •  NV-Sen: NYT hits Shelley Berkley (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, Rich in PA, jncca, Odysseus

    For conflict of interest with her husbands medical practice. It's a pretty harsh article, and better sourced than the Blumenthal one last year.

    Money paragraphs:

    Dr. Lehrner (Berkley's husband) helped build a political action committee that has regularly turned to Ms. Berkley to champion its causes. She has co-sponsored at least five House bills that would expand federal reimbursements or other assistance for kidney care, written letters to regulators to block enforcing rules or ease the flow of money to kidney care centers and appeared regularly at fund-raising events sponsored by a professional organization her husband has helped run.

    “This is a very serious conflict of interest,” said James A. Thurber, a former Congressional aide who has helped revise ethics rules and is now director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. “There is an official use of power here to help him and the family — and I think that is unethical.”

    It's Nevada, so I don't know how much of a difference something like this will make. But it probably doesn't help.

    •  Conflict if interest (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I dislike it when members if congress weigh in on issues directly related to their spouse, or vice versa.

    •  Might not be THAT bad: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, MichaelNY

      Here's what CREW had to say:

      And while she (Melanie Sloane, the head of CREW) said Berkley likely did not technically violate ethics rules, she decried those rules as "weak" and said the rules also stipulate avoiding the appearance of a conflict. "She should have stayed out of it for that reason alone," Sloan said, referring to issues that could have affected her husband, Dr. Larry Lehrner. "This is a clear appearance problem, and she shouldn't have done it," Sloan said.

      Sloan said after reading the New York Times story, "I'm a little bit mixed on it. I don't think it's good; there's some real problems there. But it (UMC) is the only transplant center."

      How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

      by KingofSpades on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 07:48:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  When do they go after Republican candidates (5+ / 0-)

      With the same intensity? Liberal media my ass.

  •  Pa . senate race seems pretty safe. The (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    interesting statewide race couldm be AG (Corbett's launching pad).

  •  Louisiana (0+ / 0-)

    Any one else find it odd that candidates an file this close to the election?

  •  That Howard Dean item (3+ / 0-)

    deserves its own diary.  It would be best written by a true Deaniac, which I'm not.  Money changes everything.

    Single Payer Single Payer Single Payer Single Payer Single Payer Single Payer Single Payer

    by CalbraithRodgers on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 06:40:28 AM PDT

    •  agreed - and could a Deaniac please explain (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jncca, MichaelNY

      Dean working for the Mujahedin-e Khalq....

      Dean is also currently one of the most prominent paid voices in a public-relations campaign on behalf of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), an obscure and controversial Iranian militant group that is aggressively lobbying the Obama administration to remove it from the official list of terrorist organizations.

      GOP 2012 campaign ad - "Tax the working poor!"

      by MartyM on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:12:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  That NY law sounds like Latin American influence (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    In many (perhaps most) countries in Latin America, you can't publish a candidate poll without a "ficha tecnica" that includes most of the nuts-and-bolts info the NY law lists.  In some countries there's also a poll black-out for a few days before an election, so the NY law seems like a hybrid: it requires the ficha tecnica during that period.  Bt as you note, it's almost certainly unconstitutional in our country.

    Let us resolutely study and implement the resolutions of the 46th Convention of the Democratic Party!

    by Rich in PA on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 06:42:27 AM PDT

  •  Ah, yes, the all-important Yom Kippor (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, MartyM

       break for the Utah Legislature.  I had almost forgotten how important that is for them.

  •  Tammy Baldwin (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm surprised Daily Kos doesn't mention that just a few hours ago, Tammy Baldwin just officially announced that she's running for the Wisconsin Senate Seat.

  •  David Williams running ad (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Will air in Paducah, Owensboro, Bowling Green, and Hazard.

    How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

    by KingofSpades on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 07:20:18 AM PDT

  •  Bachman's staff is quiting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    just heard it on the a.m.  tv news.  here comes Palin.

  •  new poll has Scott brown to 44% (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, askew, itskevin, MichaelNY

    against warren.

    he still has 54% popularity and I don't know the quality of this pollster, but these are the numbers dems need to win.  full poll is here.

    •  That's favorability (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      And it's 5 points higher here than in another recent poll.

      How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

      by KingofSpades on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 07:53:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's the party ID that has me concerned (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        the polls says it's 36/12/52 D/R/I.  the 2008 exit polls show Mass. at 43/17/40 D/R/I.  considering the recent political turmoil, it's possible that there was a mass exodus to being independents, but I'm not sure if I believe it.

        •  I wouldn't think so either. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, LordMike

          And there was no turmoil for Dems in MA last November.  They swept all statewide offices and even picked up a seat in the State Senate.

          How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

          by KingofSpades on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 07:59:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  They almost lost Auditor and Treasurer (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, LordMike

            Deval Patrick won comfortably after widely being considered endangered, though.

            21, male, RI-01 (voting) IL-01 (college), working in MA-08 for the summer, hopeless Swingnut

            by sapelcovits on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:07:57 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Suzanne Bump was a flawed candidate (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              and her opponent hammered her very hard, as well as running as the only "registered auditor in the race."  Also, Dems won Treasurer by over 200,000 votes.  Furthermore, both seats were open.

              How The Doctor does redistricting: 'I'm going to need a SWAT team ready to mobilize, street-level maps covering all of Florida, a pot of coffee, twelve jammie dodgers and a fez.'

              by KingofSpades on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:11:56 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  even if the races went well (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            it believable that some voters, while still solid dems, would claim to be indies, just to seem above the fray, or special.  most political research shows that indies are just partisans, so it's not impossible that some mass voters could have switched labels, without switching allegiances (explaining dems solid standing in mass and some of the discrepancies between the poll and the 2008 exit polls.  still, i can't believe THAT MANY people switched from party labels to indie.  

        •  Turnout (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, MichaelNY

          I am not sure that we can count on 08 turnout. Bit even with that, 52% seems quite high for indies

    •  Elizabeth Warren is in a great position. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, Odysseus, MichaelNY, DCCyclone

      Via Political Wire:

      A new WBUR Poll in Massachusetts finds Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) leading possible challenger Elizabeth Warren (D) by nine points, 44% to 35%.

      In other matchups, Brown topped Alan Khazei (D), 45% to 30%, Bob Massie (D), 45% to 29%, and Setti Warren (D), 46% to 28%.

      Said pollster Steve Koczela: "Elizabeth Warren is, especially for someone who just appeared on the scene and hasn't even formally begun her campaign yet, really making a strong showing at this point."

      Considering how she's still largely unknown, to be down only nine has to be positive. She's got plenty of time to go, and the fact that she's not a career politician might mean her appeal to those outside of the Democratic base is easier to come by. Indeed, as I keep saying, if she can get at least 45 percent of Independents, she will probably win. If she wins that group outright, she will win big.

      •  Brown's numbers can only go down from here. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        itskevin, Odysseus

        This is looking a lot sunnier, now.

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

        by ndrwmls10 on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:57:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Forecasting approval ratings (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, drhoosierdem

          Forecasting like that is not really applicable nor accurate. Brown's ratings could go up, or down, and so could Warren's. Voters are fickle, and predicting behavior like that, especially over a year out from the election, is all but meaningless

          •  He's faced no scrutiny (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike, MichaelNY

            over the past year and a half, there's no foreseeable way that his ratings could stay this good after a protracted campaign.

          •  I think that's right, but the narrative (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            that was taking hold--that he was all but unbeatable, reinforced by the actions of Democrats in the state--doesn't look to be accurate. I don't think most here believed it, but then again, most here aren't voters in the state and won't be given final say in the election. It might not be easy to take him down, but it's far from impossible. Each movement that makes more people realize this is helpful.

  •  NBC poll: Perry and Obama up (5+ / 0-)

    When the poll did a survey a month ago Romney led Perry 30 to 11. Now Perry leads Romney 38 to 23. A 34(!!) point swing in Rick Perry's direction a month.

    General Election Matchups

    47 Obama
    42 Perry

    46 Obama
    45 Romney

    •  I don't GET it??? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Skaje, itskevin, James Allen, MichaelNY

      I thought Obama is dooooooooooooooooomed, dead meat, toast, history?  Isn't that what all the comments here on threads about his approval ratings say?

      Those numbers don't seem to reflect that.

    •  Not great numbers, but not bad as I thought (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, andgarden, MichaelNY, askew

      considering all the bad news. Most of these polls just seem to confirm the horrible August.

      •  43% approval according to WP/ABC (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, DCCyclone

        44% says NBC/WSJ. 45% according to Politico/Battleground. Gallup is 43%, Rasmussen 43%. I hope this is his floor. It might not be. But if it is he isn't far off a position where even small improvements make him tough to beat. Especially considering the fact even now he still leads Perry and is level with Romney.

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

          The speech on Thursday will be key, but so will the follow up. And even more importantly, is the economic news. Even if it's small improvement, some consistently good news on the economy would help a lot. This "is the economy slipping back into recession?" narrative is mostly what is keeping his numbers down, imo. If there is a bit of news that breaks that narrative, then I think it could his numbers a lot.

          •  Too much being made of The Speech (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike, MichaelNY

            The Speech is not important.  What's important are:  (1) The Plan; and (2) The Delivery.  The Speech is merely the unveiling of The Plan and the opening volley in The Delivery.

            This is a sustained effort by Obama that he's starting on Thursday.  It probably will last for a full year, or he'll retreat on it if over the weeks and months the substance polls poorly or otherwise he thinks he's getting hurt by the debate over it.

            I'm excited about Thursday's unveiling and speech, but it's just the opening kickoff, nothing more.

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

            by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 06:50:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Also, base discontent is now showing up... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      For most of his presidency, criticism from the left - from blogs, from op-ed columns, from TV pundits - mostly didn't filter down to his numbers among rank-and-file. While plenty of Democrats and liberals had disagreements or disappointments with Obama, his numbers among Democratic-leaning groups was very healthy - often above 80%.

      The debt ceiling debate and the subsequent bad economic news changed that. For the first time, you're seeing Democratic disaffection with Obama really showing up in polls. One of those had his approval with Democrats down below 75%, and his ratings among young voters, for example, is down to 47%.

      That's mostly bad news. And it does paint a worrying picture that the debt ceiling debate may well have affected perceptions about Obama in a lasting way.

      The GOOD news is, that some of the erosion in his approval ratings can be pinned on that. And so there are quite a few people who will vote for Obama over a Republican even if they're unhappy. That's why he's still narrowly leading the Republicans in most polls.

      •  Somewhat (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DCCyclone, MichaelNY

        But those are also the voters easiest to get back given the contrasts that emerge during a campaign.

        •  More intraparty opp comes from the right (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          askew, LordMike, MichaelNY

          That's the thing a lot of disillusioned liberals don't see, that they are outnumbered by disillusioned conservaDems.

          Those conservaDems are a bit harder to win back than the liberals, but not much more, because they still are part of the base if only because they acknowledge Republicans and conservatives are batshit crazy lunatics, and unacceptable.

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

          by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 06:51:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  NY-19 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, MichaelNY

    Greg Ball is nothing if not ambitious, and Hayworth is making herself unpopular around here, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a primary in her future.

    Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

    by milkbone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:07:58 AM PDT

  •  Obama to Propose Tax Cuts? (0+ / 0-)

    That's the word from Bloomberg, via Political Wire.

    I've got a few different thoughts about this. (I'm trying to focus more on the politics and electoral effects than policy.) First, I'd much rather see a big temporary payroll tax, if not a complete holiday, so it would get people to spend sooner. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, I guess, to lower income tax rates, but that seems to be less effective than payroll tax cuts, especially since a lot of people pay more in payroll taxes than income taxes (understandably so, I should add). If lowering the payroll tax rate is a second-best policy, is lowering income tax rates a third-best policy, or a fourth-best policy?

    Second, I'm wondering if this is merely a bargaining chip for some sort of direct spending, surely the best way of increasing GDP. If so, I completely get it, but still, I think the best policy is to again lower payroll taxes. It's proven ludicrously difficult to simply return income tax rates to their Clinton-era levels, and at some point, it seems likely taxes will have to go up, possibly beyond that level. Lowering income tax rates would need to involve lowering those rates for the top, I am pretty sure, and since Republicans are hell bent on protecting lower rates for the more well off, I'd be wary of making their job easier. (Plus, over the long term, it might be easy to lower both the employer end and the employee end but broaden the base for the payroll tax cut.) As I suggested a couple of weeks ago, I suspect the best negotiating tactic may be to call for a big cut if not complet elimination of the corporate tax. It's something business wants, so working to lower it would probably help insulate Democrats from the unfair and unfortunate but politically potent anti-business charges. It's not a particularly great tax, and doing away with it now and working to put bigger pollution taxes in its place might be a good move.

    Third, he's not going to try to enact tax reform in a matter of four months, is he? I can't think he's going to do that, because it seems like a ludicrously complicated task (more politically than economically). Given the need for more revenue in the future, any sort of lower rates would almost certainly need to be made up for with lower expenditures. For both good and bad reasons, Congress will want to milk this opportunity for all its worth.

    Or perhaps none of this matters, since the House Republicans won't pass anything. If this is the case, then he should propose anything and everything that draws a strong contrast with the Republicans. Given their propensity to lie without shame, I'm not sure they'd have a problem trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths; I just don't think they'd be very successful at it.

    •  My answer to this is maybe (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Third, he's not going to try to enact tax reform in a matter of four months, is he?

      Well, the Gang of Six came with a tax reform proposal, I believe, and that was going to be a part of the $4 trillion grand bargain that Obama wanted. There is the supercommittee report coming in a couple of months. I think it's unlikely they get tax reform, but it seems like a possibility to me.

    •  I hope he has something more (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      substantial than more tax cuts for this jobs speech. I'd hate for it to be just the same old nonsense he's been peddling for a year now - tax cuts, patent reform, trade deals, infrastructure bank.

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

      by askew on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 09:36:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He isn't going to propose anything major (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, DCCyclone

        Beyond infrastructure spending else he gets laughed out of the building. The problem is the same as ever - he needs Republican votes to pass something that makes a dent very quickly. The crazy thing is that proposing things that actually work won't get anywhere and though running on that will be all well and good it won't create a single job. No way he wins without at least some economic improvement. The fundamentals are beginning to lean too strongly against him for campaigning alone to do the trick. Anyway, as ever I have faith he will say the right things. He always does in these big speeches. We go through this same thing time and time again where everyone worries needlessly.

        •  The problem is if he goes to Congress and gives a (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          speech with no new proposals in it, the media on the left and right will tear him apart. He needs to propose something new to change the conversation.  I understand that he is a cautious politician, but I think now is time to go big for a change to shake things up a bit.

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

          by askew on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 12:49:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not worried that he's moving to the right (0+ / 0-)

          on taxes or anything like that. At this point, the situation is so dire, any sort of solution is acceptable.* It's like we have a gigantic forrest fire and have different groups arguing over whether we should use dirt, water, or something else, and how we do it.

          *In some ways, it's a cynical strategy and a risky bet to get people to get behind him and other Democrats for making easy but fairly silly if not reckless decisions in the hopes that they retain or get back power to eventually make the right decisions. But I completely understand this, if this in fact the strategy, and am fully behind it.

      •  This does back to the question I asked earlier: (0+ / 0-)

        is this anything more than a political tactic?

        If there's something that could actually pass and move things in the right direction, I'm all for it, even it does make problems bigger down the line. At this point, the problem is more that Democrats need to keep their heads above water. But if there's just no way they are going to pass anything substantial, he needs to make this as clear as possible. One way to do that is to get behind things they clearly want or would want if they are being genuine, like tax cuts of some type, and then watch them twist themselves into pretzels claiming that this isn't what they want and end up voting against it.

        •  No, it's not just a political tactic (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          He knows the GOP most likely will say "no" to everything, and in that sense yes, it's political.

          But it's a sincere legislative proposal that he'd be happy to get passed.  That reflects the man he is, he takes the job seriously.  But it's also a political calculation in its own right in that an earnest proposal is what swing voters want.  They don't want gimmicks, and he knows that, in addition to being uninterested himself in any mere gimmick.

          As he has through the year, which the more malcontent parts of the left don't get, Obama is playing to the mushy middle, because that's where public consensus is built and elections are won.

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

          by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 06:58:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think he takes the job seriously, and I don't (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            think he'd propose anything that he wouldn't be comfortable passing. That said, there are some things, like further middle class tax cuts, that could both function as political tactics and leave him happy in their own right.

    •  He is calling for payroll tax cuts isn't he? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone, MichaelNY
    •  I really wish you would stop advocating (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the elimination of corporate taxes in DKE. That's a right-wing position that would go against most of the alleged core values that differentiate even fairly conservative Democrats from the Republican Party.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 11:14:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  corp tax (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jncca, DCCyclone

        This is a bit off topic, but there isn't much of an economic argument for taxing income separately at the firm level. There is an argument for treating all corporations as pass-through entities and taxing their income as business income on shareholders' individual income tax returns, which is how partnerships and C corporations are treated now. This would eliminate the issue of "double taxation" of dividends and also reduce the distortion caused by firms picking their organizational form based on tax considerations. In contrast, eliminating the corporate tax outright would probably lead to much more sheltering of income than we see now.  

        SSP poster. 42, CA-5, -0.25/-3.90

        by sacman701 on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 12:07:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not advocating for anything in particular. (0+ / 0-)

        I'm trying to be ideologically flexible and also realistic about how to accomplish our goals. And while we might not see eye to eye on everything, I'd bet a lot that we are far more similar than you might think.

        In the next week or so, when I have time, I am going to do make a policy diary for the main site that I will link to here about my preferred tax reform plans. It'll be pretty different from what we have now, but I'm fairly sure it makes the system substantially more progressive while improving incentives for the economy. (I need to do a little more research before I go live with it, you know?) I hope you have the chance to read it and tell me what you think.

        Specific policies do matter, but values and ideas can matter more. If the choice is to get something we really want, like bigger pollution taxes, by eliminating corporate taxes, you can bet your ass I am willing to do that. There are legitimate reasons to do it anyway, but the corporate tax is hardly a tenet of the Democratic party. On the other hand, if the choice was to eliminate Social Security, I wouldn't do it, because protecting that program is a basic goal of Democrats.

        There's more than I'd like to say, but I don't want to go off on too much of a tangent.

        •  I don't slam you on this, but I will say that... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, MichaelNY

          ...MichaelNY's comment is an illustration of what I've said to you before, that your idea would be universally condemned across the Democratic Party.  Only Zell Miller Democrats would support it, and not all of them.

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

          by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 07:00:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't doubt that is the case, but (0+ / 0-)

            I think that this is a case of Democrats being unfortunately close minded. I don't mean to sound like an asshole, but why is there any particular love for this type of tax? I think it's possible to accomplish what we want to accomplish with better, more efficient taxes that leave us less open to political attacks.

            •  But we don't get attacked for this (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jncca, MichaelNY

              Swing voters aren't bothered by taxing corporations, and indeed support taxing them more heavily than they're taxed now.

              Republicans never attack us for taxing corporations, they attack us for taxes in general, and they specifically aim to leave the impression with voters that the voters' own personal taxes will be raised by us.

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

              by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 08:32:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not only that (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                Increasing taxes on the super-rich is popular, too. So both on politics and policy, coddling the big corporations is lousy. But it's also issues advocacy.

                bjssp, why don't you diary your proposal on the Front Page and get your head handed to you? OK, that's a little mischievous, but I'm getting more and more annoyed by this preoccupation of yours with eliminating corporate taxes in the post-Citizens United era.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:10:34 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Once again, you misunderstand me. (0+ / 0-)

                  To the extent that I am behind this idea, it's because I think it's a good negotiating tactic and, as part of a deal that gets us something big that we want, good policy. In other words, if nothing changed, I wouldn't be bothered.

                  Besides, not to get too into a policy discussion, but if we want to limit corporate money in elections, we should just try to do that. I'm far from an expert on this, but I would be quite comfortable with strict limits on contributions for both individuals and organizations, whether they are corporations or unions or anything else. As in, one set number, adjusted for inflation, and nothing else. I'm not sure what that number might be, but rather than having an array of outs for these guys to get money into our system, we could just try to stop fucking around and cap it. It's almost certainly unlikely given our political climate and the make up of the Supreme Court, but I'm certainly for something like this.

              •  Overall, we get attacked for being anti-business. (0+ / 0-)

                It's a pretty flimsy charge, of course, but it doesn't mean it's not potent. There might--might--be good reasons for dropping corporate taxes altogether, but as part of a deal, where we get something we want, it could be even more worthwhile. But that's a policy end. In a political sense, we could remove the issue from races at the federal level entirely and insulate ourselves from the unfortunately strong claim by the other side.

            •  you say being close minded, (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I say you have to draw the line somewhere.

              I changed by not changing at all, small town predicts my fate, perhaps that's what no one wants to see. -6.38, -4.15

              by James Allen on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 11:07:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, it's not as if I think it's the most (0+ / 0-)

                important issue in the world. If nothing happens on this front, I find it hard to get that agitated.

                In general, I think everyone here would agree that we need enough revenue to provide certain government services and that this revenue should come far more from those at the top than those at the bottom, if those at the bottom pay anything at all. But how, in particular, this revenue comes from those at the top shouldn't be that important. In other words, we shouldn't get so hung on on a corporate tax (and this is just an example of one tax; see above) if there are better ways to get such revenue.

            •  Corporations are more powerful than ever (0+ / 0-)

              But besides, you shouldn't be constantly advocating an issue here. I get angry when I see you calling for this over and over. Why don't you do that in another forum?

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Wed Sep 07, 2011 at 03:07:34 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Liu not up until 2014 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    supercereal, David Nir, MichaelNY

    Under California law, newly appointed justices serve a partial term until the next election for the appointing authority -- the governor.  When the governor next stands for election, the newly appointed justice stands for election to fill the unexpired term (if any) of his or her predecessor.  The new justice will then be up for retention election again when that term expires, at which point he or she will be up for a retention election for a full term.

    Yeah, it's confusing, but is there anything about California politics that isn't?

    "Ça c'est une chanson que j'aurais vraiment aimé ne pas avoir écrite." -- Barbara

    by FogCityJohn on Tue Sep 06, 2011 at 12:18:46 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site