Skip to main content

Daily Kos Elections Live Digest banner
Want the scoop on hot races around the country? Get the digest emailed to you each weekday morning. Sign up here.

8:28 AM PT: MO-Sen: PPP continues its series of final-weekend GOP Senate primary polls with a survey of Missouri. They find businessman John Brunner at 35, Rep. Todd Akin at 30, and ex-state Treasurer Sarah Steelman at 25. Brunner's strength actually lies in winning over moderate and "somewhat conservative" voters—not a common recipe for winning a Republican nomination—while Akin leads with "very conservative" respondents. Tom Jensen offers a couple of interesting thoughts, both of which have some echoes with the recently TX-Sen runoff:

Despite Brunner's modest lead there are a couple of reasons to think an upset is possible on Tuesday night. One is that Akin leads Brunner 35-33 among voters who say they're "very excited" about casting their ballots on Tuesday. Brunner's overall advantage is based on a 37-31 advantage over Akin with "somewhat excited" voters and a 36-21 lead with those who say they're "not that excited." If we count only the "very" and "somewhat" excited voters Brunner's lead over Akin shrinks to only two points.

The other reason an upset seems possible is that Akin appears to have the momentum in the closing stretch. It's been more than two months since PPP last polled this race but compared to a Mason Dixon poll a week ago Akin's up 13 points while Brunner's gained only two points and Steelman's actually dropped by a couple. If that trend continues right on through election day Akin might be able to pull out a narrow victory.

PPP also has numbers for the MO-Gov, MO-LG, and MO-AG Republican contests at the link. Dave Spence looks like a lock for the gubernatorial nod, while the embarrassing Peter Kinder seems as though he'll win renomination with a plurality. And Ed Martin (whom you'll remember from various other races this cycle and last) is cruising in the AG race.

8:46 AM PT: MO-01: In the first and I'm sure last public poll of the MO-01 Democratic primary, SurveyUSA (on behalf of KSDK-TV) finds Rep. Lacy Clay handily beating fellow Rep. Russ Carnahan, 56-35. Many figured this contest would come down to a question of race, and indeed that seems to be the case/ Looking at the crosstabs, Clay is doing far better among blacks, winning them 81-12, than Carnahan is with whites (he's up just 65-23 with that group). And given that, in SUSA's view, blacks will make up 53% of the electorate vs. just 42% for whites, that's curtains for Carnahan.

8:58 AM PT: HI-02: This is pretty wild: With Hawaii's primaries coming up on Saturday (yep, Saturday—mark your calendars), Civil Beat hired Merriman River to conduct one final poll of the Democratic contest in HI-02. The numbers, if they can be believed, are pretty amazing: Honolulu city councilor Tulsi Gabbard is now beating former Honolulu mayor Mufi Hannemann 49-29; a couple of months ago, the same outfit found pretty much a dead heat. And prior to that, Hannemann held enormous leads of his own.

But there are reasons to remain skeptical, not least among them Merriman's shoddy track record last cycle. A week ago, a Ward Research poll put Hanneman up 43-33. And even Gabbard's own recent internal polling was nowhere near this gaudy, giving her a five-point edge. Still, I think the momentum and advantage is now with Gabbard, and as I've said before, if she pulls this off, it would be one of the biggest upsets of the cycle.

9:07 AM PT: WATN?: Uh, say what now? NRSC chair Pete Sessions just married crazy snake lady Karen Diebel? Apparently so!

9:29 AM PT: MI-13, MI-14: EPIC-MRA has a couple of last-second polls for two of Tuesday's Democratic primaries in Michigan. In MI-13, they find Rep. John Conyers crushing his nearest opponent, state Sen. Glenn Anderson, by a 57-17 margin. (It may be best to view this race as an opportunity for Conyers' challengers to position themselves for his retirement.) Meanwhile, in MI-14, they show what you'd expect: Rep. Gary Peters is beating Rep. Hansen Clarke, though his 52-33 edge is even more dominant than what I'd have anticipated.

9:34 AM PT: IL-02: I don't know that this makes Dem Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s situation any less opaque, but his wife just conducted an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times and says he's being treated for depression , not substance abuse, and repeats that he did not attempt suicide. She also describes a very unclear "collapse" on Jackson's part and says that Jackson's family has been imposing a "news blackout" on him since June 10.

10:08 AM PT: FL-26: This is a hell of a crazy story. Those of you following the FL-26 Democratic primary know that it features a showdown between businesswoman Gloria Romero Roses and 2010 nominee Joe Garcia. But there's a little-known third candidate in the race, hotel administrator Justin Lamar Sternad, and his presence is deeply questionable. Despite raising almost no money and being invisible on the campaign trail, Sternad has managed to flood the district with a ton of mailers (referring to himself as "Lamar!", like Tennessee's Alexander), one of which reads in part:

"Lamar is as American as Apple Pie. Lamar Sternad is the only Democratic candidate that was born and raised in the United states. He will advocate for English as our official language. Americans in Florida are being discriminated against by employers who hire illegal immigrants and take jobs away from our law-abiding citizens."
That's not exactly a message you'd expect to hear in a Democratic contest where a lot of Hispanic voters will cast ballots, but it may be that Lamar is letting his sheep's clothing slip a bit. As the Miami Herald points out, the same shop that produced Lamar's flyers also did nearly six figures worth of work for GOP Rep. David Rivera last cycle. Lamar's also aimed almost all of his fire in public remarks at Garcia, even going so far as to insist he would not attack Rivera until after the primary... but in the same breath castigating Garcia as a "three-time loser" while at the very same time trying to tar Garcia as the one who's "mudslinging." That's some chutzpah. And the Herald adds:
In addition to repeating Rivera's criticisms of Garcia's divorce, Sternad also appears to be misappropriating President Obama's campaign trademark "O" for his campaign. He might also be trying to persuade unaware voters that he's black, sending out two civil rights-themed mailers that depict Obama and  Martin Luther King. One mailer also features Rep. Dwight Bullard and his mother, whom he hopes to succeed, state Sen. Larcenia Bullard. They have no photos of the lilly-white Sternad, who is listing his campaign name as "Lamar Sternad" even though he goes by Justin Sternad in his business life.
All of this circumstantial evidence has led Garcia's campaign to conclude that Lamar's candidacy is "little more than another dirty trick by David Rivera," aimed at sabotaging Garcia's own bid. Given what we know of Rivera, who is as shady as they come, I'd believe it. The primary is a week from Tuesday.

10:31 AM PT (David Jarman): WA-Gov: If you were concerned that the Elway Poll several weeks ago, the first of the race to give a substantial (43-36) lead to Jay Inslee, was some sort of fluke, you can rest a little easier. SurveyUSA, the most frequent pollster of the race, finds a similar pro-Inslee trend in their newest poll (on behalf of KING-TV). The lead isn't as big (48-45, in Inslee's favor) as with Elway, but it puts Inslee even closer to the 50% mark. The big problem for Republican Rob McKenna: he's below 40% in the entire "Puget Sound area,"  a position from which a Republican simply can't win statewide; he'd need to hit 40% in King County alone, plus draw even in Pierce and Snohomish Counties.

If you're wondering what's behind this reversal of fortune in this race, a factor seems to be that the candidates finally started TV advertising, which served to remind a lot of casual but reliable Dems that there's a gubernatorial election and who their candidate is. With their intro ads behind them, they're both moving on to the inevitable 'jobs'-themed ads now, and McKenna just rolled his second ad out late last week.

10:33 AM PT: AZ-Sen: Looks like GOP Rep. Jeff Flake has some more awkward questions to answer about his past as a lobbyist. Among the many sordid entities he supported was a uranium mine in Namibia which was part-owned by none other than the government of Iran. Flake's long claimed that he didn't know about Iran's stake in the mine until 2011, and has also said that U.S. officials weren't even aware of the situation until a 2005 Reuters report, but it seems that Democrats have him busted. It turns out that the Interior Department's U.S. Geological Survey published an entry in their "Mineral Yearbook" that described Iran as a 10% owner of the venture as far back as 1994. Try again.

10:49 AM PT: Radio: In case you missed it, I was on Daily Kos Radio with David Waldman on Friday morning, talking about a bunch of different recent and upcoming races, including TX-Sen and MI-11. If you'd like to listen to my segment, you can do so here:





I was also on Kudzu Vine on Sunday night, discussing a variety of Southern races. For that, you can listen here:





11:23 AM PT (David Jarman): Census: If you pay attention to the Census's lists of the nation's most populous cities, you've probably noticed that Sun Belt cities like Phoenix, Austin, San Antonio, Jacksonville, Nashville, and Oklahoma City are some of the fastest growing. That's only part of the context, though: the Census is out with an interesting new graphic that shows that these cities aren't really becoming any more distinctly "urban" (they aren't getting any denser), because the population growth is coming through constant annexation outwards, not building up, and their density has stayed flat over the decades. There's only a handful of cities that are boxed in by suburbs and can't annex anything more, but are still growing anyway, thanks to growing upward instead of out, and those tend to be the increasingly blue strongholds in the west (Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose, Denver, and despite the fact that it's not boxed in, Las Vegas).

11:35 AM PT (David Jarman): Polltopia: This New York Times article summarizing the debate over how to (and even whether to) poll cellphone-only users may not hold too many surprises for dedicated pollwatchers, but it does contain some interesting anecdotes about which pollsters use which approaches (for instance, ABC/WaPo and NBC/WSJ will terminate a call with a cellphone user if he also has a landline, while Pew, CBS/NYT, and Gallup will still continue the call and then use weighting to achieve the right cellphone/landline balance; meanwhile, Rasmussen is starting to experiment with internet-based surveys as a means of reaching younger voters to supplement their all-landline autodialing).

12:31 PM PT: WI-Sen: There's nothing like seeing an entitled ultra-1%er flail at the injustice (oh, the injustice!) being done to him. Uber-wealthy businessman Eric Hovde is now threatening legal action over new ads being run by third-party group Americans for Job Security, which say that a company tied to Hovde accepted federal stimulus money, something that makes Hovde hopping mad. Interestingly, Hovde has accused AJS of shilling for ex-Gov. Tommy Thompson, though the framing of one of the spots (since removed from YouTube) questioned Hovde's conservative credentials, which seemed like more of an appeal to potential voters for ex-Rep. Mark Neumann.

Meanwhile, the Club for Growth's expected IE report is also now available; they're spending $441K to sandblast Hovde in the final week before primary day. Combined with AJS's $650K, that's nearly $1.1 million in last-minute attack ads being dumped on the rich guy—a taste of his own free-spending medicine.

12:50 PM PT: CT-05: I'd have to call this unexpected: Elizabeth Esty is out with a new negative ad in the Democratic primary... but she's attacking Dan Roberti, not Chris Donovan, as you might have anticipated. The spot is quite harsh, going after Roberti for his work as a lobbyist and the fact that a super PAC with ties to his also-a-lobbyist dad has been spending heavily on his behalf. Meanwhile, Roberti just contributed another $200K to his own effort, bringing him to some $830K in self-funding total. Does this mean he has a chance to win? And if Roberti and Esty train their guns on each other in the final week, could that actually put Donovan, who hasn't yet gone negative so far as I'm aware, in the unlikely position of being able to "pull a Kryzan"?

12:57 PM PT: CT-Sen: Dem Sen. Richard Blumenthal sings Rep. Chris Murphy's praises in this new ad, as "the candidate who can help me break the gridlock and get results." (PPP recently found Blumenthal to be Connecticut's most popular statewide elected official.)

1:06 PM PT: I take that back: Donovan has a new spot out in which he directly takes on Esty himself, an interesting and unusual choice. Donovan notes that he served in the legislature with Esty (and "respect[s] her greatly"), but says "there are real differences between us." Donovan goes directly at Esty's now-infamous 2009 alternate budget, saying that when the state faced tough times, she "refused to ask the wealthy to pay their fair share, and instead supported a Republican-like budget that cut education and cut services for seniors." Donovan of course contrasts that with his own budget, which did carry the day and avoided big cuts.

1:19 PM PT: FL-07: Rep. Sandy Adams has a new ad out attacking her GOP primary rival, fellow Rep. John Mica, which repeatedly features a clip of President Obama saying in reference a new transportation bill: "Congressman Mica, whose leadership made this bill a reality." Mica is steamed because at the end of the spot, Adams uses a (basically inaudible) clip of Mica telling Obama "I'm your best cheerleader" after the president's 2011 State of the Union address. The problem, says Mica's campaign, is that members are prohibited from using footage of House proceedings "for any political purpose," and they want the spot removed. That's not going to happen, though (TV stations are required to air candidates' ads regardless of content), and with the House out of session, the Ethics Committee can't even offer a reprimand.

1:30 PM PT: FL-22: It's rare to see national Democrats rally around a candidate in a contested primary so openly, but rally they have. Nancy Pelosi is the latest to make a point of backing Lois Frankel over Kristin Jacobs, stumping and raising money for her in South Florida. Pelosi also held one of those "I swear it's not political" Medicare forums with Frankel as well. Meanwhile, some random new super PAC called "South Floridians for Effective Leadership" is trying to swoop in to help Jacobs at the last moment, but seeing as their first spending report details just $13K for mailers, I doubt that's going to make much of a difference.

1:43 PM PT: Meanwhile, SEIU COPE is getting behind Garcia with a week to go before the primary, airing this new ad, backed by a $72K buy (including production costs). The spot attacks Rivera for voting for the Ryan budget to end Medicare and tries to link Garcia to President Obama, who appointed Garcia to serve in the Department of Energy in 2009.

2:04 PM PT: MN-08: Another $16K on mailers from EMILY to help Dem Tarryl Clark.

2:10 PM PT: IL-08: The New Prosperity Foundation, a right-wing super PAC whose name reminds me of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, launched a round of attack ads at Illinois Democrats a little while ago—a series of TV ads which were actually backed by very little money. Their new move doesn't pack a whole lot more oomph: They're spending $29K on mailers going after Tammy Duckworth.

2:32 PM PT: Meanwhile, the Sierra Club is leaving nothing to chance and is airing $51K worth of radio ads for Tulsi. You can listen here; the spot both attacks Hanneman on environmental grounds and praises Gabbard on the same front.

2:37 PM PT: NH-Gov: Maggie Hassan just became the first Democratic gubernatorial candidate in New Hampshire to go up on TV. One spot is mostly introductory in nature and focuses on Hassan's support for education. The other is a bit more partisan: Hassan discusses her efforts to prevent insurers from dropping coverage for birth control.

2:56 PM PT: FL-18: Pro-Dem super PAC American Sunrise is spending $38K to air a new TV ad on behalf of Patrick Murphy. It's a very generic positive spot, but it may help to increase Murphy's name rec. It would help if the buy were (considerably) bigger, though.

3:00 PM PT: ND-Sen: I found this new ad from Dem Heidi Heitkamp pretty touching, I've gotta say. She tells us about a veteran named Charlie Weichel, who volunteers to drive other veterans to distant medical appointments, putting in 14-hour days three times a week. Heitkamp promises to "fight for a Heroes Health card" so that veterans "can see a doctor closer to home." She closes by dedicating the ad to "heroes like Charlie." Seriously, I must have some dust in the corner of my eye that's causing me to tear up.

3:05 PM PT: PA-Gov: Wealthy Democrat Tom Knox, who ran for governor in 2010 before dropping out and endorsing Dan Onorato, says he plans to make a statehouse bid once again in 2014. Knox would have the ability to self-fund, but his ability to appeal to voters (he's also unsuccessfully run for mayor of Philadelphia) seems like less of a sure thing.


3:29 PM PT: AZ-09: $14K more in mailers from EMILY for Kyrsten Sinema. Arizona's primary is still a few weeks off, Aug. 28.

3:34 PM PT: VA-, ND-, WI-Sen: The pro-Dem Majority PAC has re-upped their ad buys against George Allen in Virginia to the tune of $85K. There's also a strangely tiny re-up (less than $10K) against Eric Hovde & Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin. More intriguing are some production costs for a new spot hitting Rick Berg in North Dakota, so be on the lookout for that ad soon.

3:42 PM PT: VA-02: Democrat Paul Hirschbiel is out with his first ad, a positive spot in which a teacher praises him for being "instrumental in setting up early childhood education programs like this one" and says that he "gave up a career in business to help kids instead." Hirschbiel, the founder of a private equity firm, is nevertheless reportedly quite wealthy—as is the man he's trying to unseat, GOP freshman Scott Rigell, who spent a monster $2.5 million on his own race last cycle. Hirschbiel hasn't done any notable self-funding yet, though, and his fundraising has been pretty decent. And speaking of money, the Washington Post actually has the size of the buy: $70K for a week on broadcast TV.

3:51 PM PT: Ads: AFSCME and Americans United for Change are teaming up on a new $280K ad campaign targeting five Republicans on taxes: Sen. Dean Heller (NV-Sen), Rep. Denny Rehberg (MT-Sen), Rep. Jim Renacci (OH-16), Rep. Steve King (IA-04), and Rep. Dan Lungren (CA-03). The ads are all identical (just swapping in the right name), with an announcer attacking Republicans for "trying to tip the scales even more for big corporations and the richest 2 percent." There's a national spot airing on cable news channels as well; you can find all of them at the link.

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

  •  I see you published a list... (10+ / 0-)

    Of people who trust the Nevada Republican Party with any kind of money.

  •  You know what I'd like to see? (0+ / 0-)

    Polls of the gerrymandered districts in Illinois. I have this increasing feeling it's not as much of a slam dunk for Duckworth as we think it is.

    18, Male, MD-8. Fan of University of Virginia athletics.

    by Danny Ricci on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:12:55 AM PDT

  •  FYI, Ralston has been decrying Harry Reid... (12+ / 0-)

    And calling him "another Joe McCarthy" (??!!). His recent Twitter feed IA littered with links to the usual G-O-TEA suspects bashing Reid for suggesting Mitt Romney hasn't paid taxes in some years...

    Yet none of them wants to admit that Reid has been successful in turning up the heat on Romney some more, and that there's more truth to what Reid is saying than Mittens' campaign wants to admit. It's fun to see my Senator throw caution to the wind and get so badass in DC!

    •  I'm happy with Reid on this (13+ / 0-)

      I actually believe him that someone he thinks is trustworthy told him Mitt didn't pay taxes for a decade.

      That doesn't mean the assertion is correct.  Nor does it necessarily mean Reid is displaying good judgement by believing the guy...maybe he is, maybe he isn't, since we don't know the source we don't know.

      But I think Reid subjectively believes it.

      More importantly, he's playing this game perfectly.  He just keeps Mitt's taxes in the news, which is all he cares about.  Reid has the luxury of being in the twilight of his career, almost certainly with no more elections in his future, and further he doesn't have any ego about his public image and therefore doesn't care that his public image at home and nationally are in poor shape.  That's refreshing on our side, where most of our elected officials, especially Senators, care more about being liked than doing what helps their party and country.  A lot of Republicans are bare-knuckled with wanton disregard for their reputations, we don't have enough of that.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:28:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Reid may be bluffing (4+ / 0-)

        He may have nothing but he is 100% sure that Romney will never release his taxes so what does he have to lose. It's a win/win for Reid, the tax issue stays in the news and Romney keeps punching down.

        •  But why bluff? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          atdnext, Zack from the SFV, MichaelNY

          It's easy enough to imply something shady without making a specific claim. You get to pound on Romney but not get your hands dirty, in other words. Furthermore, it's not as if Reid has a history of shooting off his mouth like a crazy drunk person on the street.

          I'm a fairly risk averse person, but I would be willing to put down big money Reid isn't talking out of his ass here.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:14:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree (4+ / 0-)

          The end game here is to create so much pressure on Romney that he has to release his taxes. Not saying that that's going to happen, just that Dems would love to facilitate it if possible. The next best thing is to just keep calling attention to Mitt's stonewalling, and drop one compelling hypothetical after another (about what may be in the returns), thus raising further doubts in the minds of the public: Swiss amnesty, financial engineering in his IRA, etc.

      •  Why shouldn't we trust Reid? (7+ / 0-)

        It's certainly possible he's wrong, even if he doesn't realize it, but it's not as if he has a reputation (that I am aware of, anyway) for spouting off ridiculous claims. From what I can tell, it's unusual for him to make a statement like this.

        Others here have covered the possibilities in more detail, so I will try to stay brief, but it's equally possible, I think, that he is correct and incorrect. A few points, in no particular order:

        1. If he's not correct, he's risking a big backlash. I don't think it's a stretch to say Democrats are held to a different standard than Republicans on this, particularly ones in higher up positions.

        2. Which leads me to think he is correct. After all, if you've got a chance to land a potential body blow to the other side without even lying, but with telling the truth, why not do it? It's not as if this is some sort of salacious but ultimately irrelevant part of Romney's personal life. It is the epitome of fair game.

        3. What if semantics is the issue? If you were to walk into Best Buy and have the salesman offer you a $1,000 television for $50, you'd be quite likely to say you got it for "nothing." I wonder if Romney paid something in taxes, but with that "something" being so low--say, one or two percent, i.e. well below what the vast majority of people anywhere would pay--that it's effectively "nothing." That might not be as damaging as paying literally nothing, but it's pretty damn close.

        4. There has to be something in there that is embarrassing. There just has to be. Hemming and hawing over this stuff might not be campaign-ending, but virtually nobody could argue that it is helping him. His campaign staffers have to realize that, even if the candidate himself doesn't. As I said over the weekend, it doesn't make sense that a guy who has wanted to be president his whole life would be willing to let a stupid fucking privacy concern--one that nobody else, anywhere, takes as seriously as he apparently takes it--derail the operation. What, exactly, he is hiding isn't clear, but at this point, it's gotta be something.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:53:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I said I DO trust him insomuch as... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          ...I think Reid is telling the truth that someone Reid believes knew Romney at the time told Reid that Romney didn't pay any taxes for a decade.  And Reid himself believes this source is telling the truth and that the claim is accurate.

          That's all I'm saying, though...it's possible that Reid is foolish to believe this source, or that the source is reputable but still very wrong.

          44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

          by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:38:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Strikes Me as a No-Lose Proposition..... (7+ / 0-)

        Reid isn't exactly a beloved figure anyway so he has nothing to lose in terms of reputation.  By throwing this out there, real or not, it keeps the pressure on Romney to release the tax returns.  If Reid's assertion turns up baseless, better for Reid to have egg on his face than anyone associated with the Obama campaign.

        •  Well said. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          itskevin, atdnext, MichaelNY

          And it would be McCarthyism if such accusations were far-fetched and ruined the accused's life.

          Hail to the king, baby.

          by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:21:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That's true, but (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          there's a way to score political points without getting his hands as dirty as he might be getting them now.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:31:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Why should he avoid getting his hands dirty? (4+ / 0-)

            Harry Reid doesn't mind that at all.  As I said above, he's in the twilight of his career, his last election is probably behind him, and his public image in Nevada has zero affect on his power in the Senate Democratic Caucus.  And Reid has skin of steel, he doesn't care what anyone in D.C. thinks of him.

            44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

            by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:41:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  He might want to get his hands dirty, and maybe he (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              should be willing to do so. My point is that there's no particular reason for him to walk out on a ledge like this, despite the fact that he is nearing the end of his career, when there's a much easier and much less potentially damaging way to hit Romney over this, which is insinuating something shady is going on but never making a specific claim. In other words, why run across a supposedly frozen lake when you might fall through and drown when you can go over a bridge?

              If anything, I think this makes the likely validity of his claim stronger.

              "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

              by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:49:13 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Again, what he's doing is NOT "damaging" (9+ / 0-)

                You don't seem to get the point I just made, that Reid can't be hurt by what he's doing, thus there's no damage to him, potential or real.  He doesn't care about his own job approvals and favorables at home, his power among Senate Dems cannot be curtailed, and he has every incentive to do anything necessary to help Obama get reelected in order to maximize Reid's own influence.

                Reid is not walking out on a ledge.  He is not walking on a frozen lake.  He is immune to the only "damage" he cares about, which is his standing among his fellow Senate Dems.

                And no, his claim isn't stronger by insinuating anything, it's stronger by his being as specific as he's being.  And I think he believes it, he's not making it up.  Again, that doesn't mean his belief is correct, but he believes it.

                44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 12:17:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think he can be damaged more than you think. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  I think I understand your point, but I think we disagree over the potential harm that might be done to his career.

                  "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

                  by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 12:55:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Detail the "harm." You're virtually alone... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    The Caped Composer

                    ...in thinking there is any.

                    Indeed, all the political reporters expressing antipathy toward Reid's claim admit openly Reid can't and won't pay any price for this.

                    44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

                    by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 04:18:07 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Another Joe McCarthy? (26+ / 0-)

      I really hate when people do that kind of thing. It really minimizes McCarthy's crimes.

      Political Director, Daily Kos

      by David Nir on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:29:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Romney wants Reid to prove that Romney paid taxes (6+ / 0-)

      with information that is in Romney's possession.

      I'm thinking of a number from 1 to 10 . . . .

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:13:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't understand that line of attack (7+ / 0-)

      McCarthy was a Republican, and Republicans have always loved him.

      Mitt Romney '12: Berlusconi without the sex and alcohol!

      by Rich in PA on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:14:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  2012 GOP Veepstakes (0+ / 0-)

    So I've (FINALLY) gotten around to working on my Veepstakes analysis over the last two days that I've put off for eight months, and I'm at the very end (I'm worried that it's too wonky lol; I'm hoping it gets more widespread appeal on Daily Kos at large). I'm at the third and final segment, and I'm writing individual analyses about my so-called "Dirty Dozen" VP candidates. I got around to Brian Sandoval, one of the candidates that doesn't get as much discussion. After looking more deeply into some info on him, it turns out that last April, Jon Ralston got a hold of transcripts of a phone conversation between Sandoval and Beth Myers, Romney's person in charge of selecting his VP candidate. Here is the entire transcript, which is interesting because of its unusually blunt and honest nature. However, this moneyquote just stunned me at how much it reinforced my preconceived notions on where the Veepstakes stand:

    Myers: “Oh, we did. He [Jeb Bush] speaks highly of you. The only real question, to be frank, Governor, is how desperate we are when we make the pick. Rubio is being a pill, Portman is boring and you would be a sort of Hail Mary, like Sarah Palin.
    So Beth Myers, the person in charge of Mitt Romney's VP selection, seemingly ruled out both Rubio and Portman just as the Veepstakes were beginning. Did this really get no coverage? I think I'm going to add this into my diary.

    "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." -- Me; The Pragmatic Progressive (IN-4); Economic Left/Right: -7.12; Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

    by AndySonSon on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:28:29 AM PDT

  •  Jeff Smith appears to have been quite wrong (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone

    about the Clay/Carnahan primary.

    Ok, so I read the polls.

    by andgarden on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:54:17 AM PDT

    •  Is that the guy who was the subject (0+ / 0-)

      of that big TNR story about bombs or something? If so...

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:58:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Carnahan should have run for Lt. Gov (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ehstronghold, dsh17, David Jarman, Woody

      Between his family's fame and Kinder's problems he likely would have won.  After that he could have run for Senate/ Gov or whatever after taking his brief detour to the Lt. Gov's office.

      22, male, new CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-2 (college)

      by Jeff Singer on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:09:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Former Missouri Democratic Party Chairwoman (6+ / 0-)

        and ex-State Auditor Susan Montee is already running against Kinder, who is looking like he'll limp out of a divided Republican primary, thoroughly weakened. It's a likely pick up for Democrats.

        Incumbent Attorney General Chris Koster is an ex-Republican state senator from the outer suburbs of KC, and he's a fairly conservative, law and order type Democrat and he has an absurd amount of money and the strong support of both the legal and law enforcement communities; Martin has no chance.

        Democrats already hold the State Treasurer's office, (after beating Brad Lager in an upset in 2008), and Clint Zweifel's opponent this year hasn't raised much and doesn't have much of a profile. With this kind of low-key, mostly nonpartisan office, incumbents tend to win easily so long as they aren't targeted or don't make any mistakes.

        I wish PPP had polled the Republican primary for SoS. That is an important office, and the most competitive statewide election. The Republican primary will be interesting because there is a three-way race going on between three prominent state legislators, while KC-area State Rep (and Iraq War veteran), Jason Kander waits in the Democratic wing. At this point Kander seems favored.

        It would interesting if Democrats swept all statewide offices this year. McCaskill too shouldn't be counted out, especially if Todd Akin wins the Republican nomination.

        Missouri isn't as Republican as some people suggest it is, and there seems to be some very slow and gradual bluing of the STL and KC suburbs that is keeping the Democratic party competitive there.

        "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

        by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:27:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It'd be nice to see (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Darth Jeff, ArkDem14, JGibson

          some success at the state legislative level, too. Getting back to a competitive spot, let alone capturing one or both houses of the legislature, will probably be an intense, grinding process that takes several cycles, but it doesn't seem like something that should be impossible.

          "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

          by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:31:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Wait, Carnahan retired? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ArkDem14

          That's just ridiculous.

          24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Gregg/Simpson for Governor! Donnelly for Senate! Mullen for Congress!

          by HoosierD42 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:58:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, she's not running for a third term (0+ / 0-)

            You didn't know?

            "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

            by ArkDem14 on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 12:26:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  hmm (8+ / 0-)

      Not sure how you mean. I said last year he had a better chance to win in MO 01 than in MO 02, and I don't see how anything that has happened since then refutes that argument. I didn't say he was the favorite in MO 01, but that if he ran a decent campaign, he could win, based on the demographics. I didn't advise him to spend six months suing when he had absolutely no case based on legal precedent, and raising money for a court battle instead of a campaign, and focusing on convoluted legal arguments rather than meeting voters and courting support in the new district. I agree with the other poster who writes that LG would've been the best choice, but it was never seriously discussed - his wife wouldn't allow that, as she wanted to stay in DC. I still think, given how poor a candidate Lacy Clay is and how weak a ground game he's shown in this race, that a good Carnahan campaign could've won MO 01. Even many who endorsed Lacy strongly dislike him, but to his credit, Lacy outmanuevered Russ in getting to political elites and interest groups first and framing the race as a referendum on blacks' inclusion in the Dem Party, while Russ's core message was "he sold me down the river." As some might've predicted, that message didn't resonate.

  •  Okay. Maybe it's just me. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Woody

    I didn't know until I saw the ad that "Lacy Clay" was a man's name.

  •  WI-Sen: Neumann on why Neumann will win (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, itskevin

    Here is a Wispolitics interview with Mark Neumannn on why he believes he will win the Wisconsin Senate primary next week Tuesday.  Hint - it's all about the Tea.

    link: http://www.wispolitics.com/...

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

    by walja on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:05:55 AM PDT

  •  Ras has Obama up 2... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArkDem14

    Romney was leading by 4 yesterday (I'm pretty sure), now Obama is up by 2 in their release this morning - 47 to 45.  Their write-up says there "may be" a bounce from the Friday jobs report... hmm.

    LINK

    "This is only the second time in more than two months of daily tracking that Obama has reached the 47% level of support."

  •  Democracy Corps: GOP slipping in top tier district (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, tk421, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:22:40 AM PDT

    •  Weren't these the same people (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      that warned of Democrats, and in particular Obama, facing impossible headwinds in November because of skepticism and negativity from Indies and swing voters just a few months ago? If so, my how things have changed!

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:10:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The bit on Ryan and his budgets indicates (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera, MichaelNY

        that if Romney picks him, the Presidential race is essentially over, for all intents and purposes, barring any major mistakes from the Obama campaign.

        "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

        by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:39:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I see RCP now shows changes to their electoral map (0+ / 0-)

    and considering that it's based purely on polling averages there have been remarkably few.

    There have only been 9 changes on the "no toss ups map" since the start of the year, and 6 of those have been FL flipping backwards and forwards. The only others have been NC flipping to Romney in May and NH and VA flipping to Obama early on in the Republican primary clownfest.

    There's probably no quick way of getting comparable data from previous races but I'm pretty sure that this is a record low in volatility.

    •  Look at their maps. (0+ / 0-)

      Arizona flips Obama to Romney, while it is not mentioned in the list. They appear to have  left out a number of flips...

      Registered in NY-02, College CT-01, Spent most of the rest of my life on the border of NY-08 and NY-15

      by R30A on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:33:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  They recently moved Michigan (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      back into the Leans Dem category.

      "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

      by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:40:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  PPP NC: split based on time living in the state (9+ / 0-)

    Obama up 59-37 with those who've lived in the state less than 20 years.  Romney up 54-41 with those who have lived in the state more than 30.

    http://twitter.com/...

    “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

    by Paleo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:30:04 AM PDT

    •  If only we could convince (0+ / 0-)

      these relatively new transplants to participate in my Hump and then Rock the Vote campaign. Seems like a win-win proposition for all involved.

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:32:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Three months until election day. (5+ / 0-)

    And less than 133,100 minutes until polls close here. Get out there and knock on some doors for whatever candidates are in a close race where you are!

    How does homeopathy work? | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | "Foreign Seamen, Servants, Negroes, and Other Persons of Mean and Vile Condition."

    by gabjoh on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:32:50 AM PDT

  •  Predictable (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    abgin, Woody

    Carnahan losing to Clay is completely predictable, and I will never understand why he chose that race instead of running statewide.  There were a couple great opportunities for him, including Lt. Gov and SoS, both of which would have been good springboards to running for Governor or Senate.  What could he have been thinking?

    •  I think the same (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mark27

      the Republicans are weak in:

      MO-SS
      MO-LG

    •  I mentioned this elsewhere (0+ / 0-)

      but high profile Democrats were already laying the groundwork for both Lieutenant Governor and for Secretary of State.

      "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

      by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:41:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Should this be a scandal for Romney? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew

    Via Kevin Drum, we see that he asked San Diego County for property tax relief because his beach front mansion (supposedly) lost 45 percent of its value in seven months. (It was settled for a 29 percent reduction over three years.) This may be routine for people, so making hay out of it would be a cheap shot, but if need be, could this be a scandal for Romney? Well, maybe not a scandal, since nothing illegal or even shady happened, but couldn't we use this to bash him with, if we wanted to?

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:38:00 AM PDT

    •  not a scandal (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hankmeister, DCCyclone

      People are expected to appeal their assessed valuations when they come out higher than the property's market value. This is true everywhere, not just in California. Hitting Romney for this would be counterproductive, to put it mildly.

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

      by sacman701 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:57:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Okay then... (0+ / 0-)

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:58:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  agreed (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Woody, Zack from the SFV, uclabruin18

        Hammering him for property tax reductions that he probably didn't even ask for would be counter productive in my opinion.
        The scale of the loss of home values and wealth in California is pretty hard for people from out of state to get a grasp on. The house across the street from my in-laws just sold out of foreclosure about a month ago for 33% of the price it sold for in 2005. A 67% reduction in value in 7 years. $335,000 in 2005 versus $109,000 in 2012.
         Its an extreme example but not atypical of what is going on.

        "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power." -Benito Mussolini, Fascist dictator of Italy

        by hankmeister on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:52:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So now is the time to buy houses in California! (0+ / 0-)

          "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

          by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:42:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Hard to believe how much has changed. (12+ / 0-)

    In 2004, Republicans proudly waved the bloody shirt against gay marriage.  Now they're afraid to reopen the culture war against it in the presidential race:
    http://www.salon.com/...

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:44:28 AM PDT

  •  MO 1: Clay up on Carnahan 54-35 (0+ / 0-)

    “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

    by Paleo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:52:53 AM PDT

  •  Interesting Details from OFA Fund Raising Email (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Woody, Christopher Walker

    Last night, I received an email from OFA about making a donation and getting a new bumper stick. At the bottom of the email, I noticed this:

    The first $5,000 of a contribution to OVF 2012 will be allocated to Obama for America (with the first $2,500 designated for the primary election, and the next $2,500 for the general election). The next $30,800 of a contribution will be allocated to the Democratic National Committee. Any additional amounts from a contributor will be divided among the State Democratic Party Committees as follows, up to $10,000 per committee and subject to the biennial aggregate limits: FL (17%); OH (16%); PA (13%); CO (11%); NC (11%); VA (11%); NV (6%); WI (6%); IA (5%); and NH (4%). A contributor may designate his or her contribution for a particular participant. The allocation formula above may change if following it would result in an excessive contribution. Contributions to OVF 2012 will be used in connection with a Federal election, and may be spent on any activities of the participant committees as each committee determines in its sole discretion and will not be earmarked for any particular candidate.
    I have no idea what to make of this. Perhaps it's standard procedure, not so much in general but for these particular states; why give it to Democrats in New York, where they are doing well, or in Idaho, where it looks hopeless at the moment?

    But is it the usual practice? Most if not all of the states on this list make sense in any year and certainly in this one. Why Wisconsin over, say, Michigan or Minnesota? All three seem to be similarly competitive.

    Am I making a big deal out of nothing?

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:04:22 AM PDT

    •  Just looks like (4+ / 0-)

      a list of the biggest swing states this year. Wisconsin jumps out as a little different from the rest, but it has been closer in some recent presidential elections than MI or MN. Don't forget Bush was just a hair away from winning it in '04. It could also be a nod to the special pressure the WI state party faces this year, with the recalls having depleted a lot of their funds.

      •  You're probably on to something. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:25:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Everything but choice of states... (5+ / 0-)

      ...is standard procedure.

      The choice of states is deliberate.

      And it's a big "tell."  The only Gore/Kerry states they contemplate as potential nuisances are Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.  Notice what's absent:  Michigan, despite all the public polls saying it's a tossup.  More evidence it's no tossup.  Wisconsin isn't really a tossup, either, but I'm guessing OFA is worried the GOP there has an infrastructure there from the recall that they can reactivate a lot more quickly than the GOP can build from the ground up a new infrastructure in Pennsylvania and Michigan......so, better safe than sorry.

      The other 8 states on the list are where OFA has had continuous high-dollar ad buys for months.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:50:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What am I missing? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GradyDem, gabjoh

      I don't see NY or Idaho on that list.

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 02:43:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're not missing anything. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        I picked those two states--one very blue, one very red--as examples of states that wouldn't receive any money.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:51:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  All I can think about when reading that (0+ / 0-)

      is that that's a heck of a lot of bumper stickers.

      How does homeopathy work? | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | "Foreign Seamen, Servants, Negroes, and Other Persons of Mean and Vile Condition."

      by gabjoh on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 05:33:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting ReachTEL poll... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, DCCyclone, Woody, gabjoh
    ReachTEL has deftly targeted Campbell Newman’s electorate of Ashgrove with one of its automated phone polls: this one from a substantial sample of 661, with a margin of error of slightly below 4%.

    Daniel Hurst of Fairfax reports the poll has Labor 51.5-48.5 ahead if preferences are distributed as per the last election, compared with Newman’s 55.7-44.3 win at the state election.

    The primary votes are 41.1% for Labor (compared with 36.6% at the election), 42.8% for Campbell Newman (51.8%), 9.7% for the Greens (9.2%) and 4.0% for Katter’s Australian Party (1.7%).

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/...

    Of course as noted in Poll Bludger and the Brisbane Times, this poll was done a day after it was reported in the Courier Mail the Newman government would get rid of a popular Breast cancer screening program to save money.

    So this poll might be a knee jerk reason, but the Newman government has been going on a Tea Party/GOP budget cutting spree and firing tens of thousands of public sector workers (all those union members who voted for the LNP in March are probably regretting it now).

    Of course this poll is just a snapshot in time and the next election is in 2015 (or maybe 2016 if four year fixed terms passes), but Newman probably will want to move into a safer LNP seat (somewhere on the Gold or Sunshine coasts perhaps) at the next election.

    And everyone loves austerity....as long as it doesn't affect them. Ha.

    Republicans and the Tea Party: Wrong for America.

    by ehstronghold on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:08:45 AM PDT

  •  DKOS/PPP Polling (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike

    Not sure If I missed something, but whatever happened to dkos/ppp state polling?  I know we had the WI-SSEN recall polling but outside of the Wisconson polls and the tracker I feel like the polling has disappeared.

    31/D/M/NY-01/SSP: Tekzilla

    by Socks The Cat on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:12:45 AM PDT

  •  Trump to Speak at RNC Convention (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, Mark27, MichaelNY

    Well, it's not a certainty, just possible. As he says, "we'll see what happens." Just don't hold your breath, Donny Boy.

    Seriously, why would ANYONE within the RNC think this is a good idea? Are they that hard up for speakers or something?

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:33:23 AM PDT

    •  doubtful (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone, bythesea, MichaelNY

      I agree that it would be hard to come up with a worse idea, but I can't imagine that the RNC would be that clueless.

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

      by sacman701 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:05:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I guess they are fresh out of (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Whitty, ArkDem14, MichaelNY

      Zell Millers and joe Liebermans

      "I'm never apologizing for who I am" — Teddy Montgomery

      by lordpet8 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:16:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Zell Miller got some of kind mental (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, lordpet8, HoosierD42

        or senility problem, or some sort of psychological disorder. He was a lifelong Democratic activist, and was known for being solidly in the left-wing of the GA Democratic party. His first term as Governor saw him as a strong backer of Clinton and a relatively mainstream Democrat who pursued some fairly progressive policies for the state. Then he came within one percentage point of losing to a little known Republican businessman in 1994 and veered sharply to the right. Even, his vitriolic and hate-filled rants against the entire Democratic party in 2004 came totally out of left field, and in 2002 he barely lifted a finger to help Max Cleland or his protege Roy Barnes.

        "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

        by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:49:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  No way Trump or Palin speaks at the RNC (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone, bythesea
      •  Palin wouldn't shock me (5+ / 0-)

        She's a former Governor, she was the last VP nominee, and she's got a rabid wingnut following.  She has the resume and following to justify a speaking slot.

        Trump is a different matter altogether......he ditched his GOP registration late last year to become unaffiliated!

        44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

        by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:53:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  VA-02: Hirschbiel has first ad out (6+ / 0-)

    Remember that this district narrowly voted for Obama.

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:42:38 AM PDT

    •  I like this ad. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Woody, MichaelNY

      "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

      by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:52:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  As did it's GOP Congressman apparently (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      (Or Rigell at least donated several thousand dollars to the Obama Campaign!).

      "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

      by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:50:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That guy on the left at the end (his son?) (0+ / 0-)

      Is mega-cute.

      24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Gregg/Simpson for Governor! Donnelly for Senate! Mullen for Congress!

      by HoosierD42 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:07:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A Post Everyone Needs to Read (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone, Woody, bumiputera, MichaelNY

    I know this is outside the purview of DKE, but this post from Bruce Bartlett is, I think, a must read for everyone. It's hardly news to anyone who isn't a hardcore conservative arguing the opposite, facts be damned, but it's still a nice link to have handy.

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:02:34 AM PDT

    •  Won't make a difference to the Republicans (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingTag, MichaelNY, supercereal

      When facts collide with their dogma, they simply ignore the facts.

      “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

      by Paleo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:10:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  True, but it never hurts to have the factual (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Woody, MichaelNY

        high ground, or at least proof that we have it. Plus, every so often, we might come across some persuadable.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:18:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Amazing how often Democrats, including Obama, (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Woody, bumiputera, MichaelNY

          fail to bring this up.

          “The country tried everything Romney says, and it brought the economy to the brink of collapse”

          by Paleo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:21:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Bartlett is reformed (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            bumiputera

            The distinguished economist Bruce Barlett is a former Repub economic adviser to Reagan and Bush. He split with W's economic policies and now he is no longer very welcome in the Tea Party-controlled Grand Old Party. He writes that the supply-side policies he advocated under Reagan are not appropriate for the depressionary situation we face today, and instead he looks back to Keynesian thinking for answers.

            President Obama remains an unreformed believer in the old-fashioned Reaganomics. Along with Sen McConnell and Speaker Boehner, Obama is still working on reducing the deficit, and actually doing it. But reducing unemployment, well, not so much.

            --------------------

            Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm gonna vote for Obama because there is absolutely no alternative. And on many, most, of the non-economic issues Obama has been right. But on the economic issues, he's been wrong from his first appointments -- Treasury Secretary, Chief of Staff, Federal Reserve, etc -- right thru every concession to the Congressional Repubs to his continuing, almost inadvertent, apparently reflexive, use of Repub talking points about big deficits and the other economic BS.

            •  If Obama really believed in Reaganomics (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              uclabruin18, The Caped Composer

              he wouldn't have pushed through the stimulus. Don't confuse things he has to do because the Republicans control the House with things he fully believes in. I have other problems with the economic team he appointed, but I don't think any of them are supply-siders.

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 02:55:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Obama believes in Reagaonomics (0+ / 0-)

                As described by Wikippedia, that's

                economic policies promoted by the U.S. President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. These policies are commonly associated with supply-side economics, or pejoratively as trickle-down economics or voodoo economics.

                The four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to reduce the growth of government spending, reduce income tax and capital gains tax, reduce government regulation of economy, and control money supply to reduce inflation.

                For two or three or almost four years Obama has been running his mouth about reducing the growth of government spending. (He should just shut up about that.)

                Obama has supported cutting income taxes on most Americans, and even cut the Social Security Tax. (Good luck with getting the tax rate supporting Social Security restored.)

                Obama has talked about reducing government regulation of the economy. (What the economy needs is much tighter regulation of the powerful banksters, but no, he won't talk about that.)

                I don't recall hearing Obama speak about a threat of inflation. (A good thing, since that would truly be delusional thinking.)

                So he repeats Reagan's views of taxation and the size of government, and you think that's the fault of the Repubs taking over the House -- after he had the run of the show for two years before he lost the election in 2010?

                If we don't understand what our problems are, we have no hope of fixing them. It is a real problem that Obama's economic thinking is close to the University of Chicago but far, far, far from the policies and programs of the New Deal that led us out of the Great Depression.

    •  good read (4+ / 0-)

      Reminds me how my old HS Econ teacher was a revisionist. He always kept harping about how Clinton's taxes were too high and Bush brought them down to right level. He also wasn't happy that DiFi was going to win a landlside in 2006.  But I digress.

      "I'm never apologizing for who I am" — Teddy Montgomery

      by lordpet8 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:25:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not against hearing (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lordpet8

        arguments that the economy would have been even stronger had taxes been lower. It's pretty much impossible to be sure, but it's not a completely ridiculous point. But the night and day certainty with which some people speak about the relationship between taxes and economic performance is just weird and the authority they are given despite having little on which to base their claims is infuriating.

        "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

        by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:34:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  My 7th grade History teacher told us (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        that the FDIC is now "obsolete."

        Hail to the king, baby.

        by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:59:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He was right in a way (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Under the TARP program put in place in the last weeks and days of the Bush Administration, broke-ass banks get bailed out with hundreds of billions of loans. Meanwhile interest rates are pushed down to a point where banks can make huge profits on their reserves required by law to be held in the Federal Reserve System.

          So now banks are "too big to fail", and who needs insurance on mere deposits.

    •  The people who make the claims Bartlett notes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Woody, MichaelNY

      sound like the same sort of morons who buy Amity Shlaes' tripe about how FDR allegedly worsened the Great Depression.  Yeah, because in 1932 and early 1933 the economy was really roaring back on its own...(rolleyes)

      36, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

      by Mike in MD on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:44:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  47 year anniversary of the VRA: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DCCyclone, bythesea, MichaelNY, HoosierD42

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:09:31 AM PDT

  •  HI-02: My calendar is marked. (5+ / 0-)

    In fact, me and the BF (if we're in the same city) might go out for Hawaiian, to celebrate the day when someone I've written extensive critiques of might well be on the verge of being elected to Congress.  Anyone know any Hawaiian places in NYC?

    I actually do think she's got at least a good shot.  Someone had pointed out somewhere that Hannemann's electoral track record is rather better in nonpartisan municipal elections than it is in partisan Democratic primaries.  On top of that, Tulsi Gabbard has a good biography and "profile" for any candidate and maybe especially for a Democratic primary. (Did you know that she'd be the first Hindu in Congress?)  The image of a young female veteran who's served in two political offices is powerful.  (And a lot of people might not know that she's the product of a questionable political dynasty, which at least complicates the narrative of her impressive accomplishments.)  

    Gabbard's been matching Hannemann's fundraising--she's raised $988,288 to his $1,083,669; she's spent a fair amount less as of 7/22 but has more CoH--and, as David's been pointing out, she's done well with support from outside groups.  Nearly all of the independent expenditures in this race have been in her favor, and collectively, she and her supporters have outspent him and his supporters by about $300,000.

    On the other hand, Hannemann has a lot of labor support, and is obviously a major political figure in the state.  I'm not the greatest forecaster, but I'd be a bit more surprised by a Hannemann win at this point.

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

    by Xenocrypt on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:21:53 AM PDT

  •  The point about the differences between (5+ / 0-)

    urban growth in different kinds of cities is well-taken.  I think many Northeasterners might not understand how different someplace like Phoenix or Oklahoma City is from someplace like New York City (of course, there really isn't anywhere like New York City).

    What would be interesting to look at is how or if political changes have interacted with these municipal changes.  If there used to be two similar areas in Franklin County, and one got annexed into Columbus and one didn't, did their politics and demographics end up evolving in different ways?

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

    by Xenocrypt on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:29:42 AM PDT

    •  Follow the money (4+ / 0-)

      As a general rule, the cities that are fenced in and unable to grow have suffered financially. With the rise of the automobile and the outer ring suburbs, and the white flight from cities that were drawing economic refugees from the Old South and Puerto Rico back in the 1940s, 50s, 60s, and 70s (not to say that it has stopped exactly), property taxes have flowed to the new suburban towns and counties and to the suburban school districts. The big cities have not been able to keep up in spending per pupil, teachers' salaries, or even maintain their basic infrastructure.

      So Rustbelt, fenced-in cities like Newark, Trenton, Camden, Philly, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, St Louis and others have withered and gone into almost terminal decline because the local governments have had less and less to spend.

      The unbound cities like Jacksonville, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Albuquerque and others have been able to keep the fat property taxes flowing from the upper class districts within their boundaries, and they have thrived.

      These cities have also been able to reduce the damaging effects that happen to the center cities when the suburbs simply zone out their social problems. That is, if you zone your town for one-acre lots, you won't have the problems that come from having low-life riff-raff, if you know what I mean. You need a smaller police force, fewer fire stations, fewer mental health workers, fewer social workers for the child welfare office, no need (or place) for public or subsidized housing, none of that! Dump all those problems on the inner city. And then hate the big cities and the Democrats who live there.

      •  Partially true (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, Woody

        "Fenced in" cities (due to geography) such as San Fran, Seattle, Portland have also done well, due to urban renewal, also known as gentrification.

        But in those cases, the money has focused inward, back towards the center city.

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

        by tietack on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 07:28:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Gentrification and race (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tietack, MichaelNY

          The popularity of living in the inner city is a fairly recent phenomenon. It has to do with a variety of lifestyle and economic trends -- empty nesters deciding to trade the boredom of crabgrass for the excitement of cracked urban  sidewalks, young couples choosing to delay having children or having none, the concentration of gay people in certain popular large cities, the relative costs of commuting (costly now in time much more than money), etc.

          Please don't confuse gentrification with urban renewal. Gentrification is a largely voluntary movement of individuals and families into rundown and unfashionable areas. There low costs to buy property allow investments to upgrade those properties and make them neighborhoods more attractive to others who follow behind.

          Part of what has made gentrification possible is the willingness in the past 30 years or so of more and more white people with some education and income to live among people of color. Even educated blacks with decent jobs had been living in decayed inner-city areas in part because they had been excluded from the lily-white suburbs. Now the displacement of poor blacks and Hispanics by young, upwardly mobile whites can be a problem. But the gentrification trend is a huge positive over all because it actually reflects a decline in racial fear and hostility among the whites moving back into the city.

          The term urban renewal quite specifically refers to the massive government programs of the 1960s and 70s to redevelop the "blighted" centers of declining American cities. Hundreds of millions were spent on land clearance to replace old buildings, often occupied by blacks and Hispanics. Taking their place usually were Modernist monstrosities featuring enormous parking garages for commuters coming from the white suburbs and huge public and private buildings such as convention centers, high rise hotels, and office buildings.

          Apparently in almost every case, in the view of the authorities, the "blight" of the big cities consisted of too many dark-skinned people too close to the downtown. So urban renewal came to be explained in the popular phrase, "Urban renewal means Negro removal."

          Also consider that many of the cities that saw corporations moving their headquarters and other good jobs there -- Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, San Jose, Salt Lake City, and others -- had low percentages of blacks compared to the big cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Chicago that the corporate jobs were being removed from.

          In America, you can't understand history or politics if you ignore race.

          •  I've never thought of the two as different (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            which means I think less of gentrification and more of "urban renewal" than you do.

            (aka, w/r/t race/class, I think gentrification often pushes out lower income people to inner suburbs)

            If I'm hearing you correctly, you're saying that urban renewal fails if the government is involved. I think urban governments can do a lot to stimulate development -- if the right conditions (e.g. an educated core) currently exists.

            While I understand that "gentrification" is a phenomenon that started in the '80s, and "urban renewal" started before, I do not see a distinction as meaningful today.

            Can you point to any literature on --current-- differences between "gentrification" and "urban renewal"?

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

            by tietack on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 06:40:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with you about gentrification (0+ / 0-)

              It's very problematic because it prices long-time poor residents out of their neighborhoods, and if it goes too far, there's no affordable housing for them anywhere and homelessness increases.

              Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

              by MichaelNY on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 02:28:15 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You are agreeing with me here (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                Because I said,

                ... the displacement of poor blacks and Hispanics by young, upwardly mobile whites can be a problem.
                And you state the problem very well.

                However, there are vast differences between the old "urban renewal" programs and gentrification. Urban renewal was usually worse than gentrification because it destroyed entire neighborhoods almost at once, and often thousands of people were displaced in a short period of time.

                As I said in another comment, I live in Manhattan in a former urban renewal district, including parts of more than 20 blocks, and which was "cleared" of tenement dwellers in the late 1960s. The old, rundown buildings were taken, using the state power of eminent domain, and demolished. Then the land was turned over to developers who put up high rise apartment buildings.

                I was not around at the time, but from what I understand, most of the displaced tenants in my area were of Puerto Rican origin. For the most part they moved into the South Bronx and areas along the Grand Concourse, where the mostly Jewish former residents were in turn relocating to Coop City. These were massive moves affecting thousands of people.

                On the other hand, gentrification usually proceeds one building at a time, by the actions of private buyers. And at least from what I have seen in NY, gentrification seems to thrive in neighborhoods of  three or four story brownstones. So a single building may tip from being fully occupied by poor people to being owner-occupied with one or two rental apartments going for higher rent after renovation. But only a few poor people at a time are displaced, hopefully making their transition less difficult.

                I'd argue that homelessness in NYC is due less to gentrification and much more due to the prohibition on single-room occupancy buildings, and nationally it is more due to the 40-year-plus stagnation and decline in real pay for the working poor. But that is a whole 'nuther subject.

                •  We are not in disagreement (0+ / 0-)

                  A great deal of homelessness also has to do with foreclosures and the lack of sufficient good outpatient mental health services for people who can no longer be legally committed.

                  Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                  by MichaelNY on Wed Aug 08, 2012 at 07:49:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Do NOT confuse urban renewal with gentrification (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              The terms have very different meanings.

              Urban renewal involved government spending on large projects and almost always featured the demolition of many old buildings and the involvement of powerful "developers".

              From Wiki:

              Title One of the Housing Act of 1949 kick-started the "urban renewal" program that would reshape American cities. The Act provided federal funding to cities to cover the cost of acquiring areas of cities perceived to be "slums." (The Federal government paid 2/3 of the cost of acquiring the site, called the "write down," while local governments paid the remaining 1/3.) Those sites were then given to private developers to construct new housing. ... "Urban renewal" was a phrase popularized with the passage of the 1954 Housing Act, which made these projects more enticing to developers, by among other things, providing FHA-backed mortgages.
              Gentrification results from the collective action of many individuals and families, who usually buy and restore old buildings but do not destroy them.

              I guess you were intended that both terms mean 'how old cities can be renewed'. But that sort of requires us to believe that the government-sponsored urban renewal programs were largely successful. Reading any 10-paragraph summary of "The Death and Life of Great American Cities" by Jane Jacobs should disabuse us of that notion.

              btw. I live in a high-rise middle income building in a former small urban renewal district in NYC. The surrounding blocks of low-rise buildings have gentrified in the 30+ years that I have lived here -- and since the largely Puerto Rican inhabitants were relocated to, or dumped in, the South Bronx. On the other hand, other massive urban renewal projects in the city are clear failures, while some city neighborhoods have gentrified without any, or despite of any, government projects in the area. The phenomena may be related, but they are quite different.

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

            There are cities with substantial minority populations that are strong (or at least stronger), courtesy of redevelopment, e.g. NYC, DC, Atlanta

            The other commonality between two of the cities that you name (Detroit, Cleveland) is that they're midwestern industrial cities.

            However, I suggest that many neighborhoods in Chicago have experienced significant redevelopment, ref http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/...

            On the other hand, redevelopment in the west coast cities that you've named have changed the nature of the racial divide (and yes there is one here too), making inner cities more white, making inner suburbs substantially poorer -- and sometimes majority non-white.

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

            by tietack on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 06:49:23 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So many things (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              So many points at issue here, I'll only touch on a few now.

              The exceptions to big city decline in the Northeast and Midwest from the 1950s thru the 1990s can be named on our fingers: Boston, New York, Washington, and Chicago. Along with SF and L.A. these are world class cities that have thrived despite the problems that have brought down their smaller sister cities.

              To some extent their survival and success has been because BIG beat out merely big, in other instances it was due to one-of-a-kind factors. D.C., c'mon, has grown because the US and its government (including the Dept of Defense) have grown. As the national capital of the FIRE industry, NYC is another unique case. Happily, Chicago has survived as the capital of the Midwest.

              Of course manufacturing has declined in every old American city, from New Orleans and Mobile to Pittsburgh and Buffalo. The newer, growing, mostly Sunbelt cities have economies that are mostly post-modern, depending on large service sectors.

              None of that changes the fact that the suburbs of, say, Buffalo have sprawled across several neighboring counties, white middleclass families fled the core city in huge numbers, taking their taxables with them. What has been left in the older core is vast tracts of disused properties paying little property taxes and housing featuring layers of  lead paint and asbestos siding now occupied by people too poor to contribute much to taxes.

              And in fact, even the Empire City of New York has been badly -- and still very much -- affected by the rise of the suburbs and their rich school districts compared to the budget available for city students. Compare taxes and teachers' pay in Westchester and Long Island with the City. And I hate to think of the comparison between schools in the District of Columbia vs, say, Tysons Ferry.

              •  You touch on this (0+ / 0-)

                But of the cities you cite as exceptions to big-city decline, at least New York and DC also suffered for several decades from white flight to the suburbs. That's been reversed only recently. So it's not that these are exceptions to big-city decline, but that they went through the decline and came out the other side. If you were in New York in the late 70s and 80s, you would never have talked about this city as an exception to decline. In fact, we almost went bankrupt in the mid 70s, and following that, because there wasn't enough money for maintenance, the subways crumbled, the streets and sidewalks crumbled, sanitation sucked, etc., etc.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 02:32:58 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm giving up (0+ / 0-)

                  Whatever time period I try to respond to, you want to talk about a different time and place. What I think we are left discussing is that you are too stubborn to admit that you have been wrong to argue that I somehow got it wrong There's not much in that discussion for me.

                  After all, it was you who cited Washington and NYC as exceptions to the general decline, and I simply attempted to respond to your complaint.

                  But for the record, NYC went thru decline and has recovered. This dramatic and exceptional recovery sets it apart from say, Newark, Trenton, Camden, Bethlehem, Allentown, Scranton, Wiles-Barre, Elmira, Binghamton, Altoona, Pittsburgh, Youngstown, and 40 or 50 other smaller cities.

                  However, NY still suffers from the fact that most of its richest citizens are not, because they are not residents. Like Rmoney, they know how to avoid taxes. So they make their money in the city but live in the suburbs and avoid NYC taxes.

                  As a result, it is still true that NYC schools are poor while suburban schools are rich. If NYC could simply annex Westchester, Nassau, and Suffolk, the differences among the resources for the city schools would end. That one thing would completely recast the standing of this big city. And in fact, the same thing goes for every other fenced-in big city surrounded by rich suburbs and suffering from a weak school system.

  •  City population growth (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, ArkDem14, MichaelNY, tietack

    I'd make note of the fact that Washington DC's population grew 5.2% from 2000-10, and it's as "boxed in" as a US city can possibly be since to take in another inch of land it would literally have to take it from states it isn't part of, with Congressional approval.

    New York City's population also continues to grow, and it's of course boxed in by island-based geography and nearby state lines.

    36, MD-8 (MD-6 after 2012) resident, NOVA raised, Euro/Anglophile Democrat

    by Mike in MD on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:41:13 AM PDT

  •  More Unsolicited Advice for Obama, Congress (5+ / 0-)

    Read this post from Kevin Drum about high frequency trading and a possible financial transaction tax.

    For at least this reason, but probably many more, I think a financial transaction tax is a great idea. I've said so for a long time now. Whether to pay for infrastructure, general deficit reduction, health care reform, or something else, I think it's an idea Democrats should be pushing hard.

    I personally like the idea of using it to pay for a permanent payroll tax cut and/or some combination of that and long-term Social Security solvency. The cost of the recent payroll tax cut is roughly $100 billion a year. As anyone who has read Dean Baker on this subject knows, it's pretty easy to get to $50 billion with a small tax. Even $100-150 billion isn't out of the question with a reasonably-sized tax. And if getting to an agree-upon amount is difficult or if we just want some extra revenue, we could probably easily supplement the FTT with higher sin taxes.

    There are a bunch of reasons why Obama wouldn't push for something like this, but outside of, say, New York's senators and a few Northeastern House members, which Democrats around the country wouldn't want to campaign on something like this? Seems like a perfectly legitimate form of giving the middle class some relief while sticking it to Wall Street in a fair manner. In other words, it's a potential political gold mine.

    "The election of Mitt Romney and a supporting congress this November would be a...disaster for America. Think of the trainwreck that has been the Conservative government in Britain since 2010. And square it."--Brad DeLong

    by bjssp on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:43:34 AM PDT

  •  Part of the change is Metro governments (7+ / 0-)

    where the city government merges with the county government aside from some small inholdings that are gradually annexed. I know that at least Nashville, Louisville, and Indianapolis have this form of government (Miami and NYC have similar but unique status).

    Particularly in the case of Nashville, this meant annexing a great deal of rural land into the combined city-county government. While most of Jefferson County, KY and Marion County, IN are perfectly good places to put suburbs, northwestern Davidson County, TN is still mostly small farms and forest due to its rugged terrain. Even while some suburbs remain as satellite cities, all rural areas are part of Nashville, leading to an even lower population density than would be expected for as suburban a city as Nashville.

    Note that this leaves these Metro areas essentially no room to expand. While you can't see this with Louisville due to the recent nature of this arrangement, notice that Nashville and Indianapolis are increasing slowly in population density.

    Male, 22, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02, remorseless supporter of Walker's recall. Pocan for Congress and Baldwin for Senate!

    by fearlessfred14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:52:21 AM PDT

    •  You might recall that Dick Lugar's farm (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      fearlessfred14, ArkDem14

      is in a historically-rural part of Indianapolis (Decatur Township), leading to some skepticism on DKE that was, I think, largely unwarranted.

      27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

      by Xenocrypt on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 12:03:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Jacksonville has a similar situation (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Except it's county and city governments were fused in the 1970s to keep the white establishment in power over the increasingly black population of the city proper.

      "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

      by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 02:01:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A good solution (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

       ... but I think each of the city-county mergers has required a long struggle to achieve.

      It is like redistricting only more so. The big issue involved is race. Black inner cities controlled by black politicians. The surrounding county and its suburbs white, controlled by white politicians.

      Want to try that merger thing with, say, Wayne County-Detroit and get back to us?

      Well, don't mean to be that sharp with you. I agree completely that the merged cities are in relatively good shape and we should try to do more of that. But it will not be easy.

      One middle way is to carve out some of the less, um, less interesting powers, like water supply and sewerage treatment, and merge those. Meanwhile leave zoning and police under more local control. But even that ain't so easy, and of course, you still have wastefully duplicated functions and unfairly funded and underfunded services.

  •  My diary on a national fair map is now up (5+ / 0-)

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    It has maps for nearly 30 states as well as graphs showing the PVI distribution of the actual districts.

    NC-06/NC-04; -9.00, -8.41; progress through pragmatism

    by sawolf on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:55:18 AM PDT

  •  Census (6+ / 0-)

    That isn't fair to Austin at all. Most of the land that Austin has annexed it completely undeveloped and was annexed for the purpose of keeping that land undeveloped. The "developed" Austin actually has gotten a hell of alot denser over the last ten years, and is actually the most dense of Texas's large cities in its core.

    22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

    by wwmiv on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 12:48:04 PM PDT

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

      I don't doubt that a lot of the land annexed is currently empty, and that they plan to keep a lot of it that way.  I wonder if the City of Austin has statistics on how much of their city limits is currently developed?

      That said, the only other way to measure this is the "urban area" measurement by the Census Bureau which measures the contiguous built-up area of a settlement (which usually overspills the municipal borders of a city).  In that case, Austin is not only not all that dense, but both "urban" Houston and Dallas has greater population (2,978.5 people per square mile and 2,878.9 ppsm, respectively).  San Antonio even has the second densest of the state's largest urban areas (2,944.6 ppsm).  Austin is the least dense urban area at 2,604.8 ppsm.

      Austin has a lot of great things going for it.  It's easy the most progressive of Texas's large urban areas, and I'd imagine it's the one I'd like the most.  It has a nice and increasingly vibrant and walkable core, but outside of that, it crawls across it's hills at a density less than that of all the other major urban areas in the state, and it's probably because of those hills.

  •  Colorado tease (5+ / 0-)

    "What do you mean "conspiracy"? Does that mean it's someone's imaginings and that the actual polls hovered right around the result?" - petral

    by conspiracy on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:10:14 PM PDT

  •  PPP tweets from CO poll (7+ / 0-)

    Obama leads among independents 49-38.

    By 55/38 margin, CO voters support assault weapons ban.

  •  PPP shilling for Bojangles, I see. (0+ / 0-)

    Not that I mind, it sounds better than KFC, CFA combined.

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:19:28 PM PDT

  •  HAHAHAHHAHA!!@!$!!%! (11+ / 0-)

    Dick Morris is like a one-man political comedy troupe.

    http://politicalwire.com/...

    26, originally OK-1, currently NY-10. Former swingnut.

    by okiedem on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:32:50 PM PDT

  •  New poll from VA has O+4 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MBishop1, askew, MichaelNY

    From a firm I've never heard of, Obama +4 in VA http://capitolcorrespondent.com/... … Interestingly, Allen also leads by 4... Not much detail in article tho.

    •  44 to 40 among LVs (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, MichaelNY

      leaves a lot of doubt, undecideds should not be so high. The article doesn't give actual numbers for the senate race either, at least I didn't see them. It just states the margin.

    •  Romney = Thurston Howell (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DCCyclone

      I haven't seen that comparison before.  Not bad.

      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

      by tommypaine on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:58:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I looked them up, they've done at least three... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, tommypaine, skibum59, MBishop1

      ...battleground state polls, only the Florida one looks in the ballpark of OK.

      Problem is, everything I'm finding is an article on each poll, and the Florida story doesn't even say what the toplines are.  It just says Romney has a small lead, and later says 8% are undecided, which makes me guess 47-45.

      The Ohio poll is 44-35 for Obama, but the Virginia story wrongly says Obama is doing better in Virginia than Ohio.  But both have ridiculously high undecideds for this stage, given that no one else has those.

      Largely unknown pollster who doesn't know what they're doing, that's my take.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 06:02:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why Reid is winning the Romney tax argument (11+ / 0-)

    There are few suggestions of why he is winning this. Chris Cilizza, I think, said it's because neither Reid nor Romney is very popular. Others have said it's because no one really knows who Harry Reid is, so why would Romney want to pick a fight with him?

    But I think there is a simpler reason: I dont think most people are really outraged by what Reid is saying. I mean, in the last few years, we've had an American president, elected by a majority of Americans, called unAmerican, anti-American, unpatriotic, marxist, socialist, communist, a dictator.

    After hearing all that from conservatives, one, I think people's threshold for outrage is much higher. And two, I'm not sure people are really buying that a party that has said all that about Obama is truly upset by someone saying Romney hasnt paid his taxes.  

  •  ND-Sen: new Heitkamp ad (13+ / 0-)

    (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

    by Setsuna Mudo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 01:45:35 PM PDT

  •  MD-Gov 2014 (7+ / 0-)

    Openly Gay State Delegate Heather Mizeur said this weekend she is considering running for statewide office in 2014, possibly governor.

    http://www.baltimoresun.com/...

    26, NE-2 (resident), IL-9 (part-timer), SD-AL (raised); SSP and DKE lurker since 2007

    by JDJase on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 02:56:43 PM PDT

    •  She'd be better off running for AG or Comptroller (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera

      Depending on which of the two current officeholders there run for Governor.

      24, Practical Progressive Democrat (-4.75, -4.51), DKE Gay Caucus Majority Leader, IN-02; Swingnut. Gregg/Simpson for Governor! Donnelly for Senate! Mullen for Congress!

      by HoosierD42 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 09:26:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  AZ-09: A SuperPAC called "Restoring Arizona's (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    ...Integrity" made a few small IEs against Cherny.  (See also here.)

    The only two people listed with it are Genevra Richardson and Jeremy Browning.  

    Both of them work at "GovGroup LLC", some kind of lobbying company.  Richardson and Sinema are both on the board of the Maricopa YWCA, where Browning also worked at some point, I guess.  Browning attended a "Women for Kyrsten Sinema Reception" that Richardson co-hosted.

    Browning used to be at (or still is at) "Ziemba Waid Public Affairs", where Richardson also worked or works:

    Fronting the Responsible Trails group in Arizona was lobbyist Genevra Richardson. Her firm, Ziemba Waid Public Affairs, is co-owned by the former Chairman for the Arizona Democratic Party. Her job before that was as Arizona Clean Elections Commission Campaign Finance Director.

    27, Dem, Dude seeing a dude, CT-04(originally), PA-02/NY-14 (formerly PA-02/NY-12).

    by Xenocrypt on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 03:19:28 PM PDT

  •  ND-Sen: Berg accidentally links supporters (11+ / 0-)

    to an anti-Berg, pro-Heitkamp website:
    http://www.northdecoder.com/...

    He's also orchestrating phony Letters to the Editor:
    http://www.northdecoder.com/...

    Hail to the king, baby.

    by KingofSpades on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 03:32:41 PM PDT

    •  I think Heitkamp might pull this off (4+ / 0-)

      It seems as if Berg is really getting close to the ropes, if he not on them already.

      26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

      by DrPhillips on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 03:40:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Premature (6+ / 0-)

        No one is on the ropes in August.

        •  Overstatement (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SLDemocrat

          Wouldn't you say McCaskill is on the ropes? No? How about Kerrey, then?

          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

          by MichaelNY on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 05:44:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  McCaskill up +2, and you call that on the ropes? (0+ / 0-)

            Uh, no, she isn't on the ropes

            Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

            by tommypaine on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 06:43:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  In 2012 is so difficult to defeat incumbents (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            The redistricting creates troubles for a decent number of them, and there is a decent number of races with incumbent vs incumbent.

            Whitout this incumbent vs incumbent cases, until now you will find few incumbents defeated the voting day (Lugar, Schmidt, Sullivan, Holden and Reyes), and will be few also in the general. No-one without fight very hard until the last day.

            •  The discussion relates to Senate races (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              I suspect that you did not read the previous notes correctly.

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

              by tietack on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 08:42:32 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  My comment includes senate races (0+ / 0-)

                I think very few incumbents will be defeated this cycle (without count the incumbent vs incumbent races created by the redistricting process).

                You will see )

                •  And the big majority of the defeated incumbents (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  will be republicans. If not all.

                •  Redistricting and incumbent v. incumbent races (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  do not apply in the US Senate.

                  I thought you were well schooled in US politics. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt.

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

                  by tietack on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:07:58 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  but apply for all the races (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    I was talking about all the races.

                    I explain that for all the races, 2012 is a good year for the incumbents, and we will see very few incumbents losing a race, except in the case of the incumbent vs incumbent races, that are obviously house races, the alone affected by the redistricting process, and where obviously we will see a decent number of incumbents losing a race.

                    Nothing is wrong.

                    The general rule for 2012, for all the races, including senate races, is that few incumbents will lose a race. And the big majority of them will be Republicans.

                    •  How many Republican senators (0+ / 0-)

                      do you expect to lose, vs. incumbent Democratic senators?

                      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                      by MichaelNY on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:23:41 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  ) (0+ / 0-)

                        A former Republican senator, G LeMieux, loses the race for the senate in Florida droping out in June, before the primary.

                        This is the closest case that I see to your question.

                        We know that one former republican senator loses a race with a Democratic incumbent senator.

                        There are not cases of Republican incumbent senators vs Democratic incumbent Senators but it would be a possible race.

                        It would be a good trivia question for the weekends if some time happen a race between the two incumbent senators of a state.

                        Do you understand well my point? You were talking about senate races, I tell you a general rule that I see in the polls for all the races, but this general rule has a special case in some house races. That is all.

                        •  It is impossible for two incumbent senators (0+ / 0-)

                          to run against each other. Or, well, it would be possible but not conceivable, because that would mean one of them would cut their term short just in order to run against the other.

                          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                          by MichaelNY on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 01:05:08 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  As example K Conrad being senator run for theother (0+ / 0-)

                            senate seat. But then the new seat was open.

                            I know not if there is some case of incumbent running vs incumbent.

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

                            did not cut his term short to run, he made a campaign promise that he would serve no more than one term if the national debt didn't go down during his term, when it didn't, he retired like he had promised. Two years after that the other seat came open, he ran for it, and held it until now.

                            (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

                            by Setsuna Mudo on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 02:38:50 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  You were responding to messages on Senate races (0+ / 0-)

                      and you come up with "redistricting" and "incumbent" versus "incumbent" races as a reason why current Senators are difficult to defeat?

                      I ask you about why you use that rationale for Senate rates, and you repeat the same reasons.

                      And then finally you come up with the excuse that you were talking about the House?

                      Then why did you not start a new thread?

                      I am annoyed.

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

                      by tietack on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:49:54 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I give a general rule that I see for all the races (0+ / 0-)

                        I see that rule in the polls.

                        The general rule apply for the senate races.

                        In few words, it will be difficult to defeat C McCaskill this year.

                        •  Why do you think it will be hard to defeat (0+ / 0-)

                          McCaskill?

                          Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                          by MichaelNY on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 01:06:06 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  she is not new in competitive campaigns (0+ / 0-)

                            she is not the kind of politician who tell what I wish to hear, but she is a competent politician that survive to many hard political battles in the state.

                            I think the level of her challengers is not the best that the Republican party from Missouri can offer, and when we see that is because the strongest challengers have fear of the incumbent. That habitually lead to the challenger party to lose the race.

                            Plus they have not enough financial support against a well funded incumbent. If Brunner wins the primary is because he has a lot of money advantage over Akin and Steelman, but Brunner is back McCaskill fundraising. For win the race he need a lot more of his own money.

                            My numbers that take into account polls, the money, the PVI and more details (that I use for unpolled races) give to McCaskill a Toss-Up.

                            I have very very few incumbents with a race leaning toward the other side.

                      •  I would have bigger reason for being annoyed (0+ / 0-)

                        you are the alone that make me explain and re-explain about the exception of the US House, giving too much importance to the exception

                        the important part of my first message was the general rule , that apply perfectly for the senate races.

                        the title was

                        "in 2012 is so difficult to defeat incumbents" (like C McCaskill)

                        I have not trouble explaining the message all the necessary times because my english is not perfect, but when you lead my comments to talk to the exception, you should not be annoyed if I talk about the exception trying to explain you.

        •  Close to, not on (3+ / 0-)

          And I think a candidate can be on the ropes at any stage in a campaign, it's not to say they can't recover, it's just that they are being outpaced and may feel cornered. Phony letters to the editor indicate that.

          26, Male, CA-24 (new CA-26), DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

          by DrPhillips on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 07:05:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Delaware Gay Marriage (10+ / 0-)

    Governor Markell is hopeful to have it legalized by 2013!
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    "I'm never apologizing for who I am" — Teddy Montgomery

    by lordpet8 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 03:52:54 PM PDT

  •  conservatives vs moderates in KS GOP (4+ / 0-)

    The latest chapter in an ongoing story.

    Doesnt seem like Dems are going to benefit from this split(like they did when Sebelius was elected a decade ago), at least initially. But the primaries are something to keep an eye on.

  •  Slightly starting to worry about (0+ / 0-)

    the effects of increased gas prices. Some of this is the downside of better economic news. The bet is a stronger economy will increase demand for oil, and thus higher prices.

    Although apparently, they arent expected to get near $4.00  on average nationwide, and are expected to decline around Labor day as the summer driving season ends and suppliers switch to a cheaper fuel.

    The spike seems to be greatest in the upper midwest where the issue isnt just prices but refinery problems and closure of a leaking pipeline(which will be restarted soon).

    Still, better than expected economy data and Iran are the wild cards.

    •  Gas prices are a nothingburger (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, MichaelNY

      Your description of what's expected settles it that there's nothing to worry about.  A spike below $4.00 that settles down almost 2 months before the election won't cost us even one measley vote.

      44, male, Indian-American, married and proud father of a girl and 2 boys, Democrat, VA-10

      by DCCyclone on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 04:31:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A quiet day so far re; National Polls (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ArkDem14

    but the two daily trackers have both moved into the blue [in tandem] for the first time in weeks, usually Gallup is blue or tied and Ras is red, red, red...

    Obama-Romney:
    46-45 Gallup.
    47-45 Ras.

    Obama's approve/disapprove numbers seem better too...

    App-Dis:
    48-50, Ras.
    46-47, Gallup.

    "Never trust a man who, when left alone with a tea cosy, doesn't try it on!!"

    by EcosseNJ on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 04:14:52 PM PDT

  •  I'm beginning to feel bullish about AZ-SEN (4+ / 0-)

    Flake just has so many vulnerabilities and so much baggage that any half competent candidate should be able to take advantage of. Carmona is running a good campaign as well.

    "Once, many, many years ago I thought I was wrong. Of course it turned out I had been right all along. But I was wrong to have thought I was wrong." -John Foster Dulles. My Political Compass Score: -4.00, -3.69, Proud member of DKE

    by ArkDem14 on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 04:41:55 PM PDT

    •  Carmona better have ads in the can... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, bumiputera

      ready to air the day after the primary is over.  I can understand why he's not up on the air now in that he'd just be taking fire from both as they try to prove how tough they'd be in the GE against him.  Also if he proved he was a real threat than GOP base/primary voters might think they better vote for Flake, but if they feel that the winner of the GOP primary will be all but coronated come the GE they might be more open to voting Cardon.  

      However he is still largely unknown and can't risk the SuperPAC's swooping in to define him either.  So if he drops some ads the day after the primary while Flake is broke and needing to build his warchest for the GE battle Carmona might get a bit of a free period to define himself.  

       

  •  The unions did it (16+ / 0-)

    Ohio redistricting is on the ballot. :-)

    (-9.38, -7.49), Blood type "O", social anarchist, KY-01, "When smashing monuments, save the pedestals. They always come in handy." — Stanisław Lem

    by Setsuna Mudo on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 05:06:19 PM PDT

  •  Speaking of ballot initiatives (5+ / 0-)

    The Personhood initiative might be on the ballot again in Colorado. Supporters turned in 25k more signatures than needed.

    If it is approved to be on the ballot, it could create an awkward situation for Romney, and GOP congressional candidates in some of the more competitive racs.

  •  MO-Sen (4+ / 0-)

    Well if this is true, this is quite awkward...

    Over at the Missouri Scout, independent campaign analyst Dave Drebes dishes up a prime example of why even his fellow Democrats don’t particularly like Guv Jay Nixon: “Primary night party poo-poo? One Dem source says the rumor mill from campaign staffs is that Governor Jay Nixon’s camp made it clear to Sen. Claire McCaskill that she wasn’t welcome at their Springfield night party. Seems the incumbent governor wasn’t keen on sharing the state with someone whose polls numbers were lower than his. McCaskill will be in Kansas City instead tomorrow night.”
    http://bergersbeat.com/...

    Republicans and the Tea Party: Wrong for America.

    by ehstronghold on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 06:46:13 PM PDT

  •  Sad news out of Michigan (5+ / 0-)

    The AG just ruled that the proposed ballot initiative to put the right to collective bargain into the Michigan Constituion was "too complicated" to be put to a vote and so it does not qualify for the ballot.  This will be appealled to the Michigan Supreme Court, but this is really bad news for the initative.  http://in.reuters.com/...

  •  personal note (9+ / 0-)

    today was my first day of my first orientation for law school.  Although I'll finally have regular internet access again, don't expect me to be back to my peak level of activity here anytime soon.

    Lewis & Clark Law class of 2015

    by James Allen on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:36:41 PM PDT

    •  1A? Free Time? Law School? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, MichaelNY

      Lots more people here more qualified than I to answer that question.

      I do wish you all the best in your studies, and won't expect to see you much here at least until you get the "hang" of things.

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

      by tietack on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 10:46:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Good Luck (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, James Allen

      I look back on my first year in law school with dread, especially with my evil torts professor and the crazy legal writing instructor. They try not to give you much free time to do much of anything the first year.

      "So there's a time for silence, and there's a time for waiting your turn. But if you know how you feel, and you so clearly know what you need to say, you'll know it. I don't think you should wait. I think you should speak now." -Taylor Swift

      by SouthernINDem on Tue Aug 07, 2012 at 12:58:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oregon: Gordon Smith said "Goodbye" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, bumiputera

    and thank you to Oregon Republicans 2 years ago, as he has no plans to run for office again.

    Lewis & Clark Law class of 2015

    by James Allen on Mon Aug 06, 2012 at 11:39:23 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site