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.

9:01 AM PT: IN-Sen: Hahah:

And that means it's up to people like Sen. Coburn to convince voters that Mourdock's views will change if he gets to Capitol Hill.  "I believe in compromise." said Coburn, "and I believe Richard will compromise in the best interest of our country which ultimately will be in the best interest of Indiana."

Mourdock, meantime, was asked to name a Democrat he could compromise with.  He said he is only familiar with the Democratic leadership.  "And I have to tell ya," he said, "I don't see many ideas coming from their leadership that are the types of ideas we need."  The remaking of Richard Mourdock, it appears, is a work in progress.

9:21 AM PT: MO-Sen: Just two weeks from Tuesday, Republicans will no longer be able to replace Todd Akin on the ballot—and Akin is taking another pass through the media to ensure that the GOP establishment once again hears that he has no intention of dropping out. Once that Sept. 25 deadline comes and goes, Akin is convinced that national Republican money will flow back into his race, and I'd personally be pretty surprised if it didn't. Still, we just need him to hang on for a fortnight—then we can worry about the final stages of this campaign.

10:14 AM PT: FL-Gov: In response to one of those junky StPetePolls.org surveys that circulated on Monday, Democratic pollster Tom Eldon of SEA Polling provided the Miami Herald with some much more legitimate-looking numbers of a hypothetical Democratic gubernatorial primary in 2014. SEA's poll, on behalf of EDGE Communications, finds 2010 nominee Alex Sink at 31 and ex-Gov. Charlie Crist (who still hasn't formally switched to the Democratic Party) at 29. That ludicrous St. Pete poll had Crist crushing... but absolutely zero undecideds.

10:33 AM PT: MT-Gov: Montana is at the forefront of campaign finance transparency, requiring monthly disclosures from its gubernatorial candidates. That keeps us regularly informed about the money race, and so now we know that Republican Rick Hill has outraised Democrat Steve Bullock for the second straight month in a row, $229K to $184K. However, Bullock still maintains a wide lead in the cash-on-hand department, with $783K in the bank versus $437K for Hill.

10:39 AM PT: OH-Sen: PPP finds Dem Sen. Sherrod Brown still comfortably leading Republican Josh Mandel, 48-40. That's a bit tighter than the 47-37 spread they saw in August, but with just two months until election day, Mandel—who has never led in a single public poll—is running out of time to catch up to the incumbent.

10:48 AM PT (David Jarman): WA-Gov: SurveyUSA (on behalf of KING-TV) has another installment in its regular polls of the Washington gubernatorial race. This one is good news for Dem Jay Inslee, who leads 49-44 over GOPer Rob McKenna. That's up from a 3-point lead six weeks ago, and SUSA looks to be right on the money in these two polls, as right in between those two polls came the top 2 primary (with a sample of n > 1,000,000), which Inslee "won" over McKenna by 4 points.

Inslee's better luck in recent months seems based on his now being known just as well as McKenna (41/28 faves for Inslee, 40/26 for McKenna). Also, Inslee seems to have drawn even on the question of who'd be better for education, which seemed to be bedeviling him earlier (McKenan now leads that only 39-38). And while this is the first time SUSA has asked the question, this may be the most important factor of all: on the question "which candidate do you think is more likeable personally," Inslee wins hands-down, 43-30.

There's also a slew of downballot data: Dem incumbent Maria Cantwell is having no trouble with the Senate race, leading Michael Baumgartner 54-38, and in the open Attorney General's race, Dem Bob Ferguson is opening a solid lead, 42-33, over GOPer Reagan Dunn. The referendum that would allow same-sex marriage in Washington is passing 56-38, while the initiative that would legalize and regulate marijuana is even more popular, passing 57-34. The only trouble spots are that an initiative allowing charter schools is on track to pass, 52-26, and the every-two-years-like-clockwork Tim Eyman initiative to require a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes is also passing, 58-21 (though it will likely get struck down by the courts just like its predecessors).

11:01 AM PT: OH Redistricting: PPP's new Ohio poll also has some unfortunate news for backers of a ballot measure that would create a new redistricting commission for the state. Tom Jensen explains:

Republicans knew what they were doing with the ballot wording for the Ohio redistricting referendum. Last month we found voters in the state supported an independent redistricting commission by a 37/24 margin. But with the official ballot language, which frames the commission as "removing the authority of elected representatives" and giving it to appointed officials, only 33% of voters now say they support the amendment to 38% who are opposed.
That's why supporters have gone to court to try to force election officials to change the ballot language.

11:01 AM PT (David Jarman): The airwaves in Washington's gubernatorial race are also going to get even busier: both sides just made big additions to their ad reservations for the closing months. The DGA-backed Our Washington PAC has made another $2.8 million in reservations, up to a $5 million total, while the RGA also put in another $1.2 million, for a total of $5.2 million.

11:47 AM PT: WI-01: Huh, wow. Paul Ryan is going on the air Wednesday... in his House district. As the AP puts it, he's asking "voters to elect him to an eighth House term he hopes to never serve." Two thoughts: First, and most obviously, Ryan's evidently making sure his backup plan is in place—which is not an optimistic statement about the Romney-Ryan ticket's chances. Secondly, does this mean Ryan is actually taking the threat from Democrat Rob Zerban seriously? Zerban's run an energetic campaign and his fundraising's been decent, but beating Ryan (who has over $5 mil in the bank) was always going to be incredibly difficult. Still, the fact that Ryan seems to be worrying at all is quite remarkable.

12:18 PM PT: AZ-Sen: A new League of Conservation Voters poll from PPP has remarkably good numbers for Democrat Rich Carmona: He trails GOP Rep. Jeff Flake by just a single point, 44-43. That's much tighter than the presidential race, where Romney is handily beating Obama, 53-44. The question is, is Carmona out-performing Obama, or is Flake just underperforming Romney? If the former, then we might have a potential upset on our hands. If the latter, then I'd expect Romney to drag Flake over the finish line. I'd also like to see some other polling here, since this is actually the first survey of the race since late July (and that poll was also from PPP, albeit using their registered voter model).

12:54 PM PT (David Jarman): MA-Sen: Local polling outfit Kimball Consulting turned some heads with its late-August poll of the Massachusetts Senate race, which put Elizabeth Warren down by 6 and, hot on the heels of PPP's sample that gave Scott Brown a similar-sized lead, led to the sudden emergence of the "OMGZ, Elizabeth Warren = Martha Coakley!!" meme. Well, Kimball is back with another poll, and now they find the race back to the same equilibrium where it's been all year, with Brown at 46, Warren at 45. They ascribe that to a convention bounce, since Warren did a star turn there and also they find a similar 5-point jump for Barack Obama vis-a-vis Mitt Romney (now leading 56-40). That's quite possible, but I think it's just as possible that there really was no August drop for Warren in the first place, that Kimball and PPP both got bad bounces of the polling ball at the same time, and the race is just as deadlocked now as it's always been. (More support for that idea: their favorables are near-identical, with Warren at 55% and Brown at 54%.)

1:07 PM PT: Primary Previews: Tonight we wrap up the federal primary season, with contests in three states: Delaware, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. (New York is holding state and local primaries on Thursday.) There are only two races of note:

NH-Gov (D & R): Two Democratic former state senators are vying to succeed Gov. John Lynch, who decided to retire after four two-year terms in office: Maggie Hassan and Jackie Cilley. Hassan is the establishment pick and also has the backing of EMILY's list (even though her opponent is also a pro-choice woman). Cilley, meanwhile, seems to have captured the enthusiasm of the party's activist base. The defining issue of the campaign has been New Hampshire's notorious anti-tax "pledge," where politicians are hectored into promising never to institute a broad-based income or sales tax. Hassan dutifully took the pledge while Cilley pointedly refused to, saying that she doesn't support new taxes but wants to be able to have an "adult conversation" about how the state's funding needs are met. Hassan's raised and spent far more than Cilley, but the only recent public poll (taken a few weeks ago) showed her with just a 30-24 edge, meaning tons of undecideds. If motivated progressives show up for Cilley, she could pull off the upset.

On the GOP side, attorney Ovide Lamontagne, who once ran for governor in 1996 and, more famously, for Senate in 2010, managed to completely make over his image in just a single cycle, from rabble-rousing teabagger to consummate insider. So total was his transformation that he succeeded in keeping out any other establishment types, though he did draw an opponent in the form of conservative activist Kevin Smith. While Smith might be keeping the flame of true conservatism alive, Lamontagne's swamped him in fundraising and polling has showed him with big leads.

RI-01 (D): Shortly after Rep. David Cicilline took office in 2011, reports began emerging that he had concealed the dire state of Providence's finances, the city he was mayor of for eight years before heading to Congress. Cicilline's poll numbers began to dive, inspiring much talk of a possible primary challenge. In the end, the only guy who showed up was businessman Anthony Gemma, a self-described "conservative Democrat" and all-around weirdo who's run a deeply strange campaign this time around, replete with unsubstantiated, lunatic charges against Cicilline over things like dead voters getting resurrected. I'm not inclined to trust the horserace polling we've seen here, though for what it's worth, the last survey showed Cicilline up. And I do expect he'll win, given Gemma's unappealing profile and the fact that the entire establishment has rallied around the incumbent. The winner will face former state police superintendent Brendan Doherty in November.

1:36 PM PT: New York: Even after a federal judge ruled that New York must conduct federal primaries in June to comply with federal laws concerning when ballots must be mailed to overseas voters, legislators decided to keep state and local primaries in September, increasing voter confusion and undoubtedly decreasing turnout. Oh, but they did move the election in the end—by two whole days, to Thursday, so that it wouldn't coincide with 9/11.

In any event, the primaries are almost upon us, and Politicker's Colin Campbell has an excellent run-down of all the key races, grouped by categories like "The End of the Rainbow" (challenges to Republican legislators who supported gay marriage) and "Indictment Excitement" (it wouldn't be New York politics without the corruption). A must-read for those interested in the Empire State, especially if you're following the contest for control of the up-for-grabs state Senate.

2:11 PM PT: MD-06: Apparently, GOP Rep. Roscoe Bartlett's been on this Holocaust kick for a while. A day before making his now-infamous remarks that put student loans on the road to the Holocaust, there was this:

"If you can ignore the Constitution to do what you consider good things today, tomorrow you can ignore the Constitution to do bad things," Bartlett said at a Funkstown, Md. town hall meeting. "More than half of our people in this country are of German descent. How in the heck—I know those people! How could the Holocaust have happened? These are the same German bloodlines that represent the biggest ethnic group in our country today. It's just, if you start down a slippery slope, you could end up doing that kind of thing."
I think the amazing thing here is not his repeated invocations of the Holocaust, but that he basically just accused German-Americans of having it in them to pull off another one! (Also, I love that there is a town called "Funkstown.")

3:18 PM PT: Crossroads: Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS is out with four new ads in three Senate races, each backed by substantial buys. In NV-Sen, they attack Shelley Berkley for (accurately) saying GOP Sen. Dean Heller voted to end Medicare while repeating the standard "voted to cut $716 billion from Medicare" crap about her. (Size of the buy: $409K.) In OH-Sen, they awkwardly turn Sen. Sherrod Brown into a quarterback who calls bungled plays. I struggle to understand how being a QB has anything to do with job creation. Unless you get hurt and open up a spot for the second-stringer. (SOTB: $1 mil.)

And finally, there are two spots in VA-Sen. Paul Krugman would love the first one, which attacks Tim Kaine for supporting the bi-partisan budget deal that includes automatic cuts to defense spending—which the narrator says would cost jobs... in the very same breath as he derides the stimulus! (Krugman refers to this as "weaponized Keynesianism.") The second claims Kaine cut education funding as governor. (SOTB: $1 mil.)

3:20 PM PT: Meanwhile, in a new ad of his own, McKenna makes a pretty transparent play for women voters by touting his work as attorney general on matters like domestic violence and stalking.

3:29 PM PT:Ads:

IL-10: GOP Rep. Bob Dold! touts his bipartisanship.

MI-01: The Michigan LCV has a second spot targeting GOP Rep. Dan Benishek as a friend of polluters.

ND-AL: Republican Kevin Cramer says: "We need to grow the economy in America, not strangle it with red tape." This ad is surprisingly un-partisan-ish, though.

3:41 PM PT: ME-Sen: Either the NRSC senses an opportunity, or they're desperate to expand a shrinking map. According to Reid Wilson at The Hotline, national Republicans plan to spend $500K in the Maine Senate race over the next two weeks, though I haven't seen any IE reports or spotted any new ads. That comes on top of $250K spent by a super PAC that's been trying to boost the little-known Democrat, Cynthia Dill, in an effort to pull votes away from leftish-leaning independent Angus King, all in the hopes of ultimately helping Republican Charlie Summers.

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

  •  Thank (10+ / 0-)

    you for finding the list of tax loopholes a Romney/Ryan budget will close! Obviously you have bested the media with your fact finding skills yet again.

    No wonder they call you the Sherlock Holmes of Daily Kos! Maybe we should call you Detective Nir from now on.

    Republicans and the Tea Party: Wrong for America.

    by ehstronghold on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:47:41 AM PDT

  •  What time do we get our fix (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    oceanview, askew, KingofSpades

    of PPP polls? We're getting some national and state polls today right?

    "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 Sep 11, 2012 at 08:48:34 AM PDT

  •  Race Ratings for the presidential election (8+ / 0-)

    Photobucket

    Here are my race ratings for the 8 key battleground states and NE-02, plus Wisconsin where it looks like Republicans are starting to dip their toes in the water.

    If the election were today I think Obama would win everything but NC and NE-02, but I think he'll pull out a squeaker in NC on election day.

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

    by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:49:29 AM PDT

    •  And apparently Indiana NT (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NM Ward Chair
    •  Optimistic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf, KingofSpades

      But certainly plausible.

    •  NE-02 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, sawolf, James Allen

      The last I heard, Obama was down by just 4% in NE-02.

      I wish we had more IN polls than just one Ras poll.

    •  That looks about right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sawolf

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:11:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No lean GOP states? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades

      Aside from NE-02, your map just goes straight from tossup to solid GOP.  I agree with your rankings on North Carolina and Florida as tossups, but I don't think Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri are so far away from those two as to be safe GOP.  If the president wins by 5 or more points (which certainly seems possible the way Romney has run his campaign, and shown in some recent polls), those states will be pretty close.

      Yeah, I know nobody is spending money there at the moment, but that doesn't mean Obama's polling is showing them noncompetitive...simply that they have better targets to focus on at the moment (such as locking down Ohio, Colorado, and Virginia early, and ensuring his re-election).  Arizona in particular I cannot imagine being more than a 4 point race, considering McCain's home-state boost only yielding a 9 point victory in 2008.

      •  I was limiting it at the moment to (0+ / 0-)

        the key 8 battleground states and NE-02 where both campaigns are actually competing (plus Wisconsin).  Yes I don't think the margin will be all that great for Romney in Arizona or Indiana, but they're simply out of play if Obama isn't investing there at all.  Of those key battlegrounds, NC is Romney's best bet, but I don't see why it is Lean R instead of Tossup when there is polling is showing Obama leading and Romney leading and both campaigns are spending a ton of money there.  On the other hand you have states like Iowa and Virginia which are clearly close, but Obama leads in nearly every public poll and given that, I don't see why it isn't at least Lean D.

        The metric I'm using for the presidential race is much tighter in this regard than further downballot races where information is more limited and there is a wider range of competitive races, or at least those where one party is trying to compete.

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

        by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:49:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Also, I think that reflects well on the Obama (0+ / 0-)

          campaign.  They aren't wasting their time and resources pursuing states they don't need to win to get over 270 while the Romney campaign doesn't have that luxury and must compete in pretty much every state they're competing in.

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

          by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:07:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, Obama up 50-44 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bear83, DCCyclone, askew, KingofSpades

    Among likely voters. Not bad.

    I was looking at the Convention numbers and it looks like Castro's speech was more of a flop.

    "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 Sep 11, 2012 at 08:52:09 AM PDT

  •  And here are my ratings for the House (6+ / 0-)

    Photobucket
    (click for larger image)

    I'll do one final diary update (my third) right before the election, but for now I'll just post the map in case anyone wants to look at it.

    Right now I have:
    Safe D - 158
    Likely D - 19
    Lean D - 16
    Tossup - 19
    Lean R - 16
    Likely R - 23
    Safe R - 184

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

    by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:53:50 AM PDT

    •  This is pretty similar (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bear83, SaoMagnifico

      To what I have.  It looks like you have 193 seats going blue outside of the tossup range at the moment, whereas I have 189.  You've narrowed down the tossup range a bit more than I have at this point so you must feel rather strongly about some races that I'm more ehh... on.  

      I don't see hardly any glaring disagreements.  Maybe IA-3 and IN-2 are my biggest, just because I think Steve King and Jackie Walorski are too conservative for those districts and are virtually unelectable.  But that's about it.

      •  So Long As Iowa Is As Close As Polls Continue..... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SLDemocrat

        ....to suggest, both Boswell and Vilsack will be losing.  Vilsack needs outrageously high margins in the eastern part of the district to counter the 25,000+ votes King will yield exclusively out of the northwestern Dutch corner of the state, and without strength at the top of the ticket it's very hard to see how she does it.

      •  IA-04 (0+ / 0-)

        ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

        by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:49:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  193 D - 223 R - 19 Tossups (4+ / 0-)

      So to get to 218 and Speaker Pelosi, Dems must win every Likely D, Lean D, and Tossup, plus peel of 6 Lean Rs.

      Uphill climb. Redistricting sure is weighing down our chances.

      NC-4 (soon to be NC-6) Obama/Biden 2012

      by bear83 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:39:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think we clear 213 (3+ / 0-)

      Maybe 207 at the lowest. A net gain of 15-21 is possible.

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

      by DrPhillips on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:54:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera, R30A

      I got something similar.  Basically, we need to really cut into the lean R category to take the House.  The good news is though, even splitting tossups still yields us a bunch of seats.

      I went through and made gut calls on every race, tallied the results, and Dems came up just five seats short in my predictions.

      •  I basically get +11 to +17 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        when I actually run the numbers.  Several of the races I have as tossup but think Republicans will win are by razor thin margins like NV-03 or CO-02 are those where if I think if we get even a modest wave we should end up flipping them.  Still, it would be much more difficult to get above +20, let alone the +30 to +35 we need to have an actual working majority.

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

        by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:52:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yup (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Davidsfr, askew, bythesea

          +14 is where I stand at the moment.  

          Watch the national ballot though...the pollster.com regression has it at D+2 right now.  If its D+2 on election day, Dems will probably pick up at least 20 seats, and would be very near the majority.  Anything north of D+3 and the House is ours.

    •  in order to win the House (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      supercereal

      we need to win races that we probably won't win.  At least if we win the ones we should, though, then we'll gain a good number of seats.  And if we get a fair map of Ohio, that could give us a shot in 2014 or 2016 to retake the house.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:51:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  And the last one, senate ratings (6+ / 0-)

    Photobucket

    Maine is Safe Angus King, who will more likely than not
    caucus with the Democrats.

    Overall I have us coming out at +1, picking up Maine, Nevada, and Massachusetts, while losing Nebraska and Wisconsin.

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

    by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:57:33 AM PDT

    •  You seem a lot more squishy on your senate ranking (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Zack from the SFV

      You have a LOT of toss-ups compared to your presidential and house rankings.

      •  Yes and no (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Skaje, NM Ward Chair

        On the one hand, we have less information on house races so those tend to have stronger effects of PVI and incumbency, meaning it's easier to put something in the leans category just based on those factors.

        On the other hand, I try to predict rather than project, which is to say I don't care what the election would look like today and instead focus on what it will look like.  Otherwise I'd almost definitely put Wisconsin as Lean R, but the state's light blue lean and Baldwin's huge money advantage keep it as a tossup/tilt R.  However, then there are other states such as Montana where polling has been far too limited excluding Rasmussen and the fact that Tester is the incumbent means he's not disadvantaged right out of the gate.  Similarly is Indiana where polling has been non-existent and if it's still something like 42-42 right before election day I don't see how Donnelly wins when most of the undecideds are Republican leaning.

        I'm also right on the cusp of putting Virginia as Leans D just due to the fundamentals of Obama being Lean D and there are going to be far more rural Romney/Kaine voters than suburban Obama/Allen voters and undervotes, so it becomes impossible for Allen to win if Obama does.

        To address your point in short, I think a lot of that discrepancy has to do with a higher proportion of the senate races up this year are being contested than house races are.

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

        by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:37:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Your reasoning makes sense (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NM Ward Chair, sawolf, JBraden

          The polling has been showing Kaine-Allen just about tied for the whole year.  But it's very hard to see Allen winning if Obama takes the state by at least a few points.

          Similarly, polls have Indiana close, but I suspect the undecideds favor Mourdock.  On the flip side, Massachusetts undecideds will almost assuredly back Warren.  I think a lot of people will be surprised by how easy Warren's victory is in Massachusetts (despite pundits fretting that "Warren can't pull ahead").

          A lot of people are also bumping Wisconsin to lean GOP, ignoring the fact that once the shine wears off of Paul Ryan, the state will deliver a high single digit margin to Obama, and Thompson will struggle to outrun Romney by that much.  He has some cross-party appeal, but he won't have as much as people think he will after the final stretch of this campaign.

          Polls are useful, but making predictions requires a bit more than just looking at the current numbers, as you recognize.

          •  Man, I hope you're right! (0+ / 0-)

            I've been wringing my hands about Warren and about Baldwin for awhile now! (And, yes, the hand-wringing has also wrung my wallet, as I have donated to both, so my worrying is not mere wasted energy).

            29, chick, Jewish, solid progressive, NY-14 currently, FL-22 native, went to school in IL-01. Mitt Romney: the Kama Sutra candidate. There's no position he hasn't tried!

            by The Caped Composer on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:35:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  It's pretty clear Tester is losing in MT, no? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oceanview

      (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

      by TrueBlueDem on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:44:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  pre-emptive Ras MN poll gives (6+ / 0-)

    Republican candidate a 2 point edge over Klobuchar.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:58:02 AM PDT

  •  JOHN DOE ALERT (6+ / 0-)

    Looks like Kelly Rindfleisch tried to use immunity from the 2002 Caucusgate scandal in Wisconsin AGAIN, but failed.

    Link to Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Story

    Joe Lieberman, Mike Madigan, Andrew Cuomo, and Tim Cullen...why are they Democrats?

    by DownstateDemocrat on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:06:21 AM PDT

  •  Ugh (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bear83, Woody

    Haven't seen this come up yet, but our candidate in MD-01 has been forced out due to voter fraud. Local Democrats are nominating a replacement but may not be able to remove Rosen from the ballot. Not that we had much chance here anyway, but still...

  •  State Polls?? (0+ / 0-)

    Has anyone heard any hint about NBC/WSJ or CBS/Quinnipiac going back out into the field for swing state polls? As bad as the national polls have been there has been a real dearth of state level polling this cycle as well.

    2012: It's about the Supreme Court. Follow me on Twitter @farrellmcmanus

    by HarlemUSA on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:48:23 AM PDT

  •  I don't know if thsi is posted elsewhere (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, bear83

    good numbers though

    Minnesota:
    KSTP/SurveyUSA    9/6 - 9/9    LV    4.3    50    40    Obama +10

    last one for reference;
    KSTP/SurveyUSA    7/17 - 7/19    552 LV    4.3    46    40    Obama +6

    Spread:
    52.0    39.5    Obama +12.5

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

    by EcosseNJ on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:58:18 AM PDT

  •  Akin? (0+ / 0-)

    I'm still not sure that Akin really is finished.  I wish we had some polls to show this.

  •  Gallup: Obama 50-44 (11+ / 0-)

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

    by Paleo on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:01:11 AM PDT

  •  WA-GOV: SurveyUSA says Inslee up 5 (6+ / 0-)

    22, male, new CA-18 (home and voting there), new LA-01 (college)

    by Jeff Singer on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:12:23 AM PDT

  •  MO-Sen (6+ / 0-)

    I don't agree with your assessment about Republican money going back to Akin if the deadline comes and goes and he's in.

    The Republicans don't believe he can win, and they very publicly wailed on him after the scandal broke. Why would they waste money on a race with a candidate they believe can't win when it comes down to it (especially given that McCaskill is holding her fire right now and there is just so much ammunition to use against him from members of his own party!)

    Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

    by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:13:23 AM PDT

    •  They've *said* (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8, NM Ward Chair

      they don't believe he can win, which is different from knowing he can't win. Most of what they were saying publicly a few weeks ago was just a massive influence campaign to try to drive him out of the race so they could replace him with someone who they believed had a better shot of winning.

      In other words, they clearly think he's a problematic candidate (or else they wouldn't have gone through so much trouble), but they don't know, for sure, that he's a doomed candidate, especially if his opponent has problems connecting with state voters herself.

      I'm sure it will all come down to polling. If internal-party polling shows him within, say, 5 points of Claire, they'll be back in a heartbeat. If it's looking like a blowout, they'll probably stay out.

      •  And they can't take any of it back... (8+ / 0-)

        Outside of what they said about his ability to win, they said a lot of things about Akin that McCaskill will carpet-bomb Akin with when the deadline passes (and the NRSC would have to pretty much bankroll the entirety of Akin's campaign, he's completely broke, he has to brag about raising $200K over the course of 2 months, that's pathetic), they can't afford to dump the kind of money it would take to ensure that Akin can even stay competitive (and I doubt that Karl Rove's group will get involved either, they've made it very clear where they stand).

        Plus, this all ignores the fact that, even without the comments about Akin's ability to win, pretty much every establishment Republican has bashed Akin over this. McCaskill has so much ammunition to use, and by getting involved in the race, it becomes a major campaign issue, not just in Missouri, but for other candidates. There's no way the NRSC is going to touch this on the premise of a somewhat competitive race (and the polling isn't going to be reliable until after the deadline, because that's when McCaskill will go after him).

        Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

        by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:39:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Everything they've said (3+ / 0-)

          will be a goldmine for us down the home stretch (as if we needed more ammunition). That's definitely true.

          But my point is that that doesn't mean they knew he couldn't win when they said those things. They suspected he'd have trouble and wanted to replace him with a safer candidate. (I actually believe they knew he was a flawed candidate even before the rape remark, and just used it as an excuse to try to "undo" the primary.)

          But having said all that, the prospect of a Republican senate will be too big of a carrot for them to ignore, assuming Akin's in striking distance. And the groups that will support him will be dark money anyway (I agree the NRSC would probably stay out). So since the links will be indirect, it would be very hard to turn it into a national campaign issue - that is, any more than it already is.

          •  Nope, I think your wrong on this one (5+ / 0-)

            NMLib is absolutely correct - they won't go back in. It's going to be prohibitively expensive, and Akin being within five points won't be enough. They won't waste money on this race when McCaskill has so much ammunition. You may get a minor player or two in, but the Republican committees and Rove and his dark money will stay far away from this one.

            The other thing going on the Republicans powers-that-be want to "teach a lesson" and draw a line in the sand about this one. Enough with the O'Donnells, the Angles and the Akins.

            So, no, they won't be back.

            (you're right about plenty of other things, however, itskevin)

            •  I like your last line :) (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sapelcovits

              Y'all could be right. And I'd say it's more likely than not that polling will show Akin in a very tough spot, thus discouraging the reentry of the Super PACs. I just believe there's at least a small (though still significant) possibility that Akin's "floor" in polling will be high enough to lure back some dark money players.

            •  One other point (0+ / 0-)

              We've already seen Akin being used as an attack against other Republicans in other races. But not funding him national Republicans can dissociate from him this election and weaken that line of attack.

              28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

              by bumiputera on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:46:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Why would those Republicans say those things...? (0+ / 0-)

            I mean really, if they still believed he could win, why would they say things that would be cannonfodder for Claire McCaskill and greatly reduce his chances of victory to try to force him out of a race (which is something that they had to have known would have been, at best for them, a 50/50 proposition) when they could have shut up for a week or two, see how the political winds would blow, and then make a decision.

            Political parties don't just try to overturn a primary based on getting a "more" electable candidate, they have to believe that something happened to disqualify their chosen candidate (otherwise, you get into the clusterfuck that Colorado Republicans got into when they completely panicked over Scott McInnis and let Dan Maes win and then tried to rally behind Tom Tancredo).

            Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

            by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:43:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Establishment players could have thought: (0+ / 0-)

              "Based on everything we know about Akin, he's going to be target-rich for McCaskill. Maybe he's got a 35-40% chance of a win, but any other reasonable candidate could bring us up to 75% against this vulnerable incumbent."

              For that kind of upside, they probably figured the onslaught against him a few weeks ago, and all the risks it involved, was worth it. I also think they sensed he was seriously wavering (and for good reason: his public statements were basically timid), and so they piled on to get the result the wanted - and it backfired. At least for now.

              •  I doubt it... (0+ / 0-)

                If they really believed he could still win, they would never have attacked him the way they did, they would have applied a lot of private pressure and maybe had a few strategic leaks (so that they could have plausible deniability later on, just in case it didn't work).

                Plus, doing it the way they did it had always had the potential to do the exact opposite, emboldening him to stay in the race (it clearly did). So even by the logic you're using (which I don't concede) they went about it in a way that made it substantially less likely that he could win, and the Republicans clearly don't believe that Akin can win, if they did, they wouldn't let him continue to be underfunded and very vulnerable to McCaskill's barrage after Sept. 25th.

                Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

                by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:15:07 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  They attacked him . . . (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  itskevin

                  . . . in order to pressure him to quit. Traditionally, the adage goes, "Democrats fall in love, while Republicans fall in line." They expected that if they gave Akin forceful enough marching orders, he would "fall in line" and get out of the way. Looks like the old adage doesn't ring so true anymore, now that the loonies have overtaken the party!

                  29, chick, Jewish, solid progressive, NY-14 currently, FL-22 native, went to school in IL-01. Mitt Romney: the Kama Sutra candidate. There's no position he hasn't tried!

                  by The Caped Composer on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:45:35 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  One minor problem (0+ / 0-)

                  for them at the time was that Todd Akin wasn't taking phone calls. Practically no one, not even Romney, could get through to him. (Ryan, however, did speak with him.) Their only means for pressuring him were through social and traditional media.

                  •  Thinking on this again... (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm just trying to figure out the exact conversation that the Republicans would have had in order to conclude that the nominee (not a candidate in a primary, but their senate nominee) who they thought would be an underdog, but with a very plausible chance of victory should simply be thrown under the bus in as public a manner as possible and without really knowing whether they could force him out or not:

                    (The conversation with Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan,  Karl Rove, and John Cornyn)

                    McConnell: Well gentlemen, we all need to discuss this whole Todd Akin business.

                    Romney: Well, I have no opinion that I can't change my mind about, so I'll just go with consensus.

                    McConnell: Thank you Governor, your leadership never fails to guide us during tough times. Anyways, what do we think the chances of us winning the seat are if Akin stays in?

                    McCain: My friends, I think we can still win the senate seat, it'll be a tough slog, but I think that Akin character still has a fighting chance!

                    Ryan: Yep, McCain's got it right, it'll be a little tough, but Akin still has a good shot.

                    Cornyn: Well, as head of the NRSC, I completely agree with Congressman Ryan and Senator McCain, it'll be tough, but Akin still has a reasonable chance of victory.

                    Rove: I completely agree with this assessment.

                    McConnell: Ok, so we agree, Akin is now an underdog, but can still win this race. So, what do we do now?

                    Rove: Well, there is clearly only one course of action: call Akin, demand that he resigns, and if we can't get in touch with him, denounce him, trash him, and very publicly demand his immediate resignation based on the premise that he's a horrible human being!

                    Coryny: Uh... if we do this, what are the odds that Akin actually exits the race?

                    Rove: Got me. Hey Paul, you're friends with him, will he drop out?

                    Ryan: (awkward silence)

                    McConnell: So... is it even a 50/50 chance that he drops out?

                    Ryan: That's an excellent question, Senator McConnell, a truly excellent question.

                    Rove: Look, I have the math, if Akin stays in, we have a 40% chance of victory in the race, if we force him out and get another candidate in, we have a 70% of victory.

                    McCain: So Karl, if trying to force him out by denouncing him as a person doesn't work, which seems like there's a very good possibility that it won't, what are the odds that we win this seat anyways?

                    Rove: Uh, I don't have the math for that one.

                    Cornyn: That's some math there, Karl.

                    Rove: ...Shut the hell up!

                    McConnell: So I'm assuming that if this doesn't work, we've probably fucked over Akin and ensured that McCaskill will win. Alternatively, we could just let this thing ride out for a week or so, make no comments, or say things like "despite his inartful comments, Congressman Akin has always been a stalwart champion for the pro-life movement, and we shouldn't let one comment define a distinguished individual, should we?" or something like that, the speechwriters can figure it out.

                    Rove: Mr. Leader, that's crazy talk, we need action right now, the only thing we can do is throw Akin under the bus and as hard and as publicly as possible!

                    Romney: I agree with Karl Rove, he does have the math after all.

                    McCain: My friends, I agree with that!

                    Ryan: Let's do it.

                    Cornyn: Let's do this thing.

                    McConnell: Very well, Paul, try to call him, if you can't get through within 30 minutes, we take to the airwaves and destroy him!

                    Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

                    by NMLib on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 09:28:13 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Polls Will Be The Difference..... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lordpet8

      ....if Akin is within five points in polling after the deadline passes, do you really think the Republican establishment will continue to cede the race?

      •  Yes I do... (3+ / 0-)

        They wouldn't have been openly bashing him the way they were (and absolutely not just on electability) and trying to force him out of the race if they didn't believe he was toast.

        I don't get why so many people just want to believe that Akin has any realistic path to victory, the only reason he's not taking a nosedive right now is that McCaskill is holding her fire to prevent him from exiting the race.

        The Republicans can't go half-assed into Missouri either, Akin has no money (and everyone knows it) so they'd have to dump a lot of money into the race, and the Republican establishment already believes that Akin can't win, and like I mentioned in my reply, going into Missouri opens up more problems for other Republicans than just ceding the race and cutting their losses.

        Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

        by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:43:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  NMLib is right (8+ / 0-)

          The NRSC won't go back in.

          Other groups are more likely to consider it, but they'll end up balking.

          The problem they have, and they know they have it, is that their own party's universal abandonment and condemnation of Akin now makes Akin unelectable, even if his original rape comments alone didn't.  These groups know McCaskill is ready to air attack ads on the GOP's own condemnation of Akin as soon as the deadline passes.

          They know Akin can't win and aren't going to waste anymore time on him.

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

          by DCCyclone on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:52:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'm Not Convinced That McCaskill's Ad Assault..... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jncca

          .....will be successful in dissuading anybody who wasn't already rejecting Akin during the week of nonstop beatings he took in the immediate aftermath of the comments.  If Akin is their potential 51st Senator and is behind two points in their internal polls, I really can't imagine the GOP will forfeit.

          •  Gotta agree with you here (0+ / 0-)

            It is a very wild assumption to think McCaskill can re-ignite the outrage that has long since cooled (in no small part due to her completely laying off the subject) simply by running ads. It was a poor decision to let the opportunity pass.

            (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

            by TrueBlueDem on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:47:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No it isn't... (6+ / 0-)

              What will continue to make the ads effective is the fact that she'll have Republicans bashing Akin on film in them.

              McCaskill hasn't been running the ads because she doesn't want Akin dropping out, if his numbers tank too far, there's a very real risk that he'll drop out. But like I mentioned above, Republicans can't take back what they've said about him, and they won't try to backtrack either, they'll sacrifice Akin, because it'll be too damn expensive for them to do otherwise when they have other races to be concerned about (Indiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Montana are all legitimate toss-ups; how much money do they want to divert from those races into a race that they think they can't win).

              Politics and more Formerly DGM on SSP. NM-01, 26 (chairman of the Atheist Caucus)

              by NMLib on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:02:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The money shot... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                KingofSpades, HoosierD42
                ...Republicans can't take back what they've said about him, and they won't try to backtrack either. They'll sacrifice Akin, because it'll be too damn expensive for them to do otherwise when they have other races to be concerned about.  Indiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, North Dakota, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Montana are all legitimate toss-ups. How much money do they want to divert from those races into a race that they think they can't win?
                I hope you'll pardon my editorial reflexes on words not mine.

                The bottom 1% are the most egregious victims of Wall Street's class war. We 99% must not abandon them.

                by NM Ward Chair on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:21:12 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  the only way I see them getting back into (0+ / 0-)

          the race is if somehow Akin manages to pull dead even in the race(which I still think is highly unlikely). At the point it would be foolish not to invest. He would need that sort of polling to prove to the GOP establishment that he can still win.

          "The constitution is a living, moving, vital instrument of government not to be preserved in a museum but to be preserved by a fair and liberal interpretation of its powers as well as a progressive and sane interpretation of its implied powers."-Barkley

          by lordpet8 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:10:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I could see Americans for Prosperity (Koch bros) (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NMLib, DCCyclone, KingofSpades

      spending seriously there, but I agree that the NRSC almost definitely wont and Karl Rove likely wont unless it becomes blatantly obvious that Akin can and will win.

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

      by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:30:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  FWIW, per twitter Nate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, lordpet8

      Thinks that Akin is the best candidate for Republicans to donate to in terms of "bang for buck" for taking back the senate.

  •  Romney's middle east campaign chair weighs in (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SaoMagnifico, bythesea
    Netanyahu took the administration of President Barack Obama to task after Washington rebuffed his own call to set a red line for Tehran's nuclear drive.

    . . . .

    "Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel

    . . . .

    The website of Israel's Haaretz daily newspaper said Netanyahu had carried out "an unprecedented verbal attack on the U.S. government".

    http://www.reuters.com/...

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

    by Paleo on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:16:26 AM PDT

  •  It appears the Reuters/Ipsos tracker will continue (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin

    According to their release from yesterday, when they said on Sunday they were done with the Convention tracker, they meant that phase.

    http://www.ipsos-na.com/...

    Now, it will just become an ongoing 4-day rolling election tracker.

    Does this mean no more Reuters non-tracker phone surveys?

  •  PPP OH Sen: Brown 48-40 (12+ / 0-)

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

    by Paleo on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:39:22 AM PDT

  •  So is MN the only state we lose when (0+ / 0-)

    it comes to the marriage amendment? WA, MD, and ME look good right? I feel like if there is a Bradley effect these days, it might apply to some of these marriage amendments.

  •  Delegates think Mayor Booker... (5+ / 0-)

    Is gearing up to run for governor. Story here.

    But to New Jersey delegates, the biggest takeaway from Booker’s high-profile role at the convention was that it suggested an increasing interest in tackling Christie in 2013. Christie was the GOP convention keynote speaker in Tampa the week previously, though many judged his speech as below par.

    “Every day we got a different flier about [Booker] and his progress in Newark,” said a member of the New Jersey delegation deeply familiar with Garden State politics. “He met with most elected officials one-on-one [in addition to county and special interest delegates]. This includes most of the congressional delegation. Most people think he’s running.”

    Delegates said literature that highlighted Booker and his accomplishments in Newark kept cropping up under the doors of their hotel rooms, adding that they received welcome bags that contained goods, like bread and coffee, produced in Booker’s city—an effort, they believed, designed to underscore Newark’s progress.

    “There’s huge buzz this week around the New Jersey hotel about Mayor Booker,” said Bob Zuckerman, a delegate from Jersey City who is the executive director of a non-profit organization, in an interview last week. “The buzz is that he’s seriously considering challenging Christie. From my perspective, I couldn’t be happier. He’s by far our best chance to unseat the governor.”

    Warning: Politico.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:52:39 AM PDT

  •  Does anyone have some good Maryland maps (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoosierD42

    to post or link to?  I think I might do a "what if" race ratings diary where Democrats pressed every advantage we had, such as drawing an 8-0 or 7-0-1 Maryland or recruiting Stephanie Herseth Sandlin to run in South Dakota for example.  I already have a pretty good 2-2 Arkansas and 2-1 West Virginia map.

    I know there was that one week last year that was all "Oh Mr. Darcy Maryland!" so I'm sure we have some good maps (my only one is a ridiculous find the limits map).

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

    by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:59:44 AM PDT

  •  Sherrod (14+ / 0-)

    Besides Obama, Sherrod Brown is the guy I want the most to return to Washington. He has stuck his neck out time and time again and should be rewarded with another term--glad to see he's beating that spoiled brat Mandel, even with all that dark money thrown at him. I've even donated to him--only one other politician has gotten my money before.

    Here's the thing: why aren't more talking about him for 2016? He's from a major swing state (if not THE Swing State), can talk about economic issues as well as anyone, and profiles extremely well in a Democratic primary. He has been pretty popular even though he has been put through a barrage of negative attacks.

    I was talking to a buddy of mine who works in politics, and he asked me who I want as the Dem nominee and I responded "Brown." To my surprise (and his), his response was also Sherrod. Why not?

    NY-14, DC-AL (College), Former SSPer and incredibly distraught Mets fan.

    by nycyoungin on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:02:41 AM PDT

    •  Here's why I think we aren't talking about him (4+ / 0-)

      1: He won't run

      2: He wouldn't win the primary

      3: Fear that he wouldn't be able to win the general

      Not to say that I necessarily agree or disagree with those reasons, but I think it's pretty clear why we're talking about someone just as liberal in "profile" as Martin O'Malley, yet not Sherrod Brown.  Yes I realize their political coalitions rely on different brands of liberalism, but that's beside the point.

      I don't know how I would feel about a Brown nomination, I would absolutely love him as president no doubt, but compared to our other key swing state possibilities of Mark Warner or John Hickenlooper, I think he probably wouldn't be as strong of a candidate as they would for their respective state.  Anyway, I think it's probably a bit early for 2016 speculation to be quite honest, I mean we're for the most part not (or not trying to be) career political consultants where getting the next big thing depends on which horse we bet on.

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

      by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:23:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Also, if Hillary (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen

        Runs it'll be virtually impossible for anyone to have any breathing room to challenge her. The only person with any shot would be Joe Biden. Brown, O'Malley, Warner, none of these guys have a shot.

        I could certainly see some of them running, hoping maybe they catch lightning in a bottle or more likely they would impress enough to be the VP pick. But I don't see Brown running basically a vanity campaign and I'm not sure he'd even have interest in being the VP.

        •  If Secy. Clinton runs... (7+ / 0-)

          Gov. O'Malley will probably just tilt hard at the veep slot. And he'd probably be the frontrunner for it, with his close ties to both the Clintons and President Obama, as well as his progressive record, executive experience, and slight Southern twang.

          Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

          by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:56:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes if Clinton runs she wins the nomination period (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NM Ward Chair, BeloitDem

            It isn't like 2008 where she wasn't ridiculously popular with Democrats and faced a challenger who was ridiculously strong with a key demographic, 2016 would be like Gore running in 2000 in terms of easily securing the nomination.

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

            by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:05:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're all making Hillary sound like Muskie, '72 (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bumiputera

              While Gore and Mondale won the D nomination from the front, relatively small additional mistakes could have doomed both of their nomination candidacies.

              •  Hillary is far more popular than (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                itskevin

                either of those two were with the party primary electorate.  And for the record I'm not fawning over her, but merely stating she would be an overwhelming favorite to win the primary should she run since she'll:
                A) have overwhelming name rec
                B) have enviable favorables to go along with that name rec
                C) clear the field of potential heavyweights such as Cuomo who have a modest amount of name rec already.
                D) have the institutional support of the Clinton machine which if anything else has been well greased since 2008 with Bill's endorsements and campaigning for Obama.

                Unlike in 2008 I just don't see at this point how she loses the primary in 2016 if she wants to run, no one else comes even close to having the potential stature, institutional support, or grassroots backing to be able to take her on.

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

                by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:31:05 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Yep, he'd pull a Vilsack (eom) (0+ / 0-)

            28, Male, MA-08 (hometown MI-06)

            by bumiputera on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:28:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  He'd certainly be (0+ / 0-)

            A strong candidate for the job. I'm guessing he'd still run and not lay a proverbial glove on Clinton, but try to impress the right people and improve his name ID making him a stronger VP candidate.

            The one wildcard in this is that Hillary would be the most qualified candidate to run for President in a very long time. She doesn't have to operate by the same VP choosing process that others do. She can afford to make a bit more of an outside-the-box choice than most.

            •  She would also be the oldest Democrat... (0+ / 0-)

              To run for president for quite a while, maybe ever. That's a consideration.

              Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

              by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:41:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  but she's a woman (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                James Allen, tietack

                I think most people know that women live longer so I think the fact that she'd be older has less of an impact than if it was a man running

              •  Seems a little odd (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                lordpet8

                To bring up that she'd be the oldest Democrat. I don't mean  to sound too sarcastic, but do Democrats age faster than Republicans? If it wasn't a huge issue for Republicans in 1980, 1984 and 2008 I don't see why it would be a huge issue for us in 2016.

                •  Age would only be an issue in picking VP (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jncca

                  The statement was made that since she had so much experience she could afford to go outside the box.  I don't think that is the case as given her age (she'd be 69 I believe) a case would be made that her VP needed to be ready on day one like it was especially focused on with the McCain pick.  

                  Ie she couldn't go with Mayor Castro, House member or a half term Governor.  

                  I think Mark Warner would be her best VP choice, especially if he runs for and wins the Governorship in 2013.

                  We have a greed with which we have agreed. -Eddie Vedder "Society"

                  by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:03:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Why is Mark Warner (0+ / 0-)

        such a great candidate? He seems popular, but meh he's so boring and a little too conservative for my taste. Why not go for a progressive who has been right on nearly every issue AND have a proven track record in winning in swing territory?

        NY-14, DC-AL (College), Former SSPer and incredibly distraught Mets fan.

        by nycyoungin on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:36:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He's far too boring (0+ / 0-)

          He'd never debate well in a Hillary-less primary and he'd be terrible on the stump.

          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 Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:04:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Pols think of Gary Hart when they see Warner (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bumiputera

          And he was literally, one bad song away from grabbing the nomination from Mondale in '84. (Cue Hart's entry at Hartsfield, using Sherman's "Marching through Georgia", 3 days before the primary, allowing Mondale to survive based on winning white votes in the south).

    •  He might be too liberal (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike

      especially for suburban swing voters due to his stances on economic issues. In particular, I think Florida is at least R+3 if he's the nominee, and he's not great in Virginia or Colorado either. That said, he sells economic populism well, and should be able to lock down the Midwestern and Rust Belt swing states, and probably has good coattails for must-win races like PA-Sen and WI-Sen. If he can make a strong campaign, he'd be a good candidate.

      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 Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:25:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  why aren't more talking about Sherrod for 2016? (3+ / 0-)

      Beats me.  Assuming he's re-elected this cycle I can't imagine why he wouldn't be on the short list for 2016.  

    •  He would be pretty formidable in a general (4+ / 0-)

      No doubt he would outperform Obama with working class whites by a good margin. Does he have that level of ambition, though?

      (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

      by TrueBlueDem on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:57:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I guess that's the question (0+ / 0-)

        I just can't imagine why not. He'd even make a great VP to Hillary if it's totally unacceptable that anyone else be the nominee. I supported Hillary in 2008, but I think we should give someone else a shot to earn it. At least hear out other candidates...

        NY-14, DC-AL (College), Former SSPer and incredibly distraught Mets fan.

        by nycyoungin on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:34:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  In which Sao deconstructs... (9+ / 0-)

    Dan Payne's indictment of Elizabeth Warren's campaign. Story here.

    A preference cascade occurs when you think that you’re the only one who believes something only to discover that lots of people share your view. That’s what’s happening to women and the Warren campaign. In my (small) sample of well-educated Democratic and independent women, they are realizing they’re not alone in being turned off by the Warren campaign. Demographically she’s one of them, but politically she’s losing them.
    Small sample...moving on.
    Close but no cigar. Recent partisan polls show that Brown is up from 1 to 5 points. The Huffington Post, which charts all publicly available polls, shows Brown ahead by less than 4 points.
    We knew this would be a tough race. Warren is clearly still in it.
    It’s no longer early. She may be a rookie but she’s been a candidate for nearly a year.
    This I do agree with.
    Yeah, it’s just like high school. In politics how you dress and act defines you socially. You hear words like “preachy” or “lawyer-like” to describe how she comes across on TV.
    I think this is a bit overblown, but I'm admittedly biased somewhat. I don't have any problem with the way she comes across, though I'd like to see her vary her stump language a bit more. It comes across as inorganic to keep using the "chipped, hammered, and squeezed" combination again and again.
    Lose the granny glasses; they’re 40 years late and add about 10 years to her age on TV. Soften the hair; the Page Boy haircut makes her seem joylessly practical. Coaching can deepen her voice, which grates on some, and make her seem less strident.
    Hmm. Perhaps. I'm no style expert.
    Her vocabulary is coarse in an apparent attempt to avoid sounding like a Harvard professor. Small business owners are “busting their tails,” she says in a new ad. At the convention, she tried to convey toughness, with words like “rigged,” “hammered,” “wrecked” and “corrosive.”
    Hearkens back to what I said earlier. Yeah, the vocabulary is awkward. But Payne seems to want it both ways on this. Should she embrace the professorial, or run away from it? I'm not sure if Warren knows, either.
    Her family is missing. While Brown’s adult daughters and his wife are part of his campaign, Warren’s family is nowhere to be seen.
    Thankfully, this appears to be changing.
    TV spots are the campaign. The bulk of voters don’t go to rallies or follow the campaign in the news. To them TV spots are the campaign. I agree with my GOP sparring partner, Todd Domke, that Brown’s TV spots are much better than hers.
    I think his ads suck, but YMMV.
    Brown’s no moderate. As Barney Frank pointed out, Brown benefits from appearing to be an island of moderation in a sea of right-wing lunacy. Some people in Massachusetts like to think that moderate Republicans are nearly extinct but lucky for us we have one! Brown’s only a moderate when compared to GOP nuts like Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin.
    Yeah, this is totally true.
    Tribal warfare. She and her campaign were unable to shut off questions this spring about her Cherokee heritage and it cost her a month’s worth of news coverage.
    Ugh. Not this again. This didn't seem to have any impact at the time, and I doubt it will be seen as anything but desperate for Sen. Scott Brown to bring it up now. Sure, right-wing outside groups could do it, but...oh wait, the candidates agreed to freeze them out, didn't they?
    It’s not about getting out the vote, it’s about getting voters to like her. Piggybacking on Gov. Deval Patrick’s field organization might add a point or two to her total.
    And Mayor Menino could hopefully get her a point or two more.
    Obama may not be able to save her. Talking to political people, I find nearly all believe Brown will win. Massachusetts voters like to create balance by voting for a candidate of one party for executive office and the other party for the legislative office. Happens all the time.
    Okay, this isn't even true.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:05:34 AM PDT

  •  Re: Ohio Issue 2 (5+ / 0-)

    I don't think people are opposed to taking away the district drawing from the legislature. I think is what people are bothered by:

    It would create a state-funded commission of appointed individuals from a limited pool of applicants to replace the aforementioned.
    Unelected bureaucrats with tax payer funding are never popular.

    NY-14, DC-AL (College), Former SSPer and incredibly distraught Mets fan.

    by nycyoungin on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:10:41 AM PDT

  •  NY 11 - Got a Republican push poll yesterday. (9+ / 0-)

    Ususally I ignore any phone calls where the caller ID says "Utah."  But answered and said what the hell.  And it was some research firm doing political pollig so.. why not.

    It first asked whether I had a positive view of Romney, Obama, Michael Grimm, and Mark Murphy.  They also asked about Paul Ryan (but no Joe Biden) and Nancy Pelosi (but no Boehner)

    it then asked who I was voting for and included the Green party candidate.  Didn't know someone else made the ballot.  It then asked who my SECOND choice was.  So I answered the Green Party candidate.

    It then asked me what I liked best and least about the candidates.  For Grimm I said he was too much of a yes man to the Republican leadership (almost all of Grimm's "independent" stands were him standing with Boehner against the tea partyers.. not actually separating himself from his party).  What I liked most about Grimm was tough.  I said he dressed well.  Which seemed appropriate for an empty seat.  For Murphy (since I had yet to know it was a push poll) I answer for positive he's easy to talk with.  And for negative he's too much of a wishy-washy flip-flopper.

    It also asked which issue I care about most and I said health care.  Staten Island only has two hospitals both of which are in financial trouble.  And if one went under the other would probably be pushed to financial insolvency.  We BADLY need a public city hospital like the rest of NYC.  Something Michael Grimm actually came out against at his 'town hall" meeting saying it would hurt the two troubled private hospitals.  Of course both hospitals violently disagree.  But I digress.

    Then the poll moved into push poll mode.  It asked which statements I "agree" and "disagre" with.  First was Grimm saying we needed to cut taxes to promote growth and then Murphy saying we needed to raise taxes so we can be more "fair."

    The questions were ridiculous but I either said I agreed with the stick man absurd Democratic opinion (telling the person asking that if she is going to ask a ridiculous question I am going to give a ridiculous answer).

    It asked about Paul Ryan's plan to "save" Medicaid.

    It then moved into attack mode asking if certain pieces of information made me less likely to vote for Mark Murphy.  That he was a top aide to a corrupt indicted congressman.  They reason they don't specify this congressman (Murphy briefly had a low level job with Rostenkowski right after graduation) is of course that they want you to think he worked for his father (which he obviously he would've been too young to do).  They also asked about him getting a tax lien in California (somtething I had never heard about before and shows just how far they have to fish to find dirt).

    What I found funny was that the person asking the questions was constantly apologizing for them saying she is required to read whatever they give her.  And having done her job in the past I do sympathize.

    The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

    by Taget on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:17:04 AM PDT

    •  Wow, Staten Island only has two hospitals? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, The Caped Composer, Taget

      my hometown of Greensboro has two and we're just of a third the population of Staten Island, and our county is only about half the size.

      Also, remembering Ron Klein losing to Allen West, if you're talking about tax liens, you're losing. :P

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

      by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If you ever been to Staten Island (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera, NM Ward Chair, Taget

        the transportation their is crap. It very difficult to get to those hospitals if you don't have a car. The only subway line they have call the "SIRT" (Staten Island Rapid Transit) runs simultaneously with the Staten Island Ferry. Every 30 mins and every hour during late nights. And it's one straight line from the northern most neighborhood St. George to the southern most Tottenville, which is across the water from Perth Amboy, NJ. It's not like living in the other boroughs of NYC. Sometimes ppl in call SI the forgotten borough.

        Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

        by BKGyptian89 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:44:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  BKGyptian89 got it right. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jncca, bumiputera

        Staten Island is isolated with high priced $10+ toll bridges on every side.  And traffic is terrible.  Due to mass transit being terrible traffic is terrible.  So unlike in other places it is a lot slower and a lot more cost prohibitive to go to a better hospital.

        Of the two hospitals.  You have Staten Island University Hospital (there is no Staten Island University).  It is a nightmare.  Last time I brought my father there the entire emergency room hallway was overflowing with patients in cots waiting to be admitted or seen.  A friend of mine's mother waited for 16 hours to be admitted with a kidney infection.  My father being sent there by is cardiologist was lucky.  He was admitted.  And the level of health care we received there was horrible.  We checked him out and moved him to the other Staten Island hospital Richmond University Medical Center or RUMC (and of course there is no Richmond Unversity just as there is no Staten Island University)

        The care at RUMC is MUCH better and you can see that they really care.  They also have less resources than the other hospital.  They also have been losing tons of money and have been looking to be bought out.  No one wants them.  Probably because they are further up on the North Shore and they receive more Medicaid patients and patients without health insurance.

        Staten Island has more favorable demographics than any other borough.  And people in Staten Island die from various diseases at a higher rate than any other borough in Staten Island.  Am I saying you can receive better health care being poor in the Bronx than you will being wealthy in Staten Island?  Assuming you do not leave the borough  Absolutely.  Give me Bronx Lebanon, Montefiore, or Saint Barnabas over anything in Staten Island any day of the week.

        The lack of hospital coverage also plays into the lack of doctors in the island.  And if you are on Medicaid and and are looking to see a private doctor?  Good luck.

        The best politicians will throw at us are proposals to build low cost health clinics.  We already have lousy "health clinics" like Clove Lake.  And Mount Sinai is actually looking to build some clinics in Staten Island to vacuum up some cheap medicaid dollars.  The problem goes beyond that and can only be solved with actual real hospitals with real emergency rooms.

        The Grimm said we do not need another hospital does not show he's a stupid clueless Republican (and he is).  A lot of otherwise inflexible Republicans are all for a public city hospital or just about anything that can be done.  They live here.  They know how it is.  Grimm before he ran for office was Mike from Queens.  He has no clue.

        The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

        by Taget on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:00:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NM Ward Chair, Taget

      I guess the best way to neutralize the corruption issue for Grimm is to accuse Murphy of similar corruption.

      "The constitution is a living, moving, vital instrument of government not to be preserved in a museum but to be preserved by a fair and liberal interpretation of its powers as well as a progressive and sane interpretation of its implied powers."-Barkley

      by lordpet8 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:31:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If it's that long (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem, Taget

      is it really a push poll? I always thought those were designed to be short and very quick, in order to reach as many people as possible. Sounds like what you got was more message-testing than anything else.

      People who know more about polls than I: am I right?

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

      by gabjoh on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:44:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The poll portion was short... (0+ / 0-)

        ...and was meant to find out which issues are most important to you.  The loaded questions they did ask were based on part on the answers you gave.  I mentioned health care so I received a lot of health care questions.

        I do think from the way they asked you to say how much a particular statement would influence you that they may have been also doing market research.  Seeing which attack lines are most effective.

        The lady was enchanted and said they ought to see. So they charged her with subversion and made her watch TV -Spirogyra

        by Taget on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:38:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Rep. Paul Ryan launching his own ads... (6+ / 0-)

    For WI-01. Not a show of confidence -- at all. Story here.

    Contracts formalized Tuesday with at least one Milwaukee television station show that Ryan's congressional ads will start airing Wednesday morning and go initially for two weeks. Ryan's congressional campaign manager confirmed that ads defending the seat will run but said additional details would come later.
    Obviously, if Romney wins Wisconsin, Ryan will be reelected. And if Romney wins the election, Ryan won't be serving in the House. So this is really weak-looking about the presidential race on a couple of different levels -- and it suggests WI-01 is close enough that Ryan feels like it's worth putting some effort into that race.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:40:07 AM PDT

  •  Arizona's Senate election virtually tied (14+ / 0-)

    PPP finds 43-44 between Carmona and Rep. Flake in Arizona for the League of Conservation Voters. Story here.

    Romney leads by a rather ridiculous-looking nine points, suggesting if anything this is an overly Republican sample.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:47:01 AM PDT

    •  Room to grow? (7+ / 0-)

      Tweet here.

      Flake has 79% name recognition, Carmona only 50%, but race is still basically tied
      Adjust the poll for toplines more along the lines of R+5 (which is about what I expect) and we're probably looking at C+2 or so. I trust his media team -- I really think they know what they're doing -- and I think his name rec is going to rise significantly by Election Day. I do see this race as a true tossup.

      Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

      by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:49:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  McCain won by around the same margin in 2008 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, NM Ward Chair

      Obama around his 2008 standing.

      My guess is more GOP political climate, particularly in AZ, balances out lack of homestate guy on the ticket.

      I'll be satisfied if Obama can outperform 2008 in this state.

      •  With demographic trends... (12+ / 0-)

        And no Sen. McCain, I would be very surprised if President Obama doesn't outperform 2008 by a few points.

        Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

        by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:53:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed..... (0+ / 0-)

        ....the white vote in Arizona really seems to be consolidated towards the GOP.  I think Romney by 9 seems like a very convincing number in AZ.

        •  facts! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen, supercereal

          In 2008, with the McCain home state effect, Obama got 40% of the white vote in AZ, vs. 43% nationally.

          In 2004, Kerry got 41% of the white vote in AZ, vs. 41% nationally.

          In 1996, Clinton got 41% of the white vote in AZ, vs. 43% nationally.

          So could you give evidence that "the white vote in Arizona seems to be consolidated towards the GOP"? Because I don't see evidence of that here.

          •  Oy....Even The Most Obvious Suppositions..... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jncca

            .....that I posit today don't go unchallenged.  I was basing it on the 2010 exit polls and all the brouhaha over the "papers please" laws that were very popular among non-Latinos in Arizona.  Perhaps that was a one-cycle anomaly but if the polls of 2012 are to believed, it would seem that whites are going stronger for Romney than they were for McCain.

            •  what's obvious about it? (0+ / 0-)

              In 2010, republicans did well everywhere. The Dem candidate in AZ got 36% of the white vote, whereas Dems got 37% of whites in the national House vote. (Sorry I can't find an apples-to-apples comparison, but this is at least consistetn with the tendency of AZ whites to be close to the national average).

              According to 538, Romney is running about even with McCain in AZ, despite running several points ahead of McCain nationally. Which is just what you'd expect given the home state effect.

              Arizona (white) voters have an obnoxious tendency to support racist laws and lawmakers, that's true. But that doesn't mean they're "consolidating" for the GOP. They've voted close to the national average for whites for a long time.

            •  I'm of the belief that the (0+ / 0-)

              Arizona law will polarize the electorate and push the state more towards our favor. From my perspective I'd say it would be similar to prop 187 in CA

              So, if the immediate result of [Gov.] Wilson’s immigrant bashing might have been to inflict grievous losses on Democrats, soon it became apparent that it had also sacrificed Republican prospects among the Latino population, which was (and is) California’s fastest growing demographic sector. Historically, Mexican immigrants were often wary of becoming U.S. citizens, and when they did they were only slightly more likely to vote Democrat than Republican. Many harbored dreams of returning to Mexico to retire.

              But 1994 changed all that. By tarring Latinos as “illegals,” Republicans drove far more legal Mexican immigrants to become not only citizens and voters, but Democrats.

              In this way, the campaign of ’94 destablilized the political establishment. The first temblor to strike came in the state elections of 1996. Latinos went to the polls in unprecedented numbers, helping to return the state assembly to Democratic hands.

              from one of my UC davis professors.

              "The constitution is a living, moving, vital instrument of government not to be preserved in a museum but to be preserved by a fair and liberal interpretation of its powers as well as a progressive and sane interpretation of its implied powers."-Barkley

              by lordpet8 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:26:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Hrm... to move to Tossup/Tilt R or not (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, lordpet8

      that is thy question...

      Seriously though, with multiple polls showing them tied in the low 40s I don't see how Carmona wins (with that sample) since most of the undecideds are going to be Republican leaning, but at the same time his name rec is much lower and he's relatively at parity with Flake on the money front so it isn't as if his floor is also in the low 40s.  Same goes for IN-Sen where polling has been even more sparse.

      I really wish we had more polling here that wasn't PPP, no offense to them, but I just want to see if other pollsters are getting the same high amount of undecideds.

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

      by sawolf on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:02:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  LCV/PPP - AZ Sen: Flake +1 (44-43) (10+ / 0-)

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

    Republican Rep. Jeff Flake holds a 1-point lead over Democrat Richard Carmona, the former U.S. surgeon general, in the poll. Flake draws support from 44 percent of voters; Carmona clocks in at 43 percent.

    The survey, which was shared with POLITICO, was taken by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling and sponsored by the LCV. It tested 993 likely voters between Sept. 7 and 9, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent.

    Also, Romney 53-44, so not an unrealistic sample.
  •  PPP AZ: Romney 53-44 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NM Ward Chair, askew, KingofSpades

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

    by Paleo on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 11:50:49 AM PDT

  •  WI-01: counter argument (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, NM Ward Chair

    Ryan has to spend that money on a House race right? So might as well spend it, and who knows, maybe having him on the air helps the GOP presidential ticket?

    •  WI-1: further counterargument (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, bfen

      Spending money to reelect himself may actually help the ticket in the state.

      I.E.

      1) This is historically a very split, slightly to the GOP, area of the state.

      2) I can't imagine that there will be very many ticket splitters that vote both for Obama and then for Ryan for the House.

      3) Therefore, it makes sense to run up the margin as much as possible to accrue as much benefit in the state as possible because every new voter that is turned out in favor of Ryan for House is likely to be a +1 for Romney/Ryan and every changed mind for Ryan for House is likely to be a +2 for Romney/Ryan as well (where the opposing side loses 1 and the R/R side gains 1).

      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 Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:38:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  17% voted for Bentsen and Bush in TX in '88 (0+ / 0-)

        Bentsen got 60% for Senate, 43% for VP.

        Without Bentsen, I suggest that Dukakis would have gotten 40% in Texas.

        Sure things are more polarized today, but there are still many states where there's a substantial ticket-splitting vote. And I suggest that by '88, TX was as polarized then as WI is today.

        •  Too true (0+ / 0-)

          But I disagree about your conclusion. I think things are massively more polarized in Wisconsin at the moment than they were in Texas at that time.

          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 Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 09:33:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Clinton hitting the trail (8+ / 0-)

    Obviously he's in Florida, and I'd read Ohio was planned, but this gives more on his travel plans:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/...

    The former president was scheduled to follow up appearances in Florida on Tuesday and Wednesday with trips to Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire and Wisconsin. He has also promised to help with fundraising
  •  PA-Gov: A little too early but I like it! (3+ / 0-)

    "Sestak for Governor"

    Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

    by BKGyptian89 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:15:05 PM PDT

  •  State-by-state predictions for president (7+ / 0-)

    Inspired by a few other users.

    Alabama: 37-62
    Alaska: 40-56
    Arizona: 46-51
    Arkansas: 38-61
    California: 62-37
    Colorado: 51-47
    Connecticut: 55-44
    Delaware: 59-41
    Florida: 50-48
    Georgia: 47-53
    Hawaii: 70-30
    Idaho: 34-64
    Illinois: 60-39
    Indiana: 47-53
    Iowa: 52-48
    Kansas: 40-59
    Kentucky: 39-58
    Louisiana: 37-62
    Maine: 57-42
    Maryland: 60-39
    Massachusetts: 57-42
    Michigan: 53-46
    Minnesota: 53-45
    Mississippi: 42-57
    Missouri: 46-53
    Montana: 45-52
    Nebraska: 40-59
    Nevada: 53-44
    New Hampshire: 53-46
    New Jersey: 55-45
    New Mexico: 52-43
    New York: 61-38
    North Carolina: 49-50
    North Dakota: 44-55
    Ohio: 53-47
    Oklahoma: 35-64
    Oregon: 54-43
    Pennsylvania: 54-46
    Rhode Island: 61-38
    South Carolina: 45-55
    South Dakota: 44-55
    Tennessee: 43-56
    Texas: 44-54
    Utah: 30-68
    Vermont: 66-33
    Virginia: 51-47
    Washington: 56-43
    West Virginia: 41-57
    Wisconsin: 52-47
    Wyoming: 31-66

    For an overall Electoral College win of 332-206.

    Keeper of the DKE glossary. Priceless: worth a lot; not for sale.

    by SaoMagnifico on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:40:00 PM PDT

    •  Home State Bump For Romney in MA? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bfen

      Interesting that give Romney the best performance in MA since George H.W. Bush in 1988.  The other state where you're to my right is Louisiana at 62-37 Romney.  Since Obama got only 14% of the white vote there in 2008, I decreed he was close to his existing basement there and went with 60-40 Romney (two-party vote only for mine).

      Outside of that, we're either close in our predictions or you're to my left in a number of states, particularly in the Appalachian belt where I think the bottom falls out for Obama.

    •  Looks about right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bfen

      Your MT, ND, AZ, NV, and IN predictions are good news for our Senate candidates in those states.  But I'd worry about Elizabeth Warren if Obama only wins by 15 in MA.

      I don't think GA will be quite that close.  Obama put some resources in to get to -5 there in 2008.

      I have the same bottom line result: 332-206.  

      White Male, 36, New FL-14 (Castor), proud father of a 4-year-old daughter. "Who let the dogs out? Who? Who?" - Mitt Romney, MLK Day 2008.

      by spiderdem on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:54:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  makes sense (0+ / 0-)

      Most of those look consistent with Obama winning by about 4 nationally. I might give him another point in MO, MI, MN, and maybe WI.

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

      by sacman701 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:08:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think Mitt does that well where (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BeloitDem

      the people know him best.

      ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

      by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:19:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Crazy ass Gravis out with OH and VA polls (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, James Allen, askew

    Shows Obama and Brown ahead in Ohio, by 4 and 6 points respectively.  But Romeny and Allen ahead in VA by 5 each.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...

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

    by Paleo on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 12:45:38 PM PDT

  •  CNN - Obama Job Approval: 51-44 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, KingofSpades, bythesea

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/...

    It was 50-46 a week ago.

    Also, Obama favored to beat Romney in the debates, 59-34.

  •  Prediction for NYC primaries. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, James Allen

    All the "machine"-backed candidates will win.  I have no idea who any of them are, but this is a pretty good rule in general and especially in urban areas that have, well, machines.

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

    by Xenocrypt on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 01:53:48 PM PDT

  •  Romney and Obama (6+ / 0-)

    going up on the air in Wisconsin.

    The Wisconsin air war is heating up fast.

    We reported earlier that Mitt Romney is spending about $361,000 on TV ads there over the next week, to try and move the Democratic-leaning state into his column.

    Now, a source tracking 2012 TV maneuverings tells me the Obama campaign is about to go up big – possibly bigger than Team Romney.

    The Obama campaign is booking seven days of airtime, from Sept. 13 to Sept. 19. Where the Romney campaign has released one ad, Obama has made reservations for three: two 30-second ads and one 60-second ad.

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

    Republicans and the Tea Party: Wrong for America.

    by ehstronghold on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:25:05 PM PDT

    •  Hopefully the 60 second one is a Convention (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, LordMike, SaoMagnifico

      mash-up.  Have Michelle, Mayor Castro, Pres Clinton, VP Biden and Pres Obama speech parts intertwined together.  

      OR have it catered to individual states - Have Michelle, Clinton, Biden and Pres Obama but then have a Baldwin snippet for Wisconsin ad, a Strickland snippet for Ohio ad, a Kaine snippet for Virginia ad etc.  

      In a Politico story last week it mentioned that OFA was going to run the Ohio ad campaign in Wisconsin.  Does Wisconsin have autoplants or feeder plants? Or does that just mean outsourcing/tax shelters and anti-union attacks?

      We have a greed with which we have agreed. -Eddie Vedder "Society"

      by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:35:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  so I guess that settles whether it's (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SaoMagnifico, DCCyclone

      a swing state or not. Still think Obama wins it in the end. But with less of a focus on PA, I guess having to spend in WI isnt that bad.

      •  Doesn't settle that it's a swing state (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32, itskevin, LordMike, bjssp, askew, tietack

        We had this in PA earlier.  If Romney spends, Obama has to do maintenance spending.

        In other words, the situation could be that if Romney spends and Obama does not, then it might become a swing state, so Obama keeps it from being a swing state by doing some counter-spending.

        Romney is so far behind that a lot of money is going to be spent now in states that are not swing states.  They are just states that Romney needs to win if he pulls out a miracle win.

        On the other hand, it could be the one state in the country with a trend toward Romney, so maybe is a swing state now.  The point though is just because they are spending there doesn't mean that it is necessarily very close there.

        Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

        by tommypaine on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:54:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, we did not have this in PA earlier (0+ / 0-)

          Romney never aired general election ads in PA.  He aired ads for the primary in the lead-up to the primary.  OFA's ads were never in response to that, they were an unrelated strategy to keep the state out of reach...they would've aired those ads no matter what.

          Wisconsin is different, the polling really has tightened (I was wrong at the outset of the Ryan pick to think it wouldn't there), and OFA is responding to both the polling and Romney's ad buy.

          It's pretty clear the new movement shows private polling shows the same tightening as Marquette Law in its last poll, and I've seen a couple reports that say the same about private polling.

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

          by DCCyclone on Wed Sep 12, 2012 at 08:53:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Finally!! (6+ / 0-)

      OFA is airing in Wisconsin, was wonderin when they were going to. I think after Priorities USA did it, it was only a matter of time for OFA. And they going to go bigger than team Romney as the article suggest, that good news for Baldwin. Her campaign and outside PAC's comitted to her campaign have been none stop.

      Very Nice! (Borat's voice)

      Moderate Progressive, Born in Cairo, Raised in NY-11, Living in NJ-13.

      by BKGyptian89 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:00:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  MD-06: Another Bartlett Unforced Error (4+ / 0-)

    It was never going to be easy for Roscoe Bartlett to survive the new map. He hasn't had to run a real re-election campaign in years, he has tons of new constituents who don't vote Republican for anything anymore, and he only survived a fractious GOP primary because his opposition was too divided (and Bartlett sounded more reasonable than some of them; I'm almost impressed he waited as long as he did to have his meltdowns.)

    This is a 56% Obama district, which isn't overwhelming but hard to see how he beats Romney's numbers by 6 points after all this.

    Stuck Between Stations : Thoughts from a bottomless pool of useless information.

    by Answer Guy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:35:50 PM PDT

  •  NRSC for ME-Sen? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lordpet8, askew, SaoMagnifico

     Sounds like desperation to me. We don't even need New Jersey to tease Republicans this year! They can be delusional all by themselves.

    http://www.snappac.org/ Students for a New American Politics!

    by redrelic17 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 03:50:56 PM PDT

  •  RI primaries (5+ / 0-)

    if you're interested in getting gay marriage in RI in 2013, you should pay attention to state legislative primaries (especially in the senate). Here is a list of candidates to root for.

    Living in Kyoto-06 (Japan), voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 04:02:59 PM PDT

  •  Or state lege (5+ / 0-)

    Governor Kitzhaber is apparently donating more money to legislators and candidates for the legislature than he did during his 1995-2003 terms as governor.  He's donated money to over two dozen candidates, mostly current legislators, and two, Mark Johnson of Hood River and John Huffman of the Dalles, who are Republicans.  Johnson's district would usually be competitive but the Democratic nominee this year is not.  Kitzhaber donated $500 to Johnson and $250 to Huffman.

    His donations to Democratic state reps are mostly in the hundreds for incumbents with a few exceptions, including Democratic Leader Tina Kotek of Portland who got $5,000 and Rep Betty Komp of Woodburn who got $4,000.  Komp is in one of the districts that was closest in 2010, but retained, the only majority minority district in the state.

    Kitzhaber has also given to a few challengers to Republican freshmen, like Ben Unger (HD29) who he's given $5,000, and Chris Gorsek (HD49) who got $2,000 from the governor.

    Why did he choose the legislators and challengers he did?

    "I'm actively supporting reform-minded legislators," Kitzhaber says.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:08:51 PM PDT

  •  re first amendment to the constitution that was (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, sawolf

    proposed which would have mandated that no representative in congress could represent more than 50,000 people:

    I think I'm going to do a series on this but I don't have any intention of doing every state.  I know at least one person has already done some.  If you'd like me to include a state that you'd like to do, that'd be great.  Just let me know.

    ...better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity, than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference. -FDR, 1936

    by James Allen on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 05:39:54 PM PDT

  •  Here we go with the next controversy (8+ / 0-)
  •  Can we "swift boat" Romney? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, SaoMagnifico

    since this is Politico, cue big grain of salt

    The Kerry-ization of Mitt Romney

    Ironically, it was the Massachusetts senator himself who offered the most biting indictment of Romney on the issue this time around. In what many consider the best speech of his career — and one that displayed humor and timing rarely if ever shown in 2004 — Kerry did to Romney what Republicans did to him: made him sound like a flip-flopping, unpatriotic wimp.

    “No nominee for president should ever fail in the midst of a war to pay tribute to our troops overseas in his acceptance speech,” Kerry said, while pounding Romney for inexperience, naïve understanding of global threats and mixed messages on the Afghanistan war.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site