Skip to main content

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

TN-05: I've long believed that wankerish NoLabels-loving conservaDem Jim Cooper has deserved a primary challenge. It's not just his votes but his mouth: He's spent his whole career publicly undermining the Democratic Party, despite sitting in a safe district. (Tennessee's 5th Congressional District went for Obama by a 56-43 margin.) On Tuesday, though, it was his vote that mattered most: He was the only Democrat who said "nay" to $51 billion in vital federal relief funds for the areas ravaged by Hurricane Sandy.

Needless to say, this is an absolute outrage. How could Cooper do such a thing? How could he stand to be such a hypocrite? Less than three years ago, his home state of Tennessee was ravaged by flooding so severe that they were dubbed "1,000-year floods" and even earned their own Wikipedia article. Cooper's own city of Nashville was damaged badly—very badly:

Flooding in downtown Nashville, Tennessee in May 2010
Flooding in downtown Nashville, Tennessee in May 2010
(continue reading below the fold)

Cooper, of course, was a passionate advocate for aid to his beleaguered district, running point on securing federal relief and issuing public statements like this:

"There is a lot of hardship in Nashville," said Congressman Jim Cooper. "A lot of streets, homes, a lot of businesses that are still hurting. We got to make sure everybody gets every penny of help."
And the federal government didn't hesitate to help, ultimately providing almost $613 million in disaster aid to the state. After all, that's what the federal government is for, to step in and help people and businesses recover when nature takes a terrible toll. No one begrudged the city of Nashville and the state of Tennessee one dime.

But oh, Cooper begrudges New York and New Jersey—and how. At $66 billion and counting—not to mention 253 deaths—Sandy is the second costliest hurricane in American history, behind only Katrina. Yet this is how Cooper reacted:

Cooper: The bill wasn't paid for. In fact, it wasn't even partially paid for. Congress really made no effort to pay for even a fracture of it, so it added $50 billion to the deficit. I did support last week $9 billion, free and clear, I did support in this legislation $20-plus billion free and clear, but the extra $30 billion really should have been at least partly paid for. This is consistent with my past votes on deficits and on disaster relief. You should read the Washington Post editorial today. It's excellent, pointing out how Congress regularly fails to handle our emergency responsibilities.

Another thing is, this isn't any regular period in American history here. This is a period of budget crisis, literally. Because America's been officially out of money since the first of the year. So we added to the deficit without even lifting a finger to offset the spending is pretty irresponsible at a time like this. You know, I love New England. My friends up there, if they need help, I voted for tens of billions of help, but to have the full package not even partially offset, it's a new level of congressional spending.

Cooper's views on deficit spending reflect the typical psychosis of what Paul Krugman refers to as the "Very Serious People," but I'm not going to get into the macroeconomics of Cooper's delusions when interest rates are at historic lows. Rather, I'll simply point out that the notion that disaster spending should be "offset"—that is, matched by equivalent spending cuts—is an extreme minority view. How do I know this? Because the GOP tried to enforce exactly this doctrine with a separate vote Tuesday on an amendment sponsored by South Carolina Rep. Mick Mulvaney.

That amendment, however, failed badly: By a 258-162 margin, virtually all Democrats and almost a third of Republicans rejected the notion that disaster aid must be accompanied by cutbacks elsewhere. Of course, Cooper was part of that minority, siding with the likes of Michele Bachmann, Steve Stockman, and Scott DesJarlais, even though he claimed afterward: "I hate voting with the Republicans."

Nothing could be further from the truth, though. Cooper, throughout his career, has made a point of siding with Republicans against major Democratic initiatives. In 1993 and '94, Cooper was a key figure in derailing the Clinton health care reform efforts by claiming that his bogus alternative was "the only bipartisan approach" and trying to gin up sentiment against the White House plan. Sadly, it worked, and Cooper, who always claims to operate out of some high-minded principle, raked in tons of cash from the insurance industry as a result.

More recently, he was one of just 11 Democrats to vote against the stimulus bill in 2009—and it's worth noting that that entire crew (save Cooper and fellow Blue Dog Collin Peterson) are all out of Congress now. But I'm not cherry-picking: These are just two of the more notable examples in this mini-Lieberman's long track record of sabotaging his own party when it mattered most. I could cite many more.

Cooper, a Rhodes Scholar, is obsessed with being a wanker. It's just in his blood. But when translated into action, his instincts lead to callous and cruel outcomes, and they damage the Democratic Party. Cooper may be a well-known and well-connected figure in Nashville (his daddy was governor, after all), but he's not invulnerable. It's long past time we rid ourselves of him. The only question now is, who will step up?


NC-Sen: Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger, who was included in PPP's new North Carolina poll this week as a possible Republican challenger to Sen. Kay Hagan, is being cagey about whether he's actually interested in running. Said Berger on Wednesday: "There have been some folks who have approached me about that, but I'm focused on what we're doing in the General Assembly at this time. I am not running for any other office at this time." Sounds like a classic dodge to me.

WV-Sen: If you're looking for a more in-depth roundup of possible Democratic replacements for retiring Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Rothenberg's Nathan Gonzales has you covered. He doesn't cite any new names but offers a detailed rundown of each of the key figures who are considering bids. Gonzales also takes a look at potential GOP challengers to Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, the lone declared Republican so far, though he comes away skeptical that anyone will jump. (Businessman Bill Maloney "doesn't appear to be initially enthusiastic" after two straight unsuccessful gubernatorial runs.)

And speaking of which, probably the top hope of the Club for Growth, 1st District Rep. David McKinley, told the National Journal's Amy Harder on Tuesday that he "plans to support" Capito, in Harder's words. That means that wingers unsatisfied with the "moderate" Capito are going to have to dig very deep to find a potential standard-bearer. However, Maloney came from out of nowhere to upset establishment choice Betty Ireland in the 2011 special primary for governor (which, as is typically the case in West Virginia, featured very low turnout), so I wouldn't close the books on this one just yet.

Finally, there's a new interview with Dem Rep. Nick Rahall in which he confirms he's "looking at" a Senate run but sounds oddly unenthusiastic. Says Rahall:

You have to have a fire in your belly—you have to have that fire in your belly to take on a statewide race. That's something that perhaps I have lacked in my last couple campaigns in southern West Virginia, but I really feel—I really feel—if, I embark upon this path, that fire will be in my belly.
I find that to be a strange remark. Proverbial "fire in the belly" is like being hungry: You can't make yourself feel hunger—either you are or you aren't. Rahall can spend the next six months on a quest to find that fire, but if it's not there right now, I don't see how it ever will be.


FL-Gov: Whoa. Check out the stink lines coming off of Republican Gov. Rick Scott, according to PPP's first poll of the cycle. His approval rating has sunk to a horrific 33-57 (down from 37-48 in November) and is getting pounded in the head-to-heads versus an array of Democrats:

• 39-53 vs. ex-Gov. Charlie Crist

• 40-47 vs. 2010 nominee Alex Sink

• 39-43 vs. Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio

• 42-44 vs. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz

• 41-37 vs. state Sen. Nan Rich

• 41-37 vs. Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer

Ouch! The important thing is not so much how Scott performs against each potential opponent but rather the fact that he can't clear 42 percent against anyone. Even against unknowns like Dyer and Rich (the only declared candidate so far), Scott's distance to 50%+1 is as long as the Florida coastline. The numbers do still matter, though, and Crist has to find them heartening: His transition to the Democratic Party now seems complete, with an impressive 73-17 favorability rating among Democratic primary voters. That's helping to power him to 49-38 favorables overall, and makes him the only would-be candidate whose name recognition matches Scott's.

It's also why, predictably, Crist leads a hypothetical kitchen-sink primary (not including DWS, who's pretty much said she won't run) by a wide margin:

Crist: 52
Sink: 18
Iorio: 13
Dyer: 4
Rich: 1
Undecided: 12

It looks like the nomination is Crist's for the taking, if he wants it. While he certainly has many flaws as a candidate, Scott's flaws are simply so much greater that Crist winds up stacking up very well. But what if Scott isn't the GOP nominee? Well, we can count our lucky stars that 50 percent of Republican primary voters still want him as their standard bearer, while 40 percent prefer "someone else." Scott won't want to get too comfortable, though: He actually trails ex-Rep. Allen West 38-37 in a fantasy head-to-head (but he leads AG Pam Bondi, whose name rec I'm sure is low, 49-25).

No, I'm not expecting West to issue a primary challenge to Scott, and I don't think Tom Jensen does, either. But the point is that if establishment Republicans decide they need to pitch Scott overboard, they could make it happen, even against his will. Of course, Scott is exceedingly wealthy and could make life hell for his party if, under this scenario, he refuses to go quietly. That's wishing for too much, though. Sure, things can change in two years, but right now, I'd be more than happy for us to take on Rick Scott directly.

P.S. Man, what a jagoff:

Facing a highly critical group of black legislators, Gov. Rick Scott largely defended his record Tuesday but distanced himself from a controversial election law that led to fewer early-voting days and long lines.

Scott agreed with black lawmakers that the 2011 election law contributed to the chaos at the polls in November, including long lines all over the state and up to seven-hour waits in Miami-Dade. But Scott, who is seeking re-election in 2014, said it was largely a decision of the Legislature.

"It was not my bill," Scott said. "We've got to make changes, I agree. ... The Legislature passed it. I didn't have anything to do with passing it."

Jesus. You signed it, schmuckface, and you defended it in court!

MA-Gov: State Sen. Dan Wolf's name has come up as a possible gubernatorial contender before, but now we're hearing from the horse's mouth. Wolf says he is "absolutely thinking about" a run for governor, joining a sizable group of Democrats who say they're potentially interested in the job. Wolf is the founder of a regional airline, Cape Air, which now employs over 1,000 people and has $100 million in annual revenues, so I'm suspecting he has some personal wealth. He also sounds like a bona fide progressive: Check out this op-ed he wrote in support of Elizabeth Warren's Senate campaign, calling her "the real pro-business candidate" and saying of himself: "I didn't 'build' Cape Air alone — many of us built it together." Really good stuff.

ME-Gov: Former Gov. John Baldacci confirms the scuttlebutt: He says he's "thinking about" a run for governor in 2014, against Republican Gov. Paul LePage. Baldacci served two terms before leaving office in 2011 and is now affiliated with the wankerish "Fix the Debt" movement (see Paul Krugman's takedown of this bogus group here).

MN-Gov: Toss another name on the pile of Republicans considering a run against Dem Gov. Mark Dayton: state Sen. Julie Rosen, who says she's "looking into" a gubernatorial bid. Her name came up last year as a potential candidate against Dem Rep. Tim Walz in MN-01, but she did not make the plunge.

NC-Gov: PPP's first batch of North Carolina miscellany in the new year is pretty unremarkable. Newly elected Republican Gov. Pat McCrory starts out with a 45-19 job approval rating, though we'll see where that heads, since his buddies in the GOP-controlled legislature are at a pitiful 16-50.

TX-Gov: New semi-annual fundraising reports are in, and Republican AG Greg Abbott continues to rake in huge dough. In the last six months of 2012, he took in $4.1 million, giving him an eye-popping $18 million cash-on-hand. The man everyone is sure Abbott would like to replace, Gov. Rick Perry, raised pretty well himself, pulling in $3.6 million, but he only has about $6 million in the bank. What I'm curious about is which moneyed interests think there's cheddar they can get out of Abbott that they can't squeeze out of Perry.


FL-18: Things we now know that Allen West won't be doing in 2014: running a rematch against Patrick Murphy, the Dem freshman who beat him in November. (West sent out a statement confirming that on Wednesday.) In a subsequent interview, West also made it clear that he isn't running for anything at all. As for the idea of running in a primary against Rick Scott, he says "That's one of the most asinine things I've ever heard." Instead, he says he has "bigger fish to fry." More likely is West cashing in on his two years of notoriety by joining the right-wing talking-head brigade, something he says he's already taken the first step towards with a new Internet TV program through PJ Media.

So is this good news or bad for Murphy? On the one hand, whoever opposes him will have much less money than West, but on the other hand, they'll also have more discipline and a better reputation. State Sen. Joe Negron is one name that immediately comes to mind (he's the guy who almost succeeded Mark Foley in 2006, and probably would have had he not been penalized by having to run as Mark Foley on the ballot). (David Jarman)

FL-19: Trey Radel is one of the more anonymous freshman of the 113th Congress: He's a 36-year-old conservative talk radio host who won the GOP primary in the dark-red seat left open by Connie Mack (on account of his disastrous Senate bid) with a mere 30 percent plurality, thanks in part to some mystery super PAC spending on his behalf. But right-wing radio host sitting in right-wing district... that's a recipe for crazy, right? Yep, it sure is: Radel, just weeks into his term, is already saying that impeaching Obama "should be on the table." He joins maniac Texas Rep. Steve Stockman, who made similar remarks on Monday, in the impeacher caucus. Please, by all means, keep up the chatter!

SC-01: There have been breathless updates from the right-o-sphere on almost daily basis for the last week that Mark Sanford's entry into the special election race for the vacant 1st was imminent. So, the fact that he made an official announcement on Wednesday morning was certainly not a surprise. Now, the eternal question resurfaces: Is it better to have bad publicity ... or to have no publicity, the problem facing the other little-known state legislators considering the race? Whether he wins may boil down to how many other candidates get into the Republican primary race and split the non-Sanford votes, but then, South Carolina is a runoff state, so he could still wind up losing if he gets forced into a second round against just one not-Sanford who gets social-conservative backing.

Actually, here's one more potential GOP candidate surfacing who's in a similar "bad-publicity > no-publicity" boat: Thomas Ravenel. (RCP's article seems to treat him as a candidate, though he doesn't seem to have progressed beyond the "considering" stage.) On the one hand, Ravenel has a last name that's a dominant one in Low Country politics, and he served briefly as state Treasurer. On the other hand, he had to resign that job after getting indicted on federal cocaine distribution charges, for which he later pled guilty. (David Jarman)

Other Races:

NYC Mayor: As expected, former MTA chief Joe Lhota, who just quit his job in anticipation of a mayoral run under the Republican banner, is getting absolutely creamed in Quinnipiac's new poll:

• 17-62 vs. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn

• 17-57 vs. Public Advocate Bill De Blasio

• 19-55 vs. 2009 nominee Bill Thompson

Lhota is, however, leading a hypothetical GOP primary with 23 percent, versus 9 percent for grocery store magnate John Catsimatidis (who may not run) and diddly for some other weaklings; more than half of registered Republicans are undecided. There's also little motion in the Dem primary compared to two months ago, with Quinn far ahead at 35. DeBlasio, Thompson, and Comptroller John Liu are all bunched between 9 and 11 percent. (Oddly, Quinnipiac insists on referring to him as "William Thompson," which might be artificially depressing his numbers since he's strictly known as "Bill." It'd be like asking about William Clinton's favorables.)

Incidentally, I dug up Quinnipiac's first-ever poll on Mike Bloomberg from 2001 the other week (also mentioned in their Wednesday press release), and the numbers Bloombo faced back then (in May) are amusingly similar to what Lhota's seeing now:

• City Council Speaker Peter Vallone over Bloomberg 58 - 19 percent, with 19 percent undecided;

• Public Advocate Mark Green over Bloomberg 62 - 19 percent, with 16 percent undecided;

• City Comptroller Alan Hevesi over Bloomberg 57 - 20 percent, with 19 percent undecided;

• Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer over Bloomberg 52 - 24 percent, with 19 percent undecided.

Of course, there are a few wee differences between then and now. The 9/11 attacks took place just two months before the election and elevated Rudy Giuliani (whose public image had suffered badly over the prior two years) to a status that is probably unparalleled in American politics, at least for a local official. Rudy's late endorsement, combined with Bloomberg's immense fortune and Mark Green's horrid political skills, allowed Bloomberg to eke out a remarkable 49-47 victory. Suffice it to say, this remarkable confluence of events will not be replicated for Lhota.

Grab Bag:

NRCC: The NRCC put out a list of its seven top targets for 2014 on Wednesday, and I've gotta wonder if they're getting a little lazy, as it's basically a list of the seven Democrats with the reddest congressional districts based on 2012 presidential numbers: Ron Barber, John Barrow, Ann Kirkpatrick, Jim Matheson, Mike McIntyre, Collin Peterson, and Nick Rahall. (I count only two other Dems in districts that Mitt Romney narrowly won, and those are freshmen Patrick Murphy and Pete Gallego.)

Of course, given the ever-steeper decline in ticket-splitting, and the increased segmentation of the nation into top-to-bottom blue and red districts, that may be all they need to do. The only name that surprises me is Peterson, who, despite a 44/54 district, has had no trouble with re-election, even in 2010. Of course, that's had much to do with the quality of his challengers, so maybe the NRCC has someone better in mind who might step up this time. (David Jarman)

Originally posted to Daily Kos Elections on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 05:00 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

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


More Tagging tips:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site