With the Montana primary approaching, I just received an anti-Baucus push poll that was fairly well disguised as a legitimate poll. It wasn't particularily nasty, but with standard push poll types of questions like "Would you be more or less likely to vote for Baucus if you knew he voted to raise your taxes over 200 times?" Has anyone else in Montana received this call yet?

All I could get from the questioner was that he was calling out of New York and worked for "Central Research."  I don't know if the fact that he had trouble reading the questions had anything to do with the nature of the outfit. Has anyone heard about this?  Is this sufficiently egregious that we should look into it, or has this become standard campaign fare?

More details below...

Holy smokes !

The 10 o'clock news (KECI Channel 13 in Missoula) just had a story that the Republican candidate for the US Senate is a wanted criminal. Apparently Joshua Gannett (sp?) has an outstanding warrant in the state of Indiana. They also reported that he has spent time in the Indiana State Prison.

This will not play well with voters in Montana.

Typical Republican.

This will probably be the last of the MONTHLY installments of the FTP series, as the election is bound to ramp up with the new year. Perhaps this will become a weekly deal. I am sure that by October, it will be a daily installment. For now, brace yourself for a statistical flood, as there were 67 polls released over the course of this month, covering a total of 44 general election contests.

A few caveats, for those new to this particular corner of the community: I only do general election polls in this diary, and I average the polls for the time period (so, yes, a poll from December 1st gets lumped in with a poll from December 29th).

Follow me past the jump for all of the numbers.

And it's official, done under cover of darkness, behind closed doors.

Mr. Bush wielded his pen with no fanfare just before leaving for a visit to Lancaster, Pa. "He’s not going to change his mind," Dana Perino, the chief White House spokeswoman, said this morning just before the president cast only his fourth veto.

The issue is already showing up in campaign ads, like this one for Montana's Max Baucus:

This really will be the gift that keeps on giving all cycle, as Democrats gear up to make it a defining issue in 2008.

That party line, of course, is coming straight from the top, and many observers think it will come back to haunt the entire GOP a year from now. While the bill passed both chambers of Congress with relatively strong bi-partisan support, it failed to get enough votes in the House to override President Bush's veto, which he issued Wednesday morning. Bush insists the expanded program, by raising the income eligibility levels, would draw children away from private insurance plans and act as a first step toward socialized medicine. But Democrats know that ideological debates are no match for pictures of sick children, and they are already training their sights on eight vulnerable Republicans, including Kuhl, who voted against it. "It is a defining vote; it says a lot about people's values and priorities," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat and head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The Democrats' priorities in this instance are abundantly clear — they intend on making as much political hay of the children's health care veto as they can, whether or not they can eventually turn enough Republicans to override it. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has insisted he will continue to send the bill back to Bush's desk without modifying it for wavering Republicans, though House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has left the door open for changes. If the President vetoes the bill a hundred times between now and the 2008 elections the Democrats can portray the GOP as voting against sick poor kids. If the GOP caves, they can declare themselves the champions of children's healthcare and finally have a legislative accomplishment to boast about. Either way, they think they can't lose. "It's our hope that these members of Congress, when they hear from their constituents, that they'll choose children's health," Van Hollen said. "If not, voters will hold them accountable." [...]

Massa, a 48-year old retired naval officer who ran against Kuhl in 2004 on a platform largely about Iraq, said he is now making SCHIP his No. 1 priority. "It is rapidly overcoming Iraq and here's why: people have a hard time finding a solution on Iraq, they just can't. This has a solution — this bill makes sense, it is clear and evident."

Democrats plan on waiting a bit before shooting for the override, apparently into early November. Here is where things stand:

First of all, Democrats have the votes to override the veto in the Senate. So the focus is on the House, where we need 19 new votes to override.

Eight Democrats voted against this bill -- Castor, Kucinich, Etheridge, McIntyre, Boren, Hill, Marshall, Taylor, while Diane Watson voted "present". Watson and at least four of those Democrats are expected to change their votes to override (though we don't know which four). Kucinich needs to quit his "purity troll" crap and vote to override the veto.

And then it's off to the races as pressure is brought to bear on the remaining number of Republicans to flip their votes.

It's amazing that Republicans sought to politicize children's health care, but they chose this battle. Not us. And as they bray and whine about those mean Democrats scoring easy political points off this issue, it's important to note that had Republicans done the right thing from the start (and many did so, let's not forget), this wouldn't be anywhere near the political suicide it has become for the GOP.

Race tracker wiki: MT-Sen

With so much going on in Land Politics, I've decided to start filing semi-regular reports on the issue like I do on the trade issue, since (like the trade issue) few - if any - cover it in a comprehensive way. Land Politics, as I have written many times before, has the potential to break apart the traditional Republican coalition all over America - but only if Democrats seize the opportunity.

Hello dailykos.  I live in South Dakota and am following the SD-Sen race this year.  I hope for this to be one of many diaries about the race.  Join me on the flip for a review of campaign news for the day.

cross-posted at usddems

To read this diary correctly, I have to ask you to work a little harder than you normally do in a diary. I'm not going to explain that much; just note the discrepancy between the words and the links and images over the jump.

Original tags include: patriotism, environmentalism, agriculture, mountain top removal, global warming, food safety, theocracy, bigotry, racism, Hurricane Katrina, tort reform, September 11, working poor, non-proliferation, George W. Bush, John Conyers, MT-Sen, Scooter Libby, domestic spying, Iraq War, Constitution, torture, abortion, Supreme Court, economy, debt, Russ Feingold, healthcare, Murder by Spreadsheet, Federal Marriage Amendment, Kelo v. New London, hate speech, estate tax.

Remember this tirade by the Montana House majority leader?

Well, the leaking of that onto the internet, and its subsequent jump to Montana media, killed Democratic Sen. Max Baucus' strongest potential opponent (after Rep. Denny Rehberg).

Republican Michael Lange, then majority leader of the Montana House, was considered a top contender to challenge five-term Democratic Sen. Max Baucus — until he went off on Schweitzer in a tirade that quickly made its way onto the Internet.

The incident took place on April 25 about an hour after Lange met with Schweitzer to discuss the budget. “I’m pissed off at that S.O.B. on the second floor that thinks he is going to run this state like a dictator,” he told his GOP colleagues in a room that also was occupied by reporters and a television camera.

“My message to the governor is stick it up your a--,” he fumed.

Lange later apologized to the governor and to his colleagues, but the Republican caucus in Montana’s House ousted Lange as majority leader Tuesday after the special session to complete the budget was adjourned.

Other top potential challengers, including Rehberg (who himself should face a spirited Democratic challenge in 2008), have begged off. For a fairly solidly Republican state, the state GOP has a surprisingly weak bench.

On the governor's front, Brian Schweitzer is still looking for a challenger. Republicans may be more apt to challenge Schweitzer, who is less entrenched in the state than the multiple-term Baucus. However, Schweitzer remains one of the nation's most popular governors and a brilliant campaigner who has a long string of accomplishments on which to campaign.

At this rate, the incredibly shrinking Montana GOP may have its hands full merely holding on to their lone House seat than in trying to run impossible races against Baucus and Schweitzer.

Race tracker wiki: MT-Gov MT-Sen MT-AL

UPDATE:  Thanks to Scarce, the video is now posted here.

I need some technical video/youtube help that will help ensure a MT Democratic seat stays blue in 2008.  What I need is for someone (if this is technically possible) to lift the video from where it's hosted on a newspaper site and capture it so that it can be placed onto YouTube for a) wider distribution and b) permanence.

In Montana yesterday, the Republican House Majority Leader raged in front of his caucus and teenage pagesabout Brian Schweitzer.  Among other things, he called Schweitzer an "S.O.B." and screamed he could "Stick it up his ass!  Stick it up his ass!" re: a standard, end-of-session budget negotiation offer.

Here's the latest rankings for Senate '08.

1. (last month: 1) Colorado (OPEN) - Leans Dem pickup

The GOP still has no one running. Are they already giving up? Rep. Mark Udall (D) continues to raise money and quietly position himself as the frontrunner. If Repubs are lucky, this will stay close like the state's last open race in 2004. Equally possible, this is becoming Illinois 2004 all over again, in which the GOP conceded their own seat before campaign season was at its height.

The rest of the races below the fold!

This report coming from the states of South Dakota and Montana shows exactly what friendship and party unity is all about. Max Baucus saw a friend in need and took action.

Seriously, stop crying. He's doing fine:

Former Sen. Conrad Burns, defeated for re-election last year, has a new job at a lobbying firm in Washington.

Burns will work for his former chief of staff, Leo Giacometto, at the firm Gage. Gage has lobbied for various Montana interests and several national technology companies, often making headlines for its connections to Burns and his staff.

The Republican senator’s connections to lobbyists were an issue in his re-election bid as Democratic challenger Jon Tester pounded him on his ties to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Burns had accepted about $150,000 in contributions from Abramoff, his clients and associates. He later gave that money away.

Burns won’t be able to become a lobbyist just yet, as Senate rules prevent former members from lobbying their former colleagues for one year. The Senate is now considering ethics legislation — partly prompted by the Abramoff scandal — that would bump that period to two years.

A release issued by Gage said Burns will be a senior adviser to the firm, focusing on “increasing the firm’s visibility and presence domestically and internationally to provide a greater reach of opportunities for Gage clients.”

The gravy train chugs along.

Race tracker wiki: MT-Sen

Boy, did Elizabeth Dole blow it big time.

As early as last summer, Mehlman signaled he lacked full confidence in Dole's committee. In an unprecedented move, he set up an independent entity to control more than $12 million that the Republican National Committee spent for television advertising in Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri.

Aides at both party committees insisted at the time the decision was a joint one. But Mehlman privately told associates he was frustrated with the Senate campaign committee. His actions contrasted sharply with the battle for control of the House, where the RNC contributed funds to an existing campaign organization rather than create its own.

Frist also wanted an outside check. In an unusual move, he hired a polling firm, The Winston Group, shortly before Labor Day to conduct surveys in six important races.

Based on the results, officials said Frist stepped in to help overhaul Bob Corker's struggling campaign in his home state of Tennessee. Corker ended up beating Democrat Harold Ford Jr. Frist also pushed for a resumption of party-paid advertising in Montana and questioned plans for a multimillion-dollar investment in New Jersey.

This was truly bizarre, and I may have written about it once or twice during those hectic final months of the election -- we were getting polling results from the various Senate races from both the NRSC and the Senate Majority Leader's office. Considering that each poll costs $15-50K, it was a great way to squander money by needlessly duplicating efforts. Or perhaps it was so "needlessly", given that it was ultimately Frist who pulled Bob Corker's balls out of the fire in Tennessee. Dole and her NRSC appeared incapable of righting that ship.

Final fundraising figures show Dole's committee raised $30 million less than the Democratic counterpart headed by Sen. Charles Schumer of New York. Given the disparity, several Republican strategists questioned the decision to spend more than $4 million last fall in New Jersey and $800,000 in Michigan in an unsuccessful attempt to find a weak spot in the Democratic lineup. Democrats won both races by relatively comfortable margins [...]

NRSC officials said the White House and RNC had recommended the late-campaign investment in new Jersey and Michigan [...]

Interesting that Dole is getting all the blame for this one, considering that it was moves that Karl Rove was aggressively promoting. And not just Michigan and New Jersey, but Maryland as well. And while in New Jersey the polling justified the expense (Kean lead for some time), the numbers in Michigan and indigo Blue Maryland never justified the millions Republicans dumped into them. A fraction of that money, spent in either Virginia, Missouri, or Montana would've likely given us a 50-50 Senate.

At the same time, more than a dozen party officials and strategists criticized the steps the committee took — or did not take — in Montana and Virginia in the campaign's final weeks.

Burns and Sen. George Allen lost exceedingly close races — the margin of defeat a fraction of a percentage point. A victory in either one would have left the Senate tied at 50-50, giving Republicans control on Vice President Cheney's ability to break tie votes.

Two more weeks of ads in Montana might have made a difference, said one of many Republicans who expressed anger that Dole's committee aired no television advertisements in Burns' behalf for between Labor Day and Halloween.

In Virginia, Allen and the Senate campaign committee combined were outspent on television advertising in each of the last five weeks by challenger Jim Webb and the Democratic campaign committee, according to internal GOP figures. The gap exceeded $700,000 in the final seven days.

Numerous Republicans also have displayed anger at Bush for the party's election losses, in particular his decision to wait until after the election to replace Donald H. Rumsfeld as defense secretary [...]

At one point, officials said, White House aides wanted Bush to make a late-campaign trip to Missouri. NRSC strategists were opposed, fearing the impact of his low approval ratings. Ultimately, Sen. Jim Talent's campaign aides decided the president should go to strongly Republican areas, but not Kansas City or St. Louis, where surveys showed the president was particularly unpopular.

That Bush visit probably cost Talent his seat.

There's another Dole decision that gets a pass in this lengthy AP report -- the NRSC's decision to go in, guns blazing, on behalf of Lincoln Chafee in the Rhode Island Republican primary. The decision left every battleground state East of the Mississippi River without party staff for 10 days during the summer, which included most of the contested Senate seats this past cycle -- Ohio, Missouri, Tennessee, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and New Jersey. They sunk millions of dollars in Chafee's effort over a popular movement conservative. Not only was the money wasted in an ultimately futile effort, but the move also angered activists and further demoralized an already dejected crowd. Picture the DSCC dumping money into Joe Lieberman's campaign against Ned Lamont in the primary, and you'll understand how they felt.

Dole was a disaster. Bush is a disaster (and always will be). The GOP playbook was a disaster. Candidates like Burns and Allen were disasters. And it's fun seeing them all blame each other.

Race tracker wiki: MT-Sen

I know everybody's been doing it, but call me a late bloomer. Here I go, with my first Senate 2008 diary. THE FIRST.

So, without further ado, let's delve in.

First, it's fair to call the following Senators totally safe so far:

Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama
Ted Stevens, R-Alaska
Larry Craig, R-Idaho
Pat Roberts, R-Kansas
Carl Levin, D-Michigan
Pete Domenici, R-New Mexico
Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island
Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina
Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee
Mike Enzi, R-Wyoming

Read my full Senate rundown below the fold...

Over at MyDD, there's a little discussion going on about the merits of having a primary challenge against Senator Max Baucus (D-MT). It's been noted that he's no friend to Democrats on many domestic issues. You know it's bad when even The New Republic thinks that Baucus is a sellout:

One could point to any number of factors to explain the stunning victory by the Democrats last Tuesday.  A disastrous war, corruption, Rumsfield not resigning two months age, were all important.  Doubtless it was a combination of these factors and more.  

But in my mind, and in my house, it was the contributions of one 19-year-old that was the difference.

And while Americans are justly primarily thankful to the Democratic party candidates who won, it remains also true:

Having gone on at considerable length about the Republican Party War on America, we now reach the momentary denouement: The Republicans have lost.  They lost the House.  They lost the Senate. With the Senate, they lost the ability to install far-right judges.  With Congress, they lost the ability to field ultraright legislation.  In the next two years, there will be no more Patriot Acts.  There will be no more Military Commission Acts.  There will be no more Real ID acts.

I turn to three Senate elections:

Montana:
Tester (D)     198,302 49%
Burns R        195,455 48%
Jones (L)       10,324  3%

Mr. Jones, who gained some publicity a few years ago through contracting argyrosis and turning himself blue, has now done one better: He turned his state blue.  MORE BEYOND THE FOLD

Before reading this diary, please read my last one on Max Baucus -- who is the GOP's number one target to enable Dick Cheney to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate.

Simple question, have you ever read a quote that sums up so perfectly everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party?

As a former Baucus campaign coordinator said, "You can't have a thought until you've taken a poll."

To put that in context, check out what came before in the article: