Two developments yesterday may have a profound impact on the Arizona Senate race in 2010. The news broke that McCain will likely seek reelection and Eric Holder has emerged as the front-runner for Attorney General in the Obama administration. It was rumored that Napolitano was under consideration for this job. Of course, Napolitano could still be tapped for another position within the administration, but let's speculate a little about 2010, shall we?
Also, the op-ed columns are full of opinions on Hillary Clinton this morning while Politico reports she may turn down a Secretary of State offer.
And, Palin faces yet another ethics complaint up in Alaska.
The AP is reporting that McCain will be running for reelection in 2010:
McCain decided Tuesday night to set up a political action committee, a step toward running for a fifth Senate term in 2010, an aide told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the decision had not yet been made public.
Come on Napolitano! She is probably the only Democrat that can beat him and I would work my little butt off for her. A Daily Kos poll conducted at the end of October had Napolitano beating McCain in the hypothethical match-up. If McCain is starting to plan for 2010, we should too! This could be a very sweet Senate pick-up. Of course, Napolitano could still be in the running for another spot in Obama's administration but it is looking less likely now that Holder is considered the front-runner for Attorney General.
::::::
Evan Brown at PolitickerAZ.com agrees that a Napolitano-McCain contest would be a tough fight:
If the race does end up between Gov. Napolitano and Sen. McCain, Kenney predicts it will be a tough fight.
"The dynamics are interesting," he said. "If she decides to run it'll be an extremely intense race - very expensive for both of them."
"[McCain] will have to decide - he'd have to start raising money and hit the campaign trail soon," said Kenney, prior to the news McCain is planning to do just that. However, he noted, so would Napolitano.
::::::
The American Prospect had a very informative story on Napolitano back in July if you are interested in learning more about the Arizona Governor.
::::::
Napolitano was at one time rumored to be in consideration for Attorney General. However, reporting yesterday and this morning indicates that Eric Holder may be at the top of the list for that position. John Nichols at the Nation lists various reasons why he is troubled by Holder's potential appointment- in addition to the Marc Rich pardon:
Appearing on CNN in June, 2002, the former Clinton administration Justice Department aide sounded as if he had just stepped out of the Bush camp: "We're dealing with a different world now. Everybody should remember those pictures that we saw on September the 11th. The World Trade Centers aflame, the pictures of the Pentagon, and any time some petty bureaucrat decides that his or her little piece of turf is being invaded, get rid of that person. Those are the kinds of things we have to do."
If that's unsettling, consider the fact that Holder was part of the legal team that in 2005 developed strategies for securing re-authorization of the Patriot Act.
For reaction to articles like these re: Holder, check out Deoliver47's diary Who is Eric Holder?
::::::
CQPolitics reports that Holder has support among Democratic lawmakers in Washington:
Holder should have support from "both sides of the aisle" in the Senate if Obama nominates him, said Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy , D-Vt.
"The next attorney general will confront many continuing challenges and can do much to restore our commitment to the rule of law," Leahy said. While the transition office did not confirm the reports, Senate Democrats expect whomever Obama nominates to review Justice Department policies and cooperate with congressional oversight.
House Judiciary Democrats also praised Holder. Alabama’s Artur Davis said Holder "is an excellent pick. I think he will be one of the all-stars of the Cabinet."
::::::
Sam Stein interviews Howard Dean and asks him about his next moves after the DNC:
And yet, there are various questions remain unresolved. Foremost is what Dean himself will do next. The rumor mill has him ending up somewhere in the upcoming Obama administration, perhaps as the head of Health and Human Services. "I'm not going to discuss anything related to the transition," he says of the chatter. But after several efforts at rephrasing the question, he offers the slightest indication of what might be -- or at least what he wants to be -- around the corner.
"I'm interested in doing something policy oriented," he says, downplaying another political post. "But please do not put me down as a candidate for one agency or another. Because it is all gossip and it doesn't help at all... That stuff is very harmful to anyone who is looking to get into the administration... The best way you don't get a job is to campaign for it. It's just the way it works. It is a very complicated, subtle way of doing it, which is why I don't talk about it... So don't make more of me saying I'm interested in doing policy because it is going to hurt my chances."
::::::
Speaking of the Obama administration, there is more back and forth speculation about Clinton and the Secretary of State offer. Now Politico is reporting that she may not accept if it is offered:
Clinton, the person said, remains deeply "torn" between the possibility of serving in Obama’s cabinet and remaining in the Senate to "help pass health care and work on a broad range of domestic issues."
That comment jibes with what others close to Clinton have been saying since the Secretary of State chatter began last week: that Clinton is conflicted and the deal far from done, despite screaming headlines in outlets including the U.K.’s Guardian newspaper claiming the offer was made and accepted.
Bloomberg News is also reporting that Clinton's remaining $7.6 million in campaign debt will likely need to be dealt with before she potentially joined an Obama administration.
::::::
The Washington Post Editorial board thinks Clinton would make a good Secretary of State, but argues that Bill Clinton could not continue in his present role at his foundation. While Thomas Friedman thinks Hillary Clinton's relationship with Obama is a much more important factor than her relationship with Bill.
::::::
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reports this morning that Bill Clinton is making some concessions in order to smooth Hillary's path towards the position. The story also echoes Politico's earlier reporting that Clinton is torn, but I doubt Bill Clinton would make these kinds of disclosures unless Hillary was absolutely interested:
Former President Bill Clinton has offered to submit future charitable and business activities to strict ethics reviews if his wife, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, were nominated as secretary of state, according to Democrats familiar with the deliberations. He has also agreed for the first time to disclose many of the previous donors to his efforts.
::::::
Kathleen Parker has an interesting op-ed in the Washington Post about how the GOP has become too beholden to the religious right (ya think?):
Which is to say, the GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. In the process, the party has alienated its non-base constituents, including other people of faith (those who prefer a more private approach to worship), as well as secularists and conservative-leaning Democrats who otherwise might be tempted to cross the aisle.
Here's the deal, 'pubbies: Howard Dean was right.
It isn't that culture doesn't matter. It does. But preaching to the choir produces no converts. And shifting demographics suggest that the Republican Party -- and conservatism with it -- eventually will die out unless religion is returned to the privacy of one's heart where it belongs.
::::::
Sarah Palin faces yet another ethics complaint up in Alaska, according to the Anchorage Daily News.
::::::
Laugh-out-loud quote of the morning, courtesy of Cokie Roberts:
Roberts said Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin could be "the white Oprah" in the near future.
Whaaaat?
::::::
So what's on your mind this morning? It's never too early to start thinking about 2010 - are there any races you are already looking to with interest?