Skip to main content


Teenage Fanclub -- "Hang On"

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

  •  As always, I'm interested in seeing your maps of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angie in WA State

    a non-partisan/court-drawn or California style commission drawing for most states, in particular Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington. I feel pretty good about the maps I've drawn myself or have seen from others to be able to asses the electoral impact of a California style map in those states, particularly for states such as Tennessee where the change makes no difference, or for Utah where it's obvious Matheson gets a compact Salt Lake County district.

    Would a commission that didn't weigh competitiveness as the Arizona one did have resulted in a loss for our three marginal seats? I really have no idea how to draw the state in a totally non-partisan manner. There are also states such as Colorado which, while being a court-imposed map, still had the two parties present alternatives and it just happened that the Democratic one was chosen.

    •  I think for Colorado (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hankmeister, Stephen Wolf

      a purely independent commission would have probably come up with a fairly similar map to what got chosen.  The Denver suburbs were getting too large to be collected in a single earmuff district, it made sense to let those to the west and north anchor a seat, and those to the east anchor one as well.  Unifying Fort Collins and Boulder also made sense from a COI perspective.  The rest of the state basically draws itself.

      I think an independent commission would have cleaned the lines up a bit though.  That tiny bit of Boulder County dumped in with the eastern half of the state was clearly for Brandon Shaffer (D) who just really wanted to run for Congress, even in an impossible seat (CO-04).  Also, I think they would have put some closer suburbs in with Denver to make population for CO-01, instead of the Ken Caryl area.

      The rest might as well have been an independent commission map.

  •  The Virginia election is the big tell. (3+ / 0-)

    In 2009, Republicans did very well, showing some energy out there for 2010. If Democrats score big in Virginia, then 2014 will be looking pretty good. So those races there are the ones I'm watching most closely.

  •  SC-01 is of big interest (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    and how MA-Sen unfolds.  Also, of course is various NJ races and VA-Gov, the latter of which would have big consequence for the people there.

    "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

    by KingofSpades on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:28:11 PM PDT

  •  Awww... I wanted a poll (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    abgin, MichaelNY

    Sc-01 is clearly a headliner.

    MD-gov for hometown reasons (Im from Baltimore)

    AZ-Gov (could we get a pick up and restore some sanity?  I was sorry to see Napolitano give up this seat.not to mention Jan Brewer is a weeping semi-scabbed lesion of National Politics)

    VA-Gov just because it's local and Cuccenelli is a scary scary man.  Im not 100% in love with Terry but still...  I'd vote for a set of Groucho Marx glasses tied to the top of a mop handle if it kept that assclown out of office.

    NJ-SEN - the country will be a better place with Booker in the Senate.  I hope this happens.

    NC-SEN - NC was a heart-breaker in 2012.  they went hard hard right across the board.  I hope Hagan turns the corner on this.

    MA-SEN - we need Merkley.  Enough said.

    MN-SEN - if someone challenges Al Franken they are, by definition, a douche-nozzle and deserve to be politically destroyed, now and forever.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:30:04 PM PDT

  •  It's early, but for me, the race to watch (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, Gygaxian

    starting now?

    Ohio's 8th District.

    Home of current Speaker of the US House, John Boehner.

    Why?

    John has a challenger.

    I want Andrew Hounshell on the #Orange2Blue program!

    He posted a letter to his campaign website (and it appeared elsewhere, too) telling how he evolved from a Republican to a Democratic Party member running for the US House.

    He has a spectacular personal story, including military service.

    That's the race I'm interested in.

    In addition to WA-03, of course, that's my home district.


    "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"

    by Angie in WA State on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:36:34 PM PDT

    •  Interesting Guy (6+ / 0-)

      He'll also be lucky if he can break 35%.

      The Pragmatic Progressive (IN-4); Economic Left/Right: -7.12; Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

      by AndySonSon on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:40:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hounshell won't come remotely close (9+ / 0-)

      sadly, since John Boehner should be public enemy #1 in the United States given all the harm the House has caused since Republicans took the majority.

      The seat is just too red. Mitt Romney won it by nearly 26 points last year and not a single Democrat won it for any statewide race even in 2006 and 2008 as even ken Blackwell very narrowly beat Ted Strickland in the 2006 gubernatorial election there and nobody else came remotely close. While it's fun to follow races like these because people like Boehner are great boogeymen, I seriously hope you don't contribute money to Hounshell's campaign because it will be flushing money down the toilet. There are plenty of progressive campaigns in far more winnable districts that could use the money.

      •  If we got a constitutional amendment... (0+ / 0-)

        for  independent redistricting passed in 2013/14, is there any fair map which would make Boehner's seat competitive? I don't know his area that well, but it would probably be pretty conservative under fair lines. I also think that if a map drew him out of his normal district, he could move to the most conservative district in the immediate area and force out the Republican incumbent.

        Still, giving a real challenge to Boehner could push him to give in on some high profile issues. I'm hoping that ALG can force a bit more cooperation from McConnell once the race heats up.

    •  Don't even bother (6+ / 0-)

      That's one of the most Republican districts above the Mason Dixon line, so it's really not worth any trouble or money. A candidate like that would be good in OH-10, which isn't an easy district, but is the type that could be in reach in a wave.

      26, Male, CA-26, DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

      by DrPhillips on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 04:50:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Aw, a fellow WA-3 citizen! (0+ / 0-)

      Who would you like to see run?

      Age 25, Republican, WA-03 (represented by wonderful Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler), getting married in September:)

      by KyleinWA on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:15:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  not sure yet. want to see if John Haugen (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        takes another run at Jaime Herrera Beutler.

        you?

        And "hi"!


        "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"

        by Angie in WA State on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:04:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think we'd need someone very popular (3+ / 0-)

          in Clark County in order to win.  

          ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:12:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  A fan of Haugen? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          He actually seems like a good guy to me as a person but he had the worst showing for a Democrat in WA-3 since the 1958 election when Victor Meyers lost to Congressman Russell Mack.

          I do think Democrats would be well served with an outsider though as their nominee. The Democrats do not have a large bench right now with most of their more prominent officeholders fairly new. But I also think Brian Hatfield could be a good nominee for the Dems. Jim Moeller does have a long history of holding office in Vancouver so he is well known in the district's largest city.

          Actually I'm a Republican and have known JHB since she was appointed to the state House, and she is one of my all time favorite politicians so who I want to run already (I assume) is.

          Age 25, Republican, WA-03 (represented by wonderful Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler), getting married in September:)

          by KyleinWA on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:51:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The reason Haugen had a terrible time in 2012 (4+ / 0-)

            was due to a number of things.

            I was his campaign manager for a while, early on (about 2 months).

            1. He told voters, in my presence, that he wouldn't "fight" for them, but look for ways to negotiate, if they elected him. His choice of words hurt him, as the voters misconstrued his words for his intent. What he meant, politically active people can understand. We live in a diametrically opposed political world. John spent decades as a serving Naval officer, buffered from much of the worst of the vitriol which has served as 'politics' since the 1980s. So when he said he wouldn't "fight", he meant he wouldn't get into shouting matches, literally. But what he would do is use his intelligence and knowledge to find a way to get something done, if the voters sent him to D.C.

            But I only know that from meeting and speaking with him, about why he wanted to be a Congressman.

            2. He refused to allow me to go after donations to the campaign, in ways large and small. It was his personal issue, the money in politics, I believe he finds it "icky", to say the least.

            3. He refused to allow me to proceed with online campaigning. He wouldn't even take a free upgrade to the campaign website.

            So he didn't come off as a Democratic standard bearer, and he didn't really have any funds, and no way to acquire volunteers in any significant fashion.

            But as a congressman? I still think he would be a great US Representative for the 3rd District of Washington.

            I've contacted Congresswoman Beutler's office (both DC and local Clark County) a number of times, on a variety of issues. I don't even get back so much as a standard, auto email.

            One thing which bothers me to no end? Her refusal to meet in public arenas with large groups of constituents, but only in "invited coffee klatches" at restaurants without any notice (they don't post the dates or times or places, you only get a phone call if they want to invite you). I know, I've gotten such a call, but it went to voicemail. This annoys the crap out of me, the person who represents me in Congress is basically hiding from me and the rest of the voters who are not Republicans and conservative. It's heinous behavior from a US Rep towards her constituents, so far as I'm concerned.

            Plus, did you know she caved in and now supports that boondoggle of a CRC (columbia river crossing), where they plan to tear down six lanes on two bridge spans --- and replace them with six lanes. And a light rail spur. For about $3 billion dollars. It's the single stupidest waste of taxpayer money for WA State since the WHOOPS scandal of the late 20th century. And Jamie is for it. oops


            "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"

            by Angie in WA State on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:46:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  House of Representatives median district (9+ / 0-)

    it appears that the 218th district by the presidential vote last year was unfortunately Jamie Herrera Beutler's WA-03, which is R+2.8. That's two point fucking eight percent to the right of the nation. That's the mountain we have to climb to reclaim the house. The median district in 2008 was CA-10 at R+2.25, meaning that our problems are only getting worse.

    There were only 195 D+ districts (assuming NY-03 was still D+ which is likely) and 209 Obama districts.

    More than anything about the American political system, it enrages me to no end that Democrats basically won the generic ballot by 2.5% yet only got 201 house seats. Seriously fuck that shit.

  •  IL-Gov: Lisa Madigan filed an A-1 report today (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    itskevin, jj32, MichaelNY, betelgeux

    totaling $740,315.  As David mentioned in the digest today, Pat Quinn raised $550,000.

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

    by JDJase on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:15:12 PM PDT

  •  Mark Pryor SSM (15+ / 0-)

    Holy. Shoot.

    Mark Pryor says he's undecided, which I'm gonna just go ahead and say is code for "I'm personally for it, but my constituents aren't and I can't say until after I win or lose".

    http://www.towleroad.com/...

    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

    by wwmiv on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:29:41 PM PDT

  •  NH-Sen (6+ / 0-)

    Could it be? Could we be so honored, so gifted, so blessed as to have a bonafide Masshole as Jeanne Shaheen's opponent? So empowered as to have the ability to deal Scott Brown his final blow during his fantastic act of carpetbaggery? This could be the best gift since Legitimate Rape guy! Or, it could just be what God intended to happen.

    Barbara Buono for NJ Governor 2013, Terry McAuliffe for VA Governor 2013

    by interstate73 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 05:43:47 PM PDT

    •  Even Stu Rothenberg thinks it's a bad idea... nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      GODSPEED TO THE WISCONSIN FOURTEEN!

      by LordMike on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 06:01:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Rothenberg makes good points (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, abgin, Darth Jeff, MichaelNY, jncca

        about carpetbagging.  It's one thing for a politician with clear skill and appeal who hasn't held office in or is otherwise strongly identified with a particular state to choose to move/register there and run, as Hillary Clinton and Robert F. Kennedy did in New York.  (Of course, HRC and RFK could be identified with Illinois/Arkansas and Massachusetts, respectively, but by the time of their NY Senate bids they were well established figures of national import whose reputations transcended state lines.)

        But in Scott Brown's case, losing an election in one state and deciding to run in another in the next cycle just because he thinks it'll be easier to win there is something else altogether and one that generally doesn't fly with the public.   And Rothenberg points out that the GOP would look ridiculous if they embraced such a move after ridiculing Ashley Judd's near-candidacy in Kentucky.

        If Brown really wants to run in New Hampshire he should move there fully but wait at least a cycle or two so the carpetbagging doesn't look so obvious.  Nonetheless, I'm having trouble figuring out why he would want to do that so soon after passing up another Massachusetts run that clearly was potentially winnable for him, especially in the forthcoming special election.

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

        by Mike in MD on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 06:24:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Pryor "undecided" on marriage equality (6+ / 0-)

    In an interview with local Arkansas news, Pryor was asked about his views on SSM:

     “I would put me down in the undecided category. I did talk with some friends of mine in the gay and lesbian community over the last week or so. We talked about this issue. We also talked about a question I received in the office not too long ago where they asked whether being gay was a choice or whether you were born that way. I told them, I said, ‘Honestly I’ve never really thought a lot about that. Maybe a lot of people think about that. I haven’t spent a lot of time thinking about that. But one of the things I hear from them is they feel very strongly that it’s not a choice for them, and I respect that. I’m not going to dispute that. I appreciate that, and I appreciate their honesty. For a lot of these people they just really open their heart to me and talked about some of the struggles they’ve had over the years with their sexual orientation. I respect that and appreciate their patience, and I appreciate their honesty.”

    More detail is here:
    http://5newsonline.com/...

    •  Mark Pryor is religious (6+ / 0-)

      but hes never been hostile to the LGBT community to my knowledge. If somebody like Bill Nelson can come out for SSM who also is one of the only two senate Dems who are apart of the C Street group, then surely Pryor can. I can't blame him being "undecided" considering he's from Arkansas, than being a hostile no like most of the GOP are.

      He'll come around on this soon. He's a decent man. Bill Halter is a strong supporter for LGBT rights. So I believe Pryor will do the right thing.

      NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

      by BKGyptian89 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 06:06:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Religion is an excuse... (0+ / 0-)

        Really religion has nothing to do with marriage or gay marriage. Hell the bible is bat shit insane on some of the shit it says.
        The real reason people oppose gay marriage is because it destroys the meme that in family matters women and men are not equal. Gay marriage opponents are just trying to deny the reality that male and female are equal and that a family does not need to have a man to protect  the female and the female to be nurturing.

        We only think nothing goes without saying.

        by Hamtree on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:34:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Skaje, MichaelNY, gigantomachyusa

          I don't really think that's why. That's just another explanation that people make to cover up really the base level reason: they just view it as icky and unnatural.

          To them, it is icky, and because that isn't a very good reason they'll justify their position by covering up in alot of hooey phooey ad hoc arguments - which is exactly why none of the arguments that they string together make any sense and change so often (because none of it is really the reason and they don't believe any of the stuff they themselves are saying, really). They're grasping at straws to make the best possible argument they can make and failing miserably at it.

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:58:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  To your point... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, R30A

            There was an awful Erik Erickson column on Red State the other day (that I won't link to) that basically says if we can legalize gay marriage why can't we legalize incest.

            I hate that whole Santorum bs "if we legalize gay marriage people will try to marry their dogs argument." I'm not going to go into the myriad of reasons why this is a stupid argument. I'm just going to question why anyone would make that sort of analogy - unless they were thinking about doing it themselves.

            •  The bestiality and incest arguments fall flat (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, gabjoh

              However the polygamy argument seems to be much more well reasoned and may have legs down the road. Although I haven't heard many people make that one explicitly as a stand-alone issue.

              •  Polygamy (6+ / 0-)

                should be legal as far as I'm concerned. Whatever relationship two or more consenting adults want to have is not for the government to judge.

                •  I agree (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jncca, MichaelNY, gabjoh, kleinburger

                  While polygamy is the last thing on my mind, I agree that it's none of my business if two or more consenting adults want to have a relationship. The tax issue and how to administer wills and other belongings between spouses makes it a lot more complex than gay marriage though. Child custody laws will have to be rewritten and half the IRS will too. It's a lot more complex than gay marriage. That said, it's none of my business and would probably vote for it if those issues got resolved. Ironically, were polygamy to be made legal it would mostly benefit the Mormon extremists in Southern Utah/Northern Arizona who are ardently against gay marriage.

                  21, Male, Latino-Spanish, OK-1 (Tulsa: The Art Deco, Terracotta, and Cultural Gem of Green Country!); Currently studying in Madrid, Spain

                  by gigantomachyusa on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:59:47 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  No (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, dufffbeer

                The polygamy issue is just as bad. Being gay is not a choice, we cannot control who we fall in love with. Therefore the government has not legitimate reason in denying us the opportunity to benefit from the institution of marriage in a way that is consistent with who we are as a person given the level of scrutiny that should apply to the LGBT community (given that we have an immutable characteristic AND are a politically unfavorable group).

                Polygamists choose what they are doing, therefore the government only needs to come up with any rational basis for having laws against multiple marriages. There are many: 1) there is actual scientific evidence that it is harmful to kids (unlike with gay parents), 2) there is legitimate reason to believe that people could use more marriages to cheat on their taxes in some way, defrauding the government out of tax dollars that it could use, 3) polygamy is historically associated with teenage brides, arranged and forced marriages, payments to brides’ fathers, little emphasis on “romantic” love and poor access to education or the work force – which are all designed to restrict the ability of women to choose who they marry - create actual social problems that are hard to remedy and any remedy that could be crafted would have to involve the government in an expensive manner.

                There are others, ofcourse, but that's just a start.

                23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:52:52 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  In other words (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Because the true reason why people don't like teh gayz is because of the "ick" factor, there is no reason which could pass strict scrutiny (which is where the LGBT community should be placed, though the court isn't there yet unfortunately).

                  Whereas, even without considering the "ick" factor of polygamy (I actually don't have a problem with it provided that it doesn't run afoul of 1, 2, and 3 above - but how do we ascertain that and then allow marriage in a non-intrusive way without also running afoul of the equal protection clause?), there are many rational bases for prohibiting it - including the potential for running afoul of the equal protection clause, actually.

                  23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                  by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:56:21 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  But, young wwmiv, (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, gigantomachyusa

                  surely you know that one never chooses whom to love?

                  •  Obviously polygamy falls in the same territory (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY

                    and there is no point pretending it doesn't.  Marriage is a choice. The key difference with polygamy is the legal mechanisms would be different with more than two people involved.

                    In other words, "marriage" is being legally defined as between two people, so all consenting adult two people groupings should be treted the same, except incest -- which does mean that incest couples do not have equal rights.  Which does make the incest argument a valid one to throw in people's faces.

                    Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

                    by tommypaine on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:18:35 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Sure (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY, Chachy, Skaje

                    But the difference here, from a jurisprudence point of view, is that being gay itself is not a choice and thus the arguments against gay marriage have to be very very good to be considered constitutional on equal protection grounds.

                    However, because polygamy by its very nature is a choice - irrespective of the love involved - all the state has to do is show that it has a rational basis, any rational basis whatsoever, to discriminate against polygamists.

                    That's the fundamental difference.

                    And I'd also like to reiterate what I said were my personal feelings on polygamy (which really in this case should be considered polyamory, which is conceptually and intellectually distinct):

                    I actually don't have a problem with it provided that it doesn't run afoul of 1, 2, and 3 above
                    I really don't have a problem with it at all. I actually know someone very close to me who has been in and continues to be in very interesting relationships and I'm totally cool with it. It's fun and interesting.

                    I was simply asserting that there are many avenues in court that a state could take to argue - and very likely win - that it can ban polygamy. Whether or not that is a good thing is totally different. I'm simply stating that polygamists don't have a good constitutional-legal argument to make for their case, irrespective of whether or not they have a good moral argument.

                    Their wins will not come in court, they will have to come through change in public opinion and the following corresponding change in public law.

                    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                    by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:09:43 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  What's the evidence? (5+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Chachy, Skaje, wwmiv, gabjoh, gigantomachyusa
                  there is actual scientific evidence that it is harmful to kids
                  Doesn't that depend on the type of polygamy? The children of the Oneida Community, in which all adults were married to each other and brought their kids up as a community, did remarkably well.

                  Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                  by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:31:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, I think these sorts of arguments are (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY, Skaje, gabjoh

                    as specious as when they are applied to gay marriage. If society changed in such a way that polygamous relationships were normalized, for instance, the experience for children raised in a polygamous environment would surely be different.

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

                    It depends on the type of polygamy, certainly, but in court that isn't going to matter because all the state has to do is provide a rational basis. And this is definitely a rational basis.

                    23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                    by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:10:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  I actually think (6+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jncca, Skaje, MichaelNY, wwmiv, Audrid, gabjoh

                I agree with kleinburger on the polygamy issue, with caveats, but I don't think it works as a slippery slope argument against gay marriage. Because you could just as easily start the argument from the principle of opposite-sex marriage. I.e., "If a man and a woman in a loving relationship can get married, why can't a man and two women, or a woman and two men?" Legalizing gay marriage doesn't change the logic of the argument.

                •  Interesting, never thought of it the other way (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  around, but good point.  As for me, I don't think the government should have marriage at all, only civil unions, with marriage remaining a more religious and private institution.  But I don't have a problem with polygamy.  I'd never do it myself, but to each their own.

                  As for wwmiv's argument that it is harmful to children, surely you'd agree that single parenthood is more harmful to children than having two parents, and being given up for adoption can be harmful as well in terms of psychological effects.  Yet we don't ban those things.  I think polygamy is banned for the "ick" factor as well.

                  20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
                  politicohen.com
                  Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
                  UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

                  by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:14:29 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I knew the Republicans (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY, dufffbeer

                    realized they were losing when I started hearing them talk about that "get government out of marriage" option you mentioned, and just having civil unions for all.  That's been a position I've seen floated for years to avoid a fight on this issue, but Republicans always rejected it, wanting to make sure that opposite-sex unions were always held as more valid than same-sex by law.  Now, after one defeat after another, I see them offering it up as a compromise.  I'm not inclined to accept it.  They put anti-gay ballot initiatives up every two years, demonized and ran against homosexuality in their campaigns, and frankly I'm enjoying rubbing their bigoted faces in it now the tables have turned.

  •  After the last two weeks (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WisJohn, jj32, askew

    With the huge shift towards gay marriage in the political world, I think there is a much bigger opportunity for a social conservative to win the Republican primary in 2016.  Even Rubio said he thinks gay marriage should be decided by the states - as did Rand Paul - and Christie will probably evolve even further by the time 2016 rolls around.

    Santorum/Cuccinelli 2016!

  •  Lautenberg uncertain about when he'll return (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LordMike, MichaelNY, lordpet8

    to the Senate, as he recovers from his various ailments.

    LINK

  •  Kamala Harris (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jj32, MichaelNY, betelgeux

    Since she's been in the news lately, I've been wondering what the future holds for her. Her future is more promising than Newsom's, but her race was the closest in 2010.

    Ideally, I'd like to see her replace Boxer or Feinstein in the Senate whenever either of them retires. Maybe she'd get a shot at a Supreme Court nomination (but her being so opposed to the death penalty may kill her shot at a nomination). I just DON'T want her to be selected to the cabinet.

    •  If her 2014 bid goes well 2010 will be forgotten (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jj32, wwmiv, MichaelNY, jncca, lordpet8

      Obviously if she underperforms in 2014 she may have some problems running for higher office.  But there's nothing like a blow out win to erase the memory of a close shave.

      23, male, CA-18 (home and voting there), LA-01 (college).

      by Jeff Singer on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:12:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think she will run for Senate (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BKGyptian89, GloFish, MichaelNY, betelgeux

      I think it's quite likely we have open races there in 2016 and 2018.

      Both she and Lisa Madigan are mentioned as being on a SCOTUS short list, but I'm skeptical they would be chosen.

      Cant see her getting a cabinet post here, although, I think she might be a good choice to run the agency that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  

      •  I agree that she'll likely run for Senate (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LordMike, MichaelNY, betelgeux

        I've had the same feeling she's going to run for Senate. I too think it's highly likely that this will be Boxer and Feinstein last ride. California will most likely have open Senate seats in 2016 and 2018. I see both Boxer and Feinstien being replace by women, specifically minority women. Since most of the strongest CADems are women.

        So I truly believe the next 2 US Senators from California will be minority women. Harris it's first African-American/South Asian Senator and it's first Latina Senator is either Solis or Loretta Sanchez.

        Gavin Newsom whos already made it known, he will most likely succeed Jerry Brown when he retires in '18 or maybe '14

        NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

        by BKGyptian89 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:29:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Or Judy Chu instead of Solis or Sanchez (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, betelgeux

          I really feel like Harris is practically guaranteed the seat if she runs for it simply because the odds are that the other seat opens up 2 years later and that will be the seat that has the crowded field.

          Sanchez, Sanchez, Solis, Chu, Bass (who is the most likely among the three AA women to run for any statewide post and is certainly the least scandalous - Lee ideologically and Waters ethically - of them) among others are all contenders. My favorite among them is actually Chu, but I'd be happy with any of them.

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:55:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Loretta Sanchez is done (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, Stephen Wolf

          after her comments about the Vietnamese.  Or at least should be done.

          20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
          politicohen.com
          Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
          UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

          by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:19:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What did she say? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gabjoh

            The only thing I've seen is that she was critical of human rights in the country.  Did she say something about Vietnamese people themselves?

            •  All I know of (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KingofSpades

              was in 2010 saying something like "The Vietnamese are after my seat."  Ill-advised but not career-ending, especially since she's won re-election twice since then, including in her new district that includes part of Garden Grove, so I don't think anyone cares anymore.  

              •  They'll care again if she goes statewide (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY

                Considering how many better people we have on our bench (Bera, Chu, Solis, Swalwell, Huffman, and Chiang, for example), there's no reason to settle for someone who has even a hint of controversy.

                20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
                politicohen.com
                Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
                UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

                by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:16:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  A bad move and she has hit her ceiling (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, AussieforObama2ndterm

            but I don't think she's done.

            "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

            by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:16:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  whenever a safe house or senate seat opens up (0+ / 0-)

          I want someone who could realistically hold it for 30+ years so that all the committees will be chaired by dems who won't have to apologize to their constituents for voting on something.

          RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

          by demographicarmageddon on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:54:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I'd love for her to be a SCOTUS justice (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, HoosierD42

      Especially as a replacement for RBG or Breyer.

      (I imagine Obama will want someone more 'moderate' or consensus-builder-y like Merrick Garland of the D.C. Circuit should Kennedy or Scalia step down.)

      Editor, Daily Kos Elections. IL-07.

      by jeffmd on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:14:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  but that will be another vacant seat on that bench (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

        by BKGyptian89 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:33:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It will probably be another appellate court judge (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, OGGoldy

          There are Obama appointees who would be very well qualified, and are relatively young, who were confirmed by lopsided margins.

          My guess is he selects one of them for a Kennedy/Scalia vacancy, and even a Ginsburg vacancy.

          •  I think he has a moderate or two... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, jj32

            In his pocket in case Justice Kennedy or Justice Scalia leave the Court, and a liberal or two in mind for when Justice Ginsburg hangs up the black robes.

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

            by SaoMagnifico on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:22:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  If he gets a chance to appoint Scalia or Kennedy's (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jncca, Skaje, MichaelNY, Stephen Wolf, gabjoh

              replacement, he should chose a liberal not a moderate. Bush didn't appoint any moderates to the bench. His choices were all extreme conservatives. There is zero need for Obama to "balance" his choices.

              President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

              by askew on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 07:20:24 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  He SHOULD choose a liberal, (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                betelgeux

                but president Obama is not a liberal, so why would he?

                •  That's ludicrous (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, askew

                  He was one of the twenty most liberal senators, probably one of the most ten.
                  Other than foreign policy, he has governed as a liberal except when he had to compromise to pass things through Congress, which is nobody's blame but the voters for not putting more liberals into Congress in the first place.

                  20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
                  politicohen.com
                  Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
                  UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

                  by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:17:26 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  He arguably hasn't been all that liberal (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    betelgeux

                    in his policies toward financial manipulators, and certainly not on questions of Executive power (e.g., pervasive domestic spying vs. government secrecy and persecution of whistleblowers).

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:36:31 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Executive power, I agree with you (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      MichaelNY

                      But that's not really a political issue so much as a good government issue.

                      Financial stuff, he did get Dodd-Frank through.  It's not perfect but it's something.  

                      20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
                      politicohen.com
                      Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
                      UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

                      by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:10:22 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  That question might have made more sense (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Skaje

                  before his first two Supreme Court picks. Now, the answer is "because he already picked two liberals for SCOTUS."

                  Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                  by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:37:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Bush didn't get to replace a liberal (0+ / 0-)

                But a hardcore conservative and a right leaning swing vote. I imagine Democrats would likely have at least filibustered Alito if Stevens or Souter had retired at that point.

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

                by conspiracy on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:22:58 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Obama's out of the box appointment was Kagen (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            I think it was a breath of fresh air so to speak that he appointed one non-judge. But if he were to make a habit of appointing non-judges, it might make the establishment and populous uneasy. I suspect any and all remaining SCOTUS appointees he makes will be sitting appeals judges, likely ones he has appointed himself.

      •  None of the current liberals are historically (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, Stephen Wolf

        that liberal. Breyer is downright conservative in some respects.

        Still, replacing Kennedy or Scalia with even a Breyer would have massive practical implications. The present Court is prepared to take Article I power out back with a shotgun. It is one vote away from not doing that.

        Ok, so I read the polls.

        by andgarden on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:36:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm pretty sure no Obama appointee (0+ / 0-)

        will be a white dude.

        25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

        by HoosierD42 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:48:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Harris' future depends on 2014 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      abgin, MichaelNY

      If she manages a standard Dem result, she'd be the fave for Gov or Senate.  If she wildly underperforms again, then she'll be lucky to eve be in contention.

      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

      by tommypaine on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:57:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really don't see her being held (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        to a close win.  2010 was just that...2010.  We almost lost incumbents in 60% Obama districts.  Harris will be fine in 2014.  She'll win by 20 points or even more if the GOP fails to scrounge up a credible opponent, like Steve Cooley was in 2010.

        •  Harris has no 2010 excuse (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Everybody else won easily, including underwhelming Gavin Newsom against a solid candidate.

          Harris underperformed against a solid Republican, when everybody else with solid opponents won by 10%+.

          People assume Harris will do better in 2014.  If she does, then she could go much higher.  If she doesn't perform at a peer level, not only does that hurt her chances of higher office, it hurts her more because a lot of people think "oh, she'll do better."

          Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

          by tommypaine on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:47:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I thought you lived in CA? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, gabjoh

            Didn't she have the issue with that family whose murderer was mishandled by her department?  And Cooley was uncommonly strong, being LA County DA.

            "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

            by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:10:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, I live in CA (0+ / 0-)

              which is why I know there is no reason to point fingers at 2010 in general for Harris' underperformance.

              Not sure what your point is, but Cooley wasn't "uncommonly" strong.  Whitman, Fiorina and Abel all were solid candidates too.

              Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

              by tommypaine on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:34:37 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  LA County DA is pretty damn good for the GOP (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, lordpet8, betelgeux

                and the GOP spent a lot on this: http://blogs.sfweekly.com/...

                "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

                by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:49:04 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You do have a point (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY

                  Jerry Brown surged to a 13% victory despite so much money against him and his alleged "has-been" status.  I guess there's still a fair amount of people in CA who ticket split over law and order and that's why they went for Cooley and almost elected him.

                  "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

                  by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:54:27 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Again, not sure of your point (0+ / 0-)

                  Cooley was a solid candidate, but so was Whitman who spent bajillions, and so was Fiorina who was well known for her business career, as was Maldonado who was the sitting Lt Gov.

                  Cooley was by no means a far tougher candidate than these three.  A bit stronger maybe, way better, no chance, and certainly not by definition 10% of the whole electorate better than the others.

                  2010 was an easy year for statewide Dems in CA, except for Harris.  She was not in the same ballpark as the other folks.  Hopefully in 2014 she will be.

                  Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

                  by tommypaine on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:16:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Abel Maldonado was not strong at all (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MichaelNY, Skaje, lordpet8

                    Incumbency didn't count for shit because he was appointed and people barely knew who he was. Newsom's far superior name recognition (for better or worse) and the state GOP effectively abandoning Maldonado due to his moderate heresies helped do him in.

                    23, D, pragmatic progressive (-4.50, -5.18), CA-14.

                    by kurykh on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:28:00 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  He was relative to Cooley (0+ / 0-)

                      How ever well known Abel was, obviously more people had heard of Maldonado than had heard of Cooley.

                      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

                      by tommypaine on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:23:29 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Obviously...not (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        MichaelNY, Skaje

                        Cooley was a longtime DA in the most populous county in the state. Maldonado was a state senator from the Central Coast. LG is a dead-end, responsibility- and news-free position, while AG is much, much more prominent.

                        Harris was a weaker candidate relative to Newsom, however.

                        23, D, pragmatic progressive (-4.50, -5.18), CA-14.

                        by kurykh on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:05:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

          •  The Death Penalty Issue was a big thing in 2010 (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            honestly most of my peers didn't think she could win in 2010.
            Her stance of the death penalty didn't help in my home county of Riverside where a Cop recently been killed. (One of the attacks against her was that she wouldn't be in favor of the death penalty for Cop killers).  So it was no surprise that she only garnered 36% of the vote there.

            In fact, the occasional victory for the GOP cannot hide the fact that this country is fast heading into another era, not of two-party democracy, but a party-and-a-half system. And the GOP is the half a party- Larry Sabato

            by lordpet8 on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:22:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Has there ever been two senators (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    from the same state with the same name and spelling? I know the last 18 years in Arizona you had Jon and John, but I was just thinking about Debbie and Debbie in Michigan, since  ndrwmls10 brought it up in today's thread.

    NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

    by BKGyptian89 on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 06:54:28 PM PDT

  •  On the Kentucky poll that we will see next week, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    any guesses on the percentage in favor/against SSM in Kentucky? My guess is 38% in favor, 58% against, 4% undecided. The baseline is that the 2004 amendment was 76% for a ban.

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

    by SouthernINDem on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 07:07:55 PM PDT

  •  So uh, Orrin Hatch is in favor of civil unions (7+ / 0-)

    As a way to "ward off" gay marriage of course, but he explains that he'd give all legal rights that a marriage has to civil unions. http://www.sltrib.com/...

    That's something, at least. And from Hatch of all people. I would say he embodies the "moderate" or "liberal" LDS view on gay rights. Very few support outright marriage equality, but many see no problem with civil unions.

    Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

    by Gygaxian on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:34:18 PM PDT

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

      That's quite a move for Hatch, endorsing civil unions.  Of course, he is fundamentally wrong though.  Civil unions don't "ward off" marriage equality, if anything they get people more used to the idea.

    •  Civil Unions have become quote in vogue lately (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      Republicans in Minnesota proposed civil unions, not 2 years after putting a gay marriage ban on the ballot.

      •  I never really understood (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WisJohn, MichaelNY, sapelcovits

        Why if you support civil unions, you wouldn't support SSM. Really, at that point, it's just coming down to a word choice and you're saying to gay couples "we respect your love and want to give it legal status, but we still want to make sure in some minor way you know you're second class citizens."

        •  Well speaking as a Mormon (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, GloFish

          It basically comes down to the name. Most Mormons are uncomfortable with gay people getting to use the word "marriage", because they're used to that being exclusively a ritual for straight people. They don't like the idea that the "institution" of marriage could be "tarnished" by gay people using it. Also they see it as a plan of Satan to undermine families. Finally, some are terrified that if gay marriage are legal, temples will be desecrated by having to perform same-sex marriages.

          Now, as I've explained before, I have a different perspective on many issues, despite being a devout Mormon. In this case, I have a gay sister, and I can't stand the idea of her not being able to be with the person she loves.

          My logic is that nobody is going to force the temples to perform same-sex marriages, that in terms of legal benefits there's no reason to deny same-sex couples the legal benefits of marriage, and that theologically, everyone has their "free agency" (Mormon term, basically means free will), and that who am I to stop them if that's what they want? Sure, the LDS Church itself can say what it wants, but that's because it's a church. They tend to do that. On an individual level, I support marriage equality, because even if it's a sin (or not), it will not affect me in any way, it will not change my church, and people should have their choice in this matter.

          I used to be concerned over the sticking point of the word "marriage", but then I realized that that is a legal term in this case, so it won't affect the LDS vision of marriage at all. So I'm okay with the term now.

          Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

          by Gygaxian on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 08:55:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think you're just speaking for Mormons. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            That's basically how people in general feel - they appreciate the argument in favor of equal legal status for gays but find the idea of gay marriage too icky or strange to go all the way with it.

            I think support for civil unions is an interesting position to hold because it implies intellectual support for the principle of gay marriage in terms of rights, but a bodily repulsion at the idea; the concept is understood, but it needs time to work into people's sort of body-level understanding of the world. That's why a large portion of civil union supporters are almost certain to eventually support gay marriage. And note that there are already considerable majorities in favor of gay marriage or civil unions in most conservative states.

          •  Difference in conception (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            Conservatives/religious see marriage as one thing: THE Institution of Marriage. One homogeneous thing. Hence, "If gays are allowed to marry, our church will be forced to perform them!"

            SSM advocates see this as nuts. Most don't care about if every individual church performs them, civil marriage is 95% of what they care about. Those that are religious would want their church to perform/recognize them, but I've known such people and the desire there is either to change minds, or move to a less intolerant church. I used to go to a Lutheran church in Sacramento that performed a few in front of the whole congregation, for example.

            This just strikes me as miscommunication--two groups with entirely different conceptions of the same thing talking across each other. I bet the religious right conception of marriage evolves--in five years, THE Institution of Marriage will be a lost talking point, and the civil/religious divide will be in vogue. Which is fine by me.

      •  Yup (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, sapelcovits, R30A

        They know they are losing.  It's actually pretty funny to me to see them offering up civil unions as a compromise after running the most bigoted, vitriolic campaigns against homosexuality just a few years before.  I see no reason why we should accept it.

        •  yup (6+ / 0-)

          funny how they're only civil union fans when the alternative is marriage. still waiting for Republicans to pass civil union legislation in conservative states. oh wait, they oppose civil unions in that case.

          bunch of transparent hypocrites. I can't wait for them to get their asses kicked in another election so I can laugh at them.

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

          by sapelcovits on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 05:24:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY, askew

            Once Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, or Ohio introduces civil unions, then it won't seem like such a craven move for Republicans to offer civil unions as an alternative elsewhere.  But in the states they control, even swingy or lean Dem states, Republicans simply refuse to do that.  They will fight us every step of the way.

            •  WI (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Skaje, MichaelNY, WisJohn

              civil unions are constitutionally banned there, however when Dems controlled the state they created a domestic partnership registry. that registry got challenged in court, where the Republican AG declared it unconstitutional and refused to defend it (typical hypocrite). thankfully that registry seems to have survived the challenge.

              unfortunately most of those states you listed have constitutional bans against civil unions, but if Rs are such big civil union fans they could still show it in IN, PA, and AZ. or, if they're really serious, Mississippi!

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

              by sapelcovits on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:09:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Sen. Landrieu sort of comes out for SSM (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY

    She says she personally supports marriage equality, but basically notes that Louisiana hasn't caught up yet and she's trying to represent her constituents. So, uh, not really sure what the practical effect of that is. Story here.

    Landrieu told CNN National Political Correspondent Jim Acosta in an interview Friday that she personally believes "people should love who they love and marry who they want to marry," but that her obligation rests with the people of Louisiana who elected her.

    "My state has a very strong constitutional amendment not only against gay marriage but against gay partnerships. So I'm looking at the people of Louisiana trying to represent their interests," she said.

    Not sure what she's saying about how she'd vote if marriage equality were hypothetically before the Senate.

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

    by SaoMagnifico on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 10:40:08 PM PDT

    •  If the issue were taxes or offshore drilling (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, jncca, askew

      or whether to run the freeway through the east side or the west side, I'd completely accept with the "represent my constituents" position.

      But when it comes to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness issues, I expect a leader to lead.  I don't care if the majority of her constituents would favor slavery, she should oppose it.

      This isn't an issue where there are viable positions on both sides.  This is an issue about equality for citizens.  

      I can appreciate her position, and recognize it as not a bad political move, but it is morally wrong.  And it is politically wrong to abdicate your responsibility as a leader when it comes to any life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and all people are created equal issues.

      Mr. Gorbachev, establish an Electoral College!

      by tommypaine on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:55:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd just observe (0+ / 0-)

        while agreeing with you that lots of politicians do things that are morally wrong, and usually it's because that's what their big campaign contributors want, not because they have any reason to believe a majority of their constituents support it.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:12:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Of course, I completely agree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        I respect the will of the people on most things -- but not on the freedoms of other people. Government must provide for the people, vouchsafe their right to be free, and represent their opinions on all matters otherwise.

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

        by SaoMagnifico on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:35:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  While I agree, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Darth Jeff, MichaelNY

        if it comes down to having to get Congress to act on SSM, then honestly, in some ways, it might be better for her to take the political route on this one for now.  If she loses re-election next year partly because she openly supported SSM, that wouldn't help the cause.

        Hopefully once she gets re-elected she'll come out more strongly.

    •  For those familiar with Louisiana politics, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      would there be any reason to expect Cajuns to be more supportive (or less antagonistic) to the idea of same sex marriage relative to other white southerners? They're kind of french, after all...

  •  New CPVIs are out (5+ / 0-)

    This includes both states and congressional districts.

    https://docs.google.com/...

    Also, the district list includes white percentages.

    23, D, pragmatic progressive (-4.50, -5.18), CA-14.

    by kurykh on Fri Apr 05, 2013 at 11:12:43 PM PDT

    •  Thank you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades

      I was waiting this since long time. Good news to have the "official" numbers.

    •  Wow, so much fun stuff (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      abgin

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:05:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  CA-07 went from R+3 to EVEN (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:09:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  too addictive! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen

      WA-01 is now D+1.  WA-08 went from R+2 to R+1.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:43:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Virginia. (4+ / 0-)

      The congressional redistricting really looks like a dummymander.

      VA-02 is already competitive.

      Southside+Charlottesville VA-05 actually trended Democratic!

      Why does Randy Forbes never get a decent challenge in VA-04? He's a culture warrior and our no-name challenger last year got 43%, the best showing since Forbes' first election.

      VA-01 trended Democratic and Wittman only got 56% last year.

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

      by redrelic17 on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 03:25:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I live here, and the truth is.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        VA-4 has a lot of racists, and the Democratic nominee is usually black, so they won't vote for the Democrat.  Sure, we have a lot of blacks too, but a lot of them are military, and Forbes fights full strength for military causes, so he siphons off quite a few black votes.  Also a lot of social conservatism here, sadly.

    •  Marginal GOP seats (5+ / 0-)

      CA31 - Miller D+5
      CA21 - Valadao D+2
      CO6 - Coffman D+1
      NY19 - Gibson D+1
      NJ2 - Lobiondo D+1
      IL13 - Davis Even
      IA3 - Latham Even
      NV3 - Heck Even
      NJ3 - Runyan R+1
      MI6 - Upton R+1
      NY2 - King R+1
      PA8 - Fitzpatrick R+1
      WA8 - Reichert R+1
      CA10 - Denham R+1
      FL13 - Young R+1
      FL27 - Ros-Lehtinen R+2
      MI8 - Rogers R+2
      MN2 - Kline R+2
      MN3 - Paulsen R+2
      NY11 - Grimm R+3
      PA6 - Gerlach R+2
      PA7 - Meehan R+2
      PA15 - Dent R+2
      VA2 - Rigell R+2
      VA10 - Wolf R+2
      WA3 - Herrera Buetler R+2
      WI7 - Duffy R+2
      WI8 - Ribble R+2
      CA25 - McKeon R+3
      MI7 - Walberg R+3
      OH10 - Turner R+3
      WI1 - Ryan R+3

      Even if Democrats retained every one of their own vulnerable seats I find it hard to identify even half of that list being truly competitive. That doesn't mean the effort shouldn't be made.

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

      by conspiracy on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:00:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Any retirements from this list (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        James Allen, Skaje, abgin

        could help a lot, though.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:41:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Here is where the Democratic Party must work for (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        a majority.

        There are more districts that can be added to the list, like NY-23, NY-22, MI-11, MI-01 and more R+4 and R+5 districts.

        If most of them has not been competitive is because have been weakly contested. With stronger candidates and stronger fundraising I think the majority can be in play in a good year (not necessarily a strong wave).

        I hope this work begins for 2014 in the easier seats.

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

        Anyone have the number the seats were at in the last working?  It'd be nice to know which directions all of these went.  I mean, it looks as if my MI-08 didn't move, but it'd be great to see the rest.

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

          Denham
          Valadao
          McKeon
          Miller
          Coffman
          Ros-Lehtinen
          Latham
          Lobiondo
          Runyan
          Grimm
          Gibson
          Rigell
          Wolf
          Reichert

          I'd say the top five are winnable and maybe the seats in New Jersey and New York. The rest probably need retirements.

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

          by conspiracy on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:35:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The Maryland-mander (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      apparently swung MD-06 from an R+13 to a D+2.  Anyone know of any other districts that changed by that much in redistricting (that are still more or less the same district)?  

      •  I would argue that isn't more or less the same (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        The only thing it has in common is the sparsely populated panhandle.

        •  Poor choice of words (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, redrelic17

          It is the successor district though. Essentially they took out the very red rural parts of Frederick County and tacked on some very blue parts of Montgomery County.  Some district numbers are going to have wild swings in PVI because the old and new districts with that number have nothing to do with each other, but I meant in cases where that wasn't true.  

          •  The old 6th district (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            included not only red parts of Frederick County but all of Carroll and some of Baltimore County and Harford County.  Virtually all this area, which made up nearly half the old 6th's population, was solid Republican and was moved into other districts (mostly the 1st and 8th).  In return it picked up Democratic territory in Montgomery County, which when appended to what was left of the previous 6th (carefully drawn to include its Democratic outposts, mainly in cities) was enough for a huge swing.  "Successor" district is probably a good way to put it; it is obviously not really the same district in anything more than a technical or numerical sense.

            In 2012 it increased its PVI to D+4; all 7 of the Maryland Democratic seats became at least a point more Democratic according to Cook's PVI.  The one exception was the 1st, recast as a GOP vote sink, which remained at R+14.

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

            by Mike in MD on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:06:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, 52 percent (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen, ProgMD

              of the district was retained from the old MD-06.

              It is the "successor" district to some extent (and certainly Bartlett chose to run there again), but the nominal swing is also definitely artificial and (almost entirely) redistricting-induced.

              Editor, Daily Kos Elections. IL-07.

              by jeffmd on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:33:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah, I forgot about Carroll County (0+ / 0-)

              Where I'm originally from was MD-06 before redistricting and stayed MD-06 afterwards, so it's hard not to think of it as the same district even though it's not (I did not know 52%).  I'm sure some of the hardline GOP types I grew up with would be surprised to find themselves in a D-leaning district.  

              The old 6th may have gotten a couple of points more D over the next decade as Frederick city continues to get more Democratic but definitely nothing on the order of 15 points.  

    •  ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      You know we already had this basically?

      https://docs.google.com/...

      I've noticed a few differences, but nothing major (Sewell is at D+20 instead of D+19, for instance).

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:00:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  True, but this one will go on wikipedia (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Darth Jeff, jncca, MichaelNY

        "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

        by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:18:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My spreadsheet also includes alot more data: (0+ / 0-)

          Actual vote counts, which can be used to get at turnout in districts.

          Yearly PVIs.

          Color coded.

          Incumbents.

          Float over boxes with lists of challengers in wide ranging categories.

          Marks for open seats.

          My spreadsheet is by far superior. I'll have to add a column to note where Cook and I differ on the PVI, but I doubt there's more than a handful of instances.

          23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

          by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:14:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

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

            Even some of his own data is off. He has Peter King's district in the old PVI as R+1, whereas his other release from last year had it at R+0.

            23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

            by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:16:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Take that up to Dave Wasserman (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY

              He should be open to corrections.

              23, D, pragmatic progressive (-4.50, -5.18), CA-14.

              by kurykh on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:59:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  After further review (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Stephen Wolf, MichaelNY, kurykh, jncca

                There are many places where his 04/08 PVIs do not match previous publications, and a bunch in Florida alone:

                http://cookpolitical.com/...

                FL-4 and FL-5 immediately stuck out to me.

                There's also the fact that Cook has never been very open with his data, which has always struck me as a way to shield himself from criticism on mistakes that he may make.

                As for differences between my data and his, there are 31. Of those, only 6 are larger than a point difference.

                SC-1 (Wilson) and WV-3 (Rahall) he has as three points more Republican than I do at R+16 and R+14, respectively.

                FL-4 (Crenshaw) and WV-1 (McKinley) he has as two points more Republican than I do at R+19 and R+14, respectively.

                SC-6 (Clyburn) and FL-5 (Brown) he has as three points more Democratic than I do at D+21 each.

                Given that DKE's data is publicly available AND the process through which DKE gathered their data is more readily described, I feel that it is more appropriate for myself - and I hope everyone else here - to continue to rely on DKE's numbers for our PVIs as they are, in all likelihood, more accurate than the numbers Cook has published in his Google Doc.

                I mean seriously! If you cannot even maintain the same 04/08 PVIs across publications, then you are not trustworthy at all.

                And we all have very big disdain for alot of his analysis, so why continue relying on him when we have data of our own.

                Case in point on transparency: if he would give us his actual presidential data per district, as any good scholar would do, they can be double checked for errors (as DKE has uploaded the primary precinct documents that they relied on for ALL of their data). Furthermore, we'd be able to fill in the last four of those New York districts that are outstanding in our own PVI document.

                In reality, Cook would be laughed out of the room for any academic work that was this meagerly transparent.

                23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

                by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 05:26:35 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Every single Dem district in Texas (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      became more Dem. Meanwhile, the most "competitive" Republican-held seat is R+10. Even by 2020, I doubt we have much of a chance to pick up any of those seats; maybe we could have a shot at Farenthold's district, though, which is only 43% white (and R+13!).

    •  That's backwards of what I expected (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      CT-02 trended a bit red and CT-05 trended a bit blue, despite Litchfield County being an Obama-Romney county.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:48:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Lots of the district is outside Litchfield County (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        Litchfield County has under 200,000 people. A lot of the district's population is in more urban areas like Danbury, Waterbury, New Britain and Meriden- all just outside Litchfield County, have sizable Hispanic populations and I believe all of them trended Dem. CT-02 is more rural overall and doesn't have any of CT's big cities.

        •  Also, he still performed better in 2012 than Kerry (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          in every county and the Kerry numbers are lopped off in the new CPVI.

          "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

          by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:30:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Where did he get the data for the Long Island (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      districts? We still don't have conclusive data on the DKE spreadsheet for NY-02 through 05, though I'm pretty sure Obama still carried the 2nd and Cook's data suggests the same thing. I'm not sure if Israel's seat was still D+ last year and if it wasn't then there were only 194 D+ districts in 2012.

  •  The only politicians who will receive money in (6+ / 0-)

    2014 from me:

    Mark Begich of Alaska, he has been downright progressive, and never afraid to defend it in front of the teabaggers that come to his town halls.  He was very good during HCR.  Surprisingly, he has maintained strong personal popularity in Alaska and is competitive for re-election, but it will be a dog fight.  And if you say he needs to be primaried because he is owned by the oil industry (some DKers do), well, go crawl in a hole and... hug a tree.

    Vincent Sheheen of South Carolina, for governor, I'm a big supporter of his firstly because I love SC and that state is in miserable shape.  Secondly because the Democrats (especially in governorships) are currently a Northeastern and west coast party with a few exceptions.  And Sheheen is a great guy!

    And maybe Mike McIntyre (NC-07) if he ends up being in a tough race.  I know many of you here, even those who think he should remain in the House, would not give a penny to him.  But it's personal for me, being from the district I would much rather have him representing me than David Rouzer.

    •  What about ALG if/when she runs? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, Gygaxian

      Personally, I gave a small sum to the Buono for Gov. campaign last week with a form to make it qualify for matching funds.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:04:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think you're wasting your money on Buono (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        betelgeux

        if you think your money could make her chances of victory any better.

        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

        by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:13:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I know, but I want to help. (4+ / 0-)

          I want to volunteer.  The people who work for her are dedicated and patient.  This isn't like the Corzine campaign where the volunteers are paid, hollow hacks.  I don't think the gap's going to be this wide this summer (a high ranking aide said they are looking into doing an intro ad in time for the primary and was mum on my suggestion of HRC coming by; also, phonebanking has just begun).  Funnier things have happened.  Bobby Jindal went from being unreachably popular to being in the crapper.  George HW Bush had massive approvals after Desert Storm and that went away.  It's not like the gap is so wide because she's unpopular, it's because she hasn't gotten statewide attention yet and giving a reason why she'd be better.  Personally, I think she has negligible chance, but that's just assuming current conditions persist.  Even if she loses, I'd accept it so long as Democratic turnout is better than 2009 and Dems do okay downballot.

          "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

          by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:22:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The gap is so wide (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SaoMagnifico

            because Christie is so popular. I don't see what's likely to happen that will dent that seriously, considering that he doesn't seem to have taken much of a hit from saying outright racist things on camera. I guess those could be put in an ad, and if I were Buono, I would do that and try to provoke an out-of-control tirade from Christie, but it's a long-shot, and it's at least as likely to backfire on her as to seriously damage Christie.

            Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

            by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:25:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  there's nothing wrong with supporting a candidate (6+ / 0-)

              in one's own state.

              ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:27:15 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Of course I agree (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Audrid

                I never said there was anything wrong with it. You read what I said; no need to repeat it.

                Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:30:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  aside from (0+ / 0-)

                  telling him it was a waste to donate to her, you're right, you didn't.

                  ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:52:33 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I specified why I thought it was a waste (0+ / 0-)

                    You know that. And do you disagree with the substance of my remark, or do you prefer to argue about something that's not actually in the comment?

                    Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                    by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:44:10 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I just thought it was really unnecessary for (0+ / 0-)

                      you to make a negative comment about someone trying to help the Democratic candidate for governor in their own state.

                      ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:55:55 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  It's topical (0+ / 0-)

                        Sorry you didn't like it. KingofSpades had a discussion about it and made quite reasonable points that I read and tipped. Probably time for you to drop this, since you're objecting to the mere fact that I made a remark that you actually aren't arguing about, substantively. I'm not going to feel bad about making a comment that's fact-based.

                        Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

                        by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 01:08:03 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  That's another reason (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichaelNY, gabjoh

              another one is people have yet to really tune in.  and yeah, it is very early, so why should they.  Finally, Christie's numbers are artificially inflated, and I think that there will be some contraction as partisan affiliation comes back into the equation.  Not a big drop, but probably by 10 and back to the 50's.  I do realize that she has real low odds, though.  I guess I just want her to do real respectably.

              "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

              by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:32:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  I'll probably donate to Secy. Grimes... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY, itskevin

        If she runs for Senate.

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

        by SaoMagnifico on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:37:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  love this map (4+ / 0-)

    Obama 2008 percentages, ignore the colors for the numbering.

    CD1: 61.4
    CD2: 51.2
    CD3: 43.2
    CD4: 37.9
    CD5: 50.4
    CD6: 40.6
    CD7: 69.2
    CD8: 48.5
    CD9: 48.4

     photo indiana_zps8fdb995b.png

    ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:03:15 AM PDT

    •  You changed some of the colors. (0+ / 0-)

      Gold is usually the 5th and dark grey is usually the 7th, for instance.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:07:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Indiana Republicans could have done much worse (0+ / 0-)

      This is not exactly all that strong of a Republican gerrymander, and none of the districts look terribly obnoxious.

    •  Ahhh ..... the good old days! (0+ / 0-)
    •  I ran some calculations on your IN-09 (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, WisJohn, jncca

      and the results would have changed to Young 50.8, Yoder 49.2. Probably taking out the northern part of Lawrence County and replacing it with Perry County would have brought the race to about 50/50. But just the removal of Johnson and Morgan, without any other calculations, takes away a 29,302 margin for Todd Young.

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

      by SouthernINDem on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:05:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I can't tell if this is a GOP or Dem gerrymander, (0+ / 0-)

      really.  Considering Obama's overperformance, you have to subtract 3 points or so from his percentage and then subtract that from 54.

      That makes IN-2 R+5.5, IN-5 R+6 IN-8 R+8 (but worse in 2012), and IN-9 R+8 as well.  Those all seem too tough and none have clear Dem trends.

      20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
      politicohen.com
      Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
      UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

      by jncca on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:23:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I made IN-02 2 points more Obama than the (0+ / 0-)

        Rs did, I made IN-05 4 points more, I made IN-08 about .04 more, and I made IN-09 nearly 2 points more.

        I mean, I would really ideally put Bloomington into IN-08 and have one district that a Dem would certainly win in the south, and try to squeeze a bit more out of IN-02 at IN-05's expense, but I thought the idea of creating 6 Dem-leaning or competitive districts in Indiana too good to not at least try.

        ...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 Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:30:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The PVI number really doesn't reflect (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Allen

          the true change in IN-09 in this map in favor of Democrats. You have Johnson and Morgan counties removed. The voters there are pretty hardcore Republicans, that would not vote for nearly any Democrat, other than maybe on of those Evan Bayh landslides. Jennings, Jefferson, Ohio, and Switzerland counties, which all voted GOP for President in 08 and 12, but have a lot of voters that will vote for Democrats. There are a lot of what you might call Hillary Clinton Democrats here, as she won over 65% of the vote in those counties. All have many Democratic local officials. Also, the Austin area of Scott County is heavily Democratic. Bartholomew County is Republican leaning, but does have some favorable precincts in the city of Columbus, and has voters that can be won over.

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

          by SouthernINDem on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 12:03:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Brendan Mullen would have won James' (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades

        2nd.

        25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

        by HoosierD42 on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:16:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You're going for a neutral map I assume? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, WisJohn, James Allen

      Very good job. I would have done a finger into Lafayette for the 2nd to boost the percentage.

      25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

      by HoosierD42 on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:15:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here's mine of a Dem gerrymander (5+ / 0-)

       photo INDem3-3-3overview_zpsfd9fee7f.png

       photo INDem3-3-3Data_zpsac9c8e4b.png

      I tried to keep it relatively clean looking while still fairly aggressive. I feel pretty good about this map having gone 6-3 last year, but obviously not every district is safe. The 8th and 9th though are a good deal more Democratic downballot than the Obama numbers, while he almost certainly overperformed somewhat in the 5th.

    •  Since we're all giving our maps (4+ / 0-)

      Red 56.5 Obama
      Yellow 56.3 Obama
      Blue 57.1 Obama
      Purple 53.6 Obama
      Green 55.0 Obama

      Cyan 48.7 Obama
      Teal 46.9 Obama

      Black 38.1 Obama
      Chartreuse 37.7 Obama

      Obviously a little bit overambitious, but not bad.

      I like SAWolf's map best except for the awfully done 2nd.

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 05:40:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Senate has gotten more attention (5+ / 0-)

    on same-sex marriage lately, but there's movement in the House too (or at least clarification of previously held positions).

    The list of non-SSM supporting Dems is down to 25 Democrats remaining now, and certain to keep declining.  Names taken off the list recently include Ron Barber, Bill Owen, Marcy Kaptur, and Dina Titus.

  •  MN-GOP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, jj32, Darth Jeff

    Unsurprisingly, former state representative Keith Downey is now the head of the state party.

    http://www.startribune.com/...

  •  NH-02: Ex-Speaker O'Brien strongly considering (5+ / 0-)

    and how weak he is: http://www.seacoastonline.com/...

    "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

    by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:39:09 AM PDT

  •  Who opposed DOMA in 1996 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MichaelNY, kleinburger, itskevin

    Great clip featuring some of the congressional debate from 1996. How right they were, especially John Lewis, Gerry Studds, and Patsy Mink. The complete debate is located in CSPAN's web archives.

    Carol Mosley Braun's speech in opposition to DOMA was especially good and it made me sad that she lost in 1998 to Peter Fitzgerald (remember him?), but then I realized if she hadn't lost, we may never have had Obama.

  •  VA-Gov: Ben Tribbett overinterprets early polling (0+ / 0-)

    "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

    by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:08:51 PM PDT

  •  VA-Downballot: Is it just me or (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, itskevin

    are the Dem candidates for A-G and LG of much higher caliber than the GOP ones?  So far, it's like the GOP candidates for both are lower tier nutjobs (no, really).

    "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

    by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:12:29 PM PDT

  •  Republicans in Colorado (10+ / 0-)

    are considering attempting recalls against the Governor and legislature Democrats over gun control.

    I like how they're relishing the chance to run against Hickenlooper this year when they don't even have any candidates for next year.  As for the legislature Dems, I think they'll be fine.  Just about all of the Democrats in the legislature are in Dem-leaning seats.  There really aren't any Jim Mathesons in the legislature.  Term limits will do that.  The constant turnover keeps the seats fairly polarized.

    •  And Hickenlooper wasn't exactly gung-ho (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      itskevin, bythesea, MichaelNY, Skaje

      over gun control.  He was iffy on it until Newtown happened.  And I don't think there's been a revolt over what they passed.  And recalling Sen. Morse?  I did a bit of research and his district makes up the blue parts of Colorado Springs.  It voted over 50% for the Dems in the 2010 Gov., Sen., and Treasurer races.  Bennet won by a 10% spread here.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 02:27:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yup (4+ / 0-)

        Morse sits in a seat that's well to the left of the state, despite being in Colorado Springs.  They're welcome to take a crack at him, but they're not going to beat him.

        Nothing the Democrats passed is even particularly controversial, all the bills passed were in the 70-80% support popularity range.  Expanding background checks, capping the large magazine sizes, removal of gun rights for domestic abusers, etc.  What exactly are the Republicans going to run on here?  The Democrats could have over-reached on this issue if they went further, but they didn't.  A bunch of these bills even got Republican votes.

    •  Pfft (5+ / 0-)

      Hickenlooper is one of the most popular statewide officials in the country according to most recent polling. Good luck.

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 04:27:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  YouGov religion poll, for those who are interested (5+ / 0-)

    http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/... (pdf)

    Disgustingly, 34% support making Christianity the official state religion and only 47% are opposed. 11% think this is constitutional.

    37% think the government has gone too far in the separation of church and state while only 29% think there's too much of a mix of religion and government (in god we trust anyone?)

  •  Here's a little something I'd been toying around (9+ / 0-)

    with whenever I was bored and felt like drawing an aggressive yet plausible Dem gerrymander. In this map of an alternate 2012 election I've tried to maximize our seat share in every state, but stopped short of doing some of the bigger states like California and New York. I also assumed for fun that we'd have strong candidates like SHS run or Dan Boren not retire. Some of the ratings though are a little off of what they should be, but you get the general idea. Additionally I've since redrawn Alabama to be a safe 3-4 and Kentucky to be a 1-2-3 map given that it's impossible to make Chandler safe when he's toxic in coal country. Finally I also reworked Florida a bit to make the 7th district more Dem and have the 2nd and 5th share GainesvilleBut here it is:

     photo DemocraticStatesofAmerica_zps1b1c75ef.png
    (click through for larger size)

    I think my favorite map out of the group is Pennsylvania where I drew a solid 13-5, but the 5-2 Colorado map is also pretty awesome.

    •  Amazing. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen, Stephen Wolf

      Any idea of how many seats we'd have?

      Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

      by WisJohn on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 05:54:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well out of those states and under the (0+ / 0-)

        changes I noted above for Alabama, etc, the count would probably be 200 Democrats and 111 Republicans. Most of the tossups are fairly generous to Republicans, as I don't think David Gill would have lost a district that was 1% better for Obama in 2008 than the actual district, but it doesn't make sense to label it Lean D when he'd have won narrowly.

        I also had another version where I tried to get as many seats over 60% Obama (D+6.3) or as possible or otherwise maximized to see if I could get a majority that high. It wasn't as clean though and I also hadn't drawn Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin in addition to the other states I hadn't drawn.

    •  Love it (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      This actually looks a little bit cleaner than the Republican gerrymander, but super effective.

      26, Male, CA-26, DK Elections Black Caucus Chair.

      by DrPhillips on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:00:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I like what you did in Florida (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf, WisJohn

      with making that Tallahassee to Gainsville district. That would be a safe and ideal district for Gwen Graham, which she could run and hold for a handful of terms and run statewide later on.

       And also taking Downtown St. Pete out of Castor's district and keeping Pinellas as a whole as it should. No way that old artifact Young would run if all of St. Pete was in his district.  I was hoping under the fair district maps the FL Supreme Court would throw out the congressional map, and the GOP would have to be force to draw those 2 districts like that.

      But whats up with Garcia's district? Extending it all the way to Collier?

      NY-9/NJ-10; Russians can give you arms but only the United States can give you a solution. -- Anwar Sadat

      by BKGyptian89 on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:19:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No that's a Republican vote sink for Diaz-Balart (0+ / 0-)

        It was R+15 in 2008 yet just 73.4% Hispanic. I'm not sure if it's VRA compliant anyway. Garcia gets a neighboring district that was 52.6% Obama 08 and probably close to 58% or more last year. IRL also gets a very Democratic 62% Obama 08 district that was easily at least in the mid 60s for Obama last year.

        The 2nd district would also be uber safe as Obama drastically underperformed there and the version that had all of Gainsville was 58.5% Obama. There's no way Southerland would have won an Obama district as even Al Lawson would have won. Young's district was bumped up 6.6% to 58.5% Obama '08 and I think it's safe to assume he'd have retired under those circumstances.

    •  With Wisconsin we could get a 7-1 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      abgin, Stephen Wolf

      or at least a 6-1-1:
       photo ScreenShot2012-11-16at120505AM.png

      Social Democrat, WI-05

      by glame on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:40:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What are the numbers on that? (0+ / 0-)

        the Ribble district is the one I have the hardest time making winnable while keeping Petri's winnable as well, which is why I drew the second vote sink. The Northwoods really trended hard to Republicans over the last few cycles and will probably keep doing so. In my map, the 7th was 58.8% Obama '08 two party and the 8th was 57.9% Obama while the 6th was still 45.9% Obama but probably a good deal worse than that in 2012.

        •  Well, the 8th (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Stephen Wolf, abgin

          Would be a tossup, but definitely winnable with the right year and candidate.  For the Northwoods, some of it is plunged into the 2nd. For the 7th, Obama won most of the counties last year and the combination of Eau Claire, Menomonee, Chippewa Falls, Wausau, Stevens Point, and the Superior counties a Dem should win it most of the time.  With St. Croix and Polk taken out, there really is not a large Republican base except the Wausau suburbs and exurbs, some of which are taken out.  So while your map gets us 6 seats, my map gets us 6 seats with a potential of a 7th.

          CD 1 (Blue): Obama (2008 performance) 58.9 Dem 2010 (average of 2010 statewide performance) 51.2
          CD 2 (Dark Green): Obama 61, Dem 2010 53.7
          CD 3 (Purple):  Obama 59.1, Dem 2010 49.2
          CD 4 (Red):  63.5 Obama, Dem 2010 57.1
          CD 5 (Yellow): Obama 37.5, Dem 2010 27.8
          CD 6 (Lime Green): Obama 59.3, Dem 2010 51
          CD 7 (Orange): Obama 57.1, Dem 2010 47.2
          CD 8 (Slate Blue): Obama 54.7, Dem 2010 43.9

          Again, this map does rely upon Dems being willing to split Dane and Milwaukee around.

          Social Democrat, WI-05

          by glame on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 08:03:32 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nice, your map is totally better than my 6-2 (0+ / 0-)

            I doubt we would have won that 8th district last year though as it's only a point more Dem than the actual district, but it's certainly a winnable seat.

          •  So I played around with the .drf you sent me (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            James Allen, WisJohn

            and I was able to improve it without sacrificing too much on the cleanliness:
             photo WIDem6-1-1overview_zpsce06482d.png

            1st is improved to 61.2 Obama (w/ 3rd parties), 53.8 D
            2nd is 59.9 Obama, 52.1 D
            3rd is 58.7 Obama, 48.7 D
            4th is 64.2 Obama, 58.0 D
            5th is 35.7 Obama, 27.0 D
            6th is 59.8 Obama 52.1 D
            7th is 57.4 Obama, 47.7 D (.5 better avg)
            8th is 55.7 Obama, 44.9 D (1 point better)

            So I don't know if we'd have won the 8th last year as I drew it, but Jamie Wall probably wouldn't have been triaged, at least as early in the cycle. It's also possible Steve Kagen might have sought a rematch as his name was floated around earlier on. I think Sean Duffy would have definitely lost under both of our maps as Julie Lassa would have still been in the district and was a much stronger candidate than Pat Kreitlow, plus the district is 4.3% better than actually drawn. It's pretty amazing what you can do to the state with just one R+18 vote sink.

            I still don't know if Dems would have drawn something like this after 2008 when we held the trifecta. I could certainly see them targeting Ryan, but I think they'd draw something more like what my 6-2 did since it preserved Dane County more and shored up Kagen a little further to 57.0 Obama, 46.5 Dem. On the other hand, with Baldwin's seat being open there would probably have been a mad rush by legislators to make the most out of the open Dane County based seat and drawing targeting the 6th allows two Dane based legislators to potentially win, so I really don't know. What do you guys think they would have gone for in 2009? I'm thinking of turning that scenario into my next diary series as I've already done plenty of plausible post-2008 maps.

            •  In that scenario (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WisJohn

              It would have been another story of Dems in safe seats wanting to keep their seats extra safe.  I remember that Moore was even concerned with getting the North Shore suburbs under the remap, so I think she would have been the most objectionable.  With Baldwin, I think she would have been more amenable given that she ultimately decided to run statewide even with the specter of Tommy.  
              However, I would think that, as you said, this simply allows more state legislators to advance.  Both of our maps allow for potentially 4 seats for Dane and MKE, as opposed to just 2. Additionally, this would allow legislators in Racine, Kenosha, Rock, Winnebago, Fond du Lac, Sheboygan, and Manitowoc counties plausible paths to Congress as well.  So I feel they would have been more aggressive.
              In terms of the 8th, I feel back in 2009 a lot of us did not comprehend just how big the wave would be in 2010 and Kagen did well in 2008, so I feel like they would have made some minimal changes like our maps did instead of the octopus creature grabbing the Dem cities in NE Wisconsin.

              Social Democrat, WI-05

              by glame on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 01:17:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Here's the Kentucky map (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Skaje

       photo KYDem1-3-2overview_zpse03d0782.png

       photo KYDem1-3-2data_zps714280b7.png

      The 3rd district is the same as in reality and is the only safe Dem seat. Chandler's district, while nominally the same for both the average numbers and Obama's numbers, removes all of the coal counties where he tanked and I think he'd have won this version. It's also trending Dem pretty fast downballot. The 2nd district is where I tried my best to give Dan Mongiardo a district, but it being very coal heavy sees Obama perform ridiculously below the average. It was only 3% worse than the 3rd on the downballot average, yet Obama did an incredible 24% worse there than the 3rd. Dan Lunsford still won it against McConnell and Jack Conway got  nearly 48% there in 2010, so I think Mongiardo would have a good shot. I drew the 1st district so that it would entice Brett Guthrie into running there so that Hal Rogers would take the 5th and clear the new 2nd so that it was open for Mongiardo. I could have drawn the 1st to be a little more Dem, but we aren't beating Whitfield in a district that's just a few points to the left of the state.

      The original map made the one eastern district stronger, but only if Chandler didn't run there so that's why I preferred this one, seeing as it's much more realistic of what Dems should have drawn had they controlled the process. Also note that the 6th in particular could have been bosted to be more Dem if I split counties, particularly to take out the red Lexington suburbs.

    •  It is a interesting work (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      Looking at the map it seems that the colors code is basen in your rating of every district. True? But I see 4 blues.

    •  Damn... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      That's pretty awesome, that New Mexico map just looks brutal on the face of it. Can you post that map?

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

      by NMLib on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 11:04:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here it is (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, GloFish, HoosierD42, jncca, NMLib

         photo NMDem3-0_zps3369ef15.jpg

         photo NMDem3-0data_zps18f3f91a.png

        Obviously not all of them are entirely safe, but they're all more or less as Democratic as the state on average and I don't think Steve Pearce could win either the 2nd or 3rd. I drew him in with Lujan.

        I also drew this more of a 2-0-1 map that I could see NM Dems maybe having drawn if redistricting took place in 2009 and they wanted to help out Teague:

         photo NMDem3-0Realisticoverview_zpsb4c8b8c7.png

         photo NMDem3-0Realisticdata_zpsf6a309a1.png

        Teague lost by about 10% in 2010 and this district is only 4% better so he probably still would have lost albeit much more narrowly, but it comes entirely at Lujan's expense and he won by about 14% so he could spare it. I think Pearce would have definitely been beatable in this district in 2012 though. What do you think? Would NM Dems have drawn something like this?

        •  I do like that you don't split Albuquerque... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades

          In either permutation, that's absolutely something that NM Democrats would have as a precondition (a Republican gerrymander, on the other hand, would have no choice but to split the city, but that's another story).

          Honestly, I don't think that either one would ultimately get through, the first one obviously because it would weaken Lujan too much for him (even though he could still win, it's still something he'd have to fight for every single time, I don't think he's willing to do that). Now I don't think that Michelle Lujan-Grisham would have any objections to it, as it more or less keeps her district whole (although it would have been a very close shave in 2010).

          The second permutation is better, but again, I'm not sure if Lujan would be willing to be weakened that much (I think he'd be fine, but it's still something he might have to fight for depending on the year).

          Traditionally, the northern district was given to the Democrats, the Republicans had the southern district, and the Albuquerque-based district was a swing, but since Obama's massive victories in 2008 and 2012 in the state, that's definitely been turned around.

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

          by NMLib on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 05:52:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well the 2nd map was the only one I was (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NMLib

            even remotely considering as realistic, but even then there's only a tiny amount of Bernalillo County (for some reason that's not in Chrome's spell check) that isn't in the 1st district so that would be easy to fix.

            I guess the real question is, had they drawn the map, how much would they have been willing to shore up Teague if not the meager 4% I did? Did Teague have no allies in the legislature? I know that Lujan's father was speaker but still, the district was basically a Dem vote sink as was and he won very easily in both 2008 and 2010.

            •  To be honest... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Stephen Wolf, KingofSpades

              Splitting Bernalillo isn't a huge thing, even the current map has small pieces of the county in both CD-02 and CD-03, so that's really not a big thing, the bigger thing is actually keeping Albuquerque whole (which both maps absolutely do).

              The problem is that it's just really hard to sustain three Democratic incumbents in New Mexico right now based only on partisanship. I honestly think that legislative Democrats would have simply assumed that Teague could have held onto the district himself just based on how he was neutralizing Republican support in southeast New Mexico (and if he wasn't running against Pearce in 2010, that might not have been a bad gamble, just look at how Teague did in the three counties in the Southeast that were part of his district (Eddy, Lea, and Chaves)).

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

              by NMLib on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:44:00 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I'll add... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Stephen Wolf

              That your second map isn't outside of the realm of possibilities of what they might have done if Ben Lujan Sr. hadn't been Speaker, even former Speaker Lujan might have been willing to consider it (although if Ben Ray didn't like it, then it would have gotten axed, that's the power of having your father as Speaker).

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

              by NMLib on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:43:03 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  AR-GOV: Coleman will raise $160K in Q1 (0+ / 0-)


  •  Thoughts about Utah and the college vote (6+ / 0-)

    So today and tomorrow was and will be LDS General Conference, our two-day binannual conference where Mormons listen to our leaders speak and instruction us in moral (though rarely political) issues.

    The thing is, the last time we had it, in October, it had some unintended political ramifications. Basically, they announced that for men, the missionary age requirement would be lowered from 19 to 18 years, and for women 21 to 19 years.

    This has already had a huge impact on college enrollment (kids don't enter college for a year before their mission like they used to), but I'm wondering if it'll have an impact on the college vote in Utah as well. After all, less college enrollment means that there's less college votes, and many young Utahns (many people anywhere, really) don't know that you can vote on an absentee ballot. Plus, missionaries are told to clear their lives of anything that might distract them from going on a mission. That could include politics.

    The interesting part could be that the kind of young Mormon who would otherwise register to vote and be interested enough to actually cast a vote might be the conservative kind. So there's the possibility of this change making Utah colleges more secular/non-Mormon, and therefore more liberal. A lot of the colleges are making up for the

    This is a reasonable question to ask since Utah has a lot of universities for how small it's population is; about 25 accredited colleges and universities, with the top 5 having multiple locations.

    Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

    by Gygaxian on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:42:41 PM PDT

    •  That's a really interesting bit of news (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WisJohn, gabjoh

      Thanks for sharing it!

      As a Mormon, I presume you, too, went on a mission. Did you vote during your time as a missionary? Did the other folks in your group (stake?) vote, to your knowledge? And what personal instructions did you get on whether voting was something that was frowned upon or supported while you were doing your mission? Has anything changed since then, in terms of how the clergy view voting while on a mission?

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 09:47:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, I haven't served a mission (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY, KingofSpades

        I'm only 19, though I turned 19 before that announcement. I haven't finished turning all of my papers in, so though I'm preparing, I haven't gone into the missionary population yet. I don't know about the general population of missionaries, but I think my brother (who was missionary around 2006-2008, IIRC), did an absentee ballot. I just know that many don't bother to register.

        The rules with anything missionaries do are pretty strict, but to sum it up, if you've seen a missionary preach, help around someone's yard, or whatever, that's all they're allowed to do or to talk about. No non-LDS music, no "inappropriate" books, nothing but church stuff, except in certain situations and on vacation days, where you're allowed to send letters, play sports, etc. It's admittedly puritanical, but I think it's useful in keeping missionaries on track.

        What's important to this discussion is that you're not allowed to talk about politics to potential converts (and are supposed to direct conversations away from that), and I would assume most missionaries are too focused on LDS teachings to care about politics though.

        Also, the stake is basically equivalent to a small regional congregation, made up usually of regular members. The stake is subdivided into a number of "wards" or smaller congregations. The more LDS folks are in an area, the smaller in population the ward is, and the less area it covers (for instance, African wards cover hundreds of miles, while my own ward compromises a few blocks).

        I just talked to my parents (who both went on missions) and they said that absentee voting while on missions then (in the early 1980s) was uncommon, but not unheard of. So it's been that way for a while. Though according to my dad (who is now an aggressive ex-Mormon), Utah may not have had enough population for it's 4th Congressional seat without the absentee missionary voters.

        Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

        by Gygaxian on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 10:35:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  We knew this already (9+ / 0-)

    But the flip-side of the House playing field tilting Republican is the presidency now tilts ever so slightly Democratic.

    https://docs.google.com/...

    There are now 272 electoral votes with a Democratic PVI.

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

    by conspiracy on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:23:06 AM PDT

  •  US Senate diagrams back to the 107th in 2001 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gigantomachyusa

    http://news.yahoo.com/...

    "When visualized, the picture looks like the final stages of cell division when a Paramecium reproduces, in which a formerly unified body has nearly split into two distinct creatures."

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

    by conspiracy on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:39:45 AM PDT

    •  Solid Cohesive Democratic Cluster (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      I'm shocked at how cohesive the Democrats are. There's a solid cluster of around 45 Democrats who vote the same way at least 90% of the time. The Republicans are all over the place by that point. It kind of destroys the notion that the 'big tent' Democrats have more ideological and political "diversity" than the Republicans. Ironically, Harry Reid, the leader of the caucus is on the fringes of that cluster, only voting 90%+ with 25 other Democrats. Maybe we could do better with a more representative Democrat (and one with a backbone but's a discussion litigated a thousand times on this site so I'll stop now)

      21, Male, Latino-Spanish, OK-1 (Tulsa: The Art Deco, Terracotta, and Cultural Gem of Green Country!); Currently studying in Madrid, Spain

      by gigantomachyusa on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:44:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

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

        I was surprised at that. Even Manchin.

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

        by conspiracy on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:52:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  This has been true of the Senate for awhile (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        The house, on the other hand, is the flip side. Democrats are much more ideologically diverse in the house, whereas Republicans are more tightly clustered.

        23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

        by wwmiv on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 12:26:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Can't gerrymander the Senate and all that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Republicans have to be able to sell themselves to politically divided states in the Senate.  Not so much in the House.

          •  Very true, just looking at the presidential vote (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kleinburger, jncca

            which obviously doesn't take into account Democrats being the default senate winners in WV for generations, you get the 25th least Democratic state being Ohio which had a PVI of R+.44 in the 2012 election.

            That's a whole 2.36 points better PVI than the median congressional district. I think there's also a far smaller proportion of states that are further away from an even PVI than there are districts. Once jeffmd gets that Nassau county data uploaded and we get the rest of the congressional districts finished, I'll make another graph showing the distribution of House seats and then states by partisanship like this one for 2008 under the same lines:
             photo DistributionofCongressionalDistricts.png

            That is unless Xenocrypt is already working on something along those lines :P

      •  It depends on who controls the Senate (7+ / 0-)

        Only things that Dems agree on are usually up for votes.  In contrast, you'd see the same thing when the GOP controlled the Senate from 1995-2006 (with a brief interlude of control by Dems).

      •  Reid (4+ / 0-)

        Sometimes he votes no on bills he wants to pass in order to be able to bring them up again.  Something about parliamentary procedure.

        20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
        politicohen.com
        Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
        UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

        by jncca on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 01:59:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hamilton Campaigns finds 73% in favor of (6+ / 0-)

    medical marijuana in Florida. 60% is needed to pass and the initiative isn't yet on the ballot for 2014 but they have until February of next year IIRC.

  •  Does anyone know, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bythesea, MichaelNY

    of the current Democratic senators who support marriage equality, who came out in favor the earliest?

  •  I found this pretty awesome map that a user made (12+ / 0-)

    on the wikipedia entry for the 2012 presidential election. I know many here were disappointed when the NYT changed their awesome 2008 maps to those stupid arrows for 2012 that obscured everything, so here's a plain county map where the counties are colored by the shift between 2008 and 2012:
     photo Presidential_Elections_2008-2012_Swing_in_County_Marginssvg_zps3feb19b4.png
    (source)

    It really is amazing just how badly Obama plummeted in Appalachia, particularly central Appalachia, despite running on the exact same positions on energy and the environment. Romney however, didn't pretend to support doing something about greenhouse gas emissions like McCain did when he ran.

    •  Central/SE Ohio and south-central KY (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      seem kind of anomalous. Why the blue trend in those places? Could that be auto industry-related?

      •  That and Ohio was really just ground center (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, Chachy, gabjoh

        for all of the incredibly technical aspects of the Obama campaign. They really tried to squeeze out every Dem vote they could, unlike every midwestern state other than Iowa. I really don't think it was the auto-industry though as that's more rural areas + Franklin, Hamilton, and Montgomery counties which have been Dem trending for a while now.

        I'm not familiar with south-central Kentucky's economy, but that same region trended even more strongly Democratic downballot between 2007-2011 so I'd imagine it's just a general trend. Kentucky was oddly one of the very few states where, although Democratic downballot performance diverges wildly from Obama's in many areas but not all, the same parts of the state had the same general trend both presidentially between 2008 and 2012 and downballot from 2007 to 2011. That's in sharp contrast to West Virginia.

        It would be nice to have the PVI trend map with a scale more like this as there would be a good deal more blue on the map. I liked the one David Jarman did with open heat map, but the scale was a little to wide given that it had to accommodate multiple cycles. I also hate that Dave Leip's atlas is too stubborn to change the colors to the typical pattern, but even his site doesn't have one big county trend map.

        •  If it's a general pro-Dem trend in southern KY (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY, gabjoh

          I find that even more mysterious; what business does an almost homogeneously white, rural region of an Appalachian state have trending Dem?

          By the way, here's a prediction: West Virginia will be the most Republican state at the presidential level by 2020. I think it may give >75% of the vote to republicans by then.

          •  That's a rather bold prediction (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY

            it really remains to be seen how much further down the Democratic presidential vote can go. Obama literally did worse than any Democrat has done there since George McClellan in 1864 and Obama was the only Democrat ever to lose every county since statehood. Only Lincoln himself and Nixon in 1972 got a higher vote share than Romney.

            That would also likely make the state somewhere in the neighborhood of R+25, which I can't imagine not being the most Republican state by PVI, but I think we might find presidential Democrats bottoming out around 30 some percent. Especially if Republicans ever come around on climate change or if 2020 is Hillary Clinton's reelection (not more likely to happen than not at this point, but one can hope). There seem to be just too many urban voters in the state for the coal counties to sink us below 30%, especially if the eastern panhandle, Charleston, Wheeling, Morgantown, and the general west of the state don't trend as quickly Republican. It's also possible that the state more or less stops trending R as parts of Appalachian Ohio did after trending sharply R in 2008. Still, it's certainly possible and I don't see us improving there as the state of coal is only getting worse as natural gas kills it. However I could see the trend being mitigated in 2016 with return of a white Democratic nominee, especially if it's Clinton.

            •  Consider (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              James Allen, jncca, Skaje, Ryan Dack

              that as recently as 2008, West Virginia whites voted more strongly for Obama than did Virginia whites - 41% for Obama. In 2012, it might have been closer to 34%. That would still be higher than NC (31%) and considerably higher than Georgia (23% in 2008, and presumably lower than that in 2012).

              West Virginia, in a lot of ways, has essentially become a culturally southern state. And it's not hard for me to imagine WV whites bottoming out as low as Georgia whites, which at least has significant liberal white populations in Atlanta, Athens, and a few other cities around the state. The thing is, WV has essentially no non-whites to mitigate the effects of that. So if Dems get 23% of the white vote in WV, they might only get 25% overall.

              There are some states where whites vote en masse for republicans, and there are some states that are homogeneously white. West Virginia is the only state that has the potential to be both.

              •  It is but it isn't culturally southern (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jncca, KingofSpades, Skaje

                it's far less evangelical Christian than the rest of the south, especially among whites. It's also considerably older than a lot of the south, which may help to explain the GOP trend. Also the majority of people in the state identify more with the northeast than the south in polling.

                Ironically, I think that if WV did have a large non-white population, it would have trended much more sharply to Republicans and a lot faster as states like Arkansas have done, or better yet as areas along the black belt of the deep south did following the civil rights act.

                I suppose it certainly could continue to trend more Republican to the point where we can't break 30, but that would make it have a very, very unique electorate by being, as you point out, homogeneously white and whites voting en masse for Republicans

              •  That's actually a very solid observation (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Ryan Dack, MichaelNY, LordMike

                For all the talk about our problems amongst West Virginia whites, they're still nowhere near the rest of Southern white voters.

                •  Yes, but consider this (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  MichaelNY, LordMike

                  no states without a significant minority population are anywhere near the rate of voting Republican among whites that the rest of the south is. There are enough poor whites out there who aren't going to be incited by hating blacks that they vote against what can be easily explained to them as in their best interest (New Deal policies). With West Virginia the only logical explanation is that A) the state is dying off, literally as the population shrinks (or at least the electorate) B) the Democratic Party's shift away from supporting coal to actively pushing for Cap and Trade is the main driver of the GOP trend, and C) there's a small but noticeable amount of racism among Democrats there who would vote for a candidate like Clinton, but not Obama and that last part remains to be seen.

                  So I don't see why the state's culture alone should shift it so hard to the right when there's practically no other state where the same is true. Even Oklahoma bottomed out in the low 30s last year.

              •  that's the reason why Texas hasn't trended D (0+ / 0-)

                a lot of the state is basically no different from the parts of LA, AR, OK, TN, KY, WV that are trending away from the dems at breakneck speed.

                Looking at a 1980s almanac of American politics, Obama in 2008 did worse than Mondale in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th, 13th and 17th districts. Even if those areas haven't grown as quickly as other parts of the state, its still an impediment to breaking through in Texas.

                RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

                by demographicarmageddon on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:45:44 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Indiana is also heartbreakingly red (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      The flipside of being the bluest state on their 2008 map.

      25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

      by HoosierD42 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 12:47:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thank god (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LordMike, gabjoh

      The 2012 NYTimes map is utterly useless because of the arrows.  Who thought that was a good idea?

      It's interesting how the region consisting of southeast Illinois, west Kentucky, Southwest Michigan, northwest Ohio, and all of Indiana was some of the strongest red shifts in 2012, yet some of the strongest blue shifts in 2008.  Going purely off of 2012, you would think these areas are trending Republican, but you get the complete opposite idea from 2008.

      There's a similar phenomenon affecting Montana, the Dakotas, and even northwest Minnesota.  The latter was the most Dem-trending part of the state in 2008, only to be reversed last year.  By comparison, the rest of Minnesota mostly was even from 2004-2008-2012.  Elasticity and all that.  St. Louis County (the base of Duluth) earns some kind of award for always delivering the same kind of margin to Democrats regardless of year (an honor it shares with Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) in Pennsylvania).

      Also, we all know this by now, but damn is Appalachia zooming away from us.  Less obvious is Cajun country in Louisiana, most exemplified by Cameron County which has gone from Clinton by 18 points, Bush by 28 points, Bush by 39 points, McCain by 65 points, and Romney by 76 points.  From Clinton-Dole 51-33%, to Romney-Obama 87-11%.  That certainly rivals the changes in Appalachia.

      •  campaign effects (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stephen Wolf, WisJohn
        It's interesting how the region consisting of southeast Illinois, west Kentucky, Southwest Michigan, northwest Ohio, and all of Indiana was some of the strongest red shifts in 2012, yet some of the strongest blue shifts in 2008.  Going purely off of 2012, you would think these areas are trending Republican, but you get the complete opposite idea from 2008.

        There's a similar phenomenon affecting Montana, the Dakotas, and even northwest Minnesota.  The latter was the most Dem-trending part of the state in 2008, only to be reversed last year.  By comparison, the rest of Minnesota mostly was even from 2004-2008-2012.  Elasticity and all that.

        I think all of this can be explained by campaign effects. Obama contested, to some extent at least, Montana and the Dakotas in 2008 but not 2012, which affected adjacent parts of Minnesota; but McCain contested MN in 2008 whereas Obama did not - hence the Dem trend there. And of course Obama contested IN in 2008 but not 2012, which is reflected not just in that state but in areas where IN media markets spill into other states.

        Another thing I notice is that PA exhibits some of the same behavior; it stands out from other bordering states as having a distinctly red trend. Could it be an effect of the late Romney push there?

    •  Is this relative to the country? (0+ / 0-)

      Or is it simply in absolute terms?

      23 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); 08/12 PVIs

      by wwmiv on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 02:46:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

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

      I wonder whats going on in Northern New York, and its weird to think that a geographicaly large swath of South Carolina voted more democratic than 2008, yet the state still went for Romney stronger than it did for McCain.

      Really liking how Blue Alaska and Mississippi are on that map.  I think AK could go our way in 2016 if Clinton is the nominee, and possibly become a true tossup in 2020 if the trend continues.  It moved from giving bush a 25 point margin in 2004 to Romney only a 14 margin in 2012.

      Mississippi's gains on the other hand, are likely middling, and if any other voting positive voting trends occurs in the future, they probably won't be strong enough to win the state for a while.

      Swingnut since 2009, 22, Male, Democrat, CA-49 (home) CA-12 (college)

      by Ryan Dack on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:33:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  NY's North Country (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        has been basically Vermontifying for people who don't want to live in Vermont proper, which is why I think Bill Owens is in a really good spot. And Alaska is trending because Sarah Palin wasn't on the ticket anymore; while I think there is a blue trend there, it's much more slight.

        Yes, it is bread we fight for -- but we fight for roses, too! | Pro-transit young black urban progressive | SSP/DKE | -9, -7.79 | MO-05: come for the jazz, stay for the burnt ends | Yard signs don't vote.

        by gabjoh on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:59:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  On the KY counties that are blue, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf, KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      I can say that as far as Taylor County, there has been a large expansion of jobs there. They had a Fruit of the Loom plant close several years ago, and it is now been replaced by an Amazon.com fulfillment center. There is also a small college in Campbellsville.

      The counties near Bowling Green have experienced some economic growth as well. I-65 has been upgraded to 6 lanes from the Tennessee state line up to the Mammoth Cave area, and there is currently construction on the expansion from Horse Cave to Elizabethtown. Glasgow has taken advantage of this and from tolls being taken off the Cumberland Parkway. There is also a lot of auto jobs in the Glasgow area.

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

      by SouthernINDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:20:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Two random challengers for the UT Congress races (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, MichaelNY

    http://www.sltrib.com/...

    This Trib article is really a random collection of stuff that the Trib writers found, but it has a few electoral tidbits. Apparently Mia Love will have a challenger for the UT-04 nomination; Bob Fuehr, a retired telecom executive. Now it doesn't seem like he'll have a real chance, as Mia Love has Hatch's old campaign manager (the one that saved him from Tea Party oblivion) behind her, but Fuehr seems like the only halfway decent challenger to Love, only because he can probably self-fund, to a certain degree. There's also been grumblings over Mia Love being "yesterday's news", and though Fuehr probably won't be able to capture the grumbler vote, he could argue that Love isn't well-versed enough on the issues to debate Matheson (she certainly wasn't last time.

    Incidentally, Fuehr wasn't able to get the nomination for UT-02 last year (a much easier task than UT-04), so I wouldn't hold my breath this time. Either way, Fuehr's website is eye-rollingly boilerplate.

    The other challenger is Democrat Peter Clemens, a doctor. He wants to take on Rob Bishop in UT-01. Clemens likes sustainable energy, a "constitutional right to affordable healthcare", and lost 60-33% to state senator Allen Christensen last year. That's basically all you need to know about him, because he has no chance whatsoever. Oh, and he calls himself a "Mormocrat", saying that he's an "independent thinker" who just happens to be Mormon and tries to appeal to people with that fact.

    Nothing too big, but just a heads up. And here's an incredibly long, but informative podcast detailing a few Utah political issues, including how Mia Love is doing things differently this time, and how the Utah legislature sees Gov Gary Herbert (basically they see him as a spineless worm, and the Speaker of the House wants to run against him in 2016).

    Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

    by Gygaxian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:39:21 AM PDT

  •  old 1980s almanac of american politics (0+ / 0-)

    said that Ed Markey was "more a direct mail entrepreneur than a legislator". What exactly do you think they meant by that?

    RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

    by demographicarmageddon on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:47:50 AM PDT

  •  KY-SEN: Grimes was the keynote speaker (10+ / 0-)

    at the Nelson County Jefferson Jackson Dinner.

    She said she is unsure of her next step, but seemed to take a swipe at McConnell, criticizing politicians who voted against renewal of VAWA. Paul and McConnell both voted against it.

    •  I'd say she's definitely exploring it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY, SaoMagnifico

      she just needs to make sure all is in order before jumping in.  I read somewhere that Republican strategists know she has no record to attack, but on the other hand, she's fairly new to elected politics.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:37:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

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

      She keeps getting better at making speeches.

    •  Interesting choice of Bardstown (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      for her first J-J speech. It is a Democratic leaning county, which also is heavily Catholic (Grimes is also Catholic). This would be an area Grimes would need to run well in against McConnell.

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

      by SouthernINDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:47:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  MD-Sen: What's up with some of the Carson crap? (5+ / 0-)

    It's Maryland, it's not going to elect a Republican, let alone one that lumps homosexuality with bestiality and pedophilia.  Hell, that wouldn't even fly in Virginia.

    "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

    by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:31:57 PM PDT

    •  I was just wondering what the hype is over (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MichaelNY

      since I found a FB page on that with over 17K likes.  I also saw that it's for MI-Sen, not MD-Sen.  Which is odd as he lives and works in Maryland.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:35:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, I know about (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        the prayer breakfast thingy.  I also know about his homophobic remarks shortly after that.

        "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

        by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:39:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Grew up in Detroit (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          Much of the love came before his comments, but of course many Republicans believe what he says about homosexuality.

          20, CA-18 (home), CA-13 (school)
          politicohen.com
          Socially libertarian, moderate on foreign policy, immigration, and crime, liberal on everything else.
          UC Berkeley; I think I'm in the conservative half of this city. -.4.12, -4.92

          by jncca on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 03:56:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It was Fox News desperately trying to launch (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades, MichaelNY

        a "rising star" I don't think anyone outside the conservosphere had heard a word about him until he put his foot in his mouth.

        25, Practical Progressive Democrat (-9.38, -8.51), Gay, IN-02 - Defeat Wacky Jackie for 2014!

        by HoosierD42 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:38:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It was the Prayer Breakfast that did it. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MichaelNY

          These quoted remarks he made on FNC ended it: "Marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn't matter what they are. They don't get to change the definition."

          "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

          by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:44:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Bu-bu-but... (6+ / 0-)

      He has crossover appeal because he represents the new face of the Republican Party!

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

      by SaoMagnifico on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 05:50:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He really doesn't sound interested in (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, MichaelNY

      running for office, but wants to pursue other things.  I'm sure Fox News will hand him an hour every day if he wishes.

      But whatever chance of winning statewide in MD he had probably evaporated with his recent NAMBLA comments, followed by his "liberal plantation" whining.  If he wants to run for office (doubtful) maybe he should move to a red state where he can say dumb rightist shit and possibly survive it, and the GOP can happily fool themselves into thinking they're changing their face and making inroads with minorities.

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

      by Mike in MD on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:11:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  IN-8 (11+ / 0-)

    I have been hearing from some folks that an unnamed certain ex state rep with two first names and a handlebar mustache is seriously considering the race...

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

    I'm curious when the Republicans will quit this flirtation with Steve King and we can see what the actual field will look like.  If A.J. Spiker (a Paulist) runs and wins their nomination, Braley will have an easier time at the end of the day in my estimation.  I'm basing that off of GOP squabbling in our state.  

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

    It's going to be interesting to see how Hispanic Mormons vote in the future, and how much political power they're going to wield, especially in Utah and Arizona. I mean, they're probably the primary reason Russell Pearce was ousted, and they're getting to be a larger portion of the LDS population every year.

    Leftist Mormon in Utah, Born in Washington State, live in UT-04 (Matheson).

    by Gygaxian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:13:30 PM PDT

  •  NJ/KY-Redist: Those of you who are familiar with (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades, psychicpanda, WisJohn

    the process of the bipartisan commission in New Jersey probably know that the two parties essentially present their maps and the tiebreaker picks a winner. Well, I was looking to see what the Democrats actually proposed that lost out to the actual map and lo and behold, they never made it public... Did this plan get leaked anywhere? I couldn't find it after about 20 minutes of looking; all I found were descriptions that said Rothman and Garrett would have been in a "fair fight" district that, let's be honest, Rothman would have won given it was NJ in 2012, Obama underperformed in Bergen County, and Garrett is Garrett. I had been hoping to use that as the "what if it took place in early 2009" scenario, but I'd have to imagine that Jon Adler would have drawn the short end of the stick there and gotten destroyed by LoBiondo or Smith, or been deathmatched with Andrews, or maybe Rush Holt would have lost to Lenoard Lance.

    But anyway, I did stumble across these Kentucky redistricting proposals, four of them to be precise. One each from the state House and Senate and one each from Greg Stumbo and then the congressional delegation. Interestingly, it looks like the Dem controlled House and speaker Stumbo were trying to give Chandler more of those central KY/bluegrass counties that were Dem leaning but not due to coal, such as Marion that actually voted for the token challenger to Guthrie, but the GOP balked and wanted a status quo map. So Chandler got more coal-heavy ones like Wolfe that, while normally very Democratic downballot, wouldn't vote for Cap and Trade supporting Chandler. It's all very fascinating and I'll run the numbers when I get a chance but I'd imagine that Chandler would have been close to a coin flip if not a narrow winner under the Dems' own proposal. "Ben Chandler lifetime employment act" how ironic indeed.

    Anyway, we really have to keep targeting this district as it trended strongly Dem between 2007 and 2011 and was about 5% to the left of the state two years ago.

    •  I think in the NJ Dem map (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf

      they kept Cherry Hill in the 3rd.  And if John Adler hung on in 2010 over the invisible Republican he lost to (he represents me now), there'd be a stronger argument to keep Cherry Hill in the 3rd, but if not, Adler could move to Medford or Evesham or Marlton or something.  It's not hard.

      How odd that Cherry Hill is such a politically hot spot.  I lived the majority of my life in neighboring Haddonfield (still in the 1st) and I never thought of it like that.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:55:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was rather amazed that he kept it that close (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KingofSpades

        in retrospect, losing by just 3 points. I wonder if he wouldn't have gotten that staph infection and died had he not lost (by doing different things at the time), or if that was inevitable whether Shelley would have won the subsequent special election. I still think his district probably would have been on John Farmer's chopping block had Runyan never won though, but Rothman/Pascrell's made better sense for a Republican map due to population loss and only Farmer and the Republicans on the commission would know for sure I'd imagine. I'd still love to know how favorable their fair fight district was. I almost think Rothman would have beaten Garrett there in the actual district in 2012. He had like $2 million in the bank and would have gotten over $1 million from the DSCC, plus Menendez carried the district.

        •  I forgot to consider that. (0+ / 0-)

          It's possible the events would have unrolled differently, but a special election would have been somewhat likely.

          "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

          by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:15:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Stumbo was interested in making the 5th district (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, Stephen Wolf

      more favorable to one of his buddies in the legislature from Eastern Kentucky to run in once Hal Rogers retires. It cut out three heavily Republican counties, and ended up adding several Democratic ones in NE Kentucky.

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

      by SouthernINDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:07:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah looking at the map it's pretty apparent (0+ / 0-)

        but since this was never going to become law why leave Pulaski, Jackson, etc. in there. Anyway though, just crunching the numbers on the Stumbo map itself, the 6th gets .7% better under the 2011 average, the 5th 2% better, and the 1st 2% better. The 6th would have been D+5 in 2011 though, while the 1st was R+1.5 and the 5th still a pretty brutal R+4 and trending away. So had that map been enacted, Chandler probably still would have lost but by closer to 1-2% instead of 4.

        It does make me wonder though if had we somehow flipped the senate in 2008 and held it in 2010 whether the final map might have looked more similar to the one I drew above than the Stumbo proposal, which left counties like Nelson and Greenup in the 4th yet kept Pulaski through Jackson through Leslie, etc. in the 5th and I can't see them having done that unilaterally, but it was at least a good attempt with Republicans I suppose.

  •  WI-St. Sen Schultz gets a primary challenger (4+ / 0-)

    So it looks like Senator Dale Schultz has received a legit challenger in State Rep Howard Marklein:

    http://elections.wispolitics.com/...

    While the number of split ticket voters would still make this race a tossup if Marklein wins, I still think we would win it in that scenario.  

    Social Democrat, WI-05

    by glame on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:51:41 PM PDT

    •  Wow. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades, Skaje, MichaelNY

      I really thought we'd beat Marklein last year. If he does win the primary, that could gift us both the Senate seat, and the Assembly seat.

      I wonder if Scott Fitzgerald had anything to do with this...

      For those who may not know, this area, southwest WI, has been trending Dem for a while now (Obama carried all three Assembly districts that make up the Senate district last year; Kerry narrowly carried the Senate district in '04 as well), but still leans Republican at the legislative level.

      Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

      by WisJohn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:18:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If this looks juicy (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MichaelNY

        who would be the Dems' top tier here?  Did Baldwin also win this?

        "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

        by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:26:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not much of a bench that I know of. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KingofSpades, MichaelNY

          We had two out of the three Assembly seats from '06-'10, but Steve Hilgenberg died, and Phil Garthwaite (who was beat 59-41 in 2010) is likely done. He is back doing auctions and doing the farm report on the radio.

          Yes, Tammy won this district, but not as big as Obama, since Tommy Thompson is from Elroy, which is in the district.

          Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

          by WisJohn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:19:57 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What's the farm report? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            MichaelNY
            •  A radio station on updates on all things farming (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Audrid, gabjoh, MichaelNY

              things like output, blights to look out for, and the like.

              "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

              by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:24:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Farm report. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Audrid, MichaelNY

              The agriculture market reports. What the price of grain and livestock and commodities are for that particular day.
              http://www.agweb.com/...

              Don't ask me how to understand them. My dad knows, but I have no idea. I need to ask him.

              Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

              by WisJohn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:29:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I wonder what living on a farm is like. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                MichaelNY, kleinburger, Skaje

                The closest I've ever gotten is reading gay romances set on a farm.

                •  I love it. (4+ / 0-)

                  But then, my dad only does crops (corn and soy beans), so it isn't like what you may read or see where the whole family wakes up at the crack of dawn to do the chores every day. Mind you, some farms, like family dairy farms, are this way, for the most part. My dad will plant by the end of this month, assuming the weather cooperates, and then harvest in October. That is our farm. My dad helps our neighbor who has about 30 beef cows (not milking ones) when he asks.

                  I live in the city now for school, but when I am done, at the first opportunity (a decent job), I want to move back home to my rural county. I am a country boy. The city has its amenities, yes, but I love the peace and quiet, and the sense of calm I feel when I am in the country.

                  If you ever get to Wisconsin or Minnesota, send me a note, and I can show you our farm.

                  Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

                  by WisJohn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:21:39 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Well, considering TT's hometown is here (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            WisJohn

            it's still a good thing she won here.

            "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

            by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:25:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Sounds awesome! (0+ / 0-)

      We can make up for likely losing John Larson.

      "...and as I learned higher joys, so I learned neither to harm, nor to wish harm upon others." -Nietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

      by KingofSpades on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:23:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  wow (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stephen Wolf, WisJohn, MichaelNY

      They are idiots to primary him.  Schultz is in the bluest seat held by a Republican by sole virtue of being a moderate.

      •  Senator Donnelly called to remind you (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WisJohn, MichaelNY, Skaje, HoosierD42

        not to put it past them. I said it before and I'll say it again, that one is like the equivalent of us primarying Amy Klobuchar with Keith Ellison while Erik Paulsen was drawn out of his house seat and then beating Ellison in the General.

        Unfortunately the Wisconsin senate margin is large enough where Republicans can lose Schultz next year and it not matter, especially when people like Lehman are absolutely doomed when the new district takes effect... Such a shame this state doesn't have the (referendum) initiative. Does anyone know if we have any other good pick up opportunities next year? I'm assuming probably not since we tried to recall all of the low hanging fruit.

        •  One other, but only if a retirement. (3+ / 0-)

          SD-19 in the Appleton area. Sen. Mike Ellis, the Senate president, is getting up there in years, and might retire. Even then, with mid-term turnout and Walker likely to do well in SD-19, it would be lean-R at best. However, if Outagamie County Exec. and former Assembly maj. leader Tom Nelson were to run, then it might be tilt-D.

          Obama beat Romney by 12 votes (45794 to 45782) here.

          Ellis needs to retire for this to be competitive, though. Don't know if he will or not, however.

          Gay farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -7.00, -3.13, 2012 Daily Kos Elections Pick'Em runner-up.

          by WisJohn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:08:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site