« CA-50: Angelenos, Join Wes Clark & Support Busby | Main | Band of Brothers: Feb. 8th Reminder »
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted by DavidNYCNeedless to say, I'm interested in TX-28 and CA-50 at the moment. Plus, of course, the Band of Brothers gathering on Feb. 8th. How 'bout you?
P.S. Forgot to mention that earlier this week, Patty Wetterling decided to run for MN-06, setting up a contested primary with El Tinklenberg.
Posted at 12:55 AM in Open Threads | Technorati
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2135
Comments
I am obviously interested in the local races. Especially MN-01 (Fightin' Dem Tim Walz), MN-02 (St. Sen. Sharon Marko is going to beat the goofy Coleen Rowley in a primary), and MN-06 (Wetterling v. Tinklenberg in a DFL primary).
But I have given money out of state, and I am really excited about Jon Tester's campaign. I joined in the blog-swarm and gave to Ciro Rodriguez's effort as well. Paul Hackett is the other guy I am keeping a watchful eye on, he's a bad-ass.
Posted by: DFLer22 ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.swingstateproject.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 5, 2006 10:34 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
NV-03. Tessa Hafen recently entered the race against incumbent Republican Jon Porter. She's Harry Reid's spokesperson (or was until about a week ago), and will make the race competitive. Good info from local blogs here, here, and here.
One thing that interests me about it is that she's only 29 years old -- that's like, my age.
Sarah
Carter for Nevada
Posted by: Sarah R Carter at February 5, 2006 01:05 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm with DFLer22. Patty Wetterling threw a monkey wrench in the MN-06 open seat this week by announcing she's running for the seat already being pursued by Elwyn Tinklenberg. Conventional wisdom suggests that Wetterling becomes the immediate frontrunner here due to her name recognition, but I'm not convinced that's the case considering Tinklenberg's high-profile among the party activists who will be choosing between them in the endorsement process that both candidates say they're gonna abide by. The people who Tinklenberg has been courting for months may take umbrage to Patty's flip-flop and may calculate that Tinklenberg's social conservatism positions him better to win in November in this conservative district. I'm conflicted between the two myself as both have their assets and liabilities. I think either one would probably beat Michele Bachmann, but probably wouldn't beat Jim Knoblach or Phil Krinkie. It's gonna be an exciting spring in Minnesota.
Posted by: Mark at February 5, 2006 01:34 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm interested in my district, NY-13, which you should be too as Vito Fossella's the only Republican representing New York City. He's not exactly a RINO either.
We finally got our candidate, Stephen Harrison. However, all of our current officeholders bailed on the opportunity to take this district. I don't know anything about Harrison (or much about the other people either, as I'm new to this area) but the sense I'm getting is that our heavy hitters passed, which is disappointing.
Someone said Harrison is a bit conservative. I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is and that's what it takes to win Staten Island, so be it. That's a reddish zone in ultra-blue NYC so I'm willing to give him some slack.
The other point of this race is that even if he doesn't win, a strong showing will underscore Vito's weakness and maybe we'll get one of the heavy hitters to not be so cowardly in 2008. If 2006 is a good year for Democrats, which it should be, it's very possible to do just that. We'll lay the groundwork for 2008, which unfortunately is needed for the local Democrats more than the electorate.
I'm starved for information here. I get the little I can from Retaking NY-13 and the occasional post on Veto Vito and Kos' NY-13 tag but its still just a trickle on all of them. That was excusable when all the candidates were still mulling it over but now that we have one, I want some real coverage.
Posted by: NYGreg at February 5, 2006 01:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
MN-06 is an awkward situation.
Wetterling, though, brings three things into the race - maybe four - that perhaps compensate for the awkwardness of her sudden candidacy:
1) $289,000 from her Senate primary warchest - $100K more than Tinkleberg's cash on hand;
2) media attention to the race;
3) I predict she'll soon have an endorsement from Emily's List - they were backing Klobucar for the Senate
but if I remember right, they put money and muscle behind Wetterling in the last cycle,
and she can probably coax her way back onto that short, powerful fund-raising list;
4) Tinkleberg is a social conservative, which may indeed be a good fit for the local district.
But to the best of my knowledge, socially conservatve Democrats are not terribly well-organized nationwide,
and don't funnel $ and volunteers into out-of-state Congressional races.
There's no Democratic equivalent of the Fund for Growth yet, unless I've missed its profile on the Net.
So perhaps Wetterling can bring resources into the race from safe districts elsewhere.
Posted by: Christopher Walker at February 5, 2006 02:05 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I think the Mountain West races are going to be the most interesting to watch. Despite all going for Bush in '04, we're going to easily win NM-Gov, NM-Sen, WY-Gov, and AZ-Gov, have excellent pickup opportunities in MT-Sen, CO-Gov, CO-7, NM-1, and AZ-8, and potentially competitive races for AZ-Sen, NV-Sen and NV-Gov. A strong showing in the mountains in '06 would have implications for '08 strategy, and lend strength to a Richardson VP pick.
Posted by: Roadrunner at February 5, 2006 02:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Regading MN-02: Sharon Marko is just embarrassing herself. Coleen Rowley is not a typical candidate, and she has certainly stumbled, but she also has the strong backing of Howard Dean and I predict will be recovering rather nicely. Marko has been a State Senator for years and has no record to show for it -- oh, except she recently supported our DINO mayor in St. Paul (a Bush supporter), who was crushed in the November election. The only thing I personally know of to come from Marko entering the race is that people I know who hadn't yet given money to Rowley started doing so, including me.
In MN-06, Patty Wetterling is treading in dangerous territory. The "She's now just another politician" can be just as damning to her as last election's "she's not ready" Republican theme, which hurt her much more than the "she's too liberal" themes. I hope she staffs up with more talented campaigners than she had the first time and gets rid of all the consultants who robbed her blind during her senate run. I'd much rather see Patty in congress than El, a guy who took his campaign announcement as an opportunity to express support for a federal amendment to ban gay marriage, making him a Right-Wing Pander Bear right out of the gate.
Posted by: DelNorte at February 5, 2006 03:22 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
This is a little awkward. I actually wrote this repsonse for the post before this (re- California's 50th CD race and the panoply of southern California candidates who were coming to a Busby-Clark rally yesterday). But the comments there don't seem to be working and the post goes just fine here too. It's all about the race to replace one of the most corrupt-- and entrenched-- Republicrooks west of Tom DeLay, his pal and Randy "Duke" Cunningham's pal from the Inland Empire: Jerry Lewis.
RBH, check a little closer before you start jumping for joy. I'm not sold on a candidate just because he calls himself a Democrat and decides to run. (And if I've learned one thing about Rahm Emanuel's regime at the DCCC, I now know that even if someone calls himself a Democrat it doesn't mean he's not a Republican!) I don't know much about Contreras-- I've been looking at his website and I spoke to him on the phone one and a half times-- and I'm reserving judgment. I am so into getting rid of Lewis that I should be sold and should be writing a check to help. But I have to know more about Contreras, why he's running and how he feels-- and plans to vote-- on the issues. You don't get that on his website and I didn't get it on the phone. I keep telling myself he's new to this and he'll be fine, just give him a little time. Maybe that's the case. Or maybe not.
Posted by: DownWithTyranny at February 5, 2006 04:40 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Del Norte,
Well I guess Sharon Marko is also embarassing the esteemed Congresswoman Betty McCollum. Marko has honorably served in the State Senate and is a consistent center-left vote. Yeah, I don't agree with her endorsing Kelly, but I can look past that. She will be a very viable candidate, and to say the least, know what she is doing. I am about to pen a check to Marko. I would not have donated any money into the 2nd district race had she not entered the fold.
Tinklenberg is a former Methodist Minister, I don't think he was pandering. His views actually seem to fit with the mainstream of the 6th congressional district. That primary should be very interesting.
Posted by: DFLer22 at February 5, 2006 05:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
CT-02. This is going to be a close congressional race, and we have a good chance to vote out our Republican congressman, and replace him with Joe Courtney.
The non-partisan Cook Political Report now lists the 2nd district as a "tossup" - one of only 10 ultra-competitive Republican-held seats in the nation. The Cook Report previously had the 2nd listed as "lean Republican."
Our candidate is better--if he has enough money to get the word out, we'll win. I hope some of the national blogs will take an interest, this is a winnable race in '06.
Posted by: MVD at February 5, 2006 07:07 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
CT on the whole. We have three races in total in the House. To get the House back we probably need at least 2.
Posted by: Democraticavenger at February 5, 2006 08:27 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I'm interested in my district, NY-13, which you should be too as Vito Fossella's the only Republican representing New York City. He's not exactly a RINO either.
We finally got our candidate, Stephen Harrison. However, all of our current officeholders bailed on the opportunity to take this district. I don't know anything about Harrison (or much about the other people either, as I'm new to this area) but the sense I'm getting is that our heavy hitters passed, which is disappointing.
Someone said Harrison is a bit conservative. I don't know if that's true or not, but if it is and that's what it takes to win Staten Island, so be it. That's a reddish zone in ultra-blue NYC so I'm willing to give him some slack.
The other point of this race is that even if he doesn't win, a strong showing will underscore Vito's weakness and maybe we'll get one of the heavy hitters to not be so cowardly in 2008. If 2006 is a good year for Democrats, which it should be, it's very possible to do just that. We'll lay the groundwork for 2008, which unfortunately is needed for the local Democrats more than the electorate.
I really want more information here. I get the little I can from Retaking NY-13 and the occasional post on Veto Vito and Kos' NY-13 tag but its still just a trickle on all of them. That was excusable when all the candidates were still mulling it over but now that we have one, I want some real coverage.
Posted by: NYGreg at February 5, 2006 08:35 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
PA-Gov. now that the corrupt refs. gave it to Pittsburgh i think Swann is going to fly up in polls.
Posted by: D in FL. at February 5, 2006 10:30 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
I am still interested in Misssouri's U.S. Senate race. We have the dynamic of stem cell research legislation also being on the ballot, pitting fundamentalist republicans against the fiscal bunch. Senator Talent has finally come out against stem cell research and I am hopeful that his urban supporters either flip or stay home and help Claire.
Posted by: Kyle SF at February 6, 2006 12:25 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
On Saturday, and continuing through this week, we are having the Democratic caucuses here in Massachusetts to elect delegates to our state convention in June. It was fun in our town, as we were able to elect our uncontested slate for Deval Patrick to be our next governor. The real surprise of the day was when Deval showed up at our caucus. We are really looking forward to turning the already very blue state of MA into a unanimous shade of blue when we take back the corner office on Beacon Hill in November.
Posted by: RoscoeRoni at February 6, 2006 10:51 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
By whatever strange coincidence, two of the races mentioned above are profiled on a single ActBlue page:
http://www.actblue.com/list/Defeat+Exxon+PAC%27s+incumbents
The page highlights Democrats who are running against GOP incumbents who take money from Exxon/Mobil's bloated PAC.
There are donation boxes on it for Joe Courtney and also for Claire McCaskill,
who's running for Senate in Missouri against GOP incumbent Jim Talent.
An easy and convenient venue to drop a couple of bucks into the campaigns of good Democrats
who are fighting yet another group of corrupt cronies and corporate yes-men (besides the Abramoff scandal).
Posted by: Christopher Walker at February 6, 2006 12:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
The lone Oregon House (R), Greg Walden, is going to be challenged!
Or so says a local blog:
http://loadedorygun.blogspot.com/
I'm psyched, I've been disgusted by the prospect of not having anyone challenge this wacko, even if he does represent the vast rural Eastern part of the state.
50 State strategy, here we come!
Posted by: verasoie at February 7, 2006 12:28 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
As I was talking with friends yesterday, I realized one complete region of the country we haven't really discussed much at all here for a long time is the South, and especially the deep South. Yeah, it's become an almost-impossible area at the Presidential level, but I would strongly argue we cannot write the whole region off, and I'm afraid the national Democratic Party is moving too far in that direction. We've got some good candidates running for house seats across the region, have very competitive governors' races in Arkansas and Florida, good women candidates in tough but potentially competitive races for governor in Alabama and Georgia, Harold Ford in Tennessee, etc., etc. Just because it's hard, and just because many Southern Democrats are more conservative than the national party doesn't mean we should write the region off.
Posted by: IndianaProgressive at February 7, 2006 08:46 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
IndianaProgressive is right to remind us about races in the South.
Another one of interest to me is the race for Chief Financial Officer in the state of Florida.
The party is fielding a fine candidate, Alex Sink.
She's a past president of Florida's largest bank, so there's no ambiguity about her qualifications,
and she should benefit from Senator Nelson's coattails,
since many Floridians will be reluctant to vote for the GOP candidate, Katherine Harris, in that race.
The Democrats need to build a strong bench in Florida and Sink seems like a great addition to
other new faces like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Betty Castor's daughter Kathy.
(Am I imagining it, or is there a rather hopeful surge of women candidates in battleground and even Red states, picking up the Democratic banner?)
Posted by: Christopher Walker at February 7, 2006 11:38 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Consider this sad fact -- in the 2000, 2002, and 2004 election cycles for U.S. Senate, in the South Democrats won only one open seat (Bill Nelson), and defeated one GOP incumbent (Mark Pryor). That's it.
And Christopher, I don't think you're imagining the growth of women Democratic candidates in the South, and in fact I think it might be a potentially winning strategy. As uncomfortable as I think everyone here is talking about racial and gender politics, the fact is we lose in the South because very few whites vote for Democrats -- and unless we can chance this and keep/expand the black base of the party in the region, we'll continue to lose. I think perhaps moderate women candidates can appeal to voters (male and female), especially younger/first time voters, who are conservative, independent, typically Republican but open minded.
Posted by: IndianaProgressive at February 7, 2006 12:16 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
We've got two great races here in North Carolina. Our biggest opportunity is in the 11th District. Corrupt GOP representative Charles Taylor is up against former Washington Redskins quarterback Heath Schuler. This is from mydd.com
Charles Taylor owns a bank--the Blue Ridge Savings Bank--in which the top official, bank president Hayes Martin, who was also Taylor's campaign treasurer, pleaded guilty to fraud and money laundering for making illegal loans. The beneficiary of the illegal $1.3 million loan was Charles Cagle, 11th District Republican Chair and a Taylor friend and campaign contributor. Cagle also pleaded guilty. Their sworn court testimony showed that Taylor micromanages all operations at the bank and was in full knowledge of the illegal loans. Yet Taylor successfully thwarted any investigation of himself. Jackson County was even forced to garnish Taylor's congressional wages in order to collect back taxes. And this was for one of the wealthiest Members of Congress!
Taylor's shady banking practices aren't restricted to the United States. Taylor owns a bank in Russia where his business partner is a former KGB General. Russian newspapers report that Taylor may be fleecing the Russians as well, with interest rates as high as 60%! Congressman Taylor's financial disclosure forms appear to lack complete and detailed information on his Russian banking interests including the Columbus Investment Company, of which the KGB general is also a partner.
He's also taken money from Abramoff and has no apologies for it.
The second race is in the 8th District. Where GOP representative Robin Hayes is being challenged by one of the "fighting democrats" Tim Dunn. If military service is going to help democrats win, it should be here. This district is a bit of a split personality. It has stretches from Union County (Charlotte suburbs) over to (but not including) Fort Bragg. I suspect many of those living in the eastern edge of this district have military service. The financials here aren't looking positive.
I wish there was more of a push in my district (NC-9), but I can't even find out whose running against her.
Posted by: cltpie28 at February 7, 2006 02:02 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
Cltpie -- How long has it been widely known just how corrupt Taylor is? And is it resonating in the district like we need it to? I'm a little surprised he's not in a weaker position than he is -- the district is not THAT right wing, is it? I don't picture it as any more conservative than Tom Delay's or Bob Ney's, and it sounds like Taylor is just as bad, or worse.
Posted by: IndianaProgressive at February 7, 2006 02:39 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment