Swing State Project

« CT-Sen: What Is Joe Thinking? | Main | CA-50: Open Thread »

Monday, April 10, 2006

House 2006: Where Their Targets Are

Posted by DavidNYC

One factor you always look at when targeting House races are the simple demographics - in particular, what's the partisan breakdown on the presidential level? Naturally, your inclination is to go after districts where there's a mismatch - ie, where the Congressperson is of one party, but his/her district voted for the other party for president.

What does it look like on our side? Forty-one Democratic members of the House sit in districts which were actually won by George Bush in 2004. Here they are:

State	CD	Member	PVI
TX	17	Edwards	R+17.7
UT	2	Matheson	R+16.9
MS	4	Taylor	R+16.3
ND	AL	Pomeroy	R+13.1
MO	4	Skelton	R+10.8
SD	AL	Herseth	R+10
VA	9	Boucher	R+7
KY	6	Chandler	R+6.6
PA	17	Holden	R+6.6
AL	5	Cramer	R+6.4
WV	1	Mollohan	R+5.7
SC	5	Spratt	R+5.6
CO	3	Salazar	R+5.6
MN	7	Peterson	R+5.6
IL	8	Bean	R+5.2
OK	2	Boren	R+4.9
LA	3	Melancon	R+4.8
KS	3	Moore	R+4.2
TN	6	Gordon	R+3.8
TN	4	Davis	R+3.2
NC	7	McIntyre	R+2.8
GA	3	Marshall	R+2.7
NC	2	Etheridge	R+2.7
MI	1	Stupak	R+2.4
FL	2	Boyd	R+2.2
TX	15	Hinojosa	R+1.4
GA	2	Bishop	R+1.1
TX	27	Ortiz	R+1.1
AR	2	Snyder	R+0.1
TN	8	Tanner	D+0.1
WV	3	Rahall	D+0.3
WA	3	Baird	D+0.3
OH	6	Strickland	D+0.4
AR	4	Ross	D+0.5
AR	1	Berry	D+0.5
OR	5	Hooley	D+0.5
TX	28	Cuellar	D+0.6
IA	3	Boswell	D+1.4
NY	1	Bishop	D+3.3
CA	18	Cardoza	D+3.4
CA	47	Sanchez	D+4.7

You'll notice that the bottom twelve seats have D+ PVIs. Recall that the PVI combines the last two presidential election results and compares them to the national average. In these twelve districts, this means that Bush won the district, but did so by less than his national average and/or that Bush made a considerable improvement on his 2000 showing. In any event, quite a few of these districts - including those with R+ PVIs - went only very narrowly for Bush.

Regardless, this is the list where you'd expect to find the GOPs top targets, especially at the top of the list. But surprisingly few of these people are under any kind of serious attack. Here are some names that stand out, one way or another:

TX-17: Chet Edwards (who represents the 21st most-conservative district in the nation, amazingly) does have a spirited challenge from an Iraq War vet - but Van Taylor has no prior political experience, and Edwards has incredibly good relations with the veteran community. I'm sweating this one out, but this race still favors Edwards.

ND-AL: Earl Pomeroy just dodged a (fairly lazy) bullet when the ND GOP decided to nominate a political unknown instead of an experienced state legislator. Hey, if they wanna shoot themselves in the foot, I won't stop `em.

SD-AL: Stephanie Herseth similarly faces a weak challenger.

SC-05: The GOP is making a very serious effort here, raising tons of money for one-term state Rep. Ralph Norman. But an internal poll by John Spratt's campaign showed him totally cruising. If Spratt was able to hang on in 1994, when everything went against us, why does the GOP think it can knock him off now, when everything is against them?

IL-08: Melissa Bean is, of course, a freshman who improbably knocked off a zillion-year incumbent last time out. She faces a rich self-funder, and she's probably among our most vulnerable reps.

LA-03: Ah, the mystery district. No one is quite sure what happened to LA-03's demos after the devastation of Katrina. This big unknown is what keeps me up at night, considering that Charlie Melancon, a freshman, won by just 600 votes in 2004. A friend experienced in Louisiana politics assures me that things look good for us here, but I'm still nervous.

GA-08: This is the former GA-03 (Georgia Republicans, worshipping at the altar of St. DeLay, also did their own mid-decade redistricting). The new district supposedly gave Bush 61% of the vote, up from 56%. Jim Marshall faces a strong challenge from a well-funded former Congressman, Mac Collins. That said, Marshall won the seat by just one percent in 2002, only to win a rematch two years later by 26 points. Collins will need more than redistricting to carry him over the top.

GA-12: Not on this list, but could be. (See explanation immediately above.) It went for Kerry 53-46, but might narrowly be a Bush district now. John Barrow (along with Bean) was one of only two Dems to beat GOP incumbents last time out, and he's facing a rematch from the guy he beat, one-termet Max Burns. This race, however, does not present the same kind of challenge that GA-08 does.

IA-03: Leonard Boswell has not been in good health of late, sadly. Bos has a pretty strong challenger, Iowa Senate Co-President Jeff Lamberti. But Bos is leading in the money race (so far), and as you can see, the district is still lean-Dem.

As far is this list goes, that's it. What I mean is that I haven't even heard a whisper of a serious challenge to anyone else on that list - and even some of the names I did mention aren't facing real opposition. Moreover, look how Republican a lot of these districts are! Jim Matheson, Dan Boren, Ben Chandler - they're just letting these guys walk. The only other places I'm aware of that the GOP is seriously contest are the open seats in OH-06 and VT-AL.

Now, don't get me wrong here: I am absolutely, absolutely not counseling complacency, or suggesting we've got this one in the bag, or anything like that at all. We have tons of work cut out for us. Rather, I'm pointing out the simple fact that the GOP has forty-one prime targets and is only mustering a serious assault against a handful of them. This just empirically confirms something we've probably all felt to be true for a while: The GOP is very much on the defensive this year. And that gives us a lot of opportunities to expand the playing field.

Posted at 04:24 PM in 2006 Elections - House | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2276

Comments

One advantage I guess of getting clocked a couple of elections in a row is that we've lost most of what we have to lose, and Dems in red districts (Edwards, Matheson, Moore, Spratt, etc.) have earned votes of Republicans in bad years, so I think they should be fine in a good year.

I've also been nervous about the whole of post-storm Louisiana politics. I took a look at Craig Romero's website (the guy challenging Charlie Melancon -- he almost made the run-off in '04), and he mentions Nancy Pelosi almost as often as Melancon. That type of stuff might work in a good year for your party, but not in a bad one.

Posted by: IndianaProgressive at April 10, 2006 05:36 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

How old of a guy is Van Taylor just out of curiosity? Honestly, I'm much more nervous for Chet Edwards than I expected I would be a couple of months ago.

And I still can't imagine there being much chance of taking out John Spratt in SC-05. Is there a reason why the GOP is so optimistic about their chances with Norman as opposed to the recent deadbeats who've run for this seat and gotten their clocks cleaned?

As one of IA-03's newest residents, Leonard Boswell will be getting at least one vote he otherwise wouldn't have. The meltdown of Maytag, one of the district's largest employers which is likely to cease to exist in the months ahead, it doesn't seem likely that voters here will be particularly receptive to the GOP message, but the saturation of Des Moines suburbs with insurance industry yuppies is a problem. Lamberti is the kind of guy who can consolidate the support of these voters the way that Boswell's last two challengers were not. I'm pretty nervous for him.

GA-12 is less scary to me than GA-08. Marshall's landslide margin in the early poll is encouraging, but something tells me this race will get MUCH closer.

Melissa Bean remains endangered Dem #1 on my list.

Melancon's seat is certainly a question mark, but would barely make my top-five list of most vulnerable seats.

The district on your list that surprised me most was Ike Skelton in MO-04. I had no idea it was more Republican than South Dakota. Scary stuff for when he retires.

Posted by: Mark at April 10, 2006 08:14 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Ike does have three sons. Two of them (Ike V and Jim) are currently in the military. Ike the fifth is in the Navy in Japan. Jim is in the army.

Sure, there are examples of where the whole 'son succeeding his father' thing went awry. Also, I guess it would be a bit of a shock if one of his sons ran for the seat.

When Ike does retire, for all we know, I might be in that district.

But, he'll probably be around for awhile. All those Republicans are probably yearning for a shot at this seat, but they're not going to get it without having to put work their hardest.

Posted by: RBH at April 10, 2006 09:07 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

but they're not going to get it without having to work their hardest.

Ok, that's better.

Lousy overrated fingers.

Posted by: RBH at April 10, 2006 09:09 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Congressman Mac Collins (Ret. R-GA) has a 12 year conservative record compared to Liberal Democrat Jim Marshall’s 4 years of putting his wet finger in the air to test which way the wind is blowing.

That means that in Georgia, Mac wins hands down and Marshall goes back to chasing ambulances. This isn’t New York son.

_ Emmanuel Goldstein

Posted by: E. Goldstein at April 10, 2006 09:20 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah, Google News is really paying off.

It shouldn't be a surprise that ultrapartisan Georgia Republicans want to get rid of Jim Marshall. After all, they want another seat for a rubber stamp Republican.

Maybe Zell will send another check to Jim Marshall (yes, that did happen in 2004. Apparently Zell didn't get the memo about Marshall being a "Liberal Democrat")

Also, in the eyes of the GOP, I'm sure that all the Democrats in the House are all "Liberal Democrats".

Posted by: RBH at April 10, 2006 09:39 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah, something I can never get about Republicans: how can they say that someone is both unprincipled ("...4 years of putting his wet finger in the air to test which way the wind is blowing") AND a flaming Liberal at the same time?

This is reality, Greg.

Posted by: HellofaSandwich at April 10, 2006 09:46 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Liberal Democrat, huh? I didn't realize Marshall was in the House of Commons. :P

Funny how he capitalized liberal but not conservative.

Posted by: Rob at April 10, 2006 10:22 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah, Google News is really paying off.

Ouch!

Posted by: DavidNYC at April 10, 2006 10:25 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Both CQ Politics and Cook Report rate OH-06 as a Toss-up or No Clear Favrite. Cook rates IL-08 also as a Toss-up, however CQ rates it as Leans Dem.
These are the two districts at the top of my watch list. I'm a little less worried about Bean. The Repubs had a nasty and expensive primary fight, the winner received about 43% (Mc Sweeney). Mc Sweeney has money, however, the woman who toppled Former Rep Phil Crane has positioned herself well politically in this Republican District. OH-06 is another story., although it is Cook rated D+0, the Dem candidarte, State Sen Charlie Wilson has opened the raced by flubbing the filing and has to win the primary by write-in. Latest reports are that the RNCC has already dumped $89K for TV ads there.

New Jersey closed today. Candidates actually filed for NJ-02 & NJ-04.
NJ-02, rated Cook D+4 held by the band of 94 member Lo Biondo-R, will see a lower tier challenge from Fairfield Twp Vice-May Viola Thomas-Hughes (this is a very small community in Cumberland County near Bridgeton) or Henry David Marcus a former West Hartford CT Justice of the Peace, residing in Smithville, Atlantic County and is not seeing regular Dem organ support and is running on the "Change The Course" banner in all 7 counties.

NJ-04, political newcomer Gary Schiavone of Lakewood, Ocean County will be the Democratic Candidate against Rep.Chris Smith in this Cook rated R+1 District.

Too bad there are not top tier challenges in either of these Districts.

Looking forward to watching NJ-07, State Assemblywoman Stender vs. Cong Mike Ferguson-R and to a less hopeful extent (but not impossible) NJ-05 Aronshon vs. Garrett-R. Aronshon does face oposition from Camille Abate running on the slogan line "A New Spine For Congress". Aronshon has the regular Democratic County Partyline endorsements in this Cook R+4 District.

Posted by: Predictor at April 10, 2006 10:40 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

looks like de Blasio is not jumping in in NY13

NY13

Posted by: jonahinnyc at April 10, 2006 10:52 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Bean? I'd be worried about her, given the revelations that the unions in her district are openly backing the candidacy of a pro-labor independent:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/4/10/202830/682

If that guy gets even the slightest traction, Bean's goose is cooked.

Posted by: HellofaSandwich at April 10, 2006 10:57 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Add to NJ:
Tom Wyka of Parsippany, Morris County did manage to get 5 County organizational line support in this Cook R+5 District to challenge Cong. Rodney Frelinghuysen, who is considered a mod-lib republican.
Congressmen Frank Pallone (D-6), Steve Rothman (D-9), Rush Holt (D-12) and Bill Pascrell (D-8), all received semi to unorganized (slogan lines, organizational support lines pending) last minute lower tier challengers in their safe seats.
Robert Andrews (D-1) and Donald Payne (D-10) will not have repub opposition.

Posted by: Predictor at April 10, 2006 11:01 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Bean pissed off labor in one of the wealthiest CD's in the nation with one of the highest % of white collar workers. Other than a possible loss of funding, this was a smart move for Bean in this non-union district. The minor party candidate will do little damage, less than the damage Kathy Salvi & State Rep Churchill did to Mc Sweeney.

We'll need to rely on Melissa's decent bankroll and DCCC and Net roots support.
I agree with CQ that Bean still has the advantage.

How many Dem candidates/congressmen have been brutalized for Union ties in Republican white collar Districts?

Posted by: Predictor at April 10, 2006 11:09 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Agreed. The Bean situation took a serious turn for the worse here today.

Posted by: DavidNYC at April 10, 2006 11:13 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yeah.

In the scheme of things, I guess those unions would be happy with Rep. McSweeney, even if that causes the Congress to stay with the GOP.

I would hope the most intense CAFTA-related efforts are actually waged against Republicans. Instead of replacing a Democrat with an even worse alternative.

Posted by: RBH at April 10, 2006 11:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

It turns out that IL-8th's third party candidate William Scheurer, ran against Bean in the 2004 Dem Congressional Primary and lost 78% to 22%.

Posted by: Predictor at April 10, 2006 11:18 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Scheurer has been on the radar screen for a few months now, he's not a surprise entry, and doubtfully a big threat. Mc Sweeney is unlikely to get all of the 57% of the vote he did not get in the primary.

Posted by: Predictor at April 10, 2006 11:22 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Dumb move by labor in IL-08. Having control of the House is a lot more important for their agenda than punishing one member on CAFTA. Since the majority controls what bills come up for a vote, there is a pretty good chance that neither CAFTA nor Bankruptcy (the two things many Dems are mad at Bean for) would have come to a vote in a Democratic House.

Posted by: John Mills at April 10, 2006 11:45 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Predictor, isn't Bean's netroots support going to be reduced greatly from last time, given that she's on Atrios's list of losers in his sidebar? A lot of the netroots gave up on her after her estate tax and bankruptcy votes, since those can't be explained as things that are wildly popular in her district that she had to vote for to keep her seat. I don't think many net folks are going to be able to work up much enthusiasm for her.

Posted by: KCinDC at April 11, 2006 11:19 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Well KCinDC, If Atrios thinks Bean is a loser or should be a loser to Mc Sweeney, I have no respect for that. Mc Sweeney is a right-wing pig, Bean is not. If anyone has sincere interest in obtaining a Dem Congress she should be supported.

Posted by: Predictor at April 11, 2006 01:07 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm not suggesting Bean isn't preferable to McSweeney, just saying that she really pissed off the netroots, just as you say she pissed off the unions. There's a lot of anger among the netroots at Democrats who voted for estate tax repeal and the bankruptcy bill. The netroots don't understand those votes, which they see as a completely unnecessary sellout of Democratic principles, and they're probably going to give a lot less to Bean this time around since they view her as a disappointment. People don't have infinite money to give, and they're likely going to give it to candidates they can feel better about.

Posted by: KCinDC at April 11, 2006 01:49 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

And as I said above she already has a huge bankroll and is getting DCCC support, so, even if she doesn't get the Netroots she had last time, she has other resources. Different game plan this time. N'est-ce pas?

Posted by: Predictor at April 11, 2006 01:53 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Bean has been a bit of a disappointment in some ways, but she retains a spot on Emily's List among the recomended candidates, as well as on the DCCC's list of 10 vulnerable incumbents. Both powerful sources of funding. If the netroots community flag in support, it's understandable, but probably not a major factor in retaining the seat.

If I lived in the district, I'd certainly vote for her. But as an out-of-state Democrat with slender resources there are other races that attract my attention.

Posted by: Christopher Walker at April 11, 2006 01:55 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Well, I'm thankful for the info provided by KCinDC, so, I'll put Bean back on my contribute list and advise my friends and rels who contribute to do the same, although I fully expect the DCCC et al to target this race for $$$.

As a social lefty but fiscal moderate/conservative, I don't find Bean a disappointment, compared to Democrats Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller or Nelson-NB, etc.

Posted by: Predictor at April 11, 2006 04:30 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

If I lived in IL-08, I'd vote for Bean and possibly campaign for her as a means to an end (Democratic House), but I wouldn't do one thing more for her than I had to based on her dismal voting record. I'm the kind of voter who has little use for any Democrat who endorses abominations like CAFTA, repealing the estate tax, and supporting predatory bankruptcy laws.

Posted by: Mark at April 11, 2006 05:29 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yup and if she had voted in the opposite direction on those issues based on the voting patterns and demographics of her district, you'd be supporting a definite loser. You may not be thrilled about her Mark but the alternative is worse.
The real abomination is the war in Iraq which Lieberman and other dems support.

Posted by: Predictor at April 11, 2006 06:05 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Predictor, are you saying Bean's district is full of people who not only are enthusiastic supporters of estate tax repeal and the bankruptcy bill, but also base their votes mainly on those issues? I find that hard to believe, but I've been wrong before.

Posted by: KCinDC at April 11, 2006 06:57 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Predictor, tax cuts maybe, but do you really believe that there's a sweeping demand in IL-08 for CAFTA, bankruptcy laws written by credit card companies, and the repeal of an estate tax that affects less than 2% of the population? I can't see what she has to gain by any of these votes, unless there's a major credit card company whose headquarters is located in her district.

And at the risk of contradicting my last message, I would probably hold my nose and vote for Lieberman if I had a chance to. I have little affinity for the man, but the slaying of this dragon at the hands of Democratic Party activists would become a national PR nightmare. Lieberman is our party's McCain, fairly or unfairly lionized as a consensus builder able to get past petty partisanship. If Connecticut Democrats vote him out in a primary, it would gift-wrap the Republicans a campaign narrative that only "radical liberals" are welcome in the Democratic Party....and they'll wave Lieberman around as a bloody T-shirt in front of independents and GOP-leaning swing voters right up until election day.

Once we become a majority party, we can start punishing the dissenters. Until then, I'm of the mind that we work with rather than against the Joe Liebermans and Melissa Beans of the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Mark at April 11, 2006 07:15 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mark, don't worry if I had to vote for Lieberman over a republican in a general election, I surely would as you would with Bean. IL-8 is literally one of the wealthiest CD's in the nation, so, no, it won't hurt her as much if she was in a blue collar union district.

From Almanac of American Politics 2006 IL-8:

"Schaumburg may not be nationally known, but it is one of America's major corporate headquarters.."
“The tone of life is not elite, but people here are affluent.”
Median Household Income: $62,762
21.8% blue collar; 67.3% white collar; 10.9% gray collar.

And we have a point of agreement about not punishing dissenters especially in a general election versus a primary, which was my whole point at the beginning of this thread, punishing Bean for CAFTA is ridiculous.

Posted by: Predictor at April 11, 2006 08:01 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I don't think very many people are really thinking about punishing Bean, Predictor. It's just that for people not in Illinois, there are lots of possible candidates to support besides Bean and little about her to get excited about. I only brought up the netroots issue because you mentioned it, and I don't know how important netroots support really was for her last time. As you say, she has other sources of support, so I'm hoping they're enough.

On Lieberman, the one time I actually had an opportunity to vote for him for Senate was 1988, and I voted against him. But that was a different time, and Weicker was even less like a Republican than Lieberman was like a Democrat. If I were living in Connecticut today, I'd vote for Lamont in the primary without a doubt, but obviously I'd vote for the Democrat in the general (holding my nose if necessary). I think a good primary scare might be useful in getting Lieberman to cool his ardor for Bush (whom he clearly supports far more than he ever supported Clinton). Having Lieberman as someone to point to as proof of his bipartisanship has been good for Bush and bad for Democrats. It's not just about the war.

Posted by: KCinDC at April 11, 2006 08:41 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

In re: Van Taylor and Rep. Chet Edwards in TX-17, allow me to call your attention to this:

[quoted material]

In endorsing Taylor, Cheney made his first public appearance in Texas since his hunting accident in February, drawing a smaller crowd than a similar fundraiser he headlined two years ago for Arlene Wohlgemuth, U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards’ last Republican challenger. Taylor said Cheney’s event rallied together the supporters he’ll need to defeat Edwards, D-Waco, an eight-term incumbent.

[...]

Two years ago, Cheney was cheered by a larger crowd of nearly 400 as he helped state Rep. Wohlgemuth raise more than $300,000 for her campaign against Edwards.

The Taylor event cost its guests $150 to $2,100. Taylor resisted comparisons that he had a smaller turnout and would raise less money from Monday’s luncheon.

“This was a hugely successful event,” Taylor said. “We had to remove all the tables so everyone could fit in.”

Guests stood as they snacked on cheese and vegetable trays, roast beef sandwiches and other foods.

Although the campaign said paid attendance at the Waco Hilton reached about 150, the crowd appeared to have fewer than 100 people. Taylor would not say how much he expected to raise, claiming he does not disclose fundraiser totals until filing reports with the Federal Election Commission.

Edwards’ campaign manager, Chris Turner, said the turnout likely fell short of Taylor’s expectations.

“The fact that the Taylor campaign won’t indicate how much they raised is likely an indication they didn’t meet their goals,” Turner said. “Having less than 150 people at a fundraiser with the vice president of the United States is a reflection of a lack of support and enthusiasm for Van Taylor.”

[end quoted material]

Just FYI.

Posted by: Charles Kuffner at April 12, 2006 09:34 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mac Collins out raises Jim Marshall in GA 8th

Warner Robins, GA - Congressman Mac Collins (Ret. R-GA), has once again out raised Democrat Jim Marshall for a second consecutive quarter in what political analysts are calling the most watched and competitive congressional race in the nation.

Congressman Collins raised $259,544.60 in campaign funds compared to his Democratic challenger Rep. Jim Marshall who raised 21% less than Collins with $201,829.91.

"It is humbling and exciting to get support from so many people that want effective representation in Washington. This campaign is about the people of the 8th district and we will keep talking about the issues that affect them", Congressman Collins said on Saturday.

The majority of Collins Campaign funds for the quarter came from grassroots individuals compared to Marshall who relied on PAC money for almost 50% of his fundraising. Mac Collins raised $207,403.60; while, Marshall's campaign was only able to raise $107,060 from private individuals. Contributions from private individuals may be the most important aspect the first quarter reports of 2006 as they are the first true indicator of candidate support in the new Georgia 8th Congressional District which traditionally votes in support of GOP candidates.

"This report along with our strong grassroots support shows that we have the momentum in this race. Residents of the 8th district are showing that they want a strong, experienced leader to represent them in Washington. They are also showing that what they don't want is a liberal democrat who answers to Nancy Pelosi", said Collins Campaign Spokesman Ted Prill.

Source:
http://congressmanmaccollins.redstate.com/story/2006/4/16/135642/014

Posted by: E. Goldstein at April 17, 2006 02:37 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment