Swing State Project

« Hodes, Sestak Are Leaders in Cash-on-Hand Competitiveness | Main | MN-Sen: Klobuchar Still Leads Kennedy »

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?

Posted by DavidNYC

The bar exam is this Tuesday and Wednesday. Ugh!

Posted at 10:00 AM in Open Threads | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2458

Comments

I am personally quite interested in SC - Gov. Since the primary, a State Senator accumulated enough petitions to run as an independent (he's a Republican) but decided not to. Still, the Democratic nominee won a higher percentage of the primary vote than the Republican incumbent (Tommy Moore, State Sen - Clearwater is our guy, vs. Mark Sanford, former member of Congress and one-trick pony on the budget).

Anyways, more than half of primary voters cast their vote for someone other than Sanford. In this Republican a state, it's cause for hope. The Republican Legislature hates him. Money is the only real thing going against us in this race. And it's really against us, to the tune of almost $5M, most of it from out of state.

Anyways, just letting you guys know we in SC are trying our best to help the party in one of the places it's doing the sorriest.

Posted by: Kyle Bishop at July 21, 2006 09:19 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Curious what is Moore like on policy I imagine he isn't exactly a Left Progressive heh. My interest is in the FL Gov. race no news just interested heh. My annoyance today is people not getting elected with 50.1% of the vote. I still believe that all elections should go into a runoff if no one can get a 50.1% majority.

Posted by: D in FL. at July 21, 2006 11:32 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm interested in the possibility of an entire different electoral field in Central Texas, primarily if the State Defendant plan is the one approved. Lloyd Doggett would either choose to buy a new home in a hispanic border district and face the possibility of a primary in the future, run against Lamar Smith (possibly) or run against Bonilla (less likely, even if this is his old residence). Smith has already been shown to be an unpopular incumbent in his district he currently represents, and if this new plan goes through, he would be in a less Republican district where he has not represented 1/2 of Hays County, Guadalupe County or South Austin that Doggett currently represents. On the other hand, Doggett is really only known in South Austin, so both would have ID hurdles to overcome. But I think with a strong Travis County turnout, as well as winning over Hays County (home to Texas State University at San Marcos) and advertising in Bexar, Lloyd Doggett could very realisticly win this race. Somehow, however, I fear he'll run away to the other district.

That scenario of course would pit John Courage against Henry Bonilla, who would then reside in a 3% less Republican district than the one Courage is facing against Smith. Essentially, in this new district, Bonilla is only known in his Bexar county base, and the remaining 65% of the district Courage has been campaigning in, or has campaigned in the past (Kerr and Kendall counties). While the one poll showed Smith to be very weak, I'm not sure exactly how Bonilla is rated, but in this new district it probably is not the best scenario where the challenger may possibly have greater name ID than the 'incumbent'. Again, as with Doggett, a Strong West + Central Travis County turnout in addition to Bexar County advertising could pull through for Courage. However, while Doggett would get help in this scenario, donors would be less enthusiastic to support Courage. However, DCCC advertising primarily in San Antonio but in Austin as well would likely help both candidates, as would interest group ads.

Now wouldn't it be ironic if through all of Delay's meddling and gerrymandering, that they would end up losing 2 Republican seats in Central Texas? It would be absolutely beautiful, in my opinion.

Posted by: KainIIIC at July 22, 2006 01:11 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Suck it up, man!

"In life you have to do a lot of things you don't fucking want to do. Many times, that's what the fuck life is ... one vile fucking task after another."

Posted by: properottoman at July 22, 2006 02:52 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

heh, if only there was a way in Texas we could pull Doggett, Ciro, Courage, and Cuellar (we'll primary him later) to wins right now.

WAIT!
TX-28 = Cuellar vs. ?
TX-25 = Ciro vs. ?
TX-21 = Doggett vs. Smith
TX-23 = Courage vs. Bonilla

As a resident of TX-22, I consider Doggett the leader of the Texas Democratic group and a win by him to be critical for our party. However, if we could pull off a seat in the process this might just work out . . . also it keeps our seats safe. And admit it, Doggett would lose the primary in TX-25, it happened to Chris Bell when he was moved to a majority African American District. There would be new primaries on Nov. 7 and finals in December. If Doggett is going to lose, might as well feel good and know Ciro will replace him.

Also anything to oust Bonilla makes me smile, he's in the republican "futures" market, specifically for senate.

Rasmussen has new Texas Senate and Governor numbers on the way, I wonder if Bell or Radnofsky have closed the gap at all. I'd like to see some improvement in our state.

Posted by: trowaman at July 22, 2006 03:30 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Looks like McCaskill managed to pull ahead of Casey in the final hours of Boxer's PAC for a Change endorsement contest. I'm amazed at how quickly those percentages have gone up or done over time -- seems a little fishy, actually. At any rate, I'm glad Casey didn't get the money after all and it went to someone who really needed it (assuming these numbers are correct), though I'm still disappointed in Webb's performance.

Posted by: KCinDC at July 22, 2006 08:39 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'd say the SC Democratic party's not doing too shabby. Tommy Moore seems like a good candidate, as was Inez Tenenbaum in 2004. But most of all, Alex Sanders has definately got to be one of my favorite politicians ever. He would have made a terrific Senator.

Keep up the good work, hopefully we'll actually elect one of these guys someday ;)

Posted by: everrpa at July 22, 2006 11:06 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

This Saturday's guest at Blue America at Firedoglake is the progressive Democrat running for the open seat in Iowa (IA-01), Bruce Braley. This is the first time we're promoting a challenger who is being supported by the DCCC. We're happy Rahm Emanuel and his crew have gotten behind a thoroughly anti-Iraq occupation, grassroots progressive with a powerful populist message.

Please join us today on the comments page at Firedoglake at 11 AM (West Coast)/2 PM (East Coast) for a live q&a with Bruce. If you want to read up about him and his campaign and find out how it's possible that Blue America and Emanuel can be on the same page about a candidate, an early post is up at Down With Tyranny.

Braley is one of the best shots in the country to take a district, trending strongly blue-- Gore and Kerry both beat Bush-- and bring it out of darkness. The current congressloon, the rubber stampin' Jim Nussle is running for governor. Even though Nussle was a right winger, the kook the Republicans have come up with to replace him, Michael Whalen, is much, much further right, another whacked-out extremist in the mode of Iowa's Steve King or, in Whalen's own words, of Mike Pence whose voting record is among the 15 most reactionary for any congressperson in the country, right down there with the likes of Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH), Patrick McHenry (KKK-NC), Virginia Fox (KKK-NC), Pete Sessions (R-TX), Phil Gingrey (KKK-GA)... all the worst trash in the Congress.

And our guy is not just some Establishment Democrat who is just better than the Republican. Nope, Braley is a pretty ideal candidate who won a hard fought primary by going directly to Iowans with a clear and powerful vision for a better America. He's not afraid to talk passionately about the hot button issues the Republicans use against wishy-washy Democrats. Braley is anything but wishy-washy.

Posted by: DownWithTyranny at July 22, 2006 12:19 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Texas, All the redistricting needs to do is put all of Travis County in Lamar Smith's district. But, Dogget is far to liberal to beat Smith in a Bush won district, but a less Republican district would help John Courage. Cuellar shouldn't be primaried, he's far from the most conserrvative Democrat and he does represent a pro-Bush district. I think Cuellar's district should be redrawn to include all of Lardeo and Bexar counties, so then Bonilla could face off aginast Cuellar, who unfortunately, would be nearly broke because of our primary challenge. I think that then, Cuellar should be let be in his new, even more conservative district.

Posted by: ArkDem at July 22, 2006 12:33 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

FYI: Braley denounced the DCCC flag-draped coffins ad.

Posted by: DavidNYC at July 22, 2006 03:01 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

The DNC Rules Committee voted to add NV and SC to the early part of the nomination calendar (passing over DC, which was expected but annoying nonetheless).

Posted by: KCinDC at July 22, 2006 05:36 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Again trying to put a list of competitve seats togther. From Races that look like the Incumbent is going to lose to races that are just barely competitve let me know what you think.

Governors (Republican Seats.) (Need 4 for Majority.)

AL-Gov
AK-Gov
AR-Gov
CA-Gov
CO-Gov
FL-Gov
GA-Gov
MD-Gov
MA-Gov
MN-Gov
NV-Gov
NY-Gov
OH-Gov
RI-Gov
SC-Gov
SD-Gov
TX-Gov

Senate (Republican Seats.) (Need 6 for Majority.)

AZ-Sen
MT-Sen
NV-Sen
OH-Sen
PA-Sen
RI-Sen
TN-Sen
VA-Sen

House Races (Republican.) (Need 15 for Majority.)
AZ-05
AZ-08
CA-11
CA-50
CO-04
CO-07
CT-02
CT-04
CT-05
FL-08
FL-09
FL-13
FL-22
IL-06
IL-10
IN-02
IN-08
IN-09
IA-01
KY-02
KY-03
KY-04
MN-01
MN-06
NE-01
NV-02
NV-03
NH-01
NH-02
NJ-07
NM-01
NY-19
NY-20
NY-24
NY-25
NY-29
NC-08
NC-11
OH-01
OH-02
OH-15
OH-18
PA-06
PA-07
PA-08
PA-10
TX-22
VA-02
WA-08
WV-02
WI-08

Governors (Democratic Seats.)
AZ-Gov
IL-Gov
IA-Gov
KS-Gov
ME-Gov
MI-Gov
OR-Gov
PA-Gov
WI-Gov
WY-Gov

Senate (Democratic Seats.)
MD-Sen
MN-Sen
NE-Sen
NJ-Sen
WA-Sen

House (Democratic Seats.)
GA-08
GA-12
IL-08
IL-17
IA-03
KS-03
LA-03
OH-06
SC-05
SD-AL
TX-17
UT-02
VT-AL

On the fringe of being put on: CO-05, CO-06 I kinda want to put them on but the 2-1 GOP voter Registration advantage makes me back away from it.

Anything I missed or should add any help on it would be great thanks.

Posted by: D in FL. at July 23, 2006 02:13 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

D, I'd just go with the latest Cook report with the addition of NC-08 and NE-01.

Depending on Texas redistricting, TX-23 could be an endangered seat as well as TX-21. We shall see . . .

Senate:
PA (TAKE 60-40)
MT (TAKE 57-43)
MO (barely take 53-47)
RI (toss up-barely take 52-48)
OH (barely loose-toss up 48-52)
Virginia (45-55 loss)
Tennessee (45-55 loss)
the rest are off the board, AZ had their chance to prove themselves and gained no traction.

That's my prediction. And ya know, if we take the house this year and get 4 senate seats, I will be just happy cause looking at the futures market there is no way that we should not gain at least 2 senate seats in 2008. Our only defensive seats are Iowa, Louisianna, South Dakota (maybe?) and Michigan if Levin retires. The republican field is much wider. Maine, Virginia, New Mexico and Alaska should all be open, heck maybe Mississippi as well. Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Colorado are all on the board already. Heck if we got some momentum, maybe we can do something about Georgia and Texas. We could have 9 points of attack while only having to play defense at 4. I like that. THis year is attack at 7 and defend at 3 (MN, WA, NJ/MD - those two are quazi vulnerable, two halfs I guess).

Posted by: trowaman at July 23, 2006 04:05 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

you're way off on your percentages. DeWine will lose because of base problems, but it will be narrow, probably around 10,000 votes, or less than a percentage point. Talenty will lose because he has absolutely no appeal with moderates while McCaskill does not. However, I cannot see her winning by that kind of margin. I don't think it'll be a margin exceding 6000 votes. Casey will win convincingly, but he can't get 60%. I don't know where you get Ford losing 55-45. I believe that if Corker is the nominee, Ford loses 51-49, if Hillearey is the nominee, Ford loses 53-47, and if Bryant is the nominee, Ford wins 51-49.

Posted by: ArkDem at July 23, 2006 02:34 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

In case anyone missed it new polls:

Rasmussen: CT-SEN http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/23/124121/272

Lamont (D) 51%
Lieberman (D) 40%

Lamont (D) 40%
Lieberman (W) 40%
Schelsinger (R) 13%

Columbus Dispatch: OH-GOV, OH-SEN http://www.dispatch.com/?story=dispatch/2006/07/23/20060723-A1-01.html

Strickland (D) 47%
Blackwell (R) 27%

Brown (D) 45%
Dewine (R) 37%

Posted by: D in FL. at July 23, 2006 02:59 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Down here in GA, we have people running for all the seats against incumbents. I don't think that most of the changes this year will come in the south but we are down here trying to change things. We have an excellent candidate in my district: Steve Sinton. He is a fantastic speaker and every forum he goes to, he wins votes. Tom Price is corrupt but I'm willing to bet that he gets reelected because the people in my district don't really care.

Posted by: Ga6thDem at July 23, 2006 09:23 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Unfortunately, GA-06 (as I'm sure you well know) is even more Republican than Chet Edwards' district.

Posted by: DavidNYC at July 23, 2006 09:46 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I was pretty down about the DFL's chances at holding the Attorney General position last week at this time, but embattled DFL candidate Matt Entenza did the honorable thing and fell on his sword on Tuesday (the last day for filing) as it became clear the double-barrel of mini-scandals plaguing his campaign would have likely been a liability, and would perhaps have down-ballot consequences. I really like Entenza, but given his conflict of interest, he made a huge blunder choosing the Attorney General position in the first place. Thankfully, several prominent candidates stepped up to the plate in his place...

The top two replacement candidates for Entenza are former gubernatorial candidate Steve Kelley (currently a State Senator from the western suburbs) and former suburban Congressman Bill Luther. Both are stand-up guys and bring both high name recognition and favorable political geography to the table. I'm leaning slightly to Luther in my preference, but would be more than happy with either of them.

As an aside, I put on hundreds of miles in western Minnesota over the weekend and was stunned by the number of Mike Hatch for Governor signs already dotting small-town yards and farm boundaries. I'm guessing it's not a coincidence that this populist area (mostly in the west-central agriculture region of Minnesota) with disproportionately senior populations is being bombarded with Mike Hatch advertising so early in the campaign. Hatch has done very well here in his two previous runs and is likely to be seen as more of a man-in-the-people than the smiling urban yuppie Pawlenty. Given Pawlenty's likely advantage in the suburbs, Hatch must be looking for places where he can make up the difference, and I'd say he made a good choice. Either way, it was heartening to see and I'm hopeful it's a sign that the DFL finally has a gubernatorial candidate capable of running a halfway competent campaign. The last time that happened, "Dallas" was still on network television.

Posted by: Mark at July 24, 2006 12:15 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Mark, I was driving through SE Minnesota this past weekend, and saw dozens of Hatch signs between Winona and Bloomington. His organization seems to be hitting the ground running.

In other Minnesota news, I was able to attend a fundraiser for Tim Walz featuring Al Franken on Tuesday. Walz was extremely motivating and well-spoken. His opponent, Gil Gutknecht, just got back from Iraq, where he's flip-flopped and is now a member of the "let's wait six months, see if there are any more corners to turn, then cut and run" crowd. Those who meet Walz seem to be quite impressed, and Gutknecht must be feeling the heat if he's changing his position on Iraq at such a convenient time. His press, both in Minnesota and, increasingly, nationwide, has been overwhelmingly positive. I really think Walz has a legitimate shot if he can get himself enough money and air time to get his name recognition where it needs to be.

Posted by: Max at July 24, 2006 01:04 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

trowaman said "the rest are off the board, AZ had their chance to prove themselves and gained no traction."

I just can't disagree with this statement more. I mean this just as a friendly dissenting voice, but your analysis is just not consistent with how elections, and especially Senate elections, typically run. This is the middle of summer, and despite the impression you might get from reading political blogs, the vast majority of the electorate is hardly paying attention to these elections at all. Polls can swing dramatically, and usually do so only at the last minute, and Senate elections especially are usually suceptible to national "waves", where even in relatively temperate years the results of closely contested races nationwide greatly favors one party over the other.

For instance, in 2004 the general consensus was that there were 9 competitive seats going into the fall campaign season: FL, NC, SC, LA, AK, CO, OK, KY, and SD. The Republicans won all but one. In 2002, there were seats up for grabs: MN, SD, GA, TX, NH, MO, AR, CO, and NC. Again, the GOP took all but 2. Same story in 1998 and 2000, when the Democrats just about ran the field, and 1996 and 1994, when the Republicans had a field day.

I'm not saying that we're going to win every potentially competitive race, but historically speaking, it's incredibly likely that races that seem out of reach at the moment are going to close in fast for us between Labor Day and Election Day, just like races like NC and AK (where Democrats seemed to have a solid advantage) ended up going tot he GOP two years ago.

And I think it's ridicilous to say that any campaign has missed the window of oppurtunity just because they have't closed the gap by now. By that reckoning, Chuck Hagel was a sure loser in 1996, Paul Wellston was a lost cause in 1990, and Harris Wofford was dead meat in 1991. I think it's way, *way* too early to be making any predictions on which races we'll win or lose, and especially to stake a claim on percentages.

Posted by: everrpa at July 24, 2006 04:00 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Start watching the VA-11 race. Has been making alot of noise on the VA blogosphere (Raising Kaine and VA Progressive), now seems to be making noise over at MyDD (a front paged diary, and another diary on #1 on rec list for over 36 hours).

Tom Davis (incumbent) seems to be losing traction against his challnger Andy Hurst with only a 37% hard re-elect rate. And with "informed" voters, the race is a draw in recent poll.

Here are some links

Great diary by Andrea Chamblee on Why Andy is energizing Dems

My diary detailing how Tom Davis is Vulnerable

Posted by: pitin at July 24, 2006 04:42 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Not sure what happened to my links so here they are

Andrea's Diary
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/24/0923/84538

My Diary
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/18/185622/538

Posted by: pitin at July 24, 2006 04:51 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Could everyone please consider donating money to Victoria Wulsin's campaign? She's running against Jean Schmidt and she might actually be able to pull this off. She's tied with Schmidt in a recent poll and Schmidt was recently booed at one of her fundraising events. To donate go here:

http://www.actblue.com/page/wulsinforcongress

OR

https://wx11.registeredsite.com/user1029935/wulsin/contribute.asp

I know I've asked this before, but if you could put this on the main page, in a small post, it would really help Victoria Wulsin out. She needs money, and after all she does have a CoH advantage to Jean Schmidt.

Posted by: Craig at July 24, 2006 11:04 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I'm interested in seeing more coverage of the MD-06. It's currently held by a lazy, Neanderthal Republican [Bartlett], and the Dems have written this district off for the past several cycles.

Now there's a GOOD Dem candidate -- Andrew Duck -- with a strong chance to capture this district. Duck's a 20 year veteran, with one tour in Bosnia and one in Iraq, and he's only 39!!

He has thoughtful positions on the budget, environment, health care, jobs, veterans' services, domestic spying, and, of course, Iraq.

He's a strong speaker, and if the state and/or national Dems would identify this as a "possible" seat, and send in the funds, we could win it!

Posted by: Mauimom at July 25, 2006 01:06 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Andrew Duck might be a fair illustration for my slowly-developing conviction that
autumn primaries are strategically difficult.
Duck is a good candidate but he hasn't won his primary yet.

Maryland is one of 12 states with primaries during or after the 2nd week of September.
That leaves the winner of a contested primary just two months
to rebuild a warchest and redirect the campaign toward the nominee of the other party.
It's a difficult challenge.

Even good prognosticators are sometimes incorrect when they look past an upcoming primary and plan moves for the projected winner.
Cynthia Matthews in CA-26 would be an instance in point.
Some of the big PACs and pundits had great plans for Russ Warner's post-primary campaign against David Dreier,
but the Democratic voters in the district surprised them.
Can Matthews cash in on the plans and enthusiasm that were coalescing around Russ Warner?
I'd like to hope so, but I'm too far from the district
to be able to hear whether all the ricochets from the firing circle have died down, and folks are working together now.

Posted by: Christopher Walker at July 25, 2006 02:52 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

I think New York should be getting more attention from the national blogs. Pundits at the New York Times and the National Journal rate New York as the swing state this cycle and local bloggers in New York are following the races and excited about the prospects.

Now, with work on the ground starting, we need more attention that bigger blogs can provide to raise our profile and generate more momentum.

Posted by: Steve at July 26, 2006 11:35 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment