Tag: 2008

Following up on last week’s updates:

Hal Daub’s announcement came with one significant surprise: He refused to rule out a run should Chuck Hagel decide to seek reelection. Daub is the ultimate Republican insider, a member of the Republican National Committee. He’s also very much part of Hagel’s circle. So, if Daub’s saying that he’s not going to base his decision on what Hagel does, that means one of two things. Either Hagel has already decided not to seek reelection, or he’s hemorrhaging support so badly that even Hal Daub doesn’t want to be tied to him. Either way, it’s going to be a tough road for Hagel to gain his party’s nomination for the U.S. Senate, especially after all the recent talk of running for President as an independent.

If Daub were to win his party’s nomination, it creates an interesting matchup should Mike Fahey run for the Democrats. A rematch of the 2001 Omaha Mayoral election, which Fahey won by a narrow margin.

But Daub’s is a history of electoral failure. He lost a primary challenge to David Karnes in 1988. Karnes was ultimately defeated by Bob Kerrey. He failed against Jim Exon in 1990. In 1997, he narrowly defeated Brenda Council in a campaign that was marred by race-baiting and outlandish stunts. (Daub actually took a polygraph test to “prove” he wasn’t a liar). By 2001, Omahans were so sick of Daub’s attitude that they were ready for someone new. Enter Mike Fahey. The last six years speak volumes, and Fahey’s landslide reelection victory in 2005 has helped to seal his legacy.

We are now less than a year from the primary. What comes next is anyone’s guess, but the field will be set by Labor Day.

In an unrelated note, we’ve got a big weekend in Nebraska – Nebraska Young Democrats are hosting YDA’s Spring National Conference in Omaha. Bill Richardson will be the keynote speaker on Friday. I mention this because I don’t think I can understate just how important the youth will be in 2008 for all of our candidates here. We saw young candidates like Jim Esch and Scott Kleeb do remarkably well for Nebraska, and energize a whole new generation of political activists in this state. It’s time to build on that for 2008.

(From the diaries – promoted by James L.)

A few miscellaneous notes to pass along from the last week.

Mike Fahey has a 54% favorability rating in the Nebraska Democratic Party’s poll released last week. The New Nebraska Network sees this as a positive sign, since Fahey is not a statewide officeholder, and suggests he may be able to bridge the gap between Omaha and the rest of the state.

Rep. Adrian Smith (NE-03) might just be a Jon Bruning supporter. The Lincoln Journal Star reports that Smith’s name is not included among the hosts of Hagel’s big upcoming fundraiser. He is one of only two Republican elected officials (besides Bruning) who is not listed as a host.

I’ve been walking back from my earlier statements that Bob Kerrey wouldn’t run, because it seems like a very real possibility now. Kerrey will headline  the state party’s annual fundraising dinner on June 23rd in Omaha.

Meanwhile, Behlen Manufacturing chairman Tony Raimondo announced that he would seek the Republican nomination should Chuck Hagel decide against seeking reelection.

And former Omaha Mayor Hal Daub is planning on announcing Tuesday that he will be running for Senate should Hagel not run.

Now, all of this movement in the last couple of weeks, and still, Hagel’s got a big fundraiser planned for next weekend, with the Senate’s top Republican planning to attend. Where does that leave us? Just as puzzled as ever. I was ready to call Hagel as in the race three weeks ago – and I am convinced right now that was a premature judgment.

Stay tuned – things are getting interesting.

Virtually all national polls show that pretty much any leading Democrat would wipe the floor with Mitt Romney. So this here poll from the Granite State sounds like Very Good News to me.

More below the flip….

According to a SurveyUSA poll of 551 likely Republican Primary voters, Mitt Romney gathered 32%, followed by Rudy Guiliani at 23% and John McCain with 22%. Fred Thompson finished fourth with 11%.

Romney leads by 9%, a result sure to please Mormons and ecumenical Christian conservatives, and horrify the more traditional anti-Mormon Christian fundamentalists that make up the Republican base. As expected, Rudy and McCain are neck and neck in the somewhat (small-L) libertarian state that went for McCain in 2000, but they are far behind the former Massachusetts governor. Obviously, it appears that downstate Republicans in the Boston media market are sweet on him.

Looking at the crosstabs, we start with what we already know – his lot is cast with the conservative wing of his party – and find a few interesting tidbits: he gets impressive support from union households, people who don’t own guns, and Generation Y.

In a poll of 589 likely Democratic Primary voters, Clinton gets 40%, Obama follows with 24%, while John Edwards trails with 22%.

Not much to report there. The last time Rasmussen polled Clinton vs. Romney nationally, Hillary was up by 9%. Obama led by 15%, and Edwards led by 26%. Heck, even Richardson leads Romney by 8%.

Now, I don’t think Romney has a shot outside of New England and the Mormon Belt (Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, maybe Nevada). But if Romney wins New Hampshire, that hopefully will make the GOP primary at least a 3 man race for that much longer. You have to wonder what things will be like in South Carolina – do they go for the “liberal”, the man they spurned in 2000, or the Mormon? Or do they go outside the top 3 and vote for Huckabee, Thompson, or Brownback? Anyone else thinking it depends which one hires the slimiest folks to pull tricks out of the Lee Atwater playbook?

I guess I should welcome myself back to being an SSP diarist after a hiatus of several months. I’ll keep watching those polls, ladies and gents.

Your guess is as good as mine at this point. Despite all of the signs showing Chuck Hagel likely pursuing a reelection bid, the news in the past week has been bizarre and contradictory. A prominent Republican donor has thrown himself into the conversation, Hagel’s making noises about an independent bid for President, and the chatter among Democrats is ramping up.

So, let’s take a look at the facts, the rumors, and everything in between.

What We Know:

– Chuck Hagel has scheduled a big-dollar fundraiser for May 18 to raise money for a Senate re-election campaign. Among those scheduled to appear at the fundraiser: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

– Chuck Hagel had a high-profile meeting with NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg on Wednesday.

– Bloomberg’s news service interviewed Hagel, who said he might consider running for President as an independent.

– Bruning is pushing back hard against Hagel in the press. It’s becoming clear that, should Hagel decide to run for reelection, he’s going to have powerful forces behind them. It might be too much for Bruning to overcome.

– Hagel is in deep trouble with Republicans, according to a favorability poll conducted by the Nebraska Democratic Party. That same poll shows Bruning with very low name recognition for a statewide officeholder, and a majority of Nebraskans favoring a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

What We’re Hearing:

– An influential Republican donor, Tony Raimondo, has started to make some noise about running for Senate. He says he would “probably not” challenge Hagel because of Hagel’s record on business. Not exactly a vote of confidence, but we’re pretty sure that Bruning’s the only one willing to risk political suicide by challenging Hagel in a primary.

– Remember how I said Bob Kerrey wasn’t going to run? I may have spoken too soon. No links, just rumors I’m hearing.

This race is growing increasingly bizarre, and Chuck Hagel is playing his cards very close to the vest right now. There’s no telling what direction he’s leaning, and his indecisiveness might just cost him the Republican nomination for Senate.

On the Democratic side, things are still difficult to read. Mike Fahey has long been considered the top candidate for the Democrats, but recently has started to make a move toward a reelection bid for mayor. Scott Kleeb is talking a lot about running for office again someday, but it’s not quite clear what office, or when. And Bob Kerrey said there was only a 1% chance that he would run. But, for what it’s worth, Kerrey still has an active campaign committee with $437,000 cash on hand.

The last several weeks in this race have been a gold mine for political junkies like myself. But, make no mistake, this is the most important race in Nebraska in 2008. Whether Hagel runs or not, there’s a strong possibility that the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate will be Jon Bruning. That’s simply a scary thought. There is no greater opportunity for Nebraska Democrats than this race. And if we fail to field a strong candidate, we fail as a party.

This just in: the Nebraska Democratic Party has released some polling information on Chuck Hagel.

The key findings?

Today, Hagel earns a net negative job performance score statewide with 42 percent of voters saying he is doing an excellent-to-good job, while a majority, 50 percent, says fair-to-poor. Hagel’s job performance is most negative with his Republican base, while it is net positive among Democrats and solidly mixed among independents. Among conservative Republicans, Hagel’s professional marks have crumbled, with almost two-thirds, 61 percent, saying he is doing a fair-to-poor job as Senator.

And Bruning’s numbers:

The poll results show that Bruning’s name recognition in the state is below what would be expected for someone who ran for statewide office twice and who has used government funds to market himself through Public Service Advertisements. Of those surveyed, 59 percent identified Bruning, 90 percent identified Hagel.

However, in sharp contrast to Hagel, Bruning earns a solid 61-degree personal feeling thermometer rating among those who can rate him, with a slightly better than three-to-one warm-to-cool ratio, 35 percent have a favorable or warm opinion of him, while 10 percent have a cool opinion. Bruning earns a strong professional rating as well, with 40 percent saying he is doing an excellent-to-good job, while 29 percent say fair-to-poor. Unlike Hagel, Bruning’s job performance is solid among the Republican base, and independents too, while Democrats split evenly.

But here’s the kicker:

The poll results indicate that Bruning might want to change the theme of his campaign however, as the Iraq war continues to be fought. Among those Nebraskans surveyed, 51 percent favor a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq, while only 37 percent believe we need to give the President’s troop surge plan a chance to work. We believe those margins will continue to widen as the President’s policy plays out in the next several months.

When talking about trying to win the 2nd congressional district in Nevada, which encompasses almost all of Nevada except for the heavily populated parts of Clark County, you almost always encounter one argument: Democrats cannot win in the rurals.

Now, at first look that might be true, statewide Democratic candidates often lose the rural counties and often by a large margin. One reason for that might be that statewide Democratic candidates most often hail from Clark County and might not campaign too much in the rurals.

However, when you take a closer look you might come away shocked. Why? Because Democrats actually get elected in the rurals on a regular basis.

Just take a look at this list of current office holders who identified themselves as Democrats on the ballot:

Churchill County:

Vicky Tripp, County Recorder
John Serpa, County Public Administrator

Elko County:

Mike Nannini, County Commissioner

Esmeralda County:

Nancy Boland, County Commissioner
R.J. Gillum, County Commissioner
Karen Scott, County Auditor/Recorder

Eureka County:

Michael Rebaleati, County Recorder/Auditor

Lander County:

Gladys Burris, County Clerk

Lincoln County:

Bill Lloyd, County Commissioner
Leslie Boucher, County Recorder/Auditor
Kathy Hiatt, County Treasurer
Tommy Rowe, County Commissioner

Mineral County:

Ed Fowler, County Commissioner
Richard Bryant, County Commissioner
Cheri Emm-Smith, District Attorney

Nye County:

Gary Budahl, County Treasurer
Sandra Musselman, County Assessor

Pershing County:

Roger Mancebo, County Commissioner
Celeste Hamilton, County Assessor
Donna Giles, County Clerk/Treasurer
Darlene Moura, Recorder/Auditor
Dave Ayoob, County Commissioner

Storey County:

Harold Swafford, District Attorney

White Pine County:

Robert Bishop, County Assessor
RaLeene Makley, County Commissioner
Martha Rivera Sindelar, County Recorder

Now, that’s one impressive list. You know how I got this information? By skimming through the Secretary of State’s website and writing down each person who won an election in the last four years and was marked as a Democrat. By doing that I may have missed someone, and there may also be persons included who are registered as Democrats but might just be so called DINOs (Democrats in name only). But I have no way of knowing. Why? Because the Nevada State Democratic Party hasn’t actually advertised the fact that Democrats get routinely (and sometimes without even having an opponent) elected in the rurals. Just take a look at their page listing county commissioners. They list the five Clark County commissioners and Pete Sferrazza from Washoe County. That’s it. No mention of the county commissioners from Elko, Esmeralda, Lincoln, Mineral, Pershing, and White Pine counties.

What conclusions can be drawn from that list? Democrats can win in the rurals, so much is for sure. How do they win? My guess is by meeting the voters and proving that they’re more qualified for the job than their Republican opponent.

Ahead of her election as Chair of the Nevada State Democratic Party, I asked Jill Derby about her experiences on the campaign trail. Here’s what she had to say:

I was able to connect with many people in all 17 of Nevada’s counties during my campaign for Congress. That experience provides me with a network of positive relationships with which to build the unity, focus, and cohesion which will be important to the Party in the year ahead. Democrats often talk about being the party of inclusion and I intend to make that happen by involving everyone – rural and urban, north and south. I also learned that many Nevadans are independent and not locked into strict party vote. I learned that reaching out and framing our message in ways that resonate beyond our traditional Democratic audience can bring support across party lines, and is particularly attractive to independent voters, of which there are many in Nevada.

In order for a Democratic candidate to beat Dean Heller next year, one can only encourage Jill Derby and hope she’ll focus more heavily on the rurals, highlight achievements in counties like Lincoln and Pershing, and set up a party structure in the rural counties.

Cross-posted from Helluva Heller, a group effort by Nevada bloggers to take on freshman Rep. Dean Heller (R, NV-02) and defeat him in 2008.

I’ve held off on making this call for a while now, but I feel comfortable saying it now. Chuck Hagel is running for reelection:

We figured out about a couple weeks ago here at UNO Dems that Lee Terry was running for reelection, and not the Senate. It wasn’t until Thursday that we figured out why. We’re ready to say with a great level of confidence that Chuck Hagel is running for reelection, and that Jon Bruning will challenge him for the nomination.

Bruning’s announcement that he wasn’t going to wait for Hagel was sign number one. Sign number two was Bruning’s polling information that showed him leading Hagel by 9 points, and Hagel’s push back in the press. For the last week, there’s been a stealth war going on between the two candidates, with Hagel’s people silently leaking a 23 year-old Jon Bruning’s Daily Nebraskan columns from around 1992, where he voiced support for gay rights, a woman’s right to choose, gun control, and endorsed Bill Clinton for President and Gerry Finnegan for Congress. Fred Thompson has been openly courting Nebraska’s House delegation.

But the two items that seal it, came in the last two days. First, Chuck Hagel’s scheduled May 18 fundraiser, a high-dollar event hosted by Governor Dave Heineman and several high-profile Omaha business leaders. Second, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s commitment to appear at that fundraiser. Certainly, McConnell would not be appearing at a Hagel fundraiser unless he was given assurances that Hagel was running for reelection and not for President.

Now, what does this mean? Unfortunately, it probably means we can count out our top tier of candidates. Mike Fahey is happy with his job as mayor, and has already said he won’t challenge Hagel. Bob Kerrey has basically endorsed Hagel for Senate. And Scott Kleeb, who has a bright future in the Democratic Party, isn’t about to jeopardize it on a challenge of a sitting U.S. Senator when there’s an absolute embarrassment of a Congressman representing his district.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that the Republican civil war that’s sure to come might just provide Democrats in this state an opportunity to make some permanent gains. Between the national climate and the disillusionment of Republicans, we might see some defection of moderate Republican voters should Hagel fall victim to Bruning’s challenge. Hagel’s going to have the backing of the NRSC, virtually every elected Republican in the state, and all but a few prominent Nebraska businessmen (Mid-America Energy CEO David Sokol is a prominent backer of Jon Bruning). But don’t underestimate Republican hatred of Hagel. It’ll be an interesting race to say the least. Stay tuned.

(More commentary from our man on the ground in Nebraska. – promoted by James L.)

In assessing the lay of the land in Nebraska, as it is becoming increasingly likely that Chuck Hagel is seeking reelection, and almost a certainty that Jon Bruning will be his opponent for the Republican nomination, it’s helpful to look back at the last high-profile Republican primary fight in Nebraska, the 2006 governor’s race between Tom Osborne and Dave Heineman. What’s different, here? And what might we see repeat itself?

The Republicans

I still contend that Heineman’s victory was a triumph of machine politics. Hagel came out early in vocal support of Heineman, while the only prominent elected Republican to endorse Tom Osborne for governor was – you guessed it – Jon Bruning.

But still, there’s no doubt that Heineman was the underdog in this race. Despite the advantages of incumbency, he hadn’t really done anything since assuming office in 2005.

A combination of factors contributed to Heineman’s ultimate victory, but the fact that Heineman was backed by almost every prominent Republican while Osborne’s most prominent endorsements were from Democrats (Warren Buffett actually switched to the Republican Party to vote for Osborne), may have sealed the deal.

The Independents

A quick look at the voter registration numbers in Nebraska shows 187,000 registered “nonpartisan” voters, or independents. (About 16% of registered voters in Nebraska). Nebraska law allows independents to vote in federal primary elections by requesting either the Democratic or Republican ballot. In 2006, independents found that they could not vote in the high-profile gubernatorial primary because state law requires party affiliation to be declared to vote in state primary elections.

Theoretically, this means that those voters could swing the Republican nomination back toward Hagel. However, the 2006 Senate race saw only 4,104 nonpartisans, just 3% of the total vote, vote in the primary. It may be significant in a close race, though, and if independents are aware that they can vote in the primary, the percentage may be higher. But historically, independents have not had much of an influence on the election.

The Democrats

Here’s where the key difference comes in. I alluded to this above, that Democrats in 2006 switched parties to vote in the governor’s race. Heineman was exceedingly popular – to the bewilderment of those of us who knew his politics. And Osborne, of course, is a demigod in Nebraska.

So the state party, in their infinite wisdom, decided to concede this race from the start, and because of their negligence, saw thousands of Democrats leave the party to vote in the Republican Primary, and leaving Democrats in nonpartisan races at a serious disadvantage.

A Lincoln businessman named David Hahn got into the race, but with limited resources and a state party that didn’t give him the time of day or any respect, it was a campaign that died on the runway. Now, Hahn could have done things differently. No one, in my opinion, had more limited resources or got treated as poorly by the state party as Jim Esch, but he performed better than any Democratic congressional candidate has in NE-02 for more than a decade. Hahn got less than 25% of the vote. Much of the blame for that has to rest at his feet.

Bruning may be an even worse story, though. The Democratic Party didn’t even bother to field a candidate against him for Attorney General (which led to this light-hearted Facebook campaign we started at UNO). Bruning still ended up spending $300,000 on ads, in an unopposed race. This was the first public sign that he was going to be running for Senate in 2008.

Now, I want to say that I feel the people responsible for those decisions and those attitudes within the state party are no longer employed by the Nebraska Democratic Party. I’m optimistic that the NDP isn’t going to concede a race before the primary this time around.

One of the key differences among Democrats this time, though, is that Jon Bruning would be an unacceptable choice as a U.S. Senator. So a credible candidate can – and likely will – run and get the support of Nebraska Democrats.

The Issues
They didn’t exist in the 2006 campaign. The most controversial issue that came up during the 2006 primary was the Omaha school segregation bill, which Heineman signed into law, and Osborne denounced. That didn’t exactly help Osborne among Republican primary voters, as a few prominent Democratic legislators quickly endorsed Osborne for Governor. That was late April 2006, less than a month before the primary.

This one will be all about the issues, while Chuck Hagel will seek to make it about character, knowing he can’t expect to win a Republican nomination if the focus is on the war or immigration. Bruning’s going to have to fight to keep the focus away from his past political beliefs, which Hagel’s people have been hammering hard for the last week.

The Civil War
This has been brewing for years, as Bruning’s faction has been trying to dethrone Hagel as the king of the Nebraska Republican Party. Heineman’s victory last May was a victory for Hagel. And everything in the Nebraska GOP in the last several years has some tie to this ongoing fight. (For a deeper background on Heineman-Hagel and Bruning, see this post). While the Osborne-Heineman race remained above the fray much of the time, this race has the potential to tear the Republican Party apart, and provide a real opening for the Democrats to make up some ground. If they purge Chuck Hagel, who votes with Bush 95% of the time, who’s next?

UPDATE: Looks like Hagel’s in it. Whatever his ultimate decision, it doesn’t look like retirement is on the table anymore, and running for President seems increasingly unlikely, but Hagel’s holding a high-dollar fundraiser in Omaha next month.