Tag: Special Election

By: Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

On Tuesday night Pennsylvania’s 12th congressional district held a special election, pitting Democratic candidate Mark Critz against Republican Tim Burns.

Mr. Critz won solidly: a nine percent margin of victory off 53.4% of the vote. Several polls had predicted a very close, photo-finish election; this result contradicted that assumption.

This victory constitutes good – very good – news for Democrats.

More below.

His district, PA-12, was one of the few countrywide that voted more Republican from 2004 to 2008, as the rest of the nation shifted substantially left. Districts such as these are prime targets for Republicans in 2010.

Indeed, PA-12 constituted the only seat in the entire nation that supported Senator John Kerry and then switched its vote to Senator John McCain. For reasons such as this, I wrote a week ago that:

It will be a minor miracle if Democratic candidate Mark Critz wins.  [Almost] no Democratic candidate has ever done better than Mr. Obama since his  election. Mr. Critz will have to do that, given that the president lost  PA-12 (the only seat in the nation to support Kerry and the McCain). In a  district with double-digit disapproval ratings of Mr. Obama, this  constitutes an arduous task.

As it turned out, Mr. Critz did far better than Mr. Obama. Indeed, his victory constitutes the first time a Democratic candidate has improved on the president’s performance since December of 2008, when Democrat Paul Carmouche barely lost LA-4 to Congressman John Fleming.

Mr. Critz won by appealing to local issues, emphasizing his independence from the president, and sounding like a fiscally liberal, socially conservative Democrat – the type of Democrat places like PA-12 have traditionally voted for.

This is a strategy that Democrats have long used, to great success, in winning congressional districts that they should not be winning. It is how both Mississippi and Arkansas elect three Democratic versus one Republican congressional representative, and how Texas elected more Democratic than Republican congressman right until 2004. It is partly how the party won such great congressional victories in 2006 and 2008.

There has been much fear amongst Democrats that, in light of Mr. Obama’s presidency, this strategy will no longer work. State Senator Creigh Deeds tried running a rural-style candidacy for Virginia’s governorship; he failed quite miserably.

Mark Critz, on the other hand, succeeded where many – including this individual – thought for sure he would fail. His performance certainly does not mean that Democrats are in for an easy time come November, but it does give the party something to work with in the tough days ahead.

So, the PA-12 special election is tomorrow, occurring in the Kerry-McCain district. Ironically, despite the failure of the Pennsylvania dummymander (the GOP having lost the 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th, AND 10th since the 2002 remap and 2004 readjustment), this is yet another district where the GOP’s intentions fell significantly short.

It’s no secret that the 12th is quite the gerrymander, winding its way from Greene and Fayette County in the Southwest, through Washington County, with an arm through Somerset County, a large section of Johnstown and Cambria County (site of John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport, no less), another arm to pick up the college town of Indiana, three distinct sections of Allegheny and Westmoreland counties each (!!), and part of Armstrong County.

The 12th, however, is somewhat ancestrally Democratic – this was Joe Hoeffel’s 4th best district in 2004, and turned out strong for Bob Casey. If you average the four federal statewide races since 2004 (Kerry v. Bush, Hoeffel v. Specter, Casey v. Santorum, and Obama v. McCain), the district’s returned on average a Democratic performance of 51.3% to 46.2%.

We can visualize this as follows (click on images for larger versions):

The Democratic strength is concentrated in the southern bulb around Washington and along the Monongahela River south of Pittsburgh, as well as in Johnstown. Of course, connecting the two areas does require passing through some significantly Republican areas.

At risk of falling victim to the “Republican Heartland” fallacy, playing around with my new GIS toys, we can pull some NYT-style map goodness, with graduated circles:

In this map, the sheer Democratic dominance of Johnstown and the Monongahela River towns becomes even more evident.

So what does this all mean for tomorrow? Critz needs to do well in Murtha’s old base in Cambria County, and hopefully stanch some of the Democratic bleeding in the southwestern half of the district.

As with Martha Coakley and Scott Brown, I also made an election-night model to predict results as they come in last night. It uses the similar uniform-swing assumptions (as compared to the 2004-2008 Democratic average) and accounts for possible variation within a given jurisdiction (this is necessary since counties here are much larger than towns in Massachusetts). I’m still fine-tuning the specifics, but expect that online sometime tomorrow afternoon!

FL-Sen: Charlie Crist has launched his first TV ad of the campaign, hitting Marco Rubio for being a lobbyist. Dunno that Crist has the cred to make these attacks stick. Rubio’s firing back with an ad that ties Crist to Obama (something that’s more easily done).

LA-Sen: Hah! Awesome! GOP Sen. Tom Coburn, hoping to force Dems into an uncomfortable vote, wants to offer an amendment to the healthcare reconciliation bill that would prohibit insurance coverage of Viagra for convicted sex offenders. The Louisiana Democratic Party put out a press release saying that surely Coburn “would agree that anyone who has admitted or been found guilty of involvement with prostitution should not be covered either.” Zing! Meanwhile, in an act of extreme bravery, Rep. Charlie Melancon says he doesn’t support repealing healthcare reform.

NV-Sen: As Las Vegas Now puts: “It has not been a pleasant two weeks for United State Senate hopeful Jon Scott Ashjian. Three of his personal properties have been served with default notices, his Nevada Tea Party supporters will not come to his aid and national party leaders have denounced him as a fraud.” Click the link for all the details.

WA-Sen: Yesterday we learned that Dino Rossi got jiggy with Michael Steele. Now it turns out that he also paid a visit to NRSC HQ. Wonder if he’ll bite.

AL-Gov: As in Georgia (see GA-12 item below), several leaders of the Alabama African American community are unhappy with Artur Davis’s vote against healthcare reform. State Sen. Hank Sanders of Selma sent an open letter to Artur Davis, criticizing his decision, and TV host Roland Martin also expressed displeasure, saying that Davis “was elected to represent the people in his district in Congress, not a future position that he may or may not get.”

NY-Gov: Newly-minted Republican Parker Griffith may have supported Howard Dean, but even more newly-minted Republican Steve Levy supports… single-payer healthcare insurance? Oh yes, according to a Working Families Party survey he filled out in 2007. Michael Long will be sooo pleased. (H/t Darth Jeff)

PA-Gov: Philly Mayor Michael Nutter will endorse state Sen. Anthony Williams in the Democratic gubernatorial primary. This gives Williams, who just joined the race and trails in the polls, a big shot in the arm, especially if Nutter puts his full machine behind him. (Williams has done quite well in the money race, though, outraising some of his better-known competitors.)

AR-03: A Republican candidate with the perversely appropriate name of Gunner DeLay is calling for “civil disobedience” against healthcare reform. Just what we needed – more incitement, from a former prosecutor, no less. I guess DeLay is trying to make amends for his pro-union past as a state senator.

GA-07: Another Republican is jumping into the field to succeed GOP Rep. John Linder: his former chief of staff, Rob Woodall. He joins state Rep. Clay Cox and Walton County businessman Tom Kirby.

GA-09: The special election date to fill Nathan Deal’s seat has been moved from April 27th to May 11th (run-off: June 8th), in order to give military and overseas voters enough time to submit their ballots.

GA-12: Dem Rep. John Barrow is definitely feeling some heat over his “no” vote on healthcare. Black political leaders, who had generally supported Barrow over the years, are very unhappy with him and are either pulling their endorsements or switching over to his primary opponent, Regina Thomas. African Americans make up a third of the district’s population and approximately 60% of Dem primary voters. Thomas, though, got pasted in a 2008 effort to defeat Barrow and has chump change in her campaign account.

IL-11: GOPer Adam Kinzinger hasn’t gotten the memo, apparently, because he’s going full steam ahead on repealing healthcare reform. The responses to this are so easy it’s ridiculous – which is why Rep. Debbie Halvorson in turn accused Kinzinger of wanting to repeal protections against pre-existing conditions. We could do this all day.

IN-09: A Wilson Research Strategies poll for Republican Mike Sodrel shows him very competitive with Rep. Baron Hill, trailing by just a 43-42 margin. Sodrel also tested the GOP primary, where he looks very strong. He has 46%, compared to 19 for activist Travis Hankins and 13 for attorney Todd Young. (Young is on the NRCC’s Young Guns list.) The poll was conducted a few weeks ago, before the healthcare reform vote.

MD-01: How much does a vote against healthcare reform get you? Dem Rep. Frank Kratovil is going to find out. Despite Kratovil’s two “no” votes, his opponent Andy Harris is charging: “This is Nancy Pelosi’s bill. Her fingerprints are all over it, and Frank Kratovil enabled Nancy Pelosi to be in the position where she is now.” If this line of attack sticks, it’ll show that cringe politics rarely works.

PA-03: Dem Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper’s Some Dude primary opponent, Mel Marin, filed a challenge to keep Dahlkemper off the ballot – and just got his challenge rejected. Supposedly he’ll appeal.

PA-07: The SEIU has backed Dem Bryan Lentz in his bid to win the open 7th CD against GOPer Pat Meehan.

SD-AL: Even though he declined to challenge Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin himself, Steve Hildebrand is trying to help Dr. Kevin Weiland qualify for the Democratic primary. Weiland has to submit 1,250 signatures in just one week’s time, though.

DNC: The DNC is trying out a new message, airing radio ads which ask voters to tell their Republican congressmen: “Hands off our healthcare!” Be very curious to see if these draw any blood – or if this message continues to see use.

Healthcare: SEIU is spending $700K on ads thanking Dems in tough districts for their “yes” votes on healthcare: Tom Periello (VA-05), Dina Titus (NV-03), Betsy Markey (CO-04), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-03) and Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL). The local New York chapter will also air ads thanking Scott Murphy (NY-20), Bill Owens (NY-23), Dan Maffei (NY-25), Tim Bishop (NY-01) and Steve Israel (NY-02).

FL-08: Former hospital administrator Peg Dunmire has left the Republican Party and will officially challenge Alan Grayson as a member of Florida’s new Tea Party.

GA-09: The special election for Nathan Deal’s now-vacant seat has been set for April 27th. This is an all-party “jungle” election, with the winner needing 50% to win. If no one hits that mark, a runoff would be held on May 25th. With 11 Republicans and only one Democrat (former Navy chaplain Mike Freeman) running, is it completely insane to imagine…? Also note that Georgia has a “resign to run” rule, so folks who hold other offices will have to quit before getting into this race, setting off a domino chain of further special elections.

IN-05: Former state Rep. Luke Messer is on the air with a biographical tv spot. He’s one of several Republicans challenging Rep. Dan Burton in the primary.

MA-05: Seven Republicans and four independents have lined up so far to take on Dem Rep. Niki Tsongas. Scott Brown won this district 56-43 in January.

NY-13: The Brooklyn Conservative Party has endorsed former FBI agent Mike Grimm. This has touched off another fight with Staten Island Conservatives who, as they did in 2008, seem inclined to endorse Democratic Rep. Mike McMahon. But back then, the Brooklyn Cons (who represent a much smaller part of the district) engineered a coup at the state party level with the backing of chair Michael Long in order to thwart the will of their SI counterparts. It looks like the same might happen again this cycle.

OK-05: SoonerPoll.com surveyed the GOP primary for the open 5th CD, which Rep. Mary Fallin is leaving to run for governor. They find former state Rep. Ken Calvey leading with 20, while state Rep. Mike Thompson is at 9 and “political newcomer” James Lankford is at 7. State Rep. Shane Jett, who just joined the field, was not included.

PA-04: Could Jason Altmire get Arcuri’d? Thanks to his vote against the healthcare reform bill, Jack Shea, the president of the Allegheny County Labor Council, says he’s considering a primary challenge. The problem is that Pennsylvania’s filing deadline closed earlier this month, so Shea would have to run as a write-in. Alternately, he could run as an independent (indies have a much later filing deadline).

PA-19: Rep. Todd Platts is expected to be on a shortlist of four possible names to fill the top spot at the Government Accountability Office. The House and Senate are compiling this list and will send it to the White House “soon.” President Obama can then select a nominee from this slate, or pick his own. Either way, his choice is subject to confirmation in the Senate.

RI-01: Retired Superior Court Judge Roy Pfeiffer is weighing a run for the now-open 1st CD as a Republican. The GOP actually already has a candidate here, state Rep. John Loughlin.

SD-AL: I’m unsurprised – Obama strategist Steve Hildebrand says he won’t challenge Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin in the Dem primary, even though she voted against healthcare reform.

TN-08: Roy Herron will have the Democratic field to himself: Educator and former John Tanner staffer Luther Mercer has dropped out, citing difficulties in fundraising. On the, well, non-Dem side, meanwhile, the knives are out for GOP frontrunner Stephen Fincher.  Teabaggy independent Donn Janes is slamming Fincher for claiming to want to cut DC spending despite having been a big beneficiary of farm subsidies.

VA-05: Ex-Rep. Virgil Goode will appear at a fundraiser on the 25th for state Sen. Rob Hurt, who is seeking to reclaim Goode’s seat for the Republicans. Hurt is the establishment favorite in this race, but the teabaggers truly seem to hate him and are determined not to let him win the primary. So it remains to be seen whether Goode can sprinkle him with winger fairy dust, or befoul him with DC stink lines.

WY-AL: Democrats have found a candidate to take on freshman Cynthia Lummis: David Wendt, president of the Jackson Hole Center for Global Affairs. Wendt specifically cited Lummis’s vote against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and also congressional inaction on emissions, as reasons for his run.

Polltopia: The boys at PPP are choosing between AL, IL, MD & WA for their next poll, and you can go over there to vote. I can also tell you that R2K will have a WA poll out this week (as well as polls in AR and WI).

Passings: Fred Heineman, a one term congressman from North Carolina, passed away this past weekend at the age of 80. The Republican Heineman beat Dem Rep. David Price in the 1994 Republican Revolution, but Price won his seat right back in 1996. Heineman’s brief tenure had a lot to do with how mind-bogglingly clueless he was, most infamously remarking:

“When I see a first-class individual who makes $80,000 a year, he’s lower middle class. When I see someone who is making anywhere from $300,000 to $750,000, that’s middle class. When I see anyone above that, that’s upper middle class.

I’m as freaked out over Massachusetts as anyone – and I might be plenty angry/despondent/confused/hungover tomorrow morning.

But in the meantime, I’ve been working on a crude projection model using, in part, the “baseline” idea that Crisitunity and DavidNYC have made a part of SSP Election Night Tradition.

The model, as inputs, takes partial results from towns that have reported, and outputs a whole slew of numbers comparing the current situation to the “baseline” numbers.

Explanations below the flip.

So here’s the front end of the model:

http://spreadsheets.google.com…

You’ll see a few things:

• How Coakley and Brown are currently doing.
  

• How Obama was doing in 2008 with the same towns and parts of towns reporting.
  

• How a 2008 “baseline” Democrat on target to win by 1 vote would be doing.
  

• How Kerry was doing in 1996 against Bill Weld with the same towns and parts of towns reporting.
  

• How a 1996 “baseline” Democrat would be doing.
  

You’ll also see comparisons between Coakley’s performance and those of Obama, Kerry, and the two “baseline” Democrats.

Perhaps most significantly, you’ll see the “2010 Projection using 2008” line.

The model compares relative turnout between 2010 and 2008, and the relative performances of Coakley and Obama to project results from towns that have not yet reported.

The “2010 Projection using 1996” line does the same, except with 1996 data.

I’m not claiming this model is perfect. In fact, it’s pretty damn bad. I can think of a few glaring weaknesses:

• The fundamental problem of the ‘baseline’ idea: it assumes that every town will swing uniformly.
  

• Disparate turnout: this model compares turnout in aggregate, instead of at the town level. This may lead to an overestimation of turnout in areas with relatively low turnout (compared to 2008 and 1996) and the reverse in areas with relatively high turnout. This may potentially bias the projections in Coakley’s favor.
  

• Assumption of town uniformity: the model assumes that each town votes uniformly the same way, but…Jamaica Plain and Southie are not going to vote the same way, very simply. If a relatively Brown-friendly area of a town reports first, this will bias the projection in his favor. The reverse is true if a Coakley-friendly area reports first.
  

Incidentally, here are the blood and guts of the model: http://spreadsheets.google.com…

Update: In columns AS, AT, BB, and BC, you can see baselines for every town for both 2008 and 1996.

I threw in some junk results to test it, and so far I didn’t detect any coding errors. I don’t pretend that I’m better than the Associated Press – but I just want to have an idea of where we are at each point of the results phase.

Hopefully I’ll get a chance to keep this updated as results stream in tonight.

Lastly, if you live in Massachusetts, are reading this, and you haven’t voted (assuming you’re a citizen, not a convicted felon, etc..), what the hell’s wrong with you?!

Here’s hoping Coakley pulls this off.

By: Inoljt, http://thepolitikalblog.wordpr…

Last night’s election exhibited two trends: one positive for the country as a whole, and one more ominous for Democrats. Firstly, Americans rejected negative campaigning and extremism – whether it be in Virginia, New Jersey, NY-23, or Maine. Secondly, the electorate as a whole shifted quite profoundly to the right.



Negative Campaigning and Extremism

In the most-watched races, voters chose the side that espoused moderation and ran a positive message. The Democratic candidates in both Virginia and New Jersey focused on the negative: state congressman Creigh Deeds of Virginia spent most of his time attacking Attorney General Bob McDonnell’s college thesis, while Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey launched a barrage of negative ads. Both candidates lost.

The other races featured the victory of moderate politics over extremism. In NY-23,  a Republican-represented district since the Civil War, conservatives sabotaged the moderate Republican candidate in favor of hard-line Doug Hoffman. Fortunately, voters in upstate New York rejected the Glenn Beck nominee and instead chose Democrat Bill Owens, an independent turned Democrat.

Thus the election results enforced a positive trend in politics – one of moderation and positive campaigning focused on the issues, rather than divisive personal attacks. For Democrats like myself, however, the other trend – a rightward shift – is more worrisome.

A Rightward Shift

For Democrats, the election’s most worrying result was not in Virginia, New Jersey, or Maine. It was the special election in CA-10.

At first glance, this might seem a bit puzzling. Democrats won that election, after all – and they won it by a comfortable 10% margin.

Yet, when compared to previous elections, this result is quite an underperformance. Barack Obama, for instance, won this congressional district by three times that margin. Since 2002, moreover, former Democratic congressman Ellen Tauscher had never polled below 65% of the vote.

Moreover, the election revealed more about the national mood than, say, Virginia or New Jersey. Those races were heavily dependent on local factors (e.g. the quality of the Deeds campaign, the unpopularity of Governor Jon Corzine). In CA-10, you had two low-recognition candidates and little publicity; it was closer to a generic ballot poll.

If  CA-10 could be characterized as a generic ballot poll, then Democrats should be extremely worried. In 2009, CA-10 went from a 30% Democratic victory to a 10% one: a 10-point shift to the right. Similar shifts were seen in New Jersey and Virginia; the electorate as a whole moved substantially to the right. The Democrats were very fortunate that Tuesday did not constitute a full-blown congressional election; they would have been crushed.

There is good news, however. Democratic weakness two days ago resulted more from an energized Republican base than a fundamental shift in the national mood. Republicans, motivated and unhappy, turned out; President Barack Obama’s coalition did not. The president still attains approval ratings in the low 50s – hardly the sign of an unpopular incumbent.

The bad news is that I am not sure if Mr. Obama’s coalition will turn out for the 2010 congressional elections. His voters have been curiously lethargic ever since his election; their low turn-out was how Senator Saxy Chambliss in Georgia went from a 3% general victory to a 14% run-off victory. Republicans, then, may do well next year.

In fact, I am not even sure Mr. Obama’s coalition will re-emerge in 2012, when he goes up for re-election. The president, after all, ran on a campaign of hope, change, and idealism. The difficult compromises forced by governing have tainted this brand, and it will inevitably continue to be diluted over the next three years. Obama’s 2008 coalition may go down as unique in American history, much like former President Jimmy Carter’s coalition.

I hope it will not. There is that word again.

(Truly tremendous work. From the diaries with minor edits – promoted by DavidNYC)

I love political geography and political history. So, something seemed out of line when I recently read diaries on several sites regarding the soon-to-be vacancy of New York’s 23rd Congressional District, made possible by the appointment of John McHugh to become Secretary of the Army. Several diaries mentioned that the district hasn’t been represented by a Democrat in a quarter-century or so. Perhaps parts of the district haven’t elected a Democrat in 25 or so years, but it seemed to me that most of the district hasn’t been Democratic-held since much earlier times. I decided to do a little research.

It turns out that NY-23 is a true political anomaly. It is one of only two remaining districts in the United States where at least part of the district has not been represented by a Democrat since 1852 (the other is Pennsylvania’s 16th District, which includes Lancaster County, most of which has not been represented by a Democrat since 1830. Tennessee’s 2nd District last elected a Democrat in 1852. There no longer are any comparable Democratic-held districts; all have gone Republican at least once since 1850, although a few in Texas held out until the DeLay redistricting of 2004.)

If Democrats win NY-23 in a special election to be held later this year, certain parts of this district will be represented by a Democrat for the first time in 159 years. The map below gives you an idea of how long it’s been since parts of the district have been Democratic-held. Almost two-thirds of the population of the current district (62%) live in territory that has not elected a Democrat since 1890 or earlier. It really is mind-boggling. (For those political geeks interested in more history about this district, I provide additional information below the map.)

Perhaps what got a few commentators confused regarding this district in diaries I read (other than often-confusing district numbering) was the fact that the district has only been around in its present “single-district” form since the 1940’s. Since that time, it has always included Jefferson, St. Lawrence, and Franklin Counties, as well as Lewis Co. (except for 1971-73), and Oswego Co. (except for 1945-53 and 1983-93). Clinton Co. and most of Essex Co. have also been part of the district since 1969 and 1971, respectively. The other, more peripheral counties have been part of this district only briefly over the last 60 or so years. Between 1883 and 1943, there were basically two districts here – a “western” one, encompassing Jefferson, Oswego, Lewis, and Madison, and an “eastern” one, encompassing St. Lawrence, Franklin, Clinton, and Essex – although during one period of time, redistricting created three districts centered in what is now NY-23. Prior to 1883, what is now NY-23 was part of four or more different districts.

Since the 1856 election (when the Republican party entered the political arena), the territory in what is now NY-23 has almost exclusively been represented by the GOP. In fact, the last Democrat elected to represent St. Lawrence Co. in Congress was a man named Francis Spinner, elected in 1854. He ran successfully for re-election as a Republican in 1856 and was later appointed as Treasurer of the United States by Abraham Lincoln. The last Democrat to represent Jefferson Co. was even earlier – Willard Ives, elected in 1850. The most amazing fact I found was regarding Franklin Co. The last Democrat elected to represent that county was Joseph Russell, also in 1850. In 1852, the district that then included Franklin elected George Simmons, a member of the Whig party. Therefore, Franklin Co. has been more recently represented in Congress by a WHIG (1854) than by a Democrat (1852)!

I wasn’t going to go into the current political situation in NY-23 at all in this diary, but one fact caught my eye while researching the info here. It is interesting that Darrrell Aubertine (who represents Oswego, Jefferson and part of St. Lawrence in the State Senate – equivalent to approximately 45% of the population of NY-23) is the first Democrat elected to his State Senate seat since 1880. (By the way, no other State Senator represents as high a percentage of NY-23 as Aubertine; GOP Senator Joe Griffo represents about 15% and doesn’t even live in NY-23; while GOP Senator Betty Little represents about 25% and also doesn’t live in the congressional district; two others represent the remainder.) Aubertine would certainly make a formidable candidate for us. However, I also understand the need to keep the State Senate in Democratic hands. NY-23 voted for Obama by 52-47, so this election will be competitive. Hopefully, we will find a good candidate and make him or her the first Democrat elected to Congress here in a long, long time.

Sources for information:

• The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress (1989)
• The Almanac of American Politics (various editions)
• Wikipedia

Is this the “dark horse” in CA-10 who will challenge Tauscher-clone State Senator Mark DeSaulnier?  Fog City Journal thinks so.  DeSaulnier is one if the names mentioned to replace Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher who has been nominated for a State Department position.  Here is his official biography.  DeSaulnier just got elected to the California State Senate in November, 2008, and has already voted in favor of the Louisiana-style “blackmail primary” which would allow candidates for office to conceal their party affiliation and turn California into the land of a thousand Liebermans.   He also has a blog.

This is almost to surreal for mere words…

http://www.poststar.com/blogs/…

Republican and Conservative congressional candidate turned down an invitation to participate in the WMHT/Times Union debate on Thursday because he already had his own multi-media event planned, said Adam Kramer, a spokesman.

Tedisco will conduct a “Jim Tedisco in 3-D” campaign forum at 7 p.m. Thursday at his campaign headquarters in Halfmoon, Kramer said.

People will be able to participate in three different ways: in person, via telephone conference call or via the Internet, he said.

Democratic, Independence and Working Families candidate Scott Murphy and Libertarian candidate Eric Sundwall, the same evening, will participate the WMHT/Times Union debate to be televised live on WMHT, WSKG and Mountain Lakes PBS public television stations.

Kramer said the Tedisco and Murphy campaigns had previously agreed to participate in four debates, that did not include the WMHT/Times Union event.

Tedisco had already planned his own event on Thursday when he was invited to the fifth debate, Kramer said.

Kramer called back to emphasize that there are still two other debates prior to the March 31 special election: one on March 24 to be broadcast on WNYT- News Channel 13 and another on March 26 to be broadcast on Time Warner Capital News 9.

There were only three debates for the 2008 presidential campaign, which was spread out over a longer time period than the 20th Congressional District special election race, Kramer said.

Hi! I’m Charlie Wheelan and I am running to fill Rahm Emanuel’s vacant congressional seat in the Illinois’ 5th Congressional District. I am an expert in economics and a public policy lecturer at the University of Chicago. I’m also the author of Naked Economics, a lay-persons guide to economics!

Last month, my “Underwater” TV ad caught the nation’s eye.  Today, I’m launching my second TV ad, “Upside Down.”

Check out the new ad at

This time, instead of being underwater, I’m dangling from my feet, literally UPSIDE DOWN!  Why?  Because I wanted to show that I understand how many people’s efforts to pay their mortgage, afford health care and college tuition costs have gone “bottom-up”.

This is an equal opportunity recession.  I’ve met people with buildings named after them who’ve lost half their net worth.  I’ve met middle-class parents who thought they’d saved four years of college tuition and now only have two.  I’ve met people who’ve lost jobs, or are really worried about that possibility.

If it takes something a bit crazy like hanging upside down to make folks sit up and take notice, I’m willing to do it.

You can see me in the ad holding a copy of my book Naked Economics while strapped in inversion boots and suspended from a bar.  Halfway through the television spot, gravity wins out; I finally plummet, like the economy.

The ad, which was shot in front of a blue screen, took more than three hours to tape and I was hanging upside down almost the whole time.  I felt like my eyes were going to pop out. It was much worse than having to submerge myself underwater. Still, it was worth every minute to show people that I am the best person to help get out of the economic struggles we are facing today.

Don’t forget – the special primary election for the Illinois Fifth District Congressional seat is March 3.