NY-Gov: David Paterson will not seek re-election — or resign

It seems that even David Paterson could read the handwriting on the wall:

Embattled Gov. Paterson has pulled the plug on his election bid, a source close to the governor said Friday.

Paterson will announce the decision later Friday.

Paterson has been under fire for having contacted a woman who accused one of his top aides of domestic violence.

The source said the governor has agreed not to seek election, but he will not resign – opting to serve out the remainder of his term.

Full article: http://www.nydailynews.com/new…

The ball would now seem to be in Andrew Cuomo’s court – one would assume that this will move up the timetable for his campaign announcement and roll-out considerably. Can he be expected to pounce quickly and decisively like his Connecticut compatriot Dick Blumenthal, or continue to dither in the manner of the ignominious Beau Biden?

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

On Martha Coakley, and the Bay State Debacle

I recognize that there is an intense level of anger and frustration among we of the Democratic base right now, faced as we are with a scenario most of us could not have conceived in our worst nightmares, however I think the rabid anti-Coakleyism spreading around the internets these days is getting just a wee bit unfair. In this respect I largely agree with Nate Silver – yes, she is a boring candidate, and yes, she did run a dull, almost absentee campaign… but when you’re in Massachusetts, and you’re a high-profile statewide elected official, and you’re running as a Democrat against a fairly obscure state senator to succeed Ted Kennedy, none of those things should be unforgivable offenses. Let’s face it: there is a LOT of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here. To be sure, there were plenty of people (myself included) who had reservations about her in the primary, but clearly none of those concerns translated into anything near the blind, existential panic we are now facing as we creep up upon January 19th. If anyone can point to a post he/she left, here or anywhere else, indicating his/her grave uneasiness about the threat posed by Scott Brown in a general election, I’d love to see it – I’m genuinely curious.

This is obviously not to say Coakley’s camp is blameless. Going dark for a month was malpractice of the highest order, and her campaign manager should never be allowed to work in American politics ever again. But the over-the-top vitriol being directed at the candidate herself is starting to become unseemly, and frankly sort of classless. I doubt any of us can imagine what its like to be in her shoes at this very moment, being pegged by pundits and partisan activists nationwide as the pariah who single-handedly flushed the Democratic supermajority – and by extension, Ted Kennedy’s dream of universal healthcare – down the drain. By all accounts, Martha Coakley is a capable public servant, a fairly committed progressive, and by almost any measure a more qualified candidate for the United States Senate than Scott Brown. Yes, her probable defeat on Tuesday will almost certainly mark the end of her political career, and that can be argued as being perfectly appropriate, but I hardly think it cause for open celebration.

Just as determinate as any particular fault of the Coakley campaign is, I think, the basic issue highlighted by PPP in the poll that touched off this horrific week: a profound disparity in enthusiasm between D’s and R’s, the very same one reflected in the outcomes of the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia. The electorate turning out for special/off-year downballot elections is simply a different universe of individuals than those who came to the polls in 2008. Beyond the predictable backlash from the right, who knows how many people voted for Obama having never voted in their lives, and may never vote again? I think we can anticipate the relative drop-off from here out to be comparable to what we have seen thus far, and that alone augurs poorly for our near-term electoral prospects – whether or not we have Coakleys or Capuanos on the ballot.

NJ-Gov: PPP & Rasmussen – Christie 42, Corzine 38

Two new polls out today paint a disturbingly similar picture of the state of the New Jersey gubernatorial race.

From PPP:


After his lead was reduced to a single point in a Public Policy Polling survey two weeks ago, Chris Christie has now widened his advantage to four.

Christie’s at 42% in the newest poll to 38% for Jon Corzine and 13% for Chris Daggett.

Earlier in the race it had appeared that Daggett was hurting Christie more, but now supporters of the independent candidate say by a 44-32 margin that their second choice would be Corzine. 43% of voters planning to support him are Democrats while only 9% are Republicans.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo…

This comes only about an hour after the latest Rasmussen survey was released showing nearly identical topline numbers – that is, prior to the pollster’s re-allocation of Daggett votes:


The initial preferences were Christie 42%, Corzine 38%, and Daggett 14%. After Daggett-supporters and undecideds were pushed, it became Christie 46%, Corzine 43%, and Daggett 7%. Last week, Corzine had led by 37%-36%-16% on first preferences, and Christie was up by 41%-39%-11% after people were pushed. The margin of error is ±3%.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo…

VA-Gov: Washington Post endorses Deeds

Tomorrow, the Washington Post will offer its editorial endorsement to Democrat Creigh Deeds in his now long-shot quest to be Virginia’s next governor.

Mr. Deeds, lagging in the polls, lacks Mr. McDonnell’s knack for crisp articulation. But if he has not always been the most adroit advocate for astute policies, that is preferable to Mr. McDonnell’s silver-tongued embrace of ideas that would mire Virginia in a traffic-clogged, backward-looking past. Virginians should not confuse Mr. McDonnell’s adept oratory for wisdom, nor Mr. Deeds’s plain speech for indirection. In fact, it is Mr. Deeds whose ideas hold the promise of a prosperous future.

http://deedsforvirginia.com/pa…

Though the endorsement itself is not especially surprising, I think many will be moved by the Post’s unwavering praise for Deeds, and its willingness to defend his integrity and policy positions in spite of a somewhat lackluster campaign. One wavering Arlington County voter I know was blown away upon hearing it in full, and immediately re-affirmed his support for the Democratic ticket.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

SC-02: Joe Wilson Jeer = Rob Miller Bonanza

As it turns out, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) is seeing immediate, tangible consequences to his now-infamous heckle during President Obama’s address before congress last night.

Proof that one man’s loss is another man’s gain: in the hours following South Carolina’s GOP Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during President Barack Obama’s joint address to Congress Wednesday evening, his 2010 Democratic opponent has raised about $100,000 from 3,000 people, according to a spokeswoman for the House Democrats’ campaign operation.

Full article: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/…

This incident could have just turned Rob Miller into this cycle’s Elwyn Tinklenberg. However, while Michele Bachmann’s loony tune Hardball appearance occurred in the lead-up to Election Day, Wilson’s fall from grace is happening over a year out from November 2010, which seemingly would give him ample time to recover, particularly in a conservative state like South Carolina.

Even so, given his fairly narrow margin of victory last year, Wilson clearly – and totally unnecessarily – has offered up red meat for a campaign that may have otherwise floundered, and given Democrats a reason to be fired up in an otherwise uninspiring midterm election season.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

FL-Sen: Crist announces LeMieux as Martinez successor

Hot off the wires:

First Read has confirmed that Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) has chosen George LeMieux to fill Mel Martinez’s (R) Senate seat.

The pick of LeMieux — who had formerly served as Crist’s campaign manager in 2006 and then Crist’s chief of staff — is the clearest sign yet that this person would be a caretaker of the Senate seat, which Crist is running for next year.

Full article: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com…

Clearly, this is an exceptionally safe and calculated choice. The question is, given LeMieux’s closeness to Crist, will it come off as too calculated? And, perhaps more pertinently, can we expect LeMieux to share the moderate streak of his old boss? Lacking any record as an elected official, is it even possible to judge as much?

My brief take on TX redistricting (since all the cool kids are doing it)

Apologies for the lack of maps – I’ve been having untold issues attempting to save and recover images  using Dave’s Redistricting App. For the time being, my summary will have to suffice.

In short, as many have rightly observed, the prospect of Texas potentially gaining four additional House seats needn’t be a frightening one. To be sure, it seems almost invariable that the new configuration will be more favorable to Democrats than the current DeLay gerrymander.

The map I created naturally aimed to maximize the strength of the ever-growing Latino vote, particularly in Houston, San Antonio, the Rio Grande Valley, and the DFW Metroplex. I also sought to contain districts within county boundaries wherever possible. Having put it through several permutations, I found it possible – if not probable, were politics somehow removed from the redistricting process – that an 18R/18D map could easily be created, and that the potential even exists, without too much re-jiggering, for a Dem-majority delegation.

>CD-12 would be contained completely within Tarrant County, taking in most of Ft. Worth and Arlington and thusly creating a majority-minority district.

>CD-14 would lose Galveston and take in most of Corpus Christie, thus giving it a narrow Latino majority.

>CD-15 would be compacted entirely within Hidalgo County in the Rio Grande Valley, where there has been massive Hispanic population growth.

>CD-16 would remain largely intact within greater El Paso.

>CD-23 would relinquish its share of Bexar County and expand Northward, taking in Odessa, Midland, and/or San Angelo currently in CD-11 – it would do this and still maintain a Latino majority.

>CD-27 would give up most of its share of Corpus Christie and expand Westward, taking in Duval, Jim Wells, and Brooks Counties, all currently in CD-15 and all heavily Latino.

>Democratic Travis County would anchor two separate CD’s.

>Bexar County would wholly contain two majority Latino CD’s.

>Harris County alone could accommodate as many as five Latino plurality districts. They would vary in range of competitiveness depending upon their remaining demographic composition.

>Dallas County could similarly accommodate three Latino plurality districts (one of which could instead be African-American plurality if most of CD-30 is kept intact).

As always, please feel free to comment and critique.

KY-Sen: NRSC backs Bunning

Uh, why?

From Politico:

A noteworthy development in the Kentucky Senate race: National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman John Cornyn said — for the first time — that the committee will be endorsing Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), if he runs for re-election.

Cornyn told the Washington Post’s Ben Pershing yesterday that Bunning has the full support of the committee.

“As long as he is running, I will be supportive of him,” Cornyn told the Post.

Full story: http://www.politico.com/blogs/…

The question in my mind is, how much pull does the NRSC have anymore – especially in relation to a whole lot of exasperated Kentuckians? I guess we can only hope and pray that its enough to drag his sorry butt across the finish line in the primary.

Well F*** Me. (Or, Some Very Generalized Thoughts, For Whatever They’re Worth).

My apologies if this is overly rant-ish.

Ever since Novemeber 5th, it seems as if I can’t venture into the blogosphere without wanting a bottle of Prozac nearby.  Apparently, while I wasn’t paying attention (audaciously daring as I did to drink in the joy of Barack Obama’s election, for, oh, five minutes or so), the progressive movement has been all but decimated, and the Democratic Party has been reduced to an even more pathetic, value-less shell of its (way, way) former self.

The litany comes across as endless: Prop 8’s narrow passage in California; Janet Napolitano being tapped for Homeland Security, and Arizona’s governorship being handed to the GOP; Paul Carmouche’s loss in LA-04; [Indicted Dem Who Shall Not Be Named]’s loss in LA-02; the collective Senate appointment clusterf*** (since, evidently, Ted Kaufman, Michael Bennet, and Caroline Kennedy were/are the worst possible candidates imagineable); relatedly, the spectacle of Rod Blagojevich, the irrevocable taint it lays upon the Obama transition, the spinelessness of Harry Reid for offering to negotiate Roland Burris’s appointment (or was it his spinelessness for denying Democrats another reliable vote just so he could grandstand?), and Mark Kirk’s imminent, virtually inevitable ascent to the Senate; the utter inadequacy of Tim Kaine as a pick for DNC (since, as it turns out, he isn’t really on our team); the lack to date of LGBT representation in Obama’s cabinet; the SCANDALOUS! withdrawal of Bill Richardson from his nomination to head the Department of Commerce…

I could go on, but I think the general message gets across.

Practically every day I run across some message board comment invoking the specter of 1994, and how Democrats are inescapably headed toward a similar bloodbath in the not-so-distant future. I even recall one comment, on the eve of the Louisiana debacle, expressing a yearning desire that Obama had never been elected.

Huh.  That’s one opinion, I suppose.  Personally, I beg to differ.

I would ask: do any of us realistically expect a fattened majority in both Houses of Congress, and a party with unified control over government, to function completely smoothly, or to have the exact same electoral fortunes as a minority party unified in opposition against a comically unpopular president?  We all (myself included) seem to be stuck in an ’06 mindset in which any vaguely competitive contest must, by default, tilt ‘D’ in the end, and any divergence from that pattern is obviously an ominous harbinger of things to come.  Moreover, we hold No Drama Obama to an unattainable standard in which NO member of his circle can be associated with even the slightest whisper of impropriety, lest he be swiftly admonished as categorically full of crap (thanks, Politico!) just like every other politician.

Plainly I am exaggerating to a degree, and this diary isn’t meant to say that there aren’t perfectly legitimate grievances to be voiced, when clearly there are.  I mean, come on: we’re Democrats.  We draw breath to kvetch, wilt, panic, and recriminate.  It’s practically sown into our DNA.  And frankly, given the state of affairs to which the country has become sadly accustomed over the last eight years of GOP rule, we ought to hold our representatives to a higher standard, both in terms of personal ethics and ideological consistency.

Maybe it comes from my living in Downtown DC, where excitement for the Inauguration is palpable some two weeks out from the event — but I cannot help but think we’re starting to overlook the magnitude of our accomplishments.  Soon, a liberal African-American president will be working hand-in-hand with a solidly Democratic congress.  In the darkness of Election Night 2004, who among us would have had the temerity to predict that this is where we would be four years on?

And hey, even if Obama isn’t the Messiah, let’s at least revel in self-delusion for a short while longer before the real work begins.  We’ll have a whole term to develop ulcers and foster our deep-seeded fatalism.

From my own perspective, I’ve truly never been prouder to be a Democrat.  I’ve never been prouder to be a progressive.  And I’ve never been prouder to be an American.

My own neurotic, utterly non-substantive reason for hoping Mary Jo Kilroy wins the recount *UPDATE*

This has no bearing on anything in particular, but I noticed it some time ago and it’s been driving me insane…

A win for Stivers would give the Ohio delegation four — yes, FOUR — members named Steve.  

It started out with just Chabot and LaTourette.  Lo and behold, Chabot came to be challenged (ultimately successfully) by none other than a fellow Steve (Driehaus). Still, this was to be no more than a preservation of the nomenclatural status quo, switching out a bad Steve for a good one.

Yet then Steve Austria won the Republican primary in OH-07. Holding out little hope for Democrats winning this seat, my attention fell to OH-15, where I assumed (probably along with many others) that Mary Jo, having been campaigning for four years, would handily beat Steve Stivers.

Election Night: the race was called for Stivers.  My heart was broken on many levels — a good, hard-working Democrat had come up short, a premier pick-up opportunity had been missed, and Ohio’s Steve contingent had been **shudder** doubled.

But soon came word that the race was in fact too close to call!

Fearing the catastrophic glut of Steves I’d seen on the horizon, I began refreshing the Ohio Secretary of State’s page every few hours to monitor the results out of the 15th District. As of this moment, Superfluous Steve #4 is leading by 146 votes.

Such has been my life for the past five days.

Can Mary Jo still staunch the oncoming Tstevenami?

UPDATED: I’m proud/dumbstruck to announce that this very diary was featured on tonight’s Rachel Maddow Show.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26…