My Trip to Washington, DC, (Districts We Need to Defend in 2008!)

One of things that I love doing on my all too infrequent trips to Washington, DC; along with networking, kicking Rethugs to the curb whenever possible, is being able to pick up “Roll Call” and “The Hill” for free.  One of the articles in the 1/4/06 edition of “Roll Call” was an article from Rep. Tom Cole, the new head of the RCCC.  One of the things that he said was that the RCCC had a debt of around $16 million and that was more than they had realized previously (SNARK WARNING) couldn’t have happened to a nicer group of gals and guys.  He also talks about 60 congressional districts that president bush carried twice that are currently help by Democrats.  I won’t bother you with 39 of them, because they are held by long term, incumbent dedmocrats with large voting percentages.  But there are 21 districts; held by Democrats, who won with under 55%.  The list is as follows:

TX 22nd  Nick Lampson  52%
PA 10th  Christopher Carney  53%
IA 9th  Baron Hill  50%
KS 2nd  Nancy Boyda  51%
LA 3rd  Charlie Melancon  55%
NC 11th  Heath Schuler  54%
IL 8th  Melissa Bean  51%
IN 2nd  Joe Donnelly  54%
GA 8th  Jim Marshall  51%
WI 8th  Steve Kagen  51%
AZ 5th  Harry Mitchell  51%
CA 11th  Jerry McNerney  53%
FL 16th  Tim Mahoney  49%
NY 19th  John Hall  51%
PA 4TH  Jason Altmire  52%
AZ 8th  Gabrielle Giffords  54%
NY 24th  Michael Acuri  54%
MN 1st  Tim Walz  53%
NH 1st  Carol Shea-Porter  52%
IA 3rd  Lenoard Boswell  52%
OR 5th  Darlene Hooley  54%

These are prime cases of defense first along with the districts that Kerry took in 2004 that have elected rethugs.

New York Politicos, We Need Your Help

The Albany Project is very excited to announce the launch of TAPopedia, project very much inspired by both dalyKos’ dKosopedia and SSP’s own race tracker wiki. It’s a heck of an ambitious project and we’re gonna need all the help we can get to turn this into a useful resource for everyone.

Here’s the announcement as it was posted at the albany project:

Introducing TAPopedia!

We here at the albany project are very excited to announce the launch of a new wiki dedicated solely to New York politics. We feel that this tool can fill a very large gap and can, with your help, become a very powerful resource bloggers, journalists and, most importantly, for the citizens of New York.

We’ve built the skeleton, now we need to flesh it out. that’s where you come in.

It’s a wiki, so it will take time and and it will require the participation of plenty of folks to make it into what we hope it can be. We invite everyone to participate and hope you will consider adopting your Senate and/or Assembly districts, your reps, your whatever and pour your knowledge into this project. The wiki will be as good and as useful as we can make it.

Having all this data in one place in an ever growing, searchable pile has a lot of potential in our view.

We are also in the process of working up prototypes of some pretty sophisticated GIS maps that we hope to add soon. This stuff will blow you away.

Let’s build something amazing, people.

You in?

________________________________________

The more folks we can get involved with this thing, the better mousetrap we will build. We can use everyone’s help and I so hope you’ll want to come out and play as well

There’s code for a button at the site, if you are so inclined.

Forward!

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

House 2008: The Vulnerable 30%

Ranking every House seat by PVI, incumbent or incumbent’s party performance in 2004 and incumbent performance in 2006, I have obtained the following list of House seats in order of vulnerablility.  While this list is in no way definitive, it does provide us with a rough sketch of the 2008 landscape.  New members are in italics, and members who received less than 55% are in bold.  Following the name of each incumbent is her or his district’s PVI, which is explicated here.  My calculations also consider the results of special elections and runoffs.

1 WI-08 (KAGEN-D) R+4
2 KS-02 (BOYDA-D) R+7
3 IN-09 (HILL-D) R+7
4 FL-16 (MAHONEY-D) R+2
5 PA-10 (CARNEY-D) R+8
6 AZ-05 (MITCHELL-D) R+4
7 TX-22 (LAMPSON-D) R+15
8 NY-19 (HALL-D) R+1
9 CT-04 (SHAYS-R) D+5
10 IL-08 (BEAN-D) R+5

11 TX-23 (RODRIGUEZ-D) R+4
12 PA-04 (ALTMIRE-D) R+3
13 NY-20 (GILLIBRAND-D) R+3
14 NC-11 (SCHULER-D) R+7
15 WA-08 (REICHERT-R) D+2
16 PA-06 (GERLACH-R) D+2
17 CA-11 (McNERNEY-D) R+3
18 NM-01 (WILSON-R) D+2
19 MN-01 (WALZ-D) R+1
20 NV-03 (PORTER-R) D+1

21 IN-02 (DONNELLY-D) R+4
22 NH-01 (SHEA-PORTER-D) R+0
23 NY-24 (ARCURI-D) R+1
24 KY-03 (YARMUTH-D) D+2
25 AZ-08 (GIFFORDS-D) R+1
26 LA-03 (MELANCON-D) R+5
27 PA-08 (MURPHY-D) D+3
28 GA-12 (BARROW-D) D+2
29 TX-17 (EDWARDS-D) R+18
30 FL-22 (KLEIN-D) D+4

31 NJ-07 (FERGUSON-R) R+1
32 GA-08 (MARSHALL-D) R+8
33 NH-02 (HODES-D) D+3
34 IA-03 (BOSWELL-D) D+1
35 OR-05 (HOOLEY-D) D+1
36 NC-08 (HAYES-R) R+3
37 UT-02 (MATHESON) R+17
38 CO-07 (PERLMUTTER-D) D+2
39 PA-15 (DENT-R) D+2
40 MI-09 (KNOLLENBERG-R) R+0

41 OH-18 (SPACE-D) R+6
42 IL-06 (ROSKAM-R) R+3
43 IN-08 (ELLSWORTH-D) R+9
44 FL-13 (BUCHANAN-R) R+4
45 OH-15 (PRYCE-R) R+1
46 MN-06 (BACHMANN-R) R+5
47 IA-02 (LOEBSACK-D) D+7
48 MI-07 (WALBERG-R) R+2
49 AZ-01 (RENZI-R) R+2
50 CO-03 (SALAZAR-D) R+6

51 MI-11 (McCOTTER-R) R+1
52 CT-02 (COURTNEY-D) D+8
53 NY-26 (REYNOLDS-R) R+3
54 NY-29 (KUHL-R) R+5
55 CO-04 (MUSGRAVE-R) R+9
56 CT-05 (MURPHY-D) D+4
57 IL-10 (KIRK-R) D+4
58 VT-AL (WELSH-D) D+9
59 VA-02 (DRAKE-R) R+6
60 PA-07 (SESTAK-D) D+4

61 OH-01 (CHABOT-R) R+1
62 IA-01 (BRALEY-D) D+5
63 NY-13 (FOSSELLA-R) D+1
64 IL-11 (WELLER-R) R+1
65 CA-26 (DREIER-R) R+3
66 CA-50 (BILBRAY-R) R+5
67 SC-05 (SPRATT-D) R+6
68 VA-11 (DAVIS-R) R+1
69 PA-03 (ENGLISH-R) R+2
70 MN-02 (KLEIN-R) R+3

71 SD-AL (HERSETH-D) R+10
72 KS-03 (MOORE-D) R+4
73 OH-02 (SCHMIDT-R) R+13
74 NY-03 (KING-R) D+2
75 KY-04 (DAVIS-R) R+12
76 FL-08 (KELLER-R) R+3
77 IA-04 (LATHAM-R) D+0
78 NJ-05 (GARRETT-R) R+4
79 NY-25 (WALSH-R) D+3
80 MI-08 (ROGERS-R) R+2

81 NJ-03 (SAXTON-R) D+3
82 TX-27 (ORTIZ-D) R+1
83 WY-AL (CUBIN-R) R+19
84 TN-04 (DAVIS-D) R+3
85 IN-07 (CARSON-D) D+9
86 PA-17 (HOLDEN-D) R+7
87 DE-AL (CASTLE-R) D+7
88 AR-02 (SNYDER-D) R+0
89 ND-AL (POMEROY-D) R+13
90 VA-09 (BOUCHER-D) R+7

91 WV-02 (CAPITO-R) R+5
92 OH-12 (TIBERI-R) R+1
93 KY-06 (CHANDLER-D) R+7
94 PA-18 (MURPHY-R) R+2
95 OH-14 (LaTOURETTE-R) R+2
96 TX-32 (SESSIONS-R) R+11
97 NY-01 (BISHOP-D) D+3
98 TX-15 (HINOJOSA-D) D+3
99 FL-15 (WELDON-R) R+3

100 IL-17 (HARE-D) D+5
101 WA-05 (McMORRIS-R) R+5
102 TX-28 (CUELLAR-D) R+1
103 OR-04 (DeFAZIO-D) D+0
104 NJ-02 (LoBIONDO-R) D+4
105 OH-03 (TURNER-R) R+3
106 WI-03 (KIND-D) D+3
107 NC-13 (MILLER-D) D+2
108 NC-02 (ETHERIDGE-D) R+3
109 CA-04 (DOOLITTLE-R) R+11
110 NE-02 (TERRY-R) R+9

111 NV-02 (HELLER-R) R+8
112 NE-01 (FORTENBERRY-R) R+12
113 WA-03 (BAIRD-D) D+0
114 AZ-02 (FRANKS-R) R+9
115 VA-10 (WOLF-R) R+5
116 MS-04 (TAYLOR-D) R+16
117 IL-15 (JOHNSON-R) R+6
118 TN-06 (GORDON-D) R+4
119 AL-03 (ROGERS-R) R+4
120 MI-04 (CAMP-R) R+3

121 MO-04 (SKELTON-D) R+11
122 WV-01 (MOLLOHAN-D) R+6
123 NM-02 (PEARCE-R) R+6
124 NC-05 (FOXX-R) R+15
125 MO-03 (CARNAHAN-D) D+8
126 OR-01 (WU-D) D+6
127 FL-02 (BOYD-D) R+2
128 IL-13 (BIGGERT-R) R+5
129 OH-16 (REGULA-R) R+3
130 CA-45 (BONO-R) R+3
131 MI-06 (UPTON-R) R+2
132 MN-07 (PETERSON-D) R+6

Lists of the most vulnerable Republican and Democratic House incumbents will be posted shortly.

A “Red State” Project?: Expanding the Playing Field in ’08

( – promoted by DavidNYC)

Last week, David took a look at the “Swing States” for 2008, adding:

Now, as you know, I’m a big believer in the fifty-state strategy, but as you also know, these things take time. As much as I’d like to believe we’ll see an expanded playing field in the next presidential race, I think we all realize that Howard Dean’s plan is the work of many years.

I agree, and it’s important to put our resources where they have the best chance of affecting the outcome, but at the same time, we don’t know how the picture will look, who our nominee will be, who their nominee will be, etc. Speculation is fun, and I’m no stranger to it. But the question that came to me, a resident of a deep-red state, when looking at the playing field, and realizing that the playing field David put out there is probably broader than the playing field we’ll see in 2008, was: What can we do to change it? How can the netroots do what we do best – making races competitive – in 2008? Can we do it in a Presidential race?

Of the 31 states George W. Bush won in 2004, he won 9 of them by less than 10%. Those states total 97 electoral votes. Those are states that we can, conceivably, win in 2008. If we flip 18 or more electoral votes from 2004, we have a majority. But playing offense is our strength, and being ambitious is a luxury we have that the campaign does not.

Of course, there’s only so much we can do on our own. But we can lay the groundwork, build up local successes, do whatever we can do to help elect Democrats in 2008. Maybe, in the process, we can make some of these states competitive on a Presidential level, and force the Republicans to play defense.

So, I’m just kicking some thoughts around here: If you live in a state that went for Bush in 2004, what races, if any, can we focus on? Are there potential Democratic candidates you think could bring the state you live in into play? Are there potential Republican candidates that could? Also, what are the prominent blogs in your state or district?

I think we need to make sure that 2006 was only the beginning. We have an opportunity to elect Democrats all across the country in 2008, we should take advantage.

States Won By Bush in ’04 (swing states in italics, electoral votes and approval rating in parentheses):
Alabama (9) 62.5% (45%)
Alaska (3) 61% (43%)
Arizona (10) 54.8% (41%)
Arkansas (6) 54.3% (38%)
Colorado (9) 51.7% (41%)
Florida (27) 52.1% (42%)
Georgia (15) 58% (45%)
Idaho (4) 68.4% (55%)
Indiana (11) 60% (40%)
Iowa (7) 49.9%(38%)
Kansas (6) 62% (45%)
Kentucky (8) 59.6% (40%)
Louisiana (9) 56.7% (47%)
Mississippi (6) 59% (45%)
Missouri (11) 53.3% (34%)
Montana (3) 59.1% (45%)
Nebraska (5)* 65.9% (46%) – There’s a quirk in Nebraska’s election law that awards electoral votes by Congressional District. NE-02 went 61-38% for Bush in 2004. In 2006, Republican Lee Terry won the district 55-45%, after a 61-36% victory in ’04. Maine is the only other state with this sort of law. The rest of the states are “winner take all.”
Nevada (5) 50.5% (37%)
New Mexico (5) 49.8% (34%)
North Carolina (15) 56% (43%)
North Dakota (3) 62.9% (47%)
Ohio (20) 50.8% (34%)
Oklahoma (7) 65.6% (43%)
South Carolina (8) 57.9% (41%)
South Dakota (3) 59.9% (42%)
Tennessee (11) 56.8% (41%)
Texas (34) 61.1% (41%)
Utah (5) 71.5% (55%)
Virginia (13) 53.7% (44%)
West Virginia (5) 56.1% (40%)
Wyoming (3) 68.9% (49%)

My goal here is simply to get some input from everyone: what can we do in the “red” states? Some of these states, particularly the ones Bush won by less than 10%, are states we can and should win on a Presidential level. Some of these states, clearly, would take an absolute disaster by the Republicans to win. So my question is obviously not limited to the Presidential race, although it’s a big part of the equation. We had a few states in 2006 that weren’t able to capitalize on the wave. We had a few states (like Nebraska, Wyoming, Idaho) that made significant progress but still couldn’t have much tangible success. What should be our strategy? Is it too soon to start talking about expanding the playing field?

Crossposted at Daily Kos and MyDD

Date Set for NY State Senate Special Election

(So the election is one month from today. I think this one is going to consume a lot of my interest. – promoted by DavidNYC)

Adapted from a post at the albany project

According to Newsday, the special election to replace outgoing state Senator Michael Balboni will take place on Feb 6th. The GOP has chosen Nassau County Clerk and former Assemby Member Maureen O’Connell and the dems will choose a candidate on Monday.

It’s interesting to me that Tom DiNapoli, who was often mentioned as being the candidate with the right of first refusal in this race, isn’t being mentioned in media reports at all anymore. I guess he really does want to be Comptroller. As for the other dem hopefuls, Newsday lists them thusly:

Jacobs said he will head a screening committee that Saturday will interview four Democrats seeking the party’s nomination: legislators Roger Corbin of Westbury and Craig Johnson of Port Washington; East Williston activist Matthew Cuomo, nephew of former Gov. Mario Cuomo and cousin of state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo; and North Hempstead Town Clerk Michelle Schimel.

The screening committee will submit its recommendation to the executive committee Monday night, Jacobs said.

Everything I’ve heard in the past two weeks points to Nassau County legislator Craig Johnson as being the new favorite. Johnson seems to be a pretty progressive candidate. (here is his  official site and campaign site)

Over at the albany project, guest blogger and all around bad ass Scott in NJ has some more relevant details about the state of the players and district.

Republicans have nominated Nassau County Clerk Maureen O’Connell, who reportedly has the Independence and Conservative lines as well.  The Democrats will pick their candidate on Monday; Nassau County Legislator Craig Johnson is the front-runner for that nomination.  Johnson has run on the WFP line in the past and he will probably get row E against O’Connell.  Insiders suggest that the parties could spend up to $4 million on the race.

As of December, the Senate Republican Campaign Committee had $580,490.96 on hand; the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee had $143,166.31.  O’Connell can expect substantial support from the Nassau County Republican Committee, which has $1,359,471.43 on hand.  The County Democrats spent all of their cash on the 2006 campaign.


Tom Suozzi had $560,190.76 left over after his primary run, but he might have spread some of that money out among ’06 general election candidates.  FWIW, Johnson supported Spitzer over Suozzi in ’06.  Spitzer-Paterson 2006 still had $5,529,993.05 in the coffers after the general election.


Democrats hold a 38-35 registration edge in the district.

Looks like we’re gettin’ it on a month from today. As soon as the dems pick their candidate we’ll be covering that as well.

Wes Clark – 192 Steps to Disaster Preparedness

  By now, anyone who hasn’t lived in a cave these past years knows the critical importance that global climate change will have in trends toward more violent weather patterns and storms of significant risk to our vital National Security.
  Despite best estimates for our ability to counter the climate shifts expected of future decades, implementing sound environmental policy with plans and processes that mitigate this threat, being prepared to deal with the inevitable pending disasters will be of vital concern as we enter the twenty-first century.
  As we look to those who would lead our United States as our next President, it should be obvious to all how important it will be to have someone in the Oval Office that understands not only the risks that we face with these changing environmental conditions, but how to best prepare to face them.

  Please take a moment to review the following interview (And YouTube Video) with Wes Clark about the failures of Katrina response  and some steps involved to prepare ourselves in the future.

Nick Ballasy: With hurricane Katrina. How do you feel about the Bush administration’s response? Was it appropriate? Would you have done something totally different? Or..

Wes Clark: Well, there are a lot of things wrong with this and there’s plenty of fault finding at every level.

  One of the things that happened, of course, that everybody knows about is the Federal Emergency Management Agency was slipped into the Department of Homeland Security and the focus was on terrorism, not on responding to natural disasters. So that was a distraction.

  Another thing is, a lot of the key people were taken out of the Federal Emergency Management Agency because these were professional people and it became part of the political spoils. They put guys like Michael Brown, I’m sure he’s a decent guy, I don’t know him personally, but he had no experience for this kind of thing. It wasn’t like he was a, you know, big business leader who knew how to make things happen. He was a lawyer. And I like lawyers, but, unless you’ve run a big organization in a crisis, a disaster like Katrina is a tough.. It’s a tough learning experience and he didn’t do very well. And by the way, the guy over him, Michael Chertoff, he’s another lawyer who’s never, you know Federal Prosecuter, but he’d never actually had his hands on the wheel of a big organization. It’s about how you communicate, how you task, how you review, how you follow up, how you set suspenses and deadlines. It’s a whole lot of things that somebody in the military, for example, I mean, I’ve learned it throughout a thirty-four year career. I know how to do that kind of thing. James Lee Witt, down there helping the Governor of Louisiana, he learned it. He was a disaster manager in Arkansas before he ran the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

  So there’s that problem.

  Then we had a problem in the Pentagon too. We used to support the disasters out of the Pentagon. Let’s face it, I mean, the only real resources that can flow around are military resources. Federal Emergency Management Agency doesn’t have a fleet of helicopters standing by. It doesn’t have a thousand trucks, you know, with food that’s all loaded up to run in for every disaster. It tasks the military.

  Now, we used to have something that was inside the Pentagon called the director of military support. It was run by the Secretary of the Army. But, organizational politics got in the way. Nobody could understand why the Army got to do all this disaster relief but the National Military Command Center, with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense, they didn’t. So people got jealous of the Secretary of the Army because nominally, he works for the Secretary of Defense, but in the case of a disaster he was working for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. And he was responding to the President. This made the Secretary of Defense feel like, “Uh, maybe I’m like, you know, I’m not needed here”. So, you know, any good bureaucratic warrior would tell you that you should take control of everything. So they took control of the domestic support agency, they folded it into the National Military Command Center and then, naturally, what’s the National Military Command Center, well, they’re fighting two wars. They’re fighting a war in Afghanistan and they’re fighting a war in Iraq and then you’re coming to them and saying “Hey, don’t forget that hurricane.” “Uh, yeah yeah, we’ll get to it right away, ok, and Sir by the way, there’s a hurricane coming.” “Yeah ok, well can you, The Secretary’s got an important meeting, can you come back and see him, you know, in a couple of hours.”

  It’s not the same kind of responsiveness as if you have the Federal Emergency Management Agency connected directly to it’s own response cell in the Pentagon.

  So those were some of the organizational mistakes, and leadership mistakes and.. choices. But when you get right down to it, to make something like this work you have to do a lot of rehearsal. People have to think through the problem. Somebody has to say “Well, gee we’re gonna have eighty thousand people with no transportation. Uh, let’s see eighty thousand, now, how many per bus? What’s our planning figure per bus? Forty. Forty, if you can get a big bus, forty. Ok, so let’s see, forty into eighty thousand. You need two thousand buses? Uh, but, uh, what’s the readiness rate on buses? Well, like one in ten won’t work. And one in ten might break down, how far they gotta go? I dunno, where we gonna put the refugees?”. So then you start, you know, trying to work your way backwards through this thing. Turns out you might need three thousand buses, with three thousand five hundred drivers, with extra tanker trucks, refueling stations because, what if it’s the middle of the night and the bus is out in the middle of Louisiana, you know, it gets, drove a hundred and fifty miles down, drove a hundred and fifty miles back, it’s got a two hundred mile range. It needs more fuel. So somebody has to think of all this, and to plan it. “Ok, what community, you got twenty buses, you got fifty buses, you got a hundred buses but you’re three hundred miles away.” So, I mean all that had to have been worked out. Where’re they gonna meet the buses? What neighborhood? What roads are gonna be flooded? Somebody has to do all that. None of that was done.

  And then, when you ask for the buses, you know you’ve gotta have a sort of sequence ok. You ask for the buses and then somebody has to call each community. Do you know who to call? Who do you call? School board? Mayor? Chief of Police? Fire Department? “Um, ok but the Mayor’s office is closed.” Got a home number for the Mayor? And then, how bout the bus driver? How do you get the bus driver at two AM? And what percentage of them no longer have the same phone number that they had when they signed up for work five years ago? You know? Have you ever tried it? So, when you sort of work all through this thing it’s like.. It’s like doing line dancing. I don’t know if.. you ever do line dancing? My wife and I went out one time, this guy says, “Hey you’ve gotta learn this.” He’s big into country western music. He says, “You gotta learn this line dancing.” My wife got to the ninety second step, and she said, “I quit!” She said, “Any dance that’s got ninety-two steps, I’m not doing!” And, to make this kind of stuff work, you gotta go though a hundred and ninety-two steps. And they’ve gotta be thought out. Somebody’s got to be responsible for it, and, as soon as they come back and tell you the, you know, “We tried, we missed ten percent of the buses. Cause we couldn’t, you know these were the ones that..”. Somebody’s got to follow up and say, “Ok, get so and so on the phone, drive from this town to that town. Go to the parking lot for the buses. Get me backup drivers. I want National Guard. Break the padlock. Get into the buses. Start the buses.” You know, and, how are you going to do that with people who’ve never done it before?

  Now, one more thing that’s worth talking about on Katrina of course, is, the National Guard leadership. Most of them were in Iraq. Both Mississippi and Louisiana have what they call an enhanced infantry brigade. And this brigade has the command and control apparatus. Usually it’s the major, let’s call it in technical terms, the maneuver arm for the state. So if you’ve got heavy lifting to be done, they’re going to do it. And they’re not the engineers that have bulldozers. They’re not the signal corps that has all the wire laying capability. And they’re not the aviators that have all the helicopters. But, these are the people that, if you want to organize something, they’re the people who do the organization and planning. They were in Iraq. Some of them had already participated in planning for disaster like this. So, somebody would’ve said, “Oh yeah, the bus problem! Yeah! Ok, remember when we did that in the exercise two years ago? How we..” You know..

  But they weren’t there.

YouTube Link..

“On the Issues” with Nick Ballasy – nickballasy.com

Weekly Open Thread: What Races Are You Interested In?

Sorry for the quiet spell around here lately.  I’m on vacation until the 8th (but no vacation is complete without internet access to the Swing State Project, of course) and David has been busy ringing in the New Year and the new Democratic Congress in Washington, DC.  Did anyone have a chance to make it to the MCCXXIII Netroots reception?  Or did you get made fun of by your significant other for watching C-SPAN all afternoon, like me?

IL-10: The Battle to Flip This Seat Begins Today

New Year, New Resolution, New Commitment to Making a Difference.  This is my first diary I have ever written on a major progressive blog.  I may not live in a Swing State (Illinois), but I certainly live in a Swing District, IL-10.  It is my intention to work deligently to see the seat currently occupied by Mark Kirk move to the Democratic column in 2008.

I was happy to see democratic avenger’s diary on The Ten House Candidates Who Should Run Again, which listed Dan Seals of IL-10 as #6. I really believe had the DCCC put the money it used in Tammy Duckworth’s campaign instead into Dan Seals race with Mark Kirk, we might have another seat in the house.  But that is water under the bridge and it is time to press foward.

Part of my plan is to write a weekly diary on Mark Kirk’s voting record and legislation sponsorship, exposing him as a faux-moderate, neocon-in-hiding GOP congressman.  Other diaries will include IL 10th District news, examination of the district political trends, etc.

Mark Kirk’s record as a legislator is marginal at best.  As a member of the majority party in 109th Congress and holding the position of assistant majority whip, Mark Kirk sponsored 32 pieces of legislation according to his THOMAS, 31 died in committee. The one item that passed was an amendment to an emergency appropriations bill to increase the funding for the DEA by $9.2MM. 

Some record of achievement.  You would think that he was living the life of a congressman in the minority party.  Let’s see what happens in the 110th Congress.  Hopefully, two years from now, we be celebrating the swearing in of Dan Seals to represent the 10th district of Illinois.

One Man With Courage Makes A Majority – Andrew Jackson

Presidential Polling – Nevada

ARG, Nevada, Dec. 19-23, MoE +/- 4%, 600 likely Democratic Caucus goers (545 Democrats and 55 no party).

Clinton 37%
Obama 12%
Kerry 9%
Edwards 8%
Clark 4%
Dodd 2%
Gravel 1%
Kucinich 1%
Richardson 1%
Vilsack 1%
Biden 1%
Undecided 23%

No one’s campaigned in Nevada yet, but so far it looks like Richardson has yet to display any regional appeal here. It’s tough enough to accurately identify caucus goers in Iowa, a larger state with top significance – Nevada caucus polling should probably be taken with a grain of salt. I have no other recent poll for this state to compare with.

Note that Nevada still has a mucher higher proportion of undecideds than Iowa. So far, though, Hillary is the one to beat in Nevada by more than 3 to 1 over any other challenger. Out of the 4 states polled by ARG in this batch, this is Edwards’ worst performance and Kerry’s best. It’s also Clark’s best, which isn’t saying much. Obama places second, but has a lot of work cut out for him here. Vilsack is not credible outside Iowa.

GOP numbers,:

Giuliani 31%
McCain 25%
Gingrich 22%
Romney 4%
Undecided 18%
(Less than one percent chose Thompson, Pataki, Hunter, Huckabee, Hagel, Gillmore, or Brownback)

Best state for Giuliani and Gingrich. Worst state for McCain and Romney.

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...