Month: October 2007

No later than the 15th day after the end of all quarters save the fourth, campaigns must file their fundraising reports with the FEC. For the third quarter, that much-anticipated day is today. As we’ve seen, many campaigns choose to file early, but we should still expect to see a flood of reports, at least from House candidates.

Senate reports are also due today, but thanks to truly insane regulations, these reports are filed in hardcopy and then, at great expense and lousy resolution, scanned in electronically. This doesn’t just cost money, it takes time as well – there’s at least a three-to-four week lag before these reports become available. That means reports from the third quarter next year won’t even be available until after the election! (For more on this insane state of affairs – which is entirely the fault of the Republicans – and what you can do to help, read Adam B here.)

Obviously, this is wildly unacceptable in this modern age. So I have a piece of advice for smart Senate campaigns across the country: post your filings on your websites. Not just a press release with your totals raised and on-hand – I’m talking about the entire PDF, or better yet, an Excel spreadsheet. Not only should these campaigns have nothing to hide, there’s nothing they can hide, because all this information will become public soon anyway.

This also leads me to another point. In the online era, the concept of quarterly filings seems rather antique. While I doubt that hidebound legislators would ever go in for this, I think some form of rolling disclosures would make a lot more sense. On one occasion, I worked in the finance department of a campaign, and we had to track donations daily anyway. Shooting this information over to the FEC on, say, a weekly basis would have meant almost zero additional work, except perhaps hitting “upload.”

The fact is, some form of this is already happening now. ActBlue updates totals in real time, and a growing number of campaigns use it as their exclusive online donation mechanism. Obviously these numbers don’t reflect checks received at live events and the like, but as ever-increasing amounts of money are contributed on the Internet, ActBlue totals are becoming more meaningful.

Like I say, I’m sure most politicians would resist this sort of reform. But with things like ActBlue and Dean bats pushing them, some smart campaigns will embrace this sort of open-ness.

In the meantime, though, I’m looking forward to all the third quarter reports. James will have a mammoth chart of all available numbers as soon as it’s feasible, but for now, you can catch up on all the early reports at these links:

Fundraising Reports | Son of… | Bride of… | Revenge of… | Indiana Jones and…

Another one bites the dust.

Republican Rep. Dave Hobson announced his retirement today, just days before his 71st birthday:

Rep. David Hobson announced at 5 p.m. Sunday that he will retire at the end of this term. […]

He made his announcement at a birthday party surrounded by staff, former staff and community leaders.

Hobson’s exit makes him the third Ohio Republican in the House to call it quits (Deborah Pryce and Ralph Regula being the others), and the 12th in the nation.  His district, however, is fairly red — with a PVI of R+6, Bush carried it by a 57-43 margin over Kerry.  It will be a tough district for a Democrat to win, but the surging fortunes of Democrats in the state could spark an interesting race here with the right kind of candidate.

Remember, Democrat Zack Space pulled off a victory in an Ohio district that’s just as red last year.  Granted, his GOP opponent was deeply flawed, but who knows what kind of Club For Growth-style stooge the local GOP might spit out for us here.

Race Tracker: OH-07

(Hat-tip: Buckeye State Blog)

Stuart Rothenberg approvingly quotes this anonymous bit of advice from a Republican consultant to the GOP on S-CHIP (sub. req.):

So what advice would this Republican give his party’s Members of Congress? “If I were in a swing district, I’d vote to override. There’s no way I’d take a bullet on this. But if I were in a good Republican district, I’d vote to sustain the veto.”

Leaving aside the obvious questions of the morality of this stance, does this even make for good advice?  Amy Walter intimates that the answer is no (sub. req.):

But the political environment is actually worse than it was at this point two years ago, making it very dangerous to assume that a GOP-leaning district will perform exactly as it had four years ago. A depressed GOP base, a very motivated Democratic base and independents still sour on Republicans all works against a return to normal. (Emphasis added.)

And today, a New York Times article on how badly the GOP is hemorrhaging over its opposition to health care for children includes this aside:

Worried about increasing departures, the House leadership has been encouraging Representative Steve Pearce of New Mexico to forgo a run for the Senate and avoid opening a second Republican-held House seat in a state where Democrats are gaining strength. A fellow Republican, Representative Heather A. Wilson, is already running for the seat being vacated by Senator Pete V. Domenici.

Pearce’s district, NM-02, is R+5.7. It went for Bush by a wide 58-41 margin in 2004. Pearce won with 60% of the vote in 2004, and, despite the huge Dem year, with the same total in 2006. In other words, this is not ordinarily a district you’d consider competitive.

But the fact that the NRCC is begging Pearce to stay put says otherwise. It gives a lot of credence to Walter’s observation, and makes you wonder about the kind of advice Republicans on the Hill are getting – and listening to. The NRCC seems to understand what time it is, but it sure looks like a lot of GOPers are happy to let themselves get surprised by another potential blue wave.

Well 5 more districts now have candidates:
FL-05 – R+5,
IL-18 – R+5.5,
KS-04 – R+12,
MN-02 – R+2.7,
NY-23 – R+0.2,

Once again go and take a look at the 
2008 Race Tracker Wiki.
***I have included Cook PVI numbers where possible after blogger requests to do so!***

Below the fold for all the news……

347 races filled! This of course includes 233 districts held by Democratic Congresscritters.

But we also have 114 GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic opponents.

So here is where we are at (GOP Districts):
Districts with confirmed candidates – 114
Districts with unconfirmed candidates – 1
Districts with rumoured candidates – 24
Districts without any candidates – 63

1) The GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic challengers are as follows:
AL-01 – R+12,
AL-03 – R+4,
AL-04 – R+16,
AK-AL – R+14,
AZ-01 – R+2,
AZ-02 – R+9,
AZ-03 – R+6,
AZ-06 – R+12,
AR-03 – R+11,
CA-03 – R+7,
CA-04 – R+11,
CA-21 – R+13,
CA-24 – R+5,
CA-26 – R+4,
CA-40 – R+8,
CA-41 – R+9,
CA-42 – R+10,
CA-44 – R+6,
CA-45 – R+3,
CA-48 – R+8,
CA-50 – R+5,
CA-52 – R+9,
CO-04 – R+9,
CT-04 – D+5,
DE-AL – D+7,
FL-01 – R+19,
FL-05 – R+5,
FL-08 – R+3,
FL-09 – R+4,
FL-10 – D+1,
FL-13 – R+4,
FL-14 – R+10,
FL-15 – R+4,
FL-24 – R+3,
GA-01 – R+?,
GA-09 – R+?,
GA-10 – R+?,
ID-01 – R+19,
IL-06 – R+2.9,
IL-10 – D+4,
IL-11 – R+1.1,
IL-13 – R+5,
IL-14 – R+5,
IL-16 – R+4,
IL-18 – R+5.5,
IL-19 – R+8,
IN-03 – R+16,
IN-04 – R+17,
IN-06 – R+11,
IA-04 – D+0,
IA-05 – R+8,
KS-04 – R+12,
KY-04 – R+11.7,
LA-01 – R+18,
MD-01 – R+10,
MD-06 – R+13,
MI-07 – R+2,
MI-09 – R+0,
MN-02 – R+2.7,
MN-03 – R+0.5,
MN-06 – R+5,
MO-06 – R+5,
MO-09 – R+7,
MT-AL – R+11,
NV-03 – D+1,
NJ-03 – D+3.3,
NJ-04 – R+0.9,
NJ-05 – R+4,
NJ-07 – R+1,
NJ-11 – R+6,
NM-01 – D+2,
NM-02 – R+6,
NY-13 – D+1,
NY-23 – R+0.2,
NY-25 – D+3,
NY-26 – R+3,
NY-29 – R+5,
NC-03 – R+15,
NC-05 – R+15,
NC-06 – R+17,
NC-08 – R+3,
NC-09 – R+12,
NC-10 – R+15,
OH-01 – R+1,
OH-02 – R+13,
OH-05 – R+10,
OH-07 – R+6,
OH-14 – R+2,
OH-15 – R+1,
OH-16 – R+4,
OK-05 – R+12,
PA-03 – R+2,
PA-09 – R+15,
PA-15 – D+2,
PA-16 – R+11,
PA-18 – R+2,
TX-04 – R+17,
TX-08 – R+20,
TX-10 – R+13,
TX-13 – R+18,
TX-26 – R+12,
TX-31 – R+15,
VA-01 – R+9,
VA-05 – R+6,
VA-06 – R+11,
VA-10 – R+5,
VA-11 – R+1,
WA-04 – R+13,
WA-08 – D+2,
WV-02 – R+5,
WI-01 – R+2,
WI-05 – R+12,
WI-06 – R+5,
WY-AL – R+19,

2) The following GOP held district has a candidate that is expected to run but is yet to confirm:
SC-04 – R+15,

3) The following GOP held districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!
AL-02 – R+13,
FL-06 – R+8,
FL-12 – R+5,
GA-03 – R+?,
GA-06 – R+?,
GA-07 – R+?,
GA-11 – R+?,
ID-02 – R+19,
KY-05 – R+8,
MS-03 – R+14,
NE-02 – R+9,
NE-03 – R+23.6,
NV-02 – R+8.2,
NJ-02 – D+4.0,
NY-03 – D+2.1,
OH-12 – R+0.7,
OK-03 – R+18,
OK-04 – R+13,
PA-06 – D+2.2,
TN-07 – R+12,
TX-02 – R+12,
TX-11 – R+25,
TX-24 – R+15,
UT-03 – R+22,

4) And last but not least the following districts have not a single rumoured candidate:
AL-06 – R+25,
CA-02 – R+13,
CA-19 – R+10,
CA-22 – R+16,
CA-25 – R+7,
CA-46 – R+6,
CA-49 – R+10,
CO-05 – R+15.7,
CO-06 – R+10,
FL-04 – R+16,
FL-07 – R+3,
FL-18 – R+4,
FL-21 – R+6,
FL-25 – R+4,
IL-15 – R+6,
IN-05 – R+20,
KS-01 – R+20,
KY-01 – R+10,
KY-02 – R+12.9,
LA-04 – R+7,
LA-05 – R+10,
LA-06 – R+7,
LA-07 – R+7,
MI-02 – R+9,
MI-03 – R+9,
MI-04 – R+3,
MI-06 – R+2.3,
MI-08 – R+1.9,
MI-10 – R+4,
MI-11 – R+1.2,
MS-01 – R+10,
MO-02 – R+9,
MO-07 – R+14,
MO-08 – R+11,
NE-01 – R+11,
OH-03 – R+3,
OH-04 – R+14,
OH-08 – R+12,
OK-01 – R+13,
OR-02 – R+11,
PA-05 – R+10,
PA-19 – R+12,
SC-01 – R+10,
SC-02 – R+9,
SC-03 – R+14,
TN-01 – R+14,
TN-02 – R+11,
TN-03 – R+8,
TX-01 – R+17,
TX-03 – R+17,
TX-05 – R+16,
TX-06 – R+15,
TX-07 – R+16,
TX-12 – R+14,
TX-14 – R+14,
TX-19 – R+25,
TX-21 – R+13,
TX-32 – R+11,
UT-01 – R+26,
VA-02 – R+5.9,
VA-04 – R+5,
VA-07 – R+11,
WA-05 – R+7.1,

Praise to those states where we already have a full slate of house candidates – Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

It is also interesting to note that we have only one race left to fill in Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Washington. Thats 22 states with a full slate, and 9 states with one race to fill! That is more than half the states with a full or nearly full slate of candidates 13 months before election day, an impressive feat indeed!

Please note that in some races others at the racetracker site have confirmed candidates that I haven’t. This is because to satisfy me a confirmed candidate has either filed with the FEC, The Sec of State or has an active campaign website, or even if they come and blog and say yep I am running. Others are not so rigorous.

It is also great to see candidates in AZ-06, CA-42, VA-06, and WI-06; 4 of 10 districts we did not contest in 2006!

We are well on track to beat the 425 races we contested in 2006.

*** Tips, rumours and what not in the comments please.***

Big news out of Alaska: Anchorage pollster Ivan Moore shares a shocking new poll (PDF) with the Swing State Project that shows former state Rep. Ethan Berkowitz with an early lead on scandal-tainted Rep. Don Young:

Ethan Berkowitz (D): 51%
Don Young (R-inc.): 45.5%
(MoE: ±4.4%)

Wowza.  Could we be seeing the continuation of an anti-incumbent wave washing across the Last Frontier, which began with Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski’s landslide primary defeat to Sarah Palin in 2006?  With Alaskans growing increasingly frustrated with their representation in Washington, 2008 could be a banner year for change in the state.

Moore’s poll also shows Young with a 49.9% negative rating in the state (43.1% positive and 7% neutral) — something that I do not expect to improve for Young as the ethical and legal morass that is his too-cozy relationship with the overwhelmingly unpopular VECO corporation continues to grow.

Still, Young will be no pushover.  He is currently sitting on a massive warchest of over $1.6 million (although some of this is being eaten away by hefty legal fees), he has the state’s Republican tilt in his favor, and he’s held statewide office since Jesus invented the wheel.

There is also the possibility that Young could take one for the team and retire, or that he could fall in a primary to a fresh-faced Republican, such as state Rep. and current challenger Gabrielle LeDoux.  In such an event, Berkowitz could find himself twice unlucky: his Lt. Governor bid in 2006 fell short because Republicans had the sense to replace the unpopular Murkowski with the independent-minded Palin.

For now, though, it’s looking like Berkowitz picked the right time to run.

Race Tracker: AK-AL

Former Gov. Jim Gilmore must be smiling at the news:

Republican leaders gave former Gov. Jim Gilmore a boost today by choosing to hold a convention to nominate the party’s candidate to run for the U.S. Senate next year.

The party’s state central committee voted 47 to 37 to hold a convention rather than a primary.

Gilmore, the more conservative choice, is seen as having an edge among the party’s inner circle over the more moderate Rep. Tom Davis.  However, his personal appeal in the state is severely weakened by his embarrassing record as Governor.  Did the Republicans just hand Mark Warner a Senate seat on a silver platter?

What’s more, the prospect of a convention could cause Davis to walk away from the Senate contest altogether:

There was speculation that Davis, now, would not seek the nomination, leaving the field to Gilmore. A Davis spokesman said he would announce his intentions after the Nov. 6 General Assembly elections.

A non-candidacy by Davis would make picking up his House seat, which is trending in favor of Democrats in federal races, a much more difficult task.

Republican reaction can be found here.

http://www.inrich.co…

The Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) voted today by a margin of 47-37 to hold a convention rather than a primary to select the GOP nominee for the U.S. Senate race in 2008. A convention would cost less and involve only core conservatives, as opposed to a primary which would cost more, but be open to all Republicans, as well as independents and even Democrats. Jim Gilmore has no money and little crossover appeal with moderates and indepedents, while Tom Davis has a lot of money and has based his political career off of appealing to moderates and independents. Thus, a convention is a tacit endorsement of Jim Gilmore to be the GOP nominee in 2008, and a primary is a tacit endorsement of Tom Davis to be the nominee.

Since Jim Gilmore is a stooge who drove the state to ruin seven years ago, then embarassed himself and Virginia with a ridiculous “campaign” for President earlier this year (campaign is in quotation marks, because I don’t know in what reality his fumbling idiocy would be considered as such), he cannot possibly compete with his successor, Gov. Mark Warner, in a general election. Many on this site and others know that I truly believe that Tom Davis can compete with Warner and keep the race competitive and in the “toss-up” category through Election Day. Jim Gilmore cannot, and the very prospect of his nomination inches Virginia more blue. Today, the RPV took a step closer to that prospect, and in all practical effect, has endorsed Mark Warner to be the next Senator from Virginia.

The question is now what Tom Davis decides to do. From what I can see, he has five options:

1) Run for the Senate anyways, keeping consistent on his record, and lose the nomination to Gilmore. ***

2) Run for the Senate anyways, tack to the far right to win the nomination, then lose to Mark Warner for being a flip-flopper who lost his grip with the center.

3) Run for re-election in the House, which is not assured but would be easier than a run for the Senate.

4) Retire from the House and start prepping for a 2012 challenge to Jim Webb.

5) Retire from politics altogether after being sold down the river by his party when he tried to offer them their once chance at holding the seat.

*** It isn’t clear whether Davis would be able to run for his seat if he lost at the convention.

Tom Davis has never aspired to be Governor, and with three strong candidates already (Bob McDonnell, Bill Bolling, and George Allen) fighting for the nomination, I don’t see him trying to elbow his way in.

Meanwhile, Jim Gilmore will be lucky to raise a million dollars and get more than 45% of the vote against Mark Warner. On the plus side, the NRSC no longer has a reason to invest in the state. I’m not one to give up on a race (I still believe Montana and New Jersey can be competitive this cycle), especially since I live in Virginia and don’t want Mark Warner to be the next Senator. But since the majority of the RPV Executive Committee disagrees with that goal, I see no reason to hope beyond hope in favor of a turd like Jim Gilmore.

There is still a chance that Tom Davis may be the nominee and that the race will be close, but that chance just got a lot fatter. Congratulations, Democrats, you’ve just practically banked a Senate seat, and you barely had to fight for it.

Yeah, I’m running out of titles for these threads.

FL-10:

Bill Young (R-inc): $29K raised; $579K CoH

Huge stunner here.  It appears that Young, an 18-term incumbent who has been long rumored to be another potential Republican House retirement, is dampening his fundraising pace dramatically (he raised $200K in the second quarter).  These numbers are positively John Warner-esque.  Is Young looking for the exit?  Perhaps that would explain why Young made this unconscionable vote recently–he knows he won’t be held accountable for it if he bails. 

FL-10 is a true swing district: Gore won it by two points, and Kerry lost it by the same close margin.  If Young cut the cord and ran, this would be a huge pick-up opportunity for Democrats.

VA-05:

Tom Perriello (D): $110K raised; $111K CoH

All this in just a few weeks since he entered the race.  Hoo-boy.  It looks like Virgil Goode will face a real test next year.

WV-02:

Shelley Moore Capito (R): $259K raised; $525K CoH

OH-01:

Steve Driehaus (D): $121K raised; $251K CoH

PA-04:

Jason Altmire (D-inc): $281K raised; $737K CoH

OR-05:

Mike Erickson (R): $101K raised; $101K CoH

Interestingly, if you follow the above link, Mike Erickson’s campaign address is listed as being in Salt Lake City, Utah, and not Oregon, where he is running.  What’s up with that?

CO-04:

Marilyn Musgrave (R): $286K raised; $602K CoH

NY-26:

Jon Powers (D): $118K raised; $182K CoH

MI-07:

Tim Walberg (R-inc): $139K raised; $328K CoH

Yep, Mark Schauer (D) outraised Walberg by a hefty margin: $220K to $139 for the frosh incumbent Walberg, despite Schauer only entering the race midway through the quarter.  Is Walberg doomed?

Let’s try something different this week.  We’ve all endured a constant drubbing of political TV ads for most of our lives.  Most of them suffer from their unremarkable sameness: cookie cutter ads dealing with issues and personalities in wholly superficial and misleading ways.  Of course, what can you expect in 30 to 60 seconds?

Still, I think we all have an idea of what makes an ad a total dud.  In the comments, please post links (YouTube preferred) to political ads by candidates, parties, or independent groups that you consider to be especially awful.

To get the ball rolling, I’ll kick things off with this 2006 ad by LA-01 Democratic challenger Stacey Tallitsch.  The YouTube link implies that this thing actually made it onto the airwaves (“broadcast version”), but I have my doubts.

Apparently only 4% of LA-01 voters “had enough”. Ouch.

And who could forget this gem by wingnut hero Vernon Robinson?

Got anything worse?  And when I say “worst”, I do not mean ads that advocate for bad causes/bad candidates (Bush, Mark Foley, etc).  I mean ads with questionable marketing sense.  Have at it–and do not let party affiliation inhibit you.