Month: March 2008

Match the following statements…

1) George Bush is “the right man at the right time.”

2) “Let’s put the United States first again, and John McCain is the man as president who will help us do that.”

3) “There is not a better Congressman in Washington than Chris Shays.”

4) “I can’t say enough good things about Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; she has been my friend since I was first elected to office.”

… to the list of politicians below:

A) Zell Miller

B) Joe Lieberman

C) Harold Ford

D) Debbie Wasserman Schultz

I doubt anyone needs an answer key to know who said what. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a member of the DCCC’s leadership, sure keeps good company.

Massachusetts has 10 representatives: All Democrats

Filing deadline is June 3, primary is Sept 16

Michigan has 15 representatives: 9 Republicans and 6 Democrats

Filing deadline is May 13, primary is Aug 5

earlier entries in this series are here

District: MA-01

Location The largest CD in MA, more than half the state, in the west.  Bordering NH, VT, NY and CT

Representative John Olver

First elected  1991

2006 margin 76-23 (against an independent)

2004 margin Unopposed

Bush margin 2004 35-63

Notes on opponents NA

Current opponents  None declared

Demographics 60th fewest Black (1.6%), 71st most Democratic per Cook PVI

Assessment Safe

District: MA-02

Location Southern MA, bordering CT and RI, from Springfield to Milford

Representative Richard Neal (D)

First elected  1988

2006 margin unopposed

2004 margin unopposed

Bush margin 2004 40-59

Notes on opponents NA

Current opponents None declared

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment Safe

District: MA-03

Location MA-03 runs from the middle of the state southeast to Somerset, and borders RI

Representative Jim McGovern (D)

First elected 1996

2006 margin Unopposed

2004 margin 71-29

Bush margin 2004 40-59

Notes on opponents In 2004, Ron Crews raised $150K to McGovern’s $1.1 million

Current opponents Todd Williams

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment  Safe

District: MA-04

Location Runs from New Bedford, on the coast, northwest and then northeast to Brookline and Newton, suburbs of Boston

Representative Barney Frank (D)

First elected  1980

2006 margin Unopposed

2004 margin 78-22 (against an independent)

Bush margin 2004 33-65

Notes on opponents NA

Current opponents Chuck Morse

Demographics 70th highest income (median = $55K), 77th fewest Blacks (2.0%), 55th most Democratic per Cook

Assessment Safe

District: MA-05

Location Northern MA, bordering NH, including Lowell and Lawrence

Representative Niki Tsongas (D)

First elected  2007

2006 margin NA

2004 margin NA

Bush margin 2004 41-57

Notes on opponents NA

Current opponents No declared opponents

Demographics 64th fewest Blacks (1.9%)

Assessment Safe

District: MA-06

Location The northeast corner of MA, bordering NH and the Atlantic, including Lynn, Salem, and Gloucester.

Representative John Tierney (D)

First elected  1996

2006 margin 70-30

2004 margin 70-30

Bush margin 2004 41-58

Notes on opponents Each recent opponent raised about $50K

Current opponents Rick Barton, who lost in 2006

Demographics 50th highest income (median = $58K), 71st fewest Blacks (1.9%), 12th most Democratic

Assessment Safe

District: MA-07

Location Northern and western suburbs of Boston

Representative Edward Markey (D)

First elected  1976

2006 margin unopposed

2004 margin 74-22

Bush margin 2004 33-66

Notes on opponents Chase, in 2004, raised about $62K

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 55th highest income (median = $56K), 54th most Democratic

Assessment Safe

District: MA-08

Location Part of Boston, plus Cambridge, Somerville, and Chelsea

Representative Michael Capuano (D)

First elected  1998

2006 margin 91-9 (the 9 went to a Socialist)

2004 margin unopposed

Bush margin 2004 19-79

Notes on opponents NA

Current opponents  None declared

Demographics 13th fewest veterans (5.5%), 50th lowest income (median = $39K), 88th fewest Whites (48.9%), 18th most Democratic

Assessment Safe

District: MA-09

Location Part of Boston, plus southern suburbs including Braintree and Brockton

Representative  Stephen Lynch (D)

First elected  2001

2006 margin 78-22

2004 margin Unopposed

Bush margin 2004 36-63

Notes on opponents Jack Robinson raised $138K to Lynch’s $850K

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 60th highest income (median = $55K), 70th most Democratic

Assessment Safe

District: MA-10

Location Eastern MA, including Cape Cod and Nantucket, bordering the Atlantic, including Quincy and Hyannis

Representative Bill Delahunt (D)

First elected  1996

2006 margin 64-29

2004 margin 66-34

Bush margin 2004 43-56

Notes on opponents In 2006, Jeffrey Beatty raised $100K to Delahunt’s $1 million; in 2004, Michael Jones raised $260K to Delahunt $840K

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 32nd fewest people in poverty (5.9%), 55th fewest Blacks (1.5%) and 42nd fewest Latinos (1.3%)

Assessment  Safe

District: MI-01

Location The UP of MI, and the northern most part of the lower part.  

Representative Bart Stupak (D)

First elected  1992

2006 margin 69-28

2004 margin 53-46

Bush margin 2004 52-45

Notes on opponents neither recent opponent raised money

Current opponents Tom Casperson

Demographics 5th most rural (66.6%), 24th most veterans (16.9%), 30th most Whites (93.8%), 30th fewest Blacks (1.0%), 17th fewest Latinos (0.9%)

Assessment Fairly safe

District: MI-02

Location Western MI, bordering Lake Michigan

Representative Pete Hoekstra (R)

First elected  1992

2006 margin 66-32

2004 margin 69-29

Bush margin 2004 60-39

Notes on opponents Kimon Kotos ran both times, and did not raise money

Current opponents :

Fred Johnson

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment Long shot

District: MI-03

Location A bit to the southwest of the center of the state, including Grand Rapids

Representative Vernon Ehlers (R)

First elected  1993

2006 margin 63-35

2004 margin 67-31

Bush margin 2004 59-40

Notes on opponents Neither raised money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment Long shot

District: MI-04

Location Central MI

Representative Dave Camp (R)

First elected  1996

2006 margin 61-38

2004 margin 64-38

Bush margin 2004 55-44

Notes on opponents Mike Huckleberry ran both time, and did not raise much – between $50K and $100K

Current opponents Andrew Concannon

Demographics 20th most rural (58.6%)

Assessment Long shot

District: MI-05

Location Flint and suburbs

Representative  Dale Kildee (D)

First elected  1976

2006 margin 73-25

2004 margin 67-31

Bush margin 2004 41-59

Notes on opponents In 2004, Myrah Kirkwood raised $250K to Kildee’s $600K.  The 2006 opponent raised little

Current opponents Bill Kelly

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment  Safe

District: MI-06

Location Southwestern MI, bordering IN and Lake Michigan

Representative Frederick Upton (R)

First elected  1986

2006 margin 61-38

2004 margin 65-32

Bush margin 2004 53-46

Notes on opponents In 2006, Kim Clark raised $150K to Upton’s $1 million.  The 2004 opponent raised little

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 82nd most rural (41.7%)

Assessment Safe

District: MI-07

Location Central part of souther MI, bordering IN and OH, including Battle Creek

Representative Tim Walberg (R)

First elected  2006

2006 margin  50-46

2004 margin NA

Bush margin 2004 54-45

Notes on opponents Sharon Renier got 46% while raising only $55K

Current opponents Mark Schauer

Jim Berryman

Possibly Renier again

Demographics 68th most rural (46%)

Assessment Vulnerable.   Superribbie ranks this the 7th most vulnerable Republican seat, and most vulnerable one that isn’t open.

District: MI-08

Location Lansing and surrounding area

Representative Mike Rogers (R)

First elected  2000

2006 margin 55-43

2004 margin 61-37

Bush margin 2004 54-45

Notes on opponents In 2006, Jim Marinowski raised $500 K to Rogers’ almost $2 million.  The 2004 opponent raised little

Current opponents None declared

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment  Long shot

District: MI-09

Location Northern and western suburbs of Detroit

Representative Joe Knollenberg (R)

First elected  1992

2006 margin 52-46

2004 margin 58-40

Bush margin 2004 51-49

Notes on opponents In 2006, Nancy Skinner raised $400K to Knollenberg’s $3 million

Current opponents Gary Peters

and Rhonda Ross

Demographics 23rd highest income (median = $65K), 26th fewest in poverty (5.4%), 88th most veterans (10.6%)

Assessment Vulnerable; superribbie (link above) calls this the 23rd most vulnerable Republican seat; Peters looks to be running a strong campaign

District: MI-10

Location Eastern MI, bordering Canada and Lake Huron

Representative Candice Miller (R)

First elected  2002

2006 margin 66-31

2004 margin 69-30

Bush margin 2004 57-43

Notes on opponents Neither raised money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 35th fewest in poverty (6%), 55th fewest Blacks (1.5%)

Assessment long shot

District: MI-11

Location Far western suburbs of Detroit

Representative Thaddeus McCotter (R)

First elected  2002

2006 margin 54-43

2004 margin 57-41

Bush margin 2004 53-47

Notes on opponents In 2006, Tony Truppiano raised $130K to McCotter’s $900K

Current opponents Spencer ,

Edward Kriewall

Demographics 37th highest income (median = $59K), 12th fewest in poverty (4.3%)

Assessment Somewhat vulnerable, superribbie ranks this as the 56th most vulnerable Republican district

District: MI-12

Location Northern suburbs of Detroit

Representative Sander Levin (D)

First elected  1982

2006 margin 70-26

2004 margin 69-29

Bush margin 2004 39-61

Notes on opponents Neither raised money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment  Safe

District: MI-13

Location Detroit

Representative Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D)

First elected  1996

2006 margin unopposed

2004 margin 78-18

Bush margin 2004 19-81

Notes on opponents No money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 37th lowest income (median = $31K), 19th most in poverty (24.4%), 9th most Blacks (60.5%), 41st fewest Whites (28.9%), 18th most Democratic

Assessment safe

District: MI-14

Location Detroit

Representative John Conyers (D)

First elected  1964

2006 margin 85-15

2004 margin 84-16

Bush margin 2004 17-83

Notes on opponents No money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics 50th fewest Whites (32.1%), 35th lowest income (median = $36K), 17th most Blacks (61.1%), 18th most Democratic

Assessment safe

District: MI-15

Location Southern suburbs of Detroit

Representative John Dingell (D)

First elected  1955 (longest serving House member)

2006 margin 88% against minor parties

2004 margin 71-27

Bush margin 2004 38-62

Notes on opponents No money

Current opponents None declared

Demographics Not unusual on what I track

Assessment Safe

There’s a great passage in The Thumpin’ about former DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel’s frustrations with Democratic colleagues who aren’t serious about doing what it takes to win.  Allow me to share an excerpt:

In early 2006, Congressman Alcee Hastings, a Florida Democrat, was quoted in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel speaking sympathetically of Congressman Shaw, one of Emanuel’s top Republican targets.  Hastings, because of his friendship with Shaw, also refused to endorse Shaw’s Democratic challenger, Ron Klein.  In the Sun-Sentinel article, Hastings even gave Shaw strategic advice on how to defeat Klein, advocating that he knock on doors to connect personally with voters rather than relying on television ads as he had in the past.  Then, in a closed meeting of Democratic House members, Hastings chastised Emanuel and the DCCC for not recruiting more candidates across the country, saying Democrats needed to run a respectable candidate in every House district.

[…]It enraged Emanuel, who saw Hastings as typifying those of his fellow Democrats who were content to criticize but did nothing to help the cause.  “He’s great on lectures,” Emanuel said of Hastings.  “Phenomenal lecturer.  I’m getting a lecture on recruitment when A, you haven’t done a goddamn thing and B, we’ve got a [Republican] target and you’re out there kissing his ass in the press?”

Keep Emanuel’s indignation in mind as you hear the following story of betrayal in South Florida.

Sensing a shift in the political climate of the traditionally solid-GOP turf of the Miami area, Democrats have lined up three strong challengers — Miami-Dade Democratic Party chair Joe Garcia, former Hialeah Mayor Raul Martinez, and businesswoman Annette Taddeo to take on Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, respectively.

While there is an enormous sense of excitement and optimism surrounding these candidacies, some Democratic lawmakers, including Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Kendrick Meek, are all too eager to kneecap these Democratic challengers right out of the starting gate in the spirit of “comity” and “bipartisan cooperation” with their Republican colleagues:

But as three Miami Democrats look to unseat three of her South Florida Republican colleagues, Wasserman Schultz is staying on the sidelines. So is Rep. Kendrick Meek, a Miami Democrat and loyal ally to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. […]

This time around, Wasserman Schultz and Meek say their relationships with the Republican incumbents, Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and his brother Mario, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, leave them little choice but to sit out the three races.

“At the end of the day, we need a member who isn’t going to pull any punches, who isn’t going to be hesitant,” Wasserman Schultz said.

Now, you’d expect this kind of bullshit from a backbencher like Alcee Hastings, but you wouldn’t expect this kind of behavior from the co-chair of the DCCC’s Red to Blue program, which is the position that Wasserman Schultz currently holds.  Apparently, Debbie did not get Rahm’s memo about doing whatever it takes to win:

The national party, enthusiastic about the three Democratic challengers, has not yet selected Red to Blue participants. But Wasserman Schultz has already told the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that if any of the three make the cut, another Democrat should be assigned to the race.

“It needs to be somebody who can roll up their sleeves,” Wasserman Schultz said. “I’m just not that person; it’s just too sensitive for me.”

Hey, Debbie: there are no recusals in politics.  If you want to consider yourself a “rising star” in the Democratic caucus, don’t think you can get away with this:

A day later, Wasserman Schultz and Ros-Lehtinen lavished compliments on each other at a Washington luncheon with Miami-Dade commissioners. “I can’t say enough good things about Ileana Ros-Lehtinen; she has been my friend since I was first elected to office,” Wasserman Schultz said, noting she relied on Ros-Lehtinen’s advice to help balance the demands of elected office and motherhood. (emphasis added)

Debbie’s behavior is tantamount to no-confidence in Joe Garcia, Raul Martinez, and Annette Taddeo, and a betrayal of her fellow Democrats everywhere.

I have a few suggestions for Debbie, if she’s at all interested in saving her credibility within the DCCC, the caucus, grassroots Dems and pretty much everyone who cares about Team Blue: enthusiastically endorse all three of these candidates and organize a fundraiser for each of them.  It’s the least she could do to help undo the damage that she’s inflicted in South Florida.

Ask yourself: What would Rahm do?

(Hat-tip: FLA Politics)

What might Bill Foster’s victory in Denny Hastert’s old seat portend?  A trip down memory lane might be instructive.

First stop Watergate.  After Richard Nixon chose House Republican leader Gerald Ford to replace Spiro Agnew as vice president, there was a by-election in February 1974 for the Grand Rapids, Michigan-based seat that Ford had vacated.  Not only had Ford held the seat without serious challenge since the late 1940s, but no Democrat had been elected there since 1912.  The Republican candidate, Robert VanderLaan, the Republican leader of the State Senate, had never lost an election.  The Democrat, Richard VanderVeen, was a member of  a suburban school board.  By making the race a referendum on President Nixon and the Republican Party, VanderVeen was victorious.  That November, Democrats gained 49 seats in the House, raising their percentage to more than two-thirds of the membership of the House.

Next stop, the Democrats’ 1994 debacle.  In the 1994 election, Democrats lost 54 seats in the House and became the minority party for the first time in forty years.  That result also was portended by two special elections held earlier that year.  In January, Glenn English, who had been elected ten times from Oklahoma (OK-03) retired to become the CEO of the lobbying group for Rural Electric Coops.  In March, William Natcher, who never had to raise  any money for a campaign in his life, died after representing the Second District of Kentucky for four decades.  Republicans won both of those races, and Frank Lucas (OK) and Ron Lewis (KY) are still around.

Discontent over the war, fears of a deepening recession and disgust over corruption and abuse of power have the potential to make 2008 an election of similar magnitude.  We must not squander this opportunity.

first of all, congratulations to bill foster, our newest member of congress.  it will be kind of weird calling him congressman.  and congratulations to his staff and all the volunteers who helped elect foster.  what a tremendous achievement!

foster’s election is vindication of all those who believed that a serious democratic candidate with a great campaign organization could turn il-14 blue.  and now we have!  it is also vindication for the plan that bill and tom put together, and especially the networking they did to create a solid pool of campaign workers who went out and delivered the vote for foster.  this should serve as both proof of what a good campaign can do and an example for the local democratic parties and their future candidates.

it’s probably too early to really dissect how bill foster won denny hastert’s open seat but we can put some things into context.

there’s no way to overstate the level of preparation that bill foster did before running for this seat.  while there have been some who sought to minimize foster’s work with patrick murphy, foster set for himself the goal of understanding how congressional campaigns work, what a good congressional campaign looks and feels like, and how it unfolds.  it should be clear by now that bill foster returned to illinois with the firmest grasp of how to run for congress by any democrat in the il-14.  make no mistake, this level of preparation was a huge advantage for foster — he knew what it would take, he was willing to make the sacrifices necessary to win, and he stuck with it.  foster now gets to enjoy the fruits (or, more appropriately, the responsibilities) of his sacrifices.

let’s go back, though, to the framework i’ve used before.  winners of elections are the one who put together the best effort in this five areas:

1. candidate.  all the major candidates in this race have had flaws.  but the one thing that foster did, which gave him an advantage — if ever so slight — was to try to minimize those flaws.  as carl pointed out, foster “needs to improve his communication skills.”  unable to take advantage of the long tail of a presidential campaign (this criticism has been made of barack obama, as well, about his debating skills), the foster campaign choose to place him sparingly in large group functions where he didn’t perform as well, and focus on his appeal one on one (and through the use of surrogates), where he performed better.

foster’s luck has been to run against other seriously flawed candidates.  it didn’t hurt at all to be seen as a practical candidate amongst other candidates viewed as extreme, or wouldn’t raise money, or had loose ties to the area.  foster benefited from not running against a “perfect candidate.”  in this context, it didn’t matter that he was flawed, because of the flaws of those he ran against.  what did matter is that his campaign didn’t deny or ignore his flaws, but sought to minimize them.  this gave him a slight advantage here.

2. money.  bill foster lost the money race ($2,121,908 to $2,884,492).  independent expenditures appear to have been a wash.  but what foster and the democrats spent was sufficient to raise his name recognition AND his favorability ratings.  about the only thing we can say here to foster’s advantage is that at least he had $2.1M.  the alternatives would have resulted in democrats being significantly out-spent, probably at least by 10 to one, and perhaps even greater.  there is simply no question that foster alone was prepared to compete at this level.  the proof here is that foster raised $805,908 from other individuals while oberweis only raised $604,492 from other individuals.

3. political environment.  the dominant environmental aspects for this special election were the fact that it was a special election held in the last year of george bush’s administration with the retiring of the former speaker of the house.  bush looked to be unpopular while hastert remained popular in his old district.

special elections are all about turnout.  pushing turnout requires organization, which is the fifth factor.  but foster was able to unite democrats around his candidacy (89% of self-identified democrats polled said they had or would vote for him while only 76% of self-identified republicans said the same for oberweis) AND he had much broader appeal among independents (47%-25%).  foster himself made every effort to reach out to the supporters of his former democratic opponents.

but special elections always have national significance — especially for republicans.  cqpolitics says:

First: the district carries great symbolic significance because it was the bailiwick of Republican J. Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the U.S. House for most of the dozen years that Republicans were in the majority from 1995 through 2006. Hastert’s resignation last November prompted this unusual Saturday balloting.

Second: The race is a close one. Party strategists and political analysts will be closely monitoring the returns for what the outcome might portend for November elections that are less than eight months away. Democratic scientist Bill Foster and Republican businessman Jim Oberweis appear neck-and-neck in the 14th, which takes in suburbs and rural territory west of Chicago.

Special elections always provide grist for the national party committees – in particular the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), which is the political arm of the majority Democrats in the U.S. House, and its partisan counterpart, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC).

dccc chair chris van hollen said “Bill Foster’s victory in the seat that was held by Speaker Hastert sends a political shock wave across America this election year,” “a rebuke of the bush administration” and john mccain (who raised money for oberweis).  bloomberg notes, “Analysts said the election is a sign that Republican losses are likely to continue this year, after the party lost control of the House and Senate in 2006. ‘I don’t think it means the end of the Republican party like some might say, but it means the worst is not over,’ said Nathan Gonzales, political editor of the Rothenberg Political Report in Washington.”

otoh, it was a clear victory for barack obama, who’s coattails proved effective in a red district.  he also gained a superdelegate for his presidential nomination.

4. local climate.  what we found in 2006 and now, in 2008, is that the electorate in il-14 was highly disposed towards electing a democrat.  the generic ballot poll in 2006 showed a one point difference between the generic democrat and republican, and that result held through this special election.  instead of the 11 point spread between the presidential candidates that national punditry focused on, local observers recognized that barack obama won this district in 2004, and the generic ballot test demonstrated that voters were more than willing to consider voting for a democrat.  but they needed to know who they were and at least something about them.

the chicago tribune noted, “That Foster is even in contention in the 14th Congressional District is further proof of the changing suburban political landscape. The heart of the district is made up of fast-growing communities in Kane and Kendall Counties, where farmland has given way to subdivisions and new residents don’t necessarily have a lot of familiarity with local politics. The territory is just the latest suburban Chicago district that’s gone from reliably Republican to a potential toss-up.”

the willingness of voters to vote for a democrat in what has been considered the reddest congressional district in the state seems to stem from three dominant factors: the economy, iraq and the issues surrounding the immigration debate.  this wasn’t a single issue election, and they couldn’t be tied together with some broad, dramatic theme.  foster dealt with them singularly with pragmatic proposals that placed him squarely in the moderate range inside il-14.  his opponent hurled dramatic accusations at him instead of offering substantial plans for the future.  while these accusations did find their way into the minds of some voters, others dismissed them as desperate campaign tactics.  in the words of another candidate, they attacked him because he was winning.

5. organization.  organization was where the foster campaign reigned supreme.  despite the fact that republicans unleashed their vaunted 72-hour project, foster’s campaign was ably prepared to compete in the special election environment.  tom bowen, foster’s campaign manager, spoke about his preparations for the special after the live blogging event held for foster.  by networking extensively, the foster campaign built up the best campaign organization that democrats have ever seen in this congressional district.  foster’s appeal brought in democratic activists from pennsylvania and dc, from chicago, the northshore, from dan seals’ campaign, melissa bean’s campaign, jan schakowsky’s campaign and scott harper’s campaign (who brought in 120 volunteers to help out on election day).  the effectiveness of foster’s campaign organization promises future success in a congressional district that — like melissa bean’s — will be competitive for years, perhaps even decades (depending on redistricting).

the influence of money in this race and the profound effectiveness of foster’s campaign organization may be depressing to some progressives inside and outside the il-14.  to those who feel this way inside the district i repeat what i’ve said all along: talk to bill foster.  i may not know the man that well, but i understand perfectly his approach, and he will listen to all points of view from a respectful, perhaps even probing, perspective.  do not expect other people to represent your point of view before him.  and if he doesn’t hear it, he probably won’t consider it.

some local progressives have been mobilized by the quixotic appeal of john laesch.  but the reality is, bill foster is your new DEMOCRATIC congressman.  it’s very unlikely that another democratic congressman (or woman) will emerge in the near future.  he’s it.  foster’s election offers democrats the unique opportunity to build and strengthen the local democratic party where you live.  it’s always easier to organize with someone from the party in power.  foster’s election should fulfill a dream we all share.  but personal feelings can sometimes interfer in what should be our self-interests…

Tom Cole, the chair of the NRCC, just lost an R+5 district formerly held by none other than Dennis Hastert, aka Denny the Hutt, aka the immediate past Speaker of the House – a district that the Hutt himself helped re-draw after the 2000 census as part of an incumbent protection plan. Tom Cole spent over a million bucks on this race from his shrinking kitty. Tom Cole is now one seat further from retaking a majority that is so, so far out of reach.

And, I suspect, there’s a good chance that Tom Cole will be out on his ass before long.

Brownsox recently took note of rumors that an Oberweis loss here would lead to Cole getting sacked. And the signs are all there. Remember this?

Apparently, House Minority Leader John “Small Price” Boehner is upset with NRCC Chair Tom Cole’s stewardship of the organization, and is heavily pressuring Cole to make some significant personnel changes.  Cole has said privately that he would rather resign than bow to such demands.

And just a ten days ago, there was this:

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) is clearly not content to sit this one out, as he exhorted his colleagues to get off their “dead asses” and pony up for the party.

However unhappy Boehner was last week, he is a lot more pissed off tonight. Pissed enough to can Cole’s sorry ass? He may just be.

So, cast your predictions in this thread and vote in the poll below the fold. Will Cole get fired? If so, when? The deathwatch begins!

P.S. The GOP is stuck with Oberweis for November, too! Hahaha suckers!!!

The Louisiana SoS site has the returns.

So far, state Rep. Don Cazayoux is leading a crowded Democratic primary field with 51% of the vote.  Woody Jenkins has about the same margin in the GOP primary.

9:48 PM: 94% in, and Foster is holding onto a 4500 vote lead.  With most of the outstanding precincts being in Kane county, this one is in the bag for Foster.

Let’s paint IL-14 a bright shade of blue.

9:43 PM: 88% of precincts reporting, and Foster is looking good at 53%.  I’m calling it for Foster.  Oberweis just doesn’t have The Math.

9:33 PM ET: With 74% of precincts reporting, Foster’s 53%-47% lead is holding firm.  This one is looking good, folks.

UPDATE (J. Hell): With 55% of precincts reporting, Foster (D) is leading Oberweis (R) by a 53%-47% margin.

While we’re at it, take a look at the county-by-county returns and compare them with the 2006 numbers.  Foster is (so far), taking an 8-point lead in Kane county, the district’s population anchor.  This is the same county that Hastert won by 18 points in 2006.  Considering that Hastert won the district overall by 20 points, this is very, very encouraging news for Foster.

---

Polls close at 7pm Central/8pm Eastern.

Josh Romney is out of the race! According to CQpolitics he will forego the race, and the best possible alternative is going to happen, we get to go up against Merrill Cook. The violent tempered, controversial three term Representative who lost in the 2000 Republican primary, and whose unpopularity made it possible for Matheson to win the seat to begin with. He recently ran as an independant for Mayor of Salt Lake City, Matheson’s base and the main population center of this district, and got 6% of the vote.

On another hand, Cook has is on very shaky terms with Utah Republican establishment, and I don’t think that Republicans will support him. He’s run as an independant for for Governor twice, and once in the 2nd district. All three times he actually ran to the right of Republicans, so it’s not as if he’s a moderate. Rep. Cannon endorsed his primary opponent in 2000, and he was on bad terms with the entire Utah Conressional delegation at the same time. This is great news for Matheson, as not only is Cook a weak candidate, but his candidacy might drive off other, stronger candidates still considering running.

Here’s a link to the CQpolitics Article: http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmsp… .