Month: May 2008

From the Staten Island Advance:

The Democratic County Committee a short time ago nominated North Shore City Councilman Michael McMahon for Staten Island’s Congressional seat, which will be vacated by Vito Fossella in January. The vote was 131-40 with 4 abstentions.

This is great news.  The GOP has been struggling hard to find a credible candidate here after Richmond County DA declined the race and state Sen. Andrew Lanza sending out signals that he’s not interested.

More as we get it.

UPDATE: From the NY Times:

Mr. McMahon, who has represented the North Shore of Staten Island for the last seven years, said he had already received the support of the Brooklyn Democratic Party leader, Assemblyman Vito J. Lopez, as well as other Democratic elected officials who had considered running for the seat. The district includes all of Staten Island and portions of Brooklyn.

“I am humbled by this responsibility, and I’m very optimistic about the new beginning in this district,” Mr. McMahon said in an interview on Wednesday night.

Meanwhile, Stephen Harrison is intent on being a pain in the neck:

Mr. Harrison has made it clear that he would remain in the race, despite any decision made by party leaders. Mr. Harrison was defiant after Wednesday night’s meeting, calling Mr. McMahon an “opportunist” who had entered the race only after Mr. Fossella had announced his decision. In contrast, Mr. Harrison said, he had been a candidate when Mr. Fossella had been expected to run again.

“This is simply a matter of the machine being at work,” Mr. Harrison said in an interview after the meeting. “Not only is he a Johnny-come-lately,” he said of Mr. McMahon, “he is not going to resonate with the voters in the Democratic primary.”

The top Democratic choices to run for the seat of retiring Rep. Vito Fossella are quickly whittling down.  State Sen. Diane Savino removed her name from consideration last week, and now, Assemblyman Mike Cusick is saying that he won’t be running, either:

“I took a hard look at Congress,” Cusick (D-Mid-Island) told the Advance in a telephone interview moments ago. “I looked hard at what it would take to get there. The one thing utmost in my mind was what would be best for the people I serve, and the people of Staten Island as a whole.”

Cusick said he was also concerned about having a fight over the seat within the Democratic Party.

“I don’t want to have a fight for the seat, a fight in the party,” Cusick said. “This is a hard decision for me.”

With this news, all eyes turn to NYC Councilman Mike McMahon, a Richmond County resident who has expressed an interest in running.  If we can’t get McMahon to run here, or get one of the earlier drop-outs to reconsider, then Team Blue is in big trouble.

(H/T: Jonah in NYC)

Cross-posted from Show Me Progress:

There are endorsements and then there are ENDORSEMENTS. If a state rep endorses Mike Garman (running for the Democratic nomination in Todd Akin’s district), that’s nice. If the Missouri AFL-CIO endorses Garman–in May!–that’s huge. For several reasons.

First, an endorsement during a primary race is unprecedented. One St. Charles Democratic official with ties to labor told me that he can’t remember the AFL-CIO endorsing in a primary contest. But it happened. The Missouri AFL-CIO’s Executive Council and its president, Hugh McVey, have announced their endorsements in Missouri’s federal races: Russ Carnahan, Lacy Clay, Emanuel Cleaver, Ike Skelton (no surprises so far), Kay Barnes (also not a surprise) and … Mike Garman.

Now that the endorsement is in place, money from the international union in D.C. might follow. The Missouri chapter of the AFL-CIO can write letters of recommendation urging the parent union to lend support to any of the endorsed Missouri candidates.

And finally, the state AFL-CIO will send out 2-5 mailers to let its members know who it’s endorsing. In St. Charles County, 35 percent of the voters are union members. Presumably, that percentage would be considerably higher among Democratic voters. Lots of those union Dems will note Garman’s name on a mailer and vote for him.

When I talked to Mike last night, he was elated with the news. He feels that people in St. Charles County respect him as a hard worker who knows first-hand the problems they face. He pointed out that for months now he’s been working a forty-hour a week job running the ambulance service in one of the St. Charles ambulance districts, then campaigning sixty hours a week and getting four hours of sleep a night. A few nights back, he knocked on 300 doors–in pouring rain.

Sheer doggedness has made Mike a serious contender in this race, and this endorsement can’t do anything but help his chances.

By the way, I wrote about Mike in December here and here, in case you want to know more about him.

From Roll Call:

In a potentially worrying sign for freshman Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho), he escaped Tuesday’s 1st district GOP primary against Iraq War veteran Matt Salisbury with just 57 percent of the vote, according to the unofficial election results posted by the Idaho secretary of state.

Salisbury closed the pre-primary fundraising period with just $3,500 on hand, spending a total of $43,000 on his campaign on contributions of $46,600. Considering that Salisbury ran a campaign bereft of a serious advertising effort, the outcome of this contest could signal trouble ahead for Sali in the general election.

57% is awfully weak, especially considering that Salisbury ran a low-profile, poorly funded campaign. Unless voters were confused by the letters “Sali” being in both names (which I doubt), that’s an awfully high protest vote.

It’s also worth noting that Ran Paul scored 25% against John McCain in Idaho’s presidential primary, which was also last night.  As Roll Call notes, that’s a decently-sized libertarian vote that Democrat Walt Minnick can play to.

SSP currently rates this race as Likely Republican.

Update: The final result was actually 60% for Sali.  That’s still very weak.

Only weeks after the special election, the Republican field to take on freshly-minted Democratic Rep. Don Cazayoux is still in flux. The Advocate reports that Chas Roemer (son of former Gov. Buddy Roemer) has taken his name out of consideration. In his place, it seems likely that perennial loser Woody Jenkins will take another kick at the can:

Jenkins said in a phone interview Tuesday Roemer’s decision to bow out is a factor in his own consideration to run. Jenkins said he wants to make sure there is a strong conservative candidate on the Republican ticket.

“I am close to making a decision, and that decision will probably be to run,” Jenkins said in an e-mail Tuesday.

It sounds like consultant/lobbyist Laurinda Calongne is gearing up for another bid, too:

Her campaign manager, Emily Tiller, said in an e-mail that they are receiving a tremendous amount of support and encouragement for her to run.

“Because she is a small business owner and a healthcare expert, people are saying she has the best chance of beating Don Cazayoux in November,” Tiller’s e-mail says. “We will be making an announcement very soon.”

Both Jenkins and Calongne are very much B-list candidates for the GOP here, but with the prospect of an independent run by Democratic state Rep. Michael Jackson still in the air, even a B-list candidate has a shot here for Team Red.

You all remember ex-Rep. John Sweeney (R-Animal House), right?  Here’s a memento from his 2006 campaign against now-Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand:

“You can’t take a resume and a pretty face from New York City and say to people this is good for you simply because we can spend a lot of money and raise a lot of money,” Sweeney told the Record of Troy. (Emphasis added.)

Now, here’s Rep. Dana Rohrabacher’s assessment of his challenger, Huntington Beach Mayor Debbie Cook:

“She’s a very attractive person, physically, and has a title, so I’m taking it seriously,” he said. “But I’m also very confident. … My beliefs are closer to what the beliefs of this constituency are all about.” (Emphasis added.)

Following this playbook didn’t exactly work out for the original Sweeney Blutarsky.

Mason-Dixon polls Montana’s at-large House seat (5/19-21, registered voters):

Jim Hunt (D): 20

Denny Rehberg (R-inc): 52

Mike Fellows (L): 5

Undecided: 23

(MoE: ±4%)

Hunt, a Helena attorney, starts this race well behind. Despite some early statewide advertising, he only has 39% name recognition. Hunt does have some room for growth — he only garners support from 48% of Democrats and 16% of independents — but Rehberg’s solid favorables (55%) and job approval (56%) will be tough to crack.

Here are the numbers from Senate race:

Max Baucus (D-inc): 65

Mike Lange (R): 26

Max Baucus (D-inc): 61

Kirk Bushman (R): 26

(MoE: ±4%)

Now is clearly not the year to run for Senate if you’re a Bush man.

I have started a fund that will help those running against Senators that voted against the GI Bill race last week.

This fund will not only help such races as Noriega in Texas, but also bring attention to places like Alabama and Tennessee.

Join me in supporting candidates that actually support our Veterans through such mechanisms as increased funding for GI education and increased funding for mental health care.

We should not give up races in Alabama and Tenn and South Carolina because the polls and the pundits tell us a Democrat cannot win there.

see http://actblue.com/page/gibill

Breaking down some of these races

Alabama – I am very much active in trying to raise awareness for this issue because of the poor record of Jeff Sessions. We have an excellent candidate in Vivian Figures and I ask that you visit her website.

http://www.figures2008.com

Sessions never served in the military and is voted amongst the worst by veterans groups in terms of support.

Tennessee – Bob Tuke is a Vietnam Veteran. Lamar Alexander also never served in the Military. Voted against the GI Bill. Alexander among the top ten enemies of Veterans.  This is a longshot race also but any support will help but this in the public.

Read this Washington Post article for more on this issue.

Veteran having trouble with benefits.

Texas – Rick Noriega is running against John Cornyn. Noriega is perhaps the most well known of this bunch. Noriega is running hard on improving benefits for veterans. Cornyn recieved awful rating from Veterans organizations and is perhaps one of the most prolific in the GI Bill debate with the argument that it would cause retention problems. Help Noriega as much as you can but also help others.

South Carolina – Lindsey Graham consistently voted against health care benefits for Veterans. His voting record shows consistency in voting against improvements in veterans health care and this will cause more issues with high amount of PTS and mental health issues on the rise. Do what you can to help support the Democratic nominee.

It’s that time of the year when people start contemplating “Oh, no! What if there’s a tie in the Electoral College?” (It’s actually not that far-fetched. Take the Kerry states, add Iowa, Colorado, and New Mexico, subtract New Hampshire and you get 269 each.)

As you might or might not be aware, the 12th Amendment states that in the event of a tie (or no one getting a majority because of a 3rd party), the House of Representatives decides who becomes President. However… it’s not done by individual votes. Instead, each state delegation gets one vote. So, let’s assume there’s no horse trading going on behind the scenes, or strangely principled decisions to honor the will of the state’s voters rather than one’s party designation, and see which party controls which party delegation: the Dems control 27, the GOP controls 21, and there are 2 ties. (This is already a dramatic improvement over the situation going into the 2006 elections, when the GOP controlled 30, Dems controlled 17, and there were 3 ties.)

Dems: Arkansas (3-1), California (34-19), Colorado (4-3), Connecticut (4-1), Hawaii (2-0), Illinois (11-8), Indiana (5-4), Iowa (3-2), Maine (2-0), Maryland (6-2), Massachusetts (10-0), Minnesota (5-3), Mississippi (3-1), New Hampshire (2-0), New Jersey (7-6), New York (23-6), North Carolina (7-6), North Dakota (1-0), Oregon (4-1), Pennsylvania (11-8), Rhode Island (2-0), South Dakota (1-0), Tennessee (5-4), Vermont (1-0), Washington (6-3), West Virginia (2-1), and Wisconsin (5-3)

GOP: Alabama (5-2), Alaska (1-0), Delaware (1-0), Florida (16-9), Georgia (7-6), Idaho (2-0), Kentucky (4-2), Louisiana (4-3), Michigan (9-6), Missouri (5-4), Montana (1-0), Nebraska (3-0), Nevada (2-1), New Mexico (2-1), Ohio (11-7), Oklahoma (4-1), South Carolina (4-2), Texas (19-13), Utah (2-1), Virginia (8-3), and Wyoming (1-0)

Ties: Arizona (4-4) and Kansas (2-2)

So which are the likeliest delegations to flip? Turning to Swing State Project’s competitive House race ratings, I’ve tried to rank the likelihood of delegations moving from majority-R (or a tie) to majority-D. Ordinarily, I’d suggest this be the basis for some consideration as to how to allocate our House race resources… but considering that we’re already up 27-21 and looking to flip more delegations without a lot of strategic targeting, simply by virtue of how much the playing field is tilted in our direction this year, this serves more as a conversation piece this year. In short, we can move the margin to 30-19 by winning all our toss-ups, and we can move it as far as 35-14 by winning all our lean Rs as well.

Alaska: 1 to flip. AK-AL is a toss-up, previously rated Lean D. The biggest threat to our fortunes in this seat would be if Don Young doesn’t make it out of his primary.

Arizona: 1 to break tie. AZ-01 is an open scandal seat, rated toss-up.

New Mexico: 1 to flip. Rated toss-up, NM-01 is an open seat in a D+2 district, although the Republicans recruited a solid contender here. (Plus, NM-02 is a likely R.)

Nevada: 1 to flip. NV-03 is lean R. Although there was some weirdness with a candidate swap last month, Dina Titus may actually be an upgrade. NV-02 is also likely R.

Ohio: 2 to tie, 3 to flip. We’re getting into table-running territory here, but we can do it by picking up OH-15 (toss-up), OH-16 (toss-up), and one of OH-01 (lean R) and OH-02 (lean R). For good measure, there are OH-07 and OH-14 (races to watch).

Missouri: 1 to flip. MO-06 (lean R) looks promising, with a former Kansas City mayor on our side. MO-09 (likely R) presents another opportunity.

Louisiana: 1 to flip. LA-04 (lean R) doesn’t seem so out of reach given our special election victory in LA-06.

Michigan: 2 to flip. MI-07 and MI-09 are both rated lean R. (And MI-07 may actually be our best shot at an incumbent.)

Wyoming: 1 to flip. WY-AL is likely R, although we’d have better odds if we were facing the retiring incumbent instead of someone new.

Further down the list, there’s Virginia (3 to flip: VA-11 is toss-up, VA-02 and VA-10 are likely R, VA-05 is a race to watch), Florida (a herculean 4 to flip, but FL-08, FL-13, FL-15, FL-18, FL-21, FL-24, and FL-25 are all likely R), Idaho (1 to tie, 2 to flip: ID-01 is likely R), Alabama (2 to flip: AL-02 is likely R and AL-03 is a race to watch), Kentucky (1 to tie, 2 to flip: KY-02 is likely R), Montana (1 to flip: MT-AL is a race to watch), Kansas (1 to break tie: KS-04 is a race to watch), South Carolina (1 to tie, 2 to flip: SC-01 and SC-02 are races to watch), Nebraska (2 to flip: NE-02 is a race to watch), and Texas (3 to tie, 4 to flip: TX-07 and TX-10 are races to watch). There’s no action to speak of in Delaware (1 to flip), Georgia (1 to flip), Oklahoma (2 to flip), or Utah (1 to flip).

OK, what about worst case scenario time? I’m not sure what could make the Democratic brand more toxic than the spoiled dog food that the Republicans are currently peddling, but suppose it happens (and Obama wouldn’t be tying the electoral vote in the general under those circumstances anyway, so this is mostly academic). Suppose the Democrats pick nothing up, and also lose every toss-up? That still doesn’t flip a single delegation back to the Republicans. The Democrats would also have to lose every lean D seat in order for the Republicans to pick up a 25-21 edge (by flipping Indiana, Arizona, and Pennsylvania, breaking the tie in Kansas, and knocking Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Mississippi back to ties).

Kansas: 1 to break tie. KS-02 is lean D, KS-03 is likely D.

Indiana: 1 to flip. IN-09 (the 4th Hill/Sodrel go-round) is ranked lean D, plus IN-02 and IN-08 aren’t out of the woods at likely D.

Arizona: 1 to break tie. AZ-05 and AZ-08 are both lean D.

Pennsylvania: 2 to flip. PA-04 and PA-10 are lean D, plus PA-08 and PA-11 are likely D.

Wisconsin: 1 to tie, 2 to flip. WI-08 is lean D.

New Hampshire: 1 to tie, 2 to flip. NH-01 is lean D, and NH-02 is likely D.

Mississippi: 1 to tie, 2 to flip. MS-01 is lean D.

Further down the list, there’s also Illinois (2 to flip: IL-14 is lean D and IL-08 is likely D), North Carolina (1 to flip: NC-11 is likely D), Minnesota (1 to tie, 2 to flip: MN-01 is likely D), Connecticut (2 to flip: CT-02 and CT-05 are likely D), and Tennessee (1 to flip: TN-04 is a race to watch). For the rest of the Dem states, there’s no path to a flip.

I just read the Analysis on the Alabama Race which has been dedicated as Tier III by your site.  I will offer my own analysis as to why that is incorrect and hope to encourage readers and bloggers to take note and possibly even donate a little pocket change.  

First of all there are several reasons why this race should be more closely examined

1. There have been a lot of campaign activities since March 27, contrary to what the report read. There have been fundraisers and grassroots events all over the State. Perhaps the main reason that there has not been more notice is that Vivian Figures has been involved in the state legislative sessions much of the past few months. Furthermore, Senator Figures has received a lot of attention for her sponsorship of a bill to ban smoking in most public places. This is a very important health issue and extremely popular with citizens over the state.

2. Sessions voted against the GI Bill.

As a article from the Tuscaloosa News said today, “In doing so, Sessions, who is up for reelection this year just may have handed his likely opponent, state Sen. Vivian Figures, D-Mobile, a campaign issue on a silver platter.

Bush and his die hard congressional supporters contend that passage of the bill would hurt retention of troops by giving them incentives to leave the military earlier than otherwise, since they currently don’t qualify for educational benefits until longer stints in the military.

Proponents say it is just the opposite — by promising tuition aid after only three years, more patriotic young men and women would be more likely to enlist since they could realize their dreams of attending college sooner than is now the case. Such enlistments would more than make up for those who leave service “early” under the new benefit package, both the Congressional Budget Office and the supporters of the bill say.

Veterans benefits are becoming very important nationwide and especially the South.

3. There has been a lot of movement in Southern races as evidenced by the special election races. This will be further helped by Obama increasing turnout as well as rising gas prices and a troubled economy.