The DCCC is merely wasting money trying to save Kanjorski. It’s time to put the party ahead of one individual. The possibility of picking up three seats or more is being sacrificed in an attempt to save just one vulnerable incumbent.
Kanjorski is to the Democrats what Phil Crane was to the Republicans. An appropriate analogy would be asking a 45 year old to suit up and placing him on the football field to make a touchdown in the final quarter of the game with no timeouts remaining: it simply will not happen.
Time’s Up!! Games Over!!
Pack up the caravan and move spending into races that are developing such as Dent in the neighboring district, Buyer in Indiana, Lungren in CA, or Bartlett in Maryland. Bartlett also has similar factors working against him which are working against Kanjorski: age and tenure. Buyer and Lungren have tenure against them.
Watching Kanjorski’s ads one can not help but feel sorry. Kanjorski appears tired and ready to retire, yet he obviously wants to do it on his own terms. Bartlett also has age working against him as it did for both Crane and Roth in Delaware. Additionally, this is a change election so obviously incumbents with the longest tenure appear to be more endangered than in previous elections (Young, Shays, Kanjorski, Rohrabacher, and Knollenberg).
Democrats have already lost Mahoney’s seat, now it’s time to let Kanjorski battle it out on his own. Obviously voters do not want Barletta and surely he will be a one termer in a district such as this. However, in the event that he is not, then expect him to be redistricted out or into an unfavorable district come 2012 (PA is on track to lose a seat). In a change election it’s simply difficult to ask voters to choose someone who has made erratic mistakes and created his own vulnerabilities, even when he’s a Democrat and would make a more effective representative.
I think Democrats can afford to lose one seat while picking up and consolidating the remaining seats in the Northeast:
– English
– Dent
– Kuhl
– Reynolds Open Seat
– Fossella Open Seat
– Ferguson Open Seat
– Walsh Open Seat
– Bartlett
– Gilchest Open Seat
– Ferguson Open Seat
– Davis Open Seat
Therefore, let’s forfeit one here and pick up 11 others.
And if a domino effect is created, then with luck, Garrett, Gerlach, Murphy (PA), and King are all ripe for the taking. However, these are long shots at best.
The only three seats that appear to create problems for Democrats in the Northeast are:
– Saxton’s Open Seat – The NRCC is spending heavy to get their extreme ideologue across the line.
– Shays – He has shown resiliance and Himes has a very high unknown percentage, even after much spending. This does not bode well since independents who have always been the deciding factor in Shays re-election, will go with Shays over the unknown.
– Wolf – Another incumbent with tenure, yet Feder hasn’t received funding from the DCCC as in 2006.
It’s also imperitive that the DCCC retain the only two vulnerable Democrats in the Northeast: Carney and Shea-Porter.
The NRCC’s recruitment failures allowed many of the 2006 freshman in the Northeast to slide by with very little or weak opposition: Hodes, Courtney, Murphy, Hall, Arcuri, Gillibrand, and Altmire.
Throwing individuals under the bus is never a good thing, yet many other capable candidates are waiting at the next stop for their turn at the wheel.
Hopefully the DCCC gets the message and understands the task at hand.
