Month: February 2009

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/29-2/2, registered voters):

Ben Chandler (D): 42

Jim Bunning (R-inc): 45

Jack Conway (D): 42

Jim Bunning (R-inc): 46

Crit Luallen (D): 41

Jim Bunning (R-inc): 45

Dan Mongiardo (D): 42

Jim Bunning (R-inc): 46

Ben Chandler (D): 42

Trey Grayson (R): 42

Jack Conway (D): 41

Trey Grayson (R): 42

Crit Luallen (D): 42

Trey Grayson (R): 42

Dan Mongiardo (D): 42

Trey Grayson (R): 43

(MoE: ±4%)

R2K polls the Bluegrass State on behalf of the Orangehate Site, and we are looking at a very tight Senate race. Jim Bunning, who has been the subject of some very public pressure from Republican leadership to get out of the way, is leading his likely Democratic opposition by 3 or 4 points. The four likeliest Democratic challengers (Rep. Ben Chandler, Attorney General Jack Conway, Auditor Crit Luallen, and Bunning’s 2004 opponent, Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo; of these four, only Mongiardo has declared) all put up virtually the same numbers, indicating, as with most polls we’ve been seeing in the last few months, that they’re all basically running as “generic D” right now. (Hard to believe, I know, but those creatures known as “voters” apparently aren’t in round-the-clock campaign mode like we are.)

On the one hand, these poll numbers may come as a bit of a surprise to people looking at the Kentucky senate race as one where the Democrats have a clear edge. Bunning has a few advantages here, though: one, the power of incumbency, and the name recognition and general staying-power that come with it. And two: the overall Republican strength in Kentucky, one of the few states that seems to keep on moving away from us at the presidential level, although it’s still quite amenable to statewide Dems.

On the other hand, Bunning clearly is in bad shape here, falling far short of the relative safety of the 50% mark, based on pretty wide name recognition (41 favorable/47 unfavorable), leaving him little room to go up. And that’s before he’s exposed to the rigors of a two-year campaign, which didn’t go so well last time back when he was five younger.

R2K also polls GOP Secretary of State Trey Grayson, a young up-and-comer who would assumedly be the party’s preferred candidate. He doesn’t fare as well as Bunning, but unlike Bunning, he’s not well-known and yet liked by those who know him (39 favorable/18 unfavorable), giving him a lot more room for expansion. This is why Grayson is, by most people, considered the more dangerous GOP option.

The Oregonian is reporting that Senator Ron Wyden (D) is a candidate to be the next HHS Secretary.  I’ll discuss the rumors, who Wyden is and what this would mean for the US Senate if he were to be nominated.

Cross-Posted from Loaded Orygun: http://www.loadedorygun.net/sh…

Link to the story: Wyden gains traction as possible health secretary

Key Quote:

   Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden is emerging as a potential candidate to become health and human services secretary after former Sen. Tom Daschle abruptly withdrew because of controversy over unpaid taxes.

   Wyden’s name is one of several prominently mentioned in Washington, D.C., health-policy circles and in news stories and blogs. Former Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber’s name also surfaced, but several Washington health care observers said they doubt he would receive serious consideration.

So who is Ron Wyden?:

Birth Date: 05/03/1949

Birthplace: Wichita, KS

Home City: Portland, OR

Religion: Jewish

Party: Democratic.

Elective History:

Representative, United States House of Representatives, District 3, 1980-1996, defeating an incumbent in the seat now held by Earl Blumenauer.

Senator, United States Senate, 1996-present, winning a special election over former Senator Gordon Smith to replace the disgraced Senator Bob Packwood (R).  He has not been challenged since.

Wyden’s Healthy Americans Plan:

Quoting from Slate: http://www.slate.com/id/2160834

Quote:

   Under Wyden’s plan, employers would no longer provide health coverage, as they have since World War II. Instead, they’d convert the current cost of coverage into additional salary for employees. Individuals would use this money to buy insurance, which they would be required to have.

   Private insurance plans would compete on features and price but would have to offer benefits at least equivalent to the Blue Cross “standard” option. Signing up for insurance would be as easy as ticking off a box on your tax return. In most cases, insurance premiums would be withheld from paychecks, as they are now.

   Eliminating employers as an additional payer would encourage consumers to use health care more efficiently. Getting rid of the employer tax deduction, which costs a whopping $200 billion a year, would free up funds to subsidize insurance up to 400 percent of the poverty line, which is $82,000 for a family of four.

   The Lewin Group, an independent consulting firm, has estimated that Wyden’s plan would reduce overall national spending on health care by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years and that it would save the government money through great administrative efficiency and competition.

Replacing Wyden:

Under Oregon law, a special election would be held to replace Wyden within 91 days (the law says “soon as practicable so it may be backed up to the May Primary”).  Here is how I think it would stack up:

Republican Possibles:

Former Senator Gordon Smith would be by far the strongest possible candidate.

Rep. Greg Walden would be a likely choice but would be quite weak.

Allen Alley, who lost in his run for treasurer, would also be possible.

Democratic Possibles:

US Rep. Earl Blumeanuer would be a very strong pick and would certainly be favored statewide.

US Rep. Peter DeFazio would also be a very strong choice for us and would likely clear the field as well.

Losing Senate candidate Steve Novick would be a strong third possibility.

Overall I think we would clearly have the edge in any special election.

Let me know what you think.

From Stateline.org:

By contrast, the Republicans have serious concerns only about Arizona, the three open seats in solidly Democratic territory (California, Hawaii and Rhode Island) plus Nevada, where first-term Gov. Jim Gibbons has gotten himself into a series of self-inflicted scrapes, and South Dakota, where a strong Democratic candidate, U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, is planning an open-seat bid.

Hardly definitive, but this phrasing makes it sound pretty certain she’s going to run.

Quinnipiac (1/29-2/2, registered voters):

Lee Fisher (D): 42

Rob Portman (R): 27

Jennifer Brunner (D): 38

Rob Portman (R): 28

Lee Fisher (D): 41

Mary Taylor (R): 27

Jennifer Brunner (D): 38

Mary Taylor (R): 26

(MoE: ±2.9%)

Rob Portman (R): 33

Mary Taylor (R): 11

(MoE: ±5.1%)

Lee Fisher (D): 18

Jennifer Brunner (D): 16

Tim Ryan (D): 14

(MoE: ±4.4%)

Quinnipiac polls a whole bunch of different permutations on the Ohio Senate race, including the primary races, and you gotta like what you see here. Lt. Gov Lee Fisher and Sec. of State Jennifer Brunner both lead ex-Rep. and ex-OMB Director Rob Portman by double digits. The only missing element is head-to-heads involving Rep. Tim Ryan, who also seems likely to run (and they do poll him in the primary)… but judging by the similarity between Fisher and Brunner’s numbers, it seems like the candidates are running more as ‘generic D’ and ‘generic R’ right now, and he’d do just as well.

The unknowns are very high even in the general, but they’re catastrophically high in the primary heats, with the majority of the electorate in the “don’t know” camp right now. This is especially the case in the hypothetical GOP primary, where Portman (who has already committed to the race) is tested against the little-known Auditor Mary Taylor. (Taylor hasn’t publicly expressed any interest in the Senate race; discussion of her at this point seems to be limited to online GOP fanboys depressed with the drab Portman and casting about for someone Sarah Palin-esque to give them the twinkles.)

A few weeks ago, PPP tried out Fisher, Brunner, and Ryan against Portman, and Portman won all three of those tests, although not by particularly large margins. So this Q-poll, in and of itself, shouldn’t be taken as a promise of a pickup; this is going to be a hard fought race for the next two years. (H/t Leftist Addiction.)

It’s NJ, so I question the polling, as always, but. . .

While few New Jersey voters know much about him, former U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie, a Republican challenger, leads Democratic incumbent Gov. Jon Corzine 44 – 38 percent in this year’s Governor’s race, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This reverses a 42 – 36 percent Gov. Corzine lead in a November 19 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

In this latest survey, Democrats support Corzine 72 – 10 percent while Christie leads 86 – 7 percent among Republicans and 49 – 24 percent among independent voters. Men back the Republican 51 – 32 percent while women go Democratic 42 – 38 percent. Black voters back Corzine 68 – 9 percent while white voters back Christie 52 – 32 percent.

As far as I can tell, Corzine hasn’t started his TV blast on broadcast yet (it would have to be on NYC and PHL networks), so I’m starting to wonder if he’s considering backing out entirely. Maybe this would be an easier race for a fresh Democrat?

So I was skimming my usual websites and this is what I found:

There’s a fairly serious scrap underway for the senate seat George Voinovich is vacating in Ohio, with Governor Ted Strickland — uncharacteristically — and other Democratic leaders pressing Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to stay in her job, and backing her rival Lee Fisher.

Link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/…

As secretary of state, she has a seat on Ohio’s Apportionment Board, which both parties want to control because it redraws the boundaries for legislative districts after each full U.S. census.

But that’s not enough to keep Brunner in place.

She and others correctly argue that the power of the Apportionment Board may be overstated – as evidenced by Democrats’ success last year in House districts last drawn by Republicans. (Democrats, though, performed badly in Ohio Senate districts.)

Also, if Democrats deliver on their promise to pass election reforms, those reforms are likely to include changing the apportionment process. Computers can redraw the lines without partisan politics, eliminating the need for board seats.

A lot of us were hoping for Congressman Tim Ryan to be our senate candidate.  I think Lt. Governor Fisher was third or further down on all of our lists for Senate, whether you had Ryan, Brunner or Sutton in front of him.  Most notably because of his poor electoral track record of 1/2 for Attorney General, 0/1 for Governor, and 1/1 for Lt. Governor.  

What do you guys think?  

Until 20 years ago the suburbs around New York City were strongly Republican. Now they are strongly Democratic. In the area I would consider the NYC metro area there are 30 Congressional Districts. These are NY-(01-19), NJ-(04-13), and CT-04. (I know, it’s debatable what is and what isn’t.) Only 5 of the 30 are represented by Republicans: NY-03, NJ-05, NJ-11, NJ-07, and NJ-04. Amazingly, there are 6 districts in this area that have a PVI of D+30 or better.

All across the country, suburbs are trending Democratic. Older suburbs are now reliably Democratic. However it looks like some of the suburban areas around New York City may have peaked in around 2000. Some of these “traditionally Republican” areas may be trending Republican again.

For a reference to the names of counties, see this map provided by Wikipedia.

The Bad News

County	2000	2004	2008
Staten Island	50/42	43/56	48/52
Nassau County	56/36	52/47	54/45
Suffolk County	52/39	49/49	53/47
Rockland County	54/37	49/50	53/47
Bergen County	55/42	52/47	54/45
Sussex County	37/58	35/64	39/59
Monmouth County	50/46	45/55	47/51
Ocean County	47/49	39/60	40/58

The Good News

County	2000	2004	2008
Westchester County	57/35	58/40	63/36
Orange County	45/47	44/55	52/47
Fairfield County	52/43	51/47	59/40
Essex County	71/26	70/29	76/23
Somerset County	47/50	47/52	53/46
Morris County	43/54	42/58	45/53
Hunterdon County	38/57	39/60	43/56
Mercer County	61/34	61/38	67/31

Some of the biggest Democratic losses at the presidential level from 2000 to 2004 came from the suburban counties around New York City. It’s tempting to dismiss these as short-term losses, and blame them on September 11. But we did worse in some of these counties in 2008 than in 2000, so this could be the beginning of a long-term trend. If we don’t take it seriously it could eventually cost us elections.

NY-13 and NY-03 currently have PVI‘s of about D+1. After they are recalculated to consider 2008 results, they will probably be about R+4.

Of the 5 Republican-held districts, we should strongly contest these 2 in 2010:

NY-03 will be an open race in 2010. Its Republican incumbent, Peter King, will vacate the seat in order to unsuccessfully run for the Senate. This race is a toss-up, depending on what the political situation is like in 2010. It’s tempting to take it for granted, because Tim Bishop and Steve Israel were able to flip NY-01 and NY-02 earlier this decade. If we win it’s because we had an excellent candidate and and excellent campaign that earned every last vote.

Meanwhile, Republican-held district NJ-07 is trending in our direction. NJ-07 was designed to be Republican, but now it’s a swing district that Obama won. I’m on the record stating we should try again in 2010 to win NJ-07.

Cross-posted to Daily Kos.

Like Punxsutawney Phil yesterday, Katrina Swett emerges:

With U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., ready to announce his candidacy for Judd Gregg’s U.S. Senate seat within a week, veteran Democratic activist Katrina Swett will become a candidate for his 2nd District U.S. House seat, Democratic sources say.

Swett briefly ran for senate last cycle, but dropped out when Jeanne Shaheen got into the race. Afterwards, as Dean says, she made nary a peep for the whole campaign. And as far as I can tell, she didn’t make any donations to Paul Hodes, who currently holds the seat she now seeks. Mind you, at no point was Swett hurting for cash. She raised $1.5 million before bailing in 2007 and still has $900K in the kitty.

I have several other problems with a Swett candidacy, among them the fact that she’s wobbly on reproductive choice. Worse still, she was a national co-chair of Joe Lieberman’s campaign for president in 2004, and she supported him to the end against Ned Lamont in 2006. But I’ll let her own words do the talking:

Swett believes Lieberman lost because of three perceived Democratic “sins”: the sin of supporting the Iraq war and being tough on defense, the sin of being bipartisan and the sin of displaying religious faith. Swett said those traits might make Lieberman undesirable to many Democrats but they could be key for Democrats in winning future national elections.

“Round two in Connecticut is going to be a battle between two Democrats: Joe Lieberman, a centrist Democrat, and Ned Lamont, a pretty-far-left-of-center Democrat,” said Swett. “I’m convinced that Joe Lieberman is the better leader… and I’m also convinced that he’s the better positioned politically for the future of the party that I love.”

That’s not the sort of person I’d like to see fill a blue-leaning open seat. Hopefully some other challengers, undeterred by Swett’s warchest, will emerge. Some possible names include: Jay Buckey, an astronaut and professor of medicine at Dartmouth who also briefly sought the senate nomination in 2007; state Sen. Molly Kelly; Stonyfield Farm CEO Gary Hirshberg; and retired Adm. John Hutson, dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center (who shot down speculation that he might run for this seat two years ago). I’m sure we’ll see how the field shakes out soon enough.

Sorry, open seat fans:

U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Mobile, told the Press-Register today that he will not run for governor of Alabama in 2010, ending months of speculation over whether he would join a crowded field of candidates seeking to replace term-limited Gov. Bob Riley.

“After a lot of serious thought and consideration, as well as many heartfelt prayers, Janee and I have concluded that now is simply not the right time to launch a statewide campaign,” Bonner said.

Bonner nabbed a spot on the Appropriations Committee last year, which makes life in the minority a bit more palatable. And a few weeks ago, he earned some upgrades on his other assignments. In any event, this move scratches a name off of our open seat watch, but both the GOP and Dem gubernatorial fields are still up in the air.