Month: April 2010

• FL-Sen: Charlie Crist, who’s been trying to sound more conservative for the last few months, seems to have changed tack again, trying to sound, well, independent… and that’s leaving many speculating that it’s a prelude to, say, an independent bid for the Senate. Crist is now portraying himself as standing up for “the people” against the GOP legislature, as he just vetoed a leadership fund bill and is poised to veto a controversial bill that would abolish teacher tenure and tie teacher pay to test scores. Polling has shown Crist in so-so shape in a three-way race, but it’s still a better bet than the GOP primary is for him at this point. Crist has until April 30 to decide whether to pull the trigger on an indie bid.

• LA-Sen: Bayou Buzz is saying that Republican incumbent David Vitter may still wind up with some conservative opposition in the Senate race, despite having scared off all the top-tier possible opponents. Former state Sen. (and 2006 Insurance Comm. loser) James Cain, who’s well-connected with the religious right, is “seriously considering” making the race. Cain says he’d prefer to run in the GOP primary, but is also considering running as a teabagger independent — which, if it splits the right-wing vote, could make things considerably more interesting for Dem Charlie Melancon.

• UT-Sen: Freshman GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz, whose name had briefly been associated with a possible primary challenge to Bob Bennett, still doesn’t think much of Bennett’s chances at the state convention, even though Bennett faces lower-caliber opposition than Chaffetz. Chaffetz drew some parallels to the same dynamic that helped him beat long-time Rep. Chris Cannon in 2008, and Cannon concurs, saying that the same movement has evolved since then.

• FL-Gov: I hinted at this yesterday, but these numbers are worth elaborating: Republican AG Bill McCollum raised $1.4 million last quarter, compared with $1.1 for Democratic CFO Alex Sink, suggesting that the same momentum change that we’ve seen in polls lately may be playing out in fundraising too. Sink still leads in receipts over the election cycle, and has the edge in cash on hand (she has $5 million).

• GA-Gov: One other gubernatorial race where the Democratic candidate is fundraising like mad is Georgia; ex-Gov. Roy Barnes raised over $900K this quarter and is sitting on $2.84 million CoH. That puts him well ahead of the top Republican, Insurance Comm. John Oxendine, who reports $2 million CoH but only raised $75K during the last quarter. Republican ex-SoS Karen Handel raised $400K in Q1, but is sitting on nearly $600K.

• PA-Gov: Little-known state Sen. Anthony Williams raised some eyebrows with his big cash haul last quarter ($1.7 million for the quarter), but it’s a little less amazing now that it’s been revealed that much of that came from one huge contribution from a not-very-appealing source: $750K came from Democrats for Education Reform, who are a school-choice group. Another interesting co-inkee-dink: Williams’ campaign manager is, in his spare time, president of a Philly charter school.

• CT-05: Sam Caligiuri and Justin Bernier have gotten some wealthy company in the GOP primary in the 5th, from businessman Mark Greenberg. He says he’s pledging $1 million of his own money for the race (although that may come in installments, as he currently reports $403K in his account).

• FL-08: You may recall our amazement the other week to find that there’s a Whig running in FL-25… well, apparently they’re proliferating all over Florida, as now there’s one running in FL-08 as well. CQ talks briefly with Steve Gerritzen, who plans to go all William Henry Harrison on Alan Grayson’s ass.

• MI-01: Sounds like Bart Stupak was speaking mostly out of frustration when he said he was considering retirement a few days ago, or maybe he got the attention he was seeking in response. In today’s Detroit Free Press, he’s sounding much likelier to run, saying he’s “not ready to quit yet,” and that he has “every intention” of running again. He still has to have his biannual sitdown with his family about whether to do it or not, though.

• NH-02: Sorry, Charlie… you’re going to need more money than that. GOP Ex-Rep. Charlie Bass reported $155K, with $262K CoH, in his quest to reclaim his old seat. Dem Katrina Swett also reported yesterday, with $325K last quarter and over $1 million CoH (mostly leftover from her Senate bid that never happened). Bass also lags Ann McLane Kuster, who reported $285K last quarter.

• PA-07: State Rep. Bryan Lentz seemed to have a pretty easy path to the nomination in the 7th, and that path got even easier, with the dropout of environmental lawyer Gail Conner from the Dem field. That leaves only political consultant Teresa Touey in the way, and Lentz is challenging her signatures.

• SC-01: Carroll Campbell III got a big endorsement in his bid for the GOP nomination to replace retiring Rep. Henry Brown, from ex-Gov. David Beasley. That makes two ex-Govs backing him (as it would be pretty awkward if he didn’t have his dad’s endorsement). (UPDATE: Ooops, my apologies. The elder Campbell died several years ago.)

• CO-AG: This is a little down in the weeds, but it may be the first big test of whether joining the frivolous Republican AG lawsuit against the feds over HCR is a net positive or negative. Republican AG John Suthers just drew a top-tier challenge, from Democratic Boulder County DA Stan Garnett. Garnett was motivated to get in largely by Suthers’ participation in the lawsuit.

• NARAL: NARAL rolled out a bunch of endorsements for Democrats going on the offense in House races. Most interestingly, they waded into the LA-02 primary, endorsing state Rep. Cedric Richmond (who still faces fellow state Rep. Juan LaFonta; the winner faces Joe Cao in November). They also supported Dan Seals (IL-10), Paula Brooks (OH-12), Suzan DelBene (WA-08), and Steve Pougnet (CA-45).

• Redistricting: If you like big charts with lots of population numbers and vote percentages (and if you’re at SSP, you probably do), here’s a post for you. Josh Goodman looks at California population changes on a county-by-county level and finds heaviest growth in Republican-leaning counties, but the growth is mostly Hispanic. Here’s the nice succinct conclusion, which I think applies everywhere and not just California:

The most rapid growth is in Republican places, but, in many cases, it’s among people who are likely to be Democratic voters. What that might mean is that this round of redistricting will produce short-term Republican gains, but, over the long haul, these Republican places won’t be Republican anymore.

• WATN?: Mahoney, Foley, and Spitzer, oh my! All three losers are in the news today as they publicly ruminate about comebacks. Ex-Rep. Tim Mahoney says people have been urging him to run for his old seat, which he lost to Republican Tom Rooney (and with Chris Craft out, hell, he may actually be their best option). Meanwhile, the guy Mahoney beat, Tom Mark Foley, has been gauging interest for his own comeback, running in 2011 for West Palm Beach mayor. Rounding out the trifecta of sex scandal survivors, Eliot Spitzer is still keeping his name in front of the press, saying that Kirsten Gillibrand presents an appealing target but sounding more plausibly interested in a run for state Comptroller.

• FL-Sen: Remember the good ol’ days of 2009, when Charlie Crist’s huge cash advantage would make him inevitable even if insurgent Marco Rubio somehow caught on with the teabagger set? Yeah, I’m having trouble remembering too. Rubio just brought in $3.6 million this quarter, the best of any candidate reporting so far. (Crist has yet to report, and even if he loses the quarter may yet lead in total cash.) Rubio may be getting himself into some trouble, though, with the all-important senior demographic in Florida, though, as his recent comments about changing Social Security (by, among others, raising the eligibility age) may not sit well with the state’s 3.5 million beneficiaries.

• IL-Sen: Looks like the biggest fundraising news today is coming from the GOP side of the aisle: Mark Kirk had a strong quarter, too, as he pulled in $2.2 million, leaving him with $3 million in the bank.

• NY-Sen: With all the state’s second-tier Republican talent interested in taking on Kirsten Gillibrand, where they might at least have some hope of an upset, no one’s signing up for the truly quixotic task of taking on Chuck Schumer in the other Senate race. That may change, as political consultant Jay Townsend is talking about stepping out from behind the curtain and trying his hand as a candidate. Townsend is currently working for Nan Hayworth’s campaign in NY-19.

• WI-Sen: A new Republican is stepping forward to run in the primary for the right to take on Russ Feingold… and, no, it’s not Tommy Thompson. Dick Leinenkugel, a former state Commerce secretary (an appointed position), plans to enter the race soon regardless of whether or not Thompson gets in. (Cillizza says, as far as Thompson goes, he’ll decide by early May and “most informed speculation seems to suggest he will take a pass.”) If Leinenkugel’s name is somehow evocative of hungover collegiate Sunday mornings, he’s from the family that owns the similarly-named brewery.

• GA-Gov: A sudden late entrant to the already-crowded Republican field in the Georgia governor’s race is bringing a lot of his own money with him. Ray Boyd is a wealthy real estate executive, and he kicked off his campaign by writing himself a $2 million check. He promises to reach out to the state’s teabaggers for support. The newest Insider Advantage poll of the GOP primary field doesn’t include Boyd; it finds Insurance Comm. John Oxendine with a solid lead at 26. Ex-Sos Karen Handel is at 18, ex-Rep. Nathan Deal is at 9, state Sen. Eric Johnson is at 5, and “Other” racks up 11, with 31% still undecided.

• MD-Gov: Ex-Gov. Bob Ehrlich officially kicked off his campaign to get back his old job from Martin O’Malley in November. The DNC, however, is trying to tie Ehrlich today to his former #2 man, who’s gone on to rather overshadow Ehrlich for the last few news cycles: ex-LG and current RNC boss Michael Steele.

• MI-Gov: There’s another EPIC-MRA poll of the Michigan governor’s race, suggesting they’re going to be polling pretty frequently. This time, they find the likeliest matchup, Democratic state House speaker Andy Dillon vs. Rep. Peter Hoekstra, goes to Hoekstra, 40-33 (one month ago Hoekstra led 41-37). Mike Cox beats Dillon 43-34 and Rick Snyder beats Dillon 42-30, while Lansing mayor Virg Bernero loses to Hoekstra 42-29, to Cox 44-30, and to Snyder 42-26. Dillon leads the Dem primary 22-15 (with 11 for Alma Wheeler Smith), while Hoekstra leads the GOP primary at 27, with Cox at 21, Snyder at 15, Mike Bouchard at 13, and Tom George at 3.

• NV-Gov: Here’s some strategic thinking from the camp of Reid the Younger. The Committee to Protect Nevada Jobs (headed by Rory Reid’s consultant Dan Hart) is running ads bolstering incumbent Gov. Jim Gibbons and attacking GOP primary rival Brian Sandoval (who’ll provide a much more difficult opponent for Reid than the thoroughly-trashed Gibbons).

• RI-Gov: The Association of Democratic City and Town Chairpersons — the umbrella group for the Dem party chairs of each of the state’s 39 municipalities — issued endorsements for a number of key races. Maybe there’s some tension between them and the state party, as they endorsed Treasurer Frank Caprio for the Governor’s race (instead of AG Patrick Lynch) and in RI-01, Providence mayor David Cicilline (instead of former state party chair William Lynch, brother of Patrick). They also endorsed Jim Langevin in RI-02, where he faces a primary challenge from a state Rep.

• WY-Gov: Democrats in Wyoming seem to have moved somewhere back behind square one in their search for a gubernatorial candidate. Their seeming best bet in the wake of Gov. Dave Freudenthal’s decision not to go for re-election, state Sen. Mike Massie, has decided to run for state superintendent of public instruction instead, where he’ll face incumbent GOPer Jim McBride.

• DE-AL: The NRCC has to be happy to get something of an upgrade in the open seat race in Delaware, shaping up to be their likeliest loss in the House. Michelle Rollins, a wealthy philanthropist, has confirmed that she’ll run. She hasn’t run for office before, but the DCCC already started attacking her several weeks ago, indicating they take her (or at least her wallet) more seriously than the Some Dudes already running. Former Lt. Gov. John Carney is the Democratic candidate, and has had a long head-start on the race.

• MA-09: Progressives looking for a primary challenge to Stephen Lynch (in the wake of his “no” vote on HCR) will have to look somewhere other than Needham town meeting member Harmony Wu; she announced via Facebook that she won’t be running.

• MI-01: Seems like Rep. Bart Stupak got his feelings hurt after taking a serious pounding from the left, from the right, and from pretty much all points in between during his last-minute obstruction of the health care reform passage. He’s saying that, although he has the signatures prepared for another run, he’s not ruling out retirement this year. Assuming he runs again, he faces a primary from the pro-choice left as well as a general election challenge from angry teabaggers on his right. If he does retire, Menhen is already on top of it in the diaries, listing some potential replacement candidates.

• NY-23: Paul Maroun, a Franklin County Legislator who got passed over by local GOP heads in favor of Dede Scozzafava in the special election in the 23rd, had been planning to run in the primary this year, but just decided against it. That leaves only two remaining contenders, Doug Hoffman (who ran on the Conservative Party line last year and is still doing his part to cheese off the local GOP), and self-funding investor Matt Doheny.

• PA-15: Bethlehem mayor John Callahan keeps on being one of the Dems’ few bright lights among its challengers this cycle, pulling in $320K this quarter, with $825K CoH. For more numbers, Reid Wilson’s out with today’s fundraising wrapup at the Hotline, with other numbers worth checking out including everybody in PA-Gov and FL-Gov.

• DNC: Michael Steele rolled out the RNC’s gaudy committee fundraising numbers early as a means of distracting the media from, well, everything else that’s happening at the RNC. Unfortunately, that kind of backfired, as the DNC put out numbers that topped the RNC’s already-high numbers. The DNC pulled in more than $13 million in March (compared to $11 million for the RNC), showing (via the HCR victory) that nothing succeeds like success.

• RNC: Speaking of the RNC’s numbers, here’s an interesting accounting trick that’s just come to light: the RNC had a deal going with the Michigan GOP to give money back and forth to each other, in order to inflate the RNC’s fundraising numbers. Not really the day that Michael Steele would have chosen for this news to come out.

This week we’re taking an in-depth, multi-part look at the 1994 election, as a means of divining what the 2010 election may hold for us in the House. To do so, we’re looking at some of the myths that seem to have taken hold regarding 1994; yesterday, for instance, we addressed the idea that 1994 was full of unpredictable, arbitrary wipeouts — which it wasn’t (our House Vulnerability Index did a spot-on job of predicting likelihood of losing compared with other Democrats).

Today, we’re looking at a couple more myths. They’re all interrelated — open seats and freshman status weigh heavily on the House Vulnerability Index — but it lets us slice and dice the data some new ways:

Myth 2) The losses in the 1994 election were disproportionately in the South, as historically Democratic districts that had started going Republican at the presidential level finally flipped downballot too.

No, not true. There’s plenty of reason to think this was the case (as I did until I started doing this research), as the 1992 round of redistricting rejiggered a number of districts in a way that was potentially harmful to moderate white Democrats elected by a coalition of African-Americans and working-class whites. With the creation of odd-shaped VRA-districts in a number of states, starting in 1992, moderate Democrats found themselves with the choice of either primaries against African-Americans in VRA districts, or against Republicans in much more conservative suburban/rural districts.

However, it turns out most of the impact from this occurred immediately in 1992, not 1994. For instance, the two Birmingham-area districts, which supported moderate Dems Claude Harris and Ben Erdreich, got turned into the mostly-white 6th and mostly-black 7th, which thus in 1992 turned into liberal Dem Earl Hilliard and conservative GOPer Spencer Bachus. Similarly, in 1992, long-time Democratic Rep. Walter Jones Sr. retired when he found himself in a now black-majority NC-01; his son, Walter Jones Jr., lost the Dem primary to Eva Clayton. In fact, this gave rise to perhaps the only Dem loss in 1994 that seems directly related to the VRA gerrymander: Rep. Martin Lancaster survived the 1992 election reasonably well despite having lost many of NC-03’s African-American voters to next-door NC-01, but in 1994 faced off against the younger Jones, now a Republican (and whose dad had represented many of NC-03’s voters prior to the redistricting), and lost.

It’s possible that Stephen Neal in NC-05, who got a nastier district in 1992 after having the black parts of Winston-Salem moved into the newly-formed NC-12 and then won by only 7% in 1992, may have felt compelled to hit the exits in 1994 primarily because he didn’t relish the task of trying to hold the district. At R+4 at the time, though, that wasn’t a particularly bad district. Norm Sisisky’s VA-04 also seems to have gotten worse post-1992 because of the gerrymandering of VA-03, but he still survived 1994 unscathed and held that district until his 2001 death. (If you can think of any other examples, please discuss in the comments. For instance, the creation of GA-11 or FL-03 may have had some consequences I’m not thinking of.)

The South (as defined by the US Census with one exception — I’m treating Maryland and Delaware as Northeast) did lose more Democratic seats than any other region of the country, that much is true. But that’s mostly because there were more Democratic seats in the South than any other region of the country; in terms of the overall win/loss percentage, the Democrats actually fared slightly better in the South than in the Midwest or West. In addition, much of what happened in the South was because of open seats; there were certainly more open seats in the South, while the South’s freshmen and veterans tended to fare better than those in the Midwest and West. There may be something of a chicken and egg effect here — old-timer Reps. in the South may have sensed trouble a-brewin’ and gotten out of the way, meaning that the inevitable losses took the form of open seats instead of defeated veterans — but, as we saw yesterday, open seats are the hardest to defend and the mass retirements (15 in the South) seemed to compound the disaster.

The one region where the Democrats performed notably better than the norm was the Northeast (their casualty rate in defensive races was only 11%, compared with 22% overall). That’s largely because there are so many safely-blue districts in the major cities of the Northeast; there were fewer suburban or rural seats there, which were the types that the GOP picked up in 1994. (The Dems faring comparatively well in 1994 in the Northeast helped pave the wave for their near-total dominance there now, as they gradually picked up suburban districts that leaned blue at the presidential level over the following decade.)

Here’s the list of who goes where. Open seats, for our purposes, includes races where the incumbent was knocked off in a primary. (And I’m not listing veterans who won, in the interest of space.)

South open seats won: TX-18 (D+22, ex-Washington), TX-10 (D+8, ex-Pickle), KY-03 (D+3, ex-Mazzoli), TX-25 (D+3, ex-Andrews)

South open seats lost: OK-02 (D+3, ex-Synar), TN-04 (R+2, ex-Cooper), NC-05 (R+4, ex-Neal), TN-03 (R+5, ex-Lloyd), OK-04 (R+7, ex-McCurdy), NC-02 (R+7, ex-Valentine), MS-01 (R+7, ex-Whitten), GA-08 (R+8, ex-Rowland), SC-03 (R+13, ex-Derrick), FL-15 (R+14, ex-Bacchus), FL-01 (R+20, ex-Hutto)

South freshmen won: FL-17 (D+25, Meek), AL-07 (D+21, Hilliard), LA-04 (D+19, Fields), TX-30 (D+19, Johnson), NC-12 (D+18, Watt), VA-03 (D+18, Scott), GA-11 (D+17, McKinney), FL-23 (D+16, Hastings), NC-01 (D+15, Clayton), SC-06 (D+14, Clyburn), GA-02 (D+12, Bishop), TX-28 (D+11, Tejeda), TX-29 (D+11, Green), FL-03 (D+10, Brown), MS-02 (D+9, Thompson), AR-01 (D+7, Lambert), FL-20 (D+3, Deutsch), FL-05 (R+1, Thurman), GA-09 (R+14, Deal)

South freshmen lost: KY-01 (D+0, Barlow), VA-11 (R+5, Byrne), GA-10 (R+10, Johnson)

South veterans lost: TX-09 (D+5, Brooks), NC-04 (D+1, Price), TX-13 (R+5, Sarpalius), NC-03 (R+8, Lancaster), GA-07 (R+11, Darden)

Midwest open seats won: MO-05 (D+13, ex-Wheat), MI-13 (D+4, ex-Ford)

Midwest open seats lost: OH-18 (D+2, ex-Applegate), MN-01 (D+1, ex-Penny), IL-11 (R+1, ex-Sangmeister), MI-08 (R+1, ex-Carr), KS-02 (R+2, ex-Slattery), IN-02 (R+8, ex-Sharp)

Midwest freshmen won: IL-01 (D+34, Rush), IL-02 (D+32, Reynolds), IL-04 (D+19, Gutierrez), WI-05 (D+13, Barrett), MI-05 (D+5, Barcia), MO-06 (D+3, Danner), MI-01 (D+0, Stupak), MN-02 (R+0, Minge), OH-13 (R+1, Brown), ND-AL (R+7, Pomeroy)

Midwest freshmen lost: WI-01 (D+3, Barca), OH-19 (R+0, Fingerhut), OH-01 (R+2, Mann), OH-06 (R+4, Strickland)

Midwest veterans lost: IL-05 (D+5, Rostenkowski), IA-04 (D+4, Smith), IN-08 (R+2, McCloskey), KS-04 (R+6, Glickman), NE-02 (R+8, Hoagland), IN-04 (R+13, Long)

West open seats won: CA-16 (D+12, ex-Edwards)

West open seats lost: OR-05 (D+2, ex-Kopetski), WA-02 (D+2, ex-Swift), AZ-01 (R+9, ex-Coppersmith)

West freshmen won: CA-37 (D+29, Tucker), CA-30 (D+18, Becerra), CA-33 (D+18, Roybal-Allard), CA-06 (D+15, Woolsey), CA-14 (D+11, Eshoo), CA-17 (D+11, Farr), AZ-02 (D+11, Pastor), CA-50 (D+7, Filner), OR-01 (D+4, Furse), CA-36 (R+3, Harman)

West freshmen lost: CA-01 (D+7, Hamburg), WA-09 (D+3, Kreidler), WA-01 (D+2, Cantwell), CA-49 (D+1, Schenk), AZ-06 (R+4, English), WA-04 (R+7, Inslee), UT-02 (R+8, Shepherd)

West veterans lost: WA-03 (D+4, Unsoeld), NV-01 (D+1, Bilbray), WA-05 (D+1, Foley), CA-19 (R+4, Lehman), ID-01 (R+9, LaRocco)

Northeast open seats won: PA-02 (D+26, ex-Blackwell), PA-20 (D+11, ex-Murphy)

Northeast open seats lost: ME-01 (R+0, ex-Andrews), NJ-02 (R+4, ex-Hughes)

Northeast freshmen won: NY-08 (D+28, Nadler), MD-04 (D+24, Wynn), NY-12 (D+22, Velazquez), NY-14 (D+20, Maloney), MA-01 (D+10, Olver), PA-04 (D+10, Klink), NJ-13 (D+7, Menendez), MA-05 (D+2, Meehan), NY-26 (D+2, Hinchey), PA-15 (R+1, McHale), PA-06 (R+7, Holden)

Northeast freshmen lost: NJ-08 (R+1, Klein), PA-13 (R+4, Margolies-Mezvinsky)

Northeast veterans lost: NH-02 (R+5, Swett), NY-01 (R+6, Hochbrueckner)

This is just brutal.

Public Policy Polling (4/1-5, Illinois voters, no trend lines):

Pat Quinn (D-inc): 33

Bill Brady (R): 43

Undecided: 24

(MoE: ±4%)

The scariest number, though, is this one: Pat Quinn’s job approval rating is 25-53. Those are some true toilet bowl numbers. It’d be an amazing feat for an incumbent, even in a blue-leaning state like Illinois, to survive in the face of such discontent. Indeed, PPP has even gone so far as to coin “The Corzine Line“, pointing out that Jon Corzine’s -23% job approval ended up giving him a defeat by a 4% spread in last year’s New Jersey gubernatorial election.

I know that some observers believed that Quinn got an easy ride with the primary win of the sharply conservative Brady. And, yes, Quinn’s lucky that he’s not dealing with the Illinois equivalent of Chris Christie, but it’ll still be pretty hard for him to gin up enthusiasm among his own base — especially with the extremely underwhelming Alexi Giannoulias sharing space on the ballot as the party’s nominee for U.S. Senate. Brady is already cleaving off 19% of the Democratic vote, and a further 28% is undecided. Quinn may be able to turn off those Democratic voters from Brady with blistering attack ads, but at this point I just have to wonder if those same voters that Quinn needs would just as easily decide to stay home.

Since I am currently on my spring break from school I thought that I’d play around with Dave’s Redistricting App in order to draw what I’d like NJ to have as a congressional map come redistricting. Since Jersey is expected to lose a congressional representative my main goal was to get rid of Scott Garrett’s (R) seat in the 5th district, considering he’s one of my least favorite members of congress. Other goals of mine were to make sure cities and counties were not separated as much as possible, make sure Adler’s (D) 3rd district makes him a safer incumbent (I predict he will win re-election in 2010), and ultimately make the map as realistic as possible. Take a look for yourself and let me know what you think.      

District 1: Rob Andrews (D)

As you can see I pretty much left the 1st district the same and only made minimal changes. My changes included moving the district out of Burlington County and further into Gloucester. This new district voted for Obama with ~64% and has a PVI of ~D+11 (from D+12). Andrews should win re-election easily as he is currently doing so.    

District 2: Frank LoBiondo (R)

Again another district with only minor changes. I moved the second out of Camden, Gloucester,and Burlington Counties and into southern Ocean county. Obama won this new district with ~53% and has a PVI of D+0 (from D+1). This district should be competitive in a good year and a top recruit (Jeff VanDrew comes to mind).  

District 3: John Adler (D)

This is the first district that I put some major changes to. First I kicked the 3rd out of conservative stronghold Ocean county and moved the district to completly cover Burlington county and into Mercer county where it covers about 60% of Trenton. Obama won 60% of this district with a PVI of D+7 (from R+1). This district will be competitive in 2010 but if Alder pulls it off (which I expect) then he will have this safer district to represent.  

District 4: Chris Smith (R)

This is another district where I only made minor changes. I was able to move the 4th district completely out of Mercer and Burlington counties and settle it into both upper Ocean and lower Monmouth counties. This is the first district so far that McCain won with ~57% and has a PVI of R+11 (from R+6). Republicans will win this seat easily and should be considered a safe seat.  

District 5(Former 12): Rush Holt (D)

This is the first district that I drew that is a textbook example of a gerrymandered district (the old district was also). I moved this new Y-shaped district completely out of Hunterdon and Somerset counties and alittle of out Mercer, Monmouth, and Middlesex counties. To make up for these loses I extended the district into Union county where Lance used to represent. This new district voted for Obama with 66% and has a PVI of D+13 (from D+5). This is a safe seat where Holt and future Democratic congress members should win without a major fight.  

District 6: Frank Pallone (D)

As anther seriously gerrymandered district (which was already so) I was able to move the 6th district out of some parts of Monmouth and Middlesex counties and into Union county where it now covers some parts where Lance’s district used to represent. The new district voted for Obama 56% and has a PVI of about D+3 (from D+8). The district is less safe than it used to be but Democrats should still be able to win it fairly easily.

District 7: Leonard Lance (R) Vs. Scott Garrett (R)

When I first tried to redraw the 7th district I tried making it into a Dem friendly district so to make the GOP lose 2 seats instead of 1 in Jersey. But the only way I could have make this happen was to turn is district into one of the worst cases of gerrymandering possible. I decided against this (based on both particle reasons and my dislike of insane gerrymandering) and instead make a super conservative district. This district combines the western portions of both former 5th and 7th districts and includes Sussex, Warren, Hunterdon, and Somerset counties completely and a small portion of Union county. This new district gave McCain a 58% victory and has a PVI of R+12. If this district is drawn there is a large possibility of a GOP primary fight between incumbents Leonard Lance and Scott Garrett where I would expect Lance to win since he would have represented most of the new district. A Lance victory would rid Jersey of the most disliked (I say this generously to Garrett) congressman by Jersey Dems.        

District 8: Bill Pascrell (D)

Now comes time for the district where I currently live. I withdrew the district a tad bit away from Essex County (only a tad) and make it not only go further into suburban Northern Passaic County but also into western Bergan county. Obama won this new district with 60% and has a PVI of D+7 (from D+10). This is a safe blue district and Bill Pascrell (love this guy) will represent this district for as long as he wants (considering he wins suburban towns that votes Republican by over 20 points).

District 9: Steve Rothman (D)

Rothman’s district is pretty much the same with minor changes of moving the district a tad bit out of Jersey City and out of Passaic County (Hawthorne) and into Bergan County. This district voted for Obama with 62% and has a PVI of about D+9 (the same as before).

District 10: Donald Payne (D)

With Payne’s district I was able to move it out of Hudson county completely (allowing Jersey City to be split into only 2 districts instead of 3) and moved it to almost completely cover Essex county. While the district is no longer a vastly Black majority district it still remains a large polarity of the pop. Obama won the district with 78% and has a PVI of D+25 (from D+33).

District 11: Rodney Frelinghuysen (R) vs. Scott Garrett (R)

Now comes the 3rd safest GOP district in the state and probably the most wealthy in Jersey.m The new district has been moved out of Essex, Somerset, and Sussex county competently and put into northern Passaic county and into northern Bergan county. This weirdly shaped gerrymandered district covers the eastern part of the old 5th district and all of Morris county. This district may become a battleground for both Frelinghuysen and Garrett if both choose to run for re-election. I would expect Frelinghuysen to win considering most of the district lays in Morris where Frelinghuysen lives and currently represents and is quit popular. The district voted for McCain with 54% and has a PVI of R+8 (from R+7).

District 12: Albio Sires (D)

Now comes the last district left, the 12th. Only small changes were made such as moving the district further into Jersey City and out of Secaucus and Kearney. The district is 47% Latino and 30% white (down from 56%) making the district minority dominated. Obama won the district with 77% and has a PVI of D+24 (from D+21). This is a safe seat for Dems where a Latino should be expected to represent.

So now that you have seen what I wish to see as Jersey’s new congressional map tell me what you think.        

MSNBC’s First Read Reported this morning that Michigan Democratic Congressman Bart Stupak is considering not running for re-election in 2010.

With just a few days to go before the end of this recess, House Democrats are cautiously optimistic that they could get through it without a single retirement announcement. That said, there is still a concern that some important incumbents in districts that they are uniquely suited could call it quits. At the top of the concern list this week: Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak. The Democrat best known this year as the Democrat who delivered the winning margin of votes for the president’s health-care reform bill is said to be simply exhausted. The criticism he received — first from the left, and then from the right — has worn him and his family out. And if he had to make the decision now, he’d probably NOT run. As of this writing, a bunch of senior Democrats (many of the same ones who twisted his arm on the health care vote) are trying to talk him into running. The filing deadline in Michigan is still a month away, but veterans of that state’s politics are skeptical anyone other than Stupak can hold that district in this political climate.

First, let me start by saying I called Stupak’s office today, but got no answer; I plan to keep calling until I can speak to a real person.  I intend to tell Stupak (well, his staffers) that as a constituent, I would hope that he would not give into the national pressures that are being put on him, and to stand strong and run for re-election.  I plan to let him know that I am a liberal, who supports Single Payer, and that I am not angry with him over the recent healthcare scuffle.  I would vote for Bart Stupak (if I could) one hundred more times, and on a personal, not political level, I would hate to see him retire.

If these rumors are true (let’s hope they aren’t), is First Read correct in saying that Stupak is the only Democrat who can hold the 1st District? No. As astute as Mark Murray is, he does not know the Upper Peninsula of Michigan like I do. It’s true that Bart Stupak is/was extremely popular, but it’s not an Ike Skelton-like situation, where the politician’s personal popularity is the only thing that keeps him or her from being defeated.  In fact, the first district has been consistently more Democratic than the state as a whole in almost every election other than in Presidential elections.  The district easily supported Senators Levin and Stabenow, Governor Granholm, and various other Statewide elected officials.  It also voted for Obama in 2008, albeit by a less-than overwhelming margin.  By my count, there are roughly 6 Democrats who represent a significant portion of the 1st District in the State House of Representatives, compared to only 2 Republicans (only one actually lives in the district).  It appears also that the one and only State Senator who lives in the 1st District is a Democrat (although it does overlap two Republican districts). So, in short, as I’ve said before, the 1st District is not lost without Stupak running, but it will be a tough fight.  

I’ll now go into some potential candidates on both sides

Mike Prusi (D-Ishpeming) – Mike Prusi is my State Senator.  I believe that he could easily win the 1st District seat if he ran.  He is perhaps the most popular politician in the Upper Peninsula, having been re-elected with over 70% of the vote in 2006.  Whether or not he would run is another story. Certainly there would be pressure from national leaders, but a relative of his who I’m friendly with has told me that he wishes to retire from politics in 2010 as he is termed out of the legislature (this was pre-Stupak retirement rumors; retiring would make sense for Prusi otherwise, he really can’t move up any farther).  Politically, despite his popularity with Conservative Democrats and many Republicans, Prusi would be a step up from Stupak. He voted against banning partial birth abortion in all cases (can you imagine Stupak doing that?) and in favor of criminalizing discrimination based on sexual orientation.  And the Unions LOVE Prusi.  He is a former Iron miner and would get tremendous Union Support if he ran.  He is also from Marquette County, the districts largest County, and received 78% of the vote here in 2006.  A Marquette County candidate could really get the vote out here in what is also the district’s most Democratic County.  If Stupak does retire, I think in the end Prusi would win. At 60, however, the hard part would be convincing him to run.

Steve Lindberg (D-Marquette) – Steve Lindberg (AKA Stevie L) is my State Rep. as well as my favorite local politician.  He represents a fairly large district in the central Upper Peninsula that includes the extremely important Marquette County. Again, it would be beneficial to have a candidate from Marquette County, and Lindberg is very popular here. On the other hand, Lindberg will be 66 on election day, and therefore may not be inclined to start a congressional career so late in life. Lindberg would be a tremendous step up over Stupak politically. He hails from the very liberal City of Marquette and is pro-choice, pro-stem cell research, pro-Medical Marijuana, and very pro-environment.  Again, like Prusi, Lindberg would get tremendous Union support as well.  One the other hand, being so liberal may hurt him in the rest of the district, which is much more Conservative than Marquette County.  Lindberg is also not the best Public Speaker, which could hurt him.  I like Lindberg, but he would not be our best candidate for holding the 1st District.

Mike Lahti (D-Hancock) – Mike Lahti is another State Representative from the Upper Peninsula.  Unlike the previous two, Lahti is from the more conservative Western U.P. (Houghton County, to be specific).  Like his district, Lahti is very conservative.  As a result of his conservatism, however, Lahti is very popular in the 110th District.  This area is normally a swing area, having gone very narrowly for Obama but comfortably for Bush twice.  If Lahti ran, he would certainly run the table in his district, and probably perform well in Marquette County; His conservativism may also resonate well in the Lower Peninsula, which is politically similar to his district. As a liberal and a progressive, however, I really don’t want to see someone who is more conservative than Stupak replace him. I would support Lahti in the general election, but only reluctantly.  One indication that Lahti may not run, however, is that he has already filed to replace Mike Prusi in the 38th Senate District (Prusi is term limited, remember). Lahti is not opposed by any Democrat as of yet, and would likely move easily up to the Senate, whereas a Congressional Campaign would be more of an up-hill battle.  If he did run, however, I suspect Lahti could potentially hold Stupak’s seat for the Democrats (or in his case, ConservaDems).

Judy Nerat (D-Wallace) – Judy Nerat is Bart Stupak’s State Represenative.  She is also a close Stupak ally, and her 2008 win had a lot to do with Congressman Stupak’s strong support of her campaign.  The 108th District is very heavily Catholic, and like Stupak, Nerat’s political views have a lot to do with her Catholicism; She is quite Conservative, and again, like Stupak, she is Pro-Life.  Stupak may like to see her move up to Congress, but she’s only in her first term in the State House, and has little other political experience. She was also recently diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a type of cancer.  For these reasons I think a Nerat run for Congress is not very likely in the case of an open seat.  

There are many other Democrats who may decide to run here, should the above decline.  Former Senator Don Koivisto (D-Gogebic) who served from 1990-2002 and who is now the Director of the Michigan Department of Agriculture. Koivisto might be a candidate worth looking at, and he is only 60.  Other candidates include former State Rep. and current State House Clerk Rich Brown (D-Bessemer), State Rep. Gary McDowell (D-Rudyard), though McDowell is already running for the State Senate in the 37th District, Former Rep. Matthew Gillard (D-Alpena), Current Rep. Andy Neumann (D-Alpena), former Rep. Steven Adamini (D-Marquette), though Adamini has had some Drunk-driving arrests that wouldn’t play well, and Marquette County Commission Chair Gerald Corkin (D-Negaunee).

You may notice that I did not mention already announced candidate Connie Saltonstall.  This was intentional.  Saltonstall, from my perspective, is far to liberal for the 1st District.  Not only that, but she has little political experience.  She also hails from the Lower Peninsula, which makes it nearly impossible for her to win (a candiate must have a UP base to win here).  I’ll do what I can to ensure that Saltonstall is not the nominee, should Stupak retire.

and now for the Republicans:

Tom Casperson (R-Gladstone) – Casperson, who you may remember ran against Stupak in 2008 and epicly failed, is now running for Mike Prusi’s State Senate seat.  He is a distinct underdog against Mike Lahti, and likely knows this.  If Stupak does retire, Casperson may decide to try for Congress again instead.  In an open seat he could make a race of it, especially against a lackluster Democrat.

Other potential Republican candidates include State Rep. Kevin Elsenheimer, and….well that’s about it for elected officials.  There are a few Republicans who’ve already filed, but they fall into the category of “Some Guy.”

So yes, if Stupak does retire, it will be a close race. Probably a tossup. But the seat is not “gone” without Stupak; far from it.  There is a deep bench of Democrats who have the potential to retain this seat, as well as a very very shallow bench of Republicans.  In any other year, I’d say this race was Leans Democrat, but unfortunately 2010 is shaping up to be a bad year for Dems, so I’m calling it a tossup.

AZ-Sen: From the Good News for John McCain Dept.: Fresh off the news that he won’t face a primary challenge from fellow Dem Nan Stockholm Walden, Tucson City Councilman Rodney Glassman resigned his seat in order to officially launch his run against Johnny Mac… or J.D. Hayworth, if we’re lucky.

DE-Sen: Mike Castle has hit the un-sweet spot: His repeal-curious approach to healthcare reform has “irritated” some teabaggers (their word), but of course it also risks turning off some of the moderate voters he’ll need to win over in order to prevail. Of course, if Chris Coons has any chops, he should be able to work up the Dem base over Castle’s “no” vote on the bill itself.

WA-Sen: The DSCC launched some attack site against Dino Rossi last week – does anyone ever visit those? – and now Rossi is complaining about the site’s contents. The Hotline says it makes him “sound like a candidate.” To me, he sounds more like a whiner. Like I say, I doubt anyone actually reads those sites.

CA-Gov: Peter Schurman, a founder of MoveOn.org, says he plans to challenge Jerry Brown in the Democratic primary.

CT-04: Easton First Selectman and Republican congressional hopeful Tom Herrmann says he raised $383K in his first 23 days in the race, and also has $365K on hand. But here’s what I’m not getting: In his intro press release, he said he started the race with $300K in the bank. The only way that’s possible, it would seem, is with a self-donation or loan. So there may be less here than meets the eye, in terms of fundraising prowess.

FL-13: Air Force veteran and Dem Rick Eaton says he’ll challenge GOP Rep. Vern Buchanan. He joins James Golden in the primary field.

FL-22: Some creepy comments from GOPer Allen West about his opponent Rep. Ron Klein, telling a gang of teabaggers:

Make the fellow scared to come out of his house. That’s the only way that you’re going to win. That’s the only way you’re going to get these people’s attention. You’ve got to put pressure on them and make them understand that you’ve got to come back and live the laws that you establish. Don’t let them be a ruling class elite. You’ve got to let them know that the clock’s ticking.

GA-07: Winger talk radio host Jody Hice plans to join the GOP field to replace retiring Rep. John Linder.

HI-01: So the DCCC is in fact getting into the race… at least, with an ad hitting Republican Charles Djou. P’co says the buy is about $34,000 –  just a toe-dip.

IL-10: Whoa mama joe: Dan Seals says he raised $663K in Q1 and has $460K on hand. (The low-ish CoH figures are undoubtedly due to the February primary election.) GOPer Bob Dold! did well, too, taking in $505K ($378K on hand), but Seals sure wins bragging rights for this quarter.

NY-15: Charlie Rangel is getting another primary challenger: Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV, son of Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., the guy Charlie Rangel ousted in a primary in 1970. The younger Powell challenged Rangel once before, in 1994, losing 58-33.

VA-11: Fairfax County Supervisor Pat Herrity is touting an internal poll from the Tarrance Group of 400 likely Republican voters showing him with a 42-21 primary lead over businessman Keith Fimian. There don’t appear to be any general election numbers showing matchups against Rep. Gerry Connolly.

RNC: So the RNC had a gangbusters fundraising month in March, raking in $11.4 mil. Bully for them. But what’s odd is that they’re released this information yesterday – a full two weeks before monthly FEC reports are due. This is not the normal practice of the RNC (or any party committee), which typically only puts out nums much closer to the 20th of each month. Undoubtedly, the embattled Michael Steele had his green eyeshade guys working around the clock in the hopes that a good financial press release would take some heat off of him. Not working.

The last item on 4/6 Afternoon Daily Digest about the relative popularity of “socialism” and Teabaggers got me thinking. If the GOP (or at least right-wing activists and opinion makers) is willing and eager to embrace the tea-party movement, why is it that Democrats continue to treat “socialism” as toxic? Certainly, its a losing proposition nationally (no Democratic candidate for president should EVER call themselves ‘socialist’). In some parts of the country though, my hunch is that progressives/liberals/Democrats/the left ought to revisit their assumption that ‘socialism’ is to American politics as oil is to water.

The question I’m exploring here is:

Where might ‘socialism’ have either 50+ favorablity, or at least net postitive favorability?

The Gallop poll referenced here (http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/socialism-viewed-positively-americans.aspx) was taken in January 2010. It found socialism at 36-58 overall, but at 53-41 among Democrats, and and 61-34 among liberals. Using Gallop’s own data on party affiliation and ideology by state (http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx), we can extrapolate views of socialism state by state:

DC (adjusted by ideology): 41/48

DC (adjusted by party affiliation): 47/47

MA (by ideology): 38/53

MA (by party): 40/54

VT-ideology: 39/53

VT-party: 39/54

NY-ideology: 37/53

NY-party: 39/55

OR-ideology: 37/54

OR-party: 37/56

CT-ideology: 37/54

CT-party: 38/55

RI-ideology: 37/54

RI-party: 40/53

HI-ideology: 38/52

HI-party: 39/54

MD-ideology: 37/54

MD-party: 39/54

I’ll stop here. The states (and district) that I tested here are a few of the most left-leaning out there, yet only in DC under one method did I find socialism not to be a net negative, and only in DC did I not find it to be over 50% unfavorable. So unfortunately, the numbers don’t support my hypothesis. A few concluding thoughts on this:

– My calculations assume that opinions of socialism are uniform nationwide among parties and ideological groups. This may not necessarily be true, but without state-by-state data on this question, I think this was the best I could do.

– My guess is that views of socialism correlate more strongly to ideology than to party affiliation. In practice though, the numbers are similar regardless of which method you use.

– The party and ideology data are from 2009. I think this may be a good thing though, since 2009 was in between a good year for Democrats and a bad one, so 2009 may be the year with data that best reflects the “starting point.”

– A major problem that socialism has is that, in political terms, it has been defined by its opponents. No one (except perhaps for Bernie Sanders) in mainstream American political discourse ever sticks up for socialism. On the other hand, Republicans bash it constantly. Additionally, many Americans probably associate it with communism and the Eastern Bloc. Perhaps if the left made an investment in trying to “sell” socialism to the public, these numbers would improve.

– A fundamental assumption that I have made, that a socialist would only be electable if socialism has a net positive favorability rating, is probably wrong on its face. Vermont, for example, elected a Socialist Senator despite socialism having a net rating of minus 14 or 15 there. Many self described Liberals hold statewide office in America, despite liberals being only 20-30% of the electorate in any given state, and nationally.

– Related to the point above, Socialism actually seems to be viewed favorably by a larger percentage of the electorate than the percentage identifying themselves as Liberal. This holds true both nationally and in every state I tested.

– In the long run, running away from labels isn’t a viable strategy. The American Left has been running away from the word “Liberal” ever since the 80s. People have thought its cute to call themselves “Progressives” instead, and Glenn Beck’s recent paranoid tirades against Progressivism are a consequence of that. What’s the next word we’re all going to flee to now that conservatives are saying bad things about “Progressivism”?

– I really don’t like the term “Liberal”. Not because it doesn’t poll well, but because its actually really inaccurate. At least on economic policy, Conservatives are far more “liberal” than “Liberals” are. “Progressive” is probably better, because it implies a belief in using government as an instrument of social progress, but again, I don’t like the way that term is used by people who are afraid being called “Liberal”.

– I consider myself a Socialist, or more specifically, a Social Democrat. This doesn’t mean I believe in Marx, revolution, the abolishment of capitalism, or anything else crazy like that. It means I believe in government as a means to establish a better, fairer society. I believe Big Government is not inherently good or bad, its what you make of it. I believe the free market is generally good, but never perfect, and that the job of Government is to fill the gaps of capitalism that too many people would otherwise fall through. My views are most in line with the Canadian NDP, or the UK Labour Party (pre-Blair and “New Labour”). I support single-payer health insurance, strong bank regulation, and cap-and-trade, but I believe in compromise. I’m a proud Democrat, I don’t do anything stupid like voting Green, I support Obama, and think “liberal No” votes are counterproductive. Were I in Congress, I would have proudly voted yes on the health care bill. I don’t think I have radical views (by international standards I’m center-left), yet the word that describes them best is politically taboo in America.

– As a “bonus”, I ran the numbers two more times, first on New York according to the 2008 exit polls, which I thought have somewhat better results (41-53 by ideology, 38-54 by party). Secondly, I tried my hometown of New York City, using numbers from this (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=c4719d83-23d9-4e1d-95a6-975f4e2562e4) poll from last year’s mayoral election. Here I found 37/46 by ideology, and 43/50 by party. I think its worth noting that opposition to socialism is at or under 50% here.

Final Conclusion: Socialism probably doesn’t poll as well as I would have liked to see. Nonetheless, it seems to outperform Liberalism, and the stigma attached to it thus seems highly disproportionate. A candidate would almost certainly prefer to call himself a Liberal than a Socialist, yet this suggest that the “S” word is probably less of a liability than the “L” word. Certainly, a “Socialist” candidate should not have a hard time winning a Democratic Primary in areas where the Democratic nomination is tantamount to election.

Which dude? This Dude:

Multiple Democratic sources now confirm that party chairs decided Monday night that Matthew Zeller is their candidate should a special election to replace Rep. Eric Massa take place. […]

Zeller, 28, is a Rochester area native with family throughout the 29th Congressional District and roots in the Southern Tier.  Zeller is an ’04 alum of Hamilton College and also earned master’s degrees in public administration and international relations from the Maxwell School at Syracuse University in ’06 according to a recent news release from Hamilton College.

Also according to that release Zeller worked as an embedded combat mentor to the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police while on deployment in 2008.  Zeller, a friend tells me, got the urge to enlist in the Army following the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.  While attending college he was a member of the ROTC program.

Assuming David Paterson calls a special election (which seems to be an unlikely turn of events at this point, but you never know), Zeller will be the guy. However, if there’s no special, Zeller will still have to compete for the Democratic nomination in the September primary. At this point, it’s unclear if he’ll get any competition, but Monroe County Democratic Party spokesman Sean Hart is telling the Politico that the local parties are discouraging anyone from challenging Zeller.

I’m not sure what in particular gave Zeller the edge, but I’m looking forward to hearing more about him.

(Hat-tip: tietack)

• AZ-Sen: Maybe she was scared off by that R2K poll that had her down more than 20-odd points? Nan Stockholm Walden, a wealthy attorney and businesswoman who had been the subject of DSCC interest as a candidate in Arizona, decided not to run. That gives Tucson city councilor Rodney Glassman a pretty clear path to the nomination (assuming he runs; he’s still in exploratory mode).

• CT-Sen: Did you know that Linda McMahon actually held (until now) a political position, in addition to, of course, all the important work she does at WWE? She was on Connecticut’s Board of Education (an appointed position, courtesy of Jodi Rell), but just resigned from that role. She says that there are too many restrictions on political activities by board members for her to be able to remain in that position, as she tries to get the GOP Senate nomination.

• SD-Sen: John Thune may have dodged having to run against a Democrat in November, but he won’t be running purely unopposed. He’s still facing off against an independent, perennial candidate Kurt Evans.

• WI-Sen, WI-Gov: I had no idea that St. Norbert was the patron saint of fucked-up polls. A poll from Wisconsin Public Radio/St. Norbert College is tilted even further in the Republican direction than recent offerings from Rasmussen and the decidedly conservative Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. They find Russ Feingold losing to Tommy Thompson 45-33 (with 14% for an independent/third party, whoever that might be), and beating Generic R by only 40-37. Their gubernatorial numbers find Tom Barrett losing to Scott Walker 44-28 and to Mark Neumann 43-29. Even the GOP primary numbers seem screwy, with underdog Neumann almost even with Walker, who leads 24-23.

• CA-Gov: Meg Whitman rummaged around in her purse and found another $20 million to throw on the table, bringing her personal contributions to the race up to a whopping $59 million. Despite her big lead over Steve Poizner in the primary, she may need to prepare to shore things up, as Poizner has been telegraphing that he’s going to start going hard at her on the hot-button issue of immigration, in a last-ditch effort to get the state’s right-wingers to pay some attention to him.

• GA-12: There were some poorly sourced rumors yesterday that Rep. John Barrow — a conservadem in a swing district facing a primary challenge and the ire of a large swath of his African-American constituency after his HCR “no” vote — was going to switch parties. Barrow now says he was never even contemplating that, though.

• KS-03: After the Kansas City Star reported last week that Stephene Moore was going to run to replace her husband, Dennis, in the 3rd, she started acting coy about it (despite insider assurances that it was a done deal). As expected, though, today she made it official, filing a glaring hole in this R+3 open seat.

• LA-03: It looks like the NRCC is finally getting a top-tier participant in the open seat race in the 3rd (despite that winning it won’t be much of a prize, as the 3rd is poised to vaporize in 2012 redistricting). Former state House speaker Hunt Downer says he’ll announce his candidacy very soon. Probably the surest indication that Downer is serious is that state Rep. Nickie Monica, who may have been the strongest GOPer in the field to date, now says he’s getting out of the race to make way for Downer. With attorney Ravi Sangisetty the only Dem willing to stick his neck out for this one, this one’s pretty thoroughly in the GOP column.

• MN-06: State Sen. Tarryl Clark has been putting up some monster fundraising numbers against Michele Bachmann this cycle; I guess that’s what happens when you run against one of the nation’s top lightning rods for teh crazy. She pulled in $505K last quarter, bringing her to $1.1 million in total receipts this cycle. Unfortunately, Clark (or her primary opponent Maureen Reed, who’s also raised well but hasn’t released Q1 numbers yet) will likely have to contend with the presence of spoiler Independence Party candidate Bob Anderson. Anderson pulled in 10% of the vote in 2008 (while Elwyn Tinklenberg lost by only 3%), and he’s seeking the IP’s endorsement again.

• NH-01: RNC committee member Sean Mahoney made a big show out of resigning his post, ostensibly out of disgust with the Michael Steele administration and its free-spending, strip-clubbing ways. Speculation, though, is that Mahoney is planning to run in the GOP primary in the 1st (where Manchester mayor Frank Guinta is considered frontrunner, although so-so fundraising has diminished his luster a bit), which would require him to resign anyway. Mahoney isn’t promising anything on that front yet, though.

• NY-29: The Democrats have literally chosen Some Dude as their standard bearer in the 29th. The party chairs in the eight counties in the district issued a statement where they said they’ve chosen a consensus nominee to replace Eric Massa in the special election that may or may not happen. However, they neglected to actually say who that candidate might be. We’ll know the masked man’s identity next week.

• TN-03: A Huck divided against itself cannot stand? In a prime example of one hand not knowing what the other is doing, HuckPAC (Mike Huckabee’s national financial arm) and Team Huck Tennessee (the local grassroots operation) are endorsing different candidates in the GOP primary in the 3rd. Team Huck is endorsing former state GOP chair Robin Smith, while HuckPAC (and presumably, Huckabee himself) is going with attorney Chuck Fleischmann.

• TN-08: State Sen. Roy Herron had another fine fundraising quarter as he tries to keep this open seat in Democratic hands; he pulled in $490K last quarter, leaving him with more than $1 million cash on hand. It’s not an expensive district, media-wise, but he has some strong fundraising competition from humble gospel-singing farmer agribusiness mogul Stephen Fincher, who pulled in over $300K himself and is sitting on $820K CoH.

• PA-St. Sen.: As if the Pennsylvania legislature couldn’t be held in any lower esteem, here’s another fresh scandal. Luckily, this one seems to be falling on the Republican side of the aisle: state Sen. Jane Orie, the body’s third-ranking GOPer, was just accused by a grand jury of repeatedly using her staff for political campaigns on the state’s dime (include the campaign of her sister, state Supreme Court justice Joan Orie Melvin). Charges are expected, but Orie is shrugging it off, saying it’s a politically motivated smear by Democratic Allegheny Co. DA Stephen Zappala.

• Filings: The filing deadline in Missouri has passed, on March 30. Rep. Roy Blunt wound up with (count ’em) 10 Republican primary opponents in the Senate race, although state Sen. Chuck Purgason seems the only one worth paying attention to. The number of GOPers vying to take on Ike Skelton in MO-04 also reached the double digits. Probably the biggest surprise and disappointment was in MO-09: not that the DCCC would likely have strongly contested this district that they barely lost in 2008 when it was open, but not a single Democrat showed up to run in this race.

• Teabaggers: Here’s a nice catch from Ruy Teixeira: teabagging is about as popular as socialism. In slightly-differently-worded questions from two different 2010 polls, Gallup found that 37% had a favorable opinion of “the Tea Party movement” (including 14% of Democrats), while 36% had a positive image of “socialism” (including 17% of Republicans?!?).