Tag: 2008 Elections

As always, crossposted at BlueNC and DailyKos.

One of the most commonly asked questions about Brad Miller running for Senate against Elizabeth Dole is from people who dont think Brad Miller can win statewide. 

How can I answer this question?

I could wax poetic about Brad’s abilities to appeal to voters statewide.  Or I could tell you things about him that make me think that he can talk to rural voters and voters in a big city.

And then you could give me all the reasons you disagree.  But where would that leave us?

The only way I can think of objectively answering this is to offer an analysis of Brad’s past election results.  For reference I have included a map of Brad’s district.  This district was drawn for a Democrat to win, but it is only slightly Democratic.  Cook has its PVI as D+2.

As you can see, NC-13 contains all of Caswell and Person counties.  It also encompasses large portions of Granville and Rockingham counties.  All 4 of these counties are rather rural, and Republican.  Although the most Republican areas of the county are excluded from NC-13, they do not add up to many people.  These 4 counties are especially important because their rural nature means they are very similar to other areas throughout the state that Brad must be competitive in to beat Dole.

To the numbers.

For this analysis, I looked at Brad’s results in these 4 counties in 2002 compared to the numbers from the Bowles v Dole race in 2002, and Brad’s results in 2004 compared to both Bowles and Kerry/Edwards.

2002
Granville County
Brad Miller 4,236
Carolyn Grant 3,759

Erskine Bowles 6,146
Elizabeth Dole 5,511

Person County
Brad Miller 5,054
Carolyn Grant 4,589

Erskine Bowles 4,444
Elizabeth Dole 5,873

Caswell County
Brad Miller 4,113
Carolyn Grant 2,320

Erskine Bowles 3,615
Elizabeth Dole 3,049

Rockingham County
Brad Miller 12,005
Carolyn Grant 9,965

Erskine Bowles 12,062
Elizabeth Dole 13,899

2004
Granville County
Brad Miller 7,184
Virginia Johnson 5,955

Erskine Bowles 9,806
Richard Burr 8,447

George Bush 9,491
John Kerry 9,057

Person County
Brad Miller 8,399
Virginia Johnson 6,291

Erskine Bowles 6,701
Richard Burr 8,212

George Bush 8,973
John Kerry 6,198

Caswell County
Brad Miller 5,737
Virginia Johnson 3,374

Erskine Bowles 4,737
Richard Burr 4,559

George Bush 4,868
John Kerry 4,539

Rockingham County
Brad Miller 16,580
Virginia Johnson 15,525

Erskine Bowles 15,435
Richard Burr 21,224

George Bush 22,840
John Kerry 14,430

So, what does that all mean?
Personally, I think the numbers speak for themselves.  In these 4 counties, the combined vote totals for 2002 show Brad winning by about 4800 votes.  Dole won those same counties by a little over 2000 votes.  In 2004, Brad won these 4 counties by 6800 votes.  Bowles lost them by 5800 and Kerry lost by almost 12,000 votes.

These are not tiny little swings.  Brad won his race by about the same percentage as Dole beat Bowles.  Yet, in these specific rural areas, he did even better Dole did.  Obviously the differences between all of these races is rather large.  Bowles v Dole garnered national attention, and was incredibly expensive.  By comparison, Brad spent under a million dollars in 2002 with his opponent spending about 400,000 dollars.

These details about the nature of these races can explain a lot of this.  However, to me these results show that Brad can win over rural voters.  In fact, I wont just say that Sherrod Brown proved you can win a swing state while being proud about your progressive values.  I will say that Brad himself has already proved that a progressive who doesnt hide from his record can win in rural North Carolina.

Now, I understand that many will not be convinced by these results.  Some will say that Brad cant win votes in rural areas until November 4th.  However, I hope that those that are unsure will find my collection of data convincing.  If you do, please think about sending 5 dollars to the draft page on ActBlue.

Hot on the heels of the DSCC’s newest poll showing Texas Sen. John Cornyn in a weak position for his re-election bid, here’s a blast from Texas’ recent past:

I wanna meet the marketing genius who came up with these.  Truly powerful stuff.

(H/T: trowaman)

Race Tracker: TX-Sen

The 2008 elections won’t only be notable for electing a Democratic President. The 2008 house races will give us a rare opportunity to increase our majority as well as test our defence.

It is great then to see candidates bobbing up and announcing so early in the cycle.

And the news on the filing front is great, courtesy of the 2008 Race Tracker Wiki. Take a look also at DCCritters.

Below the fold for all the news.
(cross posted at MyDD and Daily Kos)

277 races filled! six in the last 2 weeks alone. This of course includes 233 districts held by Democratic Congresscritters (yeh yeh I know some will not run but I am assuming we will find candidates in those districts!)

But we also have 44 GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic opponents.

So without further ado:
1) The GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic challengers are as follows:
AZ-02,
AZ-03,
AR-03,
CA-04,
CA-26,
CA-41, [In the event of a special election but he will run in 2008 methinks!]
CA-48,
CT-04,
FL-01,
FL-09,
FL-13, [Either through the House of Reps investigation or Jennings has committed to another run.]
FL-21,
FL-25,
GA-10 [SPECIAL ELECTION JUNE 19TH],
ID-01,
IL-10,
IL-14,
IN-06,
IA-04,
IA-05,
MI-07,
MN-06,
MO-09,
MT-AL,
NE-02,
NV-03,
NJ-07,
NJ-11,
NM-02,
NY-25,
NY-29,
NC-08,
NC-09,
OH-02,
OH-07,
OH-15,
PA-03,
PA-15,
TX-04,
TX-08,
TX-13,
VA-06,
WA-08,
WI-01,

2) The following 3 GOP held districts have candidates that are expected to run but are yet to confirm:
NJ-05,
OH-01,
OH-14,

3) We also have the following 37 GOP held districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!
AL-01,
AL-04,
AK-AL,
AZ-01,
AZ-06,
CA-03,
CA-42,
CA-45,
CO-04,
DE-AL,
FL-06,
FL-12,
KY-05,
MI-09,
MN-02,
MO-06,
NE-03,
NJ-02,
NJ-03,
NJ-04,
NM-01,
NY-03,
NY-13,
NY-26,
NC-03,
OH-16,
PA-06,
PA-18,
TN-07,
TX-02,
TX-03,
TX-10,
TX-14,
UT-03,
VA-01,
VA-11,
WV-02,

4) And last but not least the following 118 districts have not a single rumoured candidate:
AL-02,
AL-03,
AL-06,
CA-02,
CA-19,
CA-21,
CA-22,
CA-24,
CA-25,
CA-40,
CA-44,
CA-46,
CA-49,
CA-50,
CA-52,
CO-05,
CO-06,
FL-04,
FL-05,
FL-07,
FL-08,
FL-10,
FL-14,
FL-15,
FL-18,
FL-24,
GA-01,
GA-03,
GA-06,
GA-07,
GA-09,
GA-11,
ID-02,
IL-06,
IL-11,
IL-13,
IL-15,
IL-16,
IL-18,
IL-19,
IN-03,
IN-04,
IN-05,
KS-01,
KS-04,
KY-01,
KY-02,
KY-04,
LA-01,
LA-04,
LA-05,
LA-06,
LA-07,
MD-01,
MD-06,
MI-02,
MI-03,
MI-04,
MI-06,
MI-08,
MI-10,
MI-11,
MI-12,
MN-03,
MS-01,
MS-03,
MO-02,
MO-07,
MO-08,
NE-02,
NV-02,
NY-23,
NC-05,
NC-06,
NC-10,
OH-03,
OH-04,
OH-05,
OH-08,
OH-12,
OK-01,
OK-03,
OK-04,
OK-05,
OR-02,
PA-05,
PA-09,
PA-16,
PA-19,
SC-01,
SC-02,
SC-03,
SC-04,
TN-01,
TN-02,
TN-03,
TX-01,
TX-05,
TX-06,
TX-11,
TX-12,
TX-19,
TX-21,
TX-24,
TX-26,
TX-31,
TX-32,
UT-01,
VA-02,
VA-04,
VA-05,
VA-07,
VA-10,
WA-04,
WA-05,
WI-05,
WI-06,
WY-AL,

Please note that in some races others at the racetracker site have confirmed candidates that I haven’t. This is because to satisfy me a confirmed candidate has either filed with the FEC, The Sec of State or has an active campaign website, or even if they come and blog and say yep I am running. Others are not so rigorous.

Praise to those states where we allready have a full slate of house candidates – Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota and Vermont
Praise also to those State parties that have obviously been very aggressive in candidate recruitment. Ohio and Florida for instance have nearly full slates.

Tips, rumours and whatnot in the comments please.

Earlier today, A former CEO of Qwest was found guilty of illegal stock trading.  He was convicted for illegally selling 52 million dollars in stock.

The conviction comes on 19 counts of insider trading.

This story has a great recap of the whole history of the story.

Why does this matter for Elizabeth Dole?  After all Joseph Nacchio gave to candidates of a few different ideologies.

He gave money to a few Democrats and a few Republicans.  But, there is a tiny little detail.

Since 1994 Mr Nacchio gave 10 contributions totaling $7,500 to various sources.

But, there is a tiny little detail.  Four of those eleven contributions were to Elizabeth Dole.  These contributions total $4,000.  That number doesnt include the extra $1000 that Qwest’s PAC gave to Dole in 2006.  It also does not include the $1000 that the wife of Mr Nacchio gave to Dole in 2001.

Although the media might try to spend it, it is very obvious that a convicted criminal has supported her more than any other candidate.  Of the 7500 dollars that he has given to politicians, he gave Elizabeth Dole 4 times more than any other candidate.

Now, I wont try to figure out why a CEO of a Colorado company that reports his address as being in either CO or NJ (depending on the day apparently).

What I will question is, Is Senator Dole proud of accepting money from modern day robber barons?

In 2002 Dole accepted $1000 from both Mr and Mrs Kenneth Lay  She also took $1028 from the Enron PAC during the 2002 cycle.

Abramoff could only be bothered to give $1000 to Dole.  Money she claims is being given to charity.

However, in 2006, while head of the NRSC, she refused to give the almost $400,000 from Abramoff and his associates to charity.

However, I did an extensive search of the FEC report filed by Elizabeth Dole in the first quarter of 2006.  I found nothing.  Not a single donation to any charity.  Just normal campaign amounts.

Today I am asking that she donate every penny received from this convicted felon to charity.  Additionally, we demand that some actual proof be given that the money from both Abramoff and Nacchio was indeed sent to charity.

We will not allow her to hide behind the facade of these donations being from 5 years ago.  The simple fact is that a criminal is a criminal.  We will not accept money from criminals to influence our Senator.

Give it back Senator Dole.  Give it Back.

(From the diaries. – promoted by James L.)

Numbers courtesy of The Washington Post and the Senate 2008 Guru.

January ’07
DSCC: $2.2 million
NRSC: $0.9 million

February ’07
DSCC: $2.7 million
NRSC: $2.4 million

March ’07
DSCC: $8.8 million
NRSC: $3.7 million

Q1 Take
DSCC: $13.7 million
NRSC: $ 7.0 million

Cash-on-hand at end of March ’07
DSCC: $9.50 million ($6 million debt)
NRSC: $3.45 million ($0 debt)

Observations:
1) DSCC had a better March than the NRSC had for its entire Q1
2) DSCC’s cash-on-hand advantage is larger than the debt difference (so let’s pay off some of that debt and get it out of the way!)
3) Who has the momentum is clear.

I didn’t expect to be writing any diaries about the Massachusetts Senate Race, but I have been suspecting for some time that John Kerry might be wearing out his welcome. And now, according to a Suffolk University Poll, it appears to be just the case.

Senator John Kerry, who recently left the door open to a Presidential bid in 2008, could have problems staying in the US Senate.  When voters were asked whether Kerry should run for another six-year term in 2008 or if it is time to give someone else a chance, just 37% indicated that he should seek re-election while 56% said that it was time to give someone else a chance. Among political parties: 76% of Republicans, 62% of Independents, and 39% of registered Democrats said that it was time to give someone else a chance.

“This poll is showing us the early warning signs of a political storm for John Kerry,” said Paleologos.  “He may best be served by coming home to Massachusetts and taking care of business.”

Personally, I don’t think that coming home will be enough because Kerry has had a tough time before, and I’m not talking about 2006. Even before his legendary race against William Weld, he ran into a touch one six years earlier against James Rappaport who was, for a while, able to paint Kerry as a do-nothing Dukakis clone. Kerry fought his way partially helped by the fact that it was a Democratic year (and an excellent debate). What he has going for him heading into 2008 is a limp Republican Party with no one put against him. However, Massachusetts has never warmed to him the way they have with Ted Kennedy. If the Republicans somehow find someone al a Weld, he could be in serious trouble. It may be time for him to stand down.

In every cycle, the DSCC has a handful of targets that it aggressively focuses on, along with any Democratic Senators that might be deemed vulnerable.  However, there are also those races that escape the DSCC’s radar for a little while (or a long while) and are vehemently trumpeted by the netroots and grassroots.  My question is, in those cases of netroots and grassroots joining hands and backing a candidate, how effective do these efforts tend to be?  Or are there not enough examples, due to the young lifespan of the netroots, to really know for sure? 

We all point out (correctly, I might add, as many have praised these efforts, including DSCC Chair Schumer) that Jon Tester and Jim Webb were greatly benefited by the efforts of the netroots/grassroots – “people powered”-candidates, if you will.  So, if 2006 was a starting point, can these types of efforts be effectively spread out to several states?  How early do they need to begin and what tools are most useful in persuading a potential candidate to make the jump?  Or are draft movements even the best way to go about getting an attractive candidate in?  Also, in presidential years it seems that the most well-known possibilities in red states are very cautious about jumping in, so these movements seem to focus on less conventional nominees, am I correct in that observation?  I will run down what I believe to the DSCC’s current top priorities, races that have heir apparents upon the retirement of an incumbent, and then 7 races that I believe would benefit from a candidate in the mold of Senators Tester and Webb.

It seems that the DSCC has five definite targets, at this point in the cycle, although each race has different dynamics going on.

COLORADO – Mark Udall, who seems well on his way to a cleared primary.

MAINE – Tom Allen, is expected to announce shortly and will also have no serious opposition.

NEW HAMPSHIRE – Steve Marchand and Katrina Swett are already announced candidates but could defer if the DSCC is successful in getting Jeanne Shaheen to run.  Either way, this will remain a top pick-up opportunity.

MINNESOTA – Al Franken and Mike Ciresi are in, however, there remains the possibility of an announcement being made by a state legislator.

OREGON – Speaking of draft movements, a very well-known one is underway to convince Pete DeFazio to make the jump.  In the meantime, Steve Novick has announced and, if DeFazio declines, Earl Blumenauer will be the next to be courted by the DSCC.

Those five races seem to be DSCC targets and will probably remain among their top priorities throughout the cycle.

Then there are these next four seats that could possibly become open and, in that event, likely gain heavy attention from the DSCC.

VIRGINIA – Mark Warner has been making waves about getting in and John Warner has been making waves about getting out.

NEW MEXICO – Richardson will either be on the ticket or Sec. of State, Udall or Chavez seem to only jump if it’s indeed open, Homans seems intent on going after Wilson, but Madrid might make the jump.

NEBRASKA – If Hagel is out, Fahey seems to be in.  If Fahey declines, then expect a netroots-driven draft movement to get Scott Kleeb to run.

MISSISSIPPI – It seems a little less likely that Cochran will retire, but Mike Moore goes in if he does.

That leaves what I believe to be a group of seven states that have incumbents that might be more vulnerable than pundits seem to believe and are also ripe for “people powered”-candidates in the mold of a Tester or a Webb. In fact, many of these states already have draft movements underway.  In the other four, I’m seeking information on whether a draft movement would even work in those states and, if so, what potential candidates (but still realistic) would be able to knock off the incumbent.

1)  NORTH CAROLINA – Brad Miller.  A draft movement has been going on for months (led by blue south, I believe) and seems to be gaining much traction.  Miller has recently stated having serious interest in the race.

2)  ALABAMA – Ron Sparks.  Sparks was mentioned in Schumer’s advice thread at dKos and has been the center of much attention since.  He also has shown interest and will make an announcement,  regarding his decision, soon.

3)  TEXAS – Rick Noriega.  Also a subject of netroots support.  The Texas House is currently in session, so, understandably, no announcement is expected until after May, from any Texas legislators.

Then there are the four states that a populist candidate could make it a competitive election.

4)  OKLAHOMA – The big names (Henry, Edmondson, Boren) have been contacted and declined, for various reasons.  State Senator Andrew Rice would be a great prospect for a draft movement.  Are there any indications he’s open to it?

5)  TENNESSE – Bredesen either thinks he’s on someone’s VP list, or doesn’t want to leave his office open to the GOP Senate Pres.  If Ford doesn’t jump in, would there be any chance of persuading Nashville mayor Bill Purcell to get in?  Are there any other Tennessee Dems that have been under the radar, but would be great for this race?

6)  KENTUCKY – Any progress on the U.S. Senate race will probably have to wait until the gubernatorial primary is over.  Who do Kentuckians want to see in this race?  Is Owen really the assumed nominee?

7)  GEORGIA – After Saxby’s distasteful 02 campaign, it would seem that this race would be getting more attention.  Anyone heard of attorney Jim Butler’s plans?

Others:
IDAHO – Larry LaRocco is our nominee, whether Craig is the nominee or not.

ALASKA – I wish Mark Begich could be persuaded to make this race, even if just for the added benefits of higher name ID for the 2010 race against Lisa Murkowski.

WYOMING, KANSAS, and SOUTH CAROLINA – No clue on any of these three.  Trauner might go for a House rematch, Sebelius won’t go for it, and I have no real knowledge about SC politics, so there’s that, lol.

So, what say you?  Are the seven races I identified actual possibilities?  Are there potential candidates that have been showing any level of interest, not just being mentioned as pipe dreams?  I know that we should all be backing our candidates, even if they are already going to have the full-backing of the DSCC, but it seems that if the more “longshot” of races were the ones that the grassroots and netroots spent most of their attention on, that would benefit all involved and expand our playing field.

I know I haven’t said anything that hasn’t already been touched upon, but I am just really interested in how candidates are drafted into the tougher races and how much success such efforts are met with.

(Also, this is my first diary, so pardon the length and lack of proper editing skills, lol.)

Here’s what the House committees will report in their first quarter fundraising filings, according to this Roll Call article (2003 1Q numbers in parens for comparison):

Committee	1Q 2007 (2003)	Cash-on-Hand	Debt
DCCC	$19m ($7.4m)	$9.8m	$4.9m
NRCC	$15.8m ($22.9m)	$2.5m	$7.9m

Lookout, Republicans. With less cash-on-hand, more debt, and fundraising down 31% over the same period four years ago, the GOP’s long-vaunted fundraising dominance is coming to an end. Without the ability to swamp their Democratic opponents with huge media buys like in years past, House Republicans could be seriously imperiled, yet again.

New Mexico Dems have been waiting for someone to step up to the plate to take on Sen. Pete Domenici.  Tom Udall’s name has been bandied about, as has Rick Homans.  But a blast from the recent past may beat them all to the punch — Patricia Madrid.

According to an inside source, the former New Mexico Attorney General is considering a run against Sen. Pete Domenici.  In her last run for office, she fell to Rep. Heather Wilson by less than 900 votes.

So why would Madrid be considering a run for Senate?  There are actually some very real reasons why it would be worthwhile. 

Read the reasons under the fold.  Crossposted at New Mexico FBIHOP, MyDD and Daily Kos.

For one, Madrid is an established personality in New Mexico.  She won a statewide election — twice — for Attorney General, and narrowly lost a tough election to Wilson.  I’m guessing that nearly everyone in New Mexico knows Madrid.

For another, she has a large donor base.  She raised $3.3 million for last November’s race.  She proved she can raise the money. I’m sure the DSCC would pitch in a large amount of money to any credible candidate who was willing to take on the 74-year old senior Senator.  And his warchest, $540,000, isn’t exactly an unbeatable number.  Tom Udall has more in his warchest without raising money so far this year.

Obviously, from her run in November, Madrid wants to be in Washington.  And she does need a job… Perhaps a job in the US Senate, goes the thinking.

But the number one reason Madrid may be considering a run is that she, and many, feels Domenici is vulnerable.  With the recent Iglesias scandal and a number of other things (is his age getting to him?  That hawkish position on Iraq isn’t looking so good right now, etc.), he is no longer the unbeatable legend he once was.

Madrid even weighed in on political interference into court-goings on back in March. Madrid alleged Domenici and Wilson also have involved themselves in the probe of the state treasurer scandal. So she has been paying attention, and she knows Domenici is vulnerable.

There are still those who believe that Domenici is as unbeatable as he was two years ago.  I believe his reputation has been damaged, and there isn’t any sign of the current US Attorney scandal going away.  And also for those who believe Domenici is unbeatable, you just have to say three words.  George Allen; macaca. 

I’m not saying Domenici has any racist remarks ready to come from his lips.  What I am saying is that one moment, George Allen was the unbeatable incumbent, a frontrunner for the Republican Presidential nomination.  The next moment, he was embroiled in a fight for his political career with Jim Webb; a fight that he ultimately lost.

Or if you want another example, how about Conrad Burns (who is actually three years younger than Domenici).  Again in a YouTube moment, Burns  was caught resting his eyes, cementing the image of an over-the-hill Senator, too old to serve.  Of course, Burns also insulted firefighters and referred to taxicab terrorists.

I’ll say it once again, because it is that important — Domenici has the big ol’ scandal target on his back.  When you get that scandal target on your back, people start looking closer into things they might have let go before.

Considering all of this, it’s surprising Madrid is the only one rumored to be expressing real interest in taking on our senior Senator. 

For those who are looking for an alternative to Al Franken, Mike Ciresi has officially thrown his hat into the ring.

Minneapolis attorney Mike Ciresi (sir-EE’-see) is expected to announce today whether he will run for U.S. Senate.

Ciresi announced in February that he was looking into the D-F-L nomination for the Senate seat now held by Republican Norm Coleman.

Comedian Al Franken is already in the race for the D-F-L nomination.

Ciresi is best known for winning a 6.1 billion dollar settlement with the tobacco industry on behalf of the state of Minnesota. He made an unsuccessful bid for the D-F-L Senate nomination in 2000.

Personally, I would prefer Betty McCollum. Stay tuned.