Tag: 2008 Elections

It must be tough to be John Sununu, the Junior Republican Senator from New Hampshire who faces his first re-election test in 2008.  As if last November’s elections were bad enough for his longevity, with Granite State voters turfing Republicans up and down the ballot last November, the AP is giving him a few more reasons to worry (emphasis added):

New Hampshire’s independent voters – those unaffiliated with either political party – have doubled in number since 1992. They make up 44 percent of registered voters, more than Republicans or Democrats, and can vote in either primary, making them a potentially powerful force in 2008.

In a recent poll, 68 percent of undeclared voters likely to vote in the presidential primaries said they plan to vote for a Democrat. That’s a significant shift from 2000, the last election with contested races in both parties, when about 60 percent of the independents who turned out voted in the Republican primary.

Andrew Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, which conducted the poll, attributes the shift to three factors:

-Changing demographics have made New Hampshire more Democratic, like the rest of New England.

-Increasing opposition to the Iraq war has made voters generally more interested in Democrats as members of the party most likely to end the war.

-Candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have attracted enormous media attention on recent trips, raising the profile of the Democratic contest.

New Hampshire independents helped push Democrats Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter over the finish line in their House races last November.  It’s becoming increasingly clear that these voters aren’t going anywhere, especially as the White House fails to offer any meaningful course change in Iraq.

(Hat-tip to SaucyIntruder.)

Race Tracker: NH-Sen

(From the diaries – promoted by James L.)

[Cross-posted at my blog Senate 2008 Guru: Following the Races.]

About a month and a half ago, the Guru offered you his first Retirement Watch post, looking at any GOP Senators who might be considering retirement over a re-election bid for any number of reasons.  Here is the Guru’s first update of the Retirement Watch:

UP New Mexico’s Pete Domenici: Pajamas Pete was on the RW because of his advanced age (he is turning 75 this May) and questionable mental state.  Over the last several weeks, his role in the U.S. Attorney firing scandal has come to light, as well as his subsequent hiring of lawyers as a result.  Ethics complaints have been filed against him.  It is unclear what ramifications await Domenici, but it does suggest that this previously strong possibility for re-election has undermined his own chances with one very inappropriate phone call.  Should he retire (or otherwise not seek re-election), GOP Rep. Heather Wilson would have been the likely front-runner for the GOP nomination to replace him, but she apparently made an inappropriate phone call similar to Domenici’s, leaving super-conservative Rep. Steve Pearce as the go-to Republican, a man who is likely too conservative to win statewide in New Mexico.  So the NM-GOP’s likely choices are a politically damaged Domenici or a too-conservative-for-statewide Steve Pearce.  If a prominent Democrat steps up early to challenge Domenici, it may put enough pressure on him to opt for retirement.

UP Idaho’s Larry Craig: Since the last RW, voices both liberal and conservative have suggested that Larry Craig is not long for the Senate.  Whether the ID-GOP is trying to urge him out or are prepping a primary challenger is unclear, but the rumors are growing.

UP Virginia’s John Warner: Before the last RW, J. Warner had publicly gone back-and-forth as to where he was leaning between retirement and a re-election bid.  It has appeared that J. Warner would take another term if he didn’t have a tough challenge for it.  He has even planned a little bit of fundraising.  However, former Governor Mark Warner may be more interested in a 2008 Senate bid than previously thought.  Also, former Senator George “Macaca” Allen has held a meeting to gauge support for a 2008 Senate bid should J. Warner retire.  One wouldn’t think that Allen would hold such a meeting unless he had info that the likelihood of a J. Warner retirement was stronger than the 50-50 conventional wisdom.

EVEN Nebraska’s Chuck Hagel: Before the last RW post, questions existed as to whether Hagel would run for President, run for Senate re-election, run for both, or retire from politics.  Then, Hagel held a big press conference and answered none of those questions.  He did say that “he would actively raise money for a Senate re-election bid in 2008.”  It did come out that Hagel, before he served two terms in the Senate, made it crystal clear that he felt twelve years was enough and that he supported term limits.  Does he still support such limits?  (Probably not.)  However, GOP state attorney general Jon Bruning has already begun putting together an exploratory committee for a Senate bid.  Is he just getting a head start in case of a Hagel Senate retirement, or does he enjoy inside info?

EVEN Mississippi’s Thad Cochran: Cochran had been publicly undecided on a re-election bid, holding off on a decision until late 2007, as of the last RW.  Since then, he has planned some moderately aggressive fundraising, but he has also moved even further back his declared deadline for announcing his 2008 intentions and stated that being in the minority party would make him “less inclined” to run.

DOWN North Carolina’s Elizabeth Dole: Her age, health issues, and failure as NRSC Chair had led many to consider her a strong possibility for retirement.  Nevertheless, she says she is running for re-election and has begun aggressive fundraising.  Also, while polling for her has been pretty weak for her overall, they are polling her as the expected Republican in the race, indicating that the media outlets expect her to run again as well.

The DCCC has posted this article from Roll Call entitled “Louisiana Lightning.”  I recommend everyone read it in its entirety, as the article discusses Republican and Democratic strategy for 2007 and 2008.  Here are some of the more interesting passages from the article:

Democratic officials believe that demographic changes in one of the South’s few remaining competitive states – for instance, many former New Orleans residents now live in Baton Rouge and Shreveport – could put Rep. Richard Baker’s (R-La.) seat within their reach.
“Baker is definitely on our radar screen,” DCCC spokesman Doug Thornell said. “We believe whether Baker runs for governor, Senate or seeks re-election, we believe he’s vulnerable.”
Baker’s 6th district is based in Baton Rouge, which swelled from 225,000 residents before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit in 2005 to somewhere between 275,000 and 325,000 today, according to local officials.

The DCCC also is casting a glance at Rep. Jim McCrery (R) in the 4th district.Neither district seems like particularly fertile ground for Democrats on paper – President Bush carried both districts with 59 percent of the 2004 presidential vote – but a lot has changed since then.
Shreveport just elected a black Democratic mayor in November, Democrats are quick to note.
McCrery represents a big chunk of the Pelican State’s western side in a district that extends from Northern Shreveport almost to Lake Charles.

Former Rep. Chris John (D-La.), who lost a 2004 bid for Senate, said he thinks Democrats can not only rebound but can even make gains in his home state.
“The DCCC has hit the ground running,” John said. “I was called [for advice] five weeks after the [midterm] election by the DCCC recruitment committee.”
John said committee officials are “just trying to get a real lay of the land … just trying to get a real macro-picture with what they’re dealing with.”
He also said that Rep. Rodney Alexander (R) always has to consider himself a target given that he switched parties just before the state’s filing deadline in 2004.

Who should we recruit for LA-04, LA-05, LA-06, LA-07?  Which elected officials in Louisiana do you believe have the capacity to unseat one of these incumbents?  Which prominent people in Louisiana do you believe should run?  I have a few in mind, and I will post them in the comments.  I look forward to everyone else’s suggestions.

It goes without saying that the wave election of last November was an extremely rare spectacle in modern politics–going beyond a mere “six year itch” that Ken Mehlman and friends would like you to believe. Due to the deeply fortified structural advantages that Republican incumbents had going into the 2006 cycle (a limited number of competitive seats due to shrewd gerrymandering, the standard powers of incumbency that were as salient as ever, etc), the intensity of this “wave” is rivaled only by that of 1994’s Republican coup. With that in mind, it’s worth noting what usually happens in the cycle after wave years. From the Hotline archives:

1974: +49D

1976: +1D



1980: +34R

1982: +26D



1994: +52R

1996: +3D

Waves don’t come in pairs for the same party–at least not historically. I suppose, however, that if the GOP managed to nominate a McCain-esque Iraq War cheerleader, it would almost make a second mini-wave (a ripple?) possible. But that’s a hypothetical that we shouldn’t count on at this point.

The point is: we have a number of potentially vulnerable House freshmen and even a few incumbents who probably will lose in 2008. We should get used to this idea, even as we fight our hardest to prevent it from happening. Where do we make up for it? Of course, judiciously targeting vulnerable Republican incumbents (think MI-07’s Club For Growth stooge Tim Walberg, for example) and scandal-plagued members in tippable districts (PA-18’s Tim Murphy would make a good target). The other thing we have to hope for is a strong crop of open seats left vacant by retiring Republicans in winnable districts.

So far, the open seat picture is largely speculative at this point, but I’ve made an attempt to track the number of definite and potential vacancies up for grabs in 2008. The first chart tracks definite retirements, listing each district by its incumbent, PVI, and their age on election day in 2008.

Definite House Retirements

District	Incumbent	PVI	Age	Notes
CA-24	Gallegly (R)	R+4.8	64	Botched a retirement attempt in 2006
CO-02	Udall (D)	D+8.1	58	Running for Senate
IL-04	Gutierrez (D)	D+30.7	54	Retiring

Obviously, that’s a pretty small list at this point, as I’ve restricted it to only confirmed retirements (Gallegly has stated that this term will be his last). This list will grow considerably. There are lots of reasons for retirement: age, health issues, depression due to being in the minority, scandals, vacating the seat to pursue other career aspirations, etc. I’ve done a little bit of research into this question and have come up with a shortlist of potential retirements in districts with a PVI of less than R/D+10 (unless district history leaves me compelled to bend the rules). I could have compiled an extremely thorough list detailing including all of the members with advanced age issues (and let’s face it, we have more than our share of cryptkeepers in Congress), but I think this would be better focused on vacancies with the potential to tip the political balance. Here’s what I’ve come up with so far (and remember, just in case there’s any confusion, “age” here means age on election day, 2008):

Potential House Retirements

District	Incumbent	PVI	Age	Notes
DE-AL	Castle (R)	D+6.5	69	Health issues
FL-10	Young (R)	D+1.1	78	Speculation/age issues
IL-14	Hastert (R)	R+4.8	67	Hastert issues
IN-07	Carson (D)	D+8.7	70	Health issues
IA-03	Boswell (D)	D+1.4	74	Health issues
IA-04	Latham (R)	D+0.4	60	Possible Senate run
IA-05	King (R)	R+8.4	59	Possible Senate run
LA-06	Baker (R)	R+6.5	60	Possible Senate run
ME-01	Allen (D)	D+6.2	63	Likely Senate run
MI-09	Knollenberg (R)	R+0.1	75	Speculation
MT-AL	Rehberg (R)	R+10.8	53	Possible Senate run
NE-02	Terry (R)	R+9.0	46	Possible Senate run
OH-16	Regula (R)	R+3.6	84	Age issues/Speculation
VA-11	Davis (R)	R+0.6	59	Possible Senate run

This is by no means a complete list. There could very well be some left-field retirements that leave both parties scrambling to put up viable candidates, and I haven’t taken into consideration the potentiality of scandal-induced retirements. Additionally, maybe there have been some retirement rumblings surrounding incumbents in swing districts that I haven’t heard about. So, I invite you to join the discussion in the comments. Who do you think is likely to retire in 2008?

On the face of it, I’d say that the potential open seat picture favors Team Blue more than it does Team Red.

I previously diaried on the potential pickup opportunities in 2008 in Florida at dailykos (http://www.dailykos….).

It was suggested to me that I also post them here and I have updated a few of the situations.

Now I see an opportunity for Democrats to swing as many as two to five seats to the Democratic column in Florida.

Here are the rankings with this information:
(District: Representative (PVI, 2004 Election, 2006 Election, Funds Raised in 2006 of Republican – Democrat)

Toss-Up

8th District: Ric Keller (R+3, 61% – 39%, 53% – 46%, $1,225,000 – $918,000)

This could possibly be the best Democratic pick-up opportunity in Florida for 2008. Keller was first elected to the Orlando area seat in 2000, winning in a Republican primary runoff race after rallying on an 8-year term pledge that his opponent would not agree to. He went on to beat the Democratic opponent with only 51% of the vote. His seat was redistricted in 2002 to be more Republican friendly, yet it still has a low PVI. In 2006, his election victory was anything but impressive, as he held on with just 53% of the vote. Now he has said he is going to go against his term limit pledge that won him election in 2000. He has also voted against Stem Cell Research. Both of these issues could be crucial in a funded 2008 election contest, which is definitely going to happen.

13th District: Vern Buchanan (R+4, 0%, 50% – 50%, $6,064,000 – $2, 051,000)

We all know the story here. The 2006 election was stolen from Democrat Christine Jennings. If Jennings does not get the seat now, there is going to be a big 2008 election battle. It is actually amazing Jennings did so well, considering Buchanan’s massive war chest. It just shows where the district stands.

Update: Sided with Bush on Iraq escalation resolution.

Toss-Up (Possible Retirement)

10th District: Bill Young (D+1, 69% – 31%, 66% – 34%, $550,000 – $32,000)

This district covers Pinellas County and Young has been the representative there since 1971, despite the slight Democratic lean of the district. At 76 years of age and also the most senior Republican member of the House of Representatives, it is very well possible Young might retire, especially since his party has now gone into minority status. He previously held the position of Chairman of Committee on Appropriations and now has been delegated to ranking minority member on the Subcommittee on Defense. There was speculation even before the 2006 election that he would retire, but he ran again. Now speculation will build even more in the months to come, as his power in the House has disappeared. If the seat becomes open, it should be a very costly election of which the Democrats have a great chance of winning. If he runs again, there will probably be little chance of picking up the seat. What we should do is try to recruit a really good candidate now and that might speed up Young’s decision. Chances are he does not want to face a tough reelection battle if he does run again, so if we get a good candidate early we could scare him into retirement.

Update: With the news of the Walter Reed situation (http://www.dailykos….), the chances of a retirement may be increasing even further. It’s time to push him into retirement.

Young also sided with Bush on the Iraq escalation resolution and this is a Dem district. It’s time to really start hammering him.

Slight Republican Lean

15th District: Dave Weldon (R+3, 65% – 35%, 56% – 44%, $727,000 – $91,000)

First elected in 1994, Weldon is serving a fairly moderate district, with only a slight Republican advantage. Match that with his far-right voting record and that is why this seat will be competitive in 2008. One of his big blunders was his efforts to keep Terry Schiavo alive. He faced a lot of criticism from his central Florida district for that. But he has also had a far-right voting record, including his vote against Stem Cell Research in the last Congress and this one. In this Congress, he has voted down 9/11 Rec., Minimum Wage, Medicare Negotiation, Student Loans, Alternative Energy, and Stem Cell Research. His 2006 election performance was terrible and he had more than seven times the amount of money as his opponent, but he garnered just 56% of the vote. He should and will face a tough reelection battle in 2008.

Update: Sided with Bush on Iraq escalation resolution.

21st District: Lincoln Diaz-Balart (73% – 27%, 59% – 41%)

Lincoln is a Cuban politician who has represented the Miami 21st district since 1993. Lincoln could certainly be vulnerable. The district is fairly moderate and has had low turn out, only 111,000 voters in 2006. The election in 2008 could provide a great opportunity for Democrats to go after the Cuban vote, with older Cubans becoming less influential and possible changes in Cuba in the future.

Update: See Cuban Vote (http://www.dailykos….)

24th District: Tom Feeney (R+3, 100%, 58% – 42%, $1,295,000 – $44,000)

The Orlando area district is moderate, but Feeney is on the extreme far right-wing of the Republican Party. Feeney is so conservative that he has developed a Conservative Check Card for members in Congress when voting on legislation. He voted against all bills of the 100 Hours Plan, absolutely everything. In 2006, he was named as one of the 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress by CREW. Most notably, he has faced controversies for lobbyist paid trips he has taken. He was first elected in 2002, faced no opponent in 2004, and in 2006, as can be seen he did not have an impressive victory. In fact, his opponent had 26 times less funds to use in 2006, making the election even more miraculous. Tom Feeney should be hammered in 2008. He is far right on the issues compared to his moderate district. This district is winnable.

Update: Sided with Bush on Iraq Escalation resolution.

25th District: Mario Diaz-Balart (R+4, 100%, 58% – 42%, $658,000 – $35,000)

Mario is the brother of Lincoln Diaz-Balart and he is in a similar district, slightly less Republican, in Miami. The district also had low turn out in 2006, with just around 102,000 voters. Democrats should make a strong effort to win the 21st and the 25th district in 2008. Perhaps some kind of campaign plan could be made to campaign against both the brothers at the same time. A key issue could be Stem Cell Research, both of them voted against it.

Update: See Cuban Vote (http://www.dailykos….)

Leans Republican

5th District: Ginny Brown-Waite (66% – 34%, 60% – 40%, $736,000 – $80,000)

The district was previously represented by a Democrat, Karen Thurman, who is now Chairman of the Florida Democratic Party. However, after redistricting Brown-Waite took the district narrowly in 2002. The district is still somewhat moderate, though, and around 250,000 people in the district receive Social Security checks. Brown-Waite has had many controversies since running for office. In 2002, her husband was caught stealing Thurman campaign signs. In 2004, she faced criticism for sending free Congress mailings to constituents before the election. She has also defended Muslim hate-rhetoric. If we were going after candidates for disgust fullness, Brown-Waite would probably be our first choice. She has been a terrible representative and has not upheld the honor of the House nor of the people of her district. If we want to go after her in 2008, her vote against Prescription Drugs Negotiation could be a start.

6th District: Cliff Stearns (64 – 36%, 60% – 40%, $775,000 – $123,000)

Stearns has represented the district since 1989, when he won an open seat previously held by a Democrat. He did lose support from 2004 to 2006 and it will be interesting to see if we can continue that trend throughout the next two years.

9th District: Gus Bilirakis (R+4, 0%, 56% – 44%, $2,557,000 – $1,174,000)

Bilirakis just won this seat in 2006 after it was vacated by his father, who spent 23 years in the seat. It is still only a slight Republican district. And Bilirakis has set himself up as a target in 2008 by voting against Stem Cell Research. This will be a race to watch in 2008.

18th District: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R+4, 65% – 35%, 62% – 38%, $931,000 – $59,000)

Ros-Lehtinen was first elected in 1988. She is serving a Cuban-Miami district and she is against having relations with Cuba, which is where she garners most of her support. She supports gay rights and is moderate on some other issues. However, she voted against Stem Cell Research, which should be used against her in 2008. Overall I am not quite sure Democrats have as much a chance at this district as they do the other two Republican held Miami districts.

Likely Republican

1st District: Jeff Miller (74% – 26%, 69% – 30%, $316,000 – $52,000)

The 1st district is possibly the reddest in all of Florida. It has not supported a Democratic Presidential nominee since 1960 and has not elected a Democrat to Congress since 1994. Miller first won the seat in 2001 in a special election after Joe Scarborough resigned. He has since been reelected by fairly large margins.

4th District: Ander Crenshaw (100%, 70% – 30%)

The district has not sent a Democrat to Congress since redistricting in 1992, when a Republican was first elected to the seat. Crenshaw was elected in 2000 and since has become a Deputy Majority Whip in the Republican Party. After facing no opponent in 2004, he was elected by a large margin in 2006.

7th District: John Mica (R+3, 100%, 67% – 37%, $731,000 – $21,000)

Mica first won the seat in 1992 after redistricting. In 2006, he won by a large margin, despite the fact the PVI for the district is only R+3. Based on this last election, it is unlikely the seat can be picked up, but we should still continue to challenge it like we should all districts.

12th District: Adam Putnam (65% – 35%, 69% – 19% – 12%)

There was no Democratic opponent in the race in 2006, only two independents. Putnam first won the seat in 2000 and he has faced no Democratic opponent twice since then. He now serves as the 5th ranking Republican in the House. It is doubtful Democrats could pick this seat up, but we should definitely field someone.

14th District: Connie Mack IV (68% – 32%, 64% – 36%, $1,088,000 – $29,000)

Mack was first elected in 2004, after winning an open seat previously held by Porter Goss. This is another district, where it is doubtful Democrats can win.

In all of the cases, the money battle is startling. Democrats were heavily underfunded in all of the races, but still managed to be competitive. In the races against Weldon, the two Diaz-Balart brothers, and Feeney, the Democrats were campaigning with extremely little funds, but still managed to hold the incumbents below 60% and in the case of Weldon, just 56%.

Democrats have a real shot of picking up a few seats in Florida in 2008, particularly a couple of possible surprises in Weldon and Feeney, two dedicated members of the far-right wing conservative alliance in the Republican Party.

So far, the Indiana Governor’s race has been on the quieter end of 2008’s potential gubernatorial battlegrounds.  Incumbent Republican Governor Mitch Daniels was elected after a 2004 campaign that emphasized his close working relationship with President Bush as former director of the Office of Management and Budget.  Daniels even went so far as to adopt “My Man Mitch”–Bush’s nickname for him–as his campaign slogan.  And while Daniels handily beat incumbent Democrat Joe Kernan for control of Indiana’s gubernatorial office by a 10 point margin, he did perversely manage to follow in Bush’s footsteps during his term as Governor–that is, he perfectly mirrored Bush’s descent into an indefinite slump in the polls.  According to SUSA, Daniels only had a net positive approval rating (of 1 point) once during the 14 month span ending in November 2006.  (More recent polling seems harder to come by.)

Nevertheless, despite Daniels’ obvious weaknesses, the few big names from the state’s Democratic bench have been reluctant to throw their hats in the ring.  Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson, who was regarded as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination should he decide to pursue it, declined to enter the race last month.  So far, the only names in the race have been State Senate Democratic Leader Richard Young and Indianapolis architect and political neophyte Jim Schellinger.  However, the local media reports that a more familiar name in Indiana politics is gearing up for a challenge to Daniels:

Former Congresswoman Jill Long Thompson wants to run for governor of Indiana. A Democrat, Thompson served three terms in Congress before losing in the Republican landslide of 1994. She came to Indianapolis Monday seeking support for a bid to take on Republican Mitch Daniels in 2008.

Thompson met with union leaders to spell out her plans for the 2008 governor’s race. She began calling Democratic party leaders a month ago and says she hopes to make up her mind before summer.

“Not only am I getting a good response, but we’re optimistic that its going to be a good year for us in 2008,” said Thompson.

Jill Long Thompson, as you may recall, represented the 4th District in Congress from 1988 to 1994, when Republican Mark Souder defeated her in the so-called “Republican Revolution”.  She then served as an Under Secretary for Rural Economic and Community Development at the USDA in the Clinton Administration until 2001.  In 2002, she made a comeback attempt against Republican Chris Chocola in the 2nd District, losing by a close 46-50 margin. 

I’m not going to hold Long Thompson’s 2002 loss against her–a four point loss in an R+4.3 district in a bad year for Democrats nationwide is a pretty strong showing, if you ask me.  She might make a compelling candidate for Governor.  Certainly, she’ll have the appropriate fundraising connections to mount a strong challenge.

Another point of interest here is that by knocking out Daniels, Democrats will gain more ground in the state’s redistricting process, allowing the current map, which is quite favorable to Democrats, to survive (assuming Democrats hold their ground in the State House).

Race Tracker: IN-Gov

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

The timetable hasn’t really changed for any of our candidates. Though the Presidential race is sort of altering our idea of when the race is going to get started, it’s worth remembering that none of our candidates in Nebraska got into the race until late summer 2005 for the 2006 cycle.

The Republicans are eager to get started. Former Omaha Mayor Hal Daub was giving interviews to every single local TV station yesterday. Jon Bruning wasn’t very subtle about his intentions should Hagel retire, either.

Mike Fahey had the most realistic outlook:

Mayor Mike Fahey, a Democrat, said it was too early to start the Senate race. He said it would be a good thing if Hagel’s decision to postpone an announcement shortened the race.

“These campaigns last too long the way they are,” said Fahey, who is being courted by national Democrats to run for the Senate in the event Hagel bows out.

Examining the facts, it’s hard to see Hagel’s non-announcement announcement yesterday as anything but a stall tactic. The reasoning behind it is beyond comprehension at this point (though I suspect, between a hundred some supporters on a conference call yesterday, someone will leak the information). But two specific things point to a Presidential run:

– Hagel’s appearance at an IAFF forum tomorrow.
– Hagel’s new website http://www.hagel.tv – which features a vaguely presidential campaign ad. Remember, we’re still 14 months away from the primary election for Senate.

Here’s my take:

As much as we’re growing impatient with Hagel for not making up his mind, it’s important to realize that the timetable for a Senate campaign is a lot different than the accelerated timetable for this Presidential race. Delaying until the fall isn’t going to alter Mike Fahey’s plans one iota. He likely wouldn’t announce his intentions to run for Senate until the fall, anyway. We all know Fahey can raise the money. Everyone’s assuming Jon Bruning’s going to run. Hal Daub all but said the words “I’m running for Senate” in several television interviews in the past week. But after the hell that was the 2006 Senate race, do we really want to subject the people of Nebraska to all of that again so soon, especially if Pete Ricketts gets back in the mix?

I’m convinced that Fahey’s going to run for Senate if it’s an open seat. If it doesn’t turn out that way, then we’ll have to work a lot harder, but Ryan at the New Nebraska Network had a great point:

What this proves to me is we can’t afford to be spectators any more. The Nebraska blogosphere has served as a vigilant watchdog of Chuck Hagel’s record. That’s all fine and dandy, but there comes a day when every public official must answer those critics and defend that record and for Senator Hagel, that day is Election Day, 2008. If we aren’t committed to making that a contest, we can’t pretend to be serious about building a “new Nebraska”.

Our candidates are going to operate on their own timetables, and the best we can do right now is encourage them to run. But the grassroots will be operating in other ways in Nebraska – from local elections to Young Democrats and many other places in between – until the time comes. We’ll continue to keep you posted on any developments, of course.

A total of 23 states may hold primaries on February 5, 2008. By the end of the day as many as 50% of the delegates will have been chosen. The end of the long primary season is changing the game plans of all candidates as they figure out how to put their resources into the larger delegate rich states and to assess if Iowa and New Hampshire will have as much impact as they had in the past.

The presidential primary system as we have known it for 35 years is dead. History books will record that the era that began with the Democratic National Committee’s post-1968 reforms ended Aug. 19, 2006 at the hands of the very same DNC.

http://bluesunbelt.c…

(I’m working on what seems to be shaping up to become an all-nighter of a research paper, so please use this thread to discuss the latest goings-on in Louisiana. I’m heartened to hear that Breaux’s legal team believes that “citizenship” isn’t much of an obstacle–and indeed, “citizen” as a legal term is a much broader requirement than “resident”. – promoted by James L.)

1. John Breaux Is A Citizen

Highlight:

Breaux said there’s no question that he meets the state Constitution’s requirement of being a “citizen” of Louisiana for the past five years, even though he changed his voter registration to Maryland in 2005.

“I don’t just own two lots in Crowley. It is my family home. When my mama died, I inherited half of it. My dad lives there. We pay taxes on it. My wife, Lois, owns property in Louisiana,” Breaux said. “I never revoked my citizenship in Louisiana.”

Lawyers have looked at the constitutional requirement and determined he meets the citizenship requirement, Breaux said.

Breaux will announce in the “very near future,” or after he has a discussion with Blanco.  Foster Campell will still run, and Jindal’s supporters have hijacked the comments thread attached to the article.  But this is my favorite comment:

But his citizenship is not the issue, he said.

“The issues are health care, education and rebuilding. That’s what it is all about,” Breaux said.

2. Mary Landrieu Is Above 50%

Highlight:

GOP Sets Sights on Landrieu

The National Republican Senatorial Committee released a poll yesterday aimed at demonstrating the vulnerability of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) in her 2008 reelection bid.

Fifty-one percent of the sample said they would vote to reelect Landrieu and 42 percent said they would consider someone new — a sign, according to pollster Glen Bolger, that Landrieu is a “vulnerable Democratic incumbent.”

Although Bolger writes that “when voters are given a choice between Landrieu and a Republican they know, they invariably choose the Republican,” the poll memo includes data for only one statewide head-to-head matchup: Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-La.), who is running for governor this year, led Landrieu by 55 percent to 39 percent. No matchup between Landrieu and Rep. Richard H. Baker (La.) — the Republicans’ preferred candidate — is mentioned in the memo.

Landrieu won her seat in 1996 by 5,788 votes and was reelected in 2002 with 52 percent of the vote.

One problem to consider is the NRSC’s decision to poll Landrieu against Jindal, especially as Breaux is still considering a gubernatorial bid.  Another is the inherent bias of this Republican poll: Is Landrieu more popular than the results claim?  And would Jindal really have a chance if Breaux defeats him in 2007?  And lastly, is Landrieu as vulnerable as the RSCC claims when over 50% of Louisianans want her reelected?

Race Tracker: LA-Sen

Since I have an exam in the morning, I won’t be able to liveblog Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel’s 10 AM Central news conference on his “future plans”.  Instead, I’ll leave this up as an open thread where you can discuss and dissect his announcement as it happens.  The New York Times boils down the possibilites to three:

It’s another cryptic announcement from Mr. Hagel, whose options include:

A.) Throwing his hat into the ring for the Republican presidential nomination.
B.) Announcing his plans to seek reelection to the Senate in 2008.
C.) Stepping down from politics when his second term expires next year.

To which I would add: D.) Both A and B.  Of course, since Hagel resolutely promised us that “twelve years in Congress is enough for anyone” back in ’96, surely the former won’t be his course of action.  After all, Chuck Hagel is integrity personified, right?  Stay tuned.

The DSCC and the speculative (and conditional) Democratic nominee, Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey must be waiting with baited breath to find out whether Nebraska will have an open Senate race next year.  I’d keep UNO Democrats and the New Nebraska Network bookmarked for front row seats.

Update: Chuck Hagel joins Thad Cochran (R-MS) and John Warner (R-VA) in the ranks of indecisive and coy Senators up for re-election in 2008.  How disappointing.