North Carolina Senator Elizabeth Dole is still showing vulnerability in recent polls, even if her opponent in not Mike Easley. A new poll has Dole leading 45-30 against Congressman Bob Etheridge.
A new poll out Wednesday has Republican U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole dominating a hypothetical race against Democratic U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge, but the numbers expose a few weaknesses for the incumbent senator, the poll’s author said.
Dole, of Salisbury, has been dogged by rumors about whether she will run in 2008, especially in the wake of a catastrophic outcome for Senate Republicans after her term as chairwoman of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign.
Dole says she’s running.
The poll, by Public Policy Polling, shows Dole running ahead of Etheridge, 45 percent to 30 percent, among likely voters.
But Dean Debnam, president of the company, pointed out that Dole enjoys more name recognition than Etheridge, a Lillington congressman known mostly in his district south and east of the Triangle.
“Dole is not necessarily in a very strong position,” Debnam said.
Etheridge’s name has been floated in the past as a possible senatorial candidate. His spokeswoman said Wednesday he isn’t planning a Senate run in 2008.
“Right now his focus is on working on his committees on issues important to North Carolina,” said spokeswoman Joanne Peters.
Dole political consultant Mark Stephens disputed the accuracy of the poll, which was conducted through automatic phone calls. Respondents signaled their choices by punching numbers on the phone.
“I don’t know a campaign worth its salt that would utilize this kind of polling,” Stephens said. “They don’t even know who they’re talking to on the other end of the phone. It could be a 12-year-old kid.”
Debnam said the polling group will pit other hypothetical candidates, perhaps including U.S. Rep. Brad Miller of Raleigh, against Dole in future polls.
A poll by the group last month showed Gov. Mike Easley beating Dole by 44 percent to 41 percent.
The Dole-Etheridge poll was conducted Monday by automatic phone calls of 448 likely voters. The survey’s margin of sampling error is plus or minus 4.6 percentage points.
Granted, the sample size is small, but it mirrors similar problems she is having in a hypothetical match-up against former Gov. Easley, who has thus far declined to run. Some will also point to Jesse Helms who constantly polled terribly but won elections. But I would argue that Dole does not command the rabid loyalty that Helms did. She’s clearly vulnerable and we need to keep up the pressure.
I’ve been nursing a nasty case of bronchitis this week, so I think that I’m only going to have energy to do a round-up style post this evening. Let’s hit the ground running:
–NY-20: Recently-ousted ex-Rep. John Sweeney is apparently mulling a rematch against Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand. I can only pray that the local GOP is foolish and/or desperate enough to let this thug try again. (Hat tip to the Political Wire.) –TN-Sen: Dailykos diarist Sidof79 has an excellent rundown of possible competitors against Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander next year, from Harold Ford, Jr. to Tim McGraw. –NC-Sen: In a hypothetical election match-up, Sen. Elizabeth Dole beats Democratic Rep. Bob Etheridge by a 45-30 margin, according to a new poll by Public Policy Polling. That’s not especially strong. (Hat-tips to Blue South and Senate 2008 Guru.) –LA-Gov: According to the Cook Political Report, former Democratic Sen. John Breaux is seriously considering running for Governor this year. Breaux’s Senate politics relied heavily on backroom, floor-crossing “dealmaking”, but I’d be content to let him have a try at this. He’s our best shot at keeping the Louisiana Gubernatorial office in the Blue column. –MI-07: The locals blast Republican Tim Walberg for supporting escalation in Iraq.
Recent news that Linda Stender, Eric Massa, Dan Maffei and Larry Kissell, to name a few, are all considering rematches inspired me to create a diary to help find challengers to vulnerable Republicans. Who better to suggest candidates than people who live in or no these districts on an intimate level.
Finding the next Harry Mitchell could turn a Safe GOP seat into a pickup.
Here’s my list of the top fifty GOP house seats that could be in danger in 2008.
Rogers, Mike, Alabama, 3rd
Renzi, Rick, Arizona, 1st
Bilbray, Brian P., California, 50th
Doolittle, John, California, 4th
Musgrave, Marilyn, Colorado, 4th
Shays, Christopher, Connecticut, 4th
Castle, Michael N*., Delaware, At Large
Keller, Ric, Florida 8th
Young, C.W. Bill*, Florida, 10th
Buchanan, Vern, Florida, 13th
Latham, Tom *, Iowa, 4th
Roskam, Peter J., Illinois, 6th
Kirk, Mark., Illinois, 10th
Souder, Mark E., Indiana, 3rd
Walberg, Timothy, Michigan, 7th
Rogers, Mike, Michigan, 8th
Knollenberg, Joseph, Michigan, 9th
McCotter, Thaddeus, Michigan, 11th
Bachmann, Michele, Minnesota, 6th
Ramstad, Jim *, Minnesota, 3rd
Rehberg, Dennis, Montana, At Large
Fortenberry, Jeff, Nebraska, 1st
Terry, Lee, Nebraska, 2nd
Ferguson, Michael, New Jersey, 7th
Garrett, Scott, New Jersey, 5th
LoBiondo, Frank, New Jersey, 2nd
Heller, Dean, Nevada, 2nd
Porter, Jon, Nevada, 3rd
Kuhl Jr., John R. “Randy”, New York, 29th
Wilson, Heather, New Mexico, 1st
King, Pete, New York, 3rd
Fossella, Vito, New York, 13th
Reynolds, Thomas M., New York, 26th
Walsh, Jim, New York, 25th
Hayes, Robin, North Carolina, 8th
Chabot, Steve, Ohio, 1st
Schmidt, Jean, Ohio, 2nd
Tiberi, Pat, Ohio, 12th
Pryce, Deborah, Ohio, 15th
Regula, Ralph *, Ohio, 16th
English, Phil, Pennsylvania, 3rd
Gerlach, Jim, Pennsylvania, 6th
Dent, Charles W., Pennsylvania, 15th
Murphy, Tim, Pennsylvania, 18th
Paul, Ron, Texas, 14th
Drake, Thelma D., Virginia, 2nd
Wolf, Frank, Virginia, 10th
Davis, Tom, Virginia, 11th
Reichert, David G., Washington, 8th
Ryan, Paul*, Wisconsin, 1st
Capito, Shelley Moore, West Virginia, 2nd
Cubin, Barbara, Wyoming, At Large
* This race is only competitive if the incumbent retires or runs for another office.
2006 left us with few “low hanging fruit” targets.
Seats like PA-06, NV-03, OH-15, NY-25, NC-08 WA-08 and NM-01 need top challenges, as do lower tier races like IL-10 and PA-15. Let’s find the next batch of Democratic Congresspeople.
Here’s some names to start with: Steve Udall in AZ-01, Andy Dinniman in PA-06 and Joe Turnham in AL-2
During the 2006 election cycle, you may recall that the DCCC had a modestly-sized “Frontline 10” program, identifying potentially endangered incumbents for additional support and resources. In 2006, that slate included Reps. John Barrow (GA-12), Melissa Bean (IL-08), Leonard Boswell (IA-03), Chet Edwards (TX-17), Stephanie Herseth (SD-AL), Brian Higgins (NY-27), Jim Matheson (UT-02), Charlie Melancon (LA-03), Dennis Moore (KS-03), and John Salazar (CO-03).
Unsurprisingly, with the surge of freshmen Democrats entering the House last November, this program has been expanded dramatically to 29 incumbents:
Jason Altmire (PA-04)
Michael Arcuri (NY-24)
John Barrow (GA-12)
Melissa Bean (IL-08)
Leonard Boswell (IA-03)
Christopher Carney (PA-10)
Joe Courtney (CT-02)
Joe Donnelly (IN-02)
Chet Edwards (TX-17)
Brad Ellsworth (IN-08)
Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-08)
Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20)
John Hall (NY-19)
Baron Hill (IN-09)
Paul Hodes (NH-02)
Steve Kagen (WI-08)
Ron Klein (FL-22)
Nick Lampson (TX-22)
Tim Mahoney (FL-16)
Jim Marshall (GA-08)
Jerry McNerney (CA-11)
Harry Mitchell (AZ-05)
Christopher Murphy (CT-05)
Patrick Murphy (PA-08)
Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23)
Heath Shuler (NC-11)
Zack Space (OH-18)
Tim Walz (MN-01)
John Yarmuth (KY-03)
Barrow, Bean, Boswell, and Edwards appear to be the only holdovers from the class of 2006. Rep. Jim Marshall is the only non-freshman addition to this list.
On the face of it, there are some fairly surprising omissions from this list: fresmen Reps. David Loebsack (IA-02), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), Nancy Boyda (KS-02), and Joe Sestak (PA-07). But before jumping to conclusions, I touched bases with the DCCC, and they released the following statement regarding the omission of Shea-Porter and Boyda:
Representatives Boyda and Shea-Porter ran strong, independent grassroots campaigns. Should the Republicans target them with misleading or baseless attacks we stand ready to help.
That has me breathing a lot easier. Boyda and Shea-Porter won on the strength of intensely local, intensely grassroots campaigns, and it seems clear that the DCCC will let them do their own thing in their re-election bids, but will not hesitate to intervene with independent expenditures should the Republicans attack machine land some body blows against these Representatives.
The omission of Sestak and Loebsack is probably based on the DCCC’s confidence in Democrats being able to hold districts with a Democratic lean (D+3.6 for Sestak, and D+6.9 for Loebsack). I won’t disagree with that, but Loebsack probably could use some extra scratch to more firmly entrench himself in his district.
The other omission that I’m seeing here is Rep. Julia Carson (IN-07). While she may represent a decently Democratic district (Kerry did win 58% here, after all), her 8-point victory against a badly underfunded challenger in 2006 has got to be cause for concern. Perhaps the DCCC is betting on a retirement here. Who knows.
In 2006, we saw an mini-sized Frontline Program and an huge Red To Blue list. Expect a reversal in 2008.
We know that the numbers favor Senate Democrats in 2008. 21 GOP vs. 12 Democratic Senators up for re-election gives the GOP a great deal more territory to have to protect. And, as hard as it can be to hold incumbent seats, it’s even harder to retain open seats. This again favors the Democrats, as there are many more Republican Senators on “Retirement Watch.”
DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer has said that he has gotten assurances from every Democratic Senator that they are all running for re-election, except for Iowa’s Tom Harkin, who has since demonstrated public steps toward a re-election bid.
Aside from Harkin, I’m not sold that New Jersey’s Frank Lautenberg is definitely going to run for re-election, which might not be a bad thing given Lautenberg’s low approval ratings and NJ’s wealth of Democratic Congresspeople waiting for a promotion, not to mention that Lautenberg is the Democrats’ oldest 2008 incumbent by just over a decade.
Also, Delaware’s Joe Biden is looking at the White House, but is hardly a favorite to win the nomination in 2008, meaning that he will likely opt for Senate re-election and have plenty of time to do so.
This leaves only the recovering Tim Johnson of South Dakota as a significant question mark, and even his camp is showing signs, from staffing to fundraising, that a re-election bid could still be on the horizon, health-permitting.
Meanwhile, more than half of the GOP’s 21 incumbents are on the retirement watch spectrum. After spending much of the last decade-plus in the majority party, many of these Senators will find that spending 2007 in the minority will make for a less pleasant work environment. And with many states, like Colorado and Virginia, on a blue-trend, some Republican Senators may opt for retirement rather than risking ending their career on a loss. Beyond that, many Republican Senators are just really old.
2) Maine’s Susan Collins: Is under a self-imposed term-limit-pledge, but is planning a re-election bid. However, if Tom Allen gets in the race and Collins’ broken promise becomes a major issue, with polling going strongly Allen’s way, it’s not inconceivable that Collins would step aside
9) North Carolina’s Elizabeth Dole: her staff has claimed that she’s planning on re-election, but she has not made any definitive comments; meanwhile, many factors, including her age, her horrible job as NRSC Chair, and her recent hip replacement, suggest that retirement may be a strong possibility – also, polling has the reluctant Mike Easley ahead of Dole; if he got in, maybe she’d prefer to avoid a tough re-election campaign
10) Texas’ John Cornyn: While he is very clearing planning a re-election bid, he is also one of Bush’s top choices (if not Bush’s first choice) for a Supreme Court opening should there be one more before the end of Bush’s term – granted, I’d rather have Cornyn in the Senate running for re-election than enjoying a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court
11) Oklahoma’s Jim Inhofe: Rumors exist that he is considering retirement, though this is a rare situation (perhaps akin to NJ’s Lautenberg) where the non-incumbent party might have an easier time beating the incumbent than a replacement (say former Governor Frank Keating)
12) Idaho’s Larry Craig: Another situation of more rumors circulating while Craig waits on a formal public announcement one way or the other
Running (or most likely running) for re-election: Saxby Chambliss (GA), Norm Coleman (MN), Mike Enzi (WY), Lindsey Graham (SC), Mitch McConnell (KY), Pat Roberts (KS), Jeff Sessions (AL), Gordon Smith (OR), John Sununu (NH)
Though only one retirement is announced, if the stars aligned well enough, the GOP could face a meltdown with more than a half-dozen retirements. While we can’t hang our hats on that many open seats, we can probably expect a couple more to follow Wayne Allard.
Cross-posted from Minnesota Campaign Report – check back for more news on Franken’s kickoff. Robin Marty is liveblogging Franken’s final show on Air America here at Minnesota Monitor – check that out too!
Today, entertainer Al Franken has made official his candidacy for the DFL nomination for U.S. Senate.
In his announcement, Franken discussed his background and focused on what government can do for families: namely education assistance and social security:
Your government should have your back. That should be our mission in Washington, the one FDR gave us during another challenging time: freedom from fear.
Franken’s announcement follows that of fellow DFLer and trial lawyer Mike Ciresi, who announced the formation of an exploratory committee earlier this week. Some twenty months from now, the DFL nominee will face off against incumbent Republican Norm Coleman for the seat once held by Paul Wellstone.
Some other choice quotes:
It’s different for middle-class families, too. These families are being squeezed harder and harder every year. Maybe you know what it’s like to be one health crisis away from bankruptcy. Maybe you, or your parents or grandparents, can’t afford prescriptions. Maybe you have kids, and you’re worried about paying for their college. Maybe someone you love is in Iraq, and you don’t know how long they’ll have to stay there, or what will happen when they come home.
…
President Clinton used to say that there’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be fixed by what’s right with America, or, as I would add, by what’s right with Minnesota. We can lead the fight against global warming and dependence on foreign oil by developing new sources of renewable energy-and create good Minnesota jobs in the process. We can lead the nation in finding life-saving cures by harnessing the potential of stem-cell research. We can lead the nation by sending someone to the Senate who’ll be a voice for a strong and responsible America, one that uses its relationship with our allies to create a better and more secure world for ourselves and for future generations.
You’ll find the complete text of Franken’s announcement speech in the extended entry.
Hi, I’m Al Franken. I’m running for the United States Senate here in Minnesota.
I’d like to talk to you about why I’m running.
I’m not a typical politician. I’ve spent my career as a comedian. Minnesotans have a right to be skeptical about whether I’m ready for this challenge, and to wonder how seriously I would take the responsibility that I’m asking you to give me.
I want you to know: nothing means more to me than making government work better for the working families of this state, and over the next twenty months I look forward to proving to you that I take these issues seriously.
Today, however, I want to take a few moments to explain to you why I take these issues personally.
My family moved to Albert Lea from New Jersey when I was four years old. My dad never graduated high school and never had a career as such, but my mom’s father, my grandpa, owned a quilting factory out East and gave my dad a chance to start up a new factory in Albert Lea. After about two years, the factory failed, and we moved up to the Twin Cities.
Years later, I asked my dad, “Why Albert Lea?” And he said, “Well, your grandfather wanted to open a factory in the Midwest, and the railroad went through Albert Lea.”
So, I asked him, “Why did the factory fail?”
And he said, “Well, it went through Albert Lea, but it wouldn’t stop.”
That was my dad – great guy, terrible businessman. He got a job as a printing salesman, and my mom worked as a real estate agent. The four of us – I have an older brother, Owen – lived in a two-bedroom, one-bath house in St. Louis Park.
That was my childhood. I grew up in a hard-working middle class family just like many of yours. And as a middle-class kid growing up in Minnesota back then, I felt like the luckiest kid in the world. And I was.
My wife, Franni, whom I met our freshman year of college, wasn’t quite as lucky. When she was seventeen months old, her dad – a decorated veteran of World War II – died in a car accident, leaving her mother, my mother-in-law, widowed with five kids.
My mother-in-law worked in the produce department of a grocery store, but that family made it because of Social Security survivor benefits. Sometimes there wasn’t enough food on the table, sometimes they turned off the heat in the winter – this was in Portland, Maine, almost as cold as Minnesota – but they made it.
Every single one of the four girls in Franni’s family went to college, thanks to Pell Grants and other scholarships. My brother-in-law, Neil, went into the Coast Guard, where he became an electrical engineer.
And my mother-in-law got herself a $300 GI loan to fix her roof, and used the money instead to go to the University of Maine. She became a grade school teacher, teaching Title One kids – poor kids – and so her loan was forgiven.
My mother-in-law and every single one of those five kids became a productive member of society. Conservatives like to say that people need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps – and that’s a great idea. But first, you’ve got to have the boots. And the government gave my wife’s family the boots.
That’s what progressives like me believe the government is there for. To provide security for middle-class families like the one I grew up in, and opportunity for working poor families like the one Franni grew up in.
By the way, I stole that boots line from Tim Walz, our great new congressman from Southern Minnesota. Tim’s father died when he was a kid, and he and his brother and his mom made it because of Social Security.
Last year I traveled all over the state of Minnesota on behalf of Tim and other Democrats: from Waseca and Wabasha up to Fergus Falls and Detroit Lakes, over to Bemidji and the Iron Range, from Duluth down to Albert Lea, I was in Hastings and all over the metro, up in St. Cloud a few times, eating a lot of beans and buns and burgers and maybe a few too many Dairy Queens along the way. But most importantly, I talked to Minnesotans and listened.
They told me that they’re sick of politics as usual-and they’re sick of the usual politicians.
And I’ll tell you what else they told me. It’s different now than it was for me and Franni. When Franni’s sisters were using them to go to college, Pell Grants paid for 90% of a college education. Today, they pay for 40%. And President Bush, with the help of his Republican allies in Congress, have even tried to privatize Social Security. You should have heard Franni when they tried to do that.
It’s different for middle-class families, too. These families are being squeezed harder and harder every year. Maybe you know what it’s like to be one health crisis away from bankruptcy. Maybe you, or your parents or grandparents, can’t afford prescriptions. Maybe you have kids, and you’re worried about paying for their college. Maybe someone you love is in Iraq, and you don’t know how long they’ll have to stay there, or what will happen when they come home.
Middle-class families today struggle with that feeling of insecurity-the sense that things can fall apart without notice, outside of your control.
Your government should have your back. That should be our mission in Washington, the one FDR gave us during another challenging time: freedom from fear.
Americans have never backed away from challenges. And Minnesotans have always led the way. Our state has sent strong, progressive leaders to Washington-from Hubert Humphrey to Walter Mondale to Paul Wellstone, and now to Amy Klobuchar. Minnesota’s public servants might not always look and sound like typical politicians, but they stand by their principles and lead by their values.
That’s the kind of leader I think we need more of these days, and that’s the kind of Senator I’ll be.
President Clinton used to say that there’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be fixed by what’s right with America, or, as I would add, by what’s right with Minnesota. We can lead the fight against global warming and dependence on foreign oil by developing new sources of renewable energy-and create good Minnesota jobs in the process. We can lead the nation in finding life-saving cures by harnessing the potential of stem-cell research. We can lead the nation by sending someone to the Senate who’ll be a voice for a strong and responsible America, one that uses its relationship with our allies to create a better and more secure world for ourselves and for future generations.
My political hero is Paul Wellstone. He used to say, “The future belongs to those who are passionate and work hard.” I may be a comedian by trade, but I’m passionate about the issues that matter to your family because they mattered to mine, too. And I’m ready to work as hard as I can to help us build a better future together.
Thanks for listening, and I’ll see you on the trail.
Barack Obama will make his formal entry into the 2008 presidential race today at the old state capitol building in Springfield, Illinois, invoking the legacy of another man who began his political career against the same backdrop of Doric columns — Abraham Lincoln.
Earlier in the day, Markos billed the likely matchup between Maine’s Rep. Tom Allen (D) and Susan Collins (R) for control of her Senate seat in 2008 as a “battle of the titans”, which leads me to ask: does Allen really have what it takes to win this thing?
Now, I’m not trying to say that Allen is a weak candidate. In a state with only two House districts, it’s clear that Allen would be a fairly serious threat to an entrenched Collins. But with a Senator as popular as Collins (who enjoys a whopping 73% approval last November, according to the latest SUSA tracking poll in November), Allen will have to execute a perfect campaign in order to win.
Let’s check his track record as of late. Here’s how he fared in 2006, according to CNN:
Allen (D): 61 Curley (R): 31 Kamilewicz (I): 8
And here’s his 2004 performance:
Allen (D): 60 Summers (R): 40
Allen’s district has a PVI of D+6.2. His House colleague, Democrat Mike Michaud, occupies a seat that’s a shade less Democratic at D+3.5. In his sophomore re-election bid in 2004, he won by a margin of 58-39, a margin very similar to Allen’s, who had been serving since 1998 by this point. In 2006, Michaud crushed his Republican opponent by a 70-30 margin.
Now, there are a lot of dynamics left unstated here: Kamilewicz, his 2006 third-party opponent, ran a peace campaign that probably cut into his left flank, although it only cost a mere $42,000. And while Allen enjoyed a 4-1 spending advantage over Republican Darlene Curley in 2006, he didn’t exactly saturate the market with his total expenditures of $650,000. But the point I’m trying to make is this: winning with 60%, especially in a Democratic year such as 2006, doesn’t leave me feeling overwhelmed.
Does anyone have a better sense as to why Allen hasn’t been able to peak above 60% since 2002?
The Hill published an article highlighting some of the fundraising efforts of freshmen Democrats in the House. Apparently, many are doing quite well. David Loebsack (IA-02) has raised about $71,000. Kirsten Gillebrand (NY-20) has raised $65,000 in PAC money alone. Earl Perlmutter (CO-07) has raised $79,000. Charlie Wilson (OH-06) has raised $34,000. Paul Hodes has raised $35,000. Jason Altmire (PA-04) and Patrick Murphy (PA-08) have both raised $50,000 in PAC money alone. Zack Space (OH-18) and Steven Kagen (WI-08) have both raised $35,000 in PAC money.
As far as simple financial numbers go, this is good news. All of these candidates are vulnerable to some degree. So, if all of these House members are already off to good starts, they may be able to force out potentially strong challenges early on.
But the article also has some worrying relevations. For one thing, Nancy Boyda (KS-02) has raised only $13,000. Considering the presidential vote in her district (Bush won it by 20 points), Boyda is probably one of our top five most vulnerable Democrats. Plus, she will not have Sebelius’ coattails helping her and will instead have to contend with the Republican tide at the top of the ticket from the eventual Republican nominee and Senator Pat Roberts. Finally, she will possibly face a rematch against Jim Ryun. More over the flip…
However, the thing that is more disappointing to me than Boyda’s numbers (it’s early, give her some time) is where the other candidates are getting there money. First, relying heavily on PAC money does not give the best image. But beyond that, it’s a question of which PACs they’re getting donations from.
Both Gillebrand and Perlmutter have taken money from Altria, which represents the makers of Marlboro cigarettes. Loebsack and Perlmutter have received contributions from the American Bankers Association PAC while Perlmutter also has donations from Comcast and JP Morgan and Loebsack has donations from the American Association of Realtors.
It’s unsettling to see any elected officials taking money from cigarette makers. It’s worse to see Democrats, liberal Democrats at that, doing that. And while Comcast, et al. aren’t the scourge of Satan, I also don’t like the image of elected Democrats at their beg and call.
My suggestion for anyone else who feels the way I do, is to donate through the Netroots and other liberal PACs like MoveOn and Democracy for America. The more candidates and elected officials can get from the Netroots, the less they have to rely on PACs whose goals are sometimes/often/always contrary to the goals of progressives/working people/middle class/etc.
One should also note that Netroots heroes Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), John Yarmuth (KY-03), Joe Sestak (PA-07), John Hall (NY-19), and Tim Walz (MN-01) are not mentioned in the article. We need to act now to keep these people a)in Congress by making sure they have adequate resources to be re-elected and b)from becoming corrupted by negative interests.
Since the buzz word of the House 2008 picture this week is “rematch” (what with ex-Reps. Bradley and Ryun agitating for another run), here’s something to chew on–according to the Hotline, since 1998 “there are have been nearly 200 House rematches, with just 10 (six last cycle) being successful”. In a separate post, Hotline reports that Richard Pombo (CA-11) may be itching for a rematch against Rep. Jerry McNerney in 2008. Josh Kraushaar notes:
By choosing to run again, GOPers are making the races a choice between candidates instead of a referendum on the incumbent’s record. That could be the best scenario the DCCC could ask for in these tough races.
And the track record for repeat attempts against the same opponent doesn’t suggest otherwise, either.
Two other rematches may be in the works, as well, according to the Hotline’s subscription-only section: unsurprisingly, former State Rep. Joe Negron (R) will take on Rep. Tim Mahoney (FL-16) once again, after falling short by 2 points in 2006 while carrying the burden of being listed as Mark Foley on the actual ballot. Additionally, Idaho’s Larry Grant may be “leaning toward” a rematch against Bill “Brain Fade” Sali in ID-01. Of all of these match-ups, Negron’s may prove to be the most worthwhile, as he ran an effective campaign with the deck stacked so heavily against him. Still, with Mahoney’s self-funding capability, incumbency advantage, and moderate profile, I’d much rather be us than them.
Loading ...