You had better learn and take to heart the lessons provided yesterday by your neighboring colleague. In particular: (1) a gigantic lead now is VERY MUCH NOT the same as a blowout victory (or even any victory), and (2) neglect is NEVER the right way to run a campaign.
Your supporter,
Glenn Magus Harvey
More beneath the fold.
Dear Democratic Party,
I damn well hope that this costly lesson about the negatives of complacency has been well learned.
If we can win Idaho, they can win Massachusetts.
Your supporter,
Glenn Magus Harvey
~~~~
Dear progressive movement,
Stop whining about how watered-down the health care bill is, stop threatening to vote for all sorts of crazy people (on any side) against sane Democrats who can get elected (and possibly risk losing nasty districts), and start accepting political realities (remember the “living in reality” slogan?).
Stop whining about how the Obama administration isn’t progressive enough, and start asking yourself what realistic steps you can do to inch the country toward a better future.
You want results? Be prepared to work very hard for them. Whining and sulking do not produce results. Do something better with your time–such as learning about on-the-ground political realities, figuring out how to use and to affect them to help your goals, coming up with productive ideas, and putting such ideas into action.
Your friend and ally,
Glenn Magus Harvey
~~~~
Dear Nevada State Democratic Party and other relevant persons and parties,
Figure out a way to deal with Reid. Both of them. Preferably, figure out a way to get rid of both of them.
Your fellow Democrat,
Glenn Magus Harvey
~~~~
Dear Senator Joe Lieberman,
You suck.
If Chris Dodd can afford to offend the insurance companies, then so can you. So shut up.
In the comments reacting to the post, the big question surrounds Owens and his position on the public option. Obviously, the public option is a huge issue among progressives and the netroots. It is also a question that, in Owens’ case, does not have a clear cut response.
On August 11, Owens was profiled for PolitickerNY. He was called the “DCCC-approved non-Democrat” and was asked a few different questions. It was then that this was said about his position on health care:
Owens took a decidedly moderate line on health care restructuring, saying he does not support a public option available to anyone–the crux of the restructuring put forward by President Obama. He said some health plans in Congress not longer include the idea of a public option. This stance is gaining some traction in the Senate.
“It changes every day, the various iterations,” Owens told me. “The bill that I would vote for would have a couple of elements to it. It would cover the uninsured, it would eliminate the ability to exclude for a pre-existing condition, and also that focuses on cost-reduction.”
(As an aside, I would like to add this from the other finalists for the nomination:
“I’m with the president; I think there should be a public option,” John Sullivan, the former mayor of Oswego, told me before Owens was selected. “I’m not a Blue Dog Democrat, let me put it that way. At least in terms of health care.”
Brian McGrath, a Manhattan attorney who grew up in the district, was more cautious, saying that he supported the idea, but that “you have to look at the public option and how it has to be structured.”
The reason I bring this up is that it has been said that Owens was the only one of the finalists to oppose a public option. On the surface, that is true. But McGrath saying that you have look at it and how it is structured certainly got my attention just as Owens and his position did.)
Owens, who told me the night he was nominated that he did not support a public option, said that it was, as a component of an insurance exchange, something he “would look very carefully at; they seem reasonable as principles.”
“My view is that there are a couple of principles that have to be adhered to in coming to a resolution of the health care issue,” Owens told me. “I’m not in favor of a litmus test because I think that’s one of the big problems in Washington today. I think we need to be able to analyze the bills and make a rational decision about it in line with the principals in the bill.
“As long as they meet the four criteria that I laid out, those are things that I would consider,” he said. “Again, I don’t want to apply a litmus test, I don’t want to apply a label. I want to be able to analyze the information and the bill and come to a conclusion.”
(His four criteria are that any bill not add to the deficit or “place burdens on small businesses,” bring down insurance costs, provide access to coverage for those without insurance, and ensure those with pre-existing conditions are insured. Owens has said this before, but it’s not on his web site, which provides no information about his biography or positions.)
(Emphasis mine.)
His response to the question about the public option (which, this time, he was actually quoted on) was, just to repeat, something he “would look very carefully at; they seem reasonable as principles.”
Owens’ approach to health care reform includes a lot of key elements. He believes in controlling costs for the middle-class and supports providing access to affordable health care coverage to every American.
This is the full list of what he supports:
· Supports: Controlling health care costs for the middle class.
· Supports: Providing access to affordable health insurance for every American.
· Supports: Preventing insurance companies from denying coverage to anybody based on previous existing conditions and bans caps on lifetime coverage.
· Supports: Giving small business and individuals access to the lowest rates available to federal employees and large corporations.
· Supports: Allowing anybody to keep their existing coverage.
· Supports: Using profits from repayment of TARP funds, allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, increased efficiency in our health care system (like putting all health care records on-line and requiring insurance companies to accept payment on-line), and cutting special interest tax loopholes (like tax benefits for companies that offshore jobs) to help pay for health care reform.
· Supports: Allowing states to use savings from elimination of uncompensated care costs (Over $100 billion annually) to reduce taxes. In New York this would help prevent property tax increases.
There are three things Owens is opposed to: Cuts to Medicare, taxing health care benefits and increasing the taxes on the middle class.
Back to the public option. It is necessary for Owens to be clear about his position. He first said he opposed it, then a month later, seemed to leave the door open for it.
So for those saying he opposes it, I would hold off on those charges.
The other day, I shattered the ugly belief that the Republican candidate in the 23rd congressional district, Dede Scozzafava, was the most liberal. That post was a direct response to Markos’ post Thursday, which also included a critique of Democratic candidate Bill Owens.
One of the arguments made by Markos is that Owens is a “conservaDem” and that he would be just another member of the Blue Dog Coalition should he win in November. Owens, who was an independent but has changed his party affiliation to become a Democrat, was picked over two Democrats to run.
Because of that, there is a high level of uncertainty about Owens. Progressives are skeptical (and rightfully so) because they see the Blue Dogs throughout the country and don’t want to see Owens end up just another Blue Dog. I also think that some of this skepticism is related to the district Owens is running in. He isn’t the first Democrat running in an upstate New York district whose views have been questioned and who has been considered a prospective Blue Dog. It apparently comes with the territory, whether it’s fair or not.
Here are two of Owens’ television ads which give you an idea of his approach. His emphasis is jobs and creating jobs in the North Country.
This is what we know about Owens based on the issues page available on his campaign website:
– His area of expertise is jobs. He has a seven-point plan for creating jobs. The plan includes: An emphasis on green energy, recruiting Canadian investment (if you’re familiar with NY-23, you know that it borders Canada), keeping Fort Drum strong, job training for veterans and graduates, investing in local infrastructure, higher education and agriculture.
– When it comes to health care reform, he supports all of the following: Controlling health care costs for the middle class; providing affordable health insurance to every American; preventing health insurance companies from using preexisting conditions and caps on lifetime coverage; giving small businesses and individuals access to lowest rates available to large corporations and government employees; allowing anybody to keep their existing coverage.
This part of his health care reform platform is very interesting:
Using profits from repayment of TARP funds, allowing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, increased efficiency in our health care system (like putting all health care records on-line and requiring insurance companies to accept payment on-line), and cutting special interest tax loopholes (like tax benefits for companies that offshore jobs) to help pay for health care reform.
He also proposes the following: Allowing states to use savings from elimination of uncompensated care costs (Over $100 billion annually) to reduce taxes. In New York this would help prevent property tax increases.
Owens opposes Medicare benefit cuts, taxing health care benefits and increasing taxes on the middle class.
In addition to all of that, we also know the following:
– American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Owens said he would have voted for the ARRA if he was in the House at the time. Scozzafava also said she would have supported it, but then gave critiques of the stimulus that showed she has some problems with the package, which tells me that maybe she would not have voted for it. (Let me just add that it is easy to say now you would vote for it, as a Democrat or Republican, given the ARRA’s positive impact.)
This is what Owens said about the stimulus:
Mr. Owens said he’d like to see more of the funds redirected toward job creation or assisting farmers.
“What you want to do with the stimulus dollars is set up a infrastructure base so that people going forward can independently make their decisions and hopefully be successful in their businesses,” he said.
– Taxation of health benefits: Owens said in the article that he would have to look at it before giving a clear position. That article was written at the end of August. His website, which was recently updated, tells us that he is opposed to taxing health benefits.
– Cash for Clunkers: Owens said he supports the CARS program (commonly known as Cash for Clunkers) and that he believes “It helped put labor back to work. And it did a lot of important things to get the economy moving in the right direction.”
– Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act: Owens said he wasn’t familiar with this legislation (hard to imagine, given its profile) but he did say that “Everyone should be paid fair wages for their work, irrespective of any other factor that may come into play.” While Owens should know the legislation, that position is better than the position of his two conservative opponents. Scozzafava (a woman, I remind you) said she was oppose the legislation. Conservative Doug Hoffman also said he would oppose the bill.
– Davis-Bacon: If you aren’t familiar with this (the Watertown Daily-Times apparently thought this was a good question to ask), Davis-Bacon is described as the following:
“The law, which has been in effect since the Great Depression, requires construction workers to be paid prevailing wages on public works projects.”
Owens said he would support Davis-Bacon staying in place.
Bill Owens thinks that companies receiving tax breaks from the government must live up to their end of the promise. That’s why he supports holding big businesses accountable by taking away tax breaks from companies that outsource jobs away from Upstate New York.
That’s why Owens will fight to help local farmers and ranchers by using subsidies and import limits to make sure they get fair prices for their goods. And Owens supports Senator Chuck Schumer’s call for an investigation into why dairy farmers are getting paid lower and lower prices for their milk, while the price of milk remains high in stores. Bill will go to Congress and work for farm policy that works for producers as well as consumers to make our local economy work better for everyone.
New York has been hit hard by the dairy price crisis. One of the factors that plays into that are imports that are brought in from outside of New York (and in certain cases, outside of the country) and compete with local producers. Dairy farmers aren’t getting enough to cover the cost of producing milk and that has caused many problems for these farmers. It is key for Owens to address this issue. As an upstate representative, he will be talking about it a lot.
Social issues: There is very limited information out there, but this is what we know about Owens and two big issues: Choice and marriage equality.
On the wedge issue of same-sex marriage, Owens is to the right of his Republican opponent Scozzafava. He does not support full marriage–he opposes any federal action on the “states rights issue”–telling me, “I fully support equal rights for everybody, and certainly civil unions are in that mix. For religious reasons, I have difficulty with the use of the word marriage in that process.”
That same PolitickerNY piece said that “Both Scozzafava and Owens are pro-choice; Conservative Doug Hoffman is against same-sex marriage and is pro-life.”
To what degree Owens is pro-choice (there are other reproductive rights issues, obviously, that he should be asked about) remains to be seen.
Here’s the moment of truth: What ideology does Owens belong to? I have a hard time calling him a “conservaDem” or prospective Blue Dog. But I also have a hard time calling “progressive” or “liberal.” This is a man who has been an independent. And in the media accounts about this race, the word “moderate” has been tossed around. I tend to agree with the perception here: Owens is a moderate. We do need to know more (while I know this post is helpful, we need more information on him) but this is a start. The only thing people seem to know about Owens is that he isn’t a Democrat. That leads to immediate skepticism about what he will do, if elected.
Owens has made one thing clear: He will support the President. He’s the only candidate saying that and that’s something we need to focus on.
I hopefully outlined all the reasons why you shouldn’t support Dede Scozzafava. I should also add that she is opposed to cap and trade legislation (even though her predecessor, John McHugh, supported the climate change bill) and that she supports the Bush tax cuts. Owens does not support the Bush tax cuts and has put an emphasis on keeping taxes low for the middle class.
To close, I don’t believe Owens will be a Blue Dog should he be elected. But I also know that we need to know more about Owens. There has been a lack of access and information. Everything I have put here (with the exception of a few points) are items I had to look up on my own. There has been no clarification from the campaign on certain positions and that is something we need. We are working on getting that information, but for now, I hope this will suffice.
Jon Cooper said it was an eye-opening moment for him. He was watching the press conference announcing Governor David Paterson’s selection of Kirsten Gillibrand to serve as New York’s junior U.S. senator. His spouse Rob inquired out loud if that was former Senator Alfonse D’Amato standing on the platform with her.
Last week, I spoke with Cooper about his possible candidacy, his career and why he is interested in running for a seat that was once held by Hillary Clinton, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Robert F. Kennedy.
At first, Cooper dismissed the notion that a former Republican U.S. senator from New York – the same man Senator Chuck Schumer beat in 1998 – would be at a ceremony for Republicans. But, much to his dismay, there D’Amato stood mere feet away from Gillibrand as she was introduced as New York’s newest senator.
Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn’t just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can’t help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.
“Her past position (on gun control) was of concern,” he said. “There are some people are distrustful of her evolution on this and other issues and are concerned about what they see as flip-flopping and see this as insincere or they question her character. I’m not saying I do. But there are those who do.”
For Cooper, however, it is different. He is not yet a declared candidate but he is touting his own record and why, if he were to run, he should be considered a serious contender to Gillibrand.
“I have, many times over the years, took stances that might not have been politically popular with my constituents but I believed it was the right thing to do,” he said.
As an openly gay and happily married man, Cooper is the father of five children he and his spouse Rob have adopted. He has served 10 years on the Suffolk County Legislature and currently is the majority leader for the legislature’s Democrats. He lists two key pieces of legislation as highlights of his career. He wrote the first law banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving in the country. Since then, a number of states (including New York) have adopted such laws. In addition to that, Cooper also authored legislation that banned the sale of ephedra. That effort led to the federal government imposing a ban on the dietary supplement.
Jobs and the economy is an area that Cooper knows all too well. Cooper is running the family business, Spectronics Corporation, in Westbury. He said that while he is on the corporate side of things, he also is very much pro-labor and supports workers.
In the 2008 presidential primaries, Cooper backed an underdog named Barack Obama. Cooper was the first elected official from New York to endorse Obama and went on to be the Long Island chair of the Obama campaign. He said that, at the time, people asked him if he realized the political risk he was taking. Cooper said he had supported Hillary Clinton in the past but once he met Obama, he was sold. It was through the Obama campaign that Cooper met many grassroots organizers, some of whom are now aiding him in his exploratory efforts and organizing meet and greets throughout the state for people to meet him. Cooper was in upstate New York this weekend meeting voters in Buffalo and Rochester and will be back in upstate New York again, especially if he decides to run.
Cooper knows that he has a long way to go. He realizes that Gillibrand has millions in her bankroll. He realizes that she has received nearly every county chair’s endorsement to date. But one thing he references to is that Obama was counted out too. No one thought Hillary Clinton could be beaten. But with the greatest grassroots campaign ever, Obama pulled it out in the primary and won the general election.
A vast majority of Obama organizers and activists that Cooper worked with in 2008 are urging him to run and are supporting him. Democratic clubs have urged him to run. Progressives are supporting him. And while he says he isn’t comparing himself to Obama, the comparisons are glaring.
“The party establishment, for the most part, quite understandably is falling in line behind our Democratic incumbent senator regardless of how she got to that office,” he said. “But she’s the incumbent Democrat now and I expect most of the political establishment to back her. But a lot of the grassroots leaders that had been early supporters of Obama seem to be lining up behind me or at the very least, urging me to run so that we will have a choice, which is what this is all about: Offering Democrats in New York State a choice.”
While Cooper doesn’t have a full slate of issues on his platform yet (understandable at this stage), his platform stresses the importance of economic development, pushes for progressive values and support of the environment and the fight for health care, consumer protection, gun safety and middle class tax cuts.
So when will we know whether or not Cooper is running? He says by the end of the year he will have a decision. He is testing the waters right now to see just how much support he has and what the response is statewide. I spoke with him over the weekend and he seemed to be very pleased and excited by the response in Buffalo and Rochester. So we’ll see just how far he is willing to go and if he is going to make an upset bid for the U.S. Senate.
As before, you see members of the House and Senate ranked from most progressive to least progressive, based on all votes as well as on certain “crucial votes.” Calculating a separate score for “crucial votes” reveals which Democrats are not reliable when the chips are down. This helps prevent gaming of the system, as when Joe Lieberman voted against filibustering Samuel Alito’s nomination for the Supreme Court, then turned around and voted against confirming him.
For the new feature, Progressive Punch has placed every state and Congressional district into one of five categories: strong D, lean D, swing, lean R, and strong R. Each Congress-critter’s “crucial vote” score is then compared to the political lean of the district or state. In the right-hand column on the “Select by Score” pages, every member of Congress now has a rating from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most progressive. Progressive Punch explains:
The “%” and “Rating” columns underneath the “Progressive Score vs. State Tilt” are two different ways of measuring the same thing. They both measure how naughty or nice a member of Congress’ voting record has been in relation to his/her district. We’re grading on a curve. Five stars in the “Rating” column indicate members of Congress who are doing the best in terms of voting MORE progressively than could necessarily be expected given their states or districts. Those with one star are performing the worst in relation to their districts.
Why is this useful? It’s now much easier to see which Democrats in Congress are voting about as well as could be expected, and which ones should be doing a lot better.
Here are a few examples. Senators Dianne Feinstein and Harry Reid have identical lifetime progressive scores on crucial votes. However, since Feinstein represents a strong Democratic state (CA) and Reid represents a swing state (NV), Feinstein gets a 1 while Reid gets a 3.
Ron Wyden (OR), Barbara Mikulski (MD) and Amy Klobuchar (MN) have very similar lifetime scores, but Wyden and Klobuchar get 4s because they represent lean-Democrat states. Mikulski gets a 3 when graded on a curve that takes into account Maryland’s solid Democratic profile.
Similarly, Daniel Inouye (HI) gets a 1, while Jon Tester (MT) gets a 3 for almost the same “crucial vote” score, because Montana leans Republican.
Jeff Bingaman (NM), Jim Webb (VA) and Byron Dorgan (ND) have very similar progressive lifetime scores, but Bingaman gets a 2 for representing a lean-Democrat state, Webb gets a 3 for representing a swing state, and Dorgan gets a 4 for representing a lean-Republican state.
Scanning down the Select by Score House page, a few Democrats stand out. There’s Timothy Bishop (NY-01) with a 5 rating for how he represents his swing district, while most of the House members with similar lifetime scores get 3s, because they represent strong Democratic districts.
Dave Obey (WI-07) and Peter DeFazio (OR-04) get 4s because they represent lean-Democrat districts. Most of the House members with similar lifetime progressive scores get 3s.
Amid a large group of House Democrats who get a 2 when their crucial vote score is compared to how strongly Democratic their districts are, James Oberstar (MN-08) gets a 4 for a similar progressive score because he represents a swing district, while Michael Michaud (ME-02) and Paul Hodes (NH-02) get a 3 because their districts lean Democratic.
How can progressives use this information? One way would be to determine which incumbents in safe Democratic seats should face more pressure from the left. In extreme cases, this pressure could include a primary challenge.
Also, these rankings reveal which Democratic primaries should become top priorities for progressives when incumbents retire. For example, John Murtha (PA-12) and Henry Cuellar (TX-28) represent strongly Democratic districts but vote like Democrats representing swing or Republican districts.
I discussed Iowa representatives’ rankings in more detail at Bleeding Heartland. The relatively low score for Leonard Boswell (IA-03) was no surprise, but Bruce Braley (IA-01) and Dave Loebsack (IA-02) didn’t fare much better when graded on the Progressive Punch curve that took into account their strongly Democratic districts.
The State Central Committee of the Republican Party of Iowa picked a new party chairman yesterday. The winner was Matt Strawn, a former Congressional staffer best known as part of the group that owns the Iowa Barnstormers arena football team.
Strawn, 35, noted that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama beat Republican John McCain by 2-1 among young adults in Iowa. He said part of the problem is Republicans have failed to use modern communications methods, such as Twitter and Facebook. People are left with the impression that the party either doesn’t know how to use those channels or doesn’t care to, he said. “Either way, we’re sending a terrible message.” […]
Strawn said at a press conference that he would reach out to all age groups as he seeks to build up party registrations, raise money and recruit strong candidates for office. He vowed to regain the majorities in both houses of the Legislature, win back the governorship and make gains in Congress.
He said Republicans could do all those things without watering down the party’s conservative priorities. “If we communicate our beliefs, we can win elections,” he said.
Republicans should be asking themselves why young voters are rejecting their candidates in such large numbers. It wasn’t always this way. When I was growing up in the 1980s, the Republican Party did quite well with the 18-30 age group, including college students. In fact, my age cohort is still relatively strong for Republicans. (A chart in this post shows the presidential vote among young Americans for the past 30 years.)
Strawn’s answer is that the GOP’s failure to fully exploit new technology is “sending a terrible message” to young voters. He won over State Central Committee members in part thanks to a technologically savvy online campaign (a blog with occasional YouTube video postings).
I sincerely hope that Republicans continue to believe that their recent election losses are rooted in communication problems. I think the Republicans’ ideology is what turns off young voters. The tendency for Republicans to campaign on “culture war” issues exacerbates this problem, highlighting the topics that make the party seem out of touch to younger voters.
Some Republicans want their candidates to emphasize economic issues more and downplay divisive social issues. Shortly after the election, Doug Gross discussed the Republican Party’s problems on Iowa Public Television. Gross worked for Republican Governors Bob Ray and Terry Branstad in the 1970s and 1980s, and he was the Republican nominee for governor against Tom Vilsack in 2002. Gross had this advice for Republican candidates:
What we really have to do is speak to the fundamental issues that Iowans care about which is I’m working hard every day, in many cases a couple of jobs, my wife works as well, we take care of our kids and yet the government is going to increase our taxes, they’re going to increase spending and they’re going to give that to somebody who is not working. That kind of message will win for republicans among the people we have and we’ve gotten away from that.
Ah yes, the glory days, when Republicans could win by running against “tax and spend” Democrats who supposedly took money away from hard-working Americans and gave it to “welfare queens” and other unemployed ne’er-do-wells.
Moreover, rising unemployment is not just an issue for lower-income or blue-collar workers. Layoffs are also hitting groups that have trended toward the Democratic Party in the last decade: suburban dwellers, white-collar professionals and college-educated whites generally. Even in affluent neighborhoods, just about everyone knows someone who has been laid off in the past six months. Government assistance to the unemployed may be more popular now than it was in the 1980s.
I believe that the problems with our health care system are another reason that Republican “small government” rhetoric has less salience now than it did 20 years ago.
As I’ve written before, Republican prospects for a comeback may have less to do with new GOP leadership than with how well the Democrats govern. If Democrats do well, they will keep winning elections. If they screw up, the Republicans may rebound no matter what party leaders do at the RNC or in contested states like Iowa.
On the other hand, if Republicans want to do more than sit back and wait for Democrats to self-destruct, they will need to acknowledge that their problems go beyond communication skills. Many conservative beliefs are outside the American mainstream. I don’t think the Republican Party can twitter and YouTube its way out of the hole they’re in, especially when it comes to younger voters.
Bruce Braley was elected to Congress in 2006 with the support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s “Red to Blue” program. In 2008 he helped manage the DCCC’s Red to Blue efforts. For the next election cycle, he’s been promoted again.
From a release Braley’s office sent out on Tuesday:
The DCCC today named the second of its three Vice Chairs – Congressman Bruce Braley (D-IA) will serve as Vice Chair for candidate services, responsible for the DCCC’s offensive efforts including recruitment, money, and training.
DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen said, “The DCCC will stay aggressive this cycle and continue to challenge Republicans who are out of step with their districts. As a former chair and former member of the Red to Blue program, Bruce Braley knows first hand what it takes to be a successful candidate; his battle tested leadership will be a real asset to our candidates facing tough elections.”
Congressman Bruce Braley brings his experience as chair of the DCCC’s successful and effective 2008 Red to Blue Program and as a former member of the Red to Blue Program.
Vice Chair Bruce Braley said, “I’m looking forward to continuing my work at the DCCC in this new leadership role. It’s critical for us to continue assisting our candidates with the money, messaging and mobilization they will need to get elected in the 2010 election cycle. I will work hard to help our candidates win their races.”
Congressman Bruce Braley will serve as Vice Chair for candidate services. The DCCC’s candidate services include recruiting, money, and training. A Vice Chair focusing on Member participation will be named at a later date.
So Braley’s niche will be finding and capitalizing on opportunities to pick up Republican-held seats. 2010 is likely to be a more challenging environment for Democratic candidates than the past two cycles, but it’s good to know the DCCC is planning to remain on offense as well. We have a chance to achieve a political realignment, given the Democratic advantages with certain demographic groups in recent elections. Building on our success in 2006 and 2008 will require the DCCC to do more than protect our own vulnerable incumbents.
If you live in Ohio’s Fighting 16th and want to meet our Democratic Champion, time is running out to RSVP for this huge event!
I talked with Ian Walton, Boccieri’s Campaign Manager, at Headquarters yesterday afternoon and it is time to push, going into the end of the quarter. We led the (r)candidate 2 to 1 in the money race last quarter and now is not the time to let up. Hope to meet you there!
Steve Johnson, Ashland County Democratic Chair
Johnnie Maier, Stark County Democratic Chair
Pam Miller, Medina County Democratic Chair
Jean Mohr, Wayne County Democratic Chair
Cordially invite you to join them and Special Guest of Honor
What an incredible Monday to be a part of the John Boccieri for U.S. Congress Campaign team. Yes, Politicos the game is officially on and Kirk Schuring wants every Democrat in Ohio’s Fighting 16th District to be at the Canton Greek Festival at 5 pm Friday and then to follow him on over to First Friday for a Hometown Welcome!
Sometimes, I have to sit a really ponder what goes through a politicians head to make them say some of the the things they say. This time the answer is easy…Kirk was “fluffing” for John McCain. Oh, what a great honor and opportunity to spew divisive hate language!
Read on for more details and don’t forget your popcorn and a cold one for the movie. You’ll want to watch it over and over again!
Republican Congressional Candidate Kirk Schuring Slurs Canton Residents in Ugly, Partisan Rant
COLUMBUS – Standing before a crowd of fellow Republicans at a “John McCain for President Rally” on Thursday, Republican congressional candidate Kirk Schuring launched into an ugly, partisan rant attacking the residents of Canton, Ohio.
In a newly released video of the June 5th event at Ashland Corner Park, Schuring tells his partisan audience:
“So the other thing I know is that Ashland County has a rich history and tradition of rallying around Republicans, and I was telling people earlier where I come from we could never have a rally like this in the center of Canton. If we did we might be shot at, but not in Ashland and that’s what makes you so great.”
The clip is available here. The full video is available here
“It is appalling to witness Kirk Schuring speaking with such venom and disdain toward the very individuals he is seeking to represent in Congress,” said Ohio Democratic Party Communications Director Alex Goepfert. “Kirk Schuring’s ugly, divisive, hyper-partisan comments do a terrible disservice to the residents of Canton and to all OhioansKirk Schuring and his campaign were apparently rather proud of his remarks. The following day, Schuring touts the “warm welcome” he received at the event in an email to supporters.
Below is the text of that newsletter.
Schuring for Congress Newsletter
151 Days Until Victory!
June 6, 2008
>From Our Community, For Our Community…
This was a busy week on the campaign trail. Our organization has expanded and we’re excited about the level of enthusiasm we’ve seen at events throughout the week.
As our organization continues to build, we’ve seen some changes with campaign staff as well. This past Monday Staci Hansel started on the campaign as Political Director and today is Gavin Blair’s final on the campaign before he moves back to Columbus. We’re excited to have Staci on board and I’m thankful for the hard work Gavin put in these many months on my behalf!
On Thursday night I spoke in Ashland County at a rally for John McCain and received a very warm welcome from local community members. Thanks to hard working folks at the Ashland County GOP for putting on a fantastic event.
Don’t forget to come out and join me tonight in downtown Canton at the Greek Festival at 5pm. After the Greek fest I’ll be heading over to Canton’s First Friday event.Thanks again for your continued support!
Kirk Schuring
Oh, my! You are winning hearts there Senator and your endorsement from the Canton Repository. HAH!
Now, don’t fade on me yet fans. There’s more to this whole story.What does State Senator Major John Boccieri think about all this?
For Immediate Release
June 9, 2008
Contact: Ian Walton, 330-754-0534
The Politics of Division is Wrong for America!
Senator Boccieri issued the following statement today regarding the release of video footage of Sen. Kirk Schuring’s comments in Ashland County today:
::One more time just to jog your memory!::
“While my opponent comments publicly about hispreferred constituency, I would be proud to serve in the Congress on behalf of every man, woman, and child in the 16th District regardless of geography, age, race, gender, or religious affiliation.
“Senator Schuring’s partisan comments are the type of political ideology that is dividing our nation. At the end of the day the race for this seat, shouldn’t be about Democrats, Republicans or Independents, red states or blue states, conservatives or liberals, but about America. Our nation needs strong leadership to help turn around our failing economy, bring our troops home safely, honorably and soon, and move away from our dependence on foreign oil.
“As for my campaign, we will have rallies, town hall meetings, and events in every corner of this district, not only where it is politically comfortable, but in every region. It is important that we all come together to help change America.”
Thank you for setting the record straight, again, Major Boccieri! We have put up with enough hate-mongering, war-mongering, greed and discrimination to last a lifetime. The last person Ohio’s 16th Congressional District needs in Congress is Kirk Schuring.
NY-26 Democratic candidate Jon Powers is gaining more and more momentum. In fact, his campaign is at an excellent point right now. On Thursday, Powers was endorsed by the Wyoming County Democratic Committee. This was the fourth county Democratic committee to endorse Powers in his run to unseat Tom Reynolds.
The announcement regarding the endorsement came attached with a list of those who have already endorsed Powers.
Here is that list:
Wyoming County Democrats have answered the call for a change in leadership in New York’s 26th Congressional District. Last night, by an overwhelming majority, the Wyoming Democratic Committee endorsed Jon Powers’ campaign for Congress. Powers is running against embattled representative Tom Reynolds. “I am thrilled to have the support of Wyoming County Democrats. My family has deep roots here, my father was born and raised in Pearl Creek, and it means a lot to me to have their endorsement,” said Jon Powers, former captain in the U.S. Army, Iraq war veteran and Democratic candidate for Congress.
Wyoming is the 4th Democratic Committee to endorse Powers’ candidacy and shows that Jon’s message of leading by example and putting problem-solving ahead of party politics is resonating with the voters. Powers now holds the endorsement of the majority of the counties in his district.
Powers’ Endorsements:
· Genesee County Democratic Committee
· Livingston County Democratic Committee
· Orleans County Democratic Committee
· Wyoming County Democratic Committee
· Town of Clarence Democratic Committee
· SEIU 1199
· AFSCME Local 264
· VoteVets
· VetPAC
· General Wesley Clark
· Senator Bob Kerrey
· Senator John Kerry
It’s amazing the support Powers is getting. He also makes the occasional contribution to the blogosphere. Also on Thursday, Powers wrote a post on The Albany Project entitled, “Iraq’s Junior Mujhadeen.” Jon also posted the piece on Daily Kos, Huffington Post and Rochester Turning. Much of Jon’s work on the issues of children becoming extremists in Iraq can be linked to a group he founded, War Kids Relief. (Note: I spoke with Jon about War Kids and he said that the website is under some maintenance right now. But for future reference, the website can be found here.)
Jon’s campaign is riding high. I reported last week that Jon had raised over $139,000 during the fourth quarter and had over $261,000 cash on hand. He’s received huge support in the past and will continue to do so from some top-notch people.
One thing is for certain: Jon Powers is for real. The four county Democratic committees that have endorsed Jon thus far (Livingston County, Orleans County, Genesee County and the aforementioned Wyoming County) all are rural counties in the 26th congressional district. They are predominantly Republican and if Jon is going to win this race, he’ll need the rural Democrats behind him. We plan to do just that, just like we have since Jon declared in June 2007.
Cooper makes it clear that he has ideas. He isn’t just going to run an anti-Gillibrand campaign, but he can’t help but point out her record. He mentions her past ties to Big Tobacco, the 100 percent rating she received from the National Rifle Association and her evolution on numerous issues that could be perceived as politically convenient.