Tag: Mark Kirk

• NY-20 (pdf): There’s light at the end of the tunnel in the NY-20 count, and as we get closer, Scott Murphy’s numbers keep going up. This morning’s BoE tally gives him a lead of 167, following the addition of more votes from Columbia, Dutchess, and Warren Counties (all of which Murphy won on Election Day).

Apparently all Saratoga County votes are accounted for, except for 700 challenged ballots, which, thanks to yesterday’s court ruling, will be counted. (While Saratoga County in general is Jim Tedisco’s turf, the Tedisco camp’s heavy use of challenges of student votes suggests that these votes may include a lot of votes from artsy Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, which one would expect to lean Democratic.)

• CO-Sen: Finally, a GOPer commits to the Colorado senate race against appointee Michael Bennet. It’s Aurora city councilor Ryan Frazier, who made his announcement while teabagging in Grand Junction. Frazier is 31 and African-American, so he brings an interesting backstory to the race, but it’s unclear whether his strength among conservative activists can overcome his otherwise low profile in the GOP primary (assuming anyone else bothers to show up).

• FL-Sen: Quinnipiac takes another look at the Florida senate race; not much has changed since last time, although one noteworthy finding is that Floridians would prefer to see Charlie Crist remain as governor rather than jump to senate, by a 42-26 margin. That doesn’t stop him from crushing in the senate primary (Crist beats Marco Rubio and Vern Buchanan 54-8-8). Buchanan leads a Crist-free primary, while on the Dem side, Kendrick Meek narrowly leads Pam Iorio (16-15, with 8 for Ron Klein, 5 from Dan Gelber, and a whole lotta undecideds).

• PA-Sen: John Peterson isn’t a make-or-break endorsement, but the former GOP representative from rural PA-05 said that he won’t support Arlen Specter’s re-election bid in 2010. He stopped short of endorsing Pat Toomey (Peterson supported Specter in the 2004 primary), but said it was time for Specter to retire. In other completely unsurprising endorsement news, the Club for Growth (of which Pat Toomey was president until several days ago) today endorsed Toomey’s bid. Laugh all you want, but Toomey will need all the financial help he can get; Specter hauled in $1.3 million in Q1 and is sitting on $6.7 million CoH.

• TX-Sen: Our friends at Burnt Orange Report have a nice graph showing Bill White and John Sharp dominating the fundraising chase so far in the hypothetical Texas senate race. (The chart doesn’t include GOP heavyweights Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and AG Greg Abbott, who haven’t taken formal steps for the race, but whose cash stashes are state-specific, putting them back to fundraising square one if they ran for senate.)

• CT-Sen: If Chris Dodd is going to win again in 2010, it’s going to be on the back of money, not popularity. Luckily, he still has lots of the former, as big-money donors aren’t being scared off by his poll numbers: he raised $1 million in the first quarter, with $1.4 million CoH.

• MN-Sen (pdf): Minnesotans would like the madness to stop, and would like to have a 2nd senator. PPP finds that 63% think that Norm Coleman should concede right now, and 59% (including 54% of independents) think Tim Pawlenty should sign Al Franken’s certificate of election right now. (This should give Pawlenty some pause as to whether or not to create further delay in the name of partisan politics, as he’s about the only person left who can drag this out.)

• MO-Sen: Roy Blunt raised $542K in the first quarter, only about half of what Robin Carnahan raised. Our JeremiahTheMessiah came up with the best possible headline for this story:

Carnahan Smokes Blunt… In Fundraising

• GA-Gov: As reported in the diaries yesterday by fitchfan28, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle dropped out of the gubernatorial race, citing health concerns. Cagle was more-or-less front-runner, and his departure leaves SoS Karen Handel and Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine to slug it out for the GOP.

• IL-10, PA-07: Two huge fundraising hauls (by House standards) from two candidates who may be looking to move up. Mark Kirk, who pulled in $696K in the first quarter, is supposed to decide soon whether or not to try for IL-Sen. (He has only $597K CoH, though, after burning through all his cash defending his seat in 2008. So he may just be raising hard in expectation of another top-tier challenge in 2010 in this blue district.)

Joe Sestak raised $550K in the first quarter, leaving him sitting on a mongo $3.3 million. Could this… plus his suddenly increased media presence, as he talks the defense budget and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell… be tea leaves that he may be the Dem who jumps into PA-Sen after all? (Sestak has previously declined, and he’s always been mentioned as an afterthought in this race after Allyson Schwartz and Patrick Murphy. But neither of them have made any moves, leaving Joe Torsella the only Dem challenger so far.)

• Numbers: California’s Secretary of State office finally released its Supplement to the Statement of Vote, heaven for nerds. Now you can look up Presidential and Prop 8 votes not just by congressional district, but by state senate or assembly district or even Board of Equalization district.

• NY-20 (pdf): This morning’s update from the BoE has Scott Murphy’s lead increasing a bit, up to 56 votes. Brace yourself for later today, though, when Saratoga County (Jim Tedisco’s base) is scheduled to report absentees for the first time.

• PA-Sen: Arlen Specter picked up an important backer in the 2010 primary: NRSC chair John Cornyn (who’d, of course, like to limit the number of seats lost on his watch). “As I survey the political landscape of the upcoming 2010 elections, it’s clear we need more candidates that fit their states,” said Cornyn. Although Cornyn doesn’t mention his name, he obviously has in mind a guy who doesn’t fit his state: Pat Toomey, who just happened to officially announce his long-rumored Senate bid yesterday.

• MN-Sen: No surprise here; Norm Coleman, having lost the election yesterday according to a three-judge panel, has filed an appeal with the Minnesota Supreme Court. Election law blogger Rick Hasen looks at yesterday’s opinion and the difficulty Coleman will face in getting it reversed.

• FL-Sen: Marco Rubio reported raising $250,000 in the last month since opening his exploratory committee, a solid start. Meanwhile, Kendrick Meek continued to dominate the labor endorsement front, picking up the nod from the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO.

• IL-10: State senator Susan Garrett says she’ll decide within the month whether or not to challenge Mark Kirk (sounding like she’s trying to wait as long as possible to see if Kirk jumps into the senate race and leaves an open seat). Kirk has turned back a number of serious challenges in the 3rd-most Dem-leaning district still occupied by a Republican (won by Obama with 61% of the vote).

• NV-02: A credible Democratic challenger to Dean Heller has materialized. Douglas County school board president Cindy Trigg plans to announce her candidacy next week. This district, once a Republican stronghold, went for McCain by less than 100 votes.

• ID-01: Walt Minnick just got some fundraising help from an unexpected place. Former two-term GOP senator from Idaho Steve Symms is headlining Minnick’s April 23 breakfast fundraiser.

• NRCC: Campaign Diaries has the full list of all 43 Dems targeted in the GOP’s big radio-spot-and-robocall blitz.

• Where Are They Now?: Tom Feeney: just took a job with noted think-tank the Heritage Foundation, to focus on “community outreach.” Bob Ney: just got the 1-3 pm slot on a conservative talk radio station in Moundsville, WV. Chris Chocola: just made it official, that he will be replacing Pat Toomey as head of the Club for Growth. Vito Fossella: just pled guilty to DWI and will serve four days in Alexandria city jail.

• Red Menace: Spencer Bachus (AL-06) just announced that he is holding in his hand a list of 17 socialists in Congress. We all know about Bernie Sanders; anyone care to hazard a guess who the other 16 are?

• IL-10: Roll Call takes a look at the potential GOP and Dem fields to replace Rep. Mark Kirk should he decide to run for Senate. A spokesperson for ’06/’08 nominee Dan Seals says that he’s in for a third crack at the seat if Kirk vacates the scene, but state Sens. Michael Bond and Susan Garrett are also possible recruits. For the GOP, potential contenders include state Reps. Beth Coulson, JoAnn Osmond, and Ed Sullivan Jr — as well as state Sens. Dan Duffy and Matt Murphy. Coulson, perhaps the most moderate choice the GOP has to offer, might run into some problems in a GOP primary against a more conservative choice like Murphy. (J)

• PA-Sen: The Republican caucus in the Pennsylvania state Senate seems reluctant to comply with Arlen Specter’s desire to allow independents to vote in closed-party primary elections. If the state ultimately leaves the primary rules as they are, Specter will face the daunting task of convincing independents and Democrats to change their party registrations over to the GOP column in order for him to gain leverage against Pat Toomey. (J)

On a very related note, Specter just announced this afternoon that he will be opposing EFCA (an about-face from his previous support for it in previous sessions). Apparently he now thinks the GOP primary is his biggest worry, not maintaining union support for the general.

• MN-06: We’ll never get tired of loving Michele Bachmann. Her latest:

I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us ‘having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,’ and the people – we the people – are going to have to fight back hard if we’re not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States.

• CO-04: Speculation is growing about who the GOP will find to take on freshman Rep. Betsy Markey in this one-time GOP stronghold turned swing district. State rep. Cory Gardner seems to generate the most buzz, who has already met with the NRCC. Other possibilities include former UC regent Tom Lucero and Ft. Collins city councilor Diggs Brown.

• MI-12: Sander Levin must have had a lot of advance notice of the just-announced primary challenge from state senator Mickey Switalski, because he’s already produced an internal poll from the Mellman Group showing him demolishing Switalski. Levin beats Switalski 62-14 in a head-to-head, and maintains a 74-15 favorable rating. (Switalski’s favorables are 23-8, leaving 69% unsure.)

• NH-02: Another GOPer has lined up for the open House seat left behind by Paul Hodes: Len Mannino, former Milford selectman and current school board member, is publicly expressing his interest. He’ll face an uphill fight against talk radio host Jennifer Horn, who seems to be aiming for a rematch.

• CT-Sen: In 1970, Connecticut’s senior senator, beset by ethical issues (including a Senate censure) and health troubles, failed to re-claim the Democratic Party’s nomation and came in third as an independent that November. That man was Thomas Dodd, Chris Dodd’s father. Click the link for some fascinating details about his saga. And let’s hope that history doesn’t repeat – or even rhyme. (D)

• TX-Gov: Todd Hill of the Burnt Orange Report sat down for an extended interview with Democratic candidate Tom Schieffer. (D)

Research 2000 for Daily Kos (1/26-28, likely voters):

Roland Burris (D-inc): 37

Mark Kirk (R): 30

Roland Burris (D-inc): 38

Peter Roskam (R): 25

Jan Schakowsky (D): 36

Mark Kirk (R): 30

Jan Schakowsky (D): 37

Peter Roskam (R): 25

Alexi Giannoulias (D): 38

Mark Kirk (R): 30

Alexi Giannoulias (D): 38

Peter Roskam (R): 25

(MoE: ±4%)

Roland Burris (D-inc): 26

Jan Schakowsky (D): 12

Alexi Giannoulias (D): 11

Undecided: 51

Mark Kirk (R): 27

Peter Roskam (R): 17

Undecided: 56

(MoE: ±5%)

This poll ought to be a palliative for those people worried that the blowback from Rod Blagojevich’s attempt to sell the Illinois Senate seat (and his subsequent impeachment), and Roland Burris’s enthusiasm to occupy said tainted seat, mean that the Republicans are in prime position to take over the seat in 2010. There are a lot of undecideds, obviously, but even up against the Illinois GOP’s top tier (Reps. Mark Kirk and Peter Roskam), Burris looks to be in the driver’s seat. Considering the terrible optics of accepting Blago’s appointment, Burris’s favorability isn’t that bad; his favorable/unfavorable is 35/35.

In the general, though, Burris fares really no better or worse than any of the other Democrats interested in mounting a primary challenge to him in 2010. Rep. Jan Schakowsky and state treasurer Alexi Giannoulias put up very similar numbers, indicating that Illinoisians are retaining their Dem leanings and are capable of separating Blagojevich’s spate of increasingly appalling actions from the Democratic brand in general. Tellingly, both Kirk and Roskam have negative favorability (37/41 for Kirk and 19/23 for the little-known Roskam), suggesting that voters’ dislike for them may have a lot to do with the “R” after their names.

The Democratic primary also sees the voters in a wait-and-see mode. Burris, on the strength of a month’s worth of media saturation, has an edge. But at only 26%, it can’t be seen as a clear path to victory at this point, especially with Schakowsky probably being labor’s and EMILY’s List’s candidate, and Giannoulias bringing his own powerful connections with him.

Bennett, Petts, and Normington for Progress Illinois (10/15-16, likely voters):

Debbie Halvorson (D): 50

Marty Ozinga (R): 29

Undecided: 22

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Looks like Daily Kos has a bit of competition on the blogs-commissioning-polls front: Illinois local blog Progress Illinois (sponsored by the Illinois SEIU) has ordered polls of the two hottest House races in Illinois. The IL-11 poll is extremely good news; there had been some worries that the Halvorson internal from a few days ago taken by Anzalone Liszt was a little too good to be true (at 48-29), but these numbers almost exactly match. Money was the one asset that Ozinga had and it kept him competitive for many months, but with his fundraising numbers trailing off and Ozinga’s big fundraising dinner with Dick Cheney last week called off so Cheney could go get his heart rebooted, Ozinga’s chances seem to be circling the drain.

UPDATE: Swing State Project has upgraded IL-11 to Lean Democratic.

Bennett, Petts, and Normington for Progress Illinois (10/15-16, likely voters):

Dan Seals (D): 41

Mark Kirk (R-inc): 47

Undecided: 12

(MoE: ±4.9%)

Things don’t look quite as good further north in the 10th, as Dan Seals trails incumbent Mark Kirk by 6. This is pretty close to R2K’s poll from a few weeks ago (Kirk up 44-38), but a mirror image to SurveyUSA‘s subsequent poll (Seals up 52-44). It’s still encouraging to see Kirk well below 50, but it looks like this one will go down to the wire, with Seals heavily dependent on Obama coattails.

Progress Illinois has a pretty amusing take-down of faux-moderate GOP Rep. Mark Kirk’s recent backtracking on his enthusiasm for Sarah Palin.

Earlier in September, Kirk was gushing about how “encouraged” he was that McCain tapped Palin, and that he was excited that the GOP would be the ones to once again break through “key barriers” in politics by electing a female VP. In a radio interview the next day, describing her as a “fearless” maverick with a history of bucking the old GOP guard. He even went so far as to squawk about Palin’s deep “executive experience”:

   HOWELL: How can you convince me — a guy who is not a far-right social conservative Republican — to really consider her one heart beat away from the Presidency?

   KIRK: She’s obviously an unknown figure, but she has had a rocket sled of a career already in Alaska. I think as governor, obviously she does have more executive experience — ironically — than the three other guys on the ticket. Her big asset, though, will be on the campaign. We have seen Sen. Obama now standing forth as a recognized national figure, but his greatest achievement has been his own campaign, and being able to command and defeat the electorate and push Hillary Clinton to the side. We now will look at Sarah Palin. She did very well in her first time out when she was nominated by Sen. McCain. It was a risky strategy.

With the bloom obviously coming off the Republican ticket’s rose, Kirk is now singing a much different tune:

In an interview of two of the 10th Congressional District candidates conducted by the Tribune editorial board, Kirk would not say whether he believed Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin had the qualifications to become president.

“Quite frankly, I don’t know,” said Kirk, 49, of Highland Park, when asked if Palin could step into the job. In answer to repeated inquiries about Palin’s experience, Kirk said, “I would have picked someone different.”

Of course you would have, Mark.

Update: Statement from the Seals campaign:

“It says a lot about Mark Kirk’s desperation that he will say one thing when he’s in front of an editorial board, and do another thing when he’s attending the Republican National Convention and bundling over a hundred thousand dollars for the McCain-Palin ticket. Despite his latest efforts to distance himself from the sinking McCain-Palin ship, he can’t run from his attacks against Dan for supporting the Obama agenda or praise of Palin’s now discredited ‘reformer’ credentials. Once again, Mark Kirk has shown that he is more interested in playing partisan political games than bringing the change we need to Washington.”

I approve of this message:

Mark Kirk attacks me for backing the Obama agenda. Well, you bet I do!

Does anyone doubt that Obama will carry this district by a wide margin? An excellent ad by Dan Seals.

Over the past few weeks, our nation has been swept with the shocking revelation from former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan that the Bush White House engaged in conscious deception to lead our country to war with Iraq. After the thousands of American lives lost, hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars appropriated, and five plus years spent in Iraq, this latest disclosure underscores the need for change in Washington.

When I first launched my campaign for Congress in December 2005, I made ending the war in Iraq a central part of my campaign platform. Even as political pundits warned that opposition to the war in Iraq would show “weakness” on the part of Democrats, I was outspoken in my opposition to the war. In my opinion, some things are too important for political games. And a war—this misguided war—is one of them.
 

As I met with voters across the 10^th district in 2006, I learned that the pundits were all wrong. People here didn’t think of the war in electoral terms, instead they thought of the human loss every time they opened the paper to see that another young Illinois soldier had died heroically in the line of duty. As the details of the march to war increasingly came to light, they began to oppose it for moral reasons.
 

Scott McClellan’s revelations may not be entirely new, but they are entirely shocking. Here is an insider in the Bush administration who acknowledges that not only our government’s intelligence was faulty, but—even worse—our government actively peddled propaganda to promulgate their flawed war agenda.
 

Last week, the Senate Intelligence Committee released two bipartisan reports on pre-war intelligence that confirmed McClellan’s allegations. The reports found that the Bush administration “misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq,” leading Intelligence Committee Chair Senator Jay Rockefeller to declare that the Administration had “led the nation into war under false pretenses.”
 

According to Congressional Quarterly, my opponent, Mark Kirk, was one of nine Congressional Republicans hand-picked to craft the language to go to war. He wasn’t just one out of 435 votes, not just one of the dozens of talking heads on cable news stations, but one of nine Congressman who helped lead us into this unnecessary war.
 

Since then, he has been one of President Bush’s most reliable allies in Congress. In the last year alone, he has voted 9 times against establishing a responsible timetable withdrawal, despite growing signs that our troops are in the crosshairs of an Iraq civil war. Even worse, The Politico recently identified him as a ringleader in the effort on the part of Republicans to vote “present” on war spending.
 

Despite his complicity in propagating this war, he went to the White House in May 2007 to complain to President Bush that the war was hurting his re-election chances and continues to refuse to even list the war in the issues section of his website.
 

Leadership is about standing up for what is right, asking the tough questions, and demanding accountability. Mark Kirk has failed the 10^th district and our nation on all three counts when it comes to the war in Iraq.

 

I’m running for Congress because I believe it’s time for a change in Washington. It’s time we restore honor, honesty, and accountability to Congress. I can’t think of any better place to start than by ending this war in Iraq.

 

Cross-posted at Daily Kos and Open Left.

My name is Dan Seals and as many of you may know, I am running for Congress in Illinois’ 10th district. I wanted to take this opportunity to first thank all of you for the outpouring of support I received through Blue Majority but also to introduce myself as a candidate for Congress.

Like many of you, my decision to get politically involved was borne out of frustration. It was a decision borne out of frustration with President Bush’s re-election in 2004, frustration with our open-ended engagement in Iraq, and frustration with the record budget deficits that have saddled my three little girls with unimaginable debt.  

But it was also a decision borne out of optimism for a better future. That is why I am here today: I believe and know that we can do better. My grandparents and parents raised me with the knowledge that I was growing up in a better America than the America of their youth. Like them, I want to leave our country better off for my children, and that is why I am running for Congress.

Right now, due to wasteful federal spending on the part of the Republican Party and my opponent, Mark Kirk, each of my three daughters is over $30,000 in debt. That is over $30,000 in debt before any of them have reached the age of 10, much less gone to college or owned a home. I can’t imagine anything more un-American than saddling our children with this kind of debt.

This debt didn’t appear overnight. In fact, it is the result of seven-plus years of conscious, wasteful spending on the part of the President and the national Republican Party- from tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to hundreds of billions of dollars shipped overseas to Iraq.

My opponent, Mark Kirk, has been a part of this problem in Washington. From supporting tax cuts for billionaires and corporations who move offshore, to rubberstamping the Bush administration’s failed policies in Iraq, to giving away billions of dollars in tax breaks and incentives to big oil, he has shown where his priorities lie.

Over the next several months, I look forward to talking not only with voters in the 10th district, but also with you. I look forward to putting an end to the myth that Republicans own the mantle of fiscal responsibility. But most importantly, I look forward to being a part of a Congress that understands that we have no greater duty than leaving our nation better off for our children and grandchildren.

To learn more about my campaign, please visit my website at www.dansealsforcongress.com.

Cross-posted at Open Left and Daily Kos.

(From the diaries – promoted by DavidNYC)

The next addition to the Blue Majority page is Dan Seals, who is running in Illinois’s 10th district against Republican Mark Kirk.  The district is one of the bluest in the country held by a Republican, going for Kerry over Bush in 2004 by 53-47.  Seals ran a hard race in 2006, and had a heart-breaking and narrow loss.  Running for office is incredibly difficult; you must work 14 hour days for months, with almost no income, no sleep, limited family time, and no exercise.  You have to beg for money from anyone you’ve ever met, and you get yelled at by activists on both sides.  Meanwhile, voters are looking to be persuaded that they can trust you, and while your arguments make sense to you and your staff, you can never tell if voters believe you.  It is incredibly difficult, and almost everyone loses their first time out.  A successful political movement helps not just those who win, but those who take risks and lose, because without risk-taking, change cannot happen.  And that’s why we’re in this.  Seals gave up his career, his family life, and his privacy in 2006, and we’re going to make sure that he, like Eric Massa, Darcy Burner, and Charlie Brown, gets to finish the job.

As for Kirk, it’s pretty simple why this guy has to go.  He’s considered a ‘moderate’ Republican by many anonymous strategists in insider publications, because apparently in DC, up is down.  Sometimes he breaks with his party when we don’t need his vote, but the reality is closer to the video above, where Kirk ran away from an Iraq veteran so he wouldn’t have to answer questions about his stance on the war.  The camera man is an AAEI organizer named Josh Lansdale, who also happens to be an Iraq vet.  I wrote this episode up in July.

Kirk likes to portray himself as a moderate Republican, and he even went to the White House earlier this year to talk about Iraq with George Bush.  In fact, The Hill reported that Karl Rove came down on Kirk hard for leaking this ‘confrontation’ to the press, and Kirk has quieted down.

Josh is an organizer for AAEI, and his goal is to stop the war by getting members of Congress to come out on Iraq.  In this case, he went to the event trying to get Kirk to go on the record with what he said in the White House and what his current position is on Iraq.  Does he support a withdrawal?  Does he support timelines?  Where is he on the surge?  People who attended the event said that Kirk was wishy washy, but Josh couldn’t get a direct report.  This episode took place at an event where Kirk keynoted eight local Chambers of Commerce coming together.  Josh had bought a ticket online, but was not allowed to attend, with organizers claiming the event had been sold out as they were selling tickets nearby.  So Josh eventually had to find Kirk out back, with this video camera.

The district, blue and getting bluer, is going to eat Kirk alive on Iraq, and he’s pushing extremely hard to be perceived of as moderate.  He’s even going so far as to propose ‘bipartisan’ solutions with Bush Dog Democrat Dan Lipinski, as Kos noted earlier this month.

The Lipinski-Kirk plan calls for a phased withdrawal similar to the one that U.S. Gen. David Petraeus outlined on Monday. Under the plan, one troop brigade would return to the U.S. in December and three more would be removed in the spring, without replacement. It would provide for troop levels in July 2008 of about 130,000, which is equal to “pre-surge” troop levels.

Got that? We’d simply hit the “reset” button, taking 10 months to get us back to the pre-surge status quo. And somehow, this “bipartisan” bill (which Bush will announce this week anyway) is supposed to be a solution to anything?

Nope, it’s two endangered congressmen — one a Republican, the other a Lieberdem — clinging together for dear life in the face of an unpopular war that they in reality support. Their actions don’t change the facts on the ground (the surge was always unsustainable for the long haul). It does nothing to end a conflict in which a solution is far beyond our grasp.

We’ve already got Lipinski in our cross-hairs, and it’s going to be tough to take down the Chicago Democratic machine.  But wouldn’t it be sweet if our response to Kirk and Lipinski’s bipartisan shill plan to keep troops in Iraq indefinitely was a bipartisan response of getting rid of both of them?

Yes, it would.  Please throw a few coins to Dan Seals for Congress on Blue Majority.