Tag: Glenn Grothman

• FL-Sen: Biden alert – confirmed! There was a rumor that Joey Jo-Jo Biden Shabadoo would soon be doing a fundraiser for Bill Nelson. It turns out he’s doing two, on March 25th: One near Orlando and the other in Tampa.

• OR-01: Not a particularly good addition to the resume for Rep. David Wu (D). As The Oregonian puts it, Wu “crashed his vehicle into a parked car in Northwest Portland last year, but passed a police field sobriety test and the incident never showed up in a police report.” A police official notes that a lack of a report is not uncommon, and says that Wu didn’t identify himself as a congressman.

• VA-11: Republican Keith Fimian, who lost to Rep. Gerry Connolly in 2008 and 2010 (by a whisker), says he’ll run again – but only if the 11th CD “redistricts well,” something he doesn’t expect to happen… nor should he, given the likelihood that the state lege will adopt an incumbent-protection map.

• LA-Gov: He doesn’t have any declared opponents for the November election, he’s got an astounding $9 million in the bank, and Democrats have been getting their asses kicked in Louisiana for years, but that’s not stopping Gov. Bobby Jindal from going on the air with his first television ad. The buy, according to a Jindal spokesman, is for “six figures,” so I guess that means anywhere from $100,000 to $999,999.

• SC-LG: Republican Lt. Gov. Ken Ard has just been charged with 92 counts of violating ethics rules, in which he’s accused of putting campaign money to personal use and failing to properly disclose his spending. Among other things, Ard spent campaign funds to attend the SEC championship football game in Atlanta last year (the University of South Carolina got crushed), and he also bought his wife a gown to wear to the state’s Inaugural Ball.

• Wisconsin Recall: The linked article has some vague but somewhat more specific figures on the number of signatures gathered in the recall efforts. One interesting detail: If some collection efforts finish earlier than others, that means we could have staggered recall elections. I personally think we’d be better off waiting to submit all our signatures at once so that we can have a unified effort. (And also, we should keep gathering sigs until the last day, to ward off challenges.)

Greg Sargent also has a new version of an ad in support of the recall from the PCCC and DFA (NWOTSOTB). Oddly, the final title card calls out Alberta Darling, Glenn Grothman, and Mary Lazich by name – but as you’ll recall, Grothman and Lazich are the two pretty much untouchable senators, thanks to their super-red districts.

On a related note, Think Progress observes that Michigan’s state constitution has similar recall provisions to those in Wisconsin. Republican Gov. Rick Snyder is also pushing anti-union legislation there, and he and his allies in the legislature could be subject to a recall movement as early as July.

• WI Sup. Ct.: In other Wisconsin news, Republican Supreme Court Justice David Prosser is up with an oddly narrated ad that touts some healthcare-related decision he once made. I find it pretty gross and unseemly that high court judges are elected in the first place, and to see them speaking of judicial decision-making in such nakedly political terms is disturbing. But it’s the system we’ve got – and with any luck, Democrat JoAnne Kloppenburg will have a fighting chance against Prosser in next month’s election.

• Models: Harry Enten has published a model for forecasting the results of House races in presidential years. He predicts that Republicans will win 238 seats, which, assuming the GOP holds NY-26, would mean a loss of only four seats for the party in power. But the model has a margin of error of ±10 seats, so conceivably the Republicans could hold as many as 248 seats and as few as 228. Obviously, you’ll have to click the link for the full details of Harry’s model.

• Votes: Seven House Republicans voted against banning all federal funding to NPR: Rob Woodall (GA-07), Chris Gibson (NY-20), Richard Hanna (NY-24), Pat Tiberi (OH-12), Steve LaTourette (OH-14), Dave Reichert (WA-08), and Sean Duffy (WI-03). Weirdo teabagger Justin Amash (MI-03) voted “present.” And yeah, I had to look up Rob Woodall, too: He’s the freshman who replaced the retired John Linder last year (Woodall was Linder’s chief of staff). This vote really stands out because GA-07 is one of the reddest districts in the nation (it gave 40-point margins to Bush, though “only” 20 to McCain), and all the others on this list have quasi-semi-some-of-the-time moderate reputations.

• WATN?: In case you really care about Joe Miller, I guess you can click the link….

Redistricting Roundup:

• Louisiana: State Rep. Rick Gallot, who chairs the LA House’s redistricting panel, released three different preliminary proposals. (Scroll down to the bottom for PDFs of the maps.) All of the plans involve pitting Republican incumbents against each other: two of the maps throw freshman Rep. Jeff Landry in with Charles Boustany; the third combines Landry with Bill Cassidy. A fourth plan (not linked in the article) by Rep. Joe Harrison (R) would combined John Fleming and Rodney Alexander. By the way, Gallot is a Democrat, yet he’s apparently heading up the GOP-controlled House’s redistricting efforts. Louisiana confuses me.

• Mississippi: Uh, wow. Dem House Speaker Billy McCoy absolutely flipped out and seems to have turned what was a winning situation for the Dems into a disaster. For a moment there, it looked as though Republicans (who control the Senate) were ready to agree to incumbent protection plans for each chamber – and give the kiss-off to Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant, who wanted to take a more aggressive approach. But McCoy crumbed the play, releasing a statement saying… well, click the link for the whole thing – it’s really berserk. He says he won’t recognize any further maps from the Senate, he considers the whole thing a done deal, and he’s sending the maps to the Department of Justice for preclearance – even though they haven’t been passed into law! I have a strong feeling that he’ll get an envelope back marked “Return to Sender,” but the more important fact is that this now strengthened Bryant’s hand and probably makes Senate Republicans much more likely to jettison a bipartisan gerrymander and take Bryant’s approach. Ah, well, it’s just delaying the inevitable – even with the most favorable of maps, I can’t imagine Dems in MS holding the House for very long.

• New Jersey: It’s a classic problem, and one that puts Republicans in the rare position of siding with minority communities, while the Democrats are on the outs. Hispanic and Asian political leaders in New Jersey are unhappy with their communities’ under-representation in the legislature, and they want to see more majority-minority districts drawn. Republicans are all too eager to help – and Democrats are, of course, unhappy, because that means packing Dem voters into darker-blue districts, rather than spreading them around to make more seats competitive. This is a miniature, state-level version of what happened in the early 90s on the federal level and reflects an ongoing, hard-to-resolve tension.

(Cross-posted from Daily Kos.)

We asked our pollster, Public Policy Polling, to test the waters in all eight Republican-held state Senate districts in Wisconsin which are currently the target of recall efforts. PPP went into the field over the weekend, and the numbers we got back are very interesting. I’ve summarized the key results in the table below.

We asked a battery of questions in each poll (links to full results are at the end of this post). One basic question asked whether respondents approve of the job performance of each senator-those numbers are in the first two columns after each incumbent’s name. Four senators have negative ratings, and one is even-not particularly welcome news for Republicans.

We also asked whether respondents support or oppose the idea of recalling their senators. As you can see in the next pair of columns, this question doesn’t test as well-pluralities say they favor recall in just three districts-but in a way, it’s the least important question we asked. As long as canvassers collect enough valid signatures, a recall election will happen automatically under Wisconsin law. So while this is helpful information to have, it is far from dispositive, especially when contrasted with the next pair of columns.

“Vote Incumbent” and “Vote Democrat” summarize data from our most critical question. We asked poll-takers whether, in a hypothetical election that would be held later this year, they’d support the incumbent (whom we mentioned by name), or his/her “Democratic opponent.” (This sort of question is often described as testing a “generic Democrat.”) Here, the results give us reason to be cautiously optimistic.

Three Republican incumbents actually trail “generic Dem”: Luther Olsen, Randy Hopper, and Dan Kapanke. Two more have very narrow leads and garner less than 50% support: Rob Cowles and Sheila Harsdorf. And one more, Alberta Darling, holds a clear lead but is still potentially vulnerable. (Two recall-eligible senators, Mary Lazich and Glenn Grothman, sit in extremely red districts and look to have safe leads.) These numbers suggest we have a chance to make five and possibly six recall races highly competitive.

But a key thing to remember, though, is that if any of these senators have to face a recall election, we’ll need an actual candidate to run against each of them. In that regard, Wisconsin’s recalls are very different from California’s, where in 2003 voters were simply asked if they wanted to remove Democratic Gov. Gray Davis from office. Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected (with less than a majority) by means of a separate ballot question. In my view, California’s system makes it easier to boot an office-holder, because at bottom, the first question simply asks if you’d prefer some other-any other-alternative. If your answer was “yes,” you then had your choice on the second question, whether it was Arnold (R) or Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante (D) or Gary Coleman (?). In Wisconsin, if a recall election makes it on to the ballot, there is no California-style first question-we go directly to a head-to-head between candidates (with a possible stop along the way for primaries). So for a recall to succeed, we’ll need to convince voters to support a real live Democrat-and that means we’ll have to recruit some good candidates.

As the recall process moves forward, you’ll want to bookmark this link and keep it handy. It’s a chart of the 2004 & 2008 presidential results in each state Senate district in Wisconsin. While not a perfect measurement, the presidential numbers offer a clear baseline for a rough-cut assessment of how competitive each district is likely to be. Of course, many other factors are involved, but if you click the link, you’ll understand immediately why Kapanke is in such trouble – he’s in the bluest district held by a Republican, one that went 61% for Obama and 53% for Kerry. A little further down the list, you’ll see that Olsen, Cowles, Hopper, Harsdorf, and Darling all occupy districts with roughly similar presidential results that hover in swingy territory, so you can see why at least the first four are at risk. Darling’s stronger performance is somewhat surprising, given that senators in comparable districts all do worse, but even she is not out of the woods. Bringing up the rear are Lazich and Grothman, who holds the most Republican seat in the entire state. It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which either of them could fall.

One final detail: You’ll notice that in the table up above, the last column reads “Number of Responses.” That refers to how many people actually completed our poll when we called them. If you’re familiar with electoral polling at all, those numbers are simply eye-popping, particularly for state senate districts. Our target was 600 to 800 respondents per poll, and yet we got well into the two thousand range for all but one of them (and even that outlier had over 1,300). What does this mean? The only reasonable conclusion is that an unusually high proportion of Wisconsinites are tuned into this conflict, and when given the opportunity to make their opinions heard, they jumped at the chance. While we can’t yet say for sure whether the enthusiasm gap has been erased, we do know that folks in Wisconsin are very definitely paying attention.

And so, of course, are we. As the situation warrants, we’ll revisit these districts and test the poll numbers again. For now, though, we wait on the outcome of the petition drive to force these recall elections in the first place. Then the battle will really begin.

Full Results: Cowles | Darling | Harsdorf | Olsen | Hopper | Grothman | Lazich | Kapanke