Swing State Project

• FL-Sen: Another sign that the wheels are falling off the Marco Rubio bus: he’s cutting back on senior staff. His campaign manager, Brian Seitchik, will be off the payroll next week, and his fundraiser, Ann Herberger, is also gone. About the changes, Rubio said, “This is not a purge or anything, quite the contrary.” In other words, they’re probably out of money.

• NH-Sen: Ovide Lamontagne picked up a key backer, as the conservative base continues to look for an alternative to the may-be-a-RINO Kelly Ayotte. Former State Rep. Maureen Mooney, who was John McCain’s liaision to NH conservatives during the 2008 primary campaign, has said she’s backing Lamontagne, saying he’s a “principled and experienced conservative.”

• SC-Sen, SC-01: Interesting rumblings out of the Palmetto State: now that Jim DeMint has turned himself into Public Enemy #1 in the last few weeks, all of a sudden people sound interested in challenging him. State Senator Brad Hutto was in Washington meeting with the DSCC about the race; Hutto has been looking for a chance to move up, starting with the 2010 governor’s race, but deferred to friend and state Sen. Vincent Shaheen on that one. Attorney Ashley Cooper (a former Fritz Hollings aide) is reportedly also interested in taking on DeMint, or also in running in the 1st, where Rep. Henry Brown barely won last year.

• NC-Gov: Civitas, a local Republican pollster, stops to gawk at the Bev Perdue trainwreck, finding that her approval is at 30/44 and that right now only 26% would vote to re-elect her. They also look all the way ahead to 2012 and find that Republican Charlotte mayor Pat McCrory would win a rematch, 46-32.

• MN-06: Independence Party 2008 candidate Bob Anderson, whose 10% of the vote may have tipped the balance to Rep. Michele Bachmann last year, says that he may make another run in 2010. (Don’t forget that while Elwyn Tinklenberg received the IP’s endorsment in 2008, Minnesota doesn’t allow fusion voting with candidates running on multiple ballot lines, so Anderson went ahead and ran in the primary, winning it and getting the IP nod for the general. Our best hope here may be for Minnesota to follow Oregon’s recent lead and legalize fusion voting.)

• NY-23: In the 23rd, with Darrel Aubertine out (and New York Senate fans heaving a sigh of relief), the Dems still seem to be casting about for a replacement. Yesterday evening was the extended deadline for receiving applications, and some of the remaining serious contenders still haven’t applied. Dan French, a lawyer and former Daniel Moynihan aide, and former NY-23 candidate Robert Johnson seemed to have not been planning to run (but contingent on Aubertine running), and said yesterday that they were interested but would have to have the requisite talk with their families first. (So do the Dems extend the deadline again? That remains to be seen.) 2008 candidate Michael Oot has already submitted his application, though. Another name for the Conservative Party nom has surfaced: “locally famous” conservative activist Jon Alvarez, who is currently serving in Iraq.

I, personally, am on the left wing of the Democratic party.  On that political compass thing, I get about – 9 on social and – 8 on economic issues.  I like my rep (Nadler, NY-08) pretty well. But NY-08 is not the country.  And, although I wish I lived in a country where Nadler was a typical representative, and Sanders a typical Senator, I don’t.

In this diary, I will attempt to use data and analysis to answer several questions.  Using data and analysis is what I do for a living (I’m a statistician) and I find it fun (I’m a geek).  The questions:

Who are the Blue Dogs?

Why are they Blue Dogs?

Should we get rid of Blue Dogs and if so, Which ones? and How?

Are Blue Dogs as bad as Republicans?

more below the fold

Who are Blue Dogs?



There seem to be two common uses of the term.  One is for a group of self-identified members of congress – Democrats in the House who have centrist voting patterns.  But not all these people are the most conservative Democrats, and some very conservative House Dems are not self-identified.  Another use is for any conservative Democrat, especially in the House.  I’m going to use this second definition. So, who are they?

First, we need some measure of conservatism vs. liberalism.  There are several possibilities, but one I like a lot is the scale developed by Keith Poole and his colleagues called optimal classification, and available at VoteView.  I gave more details on this, and why I like it, in this diary.  Next, we need to decide how conservative a person has to be to be a  Blue Dog.  Any decision is arbitrary, so, let’s look at the 50 most conservative Democrats in the 110th House. (The list is below, in the table).

Why are they Blue Dogs?

I think the positions a representative takes are going to be some mix of his or her own views and his or her perceptions of what voters want.  I’m not sure how this mix is balanced, and it probably varies from person to person.  Certainly there is some overlap.  But people who are way out of step with their district are likely to face strong challenges, and may lose.

So, people are Blue Dogs from a combination of their own views and their constituents.  We don’t have good ways of looking at the representatives’ own views, but we do have some for constituents.  One good look is how they vote for POTUS.  The nice thing about this is that it doesn’t depend on polls, it isn’t issue by issue specific, and it’s easily available.  I’ll look at Obama % and Kerry %.

If a representatives votes (represented by VoteView rank) are out of line with the constituents’ views (represented by the Cook number), then it’s likely that those views are personal; and those are districts where challenges are more likely to succeed.  If the rep’s views are too conservative, they may get replaced by a Republican; if too liberal, they may get replaced by a more progressive Democrat.

Should we get rid of Blue Dogs; which ones?  

Clearly, if we can replace a BD with a progressive, we should.  But BDs are better than Repubs (see below).  One way to judge the likelihood of this is by the POTUS vote; a district that went for Obama may be ready for a progressive.

So, let’s look at some data:

Rep and district       Rank     Obama %       Kerry %   Notes

Lampson   TX-22         1       41              36      Now R

Cazayoux  LA-06         2       41              40      Now R

Childers  MS-01         3       37              37

Barrow    GA-12         4       36              34      

Marshall  GA-08         5       43              39

Altmire   PA-04         6       44              45

Donnelly  IN-02         7       54              43      

Carney    PA-10         8       45              40

Ellsworth IN-08         9       47              38

Shuler    NC-11        10       47              43

Giffords  AZ-08        11       46              47

Mitchell  AZ-05        12       47              45

Hill      IN-09        13       48              40

Foster    IL-14        14       55              44     Native son O

Matheson  UT-02        15       40              31

Bean      IL-08        16       56              44     Native son O

Boren     OK-02        17       35              41

Gillibran NY-20        18       51              46     Murphy (D)    

McIntyre  NC-07        19       47              44

Mahoney   FL-16        20       47              43     Now R        

Davis     TN-04        21       34              41

Tanner    TN-08        22       43              47

Taylor    MS-04        23       32              31

Melancon  LA-03        24       37              41

Space     OH-18        25       45              43          

Cuellar   TX-28        26       56              46     Native son B

Herseth   SD-AL        27       45              38

Peterson  MN-07        28       47              43

Ross      AR-04        29       39              48

Boyda     KS-02        30       43              40     Now R

Chandler  KY-06        31       43              41

Cramer    AL-05        32       38              41     Griffith (D)    

Gordon    TN-06        33       37              40

Skelton   MO-04        34       38              35

Salazar   CO-03        35       48              44

Wilson    OH-06        36       48              49

Boyd      FL-02        37       45              46

Perlmutt  CO-07        38       59              51      Primary!

Klein     FL-22        39       52              53      Primary?

Costa     CA-20        40       60              51      Primary!

Cardoza   CA-18        41       59              49      Primary!

Edwards   TX-17        42       32              30

Davis     AL-07        43       74              65      Retiring!

Spratt    SC-05        44       46              42

Cooper    TN-05        45       56              52      Primary!

Moore     KS-03        46       51              44

Pomeroy   ND-AL        47       45              36

Boswell   IA-03        48       53              48      

Holden    PA-17        49       48              42

Lipinski  IL-03        50       64              59      Primary?      

Native son O indicates that the vote for Obama in Illinois districts may not be indicative of a trend to Democrats; similarly, native son B indicates that TX districts may be less conservative than Bush’s numbers appear.

The two most conservative Democrats were replaced by Republicans.  And of the ten most conservative, only one district voted for Obama or for Kerry.

The most conservative representative to be replaced by a Democrat was Giilibrand, and Murphy’s election was, as you may recall, very close.

The most conservative Democrat whose district went for both Kerry and Obama is Perlmutter, in CO-07.  This looks like a primary possibility; especially since CO-07 gave Obama a considerable margin.  We also have Klein and Costa being too conservative for their districts.  Davis (AL-07) is way too conservative for his district, but he’s running for statewide office ….let’s get a real progressive in there, pronto!  Lipinski (IL-03) looks like a perfect person to primary, and we tried in 2008.

This list gives us 6 races to concentrate on; if we can replace those 6 with more progressive people, that would be excellent for us.  It is unlikely that any will be lost to the Repubs.

How should we get rid of Blue Dogs?

There are two ways, I think.  Above, I outlined a strategy for identifying BD who can be safely and sensibly primaried.  But that’s just one way to get rid of Blue Dogs.  The other way is to get on the ground and work to convince the people that liberal ideas are good.  Get them writing to their congress people.  Get them active!  While I found 6 people above who do not represent their constituents’ views; there are an unfortunate number who do represent their views, because there are too many conservatives in the USA.  It’s hard to convince a RWNJ that liberalism/progressivism is good.  But, people who are centrists are halfway there already.

This works two ways: First, if the BD hear from a lot of people, they might change their votes (it could happen!).  And, if they don’t change their votes? Well, elections come every two years.

Are Blue Dogs as bad as Republicans?

The short answer is “no”.

The slightly longer answer is to look at the Vote View methodology and notice that it perfectly separates the parties (this is usually not the case; prior to the 109th House, there was usually some overlap).

Another slightly longer answer is to say that the most conservative Democrat is somewhat similar to the most liberal Republican; but more similar to typical Democrats than to typical Republicans.

The really full answer is to look at individuals.  None of the Blue Dogs is anywhere near as bad as, say, Flake of AZ-06, or any of the other RWNJ.  A lot of votes in congress are lopsided; if a bill passes 400-20 then voting for it is not a big deal. In general, voting on close votes is more crucial.  In the 110th Congress, here is a list of votes with close margins.  But the list is mostly not too informative, as it doesn’t give much detail about the bills; still, we can probably assume that we would want people to take the Democratic position rather than the Republican one.

Let’s look at those 50 Blue Dogs again, and their votes on some close bills that were about policy and of general interest.

I’ve listed: Vote 189 on taxpayer assistance, which was tied (21 D in favor, 207 opposed; 3 R opposed, 189 in favor).

vote 316 which amended appropriations for Homeland Security; passed by 3 votes (209 D in favor, 16 opposed).  

vote 814 which was a broad appropriations bill, failed 212-216 (216  opposed, 14 in favor; R unanimous in favor).

vote 382 on the budget (passed 214-210, 214 D in favor, 14 opposed; R unanimous opposed)

and

vote 658 which is (I am pretty sure) the big Obama stimulus package (passed 213-208, 213 D in favor, 16 opposed)

A D indicates the person voted the way most of the Democrats voted; R Republican, and ? no data or not voting

Rep and district       189    316   814   382   658  

Lampson   TX-22          R     D     D     R     R

Cazayoux  LA-06          D     ?     ?     R     R

Childers  MS-01          ?     ?     ?     R     R

Barrow    GA-12          R     R     R     R     D

Marshall  GA-08          R     R     R     ?     D

Altmire   PA-04          R     R     R     D     D

Donnelly  IN-02          R     R     D     R     D

Carney    PA-10          R     D     R     D     D

Ellsworth IN-08          R     R     R     R     D

Shuler    NC-11          R     R     R     ?     R

Giffords  AZ-08          R     R     R     R     D

Mitchell  AZ-05          R     R     D     R     D

Hill      IN-09          R     D     R     R     R

Foster    IL-14          R     ?     ?     R     D

Matheson  UT-02          R     R     R     R     D

Bean      IL-08          R     R     R     ?     D

Boren     OK-02          R     R     R     R     D

Gillibran NY-20          R     D     D     D     R  

McIntyre  NC-07          R     D     R     D     D

Mahoney   FL-16          R     D     D     D     D

Davis     TN-04          D     D     D     D     D

Tanner    TN-08          D     R     D     D     R

Taylor    MS-04          D     D     R     D     R

Melancon  LA-03          D     D     D     D     D

Space     OH-18          R     R     D     D     D

Cuellar   TX-28          D     D     D     D     D

Herseth   SD-AL          D     D     D     D     R

Peterson  MN-07          D     D     D     D     D  

Ross      AR-04          D     D     D     D     D  

Boyda     KS-02          D     D     D     D     D

Chandler  KY-06          R     D     D     D     D  

Cramer    AL-05          D     R     D     D     D

Gordon    TN-06          D     D     D     D     D

Skelton   MO-04          D     D     D     D     D

Salazar   CO-03          D     D     D     D     D

Wilson    OH-06          D     D     D     D     D

Boyd      FL-02          D     D     D     D     R

Perlmutt  CO-07          D     D     D     D     D

Klein     FL-22          D     D     D     D     D

Costa     CA-20          D     D     D     D     ?

Cardoza   CA-18          D     D     D     D     D

Edwards   TX-17          D     D     D     D     D

Davis     AL-07          D     D     D     D     D

Spratt    SC-05          D     D     D     D     D

Cooper    TN-05          D     D     D     D     R

Moore     KS-03          D     D     D     D     D

Pomeroy   ND-AL          D     D     D     D     D

Boswell   IA-03          D     R     D     D     D

Holden    PA-17          D     D     D     D     D

Lipinski  IL-03          D     D     D     D     D

That is, of the 50 most conservative Democrats, every one voted with the Democrats on at least one of these 5 close and key votes.

If even a large handful of these Democrats were replaced by Republicans, some of those bills would have failed.

Here is another Democratic gerrymander, this time in Pennsylvania. I am not sure if we can pick up the entire legislature and retain the governorship. If we did, they would probably try to protect new Democrats instead of heading for an all out gerrymander. In my opinion, my map is not too realistic but just in case the Democrats have total control…. This map protects new Democrats while eliminating one Republican seat and endangering the incumbents of two others. I eliminated Charlie Dent’s seat assuming he survives 2010.I am aiming for a 14-4 Democratic delegation as a revenge for the planned 13-6 Republican delegation. My only worry for the Democrats is the 11th district with Paul Kanjorski but even there he should be safe. Here are the maps.

East Pennsylvania

West Pennsylvania

Philadelphia Area

Pittsburgh Area

District 1 Robert Brady (D) Dark Blue

Robert Brady’s district was safe with the old map and will remain safe this time, even though his district is less safe. I removed some African American areas in western Philadelphia and Delaware County. I added some white parts of Delaware County but they should not affect the voting habits of this district much. Obama probably won 73% of the vote here. Racial stats are 19% African American, 18% Hispanic, 6% Asian and 53% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 2 Chaka Fattah (D) Dark Green

For population purposes, I had to send this district up into some white parts of Montgomery County but that should not alter the voting of this district. It stays mostly the same. Obama probably won 85% of the vote here. Racial stats are 58% African American and 32% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 3 Kathy Dahlkemper (D) Dark Purple

I was worried about her because she is a freshman. To protect her, I removed all of heavily Republican Butler County and substituted it with some marginal territory along the border. I extended it into the middle of the state to pick up Elk County which Obama barely won. I probably raised Obama’s performance to 53%. She should be safe without a strong challenge. Racial stats are 92% White. Status is Likely Democrat.

District 4 Jason Altmire (D) vs. Tim Murphy (R) Red

To strengthen Altmire, I removed all of Butler County and added some of marginal Washington County. I slipped in some precincts in Pittsburgh as well. He appeared safe in 2008 and he should be even safer. Murphy will probably run in the heavily Republican 17th district so Altmire should not worry. McCain probably won 50% of the vote here. Racial stats are 5% African American and 91% White. Status is Likely Democrat.

District 5 G.T Thompson (R) Yellow

I made this district more Republican to strengthen Democrats in the 3rd and 10th districts. This district basically goes further east, loses Penn State and stays heavily Republican. McCain probably won 63% of the vote here. Racial stats are 95% White, the whitest district in Pennsylvania. Status is Safe Republican.

District 6 Open (Gerleach) (R) Teal

Trust me; this district is not electing a Republican anytime soon. With Gerleach out, this new district would oust any Republican who might have won in 2010. That will probably not be necessary because the Democrats have some good candidates here. The changes I made were removing most of Chester County while giving the district more of Montgomery County. For good measure, 9% of the district is in Philadelphia. The part it has is 75% African American. I see almost no way for a Republican to win here. Obama probably won 64% of the vote here. Racial stats are 13% African American and 78% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 7 Open Joe Sestak (D) Gray

I’m a bit worried about this district because I had to extend it all the way out into Republican areas in Lancaster County. I definitely offset Republican margins from Lancaster by putting in heavily African American parts of Philadelphia in this district. Since Chester County is trending Democratic, this district should stay with the Democrats. Obama probably won 57% of the vote here. Racial stats are 14% African American and 77% White. Status is Safe/Likely Democrat.

District 8 Patrick Murphy (D) Light Purple

All I did here was help shore up Murphy by putting in more of Philadelphia which is now 22% of the district’s population. I also removed part of northern Bucks County. Murphy should be fine now. Obama probably won 57% of the vote here. Racial stats are 86% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 9 Bill Shuster (R) Bright Blue

I kept the district pretty much the way it is. All I did was move it east so that it is only a few miles away from Harrisburg. I took in Snyder and Union Counties to help strengthen Chris Carney. Anyway, Shuster is safe in the most Republican district in Pennsylvania. McCain probably won 65% of the vote here. Racial stats are 94% White. Status is Safe Republican.

District 10 Chris Carney (D) Pink

If Chris Carney does not represent this district, he probably lost in a primary, retired or the Republicans found the strongest candidate possible. I took out all the heavily Republican western counties and snaked the district into Northampton County (Bethlehem) and Monroe County which voted for Bush but McCain lost it by 17 points. The rural counties to the north lean Republican but they only gave McCain a combined 6,000 vote margin. The only worry I have is that Dent will run but the Democratic margins from Lackawanna, Luzerne and Monroe Counties should offset Dent’s margins from his old district. With the inclusion of most of Lackawanna County are more of Luzerne, Carney is safe. Obama probably won 55% of the vote here. Racial stats are 87% White and 5% Hispanic. Status is Safe Democrat, Likely Democrat if Dent runs.

District 11 Paul Kanjorski (D) Light Green

I am a bit worried about Kanjorski. I had to shore up other Democrats so he lost a few Democratic areas. I tried to help him by sending his district into Lehigh County (Allentown) which Obama won by 15 points. Republican Charlie Dent who represents the 15th district in Allentown may want to run here. Kanjorski had a tight race in 2008 but if he loses, a strong Democrat will probably beat the Republican who won it. Obama probably won 56% of the vote here. Racial stats are 84% White and 9% Hispanic. Status is Lean Democrat.

District 12 John Murtha (D) Indigo

Due to calling his constituents “racists,” Murtha had a ‘tough’ race in 2008 but won by 16 points. The Republicans probably will challenge him again. I’m not the biggest fan of John Murtha myself but we need as many Democrats as possible and a safe district when he retires. To shore him up, I removed all of Armstrong County and part of Westmoreland County. I added in a slice of Alleghany County, all of marginal Fayette County and Penn State. Murtha should be happy. Obama probably won 52% of the vote here. Racial stats are 92% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 13 Allyson Schwartz (D) Tan

I had to change Schwartz’s district quite a bit. First, I took out much of Philadelphia and replaced it with part of Bucks and Northumberland Counties. Since those areas both voted Democratic, Schwartz should be safe. She should worry about a primary challenge from the Bethlehem area but her Philadelphia base should probably keep her in Congress. Obama probably won 58-59% of the vote here. Racial stats are 7% African American, 6% Hispanic and 80% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 14 Mike Doyle (D) Algae Green

To help protect Altmire, I had to remove the western part of Pittsburgh from this district and substitute it with more Conservative suburbs to the north and south. They should not be nearly enough to endanger Doyle, he appears safe. Obama probably won 65% of the vote here. Racial stats are 19% African American and 74% White. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 15 Tim Holden (D) Orange

Even though Holden seems pretty safe (he won by 28 points in 2008,) I figured that the Republicans would eventually field a strong candidate against him. To help Holden, I added part of Allentown and removed part of Republican Lebanon County. Holden should have no problem at all now that his district is more Democratic. If Charlie Dent ran here, he would probably lose. Obama probably won 51%-52% of the vote here. Racial stats are 7% African American and 5% Hispanic. Status is Safe Democrat.

District 16 Joe Pitts (R) Light green (in Lancaster County)

I am not completely sure if we can knock off Pitts but we definitely have a good shot at it. I removed some of the rural areas in Lancaster County making the district more centered on the city Lancaster. Even though I included part of Republican Lebanon County, I added more of Democratic Reading. The final blow to Pitts is that even though he loses part of Democratic leaning Chester County, he gets heavily Democratic areas in Delaware County and even a couple of precincts in Philadelphia. This should attract some Delaware County Democrats to run. It should be a tight race because Pitts is pretty entrenched yet his margins are dropping. Obama probably won 52% of the vote here. Racial stats are 9% African American, 14% Hispanic and 73% White. Status is Toss Up.

District 17 No Incumbent (R) Dark Purple

If I were Tim Murphy, I would move to this district and run here. It contains part of his old district and takes in the heavily Republican areas of Butler and Armstrong Counties. Other Republicans will probably aim for this seat but Murphy should probably beat them. McCain probably won 61% of the vote here. Racial stats are 95% White. Status is Safe Republican.

District 18 Todd Platts (R) Yellow (on the southern border)

This district stays basically the same. All I changed was that I shrank the district and added some rural areas in Lancaster. Platts is fine. McCain probably won 59% of the vote here. Racial stats are 89% White. Status is Safe Republican.

Having grown up in North Carolina and being a distant relative to “Senator Sam”, I’ve been told many times that his Class 3 Senate seat has been cursed.  Is this true?  Here are the facts:

(1)  Sam Ervin was a conservative Democrat that held the highest regards for the U.S. Constitution.  He was often at odds with the Democratic party on key issues, especially civil rights.

(2)  Sam Ervin was the chair of the Watergate Committee.  

(3)  Sam Ervin’s replacement, Bob Morgan, was from a similar mold as Sam, but not as eloquent in delivery.  Having served for one term, he was defeated in 1980 due in part from the Reagan Revolution.

(4)  Morgan’s successor, John East, was a conservative Republican East Carolina professor from the same cloth as Jesse Helms.  East was bound in a wheelchair, had been suffering, and commits suicide in 1986.

(5)  Jim Broyhill is appointed to replace John East.  Broyhill, a Republican, faced former NC Governor Terry Sanford in the general election.  Sanford won due to name recognition and the fact that 1986 was a Democratic year.

(6)  Terry Sanford votes against the first Gulf War, angering many North Carolinians.  Sanford also suffered from health issues and may wondered if he could serve another 6 years.  Lauch Faircloth (R), a former Democrat and ally of Sanford, defeats Sanford in a close election.

(7)  Faircloth appears to be a clone of Jesse Helms.  He had a fond dislike for President Clinton, making some politically incorrect comment about Clinton’s family and marriage.  Faircloth was also advancing in age.  John Edwards, a young, eloquent speaker, runs as a moderate as a Democrat and defeats Faircloth in another close election.

(8)  John Edwards has further political ambitions and decides in 2003 not to run for another term.  Richard Burr (R) defeats Erskine Bowles (D) in the general election.

(9)  Richard Burr has served 4 1/2 undistinguished years as a US Senator.  Many North Carolinians have no clue that he is their US Senator.  He’s displayed poor judgment (i.e. telling his wife to withdraw as much money as allowable from the ATM because of the financial crisis).

Is this seat cursed?  Or is it the fact that mitigating circumstances has prevented the incumbent from serving more than one term?

That’s the word on the street, according to the Chicago Tribune:

Three-term state comptroller Dan Hynes has told top Democrats he intends to seek the party’s nomination for governor, setting up a February primary challenge to Gov. Pat Quinn, sources familiar with Hynes’ conversations said today. […]

The comptroller starts the race with a major fundraising advantage. Hynes has $3.5 million banked after raising more than $905,000 in the first half of the year. Quinn raised more than $860,000 in that time period but had a little more than $700,000 left.

The sources, who asked not to be identified so as to not pre-empt Hynes’ official announcement, said the comptroller discussed his plans to run with leading Illinois Democrats. No timetable was given for Hynes’ formal entry into the race, but politicians can begin soliciting signatures for their candidacy petitions on Aug. 4.

You may remember Dan Hynes was one of the also-rans of the 2004 Democratic Senatorial primary, taking nearly 24% of the vote to Barack Obama’s 53%. He’s been looking to move up the ladder ever since, and was considered a likely AG candidate before Lisa Madigan announced her plans to seek re-election. The Tribune lays out what will likely be the battle lines of this primary:

As the keeper of the state’s checkbook, Hynes has become a growing critic of Quinn, noting in late June that the governor had “confused” legislators and the public and inciting “fear and panic” by promoting a “false choice” of either an income-tax hike or cuts in social services.

Hynes said then that Quinn had failed to cut the state budget, a necessary component in trying to gain public support for increasing taxes. Hynes advocated cuts of about $1.2 billion and new casinos, higher cigarette taxes, the closing of some corporate loopholes and broadening the state sales tax to luxury items as a way to raise $1.8 billion.

Earlier this month, Hynes accused Quinn of blocking legislation the comptroller pushed to impose new regulations and tougher criminal penalties for the cemetery industry, an outgrowth of the gruesome discovery of remains and double burials at Burr Oak Cemetery in Alsip. Instead, Quinn formed a commission to review cemetery regulations.

This promises to be a pretty lively fight. As an afterthought, I wonder how Hynes’ decision will affect Chris Kennedy, a man who clearly wants to run for a statewide office in 2010, but one who seems very, very confused about his options.

RaceTracker Wiki: IL-Gov

This is probably old news to all of you, but it is rather rare that a story about a House member gets reported on the half-hour evening news.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/…

The most important question for us horse-race analysts is probably, “What does this mean for whether he’s gonna be running at all, and for which seat?”.  The guy, who’s both a moderate Republican and a veteran member of Congress, is obviously aware of these shenanigans, but does he want to have to deal with them?

In other news, please say hi to Bill “Quarter Alligator” Posey on your way out.

Here’s the full statement, which includes some nice barbs at the GOP:

“There has been a lot of speculation as to whether I would run in a special election for the 23rd Congressional District.

“My priority must continue to be the work I have started in the state Senate, representing Oswego, Jefferson and St. Lawrence counties. My commitment is to the people of the 48th Senate District and has been all along. Before I could even consider the possibility of serving another eight counties, I had a duty to finish out this year’s session.

“This seat in Congress belongs to the people who live in these 11 counties, not any elected official or political party.

“Unfortunately, the National Republican Party has viewed the seat differently. National Republicans have demonstrated their belief that party registration matters more than the issues by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to attack and vilify me.  They never mentioned the important issues we care about here in the 23rd, whether it’s our military and Fort Drum, border security and international trade, agriculture, energy and the economy of the future, or rural healthcare.

“It’s no small wonder why the Washington Republicans are going extinct, and contributors should question why the money they’ve given was squandered here for no good reason at all.

“I support the process that the Democratic Party has put in place to come up with a candidate to run for the expected vacancy in the 23rd Congressional District. I’m certain the 11 county chairs involved in the process will continue to move toward finding a qualified candidate who understands the issues here and will embark on an honest campaign that puts people before politics.”

Count me as relieved. Control of the state Senate going into the next round of redistricting (both congressional and legislative) is too precious a commodity right now. We need every seat we can get in the state Senate.

While Aubertine would have been a very strong candidate for this seat, hopefully the local Democratic chairs can pick a strong, qualified nominee to give us a fighting chance against Scozzafava. More updates as we get ’em.

RaceTracker Wiki: NY-23

Quinnipiac (7/16-20, registered voters, 5/20-25 in parens, 3/26-31 in parens for Foley match-up):

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 39 (39)

Rob Simmons (R): 48 (45)

Undecided: 10 (13)

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 42 (41)

Sam Caligiuri (R): 40 (39)

Undecided: 15 (17)

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 42 (35)

Tom Foley (R): 42 (43)

Undecided: 14 (16)

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 43

Peter Schiff (R): 38

Undecided: 16

(MoE: ±2.5%)

Woof. The subtle consensus over the past couple of months has been that Dodd was beginning his slow climb back to respectability (and electoral viability) by keeping his nose clean and burying himself in the legislative process — especially since his numbers ticked upward slightly in the last Q-Poll of the race — but these numbers are still freak-nasty.

The Q also takes another look at the Dem and GOP primaries:

Chris Dodd (D-inc): 52 (44)

Merick Alpert (D): 18 (24)

Undecided: 27 (30)

(MoE: ±4%)

Rob Simmons (R): 42 (48)

Sam Caligiuri (R): 5 (10)

Tom Foley (R): 5 (n/a)

Peter Schiff (R): 0 (n/a)

Undecided: 45 (39)

(MoE: ±5%)

Well, at least those numbers look a little better for Dodd, but they’re hardly anything to brag about. On the bright side, though, Dodd’s overall favorables are inching in the right direction. After cratering in Quinnipiac’s late March survey at 30-58 (ouch!), Dodd’s currently sitting on a 40-50 favorable rating, up from 37-51 in May. Still bad, but no longer utterly toxic.

RaceTracker Wiki: CT-Sen

Strategic Vision (R) (7/17-19, likely voters, 6-12/14 in parentheses):

Roy Barnes (D): 46 (49)

Thurbert Baker (D): 31 (30)

David Poythress (D): 4 (5)

Dubose Porter (D): 3 (2)

Undecided: 16 (14)

John Oxendine (R): 38 (35)

Nathan Deal (R): 16 (12)

Karen Handel (R): 9 (13)

Eric Johnson (R): 5 (4)

Ray McBerry (R): 3 (2)

Austin Scott (R): 2 (2)

Undecided: 27 (32)

(MoE: ±3%)

Republican pollster Strategic Vision takes another look at both the primary fields in the Georgia governor’s race (sorry, no general election matchups). As their previous polls have shown, Insurance Comm. John Oxendine has a head start on the GOP field, while former Gov. Roy Barnes leads the Dems. Strategic Vision has repeatedly shown AG Thurbert Baker polling much stronger than Rasmussen.

Strategic Vision (R) (7/17-19, likely voters, 6-19/21 in parentheses):

Jon Corzine (D-inc): 38 (39)

Chris Christie (R): 53 (51)

Christopher Daggett (I): 5 (N/A)

Undecided: 4 (8)

(MoE: ±3%)

Strategic Vision also takes a look at the New Jersey’s governor’s race. This is very consistent with the most recent Quinnipiac and Rasmussen polls. Suffice it to say that if Jon Corzine is going to start making a move, now would be the time to do it.

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) got mix of good but mostly bad news with the latest Quinnipiac University Poll testing his long held Senate seat.

Overall, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination, former Congressman Rob Simmons (R-CT) has increased his lead over Dodd and now leads him 48%-39%. In May Simmons had only lead Dodd 45%-39%

Dodd also polls poorly for a longtime incumbent against poorly known Republicans in the race. Dodd is tied with former ambassador (and not former US House Speaker) Tom Foley with 42% each, and barely leads state Sen. Sam Caligiuri and investor Peter Schiff.

The poll also tested the primaries on both sides of the isle. Dodd still has some strengh left, at least with Democrats, leading former aide to Vice President Al Gore Merrick Alpert 52%-18% in the primary. On the GOP side, Simmons holds a strong 37 point lead over Foley and Caligiuri, both of whom didnt break 5%, and Schiff, who got a whopping 0%.

The best news for Dodd perhaps? Its still only 2009.

Check out the CQ story here: http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/po…