KS-Gov: Parkinson Won’t Run

The KC Star:

Kansas Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson will not run for governor in 2010, leaving the Democrats with one less candidate to replace Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Parkinson, of Olathe, said Friday that he wanted to return to private life and that he would not run for any office. […]

“I admire those who are willing and able to make the sacrifices to serve the public for their entire careers, but I’m not one of them,” Parkinson said in a statement e-mailed Friday afternoon. “As exciting as it has been to be back in public service, I look forward to returning to the private sector when our term is complete.”

With Sebelius term-limited and Parkinson retreating into private life, the Dem bench is pretty bare. The go-to guy for Team Blue appears to be state Rep. Dennis McKinney, who was recently appointed by Sebelius to be the state’s newest Treasurer.

(Big ups to TXObserver for the catch.)

IL-05: Special Election Dates Set

I guess Blago really is still Governor:

Embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) announced today that he has set April 7 as the date for the special election to fill former Rep. Rahm Emanuel’s (D) 5th district seat. […]

In a statement from his official office, Blagojevich designated a special primary election for March 3, 2009.

Roll Call has more on the likely candidates:

Among the likely Democratic contenders for the seat: state Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, state Rep. John Fritchey, former state Rep. Nancy Kaszak, who lost primaries to both Emanuel and Blagojevich, Chicago Alderman Pat O’Connor and Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley.

The Chicago Sun-Times‘ Lynn Sweet recently named Quigley, Feigenholtz, and ex-TSA official Justin Oberman as the frontrunners for the job, but we’ll see how this shakes out. At at PVI of D+18, surely this district can afford to send a strong progressive to the House.

TX-House: Craddick’s Reign as Speaker to End

Democrats in Texas came remarkably close in November to drawing into a tie in the Republican-controlled state House of Representatives where there was previously an eight-seat margin; a few dozen votes in one district that barely went the wrong way would have done the trick. However, while they don’t have control over the chamber, there’s been a steady flow of good news out of Austin over the last few days: it looks like a combination of Democrats plus insurgent Republicans are poised to replace Speaker Tom Craddick with fellow GOPer Joe Straus. As of today, Straus reportedly has secured pledges of 96 members (out of 150). This includes all Democrats except one, plus several dozen Republicans (with their numbers sure to continue to grow).

Now, before you get too happy, remember that Straus is a Republican, and a conservative one at that (although more from the Chamber of Commerce wing of the party than the truly unhinged), leaving the actual legislative agenda probably little changed. (And more importantly, for the Dems to have a meaningful seat at the redistricting table in Texas in 2010, they’ll need to actually control the chamber.)

But being rid of Craddick is a very welcome development, as he was from the hardcore knuckle-dragger wing of the GOP and, back in the day, Tom DeLay’s prime enforcer/enabler at the legislative level. Craddick, for instance, was at the core of the 2004 DeLay-mander that cut a swath through U.S. House Democrats from Texas. Craddick has even been the target of previous attempts by his own party to remove from the speaker’s seat, over his attempts to create a mini-K Street in Austin and wield power in the House through lobbyists and campaign contributions. Today, both parties are saying “good riddance.”

MN-Sen: Board of Canvassers Certifies Win for Franken

Da Hill:

The Minnesota Board of Canvassers certified Democrat Al Franken as winner of the state’s Senate race, but incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman’s (R) attorneys have vowed to challenge the decision.

After two months of political and legal wrangling by both campaigns since Election Day, the board officially recognized Franken as the victor, marking the latest in a number of dramatic turns of events that have characterized the state’s Senate election.

The board certified Franken’s 225-vote lead over Coleman, moving the Democrat one step closer to unseating the first-term lawmaker. That tally includes both the hand recount of votes throughout the state, as well as hundreds of absentee ballots that had previously been disqualified for no stated, legal reason.

Coleman’s campaign has said it will file an election challenge within the seven days required by Minnesota law. The challenge is expected to revolve around so-called “duplicate” ballots that Coleman alleges were counted twice, as well as an additional 650 disqualified absentee ballots that the incumbent’s campaign argues should have been counted. The Minnesota Supreme Court has rejected lawsuits by Coleman on both issues, saying those challenges are better suited to be handled by the Board of Canvassers.

And, of course, earlier in the day, there was this:

The action came hours after the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected a bid by Coleman to have hundreds of rejected absentee ballots considered in the recount, prompting the Coleman campaign to say that an election contest, or lawsuit,  “is now inevitable.”

The Supreme Court did not issue an opinion on the merits of Coleman’s claim that the ballots, from mostly Republican-leaning areas, may have been wrongly rejected, saying he could later pursue an “election contest,” or lawsuit, to make his case. Coleman recount attorney Fritz Knaak said the campaign would take that path.

“Given our campaign’s unwavering commitment to ensuring that the vote of no Minnesotan is disenfranchised, today’s ruling by the Minnesota Supreme Court is both disappointing and disheartening,” Knaak said in a statement.  

He also said: “Today’s ruling, which effectively disregards the votes of hundreds of Minnesotans, ensures that an election contest is now inevitable. The Coleman campaign has consistently and continually fought to have every validly cast vote counted, and for the integrity of Minnesota’s election system, we will not stop now.”

Oh that is just rich. So rich. Anyone remember when dickface Norm Coleman asked Franken to concede the race, even when an automatic recount loomed? Norm Coleman: once a dickface, always a dickface.

Anyway, the Strib has a few more details on the looming legal battle:

An election contest must be filed within seven days. It would be presided over by a three-judge panel appointed by Minnesota Chief Justice Eric Magnuson. An election certificate could not be issued before a contest is completed.

Such a legal showdown could take weeks to resolve. In addition to the Coleman campaign’s request to have the absentee ballots reconsidered, a lawsuit also include claims by Coleman that some votes in Democratic-leaning areas were counted twice.

The writing is pretty clearly on the wall here, but it brings me great joy to know that Coleman will spend the foreseeable future agonizing over this painfully close loss.

NY-Sen-B: Cuomo Now Leads Kennedy as Voters’ Preference

PPP (1/3-4, registered voters):

Andrew Cuomo (D): 58 (23)

Caroline Kennedy (D): 27 (44)

Undecided: 14 (8)

(MoE: ±3.7%)

Something big has happened over the last few weeks in the “race” to succeed Hillary Clinton as New York’s junior senator, according to the trendlines set by the new PPP poll. The Kennedy boomlet seems to have crested and is receding, suggesting that her awkward media rollout and halting answers to questions has prompted something of a backlash. (In fact, 44% of those surveyed state that their opinion of Kennedy has become less favorable since she started publicly campaigning for the seat.)

However, there is one important apples ‘n’ oranges problem here. The month-old PPP poll was a) only of Democrats, rather than all New York voters like this one, and b) included a whole raft of other candidates instead of just the big 2, although none of them polled above the single digits. The month-old Marist poll (which was of registered voters, and found Kennedy and Cuomo tied at 25%, with 26% undecided and the balance going to other candidates) might be a better reference point, although even if you use that as a benchmark, you still have a pretty significant Kennedy collapse. Another approach is to delve into the crosstabs, which indicate in the current sample that Cuomo leads Kennedy 54-34 among Democrats only (with 12% undecided)… again, a pretty steep turnaround.

Of course, there’s only one voter in this race, and if there’s any substance to the trial balloons floated by the Paterson camp last Friday, he may well be on track to pick Kennedy anyway.

TN-Gov: Wamp is In

Roll Call:

Rep. Zach Wamp (R) announced Monday morning that he would run for governor in Tennessee in 2010, creating an open House seat in what should be a safe Republican district.

The decision by the seven-term Congressman came one day after former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) announced he would not seek the gubernatorial post. Since then, the Republican field has opened up and Wamp’s name had been mentioned along with Memphis District Attorney Bill Gibbons and Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam.

According to The Hill, Gibbons has also thrown his hat into the ring, ensuring a chance at some nice primary fireworks here. (For more on the contours of the GOP’s internal battle lines, check out this piece from the Nashville Post.)  And as David notes below, open seat fans should probably not get their hopes up over the vacancy in Wamp’s R+9 district.

Wamp’s retirement brings the number of confirmed Republican open seats up to three (Pete Hoekstra in MI-02 and Jerry Moran in KS-01 being the other two), but none of these seats could be called low-hanging fruit for Democrats by any means.

Well F*** Me. (Or, Some Very Generalized Thoughts, For Whatever They’re Worth).

My apologies if this is overly rant-ish.

Ever since Novemeber 5th, it seems as if I can’t venture into the blogosphere without wanting a bottle of Prozac nearby.  Apparently, while I wasn’t paying attention (audaciously daring as I did to drink in the joy of Barack Obama’s election, for, oh, five minutes or so), the progressive movement has been all but decimated, and the Democratic Party has been reduced to an even more pathetic, value-less shell of its (way, way) former self.

The litany comes across as endless: Prop 8’s narrow passage in California; Janet Napolitano being tapped for Homeland Security, and Arizona’s governorship being handed to the GOP; Paul Carmouche’s loss in LA-04; [Indicted Dem Who Shall Not Be Named]’s loss in LA-02; the collective Senate appointment clusterf*** (since, evidently, Ted Kaufman, Michael Bennet, and Caroline Kennedy were/are the worst possible candidates imagineable); relatedly, the spectacle of Rod Blagojevich, the irrevocable taint it lays upon the Obama transition, the spinelessness of Harry Reid for offering to negotiate Roland Burris’s appointment (or was it his spinelessness for denying Democrats another reliable vote just so he could grandstand?), and Mark Kirk’s imminent, virtually inevitable ascent to the Senate; the utter inadequacy of Tim Kaine as a pick for DNC (since, as it turns out, he isn’t really on our team); the lack to date of LGBT representation in Obama’s cabinet; the SCANDALOUS! withdrawal of Bill Richardson from his nomination to head the Department of Commerce…

I could go on, but I think the general message gets across.

Practically every day I run across some message board comment invoking the specter of 1994, and how Democrats are inescapably headed toward a similar bloodbath in the not-so-distant future. I even recall one comment, on the eve of the Louisiana debacle, expressing a yearning desire that Obama had never been elected.

Huh.  That’s one opinion, I suppose.  Personally, I beg to differ.

I would ask: do any of us realistically expect a fattened majority in both Houses of Congress, and a party with unified control over government, to function completely smoothly, or to have the exact same electoral fortunes as a minority party unified in opposition against a comically unpopular president?  We all (myself included) seem to be stuck in an ’06 mindset in which any vaguely competitive contest must, by default, tilt ‘D’ in the end, and any divergence from that pattern is obviously an ominous harbinger of things to come.  Moreover, we hold No Drama Obama to an unattainable standard in which NO member of his circle can be associated with even the slightest whisper of impropriety, lest he be swiftly admonished as categorically full of crap (thanks, Politico!) just like every other politician.

Plainly I am exaggerating to a degree, and this diary isn’t meant to say that there aren’t perfectly legitimate grievances to be voiced, when clearly there are.  I mean, come on: we’re Democrats.  We draw breath to kvetch, wilt, panic, and recriminate.  It’s practically sown into our DNA.  And frankly, given the state of affairs to which the country has become sadly accustomed over the last eight years of GOP rule, we ought to hold our representatives to a higher standard, both in terms of personal ethics and ideological consistency.

Maybe it comes from my living in Downtown DC, where excitement for the Inauguration is palpable some two weeks out from the event — but I cannot help but think we’re starting to overlook the magnitude of our accomplishments.  Soon, a liberal African-American president will be working hand-in-hand with a solidly Democratic congress.  In the darkness of Election Night 2004, who among us would have had the temerity to predict that this is where we would be four years on?

And hey, even if Obama isn’t the Messiah, let’s at least revel in self-delusion for a short while longer before the real work begins.  We’ll have a whole term to develop ulcers and foster our deep-seeded fatalism.

From my own perspective, I’ve truly never been prouder to be a Democrat.  I’ve never been prouder to be a progressive.  And I’ve never been prouder to be an American.

IL-Sen: Reid Softens Stance On Burris

This looks like a pretty serious backtrack for Handsome Harry:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Sunday maintained that the appointment of Illinois Democrat Roland Burris to the Senate seat left vacant by the election of President-elect Barack Obama is under a cloud of suspicion, but the Nevada Democrat hinted the door may be open for discussion.

“I’m a trial lawyer. There’s always room to negotiate,” Reid said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“I’m a trial lawyer” – oy vey. Anyway… this is quite an about-face from last Tuesday, when Senate Dems said no way, no how to Roland Burris:

Under these circumstances, anyone appointed by Gov. Blagojevich cannot be an effective representative of the people of Illinois and, as we have said, will not be seated by the Democratic Caucus.

I think this whole episode is going to wind up being pretty embarrassing for Harry Reid, and a lot of the wounds are gonna be self-inflicted.