TN-Gov: Frist Won’t Run

Kitty Kevorkian is out:

Former U.S Senator Bill Frist announced late Sunday evening that he would not be a candidate for governor of Tennessee in 2010. Frist issued a statement to the Associated Press stating that “After significant reflection and conversations with loved ones, I have decided to remain a private citizen for the foreseeable future.”

The move by Frist dramatically opens up the Republican field, as a number of GOP gubernatorial aspirants had said that they would not make the race had Frist run.

Among those who have said that they would likely run now with Frist out is Congressman Zach Wamp of Chattanooga, District Attorney Bill Gibbons of Memphis, and Knoxville Mayor Bill Haslam.

Dem Gov. Phil Bredesen is term-limited, so this will be an open seat in 2010. I would have enjoyed seeing the hapless Frist flail about in a gubernatorial run, but at least now we will probably see a competitive GOP primary – the link cited above says Haslan and Gibbons are likely to get in with Frist gone.

Wamp, meanwhile, has always struck me as an up-and-comer in the House GOP caucus (he’s on Appropriations & he also tried to run for Majority Whip not that long ago), so I’d be a bit surprised if he jumped ship. Then again, things look awfully bleak for Republicans on the Hill, and if guys like Adam Putnam are looking to bail, then maybe Wamp is, too. Don’t get too excited about his TN-03 seat, though – it’s R+9, and I’m sure Obama did very poorly there.

NM-Gov: Richardson Withdraws as Commerce Sec’y Nominee

NYT:

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, one of the country’s most prominent Hispanic politicians and President-elect Barack Obama’s choice to be commerce secretary, on Sunday dropped out of consideration for that post. He attributed his decision to the ongoing investigation of a company that has done business with New Mexico.

Mr. Richardson said that he would continue as governor, and he added, “Let me say unequivocally that I and my administration have acted properly in all matters and that this investigation will bear out that fact.”

If Richardson does stay on as governor (something I’m not convinced of, despite his statement), then  of course Lt. Gov. (and likely successor) Diane Denish won’t get bumped up to the statehouse right away. This doesn’t change the calculus a whole lot, though, as Richardson is term-limited and we’re likely to see a serious race for this seat no matter what.

VA-Gov: Tim Kaine to Head DNC

WaPo:

Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine will become chairman of the Democratic National Committee later this month, serving as the top political messenger for Barack Obama’s administration even while he finishes his final year in the governor’s mansion, several sources said.

Kaine, who emerged as one of Obama’s vice presidential finalists this summer, will operate from Richmond in a part-time capacity until January 2010, when he will become the full-time DNC chairman. Kaine is constitutionally barred from running for reelection.

Brownsox points out that the current governor of Virginia is going to become chairman of the DNC, while a former DNC chair is trying to become governor of Virginia (Terry McAuliffe, of course).

MN-Sen: Recount Complete – Franken up 225

Strib:

Norm Coleman’s term as a U.S. senator ended at noon Washington time on Saturday, and by evening his hopes of winning a second term had been dealt an expected but serious setback as state officials counted previously rejected absentee ballots in St. Paul.

DFLer Al Franken held an unofficial lead of 225 votes over Coleman as this edition of the Star Tribune went to press, according to a newspaper tally of the officials’ count of the absentee ballots. Franken had led unofficially by 49 votes going into the day and gained a net 176 votes from the new ballots.

With the recount complete, focus immediately shifted to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which continued to consider a request from the Coleman campaign to alter the process and add more absentee ballots to be reconsidered. But by early evening there was no word from the state’s highest court as to when it would rule or hear arguments.

Coleman almost certainly can’t win no matter how many legal challenges he files. At this point, here’s the real question: Will Harry Reid fight as hard to seat Al Franken as he’s fighting not to seat Roland Burris?

Iowa caucus memories open thread

A year ago tonight, nearly 240,000 Iowans spent a couple of hours in overcrowded rooms during the Democratic precinct caucuses.

Thousands of others came to freezing cold Iowa to knock on doors or make phone calls for their presidential candidate in late December and early January.

Share any memories you have about caucusing or volunteering in this thread.

After the jump I re-posted my account of what happened at my own caucus. I was a precinct captain for Edwards.

As if I weren’t already feeling enough pressure, Jerome Armstrong, his friend Trei the videographer, Ben Smith of Politico, and a college buddy of John Edwards were all observers at my precinct caucus. Jerome gave the short version of the evening’s events here, and posted the multi-media recap here. (You can’t see me in any of the photos, but Mr. desmoinesdem is in one–I won’t say which!)

I got to my precinct a little after 6 pm. Quite a few voters had already signed in. I walked in the room and immediately saw a woman who had never caucused before sitting in the Hillary corner. I had failed to turn her out to the 2004 caucus despite multiple contacts. At that moment I thought it might be a big night for Hillary.

I saw the Richardson precinct captain setting up chairs and asked him about the reported deal to send support to Obama. (We have known each other since we both volunteered for Kerry four years ago.) At first he smiled and said he couldn’t reveal internal communications from the campaign, but then he confirmed that he had been instructed to steer voters to Obama if Richardson was not viable.

I saw the Biden precinct captain and asked him if he had been told to send support to Obama. He denied getting any instructions like that from the campaign.

I started checking Edwards supporters off my list as they came in the room. I had a list of about 50 firm supporters, plus a few dozen people we thought might be leaning our way. I was supposed to start making calls to supporters who were not there yet, but it was hard to find time, because so many Edwards supporters, including many I’d never met or spoken with, were coming to our area of the room.

I decided on the spur of the moment to focus on talking with the Biden, Dodd and Richardson supporters I recognized. I figured it was a safe bet that most of them had not heard any reports about a deal with Obama. Many of them had told me before the caucuses that Edwards was their second choice, and I wanted to get them to confirm that to me before they heard any instructions from their precinct captains.

One elderly woman apologized to me, because she’d signed a supporter card for Edwards earlier in the fall, and I’d given her a ride to an Edwards town hall meeting in November. In the last two weeks she decided to caucus for Biden, and she told me she almost didn’t show up because she was worried I’d be angry with her. I told her that of course I wasn’t angry, everyone has the right to change her mind, and Biden was a strong candidate. I asked her to keep us in mind if she needed to make a second choice, and she promised that she would be there for us.

So I shuttled back and forth between different groups, greeting new arrivals to the Edwards area and trying to touch base with people who were undecided last time I heard from them. I also handed out the bottled water I brought along, because it was getting stuffy in the room.

In theory, the caucus was to be called to order at 6:30, but so many people were still arriving that our temporary precinct chair waited until almost 7:00 to call us to order. The first items on the agenda were the election of a precinct secretary and permament precinct chair (this is basically a formality–the temporary chair is almost never challenged for this position). The precinct chair was backing Clinton, but the secretary was a rock-solid Edwards supporter.

A few minutes after 7:00, the last voters had been signed in, and they announced the total turnout for our precinct. Four years ago, we had a pretty good turnout of 175. I scoffed at the Des Moines Register poll’s prediction that 60 percent of caucus-goers would be first-timers. In that comment, I calculated that we’d need more than 300 people attending our caucus in order to have 60 percent of them be first-timers. Well, the joke was on me, because the turnout at our caucus this year was 293.

We had people in the Edwards and Clinton groups who had never caucused before, but there’s no question that the Obama corner had the largest number of first-timers. It was stunning. The chart I got from my field organizer, showing how many supporters we’d need for 1, 2, 3 or more delegates depending on how many people attended the caucus, didn’t even go past the 260s.

After the first division into preference groups, the totals were: Obama 86, Edwards 83, Clinton 63, Richardson 28, Biden 24, Dodd 9, uncommitted 2, and Kucinich 1. To be viable, candidates needed 44 supporters.

I asked people in the Edwards group to help me by approaching their own friends in other groups. At first the Richardson and Biden groups were not budging. They were trying to get people to come over from Clinton, using the logic that Clinton was way below the level needed for two delegates but could spare some supporters while remaining viable. However, the Clinton volunteers kept everyone in their corner.

Realizing they had no chance to get to the 44 people needed for viability, Richardson’s precinct captain told his group about the campaign’s strategy to go to Obama, adding that they could make up their own minds. I didn’t get an exact count, but I’m pretty sure Edwards got at least as many of the Richardson supporters, if not more. We also got a large number of the Biden supporters (including his precinct captain), part of the Dodd group, and the Kucinich supporter, who was planning to come over to us all along.

After the second division into preference groups, Edwards had 115, Obama had 104, and Clinton had 72. At first we thought we would get 3 delegates, with 2 for Obama and 1 for Clinton. However, the delegates are apportioned according to the following formula: number of supporters in group times number of delegates assigned by precinct (6), divided by total number of caucus-goers (293). That worked out to 2.35 for Edwards, 2.13 for Obama, and 1.47 for Clinton. We all got rounded down: 2 Edwards, 2 Obama, 1 Clinton.

But our precinct has to assign 6 county delegates. The precinct chair consulted the Democratic Party’s rule book while I looked over her shoulder. The precinct secretary re-did the math on her calculator as I watched. The book said that in our situation, the last delegate goes to the candidate with the decimal point closest to 0.5. Clinton was that little bit closer to 2 delegates than we were to 3 delegates.

It’s similar to what happened in my precinct in 1988. The delegates split 2-2-2 despite a fairly large difference in size between the largest and the smallest preference groups. That’s the caucus system for you.

In retrospect, the Edwards and Obama groups would have been better off helping Richardson to be viable. Then the delegates would have been split 2 Edwards, 2 Obama, 1 Clinton and 1 Richardson. But there was no way to know that, and during the realignment of course the Edwards and Obama groups were focused on attracting enough supporters to win that third delegate.

I sat down with a calculator the next day. To change the math in our favor, we needed 4 people from the Clinton group, 7 people from the Obama group or 10 people who didn’t show up to turn out and stand in the Edwards corner. I am still frustrated that I could not get Edwards that third delegate we were seeking. We exceeded the campaign’s “vote goal” for the precinct, but because of the overwhelming turnout, it wasn’t enough to win the precinct.

Every day I walk the dog by the homes of people who failed to show up last Thursday, despite telling me at some point that they supported Edwards. Several of those people either signed supporter cards or put up yard signs. Would it have helped to knock on those doors one more time, or call them again at the last minute? I was concentrating on people I considered to be less reliable voters.

Although the results in my precinct and in Iowa as a whole disappointed me, I did enjoy the caucus experience. The energy in a room packed with committed Democrats is amazing, and the competition was friendly and fair in my precinct (which, sadly, was not the case in some precincts). I don’t expect Iowa to start the presidential nominating process in the future, but I will continue to appreciate the friends and neighbors I met during my work as a precinct captain.

[NOTE from desmoinesdem, January 3, 2009: Now that Obama won the presidential election, Iowa has a much better chance of staying first in the nominating process.]

NH: Mid-Ticket Closeup: CSP/Hodes v. Shaheen

After taking a look (here and here, on SSP here and here) to see how our two re-elected reps grew in strength from ’06 to ’08, I thought it might be a good idea to see how they fared compared to Jeanne Shaheen, the next step up on the ticket (NH-Sen). It’s an especially interesting question with the first election behind us in many years without straight-ticket voting.

With very few exceptions (Danville, New Boston, and Rindge), both Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) and Paul Hodes (NH-02) gained higher vote percentages than Jeanne Shaheen in towns big and small, liberal and conservative, rural and urban.

The following charts track the ten biggest percentage discrepancies between Shea-Porter/Hodes and Shaheen for all towns and cities with more than 2000 votes cast for the congressional race in 2008. For ease of use in plugging the numbers into a spreadsheet (full data available here), I chose the lists at NHPR rather than the SoS.  Any mistakes are my own.

Town Shaheen % CSP % % Diff. Votes Cast
Rye 44.2 51.4 7.2 3693
Moltnboro 36.2 41.9 5.7 2967
Greenland 50.9 54.9 4 2227
Conway 55.1 59 3.9 5020
Strafford 50.5 54.2 3.7 2310
Seabrook 45.7 49.2 3.5 3988
Portsmouth 64.7 68.1 3.4 12326
N.Hampton 46.9 49.9 3 2810
Lee 61 64 3 2486

And I’ll throw in number 11 on the list, because ManchVegas is where so many of the votes are to be found in CD1:

Town Shaheen % CSP % % Diff. Votes Cast
Manchester 52.3 55.1 2.8 46268

Now on to CD2 and Paul Hodes.  Even greater discrepancies are to be found in the western half of the state:

Town Shaheen % Hodes % % Diff. Votes Cast
Newport 50.7 59.4 8.7 2845
Littleton 49.9 57.8 7.9 2699
Claremont 56.8 64.2 7.4 5480
Henniker 52.9 59.8 6.9 2405
New London 47.3 54.2 6.9 2788
Pembroke 51.4 56.8 5.4 3580
Weare 43.4 48.7 5.3 4447
Plymouth 62.7 67.9 5.2 3457
Hanover 73.6 78.7 5.1 6912

I’m going to resist interpreting this data too closely, other than to say that it’s clear that Carol and Paul, despite being lower on the ballot, performed better than Shaheen.  There are so many ways to answer why – and some of them non-exclusionary to others – that I’m not sure what conclusions can be drawn fairly.

Factors to consider: John Sununu was arguably a tougher opponent than Jeb Bradley (NH-01), who in turn was tougher than Jennifer Horn (NH-02).  Sununu and Shea-Porter and Hodes were all incumbents.  Shaheen was on the receiving end of far the greatest deluge of negative ads, followed closely by Carol, and finally Paul.

While I have a hard time drawing conclusions about ’08 from these numbers, I will happily draw from them for 2010.  Carol and Paul, by their strong showing relative to a senate nominee with tremendous name recognition, can both point to their results as ammunition for re-election down he road or even a run at the senate.

(Crossposted from Blue Hampshire, because I like to send my geekier vote analysis posts over here to SSP.)

MN-Sen: Big John Gets A Big Head

From Politico.com today.

Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), also the new NRSC Chair, wasted no time making a complete fool out of himself today (again), as he vowed to filibuster any attempt to seat who appears to be Minnesota’s New U.S Senator.

First, Cornyn lays out his “rationalization,” for his proposed actions:


In a conference call with reporters today, Cornyn, the newly selected head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee said: “I think it’s very clear that the people of Minnesota and the courts of Minnesota” should choose between Franken and Coleman, “and not politicians in Washington, D.C.”

“It is the height of arrogance for any leader in Washington, D.C. to tell Minnesota voters whose votes should count and whose votes shouldn’t count,” Cornyn added.

I’m not sure what Cornyn is objecting to. Al Franken appears to have the most votes cast out of every candidate. Ergo, Minnesotans have elected him as their Senator, albeit by a wafer thin margin. Unless state law has runoff provisions like in Georgia, I don’t see how Cornyn can block Franken even after the state certifies that he’s won the election. And wouldn’t it be ironic if Cornyn, as a consummate Washington insider, is seen to be blocking the will of the people? He’d just be contradicting himself! What an idiot!

Next, Cornyn says this is a response to what Amy Kloubachar, the state’s other Senator, said:

The Texas senator was responding to comments made by Minnesota’s Democratic junior senator, Amy Klobuchar, suggesting Franken should be seated in the upper chamber if he is certified as the winner by the State Canvassing Board.

However, this is what Kloubachar actually said:

“If the Canvassing Board declares a winner, that should be our senator,” Klobuchar said last week. Even if a court challenge were to follow, Klobuchar said, “[The Senate] could seat a senator pending the litigation.”

Excuse me, Big John, but where in that statement did Kloubachar say she suggested the canvassing board seat Franken, specifically? I think she was referring to either Franken or Coleman, although the latter is highly unlikely. Cornyn, maybe you should actually listen or read what other people are saying before you respond to what they’re saying.

Anyway, the Canvassing Board is meeting Saturday to count at least another 1300 ballots. Hopefully, this gets resolved before Monday, since I’m getting really tired of this story dragging on.

Oh, and to the Senate Democrats, if you actually let that clod Cornyn tell you what to do, when by next week you’ll have an actual majority in the Senate, you should just go home, since you won’t deserve the power you got. Harry Reid better get out of his perpetual comatosed state, show some actual anger and stop this waste of a filibuster from happening.  

CO-Sen: Ritter to Appoint Michael Bennet

From the Rocky Mountain News:

Denver Public Schools superintendent Michael Bennet is expected to be named Saturday as the future U.S. Senate replacement for Interior Secretary nominee Ken Salazar, according to two Democratic sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The Denver Post also confirms it:

After an array of candidates put their names forward for selection, the choice came down to Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper or Bennet, Hickenlooper’s former chief of staff. After spending a long holiday weekend in the mountains last week, Ritter began to focus on Bennet. The two men then discussed the choice on New Year’s Day and the pick was solidified, according to sources close to the process.

I would have liked Hickenlooper a great deal for this gig, but Bennet may turn out to be a fine choice, as well — I’m too unfamiliar with his record and ideology to tell at this point.

Update: For more on Bennet, check out this New Yorker profile from 2007.

Later Update: ColoradoPols has an excellent round-up of local reactions to the surprise pick.

NY-Sen-B: Paterson Leaning Toward Kennedy?

The Associated Press:

Officials say the daughter of the late President John F. Kennedy will be the governor’s choice to fill the New York Senate seat being vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Two people close to Gov. David Paterson tell The Associated Press they believe Caroline Kennedy will be his choice, but the governor cautions he’s still looking.

However, Paterson is still cautioning that “It ain’t nothin’ till I calls it.”

NY-Sen-B: Paterson Says No to Caretaker

I’ve been in favor of the idea, but the Daily News says it’s not gonna happen:

Gov. David Paterson today flat-out rejected the idea of appointing a placeholder to Hillary Clinton’s US Senate seat, saying he’s worried it would cost New York clout in the upper house. …

“I’m actually opposed to that,” he told reporters in Albany this morning. “It would cause New York to lose senioirity, and in the United States Senate the most effective senators are the ones that have seniority. So I’m hoping that the person I select wins a primary.”

Because Clinton won’t resign until she is confirmed as SoS, Paterson isn’t talking about seniority in the 111th Congress – his appointee will be the most junior member of the Senate (possibly depending on what happens in Illinois and maybe Minnesota).

Rather, seniority will only matter if the appointed senator wins a primary and general in 2010. Around ten or so new senators take office every two years on average, so our Mystery Senator would have the tremendous privilege of being, oh, about 88th or 89th in the pecking order.

I don’t purport to understand every nuance of the Senate’s internal dealings – it’s a very weird body. So maybe ten spots up the totem poll really would make a difference. But this seems like a pretty feeble justifcation for me, because I think there’s a simple solution that balances the seniority issue with, you know, the democracy issue: change the law to call for a special election. Of course, there aren’t too many sitting governors who would give up their own power like that, so I’m sure we won’t see Paterson exercise that option either.