Swing State Project

National Democrats have exactly three targets in New Jersey that they would like to seriously contest: Mike Ferguson (7th District), Jim Saxton (3rd District), and Frank LoBiondo (2nd District).  In two of those three races, the DCCC has their preferred candidates: state Rep. Linda Stender is in for a rematch against Ferguson, and state Sen. Jim Adler is taking on Saxton.  If state Assemblyman Jeff Van Drew entered the race against Republican incumbent Frank LoBiondo, he would complete the trifecta.  The only problem?  Van Drew is currently locked in a tooth-and-nail campaign against Republican state Sen. Nicholas Asselta, and he has to win that race first before thinking of another promotion.

Van Drew didn’t do much to quiet the speculation today, as he played it coy on the question of a potential 2008 congressional campaign:

“What I’ve made clear is there’s only one thing on my mind now, and that is winning the State Senate seat in the first legislative district,” said Van Drew. “I have a lot of my plate and that’s all I’m thinking about. And that’s all I’m going to comment.”

That non-committal response is in stark contrast to his campaign’s official line last month:

“He’s not running for Congress. He’s got way too much on his plate right now,” said Allison Murphy, who is managing Van Drew’s campaign to oust Asselta. “I can safely say he’s not running next year, but maybe sometime soon.”

Unsurprisingly, Asselta is slamming Van Drew for the statement.

LoBiondo would be a tough foe to beat.  His campaign coffers are flush with over $1.5 million on hand and he has always dominated his district by wide margins.  Not in his favor, however, is the following fact about his district: its PVI is D+4.  While Kerry actually lost the district by one point in 2004, Gore carried it by a healthy 11 point margin in 2000.  Rather than changing demographics, we saw a 9/11 bounce for Bush that was pronounced throughout New Jersey.  And, if the Republican presidential nominee is anyone other than Rudy Giuliani, I expect those top-of-the-ticket numbers to return to their 2000 level.  If Democrats and progressives hope to expand their caucus, this is exactly the kind of seat they should be targeting.

We’ll just have to wait and see if Van Drew can win his state Senate race this fall before we know who LoBiondo will line up against.

Race Tracker: NJ-02

With the news of Republican Sen. Pete Domenici’s expected retirement announcement tomorrow morning, let’s take a look at all the rumored candidates on the Democratic side to replace him:

State Attorney General and former 1st Congressional District candidate Patricia Madrid

Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez

US Rep. Tom Udall

Former US Attorney John Kelly

Lt. Governor Diane Denish

Governor and Presidential candidate Bill Richardson

As the Hotline notes, the biggest wildcard here is Richardson.  If he wanted to, he could wait until his Prez bid flames out in the early primary states, as New Mexico has a February 8th filing deadline for the Senate race.  He would undoubtedly be the favorite in the primary and general.  However, how wise (and realistic) is it to wait for a Richardson entry at the 11th hour?

Chavez doesn’t inspire me, for what it’s worth.  I cannot forget this cringeworthy article in which he promised that not only would he not run against Domenici, he’d also vote for him.  On top of that, his endorsed candidates in this week’s city council elections all lost handily.  Ouch.

Jonathan Singer wants Udall.  How about you?  Who should run?  Who will run?

Update: While we’re at it, let’s look at the GOP’s bench in the state: Reps. Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce.  Given that Wilson is tarred by the same scandal that dogged Domenici for most of the year, she can no longer be considered a formidable candidate.  Given that the GOP bench is pretty much her and Pearce, that’s disastrous.  Who else could run for them?  Former US Attorney David Iglesias?  Or is he too disgusted with DC Republicans to even join their team anymore?

Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?

Race Tracker: NM-Sen

Chris Cilliza has the bombshell:

Veteran Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) is expected to announce tomorrow that he will retire from the Senate in 2008, according to several informed sources, a decision that further complicates an already difficult playing field for Republicans next November.

If this proves true, Republicans have been handed a major disaster in their efforts to retain Senate seats in 2008.  While Domenici's popularity has sagged dramatically from its formerly sky-high levels, few Democrats in the state had an appetite to challenge him.  With the field clear, let's just say that developer Don Wiviott, the highest profile Democrat to enter the race so far (and that's not saying much) will find himself facing a top shelf candidate in the primary very soon.

Race Tracker Wiki: NM-Sen

The junior Congressman From Clear Channel has been notably silent during the uproar over rightwing talk show host Rush Limbaugh’s attack on U.S. troops who oppose the White House’s misadventure in Iraq as “phony soldiers.”

Now Rep. McCaul’s brother-in-law, the CEO of the company that broadcast Limbaugh’s diatribe, is defending the indefensible.

“It would be unfair for me to assume his statements were intended to personally indict combat soldiers,” said Mr. Clear Channel, as quoted in part by Fox News.

http://www.foxnews.c…

It’s time for Mike McCaul to come out of hiding and tell us whether he stands with Rush Limbaugh and his in-laws — which include the Chairman, the CEO, and the President of Clear Channel — or with the brave men and women who are defending Limbaugh’s right to broadcast such irresponsible statements.

Sincerely,

Dan Grant

http://www.dangrantf…

Max Baucus is up with an early ad highlighting his efforts to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, and criticizing President Bush for his expected veto of the legislation:

The Montana Republican party has issued a laughable response:

The state GOP noted SCHIP has the support of many Republicans in the state, including U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg.

“This is an important issue for Montana,” said state Republican Party Executive Director Chris Wilcox. “I think it’s unfortunate that Baucus decided to politicize the issue.”

Wilcox said Baucus should be working with the Bush administration to advance SCHIP, rather than spending time making television advertisements.

Really?  I think it’s unfortunate that Bush has no interest in supporting this bipartisan legislation to expand badly needed health coverage to children across the country.  Perhaps the Montana GOP would be better served to direct their criticism towards the President, who (along with the crumb-bums in the House who are sustaining his veto threat) is the sole roadblock in the way of advancing social justice for kids.

(H/T: Left in the West)

Eric Eidsness, the Republican-turned-Independent-turned Democrat who scored 11% of the vote on the third party line against Republican incumbent Marilyn Musgrave in 2006, has dropped out of the Democratic primary:

“The hand writing is on the wall and I see it is not my time to be elected to national office to represent (Colorado’s 4th Congressional District),” Eidsness said in a prepared statement. “While my populist message appeals to a broad range of voters, particularly in the more rural areas, I do not have the support I will need here in Larimer County to win the Democratic nomination.”

Eidsness’ announcement comes hot on the heels of ’06 Democratic candidate Angie Paccione’s decision to drop out.  With Eidsness and Paccione out, the field is now clear for Betsy Markey.

Contrary to what Chris Cillizza may believe, I would not rank Colorado’s 4th in the top ten competitive House races of 2008.  Part of that may be the lack of a top tier challenger (it remains to be seen whether Markey can bring the noise, even if she has credible connections), but Musgrave’s chances are helped by her decision to tone down her obsession with socially regressive causes (publicly, at least), and the tilt-red nature of the district (Bush won it by 17 points in 2004).  That’s not to say that I don’t think this race will be competitive, or that the potential for a Markey upset isn’t there, but I feel that our clearest shot at this district passed us by last November.

(H/T: ColoradoPols)

While we're still waiting for an official announcement, sources close to Illinois Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson say she's decided to seek the seat currently held by Republican Jerry Weller. Halvorson has been heavily recruited over the past few weeks by the DCCC and EMILY's List.

Update: Politico has the details: 

In a big recruiting coup for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Illinois Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson (D) has decided to run for the seat of retiring Rep. Jerry Weller (R-Ill.).

“She sees this as a historic time in Washington, and she wants to be a part of it,” said one Democratic operative familiar with her decision. “She wants to bring the things she accomplished in Illinois to Washington.”

However, just last night the Politico was reporting that a Halvorson run was unlikely. Their source was an Illinois Democratic operative who was only able to parrot Halvorson's own comments on the matter.

Compare Politico's “Illinois Democratic operative” (October 1):

It’s hard to be one of 435 when you can be the first woman state Senate president in Illinois

to Debbie Halvorson herself (September 19):

I don't know if I want to be one person out of 435. Compared to, possibly, being the first-ever woman Senate president, I don't know. It's a big decision.

Well 6 more districts now have candidates:
CA-21 – R+13,
CA-45 – R+3,
MN-03 – R+0.5,
NJ-03 – D+3.3,
NC-05 – R+15,
NC-10 – R+15,

Once again go and take a look at the 
2008 Race Tracker Wiki.
***I have included Cook PVI numbers where possible after blogger requests to do so!***

Below the fold for all the news……

342 races filled! This of course includes 233 districts held by Democratic Congresscritters.

But we also have 109 GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic opponents.

So here is where we are at (GOP Districts):
Districts with confirmed candidates – 109
Districts with unconfirmed candidates – 3
Districts with rumoured candidates – 23
Districts without any candidates – 67

1) The GOP held districts with confirmed Democratic challengers are as follows:
AL-01 – R+12,
AL-03 – R+4,
AL-04 – R+16,
AK-AL – R+14,
AZ-01 – R+2,
AZ-02 – R+9,
AZ-03 – R+6,
AZ-06 – R+12,
AR-03 – R+11,
CA-03 – R+7,
CA-04 – R+11,
CA-21 – R+13,
CA-24 – R+5,
CA-26 – R+4,
CA-40 – R+8,
CA-41 – R+9,
CA-42 – R+10,
CA-44 – R+6,
CA-45 – R+3,
CA-48 – R+8,
CA-50 – R+5,
CA-52 – R+9,
CO-04 – R+9,
CT-04 – D+5,
DE-AL – D+7,
FL-01 – R+19,
FL-08 – R+3,
FL-09 – R+4,
FL-10 – D+1,
FL-13 – R+4,
FL-14 – R+10,
FL-15 – R+4,
FL-24 – R+3,
GA-01 – R+?,
GA-09 – R+?,
GA-10 – R+?,
ID-01 – R+19,
IL-06 – R+2.9,
IL-10 – D+4,
IL-11 – R+1.1,
IL-13 – R+5,
IL-14 – R+5,
IL-16 – R+4,
IL-19 – R+8,
IN-03 – R+16,
IN-04 – R+17,
IN-06 – R+11,
IA-04 – D+0,
IA-05 – R+8,
KY-04 – R+11.7,
LA-01 – R+18,
MD-01 – R+10,
MD-06 – R+13,
MI-07 – R+2,
MI-09 – R+0,
MN-03 – R+0.5,
MN-06 – R+5,
MO-06 – R+5,
MO-09 – R+7,
MT-AL – R+11,
NV-03 – D+1,
NJ-03 – D+3.3,
NJ-04 – R+0.9,
NJ-05 – R+4,
NJ-07 – R+1,
NJ-11 – R+6,
NM-01 – D+2,
NM-02 – R+6,
NY-13 – D+1,
NY-25 – D+3,
NY-26 – R+3,
NY-29 – R+5,
NC-03 – R+15,
NC-05 – R+15,
NC-06 – R+17,
NC-08 – R+3,
NC-09 – R+12,
NC-10 – R+15,
OH-01 – R+1,
OH-02 – R+13,
OH-05 – R+10,
OH-07 – R+6,
OH-14 – R+2,
OH-15 – R+1,
OH-16 – R+4,
OK-05 – R+12,
PA-03 – R+2,
PA-09 – R+15,
PA-15 – D+2,
PA-16 – R+11,
PA-18 – R+2,
TX-04 – R+17,
TX-08 – R+20,
TX-10 – R+13,
TX-13 – R+18,
TX-26 – R+12,
TX-31 – R+15,
VA-01 – R+9,
VA-05 – R+6,
VA-06 – R+11,
VA-10 – R+5,
VA-11 – R+1,
WA-04 – R+13,
WA-08 – D+2,
WV-02 – R+5,
WI-01 – R+2,
WI-05 – R+12,
WI-06 – R+5,
WY-AL – R+19,

2) The following 3 GOP held districts have candidates that are expected to run but are yet to confirm:
IL-18 – R+5.5,
NY-23 – R+0.2,
SC-04 – R+15,

3) The following GOP held districts have rumoured candidates – please note that some of these “rumours” are extremely tenuous!
AL-02 – R+13,
FL-06 – R+8,
FL-12 – R+5,
GA-03 – R+?,
GA-06 – R+?,
GA-07 – R+?,
GA-11 – R+?,
ID-02 – R+19,
KS-04 – R+12,
KY-05 – R+8,
MN-02 – R+2.7,
NE-02 – R+9,
NE-03 – R+23.6,
NV-02 – R+8.2,
NJ-02 – D+4.0,
NY-03 – D+2.1,
OK-03 – R+18,
OK-04 – R+13,
PA-06 – D+2.2,
TN-07 – R+12,
TX-02 – R+12,
TX-11 – R+25,
UT-03 – R+22,

4) And last but not least the following  districts have not a single rumoured candidate:
AL-06 – R+25,
CA-02 – R+13,
CA-19 – R+10,
CA-22 – R+16,
CA-25 – R+7,
CA-46 – R+6,
CA-49 – R+10,
CO-05 – R+15.7,
CO-06 – R+10,
FL-04 – R+16,
FL-05 – R+5,
FL-07 – R+3,
FL-18 – R+4,
FL-21 – R+6,
FL-25 – R+4,
IL-15 – R+6,
IN-05 – R+20,
KS-01 – R+20,
KY-01 – R+10,
KY-02 – R+12.9,
LA-04 – R+7,
LA-05 – R+10,
LA-06 – R+7,
LA-07 – R+7,
MI-02 – R+9,
MI-03 – R+9,
MI-04 – R+3,
MI-06 – R+2.3,
MI-08 – R+1.9,
MI-10 – R+4,
MI-11 – R+1.2,
MS-01 – R+10,
MS-03 – R+14,
MO-02 – R+9,
MO-07 – R+14,
MO-08 – R+11,
NE-01 – R+11,
OH-03 – R+3,
OH-04 – R+14,
OH-08 – R+12,
OH-12 – R+0.7,
OK-01 – R+13,
OR-02 – R+11,
PA-05 – R+10,
PA-19 – R+12,
SC-01 – R+10,
SC-02 – R+9,
SC-03 – R+14,
TN-01 – R+14,
TN-02 – R+11,
TN-03 – R+8,
TX-01 – R+17,
TX-03 – R+17,
TX-05 – R+16,
TX-06 – R+15,
TX-07 – R+16,
TX-12 – R+14,
TX-14 – R+14,
TX-19 – R+25,
TX-21 – R+13,
TX-24 – R+15,
TX-32 – R+11,
UT-01 – R+26,
VA-02 – R+5.9,
VA-04 – R+5,
VA-07 – R+11,
WA-05 – R+7.1,

Praise to those states where we already have a full slate of house candidates – Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

It is also interesting to note that we have only one race left to fill in Idaho, Indiana, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington. Thats 21 states with a full slate, and 7 states with one race to fill! That is more than half the states with a full or nearly full slate of candidates 13 months before election day, an impressive feat indeed!

Please note that in some races others at the racetracker site have confirmed candidates that I haven’t. This is because to satisfy me a confirmed candidate has either filed with the FEC, The Sec of State or has an active campaign website, or even if they come and blog and say yep I am running. Others are not so rigorous.

It is also great to see candidates in AZ-06, CA-42, VA-06, and WI-06; 4 of 10 districts we did not contest in 2006!

We are well on track to beat the 425 races we contested in 2006.

*** Tips, rumours and what not in the comments please.***

Everyone here probably saw the disturbing Survey USA poll from a few weeks back, which showed Dem Nikki Tsongas leading Republican Jim Ogonowski, heretofore a nobody, by just 51-41. No one has publicly polled the race since, but David Wasserman at the Cook Political Report (sub. req.) has lots more to say, little of it good:

Yet at this point in the race, there is little question that a Democratic nominee with a familiar political last name is significantly underperforming against a Republican political newcomer in the run-up to the October 16th general election. The evidence is not difficult to come by: former President Bill Clinton will be headlining a rally in the district on Sunday.

…

[P]ollsters on either side of the partisan divide were sent into the field to double-check the [SUSA] numbers, as is standard procedure. As it turns out, this private polling only reinforced a Tsongas lead in this neighborhood and has led several Democratic insiders to concede that she has a real race on her hands.

The wankers at The Corner claim a Dem survey shows a mere 5-point lead, but no one has produced so much as a one-page polling memo to back this claim up. Still, I don’t like it. Anyhow, back to Wasserman:

So why in the world could this race be close?

It is possible to view the race in any number of lights, but it is hard to deny that voters in the district are angry at Washington for a variety of reasons. Polling universally pegs the district’s job approval rating of Congress in the teens, and there is little doubt the district’s job approval of President Bush languishes at similar depths. For the district’s small band of Republicans, whose base probably comprises around a third of the vote in any given election, Ogonowski is an attractive prospect considering the party has been shut out of federal office in the Bay State for so long. But those familiar with the district say he will also receive substantial support from independents and even some Democrats who are clearly very frustrated with congressional Democrats’ inability to end the Iraq War and are eager to send Congress any message they can if they perceive they are in the national spotlight.

Then, there are race-specific factors at work. Surely, there are a handful of Democrats who still harbor bitter feelings from the closely contested primary and may not get behind her in the general. Local operatives, however, point to a larger image problem for Tsongas, stemming from her desire to transition from a community college position with a somewhat opaque title to Congress. For years, Massachusetts voters have endured numerous scandals and controversies involving highly politically-involved university officials: the names Bulger and Silber come to mind. As Tsongas seeks to follow in the footsteps of an outgoing congressman who left to become chancellor of the district’s largest university, she must be wary of the perception that there is a revolving door between higher education and public office and that public institutions conceal featherbedding operations for politicians in the state.

Ugh. Wasserman notes that Romney got 53% here, so a Republican win is not out of the question. Perhaps most troubling is that he moved this race not one but two notches – from Solid Dem to Lean Dem in one fell swoop. Such big moves are extremely rare at Cook or any of the professional prognostication outfits.

Wasserman also mentions the Hackett special in 2005, and my feeling is that we might be looking at the mirror-image of that race: We’ll probably pull out a win in the end, but narrowly enough that the GOP will feel bouyed. The only silver lining here is that I think the closeness of this contest likely isn’t a sign of a widespread rot lurking just below the surface, as OH-02 was for the Republicans.

But whatever the outcome – especially if the unthinkable happens – this had better shake Hill Democrats out of their unacceptable complacency. I don’t doubt for a minute that Wasserman is correct when he describes Tsongas’s weak showing as a proxy for the disgust many Democratic voters currently harbor for the Democratic Congress. It’s long past time for our caucus to stand up to the GOP, and the situation in MA-05 is just further proof of that.

It’s officially October 1st, which means that candidates have until the 15th to file their third quarter fundraising reports with the FEC.  Got any early reports for House and Senate candidates?

Like we did last time, SSP will have a massive round-up of all the noteworthy numbers once they’ve been filed.

UPDATE: Here are a few early numbers:

MN-03:

Multiple sources are telling us that surrogates of [state Senator] Terri Bonoff [D] are calling Democrats in the 3rd District and telling them that Bonoff raised just around $90,000 in the third quarter.

Given that Bonoff only had about a week to work with before the quarter ended, $90,000 is impressive. Its clear that Bonoff has significant fundraising abilities.

TX-Sen:

Rick Noriega (D): $570K raised

OH-14:

Bill O’Neill (D): $100K+ raised

UPDATE 2 (David): Bunch more numbers in this Hill piece:

Republican Primary Challengers:
CA-04: Mike Holmes, $20K (vs. John Doolittle)
MD-01: Andy Harris, >$175K (vs. Wayne Gilchrest)
NC-03: Joe McLaughlin, $24K (vs. Walter Jones)

Republican Incumbents:
KY-Sen: Mitch McConnell, “about” $1.5 million ($6.8 million cash-on-hand)

Democratic Challengers:
CO-02: Joan Fitz-Gerald, $360K; Jared Polis, >$305K
ID-Sen: Larry LaRocco, >$100K
MN-Sen: Al Franken (D), “at least” $1.8 million